User talk:Tacsipacsi

Create a new page
Excuse me I want to learn If I want to make new page What should I do? I am sorry becouse I can't speak english very well.
 * Just search for it, and you see a red link above the search results. You can also ask for help in Turkish (if it’s your native language), try [//www.mediawiki.org/w/index.php?search=User%3Atr-N&fulltext=1 search for native speakers on mediawiki.org]. I hope I helped. --Tacsipacsi (talk) 20:14, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Preparing for translation
Re, a few notes: Nemo 14:26, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
 * no need to add the unit markers (the numbers) manually (you made some mistakes and 60, 61, 62, 130 are used more than once);
 * the list in the section "== Notes ==" (and Uninstalling) should not be a single translation unit, these are many sentences;
 * I'm not sure what to think of all the untranslatable strings in the units (those in "code" tags), I guess it's overkill to use tvar for each of them.
 * I see you are translation admin on Commons. If you fix what listed above and you are interested in converting more pages here, I'll flag you here too. Then it's easier to spot problems on your own, with the page marking interface. Nemo 14:29, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I prefer to “say” what I want—I don’t like when a program tries to figure out what I wanted, it’s easier and more precise to tell it explicitly. I also thought that if I mark the same content with the same number, it has to be translated only once—it works for references but, as I can see, it doesn’t work for translation units. (What other mistakes are there?)
 * Okay, I will split them (along with the other fixes).
 * I thought it’s easier for the translator, and can be more simply changed by the developer.
 * I think I wouldn’t use the flag, so no thanks.
 * Tacsipacsi (talk) 18:15, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Adding unit markers manually is just wrong, don't do it. Ok on the rest. Nemo 20:06, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Done. Now I tested it in my own wiki so it should work. --Tacsipacsi (talk) 20:59, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Done. Now I tested it in my own wiki so it should work. --Tacsipacsi (talk) 20:59, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

I prepared Extension for translation. The text is on my computer, because if I put the translation tags into the template, all transclusions will fail. (Maybe if I create Extension/en before saving the main template, it’ll be OK.) So I do it only if you say you can mark it for translation. (It’s somehow part of the previous, because this makes possible to translate the infobox too.) --Tacsipacsi (talk) 22:04, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Uh, that's an ambitious page to mark. Yes, please copy the current text to /en before preparing the page. Then I *think* adding the translate tags will not break anything, although we can't be sure because many pages may still transclude the template directly. Nemo 21:48, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I found Extension status while correcting transclusions (there are now fewer than 700 pages without translated subpages). Can you mark it for translation? (Maybe I need the translation admin right at least temporarily indeed…) Thanks, --Tacsipacsi (talk) 19:52, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

I’ve changed all templates, except the userspace. Shall I change user pages too? --Tacsipacsi (talk) 22:11, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

CategoryTree
Can you help with the problem of the not shown collapse/expand/empty bullets in the extension? is there any posibility to change the "symbols" to images? at the moment the toggle works once, after toggle back the image-tag or the code is shown instead of the picture. Reload the page will bring the piucture/image back?!? https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Topic:Usylqmndfj3q2ijw thanks a lot ... Gerd 10:06, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Regarding integration of voting feature in 'Extension:StructuredDiscussion'.
I wanted to know if there is any simple way in which a voting feature can be added to 'Extension:StructuredDiscussion' ...

One way can be to somehow integrate 'Extension:VoteNY' with 'Extension:StructuredDiscussion'. Is this possible ?

(I dont want the replies to move up and down like reddit..I just want to add a functionality so that user can vote replies given by other users)

please guide me. --Falcopragati (talk) 09:23, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks
Hey. Thanks for fixing the module! Minorax (talk) 12:30, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
 * You’re welcome, but I would be happier if there was nothing to fix. :) I still don’t understand why this import was needed to begin with, could you please give me a clue? I think these basic templates are usually at least as much up-to-date as on Meta, but in this particular case the documentation module was even more up-to-date here. —Tacsipacsi (talk) 12:41, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Wanted to import the Noping template and I checked the import all templates box. To be honest, I didn't even expect the Lua error to appear. Minorax (talk) 12:44, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I wouldn’t expect it to overwrite templates either, but now that you know that it does, please be more careful next time, and please use the comment field if you didn’t use it this time. —Tacsipacsi (talk) 13:18, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeap. Thanks for helping :) Minorax (talk) 13:25, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Template:Wikimedia_engineering_project_information has no linebreaks anymore
Hi, it looks like https://www.mediawiki.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Wikimedia_engineering_project_information&type=revision&diff=3994555&oldid=3875307&diffmode=source somehow destroyed the styling and also removed all and any line breaks for fields. See e.g. the box on Wikimedia_Quality_and_Test_Engineering_Team. Any idea how to fix this? :-/ Thanks! --AKlapper (WMF) (talk) 14:45, 28 July 2020 (UTC)


 * I was too late, Majavah already fixed it. Thank you, Majavah! (Unfortunately translated pages are quite hard to test, and I haven’t thought that someone would place the  tag in the   section…) —Tacsipacsi (talk) 15:19, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

[WMF Board of Trustees - Call for feedback: Community Board seats] Meetings with MediaWiki and Wikitech communities
The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees is organizing a call for feedback about community selection processes between February 1 and March 14. While the Wikimedia Foundation and the movement have grown about five times in the past ten years, the Board’s structure and processes have remained basically the same. As the Board is designed today, we have a problem of capacity, performance, and lack of representation of the movement’s diversity. Our current processes to select individual volunteer and affiliate seats have some limitations. Direct elections tend to favor candidates from the leading language communities, regardless of how relevant their skills and experience might be in serving as a Board member, or contributing to the ability of the Board to perform its specific responsibilities. It is also a fact that the current processes have favored volunteers from North America and Western Europe. In the upcoming months, we need to renew three community seats and appoint three more community members in the new seats. This call for feedback is to see what processes can we all collaboratively design to promote and choose candidates that represent our movement and are prepared with the experience, skills, and insight to perform as trustees?

In this regard, two rounds of feedback meetings are being hosted to collect feedback from the technical communities in Wikimedia. Two rounds are being hosted with the same agenda, to accomodate people from various time zones across the globe. We will be discussing ideas proposed by the Board and the community to address the above mentioned problems. Please sign-up according to whatever is most comfortable to you. You are welcome to participate in both as well!


 * Round 1 - Feb 25, 4:00 pm UTC
 * Round 2 - Mar 4, 4:00 am UTC
 * Sign-up and meeting details: Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees/Call for feedback: Community Board seats/Conversations/MediaWiki and Wikitech

Also, please share this with other volunteers who might be interested in this. Let me know if you have any questions. KCVelaga (WMF), 14:38, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Re: Template:Uses TemplateStyles?diff=4683098
The invocation was actually correct, because the  is part of the outer  instead of the inner s, which uses the  syntax, which tests for numeric boolean truthy&#x2011;ness. — ExE Boss 07:10, 3 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Almost correct. Okay, I got lost in the curly braces (using the parameters of yesno, i.e.  → , would’ve made it more readable, just like inserting an—HTML comment-escaped—line break before the opening   would’ve), but there are still edge cases where the two are different:  is valid for the module (see on the right), but your categorization skipped it, as the first unnamed parameter is blank;  returns  , while   returns false . The latter is rather an inconsistency between the template and the module than a bug in your code, but it still means that the categorization used different rules than the actual display. (By the way, your talk page message’s source code is also unreadable. There’s nothing wrong in web text wrapping on whichever word boundaries, but wikitext full of  ’s makes it practically impossible to read diffs.) —Tacsipacsi (talk) 22:56, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Module:Documentation
Hi. I wanted to change language of Module documentation pages by Special:Diff/4731418. Can we refer namespace index of the current page there?--Shirayuki (talk) 21:32, 31 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Yes, . However, even with that fixed,
 * You unnecessarily duplicated the configuration and i18n. Module:TNT has a function named formatInLanguage, which can be used to load translations from Commons in an arbitrary language, without manually copying them over.
 * Your solution changed only half of the messages, messages from Module:Documentation/i18n were not changed.
 * Also, keep in mind that this is a global module. Non-trivial changes like this one should be tested in the sandbox. Or even better, not put in the global part at all, since monolingual wikis usually won’t have this  hack, and the module will probably break in them. It’s not even needed, it can be handled on the /config and /i18n subpages. —Tacsipacsi (talk) 22:30, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

A link to a translatable page
Thanks for that edit! I was certain I pasted the link above the translate tag. Obviously, you made it correct. SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 02:06, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

group=ext-disambiguator
Hey, could you finish the translation? It's just three short elements. Thank you! SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 15:09, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Help with translation
Hey, would you be able to finish this translation? This will be a landing page of a banner encouraging the communities to share their thoughts on the improved table of contents. Thank you! SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 15:23, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Show new topic tool empty state on existing pages with no topics too
Hi, I wonder if you've seen my reply on https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/c/mediawiki/extensions/DiscussionTools/+/794562. Cheers. Matma Rex (talk) 00:15, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Help with translation
Hi, I'm sending a message that Vector 2022 is almost done, and I realized there's no Hungarian version. I must have forgotten to ask for it earlier :o Could you maybe do the translation by... Monday, perhaps?

Just to make it clear, Vector 2022 is almost done relative to the entire timeline. There surely are things that may and will be changed before it's really ready. Soon, we'll ask communities what exactly should be fixed before the deployment.

The last 6 pieces of the translation ("In the meantime, we will complete building all the major changes." and all the following ones) are obsolete. You may ignore these.

Thank you! SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 01:14, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Sites using MediaWiki/multilingual
Thanks for the correct revert. I was correcting a mistake but was preceded Quinlan83 (talk) 12:08, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

just make it a user preference
Ad 


 * Quotes can be altered by using brackets ("[]"). Since this is a quoted conversation by a "staff developer" this presumably means that the person quoted is a representative of the Wikimedia Foundation, and so it is appropriate to alter the quotation in order to better reflect the values of the Wikimedia Foundation with gender inclusivity.  The amended quote can then be: "every nerd worth [their] salt".  The other alternative is to add "[sic]" which indicates that the words are quoted exactly despite using gender-incorrect grammar: "every nerd worth his or her [sic] salt".  My opinion is that amending the quote is more appropriate here than using "sic".  The third option is to just remove the quote altogether &mdash; it isn't necessary for understanding the article.  A fourth option is to paraphrase the conversation instead of using the original quotes.  The original quote is problematic since it infers that anyone who is a "nerd" can only be one of two genders, when the human species has more than two genders.  This can be offensive to the reader, which is something to avoid in a technical manual (or in general).  Nicole Sharp (talk) 12:36, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I didn't quite make the link that this was an actual quote; for some reason I thought it was fictional. In any case, I'd personally be fine with either square brackets or a removal of the quote. Remagoxer (talk) 13:45, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
 * "Since this is a quoted conversation by a 'staff developer' this presumably means that the person quoted is a representative of the Wikimedia Foundation"
 * I don’t think so. According to the caption, this is two people chatting with each other in a quite informal communication channel; they didn’t speak as representatives of the WMF. Also note that this quote is at least nearly nine years old; people being really aware of using gender-neutral pronouns is the latest years’ development. Article One of the United States Constitution also quotes the constitution with “in which he shall be chosen”, even though this pronoun may not fit all people (in fact, it doesn’t fit many people, for example female representatives).
 * I’m certainly against the “[sic]” solution (“[ sic ]” is for misspelled or grammatically incorrect text – “his or her” is grammatically correct, although misgendering) and the paraphrasing (paraphrasing would really work only if we had a source, not only “Alice” and “Bob”). I don’t like “[their]” either, just like the constitution article doesn’t do it, although I’m not entirely opposed to it. Removal is of course an option, but the quote was added to serve a purpose. What about adding a date and thus making it clear that it’s not a recent quote? Maybe Quiddity can tell us when this conversation happened. —Tacsipacsi (talk) 02:11, 3 April 2023 (UTC)