Talk:Structured Discussions

Jump to navigation Jump to search

About this board

Structured discussions (Flow) is used on this page (documentation).

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

StRiANON (talkcontribs)

Is it possible to show structured discussions like a comments, in article's footer?

Tkess (talkcontribs)

I'm not aware of how to do that with Structured Discussions, but you might find this extension helpful: Extension:Commentbox

It might not be exactly what you're looking for, but it does allow for comments at the bottom of an article.

This post was hidden by Tkess (history)
Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

At the moment, that's not possible.

Reply to "Comments under article?"
Ricordisamoa (talkcontribs)

Why not to allow 3rd, 4th, etc. level for messages, as in LiquidThreads?

If user A creates a post, B replies to A, A replies to B and C replies to A's first post, C's reply could be misinterpreted as a reply to A's second post. This is undesirable.

Maryana (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Ricordisamoa: We want whatever we build to work across all the different kinds of devices that people use to access Wikipedia now and 5-10 years from now: desktop, laptop, tablet, phone (mobile phones currently represent ~20-30% of Wikipedia pageview traffic, and this number is steadily growing). Infinite levels of threading display very badly on smaller screens. We're testing 3 levels currently (reply to topic, reply to user, reply to user's reply) to see if this suffices for more complex back-and-forth discussions.

Ricordisamoa (talkcontribs)

Maryana (WMF): anyway, Common Sense should forbid users creating more-than-5-level threads.

Pajz (talkcontribs)

Maryana (WMF): Can't you increase the width of the comment threads a bit? It's somewhat weird: Articles are much more dense in terms of the information contained yet they extend over the entire width of your screen, but discussion threads (here) only get roughly 60% of the normal width of a Wikipedia page.

Maryana (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Pajz: Full width looks very strange with short comments and is difficult to read. Following 1 line of text across an entire screen is tough on the eye. There's some more info on this at the Flow design FAQ if you're interested.

137.147.205.98 (talkcontribs)

Maryana (WMF): While I agree with using an optimal reading width; with further nesting levels you run into the issue of the comment being less than the optimal width. I assume the reason for the first nesting level having a smaller font size was to solve this, however you won't be able to just keep lowering the font-size for additional nesting levels.

The easiest solution would be to allow nested comments to extend out further, however this would look pretty messy. So perhaps the solution is to meet it half way and extend the width to a bit greater than optimal, so nested comments are a bit closer to optimal?

GeorgeBarnick (talkcontribs)

137.147.205.98: I mostly agree with your comment right there. Additionally, longer replies get more compressed in such a narrow width.

Since Maryana said it's at approximately 60% width right now, I'd just take a guess that 70%-80% would still look good, and meet half-way with the two opinions on the width.

Thedonquixotic (talkcontribs)

Why not just do like Reddit does and have the ability to enter into deeper thread layers?

Patrick87 (talkcontribs)
BobaFett9 (talkcontribs)

nesting seems broken

ChristianKl (talkcontribs)

Given that the acceptance of Flow/Structured Discussions by the Wikimedia community is already hard, why make it harder by not allowing the administrators of wherever it gets installed to decide on the level of nesting?

Thedonquixotic (talkcontribs)

Yes, agreed, this seems like something that admins should be able to decide. It makes sense to have an opinionated default but to make this difficult to change is just silly.

Plus there ARE solutions to making deeply threaded conversations mobile friendly. Reddit does it after all.

Reply to "Multiple threading levels"
Fokebox (talkcontribs)

Are there any plans to allow users to add their own avatars near name?

Alsee (talkcontribs)

The current Development status is no developments scheduled. It's largely in maintenance mode. The foundation is still interested in Structured Discussions, but there have been major deployment rollbacks due to strong community rejection of the product.

The foundation has announced a Talk pages consultation for early 2019, to reconsider how to proceed. It may result in resumed development of Structured Discussions, enhancements for the wikitext Talk page system, building an entirely new system, more than one solution for different uses, or "Something completely different that I can't imagine yet".

Fokebox (talkcontribs)

It is clear. Than we have to just wait.

Reply to "Avatars"
70.21.193.11 (talkcontribs)

Also, is it active on commons and english Wikipedia? If not, can I still have it on my own?

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

There are some wikis where you can try Structured discussions, some others are actively using them. On most active wikis using Structured discussions, people can use them on their user talk pages or on every discussion page.

Commons and English Wikipedia have decided to have those options not available to their communities.

Reply to "On what wikis is this active?"
George Ho (talkcontribs)

The "Browse topics" feature, scrolling down the whole page, and watchlist are the only available options to search for older discussions. Not only the "Browse topics" feature is very lengthy and slow to load, it is becoming also cumbersome to use. I don't need to explain how slow loading performance is while scrolling down into the bottom, do I?

If more features to improve the browsing/searching for older discussions are added, that would be great. My ideas in mind are a search box and some calendar-like feature. Thoughts?

Reply to "Improving search for older topics"

Exception caught when starting a new topic

7
Summary last edited by PlavorSeol 14:45, 2 September 2018 2 months ago

SQLite syntax problem, which reported to phabricator

PlavorSeol (talkcontribs)
Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Hello

You mean on a non-Wikimedia Foundation hosted wiki?

PlavorSeol (talkcontribs)
Framawiki (talkcontribs)

Nothing in log files ?

PlavorSeol (talkcontribs)

Which log file?

Hoto Cocoa (talkcontribs)
PlavorSeol (talkcontribs)

I found this in log file:

[exception] [e66a958595cd23350b3269c9] /plavorexitbeta/api.php   Flow\Exception\InvalidDataException from line 253 of C:\inetpub\wwwroot\plavorexitbeta\extensions\Flow\includes\Collection\AbstractCollection.php: Invalid workflow: ugvzzs70cj48wj9t

#0 C:\inetpub\wwwroot\plavorexitbeta\extensions\Flow\includes\Collection\AbstractCollection.php(238): Flow\Collection\AbstractCollection->getWorkflow()

#1 C:\inetpub\wwwroot\plavorexitbeta\extensions\Flow\includes\Model\AbstractRevision.php(413): Flow\Collection\AbstractCollection->getTitle()

#2 C:\inetpub\wwwroot\plavorexitbeta\extensions\Flow\includes\Data\Listener\ReferenceRecorder.php(249): Flow\Model\AbstractRevision->getContent(string)

#3 C:\inetpub\wwwroot\plavorexitbeta\extensions\Flow\includes\Data\Listener\ReferenceRecorder.php(115): Flow\Data\Listener\ReferenceRecorder->getReferencesFromRevisionContent(Flow\Model\Workflow, Flow\Model\PostRevision, Flow\Model\PostRevision)

#4 C:\inetpub\wwwroot\plavorexitbeta\extensions\Flow\includes\Data\Listener\ReferenceRecorder.php(82): Flow\Data\Listener\ReferenceRecorder->calculateChangesFromExisting(Flow\Model\Workflow, Flow\Model\PostRevision)

#5 C:\inetpub\wwwroot\plavorexitbeta\extensions\Flow\includes\Data\ObjectManager.php(264): Flow\Data\Listener\ReferenceRecorder->onAfterInsert(Flow\Model\PostRevision, array, array)

#6 C:\inetpub\wwwroot\plavorexitbeta\extensions\Flow\includes\Data\ObjectManager.php(173): Flow\Data\ObjectManager->insert(array, array)

#7 C:\inetpub\wwwroot\plavorexitbeta\extensions\Flow\includes\Data\ObjectManager.php(146): Flow\Data\ObjectManager->multiPut(array, array)

#8 C:\inetpub\wwwroot\plavorexitbeta\extensions\Flow\includes\Data\ManagerGroup.php(80): Flow\Data\ObjectManager->put(Flow\Model\PostRevision, array)

#9 C:\inetpub\wwwroot\plavorexitbeta\extensions\Flow\includes\Block\TopicListBlock.php(178): Flow\Data\ManagerGroup->put(Flow\Model\PostRevision, array)

#10 C:\inetpub\wwwroot\plavorexitbeta\extensions\Flow\includes\SubmissionHandler.php(150): Flow\Block\TopicListBlock->commit()
#11 C:\inetpub\wwwroot\plavorexitbeta\extensions\Flow\includes\WorkflowLoader.php(66): Flow\SubmissionHandler->commit(Flow\Model\Workflow, array)

#12 C:\inetpub\wwwroot\plavorexitbeta\extensions\Flow\includes\Api\ApiFlowBasePost.php(35): Flow\WorkflowLoader->commit(array)

#13 C:\inetpub\wwwroot\plavorexitbeta\extensions\Flow\includes\Api\ApiFlow.php(98): Flow\Api\ApiFlowBasePost->execute()

#14 C:\inetpub\wwwroot\plavorexitbeta\includes\api\ApiMain.php(1584): Flow\Api\ApiFlow->execute()

#15 C:\inetpub\wwwroot\plavorexitbeta\includes\api\ApiMain.php(535): ApiMain->executeAction()

#16 C:\inetpub\wwwroot\plavorexitbeta\includes\api\ApiMain.php(506): ApiMain->executeActionWithErrorHandling()

#17 C:\inetpub\wwwroot\plavorexitbeta\api.php(83): ApiMain->execute()

#18 {main}

ApiMain::setCacheMode: setting cache mode private

[Mime] MimeAnalyzer::loadFiles: loading mime types from C:\inetpub\wwwroot\plavorexitbeta\includes/libs/mime/mime.types

[Mime] MimeAnalyzer::loadFiles: loading mime info from C:\inetpub\wwwroot\plavorexitbeta\includes/libs/mime/mime.info

[error] [e66a958595cd23350b3269c9] /plavorexitbeta/api.php   ErrorException from line 100 of C:\inetpub\wwwroot\plavorexitbeta\includes\libs\HttpStatus.php: PHP Warning: Unknown HTTP status code invalid-workflow

#0 [internal function]: MWExceptionHandler::handleError(integer, string, string, integer, array)

#1 C:\inetpub\wwwroot\plavorexitbeta\includes\libs\HttpStatus.php(100): trigger_error(string, integer)

#2 C:\inetpub\wwwroot\plavorexitbeta\includes\WebResponse.php(106): HttpStatus::header(string)

#3 C:\inetpub\wwwroot\plavorexitbeta\includes\api\ApiFormatBase.php(181): WebResponse->statusHeader(string)

#4 C:\inetpub\wwwroot\plavorexitbeta\includes\api\ApiMain.php(1808): ApiFormatBase->setHttpStatus(string)

#5 C:\inetpub\wwwroot\plavorexitbeta\includes\api\ApiMain.php(600): ApiMain->printResult(string)

#6 C:\inetpub\wwwroot\plavorexitbeta\includes\api\ApiMain.php(544): ApiMain->handleException(Flow\Exception\InvalidDataException)

#7 C:\inetpub\wwwroot\plavorexitbeta\includes\api\ApiMain.php(506): ApiMain->executeActionWithErrorHandling()

#8 C:\inetpub\wwwroot\plavorexitbeta\api.php(83): ApiMain->execute()

#9 {main}

MediaWiki::preOutputCommit: primary transaction round committed

MediaWiki::preOutputCommit: pre-send deferred updates completed

MediaWiki::preOutputCommit: LBFactory shutdown completed

[cookie] ''(Hidden)''

[cookie] ''(Hidden)''

Request ended normally

[session] Saving all sessions on shutdown

[DBConnection] Wikimedia\Rdbms\{closure}: closing connection to database ''.

Error in topic deletion and slow update

9
Sokote zaman (talkcontribs)

Hello

This is my system profile and my wiki:

محصول     نسخه

MediaWiki:    1.31.0 (b9cc61f)

PHP:        7.2.7-0ubuntu0.18.04.2 (fpm-fcgi)

MariaDB:    10.1.34-MariaDB-0ubuntu0.18.04.1

ICU:        60.2

ubintu 18.04 x64

LocalSettings.php profile:

wfLoadExtension( 'Flow' );

$wgNamespaceContentModels[NS_TALK] = 'flow-board';

$wgNamespaceContentModels[NS_USER_TALK] = 'flow-board';

$wgGroupPermissions['write']['flow-create-board'] = true;

$wgFlowHelpPage    = '//www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Help:Extension:Flow';

$wgFlowCluster = false;

$wgFlowUseMemcache = false;

$wgFlowEventLogging = false;

$wgFlowDefaultWikiDb = false;

$wgFlowExternalStore = false;

$wgFlowParsoidForwardCookies = false;

$wgFlowServerCompileTemplates = false;

$wgFlowSearchEnabled = true;

$wgFlowParsoidURL = "null";

$wgFlowContentFormat = 'html';

$wgFlowParsoidPrefix = "null";

$wgFlowParsoidTimeout = "null";

$wgFlowDefaultWorkflow = "discussion";

$wgFlowSearchServers = array( 'localhost' );

$wgFlowEditorList = array( 'visualeditor', 'wikitext' );

$wgFlowAbuseFilterGroup = 'flow';

$wgFlowCoreActionWhitelist = array( 'info', 'protect', 'unprotect', 'unwatch', 'watch', 'history', 'wikilove', 'move', 'delete' );

$wgFlowMaxLimit = "100";

$wgFlowAjaxTimeout = "30";

$wgFlowDefaultLimit = "10";

$wgFlowCacheVersion = "4.7";

$wgFlowMaxMentionCount = "100";

$wgFlowMaxThreadingDepth = "8";

$wgFlowCacheTime = "60 * 60 * 24 * 3";

$wgFlowAbuseFilterEmergencyDisableCount = "50";

$wgFlowAbuseFilterEmergencyDisableThreshold ="0.10";

$wgFlowAbuseFilterEmergencyDisableAge = "86400"; // One day.

My question is: Why to eliminate an issue with an error: An error occurred while contacting the server.         ??????????

And when I cancel the removal operation, I'm surprised to find that the issue has been removed!!!!!!!!۱

Why the flow is slow?

Why is the visual editor gadget low? Only bold and italic is available ???

please guide me

Thanks

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Why to eliminate an issue with an error: An error occurred while contacting the server. And when I cancel the removal operation, I'm surprised to find that the issue has been removed!!!!!!!!۱

Where do you have that problem?

Why the flow is slow?

It is not supposed to be. Do you have that issue when you're not logged-in?

Why is the visual editor gadget low? Only bold and italic is available ???

Bold, italic and more. You can also use any visual editor shortcut.

Sokote zaman (talkcontribs)

Meanwhile, my wiki does not have more buttons

Sokote zaman (talkcontribs)

f I delete the settings below, it will work without a problem. With this setting, the wiki will be slowed down and the conversation will be delayed....:::

$wgFlowHelpPage    = '//www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Help:Extension:Flow';

$wgFlowCluster = false;

$wgFlowUseMemcache = false;

$wgFlowEventLogging = false;

$wgFlowDefaultWikiDb = false;

$wgFlowExternalStore = false;

$wgFlowParsoidForwardCookies = false;

$wgFlowServerCompileTemplates = false;

$wgFlowSearchEnabled = true;

$wgFlowParsoidURL = "null";

$wgFlowContentFormat = 'html';

$wgFlowParsoidPrefix = "null";

$wgFlowParsoidTimeout = "null";

$wgFlowDefaultWorkflow = "discussion";

$wgFlowSearchServers = array( 'localhost' );

$wgFlowEditorList = array( 'visualeditor', 'wikitext' );

$wgFlowAbuseFilterGroup = 'flow';

$wgFlowCoreActionWhitelist = array( 'info', 'protect', 'unprotect', 'unwatch', 'watch', 'history', 'wikilove', 'move', 'delete' );

$wgFlowMaxLimit = "100";

$wgFlowAjaxTimeout = "30";

$wgFlowDefaultLimit = "10";

$wgFlowCacheVersion = "4.7";

$wgFlowMaxMentionCount = "100";

$wgFlowMaxThreadingDepth = "8";

$wgFlowCacheTime = "60 * 60 * 24 * 3";

$wgFlowAbuseFilterEmergencyDisableCount = "50";

$wgFlowAbuseFilterEmergencyDisableThreshold ="0.10";

$wgFlowAbuseFilterEmergencyDisableAge = "86400"; // One day.

This post was hidden by Sokote zaman (history)
Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Is your wiki a Wikimedia Foundation hosted wiki?

Sokote zaman (talkcontribs)

Yes, it's for mediawiki

MediaWiki: 1.31.0 (b9cc61f)

PHP: 7.2.7-0ubuntu0.18.04.2 (fpm-fcgi)

MariaDB: 10.1.34-MariaDB-0ubuntu0.18.04.1

ICU: 60.2

ubintu 18.04 x64

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Is it your personal website?

Sokote zaman (talkcontribs)

Yes

Reply to "Error in topic deletion and slow update"

Ways to easily revert to unconstructive edits

4
George Ho (talkcontribs)

The Structured Discussions system is prone to unconstructive edits, like some seen here and there. I don't get why there is no "undo" option. The way I reverted those edits on Structured Discussions is not as convenient as on other project. Are there more convenient ways to revert such edits?

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Thank you for taking care of those edits. There is usually an "undo" button, but I can't find it on the examples you gave me. I'll do more tests.

Improvements needed to Structured Discussions on that area have been documented, especially the ones concerning how to deal with history and moderation.

George Ho (talkcontribs)
Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Thanks, I've updated it with your feedback.

Reply to "Ways to easily revert to unconstructive edits"

How much money was wasted on this failed project?

10
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)
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 en.wiki 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)
The Quixotic Potato (talkcontribs)

@Sänger I do not think we've ever received an official reply to this answer.

Sänger (talkcontribs)

No, and I don't expect any. They still maintain this fairytale about a dichotomy between wysiwyg and talk pages, the one that was the base of this completely useless "survey" I mentioned above. They even implemented VE in discussions themselves in the 2017 Community Wishlist Survey, but in this still insist that very discussions with VE that it's not possible and moved this simple wish, that could be done in no time with probably just a simple check in a checkbox, to "not possible", because those who desperately want Flow don't want better real talk pages. Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) 09:28, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

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

Cleaning up the mess left behind from the failed LQT and Flow experiments

3
The Quixotic Potato (talkcontribs)

The WMF should focus on cleaning up the mess left behind from the failed LQT and Flow experiments before it starts yet another experiment that is doomed to fail under the new name "Structured Discussions".

77.161.58.217 (talkcontribs)

No reply whatsoever?

Moonian (talkcontribs)

They never admit this project is a failure, why would they reply?

Reply to "Cleaning up the mess left behind from the failed LQT and Flow experiments"