TestWiki:Community portal

Welcome to our Community portal. Post your questions, issues or problems below by clicking Add topic

We need to work on

For anyone that wants to help here is a list of stuff that needs to be done :

• Import useful templates (and files)
• Create main page (maybe wait for Meta first)
• Develop policies
• Fix request template (permission)
• Backup

Please add anything that you think is relevant to the list.--Reception123 (talk) 02:12, 8 August 2015 (EDT)

Mediawiki:Common.css

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

User removed. If you disagree please add another discussion — Preceding unsigned comment added by Reception123 (talk • contribs)

---

Hello, as it seems that not everyone likes MediaWiki:Common.css we should have a vote to keep it. --Reception123 (talk) 08:57, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Oppose

• Oppose I currently oppose the colored usernames for more reasons. First, we would have to add them to all users. Second, not everyone wants them. Third, who would have colored usernames? Bureaucrats? Consuls? Reception123 (talk) 08:57, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
• Vote to remove them. :-p Revi (talk) 10:36, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Comments/Questions

As for two Oppose, I removed the coloured usernames. --TheTVFan (talk) 10:49, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

If you would like to have one for yourself, feel free to. Reception123 (talk) 10:50, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

---

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

New comment on MediaWiki:Common.css

Currently editing the interface page to test making my name (and mine alone) red, but also trying to get links to other pages working (my talk page etc). Any sysop who feels this is disruptive is welcome to delete the page. -- Cheers, NDKilla ^{( Talk • Contribs )} 17:44, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

I think that it is every user's choice if they want to change their name color. Everyone is free to edit their own name. Reception123 (talk) 18:08, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Bot policy

Per TestWiki:Bots and TestWiki:Bot approval requests‎, I've gone ahead and pushed a configuration change. Effective immediately, Bureaucrats may no longer assign the bot flag. For now, all bot requests must be made directly through a Consul. Operating a bot without the bot flag (or contacting us asking for authorization to test the bot without the flag) will be grounds for an immediate, indefinite block against the bot, and possible sanctions against the bot operator.

I apologize for what I'm well aware are harsh measures, but bot's (even without flag/permission) can cause a lot of damage quickly, that even with certain tools, can be hard to undo. A more in depth bot policy will be created in the near future.

In general:

• NEVER GIVE THE BOT FLAG TO AN ACCOUNT YOU HAVE ACCESS TO, OR AN ACCOUNT USED BY A BOT YOU OPERATE This will be grounds for removal of your permissions (up to discretion of Consuls)
• Never operate a bot without authorization
  • For testing a bot, this involves asking a Consul directly for permission to run the bot without the flag
  • For tested, working bots, this involves acquiring the bot flags via appropriate means
• Try to document what the bot does, how it works, etc
  • Although you are free to use a bot for whatever reasons, and you may test whatever on this wiki:
    • Consuls, Stewards, and System Administrator's may request source code for your bot. IT MUST BE PROVIDED UPON A VALID REQUEST
    • Additionally, even if source code isn't requested, you are required to make a public note about the bots tasks. This will allow users who wish to do so the ability to monitor your bot and make sure it is not malfunctioning
    • Bots are recommended but not required to have their "power" based on an on-wiki page. This page, if needed, can be protected to logged in users, autoconfirmed, sysop, crat, or consul only.
    • Bots failing to abide by on-wiki toggle switches may be indefinitely blocked at any hint of malfunction or operation outside of authorized scope

Gadgets

Why is there no gadgets section in my preferences? Ipadguy (talk) 13:33, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

@Ipadguy: Because the testwiki has no gadgets yet. Feel free to add some (you can copy them from wikipedia, Mediawiki:Gadget-etc.) Reception123 (talk) 14:03, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

But this one and this one already exsist. Ipadguy (talk) 14:59, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

I forgot I installed those. I think gadgets did work sometime. I'll look into it. Reception123 (talk) 15:05, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

@Ipadguy: A vandal deleted the page that made them work, gadgets now work again. Reception123 (talk) 15:38, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Why I can't edit that gadgets, what only bureucrat doing? AYST201 (talk) 07:33, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

VisualEditor

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

To make a compromise I will add VisualEditor to TestWiki but it will be OPTIONAL to enable it or not. So who doesn't want it doesn't get it, who does can enable it. Reception123 (talk) 14:24, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

---

As you may know, VisualEditor has been added to Meta. I am not sure if it is wanted on TestWiki. Please vote below. Reception123 (talk) 18:51, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Support

Support Not a bad idea. Reception123 (talk) 18:51, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Strong support Most wikis use VisualEditor, it will help for testing too. SleepyMode 09:41, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Oppose

Oppose I don't think we need it here. Ipadguy (talk) 20:46, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Comment

After 7 days of this being open (5 February 2016), I will calculate how many votes are against and for and per that will make a request. Reception123 (talk) 09:44, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

---

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

Adding "FAQ" to The Sidebar

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

No need for a vote, it will not be added until the FAQ is improved Reception123 (talk) 16:44, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

---

What about making FAQ to The Sidebar? SleepyMode

Comment

The vote will last atleast 7 days and with atleast %60+ of the votes, the rest is for the decision of the Consuls. SleepyMode 16:41, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

---

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

Consul Nomination(SleepyMode)

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

I'm closing this request per this page. -- Cheers, NDKilla ^{( Talk • Contribs )} 00:27, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

---

It's been a while, the community is getting slowly active, and I would be glad to help.
I hope you trust me enough, and think I'm ready. SleepyMode 16:08, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Support

1. Support I'm support, If you to help and active in all wikitest poject. AYST201 (talk) 07:36, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Strongly oppose for a few reasons. I really have several major concerns about this user, but most prominantly are the following:
   • No need for another Consul, crat's are fine to demote obvious vandals, most vandals don't get crat.
   • This user's activity on this wiki, and on Miraheze in general.
   • This user's previous attitude towards other users and wikis in relation to abuse of powers, namecalling, random demotions, and hat collecting.
   • This user's recent block (on another wiki) that appeared to have blatant lies in several different block reasons, along with (what I would call) misuse of block permissions (even though there's no blocking policy there).
   • -- Cheers, NDKilla ^{( Talk • Contribs )} 22:51, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Comment

Comment I think SleepyMode's work is really good, but I don't think we are in need of more than 2 consuls. Reception123 (talk) 12:55, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Miraheze is growing fast, you can never know when you will need, its always good to have spear, and I can use something to do as well. SleepyMode (talk) 17:03, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

---

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

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

No other comments, I agree with NDKilla's point. Reception123 (talk) 13:59, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

---

TriX for consul in here

Hi guys I'm to become consul in here to help or monitoring in here. how your opinions?

Support

1. Support This is user is active and is qualified. Wikiuser1 (talk) 20:54, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Weak oppose No offense but I don't think there's a need. There hasn't been a crat demoted besides inactivity in a long time. -- Cheers, NDKilla ^{( Talk • Contribs )} 16:16, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

my intentions for aware :)TriX (talk) 22:33, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

---

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

Couple of issues here

I know these aren't big, but someone should handle them.

• On TestWiki:Administrators it says that admins can Add group: Autopatrolled, Rollbackers, Confirmed, however, this is not supported by Special:ListGroupRights (or my own visit to Special:UserRights).
• There is a page named Talk:TestWiki:Request permissions, but I cannot deal with it since the server gives me an error when I try and visit it, move it, or delete it.

Cheers! -- Void ^Discuss 19:09, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Dealt with the issue on TestWiki:Administrators myself. -- Void ^Discuss 01:03, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Weird, happening to me too. Omni Flames (talk) 07:41, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

What I know is that the page should be TestWiki_talk:Request permissions. Reception123 (talk) 13:58, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for bringing this to my attention. This should be fixed now, see TestWiki talk:Request permissions Talk: is only for pages in the 'main' namespace. -- Cheers, NDKilla ^{( Talk • Contribs )} 18:13, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Prevent recent events from happening again

Good morning,
I would like to talk about the recent events and how we can prevent them from happening again, I am some of you are familiar with the recent administrator rights abuse,
I don't want to talk about it for long, so I will simply say that people are randomly protecting, and blocking, making bad edits and never reverting after them, and that should be fixed.
I think we should make a new group called "Test Administrator", which will only be able to block itself, not edit admin-protected pages, but test admin protected pages only, and basically get most of the admin permissions removed and only a few given to them, so no or minimal damage can be made.

Cheers,
SleepyMode (talk) 08:44, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose This isn't a bad idea, but I don't think we need it right now, as there is not much vandalism, and it can easily be prevented by any other users. If there is a lot of vandalism on this wiki, then I think we should consider this option. Reception123 (talk) 08:53, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
2. Oppose Cyborg (talk) 20:24, 13 July 2016 (UTC)