Talk:Gadget – Invention, Travel, & Adventure

Edit request
If possible, please add...""...to this page per Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 August 31. Thanks! Steel1943 (talk) 16:43, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Pinging who needed to use the shell interface to create the original redirect. – Train2104 (t • c) 16:51, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I'd rather not encourage using wikitext in this namespace. Redirecting was strictly needed, templates aren't. Max Semenik (talk) 18:19, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

I had requested the same thing a year before, only to be denied ... &#123;&#123;3x&#124;p&#125;&#125;ery (talk) 03:19, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

I believe that, contrary to what was said when the namespace was created in 2015, that this request could be actioned by a steward. Shall I post a request on SRM? &#123;&#123;3x&#124;p&#125;&#125;ery (talk) 22:55, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Actually, m:Special:GlobalGroupPermissions says that only  have the   right needed (though stewards could just give it to themselves I assume) --DannyS712 (talk) 23:01, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Stewards giving it to themselves is what I was talking about. &#123;&#123;3x&#124;p&#125;&#125;ery (talk) 23:03, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Any comments on this, as it was you who first proposed the rcat be added? &#123;&#123;3x&#124;p&#125;&#125;ery (talk) 16:19, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
 * It would be nice to have the rcat, but I personally don't think it is worth the hassle. Given that MaxSem said no, I am happy to let it go. —Kusma (t·c) 19:51, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
 * You may be willing to let this go, but I have decided that I am not. What I see here is a consensus of three users (Kusma, Steel1943, and me) to add the rcat being rejected by one user and none of them having the technical know-how to pursue it further. Thus, posted at SRM. * Pppery * survives 00:28, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Why was it moved?
So why was the page originally a gadget? -Cupper52 (talk) 20:27, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

It wasn’t. The page name should have been Gadget: Invention, Travel, & Adventure. But because articles should not begin with any namespace prefix, the colon was removed for the title. The redirect at Gadget: Invention, Travel, & Adventure is just in case someone types in the title with the colon. Gioguch (talk) 00:39, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Is this the only page in the Gadget talk namespace?
A search seems to indicate so. Bizarre if true! jp×g 08:19, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
 * yes - for silly reasons - eventually either this page will be deleted or the namespace will be. — xaosflux  Talk 11:01, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Also a page listing of ns 2301 is a better way to check then a search. — xaosflux  Talk 11:02, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
 * What does "eventually either this page will be deleted or the namespace will be." mean? Why would this page get deleted if the subject page would still be a redirect? Regarding the deletion of the namespace, I remember Village pump (proposals)/Archive 176, the discussion we had a while ago regarding the deletion of these namespaces. What was the conclusion? Will the namespace be deleted in the near future? 54nd60x (talk) 12:56, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
 * either the developers are going to give up on the gadget namesapce, meaning that namespace can be completely removed and this will just be back in ns:0 - or if it does develp further the future Gadget namespace may not support a content model for wikitext redirects, making this useless. This is all academic at this time of course. —  xaosflux  Talk 13:27, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
 * The Gadget (talk): and Gadget definition (talk): namespaces are completely useless. Unless pages finally start being moved in there within the next few months, they should be deleted. In addition to this, the page Gadget should be edited to make it clear that there are no pages in the Gadget:, Gadget talk:, Gadget definition:, and Gadget definition talk: namespaces. 🐔 Chicdat  Bawk to me!  12:13, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
 * these are global namespaces, so nothing for us to do here on the English Wikipedia - feel free to follow up at the tasks under T31272. — xaosflux  Talk 15:34, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
 * So Wikipedia can do nothing in this situation? 🐔 Chicdat  Bawk to me!  10:47, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
 * there is nothing we on enwiki need to do right now - there is LOTS for "we" the large mediawiki using/supporting community can do - feel free to follow up on that phab ticket and all the open tasks. — xaosflux  Talk 10:57, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I'll make sure to follow the phabricator. 🐔 Chicdat  Bawk to me!  11:00, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
 * They already are listed as deprecated namespaces, so it'd be no wonder if they'll be removed in the near future. I don't know any Wikipedia that still uses it. Alfa-ketosav (talk) 09:33, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Requested edit 30 April 2022
Please fix the double-redirect caused due to the move of target page, now at Gadget – Invention, Travel, & Adventure. Also, consider placing the RCAT templates within the Redirect category shell template. Thanks! &#8212;CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 21:02, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
 * ❌ because we can't.  This page is nothing but trouble and should just be deleted.  Your options now are: (a) Go support T229735 so that we can do this, (b) go contact some WMF staff since this is SUPERPROTECTED. —  xaosflux  Talk 00:03, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I saw that the redirect had been messed up when I linked this page to my friend in a discussion where I was trying to explain how fucked-up the namespace collisions on MediaWiki were, so I'd like to request it be kept for this reason. jp×g 23:56, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Would you mind doing this since you added the R restricted template back in 2019. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:54, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Or get some developer friends to get rid of this superprotection...... — xaosflux  Talk 00:38, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
 * @Pppery done. Though I agree it would be better to delete it - it needs to happen anyway when gadgets are moved to the new namespace. Tgr (WMF) (talk) 12:30, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Requested edit 6 March 2023
If possible, please add  and change   to. Also, consider if the creation of the page Gadget:Past as Future is possible as it's an alternative name, create it as a redirect with  as well as. Cmnpt (talk) 04:17, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: Closing this as not done since admins literally can't do anything about this. If you want you could follow the advice in the section above. This namespace may be my biggest pet peeve on wiki. --Trialpears (talk) 09:40, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Follow-up: Cmnpt was blocked as a sock. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:52, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Should this page be merged?
Genuine question from someone who might not know too much about Wikimedia technicalities: as having this page in the Gadget talk namespace seems to be more trouble than it's worth, should it be merged with the main talk page for the redirect target? Are there any technical limitations? Chaotıċ Enby  (t · c) 00:14, 7 January 2024 (UTC)


 * As far as I know there are technical limitations: seeing as "Gadget:" is a namespace, any page starting with "Gadget:" would be in this namespace. Because this is an obvious problem (articles go in Article namespace), a redirect is here so that the correct title can still be searched for and will lead the reader to the page. The talk page here is just a talk page for that redirect in the usual fashion. Schminnte &#91;talk to me&#93; 00:19, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I completely understand, it just feels weird to have a talk page for a page on which nothing can actually be done for technical reasons. Chaotıċ Enby   (t · c) 00:28, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
 * It served as a way for people to complain about the unfairness of this title (and variants of this title) being stolen from the community. Anyway following recent software changes Interface admins like myself can edit this page again, but there's enough discussion here that it can stay. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:19, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Of course it's weird. It's a secret talk page where weirdos can chat about extremely obscure MediaWiki implementation bugs and look at our stupid old sigs from 3 years ago. How could a page like that not be weird? jp×g🗯️ 12:35, 20 January 2024 (UTC)