I've posted a link to your message at what looks like the proper page:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Freedom_of_Panorama_2015#Problem_with_banner_.22breaking.22_mobile
Risker/Anne
On 30 June 2015 at 17:49, Jon Robson wrote:
> I noticed a banner on the mobile site that
f tools
out there that do just this kind of tracking; none of them will be perfect.
(You're engineers, you know that.) It's really important that the left hand
know what the right hand is doing.
Good luck in your choices.
Risker/Anne
On 3 July 2015 at 13:30, Arthur Richards wrote:
&
cal admins (copyright being the primary example, but probably
some others as well).
This would require very diplomatic discussion. And given that this is the
'anniversary' of the introduction of Superprotect, it might be better to
wait for a while to really have that conversati
even that would be a fight as we have seen with past examples; it's
vanishingly unlikely they'd even get blocked, let alone banned.
Risker/Anne
On 11 August 2015 at 14:17, Pine W wrote:
> Yeah, the same thought crossed my mind. Unfortunately, superprotect has
> such a well-earn
attend; and
outside of Wikimedia events, the conferences I go to are usually full of
conservative businesswomen, and alcohol is rarely involved.
So yeah...you need a code of conduct. Because if I was even 15 years
younger, I'd never go to a Wikimedia conference.
Risker/Anne
On 22 August 2015
ps more importantlywho were the local contacts at Hackathon 2015?
I can't even dig that one up in the event documentation.
A policy that exists but has no clear or visible support isn't worth the
bytes it's written with.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
On 28 August 2015 at 06:05, Quim Gil wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 1:52 AM, Matthew Flaschen >
> wrote:
>
> > On 08/22/2015 10:52 PM, Risker wrote:
> >
> >> Perhaps more importantlywho were the local contacts at Hackathon
> 2015?
> >&
ps in their work as they go
forward.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Pine, given the questions at this point seem to be directed to the
Collaboration team, with the intention of clarifying what their plans are,
perhaps it would be best to encourage them to answer the questions rather
than continue the speculation.
Danny, perhaps you could take the lead on respondin
dia.org/wiki/Code_of_the_United_States_Fighting_Force
Risker/Anne
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
to send it here or not.
>
> On 6 September 2015 at 01:42, Risker wrote:
>
> > On 5 September 2015 at 19:11, MZMcBride wrote:
> >
> >
> > > It seems weird to me that the
> > > push (perhaps a movement, who knows) to implement codes of conduct
Well, bluntly put, since LDAP is how most non-WMF staff sign into
phabricator, I'd say it's become an essential extension.
So yeah, this one should be taken over by WMF staff.
Risker/Anne
On 18 September 2015 at 12:54, Greg Grossmeier wrote:
>
> > Hi maybe Wikimedia c
by an *internal* error rather
than an external attack, is a very, very big deal, but I'm not getting that
impression from anything written here, on phabricator, or in the report
itself. That disappoints me far more than that an error was made in the
first place.
Risker/Anne
On 26 October 201
On 27 October 2015 at 09:57, Brad Jorsch (Anomie)
wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 8:02 AM, Risker wrote:
>
> > The incident report does not go far enough back into the history of the
> > incident. It does not explain how this code managed to get into the
> > deplo
his (more accurately, what we can do to prevent
> it).
>
> I think, after reading Brad's, Oliver's, and Erik's (partial, early
> release due to train) responses most of Risker's questions are answered.
> I'll just give a bit more from my perspecti
mple:
wikEd 33462
-wikEd 7
Twinkle 32487
-Twinkle 7
Are the negative numbers the number of users who had previously enabled the
gadget and then subsequently disabled it? If not, what are they?
Thanks for targeting the cleanup and broader distribution of those high-use
tools and gadgets.
Risker/Anne
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:GadgetUsage
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Agree with everyone else - this looks pretty cool. Just as importantly,
it's pretty straightforward - I could figure out all of the options quickly
and intuitively. Thank you for working on it.
Risker/Anne
On 9 December 2015 at 01:02, Jnanaranjan Sahu wrote:
> Very nice and most
those URLs -
even government websites rearrange themselves periodically - and replacing
a bad link with a more secure bad link is not really helpful.
Risker/Anne
On 13 January 2016 at 13:32, Max Semenik wrote:
> Fix them with a bot, for example AWB
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip
eye.
And now, having written this, I'm going to spend some time trying to figure
out how to create a message to new users I encounter when I'm oversighting
their personal information...without templating or linking to complex
policies, but pointing them to the Teahouse. I'm pretty
teers - until
they stop working. These tools are one of the hidden underpinnings that
help make the Wikimedia family of projects successful - and it's great to
see someone who is so passionate about this taking on the role.
Risker/Anne
On 15 April 2016 at 20:04, Magnus Manske
wrote:
> Yay
Just noting that 1700-1800 PDT on Wednesday May 11 is -0100 UTC on
Thursday May 12. Based on the link given, this seems to be when the meeting
will be held. Please verify.
Risker/Anne
On 4 May 2016 at 21:28, Pine W wrote:
> Forwarding.
>
> Pine
> -- Forwa
who is the Wikimania Convenor) to see how this
could be accommodated.
Thanks Brion for raising the topic - and thanks to everyone in this thread,
you've all taken this idea to heart and recognized the value of user
input.
Risker/Anne
On 1 September 2016 at 13:12, Brion Vibber wrote:
> The las
ng that problem. That's not to deprecate the hard work and
investment of all of the staff and volunteer developers that keeps the
place functional and brings new and desirable features to the users - thank
you all.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikitech-l
a positive thing. It's like all the
web designers are using the same textbooks. And #ac6600 is not a colour I
really want to see on my screen; ask any parent to think back to those
first six months, and they'll explain...
Risker/Anne
___
Wikitech-l
Welcome, Danny!
Is there a specific product that Danny will be managing?
Risker/Anne
On 25 April 2014 10:58, Howie Fung wrote:
> Everyone,
>
> I am pleased to announce that Danny Horn is joining the Product Development
> team as Product Manager. His first day was Monday April 21.
ther words, this is a leadership issue that is
playing out repeatedly across each product line, and it's pretty much the
same issue over and over again, just focused on a different product. It's
not the fault of the back-room engineers; it's at the PM level and above.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
and working with
users whose longtime Wikimedia identities will have to be changed. This
is optimistically a year-long project that's been passed around amongst WMF
staff for years as if it was a hot potato. Well, I guess it actually is,
so I can see why. But if this is hard, then I don't understand why anyone
would think that forcing projects to conform to WMF's vision of how they
should manage everything from Wikiproject templates to content quality
reviews to RFA to any other process that isn't actually creation or editing
of content is going to be perceived as anything but the WMF sticking
its nose into areas that are none of its business.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
I do urge you to start such a discussion, bawolff. It would seem to me
that a one- or two-week RFC should be sufficient to opt out contributions
to MediaWiki. I'd be happy to support, even though it's more likely that
I'll star in the next James Bond film than ever write a line o
t because of the interface? One would think a custom
skin could be developed that would permit inclusion of such links.
Part of the issue faced by developers is the fact that there is really no
viable method by which to "label" their contributions as "paid". Doesn'
Thank you, Luis. I have drafted a request for comment on mediawiki.org
[1], but it can probably use some review to ensure I have included the
correct list of related projects.
Risker/Anne
[1]
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Alternate_disclosure_policy
On 16 June 2014 18:25
ours, or there would have been a bigger problem.
Testwiki is for testand if you must test on enwiki, do it in userspace.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
7;s never
made it to the top of the priority heap.
Putting on my checkuser hat for just a minute...it's essential information
for having any chance at all of identifying multiple accounts or pattern
editing; however, the tables used by checkusers are non-public so
Checkusers continuing to hav
hitespace.
I'll try to grab a screenshot and send it in.
Risker/Anne
On 14 July 2014 01:03, Brandon Harris wrote:
>
> I have uploaded a new version of the Winter framework/prototype,
> v. 0.6.
>
> http://unicorn.wmflabs.org/winter/
>
>
Just to note, I've sent the screenshot directly to Brandon; I also
forwarded a copy to this list but because of the size the email needs to go
through moderation.
Risker/Anne
On 14 July 2014 08:55, Risker wrote:
> Thanks Brandon for letting us know about this. Since it will be many
hind having it there; the problem isn't really the format, it's
the quality and relative importance of the information.
Risker
On 14 July 2014 16:06, Trevor Parscal wrote:
> I want to suggest that we give Brandon a lot of slack here, and be as
> supportive as possible.
>
>
egistered for the hackathon because it was
the only way to show that they would be around on Tuesday and Wednesday.
You're not going to get 400 developers. You'll probably get about 15% more
people than what you had in Washington in 2012. The rest of us will just
be hanging around and b
, but then they'd want to be sent back
to the watchlist.
Risker/Anne
On 15 July 2014 14:49, Tyler Romeo wrote:
> https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/146515
> --
> Tyler Romeo
> 0x405D34A7C86B42DF
>
> From: Jon Robson
> Reply: Wikimedia developers >
> Date: July
is is terrible UX. Logging out or in should only apply to one
> device.
>
>
Or alternately have a "log out on this device/log out everywhere" option.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
computer
logged in while ending a session from the library wi-fi); it would be a
pain to have to keep updating preferences everytime one of those situations
occurs.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
o that - there are other bugzillas
with suggestions on how to reduce spam including various filters - but it
does make a difference. (I'm away from my usual computer right now so
can't give you any links.)
Hope that helps.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
As someone with one of those "high risk" accounts, one time passwords would
be more likely to make me drop those permissions. Any administrator has a
"high risk" account given the opportunities that they have.
Risker/Anne
On 7 August 2014 07:59, Pine W wrote:
>
On 7 August 2014 10:49, Chad wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 9:49 AM, Risker wrote:
>
> > As someone with one of those "high risk" accounts, one time passwords
> would
> > be more likely to make me drop those permissions. Any administrator has
> a
ndied about involve things like
two-factor identification, which has the "additional" password coming
through a separate route (e.g., gmail two-factor ID sends a second password
as a text to a mobile) and means having more expensive technology) or using
technology like dongles that cann
, sites like Anonymouse, etc. TOR is but
one editing vector that is similarly problematic, and it would boggle the
minds of most users to discover that developers are more interested in
enabling another of these vectors rather than thinking about how to prevent
problems from the ones that are curre
atively few commercially- or philosophically-driven problem editors.
Unfortunately, with our limited human resources (what with everyone being
volunteers, and most editors just editing), it doesn't take a lot of
problem editors to overwhelm our resources.
Risker/Anne
__
much disagree that this
is a technical issue; Tor's blocking is a technical solution to a genuine
policy/behaviour problem.
Risker/Anne
On 1 October 2014 09:05, Derric Atzrott
wrote:
> > If, as it seems right now, the problem is technical (weed out the bots
> > and vandals) ra
ble prospect of tracing back to
the original IP address (unlike many other anonymising proxies). Thus the
attribution issue.
I've copied Luis Villa on this specific email just as a heads up that this
matter might land on the Legal & Community Advocacy doorstep, but I don't
think we should expect a formal legal response about this.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Umm. No. If ever you want major pushback from the broad international
community, requiring any kind of "documentation" to open an account will
probably work very well. I certainly would never have signed up for an
account on Wikipedia if I'd had to supply an email address.
Ri
On 9 November 2014 02:51, Pine W wrote:
> We're talking about a test, not a broad rollout (:
>
> I'm curious, Risker: if you don't mind my asking, what about being
> required to supply a throwaway email address would have discouraged you
> from opening a Wikimedia
It's a cool idea. Also not usable by those who are visually impaired, as
best I can tell.
I'm going to be honest, I think svetlana may be on to something.
Risker/Anne
On 3 December 2014 at 18:17, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> - Original Message -
> > From: "Ryan Kald
nce in the
past with people actively harassing oversighters because of legitimate
suppressions they've carried out, and perhaps this is exactly how they've
found out it was Oversighter A who did that particular suppression.
Risker/Anne
On 9 December 2014 at 14:01, Dan Garry wrote:
>
entirely voluntary change in username. I suspect
that, with careful communication, even the enwiki community would come to
see this as a net benefit for username changes related to the SUL
finalization specifically.
What would be needed is some script or bot that changes the signatures from
prior to the date of username change, in particular, so that signatures by
the "new owner" of the username won't be changed.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
things that might no longer be up to date
when there is no correlating action plan for updating the same information
is probably not good use of anyone's time or effort.
Risker/Anne
On 13 February 2015 at 07:57, James Salsman wrote:
> Brian Wolff wrote:
>
> > Have you run this
ate
should be requested; it doesn't even fix out-of-date information. There is
no indication at all that there is any interest on the part of Wikipedians
to review data identified in the manner you propose.
Risker/Anne
On 13 February 2015 at 12:58, James Salsman wrote:
> Risker wrote:
&
;
> -
Help me out here. Why does anyone care that the article was last edited 13
days ago by Omeganian? And even if they do, why is that the very first
thing that someone sees?
Risker/Anne
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
On 13 February 2015 at 17:25, Max Semenik wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 2:23 PM, Risker wrote:
> >
> > Help me out here. Why does anyone care that the article was last edited
> 13
> > days ago by Omeganian? And even if they do, why is that the very first
>
IPBE process in which there is even
less control than the project has now, particularly in the ability to
address socking and POV/COI editing. Am I missing something?
Risker/Anne
On 10 March 2015 at 13:16, Giuseppe Lavagetto
wrote:
> Hi Chris,
>
> I like the idea in general, in
.
Unfortunately, there's been plenty of history on enwiki of experienced
users having multiple accounts that were used inappropriately, including
administrator accounts, so that raises the bar even higher.
AlsoI'm a little unclear about something. If a "Tor-enabled" account
creates
account (still to be determined)
In other words, the difference between the existing process and the
proposed process is the addition of the third party and the deliberate
separation of the two accounts. (I'm trying to put this into plain
language so that it
y all
that sure it's an overall improvement in safety.
Risker/Anne
On 10 March 2015 at 20:40, Chris Steipp wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 2:58 PM, Risker wrote:
>
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > AlsoI'm a little unclear about somethin
hich we
get spam particularly, and abusive harassment-type vandalism secondarily.
The user would still need IPBE or similar permissions to edit through that
service.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
ments/concerns/ideas/observations on Mediawiki, the use of Flow will
become a barrier for participation.
Risker/Anne
On 16 March 2015 at 20:51, Nick Wilson (Quiddity)
wrote:
> LiquidThreads (LQT) has not been well-supported in a long time. Flow
> is in active development, and more real
On 16 March 2015 at 21:20, Ryan Lane wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 6:02 PM, Risker wrote:
>
> > How about just converting those threads back to Wikitext, instead? That
> > script already exists, I've seen it used on Mediawiki. Will it mess up
> the
> > pages
et of conditions where the access
would be withdrawn.
Risker/Anne
On 16 March 2015 at 01:29, Arlo Breault wrote:
> I share Risker’s concerns here and limiting the anonymity
> set to the intersection of Tor users and established wiki
> contributors seems problematic. Also, the bootstr
ch message is being responded to when everything has essentially the
same indent level.
There's also the huge waste of screen real estate - I knew it was bad on
desktop, but I was surprised to see it looks almost as bad on a tablet when
I had an opportunity to take a look.
Risker/Anne
_
On 17 March 2015 at 10:49, Brad Jorsch (Anomie)
wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 10:35 AM, Risker wrote:
>
> > On 17 March 2015 at 09:45, Brad Jorsch (Anomie)
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Ricordisamoa <
> > &
ponse to one comment to also make sense as a response to other
comments - which leads to miscommunication, confusion and difficulty
figuring out who is saying what to whom.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
n
the wikitext system? (i.e., are there more "talk page" comments now than
there were before?) Have users expressed satisfaction/dissatisfaction with
the system? Have they been surveyed? Do they break down into groups
(e.g., engineering loves it, grants hates it, etc...)? I hear some stories
(including stories that suggest some groups of staff have pretty much
abandoned talk pages on office-wiki and are now reverting to emails
instead) but without any documentary evidence or analysis it's unreasonable
to think that it is either a net positive OR a net negative.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
On 19 March 2015 at 13:28, Ryan Lane wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 8:18 AM, Risker wrote:
>
> >
> > The dogfooding has been happening for a while on WMF's own office-wiki.
> We
> > haven't heard any results about that. Is the system being used more than
don't think anyone
is disagreeing with you about that, and simplification of the indentation
system/process would be desirable no matter what underlying software is
used for discussion. What is being said in this thread is that Flow does
not do this now, and in fact is currently designed to pr
-understood to mean something
entirely different. From my perspective, the idea (and the execution) is
fine.
RIsker/Anne
On 2 April 2015 at 18:19, Jon Robson wrote:
> I am writing to invite you to preview and hopefully contribute to
> Gather [1], a new MediaWiki extension that allows us
with words in other languages, too.
Nonetheless, those are some suggestions for English.
Risker/Anne
On 4 April 2015 at 12:37, Brian Wolff wrote:
> Oh look, we go full circle ;)
>
>
>
> I haven't checked but given its implemented as a special page i doubt
> Risker&#x
rite robust code for deletion and revdelete/suppress that will operate on
those pages, when both of those are covered by well-written, robust,
heavily tested and used code now.
I would have thought that having to constantly write new extension-specific
code for these basic admin functions would hav
On 24 April 2015 at 09:21, Alex Cella wrote:
>
>
> Registration ends on the 8th of March.
>
>
I'm pretty sure that's not right.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikim
all of the current existing accounts every single
month just on mobile? Or does that include accounts that already existed
on a WMF site?
Risker/Anne
On 28 April 2015 at 20:00, Jon Robson wrote:
> Anonymous editing was enabled on mobile web on 30th March 2015 to all users
> (previous it was
ay from other tasks to problem-solve downtimes on big
projects.
Risker/Anne
On 28 May 2015 at 07:51, Dan Garry wrote:
> Awesome! This will make many teams very happy since they'll be moving
> faster.
>
> What's the criteria by which you will evaluate the success of this
have fresh eyes
on a situation. Thank you for your work on this, it was quite
enlightening.
Risker/Anne
On 7 June 2015 at 00:09, Neil P. Quinn wrote:
> Hey Greg!
>
> Yes, this is meant to be a one-time process. We've been spending a
> significant proportion of our time on it
oint is well taken, though. Decide what you want to say to
prospective developers, and make sure the landing page is welcoming and
useful, before you send anyone there.
Best,
Risker
On 19 September 2012 20:12, Tomasz Finc wrote:
> I really wish I could just got to http://developer.wikimedia
oid other WMF wikis like the plague
for complex sociological reasons. Bottom line, the objective is getting a
wide range of editors to test the software through its various functions,
identify issues, and report them. Making it as easy as possible for them to
do so will produce the best response.
R
been found to use [not yet blocked]
Tor IPs was identified as such because of a legitimate concern about that
editor's behaviour.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Well done, very pleased to see that the careful planning paid off so well.
I raise a glass in honour of those who worked so hard to make this an
almost invisible operation.
Risker
On 22 January 2013 19:04, Tomasz Finc wrote:
> So seamless. Well done!
>
> --tomasz
>
>
> On Tu
countries with censorious governments), and there are huge regions where IP
data cannot be considered at all accurate: for example, most of the Middle
East.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
of the small/private wikis. I got
"bad certificate" messages for the English Wikipedia Arbcom wiki tonight.
But thanks for working on this.
Risker/Anne
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
e the
subdomain's cert changed.
Risker/Anne
On 13 March 2013 00:30, Ryan Lane wrote:
> You mean: https://arbcom.en.wikipedia.org ?
>
> Our certificates have never covered that. That's a sub-sub domain, and our
> certs only cover single subdomains. We really need to rename all
On 13 March 2013 00:50, Ryan Lane wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 9:45 PM, Risker wrote:
>
> > Yes, that's the wiki I mean. And I can see your point about all those
> > sub-subdomains; there must be a stack of them. The domain name was
> changed
> > fairly
se point me to the discussion on *English Wikipedia*
where the community indicated an interest in deploying this software?
Infoboxes and sourcing to another website completely outside the control of
English Wikipedia is a rather big issue, and I would expect to see a
Request fo
On 5 April 2013 22:24, phoebe ayers wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 6:33 PM, Risker wrote:
>
> > On 5 April 2013 19:07, Lydia Pintscher
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 1:00 AM, MZMcBride wrote:
> > > > Sorry, I don't kn
etty good chance that
issues related to infoboxes will wind up being brought before the
Arbitration Committee within the next few months. English Wikipedia is not
the place to test this software now. That's what test wikis are for, and
what voluntary project participation is for.
Best,
Risker
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
more cohesive, less
diverse projects for their ability to come to well-discussed, well-reasoned
decisions in a timely way. I think there are lessons out there for English
Wikipedia to learn.
Risker/Anne
On 6 April 2013 12:47, Eran Rosenthal wrote:
> In hewiki we had a discussion in village p
On 8 April 2013 09:20, Brad Jorsch wrote:
> On Apr 8, 2013 12:11 AM, "Risker" wrote:
> >
> > As I've indicated very early in this thread, Phase 2 affects an area of
> > English Wikipedia that is already under considerable dispute (i.e.,
> > infoboxes)
On 8 April 2013 12:51, Brad Jorsch wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 12:16 PM, Risker wrote:
> >
> > I do not think it is particularly obvious outside of our project the way
> > that Wikidata is being "weaponized" as the reason for attempting to force
>
On 9 April 2013 12:15, Denny Vrandečić wrote:
> Risker,
>
> I find myself unconvinced by your argumentation as I perceive it as
> inconsistent.
>
> On the one hand, you suggest that before we enable the option to access
> data from Wikidata using either Lua or a pars
n
about living people.
I'd be happy to give you a tour and some further information off-list if
you think this would be helpful in making a decision. Meanwhile, the main
participants of this list can probably answer more of the technical
questions.
Best,
Risker
___
d users) who have very limited technical knowledge; write in
plain language without jargon. Get someone with limited techie vocabulary
and understanding to copy edit your communication.
These are useful, and fairly standard, communication processes. Here's
hoping that a good so
bottom of the article.
>
> Thank you,
> Derric Atzrott
>
>
It would also be helpful to post it on the enwiki VE feedback page[1] so
that community members can monitor for other examples. There are already
several bugzillas related to the tags, as well as to table
editing,
hat close to the top priority,
particularly as categorization is almost exclusively done by experienced
editors.
I note that someone commented below about WikiLove. While it's a nice
extension, it's also had to be disabled on multiple occasions on enwiki
;>
>
> Yesterday I recommended Peter to post here in this list. :) I think it is
> good to test the waters and get a first round of feedback.
>
>
There is also some related discussion on the Flow portal.[1] It might be an
idea to pull all of this information togeth
tween projects in how they categorize pages,
as well, particularly as we add sister projects to the mix.
Risker
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
of the most
effective ways of getting the eyes of both groups is to launch and comment
on Bugzillas.
Risker
[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:CONEXCEPT#Decisions_not_subject_to_consensus_of_editors
On 22 July 2013 12:51, Tyler Romeo wrote:
> On that note, I think we should star
e is no benefit in putting
other projects through this when you have more than enough issues to fix.
Risker
[1]http://ee-dashboard.wmflabs.org/datasources
On 23 July 2013 00:01, David Cuenca wrote:
> I'm glad that Tim is bringing some facts and numbers that back up what the
> c
1 - 100 of 180 matches
Mail list logo
