Wikimedia Forum: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 22:26, 17 February 2011

<translate> The Wikimedia Forum is a central place for questions, announcements and other discussions about the [[<tvar|wmf>Special:MyLanguage/Wikimedia Foundation</>|Wikimedia Foundation]] and its projects. (For discussion about the Meta wiki, see [[<tvar|meta-babel>Special:MyLanguage/Meta:Babel</>|Meta:Babel]].)
This is not the place to make technical queries regarding the [[<tvar|mediawiki>Special:MyLanguage/MediaWiki</>|MediaWiki software]]; please ask such questions at the [[<tvar|mw-support-desk>mw:Project:Support desk</>|MediaWiki support desk]]; technical questions about Wikimedia wikis, however, can be placed on [[<tvar|tech>Special:MyLanguage/Tech</>|Tech]] page.</translate>

<translate> You can reply to a topic by clicking the "<tvar|editsection>[edit]</>" link beside that section, or you can [<tvar|newsection>//meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Forum&action=edit&section=new</> start a new discussion].</translate>

You can reply to a topic by clicking the '[edit]' link beside that section, or start a new discussion

Participate:

This page experimentally allows language localisation.

Blocking on Wikimedia

Dear users. I'm Theklan, sysop on basque wikipedia and devote wikipedian since 2006. I'm really ashamed about the decision to hold Wikimania on Haifa, Israel, where many araba country wikipedians and many other left-side activists can't enter. This is a real shame. I'm trying to express my concerns about this on Wikimania 2011 Desk, but I've been blocked because my political point of view is not accepted by the admins of that place. This is a double shame. I ask to unblock me now or I'll try to get an official boycott position from many other wikipedians and even some Wikipedia sections. -Theklan 18:19, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it seems that the place of wikimania 2011 can't be changed anymore. Maybe a boycott is the only thing that you can do now. Hope no more wikimanias in such places. --DS-fax 15:49, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Conference in kenya.

The kenyan chapter of Wikipedia held a conference to celebrate the 10 anniversary of wikipedia foundation. It was held at Strathmore University in Nairobi Kenya. The chief Guest was Mr. Ting Chen the chairman of Board of Trustees. It was a very successful meeting bringing together students from various universities across Kenya. I must say I learnt a lot from the conference and was so inspired by the speech given by the chief Guest. Look forward to more of such interactive conferences. LONG LIVE WIKIPEDIA AND HAPPY BIRTHDAY

When and how to use central notice

Having a central notice should be a rare exception, not the standard. The vector skin was developed to have a clean, uncluttered page. But since November there has been not a single day without a central notice. That's way too much.

The fundraiser was mandatory, the "thank you" too. As well as the anniversary.

But the scholarship for Haifa was nonsense: how many people could possibly be affected by that? 100? 200? All of them deeply engaged in their projects. Hardly an issue worth bothering every (logged in) user. And the steward candidates are even worse. We are talking about maybe twenty-five people, and every one of them is already hanging out in our IRC channels all day. No one can be a steward unless he or she is well connected in the movement for ages, way beyond individual projects. And of course I know how to block the notice, but I am not the issue. The issue is cluttering the page and bothering people with stuff outside of their interest.

This is about information management: If we use central notice for stuff, our people are not interested in, we diminish the value our users see in this tool. Then we can't reach them anymore if it is really important. Please let us restrict the central notice to issues that affect all the community or a public of maybe 100.000 people or more. Never ever bother everyone with stuff, that is of interest only to a few of those who are already deeply involved.

Now pull the call for steward candidates please and don't use central notice at all until the election begins. --h-stt !? 20:37, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you. Fundraising and anniversary may be inportant, but they should not take up so much place. Centralnotice for Wikimania is totally unnessesary. We can develop some other methods to deliver these messages to the communities. --DS-fax 15:45, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So please, Meta-Admins: disable the current central notice and be much more strict in setting new ones. TIA --h-stt !? 14:09, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Toolserver resources in need of attention

It's a shame about all the previously useful stuff listed on Toolserver/Projects, Toolserver/TStoc (see below) and elsewhere.

As of current, a high percentage of the items listed there is defunct or, rather, unreachable due to expired accounts and the like.

Toolserver/Projects is documenting rather a misery. (To make myself clear, please evaluate the introductory paragraph on that page.)

The once well-maintained, now (just officially) outdated Toolserver/TStoc is not much more well.

TStoc should not so much be viewed as outdated in that if it were, wouldn't everything it once listed be listed in Projects and be intact? Or does it?

Somebody please review the issue and do something about it?

--217.229.24.51 23:43, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I totally agree with that comment... Anthere

Seconded. -- OlEnglish ^(Talk) 06:13, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

⅓ ed. I don't see an updated equivalent on the Toolserver wiki either. –SJ · talk | translate 14:25, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for new languages

Requests for new languages/Wikiversity Chinese translation for all mw & extension messages is done. What next? --Waihorace 10:31, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The project needs an active community (I would rather say it's more than 3 active USERS) now, and it is required to keep the community active for several months. BTW, It's ironic to answer you in English. --DS-fax 14:15, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Friendly reminders

Wikipedia user should be aware for the following website, and its link is similar to Wikipedia's link.

wikiedia.org
wikipeda.org
wikiepdia.org
wikipedoa.org

These site I think is not controlled by Wikimedia Foundation. --Waihorace 14:32, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's a deliberate attempt to catch traffic from people who have mistyped the name Wikipedia, but as the landing pages are clearly different to Wikipedia, people should see that they have landed in the wrong place, and will type again. I don't think it's a serious enough issue for the Foundation to consider buying the names. SilkTork 23:24, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

These sites claim that you have owned a big prize from Wikipedia, [1]. So they're misleadable.––虞海 (Yú Hǎi) ✍ 10:58, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ugh. Shameless!! They even tried to rip off the puzzle globe! -- OlEnglish ^(Talk) 06:11, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. When I noticed the image changed to a coin, I knew that they were stopped from trying to mislead people. WhisperToMe 01:22, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What the difference between policies which apply to all Wikimedia projects and founding principles?

Both the two claim to be mandatory and refinable. ––虞海 (Yú Hǎi) ✍ 17:49, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think the "founding principles" are set in stone and can never be changed. Policies can change if there is a discussion. Not sure though... Seb az86556 18:39, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The founding principles are historic. The five principles are here. They are sound principles, and I don't think there would be reason to change them. Core policies on local Wikimedia projects are likely to be based on those founding principles, though there will be other policies and guidelines which will emerge as appropriate, and which may not be connected to the founding principles. SilkTork 23:35, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

But the five principles claimed to be “refinable”. See founding principles. ––虞海 (Yú Hǎi) ✍ 10:56, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For perspective on policies applying to all Wikimedia projects, you might start at Policies. The "five principles" of the above link are explicitly specific to Wikipedia; they "apply to all Wikimedia projects" only in the same sense that, everywhere in the world, the capital of Ohio is Columbus. (I actually had to look that up. :-) --Pi zero 14:44, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The five principles is why wikimedia came into being. --DS-fax 09:37, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support needed for Wikipedia QnA website to open

Hi,

Wikipedia is a great system to organize a set of articles, and it has a large help system as well. But newcomers and mid-termers alike would have lots of similar questions about the system, specific guidelines, or techniques of writing articles.

StackExchange, a free Question and Answer network of websites would start a website dedicated to Wikipedia and Wiki questions if the community only supports the project by voting for it. This website would have a very unique set of features that cannot compare with the way Wikipedia handles questions, simply because it is different. In Wikipedia questions are added to pages, much like a forum. In StackExchange, questions are added to a database that is searchable where each question can be voted for by the community.

Database of questions, listings by vote, or by newest/oldest
User accounts with ranking system per user based on helpfulness
Answers are voted for by users, and best answers show on top
Tagging and searching for questions by tag (eg. 'syntax', 'images', 'audio')

I'm writing here to call for the support of Wikipedians around the world, simply for our own benefit. If we can vote for this site and visit it regularly to answer questions then Wikipedia could grow so much faster since newcomers would have an intelligent and easy-to-use platform for their questions and troubles.

Please start on this proposal page.
You'll need to login (link on the top)
Then you have to click the "Follow" button (or "Commit", if available)
When the site begins you will get a link to it on the same page.

Thank you! Tomjenkins52 14:53, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A nice idea. I'd like to see us set up an OSQA site, like http://help.openstreetmap.org, rather than a (proprietary) StackOverflow site. Here's a slightly dated comparison of the two. –SJ · talk | translate 13:56, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Historical data/research

Hello,

I'm a sysop/bureaucrat on w:mr. We're trying to trace our roots (of w:mr) using historical data and other stats. When I joined the party (sometime in 2005), I was told that w:mr was started on May 1, 2003. I have been trying to substantiate that date, but can not go back beyond Jan 21, 2005, based on the "oldest articles" list.

Is there another way I can find out when w:mr was commissioned, launched and when the first edit happened?

Thanks much.

Abhay Natu My talk page on w:mr

The oldest page i found in the Web Archive is that one from 22 December, 2003. Maybe that helps. Béria Lima ^msg 18:02, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I found this. Maximillion Pegasus 19:41, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

But http://mr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?rcid=1 suggests that perhaps some older edits have been lost, doesn't it? --Nemo 08:52, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your help.

w:mr:सदस्य चर्चा:अभय नातू

The first 5 edits of Chinese Wikipedia are also lost. --DS-fax 09:24, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Need help

Hi Амба,
What you want to know about this category?
Talking about templates:
What is the status of the possibility of using HTML5 in WikiMedia Foundation sites? Template HTML5 --Patio 09:50, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See de:Benutzer_Diskussion:Xqt#Mjbmrbot.--Амба 19:01, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

whew --DS-fax 09:25, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Food for thought, knowledge for change

Here's a possible new fundraising source that may be both practical and able to generate significant funds, submitted for consideration.

Aside from the annual fundraising drive which appeals to many Wikipedians, its possible to have a separate benefactor microdonation system linked to every article page. It would permit readers of Wikipedia articles to make payments to both the contributors of an article, and to Wikimedia itself.

I'd recommend involving an electronic payment company such as PayPal, Visa, Matercard, Amex... (companies which I have no employment relationship with) to administer the actual processing of payments. We can believe that such companies can provide the electronic payment processing for Wikimedia on a pro bono or at cost basis, since it wouldn't likely involve a great deal of effort on their part because of the use of their existing infrastructure.

The Wikipedia encyclopedias have several stakeholders -let's reward the two principals. This would benefit both Wikimedia and the quality of its encyclopedic articles at the same time. The two most important stakeholders are, naturally, Wikimedia, which runs and enables the entire organization, and the editor/contributors who both create and upgrade its encyclopedic articles. A new system can benefit both stakeholders, and at the same time provide greater motivation for expansion of its articles, depth and quality, all without conflict to Wikipedia's traditional fundraising.

New microdonation system:

1) DONATION SYSTEM PROCESSOR: a donation processing agreement is coordinated with a company such as PayPal. The processor would receive the payments from readers, aggregate them and then bill them monthly to the readers that volunteer to make such payments. As per the procedure schedule and formula, the payments would be made to both the registered-contributors/editors and to Wikimedia itself.

2) ENROLMENT OF MICRODONATORS: the Wikipedia encyclopedia would offer readers, via a hyperlink, the opportunity to register themselves for microdonations, and then make such donations while reading its articles. Registration of benefactors would be handled by the processing organization, which would obtain valid credit card or bank account information from those wishing to donate. Doubtlessly, many readers have been impressed by the broad scope of articles available, and by the depth and quality of its many individual articles. Let's allow such readers the opportunity to provide a modest award to the article's contributors and to Wikimedia at the same time. The range of donations can be set with minimum/maximum limits: expressed in U.S. currency, perhaps 5 cents at the minimum, and perhaps $1 at the maximum, per article, that the reader wishes to award. For simplicity, such donations would be tax exempt: no formal donation paperwork would be issued regarding donations for income tax purposes.

If a reader found an article compelling and educationally satisfying to him/herself, the reader clicks on a micropayment button to make one-time donation payment, either for a default amount or for another amount within the min/max range. After confirmation, that payment data would be registered by the donation system processor. At the end of the month, the payment processor would aggregate the donation data and bill the benefactors' registered credit cards or other accounts. Ex: if a casual reader read 20 quality articles in a month, and then donated 10 cents for each one, that person would be billed exactly $2.00 on his or her credit card or other account, paid to both the article's registered editors who wish to receive such payments, and to Wikimedia, as applicable.

3) ENROLMENT OF ARTICLE WRITERS AND EDITORS: contributor/editors would be permitted to register themselves if they wish to receive such payments.

Payments could be make to valid PayPal, direct deposit bank accounts and possibly to credit card accounts.
To reduce the operational costs, payments would only be made electronically, and would not be made unless the registered contributor/editors had such accounts, i.e.: no time-consuming or expensive payment methods would be utilized, such as mailed cheques.
Registration of the editors/contributors would be entirely voluntary; they would receive such payments only if they personally take the time to register themselves.
Any such payments would be classified as a contract service: no withholding taxes or other fees would be applied, and it would be up to the contributor/editors to register their own earnings if income taxes were applicable.
If a minimal payment transaction fee were required by the payment organization or the bank or credit card company to handle the cost of the payment service, it would be deducted from the payment. If a registered contributor/editor were to receive a payment of $25 and a 15 cent service fee was required to cover the transaction, then he/she would receive a net payment of $24.85. Wikimedia would obviously have the ability to veto the use of any payment service that proposed exorbitant rates for such payment transactions.

4) PAYMENT CALCULATIONS AND ASSIGNMENTS: Do not award contributors by the number of edits they make to an article that receives donations! Some contributor/editors (of the 'starving artist' category) might change their edit style to inflate the number of edits performed to create or upgrade articles.

a) Award the payments on the basis of the percentage of article's length that the editor has written which has not been reverted. If the hypothetical article 'The History of Pie' was written and upgraded by a total of three award-registered editors, and a combined total of seven unregistered/IP editors, and if editors A, B and C hypothetically wrote 20%, 15% and 10% respectively of that article, then at the end of the payment period Editor A would be awarded 20% of the aggregated payments collected, Editor B would receive 15%, Editor C would receive 10%, and the remaining 55% of the amounts collected would be awarded to Wikimedia itself.

b) The percentage each individual registered contributor/editor would receive would be calculated by the amount of editorial material he or she contributed, minus any materials reverted by others. If the case of 'The History of Pie', if Editor A had contributed 40% of the article, but 20% of his/her contributions had been reverted due to inaccuracies, then that person's net contribution to that article would be calculated at 40% - 20% = 20%, resulting in an award of 20% of the aggregated collections for that article.

5) NET BENEFITS:

Readers who wish to reward article writers for the efforts would now have a vehicle to do so with;
Article writers who have a need for some extra funding would be able to receive such payments;
Article writers would also be encouraged to create more articles and expand existing ones: exchanging 'knowledge for change';
Article writers would be encouraged to improve the quality of their articles, since the greater the quality, the greater the reward. Its exactly like busking: the more you impress and move your target audience, the more change they'll drop in your hat;
Many writers will not wish to register themselves to receive such payments; those portions, as well as the portions performed by IP editors will default to Wikimedia. If the hypothetical The History of Pie article receives an aggregate total of $100 in donations in a one month period, and only $45 is awarded to the registered editors, Wikimedia would benefit by receiving the remaining $55 for that article;
Finally, a certain percentage of unregistered IP editors may be encouraged to sign up for Wikipedia accounts! Hooray! More registered Wikipedians creates more Wikipedia involvement (hopefully of the positive type)—another plus!

For your consideration; feel free to contact me if I can be of help in refining the suggestion. Best regards: HarryZilber

ITI Khamariya upgraded by world bank

Last year ITI khamariya Seepat Bilaspur Chhatisgarh upgraded by world bank project and Chhatisgarh Govt. for training in COPA trade.

MediaWiki:Gadget-searchbox.js

Hello, I've installed wikt:fr:MediaWiki:Gadget-searchbox.js from wikt:pl:MediaWiki:Gadget-searchbox.js. It adds the text treatment functions: "go to line n°", "change the capitalization", "search and replace" (eventually "replace all"), and sort alphabetically. JackPotte 20:44, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Data security of Special:Preferences

Special:Preferences contains private information such as an user identity number, an e-mail adress, a watchlist-token and the option to change the account's password. Nevertheless, it is still send via a non-secure connection.

At the beginning of 2010, after repeated public demands, Google has changed its connections for mail, document and calendar services to secure https by default.

Does Wikimedia intend to change its software too, so that Special:Prefences can be accessed through https, and make https the default setting just as Google did? If yes, when?

--Rosenkohl 14:42, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You can access every Wikimedia website and every aspect of the site via the secure server at https://secure.wikimedia.org/. – Adrignola talk 13:43, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok this would answer my first question. However, please remember that the Google services also could be accessed through https before 2010, but it was not set as default. So the point of the public demand was not that that Google should give the possibilitie to use https, but that Google should set it as the default. Also Special:Preferences pages are different from other pages since they contain private data. Nevertheless Wikimedia projects still don't have set https as default for Special:Preferences. So I don't think my second (and third) questions still have been adressed, Greeting --Rosenkohl 15:37, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd just like to point out that the user id number isn't private. While it's not easily viewed (as there's little reason to do so), it is viewable via both pages on-wiki and various toolserver tools. There's also little use to knowing the user id except for possibly wiki-age bragging rights of some sort, I suppose. As far as Wikimedia changing its configuration similarly, I would tend to think that the direction to do so would come from the community rather than the Board, so the best way to implement such a change would be to suggest it to the greater Wikimedia community and develop consensus for the change. Best regards. Kylu 18:13, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding chapters

Thread brought from Wikimedia Foundation wiki feedback.

Hello. Please, I have a question.

As I have seen, there is no Wikimedia USA, but Wikimedia New York, and several other places in the USA as potential new chapters. Your reason about the possibility of having multiple national chapters is that they "may be founded on a metropolitan and regional-scale level, because of the unique issues of uneven population density throughout the country, and the relative unimportance of state boundary lines". On the other hand, the creation of multiple chapters in other countries is *forbidden*, regardless of their "unique issues of uneven population density throughout the country" (in Spain, if you pay close attention to the population, you'll find that it's everything but even, and let's not even think about Russia or China). So, my question is (sorry for being so blunt), does that mean that, in the future, you'll have several chapters to receive money from the Foundation and the rest of the countries just one each? --Dalton2 04:47, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Si Gam Aceh

Hi! I found this at the Indonesian Wikipedia: id:Wikipedia:Surat pernyataan permintaan penghapusan gambar-gambar penghinaan terhadap Nabi Muhammad saw.. I'm not exactly sure what it is (I don't know Indonesian, so I am not sure if this is a userbox or an essay or something) - But it seems like Si Gam Aceh is editing again. Is his block expired? WhisperToMe 01:41, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like a petition:

"Wikipedia: The statement requests the elimination of the drawings insulting the Prophet Muhammad.

Bismillaahirrahmaanirraahiim ...

In the spirit of welcoming the birthday of Prophet Muhammad., we are the Wikipedians from Wikipedia Bahasa Indonesian, demanding abolition of all the drawings insulting the Prophet Muhammad. contained in the various Wikimedia projects particularly in Simple English."

Seb az86556 02:41, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So, the question is, is the petition in the correct space? (Maybe user space, like the German userbox solution?) What are the Bahasa Indonesia Wikipedia's rules on this? WhisperToMe 02:59, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No idea; it's labeled a project. What they don't seem to get is that it's pointless — so let them. No one on any other wiki is gonna give a rat's ass what they do or rant about. Once they start vandalizing, it's block time again. FWIW, I'm gonna notify en.wiki, since their articles are linked to from there. Seb az86556 04:29, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, btw, the account is a sock, started today Seb az86556 04:44, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alrighty. About the petition, I personally don't mind as long as the petition is in the correct userspace/project space on ID. I fully understand that its goals are not attainable. About the user, I will let the stewards decide what to do, depending on the user's actions. WhisperToMe 04:52, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As a side note, I made a userbox image for people who disagree with hosting Muhammad images en:User:WhisperToMe/Userboxes/NoMo - Maybe a good way to deal with this is to promote the usage of this userbox and any translations of them WhisperToMe 05:37, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't think that it is appropriate for this sort of thing to be hosted on Wikimedia Foundation projects. If someone wants to start a petition against a Wikimedia project, they should do so on an external site. The creator of the petition, Si Gam Aceh (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date ^(alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser), is a blatantly obvious sock, main account: Si Gam Acèh (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date ^(alt) • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) (see [2]). See also [3]. That is me removing the almost exact same template from the main page of w:ace about 6 months ago, after he put it there. See [4]. Finally, note the massive amount of canvassing he has done for his petition, more than 100 pages. Machine translation of his messages:

Celebrate the birthday of the Prophet Muhammad saw, I had an idea to Wikipedia Bahasa Indonesia to send a letter of request removal of images of an insult to the Prophet Muhammad. published in various Wikimedia projects, especially in the Simple English. When WBI is not ready, we can raise the voices wikipediawan Indonesia especially the Muslim to sign a letter requesting removal of the pictures are an insult. How do you agree? - Aceh Gam Si ( talk) 08:19, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Please signatures here:Wikipedia: statement letter request removal of images of an insult to the Prophet.. - Aceh Gam Si (talk) 08:19, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

So, we have socking, canvassing, and using WMF projects to attack other projects. The way I see it, this user is not doing anything productive at all, only attempting to mount a campaign against other WMF projects. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 17:21, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Indonesian Wikipedia discussion started at id:Wikipedia:Permintaan_perhatian_pengurus#Si_Gam_Aceh - English Wikipedia discussion at en:Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#just_a_heads-up - J. Delanoy notified him about the meta thread, while I notified him about this one and the English Wikipedia thread. WhisperToMe 18:16, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wow

Finally, I found a more correct place to can talk with more users about Wikipedia, my first time here (I was thinking in send a fax to California but, it's nice that also it's possible to speak about it here). Well, it's only because I had very strong problems with the Spanish Wikipedia that affect me really (this is not a soap start, don't worry), and well, I really didn't think in more ways to can solve it or comment it, so I felt very insecure in Wikipedia en español.

I was reading last days opinions and cases of Wikipedia en español and I understand now that this is a very particular case, really and without doubt. I also use Viquipèdia and the difference is very strong but, what I mean is, that it's not only a "results" matter. I don't know if you have the information about what is happening in this Wiki...

Well, I think we or you must talk about it. What can I say at first is that now I have fear because the information that it gives is going in a very bad way... relatively "very bad" is small. Do you have references about this case? --Emporio2012 13:34, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Context: She was blocked after creating some usernames attacking another female editor (while she was already having a short block). She admitted accounts linked to IP, but claims it wasn't her, but an acquaintance that was visiting her mansion and that it was done as a joke (cachondeo) [5] . es:Magister Mathematicae 19:48, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Emporio2012 known sockpuppets:

Libertatcom
Bucephala la Gallinita] (attack account against es:User:Bucephala)
Bucephala FemiNazi (idem)
Hermana Clausa [6]
Began

es:Magister Mathematicae 22:26, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 262: / Line 262: @@
 Well, I think we or you must talk about it. What can I say at first is that now I have fear because the information that it gives is going in a very bad way... relatively "very bad" is small. Do you have references about this case? --[[User:Emporio2012|Emporio2012]] 13:34, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
 : Context: She was blocked after creating some usernames attacking another female editor (while she was already having a short block). She admitted accounts linked to IP, but claims it wasn't her, but an acquaintance that was visiting her mansion and that it was done as a joke (cachondeo) [http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usuario_Discusi%C3%B3n:Emporio2012#Bloqueo] . <small>[[es:User:Magister Mathematicae|es:]][[User talk:Magister Mathematicae|Magister Mathematicae]]</small> 19:48, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
+: Emporio2012 known sockpuppets:
+* [https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/meta/wiki/Special:CentralAuth/Llibertatcom Libertatcom]
+* [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:CentralAuth/Bucephala_la_Gallinita Bucephala la Gallinita]] (attack account against [[:es:User:Bucephala]])
+* [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:CentralAuth/BucephalaFemiNazi Bucephala FemiNazi]  (idem)
+* [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:CentralAuth/Hermana_Clausa Hermana Clausa] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sailorsun&diff=prev&oldid=413306315]
+* [http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Especial:Contribuciones/Began Began]
+<small>[[es:User:Magister Mathematicae|es:]][[User talk:Magister Mathematicae|Magister Mathematicae]]</small> 22:26, 17 February 2011 (UTC)