Wikimania:Information Desk/Archive 1

From Wikimania 2014 • London, United Kingdom

Sundial Court lodging

I have a message from the Sundial Court saying that they are fully booked for August 4-31, 2014. Can someone please look into that?--Dthomsen8 (talk) 02:21, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We're using different accommodation, which will be announced shortly. EdSaperia (talk) 12:51, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Have the dates been set yet? 00:05, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Wikimania will take place 6-10 August 2014. - Lawsonstu (talk) 13:53, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Global Abusefilters

Hi. An extension of the deployment of the global abusefilter function is active for months now on Meta,, and other global wikis.
We stewards would like to propose that this wiki gets added to the protection as well, in order to allow better fighting of crosswiki vandalism and spam.
To be clear, the filters which are currently enabled for the "global" function do nothing except logging the caught edits on Meta. If at anytime the testing should be extended to further abusefilter functions, like disallowing edits, - or if the global abusefilter function should finally be deployed truly globally - we will ask the affected communities again whether they want to opt-in or opt-out. Best regards, — billinghurst sDrewth 11:22, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This seems reasonable, given that this wiki will soon have a lot more traffic once submissions open in January and there are CentralNotices etc linking people to the wiki. Please could you tell me where I can see the configuration for the global AbuseFilters that are currently in place? Thehelpfulone 01:35, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
m:Special:AbuseFilter and as a meta admin you can view them, and you will see that they are global where that word appears in the status column. At this point of time, they are spambot-focused, have been in operation on meta by the stewards for a year, and on other wikis since August. I suggested it due to your getting spam that would have been identified by the filters in place. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:33, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not hearing anything to the contrary, I will close this and submit a bugzilla. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:10, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Just FYI, I couldn't replicate my Meta userpage here because the edit gets "automatically identified as harmful". This is... disappointing. --Elitre (talk) 09:49, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]


I have some doubts about a wide translation of this site since anyway the attendees are expected to speak and read in English. Instead of setting a bunch of pages for translation, perhaps only the "general public" pages should be translated; I mean by "general public": the Wikimedians who don’t intend to participate but who are interested in general informations, the journalists, and other supporters who don’t attend.

So I propose to set up translation on the Main Page, the FAQ, possibly the contact page, and the programme when this one will be quite ready (firstly to permit the local communities to request that one attendee of the community go to a specific conference for a specific report in their language afterwards -- if the messenger agrees of course, that’s their stuff -- and secondly for the posterity to review the conference titles); but all pages directly related to the event itself don’t worth to be translated imho (e.g. the Scholarships page requests that the applicants speak English, so the translation is worthless). Seb35 [^_^] 01:08, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Seb35: IMO, if you don't want to translate particular pages - nobody can force you do so but that doesn't mean that others would not want as well :) Scholarships applications AFAICA can be submitted not only in English (but sure user must somehow prove that (s)he can speak it). Application software is currently translated in many languages. But I keep position that all content should be translated. It's much better to have text around you in your mother tongue even if you are to write input in English, some wikimedians can read pages like Scholarships just because of curiosity about how it works without intend to apply in this year. Attendees aren't the only readers of the wiki and the wiki isn't for training attendees' English level :) --Base (talk) 17:51, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. We should encourage as much translations as possible. We may not get everything covered and need to actively recruit for volunteers to help with specific texts given high priority. However, hopefully enough self-motivated wikimedians will step forward and deal with articles they feel important to make this the exception rather than the rule. Leutha (talk) 18:27, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I know I’m not forced to translate the pages :) To give some more background of my message, I translated the Wikimania websites into French in 2009 and 2010 iirc (and there were also dozen of languages), but I stopped then because nobody said it was useful and, given Wikimania is English-only (apart in Buenos Aires and Alexandria before), non-English-speakers can only visite the website. E.g. the local informations are mainly useful for the attendees. Probably the pages about general information on Wikimania and the programme are worth translating, but I hardly see the need for the others (although I’m really a translation-maniac these times). Obviously I will not prevent anybody to translate, I just find it’s a lot of efforts for a small benefit. ~ Seb35 [^_^] 22:47, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Email required to be a presenter?

I have been putting together a proposal for a presentation, and it says it will not be reviewed if I do not provide an email address. Currently I am indicating I can be reached with the "email this user" function at en.wp. I'd be happy to provide my email directly to the conference organizers, but do I really have to provide it to the whole world as well? Beeblebrox (talk) 19:40, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As long as you put any reasonable way we can contact you in the submission, that'll be fine. 13:39, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I changed the template to add email this user as an option. WereSpielChequers (talk) 20:17, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Beeblebrox (talk) 21:32, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Conference registration fees

How much are the conference registration fees? --Daniele Pugliesi (talk) 02:16, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't yet fully decided, but we imagine earlybird registration fees will be in the region of 50GBP. 13:40, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Earlybird fees are £45 for the three-day conference, and £55 including the two-day hackathon (see Registration). - Lawsonstu (talk) 06:56, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Can I participate to Wikimania 2014 if I don't win the sponsorship and I pay the conference registration fees? In this case, do I need to register before? --Daniele Pugliesi (talk) 02:16, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The answer to the first question is yes, anyone who attends can participate and submit a proposal if they wish. You don't need to register before submitting a proposal. - Lawsonstu (talk) 08:29, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Is there a minimal age?

No minimum age, though we can't guarantee all the material at the conference will be suitable for minors, and currently there are no plans to provide childcare. EdSaperia (talk) 16:01, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Have any previous Wikimanias provided childcare? Just wondering if there is a demand for it. - Lawsonstu (talk) 18:27, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No, but it usually gets asked for by a few people. It's quite a difficult and expensive thing to arrange though. EdSaperia (talk) 22:45, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
At least one recent Wikimania has had comments about the need for Tshirts in children's sizes, so yes some attendees will have chldren with them. I do know that surveys of Wikipedians show that people with small children is one of the demographics least likely to edit Wikipedia, so providing childcare should be relatively cheap for an event of this size as few will take it up and it would be an action to address one of our biggest skews as a community. Back to the original topic of the thread, with the greying of the pedia we have fewer adolescents and teenagers in positions of responsibility within the movement; Most of the teenage admins on the English Wikipedia are probably at University now. But I've met a sixteen year old attendee at a wikimania, if someone is active in the movement then they'd probably fit in well with the event, though I should point out that the minimum age for buying alcohol here is 18. WereSpielChequers (talk) 08:42, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Generally things are more expensive per head if they only cater for a small group, and the organisational cost is the same. It's on the wanted list though, so hopefully we'll get to it in due course. EdSaperia (talk) 22:58, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What happens to the output?

I proposed a submission directed at encouraging readers of Wikipedia to become editors, and encouraging discouraged editors to resume editing.

By definition there won't be any of those people at Wikimania, and I am now reflecting on where my input would go. Actual attenders may well be insiders who are comfortable with the status quo. So let's suppose my submission is accepted, and three people sit in and listen on the day, and one is persuaded by my oratory and the other two were busy updating their Facebook, what then?

Wikipedia is a near-democracy -- after all it's the "community" that polices behaviour -- so I presume there is no hierarchy whom I could try to persuade. So maybe it would be simpler if I just post my thoughts at the "Village Pump"?

No doubt the official answer would be that the Wikipedia management team will read my submission and take careful note of it. But then I assume that they do that to the Village Pump inputs ... ?

Afterbrunel (talk) 11:47, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Afterbrunel, in fact outreach will be a hot topic at Wikimania. There are many outreach initiatives (see and, which are likely to be represented at the conference. So rather than address your session at potential editors, perhaps you could do some research around what outreach initiatives already exist and see if you can submit something relating to those, or about a new initiative that you'd be interested in starting? EdSaperia (talk) 19:08, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you EdSaperia, that's interesting. Is that an official Wikimania response, or are you a rank and file editor like me?
I think I didn't make myself clear. The purpose of some presentation at Wikimania must be to try to achieve some change of policy, otherwise it's just wasted hot air. Any presentation therefore needs to make its recommendation adapted to how the system works; it's no use just saying "this is bad" if there is no mechanism to improve it. I need to understand how Wikipedia etc implements managerial change in order that proposals I make are actually adapted to that. Could Wiki management please direct me to an explanation of how that works please? Afterbrunel (talk) 07:24, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
May I have an answer to this question now please? You will appreciate that it is futile for me to prepare a presentation without understanding how recommendations might be adopted for implementation. Afterbrunel (talk) 14:52, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to be looking for an 'official' response, but there isn't one to give: Wikimania is organised by whoever in the community of editors decides to get involved. As you said, 'it's the "community" that polices behaviour -- so I presume there is no hierarchy whom I could try to persuade.' If you have an idea and present it, then if attendees think it's a good one, we can work together to implement it. - Lawsonstu (talk) 16:18, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I am looking for an official response. How could I possibly persuade "the community" by a thirty minute presentation in London? Afterbrunel (talk) 09:54, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There is no "wiki management" in the way that you're imagining. The community establishes its own programmes and is self policing. Implementing a change like the one you're suggesting is difficult for exactly the reasons you identify! EdSaperia (talk) 12:48, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


I'm not able to attend the Wikimania in London, but I would like to start a discussion about the role of the wikiversities. Since 2011 I'm trying to set up a Dutch wikiversity. I have a lot of fun, but the people that are participating monthly can be counted on one hand. I have already spoken with the Dutch Wikimedia Chapter about this challenge but I find it very hard to convince them to put energy in the wikiversity. Can I get some help from other succesfull countries? Cheers, Tim, Timboliu (talk) 06:38, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

--SalimSmoy12 (talk) 11:16, 12 February 2014 (UTC)salim gazi[reply]

Hi Timboliu, have you tried asking this on the English Wikiversity:Colloquium or at Wikimedia UK's Water Cooler as well? You might get a better response there. - Lawsonstu (talk) 16:27, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Lawsonstu, thanks for the tip! I posted a similar question on wikiversity:colloquium, see

Ask for delete a page.

Just for deleting the page Submissions/Wikipedia and citizen émancipation because I've moved it to Submissions/Wikipedia and citizen emancipation to get the title orthographically correct --Lionel Scheepmans : Wiki ou eMail 14:31, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

YesY Done --Base (talk) 16:21, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sponsorship for writers of accepted submissions

Hi. I have made a few submissions. If any of them are accepted, will I be given any types of sponsorship? The answers will help my plan. Universehk (talk) 16:35, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

While I am not a member of either the scholarship committee or the programme committee, I do know that they are separate. In some years we have had people whose submissions have been acepted by the programme committee but who did not attend because they did not get a scholarship. Sadly the number of scholarsships is limited. WereSpielChequers (talk) 19:45, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Request move

Hello: I've changed the title of to "Bootstrapping the Wiki Way with the Peeragogy Accelerator", could someone move the page, too, please? Arided (talk) 17:27, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Arided. YesY Done. Ralgis (talk) 20:37, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Types of proposals

The proposal submission form has a field for "Type of submission (discussion, hot seat, panel, presentation, tutorial, workshop)" — what's a "hot seat"? Could someone add a bit more information about these? Is a "discussion" just a "panel with only one person"? Is the difference between a "tutorial" and "workshop" just that participants are supposed to be following along in real time in a workshop? Cscott (talk) 21:15, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think that a discussion is where the whole audience are the panel, and the difference between a tutorial and a workshop is that in a tutorial you just listen and are tutored but in a workshop you may get the opportunity to actually do some work. I've used hotseat for a presentation on something slightly controversial, that may not have been what I was supposed to do but no-one has yet complained or corrected me. WereSpielChequers (talk) 19:57, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Blank Submissions

I usually userfy or delete blank submissions that I come across that are more than a week old. I have now created Category:Blank submissions to help manage that process. Feel free to add more, I will probably trawl it every few days and deal with the ones that are still blank. WereSpielChequers (talk) 19:52, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Uncategorised Submissions

I have categorised most of the submissions into our various tracks, or otherwise dealt with them. However that leaves a few where I am unsure of the track or want a second opinion before deletion. So I have created Category:Uncategorised_submissions feel free to add or subtract from it. WereSpielChequers (talk) 19:52, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Broken header formatting?

For some reason, the headers of all pages here (including this one) seem to be indented by about 150px, which is quite annoying. Please can that be fixed so they appear the same as on other wikis? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 20:21, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is not that case for me, it looks normal (logged in on Chrome on Ubuntu or Windows). - Lawsonstu (talk) 10:44, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
here's a screenshot of how it looks to me. Using Firefox 28.0 on Mac OS X 10.9.2. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 13:27, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I see, that's not good! Maybe User:EdSaperia can look into it. I just tested it on a Mac in Chrome and Firefox and looked normal to me. - Lawsonstu (talk) 16:01, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I added what should be a fix but I can't replicate the problem, can you confirm if it's still indented? KimiLawrie (talk) 18:55, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, it's fixed now. :-) Mike Peel (talk) 18:56, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Also, the font on this page seems to be different from usual - perhaps this is a related bug? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 20:22, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Request to change the title of our submission

Hallo. We titled our submission "We are WeLand: a project for a sustainable, smart and hi-tech integrated development" but now we would like to change it with another title: "Wikipedia: from participatory didactics to civic education". Is it possible? How can we do it? Someone could please do it? This is the page of our submission:,_smart_and_hi-tech_integrated_development Thank you very much.

YesY Done RZ (talk) 19:10, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]