Please enable the default search on Swedish Wikipedia (sv.wp) to include the namespace Portal.
There was a short and positive discussion after the idea came up, then I forgot to create the request:
http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipediafr%C3%A5gor/Arkiv/2011#S.C3.B6k_och_portaler
Version: unspecified
Severity: enhancement
URL: https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bybrunnen#Include_Portal:_in_default_search
I think you will get a better discussion with more participants at the village pump ([[:sv:Wikipedia:Bybrynnen]]). Wikipediafrågor is more of a help desk where you can get answers to questions about how Wikipedia works. (Example: WP:WF answers if it is possible to search portal namespace, but WP:BB discusses if the community wants this as default.)
Now there is a consensus for adding portals. Some people wanted to add more namespaces, but no consensus was found for that (and that is not within the scope of this issue). [[:sv:Wikipedia:Bybrunnen#S.C3.B6k_och_portaler]]
Please post a working link to community consensus. The one in your last comment does not appear to point to a section any more.
Here is a linked to the archived discussion:
http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bybrunnen/Arkiv/2012/April#S.C3.B6k_och_portaler
Thank you for the consensus link. I would have thought the sv. Wikipedia had a more active community than that. Taking this bug.
Meanwhile, Barras on #wikimedia-stewards have suggested a bureaucrat gives a formal closure. He pointed the wiki is active, gets regular participation to votes. So the amount of voice is still weird.
I would not call that real consensus for this change on a wiki like svwp.
Considering that you managed to get local oversights and checkusers, it is a
bit odd that only that few people commented on this change. There should be
more people commenting, imo.
(comment requested by Dereckson)
-Barras (steward)
(re-posting after conflict)
la.vallen wrote:
"Formal closures" are not made by bureaucrats or any special designed usergroup on svwiki. It is made by any trusted user who can see an obvious consensus of a thread. Closing with 3 support in November 2011, imo, would have been correct. The new thread in april 2012, had no obvious consensus. In the latter thread, the ns-Portal is confused with ns-Project, that can have affected the reactions.
I recommend Ainali to reopen a thread on BB and be very very clear about what this change will do to the project. I cannot see It will do any harm, and is reversible if it become impopular.
Updating URL to the new thread:
https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bybrunnen#Include_Portal:_in_default_search
No consensus, per https://sv.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Bybrunnen&oldid=17629592#Include_Portal:_in_default_search
[ Closing bug report as WONTFIX ]