FR talk:Wiki
Catégorie redirigée
Cette catégorie a été renommée ou fusionnée dans une autre et ne devrait plus lister aucune page. Toutes les pages membres qui pourraient encore être listées dans cette catégorie devrait être placée dans:
Category:FR:discussion:Wiki
- REDIRECT Category:FR: Administratif
- Si vous avez des idées pour le wiki, vous pouvez généralement "les faire" en éditant le wiki ! En général, nous vous encourageons à faire preuve d'audace, même si cela peut valoir la peine de discuter d'une grande restructuration.
- Si vous avez des idées "d'améliorations techniques" du fonctionnement du wiki, par ex. des extensions que nous devrions installer, vous pouvez les ajouter ici. Pour ajouter des extensions, une fois discuté et qu'un consensus est présent, un administrateur wiki doit être invité à ajouter la suggestion en tant que problème à Add Structured Discussions (Flow) Wiki Extension.
- Si vous avez une demande nécessitant l'attention des administrateurs, consultez Wiki:Requests for administrator attention.
Les demandes plus anciennes peuvent être trouvées dans les archives, voir l'encadré jaune sous cette ligne, sur le côté droit de la page.
Des requêtes beaucoup plus anciennes peuvent être trouvées dans un référentiel GitHub archivé : openstreetmap/trac-tickets.
![]() Archives | |
---|---|
| |
L'éditeur visuel n'est pas utilisable à cause du modèle {{Fa}} template


En plaçant le modèle {{fa}} au début des pages en Farsi, le contenu de la page y sera intégré, et donc, l'éditeur visuel ne permet pas l'édition directe, mais nous devrions éditer le contenu via une interface de type éditeur de texte.
J'ai découvert que si je mettais le code HTML direct du modèle au lieu du modèle lui-même, l'éditeur visuel fonctionnerait.
Un exemple de page qui utilise le {{fa}} pour rendre la page RTL , et la même page qui utilise directement le code HTML suivant (code HTML du modèle):
<div lang="fa" dir="rtl" class="mw-content-rtl" style="direction:rtl;text-align:initial;font-family:'Noto Naskh Arabic',Noto,'Segoe UI','Iranian Sans',Tahoma,sans-serif;font-size:initial;line-height:1.6">
Ma question : existe-t-il une solution pour éviter d'utiliser ce long morceau de code HTML et en même temps que l'éditeur visuel fonctionne correctement ? iriman (talk) 13:15, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
- Quelle mise en forme et quels modèles (le cas échéant) les wikis WMF multilingues tels que Wikimedia Commons, meta.wikimedia.org et Mediawiki.org utilisent-ils ? L'éditeur visuel fonctionne-t-il ? --Andrew (talk) 19:09, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
I tried out a workaround so that for using it without a parameter we should use <div {{fa}}>
instead of bare {{fa}}. Apparently it works. Please take a look at my draft. iriman (talk) 14:22, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
- I want to modify {{Fa}} as its sandbox version. Then change all instances of
{{fa}}
to<div {{fa}}>
on all pages of this wiki (~300 pages) with a comment for users who are following those pages. - This will not hurt inline ones
{{fa|some text}}
, as you can see in my draft mentioned on previous message. - I cannot do this task manually, and willing someone do it automatically.
- After that we also need to update {{Ltr}} (~50 pages). iriman (talk) 14:51, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
- Regarding your question: WM Commons seems to use the page content language property. According to the MediaWiki documentation, changing the page language wraps the content area in
<div lang="xyz" dir="ltr/rtl" class="mw-content-ltr/rtl">page content</div>
. So, in this case it would be<div lang="fa" dir="rtl" class="mw-content-rtl">...
. This solution looks a bit more professional for me, but it would not necessarily include the additional style definitions by {{Fa}}. Is that an issue? (from a technical POV, we would need to request the system administrators to carry out some configuration changes and it may take a few days to review.) --Tigerfell(Let's talk) 18:08, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
- There is no Special:PageLanguage here though. --Andrew (talk) 08:44, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
- That is what I meant with "configuration changes". First of all, they would need to enable setting languages for individual pages using
$wgPageLanguageUseDB
and then they need to assign thepagelang
permission to some user group. I'd suggest eitheruser
orautoconfirmed
(most of us are a member of both groups). The special page will then appear. The procedure for changing the page language would then work similar to changing the page content model using Special:ChangeContentModel. BTW, we could save the rest of the markup of {{Fa}} in MediaWiki:Common.css. --Tigerfell(Let's talk) 10:57, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
- That is what I meant with "configuration changes". First of all, they would need to enable setting languages for individual pages using
@Iriman: The feature was added in openstreetmap/chef/pull/239. I already tried it out in my sandbox. Regarding the rest of the formatting, I would suggest you make an edit request at MediaWiki talk:Common.css for all RTL languages' formatting. --Tigerfell (Let's talk) 20:52, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
- Nice! Many thanks for following up on this issue. Ok, I will make a request there, thanks for the link! iriman (talk) 23:39, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
- @Yurik: Is it possible to set this for all pages with language prefixes in their names by bot? --Andrew (talk) 06:21, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
- Yes, it would be a fairly simple bot that would call action=setpagelanguage, but I am not sure how the bot will know the current language of the page - I couldn't find the api for that. Perhaps the bot will just keep a list of pages it has already modified. --Yurik (talk) 18:46, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
- All pages except for those changed recently (after the configuration change) are in English (default language for this wiki). --Tigerfell
(Let's talk) 20:10, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
- All pages except for those changed recently (after the configuration change) are in English (default language for this wiki). --Tigerfell
- Yes, it would be a fairly simple bot that would call action=setpagelanguage, but I am not sure how the bot will know the current language of the page - I couldn't find the api for that. Perhaps the bot will just keep a list of pages it has already modified. --Yurik (talk) 18:46, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
- @Yurik: Is it possible to set this for all pages with language prefixes in their names by bot? --Andrew (talk) 06:21, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
- Long term maintenance could be done various ways, for instance putting a warning message and tracking category in the language template if the language set in Mediawiki differs from the one inferred from the page name. Populating the language tags in the first place is the tedious bit. --Andrew (talk) 07:36, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
- Why do we need to have the correct language setting for all pages? It would be obviously nice to know and a good info for search engines and the like, but apart from that? --Tigerfell
(Let's talk) 17:23, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
- It could be useful for language-specific formatting, for example font face (since it's a common need between all languages). This is a possibility only. Users of a language may need it, or not if default configuratuon satisfies them. For Fa, Ar, He, etc. currently we have font settings on our templates {{fa}}, {{ar}}, {{he}}, etc.iriman (talk) 10:59, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
- Why do we need to have the correct language setting for all pages? It would be obviously nice to know and a good info for search engines and the like, but apart from that? --Tigerfell
- Long term maintenance could be done various ways, for instance putting a warning message and tracking category in the language template if the language set in Mediawiki differs from the one inferred from the page name. Populating the language tags in the first place is the tedious bit. --Andrew (talk) 07:36, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
By use of @Wynndale: idea, I put a general notice on {{Fa}} template for a somehow long term maintenance on Farsi wiki. iriman (talk) 15:21, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi again, could someone please take this issue in hand: Setting the page content language for new wiki pages automatically on page creation iriman (talk) 05:51, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
Transition to use data items when this can be done without loosing information
Hi I have experienced an editor who claims that we have not decided to start using the data items. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:amenity%3Dshelter&diff=next&oldid=1944254 In this edit the user reverted my edit resulting in a net loss of information because the data item have a lot more combinations: combination: shelter_type bench table drinking_water water_source floor:material building access image fireplace mattress locked distance_from_road year_of_construction water_source bin wikidata capacity
I therefore suggest that we discuss here and later vote about start using the data of our fantastic data items when no data is lost doing so as in the example case above.--PangoSE (talk) 10:56, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
- This specific case is a separate issue, for example distance_from_road=* seems to be dubious at best and in my opinion it should not be used at all. I will start a discussion on the tagging mailing list to get wider opinions Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:08, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
- No, you did not mention this at all in you revert. You also did not discuss this in the talk page of either the tag in question nor the discussion page of the data item.--PangoSE (talk) 11:18, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, initial revert was done with justification "relying on fetch data from wikidata data items is not desirable". I am disputing claim that it resulted in "net loss of information". I will add further comments about what I consider as mistakes on Item talk:Q5007 (starting from wikidata and image tags). Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:27, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
- For what it's worth, I was also going to revert the change, but I see Mateusz Konieczny got to it before me. --Jeisenbe (talk) 13:33, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, initial revert was done with justification "relying on fetch data from wikidata data items is not desirable". I am disputing claim that it resulted in "net loss of information". I will add further comments about what I consider as mistakes on Item talk:Q5007 (starting from wikidata and image tags). Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:27, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
- Also I'm not in favor of fragmentating the discussion away from this wiki. Please urge wherever you share this that they contribute here.--PangoSE (talk) 11:20, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
- Certainly, any external notification should mention that it is 100% invitation and that comments elsewhere are going to be ignored. Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:24, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
- No, you did not mention this at all in you revert. You also did not discuss this in the talk page of either the tag in question nor the discussion page of the data item.--PangoSE (talk) 11:18, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
- For more general issue - I have several problems with data items. Main ones for me are
- Adding data item to the Watchlist means that it gets filled with "used added translation in Hungarian/Korean/etc" or in other language that is 100% unfamiliar to me where I am unable to distinguish correct edit from clear vandalism, AFAIK it is impossible to avoid it and makes easy to miss edits that I can review
- Watchlist is filled with things like Item talk:Q5007. I really prefer to not use database identifiers as titles, especially in cases where obvious human-rememberable titles are available
- As a direct result of watchlist issues - quality of data in data items is significantly lower than data specified in the article text (including template parameters)
- poor page titles (compare Item:Q5007 and Tag:amenity=shelter), naming collision with the main Wikidata (see https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q5007 )
- Editing interface requires JS, page loads for far longer and interface elements jump around as page continues to load
- Inability to copy content, edit it outside browser as text and copy it back
- Tying OSM Wiki to one more third-party system and relying on it, one more part that may break
- Making editing Wiki more complex, now people need to edit in two different places
- Overall, due to UI issues I am not a fan of data items and oppose migrating to them
- Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:24, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
- PangoSE I'm very unhappy with changes you made. Some tools use wiki and not data items (for ex taginfo). Removing stuff from wiki destroy usefull information for those tools. Keeping it in the wiki without editing the data item allow all info to be used by both wiki-based and dataitems-based tools.
- in fact I'm unhappy with the write acces to data items that has been done too early, all major tools must first be migrated to the dataitems.
- unfortunately for the moment the data items lead to a desyncronization of the information according to the method used to access it, which is the opposite of the arguments used for the experiments.
- Marc marc (talk) 12:03, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Marc, based on the other answers here, maybe the data items should as you suggest be read-only until wider adoption is agreed. Personally I would rather transition to a wikibase-only solution parsed from the wiki and the wiki deprecated, instead of this half-half solution that is brittle/confusing/not agreed on. I like the wikibase-editing approach and consistency better, but this is my subjective taste.--PangoSE (talk) 15:02, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
- I also oppose this idea. Editing the data items is more difficult than adding the text-based templates and maintenance is harder. It is nearly impossible to follow the changes to a data item, because each change is recorded separately. Right now you can understand the whole history of a Tag: or Key: page, which describe the basic features in Openstreetmap, just by looking at the page history. If we instead switch to pull everything from the wiki data item, you will have to look at 2 pages histories to understand what has happened. I don't see any benefits to outweigh these problems, especially for the English language pages. --Jeisenbe (talk) 13:33, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
- I disagree that it is harder than templates and text - I personally dislike wiki-templates if the data is suitable to model in a wikibase instead (which it is in this case IMO). This is the reason I edited the combination-property on the item instead of the wiki-infobox, I remind you that I saw nothing anywhere discouraging me from doing this. I agree that having both side by side is confusing and not a good idea. Wikipedia and Wikidata work because they are not side by side and it is quite clearly define what goes where. It seems we don't have the contributor base or manpower to succeed in copying this WMF wikidata-way at the moment and the result is bad. What about uninstalling the wikibase from the wiki and create a wholly separate OSMbase website where the bot can run loose and whoever want can contribute? This would as I see it solve all the problems in one go: no more confusion, no more editing items instead of wiki and we can choose to copy information from the OSMbase site if we want to and reference properly.--PangoSE (talk) 15:02, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
- I agree with Mateusz and Jeisenbe, the complexity added with the wikidata items makes it harder to understand what is going on, and while I follow quite some wikipages with respect to their changes, I do not do it for our wikidata items because of too much noise. —Dieterdreist (talk) 18:49, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
- I disagree that it is harder than templates and text - I personally dislike wiki-templates if the data is suitable to model in a wikibase instead (which it is in this case IMO). This is the reason I edited the combination-property on the item instead of the wiki-infobox, I remind you that I saw nothing anywhere discouraging me from doing this. I agree that having both side by side is confusing and not a good idea. Wikipedia and Wikidata work because they are not side by side and it is quite clearly define what goes where. It seems we don't have the contributor base or manpower to succeed in copying this WMF wikidata-way at the moment and the result is bad. What about uninstalling the wikibase from the wiki and create a wholly separate OSMbase website where the bot can run loose and whoever want can contribute? This would as I see it solve all the problems in one go: no more confusion, no more editing items instead of wiki and we can choose to copy information from the OSMbase site if we want to and reference properly.--PangoSE (talk) 15:02, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
@Mateusz Konieczny: I appreciate you spelling out in detail the pain points you're experiencing with data items. I hope we can chip away at these problems without making data items read-only or shunting them onto a less integrated site, so that OSM can continue to benefit from increased software integration (that isn't bottlenecked by taginfo) and improved translation coverage.
I think I misunderstood you the other day when you asked how to filter your watchlist in Slack. Here are some possible solutions to the noise that you're experiencing on Special:Watchlist. These solutions also work equally well on Special:RecentChanges and Special:RecentChangesLinked:
- To filter out changes to data items associated with the wiki pages you're watching, uncheck the "Show data item edits in your watchlist" setting in your watchlist preferences. (The watchlist page itself also has a checkbox in the "Filter changes" dropdown to filter them out temporarily.) The checkbox was misleadingly labeled "Show OpenStreetMap Wiki edits in your watchlist" until just now. There are many such messages that refer to the
{{WBREPONAME}}
variable. I've fixed all the messages I could find, but only in English. This GitHub issue tracks changing the MediaWiki configuration to resolve the ambiguity across all languages. - To filter out all edits to data items, click the
Namespaces button in the filter panel, check "Item", and click "Exclude selected". You can click the
button to save the filters for next time.
- To filter out only changes to labels, descriptions, or aliases on data items, click the
Tags button in the filter panel, check "Data item terms", and click "Exclude selected". You can click the
button to save the filters for next time. I just set up an "abuse filter" to automatically tag incoming edits going forward. (Edit: This filter is temporarily disabled due to a configuration issue.)
- If you need to track edits to descriptions in a particular language but not the other languages, I could create a dedicated abuse filter for your language, but we should limit such tags to the most widely used languages to avoid unnecessary load on the server. That said, I hope the existing filter and tag are enough for your needs; to me, an inability to filter on specific languages would be similar to the situation with translatable templates.
@Yurik: has been working on some enhancements to this wiki's interface that will integrate data item editing into the main wiki reading interface. That should result in more intuitive editing than the existing template system without the excessive clicking that the default Wikibase interface currently requires.
I think it's fair to say that editing either the wiki pages or the data items is still too confusing to inexperienced wiki editors (which is to say, inexperienced and experienced mappers alike). I value data items but also think we should make sure they coexist with key/tag description pages for now, rather than coopting them. Data redundancy isn't ideal, but we already flag some inconsistencies through maintenance categories such as Category:Mismatched onNode. If these inconsistencies become too overwhelming to resolve manually, we could have bots like Yurikbot do the gruntwork of automatically synchronizing the data items with pages or vice versa. This kind of synchronization is impractical if we rely solely on wiki pages and translations of wiki pages, as evidenced by the 1,278 keys and tags that are documented inconsistently among wikitext translations.
– Minh Nguyễn 💬 19:11, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
- I would want to ability to exclude from watchlist edits for labels, except specified languages (Polish and English in my case). Weird setups like filtering RSS or abuse filters are not really solving the root problem with watchlist. Note that watchlist pollution affects everybody, not just me and this is a basic tool in wiki. Solution to this problem should be accessible to normal users. Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 19:15, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
I agree, we can do more to improve the ergonomics. Using abuse filters in the manner described above is not uncommon with MediaWiki instances, but it does require some adjustments to the default configuration.
At a certain point of granularity, we’re really talking about the ability to query changes based on arbitrary criteria, which is beyond MediaWiki’s built-in capabilities regardless of the page’s content model. Such querying is relatively straightforward with tools like Quarry. But if the primary requirement is that the tooling is 100% built into MediaWiki, then there’s no good workaround for the fact that translations live on the same page as each other. This same limitation applies to various templates around here, to the extent that anyone cares to watch templates.
On the other hand, keeping translations together means they’re less likely to get out of sync, and sharing untranslatable properties among translators keeps our tagging system from fragmenting between language communities. If hypothetically we were to abandon data items, we would still need a solution for these problems. But an alternative translation solution, the Translate extension, has gone nowhere. Meanwhile, if we were to require that every key/tag infobox draws its data from a shared template instead, I’m not sure that would be any more ergonomic, except for the few of us who are comfortable hacking on templates. (As it is, even the infobox parameters being discussed above require plenty of clicking around in the visual editor, which is enabled by default.)
This is also a good opportunity to examine the practical problems with relying on non-core tools. (I hesitate to call something run entirely by OSM contributors, often on OSM infrastructure, “third-party”.) If filtering the watchlist were to require a user script or potentially a lightweight tool that uses the MediaWiki API, would that be any more unusual than our reliance on taginfo for analyzing OSM tag usage or OSMCha for supplementing the OSM website’s changeset history functionality?
If the concern is about learning curve and discoverability for new contributors, then the solution is to embed these tools in the wiki, which we can do by writing gadgets. If the concern is that only a limited subset of the mapping community has the wherewithal to contribute to data items or tooling around them, then I would just take a look at the limited number of people who maintain our templates today as a counterpoint. The power of a wiki is its openness to new contributors being bold with new ideas, but that flexibility has long been hamstrung by concerns about compatibility with screen scrapers used by taginfo and OSMBC, neither of which are actively maintained, making it difficult to revamp poorly architected templates.
I think the ultimate goal should be that every mapper should be able to improve our documentation and shape the community’s understanding of our tagging system without having to learn a foreign language (human or computer). None of our schemes accomplishes that, not even close. But a system that has localization and programmatic access built in is far superior to a system that can only be localized or parsed thanks to layers of templating hacks and unmaintained regular expressions.
Finally, since Gmane is down and I can’t respond directly to the mailing list thread about this discussion, it should be noted that data items are an approach to managing documentation about tags; its adoption is completely orthogonal to the inclusion of Wikidata QIDs in the OSM database.
– Minh Nguyễn 💬 23:46, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
- Re: "...[it] keeps our tagging system from fragmenting between language communities. If hypothetically we were to abandon data items, we would still need a solution" - this is assuming that allowing tags to be used differently in other countries and language communities is a problem that must be stamped out, rather than a normal result of a global project which is adapted to local conditions in many different countries and language areas.
- The watchlist is currently an automatic way of maintaining the wiki pages: anyone who edits a page is signed up to get notifications about any changes that happen. That's why I am watching almost all of the Tag: and Key: pages listed in Map Features: I have edited most of them at one time or another, and I now am aware if they are changed. There are a dozen other users that are being notified of each change for the same reason, and this prevents vandalism and mistakes. But watching the wiki data items is nearly impossible: there are far too many email notifications to manage as less than a full-time job, since every individual change in every language is a notification.
- Re: "I think the ultimate goal should be that every mapper should be able to improve our documentation and shape the community’s understanding of our tagging system without having to learn a foreign language (human or computer)" - in this case we should remove the ability to directly edit wiki data items and use get things like the "combinations=", "see also=", "requires=" and "onNode, onArea" from the plain text of the wiki page by using a natural language parser. This could still use the wiki data items as a back-end, but it should be designed in a way that does not require any maintenance. Perhaps it is better if tools like taginfo can do this step automatically. I don't know if algorithmic language processing is anywhere near good enough for this purpose, but the goal should be encouraging human-readable, well-written wiki page text (plus some relevant images). All of this data item distraction is taking up time that could be used improving the human-written, human-readable documentation that should be in the main text of the wiki pages, not in a secondary database. --Jeisenbe (talk) 02:46, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
Ignoring its potential to the wider OSM project beyond the wiki, Wikibase is a tool for managing the content of infoboxes. Just as infoboxes aren't a replacement for body text, data items aren't a replacement for body text either. As things stand, everything in a data item should already be shown in the key or tag description page's infobox. Eventually, I hope you'll be even able to click a
button next to each row in the infobox, type the new value inline, and save without ever leaving the page. But there will always be a place for human-written, human-readable documentation regardless of data items. The body text is a great place to explain the real-world phenomenon expressed by the tag, how to find such things on foot or in imagery, common mistakes to avoid and how to fix them, external resources for learning more about the topic, and so on. For example, very little of the body text in Tag:emergency=siren or Tag:service=driveway overlaps with the infoboxes.
Some variability is inevitable and preferable in such a global yet hyperlocal project as OSM. However, most of the interlanguage discrepancies on this wiki are unintentional. (This list links to items for which inconsistencies were identified when seeding the original data items with data parsed from key and tag description pages and their translations, minus the inconsistencies that have since been resolved thanks to the data items bringing them to light.) Indeed, the few intentional differences seem to conflate languages with countries. The rest are symptoms of the decentralized management of infobox data – inconsistencies that are just as problematic to mappers as they are to any validator, editor, or data consumer that would be built upon the wiki's documentation. After all, most people who edit an infobox won't think to synchronize all the other languages' infoboxes. In the days before Wikibase, someone might've proposed that the infobox in Tag:amenity=telephone and all its translations be populated by the contents of a shared Template:Tag:amenity=telephone. Then maybe someone would've proposed a boilerplate template you could fill out, and then localized versions of that boilerplate template. Wikibase formalizes this functionality for all tags without the overhead of countless error-prone templates.
I'm a bit puzzled by your suggestion about natural language processing. My point was that Wikibase and the data items' properties are already fully localizable, and many languages now enjoy translated tag descriptions in iD because the barrier to creating a translation is so low compared to standard wiki pages. If the problem is that this Wikibase installation is half-baked in any way, yet-to-be-written NLP software isn't a solution. Nor is less sophisticated screen scraping: there's no point to a freeform, human-readable wiki page if it has to be formulated a certain way for a parser to pick it up. Anyways, no one is suggesting that body text be generated from data items, only that the infoboxes draw from data items (which are fully localized) instead of template parameters (which require not only English language skills but also potentially wikitext skills). Even then, I would caution that there's no need to rush and remove template parameters until the tooling around editing and watching data items becomes more mature.
– Minh Nguyễn 💬 06:28, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Jeisenbe: I take it that you enabled the "Email me when a page or a file on my watchlist is changed" and "Add pages and files I edit to my watchlist" preferences? If you're receiving e-mail about every granular change to a data item, I can definitely understand that frustration. Have you considered disabling watchlist e-mails in favor of Special:Watchlist, which can group repeated changes to the same page or data item (as long as you keep "Use non-JavaScript interface" disabled)? I'm currently watching about 500 data items, but the automatic grouping keeps the noise down, and I'm trying to get the translation filter back up and running. If you prefer e-mail or a feed reader, perhaps you could configure your client to filter out notifications about data items. – Minh Nguyễn 💬 06:46, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
- "Have you considered disabling watchlist e-mails in favor of Special:Watchlist, which can group repeated changes to the same page or data item (as long as you keep "Use non-JavaScript interface" disabled)?" - I am using solely Special:Watchlist and it is also not capable of handling data items (unable to exclude translation edits in languages that are unfamiliar to me and show other edits). I am unable to keep them on watchlist as label-translation edits to them lead to an unreasonable spam. I never used email notifications Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 10:22, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Jeisenbe: I take it that you enabled the "Email me when a page or a file on my watchlist is changed" and "Add pages and files I edit to my watchlist" preferences? If you're receiving e-mail about every granular change to a data item, I can definitely understand that frustration. Have you considered disabling watchlist e-mails in favor of Special:Watchlist, which can group repeated changes to the same page or data item (as long as you keep "Use non-JavaScript interface" disabled)? I'm currently watching about 500 data items, but the automatic grouping keeps the noise down, and I'm trying to get the translation filter back up and running. If you prefer e-mail or a feed reader, perhaps you could configure your client to filter out notifications about data items. – Minh Nguyễn 💬 06:46, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
Hi @PangoSE: and thank you to have started this discussion. It seems we'll have to discuss, contribute and wait a bit more before DataItems be adopted as wide as wiki is currently in a large variety of tools. WikiData, DataItems, @Yurik: and other contributors works bring here a lot to samentical information quality and benefits will surely be far more important than preserving wikicode edition on a long term basis. As few concerns raise about how such tools are deserving mappers comunity, I find myself each time more surprised on how changes are first of all critisized and pretty not understood. As a wikieditor I just can't wait for a better DataItem integration in as many tool as possible. For instance, it's currently under discussion with JOSM team to take the good of this solution to produce useful and translated presets. Let's keep going with this good work and positive feelings. Fanfouer (talk) 20:00, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
I never liked the "Wikibase" related changes to our wiki and felt this was driving things away from a relatively simple schema accessible to everyone, into an expert-only realm that required much more domain knowledge to actually make a change. I do not want wiki editing to be (even) more complex than mapping is; most steps in the "Wikibase" direction seemed to me to complicate things, or at least rely on some experts to make some things available that are easy to use (but if you want something else it's template madness). I usually kept quiet because I didn't want to ruin the fun for the Wikibase advocates as long as the "normal" use of the Wiki was not hindered too much, but if people start treating the "Wikibase" part as the master system and everything else as "derived content", and you are forced to understand the "Wikibase" stuff to participate, then the buck stops for me and I am in favour of throwing out the lot. --Woodpeck (talk) 14:51, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
- Same remarks apply to wikicode and templates. It is retricted to a small community mastering the edition of wikicode to change anything. Let's call it the OSM community. Fanfouer (talk) 16:05, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
- I agree with Fanfouer here. I think much of this discussion is based on an unmerited bias towards wikicode. Lets face the facts:
- wikicode as technology is +20 years old and besides adding Lua not much has changed
- Wikicode might look pretty but it is notoriously hard to parse and a bad choice if that is your top priority
- Wikibase is a fairly new technology with much improved data consistency and interoperability.
- wikibase items can be improved from e.g. inside josm if we would like that
- improvements to the documentation in items reach everyone, improvements in the wiki might only reach a minority understanding that language
- I have the impression that with well documented items with qualifiers - I'm not so sure we need the body text anymore to explain use of tags. People in doubt can ask on a mailing list or on the talk page of an item. This might cause a steeped learning curve, or might not because the presets in both josm and ID are very nice and helpful and ease my memory so that I font have to remember a lot of tags. With data items we can have a mouse over popup that defines any tag the user sees on the screen. This is wonderful!--PangoSE (talk) 21:19, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
- "not much has changed" - I consider it as a strong benefit. It means that there is much larger pool of people familiar with it. Old technologies are often worse than new technologies, but "X is an old technology, without breaking changes for a long time, familiar to many" is a strength, not a weakness
- easy to edit, hard to parse - again, I consider this tradeoff as a strength. OSM Wiki is already hard to edit. Making it even harder, just to make parsing of data easier seems a bad change. Especially as data in the infobox templates is parseable and is already used, for example in taginfo!
- I agree that keeping data in one place rather than in several is an improvement. But I am not convinced that it is so significant to make data items net positive.
- Why we would want to allow editing summary of the article (template parameters/data items) without looking at the article? It will just encourage mismatch between article text and article summary
- Can you give an example of some data item that without translation gives useful info? More than image + usage on way/node/area/relation + in use/de facto/deprecated/approved status already displayed by an infobox? I would expect that it is not enough to understand or use the tag.
- I am pretty sure that qualifiers are not enough to replace entire article text, though it could be interesting to see this in action. Can you give examples of some complicated tag documentation article and its full replacement in the data item? (BTW, thanks for presenting your arguments!)Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 10:06, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
- I agree with Fanfouer here. I think much of this discussion is based on an unmerited bias towards wikicode. Lets face the facts:
- @Jeisenbe: -- RE: "Re: "...[it] keeps our tagging system from fragmenting between language communities. If hypothetically we were to abandon data items, we would still need a solution" - this is assuming that allowing tags to be used differently in other countries and language communities is a problem that must be stamped out, rather than a normal result of a global project which is adapted to local conditions in many different countries and language areas.
You are equating regions and languages. The language of the wiki should not be the deciding factor of what should be used where. I could be a Russian-speaking person living in Brooklyn/New York (huge community there, with older generation not speaking any English), or Russia (many different locales), or any other place. Portuguese is spoken in Portugal and Brazil - very different mapping communities. Regions on the other hand could have different rules. But those differences must be documented, hopefully in every language, to make sure everyone understands them including all the data consumers. So far I only know of one case like this -- Key:noexit is allowed on ways, but DE:Key:noexit prohibits it. Most other cases are the result of stale documentation - thus a huge documentation problem. Please see storing geographical differences and the following section about locales. --Yurik (talk) 05:04, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Jeisenbe: -- RE: "Re: "...[it] keeps our tagging system from fragmenting between language communities. If hypothetically we were to abandon data items, we would still need a solution" - this is assuming that allowing tags to be used differently in other countries and language communities is a problem that must be stamped out, rather than a normal result of a global project which is adapted to local conditions in many different countries and language areas.
I find myself disagreeing both with those who want to abandon data items and with those who want to abandon ordinary prose on wiki pages. I think we're all going to talk past each other ad nauseam if we only consider extreme measures. On the one hand, it's ironic that that we're mappers who spend much of our time literally making the world machine-readable through tags, yet we can't accept some structured metadata as a complement to our tag documentation. On the other hand, anyone who thinks we can replace prose mapping documentation with data items should click on Special:RandomInCategory/Tag descriptions a bunch of times and try porting all the body text to the corresponding data item – I think you'll be mired in proposing new properties and qualifiers in Talk:Data items for some time to come.
The issue of unintentional discrepancies between infobox translations is actually a significant problem. If the wiki is internally inconsistent on basic facts like whether a particular tag can be used on an area – in hundreds of cases – can validator and editor developers trust the wiki? Or will they be forced to march to their own tune and bring mappers along with them? Wikibase carries the potential to make the wiki more relevant and harder for tool developers to ignore. Isn't that good for the wiki? But imagining that Wikibase had never been installed, would you favor factoring out each English tag description page's infobox code into a template such as Template:ValueDescription/amenity=telephone, to centralize language-agnostic details like |onArea = and |implies =? What about the English template and parameter names – would we rename the parameters to be panlingual or insert comments in every language? Or should everyone learn English in order to contribute to the infoboxes?
The guide for creating a translation of a tag description page is full of wiki jargon and glosses over lots of things that make it difficult to understand the text that one would be copy-pasting. The Wikibase interface also uses some jargon like "statement" and "qualifier", but all those terms are translated, and a translator doesn't have to bother with anything but the description anyways. It's little wonder that, for instance, there are 1,538 feature description pages in Polish but 2,017 data item descriptions in the same language. (It's even more pronounced in other languages: 41 times more descriptions than pages in Vietnamese.) I look forward to the Polish community eventually writing up full-fledged mapping how-tos for the remaining 479 data items and any others that get Polish descriptions in the meantime, but let's not make perfect the enemy of the good.
Taginfo has been brought up many times in this discussion, but it rather proves the point that this wiki needs structured metadata. Taginfo's wiki scraper is quite involved, but it can't deal with slight variations in wiki syntax or the annotated lists of valid values or related tags that often appear in the page body. [1][2] Validators can't use the taginfo API to flag usage of deprecated tags, so every editor has its own logic. [3] I don't mean to disparage taginfo: its specialty is analyzing the OSM database, not making the wiki more digestible. But the scraper does keep us from modernizing templates like {{ValueDescription}}. We can't for instance remove the redundant "File:" from |image = and |osmcarto-rendering-area = or automatically derive |key = and |value = from the page title without having to also hack on Ruby code.
@Mateusz Konieczny: You might see the constant hum of data item changes in your watchlist as nothing more than noise, but to me it's evidence that the wiki is growing beyond what it was before, becoming more relevant to a larger swath of the OSM community. I feel bad saying you have to put up with daily inconveniences for the sake of this growth. As an administrator, I view it as my responsibility to collaborate on solutions for the inconveniences you're experiencing. Your claim that data items are more difficult to edit than infobox templates is intriguing. So far, all I can surmise is that there's a lot more clicking, and that you need to keep other tabs open for context while you edit the data item. If these or other usability problems have soured you on Wikibase, then we should explore each of those problems, perhaps in new sections of Talk:Data items where the focus can be on improvement rather than elimination.
(Sorry for not responding to each of your above bullet points one by one. It's difficult to do so in this talk page format. In my opinion, the mailing list would've been a less confusing place to quote and reply.)
– Minh Nguyễn 💬 07:03, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
- "wiki is growing beyond what it was before" the difference is that with wiki pages I am intentionally not watchlisting for example German translation page. Data items are forcing me to watchlist all translations. That is why I am using Special:Watchlist, not Special:RecentChanges, Maybe data items have overall better UI and people prefer structured interface. Even at cost of horribly long loading time and slower editing speed. But is there any evidence that data items are overall more accessible or used more? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 14:54, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
- "So far, all I can surmise is that there's a lot more clicking, and that you need to keep other tabs open for context while you edit the data item." - horrible load time, each change must be saved separately, changes now require editing both description and a completely separate page Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 14:54, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
- "the mailing list would've been a less confusing place to quote and reply" - I am not going to defend talk page interfaces in mediawiki, this is a clearly horrible hack that really deserves to be replaced. Though for OSM Wiki specific discussing it on Wiki seems a much better idea that using a separate forum like mailing list. Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 14:54, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
Data items - displaying P16 in Wiki lists
More and more data items are translated in other languages (e.g. German). Due to the translation of the label it is difficult to recognize the nativekey behind it in the Wiki, at least working in the Wiki is no longer comfortable. This is especially true for special pages like "Recent changes" or "Watchlist". Therefore I would like to see that these pages in the Wiki always show or list the permanent key P16 instead of the label in the respective display language. - Is there any way to change this? Where would I have to ask this? In the meantime, the only solution is to change the display language to English. Regards --Chris2map (talk) 16:16, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
- What you mean by nativekey and P16? (in my case "solution" is to not add data items to watchlist and treat them as separate project, unrelated to real OSM Wiki - though it would not help if someone wants to have data items on a watchlist) Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 16:40, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
- You could move the labels of the items concerned to be aliases instead. @Yurik: Any other ideas? --Andrew (talk) 16:54, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
- OK I could ignore data items and exclude the namespace :item from watchlist. But if we gonna ignore them, who cares (maintains) about them? - Don't get me wrong. I'm not keen on it. - I think a further separation of the data items from the Wiki must be avoided. Otherwise there will be 2 competing wikis for OpenStreetMap and it is not clear anymore which one will apply. So improving integration or wiping away data items. --Chris (Chris2map (talk) 18:21, 5 June 2020 (UTC))
disagreement in the community about data items and tag pages: how to proceed?
Recently I observed an edit war starting in Tag:highway=living_street, where some lines in the ValueDescription template were repeatedly removed and re-added to start/stop the use of data items for this tag, and one user proceeding to delete the data item itself. For the moment I have locked the page and data item before this gets out of hand any further.
I have commented on Talk:Tag:highway=living street and asked for more cooperation instead of more confrontation, but as the disagreement is not about that tag page itself but the use of data items in general, the discussion really should be on this page here.
I'm putting this here in the hope that we as a community are able to find a better solution than an edit war. --Lyx (talk) 22:07, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
- In my opinion, given that there is no consensus to start blanking infoboxes doing this is not OK. At least on English language pages, not sure about translations. Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 08:02, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
- Also, please see Talk:Tag:highway=living_street#Blanking_infobox, Talk:Tag:highway=living_street#How_can_a_tag_imply_a_key.3F and Talk:Tag:highway=living_street#Conflict_about_.22info_boxes.22 for arguments already made about this issue. --Gileri (talk) 08:09, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
I also think we do need here a procedure in general.
At the moment there is a duplicity of content. IMHO this could only be accepted if at first it was clearly defined what is the master content an at second the content would be automated copied/transferred from master to the other data.
For all other cases we should eliminate duplicity. At a technical view it is cool that infoboxes can handle both sources of content (wiki page and data items). But here we have the issue that it is not decided which twin is preferred.
I think I understood data items are an extended offer to software and consumers. By having that database of data items there must be a way to check and maintain them in the wiki. So the infoboxes seem the logical place for showing the content of data items and provide the link to edit them.
From my view there are some major disabilities or missing features to be fixed, before immediately and completely change to data items in infoboxes:
1. The fixed native key/tag name of an item must show up in lists like recent changes and watchlist (not the label which might be translated).
2. The human readable name of an item must show up in email notification of a watched item (not only the item number).
3. There should be the ability of an edit comment to edits in data items.
If these points are solved it would be fine to me exlusively use data items for content in infoboxes and remove them at the wiki page.
With that step we'll have to decide, which rows or parameters in infoxboxes should "move" to data items. There are ones being predestinated for data items (like "use on nodes/ways/...", status and image). Others like the short "description" might be also a good idea. With "requires", "implies" and "see also" it is more complex.
The topics of a key/tag like "requires", "implies" and "see also" might be better placed and treeted at the wiki page, due to having more flexibility to describe them.
We should think about to limit (and maybe reduce) the content of the infobox. It is developed as a short information on a key/tag and never could cover all content. The same applies to data items. So instead of struggling with pressing more and more information in data items, IMHO we should limit it for now to have a well working short content database and first define the use in the wiki and remove duplicity. E.g. by moving "image", "description", "status" and "use on..." completely to data items.
What would be the procedure to proceed? Some kind of proposal?
By the way, the continuation of the discussion is hard to find cause it doesn't show up in TOC. regards --Chris2map (talk) 10:34, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you for you detailed input Chris2map !
- I agree that the points you raise makes moderation/review harder. Do you think that having a readable watchlist/log/comments (metadata) are more important than having up-to-date content ? Also a big advantage of Data Items is that one can see edits on the one Data Item "page" instead of in each of 10+ languages, which they most probably can't understand the language for most of them. So those advantages may offset the problems you pointed out. --Gileri (talk) 20:20, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
- The maintaining abilities aren't more important than the content. Nevertheless those are important to handle with the content and keep it right and up-to-date. But the underlying issue is how to switch to data items as base for the content of the infobox. Up to now the valid content is the one on wiki page and data item is only determined to be an extension with (automatically) copied data from wiki page. There has to be defined and described what changes are going to be made and how to manage the content data in future. Then it will affect all pages and there must be checked and decided for each page and item, if item data matches the actual page content, before switching infobox. Otherwise content showed on mismatching wiki pages would change at one swoop, even without a note in page history. So maybe it must begin step by step and could be started with the "description", the more so as "description" in data items is already being used by iD editor. I agree that editing the parameters in different languages is more forward at items than at wiki pages. --Chris2map (talk) 22:22, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
- Okay, so if I understand you correctly you oppose a global change to infobox in one swoop. What I did, and what the conflict is about, is changing one or two infoboxes attributes to use Data Items, after manual verification that the content is up-to-date.
Also, you indicate that moderation issues makes it hard to follow Data Item changes. But currently one has to follow both Data Items and each and every language version of the tag page if they want to make sure there are no errors. After using Data Items, that makes a lot less content to follow, so that is a net gain, even with the current issues. --Gileri (talk) 09:12, 30 May 2021 (UTC)- Hi, I don't refer to the initiating conflict. My request is what global solutions are there and how to get there (to dissolve duplicity of content data). I'm still open with my position. Actually I would be glad if we could move "description", "use on..." and "status" to data items, and could maintain them in one place. But I think if we (two) do this simply in one swoop by changing templates of infoboxes, there would occure at least 3 problems popping up: 1st) An outcry of part of the community. 2nd) How to ensure that the more up-to-date data has been adopted (if there are discrepancies between wiki and item, as I mentioned above). 3rd) How should the data or parameters be deleted from the wiki pages? So I'm definitely in favor of improving the current situation. Hence my consideration of whether a small step is somehow practical. Do you have an idea for a bigger swoop? --Chris2map (talk) 11:25, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
- I don't have ideas to change every infobox at once. Even if I did, based on the resistance on some vocal users for the tiny change I did, I think such an endeavor is bound to fail, sadly. But I would be glad someone with more time and energy on the issue found a way to both solve the technical issues, and convincing that structured data in the wiki for OSM, a structured data project, is a good thing. --Gileri (talk) 11:37, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
- Couldn't an update to the template with a check for correct data duplication with warning or error messaging be a solution ? The new infobox would display the wikidata item if it would fits the infobox content from the wiki page. If there is inconsistencies, or wikidata is non existent both values could be displayed in the infobox and the infobox template could generate a "clean-up" or "warning" ambox or a category as you like. This would allow for a gradual transition, a new global changed infobox template but for all at once, as data inconsistencies are clearly displayed and the amboxes or category can be used to trace data duplication errors. Even after a transitional period, I expect that many wiki editors will not feel familiar enough with wikidata to edit it whenever a tagging addition or change is eminent. So the "transitional" template might as well work as a permanent solution and provide more efficient tracking tools for data duplication. --Bert Araali (talk) 12:32, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
- "This would allow for a gradual transition" - what should be done only if there is a clear support for such transition. ""clean-up" or "warning" ambox or a category as you like" - such categories exist already, see Category:Mismatched wikidata, Category:Mismatched onArea etc. Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:39, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
- What I am missing in this discussion so far are ideas - by those opposed to the use of data items and of course others as well - how to make sure that mappers who do not speak English can participate in OSM. In other words, how do we keep documentation consistent about language versions. And if the idea is "Someone monitors changes and adapts the existing translations" I would like to know who that "Someone" is and if "Someone" agrees to take the job. --Lyx (talk) 15:36, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
- Actually, for keeping translation in synch data items are worse than OSM Wiki pages. There is no effective way to notice that something is changed (as watchlisting data items fills watchlist with translation updates in all languages, including ones where you cannot review changes). That is why I am against blanking infoboxes, it would Watchlisting wiki page in your language and in English is right now the best solution. And for parameters in infoboxes like onArea - I would be happy to generate list of mismatches if anyone would be interested and keep it up to date. If anyone actually interested in fixing such mismatches - which language is interesting for you? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 16:19, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
- I think you missed the "do NOT speak English" in my comment above. I don't worry so much about Wiki translators or editors but about readers who just "consume" wiki pages to find out about tags they want to use. With data items they could get at least rudimentary information consistently auto-translated instead of (in worst case) nothing that they can read. --Lyx (talk) 18:55, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
- Actually, for keeping translation in synch data items are worse than OSM Wiki pages. There is no effective way to notice that something is changed (as watchlisting data items fills watchlist with translation updates in all languages, including ones where you cannot review changes). That is why I am against blanking infoboxes, it would Watchlisting wiki page in your language and in English is right now the best solution. And for parameters in infoboxes like onArea - I would be happy to generate list of mismatches if anyone would be interested and keep it up to date. If anyone actually interested in fixing such mismatches - which language is interesting for you? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 16:19, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
- What I am missing in this discussion so far are ideas - by those opposed to the use of data items and of course others as well - how to make sure that mappers who do not speak English can participate in OSM. In other words, how do we keep documentation consistent about language versions. And if the idea is "Someone monitors changes and adapts the existing translations" I would like to know who that "Someone" is and if "Someone" agrees to take the job. --Lyx (talk) 15:36, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
- "This would allow for a gradual transition" - what should be done only if there is a clear support for such transition. ""clean-up" or "warning" ambox or a category as you like" - such categories exist already, see Category:Mismatched wikidata, Category:Mismatched onArea etc. Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:39, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
- Couldn't an update to the template with a check for correct data duplication with warning or error messaging be a solution ? The new infobox would display the wikidata item if it would fits the infobox content from the wiki page. If there is inconsistencies, or wikidata is non existent both values could be displayed in the infobox and the infobox template could generate a "clean-up" or "warning" ambox or a category as you like. This would allow for a gradual transition, a new global changed infobox template but for all at once, as data inconsistencies are clearly displayed and the amboxes or category can be used to trace data duplication errors. Even after a transitional period, I expect that many wiki editors will not feel familiar enough with wikidata to edit it whenever a tagging addition or change is eminent. So the "transitional" template might as well work as a permanent solution and provide more efficient tracking tools for data duplication. --Bert Araali (talk) 12:32, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
- I don't have ideas to change every infobox at once. Even if I did, based on the resistance on some vocal users for the tiny change I did, I think such an endeavor is bound to fail, sadly. But I would be glad someone with more time and energy on the issue found a way to both solve the technical issues, and convincing that structured data in the wiki for OSM, a structured data project, is a good thing. --Gileri (talk) 11:37, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
- Hi, I don't refer to the initiating conflict. My request is what global solutions are there and how to get there (to dissolve duplicity of content data). I'm still open with my position. Actually I would be glad if we could move "description", "use on..." and "status" to data items, and could maintain them in one place. But I think if we (two) do this simply in one swoop by changing templates of infoboxes, there would occure at least 3 problems popping up: 1st) An outcry of part of the community. 2nd) How to ensure that the more up-to-date data has been adopted (if there are discrepancies between wiki and item, as I mentioned above). 3rd) How should the data or parameters be deleted from the wiki pages? So I'm definitely in favor of improving the current situation. Hence my consideration of whether a small step is somehow practical. Do you have an idea for a bigger swoop? --Chris2map (talk) 11:25, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
- Okay, so if I understand you correctly you oppose a global change to infobox in one swoop. What I did, and what the conflict is about, is changing one or two infoboxes attributes to use Data Items, after manual verification that the content is up-to-date.
- The maintaining abilities aren't more important than the content. Nevertheless those are important to handle with the content and keep it right and up-to-date. But the underlying issue is how to switch to data items as base for the content of the infobox. Up to now the valid content is the one on wiki page and data item is only determined to be an extension with (automatically) copied data from wiki page. There has to be defined and described what changes are going to be made and how to manage the content data in future. Then it will affect all pages and there must be checked and decided for each page and item, if item data matches the actual page content, before switching infobox. Otherwise content showed on mismatching wiki pages would change at one swoop, even without a note in page history. So maybe it must begin step by step and could be started with the "description", the more so as "description" in data items is already being used by iD editor. I agree that editing the parameters in different languages is more forward at items than at wiki pages. --Chris2map (talk) 22:22, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Detecting differences between infoboxes in English and translated pages
If anyone would be interested in listing differences between infoboxes in English and in some specific language, please let me know. I have a complete toll allowing to produce such list, and in smarter way than current available one (skips some irrelevant differences).
If you are interested in using something like that - which language you are interested in? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 20:32, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
what do we mean when we talk about consistency between language versions?
I see three different forms of consistency that we could talk about, and I like to describe them using examples. Please note that these examples are NOT valid tags in OSM (at least not as far as I know) and are only used here for illustration.
First form of consistency is "One specific tag should always specify the same kind of object regardless of the language used in the area where the tagged object is located". So assume we had a tag "biome=tundra", and it would be used for tagging areas of land where the vegetation is limited by low temperatures and short growing seasons. Then if in a specific language version this tag was documented as a tag to be used on nodes instead, or to be used for tagging e.g. railway stations, that would be a breach of consistency. In my opinion that kind of consistency breach would be unacceptable.
Second form of consistency is "The same kind of object should always be marked with the same tag". So if there were one language documenting that a "land area with vegetation limited by low temperatures and short growing seasons" should be tagged "landscape=cold_steppe" while in other languages it would be called "biome=tundra", that would be a breach of this form of consistency. I personally would consider this kind of inconsistency as mildly annoying, but not a big problem.
Third form of consistency is "The same tag should have the same useful combinations in all language versions". So if some languages documented that "biome=tundra" could be combined with "permafrost=yes" and other languages did not, this would breach the third form of consistency. Personally I would not see this as a problem at all; if that combination is useful someone will get around to document it eventually.
What do you think, are there other forms of consistency you care about or do you disagree with me about the importance of these forms of consistency? Let us know, please. --Lyx (talk) 20:23, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
- 1 is important to me, 2 is nice to have but not critical, 3 is not a good idea at all as it disallows making a new translation page with the most important info and skipping less important parts. Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 20:48, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
CAPTCHA


I've noticed OSM Wiki uses Google reCAPTCHA which I've been almost hit with trying to create my user page. (By "almost" I mean I have Google's domains blocked so my browser cannot download the captcha)
There are automated tools specializing in solving Google's captcha (Buster captcha solver is a freely available example) and I've used some to fully automate jDownloader and similar workflows. Hence reCAPTCHA leaves a lot to be desired in fighting off automated spam.
Moreover, all such tools don't prevent reCAPTCHA's code from running, they simply automate the typing and clicking-through behavior. ReCAPTCHA's code analyzes and attempts to fingerprint your OS and computer. In effect reCAPTCHA de-anonymizes to Google the users of every site which requires its users to solve it. In addition to obvious privacy concerns, as Google is OSM's main competitor, I'd argue doing this to OSM's own contributors is unwise.
I would suggest replacing this with another captcha system, such as Wikipedia's captcha. Rostaman (talk) 03:21, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
- See https://github.com/openstreetmap/operations/issues/19 for some context. "I switched to FancyCaptcha for awhile and got shouted at because blind users were unable to complete the captcha.". I am unfamiliar with Wikipedia's captcha (is it usable by us?), but you may try opening a new issue there proposing such change Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 10:12, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
- Yeah it seems Wikipedia's captcha has the same problem. I wonder if it could be possible to create some sort of fallback where people can choose to solve Google's captcha if they can't solve the one that doesn't have audio fallback. Rostaman (talk) 02:45, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
- It is probably one of cases that are in category of "will be not fixed without someone willing to write necessary code/configuration updates, current contributors are unlikely to have time for that" Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 10:04, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
- Yeah it seems Wikipedia's captcha has the same problem. I wonder if it could be possible to create some sort of fallback where people can choose to solve Google's captcha if they can't solve the one that doesn't have audio fallback. Rostaman (talk) 02:45, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
I wonder if the amount of spam would increase significantly, if we would switch off this CAPTCHA. @Rostaman: Is there any way to get the number of actions denied by reCAPTCHA? --Tigerfell (Let's talk) 13:43, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
- I don't know, I've never served reCAPTCHA on a website, only solved them. You might want to ask Google or whoever has set up reCAPTCHA on this wiki. I'd say that Wikipedia, despite using a simpler Captcha, doesn't seem to have a large problem with automated spam. They also have nofollow set for links from user pages (see https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Nofollow ) - reading that page, this might already by in place here too since this wiki appears to use MediaWiki too. Rostaman (talk) 05:39, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
Yes, please remove the Google Captcha immediately!.--Kartenziegel (talk) 15:23, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
As a follow-up, I suggested to disable CAPTCHA and check if spam increases significantly. openstreetmap/operations/issues/383 --Tigerfell (Let's talk) 10:57, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
Rendering sample images broken in Taglists if they include spaces or underscores
I've been about to change Template:Map_Features:aerialway and Template:Map_Features:power to taglists, but I see that the rendering samples in the taglists do not work properly. This problem is currently visible in taglists like Template:Map_Features:barrier and Template:Map_Features:military. I'm not sure if the issue is in the wiki software or in taginfo or both, but it appears we can fix this by changing the underscores to dashes instead. Geozeisig, would you be interested in trying to fix this? I know you have done a lot of work to maintain these rendering sample images. --Jeisenbe (talk) 22:37, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
- Jeisenbe Can you give an example of how it is meant? I am no longer a friend of taglists because a lot of information is lost.--geozeisig (talk) 06:49, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
- Well, I thought that changing the underscores to dashes would fix the problem, but now it does not appear to be working for Template:Map_Features:aerialway. Perhaps the problem is with all png files? See https://github.com/taginfo/taginfo/issues/201 and https://github.com/taginfo/taginfo/issues/223 --Jeisenbe (talk) 08:01, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you for finding the reason of not displayed pictures in Taginfo/Taglists. I noticed this behavior some time ago also for the historic=* table, see my question there at the discussion page: Talk:Key:historic#Taglist_rendering_pic_not_displayed_e.g._for_historic.3Dcastle_wall. Okay, i could help to fix it, but can't tell when i have time for it. By the way, i also struggle a bit with the newer Taginfo/Taglists system, because for some reason i can't see the preview (edit:"Show preview"-function button). The error message says
LOADING TAG LIST... (If you do not see this tag list, you need to enable Javascript)
. Is there something i have to configure on my machine (Javascricpt seems activated for the used browser - firefox), or is this a general issue? Without working edit:"Show preview"-function i wouldn't want to switch to the taglist system. --MalgiK (talk) 11:03, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
- Re: "The error message says LOADING TAG LIST..." - I see this sometimes when I have a bad internet connection, but usually if I hit the "preview" button again, it will show. I agree that it is annoying to rely on Javascript rather than having the table pre-rendered. Perhaps someone can fix this technically.
Hi, I fixed all problems on the page Map_features : the solution with dash doesn't work properly, the good solution for taglists needs 2 steps. 1. underscores don't work (as it was said above) : you have to put a space instead and only a space. More precisely, if you have an underscore in the name of the file for the osmcarto-rendering parameter in the ValueDescription of the tag, page in English, you have to replace it by a space. Example : for the tag tree_row, the name of the rendering file is File:Rendering-natural_tree_row-mapnik.png. In the osmcarto-rendering, you have to write : osmcarto-rendering=File:Rendering-natural tree row-mapnik.png. 2. You have to wait one day to see the result : taglists work with the taginfo API. Taginfo is updated once a day so you have to wait the next update to see the result in your taglists. Best regards. Fred73000 (talk) 18:38, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
Followup on CAPTCHA


I've recently found out that Cloudflare has its own CAPTCHA service called hCaptcha. It's not tied into Google's surveillance network, it doesn't discriminate against non-Chrome users, it has some kind of token pass system for visually-impaired and/or privacy-positive users, and it's even currently paying webmasters for completed captchas (Google doesn't reimburse its clients for making their users do free work for its AI program). Might not be the best alternative in regards to privacy (since it still relies on a large company) but arguably better than Google. Rostaman (talk) 15:44, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
- I'm surprised there isn't a viable open source non-commercial CAPTCHA system out there that could be adopted. When I randomly looked into it a while back it seemed like all the opensource options still sent information to some random server. Maybe there's one I'm not aware of though that could be used by the wiki. As I think any commercial one, Google or not, will probably compromise privacy somehow and therefore be semi-problematic. The only way around it would be to go with an open source one where the information sharing can be turned off or to create one just for OSM. --Adamant1 (talk) 11:52, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
- I agree 100%. However the last time I came here with this question the message was that CAPTCHA is necessary and Google's will remain in use because nothing else satisfactory was suggested. That's why I suggest switching to Cloudflare's for the time being until a privacy-friendly software is found, since Cloudflare is a lesser evil than Google. Rostaman (talk) 13:10, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
- See also https://github.com/openstreetmap/chef/issues/298. --Andrew (talk) 17:19, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
- Google's Captcha is especially vicious because it punishes you for not having a Google account, deleting cookies or using Tor.
- If you really want to defeat the SEO spam (NEW: use Cyrillic to fool the admins) you should just demand an OSM account with > 10 map edits as requirement for a Wiki account.--Tito (talk) 20:56, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
- I don't think the wiki and main site are connected in way that would allow for the wiki to be able to tell if a user has 10 map edits. As far as I know, they are completely different logins etc. Not that they couldn't be integrated somehow to get around it. But a lot of higher up OSM people that should be able to edit the wiki lack map edits but are extremely active with the organization in other areas. Same for developers. So, arbitrary map edits as a qualifier could be kind of iffy. Although, 10 is a low bar, but it might be low enough for scammers to just map 10 objects then spam away. Which might slow them down but wouldn't stop them. Not that there aren't ways around CAPTCHA systems either though. --Adamant1 (talk) 04:06, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for linking the issue @Andrew:. @others if you want to get in touch with the administrators to initiate a change, I suggest to comment on the GitHub issues. --Tigerfell
(Let's talk) 11:26, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for linking the issue @Andrew:. @others if you want to get in touch with the administrators to initiate a change, I suggest to comment on the GitHub issues. --Tigerfell
- I don't think the wiki and main site are connected in way that would allow for the wiki to be able to tell if a user has 10 map edits. As far as I know, they are completely different logins etc. Not that they couldn't be integrated somehow to get around it. But a lot of higher up OSM people that should be able to edit the wiki lack map edits but are extremely active with the organization in other areas. Same for developers. So, arbitrary map edits as a qualifier could be kind of iffy. Although, 10 is a low bar, but it might be low enough for scammers to just map 10 objects then spam away. Which might slow them down but wouldn't stop them. Not that there aren't ways around CAPTCHA systems either though. --Adamant1 (talk) 04:06, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
Discrepancies in wiki articles: can this tag be used on node? way? area? relation?
Hi everyone,
I found some discrepancies between articles. For example, in the article highway=footway, we can see in the infobox (on right) in section Used on these elements, that this tag can be used only on ways and areas. But on the other language pages (ex: FR:Tag:highway=footway), we can see that this tag can only be used on ways and not on areas. And we have the same issue on the highway=* page in the table listing all values for this tag.
And I'm pretty sure there are a lot of issues like this one.
So either we (I) will need to check every articles in every languages (very long task!) or I can create a bot.
So I want my bot to check for those issues and 'print' a report. So a regular user can try to fix those issues. I never created a bot yet, maybe I will use Pywikibot. Does anybody know if this kind of bot work on this wiki? Also, I may want to use Toolforge to run my bot, but I don't know if Toolforge can target this wiki (a wiki outside wikimedia fundation), any ideas?
Have a nide day. --Binnette (talk) 08:54, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
- Ok, so it's seems that we can simply remove the parameters "onNode, onWay, onArea and onRelation" to get the 'fallback' values defined here Item:Q5015 in "use on nodes", "use on ways", "use on areas" and "use on relations". (The job is done by the module Module:DescriptionFromDataItem.)
- So I'm just gonna edit highway=footway and remove the 4 parameters "onNode, onWay, onArea and onRelation".
- Anybody is against my solution? --Binnette (talk) 11:37, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
- If you delete the VD parameters ("onNode, onWay, onArea and onRelation") you will loose the taginfo displaying compatibility :-( , see on this table: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/highway=footway#wiki --MalgiK (talk) 21:56, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
- Please don't delete the parameters from the actual wiki pages. I also think that a bot is the incorrect way to do this. The right way is to check how each tag is actually being used (by looking at taginfo and overpass-turbo) and make sure the description in the wiki matches how the tag is used by most mappers. --Jeisenbe (talk)
- Please don't delete any parameters at all. It is fine to edit them, but I am not OK at all with deleting such content from OSM Wiki pages and relying on this data items (there was a big discussion about this already). Note that for translation in a given language it is possible that there is agreement to give up on maintaining this and use unreliable data items. Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 08:15, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
- Discussion was on this very page, see Talk:Wiki#Transition_to_use_data_items_when_this_can_be_done_without_loosing_information Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 08:26, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
- "So I want my bot to check for those issues and 'print' a report. So a regular user can try to fix those issues. " - it exists already, see list of mismatches at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Data_item_issues Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 08:18, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
- For example https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Mismatched_onNode (I am not using this as in 99+% cases either translations or data item is wrong - and I do not care about data items and I edit only Polish translation, and even mismatches between PL and data items are generally data item mistakes) Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 08:20, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Binnette: I am not yet comparing between languages, but I nearly wrote such bot myself. See User:Mateusz Konieczny/TODO for typical output, code is at https://github.com/matkoniecz/osm_wiki_tag_api If you are interested specifically in log about conflicts between English and French Wiki entries (or maybe French OSM Wiki vs Data items conflicts) I can generate something in format that you want Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 14:43, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
Redesign of page not found message
As a followup to Talk:Wiki#Taginfo placeholders for undocumented tags, I've started a redesign of MediaWiki:Noarticletext at Template:Noarticletext/sandbox based on w:Template:No article text. Here are the main changes:
- A modicum of styling distinguishes the message from a very short page, so users familiar with the wiki will immediately recognize the message.
- The message differs slightly depending on the namespace and also for keys and tags.
- There are links to both taginfo and a tool to look up the associated data item without having to fiddle with Special:Search's advanced options.
- For Key: and Tag: titles, clicking "Create this page" preloads some boilerplate with instructions for creating the page. There's a different boilerplate for keys versus values.
This is a work in progress:
- MediaWiki:Newarticletext should be redesigned at the same time. It might feature a button to optionally load the boilerplate, as in User:Minh Nguyen/preload. It also needs to fit inside the narrower flyout panel in the visual editor.
- For now, the redesigned message and boilerplates are all in English.
- When the boilerplate is loaded, we should replace MediaWiki:Noarticletext with instructions for working with the boilerplate. (For example, when the visual editor is enabled, you'd type below each
comment, optionally deleting the comment.)
Try it out, entering a variety of page titles to see how the message adjusts to different scenarios.
– Minh Nguyễn 💬 23:53, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Minh Nguyen: - thanks for developing this, how it would be deployed? As filler on text of any page not created after entering it? Filled after deliberately pushing some button? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 07:30, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
- The "try it out" link above previews what a redesigned MediaWiki:Noarticletext would look like. This is the message that shows up when you go to a page like https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:yes=no. When you click "Create this page", you're taken to a prefilled edit page, which you can fill out and preview before publishing. You can of course continue to edit the page afterwards. Users who know what they're doing can click the "Create" tab at the top of the page to get a blank edit page, or they can simply delete all the boilerplate text and start from scratch. If this is confusing, perhaps the Noarticletext message could offer both options. – Minh Nguyễn 💬 18:33, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
- I am unsure about gallery by default. Problem that repeats is that page supposed to describing tag has massive gallery that ads nothing to an article Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 07:30, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
- The sections included by default are by no means meant to be required, and sections that aren't needed should be deleted. Perhaps the comments should make that clearer. I was under the impression that galleries are common enough and figured that the
<gallery>
syntax is fairly obscure. – Minh Nguyễn 💬 18:33, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
- The sections included by default are by no means meant to be required, and sections that aren't needed should be deleted. Perhaps the comments should make that clearer. I was under the impression that galleries are common enough and figured that the
- What is the plan to make clear that user should save page so that "{{safesubst:#invoke:DescriptionFromDataItem/sandbox|preload|key={{safesubst:#invoke:OsmPageTitleParser|" will generate something? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 07:30, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
- Good question. We can add a message above the edit box (in wikitext mode) and in a flyout panel (in the visual editor) that explains what that gobbledygook does. It would take the place of the existing MediaWiki:Newarticletext message. I'd love to make the infobox code look more like an infobox in the visual editor, but I think
safesubst:
interferes with that. – Minh Nguyễn 💬 18:33, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
- Good question. We can add a message above the edit box (in wikitext mode) and in a flyout panel (in the visual editor) that explains what that gobbledygook does. It would take the place of the existing MediaWiki:Newarticletext message. I'd love to make the infobox code look more like an infobox in the visual editor, but I think
- "Where to find them" section seems unusual, not sure whatever have seen it usefully used anywhere and is quite rare anyway. Why it is needed if there is both description of feature and how it is mapped? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 07:30, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
Sometimes mappers see something in imagery and want to know how to map it, but other times they're browsing the wiki, see something interesting, and wonder if they can map any instances of it in their own area of interest. The definition doesn't always make it obvious where to find the feature, because the location may differ between regions, cultures, or levels of urbanization. Separately, many organized mapping teams have developed their own training materials to supplement the wiki; as far as I can tell, this is a common element of those training materials. In general, I would like the wiki to address the aspects that are currently exclusively covered by those training materials, so that the wiki can be more authoritative and there's less opportunity for conflict between the community and mapping teams.
You're right that this section is relatively uncommon (and sometimes titled differently), but I do think the content that has been placed within this section so far has been pretty useful. I only included "Where to find them" on the tag description boilerplate, because keys on their own don't represent features; some key description pages have an analogous section called "Rationale" or "Use cases". I'm hoping this boilerplate sparks a discussion about the "standard" sections of tag description pages from a reader perspective, but perhaps I'm trying to do too many things at once.
:-)
– Minh Nguyễn 💬 18:33, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
Usage of 
icons on boundaries
The use of the icons and
are used inconsistently across the wiki when it comes to boundaries (specifically, relations tagged with type=boundary). It is clear that
applies to relations of type=multipolygon. However, a boundaries are more complex - they are a relation of type=boundary with one or more closed ways and optionally nodes with the roles
admin_centre and
label. Are boundaries
,
, or
?
The table below shows the different answers given on different wiki pages.
1. Does apply to relations of type=boundary?
Yes | No |
---|---|
2. Does apply to relations of type=boundary?
Yes | No |
---|---|
Which icon(s) should be used when describing boundaries on the wiki?
Add Structured Discussions (Flow) Extension


openstreetmap/operations/issues/496
Editing talk pages is hard for new/inexperienced users.
This can be especially frustrating/limiting when wanting to comment on a Proposal being proposed.
Adding the Structured Discussions extension provides a simple interface that allows users to respond, create, resolve, etc. topics easily.
The WikiMedia Talk Pages Project is being worked on but it doesn't look like it's available for install. Converting to this should also be a priority when it becomes available.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Lectrician1 (talk • contribs) 00:20, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
- If any of these tools can save us from figuring out the right combination of
:::*::*:*::
to preface a comment with, then I'm sold!:-D
My only concern with Flow is that it seems to be in maintenance mode as the Wikimedia Foundation has refocused its efforts on more incremental talk page improvements. My impression is that Flow isn't a particularly straightforward extension, since it changes the content model of a page irreversibly and introduces new namespaces. That said, it's a much more polished system than LiquidThreads, which Translatewiki.net is still annoyingly relying on. So if it does adapt well to a non-Wikimedia wiki, then it would make integral OSM processes like the tag proposal process more accessible to the bulk of the OSM community. – Minh Nguyễn 💬 02:26, 7 January 2021 (UTC) - (1) what would be import plan for old talk pages? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 10:02, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
- (2) is there a working export from StructuredDiscussions to standard talk pages if development on it stops? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 10:02, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
Following up on my impression above: Flow development was put in maintenance mode in 2015 before it gained enough of a feature set to be adopted more widely. [5] Though the WMF left open the possibility of restarting work on it, the general sense in places like Wikidata Telegram is that the extension is a "technological dead end" and that it won't ever be developed any further beyond basic maintenance. At the moment, that doesn't present a practical issue for us. LiquidThreads has also been in maintenance mode for almost a decade, but Translatewiki.net uses it today. Still, I would be wary of relying on something in maintenance mode when we could wait a little longer for the new talk page improvements to mature.
@Mateusz Konieczny: Flow is opt-in: there's a special one-time UI command to convert a talk page to be Flow-enabled, and there's no going back (because the topics end up on disparate pages in a different namespace).
I'm unaware of a built-in way to bring everything back to how it used to be if we decide to uninstall Flow. Ultimately, each topic is a wiki page with a unique identifier as the page title, so it should be possible to archive these pages. However, compiling them back into a standard wiki talk page would require a bot to crawl these pages and some assumptions about how the topics fit together. I really do like the Flow interface, but it's a matter of taste and a rabbit hole that we probably shouldn't go down right now.
– Minh Nguyễn 💬 01:25, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
- I've used StructuredDiscussions or Flow on the www.mediawiki.org website several times last year, assuming that's what it was. I've found it to work a lot like forums - it has the same set of issues with editing and deleting posts. I wrote a message on someone's talk page and couldn't edit it to fix a typo. Eventually I was told by an admin that nobody can edit my post anymore. I also couldn't delete my own double-post immediately after I made it, an admin had to do it. That was pretty baffling.
- I've noticed that Wikipedia now has a "reply" button on talk pages, I think that equally well solves the problem of counting the
:::::
and wondering where you need to place your message, without introducing the forum moderation-type problems. Hopefully they'll release it to other wikis soon. Rostaman (talk) 15:36, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
- @Rostaman: The "Reply" button is part of the talk pages project that the Wikimedia Foundation is actively pursuing as an alternative to StructuredDiscussions/Flow that's much more flexible. It isn't mature enough to install here yet, but it seems quite promising. – Minh Nguyễn 💬 09:45, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
For future reference, the Reply and New Discussion tools are implemented by mw:Extension:DiscussionTools, which seems like a refreshingly simple extension: backwards-compatible, no special namespaces, and the BetaFeatures dependency is optional. The only downside is that it's currently in beta. If this is a problem, perhaps Commons:User:Jack who built the house/Convenient Discussions would be a good stepping stone, since it's nothing more than a gadget. – Minh Nguyễn 💬 18:47, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
I'm considering installing Commons:User:Jack who built the house/Convenient Discussions as a gadget here, as a stopgap until mw:Extension:DiscussionTools is ready for primetime. Both extensions are backwards-compatible with the wikitext conventions for replies and signatures. The two extensions seem to be capable of coexisting; Convenient Discussions provides some power-user features that DiscussionTools probably won't end up offering, like the ability to move discussions between talk pages. – Minh Nguyễn 💬 06:55, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
- Yes, this would be great! This tool is of such use on the Wikimedia wikis! Lectrician1 (talk) 22:53, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
- @Lectrician1 and Adamant1: Here you go: Convenient Discussions. Minh Nguyễn 💬 09:54, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
DynamicPageList extension
A recent mailing list post by Lectrician1 got me thinking we should install the DynamicPageList extension. This simple extension adds a tag that allows any page to include a dynamic list of the contents of a category and customize some basic sorting and display options. For example, Proposal process could have a table that looks like this, populated automatically as a result of each proposal page using the {{Proposal Page}} template and sorted by the date the status was last changed:
- 22 December 2020: Proposed features/golf cart path
- 21 December 2020: Proposed features/addr:interval
- 28 November 2020: Proposed features/wait
A similar list based on Category:Key descriptions with status "de facto" could appear on the Changelog. Or these lists could even appear on Main Page to supplement {{News}}, which is very quiet (only three items for all of 2020).
The extension's official documentation includes a warning to only install it on small- to medium-sized wikis due to scalability. Fortunately, I don't think this wiki is anywhere near the scale where that issue would matter. The Vietnamese Wiktionary, one of the largest Wiktionaries about four times the size of this wiki, bravely uses it on its front page to showcase new entries. Also, I think the scalability issue is specific to performing an intersection between two categories (must be in category A and B but not C), which isn't necessary for the use case described above.
If there's agreement that this extension would be useful, we can ask the operations team to install it.
– Minh Nguyễn 💬 02:13, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
- +1 if this extension is not introducing some noticeable complexity. Is there a real risk of increased instability and poor performance if we keep enabling bunch of extensions? Here benefits seems minimal Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 10:00, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
- I can't speak for the cumulative effect of many extensions being enabled, but one way of looking at it is that we have far fewer extensions installed than a typical Wikimedia wiki, while the community seems to expect a similar level of service. DynamicPageList is fortunately a relatively simple extension, befitting its relatively minimal benefits, but I think your concern is worth keeping an eye on. – Minh Nguyễn 💬 06:55, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
Support --Lectrician1 (talk) 15:01, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
- I
Support it. maro21 18:13, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Support --Tordanik 20:52, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
By way of an update, the MediaWiki developers have reported stability issues due to intersections with very large categories on some wikis. They're planning to limit DPL to categories containing 100,000 or fewer pages, which shouldn't by itself affect this wiki: our largest category is Category:Pages unavailable in Dutch with a mere 45,188 pages (just a bit of translating to do). However, Wikimedia's problems may warrant some investigation as to whether other performance issues could affect us. – Minh Nguyễn 💬 22:50, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
Add TemplateStyles Extension
openstreetmap/operations/issues/509
I am looking to redoing the Main Page however I require css. This extension allows for separate stylesheets.
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:TemplateStyles
Any objections?
--Lectrician1 (talk) 03:52, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Custom CSS is possible now, it just needs to be installed by an admin. I had to do this for my taginfo box replacement project. No need for a separate extension AFAIK. @Minh Nguyen: --ZeLonewolf (talk) 04:05, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Yes, Minh and I discussed this. However I run into the issue of not being able to test the css and how it looks on a page before I commit to the actual page. I want to use my user pages to test both the Main Page Wikitext and CSS combination. Not being able to test means going through a admin is practically unreasonable. It's also nice to have publicly-available css stylesheets for easy reference and changes. All Wikimedia projects have this extension and it's been very handy to work with in the past before. --Lectrician1 (talk) 05:03, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- That doesn't make any sense, I had no problem testing my CSS without any special extension. --ZeLonewolf (talk) 05:19, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Yes, Minh and I discussed this. However I run into the issue of not being able to test the css and how it looks on a page before I commit to the actual page. I want to use my user pages to test both the Main Page Wikitext and CSS combination. Not being able to test means going through a admin is practically unreasonable. It's also nice to have publicly-available css stylesheets for easy reference and changes. All Wikimedia projects have this extension and it's been very handy to work with in the past before. --Lectrician1 (talk) 05:03, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Following up from our private conversation, hopefully your browser's built-in developer tools provide the facilities you need to prototype style rules for the main page. TemplateStyles is a nice extension to have, but it is already technically possible to implement something similar without TemplateStyles by writing a user stylesheet that an administrator can turn into a gadget or copy into MediaWiki:Common.css. Gadgets and sitewide stylesheets affect every page for every user, so it's important to scope style rules, for example by prefacing each ruleset with
.page-Main_Page .bodyContent
. Even then, there is extra overhead loading any page on the wiki, so consider inlinestyle
attributes if possible. TemplateStyles is nice to have because you can express more thanstyle
attributes but without adding overhead to unrelated pages. – Minh Nguyễn 💬 09:35, 6 February 2021 (UTC)- How can other users see the programmed css for a page after an admin has added it. What if they wanted to redo the main page after me in the future and reference the old css?
In my opinion, using browser tools is going to be much more of hassle for me than just having the easily-installable TemplateStyles.
I also just thought of another conflict I might run into. If I'm using templates on the main page that rely on their own css, will the css I program for the template and main page show up? Templates render based on their source page and if the source page has no css, I'm not sure this will work. The template won't be able to pick up any css references either since it's only coded presence on the main page will be {{Frame}}.
--Lectrician1 (talk) 13:53, 6 February 2021 (UTC)- Okay I tested my "possible problem" and turns out css does work for templates that are transcluded on another page.
However, can we please just add the extension out of convenience?
Evey time I want to change the wikitext, I have to copy and then reinsert the css into into my browser developer panel. There is a lot of Wikitext I'm going to have to change for the main page. This is going to be a big hassle.
Also, as I noted before, it's nice to have the css stored in a file everyone can easily reference, rather than wherever an admin has to store it ingrained in the page. --Lectrician1 (talk) 23:26, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
- Okay I tested my "possible problem" and turns out css does work for templates that are transcluded on another page.
- How can other users see the programmed css for a page after an admin has added it. What if they wanted to redo the main page after me in the future and reference the old css?
- Following up from our private conversation, hopefully your browser's built-in developer tools provide the facilities you need to prototype style rules for the main page. TemplateStyles is a nice extension to have, but it is already technically possible to implement something similar without TemplateStyles by writing a user stylesheet that an administrator can turn into a gadget or copy into MediaWiki:Common.css. Gadgets and sitewide stylesheets affect every page for every user, so it's important to scope style rules, for example by prefacing each ruleset with
@Lectrician1: Any reasons to do that? Enabling all extensions possible is asking for a trouble. Also, can you finish FAQ project where useful info was lost/hidden before starting a new one? Also, please do not spam extension requests on openstreetmap/operations - posting there about every single extension you found will just make more likely that OSM-wiki related requests will be ignored in bulk. In general, feel free to start 24387427248427842784287 projects - I am also guilty of that - but, please, avoid opening issues on for example openstreetmap/operations until there is confirmation that it is a good and necessary idea. Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 10:41, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Mateusz Konieczny: I'm still thinking about FAQ. I also gave this 2 weeks after the last piece of discussion on this before posting an issue on the operations repo. That was plenty of time for people to respond, in my opinion. Also, this is not being implemented is limiting me from doing something on the Wiki, so I felt it was important to post it. --Lectrician1 (talk) 16:16, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
Give auto-confirmed after 2 days, not 4?
I just run in case of a mapper (User:Cartographer10) unable to upload files, unable to move their own proposal because their wiki account has no autoconfirmed status. Maybe give this right quicker?
It appears to be defined at https://github.com/openstreetmap/chef/blob/dfc631109a486788a18b57da696c06339368993e/cookbooks/mediawiki/templates/default/LocalSettings.php.erb#L248-L250
I propose to give it after 2 days, not 4.
Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 09:27, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Support I see no vandalism on the Wiki anyways so unless this change ends up causing it, then we should be okay. --Lectrician1 (talk) 13:41, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Support Never really any spam onwiki, changing it wouldn't cause any harm. Berrely (T•C) 14:56, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- There is spam occasionally, but it gets deleted quickly. --Jeisenbe (talk) 19:52, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Oppose I am not necessarily against the proposal, but the timing is very unfortunate. We just changed the configuration with your support, Mateusz Konieczny. As of now, there is a solution and I would prefer if we try that out first instead of approaching the sysadmins once a week and discussing the same topic over and over again.
BTW, the linked user account is currently autoconfirmed and has not uploaded any files. --Tigerfell(Let's talk) 19:44, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
- Files were uploaded by someone else, based on their request. And note "unable to move their own proposal" part - is it also solved by this recent change? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 07:56, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
- Yes, confirmed users can move pages. There is a list of permissions at Special:UserGroupRights. --Tigerfell
(Let's talk) 19:13, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
- I have to admit that there is a flaw in the configuration which I just noticed after writing the previous comment. As you can see from Special:UserGroupRights#confirmed, confirmed users have to solve the CAPTCHAs. Additionally, they can not fix transcoding errors. The major objective of the previous configuration change is still fulfilled, but I guess my argument is void if you mind the CAPTCHAs and all of the problems they cause. --Tigerfell
(Let's talk) 14:21, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
- As a side effect, openstreetmap/chef/pull/400 aims to fix the shortcomings of the current configuration, but it will not change the autoconfirmation period, because the pull request targets namespaces, and I was asked not to combine unrelated changes into one pull request. --Tigerfell
(Let's talk) 14:59, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- As a side effect, openstreetmap/chef/pull/400 aims to fix the shortcomings of the current configuration, but it will not change the autoconfirmation period, because the pull request targets namespaces, and I was asked not to combine unrelated changes into one pull request. --Tigerfell
- Yes, confirmed users can move pages. There is a list of permissions at Special:UserGroupRights. --Tigerfell
Authentication from osm.org
openstreetmap/operations/issues/507
OAuth login to Wiki is a Top Ten Task
PluggableAuth looks like a suitable extension for this.
I'm surprised this hasn't been implemented yet because the configuration for this is quite simple.
You're probably going to have to read into the specifics on your own since the various options for how users can log in can be a bit confusing.
Either way, this works and should be implemented. Here is an example of a Wiki that uses it.
--Lectrician1 (talk) 21:39, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
- Enabling OAuth2 authentication between osm.org and the wiki should be the #1 priority for new features to the Wiki. The lack of this seamless authentication is often cited as a barrier to entry for participation in tagging discussions. Issues that need to be addressed:
- What is the process for linking existing wiki usernames to osm.org usernames in a way that's straightforward for users and not a burden on admins?
- Will the process be seamless for new users?
- Do we have an issue in the case of name collisions? (in which an osm.org user and a wiki user of the same name are actually two different people)?
- --ZeLonewolf (talk) 22:18, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
- It seems that as long as an account on the Wiki and OSM have the same username and/or (not sure) email, then they can login.
- Yes, it is seamless.
- I think the emails being the same is the deciding factor.
- --Lectrician1 (talk) 22:26, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
- It would be great to eliminate this barrier for participation on the wiki, seems very promising! I've got some questions as well:
- What does it mean that the process is seamless for new users? Can they just log in using their existing account without having to "create a wiki account" first?
- Yes. If a Wiki account does not exist with the username and email that is returned by the osm.org client, then a new account for the Wiki will be created and the user can continue to use osm.org to login. --Lectrician1 (talk) 17:24, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
- I understand that the plan for dealing with differences between the two sets of accounts is that users resolve these themselves (by changing their user name and/or email address so that they match, or creating an OSM account for wiki accounts that don't have an equivalent yet)? For that to be possible, there will be a co-existence of linked accounts and un-linked accounts at least for a transition period, right?
- Correct. It is up to the users to decide when and whether they want to "link" them. They can do so at any time because the login process will remain the same always. --Lectrician1 (talk) 17:24, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for attacking this long-standing problem! --Tordanik 14:04, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
- It would be great to eliminate this barrier for participation on the wiki, seems very promising! I've got some questions as well:
- PluggableAuth may not be sufficient to address the issue, at it is only a framework to create authentication and authorization extensions on top of it. Also, OAuth2 authentication isn't available yet on the Rails port (osm.org website), which means we cannot use plugins like OpenID Connect. Then, having an explicit link between the Wiki and osm.org (vs. an implicit one which relies on the same username across both sites) is the preferred option. Matching via username and email also wouldn't work, because we deliberately don't expose users' email addresses via any API call for privacy reasons. There's quite a bit of work involved here which goes much beyond installing a Wiki plugin. mmd (talk) 11:40, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Mmd: What would you suggest be the steps we should take to making this happen then? How exactly could we establish an explicit link? --Lectrician1 (talk) 07:22, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
- Well, finding that out would be exactly one of the tasks of the Github issue. We probably need some Mediawiki expert and/or more research to work out possible solutions. Think of the whole topic more in terms of a project, rather than some few hour configuration task. Mmd (talk) 09:36, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Mmd: What would you suggest be the steps we should take to making this happen then? How exactly could we establish an explicit link? --Lectrician1 (talk) 07:22, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
- Hm ... the goal discussed in some previous conversations, and when writing that Top Ten Tasks entry, was to eventually get rid of the distinction between OSM wiki account and OSM account as far as practically possible – i.e. users would have the same name, and there would be no need (and no ability) to "create a wiki account". How would the process of establishing an explicit link look for an OSM user editing the wiki for the first time? --Tordanik 19:29, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Tordanik: They could sign in with osm.org and their account would be created based on the information returned by the osm.org OAuth client. This would work exactly the same as when you login/signup with Google on a site and you are able to immedeatly use it. --Lectrician1 (talk) 02:23, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
- Hm ... the goal discussed in some previous conversations, and when writing that Top Ten Tasks entry, was to eventually get rid of the distinction between OSM wiki account and OSM account as far as practically possible – i.e. users would have the same name, and there would be no need (and no ability) to "create a wiki account". How would the process of establishing an explicit link look for an OSM user editing the wiki for the first time? --Tordanik 19:29, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
It seems that further activity would be at https://github.com/openstreetmap/operations/issues/507 - and that is solved as far as we can here, right? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 10:13, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- Maybe create Authentication from osm.org describing the situation? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:08, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
- There is Develop/Single sign on. --Tigerfell
(Let's talk) 12:08, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- There is Develop/Single sign on. --Tigerfell
Add Page Forms Extension
Page Forms allows users to create forms who's inputted information can then be formatted and inserted into a page.
I would like to use Page Forms to create forms that allow for the easy creation of proposal pages and the management of transitioning proposal stages.
For example, a Page Form could allow:
- Each of the proposed tags and their used entities, descriptions, and examples to all be easily-inputable and displayed in a standard fashion.
- Proposal can change stages from draft to proposed to voting to post-vote, all with the configuration of the form. This requires no editing of the proposal itself.
- Possibly the seamless transition from copying a proposal's data from the proposal to a new page(s) for the approved tags.
Here are examples of sites that use Page Forms.
--Lectrician1 (talk) 00:41, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
- "Proposal can change stages from draft to proposed to voting to post-vote, all with the configuration of the form. This requires no editing of the proposal itself." - how it would be detected?
- "easily-inputable and displayed in a standard fashion" - how it deals with fact that proposal may propose one new key or new value or values or deprecate existing tag or change voting rules or introduce new key and deprecate specific value (or values) and so on? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 07:54, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Lectrician1: - have you tested how this extension interacts with all subsets of extensions that you also proposed? And with current OSM Wiki install? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 10:44, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Mateusz Konieczny: I'm going to setup my own install of MediaWiki and test before I suggest we move forward with actually implementing it.
Also for, "How would it be detected". What I mean is that with Page Forms none of the raw text on the proposal has to be edited. Everything is configured through the form. Selecting an option for a proposal stage in the form should be able to automatically add the voting section to the proposal, etc.
Form elements are also replicatable so you can setup a field to repeat itself with multiple options. For example, you can add as many tags that you want to propose addding or depreciating etc. IDK if this makes sense :P
--Lectrician1 (talk) 16:22, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Mateusz Konieczny: I'm going to setup my own install of MediaWiki and test before I suggest we move forward with actually implementing it.
Add Translate Extension
Bringing up this archived discussion again.
Reasons
- Direct and up-to date translation will be much easier than the current state.
- Differences and amount translated of each page in each language is tracked.
How to use
- Configuring pages to be translated is easy.
<translate></translate>
tags only need to surround headers, sections of text, and other special formats.- The
<!--T:1-->
tags are auto-generated and do not need to be placed. Only the<translate></translate>
tags do.
I am personally willing to take the time to convert as many pages as possible to be translated if this is implemented.
--Lectrician1 (talk) 23:40, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
- I am against adding this extension. It won't help anything and will only cause more problems. Besides, pages in other languages don't have to be an exact reflection 1:1 of English pages, they just shouldn't contradict. maro21 11:52, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
- I don't think there are that many good reasons for page in different languages to significantly depart from each other. So in my opinion, it would be very valuable to have software support for translations and to keep track of untranslated/outdated sections. But unfortunately, it seems there has been no progress on the objections from the last time this extension was discussed: The large amount of special markup that would have to be added to the English text. Auto-generation doesn't help much because these tags will still burden every future editor of the English page. This is especially frustrating as it would seem easy enough to just use section headings to split the page for translation – larger restructuring of the page will almost always necessitate an overhaul of translations anyway. --Tordanik 13:19, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
- No page needs to be "restructured". The
<translate></translate>
tags are simply added and you're good to go.
Yes, the auto-generated<!--T:1-->
tags can get in the way and might confuse new editors, but editors are warned when they edit a page with a message at the top of the editor that they need to use translate syntax. This message also links to tutorials that I find are very-detailed and easy-to-understand.
Also, not-using or removing any translate-associated tags doesn't break anything. You just have to make sure every open tag is closed with a closed one (the editor will display an error if there isn't).
If a new editor makes an addition to a page (such as a new section or paragraph) and forgets to put new translate tags around it, then the Translate extension will simply not show that it needs to be translated or show a longer section in-need-of-translating with the added text rather than the shorter, paragraph-oriented ones. Experienced editors who watch the page will likely fix this so that the translation is present and in the correct syntax.
--Lectrician1 (talk) 17:41, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
- No page needs to be "restructured". The
- It will help everything. There are so many pages that have not been kept up to date and can/should be translated. Pages should be a 1:1 translation. If OSM is a global project, shouldn't we provide the access to all resources in all languages that is up-to-date and consistent so that we don't run into mapping-convention divisions? --Lectrician1 (talk) 17:41, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
- I don't think there are that many good reasons for page in different languages to significantly depart from each other. So in my opinion, it would be very valuable to have software support for translations and to keep track of untranslated/outdated sections. But unfortunately, it seems there has been no progress on the objections from the last time this extension was discussed: The large amount of special markup that would have to be added to the English text. Auto-generation doesn't help much because these tags will still burden every future editor of the English page. This is especially frustrating as it would seem easy enough to just use section headings to split the page for translation – larger restructuring of the page will almost always necessitate an overhaul of translations anyway. --Tordanik 13:19, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
- What is the supposed benefit of this extra code littering page text? Is it compatible with visual editor? Is it mandating that content on each page is the same? Where is its repository and its issue tracker (AKA "is it maintained or abandoned and bitrotting")? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 07:56, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
- Mateusz Konieczny: The extra code is used to keep track of the parts to translate. It uses a separate interface for translation that is source-code only for now (see w:phab:T55974). It is maintained and used by the WMF itself on a lot of MediaWiki, meta, and Commons docs, and the bugtracker link is something you can click the links to find out. It does partially mandate commonness, but you can: (a) cheat the system and put something else in, or (b) transclude parts of the translated page in a more flexible article.--Artoria2e5 (talk) 05:54, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
- I am very much in favor of this thing, as it would represent a pretty big improvement from what we have right now. I do have a bit of an issue with the "marks the page for translation" process, since it often induces delays in updating back on WMF sites. I recommend opening up this position for application by autoconfirmed users so that more people can do the job. --Artoria2e5 (talk) 05:58, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Lectrician1: - have you tested how this extension interacts with all subsets of extensions that you also proposed? And with current OSM Wiki install? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 10:44, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Mateusz Konieczny: Okay so this extension and its implementation is another reason why I need to setup my own instance of MediaWiki. Like Artoria2e5 said, administrators/people with permissions are needed to indicate if a page should be translated. That means if the Translate extension were to be implemented on this Wiki today, we wouldn't really be able to translate any of the pages with out an admin checking through each of the pages and marking them for translation. There are also other things I have to test.
I am also going to make a tutorial video on how to set up a page for translation the formatting, actually translating etc. so that people on this Wiki knows how it works before implementing it. The tutorial video on MediWiki is too old and long so I think I'll also make the video to replace that one too.
I don't have a lot of time right now though, so it might be another 1 or 2 weeks before I can get to this.
--Lectrician1 (talk) 16:27, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Mateusz Konieczny: Okay so this extension and its implementation is another reason why I need to setup my own instance of MediaWiki. Like Artoria2e5 said, administrators/people with permissions are needed to indicate if a page should be translated. That means if the Translate extension were to be implemented on this Wiki today, we wouldn't really be able to translate any of the pages with out an admin checking through each of the pages and marking them for translation. There are also other things I have to test.
- @Tigerfell or anyone else: Are there any further comments on the Add Translate extension to Wiki proposal? I think I have covered everything previously asked on the Discussion page. How should I go about achieving community consensus? Should I post an RFC for it on the osmtalk mailing list? Lectrician1 (talk) 18:33, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
- I would proceed as in the proposal process i. e. creating a voting section on that page and sending out an e-mail to the mailing list but use talk@ instead of tagging@. Regarding the policy that only wiki admins should propose new installations to the system administrators, I would say that if the proposal is accepted, I will propose the extension's installation to them. --Tigerfell
(Let's talk) 21:41, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
- I would proceed as in the proposal process i. e. creating a voting section on that page and sending out an e-mail to the mailing list but use talk@ instead of tagging@. Regarding the policy that only wiki admins should propose new installations to the system administrators, I would say that if the proposal is accepted, I will propose the extension's installation to them. --Tigerfell
Short Tutorial 1: How to make a page translatable and translate a page --Lectrician1 (talk) 02:57, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
Short Tutorial 2: How to change the translatable page and re-mark it for translation --Lectrician1 (talk) 03:58, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
I would like to reintroduce proposing and implementing this.
@Maro21: Are you still against implementing this, even after the basic instructions I gave on how to use this extension in the videos above?
@Dcapillae: I know that you consitently update EN -> ES translations on Proposal process (thank you!) Would you and others in the Spanish translation community be interested in this extension? It could make translating much easier!
--Lectrician1 (talk) 19:30, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
- Yes, I am against. I know how the extension works, because I use it on Translatewiki. It's good to use it for short messages, but not for long articles. Everyone would translate 1/100 of the page and it will be a mess. Do you translate articles to other languages? I do and I prefer to press edit and write the whole article and this extension won't make translating easier, but harder. I also think that article translations into other languages don't have to be 100 percent identical. I often write articles in Polish and sometimes I add more than there is in English. maro21 21:09, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
- Hi! Thank you for the video tutorials. I have never used the extension before. Watching the videos, it looks really convenient and easy to use. Maybe it would encourage more users to collaborate with translating. I don't really have a strong opinion on whether it is a good idea to add the extension or not. Many pages on the wiki include templates and tables. If it works properly on those pages too and doesn't give problems, any improvement is welcome. Regarding the Spanish translators community, I think nobody will be against it. We will adapt to any wiki improvements. --Dcapillae (talk) 22:36, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
@Tigerfell: How can we make progress so that this proposal can fully be considered and possibly implemented by the community? Should a formal proposal page be made? Should a discussion be started on the talk mailing list? --Lectrician1 (talk) 01:45, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
- I suggest you first contact
Firefishy (on osm, edits, contrib, heatmap, chngset com.) and ask him whether there was a technical reason for not installing the extension in the past. The chef configuration controls five wiki instances with different extensions. The sysadmins and I once tried to install w:mw:Extension:Maps. It required Composer, which did not work well with the configuration back then. --Tigerfell
(Let's talk) 15:53, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
- (I'll just ask here) @Firefishy: Is this possible to install for this Wiki? --Lectrician1 (talk) 18:58, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
Okay, well User:Firefishy never responded even after emailing them, so I went ahead and created a full proposal page where the entire system and implementation is documented.
The plan is probably to release it to the talk mailing list in 2 days and then maybe 2 weeks later start a vote.
Let me know if I've missed anything and feel free to contribute.
Proposal: Proposed features/Add Translate extension to Wiki
--Lectrician1 (talk) 23:53, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
@Tigerfell: Well IDK when or if openstreetmap/operations/issues/555 will be answered, but at some point, could you make a issue formally proposing the extension? --Lectrician1 (talk) 18:04, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
- I would like to have a community consensus or at least a majority decision to back up a formal proposal. When I formally propose the addition of an extension or even write a
Pull request, I essentially decide the case. Nonetheless, the system administrators will check my request, too.
- I will review your proposal and comment on its talk page in case I think something should be discussed before voting on the proposal. --Tigerfell
(Let's talk) 19:50, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
- Is it replaced by Proposed features/Add Translate extension to Wiki? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 10:23, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Bug displaying images on Discussion pages in Mobile View ?
When you switch to Mobile view, images are converted to
<img>
on normal "Page" wiki pages.
However, when you include images on a "Discussion" page, they are converted to
<span ...> </span>
. This makes them appear as whitespace.
This does not happen in "Desktop" view.
Example:
Insert the following template
{{User|Bert Araali|osm=Bert Araali|m=1|noedits=1}}
the transcluded image in the template on a normal "Page" wiki page (switch to Mobile view) will be converted in HTML as:
<img alt="User icon 2.svg" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/12/User_icon_2.svg/18px-User_icon_2.svg.png" decoding="async" srcset="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/12/User_icon_2.svg/27px-User_icon_2.svg.png 1.5x, https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/12/User_icon_2.svg/36px-User_icon_2.svg.png 2x" width="18" height="18">
On a "Discussion" page (in Mobile view) will be converted to:
<span class="lazy-image-placeholder" style="width: 18px;height: 18px;" data-src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/12/User_icon_2.svg/18px-User_icon_2.svg.png" data-alt="User icon 2.svg" data-width="18" data-height="18" data-srcset="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/12/User_icon_2.svg/27px-User_icon_2.svg.png 1.5x, https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/12/User_icon_2.svg/36px-User_icon_2.svg.png 2x"> </span>
.
--Bert Araali (talk) 21:41, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
Template:Languages/div Mediawiki bug

I can't open Template:Languages/div. There is no page at all, only the name of an error and date. This is the first time I've seen such a bug. maro21 22:31, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
- The same for me:
[ecf673d83453ac48a248f2fa] 2021-05-03 23:11:13: Fatal exception of type "Wikimedia\Rdbms\DBQueryError"
--Vazhnov Alexey (talk) 23:15, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
- Reported openstreetmap/operations/issues/533 --Tigerfell
(Let's talk) 17:14, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
- Reported openstreetmap/operations/issues/533 --Tigerfell
- The reply suggests that there is an issue with that wiki page. Since I do not even know what the template does I will not change it. --Tigerfell
(Let's talk) 10:59, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
- The reply suggests that there is an issue with that wiki page. Since I do not even know what the template does I will not change it. --Tigerfell
- As Template:Languages/div and Template:LanguageLink are no longer used since Minh rewrote Template:Languages and the wiki has never had any pages in Marathi the only real concern is what the underlying problem is. Has this been reported on the Mediawiki bug tracker? --Andrew (talk) 15:44, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
- Looks like there is something wrong with the Marathi language in {{Languagename}} template.
- See for example
- {{Languagename|de}} -> Deutsch
- {{Languagename|abc}} -> abc
- but {{Languagename|mr}} throws an error
- This template uses magic word #language but {{#language:mr}} works well.
- {{#language:ar}} -> العربية
- {{#language:br}} -> brezhoneg
- {{#language:mr}} -> मराठी
- I'm still thinking how to solve it. maro21 16:57, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
- The {{Languagename}} template was used enthusiastically by, and over-engineered by, a former wiki contributor for purposes such as enabling links to Wikipedias in languages without Mediawiki support. Many (not all) uses can be (and often have been) replaced with #language; {{Languages/div}} needed it for gcf: until the current language template made it redundant. --Andrew (talk) 19:48, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
- We could revisit the remaining templates with languagename and convert as many as possible to #language. --Andrew (talk) 05:50, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
- I didn't say that we should get rid of the template:). There was a problem only with Marathi language but this language isn't used on this Wiki at all. I think there is a bug with the database somewhere, the template is ok. maro21 19:28, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
- We could revisit the remaining templates with languagename and convert as many as possible to #language. --Andrew (talk) 05:50, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
- Wiki:Babel templates was also affected through Template:Babel list of languages, fixed by replacing Languagename with #language. --Andrew (talk) 11:40, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
- I think I’ve found the problem. {{#language:mr}} (Marathi, native name) works correctly. {{Languagename|mr}} expands to {{#language:mr|mr}} (Marathi, in Marathi), which doesn’t. {{#language:en|mr}} (English, in Marathi) also fails. There is no problem with {{#language:mr|en}} (Marathi, in English) so OsmAnd renders. Tagalog has the same problem ({{#language:tl|tl}} fails) and there may be others that we don’t refer to on this wiki. --Andrew (talk) 17:49, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
- Good job! But where are these defined? Somewhere in the Mediawiki files? I've never seen source code of Mediawiki and I don't even know where to look for. I checked your examples on English Wikipedia and they work well. maro21 18:07, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
The same bug here: File:K9 BountyHunter.png and File:Wetter Atlantiksturm.png. maro21 21:47, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
Not sure if it's related, but I'm seeing this issue with a creative but valid invocation of {{Tag}}: Template talk:Tag#Database error with HTML character entity reference to emoji. – Minh Nguyễn 💬 02:00, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
I can't open Key:tracktype nor any other language version: Item:Q784. The bug must be somewhere in the data item because {{KeyDescription|key=tracktype}} itself generates an error. maro21 20:32, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
This is a broader problem than I thought: No tag or key page that has a description in Hebrew can be opened, see: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/YaronS
But it's not this user's fault, because not long ago I was accessing some of these pages and everything was working. Have there been any recent MediaWiki updates? Because sorting by namespace in Recent Changes doesn't work either. maro21 21:01, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
- I can open all of those: I don′t see descriptions in Hebrew by default but I get them if I view all languages. I can also view He:Key:fax and fax (Q268). --Andrew (talk) 13:41, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
Category Tree extension missing


Since MediaWiki 1.31, CategoryTree extension is packaged by default, we are running version 1.35, so why is it removed. It is a standard and very nice extension to view categories as dynamic intercative trees and could improve our wiki and navigation a lot. So this is a request to leave it included.
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:CategoryTree and https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Categories#Managing%20the%20category%20hierarchy.
--Bert Araali (talk) 15:16, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
- The extension's files are included in MediaWiki, but one would need to enable the extension. This is not done automatically. --Tigerfell
(Let's talk) 20:52, 19 May 2021 (UTCi
- So is one of the admin's willing to enable it ? Any objections or issues against enabling it ? Bert Araali (talk) 22:12, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Bert Araali: Administrators unfortunately don't have access to the configuration files that load extensions. You'll need to ask the sysadmin team to enable CategoryTree. – Minh Nguyễn 💬 10:13, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
- @Minh Nguyen: I think Bert Araali intended to ask if one of the wiki administrators supports the request.
- I think the extension could be useful when cleaning up categories or just searching for articles via categories (like looking for a similar tool). I just did not yet managed to look at it in more detail. Someone else proposed to add Extension:DynamicPageList (Wikimedia). I wonder if the use cases of both extensions overlap and we should choose either of them. --Tigerfell
(Let's talk) 21:02, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Bert Araali: Administrators unfortunately don't have access to the configuration files that load extensions. You'll need to ask the sysadmin team to enable CategoryTree. – Minh Nguyễn 💬 10:13, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
- So is one of the admin's willing to enable it ? Any objections or issues against enabling it ? Bert Araali (talk) 22:12, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Tigerfell: CategoryTree is different than DynamicPageList, which was proposed earlier this year. The former makes it easier to browse any existing category, while the latter powers special lists based on categories (or category intersections), for example "the latest pages in both A and B but not C". Such a list would be explicitly added to a page in wikitext, similar to how we integrate with OSMCal today. Of the two extensions, CategoryTree would be a no-brainer: it's convenient and, if anything, would reduce load on the servers because users wouldn't have to load full category pages in many cases. – Minh Nguyễn 💬 22:45, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
- I requested the extension to be added to this wiki in openstreetmap/chef/pull/463. --Tigerfell
(Let's talk) 16:06, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
- I requested the extension to be added to this wiki in openstreetmap/chef/pull/463. --Tigerfell
OSM Carto categories

I'm planning to upload some screenshots of OSM Carto and I noticed that we don't have categories for such images. Currently there are:
- Category:Mapnik Rendering Examples (319 files),
- Category:Mapnik Icon (65 files),
- Category:Mapnik Icon svg (270 files),
- Category:Slippy Map (Mapnik) screenshots (11 files),
- Category:Mapnik map key images (6 files),
- some of them are in Category:Rendered OSM data
- and a lot of uncategorized files.
I think there should be categories with names starting with OSM Carto * because Mapnik is a map rendering toolkit and OSM Carto is a map style. These names are often confused. What do you think? Do you agree?
I think there should be 3 categories:
- one for icons like this one
- one for rendering examples used in infoboxes, like this one
- one for any screenshot from OSM Carto, like this one.
I will create templates, for example {{OSM Carto icon}}, {{OSM Carto example}}, {{OSM Carto screenshot}} which will add a proper license template and categories.
I will create the templates and categories, I just don't know what would be the appropiate names for these categories: Category:OSM Carto icon (or Category:OSM Carto icons?), Category:OSM Carto rendering examples, Category:OSM Carto screenshots? Are these names ok?
I can recategorize files, I'm just asking here for the names of such categories, if they're ok. Category names will only be added by the template, so they can easily be changed anyway. maro21 17:21, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
- "because Mapnik is a map rendering toolkit and OSM Carto is a map style. These names are often confused. What do you think? Do you agree" +1, that is a great idea! Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 07:34, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
- Template:OSM Carto example has a misleading name - not all OSM Carto examples qualify as Template:PD-shape, only the simplest ones. This name is poorly chosen and should be changed to avoid confusing people. Or just use Template:CC0 here, with Template:PD-shape added to files qualifying for it (@Maro21:) Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 07:34, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
- I corrected the description because this template was only meant for simple shapes that qualify for PD-Shape. The purpose of this category and template was to be for simple shapes where there is no data from OpenStreetMap contributors. Can you give an example that does not qualify under PD shape and what license would it have? If there are such instances, this template simply won't be added there. maro21 20:14, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
So, since June 2021 I've been working on these files and categories. There was a lot of work. In addition to adding categories, I had to unlink the old renderings on tag pages and replace them with new ones. I also found some duplicates. I emptied following categories:
- Category:Mapnik Rendering Examples (319 files → 0)
- Category:Mapnik Icon (65 → 0)
- Category:Mapnik Icon svg (270 → 0)
- Category:Slippy Map (Mapnik) screenshots (11 → 0)
- Category:Mapnik map key images (6 → 0)
created new ones:
- +277 Category:OSM Carto icons
- +38 Category:Old OSM Carto icons
- +216 Category:OSM Carto rendering examples
- +73 Category:Old OSM Carto rendering examples
- +970 Category:OSM Carto screenshots (populated not only by me)
- +85 Category:Animated OSM Carto screenshots
and populated existing ones:
- +202 Category:Osmarender Rendering Examples (there were only a few files before)
- Category:Main OSM website (with files)
- Category:Trademarks and logos of OpenStreetMap Foundation
maro21 19:28, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
License of old OSM Carto screenshots

Should old "Mapnik" (a name used for standard tile layer OSM Carto in the past) screenshots like this File:2010 decembris.png, made before September 12, 2012, have CC-BY-SA 2.0 license? I read https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/About_The_Licence_Change but I'm not 100% sure. Help is welcomed. maro21 20:23, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
- Yes, this change is (1) unable to retroactively remove CC-BY-SA license from old ones (2) not indicating that ODBL was granted to screenshots made in the past Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 07:29, 29 July 2021 (UTC).
- Thanks. I asked because I stopped during categorizing the other screenshots. I realized that they should probably have a different license. So I created an additional template similar to {{ODbL OpenStreetMap}} which contains "© OpenStreetMap contributors" + CC-BY-SA-2.0 license: {{CC-BY-SA-2.0 OpenStreetMap}}. Example usage here: File:2010 decembris.png. Is everything ok with it? maro21 18:09, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
Legal requirements to images or media files
> Main topic: Category:Media without a license
Several uploads to the Wiki still have been done without specifying the license and many images are in use missing an adequate license.
On search how to put things better I looked for a guide or at least an annotation, what has to be respected with uploading and using media like images in the Wiki. But I cannot find such!
- There is one short and unclear note at Wiki_Help. And that page not even is linked at mainpage or main help page Get_help. (Another issue itself.)
- Even at the Special:Upload page there are several hints but there is no given help what licenses must or can used basically.
IMHO that way we cannot expect "correct" use of media in the Wiki. I myself have my difficulties with seeing what is right now in view of (using) uploads.
I think an upload or media guideline must be created and put at Wiki_guidelines. And the Wiki guidelines must be directly linked at Get_help and at Special:Upload.
Question: Did I miss or overlook a description or guide in terms of licenses with images at the Wiki and can anyone provide a link?
I would really appreciate if more users could help hereby. --Regards, Chris2map (talk) 19:08, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
- At Special:Upload you first see MediaWiki:Uploadtext, at least if you see this page in English, German, or Spanish. It mostly focuses on the question whether the uploaded files are relevant to this wiki not so much on licensing. The upload page also features a dropdown menu for selecting the correct license. This is taken from the configuration page MediaWiki:Licenses. Licenses in this list are definitely acceptable. Media license templates lists all licenses I know. I guess the problem with GFDL is that you are not allowed to trace from such files for OSM. I do not know why it should be a problem to upload such files.
- Some sort of guideline could be useful.
- I currently do not fix the licensing issue because there are still the options to select "None selected" and "I don't know exactly" which leaves it up to others to fix the licensing. This is often more difficult because you have to find out if the uploader took the picture by themselves etc. Just looking at the last ten uploads (until 19:15, 2 November 2021 UTC) you find four without any licensing and one with a contradicting licensing combination. --Tigerfell
(Let's talk) 23:02, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
- By the way, this topic also came up recently in relation to a claim of fair use, which is of questionable applicability to a website based in the United Kingdom or European Union. We should at least do something about Category:Labelled for deletion, but Category:Media without a license needs a lot of work to contact the uploaders for more information (giving them a fixed amount of time to respond before deletion, that sort of thing). – Minh Nguyễn 💬 01:43, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
- Deciding whether we can and should keep fair use images is one of things that needs to be done Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 09:55, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
- Category:Labelled for deletion can be emptied only be people with admin rights and they do it, though quite slowly (but there is no real backlog here) Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 09:55, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
- Category:Media without a license - what you think about splitting it into subcategories "uploader not notified" and "uploader notified", with second split based on notification date? This would make easier to ensure that all editors are notified and later to start deleting images where uploaders were notified and failed to respond for a long time. Right now processing this category is irritating as many images are stuck in limbo, without any action to be taken for now Mateusz Konieczny (talk)
- By the way, this topic also came up recently in relation to a claim of fair use, which is of questionable applicability to a website based in the United Kingdom or European Union. We should at least do something about Category:Labelled for deletion, but Category:Media without a license needs a lot of work to contact the uploaders for more information (giving them a fixed amount of time to respond before deletion, that sort of thing). – Minh Nguyễn 💬 01:43, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
- That could work, though it's even more manual work. Wikipedia and Commons actually use a bot to handle these notifications. Smaller Wikipedias don't run bots for them, but most wikis have a template similar to {{Unknown}} that automatically adds the page to a category based on whether it's been tagged for more than a week (or some other time period). That kind of automation requires using the
subst:
keyword when inserting the template. – Minh Nguyễn 💬 17:56, 3 November 2021 (UTC)- I actually have plans to automate this a bit - but I want to design process before sending thousands of notifications, also it would be nice to have it runnable without relying on bots (even if it would be more tedious). And yes, something
subst:
based would be included Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:50, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
- I actually have plans to automate this a bit - but I want to design process before sending thousands of notifications, also it would be nice to have it runnable without relying on bots (even if it would be more tedious). And yes, something
- That could work, though it's even more manual work. Wikipedia and Commons actually use a bot to handle these notifications. Smaller Wikipedias don't run bots for them, but most wikis have a template similar to {{Unknown}} that automatically adds the page to a category based on whether it's been tagged for more than a week (or some other time period). That kind of automation requires using the
- Thanks for your replies! The ideas to straighten or establish a process to handle the license issue sound good. The template to categorize the contacted cases might automatically switch from "uploader notified" to "uploader notified without reaction" after 4 weeks since placing the template (if this works). - The other part, an explanation for normal users what are the requirements, should been made available as quick as possible. Last week I contacted a user who recently uploaded loads of images and he will/might subsequently add source (own pictures) and license information. He didn't complain, but understandably will not be delighted to edit dozens of file pages. - Is there anywhere a kind of document that can provide a basis for the explanation? --Chris2map (talk) 20:41, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
- Talk:Wiki#PD-shape_to_series_of_images is related topic where help would be welcome and basically anyone can do this Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 15:31, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
- I linked Wiki Help at Get Help Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 13:07, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
- Addition to MediaWiki:Uploadtext
- Please have a look at MediaWiki_talk:Uploadtext#Addition_of_two_basic_statements. I'm proposing two basic statements for the file upload page. --Chris2map (talk) 16:38, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
TODO
MediaWiki:Uploadtext - Addition of basic statement
(Follow-up of discussion from MediaWiki_talk:Uploadtext#Addition of two basic statements)
- -- (copy of last 3 comments) --
- I see your points. Let's try a conclusion:
- I . Please do not upload any file without clarifying and indicating the source!
- II . a) If you are the author of this file, you must make it available under a free license.
- b) If you are not the author of the file, the file must be under a free license and you must provide the source.
- c) In any other case you have to clarify the legal use and compatibility with OpenStreetMap Wiki. A file without source and license will be deleted later.
- (The linked pages would still have to be created.) What do you think? Please check my wording. --Chris2map (talk) 12:41, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
- Technically, https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Wiki#Designing_policy_for_handling_files_without_clear_license seems to trend toward allowing at least some unfree images. But maybe it is not necessary to mention it in summary, just link to full version somewhere? But it would be nice to clarify upload text before we handle fair use and have some clear policy on that. Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 13:18, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
- I suggest we continue the discussion in the linked thread on Talk:Wiki given the general impact with regards to file uploads. --Tigerfell
(Let's talk) 13:24, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
- I suggest we continue the discussion in the linked thread on Talk:Wiki given the general impact with regards to file uploads. --Tigerfell
- -- (end of copy) --
I hope we can get to a simple conclusion without clarifying all parts of licensing and a quick implementation of the statement on file upload page. --Chris2map (talk) 12:59, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
- I thought it would be more useful to establish the licensing guideline first and then change MediaWiki:Uploadtext and all of its translations accordingly. Otherwise, we would need to change it multiple times. --Tigerfell
(Let's talk) 13:08, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
- I definitely have to agree with you on the need of a comprehensive guideline and that file upload page should be changed as few as possible. However, the statement "I." of above is matching the common state and appropriate without further guidelining, IMHO. I would like to bring this forward. --Chris2map (talk) 08:57, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
Guidelining chart for media file licensing
I want to put my draft for a chart up for discussion: → Drafts/Media file license chart ← --Chris2map (talk) 10:36, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for that! Maybe asking LWG for review could be useful? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 08:03, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
- It would be nice to get more feedback before taking any further steps of survey and proposing. I don't want to rush ;) --Chris2map (talk) 15:02, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
Beside the chart to help what to do with uploading regarding licensing, we need to help how to do it (technical/practical), don't we? E.g. where and how to edit, how to embed license, layout things (like header), etc. I think that should be provided on another page (a manual / step-by-step instruction) and not on the chart's page. What do you think? --Chris2map (talk) 17:12, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
Designing policy for handling files without clear license
OSM Wiki has a serious problem with files that have no clear copyright status ([6][7]).
We have many files that are blatant copyright violations.
Many wiki pages is using clear known copyright violations or files with unknown status.
There are following groups
- Clear copyright violations - obvious copyright violation, also files where uploader admitted that files are copied from random website, Google Street View or source is stated. Or files copied from Wikimedia Commons that were deleted there.
- Such files should be identified and marked with {{Delete}} template
- Files openly licensed and marked as such with proper licensing template, with clear source
- Not a problem
- Files where licensing info is stated, but in text rather than using a proper licensing template
- In such case licensing template should be applied
- Files where licensing info is missing and author was never notified about problem
- There is ongoing work to automate this, see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Wiki#Legal_requirements_to_images_or_media_files
- Files that were clearly uploaded in good faith by OSM mappers, but without any licensing info and uploader is inactive
- What should be done with such files? Delete? Keep and mark specially?
- Example where authorship is nearly certain: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:20080615_LondonToBrightonBikeRide2008_157.jpg
- Example where it is not entirely clear who is the author: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:IndoorFireHose-non.jpg
- What should be done with such files? Delete? Keep and mark specially?
- Fair use - unfree images that re impossible to replace and important
- Example: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Free.png (for crediting sponsor)
- Also, most of https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Logos
- Ones that are complex enough to qualify for copyright and in use beyond mere decoration
- Very simple are {{PD-shape}}
- Ones where use is not critical are not qualifying for fair use
- Ones that are complex enough to qualify for copyright and in use beyond mere decoration
- File:2021 torokbalint ortofoto engedely.webp - permissions to use data may be copyrighted (or not), in both cases it should be fine to upload them here
- And for example https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:OpenStreetMap_data_used_by_Google_Maps.png documenting something relevant where fully free image is inherently impossible
- Probably also https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:124787243-5992ce80-df16-11eb-9809-ab731f25733d.png requires fair use to be kept (or is it {{PD-shape}}?)
Why this cleanup is worth doing?
- Copyright violations are illegal and often unethical
- Files with unknown copyright status have limited usability and are a legal risk
- Reputation of ignoring copyright is unwanted for us
- OSM Wiki content, including images, should be safe to use and usable by others - not filled with traps
- Nearly all problematic images are replaceable by superior images
Questions
- How long we should wait between notifying uploader and deleting the image? 2 months? 4 months? 1 month?
- Is it desirable to delete old irreplaceable images with unclear licensing status uploaded by OSM mappers? For example photos of OSM events?
- If such images would be kept - how to specify rules to block further uploads without a clear status?
- Is it OK and desirable to have some fair use images? On which rules?
- Have I missed some category of images?
- Is it OK to upload "noncommercial use only images"? This is problematic as it is not really clear which use is forbidden, severely restricts reusability and so on. Wikimedia Commons is not allowing such images for quite good reasons
- Would it be OK to allow user-page only personal images that are not openly licensed? See User_talk:Nacktiv
- Template:Maxar image - Are we allowed to use Maxar imagery such as https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Ford_line.jpg for illustration on wiki? If yes - why and how? (it is not covered by editing permission - "you understand and agree that you may only use our imagery to trace, and validate edits that must be contributed back to OSM. You cannot download our imagery or use our imagery for any other purpose" - Maxar
- Template:Bing image - Are we allowed to use Bing imagery for illustration on wiki? If yes - why and how? (it is not covered by editing permission - "The rights that you have under this agreement are limited solely to aerial imagery use in a non-commercial online editor application of OpenStreetMap maps (an "Application")." - Bing Maps)
Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 02:36, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
- How much of imagery is allowed? Is small snippet of unknown imagery like at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Circles.png allowed? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 15:24, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
Discussion
Please, if you have any opinions on questions raised here - please comment. Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 02:36, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
Example where it is not entirely clear who is the author: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:IndoorFireHose-non.jpg - this file is from Commons: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:IndoorFireHose-non.jpg
Re questions:
1 - I would say 6 months. But we can also try to contact them on OSM.org because it's more likely they will read the message there if they haven't been logging in to the Wiki for a long time. But 6 months for old files, uploaded long time ago and where the user is not active.
2 - I wouldn't delete them.
3 - Yes, if there is a need, as in the examples you gave. maro21 22:57, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
- @Maro21: "6 months" That is for old images, right? What about brand new upload where user was notified within days from upload? Would it be OK to have shorter time there? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 08:14, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
- I assume that in such cases they will react, answer and add a license sooner than later ;p. Otherwise yes, shorter time would be ok, 1 month? maro21 16:45, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
- IMHO 3 months for old ones is OK, but I'm also fine with 6 months. For new ones, if uploader is notified in same week (within 1 week) then 1 week time limit from moment of notifying should be adequate. If within 2 weeks then +2 weeks. Within 1 month then 1 month. - What about this proposal: If image file is uploaded without selecting a license, there will be automatically added a template that indicates there is no license and sets a time limit (e.g. 2 weeks) for deleting the file? --Chris2map (talk) 19:16, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
- @Maro21: "I assume that in such cases they will react, answer and add a license sooner than later" - at least some are no longer active, sometimes for 10 years and more. We have large enough project that some left completely (sometimes due to lack of further interest, some were banned and some died) Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 08:08, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
- I meant recent uploads from active users, that they will react sooner so 6 months period won't be necessary. maro21 21:56, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
- I assume that in such cases they will react, answer and add a license sooner than later ;p. Otherwise yes, shorter time would be ok, 1 month? maro21 16:45, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
- 3 - Are screenshots of websites such fair use images as long as they are used as previews in descriptions or lists of the website service and the service relates to OSM in some way? (e.g. List of OSM-based services) --Chris2map (talk) 19:02, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
7 - (Use of images of Maxar imagery) In most cases images are used in the wiki to describe or support the tracing or validation process. Might this be interpreted as part of validation? --Chris2map (talk) 13:50, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
- Good point, maybe it would work with broad interpretation Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 14:14, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
2.1 - (how to specify rules to block further uploads without a clear status) Wikimedia Commons uses abuse filters (like #31, #154, #156). There is also an abuse filter preventing the upload of files without a license. This solution avoids that administrators have to review the obvious cases of copyright violations. Otherwise, I expect a lot more deletion requests coming up. --Tigerfell (Let's talk) 13:29, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
copyright violations that needs replacement
I would really appreciate help with removing copyright violations. Files were not reviewed for a long time and there is a noticable backlog. We really should not use images illegally - it is problematic for several reasons. (resurrecting as I keep finding such file at rate greater than I can process) Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 18:06, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
Generally editable part
Help is needed with handling some illustrations that turned out to be a copyright violations.
You can help by following:
- open file page of one of files below
- Go to "File usage" section and open page or pages listed there
- Replace it with some alternative (preferable) or remove it
- Note that proposed alternative images are listed at given file pages
- Save page with edit like "remove copyright violation"
Once file is not used anymore
- replace {{Delete proposal}} by {{Delete|Unused copyright violation, see file talk page for details}} to let wiki sysops that file should be deleted
- mark such file as processed by removing it from the list below
Files:
- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Kuala-Namu.jpg (falsely uploaded as public domain)
- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:1413-aed-cabinet.jpg (see talk page) - can be replaced for example with https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Automated_External_Defibrillator_Amsterdam_airport_front.jpg
For files without replacement:
- Find acceptable (or better!) image on Wikimedia Commons
- Or upload file on a free license to Wikimedia Commons / OSM Wiki
- You can take image on your own and release it under open license
- Edit file page with note where such image is
- Or immediately do steps listed above
- Edit list below and remove this file
Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 18:06, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
Migrate taginfo to AJAX-based rewrite
Please comment on this proposal to replace {{Taginfo}}'s implementation with {{Taginfo2}}. A migration was previously discussed but the discussion was inconclusive. – Minh Nguyễn 💬 21:24, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
Templates for licenses requiring credit should check for it
There are some licenses that require attribution.
But it is sometimes missing, see for example https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:OpenStreetMap_in_an_IC2_carriage_(DB).jpg https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:ETrex20.jpg https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Basemap-screenshot.png https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Mappertreffen_Torgau_2015.jpg https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:By.png https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Addr-housename.JPG https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Josm1.png https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:16052010022.JPG https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Barrier1.jpg https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Cc.png https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Icon_gps.png https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Asso.png https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Data_conflation_workflow3.gif https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Grenoble_-_nouveau_panneau_d%27affichage_municipal.jpg https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:French_sfr_ftth_id.jpg https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Beyondtracks-map.png https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Snowmobile_route_sign.png
In some cases uploader is author, but in some not. And it is not always certain.
I propose to replace free floating credits like
{{cc-by-2.0}} author: Foobar
by automatically checked
{{cc-by-2.0|author=Foobar}}
That would make possible to automatically detect cases where attribution is missing
Alternatively, create a separate template for author:
{{cc-by-2.0}}{{author|Foobar}}
It is better because such new template would be easier to use (non need to modify many templates), but detection of missing authorship would not be possible using categories on Wiki, but a script crawling through pages
Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 15:54, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
Hi Mateusz! Why do one have to modify templates in case of the script thing? Couldn't you script to provide e.g. {{cc-by-2.0|Foobar (Author)}} instead? --greetings, Chris2map (talk) 16:36, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
- Script would be needed in case of going with {{cc-by-2.0}}{{author|Foobar}}. In case of going with demanding {{cc-by-2.0|author=Foobar}} (or {{cc-by-2.0|1=Foobar}}) no script would be needed. In either case part of the work would be on converting free floating author into something machine readable and asking uploaders to fix remaining ones Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 22:02, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
- OK, I just wanted to point out that templates with cc-by already have parameter 1 for attribution. The inline variant is ok for me, also if work may be to do on license templates. - On the other hand we might yet fundamentally need an extra template to structure the process of licensing by uploaders (I have started a first draft User:Chris2map/Sandbox#Testing_Template:License_of_file). --Chris2map (talk) 10:00, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
- I found {{Information}} - which would solve this problem if it would be used across files Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 07:58, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
- Also found it one week ago and reused it in Template:Sandbox for a draft for License of file. --Chris2map (talk) 13:32, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
Dubious licensing of a derivative work
I started asking users to state license of work they uploaded. In most cases it was just clarification of self-made work but there are cases where it is not obvious and appears that users tag things as "own work" where it is actually just screeshot and they may not hold copyright. In such cases user should be asked a clarifying question.
I already edited what I post on user talk pages to be more clear and to be better at not triggering such answers.
I plan on handling that but I post here in case that something would go wrong with that to prevent likely invalid license staying.
If anyone want to handle one of such case: feel free to ask this users. If something is fully explained - feel free to edit list above.
In case of solving something from this list: please add note on the list below Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:13, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
Current list is as follows:
- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=File:Autobahnanschluss_grosskugel.png&curid=28522&diff=2253157&oldid=2251967
- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=File:Balticmaps-high_zoom.png&curid=183978&diff=2252416&oldid=2252033
- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=File:Braided-streets-example.jpg&curid=14555&diff=2254083&oldid=2254065
- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=File:2008-10-30_155254.png&curid=24489&diff=2251813&oldid=2251369
- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=File:Bus_platform.png&curid=65803&diff=2256092&oldid=2254308
- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=File:CH-Zusatztafel-5.18.jpg&curid=264192&diff=2254392&oldid=2254334
- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=File:TrackVsStreet.png&diff=2276065&oldid=2275892
- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=File:R_kleineisel_6.png&curid=30047&diff=2296538&oldid=2296489
--
- File:Beverley.png, File:Trieste 2009.01.13.png - these are Osmarender screenshots, so for sure it's not CC0, I changed it to {CC-BY-SA-2.0 OpenStreetMap} + [Category:Osmarender Rendering Examples]
- File:R kleineisel 6.png - if the map data comes from OSM, it should also have at least {CC-BY-SA-2.0 OpenStreetMap}
- File:Bahndach.jpg - screenshot of Potlatch should have the same license as the program?
- File:BusStopConnection.png - an iD screenshot, so I added the license. Not enough features to say it's either "copyright OSM contributors" I think. maro21 23:23, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
- File:Balticmaps-high zoom.png - as I can see on balticmaps.eu the data does not come from OSM, so it's copyrighted and may not be on a free license. maro21 23:42, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
Forbidding upload of new files using outdated Creative Commons license?
Related to Talk:Wiki#Designing_policy_for_handling_files_without_clear_license
See https://doctorow.medium.com/a-bug-in-early-creative-commons-licenses-has-enabled-a-new-breed-of-superpredator-5f6360713299 for description of the problem.
I propose to follow their recommendations and to
- forbid uploads of new files on this affected licenses
- Modify license templates and note the problem
- Notify uploaders of this files and ask them to consider relicensing
Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 17:59, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for discovering! I think we should regard that. At least prohibit uploads and enhance the templates. --Chris2map (talk) 20:25, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
- What about this text for the "-self" templates? Dear author! This version of the CC license is outdated. Please consider updating to latest version 4.0 to avoid legal hassle. (Learn more). Maybe we should create a wiki page with infos and link to it. --Chris2map (talk) 21:35, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
Can you license OSM-based map as CC0?
For example in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=File:Early_UK_coverage_growth_2005-2007.gif&curid=5339&diff=2276626&oldid=2276504 I suspect that CC0 may be applied to additional creative work if any, but OSM data will be still licensed as Template:CC-BY-SA-2.0 OpenStreetMap (note dates) Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 10:54, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
- In my opinion, work with OSM data under CC-BY-SA-2.0 could only be licensed "alike" under same license, so CC-BY-SA-2.0 and not CC0. ("ShareAlike — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.") --Chris2map (talk) 20:29, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
Is it OK to blank these pages?
I am trying to process Category:Image superseded by Wikimedia Commons (verify proposed replacements, migrate file use, mark files for deletion as not needed duplicates) and run into User:Simone/FotoTaggare User:Marcello/tag which are a bit fragile (files shown in full size making necessary to tweak how files are displayed). These are user subpages of inactive users.
Would it be fine to just blank them? If they return (unlikely) they would be able to simply revert such change. Or should I continue repairing/improving this pages on processing this files? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 04:57, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- I would support your plan. I think we should avoid emptying pages, but if we get in copyright issues with old content, we need to have a practice to treet it with acceptabel time and effort. What about this: - A) If user is inactive less than 3 years, we could try to contact him and ask to help solving the issues (like licensing of images). If there is no reaction within 1 month, page will be blanked. - B) If user is inactive for 3 years or more, page can be blanked. - In all cases of blanking we should place a template which shows an info box and adds a category to inform others what was going on. --Chris2map (talk) 17:19, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
I now edited this two pages Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:24, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
resolved|Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:26, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- In my opinion, user pages should not be edited in such cases. If something else is displayed there, we should not worry about it. I am against editing users' pages unless it is necessary (e.g. removing a page from a category). maro21 12:55, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
- I understand your concerns. But in case of media files such as images - those are not stored on the user page only. How to handle copyright queries? The deletion of used files always is a question. Should we override files lacking copyright information but used on user pages with place holders? --Chris2map (talk) 13:17, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
- If we delete a file, we can either: 1) do nothing - leave a userpage with a broken link to a file, which is fine; 2) edit the page and fix a link: a) if there is a replacement, add a new link to the identical file; b) delete a link if there is no replacement to the deleted file. This (point 2) is good behavior but requires taking the time to edit the page. 3) blanking the whole page - I see no logical reason to blank the user subpage just becasue some files were removed. I wouldn't like someone to edit my user subpages if I'm inactive.
- Such tasks - replacing files with files from Commons - would be best done by bots. maro21 14:10, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
- So you would prefer to delete file despite its use at user pages, right? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 15:15, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, I would. On the assumption that the reason for deletion will tell the user why the file was deleted. maro21 21:05, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
- So you would prefer to delete file despite its use at user pages, right? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 15:15, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
- I understand your concerns. But in case of media files such as images - those are not stored on the user page only. How to handle copyright queries? The deletion of used files always is a question. Should we override files lacking copyright information but used on user pages with place holders? --Chris2map (talk) 13:17, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
Hello to all,
I would like to change the layout of the page MediaWiki:Sharedupload-desc-here,
Before | After |
---|---|
This file is from $1 and may be used by other projects.
The description on its [$2 file description page] there is shown below. |
What do you think about it? Thanks in advance — Koreller (talk) 17:45, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Looks good. Where is it used? --Chris2map (talk) 18:36, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- It's used here MediaWiki:Sharedupload-desc-here and under a lot of File in the wiki, exemple File:Maps.me_android_screenshot_2015-10.png — Koreller (talk) 19:03, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- I don't know if that might be a problem: The existing text is not only limited to files from Commons, but neutral and so could be used for embedding files from other wikis than Commons. --Chris2map (talk) 19:29, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- I thought there were only links to Commons images... @Mateusz Konieczny:, are there any external photos that are not from Commons? — Koreller (talk) 21:20, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- AFAIK no, and I am not really expecting it to change Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 21:41, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- so @Chris2map: I think there is no problem to make the change in this case? — Koreller (talk) 17:04, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
- I think so, too. But I can't estimate the probability of other integrations coming. In case of changing the text layout: Do you also consider the translations? E.g. /fr, /de, ...? --Chris2map (talk) 17:18, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
- so @Chris2map: I think there is no problem to make the change in this case? — Koreller (talk) 17:04, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
- AFAIK no, and I am not really expecting it to change Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 21:41, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- I thought there were only links to Commons images... @Mateusz Konieczny:, are there any external photos that are not from Commons? — Koreller (talk) 21:20, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- I don't know if that might be a problem: The existing text is not only limited to files from Commons, but neutral and so could be used for embedding files from other wikis than Commons. --Chris2map (talk) 19:29, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- IMHO, I think it is a bit overkill. Looking at File:Maps.me_android_screenshot_2015-10.png, there are already three sections with boxed/tabular layout. Why do we need to place even more fancy formatted sections on pages like that? --Tigerfell
(Let's talk) 22:23, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
- My redesign process has several objectives:
- To allow an easier and faster access to the source
- Allow a better understanding that the file is not hosted on the OSM Wiki but on Commons
- Have a more ergonomic design in general
- I think my modification is really useful and will make the life of the users of this wiki easier — Koreller (talk) 08:15, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- My redesign process has several objectives:
- Are you sure that "Wikimedia Commons" is the only value that the $1 argument can take? Why $2 is removed? I also support what Tigerfell wrote. For me the current message is more readable. The button to Wikimedia Commons file is at the very top of the page, which is the most visible place. maro21 13:03, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, no I'm not sure. Do you know if anyone on this wiki has a definite answer to this question of "do the external files come exclusively from Commons"? If so what is the nickname? The $2 is not deleted but embedded in the button leading to Commons.
- I think your point about "placing the button to the most visible place" is very relevant, but it should not take precedence over the most important information which is the file image. So in my opinion, it should be placed after the image but before the file description.
- On the other hand, indeed there is a change to be made, it is to modify the translations of this sentence, but I did not manage to find where it is done. Do you know where the translation comes from? (As it is, I would have to find where this translation is made before we can make the graphic change)
- Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version) — Koreller (talk) 13:33, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
- I didn't say about "placing the button to the most visible place" - the button is already there. If a file is from Wikimedia Commons, there is a button "View on Wikimedia Commons" at the top. maro21 13:56, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
- Translations are at MediaWiki:Sharedupload-desc-here/ar, MediaWiki:Sharedupload-desc-here/fr etc. maro21 13:56, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
Backlog among images in Labelled for deletion
Images waiting for processing in Category:Labelled for deletion are growing. For example this obvious case is waiting since December 2021.
For start: I am thankful to people dealing with this and handling deletions.
Is there some way how it can be handled better by people requesting deletions?
Separate subcategories based on why deletion is requested (separate categories for useless ones / duplicates / unfixable copyright violation / duplicate + fixable copyright violation but requiring wasting effort on that)? Just wait longer and accept that images will be not deleted for months? Help to find someone new who would be viable moderator?
I am one of main people directly responsible for that backlog as result of going through several thousand images and nominating some for deletion. (Indirectly: lack of real oversight over what is uploaded over years, result in large amount of images processed right now and likely also growing amount after six month in #Designing policy for handling files without clear license will be reached.)
So if I can do something better and allow easier processing of this images - please let me know Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 22:45, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
- Sorry for being very direct but there is something you could do better IMHO. You could reply more quickly on comments regarding the deletion. I commented on the deletion of the case above on 31 January. ;-) Additionally, the wiki categorisation does not work reliably since 13 February 2022. This also effects this category.
- I usually review most of the requests on the last weekend of each month. I used to do that more often, but it did not turn out to be effective.
- I noted on Category:Labelled for deletion how I judge deletion requests with respect to the arguments of other administrators. When establishing Wiki:Rejected deletion policy I managed to reach some sort of consensus about the length of time before something can get deleted. It was 31 days and longer if there was a discussion previously in which one person objected the deletion. Consequently, a case might have to wait 61 days until I review the delete request. Additionally, I usually do not delete pages with a discussion that I was involved in (if it is not about formalities). As a result, Proposed features/Xian remains unresolved until someone else decides on the case (ironically, it was Mateusz Konieczny who objected my deletion request :-D).
- If you want to speed up the process you could establish some sort of "simple cases" category and propose rules about what qualifies for a simpler case that can be solved more quickly. Given the negative response of my proposition, I doubt that it will be successful but maybe times have changed ....
- Just commenting on the top items in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/api.php?action=query&list=categorymembers&cmtitle=Category%3ALabelled+for+deletion&cmsort=timestamp&cmprop=timestamp%7Ctitle&cmlimit=50:
- DE:HowTo minutely hstore
- The user only requested deletion of the German translation but neither the English nor the Italian pages. Was that intended? Before the deletion request, the page looked similar to the other versions. There are many incoming links, some should be fixed.
- Creating a local OSM server under FreeBSD
- The same user requested deletion of the English version but not for the Russian translation. Has FreeBSD actually changed that much?
- Template:Ka:Map Features:amenity
- Ka:Map Features uses the template. Previously, the template was replaced with the deletion request. That meant that the pages transcluding the template had deletion requests on them, too. I fixed <noinclude> first. I think there used to be more than one, I updated the other pages, but apparently forgot this occasion.
- I hope this helps. --Tigerfell
(Let's talk) 20:22, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for a response! I did some things that may unblock some of deletions (pinged person who requested deletion of DE:HowTo minutely hstore, finally responded to the missed message in this file, withdrawn objection to Proposed features/Xian deletion). In general I have not considered that deletion may be stuck on text pages as I recently focused on files. I hope that there no other files stuck in similar way. I will also try to handle some other issues you raised, but I hope that images in general should be easier to process than some long-standing article pages Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 21:53, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- BTW, if you run into such cases where you refuse to delete and post in discussion - maybe switch {{Delete}} to {{Delete proposal}} would be a good idea? I sometimes look through {{Delete proposal}} to fix raised issues such as delinking and/or withdraw deletions that seem to be a poor idea Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 21:53, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- I think the way it is now is fine. No need to hurry. Tigerfell usually removes pages 30-40 days after reporting - that's not long. But for the reason that we don't have procedures for deleting pages, like on Wikipedia, it's that time when others can question the deletion (e.g. people watching the page). maro21 13:06, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
Graphical improvements to the Wiki
Hello, I noticed that the interface of the wiki was not very adapted to the mobile and that some formatting was not very ergonomic.
For that I would like to recast some pages in particular with the following formatting models:
- {{Clickable button}}, {{Colored box}}, {{Colored rule}}, {{Colored bar}}, {{Begin colored insert}}
And I will use those icons (and especially OOUI icons), combine with some responsive code.
I started to do some graphic redesigns like here : Develop or there : Get help (Tab system), or there : Use OpenStreetMap, or there : Template News (see also the topic for the simpler, more accurate and accessible system for accessing external files that are hosted on Commons)
Do you see any reason not to do so ?
Thank a lot and have a good day ! — Koreller (talk) 23:59, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Are the templates your own work or are you copying another wiki? --Andrew (talk) 22:03, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
- Could we adapt this a bit more to the OSM designs as shown on https://osmfoundation.org or https://osm.org? The icons and colors reflect the design guide of Wikimedia Foundation but OSM is not a part of it. Additionally, I think that Template:HelpMenu looks good but it does not match the visualisation of the card index style the template used to have before. The homepage uses Bootstrap and Flex. Some years ago, I used icons by The Noun Project when updating templates. --Tigerfell
(Let's talk) 12:55, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
- Of course ! You totally right, so I will try use more icon from c:Category:SVG icons from The Noun Project.
- Furthermore I try to change the Template:Colored bar to looks more like https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Main_Page, what do you think about this ?
- Also, does the foundation have any graphic guides? (It would help me a lot to not just copy the Wikimedia foundation's graphic guides) — Koreller (talk) 15:41, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
- I could not find any. User:Tigerfell/User interface holds a compilation of currently used styles in templates. It is a bit chaotic because people just copied stuff from other wikis. I did not include every template but just the basic ones. The commonly used templates reference these templates in return. Template:Colored bar looks good! --Tigerfell
(Let's talk) 14:06, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
- I could not find any. User:Tigerfell/User interface holds a compilation of currently used styles in templates. It is a bit chaotic because people just copied stuff from other wikis. I did not include every template but just the basic ones. The commonly used templates reference these templates in return. Template:Colored bar looks good! --Tigerfell
- Develop does now indeed work better on mobile, that's a clear improvement! Would it be possible to make the green boxes on the Main Page vertically stacked on mobile as well?
- As for the aesthetical changes, I'm not convinced that all of them are improvements. In particular, I believe that styling small links such as Template:Main as a prominent box that runs across the entire width isn't ideal. IMO, the border and different background serve no clear purpose here, the icon and indent already make the link sufficiently noticeable for the reader.
- At Get help and other pages using Template:HelpMenu, I'm afraid the new design may degrade usability: There is no indication to the user about the purpose of these boxes as they do not look even remotely like tabs. (And visually, I would prefer not to have a colored box behind the main content of the page.)
- --Tordanik 21:54, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
- Main page: You could split the used tables and add floating to allow mobile devices view the boxes one below the other instead of side by side. I made a test here: Test of floating Main page --Chris2map (talk) 15:10, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
- There was a different proposal recently at Talk:Main Page#Improving mobile view. Please file requests there. --Tigerfell
(Let's talk) 10:49, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
- There was a different proposal recently at Talk:Main Page#Improving mobile view. Please file requests there. --Tigerfell
- Main page: You could split the used tables and add floating to allow mobile devices view the boxes one below the other instead of side by side. I made a test here: Test of floating Main page --Chris2map (talk) 15:10, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
I think it is time to re-style a lot of the message boxes derived from Ambox and navigational templates to give them a more OSM-like look. Unfortunately, there are many templates that are not used very frequently and they are not documented or listed so the users create new ones whenever they need them. As a first step, I overhauled Wiki organisation#Labels to document useful message boxes regarding the wiki cleanup efforts. --Tigerfell (Let's talk) 10:06, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- What is "OSM-like look"? :) maro21 10:22, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- As I wrote above already, there is no exact OSM design guide. I would suggest to copy the design of osm.org and wiki.osmfoundation.org. Images could be used form the homepage or The Noun Project (TBD). --Tigerfell
(Let's talk) 12:32, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- IMHO if so, the wiki should be based on OSM/OpenStreetMap.org. But there isn't very much design to copy for the wiki. I am against copying from foundation. I think OSM wiki should be clearly distinguishable from foundation pages and personally I don't like the foundation page design that much. I don't think the current wiki is that bad. We could pay a little more attention to creating uniform boxes and updating old boxes. --Chris2map (talk) 20:07, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- As I wrote above already, there is no exact OSM design guide. I would suggest to copy the design of osm.org and wiki.osmfoundation.org. Images could be used form the homepage or The Noun Project (TBD). --Tigerfell
DBQueryError
I encountered this bug while trying to update this page:
[54ee259848babdd9bc96ecb4] 2022-03-17 02:54:59: Fatal exception of type "Wikimedia\Rdbms\DBQueryError"
I wonder if that was triggered by this edit or something else and how that can be resolved? -Ianlopez1115 (talk) 04:07, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
- The same error is also encountered when trying to create Tagalog version pages of certain articles with the ValueDescription and/or Translated templates. If said templates aren't added to the translated page (as in the case of this version of Tl:Tag:fast food=cafeteria), then no such errors are encountered and edits can be previewed and/or saved. -Ianlopez1115 (talk) 09:06, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
- Your edit to {{Translated}} expands to
{{#language:{{{srclang|en}}}|tl}}
, which crashes this wiki and expands to language names in English on English Wikipedia; try replacing it with alternative text. This same flakiness affects {{ValueDescription}}; however, adding a full set of strings to {{DescriptionLang}}, {{ElementUsageLang}} and {{StatusLang}} may fix the problem for you. --Andrew (talk) 20:44, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
- Your edit to {{Translated}} expands to
- If that's the case, have reverted my previous edit in the {{Translated}} template and see if that solves the problem for now. Despite edits to {{DescriptionLang}}, {{ElementUsageLang}} and {{StatusLang}}, errors in the {{ValueDescription}} tag still persist and I'll revert them once this is posted.
- Additionally, categories with the Tl: prefix are also hit with the same bug and encountered the same while trying to put a delete template on an inadvertently created redirect (TL:Limitations on mapping private information). -Ianlopez1115 (talk) 13:48, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
- @Minh Nguyen:@Tigerfell: In addition to the previously reported crash with #language there is a failure in {{LangSwitch}} inside the Lua code. This code was copied directly from Wikimedia Commons; commons:Module:LangSwitch has needed no bugfixes since although it’s gained extra features, I believe our Mediawiki installation is probably misconfigured. To my knowledge no other language with any content in this wiki is affected, although pages in Marathi would have the same problem. It appears that this can be worked round by adding explicit output strings in Tagalog (tl=) to {{LangSwitch}} calls. This would be the ones in {{TranslateThis}} (not using
{{Languagename|{{#if:{{{lang|}}}|{{{lang|}}}|{{{2|}}}}}|tl}}
because it expands to #language) and possibly others for ValueDescription; the categories need a string added to {{Localised-colon}}. However the most robust solution is to fix the misconfiguration at source. --Andrew (talk) 17:49, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
- @Minh Nguyen:@Tigerfell: In addition to the previously reported crash with #language there is a failure in {{LangSwitch}} inside the Lua code. This code was copied directly from Wikimedia Commons; commons:Module:LangSwitch has needed no bugfixes since although it’s gained extra features, I believe our Mediawiki installation is probably misconfigured. To my knowledge no other language with any content in this wiki is affected, although pages in Marathi would have the same problem. It appears that this can be worked round by adding explicit output strings in Tagalog (tl=) to {{LangSwitch}} calls. This would be the ones in {{TranslateThis}} (not using
@Ianlopez1115 and Wynndale: Thanks for narrowing it down to Tagalog. I opened this operations issue to track debugging this issue more thoroughly. I have a hunch that it's related to phab:T251850. – Minh Nguyễn 💬 22:01, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
- @Ianlopez1115: I have managed to get the categories to display by setting the page content language (in the page information) to Cebuano (ceb) overriding the prefix for the {{See also}} template. (Unfortunately this also changes the “See also” text. This trick works for any language except English.) I have also got the description box to work by setting the language explicitly, which we don’t usually do. --Andrew (talk) 20:42, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
Automate obvious part of "Image superseded by Wikimedia Commons"
There is Category:Image superseded by Wikimedia Commons which contains files which should be replaced by Wikimedia Commons files. I propose to automate replacement where image use
- is being displayed with a specific size or where file size is the same (to avoid situation where image is displayed as much larger after the edit) - edits would look like this one
- is being used as infobox parameter - edits like this one
Additionally, if image is no longer used it would be marked for deletion.
Following would be still handled manually
- confirming that file is an exactly the same image, maybe with lower resolution (and not just very similar - that requires manual checks during replacing)
- cases where image would be now displayed with a changed size
Code was tested in manual operation, I expect it to work well without supervision (after limiting to only safe edits)
Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 09:20, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
- And the question: is it a good idea to edit file use also on talk pages with such bot? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 09:26, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
- I mean talk pages should rather not be changed. --Chris2map (talk) 21:19, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
- In such case we have some options (1) accept talk pages with dead images (2) accept archived talk pages with dead images (3) we need volunteers to maintain pointless duplicates (licensing info etc is missing for most Category:Image superseded by Wikimedia Commons) Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 22:16, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
- I mean talk pages should rather not be changed. --Chris2map (talk) 21:19, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
Installation of the "Extension:Media Viewer" on the wiki
Hello everyone,
Is it possible to install the Media Viewer extension on the wiki?
The Media Viewer allow to view images in larger size, with useful information about their contents, authors and related metadata. It also offers a number of tools to share, download or embed media files.
The Media Viewer extension aims to:
- improve the viewing experience for readers
- make it easier to preview and browse images
- provide a quick summary, with easy access to details
- offer features such as enlarge, download, share and embed
(see Help:Extension:Media Viewer for further information)
Thanks for your answers — Koreller (talk) 09:14, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
- Can you give examples of specific files and actions where it would be helpful?
- I think that smarter solution would be moving files to Mediawiki Commons, we are unable to handle existing ones. Note that downloading, viewing files is possible already Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:22, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
- Once this extension is installed, will it be possible for anyone to disable it? maro21 18:59, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
- @Maro21 Yes, you just click the settings button in the upper right of the image viewer when an image is shown and click "disable". Lectrician1 (talk) 22:22, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
Support Lectrician1 (talk) 22:23, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
CC-BY licenses without attribution: notify uploaders
Yes, I am proposing one more bot edit.
There are many images which are using CC-BY licenses (including CC-BY-SA of various versions and so on).
Sadly, large part of them is not specifying who should be attributed. For example https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Sushi_k.jpg - who should be attributed as author?
Note that "lets credit uploader" is not always correct, I encountered some obvious ones where someone took CC-BY file, remembered to note license and then immediately violated its rules by skipping attribution.
I propose to
- post messages on talk pages asking to fill this info
- mark images as problematic
Note that there are cases where instead of
{{CC-BY-SA-2.0|1=name of whoever should be credited}}
freeform text is used
wykonane przez Foobar {{CC-BY-SA-2.0}}
I will try to skip such cases and review ones containing words "author" or "created" or "made" manually (or post list here asking for help), but some will receive notification asking to fill author properly
Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:23, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
- I created https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Template:Proper_attribution_missing that I plant to use for that purpose (putting it on pages where author was notified, similarly to {{Unknown}}) Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 08:20, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
Wiki:Requests for administrator attention
I've recently created Wiki:Requests for administrator attention because there was no such place on the Wiki where on could write such requests. So instead of writing on admins' talk pages or posting on talk pages where requests may go unnoticed, there is one place for it now. I suggests all admins to add it to the watchlist :). @Harry Wood, Lyx, Minh Nguyen, Pigsonthewing, Reneman, SomeoneElse, and Tigerfell: maro21 13:52, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- There was Category:Edit requests but it was not used very often. Some comments about the page
- As one can see from Special:ListGroupRights#sysop, admins/sysops cannot create properties, only Data administrators can.
- Shouldn't we archive the requests?
- I think it would be useful if this page were linked from any "wiki management page" like Wiki.
- --Tigerfell
(Let's talk) 09:56, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- 1 - Yes, I know that but I decided that I can include data administrators as well (a user doesn't need to know the difference). So I will change the text on the page and add "administrators or data administrators". We could also make a separate page "Wiki:Requests for data administrator attention", but there probably won't be many requests to create Properties. Another thing is that we have only one data administrator and he is inactive...
- 2 - I don't know, should we? I'm open to suggestions.
- 3 - Yes, I realized that today. I've been looking for places, but I don't know where to link it. One place could be the top of this page? maro21 10:17, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- Let's just see what happens.
- When users use Special:PermanentLink we do not necessarily need archives to reference requests.
- This page might be helpful or Wiki itself. I also thought of a navigation system as in Template:Good practice but I did not find a conclusive theme among the "wiki:" prefixed pages.
- --Tigerfell
(Let's talk) 20:39, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- I don't understand the second point. How can I use it to archive requests? maro21 19:29, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
- With it there is no need to extra archive it. Use e.g. like Mateusz has done on MediaWiki_talk:Lang#Howto. Copy the link "Permanent link" ("Link do tej wersji") in main menu on the left when you are at Wiki:Requests for administrator attention --Chris2map (talk) 20:06, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
- Ok, now I get it how we can use permalink. See [9]. So in case anyone ever doubts why Tigerfell added this translation, there is a link. maro21 21:25, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
- I don't understand the second point. How can I use it to archive requests? maro21 19:29, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
- @Tigerfell: Archives are more discoverable (searchable) than arbitrary revision IDs. It could turn out to be relevant if a particular request is declined with some substantive discussion. – Minh Nguyễn 💬 01:48, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
@Maro21: Thanks for setting up this page. Hopefully centralization will help us keep track of these requests, though the work will probably still fall on the same administrators who already keep a close eye on Category:Edit requests (not everyone does). – Minh Nguyễn 💬 02:11, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
I have one thought to add: I think it would be good not to have discussions on the page Wiki:Requests for administrator attention, but to always have discussions on the individual article or topic pages, or on general ones here on Talk:Wiki. --Chris2map (talk) 19:18, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
EWG projects to improve wiki software
The Engineering Working Group is attempting to improve OSM's software infrastructure with funding for moderately-sized open source development projects. As part of this effort, we're also looking at the wiki:
- Are there desirable improvements to the OSM wiki that are not possible with existing configuration options or plugins and would therefore require some software development?
- If we decide to invest in improving the wiki software, where do we find competent developers for MediaWiki projects?
We would welcome your input as active wiki contributors! --Tordanik 09:28, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- That sounds great!
- There are a lot of requests for configuration changes to the wiki. Note that there is a general wiki configuration for this wiki as well as all wikis of the working groups and a separate one for this wiki, so changes might effect all MediaWiki instances. There are also some pull requests ready to be merged into the configuration. However, they are not merged and feedback information is rather rare. If you want to improve that situation, you would need to get in touch with OWG and find out the issue. IMHO that is either that they do not have the capacity to review such changes or they think we open to many requests.
- If you want to have more specific projects, I can name two from the top of my head
- Unify wiki and homepage accounts: First, find out if the involved parties (i. e. OWG on the configuration side and wiki administrators on the administrative side) still favor this. Second, evaluate technical solutions and decide for one (some software engineering might be necessary). Third, document processes for account transfer/renaming/merging/... as well as account termination and user name changes. Forth, get the new configuration merged. Lastly, some minor support for user and administrator inquiries for a limited time (might not be necessary if documentation (3rd step) is good).
- Updating MultiMaps MediaWiki extension (project work board): the maintainer has stopped maintaining the extension. Some security updates are added via MediaWiki maintainers but that is probably insufficient to maintain the extension in the longer term (i. e. that it will still work with MediaWiki in five years). That would include updating Leaflet to a recent version and other tasks on the project work board. First, you probably need to find a new maintainer so that they will get access to the code. Second, you would need a code reviewer. Fortunately, those changes are bug fixing, improving unit tests, and dependency updating and therefore uncontroversial. This does not involve a configuration change on OWG's side, because their configuration always uses the same version of the extension as the MediaWiki version. So, when OWG updates MediaWiki, MultiMaps extension will be updated, too.
- I have never tried to acquire competent developers, but if you have a financial budget you can have a look at the Jobs page on mediawiki.org. Additionally, I might be able to help out with questions regarding the interplay of the configuration and MediaWiki or some code reviews.
- Hope this helps. --Tigerfell
(Let's talk) 11:13, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- For start, reviewing and merging/rejecting https://github.com/openstreetmap/chef/pull/462 and https://github.com/openstreetmap/chef/pull/400 would be great. And I want to concur that most of issues are listed already, especially https://github.com/openstreetmap/operations/issues/507 https://github.com/openstreetmap/operations/issues/373 https://github.com/openstreetmap/operations/issues/383 https://github.com/openstreetmap/operations/issues/449 https://github.com/openstreetmap/operations/issues/573 https://github.com/openstreetmap/operations/issues/466 Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 07:12, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
Map style KVB and TVM
Bonjour, Sur le site openrailwaymap.org, lorsque le filtre signalisation est activé, les signalisation KVB (contrôle de vitesse par balise) et TVM (transmission voie-machine) ne s'affichent pas, alors qu'ils sont pourtant bien dans la légende. Si quelqu'un sait comment résoudre le problème et/ou sait à qui s'adresser pour que le problème soit résolu, pouvez-vous vous manifester ? Merci de vos réponses !
France
La France offre une grande diversité de régions et de villes, chacune ayant ses propres caractéristiques et attraits. Tout dépend donc de vos préférences et de vos besoins. Si vous recherchez une grande ville dynamique, Paris est certainement un choix populaire. Si vous préférez une ville plus petite et historique, vous pourriez envisager des villes comme Bordeaux, Strasbourg ou Nantes. Si vous voulez être proche de la nature, vous pourriez envisager des régions comme la Provence, les Alpes ou la Bretagne. En fin de compte, le meilleur endroit pour vous dépendra de ce que vous recherchez et de votre style de vie.