User talk:Trizek (WMF)

Jump to navigation Jump to search

About this board

This page uses StructuredDiscussions. For general Feedback about StructuredDiscussions, please post it on the dedicated page!

Previous discussion was archived at User talk:Trizek (WMF)/Archive 1 on 2015-09-30.

I want to add Structured Discussions Extension to my wiki..

1
Falcopragati (talkcontribs)

Does anybody knows the correct way to do so ??

Using MediaWiki for the first time

Reply to "I want to add Structured Discussions Extension to my wiki.."
Sunpriat (talkcontribs)

I wrote on the forums of other projects (ru.wiktionary, ru.wikiquote, ru.wikibooks, ru.wikisource, ru.wikinews, ru.wikiversity, ru.wikivoyage) and invited for general discussion in ru-wikipedia or Mediawiki, but there is low activity. Can a banner be shown to them too?

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Sure! I'll configure it that way. :)

Sunpriat (talkcontribs)

"Talk pages consultation 2019" page says that everything should be completed by June 10th. It is now June 13th, but the banner is still showing. Maybe it's time to stop the banner to close the discussion and make a summary? And where is the page for summary?

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

The deadline has been changed to June 15, but apparently the person in charge of the updates hasn't changed the pages. Sorry.

Concerning the page for summaries, we will contact you soon about it.

Reply to "Banner"

Talk Pages

5
Summary by RhinosF1

Qualtrics was withdrawn - Discussion regarding communication ongoing

RhinosF1 (talkcontribs)

As asked previously on the Individual feedback page, When will the Qualtrics survey be available for the talk pages consultation?

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

I'm afraid that option is not on the table anymore. We had some issues to configure it and the deadline is soon.

RhinosF1 (talkcontribs)
Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

I need to confirm that first. Thank you for the ping though! :)

RhinosF1 (talkcontribs)

@Trizek (WMF): What is their to confirm? If the option is not available then you should tell people especially when someone has asked about it.


If you're on IRC, please feel free to PM me (RF1dle) as long as you have a registered nick.


RhinosF1

Reply to "Talk Pages"

Some news for Talk pages consultation primary contacts

1
MediaWiki message delivery (talkcontribs)

Hello

You have volunteered to be a coordinator for the Talk pages consultation 2019. Thank you!

We want to share with you some important information, so as some advice. All of this is based on feedback, observations and some decisions taken around phase 1 of the consultation.

Can you ask for details?

We have noticed that some people explain what they wish to have, and they express what they like or dislike on talk pages. However, they don't explain why.

Explaining why is very important: it allows us to find the common needs between users. Can you please review the feedback already received, and ask for details and "why"?

Reaching at other projects

Most of the consultation pages are hosted on Wikipedia, on several languages. We also need to get the feedback from people who contribute to other projects. Don't forget to invite them to participate (or setup their own consultation page). The more feedback we have, the better.

Reaching at newcomers

Most feedback received so far has come from experienced users. It is unfortunately not representative of all the users who use talk pages. Please consider to send an invite to some active newcomers. Again, the more feedback we have, the better.

To find some newcomers to contact, you can replace the RecentChanges link on your wiki with the following set of filters: Special:RecentChanges?userExpLevel=learner&hidebots=1&translations=filter&hidecategorization=1&hideWikibase=1&namespace=1%3B3%3B5&limit=500&days=30&urlversion=2. It will show the list of users who have made less than 500 edits, and some edits on discussion pages. You can also invite people who left messages ont your local Help desk.

Due date is now known!

Community summaries are due by April 6, 2019. We advise communities, especially the ones that would have had collected a lot of replies, to end the conversation by March 31. That way, volunteers will have enough time to wrap up the discussions.

How to close the conversations?

We have seen that some of the coordinators have started the conversations using the usual places to have conversations on their wikis. It is an easy way to reach people. However, since the consultation is based on a different consultation process than the usual ones, those rules regarding how to close conversations may not need to be applied. It is up to you to decide!

And again, thank you for your help!

Trizek (WMF) 16:56, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

Broadcasting the talk-page-consultation to a more massive audience

2
Winged Blades of Godric (talkcontribs)

If I search the archives of en.wiki; I find many people who were intrinsically involved with Flow/LT. It might be that they liked that or that they thought it to be a disaster or that they offered general opinions on the broader aspects. Don't you think that reaching out to them is prudential, too?

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Anyone is welcomed to participate to that consultation. I've only targeted people who identified themselves as being interested by those kind of updates.

I haven't targeted people who were involved in former discussions because those discussions have also happen on multiple wikis and, since our talk pages are like they are, it is really much more difficult to search in archives and get those names.

If you think that former participants to Flow/LQT should be more informed about that conversation, please contact them.  :) We are also going to display a banner to all users soon.


Reply to "Broadcasting the talk-page-consultation to a more massive audience"

Activate Structured Discussions on vi.wikisource

6
Summary by Trizek (WMF)
Vinhtantran (talkcontribs)

Hello Trizek, I posted a request here but it didn't get notice. Could you take a look at that? Happy holidays. Vinhtantran (talk) 15:38, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Hello

sorry for the delay, but I was off for holidays. :)

I'll start the process to deploy Structured Discussions as the Beta feature on your wiki.

It will include the possibility for every user to convert their talk page and to admins to create or convert any pages as well. If I've understood correctly your discussion on Vietnamese Wikisource, that's where you are expecting. Correct?

Vinhtantran (talkcontribs)

Yes, that's what we discussed. Thank you.

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Hey Vinhtantran, FYI the process is onging. Where should I tell the community when the feature will be available?

Vinhtantran (talkcontribs)

That's great. s:vi:Wikisource:Thảo_luận is our central discussion and also the place for general accouncement and news from meta and MediaWiki. You can place the announcements there and I'll help translating them to Vietnamese.

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Hey, I've left a message there.

You can now enable Structured Discussions on your talk page using the Beta feature. sysops can also enable Structured discussions on any page, using Special:EnableStructuredDiscussions.

Thank you!

Martyav (talkcontribs)

Hi. I'm an intern with Outreachy/Round 17. I'm currently working closely with Srishti Sethi on the Developer Advocate team. My project is to update and improve the action API docs. Some of the pages I am tasked with have translation tags, which makes moving sections around to fit our template more complicated. Could you have a look at the drafts in my Sandbox to make sure the tags are correctly place and won't cause headaches for future editors? I have a list of my work in progress on my user page. Thanks! Martyav (talk) 15:20, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Hey Martyav

Thank you for your message!

The translated pages are two types:

Literal translations are like taking a full page and translating it without any guide or structure. This is not what we use now.

From what I see, pages you're working on are using the literal system. Their translations are outdated since a while. It would be simpler to have those pages deleted and the pages you're creating properly marked for translations, using the actual system in use. There is a doc about preparing a page for translation.

Ask me if you block on something.

Martyav (talkcontribs)

Thank you. I'll talk to my mentor about it. That would certainly speed things up. However, I'm concerned this would remove the existing translations on the pages in the main namespace. The way we work, we take an existing page, create a draft based on it, then copy and paste the draft into the existing pages when it's ready. The tags on my drafts are based on the existing translation units on these pages. If we started over completely, we would lose the edit history and any translations already made to the page.

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

My suggestion to work from scratch is only for pages that are using the old translation format. That's the case for the pages you have in your sandbox, which was your initial question.

Pages using extension:translate should indeed be updated to keep existing translations alive. It is a bit trickier, but it saves time a lot for translators. Pages using that extension have been reviewed by some translation admins. They have changed some details and marked the pages for translations. Which means you are doing this well. :)

Martyav (talkcontribs)

Thanks for the response. While most of the articles listed on my userpage are as you described, the ones with 'WIP (translation)' contain tags that are based on the translation units from existing pages. It is indeed trickier to deal with these, and my mentor is concerned that they will introduce breaking changes if they are copy/pasted into the existing pages they are based on. For these pages, I need someone to review that the tags are correctly placed and will not cause problems.

SSethi (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Thanks, @Trizek (WMF), for your reply on this so far! :)

I want to chime in here and add a few more details and ask a couple of questions:

More specifically for API:Lists could you tell if this an example of literal translation or this is something done via Extension:Translate tool? What is the best way to identify that? Changes that we plan to integrate are still in @Martyav's Sandbox: User:Martyav/Sandbox/API:Lists. We tried to retain the translation tags in the new changes where feasible, but we ended up keeping very few because of quite a lot of re-organizing/re-wording content. Now, we are hesitant to push our changes to the main namespace because we feel that a lot of the work of translators might get lost in this process.

It might appear that User:Martyav/Sandbox/API:Lists and API:Lists are not different, but the attempt was to follow theAPI:Documentation_template and re-organize the content for better readability/ understanding on the topic.  

There will be similar more documentation examples like the API: Lists I shared above that Marty will be addressing shortly, and so understanding the approach we should take on this one might help us a lot going forward :)

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

@SSethi (WMF) API:Lists is using Extension translate. Pages using Extension translate have a "Translate this page" link on top and small colored squares close to each language.

User:Martyav/Sandbox/API:Lists has zero translation tags and markers. When I compare the two pages, I see that some content from the draft is really, really close to the wording of the old one. Things similar should be kept. The best practice is to preserve everything that can be preserved:

Draft:

Results for list queries always have a limit; the default limit is 10. The results limit can be set as high as 500 for regular users, or 5000 for users with the apihighlimits right (typically bots and sysops). Some modules impose stricter limits under certain conditions (more details).

Existing page:

<translate>

All list queries return a limited number of results.

This limit is 10 by default, and can be set as high as 500 for regular users, or 5000 for users with the <tvar|apihighlimits><code>apihighlimits</code></> right (typically bots and sysops).</translate>

Ideal compromise

Draft should then be the following, to preserve as many elements as we can:

<translate>

All list queries return a limited number of results.</translate> <translate>

This limit is 10 by default, and can be set as high as 500 for regular users, or 5000 for users with the <tvar|apihighlimits><code>apihighlimits</code></> right (typically bots and sysops).</translate>

<translate>

Some modules impose stricter limits under certain conditions (<tvar|conditions>[[Special:MyLanguage/API:Lists/All</>|more details]])

</translate>

We should have a meeting to discuss, it would make things easier.

Martyav (talkcontribs)
SSethi (WMF) (talkcontribs)

@Trizek (WMF) Thanks for taking a look! I am sorry I shared the wrong link in my reply to you. As @Martyav points out the correct link, could you take a look at it one more time and comment if the translation changes look up to the mark and convey that we have tried to preserve whatever we could :)

If there are major tweaks required, we would love to meet with you to discuss/ understand more on this topic.

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

I believe you when you say that you've preserved whatever you can. I've checked the page and fixed some details about the lists and added a tvar (on an existing item, but that's an improvement).

Translation are ready to be set. Using the translation markup is not really easy, and you've done a great job, @Martyav. Bravo!

To replace the existing page by your draft, copy the content of your draft where the page is and ask a translation admin to mark it for translation. But don't mark the draft for translation and then move it: it would break.

SSethi (WMF) (talkcontribs)
Martyav (talkcontribs)
Reply to "Help with improving API docs"

About Growth Team in Vietnamese Wikipedia

2
Bluetpp (talkcontribs)

Hello,

I was informed that you're looking for a team for a project in ViWiki, I'd like to help the project. How can I help? Thank you very much. Bluetpp (talk) 11:00, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Hello Bluettp and thank you for your message!

So far, we are looking for a wiki that agrees to work with us. You can hep by looking at the ressources we have. minhhuy has forgotten the links in his message - not a big deal, it happens. :)

If your community agrees to work with us, we will globally need help on translating the tools.

Each project has some specific tasks to work on:

  • for Understanding first day (Hiểu được Ngày đầu tiên), we will need your community help to edit some templates and pages. This is needed to know where people go when they create an account.
  • for Personalized first day (Cá nhân hóa Ngày đầu tiên), we will ask newcomers about their motivation. Why have they created an account? About which topics do they want to edit pages? Do they want to be contacted by a volunteer via email? We will need a list of the most active wikiprojects your community have and some people ready to reply to some emails (that option is still under discussion).
  • for the focus on the help desk we will need more people ready to reply to newcomers. We will provide some advice for people who are not sure about how to interact with new users.

I will recontact your community about all those tasks if you all agree to work with us.

Your community will get some benefits from those experiments: you will have a better understanding of what people do and want to do when they create an account on Vietnamese Wikipedia. You will also have a better way to interact with them.

Do not hesitate to tell me if you need more information. You can share what I've written to your community. If your community has questions, please gather them on Vietnamese Wikipedia's Thảo luận, I'll reply there.

Thank you again for your help!

Reply to "About Growth Team in Vietnamese Wikipedia"

Right place to provide a piece of community feedback

4
Kaartic (talkcontribs)

Hi Trizek,

I suppose you remember the discussion related to the New filters for edit review that was happening in Wikinews. I continued to discuss a little to find what was wrong with deploying the change and got a sensible response from a user. I think the reason as to why they push back changes is well described in that reply.

It seems to be a valid reasoning to me. So, I thought of getting more information to find what would make things smoother for them. The user stated that "design changes should be in the hands of the local communities" as a thesis which might help solve the issue. I'm not sure as to whether it's a good suggestion or not but I thought it would nice to point that to the relevant people so that they could take it into consideration.

That said, I'm not sure who to point that piece of feedback to. It would be nice if you could help me with it. Thanks.

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Hello Kaartic

What is precisely the point you refer to? If that's the burden caused by new tools, I haven't seen any good will to try those tools. The lack of volunteers is not a point as well: ORES can help to review edits more easily; we've offered that option. I question myself since the beginning: the discussion is about the filters in theory, but what is the real point behind that discussion? The filters are not imposed to individuals (option to opt-out individually). In your opinion, am I missing something?

Concerning the design of tools let to communities, every design process is open and we do our best to be transparent. I've also seen too many times people refusing facts and figures about why a new tool is useful, or assistance in assimilating those, new tools because those tools and features are not aligned to their personal plans. That mentality really depends on the community and, fortunately, I see more people happy of the changes than the opposite. :)

Kaartic (talkcontribs)

Hi,

Sorry for the delayed response. Got busy a little these days.

> What is precisely the point you refer to?

I was just conveying a comment of one of the Wikinews community members in which he possibly theorises that "When the design of the tools are given in the hands, the deployment would be more gradual and accepting". It does seem to touch upon the burden of the new tools, I suppose.

> The lack of volunteers is not a point as well: ORES can help to review edits more easily; we've offered that option.

I'm not sure whether that holds for Wikinews. I guess it's mostly about facts and getting them into news and publishing them at the right time. I'm not sure how much ORES could help in that means. If there are way it could, let me know.

> Concerning the design of tools let to communities, every design process is open and we do our best to be transparent.

I do accept this. I've personally felt that and even given some tips myself. May be we should ask for a clarification to the user about why he doesn't feel the design process to be transparent? What do you think?

Trizek (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Hey Kaartic! No apologies needed for your late reply: you're a volunteer already giving a lot of time (than you for that!) and we are all busy. :)

I was just conveying a comment of one of the Wikinews community members in which he possibly theorises that "When the design of the tools are given in the hands, the deployment would be more gradual and accepting". It does seem to touch upon the burden of the new tools, I suppose.

What can we do more than having a long Beta test phase, of people don't take the opportunity to really try the features at that time and provide feedback? Beta features are not Beta forever and at some point they will be deployed by default. The burden can be reduced if people are curious of new tools and aimed to help improving them to fit their needs (in a reasonable way, of course; we can't create custom tools while we try to serve all cases on all wikis).

Concerning ORES, that tool may help people to surface possible vandalism instead of trying to find it edit by edit. They can then have more time to validate new articles. However, it takes time to "feed" ORES.

May be we should ask for a clarification to the user about why he doesn't feel the design process to be transparent? What do you think?

You can if you want, and I'll be curious of the results. But I won't spend time on that while that question has already been commented on English Wikinews, with something I can summarize as "you should do what we want and then prove that's useful to our wiki", which is, in my opinion, a process we can't afford.

Reply to "Right place to provide a piece of community feedback"
Hamilton Abreu (talkcontribs)

Hi Trizek, this edit to Help:Notifications/Notifications types added "Mention templates don't work." Do we really want to state in a help page that something not previously defined (either on that page or on the entire site) doesn't work, and not tell why?

Elitre (WMF) (talkcontribs)
Hamilton Abreu (talkcontribs)

So it is saying that {{ping}} and {{reply to}} don't work if used in edit summaries. Correct?

Elitre (WMF) (talkcontribs)

That's how that worked last time I checked, correct. I pinged you while editing Project:Sandbox and you shouldn't have received anything.

Hamilton Abreu (talkcontribs)

Confirmed. Many thanks.

Reply to "Mention templates"