Talk:Extension requests

Resolved issues
Is there a general consensus on what to do with issues / rquests that have been resolved? Blckdmnd99 15:35, 10 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Someone should refactor them. See:
 * Refactor
 * w:WP:REFACTOR
 * Since functions like a talk page, it seems reasonable that we should follow the Wikipedia policy for refactoring talk pages. For example, if someone writes the Wikitext help annotator extension that I requested, or tells me where to find an existing one, I will move my lengthy description of the proposed extension off the request page, and refactor the content into the extension's manual page, if the material helps there. Teratornis 01:56, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

This is a really good question. Should we simply remove them some weeks later? --Flominator 11:06, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

A first action should be putting (resolved) in the headline. --Flominator 11:10, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Wrong namespace
This page should not be located in the Project namespace. The project namespace is for discussion of the MW.org website, not the software. I have previously requested that it is renamed to 'Site:' to avoid this confusion, but Brion refused. However, if this is still causing confusion then it would be good to get a community consensus on a rename, which would probably be enough to convince him of the change.

This page should either be located in the main namespace or the Extension namespace.

--HappyDog 15:15, 27 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Extension:Requests? —Eep² 19:03, 27 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree that this page should be moved. While the distinctions betweeen namespaces aren`t always as clear here as on on Wikipedia, this page is not related to the software, or the administration of this site- the stated purpose of the "Project" namespace. I can see moving this page either to the extension namespace, or to mainspace, along with Bugzilla, which is also dealing with requests for software improvment. More broadly, we might want to define the projectspace a bit more- besides this page, there`s Project:Support desk, which is about the software but in projectspace. Also,  About this site is in mainspace. Anyways, I`m intrested in what everyone thinks of these naming issues.  --Brian 10:18, 15 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Project:Namespaces gives some information about the namespaces, but perhaps it is not clear enough. The roles of the various namespaces are pretty well defined by now, at least to the people who have been here for while, but you're right that they are not very clearly documented.  I will try and update that page soon with the current namespace definitions.  On top of that a lot of pages are currently in the wrong place.  This is partly due to the confusion, but also largely due to pages that were created before the namespace usage was defined and which have not been moved yet.  In relation to this page, it does fall slightly on a boundary, but I think it should really be in the main namespace.  The extension namespace is really for the actual extensions themselves, not discussion or feature proposals.  Extension matrix sets a good precedent. --HappyDog 16:24, 17 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the clarifications. Based on the above I agree this page should go to the main namespace, which I will probably do in a few days if no one objects. Also, I continue to believe that the other pages I mentioned above may be in the wrong namespace, though I want to be sure I`m acting within preccedent, so I look forward to your updates to  the namespace policy.  --Brian 06:44, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Redlinks
I need an extension to avoid anonymous users (rigorously users who can't edit) to see the redlink for edit new articles. Then they must see a special styled (the CSS must specify it) title. At least I wonna know how to create it (the name of parser functions). Thanks!Eloy 00:17, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Category:Feature requests on Meta-Wiki
Top links to Category:Feature requests on Meta-Wiki. This is a dead page. Page and entries all from 2006 and before. --Subfader 12:19, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Resolved requests
What happens to them? --Subfader 12:19, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Cleanup!
Created 2 new subpages.


 * Resolved requests (Moved those with [RESOLVED] in front)
 * Old requests from before 2007 (Too old to keep upfront. May be solved meanwhile by new MW versions)

No data lost except the 2 removed outdated metawiki links.

The left request still could lists solved requests but one would have to read them to move them to the subpage. --Subfader 17:40, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Purpose of this Page?
What is the purpose of this page? It says "Use this page for preliminary proposal and discussion of ideas". But actions speak louder than words. Requests have been consistently ignored for years. All that really is being done for the most part is people put requests up, and then they are left there to die. The only lucky ones are ones that an extension developer obtains from somewhere else. I don't mean to sound too harsh. But it is what has been happening. There are some awesome ideas on this page. But they are just ignored. If the developers are not going to discuss these ideas to determine if they can be implemented, then there is no point to keep this page.--Matt 03:04, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Seconded
I agree, most of the ideas on this page are excellent and should be discussed by the Developers and then this page can be deleted. It's casting MediaWiki in a very bad light... --Stuart Halliday 19:29, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

This is the first I've ever heard of this page -- it's certainly not actively used by MediaWiki developers.

Tracking of actual work on such things belongs on Bugzilla. Initial discussion might be better served on IRC and the mailing lists; discussion specific to a topic should probably go on a page on the wiki, and people can link around to those pages from various discussion areas. --brion 23:36, 29 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah, you not hearing about kind of proves the point of not be used by developers. By the way, could you look the suggests I made here. The ones about changing the list redirects special page and the one listing redirecting links on a page? They should not be too hard to implement.--Matt 23:56, 29 October 2008 (UTC)