[Foundation-l] Restriction on page movesinpt.wikipedia.orgThankyou

Titoxd@Wikimedia titoxd.wikimedia at gmail.com
Tue Feb 20 06:11:31 UTC 2007

Well, this is a technical change to one site's configuration of a magnitude
similar to adding an extra namespace to a wiki. More technically, it means
modifying one wiki's LocalSettings.php file. I'm not entirely sure how
changing $wgAutoConfirmAge on pt.wikipedia.org will affect en.wikipedia.org,
for example. Technically, those settings are completely independent of one
another, as they reside on separate files. The only way one wiki's technical
requests affect everyone is when there is something *added* to MediaWiki,
and those effects are due to a new setting added to MediaWiki's
DefaultSettings.php file. As this isn't the case, since the functionality is
already there (that's the reason there's a four-day page-move restriction in
*all* Wikimedia wikis), changing it on one should not affect the other ones.
I'm not sure if Anthere's worry is that a setting of 45 days in pt: will
mean changing the setting to 45 days everywhere else, but if that is it,
then there is no reason to worry. Looking at the code, there is absolutely
no reason why the change would impact other wikis outside the Portuguese


-----Original Message-----
From: foundation-l-bounces at lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:foundation-l-bounces at lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Anthere
Sent: Monday, February 19, 2007 3:17 PM
To: foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Restriction on page

Thomas Dalton wrote:
>>First, having a software displaying different behavior depending on the
>>language/project is a bad idea. It makes things very complex and users
>>travelling from one language to another are likely to find this
> That same logic could be used to say all languages should have the
> same system for RFA, AFD, etc. It was decided a long time ago that
> different languages would be allowed to decide their own policies.
> Policies which are enforced by the software are no different from any
> other policies.

No, it is not the same. Policies with social implications (such as RFA, 
AFD) may be developped independently by each community, without having 
any consequences on the choice made by other communities.

Policies with technical implications may imply that a decision made by 
one community, will be forced over the other communities. This is what 
happened for many many months, as all software evolutions were driven by 
the english community and forced over the other communities along the 
way. We are no more in these times. If a change of software is 
suggested, which could impact all communities, then there must be a 
general agreement that this is a good idea.

Note that I do not say the suggestion is good or bad. I simply say "do 
not expect a top down decision".


> Personally, I think 45 days is rather long, and I'm a little
> uncomfortable with it apparently being handled as a vote (although the
> results of the vote don't leave much room for interpretation, so it
> probably makes no difference), but if that's how pt want to do things,
> it's entirely up to them.

foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org

More information about the foundation-l mailing list