This was formally declined by greg some time ago, and there is no update for extended period of time. Very unlikely to be closed as successful. Closing to clear up.

Hello everyone,

Done

In T282132#7088265, @Sunpriat2 wrote:

@Urbanecm We have already "delete them all". These were two boards with sandbox function for the test in 2014. All useful messages have been moved to wikitext. Just delete that already and delete associated namespaces.

In T282132#7088262, @Sunpriat2 wrote:

@Urbanecm Is this "Bulk-delete" script different from local admin rights? If the administrator manually deletes all pages in the "Topic" space - will it be the same as the deleteBatch does or not?

In T282132#7066042, @Iniquity wrote:

This is bad, but maybe there is some simple way to do it. See T188812: Uninstall Flow on all wikis where it has zero topics and T148611: Plan to disable Flow on Enwiki.

In T282755#7086024, @C.Suthorn wrote:

Could you give an example of a re-uploaded file? I assume that there may be some files that have been changed in the past, but still do not contain the (full) IPTC information. I would appreciate an example. tar.gz: I used up the online space that is available and uploading took long, deleting the zips and do tar.gz would be very time consuming. I can lool over the CSV file, but the majority of the files do not contain special charcters and these filename should work right away,

I reverted the enabling patch, as it caused T282822: Certain tags are no longer activated by default. Also uploaded a patch that hopefully will enable this feature properly, but that should be ideally CR'ed first.

This should be fixed by reverting the patch for T266067: [L] Create edit tags to measure multimedia edits to Wikipedia articles. I proposed a patch to enable media tags properly, but doing that can and should be done later.

I looked around a bit, and I find no way the old account is connected with requestor's off-wiki identity. There is no email attached, enwiki userpage has no off-wiki information. Not sure if the user is reading the ticket, but do they have any way to prove the relationship between the two accounts?

Hello, thanks for your request @C.Suthorn. Unfortunately, the data in the provided format are hard to process, because the information in archive.csv is not always up to date (the filename sometimes doesn't match).

For the record, here is a list of past requests:

In T282600#7084748, @elukey wrote:

@Urbanecm the task description is correct, but the title it is not, the request is for nda LDAP (you are totally right about wmf). Fixing.

In T282600#7084689, @elukey wrote:

@KFrancis hi! I can't find Sannita's NDA in the spreadsheet, could you please help with next steps? Thanks in advance :)

I'm going to be the one doing this. Claiming.

In T282624#7081591, @Proc wrote:

In T282624#7081573, @Minorax wrote:

In T282624#7081570, @Minorax wrote:

Totally agree with SilkTork, bureaucrats should have access to Special:VerifyOATHForUser. While still unpopular, I believe temporarily de-crating a user until they enroll in 2FA is a better solution than removing one of their main scope/job quoting that crats don't need to have 2FA enabled. Correct me if I'm wrong, I believe that this was done when IA & CNA were introduced back in 2018.

Seems that letting crats have access to that special page is more dangerous as I thought it would be

Why is that?

In T281925#7076556, @Juan90264 wrote:

@Urbanecm: I just forgot to leave the links in the message, ICON: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e5/WP20Symbols_twenty_v2.svg/50px-WP20Symbols_twenty_v2.svg.png; WORDMARK: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2f/WP20_ptwiki20_logo_wikipedia.svg/119px-WP20_ptwiki20_logo_wikipedia.svg.png. I also prepared a code that requires the use of [[pt:MediaWiki:Common.css]], if you want we can use this alternative for the new vector, but I need your editing to do this.

@Jdlrobson Wouldn't it be easier to move it on all wikis, keeping redirects? It looks wrong to require wikis to do maintenance on the right day. I can do it, if you confirm.

Alternatively, since the account does not have any privileges, it might be possible just to create a different account.

In T281925#7076534, @Juan90264 wrote:

@Urbanecm: Can you then place the version of the old vector publicly on the Lusophone website temporarily? Or if there is how, put a version of the logo already prepared for the new vector?

This was synced out and works with old vector. Since ptwiki is a desktop improvements pilot wiki, and since the image provided is used only in old vector, I'm not closing this for now, and waiting for further information.

I -2'ed the patch for now, because of the declining comments from 2018 and because the dewiki deployment (T279829) is happening under DannyH's supervision, setting a newest precedent for how this sort of thing should be done.

Tentatively marking this as next train blocker, since this will likely break i18n cache building in production as well.

Done

Should be done now :).

Please try to upload it with upload_by_url feature. It seems to work with my tests.

Please try to upload it with upload_by_url feature. It seems to work with my tests.

Please try to upload it with upload_by_url feature. It seems to work with my tests.

I'm going to publish this, since it is a dupe of a five years old public task.

In T282390#7072946, @Legoktm wrote:

Dupe of T235687: Edits of deleted topic not shown in special:deletedcontribs/user neither in topic history?

In T282344#7072561, @Nikerabbit wrote:

https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Extension:Translate/Move_translatable_page

In T282344#7072515, @Jayprakash12345 wrote:

Per Special:ListGroupRights, only Wikimedia Meta's sysop has move-subpages rights. You don't have this permission. So I think you should request to Wikimedia Meta's sysop first at here.

I tried to do the move via the UI, and this is what I see:

Dupe of a security protected task, protecting this one too.

@Zabe I deployed your change. It works, but it would be even nicer with one change, see below:

@Pchelolo This task is not very important IMO. If passing IDatabase is not how it should be done, and the proper mechanism is not yet available, I believe it can wait. We have a script which can be used in cases this behavior is really necessary for some reason :).

In T112147#7070603, @Mz7 wrote:

Just to clarify, in what areas of the interface would this change be visible? For example, on enwiki the term "oversight" currently appears in Special:UserRights and Special:ListUsers, and the term "Oversighters" appears in Special:ListGroupRights. Would that change to "suppress" and "Suppressors" if this change is deployed? Would it be possible for local communities to overwrite this change with their own custom label if they don't want it?

Edit: After talking to someone on IRC, my understanding is that the end result would be similar to how the software refers to the Administrators group as 'sysop' in parts of the interface (e.g. Special:ListUsers/sysop), but describes it as "administrator" and "Administrators" in other areas of the interface. As long as the interface still reads "oversight" and "Oversighters" just as it works for 'sysop', I don't think this is an objectionable change.

Done

I can see the change in 504 trends at commonswiki (link):