User talk:RobLa-WMF/Blog

Jump to navigation Jump to search

About this board

Per RobLa's request.

SPage (WMF) (talkcontribs)

You should be dogfooding the prototype dogfood :-) I wonder how a blog in Flow would work. Off the top of my head:

  • Conversations on old topics would push them to the top until users switch from "Recently active topics" to "Newest topics".
  • You could Summarize blog posts, and in the summary use templates with icons for different kinds of posts. You can't (?) filter by them yet, but you/your bot could build subpages that just list different groups of topics.

etc. Anyway, welcome back!

RobLa-WMF (talkcontribs)

Thanks @SPage (WMF). I thought about using Flow for the blog, but I think I want more control than Flow allows me for that. I like having comments managed by Flow, but I also like that I was able to transclude User:RobLa-WMF/Blog into User:RobLa-WMF. My blog, I think, may bear some resemblance to very early blogs, which I kinda like actually.

Reply to "Flowify the dog/blogfood"
Greg (WMF) (talkcontribs)

The phrase "and WikiDev '16 established as an opportunity to settle many stalled issues" could probably just be turned into a success metric itself. Eg: "The Wikimedia Developer Summit is seen as *the* opportunity to settle many stalled issues by all Wikimedian developers."

Greg (WMF) (talkcontribs)

No idea how to measure that, though, especially by the end of Q2 (or even Q3).

Reply to "Q2 goals feedback: Focus"
Greg (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Is this a goal to more formally outline the process and terminology used by the Committee (and by extension, the rest of the Wikimedia developer community) to do what it does? I purposefully didn't say "simply to more formally...".

Reply to "Q2 goals feedback: Experiment"
Greg (WMF) (talkcontribs)

The goal, I suppose, is to make the ArchComm (whatever name, and I'm not in a place right now to judge the relative usefulness of any particular name) appear, through whatever measure one uses (defined by you?), as a functioning group of individuals working together in a more or less unified way (not necessarily in always agreeing, just like supreme court justices don't); in other words, a "team". Is that an accurate interpretation?

Reply to "Q2 goals feedback: Strengthen"
Guillaume (WMF) (talkcontribs)
Reply to ""Where's my RSS feed?""
There are no older topics