TestWiki:Community portal

From TestWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Community Portal

Archives: 1 | 2 | 3
Welcome to our Community portal. Post your questions, issues, or problems below by clicking either here or the Start a new topic big blue button to the immediate right.



Favicon[edit source]

Should the favicon of this wiki be the same as the logo instead of the regular miraheze favicon? Naleksuh (talk) 02:56, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Naleksuh: It probably should be. Do you happen to know the dimensions of a favicon, so I can resize the image, upload, and set in ManageWiki? Dmehus (talk) 03:04, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Dmehus: That's not necessary, just take the same url being used for the logo and use that for the favicon. I did that for dev wiki and it worked out fine. Naleksuh (talk) 04:50, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Naleksuh: Ah, I wasn't sure if the favicon would automatically resize, as I know the site logo has to be an exact 135x135 (or 135xx or xx135), so I'll try and make this change now then. Thanks for the good suggestion! Dmehus (talk) 14:57, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Naleksuh: This seems to be  done now. Thanks again. Dmehus (talk) 15:02, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
For me the Miraheze logo is still the fav icon. PorkchopGMX (talk) 15:10, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@PorkchopGMX: That is very strange and shouldn't be happening. Have you tried reloading your cache for publictestwiki.com? Reception123 (talk) 15:18, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I completely forgot about this, but the correct fav icon is showing up now. PorkchopGMX (talk) 13:01, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, okay, that's great. :) Dmehus (talk) 19:29, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Inactive Rights Removal - 2020-12-21[edit source]

The rights of the following users will be removed on or after 2020-11-28 if they do not return to activity:

Thanks,

Dmehus (talk)
For the Consul Team
01:13, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
 Rights removed from seven (7) users. Dmehus (talk) 01:03, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Inactive Rights Removal - 2021-01-19[edit source]

The rights of the following users will be removed on or after 2021-01-26 if they do not return to activity:

Thanks,

Dmehus (talk)
For the Consul Team
16:30, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
 Rights removed from ten (10) users. Dmehus (talk) 14:29, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Inactive Rights Removal - 2021-02-15[edit source]

The rights of the following users will be removed on or after 2021-02-22 if they do not return to activity:

Thanks,

Dmehus (talk)
For the Consul Team
21:42, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
 Rights removed from ten (10) users. Dmehus (talk) 18:45, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Translation not possible[edit source]

Hello, I have tried to translate the main page, but I receive an error: The title "Translations:Main Page/2/de" has been banned from creation. It matches the following blacklist entry: " Translations:.* " Is anybody able to activate the translation system again? Thanks --Ameisenigel (talk) 21:55, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ameisenigel This is very strange because you're already logged in. I've referred this to Void to see if he can take a look. Dmehus (talk) 22:08, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ameisenigel Void has found the cause, and it seems it was an issue with our local title blacklist, which, arguably, seemed unnecessary, so I've now  deleted the given interface message. Please try translating now. Dmehus (talk) 22:19, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Dmehus Thanks, now translating works. --Ameisenigel (talk) 23:06, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Okay,  great. Thanks again for reporting this. If I had to guess, we'd probably disabled translations by non-administrators due to poor quality machine translations and translations being done outside the translation system. Dmehus (talk) 23:15, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Inactive Rights Removal - 2021-03-21[edit source]

The rights of the following users will be removed on or after 2021-03-28 if they do not return to activity:

Thanks,

Dmehus (talk)
For the Consul Team
09:44, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
 Rights removed from ten (10) users, notwithstanding the two users who voluntarily removed their user groups above. Dmehus (talk) 14:45, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Can my name be changed?[edit source]

Hi, can I please have my name changed to Namielle please? Thank you! Theory of Eternity (talk) 12:41, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See meta:Special:GlobalRenameRequest. --Anton (talk) 12:54, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request[edit source]

Change in the TestWiki:Main policy#Blocking and unblocking[edit source]

Hello fellows, the policy clearly states that

You may create test accounts to test blocks or you can place blocks on yourself.

It is ok to test blocks on yourself (your own/main account), but it also states

You may create test accounts to test blocks

which, in my opinion is wrong. If users create an alternative account, the underlining IP address remains same and if they block the alternative account, their main account will also get blocked and won't be able to test anything since the IP address will be same in both the accounts. This happened to me (probably on my second day here). I'd suggest to replace

You may create test accounts to test blocks or you can place blocks on yourself.

with

As a best practice, test blocked should be made on User:Example or yourself.

-- Jusl¡t (talk) 17:25, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Users can create alternate accounts, though. Nevertheless, this is fairly non-controversial, so if there's no objections, I'll close this as a non-controversial amendment after three calendar days by replacing the above with, "You may place clearly marked test blocks on yourself, on User:Example, or on any alternate accounts you create for this purpose. As a best practice, it's recommended you (a) create any alternate accounts while logged into your main account and (b) identify any alternate accounts via your local or global user page in some way." How does that sound? Dmehus (talk) 17:52, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Dmehus, since the IP block exemptions have been added to the sysop group, I have no objections. -- Jusl¡t (talk) 19:56, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Olipino Okay,  great. If you or Anton want to add the ipblock-exempt to the TestWiki:Administrators page, that'd be great, but do link to my Consul action in your edit summary using [[Special:Redirect/logid/15678|this Consul action]]. Thanks! Dmehus (talk) 20:01, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Done I've added (ipblock-exempt) to TW:A. -- Jusl¡t (talk) 20:13, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Dmehus (talk) 20:14, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Inconsistency regarding requirements to request Bureaucrat[edit source]

I noticed that both TW:B and TW:RfP list different requirements to be eligible to obtain bureaucrat. TW:B states that a user must be a registered user for 24 hours before requesting bcrat, where as TW:RfP states that a user must be an administrator for 24 hours before requesting bcrat. Typically I would correct this issue myself, but I do not know what the real requirement is, so I am bringing it up here in hopes that someone else can rectify the issue. Joritochip (talk) 02:55, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Joritochip, I think bureaucrats can only promote admins to bureaucrats user right (but I may be wrong). That's why it may be necessary to be an admin for 24 hours. -- Jusl¡t (talk) 04:42, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Joritochip Interesting point. In theory, I would say TestWiki:Bureaucrats would be correct, as one could theoretically have had a TestWiki account for more than twenty four hours but simply never requested administrator, so they've demonstrated that they're trusted. In practice, though, TestWiki:Request permissions' language may be the way to go. Reception123, do you have any thoughts? It is a policy page, but this a non-controversial administrative change I think we can clarify administratively as a Consul action. Dmehus (talk) 14:16, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested move[edit source]

While testing, I came across the template, RfPdone. I'd suggest to move it to the new more suitable title, AdminGranted or something similar. I'd also like to make a new template to use when we will add someone to the bureaucrats group to let them know about the policies. Let me know who supports this. Dmehus, Anton, what do you think. -- Jusl¡t (talk) 13:47, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It serves a different purpose than {{AdminAcceptRfP}}; however, I personally don't think it's needed, as everyone can be a TestWiki sysop. I'm checking with Reception123 to see what he thinks. Dmehus (talk) 14:10, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Dmehus, you took me in the wrong way. I know it serves a different purpose. What I mean is "this template should be posted on the talk page of a person who got the admin flag, to let them know about the TestWiki policies. Posting at the talk page produces a notification and a user is bound to see what it is. I know everyone can be admin but, not everyone knows about the policies. -- Jusl¡t (talk) 14:23, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I just think we don't necessarily need to be creating a user talk page message for every user who requests permissions at TestWiki:Request permissions. I mean, we can keep the template, but my preference would be for deletion. Arguably it would be better to encourage Bureaucrats and Consuls to use {{AdminAcceptRfP}} and {{BureaucratAcceptRfP}} at TestWiki:Request permissions when granting permissions, as then the diff to the completed permission's request can be included within the requesting user's user rights log, no? Dmehus (talk) 14:29, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Inactive Rights Removal - 2021-04-18[edit source]

The rights of the following users will be removed on or after 2021-04-25 if they do not return to activity:

Thanks,

Dmehus (talk)
For the Consul Team
00:08, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
@Dmehus: Hi, I've been busy for quite some time because of my exams. It will take me another week to return. Thanks SHEIKH (talk) 19:06, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
SHEIKH No problem. In any case, the act of you replying to this thread has now made you active, so I've now updated that. Dmehus (talk) 19:42, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Dmehus: I'm taking a long break from wikis in general because I have a lot of stuff to do in real life. Remove my rights if you wish. Justarandomamerican (talk) 02:40, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Justarandomamerican Alright, sounds good. When you return, please feel free to request rights at TestWiki:Request permissions or at my user talk page. Dmehus (talk) 02:48, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Rights removed from three (3) users, notwithstanding the user who requested voluntary removal of their rights while they are on an extended wiki leave of absence. Dmehus (talk) 16:17, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AWB testing page[edit source]

Hello an AWB testing page would be really useful.--Angelo Pisani (talk) 18:14, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Angelo Pisani Sure, I can see a use case for that. Please feel free to create AutoWikiBrowser test as the title for the page, then categorize it with Category:Special test pages. Dmehus (talk) 18:16, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Dmehus Done--Angelo Pisani (talk) 19:30, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Angelo Pisani That's great. Thank you. Dmehus (talk) 19:43, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
PS the page must be added here.--Angelo Pisani (talk) 13:58, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Angelo Pisani:  Done. --Brewster239 (T/C) 14:53, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I've updated the japanese version too.--Angelo Pisani (talk) 15:21, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Inactive Rights Removal - 2021-05-23[edit source]

The rights of the following users will be removed on or after 2021-05-30 if they do not return to activity:

Thanks,

Dmehus (talk)
For the Consul Team
02:09, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
 Rights removed from ten (10) users. Dmehus (talk) 01:12, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wordmark[edit source]

I propose that we use the following as our new wordmark. What does people think?

TestWikiWordmarkMockup.png

MacFan4000 (Talk Contribs) 20:33, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is so small, and our logo already includes the words "Public Test Wiki." I'm not certain we need this here. I propose we just have the space allocated for the wordmark in New Vector be whitespace instead. Dmehus (talk) 22:50, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This is too small Shakil (talk) 08:20, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello MacFan4000, I would like to say that the proposed wordmark is small and, at least to me, it seems it's width is more than its height. And well that's not an issue.
I can't read what is written on the two sides of the triangle. It looks like it's pixels has broken and the current one seems to be more clearer. Thanks:) Mazzaz (talk) 05:09, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]