Re: [Wikitech-l] GSoC 2015 participation
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 2:25 AM, wctaiwan wctaiwan+li...@gmail.com wrote: There has been some ongoing activity at the Phabricator task for to this proposal.[1] In particular, [[User:01tonythomas]] seems to be interested in mentoring the project, and a few other potential students have expressed their interest in working on it. wctaiwan [1] https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T76199 Indeed, you can see three GSoC project proposals blocking that task (including the one Vicky submitted today). We are expecting at least one more from @Tinaj1234 based on her comments in that task. All this to say that there is no need to point new candidates to this project idea. Thank you for your support, Pine! ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Starting conversion of LiquidThreads to Flow at mediawiki.org
Hi Risker, the researchers' conclusion in their own words (see section 4.1, Indentation Reliability) is: *Incorrect indentation (i.e., indentation that implies a reply-to relation with the wrong post) is quite common in longer discussions in the EWDC [the English Wikipedia Discussion Corpus].* Responding below to your concerns about their methodology, taking the opportunity to clear up some statistical misconceptions, which might be valuable for other contexts too. On Friday, March 20, 2015, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote: On 20 March 2015 at 06:13, Tilman Bayer tba...@wikimedia.org wrote: On Friday, March 20, 2015, Tilman Bayer tba...@wikimedia.org javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','tba...@wikimedia.org'); wrote: Just to throw this in here as one data point: 39% of talk page threads contain wrong indentations https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Newsletter/2014/November#39.25_of_talk_page_threads_contain_wrong_indentations PS: The result from that paper was actually even worse than that (somewhat sloppy) headline suggests: the researchers found that 29 of 74 total turns, or 39%±14pp of an average thread, had indentation that misidentified the turn to which they were a reply. I'm not sure you really read the underlying study, Tilman; the sample size is so absurdly small that there is no way it is statistically signifant. (550 discussions on 83 article talk pages, in case anyone was wondering; No, the sample size was actually stated right in the sentence I quoted above: 74 total turns (talk page comments responding to another one), together with a ±14pp confidence interval. And what exactly did you mean here by statistically significant? The term doesn't make mathematical sense when applied to such a measured percentage in isolation, i.e. without a hypothesis or comparison value. Rather, one can talk about confidence intervals - a smaller confidence interval means the estimate is likely to be more precise. The 550 discussions you quoted refer to a different sample within the same corpus. the equivalent of about 10 minutes' worth of discussions on enwiki, except that they are looking at talk pages that may have conversations dating back 10+ years.) This 10 minutes/10 years comparison and the absurdly small/no way rhetoric sound a lot like a common statistical fallacy, namely erroneously assuming that it is size of the sample as a fraction of the population that matters http://www.amstat.org/publications/jse/v12n2/smith.html (Unless the sample encompasses a substantial portion of the population, the standard error of an estimator depends on the size of the sample, but not the size of the population. This is a crucial statistical insight that students find very counterintuitive). Granted, if one draws a sample of 74 turns from all turns on all talk pages made in Wikipedia's history, then it's plausible that that overall population numbers hundreds of millions. But at such a large population size (or small sample/population ratio) it is is the absolute size of the sample that matters for the size of the confidence interval - not how large the sample is compared to the population. There may be accessible explanations elsewhere that include more of the math behind it, but perhaps this Khan Academy video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1JT9oODsClE helps, which walks one through a calculation showing how measuring a percentage of 38% in a sample of just 150 US households (out of 100+million) already allows one to reject the null hypothesis that the real percentage among the entire population of all households is less than 30%. It calls 150 a large sample in terms of the approximation regime used there - which I'm sure you must find extremely shocking as you earlier called a sample of 550 absurdly small. For a more thorough derivation, these online lectures http://www.stat.berkeley.edu/~stark/SticiGui/Text/confidenceIntervals.htm are quite useful (see e.g. the Conservative confidence intervals for percentages section. The finite population correction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finite_population_correction term there is close to 1 for small sample/population ratios and so the resulting formula for the confidence interval does no longer depend on N, the population size). Sure, in the present case the absolute size of the sample (74) wasn't very big either, and there are other things to consider such as the selection method (e.g. they actually selected from whole threads longer than 10 turns each only, so that's what the percentage relates to). But the authors did their due diligence and indicated the limitations resulting from the sample size by including that ±14% confidence interval. Yes, that's quite broad and for more precise estimations of the real overall percentage of wrong indentations (39% or 32% or 48%?...) one would need a larger sample. But it already makes it highly unlikely that this real percentage is only 1% or 2%, say. Hence I
Re: [Wikitech-l] Renaming two extension with same name
Hi i think we should rename this http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:DynamicPageList_(Wikimedia) back to its old name or a new name since the page identifier people would think it is confusing since it says Wikimedia people might think this extension will only work on Wikimedia. and then the pages can be moved back intersection and DynamicPageList_(thid_party) to DynamicPageList with out needing Wikimedia org third party at the end. On Monday, 23 March 2015, 7:15, Krinkle krinklem...@gmail.com wrote: They have the same label but they don't have the same identifier internally. They have different wiki page names: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:DynamicPageList_(Wikimedia) http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:DynamicPageList_(third-party) Software shouldn't treat parenthesis different than any other part of it. The repositories are different:* mediawiki/extensions/intersection * mediawiki/extensions/DynamicPageList They register different ExtensionCredit names (which I believe is what WikiApiary uses: 'name' = 'DynamicPageList',* 'name' = 'DynamicPageList (third party)', Confusing indeed, and I wouldn't oppose renaming the Wikimedia one to Intersection. But it sounds like a bug in WikiApiary if these are someone being considered the same by it's tracking software. Please report that to them or file a bug in Phabricator if there is something they found wrong in the extension that could help mitigate the issue. — Krinkle On 22 Mar 2015, at 13:08, Thomas Mulhall thomasmulhall...@yahoo.com wrote: They both have the same name and when in api it would show twice resulting in wikiaprary tracking them both and putting them in the same page causing it to show the wrong extension. On Sunday, 22 March 2015, 11:27, Andre Klapper aklap...@wikimedia.org wrote: On Sun, 2015-03-22 at 08:54 +, Thomas Mulhall wrote: Here are links to the extension. http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:DynamicPageList_(Wikimedia) http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:DynamicPageList_(third-party) Is there some problem with them or any resulting question? andre -- Andre Klapper | Wikimedia Bugwrangler http://blogs.gnome.org/aklapper/ ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Renaming two extension with same name
They have the same label but they don't have the same identifier internally. They have different wiki page names: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:DynamicPageList_(Wikimedia) http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:DynamicPageList_(third-party) Software shouldn't treat parenthesis different than any other part of it. The repositories are different: * mediawiki/extensions/intersection * mediawiki/extensions/DynamicPageList They register different ExtensionCredit names (which I believe is what WikiApiary uses: 'name' = 'DynamicPageList', *'name' = 'DynamicPageList (third party)', Confusing indeed, and I wouldn't oppose renaming the Wikimedia one to Intersection. But it sounds like a bug in WikiApiary if these are someone being considered the same by it's tracking software. Please report that to them or file a bug in Phabricator if there is something they found wrong in the extension that could help mitigate the issue. — Krinkle On 22 Mar 2015, at 13:08, Thomas Mulhall thomasmulhall...@yahoo.com wrote: They both have the same name and when in api it would show twice resulting in wikiaprary tracking them both and putting them in the same page causing it to show the wrong extension. On Sunday, 22 March 2015, 11:27, Andre Klapper aklap...@wikimedia.org wrote: On Sun, 2015-03-22 at 08:54 +, Thomas Mulhall wrote: Here are links to the extension. http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:DynamicPageList_(Wikimedia) http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:DynamicPageList_(third-party) Is there some problem with them or any resulting question? andre -- Andre Klapper | Wikimedia Bugwrangler http://blogs.gnome.org/aklapper/ ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Regarding gsoc 2015
On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 7:25 PM, Arindam Padhy b113...@iiit-bh.ac.in wrote: in so less time it is not possible to think on a different project or try to choose another project. I understand, but this is exactly what the mentor of this project idea was trying to avoid by commenting publicly https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T90238#1110579 twelve days ago. As he has pointed out when I asked, by that time there were other contributors working on the microtasks proposed. All this information was linked from the Phabricator task, again, thanks to the Wikimedia evaluation process that extends on transparency and community participation on top of GSoC process. i have already done a lot of thinking on this project. if possible we both can design half projects respectively because i assure i can do this also and quite well. please consider my proposal and think about it. We have tried once accepting two interns to collaborate on the same project, and the experience was not stellar... But what is more important, regardless of what happens before the deadline for projects, all proposals submitted to Wikimedia are treated equally, applying common standards (see https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Outreach_programs/Possible_projects#Possible_mentors and the links mentioned there). You have submitted your proposal to Google Melange, which is the required step to be accepted in GSoC. Good! Please create the related Phabricator task as indicated in https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Google_Summer_of_Code_2015#Add_your_proposal and work on one microtask or more. This is the best way to be assessed fairly, based on your proposal and contributions. ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Regarding gsoc 2015
Okay sir I will proceed forward as you say On 23 Mar 2015 14:32, Quim Gil q...@wikimedia.org wrote: On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 7:25 PM, Arindam Padhy b113...@iiit-bh.ac.in wrote: in so less time it is not possible to think on a different project or try to choose another project. I understand, but this is exactly what the mentor of this project idea was trying to avoid by commenting publicly https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T90238#1110579 twelve days ago. As he has pointed out when I asked, by that time there were other contributors working on the microtasks proposed. All this information was linked from the Phabricator task, again, thanks to the Wikimedia evaluation process that extends on transparency and community participation on top of GSoC process. i have already done a lot of thinking on this project. if possible we both can design half projects respectively because i assure i can do this also and quite well. please consider my proposal and think about it. We have tried once accepting two interns to collaborate on the same project, and the experience was not stellar... But what is more important, regardless of what happens before the deadline for projects, all proposals submitted to Wikimedia are treated equally, applying common standards (see https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Outreach_programs/Possible_projects#Possible_mentors and the links mentioned there). You have submitted your proposal to Google Melange, which is the required step to be accepted in GSoC. Good! Please create the related Phabricator task as indicated in https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Google_Summer_of_Code_2015#Add_your_proposal and work on one microtask or more. This is the best way to be assessed fairly, based on your proposal and contributions. ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
[Wikitech-l] [VisualEditor] 7th weekly triage meeting; office hour for March
Hello all, and apologies for cross-posting. Here are some reminders and announcements about upcoming appointments related to VisualEditor. A *triage meeting* for VisualEditor (the last one for this quarter) is scheduled for* Wednesday, 25 March 2015 at 19:00 UTC* [1]. For more information, and to learn how you can participate even if you're not taking part to the Google Hangout, please see the relevant page at mediawiki.org [2]. This *Friday 27 March at 15:00 UTC* an *office hour* about VE will be held on IRC [3]. Previous logs and other information, including how to participate, can be found at Meta [4]. Please notice it will be the last office hour in this format, but we'd like to discuss alternative formulas which are more useful for everybody. Therefore, please see and comment the related Phabricator task [5], or just come and discuss the future of these conversations with us on Friday. Looking forward to meeting you later this week! Elitre (WMF) https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Community_Engagement_(Product) [1] http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?hour=19min=00sec=0day=25month=03year=2015 [2] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:VisualEditor/Portal [3] http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?hour=15min=00sec=0day=27month=03year=2015 [4] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC_office_hours [5] https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T92783 ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Office hours for Flow - 23 March 2015 19:30 UTC / 12:30 PDT
Hi, A quick reminder, this is starting in 1 hour. Please see below, for the original announcement and links. Thanks, Quiddity On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 7:19 PM, Nick Wilson (Quiddity) nwil...@wikimedia.org wrote: Hello everyone, (my apologies for cross-posting) We'll be holding an Office hour for Flow on IRC, this Monday at 19:30 UTC / 12:30 PST.[1] It will take place in #wikimedia-office on Freenode IRC. You can find information on how to get online, including a link to a webchat option if you don't have an IRC client, on the meta office hours page.[2] The intended focus is for questions about the LQT - Flow conversion on MediaWiki.org, as discussed in the related wikitech-l thread and onwiki.[3][4] Everyone is welcome for discussions and question answering. Logs will be posted on the meta office hour page afterwards. Thanks, Quiddity [1] Time conversion: http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?hour=19min=30sec=0day=23month=03year=2015 (30 mins later than previously mentioned) [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC_office_hours#How_to_participate [3] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Topic:Sdoatsbslsafx6lw and at http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.science.linguistics.wikipedia.technical/82069 [4] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Flow -- Nick Wilson (Quiddity) Community Liaison Wikimedia Foundation ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
