Friendly reminder: 1/13 @ 19:00 UTC - MediaWiki Workshop: Preparing extensions for MW 1.19 in #wikimedia-devEdit
This workshop will be an opportunity to share information about changes in MediaWiki 1.19 that may require revisions to extensions or skins. Also an opportunity for developers to ask questions regarding extension development.
Look forward to seeing you in IRC. :) --Varnent 06:20, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
Usurpation request / SUL unificationEdit
A barnstar for you!Edit
|The Original Barnstar|
|Nice extensions.... Please share your wikimedia email... :) Adi.iiita (talk) 07:30, 20 February 2014 (UTC)|
GSoC 2014 TalkEdit
I have submitted my proposal for Catalogue for MediaWiki extensionsfor GSoC 2014. Need to talk to you about the project. Please tell me how can i contact you.--mecyborg (talk) 5:30, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
Wikimania Submission AcceptanceEdit
On behalf of the Wikimania 2014 program committee, I am very pleased to inform you that you that your Wikimania submission "How about a MediaWiki Consortium?" has been accepted PENDING CONFIRMATION OF ATTENDANCE.
Please reply promptly to wikimania2014programme gmail.com quoting this message to accept and confirm your attendance by Thursday, 5 June or your submission will be considered withdrawn.
We have reserved a 30 minute slot beginning at 15:30 on Sunday, 10 August for your session. You'll have access to an internet-enabled terminal, a projector, and a microphone; if you need additional support, please let us know. You can bring your own laptop, or share the slides with us ahead of time.
By agreeing to present during Wikimania 2014, you agree that video recordings may be made of your presentation by The Wikimedia Foundation or the organisers. You hereby give permissions for those recordings and any associated presentation materials, including slides, to be broadcast live, recorded, made available for later download, or otherwise redistributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License 3.0 or a compatible license. If you object to any part of these requirements (for instance, if you would prefer not to be recorded), please let us know before accepting this offer.
We look forward to your reply and hope to see you in London!
Edward Saperia, Chief Coordinator Wikimania London
I read your Wikimania page (). I would like to suggest that you use connect if not already: I could not find you in there. The channel would make use of extra support from knowledgeable people, from what I could see.
On a related note, I believe Wikimedia Foundation is interested in third parties — unlike what you are saying in your presentation abstract at Wikimania. A part of this interest is their desire to develop new extensions by Wikimedia Engineering. These extensions are undergo code review, and some of them become built into mediawiki. They feel that such extensions are easy to install. Some of their such thoughts can be seen here: they say
- [By writing UploadWizard in wiki markup,] we would lose a lot of the benefits we get from having UploadWizard be an extension: It gets proper code review, it can be configured (and the configuration also gets code review), it can be distributed to third party sites, and so on.
During this process, they also manage to, in my personal view, fail to meet the needs of Wikimedia projects themselves. This is caused by, at least, these issues.
- They do the decision-making and don't ask community what it wants. What it does in fact need is universal means of easing routine work. The software should be easily scriptable by end users, and this should be doable by means other than manually editing a file with importScript() lines (which lack information about maintainer, a description, or a link to documentation).
- The gadgets tab is half-way there. But everyone should be able to make them. Sysops should be actively making them.
- Gadget kitchen should be more systemized and localised.
- Unregisterd contributors’ life is getting harder with each step of the Engineering team, but they are the majority of contributing force. I had written an essay at Meta about this, and helpful people added some more things I didn't even know about: Musings about unregistered contributors.
--Gryllida 11:20, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
- Hi Gryllida, thanks for sharing your thoughts. A few remarks and answers:
- I do not think (and did not mean to state) the Foundation is not interested in 3rd parties. It's just that their focus is not on 3rd party use. As they do have sparse ressources, this naturally leads to less attention to 3rd party issues.
- As the recent discussions about MediaViewer have shown, there's a big issue we need to tackle. That is: moving code that is meant to be essential to the user experience from the scope of site developers to the scope of site admins. While this gives more power to the admins, it also means more responsibility for them. As you have pointed out, this is putting decision making about site behavior on a new level. In 3rd party wikis, this question makes a big difference: how much of the site customisation can be done on-wiki, without permission to access the server scripts (which usually means involving the IT department)? I feel that MediaWiki, with its Common.js and other js articles, is quite unique among other software in empowering site admins. Now, on Wikimedia sites, we can and must find good policies that can serve as a role model for 3rd parties. Having said that, I do not have a solution ready :/
- re:Unregistered contributors. I like the essay and the issues you pointed out are very vaild. However, I tend to think these are not major issues in most 3rd party wikis, as they run in corporate or otherwise closed shop contexts which require log in anyways.
- In case you are interested in helping 3rd parties, you could have a look at MediaWiki Cooperation. I am very interested in your thougts! --Mglaser (talk) 22:53, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Decoupling security logicEdit
Hi Markus, glad to chat with you yesterday! The componentization initiative I was mentioning can be found here, and FYI I've added you as a reviewer to the current patch, Gerrit change 166357. Thanks, Adamw (talk) 18:51, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
BlueSpice and SemanticEdit
I see you gave a talk in 2012. I'm currently using BlueSpice and am considering adding Semantic extensions. Can you please comment on the compatibility of these two and any issues I may face? Thanks. WilliamKF (talk) 19:09, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
- Hi, WilliamKF, nice to hear you're using BlueSpice! The current version, 2.23.1 should be fully compatible with SMW 2+ and extensions thereof. That means, you can run BlueSpice and SMW in the same wiki and they don't interfere with each other. As of now, there is no futher integration of both, so e.g. in Semantic Forms you'll not be able to use BlueSpice's visual editor. However, that is on the roadmap for our upcoming release, which is scheduled in October. --18.104.22.168 02:35, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
SMWCon Fall 2016 - Frankfurt am MainEdit
Hello there! I am the local chair this year. Please add you talk at the:
section. Please add also a wiki page with a short description of your talk.
Best wishes and see you soon!
Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia surveyEdit
(Sorry to write in Engilsh)
issue for MW Stakeholders' Group perhaps?Edit
Just a heads up, I thought the phabricator issue concerning ElasticSearch versions supported might be relevant for the Stakeholders' Group. Cheers! --JosefAssad (talk) 08:29, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
Thumbnail image generationEdit
I recently noticed that the thumbnail image generation can generate poor quality images when downscaling JPEG or PNG files. For example, the thumbnail generated for
is []. A good scaling algorithm will produce something like this:
If you are not the right person to ask about this, could you please pass this on to someone who might be interested?
- This survey is primarily meant to get feedback on the Wikimedia Foundation's current work, not long-term strategy.
- Legal stuff: No purchase necessary. Must be the age of majority to participate. Sponsored by the Wikimedia Foundation located at 149 New Montgomery, San Francisco, CA, USA, 94105. Ends January 31, 2017. Void where prohibited. Click here for contest rules.
Results from global Wikimedia survey 2018 are publishedEdit
19:25, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
A proposal for WikiJournals to become a new sister projectEdit
Hi Markus. Over the last few years, the WikiJournal User Group has been building and testing a set of peer reviewed academic journals on a mediawiki platform. The main types of articles are:
- Existing Wikipedia articles submitted for external review and feedback (example)
- From-scratch articles that, after review, are imported to Wikipedia (example)
- Original research articles that are not imported to Wikipedia (example)
Proposal: WikiJournals as a new sister project
I'd be particularly interested in your opinion as someone with MediaWiki experience outside of the traditional WMF ecosystem! We are attempting to improve awareness within the extended mediawiki community, so feel free to share with others.