I'd suggest a different scheme.
Create a set of pages (at meta) explaining the pros, set a deadline for
change and use a notice/global message delivering asking wikis to opt
out if they disagree.
Vito
Il 03/06/2016 12:12, Jaime Crespo ha scritto:
I agree with having a discussion on Meta-Wi
+1
Vito
Il 21/05/2016 21:01, rupert THURNER ha scritto:
On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 1:07 AM, MZMcBride wrote:
It's frustrating and annoying that your happy team hijacked this portal...
(snip)
Hostility and anger are not welcomed in this mailing list, neither in the
rest of Wikimedia spaces. Any
cator is considered a not-so-resource-consuming
service...
On 4 April 2016 at 19:01, Vituzzu wrote:
Why not a small virtualised cluster for these not-so-resource-consuming
services like OTRS, phab, etc?
/me runs away before writing the world-which-shouldn't be written
Vito
Il 04/04/2016 19
Why not a small virtualised cluster for these not-so-resource-consuming
services like OTRS, phab, etc?
/me runs away before writing the world-which-shouldn't be written
Vito
Il 04/04/2016 19:57, Greg Grossmeier ha scritto:
Apologies for not sending out this announcement before hand.
Short su
I have nothing against "related pages", I've been testing it for a while
but:
*its graphics suddenly worsened not so much time after the first release
*it often overlaps with pages already listed in "see also" section
*some results aren't relevant at all
IMHO all these issues should be addressed
My appreciation goes to:
*Wikidata developers which turned into solid reality one of the most
dreamlike ideas of our universe
*Those developers who didn't forget their roots in daily building the
encyclopedia
*Those folks promptly responding to emergencies...even those caused by
themselves :p
