Jump to: navigation, search

About this board

Edit description

The Collaboration team has enabled Flow on this talk page (documentation).

Previous feedback is on Talk:Flow Portal/Archive2 (using old Liquid Threads), and on our labs server.

You can leave your message in any language, but answers will be made in English (or your language if we speak it).

By clicking "Add topic", you agree to our Terms of Use and agree to irrevocably release your text under the CC BY-SA 3.0 License and GFDL

Activation cleared off my previous Discussions

Yahia.Mokhtar (talkcontribs)

By activating "Flow", I lost all my previous discussions and was unable to track open discussions, so I had to deactivate it, and *luckily* my old page returned.

Suggestion: to let the previous (running) discussions be copied once "Flow" is activated.

Reply to "Activation cleared off my previous Discussions"

Where is a list of proposed features? (Reputation display feature)

Shanen (talkcontribs)

So far this is quite confusing, but I was referred here in relation to a suggestion I offered about a reputation-display feature. One of the features I would like would be background search support. In this case, as soon as I wrote the Subject it would show me candidate threads or comments that I might want to read or even help me add my comment in the proper place.

The feature I was suggesting would be to accumulate a person's reputation based on reactions to the things that the person wrote. I think there should be multiple orthogonal dimensions, with a bias in favor of positive participation. The accumulated reputation could be displayed in a small radar diagram. One way to do it would be to have two icons, the person's own avatar (linked to their self-generated profile) and a small radar icon (linked to a larger and detailed radar diagram and history of reactions). The dimensions should also allow for negative values, such as dimensions for interesting versus boring, polite versus rude, and happy versus sad. The positive-bias can be done by making it easier to give favorable mods. For example, if there is a dimension for consistent versus inconsistent, then you could just click "consistent" (because you think you remember this person saying similar things in the past), but if you want to click "inconsistent" then you'd need to reference a conflicting comment from that person.

As a user of this feature, I'd be able to filter out people who I don't want to see, so mostly this is a way to save time. However, it would also give me a relatively stable and objective snapshot of what sort of person I'm thinking about responding to. I'd prefer to tweak my setting so that it is easier for me to communicate with thoughtful and interesting people (and I would prefer to never see the trolls (based on negative politeness and negative sincerity) or waste any time on them). (talkcontribs)

You can see a list of proposed features (and software issues) here :

That being said, an arbitrary ranking of individuals is not likely to ever be implemented because it would be too prone to abuse, gaming, and some wikis won't likely want such social network features (karma like features).

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Hi Shanen

Your suggestion is not related to Flow. Plus having a way to rank people is not really compatible with the idea of inclusiveness the Wikimedia Foundation tries to promote. Such a tool can be used for wrong purposes. Imagine if someone considers every newcomer's contribution as negative?

Shanen (talkcontribs)

Tracking the behavior of the person who gives too many negative evaluations would justify discounting that person's evaluations. If you don't like to think of it that way, think of it as a way to normalize behaviors on an individual basis. Perhaps a criticism is justified, but I'm going to take it more seriously depending on who it comes from.

Reply to "Where is a list of proposed features? (Reputation display feature)"
Sänger (talkcontribs)

Please fill out this survey, which is administered by a third-party service. It will not require an email or your username. See our privacy statement

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Distribution of an invitation for Mediawikiwiki users will be done today or at the beginning of next week. It has been postponed due to difficulties to identify active users on that wiki.

ImperfectlyInformed (talkcontribs)

I wasn't really a fan of this survey. I ended up filling out N/A for almost everything. I don't think it's fair to say Flow is better or worse than the alternative right now per se, because it does have weaknesses and strengths. I don't want to mislead the Product team into thinking that Flow is perfect, but I also don't want to discourage them. Flow is necessary, and lots of good progress has been made. Admittedly, I haven't really played with Flow much.

Not necessarily comprehensive list of specifics:

  • I do feel like it is not as good as Reddit, which most internet denizens are familiar with. For example, I would like to be able to vote on comments and collapse threads.
  • Outdenting and adding section headings is unclear, and doesn't roll up into a table of contents, as SMcCandlish has noted below (altho I have trouble finding real specific improvement suggestions from the discussion below).
  • "Hide" is weird - not really clear if that hides it for everyone or just me, but I think it hides for everyone? Maybe it should be report or something. Most users (including someone like, who has been editing since 2007) don't feel comfortable just hiding someone's comments.
  • More whitespace and larger font than I'd like. I guess that's probably configurable, but again, think about the audience... Wikipedia discussions are often HUGE, so extra whitespace can get annoying quick.
Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Thank you for your feedback, ImperfectlyInformed!

Flow is not perfect, we know that, and there is a lot of things to improve on it. We expect to have enough community feedback to create a strategy for the future.

I've read some random comments and results, and Flow users mostly have the same opinion as yours: Flow is good, but not that much. It must be improved because there is a lot of features missing. I've also read some comments like yours, suggesting that kind of improvements. I hope we will adress these concerns soon.

Shanen (talkcontribs)

Survey has closed, probably long ago. I was just referred here in relation to a Flow-related suggestion I'd offered elsewhere, but so far I'm having some difficulty figuring out the context and the survey link was just a distraction of a sort of annoying kind. I had hoped it would help me understand the issues, but... Can the "notice" to edited to show it is closed?

As a Flow feature, I wish my draft comments (here in this input window) were being used to find related comments to call to my attention. That's one of the features I would like to see, too.

Flow boards were down due to a database problem

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Just a note for anyone who's curious about what happened: during the m:Tech/Server switch 2017 work, a problem temporarily prevented edits to Flow boards. Everything should be fine again, but if it's not, then please {{ping}} me.

Reply to "Flow boards were down due to a database problem" (talkcontribs)

Will there be a way to view the source of someone's comment, for things like viewing code examples where the commenter hasn't put it in <code> tags?

I don't expect just anyone to be able to edit others comments, but being able to see their code would be useful.

SPage (WMF) (talkcontribs) neat idea, I filed it as bug 60465.

Currently you aren't presented the edit action if you don't have rights to change a post, and even if you guess the URL for action=edit-post , it fails with "Insufficient permission to access the content", rather than falling back to presenting read-only wiki source the way action=edit works on a protected wiki page. (e.g. )

Skalman (talkcontribs)

S Page (WMF): I wonder if it wouldn't be better to allow anybody to edit anyone's comment, as long as "Edited by X" appears. That way you could correct someone's syntax, or clarify formatting.

Quiddity (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Skalman: See the "Comment editing" section in Flow/FAQ#Components of the discussion system (4th down), for details on that possibility. :) (talkcontribs)

Not sure why this wasn't done yet. It is so trivial to do this that a very naive implementation doesn't even take more than 9 lines:

$(".flow-reply-link").parent().append('<a class="flowviewsource"> View source </a>');
$(".flowviewsource").on("click", {	type: "normal"}, function (){
	flowPost = $(this).parents(".flow-post-meta").siblings(".flow-post-content")[0].innerHTML;
	$.post("", {
		html: flowPost,
	}).then(function (data) {

It can probably be polished up and made into a gadget if the developers aren't interested.

Reply to "View source"

My Flow can not work now

Summary by Trizek (WMF)

At the moment it is not possible to activate and deactivate Flow on a user talk page. Activate or deactivate Flow will lead to an empty page, with an error message.

Developers are fixing it now.

Pdch226 (talkcontribs)

My Flow ConfirmEditer postion can not work

The Quixotic Potato (talkcontribs)

@Trizek (WMF) Has this been fixed yet? I want to disable Flow on my talkpage.

This comment was hidden by (history)
Reply to "My Flow can not work now"
Daylen (talkcontribs)

Any plans to automatically show translated text for the language that the user has set as their preferance?

Quiddity (WMF) (talkcontribs)

That feature request has been suggested before, and is tracked at Phab:T98728. However there are no near-term plans to implement it. Thanks for sharing the idea, though.

Reply to "Built in machine translation"

How much money was wasted on this failed project?

The Quixotic Potato (talkcontribs)

Has anyone published a guesstimate of the amount of money that was wasted on this terrible idea?

Sänger (talkcontribs)

Look at this thread, they actively deny VE on talk pages, probably to push this failed bullshit Flow. This is just a weask forum impersonation, without any of the flexibilities the current system has. Dumbed down beyond recognition to increase the facebookisation.

The Quixotic Potato (talkcontribs)

you summed it up nicely here: "preferred to create shiny new bling instead of boring maintenance".

Flow is a vanity project, just like LT was.

Sänger (talkcontribs)

They did a so-called Flow satisfaction survey, but under completely bogus assumptions: They artificially created a rift between wysiwyg and proper talk pages, although that's just a decision by the WMF not to implement it on talk pages, without real merit. They based a lot of the questions ion this bogus assumption, so the answers are just rubbish. Of course asked this way: old fashioned editor or wysiwyg-editor, and the second only possible with flow, you'll get the answers, that were intended by this: I want wysiwyg, so I have to want Flow.

It's this complete dishonesty about projects like Flow that's so frustrating. They seem to do anything, including blatant lies, to push their pet projects against the community. Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) 17:28, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

The Quixotic Potato (talkcontribs)

The WMF should not be allowed to use surveys because they are using them to get the result they want instead of trying to determine what the consensus is.

They use surveys on external servers, and they only invite a small group of people, because they know the majority disagrees with them. We should have an RfC on instead.

Sänger (talkcontribs)

There was an RfC on enWP already, and Flow was planted in the bin: T148611.

They will probably get the same results on deWP, if they dare to introduce this piece of junk there anywhere.

Bur as you see on this baloney "survey", they don't like real feedback based on facts, they live on those kind of alternative facts like the groper in chief and his lackeys. Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) 14:43, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Sänger (talkcontribs)

Thanks, He7d3r, for fixing my wrong syntax. I tried to do this the usual way, via the thanks link in the version history, but thanks to Flow that's impossible. So I had to use this quite elaborate way ;) Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) 08:38, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

The Quixotic Potato (talkcontribs)

Check out


Reply to "How much money was wasted on this failed project?"

What can interested users do to help the development of Flow (when it starts again)?

BurritoBazooka (talkcontribs)

I really like Flow, and dislike the English Wikipedia's current talk page system. I have witnessed a lot of instances where users are confused about the talk page system and end up using it wrong, many times resulting in their opinions not seen by the relevant people, nevermind considered; and other times resulting in historical discussions being difficult to follow without using the page history to see who said what when.

I think Flow is better for new users, and is a good way of encouraging their input on Wikipedia, thus making Wikipedia grow as a project - at the very least by making it easier for them to submit properly filed edit requests. Although I have a personal leaning towards the freeform style that Wikipedia's talk page system allows for, I want to see Flow succeed for the greater good, and I think there are many others like me. I'm glad to see it being implemented in other Wikimedia projects and I hope that it will benefit them greatly.

I recently noticed that the English Wikipedia has had its Flow extension uninstalled because of the halt in development.

What can people like me do to help Flow succeed? Is there a donation page especially for this extension? Could there be one next time development starts? Is there a bounty program? A box to tick showing our support?

The Quixotic Potato (talkcontribs)

If you want Flow to succeed you would have to redesign it from scratch.

BurritoBazooka (talkcontribs)

What issue do you have with it? It's far better than the current talk page system, that's why I like it. Redesigning it would mean it would just take longer to implement.

The Quixotic Potato (talkcontribs)

No, it is inferior to the current talk page system. Flow is confusing, counter-intuitive, user-unfriendly and a gigantic waste of time and money.

Are you aware that people are trying to create a VisualEditor? The VisualEditor will make Flow obsolete, right? Or do you think we should ask newbies to learn to use both Visual Editor and Flow??

BurritoBazooka (talkcontribs)

Flow doesn't require that much learning. VisualEditor will still not be a suitable interface for "comment section" type interaction.

"confusing, counter-intuitive, user-unfriendly"

I disagree that this is a good reason to require a complete redesign. Any concerns can be handled during the next development phase. I really don't think it needs redesigning from the ground up.

The Quixotic Potato (talkcontribs)

Flow is confusing, annoying and very buggy. Why can't I delete my own comments for example? WTF does "hiding" a comment do? Many other people have already expressed their displeasure with it. VisualEditor is currently not ready to be used on talkpages (or anywhere else), but maybe it will be at some point in the future.

I hope there won't be another development phase, because Flow is a huge waste of time that could've been spend more productively.

A complete redesign of Flow could result in a viable alternative to normal talkpages, but at this stage it is probably better to send Flow to /dev/null and forget it ever existed.

I tried to save this message and it gave me this error:

Developing Flow and VE alongside each other is (obviously) a stupid idea. If we would use them both then newbies would be required to learn 2 different badly implemented counter-intuitive systems that are (in their current state) inferior to wikimarkup. We have to make a choice, and Flow is the least desirable option.

You and I may have a high-speed internet connection and a computer worth several thousand euros, but not everyone is so lucky, and Flow is basically unusable for those on older hardware with a bad WIFI connection.

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

VE will not be used on talk pages because discussions are not plain text editing. That has been said and repeated.

Sänger (talkcontribs)

Yes, because it's a threat for this new pet project here, not because of some valid reason.

A wikipage is a wikipage is a wikipage. The best thing about this wikisystem is, that in principle all pages are just the same, editable in the same manner, no rift between the pages. There are some gimmicks, that have been developed for certain types of pages, but that's the only difference. The exemption was LQT, which was a failure. Now they want to recreate LQT in another manner, to get some dumbed down forumesque page to simulate some blahblah pages from social media.

This page here has a complete different look and feel as all other pages in the wikiverse, it's only useful for discussions and social chatter, not for working on articles for the wikipedias around the world. A talk page of an article is the core implementation of any talk page, any other implementation hast to cow to the needs of article talk pages. The wikiverse is about the creation of articles, it's talk pages for the betterment of them, to test stuff, to show co-authors solutions for problems on the front side, to answer several former questions at once, to restructure some parts that have run out of control, to divide and unite different threads, all possible with the same tools used on every other page in the whole wikiverse.

But not here, this is just a weak forum implementation, without any other merit. Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) 15:56, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

The Quixotic Potato (talkcontribs)

Do you think repeating a nonsensical mantra over and over is a good strategy to use in communication with people who disagree with you? It seems quite insulting to me. I am not a [[:en:Hare Krishna (mantra)|Hare Krishna]].

If VE will always be restricted to plain text then VE is not gonna be very useful. Seems like a huge waste of time and money to me.

I can't even preview my edits in Flow... I tried to link to an article on and it failed (after annoying me with a stupid GUI).

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

There is plenty of pages plain text, actually quite all. But structured data pages, like the ones using Wikibase, are using VE. That's a decision from the VE team. That decision also concerns talk pages.

Concerning the preview, I've seen on you screenshot that you have an interface like that one:

If so, you are using the visual mode. If you type :en:Hare Krishna (mantra) in the link inspector, that will create a link . If you prefer to use wikitext, you can click on the two brackets to have access to wikitext, and then on the pen to have a preview. Add a link using Flow's GUI is the same as on the visual editor for articles.

The Quixotic Potato (talkcontribs)

That proves my point about how counter-intuitive and badly designed this system is.

When I type the first 2 square brackets a GUI pops up and the square brackets disappear.

This is a bad idea, the brackets shouldn't disappear, ask any UX designer.

Then I type a colon and the box becomes red (which makes me believe something is wrong).

When I type the first letter (the letter "e") the GUI shows me article search results from the wiki I am currently on, even though I already typed a colon.

It is far more likely that I am going to link to a category or another wiki.

The search results disappear again when I have written <nowiki>[[:en:</nowiki> It doesn't give me any search results that are categories or articles on the English Wikipedia.

My father is old, how is he supposed to understand how to use this functionality?

How are people with visual handicaps going to use this GUI?

In the bottom right of the box I am typing this message in there is an icon with 4 square brackets. Of course I assumed that this means (internal) link.

Near the bottom left of the box I am typing in there is a more conventional hyperlink symbol, so I would assume that means external link.

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

You are raising up problems that are not Flow specific, but visual editing ones.

The Quixotic Potato (talkcontribs)

I do not use Visual Editor (for obvious reasons). Does Flow use VE?

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Both visual editing and wikitext editing. I've explained it to you just above your previous answer.

The Quixotic Potato (talkcontribs)

Sorry, I forgot, that was 10 days ago. Thank you I will probably have to install VE and Flow on my own mediawiki installation in order to understand how everything works.

Sänger (talkcontribs)

That's difficult. As the fairy tale goes, VE is not suitable for talk pages, at least that's what the fanboys say, it's not VE but the underlying Parsoid Engine that's used here, and by the VE as well. Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) 18:18, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

The Quixotic Potato (talkcontribs)

Hm, interesting. I will have a look at this Parsoid thingy. The name is pretty cool! Oh look I praised something even though I dislike Flow maybe we won't be blocked now.

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Hello BurritoBazooka

A good way to help talk page improvements is to show how important it is for you. Thank you for your message!

Flow extension has been uninstalled from English Wikipedia after a community discussion. Some other communities are using Flow on user talk pages, as a Beta feature (people can opt-in) or as the default discussion system (like here, on

At the moment, Flow development is stalled, waiting for a decision concerning talk pages improvements. That decision will be partially based on the results of a survey I'm working on at the moment. I hope we can reach a firm decision in 2017. There is no donation page dedicated to that project, but, if you are a developer (PHP), you can help for sure.

You can remain informed about the next steps concerning Flow by subscribing to our monthly newsletter (edit: as you already did).

The Quixotic Potato (talkcontribs)

The community has already reached a firm decision on Flow's future, the overwhelming consensus on is that Flow is shit, but that is difficult to accept for some people who have a minority viewpoint.

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

English Wikipedia's consensus is a consensus for just one wiki among hundreds, not the whole community one. Other wikis don't agree with that consensus. Please show respect to those communities.

The Quixotic Potato (talkcontribs)

Woah, maybe the WMF should show some respect to the communities... The WMF is using money earned by content creators to fund stupid vanity projects instead of using it to serve & protect those communities like they are supposed to!

The WMF does not respect the communities and it does not respect the people who have donated to the WMF, that is a major problem.

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

We have respected the wish of English Wikipedia to remove Flow. We are also respecting the wish of other communities that want to use Flow to ease discussions.

A lack of respect would be to force communities to use Flow, which is not the case: community volunteer and must have a discussion and a formal decision must be obtained prior enabling Flow on a wiki.

The Quixotic Potato (talkcontribs)

Are there any communities that have requested to use Flow (without it being forced on them)? You are forcing me and Sanger to use Flow, even though we prefer normal talkpages....

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Concerning communities, yes there are. Including mediawikiwiki one.

The Quixotic Potato (talkcontribs)

No, the MediaWiki community has not requested to use Flow without it being forced on them if I understand the page you linked to correctly.

So the only community where Flow is the default per consensus is, right?

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

MediaWiki has it by default since end of 2013. kab.wp is missing on that list. I have to update that page.

Sänger (talkcontribs)

Where exactly was the community decision to make Flow default here, it has to be some RfC or such, can you please post a link to this? Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) 18:24, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Sänger (talkcontribs)
;P My talk page is a real one, not this fake one here. Yours on the other hand is a Flow forum imitation, you should have started it before this shit was made default by the fanboys. Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) 17:38, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
The Quixotic Potato (talkcontribs)

How can I disable Flow so I can use my talkpage???

Sänger (talkcontribs)

A lack of respect is not to enable VE on talkpages to push Flow. And don't come with the fairy tales the WMF is uttering, a talk page is a wiki page, and thus able to be edited by VE.

Flow on the other hand creates a deep rift between talk pages and the rest of the wikiverse in terms of look and feel. But it's the new pet project, and much sexier than boring maintenance.

Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) 21:03, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

The Quixotic Potato (talkcontribs)

I made a comment here, but it was intended to be a reply to Trizeks comment. Flow does not allow me to remove this comment...

Update: someone hid this comment, which illustrates the problem. Flow simply does not allow me to delete the comment. Hiding it is not the same as deleting it.

The Quixotic Potato (talkcontribs)

I still do not know how to delete messages. Not just my own, also those of others.

For example, if Sanger doxes himself, and I want to delete the message that contains the dox, how would I go about doing that??

Sänger (talkcontribs)

That's the only way, and go to some oversighter/admin to properly delete that stuff. Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) 17:44, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

The Quixotic Potato (talkcontribs)

So our overworked admins would have to deal with every single case where text needs to be removed on talkpages if Flow would be the standards for talkpages???

Lol, that is bizarre. (talkcontribs)

I just logged out, to see whether I can see anything, and as an IP I'm not able to see the hidden stuff, so probably webspiders won't as well. Sänger as an IP ~~~~

The Quixotic Potato (talkcontribs)

Woah that means that Flow has created a totally new type of vandalism, any IP can simply start hiding posts for no reason! (talkcontribs)

Yes, I can! And don't dare to reopen your post!

Sänger (talkcontribs)

Can you undelete your own post now? I can't see it any more. And I can't undelete it as Sänger as well.

I still can see it in the single post view:

It's possible to reopen probably anything in the version history, so this hiding doesn't really serve anything. Next I'll try an unhide as an IP. Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) 18:05, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

The Quixotic Potato (talkcontribs)

I would if I knew how to do that conveniently! Do I really have to dig through all the edits on the History page to unhide my post?? Are we going to get blocked because we do not like Flow?

This was intended to be a reply to the IP, but I cannot delete it here and move it there.

The Quixotic Potato (talkcontribs)


I cannot unhide it in single post view...

I cannot unhide it in topic view Topic:Tfvdax4qh9t3ijxd

The topic view shows this line: This comment was hidden by Sänger (history)

The history link goes to the history page, there is no unhide link.

Sänger (talkcontribs)

There is an (hide|unhide) link at the end of every version, at least in my history view. Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) 18:10, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

The Quixotic Potato (talkcontribs)

Yeah, there are (hide|unhide) links on the history page, but not on the talkpage itself.

Imagine if someone has hidden a post on a popular topic on a frequently used talkpage that was was written in a long time ago...

The history link goes to the history of the topic, but not to the specific edit.

I wonder how archiving would work when posts can be hidden. Flow is so confusing!

I don't seem to be able to move my post to a new location for some reason.

Sänger (talkcontribs)

Archiving? Oh, my dear, how last year you are...

There is no archiving in Flow, it's a never ending page, to scroll endlessly down. I've been told that facebook uses this so they had to imitate it. Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) 18:26, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

The Quixotic Potato (talkcontribs)

I feel old now. Facebook is evil, like Google.

This is weird, on Special:SpecialPages I found a link that says "Enable Flow" so I tried visiting Special:DisableFlow but it does not exist....

Sänger (talkcontribs)

I tend to agree with your views about the Datenkraken (data leech, literally data kraken) Fratzenbuch and Kugel (literally grimace book and globe), and I have neither a facebook account nor an active google one (I've only got one, because I use an android phone) Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) 18:42, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Reply to "What can interested users do to help the development of Flow (when it starts again)?"
A2093064 (talkcontribs)

I use "$wgNamespaceContentModels[NS_USER_TALK] = CONTENT_MODEL_FLOW_BOARD;" to enable Flow in User_talk namespace. But now I want to disable it (Keep using Flow in other namespaces).

When I remove the above code, I got {"flow-workflow":"t8kftrqtinnh54af"} in those page in User_talk. And I can't use Special:EnableFlow to enable Flow on it.

Edward Chernenko (talkcontribs)

You can probably use Special:ChangeContentModel on those pages, thus marking them as "flow boards" manually. Edward Chernenko (talk) 18:25, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Mattflaschen-WMF (talkcontribs)

Make sure you have $wgContentHandlerUseDB set to true (it is true by default).

Then, set User talk back to Flow, and follow the steps at Extension:Flow#Enabling or disabling Flow. In your case, you just need the =3 set of commands. I just added those docs (sorry, it wasn't properly documented before).

Basically, this sets the correct values for existing pages and revisions, so it is safe to change the defaults.

Let me know how that goes.

A2093064 (talkcontribs)

It works. Thank you for your help.

Reply to "How to disable Flow in User_talk"