Hello,
I'm a member of the German language Wikipedia community and have a question that no-one could give me a definite answer to so far. I hope someone here can answer it, or point me to where I should go to get a definite answer.
The question is, what level of self-determination do the 260 language versions of Wikipedia have as to the design of their user interfaces (skins)? Can individual wikis choose independently modifications of their skins, and which of the available skins to use as the default for unregistered users, or is this controlled centrally by the Foundation?
For backgrund, this question arose after the German language Wikipedia (de.wikipedia.org) was switched from Monobook to Vector as the default skin on the 10th of June 2010, resulting in considerable criticism from the community. On the more sober side of the debate, it was asked whether it would be theoretically possible to return to Monobook as the default skin, at least for some time until the biggest known issues with Vector have been fixed. Under the theoretical scenario that a majority voted for a return to Monobook as the default skin, would it be possible at all to switch it back? Or would the Foundation not permit that?
The question seems to be a very fundamental one and I would also appreciate insights into the big picture. How independent are the language versions? To what degree can they govern themselves and to what degree are they bound by decisions made centrally by the Foundation?
Thanks, Martin
Hey Martin,
You've written to the MediaWiki technical list, which probably is not the right place for this discussion.
You may instead want to write the Wikipedia-L mailing list, which focuses on issues that affect Wikipedia as a whole. The page for this list is https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l.
Cheers! --zak
2010/6/28 Zak Greant (Foo Associates) zak@fooassociates.com
You may instead want to write the Wikipedia-L mailing list, which focuses on issues that affect Wikipedia as a whole. The page for this list is https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l.
Foundation-l would be even better: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
-- אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי Amir Elisha Aharoni
"We're living in pieces, I want to live in peace." - T. Moore
You've written to the MediaWiki technical list, which probably is not the right place for this discussion.
Sure it is. It is a question to the System administrators by the community (or parts of it). Discussing it in the community itself won't help answering the question.
foundation-l might be a bit better than wikipedia-l, but still it is a very concrete and legitimate question: "Will the system administrators change the default skin for a wiki, provided there is an consensus by the wiki community?"
A simple "Yes" or "No" would suffice.
(I'd argue that changing the skin to vector is a strategic decision by WMF and cannot be overruled by local communities - but that's something a system administrator has to decide.)
Regards, CoE
(I'd argue that changing the skin to vector is a strategic decision by WMF and cannot be overruled by local communities - but that's something a system administrator has to decide.)
I'd say the system administrators will do as the foundation (board perhaps? or some other organ) says.
Having different looks on different wikipedias is raising some identity questions, but I'd say that the simple fact that right now en.wiki looks in a way and smaller wikis look differently is a hint that the problem is not that serious. I'm really curious about the outcome of this discussion, be it here or not :)
Hoi, Wikimedias development is centred on one skin. This used to be monobook and it is now vector. The question if a community may elect to be conservative / retro / different ignores this issue. There will be some effort to maintain other skins as well but as history has shown, bit rot will creep in. New functionality will not be designed to work with other skins.
As it is there is very little communities can ask to be implemented for them. A good example is the Babel extension that is wished for by many communities. Thanks, GerardM
On 28 June 2010 19:58, Strainu strainu10@gmail.com wrote:
(I'd argue that changing the skin to vector is a strategic decision by WMF and cannot be overruled by local communities - but that's something a system administrator has to decide.)
I'd say the system administrators will do as the foundation (board perhaps? or some other organ) says.
Having different looks on different wikipedias is raising some identity questions, but I'd say that the simple fact that right now en.wiki looks in a way and smaller wikis look differently is a hint that the problem is not that serious. I'm really curious about the outcome of this discussion, be it here or not :)
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
"Gerard Meijssen" gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote in message news:AANLkTimbfWBz3Nlb-AaQcYWBsmG3igxmV2ZUq3roEPRC@mail.gmail.com...
Hoi, Wikimedias development is centred on one skin. This used to be monobook and it is now vector. The question if a community may elect to be conservative / retro / different ignores this issue. There will be some effort to maintain other skins as well but as history has shown, bit rot will creep in. New functionality will not be designed to work with other skins.
Why not? Isn't the whole *point* of a skinning system that users can choose which skin to use *without* affecting functionality? Otherwise, it's not a skin, it's a different user interface.
If Gerard is correct and only the 'current' skin is supported, then all other skins should be removed from the software (including monobook). Conversely, as long as they remain part of the software, they should be supported. It is absolutely bonkers to ship with unsupported features, particularly for such a critical element as the user interface.
- Mark Clements (HappyDog)
2010/6/29 Mark Clements (HappyDog) gmane@kennel17.co.uk:
Why not? Isn't the whole *point* of a skinning system that users can choose which skin to use *without* affecting functionality? Otherwise, it's not a skin, it's a different user interface.
If Gerard is correct and only the 'current' skin is supported, then all other skins should be removed from the software (including monobook). Conversely, as long as they remain part of the software, they should be supported. It is absolutely bonkers to ship with unsupported features, particularly for such a critical element as the user interface.
By far most features are independent of the skinning system and will "magically" work in any skin. JavaScript-based features sometimes do depend on skin-specific details: in that case we generally won't bother to make them work on older skins such as CologneBlue, although there's a fairly good chance they'll work by accident. Which skins are considered to be supported and unsupported exactly I do not know.
Roan Kattouw (Catrope)
On 29 June 2010 00:36, Mark Clements (HappyDog) gmane@kennel17.co.uk wrote:
"Gerard Meijssen" gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote in message news:AANLkTimbfWBz3Nlb-AaQcYWBsmG3igxmV2ZUq3roEPRC@mail.gmail.com...
Hoi, Wikimedias development is centred on one skin. This used to be monobook and it is now vector. The question if a community may elect to be conservative / retro / different ignores this issue. There will be some effort to maintain other skins as well but as history has shown, bit rot will creep in. New functionality will not be designed to work with other skins.
Why not? Isn't the whole *point* of a skinning system that users can choose which skin to use *without* affecting functionality? Otherwise, it's not a skin, it's a different user interface.
I don't think Vector is just a "different" theme, for the sake of having things that glow and pretty colors. I think is a better theme, and better here means is a better fundation to build things.
Going "obsolete" is a luxury. Is possible, if theres enough resources available.
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 3:58 AM, Strainu strainu10@gmail.com wrote:
(I'd argue that changing the skin to vector is a strategic decision by WMF and cannot be overruled by local communities - but that's something a system administrator has to decide.)
I'd say the system administrators will do as the foundation (board perhaps? or some other organ) says.
I have taken the question to foundation-l now because I don't want to risk that we run a poll and then at the end the Foundation will veto against the change.
Martin
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org