Project:Current issues
 Archives |
Contents
 First page |
 Previous page |
 Next page |
 Last page |
Nikerabbit just put an end to the painful wait! Now the special page works again; you have to open a specific subpage to see usernames. Example: Special:SupportedLanguages/it.
Great ! Kiitos Nikerabbit :)
Hi, I've no idea what Topic talk:Sewfq489tp3iic43 is, either a weird name in the main name space, or a weird talk page for a namespace not needing any talk pages at all, but it's definitely unrelated to Topic:Sewfq489tp3iic43, please move it without leaving a redirect.
Move to what place? You're the author of the talk page: Is it really needed, or maybe it can be deleted? How you created these talk page? :/
It's an experiment, I tried to figure out why an existing Topic:Sewfq489tp3iic43 contains a red link to itself, and is actually always shown as red link. Additional test:
| Namespace | Talkspace | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 90 | Thread pages | 91 | Thread talk pages |
| 100 | Manual pages | 101 | Manual talk pages |
| 2600 | Topic pages | 2601 | pages |
Apparently there is no "Topic talk", the experiment ended up as article. JFTR this bogus article could be moved to Thread_talk:Project:Current_issues/Topic_talk:Sewfq489tp3iic43, as entertainment for the folks migrating Liquid threads to Flow, apparently namespace 91 is empty at the moment. But the red Topic:Sewfq489tp3iic43 is really wrong, it exists.
Done
Manual thanks, I miss the tnx-button whenever it doesn't show up—IPs, bots, liquid threads, … 
dearest,
Has anyone had seen this error before while converting/rendering
an assembled book in to pdf ?
Tim
Yes, it's rather common. It can have several reasons, so it's best if you mention the specific page which is giving you the error.
Is git.wikimedia.org down? I tried to look in the irc logs for mediawiki/mediawiki tech and search here, but could not find anything about it...?
I've been trying to start a new discussion in the support desk but when I click on 'Save Page', my browser keeps reloading the Support desk page in editing mode with my post still inside the editor and not yet posted in the discussion.
(and apparently I can post here without a problem)
Using OS X Yosemite10.10.2. Tried Google Chrome 41.0.2272.118, and Safari 8.0.4.
It's completely broken script hell, Chrome never knows what the URL is, what the state is (crying "don't leave unsaved page" long after it was saved), wild guess, was your attempt over a slow/shaky connection? Maybe test a Thread:Project:Support desk/Cannot starting a new discussion in support desk/reply to figure out what's wrong.
It wasn't over a slow or unstable connection. It seemed to be related to the inclusion of external URLs, you can see my various experiments in the edit history found in Thread:Project:Support desk/Cannot starting a new discussion in support desk/reply
I was able to modify my original MediaWiki issue by eliminating the http:// part of the URL to my wiki and I was able to post successfully.
But yes, totally broken script. I've been getting those "don't leave unsaved page" prompts more often now.
Hi when visiting https://tools.wmflabs.org/extreg-wos/ it brings up a error saying tool does not exist but it was only working a few days ago.
The page says that Legoktm is the maintainer, plus this does not look MediaWiki related so Project:Current issues might be a more appropriate place to bring this up.
You should ask the maintainer (@Legoktm:), if he can fix the problem :) I'll move this to Project:Current_issues for now :)
[RESOLVED] Mass vandalism by User:Prianka
Hi, I updated a translation, but it won't save because of a cascade protection. I put my new version here : Translations_talk:How_to_contribute/26/fr It's the relevant discussion page.
I put that here then. TomT0m (talk) 09:12, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
The difference was apparently only "Le code est open source, libre et gratuit." I added it, clicked on save, and it was saved. Maybe the cascading protection or whatever it was is gone.
It seems the default search namespaces on this wiki haven't been updated for some time. Just now I searched for apidisabled in the search box, and only got 1 result, which was some release notes page. What I really wanted was API:Restricting API usage.
Currently the following namespaces are in our default search namespaces:
- (Main)
- Help
- Manual
- Extension
I propose that we add the following namespaces:
- API
- Skin
Any comments?
Good idea.
I believe you need to log a ticket in the bug tracker for this kind of change, as it requires modifying the site config files.
+1 Should be an easy change with a lot of benefits.
Yep, makes sense; let's also include them in content namespaces if we didn't yet.
+1 (they aren't content pages atm), if there is enough content to be helpful for search, it should be a content page.
I just read it now, so that would be a new change/task :)
Tracked in Task T86391
Done by Reedy :)
I'm not sure if it is related to this change, but why are content pages no longer included in the default search? For a couple of weeks now I think, API: and Skin: are the only namespaces to be searched by default. To search "(Main)", "Help", "Manual", "Extension", you have to click "Content namespaces" (or check the appropriate checkboxes) after the default search has run.
這個頁面應該是繁體中文(Chinese Traditional, zh-hant)文字，為何變成了簡體中文(Chinese Simplified, zh-hans)文字？translatewiki:MediaWiki:Extdist-created-extensions/zh-hant
- And MediaWiki:Extdist-choose-extensions/zh-hant (translatewiki:MediaWiki:Extdist-choose-extensions/zh-hant).
translatewiki was changed but the change hasn't been reflected on the Mediawiki.org.
How come there's no search feature in the archives @ Project:Support desk?! (or here at Project:Current issues, for that matter)
You can watch such a thingy in action at WikiPedia. IMO, this is very useful, and i quite miss it here on MediaWiki.
Later edit: I guess this might be related with the new "LQT"/"Flow" design. Choosing eye-candy vs functionality, very well done. :-|
This is bugzilla:20004.
Actually, some research option is available, but doesn't check where the thread is currently located.[1]
Link to list open tasks from the extension's page displays both open and closed tasks
The link to list open tasks from the extension's page, displays both open and closed tasks. See for example Extension:UserMerge, which links to [1].
That's because now in phabricator, the project page goes to the workboard (see Task T89865).
Is there any other viable URL that we could use to link to all open tasks of a project? All searches give ugly URLs without a project name on them, just numeric codes or similar.
I think there is no such feature any longer: the only option would be the advanced maniphest search, but the projects selectors don't accept strings, only PHID* variables.
Maybe there is a way to get all the PHID numbers or the project description URLs for all projects, we could then store them in a switch.
As Nemo says. If you want to get a PHID of a project (e.g. Flow): Go to https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/conduit/method/project.query/ , enter ["Flow"] in names, get PHID-PROJ-ntg6sf6mfl2qm2e4qgxc.
The workboard view is not the problem itself. Showing also closed tasks by default is the problem and will get fixed by the next update: phab:T90661.
Please assist - I am unable to access/log into my account:
https://www.mediawiki.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ACentralAuth&target=TimiOribunmi
There is such a proposal, see [Wikitech-l] Starting conversion of LiquidThreads to Flow at mediawiki.org. This is the place where consensus for mediawiki.org changes is checked, hence I'm opening the discussion here.
Also, some users have already started disabling LiquidThreads on some talk pages to use wikitext instead: what to do? Should that be done on more or less pages?
LiquidThreads was an unmitigated disaster, in my view, and has made the site worse for being here. History before it was enabled was lost (or, at least, very hard to find) the links in e-mails never take you to the thread they're supposed to, the UI is horrible and it is difficult to find things you are looking for. It actually makes the site harder to use for anyone at all experienced in wikis, not easier, and so should never have been enabled.
I haven't used Flow, so I don't know how it compares, but I would certainly vote for removing LiquidThreads! If Flow actually works in a wiki-like way (i.e. you can view history, see the state of the page before it was enabled, edit comments where necessary, etc.) then I might be persuaded that it is a good replacement, but given our experience with LiquidThreads I am fairly sceptical. For it to work it would have to be something that works inside existing wiki pages, rather than fighting against them. It would also be a requirement that all LT content can be 'migrated' to Flow so that it is not lost or broken. It is not acceptable for it to simply be shunted off to an 'old threads' namespace and abandoned - it needs to appear where it was originally posted.
The issue is as much about how the extension works behind-the-scenes and how well it integrates with the rest of the wiki, as about the interface it provides.
For example, I don't want to lose my current talk page, nor its history. If what is there can be converted seamlessly to Flow, without losing my ability to view old revisions of the page (pre-flow and post-flow), archive things in the way I have done in the past, include some non-thread-like content (e.g. introduction section) and link to specific items without the links breaking as items change (e.g. if they move to 'page 2' of the listings) then it might be viable. Otherwise, please just remove LiquidThreads and don't mess up the wiki with further incompatible plugins.
PS - From reading the wikitech-l post, it looks like once again this is a decision being forced upon us without any kind of local consensus. MediaWiki.org should not be treated as a test site, without community buy-in. If you want people to be antagonistic towards Flow, and to resent its presence on the wiki, then that is a pretty good way of going about it.
Also, I didn't realise quite how experimental/incomplete Flow currently is. Therefore, my vote is (for now at least) a firm no!
The comment from Risker/Anne sums things up pretty well, as far as I'm concerned.
Please just remove LiquidThreads and come back to us with a proposal for Flow when it is out of beta and feature-complete.
Please no back to plain wikitext talk pages, at least for talk pages with hundreds of posts (like Current_issues and Support_desk). Wikitext talk pages are terrible to follow and archiving is as bad as the wikitext discussion format itself. I prefer LQT (in it's fairly bad state) before wikitext, but i welcome a move to Flow, after it is in a workable state (see, e.g., this mail).
See also[edit | edit source]
- Thread:Project:Support desk/Starting conversion of LiquidThreads to Flow at mediawiki.org
- Topic:Sdoatsbslsafx6lw
So, from my side: 
Support
Is it possible to have a complete list of LQT pages on this wiki? That would help the discussion.
Certainly it makes sense to use modern discussion software on Project:Support desk, as that is a high-traffic forum-style page which is aimed at IT professionals and server administrators more than wiki users.
I agree that for the support desk, and maybe a couple of other support-related pages, a more forum-like approach is sensible.
However, one does have to question why we use the wiki for these purposes at all. We don't use the wiki for internal issue tracking, so I'm not sure why we are using it for support. I am not aware of any other company or open source project that would consider using a wiki for handling support issues - it is clearly the wrong tool for the job.
Perhaps a more sensible solution would be to use support desk software for handling the support desk, rather than trying to shoe-horn non-wiki-like tools into the wiki, which will inevitably bring unsatisfactory results (as has been shown with LQT).
FWIW, there was such a proposal too: phabricator:T31923.
Search is pretty good at finding LQT talk pages: [1].
Special:PagesWithProp also works. [1] - currently LQT is on 1,639 pages - (I'm not sure why that number differs (1,567) from the search that Nemo linked?)
Re: existing posts - currently 52,526 individual posts. Of those: 24,897 of those are in Project:Support_desk; 1,269 in VisualEditor/Feedback.
I'm asking devs for help getting a more detailed listing of All pages ordered by size (number of posts).
[Update: A list of all pages with more than 10 posts, is now at phab:P417, and converted into an onwiki page with links at Flow/LQT pages.]
The Flow/LQT_pages are interesting, thanks. Just for fun I looked at the even (non-talk) namespace numbers: One entry in 90 might be odd (3 contributions counted as 12), and for the Project:Forum redirect I didn't get why it's counted as 94.
Note: We'll be holding an IRC office hour for Flow, this Monday at 19:30 UTC / 12:30 PDT. You can find information on how to get online, including a link to a webchat option if you don't have an IRC client, on the meta office hours page. The intended focus is for questions about the LQT -> Flow conversion here. Everyone is welcome for discussions and question answering. Logs will be posted on the meta office hour page afterwards. Thanks.
Few minutes of testing were enough to discover that
- T93723: Conversion to Flow eats content
- T93721: Links to LiquidThreads threads don't work after conversion to Flow
WMF, please ensure you table such proposals only after you've thoroughly tested the conversion. Thanks.
I don't know if it's just an unfortunate coincidence, or what, but since this announcement, the usability of LQT has degraded a lot...
First I reported that submitting a reply doesn't display the reply unless you refresh the page (Task T93374).
Today hitting "show preview" displays a confirmation dialog about leaving the page, and if you proceed, you end up submitting an edit to the underlying page and not on the message you was editing!
PD: Reported as Task T94089
Some time ago I proposed this client. Unfortunately it never got approved and is now listed as "expired", but I'm still interested in it. What am I supposed to do?
Vague ideas, maybe ask one of the OAuth admins what's next after "expired". If you figured it out please add it on the Extension:OAuth page, and/or start a thread on Extension talk:OAuth, and/or tackle the odd m:Meta:OAuth administrators stub.
More to the point, some kind of "identification game" sounds like "bring as many privacy lawyers as the EU has members for an initial informal discussion how to get global community consensus".
Hi,
Just a quick notice, letting you know I'm currently working on a bot that get's documentation from the PHP classes (required rights, must be posted, parameter optional/required + description, examples etc.) into wikitext and saving to a wiki page.
Zak originally created something for this (example), but the source code remains unpublished and the format has changed a lot since then.
Roughly what I've got / aiming for (about 50% done)
- Extract module name/class pairs from
$mainApi = new ApiMain - Loop over and instantiate it:
$module = new $class( $mainApi, $name ); - Buid a documentation page in wikitext format:
new ApiDoc4Wikitext( $module );- {{API-head}} with parameter values from
getModulePrefix,mustBePostedetc. - Parameter section build with a function based on
makeHelpMsgParametersbut in wikitext format - Examples section based on array from
getExamples, which is then dissected into parts for {{ApiEx}}, followed by an http request to exampleurl+format=xmlfm and output cleaned up and unescaped and fed to result-parameter of {{ApiEx}}. - Categories
- {{API-head}} with parameter values from
- Either write wikitext to a file and let another bot save to wiki, or write a simple wikibot and save right away.
To be done:
- Example section
- Saving mechanism
Any ideas / existing code I can look at ?
The source code mentioned above is an empty svn folder. Is it hiding in an archived svn branch, or did it never see the light of day? This is now relatively easy to do with Pywikibot since I added a ParamInfo class. See API_talk:Main_page#Missing_documentation_pages for some basic code.
Does anyone know who Zak is? And/or where this prototype code might be?
Zak was probably the contractor that the foundation hired a few years ago, Once his contact ended he didn't return.
Zak hasn't been around for a while. I knew him when he was here (I had a chance to meet him in Gdansk) but since then he hasn't really been involved.
Thanks Peachey88 and Mark. Is his code lost? Can we contact him? phab:T31936 is related. I cant find much more about it.
I sent him a message on FB. Let's see if he responds.
Greetings All,
Any source code that remains in sitting in storage about 8000km from where I am at the moment. :-/
However, I'm happy to look at source code and otherwise pitch in some.
Cheers! --zak
Note that ApiHelp can now be transcluded, see an example at Extension:Flow/API. I think SPage has plans to start/propose using this feature more widely once it gets possible to select content language à la {{TNT}} (currently it's only possible via interface language change, e.g. [1]).
So far, Special:ApiHelp is extremely ugly (but better than nothing), and the details on Extension:Flow/API are not provided by Special:ApiHelp - they are added by hand. Also there is one aspect of the documentation which can't be generated (currently): information about previous releases. i.e. when each module & parameter was added, deprecated, & removed. Sadly there is not a lot of care for wikis running anything but the bleeding edge.
{{API-head}} has been improved to include a link to the API help module, so the current help is easy to get to, and that template has been added to most of the existing API pages.
My proposal is phab:T89318, John Vandenberg and RobinHood70 raise excellent points. We'll have this tension with any generated documentation, so I mention it in phab:T93026 "remove wiki documentation that duplicates generated documentation (tracking)."
"It gets rebuilt from scratch on every code change" is a feature and a bug :)
@Kaldari: uploaded a new version of File:Wiki.png today. I don't like it. In fact, I thought it was vandalism at first. Can we get this reverted?
I like the idea of using special logos for special milestones and/or events and so on, but maybe it should be discussed first.
Discussion, it's not directly related to Extension:SemanticMustacheFormat, but just in case I "rescued" it.
It would be OK if it was explained somewhere... Most folks won't get such tech-jokes and therefore mistake them for vandalism or at least for a bad joke.
And this logo was used on https://www.wikimedia.org too until a few minutes ago [1]... I'm also not completely against changing logos for special occassions but there is no explanation about why it was changed.. I've checked various places but I still can't find anything about this.
Hmm, https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/181708 Okk but can we really have an explanation somewhere; maybe the logo's link could be changed..
Extension:GraphViz The design of the page looks broken. Funny thing is that has been no edit recently.
- Firefox (35.0.1): completely broken
- Chrome (Version 40.0.2214.115 m): same as Firefox
- Internet Exporer: looks awful, especially the top part.
Thanks for reporting this! Seems to be related to recent edits to Template:WikimediaDownload (which is used on that page) to make it translatable. I've dropped a message on the author's talk page as I have no idea what went wrong here exactly... :(
First page |
Previous page |
Next page |
Last page |
