On Sep 10, 2014 5:11 AM, Keegan Peterzell keegan.w...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 10:04 AM, Wil Sinclair w...@wllm.com wrote:
FWIW, I signed my first comment by hand. I missed the comments about
sigs in the wikitext editor interface. If it weren't for my family
situation,
I had a reply yesterday from WMF legal. The answer is no.
This is based on the WMF believing that they have no policies which
obligate them to explain what records they keep on a volunteer or
provide copies of records, and that there are no data protection laws
that ensure that this information
Hoi.
When you look at talk pages in isolation, you look at them on a computer
screen. A mobile or tablet screen is increasingly not used in isolation. It
is where we find our new users and editors. We cannot afford to ignore
them; they are our future. This is why tinkering with talk pages is not
On Sep 10, 2014 9:35 AM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hoi.
When you look at talk pages in isolation, you look at them on a computer
screen. A mobile or tablet screen is increasingly not used in isolation.
I'm not sure what you mean by this.
It
is where we find our new
Hoi,
I expected that it was obvious... Arguments that are based on desktop
experiences are futile because the desktop experience is the lesser of two
evils. The desktop experience is already bad, the experience on mobiles and
tablets is much worse it is intolerably unusable,
Yes, you are
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 9:55 AM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hoi,
I expected that it was obvious... Arguments that are based on desktop
experiences are futile because the desktop experience is the lesser of two
evils. The desktop experience is already bad, the experience
In case it's not clear enough in my sig, this is my personal opinion:
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 12:20 AM, Martijn Hoekstra
martijnhoeks...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sep 10, 2014 5:11 AM, Keegan Peterzell keegan.w...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 10:04 AM, Wil Sinclair w...@wllm.com
Dear WikiMedia foundation,
in the context of a EU research project [1], we are interested in accessing
wikipedia access traces.
In the past, such traces were given for research purposes to other groups
[2].
Unfortunately, only a small percentage (10%) of that trace has been made
made available
Hi Valerio,
This kind of request is a better fit for the Research mailing list. I've
included the email for that list in the To: line of this email reply.
Pine
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 4:15 AM, Valerio Schiavoni
valerio.schiav...@gmail.com wrote:
Dear WikiMedia foundation,
in the context of
On 8 September 2014 08:22, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8 September 2014 05:46, John Mark Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote:
If it is good
software, the projects will *ask* for it to be deployed, like they did
with LiquidThreads, and users will want to use it on their user talk
On 10 September 2014 12:54, Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk wrote:
* inter-wiki or intra-wiki integration of multiple-venue discussions
rather than several parallel pages and potentially parallel
discussions (not a very frequent issue, but a messy one when needed;
Pine notes this below)
On 10 September 2014 07:54, Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk wrote:
On 8 September 2014 08:22, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
snip
* potential to work with Notifications (tell me when anyone replies
to this discussion) without needing individual pings or relying on
spotting
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 12:27 AM, Fæ fae...@gmail.com wrote:
Should WMF Legal say they are happy for me to do so, I will be happy
to publish their reply in full.
Our reply, as I sent it at 7:58 pm Pacific time, Sep. 9:
===
Hi, Ashley-
As you know, the Wikimedia Foundation keeps
Am 10.09.2014 09:56 schrieb Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com:
Hoi,
I expected that it was obvious... Arguments that are based on desktop
experiences are futile because the desktop experience is the lesser of
two
evils. The desktop experience is already bad, the experience on mobiles
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 2:42 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10 September 2014 07:54, Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk wrote:
On 8 September 2014 08:22, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
snip
* potential to work with Notifications (tell me when anyone replies
to
On 09/10/2014 11:45 AM, MF-Warburg wrote:
What do you propose to make talk pages easier to read and analyse?
That's a hard question, and I expect one where a lot of UX
experimentation will need to take place before we know.
But one thing /is/ known: it's going to be feasible iff the data is
On 10 September 2014 16:48, Marc A. Pelletier m...@uberbox.org wrote:
On 09/10/2014 11:45 AM, MF-Warburg wrote:
What do you propose to make talk pages easier to read and analyse?
That's a hard question, and I expect one where a lot of UX
experimentation will need to take place before we
On 09/10/2014 11:53 AM, David Gerard wrote:
Making entering text on a phone a process not made entirely of pain
will be interesting.
I don't think it's the text proper that's the issue so much as the
navigation and (often) markup that uses a great deal of punctuation that
phone interfaces were
On 10 September 2014 17:29, Marc A. Pelletier m...@uberbox.org wrote:
Clearly, text discussion with people on phones is a known use case - and
arguably the primary use of those things nowadays - so it's not like
we're blazing new trails there. Editing /documents/ is a different
beast
Hoi,
Ditch talk pages asap. In my opinion tinkering is mostly a waste of effort.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 10 September 2014 17:45, MF-Warburg mfwarb...@googlemail.com wrote:
Am 10.09.2014 09:56 schrieb Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com:
Hoi,
I expected that it was obvious...
On 10 September 2014 17:47, Martijn Hoekstra
I think this is something of an oops, and not really something we should
judge the product on. Currently the broken mess is notify on all posts on
all threads on the page, which should be notify on all posts on the
subscribed thread, and possible on
Gerard, please think of the consequences of what you're proposing.
There are features at talk pages (detailed watchlists, incremental
diffs, true deletion of content) that allow editors and admins to
detect and combat vandalism and remove BLP sensible material and
libel; features which are not
On 09/10/2014 01:25 PM, Diego Moya wrote:
[...] that allow editors and admins to
detect and combat vandalism and remove BLP sensible material and
libel; features which are not available in Flow as of today.
That is simply not true, at last as of the master branch. Topics and
replies can be
On 10 September 2014 18:29, Marc A. Pelletier m...@uberbox.org wrote:
Indeed, the Flow equivalent is even superior in at least one aspect:
given that the actual comments are isolated and not differences between
revision, supressing a comment containing libel that has gone unnoticed
for a bit
On 10 September 2014 04:58, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10 September 2014 12:54, Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk wrote:
* inter-wiki or intra-wiki integration of multiple-venue discussions
rather than several parallel pages and potentially parallel
discussions (not a
On 10 September 2014 19:29, Marc A. Pelletier m...@uberbox.org wrote:
On 09/10/2014 01:25 PM, Diego Moya wrote:
[...] that allow editors and admins to
detect and combat vandalism and remove BLP sensible material and
libel; features which are not available in Flow as of today.
That is simply
On 10 September 2014 18:37, James Forrester jforres...@wikimedia.org wrote:
There have been proposals to use a right-hand bar to show information
relevant to the content in view (see related Wikidata item; articles on
this subject in other languages use these images; etc.); that could be a
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 7:17 PM, Diego Moya dialm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10 September 2014 17:47, Martijn Hoekstra
I think this is something of an oops, and not really something we should
judge the product on. Currently the broken mess is notify on all posts
on
all threads on the page,
Hoi,
Asap stands for as soon as possible. It is obvious that there I do not
like the talk pages at all. That does not mean that it makes sense to
replace them tomorrow.
I want us to cut the crap. Absolutely get rid of talk pages and understand
what it is EXACTLY what the cost benefit is of such a
On 09/10/2014 01:41 PM, Diego Moya wrote:
Take a look at this deleted topic at the test page that was deployed at
en.wiki:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topic:S214uoczkp47cfsx
As far as I can tell, you could see it because it never /was/ deleted.
I just deleted it, can you still see it?
I
On 10 September 2014 10:52, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10 September 2014 18:48, Todd Allen toddmal...@gmail.com wrote:
I think that would be very helpful indeed. This part of the article was
most recently discussed under subject Stop changing the genre. Click
here
to review
On 10 September 2014 18:54, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote:
When a specific way of working insists on talk pages, it means that the
associated workflow has to be revisited and changed with urgency. It cannot
be permitted that special interests take the whole of the much needed
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 7:54 PM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hoi,
Asap stands for as soon as possible. It is obvious that there I do not
like the talk pages at all. That does not mean that it makes sense to
replace them tomorrow.
I want us to cut the crap. Absolutely
On 10 September 2014 18:59, James Forrester jforres...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Eh. I'm not particularly interested in building features that only work in
VE and not wikitext, and particularly not in ones that would require
changing both the wikitext used to write talk pages for the benefit of VE
On 10 September 2014 11:01, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10 September 2014 18:59, James Forrester jforres...@wikimedia.org
wrote:
Eh. I'm not particularly interested in building features that only work
in
VE and not wikitext, and particularly not in ones that would require
On 8 Sep 2014, at 08:22, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 8 September 2014 05:46, John Mark Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote:
If it is good
software, the projects will *ask* for it to be deployed, like they did
with LiquidThreads, and users will want to use it on their user talk
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 7:54 PM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hoi,
Asap stands for as soon as possible. It is obvious that there I do not
like the talk pages at all. That does not mean that it makes sense to
replace them tomorrow.
I want us to cut the crap. Absolutely
Right, it's gone now. However that page survived the attempts of
removal from several administrators who positively wanted to get rid
of any trace of the Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Flow test page, so
I don't know what it says about the discoverability of those features
:-/
It's disturbing to
this represents my personal opinion and in no way is anything official
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 1:17 PM, Diego Moya dialm...@gmail.com wrote:
The feature shouldn't be notify on all posts on the subscribed
thread either. I don't want to be notified every time a new thread
appears at any one of
On 10 September 2014 22:28, Brad Jorsch (Anomie) bjor...@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 1:17 PM, Diego Moya dialm...@gmail.com wrote:
I have about 3000 pages in my
watchlist, and receive around 400 updates daily only from talk pages,
which 50 or so come from unique pages;
On 10 September 2014 19:49, Martijn Hoekstra martijnhoeks...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 7:17 PM, Diego Moya dialm...@gmail.com wrote:
The feature shouldn't be notify on all posts on the subscribed
thread either. I don't want to be notified every time a new thread
appears at any
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 10:42 PM, Diego Moya dialm...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10 September 2014 19:49, Martijn Hoekstra martijnhoeks...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 7:17 PM, Diego Moya dialm...@gmail.com wrote:
The feature shouldn't be notify on all posts on the subscribed
thread
Wil Sinclair wrote:
Flow needs a deep and broad community consensus
to what would probably amount to the biggest single
change in the history of the project for the day-to-day
collaboration amongst editors that is so vital to our success.
Wouldn't it be easier to achieve such consensus if
On 10 September 2014 22:49, Martijn Hoekstra martijnhoeks...@gmail.com wrote:
That doesn't make any difference, Martijn. I ''want'' to be subscribed
to all the topics at my 3000 pages, I just don't want to get a
notification for all them; I want to actively seek most of those at
the watchlist
Having listened for the last week or two, here's what I'm getting as the
WMF perspective as the three primary things attempting to be remedied with
Flow:
1) Newcomers and casual contributors have a very hard time using wiki
markup language and find it difficult to participate in talk pages. Flow
Tim, do you think that this list of all the useful stuff that talk
pages can currently includes things that aren't being done because
they are too advanced for newbie editors or too inconvenient for
veterans?
Regardless, you make a strong argument for keeping a meta-document
that spans threads
On 10 September 2014 19:54, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote:
I want us to cut the crap. Absolutely get rid of talk pages and understand
what it is EXACTLY what the cost benefit is of such a change.
That should be known in advance, before removing the old mechanisms,
not as a
Hoi,
What should be known in advance are the features that are important and how
those features function in a workflow. During the development of software
we work towards implementing such features and corresponding functionality.
We may allow for partial implementation when it fulfills a need
48 matches
Mail list logo
