Talk:Talk pages project/2022

This page used the Structured Discussions extension to give structured discussions. It has since been converted to wikitext, so the content and history here are only an approximation of what was actually displayed at the time these comments were made.

This page is for discussing the Talk pages project. The software interface on this page is Structured Discussions ("Flow"), which is not part of the Talk pages project.

The "Mention a user" box is not screen reader accessible

Latest comment: 3 years ago7 comments3 people in discussion

When you press the Mention a user button, there is no way to accessibly move to the box to select a user. In most cases, focus is not moved to the box either after typing an @ either, although weirdly the one of the cases where it does is on this page. Can this be fixed please? I believe it happens with both source and visual editors. ~ KaraLG84 (talk) 19:59, 7 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for this note, KaraLG84. When I type @ in the Reply tool, or when I click the Mention a user button in the toolbar, my cursor is already in the right place. I can use the arrow keys to choose a name from the list, or I can start typing a new name.

What happens when you type @ and then type someone's name? Also, what web browser are you using? (I just tested in Safari; I often have more problems with cursor focus in Firefox.)

(This page uses Flow, so it's different software. You can test on my user talk page here, if you want. Just click on this link to a test section my talk page.) Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:06, 7 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Whatamidoing (WMF) typing an @ and a username just inserts plain text, with no markup. I normally use the source editor. KaraLG84 (talk) 22:25, 7 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Whatamidoing (WMF) I'm using Firefox, which probably explains the issues I'm having. KaraLG84 (talk) 22:19, 7 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

@KaraLG84: I tried it in Firefox 91 ESR, and when I typed @whatam in the visual mode and pressed Enter, it correctly pinged WhatamIdoing (the personal account, but it doesn’t matter here). I don’t know about screen readers, but it’s definitely keyboard-accessible for sighted users. Tacsipacsi (talk) 16:05, 12 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

KaraLG84, could you check Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing-discussion (at your home wiki, not necessarily here at MediaWiki.org), and let me know whether "Enable editing tools in source mode" is turned on or off? Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:02, 12 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Also, are you using screen reader software? If so, which one? Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:03, 12 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

[reply] doesn't show next to my own signature on my talk page

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

RESOLVED

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T287818

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

On my home wiki (en), I noticed that "[reply]" doesn't show next to my signature (czar). Does it have a linting issue or something else unsupported? czar 06:07, 10 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

I can see the problem on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Czar, but it works correctly on other pages, e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Michael_Laufer#Edit_loop. I think this is a bug in our support for "self-links", it's already reported here: task T287818. Matma Rex (talk) 16:19, 10 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Congrats

Latest comment: 3 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Just wanted to add that this is the best beta feature rollout I've seen on the English Wikipedia in years. It's a very useful tool and improves every aspect of the commenting experience. Please pass my congrats to the dev team! czar 01:47, 23 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Czar, the entire Editing Team will be *delighted* to hear how helpful and valuable you have found the Reply Tool...thank you for sharing this feedback with us!

If there are particular aspects of the rollout you particularly liked, we would be keen to know so that we can continue them as part of upcoming Talk Pages Project feature deployments ^ _ ^

And of course, if/when you notice aspects of the tools that you think could be improved, we would value knowing that too. PPelberg (WMF) (talk) 00:25, 25 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

I agree with Czar. This feature is indeed the best thing for years. Please add my congrats to the team, too. MichaelMaggs (talk) 09:26, 29 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Dedicated menu button for subscribed topics

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

It would be nice if all of the topic subscription notifications would be separated and get their own button in the menu bar (like next to the new Watchlist button in New Vector).

When I'm following a frequent-response conversation, I find myself repeatedly clicking on the subscribed page notifications and reopening tabs to see the most recent reply. This can get quite repetitive after awhile and it would be nice if I could just see the most recent reply and maybe an entire interface that allows me to see the topics I'm subscribed to and their most recent replies.

This is actually kind of an implementation of my Chat client Community Wishlist Survey proposal.

Here is a prototype interface that allows you to browse all of the topics you're subscribed to and open them: Lectrician1 (talk) 03:34, 29 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

I think that Special:TopicSubscriptions has some of what you're looking for. It doesn't display the recent replies, however. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 05:09, 7 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Do subscriptions expire?

Latest comment: 3 years ago18 comments9 people in discussion

And if not, will a build up over time slow me down? Should there be a "list" where I can delete them? Doug Weller (talk) 07:41, 29 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Use Special:TopicSubscriptions. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 13:31, 29 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

And a related question: what happens to a subscription when the pages gets archived? At that point I imagine it gets deleted to avoid old subs building up? MichaelMaggs (talk) 09:24, 29 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

At the moment, there's a hard limit of 5,000 subscriptions per user per wiki, and after that point (which nobody's come close to), you can't add any more.

A long list shouldn't slow you down.

When a conversation gets copied to a different page (e.g., by an archiving bot), the subscription transfers to the new page. This means that if someone adds a new comment to an archived discussion, you will still get notifications. However, the name of the old/original page is still displayed and linked in Special:TopicSubscriptions. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 05:08, 7 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

So if I add 10 a day, in about a year and a half I'll have to stop. But I think I add more than 10 a day just by starting a new topic. What's the plan for that? Doug Weller (talk) 07:58, 7 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Editing's devs' plan is to remove the hard limit. Whether they'll get agreement (e.g., from Ops) might still be an open question, but I think we still have a few months before it will become a problem for anyone.

Looking at your contribs last month, you used the New Discussions tool to create 130 sections, and you used the Reply tool about 450 times. Originally, automatic subscriptions were only enabled for those two tools (e.g., not for Twinkle), and I believe that's still the current situation.

I'd really like to know how well it's working for you. Is it a good idea? Would you recommend it to others? What kind of editor will it work best for? Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:43, 7 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

It's pretty good but I find it discourages me leaving edit summaries, which I predict it will do for others. When I do I feel the need to remove the word "reply" as it looks awkward. We need to do everything we can to encourage edit summaries. IMHO one reason to revert a dubious edit is lack of explanation for the edit. Agh, why wasn't I automatically logged in when replying? Refreshing logged me in. Doug Weller (talk) 11:23, 8 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

I remember you mentioning this concern at enwiki last month. I don't think that people revert signed talk-page comments due to a lack of explanation. They're pretty self-explanatory. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 17:52, 8 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, I wasn’t thinking, that’s articles of course.. So long as not encouraging people to leave edit summaries on talk pages doesn’t effect their leaving summaries on articles. 86.14.197.26 (talk) 19:15, 8 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Damn, happened again. Doug Weller (talk) 19:16, 8 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

I think the best way to make people’s article edit summary customs be independent from their talk page edit summary customs is actually what this project does: present a completely different UI that doesn’t even show the edit summary field by default—this reinforces that talk pages and articles are fundamentally different and should be used differently. Tacsipacsi (talk) 19:52, 8 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Terrible idea. Edit summaries can still be important on talk pages. Doug Weller (talk) 20:57, 8 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

I agree that they can be important. In my experience, though, when you're posting a new comment (as opposed to, e.g., editing someone else's comment), they almost never are important. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 22:07, 8 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

For what it's worth, our intention around the 5,000 subscriptions limit is that it was added in case we were monumentally wrong about our estimate of how much data this feature would generate. E.g. If a lot of people had managed to hit the limit within a few weeks of usage, we'd have had to rethink our storage needs. But they haven't, and so I think our current plan is to remove the limit before anyone actually hits it. (Again, unless things change and make us reconsider that...) DLynch (WMF) (talk) 21:28, 7 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. Doug Weller (talk) 11:23, 8 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Whatamidoing (WMF) - did the 5000 limit ever get removed? If not is there a tracking task open to do so? Xaosflux (talk) 18:42, 26 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

And is it technically possible to build in a “delete after one year” or something similar? Doug Weller (talk) 18:56, 26 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

Yes, it has been removed in T294881.

It would be technically possible to make them expire and get deleted automatically, we have a task for it here: T278190. We also have one about making it easier to clear out your subscriptions manually: T292035. I don't know if we'll get around to working on these, though. Matma Rex (talk) 20:47, 26 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

Is there a page size limit to use the reply tool?

Latest comment: 3 years ago8 comments3 people in discussion

My talk page at wiki.pt has little more than 300 kb, and I'm still getting server timouts each time I try to use the tool. Is there a size limit, for it to work? (please ping me when replying) DarwIn (talk) 02:15, 14 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

After emptying the page some more, I'm also getting this error now... (and also the other , occasionally - server timeout). It says the "reply" option can't be used to reply to the message. I'm getting it on a number of posts, not only that one. DarwIn (talk) 02:23, 14 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

For the "can't be used" error, see Help:DiscussionTools/Why can't I reply to this comment? You might find this debug link useful, when you're trying to figure out where bits have gone wrong: https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usu%C3%A1rio_Discuss%C3%A3o:DarwIn?dtdebug=1 Comments should alternate between pink and blue, signatures/timestamps are circled, and there should be no ⚠︎ warning icons (hover over the triangle to see what the problem is). When it believes some text isn't part of a comment, it doesn't highlight it in pink or blue. (I think the debug tool disables the [reply] buttons.)

Theoretically, there is no size limit. However, in practice, very large pages are at risk for the timeout problem. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 17:39, 14 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Whatamidoing (WMF) Thanks.. Unfortunately I couldn't find what is causing the error, with the debug link. Everything seems ok, though the does not work there (either throws server timeouts or says reply button can't be used there) DarwIn (talk) 20:11, 14 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Your talk-page header might be a source of some of the problems. Look at the Special:LintErrors in https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usu%C3%A1rio:DarwIn/Cabe%C3%A7alho&action=info#Lint_errors I used https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usu%C3%A1ria:Whatamidoing_(WMF)/Testes?dtenable=1 as a test page; feel free to use it yourself if you want. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:22, 14 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

I couldn't test it in the test page, since the reply button do not appear there. But I reviewed the code of "Cabeçalho" and fixed a number of errors, which seem to have fixed the reply button problem as well - Thank you very much!

There are still 1 or 2 lint errors to be fixed, which are not obvious to me, due to the intermingled wikicode /html/css. Can you give me some heads up about some kind of online check tool I could use to find out what mediawiki is telling is wrong with the code? DarwIn (talk) 12:59, 15 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

See https://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:LintErrors&pagename=Usu%C3%A1rio:DarwIn/Cabe%C3%A7alho – I asked for a link to be added to the action=info page, but it looks like it’s not there yet. But at least you can confirm what I wrote about the (lack of) discoverability. 🙂 Tacsipacsi (talk) 11:28, 16 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

DarwIn, if you use the old wikitext editor, and you follow Tacsipacsi's link, and click the "edit" buttons in the table, it's supposed to highlight the offending code. That sometimes gives a clear indication ...and sometimes not. I usually ask someone at w:en:WP:CHECKWIKI when I'm struggling with lint errors. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 02:27, 17 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

New topics should be at top of page

Latest comment: 3 years ago21 comments7 people in discussion

Currenly, new topics get added below older topics. It would be optimal if this was reversed. HopelessNightOwl (talk) 16:35, 18 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hi @HopelessNightOwl. I found your question very interesting, so I decided to do it. Go to w:User:Alexis Jazz/Bawl#How to install and copy/paste the mw.loader line to m:Special:MyPage/global.js. Go to a talk page and press a blue speech balloon. Open the settings (gear icon) and enable "Reverse section order (newest threads first)". Scroll down and save. Reload the page. Please do let me know if this has the desired effect for you, and thank you for the inspiration to add this feature! Alexis Jazz (talk) 04:31, 12 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

Definitely not. A couple of decades of expecting new topics to be at the bottom can't be easily reversed, nor should it be. Doug Weller (talk) 16:41, 18 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

The longstanding convention on Wikimedia sites is for new topics to be posted at the bottom, and I doubt that's going to change. However maybe it could be a config setting for other sites that want it? the wub "?!" 16:43, 18 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Top-posting is the longstanding convention on the internet.

To understand the bottom-posting preference on the older Wikipedias, it's helpful to know what we started with. Back in the day – see nostalgia:Neutral point of view for an example – there were no talk pages at all. Discussion (and policies and everything else) happened in the mainspace articles, because that was the only option. Later, most discussion was moved to a subpage like nostalgia:Spacetime/Talk.

At the time, it was common to have a discussion and then replace the discussion with a summary of the decision ("Alice and Bob agreed that this article should include information about elephants").

In this model, bottom-posting makes a lot of sense. The top of the talk page/section works like a FAQ, and active discussions are at the end of the page. You can read the past decisions before you join the new discussions.

However, in 2022, it has two drawbacks that will be significant to some:

It's inconvenient on a mobile device, especially when the page is long.
It's not what newcomers expect. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:10, 18 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Ah, mobiles. I can see that problem. Could do there be a fix, eg something at the top of the page to click to tale you to the bottom? Doug Weller (talk) 20:17, 18 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Perhaps a Table of Contents (with date of first post / date of latest post) would help? — GhostInTheMachine ^{talk to me} 20:50, 23 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

HopelessNightOwl, I would be very interested in hearing what problems you have encountered with bottom-posting, or what problems you think could be solved by top-posting. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:11, 18 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

If some users are using AddNewSection as for the last two decades they will add at bottom, and if this tool starts to add sections on top if users are utilizing DT you will get an interesting structure within the page. Even more, those who are reading top sections only will never guess that there are recent topics on bottom, while those who acquired bottom sections will fly over top sections.

There are also multi-threaded talk pages, like Nominated for Deletion per Day in German Wikipedia at de:WP:LKH, where new entries are supposed to be added to the end, with the first proposal of the day in first position. Note the blue buttons. Later proposals might be related to the ones mentioned before. PerfektesChaos (talk) 09:21, 22 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

I think it would make sense for &section=new to post in the same part of the page, regardless of which tool you are using. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 00:43, 24 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

That would require new syntax to mark selectively such classical talk pages which shall follow the reverse sequence.

A parser function or page switch is required to identify such pages for DiscussionTool.
The AddNewSection functionality needs to be extended for that mode, best by automatic recognition of the first switch to avoid incongruent behaviour and requiring additional manual efforts to change all implementations on all such pages.

Please see German Village Pump and explain the effect on those headlines and TOC. PerfektesChaos (talk) 10:53, 24 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

I don't think it would require new syntax. I think you would just have a moment of temporary but confusing transition. Perhaps you would schedule it for midnight on New Year's. Before then, you would have the old bottom-posting method of:

29 December–30 December–31 December, and then starting in January, you would have:

1 January––30 December–31 December, followed by:

2 January–1 January–31 December, and finally:

3 January–2 January–1 January.

Of course, it would be confusing if someone said that my page is special and must use the old style forever, because now you have to figure out which pages get which style, but a wholesale, complete switch for all pages would produce only temporary challenges (especially on high-traffic pages). Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 02:42, 25 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Did you ever try in a project of 10,000 active users with 10,000s of portals, local projects, request pages to convince them to change a two decades old method on all community pages?

And necessarily on all article discussions, user talks, and template discussons?
With 10 unresolved issues present on X-day in chronological order, but section 11 and more on top now?
German Wikipedia has about 10,000,000 non-empty talk pages which are affected by your transition event, which mostly have more than one section and will need to be re-ordered. How long will a bot run take if server load does not permit more than one edit per 10 seconds per Wiki? I guess they are busy for several years. No X-day, not really.

Another interesting effect with classic order: Until after midnight some sections may be archived by bot and deleted, or somebody might insert a sub-section somewhere above, the &action=edit&section=42 in URL will edit always the same section for answering.

With on-top-AddNewSection the offered link to &section=42 becomes invalid and confusing half an hour later, since that is now &section=43. If you did not rebuild the entire page in your browser immediately before you answer, your village pump contribution will answer the wrong question. Oh, sorry, now it is &section=44 on saving, since between beginning and terminating typing a new issue became &section=1.
Hope at least everybody recognizes that just answering in the wrong section.

If ever introduced, this may be used on a few pages within the Wiki which are prepared and announced to follow the New Order. And this will need a software marker to be detected by both AddNewSection and DT to distinguish between sequence request and set by bot after re-ordering the previous content. And since you cannot change an entire large project with all talk pages by turnkey from one minute to the other you will need to support both methods simultaneously for a longer migration period. PerfektesChaos (talk) 13:54, 25 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

> Did you ever try in a project of 10,000 active users with 10,000s of portals, local projects, request pages to convince them to change a two decades old method on all community pages?

Yes, and so far it seems to be going pretty well. ;-) But I think you mean: Did I ever try to restructure millions of wikitext pages? The answer to that is "no".

I'm not sure that it would be necessary to restructure the pages. Yes, the old discussions would be in a different order. But high-traffic pages will sort themselves out via archiving, and I don't think it will matter for low-traffic pages. If you go to a page with three sections, and they are in the order of "3 – 1 – 2", it's still just three sections. You can still find everything on the page, even if the sections are not in order. It doesn't really matter if an article's talk page follows the order of "Book – Marriage – Links" or "Links – Book – Marriage". Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 22:23, 10 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

It appears from the post at the top that it's possible to do this through a script, so it should be possible to make it a choice? I think you overestimate archiving as not all article talk pages are archived and I've seen some very long ones. Doug Weller (talk) 09:52, 12 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

On a few highly frequented and archived pages it might be possible to reorder the appearance of independent sections via JavaScript.

However, the physical order needs to be constant, especially the section numbering and the effect of &section=new.

I recall more sophisticated and controversial discussions over weeks looking like that:

== Some topic ==
=== Severe objections ===
=== Other viewpoint ===
=== Reset this discussion and make a new starting point ===
=== Conclusions ===
=== Straw poll ===
=== Follow-up ===
== Some other topic ==

If ever, sorting on top is the exception on some pages requesting that, but should not become standard behaviour on all talk pages from one day to the other, without migration of unarchived dozens of sections within a page, and re-education of some 10,000 wikipedians used to the other way. PerfektesChaos (talk) 11:23, 12 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

@PerfektesChaos, there's no reason for the end user to care if the physical order is oldest first, newest first, diagonally or inscribed on cucumbers. There is no "physical" order anyway, it's all virtual. :-) My script option does four things: reverse all H1 sections, reverse all H2 sections without leaving their H1, make the new section form appear at the top instead of the bottom, collapse the TOC. The latter because if you enable this you probably want to minimize scrolling/start reading as quickly as possible. When a thread is posted the form is replaced with the preview, so the preview also shows correctly. H3/H4/etc sections and individual comments keep their original order exactly for the reason you stated. An individual Twitter thread is also oldest-first so this isn't out of the ordinary. It should help with the excessive scrolling issue on mobile devices in most cases, though some extremely long H2 sections are known to exist, luckily they are fairly uncommon. Alexis Jazz (talk) 15:02, 12 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

"New to the top" is only at all valid if the ordering is implemented as a display option for the user. If the page showed a up/down button and allowed the time flow to be revered, then that might be acceptable. The posts would also need to show a valid timestamp as part of their heading so that a user could tell which way up everything was — GhostInTheMachine ^{talk to me} 19:10, 12 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

@GhostInTheMachine, I'm not entirely sure what you mean. In case of my script, there is no up/down button, it's an option in its preferences. As a matter of fact, once the reversal is complete it currently can't be undone without reloading the page. What do you mean with the "heading of the posts"? Alexis Jazz (talk) 23:46, 12 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

I don't think that Ghost meant to write quite so absolute a statement. Presumably he'd have no objections at all if a community chose to top-post on some or all of their pages. The English Wikipedia top-posts their AFD entries, and I'm sure that Ghost wouldn't want to change that just for the sake of making every AFD entry for each given day be posted in chronological order (example: the entry for Jabaco was posted at 01:39, 16 March 2022 (UTC) and is correctly above the entry for "Commit Media", which was posted 18 minutes earlier). Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 04:26, 16 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

I cannot remember discussing this with Whatamidoing. — GhostInTheMachine ^{talk to me} 19:13, 30 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

Line-item selection for the beta feature

Latest comment: 3 years ago12 comments5 people in discussion

I want the reply-tool and new section creator, but the section subscription is just a headache... can i have the option to disable it? Theleekycauldron (talk) 01:27, 13 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Yes, you can disable individual features in Preferences → Editing → Discussion pages. Matma Rex (talk) 01:40, 13 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

...the section subscription is just a headache

hi @Theleekycauldron: are you able to share a bit more about your experience with the section subscription feature? I'm curious to learn what's causing you to want to disable it in case there are aspects of the feature we ought to consider revising... PPelberg (WMF) (talk) 16:21, 13 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

@PPelberg (WMF): it's just that it keeps showing up whenever I use the double-click to try and copy the whole of a section heading. then I gotta delete it, and since I do a lot of manual copy/paste work, it's a hassle. Theleekycauldron (talk) 18:05, 13 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Ah, I see! Can you share what browser you are using? And even better, a screen recording of you experiencing the issue you are describing above?

...I ask the above as I seem to be able to double click section headings without the [edit] or [subscribe] links being selected. PPelberg (WMF) (talk) 18:23, 13 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

I've uploaded a video here; i use google chrome 100.0.4896.75, as you can see Theleekycauldron (talk) 19:02, 13 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, that’s really useful! I can reproduce it with Chromium 90.0.4430.212 (but not with Firefox 91.8.0esr), even on w:Bay of Winds, which has absolutely nothing to do with DiscussionTools (on this page, of course only [edit] gets unnecessarily copied, as there’s no subscribe link). Disabling topic subscriptions can reduce the number of characters you need to delete after copying, but the bug doesn’t seem to be specific to DiscussionTools. Tacsipacsi (talk) 22:17, 13 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Leeky, I don't see anything at that link.

I wonder if this could be solved with CSS (for all the [buttons]). Perhaps there's some way to mark them as not worth copying, or as being separate? Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:51, 14 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

the video contained some identifying information, so I removed it. I could upload another, if you'd like? Theleekycauldron (talk) 20:33, 14 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

No, I don't think I need that. I'm glad that you removed the file with identifying information. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:31, 18 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

I wonder if this could be solved with CSS (for all the [buttons]). Perhaps there's some way to mark them as not worth copying, or as being separate?

They already have user-select: none, which is a hint that they’re not worth copying. However, per the spec, browsers are only required not to select such text, copying it is not forbidden. Making selection and copy behavior consistent is just a best practice recommended by the spec, and Chrome seems to ignore it. I think the best we can do here is to ask Chrome developers to follow the best practices. Tacsipacsi (talk) 10:27, 15 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, @Matma Rex! Theleekycauldron (talk) 18:05, 13 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Editing news 2022 #1

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Read this in another language • Subscription list for this multilingual newsletter

The New topic tool helps editors create new ==Sections== on discussion pages. New editors are more successful with this new tool. You can read the report. Soon, the Editing team will offer this to all editors at the 20 Wikipedias that participated in the test. You will be able to turn it off at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing-discussion.

Whatamidoing (WMF) 18:43, 2 May 2022 (UTC) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:43, 2 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Bengali language project issue

Latest comment: 3 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Discussion tools in Bengali language project contains ertra -- before automatic signed. As far i saw this things was not in other projects. Where is it coming from and why? @Whatamidoing (WMF): MdsShakil (talk) 08:42, 8 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

It is defined in the translation here: https://translatewiki.net/wiki/MediaWiki:Discussiontools-signature-prefix/bn Matma Rex (talk) 21:35, 8 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your help. That's now fixed in translatewiki MdsShakil (talk) 01:18, 9 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Templated answers

Latest comment: 3 years ago17 comments3 people in discussion

I do feel like this would be a bit hard to make it scalable globally but I thought it would be worth a discussion anyway.

Please check the idea here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:User_scripts/Requests&oldid=1089378556#Script_that_adds_the_possibility_to_give_template-replies_with_1_button

Do you think that could be implemented as a native function? Klein Muçi (talk) 13:20, 23 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

I'm pretty sure that one of the communities has something similar, built into the toolbar of the 2020 wikitext editor. It's mostly used by vandal fighters and RecentChanges patrollers to leave messages on new editors' talk pages. @Patrik L., is that a cswiki script/gadget? Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:49, 27 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

There is a gadget on huwiki that matches Whatamidoing’s description (maybe you remembered that, I think I’ve talked about it related to the preload support in New Topic Tool), but it’s different from what Klein Muçi is asking: warning.js can only start new topics, while this request is about adding replies to existing topics.

(Actually, warning.js doesn’t even have a notion of “topics”—it just has four modes (prepend—e.g. amboxes—, append—e.g. message templates—, comment out the rest—e.g. copyright violation notice—, and replace); if append mode is used and the content happens to include a topic header, it will result in a new topic.) Tacsipacsi (talk) 09:18, 28 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Maybe reading the other part of the aforementioned discussion will bring more clarity in what I'd be trying to achieve with the said function: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:User_scripts/Requests#Script_that_adds_the_possibility_to_give_template-replies_with_1_button

If you see my current last answer there, you'll see that I do mention 1 specific list of templates I'd like to be able to use with a function like this. We're talking about templates such as "done", "read", "agree", etc. This is no news with me because ever since the reply tool was first introduced I've asked for the ability to vote and thank with it. (I'd still like it if for the thanking function the native "thank this user" function was used and for voting we had an overall better interface that also allowed for better "vote counting".) This is in the same waters. Generally I do enjoy templated answers and I think they're a great "solution" to "one-liners". This isn't as much related to warnings and vandal fighting as it is to organizing everyday wikiwork. Actually the whole inspiration behind this came because I was thinking of asking for a script that gave me a button on a press of which I could quickly add a reply on the lines of "I've seen this request and I'll answer shortly." because Wikipedia has no "seen/read; online/offline" function. (That's a good thing I believe.) There I saw the {{Read}} template and with it the whole list I mention above. This is when I started thinking that most of them would also be pretty useful in everyday work in many wikis, hence the user script request and this discussion here.

The scalability problem I mention comes because I imagine that if such a tool would be made possible as a native function, it would also force each wiki to first import all those templates, that is, unless we are willing to make those templates also ingrained in the function itself somehow. Klein Muçi (talk) 13:06, 28 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

It sounds like you want the original vision for Flow. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 23:54, 30 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Could be. Don't really know in what that vision consisted of. :P Klein Muçi (talk) 06:53, 31 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Imagine Articles for Deletion at enwiki, except that the page could offer a form for creating the page, pre-set responses, automatically count votes, be tagged by subject area (like you might tag a blog post), be visible on and editable through multiple pages or even multiple wikis (imagine if a Commons deletion discussion could be seen and edited from the talk page of a Wikipedia article that was using the image in question), and put itself in a category or dashboard for admin attention when it was seven days old plus had comments from at least three editors, or relist itself if there weren't enough comments.

There is a joke souvenir in the US. It's a T-shirt that says "My grandparents went to <famous holiday destination>, and all I got was this lousy T-shirt". They designed an awesome communication system, but all we got was the first phase. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 19:50, 6 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

Well, if that was the original vision of Flow, it sure looks interesting (and I feel like it would encompass my request of templated answers). Klein Muçi (talk) 00:01, 7 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

The original vision for Flow was specifically designed around enwiki's AFD process and ArbCom cases. It would have been awesome. We probably won't ever see anything like it. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 17:52, 7 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

I think one of the main reason Flow's progress was stopped was because it lacked the ability to switch back and forth between visual and source editing. It's hard to recreate immediately visually all the features you have while source editing which nonetheless can be achieved with optimization through time. But editors are usually impatient and wikis, especially EnWiki, can sometimes be pretty dynamic environments.

Tangent to this subject I can say that sometimes I feel like EnWiki does get a tiny bit more weight than it normally should in many aspects. Don't get me wrong, as the wiki with the largest numbers of editors it should get "the biggest slice", sometimes even that "slice" may not be enough for the large resources it needs to exist. But some other times the discussions start to go in subjectivity territory and EnWiki's opinions get to dictate indirectly the course of progress for many projects. Flow aside, the whole promising progress with WikiData seemed to come to a halt after the so called Infobox Wars in EnWiki and WikiData turned from a "new project that will revolutionize information gathering and displaying" to "a project that offers easy data for robots and search engines", at least in the eyes of "the general public". Content Translation Tool was at one point at the risk of taking such a similar turn as a project when EnWiki deemed it to be too risky for their standards and I do feel like part of the reason why the Review extension eventually became orphaned was because it was one of the extensions that aren't used in EnWiki. Very generally said, EnWiki likes to do things as organically as they can and that's not bad at all per se. They can afford that because of the enormous resources that they have, in technology and in working power. The problem starts when they indirectly start "vetoing" other projects which can be beneficial in other environments. Of course it's not their aim to do so but it happens by the "peer pressure" they project as the biggest community and most successful community. After all, "it's better to invest at something that it's known to work than to spend time and resources for new unreliable projects". Klein Muçi (talk) 22:26, 7 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

Look in the lower corner for a pencil icon. You can switch back and forth between Flow's visual and wikitext source mode all day long. I think Flow had some significant w:en:FUD problems. There was a point at which editors simply would not believe that Flow supported the things they wanted. At one point, someone was edit warring over the documentation to insist that Flow was replacing wikitext, despite staff telling him that he was wrong. I remember an exchange between a volunteer and a WMF staffer in which the volunteer insisted that it was impossible to talk about math in Flow, and the staffer wrote that he had seen math equations typed into a Flow comment with his own eyes, and was the volunteer calling him a liar? I've certainly answered more than my fair share of the "but Flow is terrible because newbies can't change my comments!" questions.

I think that we've been seeing a shift in enwiki's expectations during the last few years. Years ago, editors wanted to do as much as possible by themselves and certainly to have full control of content. Now there are some complaints that the WMF isn't telling other wikis what they're allowed to post, the WMF hasn't assumed control of volunteer-created scripts and gadgets, etc. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 00:54, 9 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

I think Klein Muçi didn’t mean that you can’t use wikitext in Flow at all, but that you can’t do whatever you want (and you’re used to). Talk page header templates and WikiProject boxes? They look awful in the teeny-tiny narrow sidebar, especially when they’re designed to have 10% margin on each side. w:Template:Archive top? Only the way Flow provides it, without possibility to use colors to indicate the outcome, write something at the bottom, and so on. Putting out-of-scope parts of a discussion in a separate collapsible box? Forget it, you can’t do anything in wikitext that affects multiple comments.

And also things that could have been (or even have actually been) improved over the years, but these years were after Flow has already lost: for example that Flow builds on Parsoid, which is to date still not 100% par with the legacy parser people are used to, but was even more buggy back then. Tacsipacsi (talk) 14:26, 9 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

I've only had the chance to use Flow here. Back then when it was discussed on EnWiki I wasn't much active around beside my homewiki, wasn't too versatile on the whole wiki thing and only got the chance to mostly read about it than actually use it. I remember trying it once, loving the idea that things were finally changing from the "ugly black and white editing interface that Wikipedia had" (I didn't even know about syntax highlighting back then) and then being sort of frustrated while using it and switching back to the old way. I also remember leaving with mixed feelings from that episode: Scared that a thing that I didn't know how to use was coming eventually whether I liked it or not and also sort of optimistic that "everything was better than the current editing interface" and that most likely the change would be for the good. (I sort of feel the same about the new Vector skin coming now.) The reply tool felt amazing almost immediately though, it looked like it handled wikitext way more smoothly and acted more intuitively in some aspects (the @=mention feature that got popularized in social media that is still "missing" here). I was optimistic for its future and would have accepted with patience every "visual feature" over the source editing mode but others weren't so patient and FUD is often present in these cases.

As for the enwiki's expectations change... You're right on that aspect. Funny enough, I may be one of the users that are vocative on that matter (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Forum/Archives/2022-04#What_Wikipedia_means_in_different_projects - I failed to attract much attention) but I still believe EnWiki inadvertently vetos some projects that can be pretty important to small wikis. This discussion (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Tree_of_Life/Archive_50#The_automatic_taxonomy_system) + 1 with a similar length at WikiData and 1 at a user's personal talk page happened just because we suggested to utilize WikiData for building a suite of Lua modules capable of handling the taxonomy templates in EnWiki instead of having 97,526 individual wikitext templates that it currently uses. In the end WikiData editors and EnWiki ones refused to collaborate on a solution for the matter and nothing happened. There were a couple of small projects that were hoping for the creation of that module suite, my homewiki included, just so that we could finally have a system similar to EnWiki on our biology articles but alas the only viable solution that was left for us all was to catch up with a decade worth of work and import + localize ~100 000 individual templates if we wanted such a thing. This is not the perfect example because the changes this time involved EnWiki directly but it's the most recent one after those that were mentioned above. Klein Muçi (talk) 01:24, 10 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

Syntax highlighting didn't really work until a few years ago.

I agree that we have some structural problems, and I suspect that Tacsipacsi, who is one of the primary technical editors at a wiki with 1500 registered editors each month, could empathize with you in every detail. We should not be re-inventing the wheel at every wiki. Common citation templates and basic Wikidata-enabled infoboxes should be centrally managed, available by default at all Wikipedias, and translated into every language. All the Wikipedias should be able to use these "normal" features without needing to get enwiki's agreement or to find and train local technical experts. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 19:59, 29 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

Oh, I didn't know that. Maybe it wasn't my ineptitude then.

As a matter of fact, I've tried starting something about the citation templates in the past (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Forum/Archives/2020-09#CS1_module_-_Global) which failed to attract any attention whatsoever despite my insistence. It was supposed to be a "crude solution" while global templates were established.

But yes, I'm active on at least 2 small Wikipedias (sq & la) and both technical communities there have been eager for that idea for ages. The JSON solution in Commons I've seen around (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Data:I18n/Uses_TemplateStyles.tab) looks like a good start (?) for that. Klein Muçi (talk) 23:26, 29 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

For global templates, you want to make friends with @Amire80. He's been advocating for them for years, so he'll know if anything ever happens. There is an old discussion at Translatable modules and an attempt at Multilingual Templates and Modules that might be worth putting on your watchlist. (My theory is that if anything ever happens, someone might leave a note on one of those pages.) Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 22:08, 2 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I've had the opportunity to talk with Amire80 in regard to global templates/modules. Thank you for showing me the aforementioned pages! :) - Klein Muçi (talk) 10:05, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

reply-tool tabbing?

Latest comment: 3 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

So, when using the quick reply tool, can TAB go to either the edit summary or the submit button, similar to if you are in the wikitext editor? Having it go to the next hyperlink on the page (for example in the preview) doesn't seem very helpful. Xaosflux (talk) 17:42, 6 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

Cross posted to w:en:Wikipedia_talk:Talk_pages_project#Tab_controls? Xaosflux (talk) 12:56, 8 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

This idea was previously discussed in T271773. At the time it seemed like it wouldn't necessarily be intuitive, and could be particularly confusing for screen-reader users. In my own experience, in cases where I'd previously press Tab then Enter to submit a message, I just press Ctrl+Enter. Matma Rex (talk) 16:48, 9 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the note, I certainly find it more confusing for non-screen reading purposes - not sure of the utility of tabbing in "to" the preview content, but maybe someone will find it useful? Xaosflux (talk) 16:58, 9 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

Link for specific reply highlighted

Latest comment: 3 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

If you follow the link in the email you get for a new reply, you get sent into the page with the discussion you are subscribed to and the new reply gets highlighted in blue.

Is there any way to get the same highlighting effect for different comments? Said differently, an anchor URL for individual comments of choice, the same logic that we follow when sharing links for specific sections on pages. If you share the very-long URL that makes such a process possible the other person will get that reply highlighted in the same way as you do, so I would assume that what I'm asking is technically possible. The only question is how do you get that URL for different comments in the discussion? Klein Muçi (talk) 00:18, 10 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

Yes, you can find the anchor if you use the "Inspect" tool in your browser, and look for an element like <span data-mw-comment-start="" id="..."></span> near the beginning of each comment, then copy the id attribute from it.

There is a gadget that adds a "link" button next to "reply" to simplify this: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:ESanders_(WMF)/commentlinks.js

We didn't add this feature to the normal reply tool because we feared cluttering up the page, but we're considering adding it as part of the talk page usability work. Matma Rex (talk) 11:43, 10 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

Thanks a lot! This resolves my request.

I really hope you add that as a native feature. Does the link really have to be that long though? Klein Muçi (talk) 12:08, 10 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

It doesn't really have to be. There are some ideas to improve the links in T302012 and related tasks. Matma Rex (talk) 12:23, 10 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

Special:TopicSubscriptions

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

To unsubscribe from Special:TopicSubscriptions, I must press the Cancel button, and then press the Cancel button again. And if I want to unsubscribe from multiple topics, I have to come back and repeat the process. This is very inconvenient for users. I wish I could cancel subscription without moving the page like Watchlist. Bluehill (talk) 10:30, 17 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

There is also a limit of 5,000 subscriptions. Editors who edit a lot of pages that use this will hit it. How to undo old ones fast? Eg the earliest 3;000. And why can’t I make an edit summary here? ~ Doug Weller (talk) 19:18, 17 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

Move the title underline

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello! It seems to me that moving the line to the top breaks the user experience very much. Throughout the MediaWiki, headings are underlined rather than overlined. Iniquity (talk) 15:42, 30 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

Section subscribing

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Is there a way to activate section subscribing on some project pages? Example: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Files_for_discussion/2022_July_15#File:500_Brunei_Dollar_Note.jpg> I'm interested in the "Brunei dollar images" section, but not the rest. - FlightTime (open channel) 18:44, 15 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

It works on project pages too, but only for level 2 headings using == (and only on sections that already contain discussion comments). Matma Rex (talk) 14:34, 16 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

Talk page subscriptions not working

Latest comment: 3 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

@ WP-EN when the subscription link on a talk page thread is clicked, it just refreshes the page and does not set the subscription. - FlightTime (open channel) 23:44, 6 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

hi @FlightTime – I appreciate you coming here to share the issue you're experiencing. Can you please share a link to a talk page section that you have been unable to subscribe to? PPelberg (WMF) (talk) 22:04, 8 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

It's all talk pages with subscriptions available, not just one particular one. - FlightTime (open channel) 17:40, 9 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

It works for me on en:Talk:Macross operators. If it doesn’t work for you, it’s probably caused by a user script/gadget or browser setting/extension. See en:WP:JSERROR about extracting useful info for debugging. Tacsipacsi (talk) 21:40, 9 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

It's working now, I didn't do anything on purpose (troubleshooting wise), but it's working. Thank to all. Cheers. - FlightTime (open channel) 21:54, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

New topics on top of the page

Latest comment: 2 years ago7 comments3 people in discussion

Sorry if I missed it elsewhere, but does New topic tool support (or plans to support) adding new sections on top of the page? Ата ^(talk) 09:15, 20 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hi :) I have created a task for this: phab:T313165. Iniquity (talk) 14:27, 20 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

It's my impression that the biggest blocker for this is the perception that bottom-posting is popular. See phab:T17494 from 2008, which considered making this a per-wiki default. It doesn't appear to be technically difficult, but I'd predict months of complaints at the larger wikis. Smaller, more mobile-oriented wikis would probably appreciate it. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 02:11, 1 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Whatamidoing (WMF), It does not mean enabling this behavior (new topic on top) by default. It's about making the functions of the new topic (DT featured) understand the existing mechanics in advance. Iniquity (talk) 14:20, 25 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

I believe that DiscussionTools already/automatically/unavoidably follows whatever the page does. The problem isn't that DiscussionTools can't do it; the problem is that MediaWiki Core can't do it. DiscussionTools will post wherever on the page that &action=edit&section=new will post if DiscussionTools didn't exist. You don't want a situation in which one editor has DiscussionTools enabled, so they top-post, and the next editor has DiscussionTools disabled, so they bottom-post. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:40, 26 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

No, DT can't do that. You can read @Matmarex post in my task. And I even agree that this feature should be in Core.

> You don't want a situation in which one editor has DiscussionTools enabled, so they top-post, and the next editor has DiscussionTools disabled, so they bottom-post.

I sincerely apologize, but it seems to me that you again did not understand the situation and are trying to prove something to me, which is not reality. Please follow the links in my task and see how these forums work now. Iniquity (talk) 09:13, 27 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

I did read what he wrote:

If T33919: Allow posting new sections to top of page on a per-page basis was implemented in MediaWiki core, it would work with the DiscussionTools new topic tool as well – new topics would be added to the top, since we use the same code for saving changes.

In other words, DiscussionTools already/automatically/unavoidably follows whatever the page does, because it uses the same code for saving changes as MediaWiki core. So long as MediaWiki core bottom-posts for &action=edit&section=new, so will DiscussionTools. If MediaWiki core is changed to top-post, then so will DiscussionTools.

What you seem to be asking for is "Please let me use DiscussionTools's New Topic tool when MediaWiki core believes I am editing section 0 instead of creating a new topic". Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 00:03, 12 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

Editing news 2022 #2

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Read this in another language • Subscription list for this multilingual newsletter

The new [subscribe] button notifies people when someone replies to their comments. It helps newcomers get answers to their questions. People reply sooner. You can read the report. The Editing team is turning this tool on for everyone. You will be able to turn it off in your preferences.

–Whatamidoing (WMF) 23:35, 29 August 2022 (UTC) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:35, 29 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

Topic Subscriptions in Watchlist

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi all, I hope this is the right place to post; I find the feature of subscriping to certain topics on talk pages quite useful, but was surprised that changes in these topics did not appear on my watchlist but instead in my notifications. I think it would be more intuitive to have updates there (which would also allow filtering) than in the notifications, so if that was possible (maybe as an option?) I would appreciate it! Polibil (talk) 11:48, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

How to translate the timestamp ago just below the headings?

Latest comment: 2 years ago22 comments4 people in discussion

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hello, I guess there's no way to translate the "timestamp ago" message (exactly what you see below the headers, is there? This is the message. I mean, I want to translate the minute, hour, month, etc ago parts, but those are part of $1. Aram (talk) 18:11, 11 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

The translations for the date and time formatting are using data from the Common Locale Data Repository. If they are incorrect or missing, we have the ability to override them, but it's a manual process. Translatewiki has some instructions for contributing to those translations at https://translatewiki.net/wiki/CLDR.

You can check out this thread from a few day ago as an example of this process: Talk:Talk pages project/Replying/2022#h-misspelling-20220829224200 Matma Rex (talk) 05:36, 12 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your reply and all your explanations. What I got from the reply and the previous Bangladesh project discussion link you provided above was that a task should be created on Phabricator; the efforts they have already made have not paid off and it will take a very long time for the localization to be done. Aram (talk) 10:02, 12 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

It takes a while for translations to reach the wikis, but if it's been more than a week, then you probably want to ask Amire80 about it. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:20, 13 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Are you working on it? If so, who did the translations? Aram (talk) 21:25, 13 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

If you're asking about the problem in that topic with the Bangla language, I used translations provided by the person who reported it, and it is already fixed and deployed to Wikimedia wikis.

If you're asking about your problem (I assumed with the Sorani Kurdish language?), we haven't done anything about it.

I understand that CLDR has a more complicated process for localisation than MediaWiki, but if you find the time for it, your translations will (eventually :) ) be used by a lot of other software too. Matma Rex (talk) 08:22, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Matma Rex At first, because you linked to the related topic of Bangladesh Wikipedia, I thought it was the same case, but later when I looked at the messages, I saw that they were all about "hour" and thought that our case may not be the same. As I mentioned above, MediaWiki:Discussiontools-topicheader-latestcomment/en, the dollar sign contains those words we want to translate. Thanks! Aram (talk) 16:27, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

I don't think that local admins can fix the contents of the "$1" variables.

Could you provide a copy of what you see now, and what you would like to see instead, in the language with the problems? Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 19:56, 16 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Whatamidoing (WMF) Is my point still unclear? I don't know if I can explain more. All I have to do is just send a screenshot. Aram (talk) 19:27, 21 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I think you should provide Sorani Kurdish translation here and then developer can do something. E.g.

'day-other' => '{0} days',
'day-one' => '{0} day',
'hour-other' => '{0} hours',
'hour-one' => '{0} hour',
'minute-other' => '{0} minutes',
'minute-one' => '{0} minute',
'month-other' => '{0} months',
'month-one' => '{0} month',
'second-other' => '{0} seconds',
'second-one' => '{0} second',
'week-other' => '{0} weeks',
'week-one' => '{0} week',
'year-other' => '{0} years',
'year-one' => '{0} year',

Also create a ticket on unicode, provide these translations to them, so they can add it. আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 00:14, 23 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hi @আফতাবুজ্জামান, Thanks for the reply! These are the translations for ckb language.

'day-other' => '{0} ڕۆژ',
'day-one' => '{0} ڕۆژ',
'hour-other' => '{0} سەعات',
'hour-one' => '{0} سەعات',
'minute-other' => '{0} دەقە',
'minute-one' => '{0} دەقە',
'month-other' => '{0} مانگ',
'month-one' => '{0} مانگ',
'second-other' => '{0} چرکە',
'second-one' => '{0} چرکە',
'week-other' => '{0} ھەفتە',
'week-one' => '{0} ھەفتە',
'year-other' => '{0} ساڵ',
'year-one' => '{0} ساڵ',

But the word "ago" is not in the messages! However, "ago" means "لەمەوپێش".

I've never created a ticket in unicode before and I really don't know if I can do that. Aram (talk) 16:09, 23 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Matma Rex, @Whatamidoing (WMF), @আফতাবুজ্জামান Sorry, can't this problem be fixed? Aram (talk) 12:54, 16 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, I also didn't know what we need to do here. I am still not sure, but I have ideas.

I filed https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T327123 and I will try to find someone to help us submit the translations to CLDR.

Unfortunately the list above was not complete – it looks like there are 172 messages to translate. We do not use them all in DiscussionTools, but we will probably want them all for CLDR.

The full list is below. @Aram Would you be able to translate these? Once you do, I will prepare a test wiki for you where you will be able to verify that they are all displaying correctly.

	'century-one' => '{0} century',
	'century-other' => '{0} centuries',
	'day-future-one' => 'in {0} day',
	'day-future-other' => 'in {0} days',
	'day-one' => '{0} day',
	'day-other' => '{0} days',
	'day-past-one' => '{0} day ago',
	'day-past-other' => '{0} days ago',
	'day-short-future-one' => 'in {0} day',
	'day-short-future-other' => 'in {0} days',
	'day-short-past-one' => '{0} day ago',
	'day-short-past-other' => '{0} days ago',
	'decade-one' => '{0} decade',
	'decade-other' => '{0} decades',
	'fri-future-one' => 'in {0} Friday',
	'fri-future-other' => 'in {0} Fridays',
	'fri-narrow-future-one' => 'in {0} F',
	'fri-narrow-future-other' => 'in {0} F',
	'fri-narrow-past-one' => '{0} F ago',
	'fri-narrow-past-other' => '{0} F ago',
	'fri-past-one' => '{0} Friday ago',
	'fri-past-other' => '{0} Fridays ago',
	'fri-short-future-one' => 'in {0} Fri.',
	'fri-short-future-other' => 'in {0} Fri.',
	'fri-short-past-one' => '{0} Fri. ago',
	'fri-short-past-other' => '{0} Fri. ago',
	'hour-future-one' => 'in {0} hour',
	'hour-future-other' => 'in {0} hours',
	'hour-one' => '{0} hour',
	'hour-other' => '{0} hours',
	'hour-past-one' => '{0} hour ago',
	'hour-past-other' => '{0} hours ago',
	'hour-short-future-one' => 'in {0} hr.',
	'hour-short-future-other' => 'in {0} hr.',
	'hour-short-past-one' => '{0} hr. ago',
	'hour-short-past-other' => '{0} hr. ago',
	'microsecond-one' => '{0} microsecond',
	'microsecond-other' => '{0} microseconds',
	'millisecond-one' => '{0} millisecond',
	'millisecond-other' => '{0} milliseconds',
	'minute-future-one' => 'in {0} minute',
	'minute-future-other' => 'in {0} minutes',
	'minute-one' => '{0} minute',
	'minute-other' => '{0} minutes',
	'minute-past-one' => '{0} minute ago',
	'minute-past-other' => '{0} minutes ago',
	'minute-short-future-one' => 'in {0} min.',
	'minute-short-future-other' => 'in {0} min.',
	'minute-short-past-one' => '{0} min. ago',
	'minute-short-past-other' => '{0} min. ago',
	'mon-future-one' => 'in {0} Monday',
	'mon-future-other' => 'in {0} Mondays',
	'mon-narrow-future-one' => 'in {0} M',
	'mon-narrow-future-other' => 'in {0} M',
	'mon-narrow-past-one' => '{0} M ago',
	'mon-narrow-past-other' => '{0} M ago',
	'mon-past-one' => '{0} Monday ago',
	'mon-past-other' => '{0} Mondays ago',
	'mon-short-future-one' => 'in {0} Mon.',
	'mon-short-future-other' => 'in {0} Mon.',
	'mon-short-past-one' => '{0} Mon. ago',
	'mon-short-past-other' => '{0} Mon. ago',
	'month-future-one' => 'in {0} month',
	'month-future-other' => 'in {0} months',
	'month-one' => '{0} month',
	'month-other' => '{0} months',
	'month-past-one' => '{0} month ago',
	'month-past-other' => '{0} months ago',
	'month-short-future-one' => 'in {0} mo.',
	'month-short-future-other' => 'in {0} mo.',
	'month-short-past-one' => '{0} mo. ago',
	'month-short-past-other' => '{0} mo. ago',
	'nanosecond-one' => '{0} nanosecond',
	'nanosecond-other' => '{0} nanoseconds',
	'quarter-future-one' => 'in {0} quarter',
	'quarter-future-other' => 'in {0} quarters',
	'quarter-past-one' => '{0} quarter ago',
	'quarter-past-other' => '{0} quarters ago',
	'quarter-short-future-one' => 'in {0} qtr.',
	'quarter-short-future-other' => 'in {0} qtrs.',
	'quarter-short-past-one' => '{0} qtr. ago',
	'quarter-short-past-other' => '{0} qtrs. ago',
	'sat-future-one' => 'in {0} Saturday',
	'sat-future-other' => 'in {0} Saturdays',
	'sat-narrow-future-one' => 'in {0} Sa',
	'sat-narrow-future-other' => 'in {0} Sa',
	'sat-narrow-past-one' => '{0} Sa ago',
	'sat-narrow-past-other' => '{0} Sa ago',
	'sat-past-one' => '{0} Saturday ago',
	'sat-past-other' => '{0} Saturdays ago',
	'sat-short-future-one' => 'in {0} Sat.',
	'sat-short-future-other' => 'in {0} Sat.',
	'sat-short-past-one' => '{0} Sat. ago',
	'sat-short-past-other' => '{0} Sat. ago',
	'second-future-one' => 'in {0} second',
	'second-future-other' => 'in {0} seconds',
	'second-one' => '{0} second',
	'second-other' => '{0} seconds',
	'second-past-one' => '{0} second ago',
	'second-past-other' => '{0} seconds ago',
	'second-short-future-one' => 'in {0} sec.',
	'second-short-future-other' => 'in {0} sec.',
	'second-short-past-one' => '{0} sec. ago',
	'second-short-past-other' => '{0} sec. ago',
	'sun-future-one' => 'in {0} Sunday',
	'sun-future-other' => 'in {0} Sundays',
	'sun-narrow-future-one' => 'in {0} Su',
	'sun-narrow-future-other' => 'in {0} Su',
	'sun-narrow-past-one' => '{0} Su ago',
	'sun-narrow-past-other' => '{0} Su ago',
	'sun-past-one' => '{0} Sunday ago',
	'sun-past-other' => '{0} Sundays ago',
	'sun-short-future-one' => 'in {0} Sun.',
	'sun-short-future-other' => 'in {0} Sun.',
	'sun-short-past-one' => '{0} Sun. ago',
	'sun-short-past-other' => '{0} Sun. ago',
	'thu-future-one' => 'in {0} Thursday',
	'thu-future-other' => 'in {0} Thursdays',
	'thu-narrow-future-one' => 'in {0} Th',
	'thu-narrow-future-other' => 'in {0} Th',
	'thu-narrow-past-one' => '{0} Th ago',
	'thu-narrow-past-other' => '{0} Th ago',
	'thu-past-one' => '{0} Thursday ago',
	'thu-past-other' => '{0} Thursdays ago',
	'thu-short-future-one' => 'in {0} Thu.',
	'thu-short-future-other' => 'in {0} Thu.',
	'thu-short-past-one' => '{0} Thu. ago',
	'thu-short-past-other' => '{0} Thu. ago',
	'tue-future-one' => 'in {0} Tuesday',
	'tue-future-other' => 'in {0} Tuesdays',
	'tue-narrow-future-one' => 'in {0} Tu',
	'tue-narrow-future-other' => 'in {0} Tu',
	'tue-narrow-past-one' => '{0} Tu ago',
	'tue-narrow-past-other' => '{0} Tu ago',
	'tue-past-one' => '{0} Tuesday ago',
	'tue-past-other' => '{0} Tuesdays ago',
	'tue-short-future-one' => 'in {0} Tue.',
	'tue-short-future-other' => 'in {0} Tue.',
	'tue-short-past-one' => '{0} Tue. ago',
	'tue-short-past-other' => '{0} Tue. ago',
	'wed-future-one' => 'in {0} Wednesday',
	'wed-future-other' => 'in {0} Wednesdays',
	'wed-narrow-future-one' => 'in {0} W',
	'wed-narrow-future-other' => 'in {0} W',
	'wed-narrow-past-one' => '{0} W ago',
	'wed-narrow-past-other' => '{0} W ago',
	'wed-past-one' => '{0} Wednesday ago',
	'wed-past-other' => '{0} Wednesdays ago',
	'wed-short-future-one' => 'in {0} Wed.',
	'wed-short-future-other' => 'in {0} Wed.',
	'wed-short-past-one' => '{0} Wed. ago',
	'wed-short-past-other' => '{0} Wed. ago',
	'week-future-one' => 'in {0} week',
	'week-future-other' => 'in {0} weeks',
	'week-one' => '{0} week',
	'week-other' => '{0} weeks',
	'week-past-one' => '{0} week ago',
	'week-past-other' => '{0} weeks ago',
	'week-short-future-one' => 'in {0} wk.',
	'week-short-future-other' => 'in {0} wk.',
	'week-short-past-one' => '{0} wk. ago',
	'week-short-past-other' => '{0} wk. ago',
	'year-future-one' => 'in {0} year',
	'year-future-other' => 'in {0} years',
	'year-one' => '{0} year',
	'year-other' => '{0} years',
	'year-past-one' => '{0} year ago',
	'year-past-other' => '{0} years ago',
	'year-short-future-one' => 'in {0} yr.',
	'year-short-future-other' => 'in {0} yr.',
	'year-short-past-one' => '{0} yr. ago',
	'year-short-past-other' => '{0} yr. ago',

Thanks! Matma Rex (talk) 23:20, 16 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Matma Rex Hi, and sorry for the late reply. I just translated those messages you provided above. But I wasn't very sure how I translate those ones starts with "in" (i.e. in {0} days). So, I leave them. Can you give me a use case example of that message? Thanks!

	'century-one' => '{0} سەدە',
	'century-other' => '{0} سەدە',
	'day-future-one' => 'in {0} day',
	'day-future-other' => 'in {0} days',
	'day-one' => '{0} ڕۆژ',
	'day-other' => '{0} ڕۆژ',
	'day-past-one' => '{0} ڕۆژ لەمەوپێش',
	'day-past-other' => '{0} ڕۆژ لەمەوپێش',
	'day-short-future-one' => 'in {0} day',
	'day-short-future-other' => 'in {0} days',
	'day-short-past-one' => '{0} ڕۆژ لەمەوپێش',
	'day-short-past-other' => '{0} ڕۆژ لەمەوپێش',
	'decade-one' => '{0} دەیە',
	'decade-other' => '{0} دەیە',
	'fri-future-one' => 'in {0} Friday',
	'fri-future-other' => 'in {0} Fridays',
	'fri-narrow-future-one' => 'in {0} F',
	'fri-narrow-future-other' => 'in {0} F',
	'fri-narrow-past-one' => '{0} ھەینی لەمەوپێش',
	'fri-narrow-past-other' => '{0} ھەینی لەمەوپێش',
	'fri-past-one' => '{0} ھەینی لەمەوپێش',
	'fri-past-other' => '{0} ھەینی لەمەوپێش',
	'fri-short-future-one' => 'in {0} Fri.',
	'fri-short-future-other' => 'in {0} Fri.',
	'fri-short-past-one' => '{0} ھەینی لەمەوپێش',
	'fri-short-past-other' => '{0} ھەینی لەمەوپێش',
	'hour-future-one' => 'in {0} hour',
	'hour-future-other' => 'in {0} hours',
	'hour-one' => '{0} سەعات',
	'hour-other' => '{0} سەعات',
	'hour-past-one' => '{0} سەعات لەمەوپێش',
	'hour-past-other' => '{0} سەعات لەمەوپێش',
	'hour-short-future-one' => 'in {0} hr.',
	'hour-short-future-other' => 'in {0} hr.',
	'hour-short-past-one' => '{0} سەعات لەمەوپێش',
	'hour-short-past-other' => '{0} سەعات لەمەوپێش',
	'microsecond-one' => '{0} مایکڕۆچرکە',
	'microsecond-other' => '{0} مایکڕۆچرکە',
	'millisecond-one' => '{0} میلیچرکە',
	'millisecond-other' => '{0} میلیچرکە',
	'minute-future-one' => 'in {0} minute',
	'minute-future-other' => 'in {0} minutes',
	'minute-one' => '{0} دەقە',
	'minute-other' => '{0} دەقە',
	'minute-past-one' => '{0} دەقە لەمەوپێش',
	'minute-past-other' => '{0} دەقە لەمەوپێش',
	'minute-short-future-one' => 'in {0} min.',
	'minute-short-future-other' => 'in {0} min.',
	'minute-short-past-one' => '{0} دەقە لەمەوپێش',
	'minute-short-past-other' => '{0} دەقە لەمەوپێش',
	'mon-future-one' => 'in {0} Monday',
	'mon-future-other' => 'in {0} Mondays',
	'mon-narrow-future-one' => 'in {0} M',
	'mon-narrow-future-other' => 'in {0} M',
	'mon-narrow-past-one' => '{0} دووشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'mon-narrow-past-other' => '{0} دووشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'mon-past-one' => '{0} دووشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'mon-past-other' => '{0} دووشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'mon-short-future-one' => 'in {0} Mon.',
	'mon-short-future-other' => 'in {0} Mon.',
	'mon-short-past-one' => '{0} دووشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'mon-short-past-other' => '{0} دووشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'month-future-one' => 'in {0} month',
	'month-future-other' => 'in {0} months',
	'month-one' => '{0} مانگ',
	'month-other' => '{0} مانگ',
	'month-past-one' => '{0} مانگ لەمەوپێش',
	'month-past-other' => '{0} مانگ لەمەوپێش',
	'month-short-future-one' => 'in {0} mo.',
	'month-short-future-other' => 'in {0} mo.',
	'month-short-past-one' => '{0} مانگ لەمەوپێش',
	'month-short-past-other' => '{0} مانگ لەمەوپێش',
	'nanosecond-one' => '{0} نانۆچرکە',
	'nanosecond-other' => '{0} نانۆچرکە',
	'quarter-future-one' => 'in {0} quarter',
	'quarter-future-other' => 'in {0} quarters',
	'quarter-past-one' => '{0} چارەک لەمەوپێش',
	'quarter-past-other' => '{0} چارەک لەمەوپێش',
	'quarter-short-future-one' => 'in {0} qtr.',
	'quarter-short-future-other' => 'in {0} qtrs.',
	'quarter-short-past-one' => '{0} چارەک لەمەوپێش',
	'quarter-short-past-other' => '{0} چارەک لەمەوپێش',
	'sat-future-one' => 'in {0} Saturday',
	'sat-future-other' => 'in {0} Saturdays',
	'sat-narrow-future-one' => 'in {0} Sa',
	'sat-narrow-future-other' => 'in {0} Sa',
	'sat-narrow-past-one' => '{0} شەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'sat-narrow-past-other' => '{0} شەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'sat-past-one' => '{0} شەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'sat-past-other' => '{0} شەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'sat-short-future-one' => 'in {0} Sat.',
	'sat-short-future-other' => 'in {0} Sat.',
	'sat-short-past-one' => '{0} شەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'sat-short-past-other' => '{0} شەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'second-future-one' => 'in {0} second',
	'second-future-other' => 'in {0} seconds',
	'second-one' => '{0} چرکە',
	'second-other' => '{0} چرکە',
	'second-past-one' => '{0} چرکە لەمەوپێش',
	'second-past-other' => '{0} چرکە لەمەوپێش',
	'second-short-future-one' => 'in {0} sec.',
	'second-short-future-other' => 'in {0} sec.',
	'second-short-past-one' => '{0} چرکە لەمەوپێش',
	'second-short-past-other' => '{0} چرکە لەمەوپێش',
	'sun-future-one' => 'in {0} Sunday',
	'sun-future-other' => 'in {0} Sundays',
	'sun-narrow-future-one' => 'in {0} Su',
	'sun-narrow-future-other' => 'in {0} Su',
	'sun-narrow-past-one' => '{0} یەکشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'sun-narrow-past-other' => '{0} یەکشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'sun-past-one' => '{0} یەکشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'sun-past-other' => '{0} یەکشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'sun-short-future-one' => 'in {0} Sun.',
	'sun-short-future-other' => 'in {0} Sun.',
	'sun-short-past-one' => '{0} یەکشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'sun-short-past-other' => '{0} یەکشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'thu-future-one' => 'in {0} Thursday',
	'thu-future-other' => 'in {0} Thursdays',
	'thu-narrow-future-one' => 'in {0} Th',
	'thu-narrow-future-other' => 'in {0} Th',
	'thu-narrow-past-one' => '{0} پێنجشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'thu-narrow-past-other' => '{0} پێنجشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'thu-past-one' => '{0} پێنجشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'thu-past-other' => '{0} پێنجشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'thu-short-future-one' => 'in {0} Thu.',
	'thu-short-future-other' => 'in {0} Thu.',
	'thu-short-past-one' => '{0} پێنجشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'thu-short-past-other' => '{0} پێنجشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'tue-future-one' => 'in {0} Tuesday',
	'tue-future-other' => 'in {0} Tuesdays',
	'tue-narrow-future-one' => 'in {0} Tu',
	'tue-narrow-future-other' => 'in {0} Tu',
	'tue-narrow-past-one' => '{0} سێشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'tue-narrow-past-other' => '{0} سێشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'tue-past-one' => '{0} سێشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'tue-past-other' => '{0} سێشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'tue-short-future-one' => 'in {0} Tue.',
	'tue-short-future-other' => 'in {0} Tue.',
	'tue-short-past-one' => '{0} سێشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'tue-short-past-other' => '{0} سێشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'wed-future-one' => 'in {0} Wednesday',
	'wed-future-other' => 'in {0} Wednesdays',
	'wed-narrow-future-one' => 'in {0} W',
	'wed-narrow-future-other' => 'in {0} W',
	'wed-narrow-past-one' => '{0} چوارشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'wed-narrow-past-other' => '{0} چوارشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'wed-past-one' => '{0} چوارشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'wed-past-other' => '{0} چوارشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'wed-short-future-one' => 'in {0} Wed.',
	'wed-short-future-other' => 'in {0} Wed.',
	'wed-short-past-one' => '{0} چوارشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'wed-short-past-other' => '{0} چوارشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'week-future-one' => 'in {0} week',
	'week-future-other' => 'in {0} weeks',
	'week-one' => '{0} ھەفتە',
	'week-other' => '{0} ھەفتە',
	'week-past-one' => '{0} ھەفتە لەمەوپێش',
	'week-past-other' => '{0} ھەفتە لەمەوپێش',
	'week-short-future-one' => 'in {0} wk.',
	'week-short-future-other' => 'in {0} wk.',
	'week-short-past-one' => '{0} ھەفتە لەمەوپێش',
	'week-short-past-other' => '{0} ھەفتە لەمەوپێش',
	'year-future-one' => 'in {0} year',
	'year-future-other' => 'in {0} years',
	'year-one' => '{0} ساڵ',
	'year-other' => '{0} ساڵ',
	'year-past-one' => '{0} ساڵ لەمەوپێش',
	'year-past-other' => '{0} ساڵ لەمەوپێش',
	'year-short-future-one' => 'in {0} yr.',
	'year-short-future-other' => 'in {0} yr.',
	'year-short-past-one' => '{0} ساڵ لەمەوپێش',
	'year-short-past-other' => '{0} ساڵ لەمەوپێش',

Aram (talk) 13:05, 11 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

They refer to dates in the future – for example, "the voting ends in 5 days" or "the meeting will be held next Friday" (I don't know why the English example uses the weird phrase "in 1 Friday"). We don't use them in DiscussionTools as far as I know.

I set up a test wiki with the translations so far, so you can review them in context: https://patchdemo.wmflabs.org/wikis/e9c37968c1/wiki/وتووێژ:دەستپێک – feel free to create an account there, and edit that page (or any other) with fake comments/dates to test how the headings are displayed. Matma Rex (talk) 16:44, 11 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Matma Rex Thank you for your all explanations. I tried some different dates from that test wiki you have created and I think everything is okay. Here is the full translation according to those examples:

	'century-one' => '{0} سەدە',
	'century-other' => '{0} سەدە',
	'day-future-one' => '{0} ڕۆژی تر',
	'day-future-other' => '{0} ڕۆژی تر',
	'day-one' => '{0} ڕۆژ',
	'day-other' => '{0} ڕۆژ',
	'day-past-one' => '{0} ڕۆژ لەمەوپێش',
	'day-past-other' => '{0} ڕۆژ لەمەوپێش',
	'day-short-future-one' => '{0} ڕۆژی تر',
	'day-short-future-other' => '{0} ڕۆژی تر',
	'day-short-past-one' => '{0} ڕۆژ لەمەوپێش',
	'day-short-past-other' => '{0} ڕۆژ لەمەوپێش',
	'decade-one' => '{0} دەیە',
	'decade-other' => '{0} دەیە',
	'fri-future-one' => '{0} ھەینیی تر',
	'fri-future-other' => '{0} ھەینیی تر',
	'fri-narrow-future-one' => '{0} ھەینیی تر',
	'fri-narrow-future-other' => '{0} ھەینیی تر',
	'fri-narrow-past-one' => '{0} ھەینی لەمەوپێش',
	'fri-narrow-past-other' => '{0} ھەینی لەمەوپێش',
	'fri-past-one' => '{0} ھەینی لەمەوپێش',
	'fri-past-other' => '{0} ھەینی لەمەوپێش',
	'fri-short-future-one' => '{0} ھەینیی تر.',
	'fri-short-future-other' => '{0} ھەینیی تر',
	'fri-short-past-one' => '{0} ھەینی لەمەوپێش',
	'fri-short-past-other' => '{0} ھەینی لەمەوپێش',
	'hour-future-one' => '{0} سەعاتی تر',
	'hour-future-other' => '{0} سەعاتی تر',
	'hour-one' => '{0} سەعات',
	'hour-other' => '{0} سەعات',
	'hour-past-one' => '{0} سەعات لەمەوپێش',
	'hour-past-other' => '{0} سەعات لەمەوپێش',
	'hour-short-future-one' => '{0} سەعاتی تر',
	'hour-short-future-other' => '{0} سەعاتی تر',
	'hour-short-past-one' => '{0} سەعات لەمەوپێش',
	'hour-short-past-other' => '{0} سەعات لەمەوپێش',
	'microsecond-one' => '{0} مایکڕۆچرکە',
	'microsecond-other' => '{0} مایکڕۆچرکە',
	'millisecond-one' => '{0} میلیچرکە',
	'millisecond-other' => '{0} میلیچرکە',
	'minute-future-one' => '{0} دەقەی تر',
	'minute-future-other' => '{0} دەقەی تر',
	'minute-one' => '{0} دەقە',
	'minute-other' => '{0} دەقە',
	'minute-past-one' => '{0} دەقە لەمەوپێش',
	'minute-past-other' => '{0} دەقە لەمەوپێش',
	'minute-short-future-one' => '{0} دەقەی تر',
	'minute-short-future-other' => '{0} دەقەی تر',
	'minute-short-past-one' => '{0} دەقە لەمەوپێش',
	'minute-short-past-other' => '{0} دەقە لەمەوپێش',
	'mon-future-one' => '{0} دووشەممەی تر',
	'mon-future-other' => '{0} دووشەممەی تر',
	'mon-narrow-future-one' => '{0} دووشەممەی تر',
	'mon-narrow-future-other' => '{0} دووشەممەی تر',
	'mon-narrow-past-one' => '{0} دووشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'mon-narrow-past-other' => '{0} دووشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'mon-past-one' => '{0} دووشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'mon-past-other' => '{0} دووشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'mon-short-future-one' => '{0} دووشەممەی تر',
	'mon-short-future-other' => '{0} دووشەممەی تر',
	'mon-short-past-one' => '{0} دووشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'mon-short-past-other' => '{0} دووشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'month-future-one' => '{0} مانگی تر',
	'month-future-other' => '{0} مانگی تر',
	'month-one' => '{0} مانگ',
	'month-other' => '{0} مانگ',
	'month-past-one' => '{0} مانگ لەمەوپێش',
	'month-past-other' => '{0} مانگ لەمەوپێش',
	'month-short-future-one' => '{0} مانگی تر',
	'month-short-future-other' => '{0} مانگی تر',
	'month-short-past-one' => '{0} مانگ لەمەوپێش',
	'month-short-past-other' => '{0} مانگ لەمەوپێش',
	'nanosecond-one' => '{0} نانۆچرکە',
	'nanosecond-other' => '{0} نانۆچرکە',
	'quarter-future-one' => '{0} چارەکی تر',
	'quarter-future-other' => '{0} چارەکی تر',
	'quarter-past-one' => '{0} چارەک لەمەوپێش',
	'quarter-past-other' => '{0} چارەک لەمەوپێش',
	'quarter-short-future-one' => '{0} چارەکی تر',
	'quarter-short-future-other' => '{0} چارەکی تر',
	'quarter-short-past-one' => '{0} چارەک لەمەوپێش',
	'quarter-short-past-other' => '{0} چارەک لەمەوپێش',
	'sat-future-one' => '{0} شەممەی تر',
	'sat-future-other' => '{0} شەممەی تر',
	'sat-narrow-future-one' => '{0} شەممەی تر',
	'sat-narrow-future-other' => '{0} شەممەی تر',
	'sat-narrow-past-one' => '{0} شەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'sat-narrow-past-other' => '{0} شەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'sat-past-one' => '{0} شەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'sat-past-other' => '{0} شەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'sat-short-future-one' => '{0} شەممەی تر',
	'sat-short-future-other' => '{0} شەممەی تر',
	'sat-short-past-one' => '{0} شەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'sat-short-past-other' => '{0} شەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'second-future-one' => '{0} چرکەی تر',
	'second-future-other' => '{0} چرکەی تر',
	'second-one' => '{0} چرکە',
	'second-other' => '{0} چرکە',
	'second-past-one' => '{0} چرکە لەمەوپێش',
	'second-past-other' => '{0} چرکە لەمەوپێش',
	'second-short-future-one' => '{0} چرکەی تر',
	'second-short-future-other' => '{0} چرکەی تر',
	'second-short-past-one' => '{0} چرکە لەمەوپێش',
	'second-short-past-other' => '{0} چرکە لەمەوپێش',
	'sun-future-one' => '{0} یەکشەممەی تر',
	'sun-future-other' => '{0} یەکشەممەی تر',
	'sun-narrow-future-one' => '{0} یەکشەممەی تر',
	'sun-narrow-future-other' => '{0} یەکشەممەی تر',
	'sun-narrow-past-one' => '{0} یەکشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'sun-narrow-past-other' => '{0} یەکشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'sun-past-one' => '{0} یەکشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'sun-past-other' => '{0} یەکشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'sun-short-future-one' => '{0} یەکشەممەی تر',
	'sun-short-future-other' => '{0} یەکشەممەی تر',
	'sun-short-past-one' => '{0} یەکشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'sun-short-past-other' => '{0} یەکشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'thu-future-one' => '{0} پێنجشەممەی تر',
	'thu-future-other' => '{0} پێنجشەممەی تر',
	'thu-narrow-future-one' => '{0} پێنجشەممەی تر',
	'thu-narrow-future-other' => '{0} پێنجشەممەی تر',
	'thu-narrow-past-one' => '{0} پێنجشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'thu-narrow-past-other' => '{0} پێنجشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'thu-past-one' => '{0} پێنجشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'thu-past-other' => '{0} پێنجشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'thu-short-future-one' => '{0} پێنجشەممەی تر',
	'thu-short-future-other' => '{0} پێنجشەممەی تر',
	'thu-short-past-one' => '{0} پێنجشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'thu-short-past-other' => '{0} پێنجشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'tue-future-one' => '{0} سێشەممەی تر',
	'tue-future-other' => '{0} سێشەممەی تر',
	'tue-narrow-future-one' => '{0} سێشەممەی تر',
	'tue-narrow-future-other' => '{0} سێشەممەی تر',
	'tue-narrow-past-one' => '{0} سێشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'tue-narrow-past-other' => '{0} سێشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'tue-past-one' => '{0} سێشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'tue-past-other' => '{0} سێشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'tue-short-future-one' => '{0} سێشەممەی تر',
	'tue-short-future-other' => '{0} سێشەممەی تر',
	'tue-short-past-one' => '{0} سێشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'tue-short-past-other' => '{0} سێشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'wed-future-one' => '{0} چوارشەممەی تر',
	'wed-future-other' => '{0} چوارشەممەی تر',
	'wed-narrow-future-one' => '{0} چوارشەممەی تر',
	'wed-narrow-future-other' => '{0} چوارشەممەی تر',
	'wed-narrow-past-one' => '{0} چوارشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'wed-narrow-past-other' => '{0} چوارشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'wed-past-one' => '{0} چوارشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'wed-past-other' => '{0} چوارشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'wed-short-future-one' => '{0} چوارشەممەی تر',
	'wed-short-future-other' => '{0} چوارشەممەی تر',
	'wed-short-past-one' => '{0} چوارشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'wed-short-past-other' => '{0} چوارشەممە لەمەوپێش',
	'week-future-one' => '{0} ھەفتەی تر',
	'week-future-other' => '{0} ھەفتەی تر',
	'week-one' => '{0} ھەفتە',
	'week-other' => '{0} ھەفتە',
	'week-past-one' => '{0} ھەفتە لەمەوپێش',
	'week-past-other' => '{0} ھەفتە لەمەوپێش',
	'week-short-future-one' => '{0} ھەفتەی تر',
	'week-short-future-other' => '{0} ھەفتەی تر',
	'week-short-past-one' => '{0} ھەفتە لەمەوپێش',
	'week-short-past-other' => '{0} ھەفتە لەمەوپێش',
	'year-future-one' => '{0} ساڵی تر',
	'year-future-other' => '{0} ساڵی تر',
	'year-one' => '{0} ساڵ',
	'year-other' => '{0} ساڵ',
	'year-past-one' => '{0} ساڵ لەمەوپێش',
	'year-past-other' => '{0} ساڵ لەمەوپێش',
	'year-short-future-one' => '{0} ساڵی تر',
	'year-short-future-other' => '{0} ساڵی تر',
	'year-short-past-one' => '{0} ساڵ لەمەوپێش',
	'year-short-past-other' => '{0} ساڵ لەمەوپێش',

Thank you for your help! Aram (talk) 21:14, 11 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

Thank you. I will try to get these deployed to Wikipedia soon. Matma Rex (talk) 13:26, 13 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hello @Matma Rex, I can now confirm that the changes have been made. We, as ckbwiki, really appreciate you taking on this task and doing it successfully. As a reminder, please close T327123 as resolved. Thank you very much again! Aram (talk) 19:50, 2 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your patience! I'm glad everything works well (and I'm sorry I forgot to let you know when the changes were going live). Matma Rex (talk) 05:28, 3 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

No problem, It's okay. :) Aram (talk) 09:38, 3 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Aram, most translation is done at TranslateWiki.net. You can see the names of two translators on this random history page. You can also see what has been translated into ckb for this tool.

As I understand it, this particular problem would ideally be solved through a different (underlying) system. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 16:09, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Whatamidoing (WMF) Yes, I know most of the translations are done at TranslateWiki.net, but these ones are not belong to there. As far as I can remember, I translated most of the messages in this project. Thanks! Aram (talk) 13:07, 11 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Notifications about topic archiving

Latest comment: 3 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

The talk page discussion archiving notifications that were recently introduced don't strike me as particularly helpful, and I'm not sure I'd suggest including them on by default. Most of the time, it seems the subscription transfers to the archive page, so telling me I might no longer get notifications for it seems misleading. On usefulness, most of the time, it seems that discussions have naturally concluded by the time they're archived, so it's just a nuisance. And in the times when things are more dicey, I worry that the notification could spur participants in a dispute to take up again an issue they had previously dropped, leading to WP:STICK violations. Lastly, when I clicked "stop getting notifications like this", it didn't give me any confirmation feedback, so I wasn't sure it actually worked, or how to turn it back on again if I wanted to (although I managed to find it in the settings when I searched). Sdkb ^talk 00:32, 12 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

I am glad with this notification which I happened to receive the first time today.

I do need such information:

Nobody did complain any longer about this issue, I can procede now.
This case has been closed, I can forget about it.
I need to re-open and unarchive this section since it has been gone without solution.

I do not need to worry about issues which seem to be open, I can terminate the neurons in my brain.

In other tools like Flow (SD) or Phabricator I also get a note when an issue has been resolved, answered, declined etc. PerfektesChaos (talk) 19:29, 12 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

I am wondering whether this is something that we want now, while people learn the limitations of the system, but maybe not forever. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:18, 13 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Overlined links

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

In Google Chrome on macOS 12.5.1, liks can sometimes be overlined if they are immediately below a reply button. I observed this somewhere in w:Special:Permalink/1110254662. LaundryPizza03 (talk) 14:20, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

@LaundryPizza03 This is caused by a bug in Chrome (https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1359501), but there is a MediaWiki workaround being worked on (https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T317135) the wub "?!" 16:48, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Suggestion: Alert me when posting that someone else's reply has come in since I started replying

Latest comment: 3 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Sometimes, another contributor reply the exact same thing just a few minutes before me, making my reply useless or even annoying (if I ping an user). Example : :fr:w:special:diff/197452297.

When I submit a reply, I would prefer to automatically check if new reply has been submitted by other users and if there is, be asked for confirmation. Metamorforme42 (talk) 11:35, 3 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

Support.

However, IIRC this suggestion has been made already and it has been discontinued to avoid confusion of less experienced users. Perhaps an expert mode for tough users would be required.

It is not obvious how the author should react when such message arrives, and they might discard and loose their entire edit now. PerfektesChaos (talk) 13:20, 5 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

This already exists. If someone else replies while you're typing, you'll get a "Show new comment" alert. Clicking that will reload the page and highlight the new comments in that section. If the toolbar is still turned on in the Reply tool, it will even rescue the text you've already typed.

It won't catch 100% of replies (what if they other person clicked the button only five seconds before you?), but it should catch most of them. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:29, 11 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

Possibility to disable automatic subscription for certain pages

Latest comment: 3 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Hello @Whatamidoing (WMF) and everyone else in Editing,

I very much love using DiscussionTools, but since recently, it subscribes me to certain high-traffic noticeboards, which fire dozens of notifications. Is it possible to disable the automatic subscription for certain high-traffic pages?

Most of those high-traffic noticeboards are SRP, SRGP and similar. Those pages are split into several sections (by affected permissions), and the actual threads then start with === sections. This means that any time I say something on any of those noticeboards, it subscribes me to everything that happens there, which is...a lot of notifications.

I see two potential solutions for this problem:

Let me disable the auto subscriptions for certain pages (in my user preferences)
Make the tool handle SRP/SRGP properly (ie. somewhat recognize that sections start at a different headline level; perhaps, through a magic word added to the special page?)

Implementing any of those two solutions would make me enjoy DiscussionTools even more!

Have a great day, Martin Urbanec (talk) 16:09, 2 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

First thought: "See? I'm not the only person who needs phab:T287790!" ("Let me mute pages that I don't want to be auto-subscribed to discussions on")

A couple of thoughts:

Could you be the victim of the "duplicated discussion" problem? It basically matches the oldest signature in a section, so if someone posts multiple comments in a single whole-page edit, you could end up subscribed to all the sections with the same timestamp, including matching items on other pages. (Expect this if you ever subscribe to a Tech/News section...)
You can't subscribe to ===Level 3=== subsections because phab:T275943 (the code's probably easy, but making the result predictable/expected is difficult). As a workaround, could at least some of these pages be re-structured, so that they use ==Level 2== section headings for the individual reports? Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 04:46, 3 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the reply! I think the duplicated discussions is not the issue, the headlines are unique, but are Level 3, unfortunately.

I'm afraid that restructuring the pages could be tricky (many existing tools, such as archival bots or filler helpers, expecting Level 3 headlines). Perhaps we can introduce a new magic word, something like {{#threadheadline:3}}, to indicate which headline level indicates a new thread? That way, pages with different threading system can easily benefit from Discussion Tools as well.

FTR, there are also other pages that would benefit from this feature (m:Talk:Spam blacklist and m::Title blacklist are the ones I'm aware from the top of my head, but there are likely others in the world of wiki). Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:43, 5 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

There are lots of pages structured link this at the English Wikipedia, including the daily pages for w:en:WP:AFD, w:en:WP:PM, w:en:WP:ANRFC, and w:en:WP:RFPP. I think this structure really only happens at the largest wikis. phab:T275943 is the Phab task for it. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 00:10, 8 November 2022 (UTC)Reply