Wikisource:Administrators' noticeboard

From Wikisource
Latest comment: 1 hour ago by EncycloPetey in topic Change to proofreading colors
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Administrators' noticeboard

This is a discussion page for coordinating and discussing administrative tasks on Wikisource. Although its target audience is administrators, any user is welcome to leave a message or join the discussion here. This is also the place to report vandalism or request an administrator's help.

  • Please make your comments concise. Editors and administrators are less likely to pay attention to long diatribes.
  • This is not the place for general discussion. For that, see the community discussion page.
  • Administrators please use template {{closed}} to identify completed discussions that can be archived
Report abuse of editing privileges: Admin noticeboard
Wikisource snapshot

No. of pages = 4,420,565
No. of articles = 1,066,613
No. of files = 16,210
No. of edits = 14,486,210


No. of pages in Main = 618,862
No. of pages in Page: = 3,312,415
No. validated in Page: = 654,051
No. proofread in Page: = 1,293,240
No. not proofread in Page: = 1,066,074
No. problematic in Page: = 45,799
No. of validated works = 6,507
No. of proofread only works = 6,570
No. of pages in Main
with transclusions = 409,425
% transcluded pages in Main = 66.16
Σ pages in Main


No. of users = 3,140,919
No. of active users = 431
No. of group:autopatrolled = 501
No. in group:sysop = 23
No. in group:bureaucrat = 2
No. in group:bot = 17


Checkuser requests

[edit]
  • Wikisource:checkuser policy
  • At this point of time, English Wikisource has no checkusers and requests need to be undertaken by stewards
    • it would be expected that requests on authentic users would be discussed on this wiki prior to progressing to stewards
    • requests by administrators for identification and blocking of IP ranges to manage spambots and longer term nuisance-only editing can be progressed directly to the stewards
    • requests for checkuser

Bureaucrat requests

[edit]

Page (un)protection requests

[edit]

Other

[edit]
[edit]

We have a bit of a maintenance issue in that external links in protected templates and mediawiki: ns are being missed when we are updating links. To assist, I have created the above parent tracking category to label such pages. We obviously cannot use it on Mediawiki: pages, so will have to be content with putting it on the corresponding talk page. I am working through creating subcats for each WMF tool that I find as they are more likely need to be what is changed, and will do some checks. I will note that as some of these pages use conditional code or includeonly so may be a little tricky to find by searching. [Reminder to not unnecessarily hide things to just avoid visual errors in non-display namespaces or ugly display code.] I am hoping that this will also allow us to check these a little more easily as we have suffered some link rot. I think that we may also need to put some checking categories on these so we can at least check these yearly, though haven't got that far and welcome people's thoughts.

I have also identified that we have had some templates transcluded to the mediawiki: ns that have not been protected. Can I express that any such templates need to be fully protected. If you are using a template within another template, then all subsidiary templates also need to be protected. Noting that it often it can be safest to simply use html span and div code and embedded css.

On that note, if we are protecting templates, it is better practice to use separate {{documentation}} so the docs can readily updated without someone asking for editing of protected templates. This is not pointing fingers, as some of these are old static pages that don't readily get traffic, and reflect older generation practices.

I welcome any suggestions/feedback here, and any help perusing of the template: and mediawiki: namespaces for targets. — billinghurst sDrewth 08:39, 26 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

Seems we already have Category:MediaWiki namespace templates, I will transition to that and update categories. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:07, 26 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

Download button vs. download sidebar

[edit]

I’m reporting this here because I think an administrator needs to fix a page. The download features in the sidebar don’t do the same thing as the “download” button which floats to the right of the title; see, e.g., here, where the “Download” button gets the whole book, and the download sidebar features only get a list of the books. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 20:15, 3 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

@TE(æ)A,ea.: I don't know why nobody followed up on this issue back in February. Possibly it's because it's a somewhat technical issue and we're a little short on technically-minded admins. In any case: apologies for dropping the ball on this one! Could you retest the issue you originally saw to verify it still behaves the way you observed then? I suspect there may have been intervening changes.
@Samwilson: Using the Download button to download a PDF on the page TE(æ)A,ea. links above gives me a PDF with all the auxtoc pages but none of the actual chapters. Can you tell what's going on there? Xover (talk) 06:29, 8 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Index:Studies in constitutional law Fr-En-US (1891).pdf

[edit]

The original upload of this file had many pages removed, for some reason (separate from the two missing pages, which have been added). The following pages need to be moved:

  • /2–/12 up 5
  • /13–/15 up 6
  • /16 up 7
  • /17–/65 up 8
  • /66 up 9
  • /67–/149 up 10
  • /150 up 11
  • /151–/185 up 12
  • /186 up 13
  • /187–/192 up 14
  • /193 up 19

The large swath of pages marked “Problematic” is, I believe, owing to the confused state of the pages. I’ll look over them after the move to see if they need to be changed in any respect. In addition, /31 and /32 can be deleted. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 01:35, 8 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

@TE(æ)A,ea.: Done Xover (talk) 05:49, 8 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Possible sockpuppet accounts

[edit]

Based on their editing style, I believe that ALPHATMINJO (talkcontribs) and Natella1995 (talkcontribs) are the same person using undisclosed sockpuppet accounts. —Justin (koavf)TCM 20:03, 17 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Change to proofreading colors

[edit]

If you go to proofread a page, the colors of the buttons have changed (they’re now so washed out as to be unreadable). This is being discussion here, as well, but I thought it important enough to bring to the attention of administrators. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 14:34, 18 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Adding your voice, explaining the problem, in the Scriptorium is probably more useful. That is the discussion that was linked from the Phabricator ticket, so that is where developers will look to see what the issue is, how it has impacted the community, and what (if anything) to do about it. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:31, 18 September 2024 (UTC)Reply