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

Anthere Anthere9 at yahoo.com
Tue Feb 20 11:22:53 UTC 2007

No, I said that if a technical change was required and would impact the 
entire community, then the entire community should agree.


PS: from a personal point of view, I think one month and a half is a 
hell of a long time :-)

effe iets anders wrote:
> I think anthere tried to explain that those changes have to be made on every
> wiki. Not technically, but regarding policy. If I read correct, the
> foundtaion wants that the technical side of every language project is about
> the same, to make it easy to switch from one project to another.
> In that case, I would like to add that the move page functionality should be
> given to both users with a certain time of existance, but also to sysops.
> That is because of the stewards, reverting vandalism on small wiki's then.
> But that might be logical anyway. I think in that case two weeks makes more
> sense then one and a half month. That is imho just far too long. In one
> month a person is usually able to vote in votes, and is already sometimes
> part of the hardcore community. Two weeks might even be too long.
> Lodewijk
> 2007/2/20, Titoxd at Wikimedia <titoxd.wikimedia at gmail.com>:
>>Well, this is a technical change to one site's configuration of a
>>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
>>for example. Technically, those settings are completely independent of one
>>another, as they reside on separate files. The only way one wiki's
>>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
>>already there (that's the reason there's a four-day page-move restriction
>>*all* Wikimedia wikis), changing it on one should not affect the other
>>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
>>foundation-l mailing list
>>foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org

More information about the foundation-l mailing list