Wikipedia:Geselshoekie/Argief2020 - Wikipedia Gaan na inhoud in Wikipedia, die vrye ensiklopedie Wikipedia:Geselshoekie Hierdie bladsy dien as 'n argief van ou besprekings. Moenie die inhoud van hierdie bladsy wysig nie. Indien u 'n nuwe bespreking wil begin, of by een van die ou…
… topic was opened with the focus on the actions of mainly one user on the Scots Wikipedia. His actions, albeit well-intentioned, nonetheless exposed a large vulnerability not just in the Scots Wiki, but small language Wikis in general. The conversation that followed quickly turne…
… topic was opened with the focus on the actions of mainly one user on the Scots Wikipedia. His actions, albeit well-intentioned, nonetheless exposed a large vulnerability not just in the Scots Wiki, but small language Wikis in general. The conversation that followed quickly turne…
On 10 June 2019, an English Wikipedia administrator was banned by the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) from editing the English Wikipedia for a period of 1 year. A large community discussion followed, which included various statements by stakeholders , including the Trust & Safety depa…
…majority of all active, unrecused arbitrators (same as the final decision). See Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures#Motions to dismiss . Template 1) {text of proposed motion} Support: Oppose: Abstain: Comments: Proposed final decision Purpose of Wikipedia 1) The purpose of…
…subpages) Discuss existing and proposed policies Discuss technical issues about Wikipedia Discuss new proposals that are not policy-related Incubate new ideas before formally proposing them Discuss matters involving the Wikimedia Foundation Post messages that do not fit into any …
… caveats, left out of the initial statement to keep it reasonably concise. "All wikis" is, in effect, "all reasonably active wikis"—if a wiki has only had twelve searches last month, none with apostrophes, it's hard to meaningfully measure anything. More details in "Data Collecti…
…"save page"? Dr Adam Carr 12:12, 19 Sep 2003 (UTC) Probably a cookie issue. See wikipedia:how to log in . Martin 12:22, 19 Sep 2003 (UTC) Well, I find it happening often enough: not that I don't get logged in properly, but that it times out much sooner than I'd like: often enough…
…g the talk pages of drafts, so they get put in the various WP:AALERTS notice of Wikiprojects. It works pretty well at WP:JOURNALS and WP:WPWIR and other involved projects. Headbomb { t · c · p · b } 19:56, 15 February 2020 (UTC) I don't see what benefit the current use of draft s…
…p a page to organise how best to tackle improving the Penwith pages here , as a wikiproject - feel free to add your name to the list. there isn't much there yet as we haven't had much time to organise lists of things to do yet, but the idea is to write down a list of things that …
…ges that indicate precisely which comment the user was replying to 5 May 2020 ptwiki busted 18 may 2020 Display editnotices 28 May 2020 Can't handle SineBot-signed posts 14 Sep 2020 Additional link to reply to the original post at the end of a section 21 Nov 2020 Apologies if thi…
…s://voice.mozilla.org/en/datasets now released as CC0. Should we import this to wikimedia? Somehow related to this: We have many uploads of personal images which then are delete as being out of scope. Would they not be potentially useful for building a training dataset for faces?…
…aborate. — Justin ( ko a vf ) ❤ T ☮ C ☺ M ☯ 00:10, 13 March 2026 (UTC) Reply On wikis, the custom is to take more into account than just the raw number of votes on either side. That's why the term " !vote " is used in discussions here. A bare "support" or "oppose" doesn't carry a…
…nge much, but I think we should use the latest Creative Commons license because Wikimedia may get in trouble otherwise. -- RafChem ( talk ) 16:26, 23 October 2016 (UTC) Reply First of all, Wikimedia won't get in trouble for sticking with the existing terms. Secondly: fair enough …
…ely make anyone elaborate. — Justin ( ko vf 00:10, 13 March 2026 (UTC) Reply On wikis, the custom is to take more into account than just the raw number of votes on either side. That's why the term " !vote " is used in discussions here. A bare "support" or "oppose" doesn't carry a…