Centralizing discussion of historical discussions, proposals, and extension pages related to MediaWiki on Meta

As I wrote previously, there should be some mechanism (perhaps a new set of categories) to mark the historical discussions, proposals, and extension pages (related to MediaWiki on Meta, that have not yet been moved to mediawiki.org) as historical and/or as dangerous. That would provide direction to users happening upon such pages. There is a reason behind each and every categorization in m:Category:Pages to be exported to MediaWiki.org - perhaps a new m:Meta:Requests for export to MediaWiki.org process modeled on m:Meta:Requests for deletion would be helpful for centralizing discussion of such pages for which that categorization is questioned.   — Jeff G. ツ 02:59, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Isn't that something to bring up on meta? I think the mw.org community has made it pretty clear that we don't want any more of that old stuff from meta to make its way over here. What meta decides to do with it is entirely up to that community. ^demon 03:47, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Where exactly have we made that clear? If that's been agreed somewhere, then fair enough, but the original point was to migrate all MW content from meta so it could be deleted from there and we get a proper separation. The fact this hasn't happened is not necessarily a reflection on intent.

I would say that regardless of the broad approach we adopt/have adopted, there are certainly *some* pages on Meta that should still be brought over here. HappyDog 14:34, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Well the page JeffG linked above had a discussion on the issue. Another instance was at another transwiki request.

Like Peachey says below, most of this content is horrifically outdated and unloved. A good many of them could be deleted. If anyone can point to specific pages we still need to import then we should get on that. Once we've got what we want, the remaining ones can be mass-deleted from meta as far as I'm concerned.

On a tangental note, I'd like to suggest retiring the importer group from mw.org. Sysops can already handle it, so I don't really think it requires a dedicated group anymore. ^demon 23:30, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

I was looking at the content left on there the other day, Most of it is pointless and unwanted. TBH it could be deleted and no one would bat a eye lid if it was deleted. If there is any specific pages on there (meta) that should be imported over, just bring them up and mention them to someone (eg: on here or irc). Peachey88 05:20, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

wiki image

Extension:YetAnotherTagCloud

Hi, I think it would be good to have this page restored again. I know that the extension is obsolete but to indicate this the template "ObsoleteExtension" is used. The reason for my request is that this extension had a big impact on the development of an still existing and active extension with cross reference. Cheers [[kgh]] (talk) 19:09, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

The extension does not exist anymore; it is linking to a site that does not exist. -- Bryan (talk|commons) 09:27, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

I know, but ... see above :) [[kgh]] 18:06, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

With no source code or anything, what's the point? Max Semenik 18:20, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Hmm..., my request must have been very badly written. Never mind anyway. Cheers [[kgh]] 19:46, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

How to display code text to provide appropriate color

This post by MaxSem was moved on 2011-05-03. You can find it at Project:Support desk/Flow/2011/05#h-How_to_display_code_text_to_provide_appropriate_color-2011-05-03T13:17:00.000Z. Max Semenik 13:54, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

internal links are case sensitive

It would be far less frustrating if the software would not distinguish between capital and lower case letters. For example: Suggestions for extensions to be merged into core could be written Suggestions for Extensions to be Merged into Core.

I sincerely hope I have placed this suggestion/concern in the right area. Thank you for listening. 68.96.52.71 01:24, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

I agree. I'm working on a site with lots of people new to wiki markup and case sensitive internal links have been one of our most common errors. 12.129.98.129 15:45, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Experiment on MediaWiki.org

MediaWiki.org editors--- help discuss and pick Wikimedia Leadership-- Election underway.

lets unflag non-english pages that aren't getting reviewed

I propose we unflag (mark all revisions as not-sighted, so flagged revs stops taking affect) to any page that has unreviewed edits for longer than 60 days, and is not in English. 2 months is a pathetically long amount of times to wait for someone to hit review, and there is a very limited group of people who can review non-english material. Thus I feel it would be significantly better if such pages went back to the plain ole' instant editing mode.

As it stands, this includes 14 pages (See Special:PendingChanges). Personally I think we should perhaps do this to even more pages, but I thought I'd start with proposing the extreme cases. Bawolff 22:32, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

I have no issues with this idea. Peachey88 05:12, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Sounds ok to me too. ^demon 22:18, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

JS2 Overview and related pages

Hi,

I was just looking at some old commits and was wondering what happended to /js2/ and how it relates to the ResourceLoader project.

From what I can find in a quick search "JS2" was the working title of a project that was later replaced or intergrated with ResourceLoader. Is that correct ?

If so, I think we should mark JS2 Overview with {{Historical }} or something like that.

Aside from it's status, it appears JS2-related pages are a bit spread all over the place, I haven't been able to find them all but someone who knows it better, could you move them as subpages of JS2 ? Krinkle 17:06, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Basically JS2 was Michael Dale's first approach to the resource loader we have now. Some of the ideas in that initial design made their way into ResourceLoader, but a lot of the architecture decisions were changed. I went ahead and tagged the overview page with {{Historical }} with a pointer to ResourceLoader.

As far as them being all spread out, I agree to moving them to subpages of JS2 for organization. ^demon 22:17, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

I believe you can do that in a way. Nitropedia 00:38, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Please use HTML5 DOCTYPE

Weird text in tabs

For some reason, on this page the first tab is displaying "& lt;nstab-manual& gt;". Could someone take a look into it?

BTW: How do I avoid the convertion of "& gt;" (without the space) to ">"? Helder 23:35, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

The fallback isnt handled propery + LQT incorrectly re-encodes the HTML here.

I reported this early last month in the bug tracker under bug 29310.

It's a low priority bug and expected to be fixed in the rewrite. Krinkle 22:46, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

MW 1.xx templates

Does anybody have any objections if I tweak the colours on the MW 1.xx templates? The ones from {{MW 1.16 }} onwards look rather odd, since the "colour" surrounding them is white, which matches the background. Any thoughts on what the colour scheme should be? Should I take the existing purple scheme and just spread it out more (aiming for, say, 1.25 to be white whenever we get up to that) or should I choose random colours to make each version readily identifiable at a glance?

Examples, just for easy viewing:

– RobinHood70 ^talk 20:45, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

If you want to be the bikeshed painter, feel free to choose the colors. :-) —Emufarmers^(T|C) 07:15, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

How about using 3 colours: red for old, unsupported versions, green for latest version, orange for recent versions. Or is that missing the point? Probably still need some varying shades within that, so they don't all end up the same. Just a thought - don't know if it's a good one. HappyDog 10:55, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

I really like the themed colours idea that HappyDog is suggesting. One question: Is there a list somewhere of what versions are supported and unsupported? I don't think I've come across that anywhere. I like your proposed scheme, though I'd add...let's say blue...to it for future/beta versions, since we clearly have cases of those as well (e.g., {{MW 1.18 }}). – RobinHood70 ^talk 20:40, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Not sure what the official line is at the moment. Used to be latest version, plus previous, plus 1.6 (for people stuck on PHP4). I suspect the latter has been dropped by now, but worth checking. Maybe ask on IRC or the mailing list? May turn out that the old:new ratio is too lopsided for this kind of colouring to be very useful. --HappyDog 00:40, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

1.6 (for PHP4) has been completely discontinued. Any docs that still suggest using it are completely wrong and should be fixed. ^demon 23:46, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I figured I'd been forgetting about this long enough that I should probably just do it. The version scheme I went for is:

I suffer no delusions of being Picaso, a graphic artist, or a web-page designer—nor is my monitor even calibrated—so if any of these colours look horribly out of whack, feel free to change them!

Also, I haven't changed any of the international versions for a variety of reasons, including wanting to finalize the English ones and due to the language barrier. Once we're sure we like these ones, I'm happy to change the international versions as well if there's agreement that I should do so. – RobinHood70 ^talk 17:58, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Good! Though I would offer a couple of suggestions - take 'em or leave 'em:

• Reverse the saturation order in each row, so the darker (stronger) shades are more recent than the lighter (weaker) shades.
• Make the division between the first two tiers after 1.6 (rather than 1.7). I feel that the PHP4/PHP5 minimum requirement is more relevant than the No-API/API feature change. There are a whole bunch of features that could be similarly used as the divider, e.g. No Categories/Categories, so a requirements-based distinction is better. In my view, there have been three stages of 'modern' MediaWiki. Major changes were introduced in 1.7 and 1.16, but most other versions have been more gradual evolutions. The division should probably reflect that (In other words, I would start a third 'old' tier at 1.16 when that is retired, rather than adding that to the existing second tier).
• The two shades of green seem like different greens rather than the second being a lighter version of the first.
• Shade future versions in grey, rather than a colour, and make the border dotted. Might make it clearer that they don't exist yet. HappyDog 20:06, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I completely forgot about this. Since several of your suggestions were things I'd also considered, and the rest I think are great ideas, I'll go ahead and implement them. It's not like these are hard to change if anybody dislikes them.

Okay, done. The only tweak I made to your suggestions is that the future versions still fade in the same direction, giving the next version a more solid colour than the later version, which is more ephemeral. Here's another copy of the table for comparison:

– RobinHood70 ^talk 17:25, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Good work! I think the reversal of fade for future versions makes a lot of sense. HappyDog 13:49, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

How to deal with greed-motivated documentation suppression on mediawiki.org?

Read this for some background:

• http://old.nabble.com/Why-you-will-regret-asking-SMW-people-about-paid-support-tt32122897.html
• http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension_talk:Semantic_Forms#removing_detailed_examples_requires_people_to_annoy_developers_for_basic_help

The short version:

• Developers demand $100+ per hour for support, which mere mortals can't afford.
• Developers delete mediawiki.org documentation for basic tasks that eliminate the need for support on simple stuff.
• Strong backlash against documentation writers that protest.

How do I deal with this? Am I wrong about this somehow? I am very upset and frustrated... Badon 02:17, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

• After reading the sections above it sounds like you need assistance understanding some of the concept and how to do some development. ($100+/hour is a really good rate for software development support)
• There is very helpful documentation in the Help namespace: Help:Contents
• I think the backlash is because you are being a jerk. Dgennaro 04:04, 26 July 2011 20:05, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry my documentation makes it so people get an even better rate for support ($0/eternity).

You're just going to have to do real work that requires talented effort to EARN your enormous $100 per hour fee. There's no money for basic tasks like uploading files anymore. Are you afraid of fair competition from me? Does that make me a jerk? Badon 20:24, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

I have never come across anyone that charges a fee for their contributions to this project...although very few portions of the project do receive funding from grants or are commissioned to develop something specific and complicated, but this is not very common. The community contributes to continue the development and forward progression of the project...most people here are "for the love of the game" players (including myself), not "show me the money" players. Please keep in mind...in most cases, this is a person's hobby, not their job. This is not a competition, it is a group effort..."collaboration" is the name of the game.

My proclamation of you being a jerk is because you are being a jerk. The MW/SMW community does not only revolve around your needs, this is because it is a community. If you have a requirement that is not fulfilled by an extension then write (and document) a new extension or add-on to an existing extension. There is a Developer hub just for learning how to do this. If the author does not happen to accept this patch/add-on then continue to patch it as new versions are released...no biggie.

Finally, I am sure if you did not act like such a jerk in the early stages of your online presence within the MW/SMW community other user, admins and developers would have assisted you with your questions with no resistance...I know this because it is how I learned.

--Dgennaro 15:50, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

I have no idea what you're talking about. I smell a red herring.

It seems the problem that prompted this has been resolved, now that there's a lot less resistance to the restored documentation. Still, this is a problem that can occur and reoccur in any project where the developers have a financial stake in ensuring that the documentation is inadequate.

The advice of someone NOT coming from the viewpoint of the SMW project is appreciated.

Does the Wikimedia Foundation have a policy about public documentation suppression for the purpose of private gain? Badon 18:58, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Of course they don't. You're being an idiot. HappyDog 19:54, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm not going to take you seriously if:

1. your first words to me are an insult.
2. you generally convey the idea that you disagree with me, but can't explain why.
3. all of the above. Badon 20:09, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Alright then. Prove to me that it wasn't an idiotic question. Name me one open-source project that does have a policy about public documentation suppression for the purpose of private gain. HappyDog 20:22, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

403 Forbidden on LocalSettings.php set up

This post by Peachey88 was moved on 2011-08-02. You can find it at Project:Support desk/Flow/2011/08#h-403_Forbidden_on_LocalSettings.php_set_up-2011-08-01T23:51:00.000Z. Peachey88 00:03, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Api documentation bot

Hi,

Just a quick notice, letting you know I'm currently working on a bot that get's documentation from the PHP classes (required rights, must be posted, parameter optional/required + description, examples etc.) into wikitext and saving to a wiki page.

Zak originally created something for this (example), but the source code remains unpublished and the format has changed a lot since then.

Roughly what I've got / aiming for (about 50% done)

• Extract module name/class pairs from $mainApi = new ApiMain
• Loop over and instantiate it: $module = new $class( $mainApi, $name );
• Buid a documentation page in wikitext format: new ApiDoc4Wikitext( $module );
  • {{API-head }} with parameter values from getModulePrefix, mustBePosted etc.
  • Parameter section build with a function based on makeHelpMsgParameters but in wikitext format
  • Examples section based on array from getExamples, which is then dissected into parts for {{ApiEx }}, followed by an http request to exampleurl+format=xmlfm and output cleaned up and unescaped and fed to result-parameter of {{ApiEx }}.
  • Categories
• Either write wikitext to a file and let another bot save to wiki, or write a simple wikibot and save right away.

To be done:

• Example section
• Saving mechanism

Any ideas / existing code I can look at ? Krinkle 09:02, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

The source code mentioned above is an empty svn folder. Is it hiding in an archived svn branch, or did it never see the light of day?

This is now relatively easy to do with Pywikibot since I added a ParamInfo class. See API_talk:Main_page#Missing_documentation_pages for some basic code. John Vandenberg (talk) 01:47, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Does anyone know who Zak is? And/or where this prototype code might be? John Vandenberg (talk) 00:04, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Zak was probably the contractor that the foundation hired a few years ago, Once his contact ended he didn't return. Peachey88 (talk) 00:29, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Zak hasn't been around for a while. I knew him when he was here (I had a chance to meet him in Gdansk) but since then he hasn't really been involved. ☠MarkAHershberger☢(talk)☣ 03:33, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Peachey88 and Mark. Is his code lost? Can we contact him? phab:T31936 is related. I cant find much more about it. John Vandenberg (talk) 03:56, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

I sent him a message on FB. Let's see if he responds. ☠MarkAHershberger☢(talk)☣ 19:15, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Greetings All,

Any source code that remains in sitting in storage about 8000km from where I am at the moment. :-/

However, I'm happy to look at source code and otherwise pitch in some.

Cheers!

--zak Zak 08:04, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Note that ApiHelp can now be transcluded, see an example at Extension:Flow/API. I think SPage has plans to start/propose using this feature more widely once it gets possible to select content language à la {{TNT }} (currently it's only possible via interface language change, e.g. ). Nemo 20:10, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

So far, Special:ApiHelp is extremely ugly (but better than nothing), and the details on Extension:Flow/API are not provided by Special:ApiHelp - they are added by hand. Also there is one aspect of the documentation which can't be generated (currently): information about previous releases. i.e. when each module & parameter was added, deprecated, & removed. Sadly there is not a lot of care for wikis running anything but the bleeding edge.

{{API-head }} has been improved to include a link to the API help module, so the current help is easy to get to, and that template has been added to most of the existing API pages. John Vandenberg (talk) 08:45, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

My proposal is phab:T89318, John Vandenberg and RobinHood70 raise excellent points. We'll have this tension with any generated documentation, so I mention it in phab:T93026 "remove wiki documentation that duplicates generated documentation (tracking)."

"It gets rebuilt from scratch on every code change" is a feature and a bug :) SPage (WMF) (talk) 06:22, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Как включить возможность отображения внешних картинок?

image filter referendum vote

Hello.

Sometime back I tried to vote on Wiki Commons in the image filter referendum, a referendum to gather more input into the development and usage of an opt-in personal image hiding feature.

But there was sudden internet disruption after I pressed the "submit vote" button.

Please let me know if my vote has been recorded because I am told that I can vote only once.

Your kind gesture in this regard will help me in contributing constructively to the Wiki Projects, which is also my intention, aim and effort. Regards, Hindustanilanguage 07:38, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Try voting once more, you'll see. Max Semenik 07:42, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello once again,

As suggested above, I tried voting once more.

I got the following message:

Welcome Hindustanilanguage!

Note: You have voted in this election before. You may change your vote by submitting the form below. Note that if you do this, your original vote will be discarded.

I hope that as per my understanding my previous vote has been recorded. Please update me.

Regards, Hindustanilanguage 10:25, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes, that means you have a vote already recorded in the poll. Peachey88 10:27, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you Peachey88 for the clarification Hindustanilanguage 08:11, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Scanning Encyclopedia for Mobile Support (MediaWiki ver 1.19+)

Are there any plans for expanding MediaWiki's mobile portability to support realtime scanning and barcode libraries? It would be logical to expand both the MediaWiki code and perhaps an existing wiki site such as Product Wiki or Logo Wiki to include such extensions. (i.e.- Android App Reader Library, IPhone App Reader Library, etc.?) Habatchii 16:54, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Username: iantresman (lost password)

I've lost my password, and stupidly didn't add my email address. However, I don't think I've made any contributions. But I'd like to unify my account here, with all my other accounts on other Wikis. Can my password be reset, or my account deleted so I can start again? See a summary of my other accounts here 93.97.21.214 20:48, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

ANI for MW?

Is there an equivalent of the English Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents for MediaWiki? Crakkerjakk (talk · contribs) has apparently decided that a helpful style of discussion involves repeatedly insulting someone he disagrees with at Talk:Article feedback as an alcoholic, apparently on the grounds that everyone who is professionally interested in wine is an alcoholic. See here, here, here, here, and many recent comments. I assume that this is not considered either a normal or an acceptable level of civility for this project. WhatamIdoing 21:10, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Here is good enough, I've read some of the comments and he is now blocked for 1 week. Peachey88 22:59, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the help. I'm sorry the conversation reached that level, and there just didn't seem to be any other way to stop the incivility. WhatamIdoing 05:39, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Well, perhaps I spoke too soon. WE may have a sockpuppet problem/block evasion at Talk:Article feedback now. The thread "The people dropping in on this page are the random users we want to get feedback from" is from Gee totes (talk · contribs) and the thread ""I am highly knowledgable about this topic" in AFT seems redundant. I suggest "I describe my personal knowledge about this topic"." is from Everyone Else (talk · contribs). They both express opinions that the now-blocked Crakkerjakk (talk · contribs) held: that "everyone" dislikes the tool (except for 90% of surveyed users, who directly expressed support for it) and that mere readers are incapable of providing interesting feedback. WhatamIdoing 15:33, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Template:Stub

I think that it would make sense to redirect it to Template:Documentation needed: the scope is similar and this would help users finding it. Nemo 08:02, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

up :-) [yes, I hate LQT and I'll abuse them as forums are abused] Nemo 11:47, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

JavaScript is dead

JavaScript has been dead since last night; I get errors that common wikibits funtions are undefined. — Edokter (talk) — 10:49, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Evil Krinkle broke several gadgets :P Fixed. Max Semenik 15:46, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

I intentionally flipped the switch for all gadgets on MW.org to be loaded through ResourceLoader in order to find out if there are any problems (as this will become the default in MediaWiki 1.19).

Edokter presumably had a gadget enabled that doesn't yet work with RL for some reason (either in the gadget or in RL). Thanks for your report.

Max either fixed (or exempted from RL) the gadgets that were breaking. Thanks ! Krinkle 19:00, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

index filter

I can not create page called Manual:Rebuildtextindex.php/pl(and other subpages) because filter "index.php" works. So, I Created page Manual:Rebuildtextindex/pl what will be moved into Manual:Rebuildtextindex.php/pl. wargo 08:52, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Done... (Although admittedly with a few unneeded extra moves) Peachey88 09:25, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Wanted pages

What about to update Special:WantedPages list? wargo 19:32, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

bugzilla:15434 Krinkle 20:01, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Contest and RTL

This post by Peachey88 was moved on 2011-10-21. You can find it at Talk:October 2011 Coding Challenge#c-Amire80-2011-10-21T08:00:00.000Z-Contest_and_RTL. Peachey88 08:34, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

All JavaScript broken in Opera due to jQuery not loaded?

[21.10.2011 17:03:17] JavaScript - http://www.mediawiki.org/w/index.php?title=Project:Current_issues&action=submit

Inline script thread
Uncaught exception: ReferenceError: Undefined variable: jQuery
Error thrown at line 37, column 0 in http://www.mediawiki.org/w/index.php?title=Special:BannerController&cache=/cn.js&303-4:
    ( function( $ ) {

Currently, all JavaScript on mediawiki.org is broken when using the Opera web browser. I was able to track the problem down to Special:BannerController. In the last line it depends on a variable jQuery that does not exists (at least when using Opera). The script crashs and no other script is executed. Due to this error the coding challenge page is broken. TMg 15:04, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the report; we'll look into it. Eloquence 15:30, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

What version of Opera, on what operating system? I see no obvious problems under Opera 11.52 (current release) on Mac OS X 10.7 which I have handy.

I do recall hearing something about there possibly being a problem on old versions of Opera that jQuery no longer supports; might you be running one of these versions? We'll need to check the fallback behavior and see what's going on... brion 16:18, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Happened in the current Opera 11.52, running on Windows 7 behind a company firewall. It worked in Firefox 7 on the same machine. At the moment, I can not reproduce it. On an other machine (and other network) it works in all browsers, including Opera. TMg 17:59, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

I found the error. It happens with the NoAds Opera extension installed and active. In the last step of your "startup" module this line is executed:

document.write("\x3cscript src=\"//bits.wikimedia.org/www.mediawiki.org/load.php?debug=true\x26amp;lang=en\x26amp;modules=jquery%2Cmediawiki\x26amp;only=scripts\x26amp;skin=vector\x26amp;version=20111007T213533Z\"\x3e\x3c/script\x3e");

This line is blocked by the extension. But it is not blocked at wikipedia.org. Why not? My answer: There is a difference in both scripts. At the end of the line shown above this part is missing:

type=\"text/javascript\"

Please add this.

PS: The function linkedScript() in Html.php does not output the type attribute in HTML5 mode. Why not? Please always output the type attribute for compatibility reasons, even if it's the default value type="text/javascript". It's not wrong to do this according to the spec.

PPS: Reported at bugzilla:31920.

PPPS: I'm sorry. I was sure I found the reason but adding type="text/javascript" does not help. Still a strange bug. No problem at de.wikipedia.org with this (bad) extension enabled. I think I will look for an other extension that's better maintained.

PPPPS: Same problem with an other extension. The reason is pretty simple: It blocks all external scripts. wikipedia.org is on the default white list that comes with the extension. mediawiki.org is not on the white list. That's the difference.

PPPPPS: How do I edit the wrong date under this post? --TMg 00:00, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

The timestamp of discussion thread entries can not be changed. It reflects the creation date, which is correct. Later edits are noted on the top right, if any Krinkle 18:09, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

The absence of the type-attribute is unlikely a problem. One of the reasons it was safely removed in HTML5 is because older browsers (even those without special HTML5 support) already defaulted to 'text/javascript').

If you think it is the problem though, feel free to check out MediaWiki and see if it works if you re-add that attribute in a local patch. Krinkle 19:07, 24 October 2011 (UTC)