Meta:Babel

SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 1 day and sections whose most recent comment is older than 30 days.

Currently, the page translation target language configuration on Wikimedia Meta-Wiki were inherited from the "language converter page translation model".

However, this actually created several problems including the broken page transclutions with malfunctioned language converter tags exposed and using the workaround of Template:Conversion-zh, Template:LC zh. More breakages could be found on phab:T328838.

I would like to propose to use the "translatewiki.net page translation model"/"Miraheze Meta page translation model" instead on Meta-Wiki after the related proposal had been discussed, supported and approved and changes had been done on Wikifunctions.

Below are examples of the proposed translation model.

• https://translatewiki.net/wiki/Special:Translate?group=page-Project%3AAbout&action=page&language=zh-hans&filter=
• https://translatewiki.net/wiki/Special:Translate?group=page-Project%3AAbout&action=page&language=zh-hant&filter=
• https://meta.miraheze.org/wiki/Special:Translate?group=page-Miraheze+Meta&action=page&language=zh-hans&filter=
• https://meta.miraheze.org/wiki/Special:Translate?group=page-Miraheze+Meta&action=page&language=zh-hant&filter=

More briefly for the zh part: The old configuration can only translate into zh while the new configuration can translate into zh-hans (for zh-Hans-CN, zh-Hans-MY, zh-Hans-SG), zh-hant (for zh-Hant-TW) and zh-hk (for zh-Hant-HK, zh-Hant-MO).

Without using /zh-hans, /zh-hant, /zh-hk, we have to pass the language tag every time using message bundle messages.

-- Wrapping all of them under /zh using {{LC zh|, without using /zh-hans, /zh-hant, /zh-hk
tmb.new( mb_page_title, lang_tag ):t( message_key ):params( lang_tag ):plain()

-- Using separated /zh-hans, /zh-hant, /zh-hk, we no longer need to pass the language tag :params( lang_tag ) every time
tmb.new( mb_page_title, lang_tag ):t( message_key ):plain()

With this change, every Lua module using translation bundles can be simplified:

- :t( message_key ):params( lang_tag ):plain()
+ :t( message_key ):plain()

Without this change, every Lua module using translation bundles need to:

- :t( message_key ):plain()
+ :t( message_key ):params( lang_tag ):plain()

Note: "translatewiki.net page translation model"/"Miraheze Meta page translation model" refer to the same translation model.

-- Winston Sung (talk) 07:57, 30 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

Pinging @​94rain @​乌拉跨氪 @​梦夕琳 ​@Allenwang6212a、 @ASid @Cookai1205 @​Cwek @​Ericliu1912 @​Hamish @​Heihaheihaha @​Joycewikiwiki @​Kaganer @​KOKUYO @​Kuailong @Lakejason0 @​LowensteinYang @​Minorax @​Reke @SCP-2000 @​Shangkuanlc @​Shizhao @SolidBlock @​Stang @​SunAfterRain @​Supaplex @​Taiwania Justo @​Tigerzeng @​Venuslui @​WhitePhosphorus @​Wong128hk @​Xiplus @​YFdyh000 @人间百态 @魔琴 @​だ＊ぜ -- Winston Sung (talk) 04:24, 5 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

As I didn't look into two models, is there any major difference? If yes, would you briefly describe the difference please? Hamish 16:02, 5 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

More briefly for the zh part:

• The old configuration can only translate into zh, while:
• The new configuration can translate into zh-hans (for zh-Hans-CN, zh-Hans-MY, zh-Hans-SG), zh-hant (for zh-Hant-TW) and zh-hk (for zh-Hant-HK, zh-Hant-MO).

-- Winston Sung (talk) 08:27, 8 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

A future timestamp to prevent automatic archive to unresolved topic. -- Winston Sung (talk) 00:00, 1 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

Each year, typically from October through December, several of the movement’s committees seek new volunteers.

Read more about the committees on their Meta-wiki pages:

• Affiliations Committee (AffCom)
• Ombuds commission (OC)
• Case Review Committee (CRC)

Applications for the committees open on October 30, 2025. Applications for the Affiliations Committee, Ombuds commission and the Case Review Committee close on December 11, 2025. Learn how to apply by visiting the appointment page on Meta-wiki. Post to the talk page or email cstwikimedia.org with any questions you may have.

For the Committee Support team,

- MKaur (WMF) 14:12, 30 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

October 2025 education newsletter released for translation. Please help our readers to read education newsletter in their native language. The latest education newsletter is ready for translation: here Newsletter headlines link for translation: here, to read individual articles check out: Category:Education/Newsletter/October 2025. Your support in making this newsletter multilingual means a lot. Thanks for helping share knowledge across borders! Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 06:01, 2 November 2025 (UTC)Reply

Hi guys. In the talk of the Article depth metrics page I put my analysis of it and presented some alternatives. You can find it here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikipedia_article_depth#Depth_metrics_makes_little_sense_-_my_analysis_and_alternatives_to_it. The problem is that, as it was mentioned before, the current metrics actually doesn't make sense. It's meaningless. Could you read it and express your oppinion? I thank in advance for all comments. Tim Ocean (talk) 15:09, 6 November 2025 (UTC)Reply

Agreed; commented there, thanks. Prototyperspective (talk) 20:48, 19 November 2025 (UTC)Reply

DannyS712 seems to have gone entirely inactive. User:DannyS712/EasyResolve is a very important very useful and highly-used simple gadget used across Wikimedia projects including Commons, Metawiki, English Wikipedia, etc.

I believe its functionality would best be part of the default UI so the gadget isn't needed/useful anymore. I mentioned this in W368: Fix the issues breaking the Reply tool .

However, until this is part of the default discussion page UI / the Reply tool, the gadget remains quite important. By marking threads as solved the community can focus on unsolved topics and tasks so these get more attention and people keep checking discussion pages because they're not overflowing chaotically with already-solved threads and taking lots of time to go through.

The code is also located in that user's userspace, at User:DannyS712/EasyResolve.js.

Now there are several changes that would be great to add to it, such as including a link to the closed section in the edit summary, an unarchive button in archive pages, and more pages like c:Commons:Categorization requests that apparently need a change to the tool to have the button display there.

• What could or needs to be done to make it possible for other developers to change the code?
• What would need to be done so that the tool can be enabled by simply checking something in the Preferences under "Gadgets"?
• How can the prior two things be achieved without breaking the script for those who already have it installed but also enable updating their script – maybe by redirect the .js page to the new place of the actively-developed .js? Alternatively, one could ping all the users who have the tool installed to explain how they can install the actively-developed version.
• Could somebody here continue its development or where would be a good place to ask? The change requests for the script can be found in User talk:DannyS712/EasyResolve.

Prototyperspective (talk) 21:06, 19 November 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Prototyperspective: This script in particular has a few forks. A notable one is User:DreamRimmer/WhyNotResolve.js. That aside, unless I'm misunderstanding something, I don't think it should be part of MediaWiki, as allowing every user to make edits with just one click sounds like an easily misused feature. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 21:12, 19 November 2025 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the info about the fork. That doesn't fully answer the question but maybe I'll ask these things there. I don't know why these scripts are located in user space instead of some proper meta page. Doesn't this mean that only that one user can edit the js and isn't that a problem?

I don't see why it shouldn't be part of MediaWiki just because a few users may misuse it. The same goes for talk pages: why enable users to post to talk pages when they could post offtopic things or vandalism? Similar and some of the same reasons apply here. Moreover, this was already part of MediaWiki, namely the DiscussionTools that were the default discussion tool on the MediaWiki wiki. Prototyperspective (talk) 21:32, 19 November 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Prototyperspective: See WP:USERSCRIPTS for more information. That few can edit scripts is a feature, not a bug. Regarding misuse, it won't just be "a few users", and some will even intentionally abuse it; as an example, Twinkle is limited to autoconfirmed users for this very reason. Also, note that most wikis don't even have the concept of marking sections as resolved. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 21:59, 19 November 2025 (UTC)Reply

I know it's important that only few can edit scripts. But I thought wouldn't one want to have more than one single person being able to edit a script such as all interface admins. I don't know which info I'm supposed to find at that Wikipedia page. I can only repeat what I said about Talk pages and the existing mark-as-solved button and would like to add that, as with these two things, problematic edits can be reverted.
Okay, if we're talking about limiting this to autoconfirmed users then that's a good point and I strongly support limiting it to autoconfirmed users. That most wikis don't have this important concept is just more reason to add it to the default UI instead of requiring creation of some template and enabling a userscript. If I didn't miscount, 33 wiki projects have it now. Prototyperspective (talk) 22:42, 19 November 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Prototyperspective: Sorry about the link; apparently I was mistaken about how informational the page was. My point is that scripts are intentionally interface-protected for a reason. To answer your other questions:

• One can always make edit requests, or create their own fork. Scripts with multiple maintainers are often, if not always, developed on an external system, like GitHub or GitLab (en:WP:RW/en:WP:UV are two examples), and the synchronization is done automatically.
• A script needs to be of high quality to be converted to a gadget. Other than that, a sysop just need to add it to the site's MediaWiki:Gadgets-definition (see also the manual).
• Redirecting or something to that effect can be done (as with en:User:Lupin/popups.js and en:User:AzaToth/twinkle.js), but often isn't. Users might not like the new changes, and/or they might not trust the new maintainers. A rule of thumb: the more people you ask to do something, the more likely they will do it wrong, especially when the task is something they don't fully understand.
• As stated above, User:DannyS712/EasyResolve.js has forks. Either install one of them, or fork it yourself if you find it to be lacking something.

NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 23:17, 19 November 2025 (UTC)Reply

• Edit requests have already been made but the user didn't respond and is inactive now. As for forks, that doesn't update the script for the other people using it. Moreover, I was looking for a place to request it where a user currently very fluent in coding can readily implement it if they also think it's important.
• What would be the place to ask about this script which is used across Wikimedia projects to be adopted and improved to be converted to a gadget? It doesn't seem to be Meta:Babel but that's what my fourth point was about.
• Regarding forks, what is missing is a way to find them and documentation. So far, I know of one js page that you linked above with no documentation, again in userspace, and no other fork. Maybe for context I should say: I'm looking not for a tool for practical purposes for myself but for a functionality used and widely adopted by the Wikimedia community / Wikimedians. Maybe I'll try the js you linked, thanks.

Prototyperspective (talk) 23:33, 19 November 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Prototyperspective: It is true that user scripts have been one of the less organized parts. There are no truly global gadgets yet (it's the most popular wish of the 2016 survey), so you will have to ask local interface admins of each site. Personally, I would be more willing to support global gadgets than making "resolve this section" a built-in feature. NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 23:54, 19 November 2025 (UTC)Reply

Interface admins can edits other's user scripts. By convention many of them often don't except to fix bugs that totally break the script (and sometimes not even then), but that's a convention not a hard social rule. * Pppery * _{it has begun} 22:34, 19 November 2025 (UTC)Reply

Hello. Reminder: Please help to choose name for the new Abstract Wikipedia wiki project. The finalist vote starts today. The finalists for the name are: Abstract Wikipedia, Multilingual Wikipedia, Wikiabstracts, Wikigenerator, Proto-Wiki. If you would like to participate, then please learn more and vote now at meta-wiki. Thank you!

-- User:Sannita (WMF) (talk) 14:21, 20 November 2025 (UTC)Reply