TestWiki:Community portal

Welcome to our Community portal. Post your questions, issues or problems below by clicking Add topic. TestWiki:Community portal/Archive 1

Gadget description

I noticed the gadget description on MediaWiki:Gadget-UTCLiveClock includes the text "After adding please en:purge the page" and was wondering what the point of it is. After all, the page already says that the tool includes a purge link. wikipedia:en:purge (apparent intended target) is no help either. ping @Reception123: who added it. -- Void ^Discuss 20:43, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

I have not seen this when importing the template. Removed. Reception123 (talk) 04:41, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

The logo

Shall we remove the background color of the logo just like File:NewLogo2.png? --Gyakusyuu no Amanojaku (talk) 10:50, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

.........Already changed by Gyakusyuu no Amanojaku.--Tiger (talk) 07:31, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Bit of advice, don't change the logo by css. I'll upload a new version of the File:NewLogo.png, and, if needed, do a pull request to change the logo. -- Void ^Whispers 01:14, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Are bureaucrats allowed to grant administrator right?

I found that bureaucrats are able to grant administrator right to other users technically. Are bureaucrats allowed to grant administrator right when other users request it on TestWiki:Request_permissions? Are they allowed to revoke the right when it is inappropriately used?--Tiger (talk) 14:51, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Bureaucrats are allowed to grant sysop and bureaucrat, and can revoke sysop. If you are granting admin/bureaucrat, just make sure that the request fulfills the requirements at the top of the page. If in doubt, let someone else handle it. -- Void ^Whispers 15:06, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

RFC: Puffin Web Browser global blocks

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Proposal made by Long-term abuse sockpuppet

---

Greetings,

As some may know, the entire Puffin Web Browser has been globally blocked on Miraheze through 4 or 5 separate rangeblocks due to suspected and in some cases confirmed abuse. However, this massive block(s) have the serious potential to cause collateral damage. I have locally blocked the same ranges specifically here, anon. only and with account creation allowed. I would like to propose the following:

"Immediately following the closure of this RFC, all global blocks on Puffin Web Browser IP addresses are to be locally disabled. The local blocks made by Primeferac shall be left as is for the time being, but any admin has permission to harden the blocks if obvious abuse occurs."

I personally use Puffin when accessing the Internet from unsecure locations like restaurants and public transportation, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. Therefore, I would like to help reduce the potential for collateral damage, which is never a good thing. Primeferac (talk) 00:30, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Support

• Strong support as proposer. Primeferac (talk) 00:30, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Comments

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section

Protected

The community portal has been protected from anonymous editing for 24 hours due to excessive vandalism. Amanda (talk) 18:08, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Userrights update

Just an FYI in a visible place.

• After a bug was resolved in the config, sysops now have the ability to add Autopatrolled, confirmed, and rollbacker to accounts.
• 'Crats may now assign the bot usergroup. However, please be aware to only assign the group for testing or to prevent flood, never run a full bot account without consul permission.
• The exampleuser usergroup will be removed as the only accounts it was assigned to were locked for security concerns. It is no longer useful.

If I'm forgetting anything, remind me. If you have any questions, ask below. Cheers -- Void ^Whispers 21:19, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

I think we can set a special usergroup like "flood" on Chinese Wikipedia (can be added by admins and only to admins themselves) to divide test groups from non-test groups. However, I don't think it's necessary because there are no real bots now. --Amanojaku (talk) 13:58, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Does the email notice work?

I can't receive emails when someone leaves messages, but I can receive emails when changing the email address in preferences. --Amanojaku (talk) 14:03, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Already posted to phab:T1738 by Reception123. --Amanojaku (talk) 16:45, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Spanish PublicTestWiki

Hello, I just wanted to announce that I have established the Spanish Version of PublicTestWiki for native speakers of Spanish and that they need to have more facilities to communicate with the rest of their peers, all Spanish speakers who want to participate can visit the wiki in https://es.publictestwiki.com and begin to be part of the community. Regards. —Alvaro Molina (✉ - ✔) 12:24, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Que bueno, una versión en español :) Cyborg (talk) 17:04, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Don't need to test any more

Please revoke my crat and admin flag. I don't need them any more.--Tiger (talk) 12:09, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Done; if you need the rights back at any time, just let me know. Cheers -- Void ^Whispers 17:22, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

5 supports and no opposes therefore this request is approved. It is up to Pywikibot administrators to test it now. Reception123 (talk) 05:30, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

---

Pywikibot official community approval

This is just something for more "formal" reasons, and so that the WMF sees that there is community support for having Pywikibot here (details. It would be nice to get Pywikibot working here so we can have that as a testing option. Reception123 (talk) 17:26, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Support

1. Support Reception123 (talk) 17:26, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
2. Support Videojeux4 (talk) 17:40, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
3. Support —Alvaro Molina (✉ - ✔) 18:04, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
4. Support Amanojaku (talk) 07:07, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
5. Support PokestarFan (talk) 23:42, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

# Strong support Test user (talk) User is indefinitely blocked for disruption --Reception123

# Support 13Reasons (talk) 18:06, 3 August 2017 (UTC) User is indefinitely blocked for abusing multiple accounts --Reception123

Comments

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section

Abuse filter

Please examine my (IP) edits to my named account's userpage, it shouldn't be disallowed even though it starts with an IP address. 83.24.97.195 10:11, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Please see your talkpage. Reception123 (talk) 14:15, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Recent vandalism

I restored pages deleted by User:Anniubbo but please note that translation pages are not restored yet because they can't be undeleted directly. --Amanojaku (talk) 15:18, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Temporary feature

Hi, yesterday I used the temporary feature on Special:Userrights and I'm wondering if that feature was created by Miraheze or it comes with MediaWiki. Thank you, Cyborg (talk) 20:52, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Temporary userrights is a feature that was added in MediaWiki version 1.29. It is not specific to Miraheze. -- Void ^Whispers 00:03, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. --Cyborg (talk) 00:17, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Titleblacklist

I've added translation pages to the MediaWiki:Titleblacklist to prevent vandalism. Only autoconfirmed users can modify or create translations now. The translations of the main page are also protected. Please feel free to change it after it's safe. --Amanojaku (talk) 04:19, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Good! Sherry J. Scott (talk)

Able to change protection levels

Even though deletion and move rights are consul only, I am able to change them. Why? PokestarFan (talk) 19:35, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Because the protect action is not restricted. As a result, unless we decide to modify the configuration, the only way to prevent the modification of protection levels is to remove edit access as well. It would make sense if the software only allowed users to modify protection levels if they had the ability to perform the action with its current restriction level. (eg that an admin would not be able to modify consul level move/deletion restrictions). But, this is not the case. -- Void ^Whispers 19:45, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

This can be configured said way. That is how it’s done on https://testwiki.wiki . Config is here. MacFan4000 (talk) 20:13, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Got fatal error

I made a test on how long can a user be blocked (except indefinite) and set a block till 31 Dec. 9999 23:59:59 on a wasted account (declared by its owner). Then I met "[cadbecb3fec4cc62aa74674e] 2017-11-29 12:16:46: Fatal exception of type "MWException"" on all the pages that involving the block log of that account.(Block log of that account, Block log of this site, Logs of me and so on.) Sorry for making this trouble and wish it not a big trouble for the consuls.--Tiger (talk) 12:22, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Well, it's not a problem anymore (as far as I can tell), so no big deal. -- Void ^Whispers 20:50, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

how can I help you? Artix Kreiger (talk) 22:29, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

It seems that the problem doesn't affect anyone except me........-Tiger (talk) 10:51, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Asdfugil for consul in here

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Closed as unsuccessful. Reception123 (talk) 09:00, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

---

Hi guys I'm to become consul in here to help or monitoring in here. how your opinions?--Asdfugil (talk) 10:28, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Arguments against

1. Oppose Maybe if you were more actively involved in the project. Plus, this wiki is not very active. MacFan4000 (talk) 12:06, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
2. Oppose Currently there's no need for new consuls. Esteban (talk) 20:46, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
3. Oppose Has a few test edits, but no real serious edits, or anything that shows a need for this user to be a consul, or that they would benefit from the extra rights. At the moment, I think that three consuls is enough. Reception123 (talk) 19:20, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
4. Oppose Not in a snowballs chance in hell... Then again who are you? Consuls should be a person thats known in the community not just anyone Zppix (talk) 19:20, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

comments

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section

Allow bureaucrats to self resign

Dear community,

I believe bureaucrats should be allowed to resign. A little bit of code like '+testwiki' => array( 'bureaucrat' => array( 'bureaucrat', ), or similar should be added to wgGroupsRemoveFromSelf in LocalSettings.php .

This code would allow a bureaucrat to revoke their own access themselves immediately without letting a bureaucrat decrat another user. Consuls would still be able to remove such access from anyone as required. --Sau226 (talk) 12:02, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Can someone else please comment on this? --Sau226 (talk) 10:21, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

I support this. maybe more like $wgGroupsRemoveFromSelf = [ 'sysop' => true ]; like The Test Wiki has to allow admins to remove themself from any group. Bonnedav (talk) 02:46, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Consul for MacFan4000

I would like to be a consul. I am currently a sysadmin, and I helped to fix this wiki from the incident. I am familiar with the permissions. I currently have them to work on cleanup.

Support

1. Support Cy (talk) 06:38, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Comments

Hay, I am new so i can say nothing as to the merits of this candidate, however I do wish that people would vote based on the merits of the candidate rather than weather they believe more Consuls are needed or not. the vote should be to determine whether or not the candidate would be a good fit for the position and weather they are trustworthy or not. After that, if the vote succeeds then it can be put on hold until such time as the current Consuls decide another one is needed. Then successful candidates can be promoted without further discussion, unless they have exibed bad behavior or gone inactive in the meantime. Bonnedav (talk) 03:05, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Request for Consul - Kiko4564

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Unsuccessful request. -- Void ^Whispers 17:36, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

---

I wish to be a consul and have experience with admin tools both on this wiki and here Kiko4564 (talk) 20:08, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose We have enough consuls already, plus, on wikipedia you are blocked for sock puppetry. Maybe later. Cy / Talk 05:02, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
2. Oppose We have 4 consuls, plus this wiki isn’t very active MacFan4000 ^{(Talk Contribs)} 22:15, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Comments

Hay, I am new so i can say nothing as to the merits of this candidate, however I do wish that people would vote based on the merits of the candidate rather than weather they believe more Consuls are needed or not. the vote should be to determine whether or not the candidate would be a good fit for the position and weather they are trustworthy or not. After that, if the vote succeeds then it can be put on hold until such time as the current Consuls decide another one is needed. Then successful candidates can be promoted without further discussion, unless they have exibed bad behavior or gone inactive in the meantime. Bonnedav (talk) 03:06, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section

Special:AggregateGroups

Hi. What does Special:AggregateGroups do? Pkbwcgs (talk) 08:15, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Request for consul (Pkbwcgs)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Withdrawn, I will not run for consul for a long time. Pkbwcgs (talk) 16:32, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

---

I would like to be a consul because I have been on this Wiki for a reasonable amount of time and I have experience in combating spambots and combating vandalism on Wikipedia. I think being a consul would be the perfect bit for me. Pkbwcgs (talk) 12:32, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Support

1. Support you have been very active here and is nice experienced user. No oppose -Psl631 ^{(Let's Chat!)} 08:00, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose, there are enough consuls. Artix Kreiger (talk) 03:15, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
2. Oppose per above. MacFan4000 ^{(Talk Contribs)} 12:33, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
3. Oppose The user does not seem to be trustworthy enough. Malcolm ^{Aces! Aces!} 00:01, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

   @Cy: In what way am I not trustworthy enough? This is publictestwiki and I have done nothing wrong. Pkbwcgs (talk) 06:47, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Comments

Hay, I am new so i can say nothing as to the merits of this candidate, however I do wish that people would vote based on the merits of the candidate rather than weather they believe more Consuls are needed or not. the vote should be to determine whether or not the candidate would be a good fit for the position and weather they are trustworthy or not. After that, if the vote succeeds then it can be put on hold until such time as the current Consuls decide another one is needed. Then successful candidates can be promoted without further discussion, unless they have exibed bad behavior or gone inactive in the meantime. Bonnedav (talk) 03:06, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

The worthiness of a candidate is only half the consideration. Artix Kreiger (talk) 19:08, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

@Psl631: How about you to be one of the consul in the future? SA 13 Bro (talk) 02:30, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I can try to become consul here at Public Test Wiki, I are trusted and like testing here :) Psl631 ^{(Let's Chat!)} 12:24, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

I would also like to comment that the recent demands on Wmf sites for administrator and checkuser powers stands at 6 times, all 6 times were told by others with a firm "no", to put it mildly. and I mean, he really wants power. Artix Kreiger (talk) 12:57, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section

Bureaucrat weirdness.

Why can bureaucrats only add Confirmed users, Autopatrollers, and Rollbackers when administrators can both add and remove them? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bonnedav (talk • contribs) 05:55, 11 September 2018‎ (UTC)

And, that's all cleaned up now. -- Void ^Whispers 16:41, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

I was thinking more like just let them remove the groups as well so it is easier to tell the difference in group add/remove perms between crat and Consul, but it's your call. Bonnedav (talk) 03:09, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

How about the "Testgroup"? By right "Bureaucrats", "Admins", and "Bots" it should only added by a bureaucrat. SA 13 Bro (talk) 15:01, 18 September 2018 (UTC)