Danny_B added a comment.
In https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T127674#2056903, @Izno wrote: > In https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T127674#2056791, @Danny_B wrote: > > > Besides votes in Bugzilla were never considered relevant, they can //never substitute local consensuses// on and for single wikis. > > > It's true that they cannot substitute local consensus on a wiki. But apparently the bug //also// had the most votes of //any// bug on Bugzilla. Contrast that with a whole bunch of other features which have been requested (or not) and subsequently enabled.... The argument you are making is attacking a strawman argument, in this case. And I know about bugs with many votes which have been wontfixed. So obviously you can't absolutely measure by votes in Bugzilla since not only their relevancy highly varies but also their weight in decision processes. >> make Chines as a site language for all wikis having less than 1M of articles... > > Sure, and the WMF would close the task as invalid because that's clearly not the point of the Wikimedia movement. Another strawman. Yes, that was intentionally quite absurd example, but exactly to demonstrate the absurdity of claiming that there can be consensus taken by somebody else but involved community. Btw: WMF does not override community consensus (at least they say so...), but let's not continue this into details, the purpose was to show what I said above. PS: None are straw man - you brought Bugzilla as an supportive argument. So I am simply just rebuting it. >> Anyway, thousands opted-in where? On which wikis? It should have been taken into consideration the ratio of those who turned it on vs. number of active users on such wiki, and if it was at leas over 50 %, then turn the feature on, otherwise not and definitely wait for opt in consensus. > > That seems like an unreasonable requirement for //any// beta feature given that typical user response is around 1k users turning a feature on (some features less than that). If you have a problem with the current beta process, you should consider leaving that feedback elsewhere, since this is not the task for that discussion. You brought beta stuff here... However, good suggestion, thanks for it. I'll consider some way how to discuss the suggestions for the change. >> I do not question the principiality of the feature, > > I never so-questioned you. To do so would have been improper etiquette. I never said so ;-) I just noted that as I said to prevent possible misunderstanding (it's not only us two who can read this conversation ;-)) >> But until its //implementation// fulfills various projects needs (as partially described by example in T127673: Ability to set up order and presence of sister projects <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T127673>), it should have never been turned on globally. > > How can we know what the projects need without enabling-by-default working software (contrast this with Gather, which is soon-to-be-removed from en.wp)? We can ask them, but (as below) some people miss the message. Somehow. Simply and clearly: Ask //before// on "how would you like to implement it" / "what are your needs in this feature"? I don't remember any such survey not only local but even any global (though again, I might have missed it, links welcome in nsuch case). Sure people could miss it, but then you still have an argument that there //was// an announcement and there //was// a survey thhus it is //not// a single person (or highly narrow group of people) decision. >> Re the claiming of fact: Was there any announcement on wikis like: >> "There will be sisterproject links turned on on your wiki on <date goes here>, if you do not wish so, please <process description goes here>" >> Being just an ordinary human, I could have simply missed that one, but I clearly do not remember any. Please navigate me to such announcment, thank you. > > https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T103102#1921345 says it was in the news on or about January 8, 2016. I do not know exactly which pages are delivered to on which wikis (on en.wp it's WP:VPT), but I'm sure you can ask the person who made the column-move about specifics for each wiki. I've just checked several Village pumps and it was not on any of them. So clearly the whole process was completely bad. Pity that it was driven by German community, who on the other hand was so sensitive to mediaviewer and superprotect. :-/ > Anyway, I'm done discussing with you. The project manager of the Wikidata component has closed this bug as invalid. I doubt anyone is going to disagree with her decision except with specific wikis in mind. Neither will I, if the ability exists (and that's what the task was about). This whole discussion was about the totally wrong process taken to enable it and that it should be opt-in and not opt-out. TASK DETAIL https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T127674 EMAIL PREFERENCES https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/ To: Danny_B Cc: Lydia_Pintscher, Izno, Glaisher, TTO, Aklapper, Danny_B, StudiesWorld, Wikidata-bugs, aude, Mbch331 _______________________________________________ Wikidata-bugs mailing list Wikidata-bugs@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-bugs
