User talk:Quiddity (WMF)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Questions about WP:Flow in general? Please ask at Wikipedia talk:Flow, to keep discussions non-fragmented!
"I have studied many philosophers and many cats. The wisdom of cats is infinitely superior." - Hippolyte Taine

Category:Flow[edit]

Category:Flow, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Armbrust The Homunculus 16:11, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Whoops! Agreed with rename, thanks. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 16:52, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Wikiprojects interested in assisting with Flow's first release[edit]

See User talk:Maryana (WMF)#Wikiprojects interested in assisting with Flow's first release.

Congratulations[edit]

I've been waiting for this since we worked together at Wikipedia talk:User Advocacy over the summer. I was thinking Wow, wouldn't Quiddity make a great addition to the WMF team and here you are. This is great news for the project. Sorry I didn't notice until just now. Congratulations. Go team!. 64.40.54.186 (talk) 06:48, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you muchly!
Someone told me, many years ago, (and I wish I could find the exact comment and author, but many searches have failed), something along the lines of "you're not a real Wikipedian until you've made, and learned from, 50 mistakes". I imagine the same will apply to this new role.
*/me raises a toast, to new and interesting mistakes/lessons* :) –Quiddity (talk) 17:51, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Comments on flow[edit]

  1. Too much white space. Needs to be compacted up. We Wikipedians write a lot and need more packed on a page.
  2. My fancy signature does not appear to work. Not a huge issue.
  3. New topics should appear at the bottom rather than the top. That is Wikipedia convention. Could probably adapt.
  4. I like not having to hit an edit button. Big plus as it is faster (much faster) and that will win me over. VE sucked as it was too low.
  5. Like the new time since the edit was made. Way better than that old time thing.
  6. Nothing under history yet. I assume that is coming.
  7. I like the fact that you cannot edit others comments.
  8. While need a way to hide personal info / delete legal attacks
  9. And refs? We need a way to add references, preferably using the cite template. We discuss refs lots on talk pages

Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 22:13, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Some thoughts from the edge[edit]

A few weeks ago, I noticed something on Wikipedia. I noticed it while editing in my volunteer capacity, but as it so happens I work for the Wikimedia Foundation, and what I noticed relates directly to mw:Flow, the product I'm working on. While thinking about how to approach it, it brought home to me the serious dilemma I face every day - an overabundance of choices. I took some notes on my thought processes, to give the community insight into what I'm actually doing as a liaison (because so much is hidden in private email or public-but-off-wiki locations such as IRC/bugzilla/mingle).

What I noticed is that Flow is missing copy of the copyrightwarning, in the edit-mode. Now, I am normally a cautious and critical (in both senses) person. I will happily point out the flaws in something, whilst taking joy in any of the fine points. I was one of the handful of grumpy & conservative commentators and participants in the various 2006 redesigns (main page, help pages, community portal, sidebar, etc). So, never mind my job, it's in my nature to point this out. A year ago, I would have just taken it to the project-talkpage and said, "Here's the problem, and [if I have any] here's the possible solutions." Now, that simple approach has become a lot more complicated.

As a new liaison - someone who listens to the daily meetings and IRC discussions, and receives a ton of daily email from various directions - I'm getting to know the team's decision-trees and workflow-patterns. For a missing feature, with visual elements, that has to be added somewhere, it needs to be:

  1. approved by the manager and prioritized,
  2. sent through research, brainstorm, and design [created in Flow at a visual and psychological level]
  3. planned, developed, and documented [created at a software level]
  4. tested
  5. approved.

As an editor-but-also-liaison, I could therefor take the problem to any (or all!) of:

  • the WT:Flow/Design FAQ wiki talkpage
  • bugzilla
  • the Core Feature Team's public IRC-channel
  • the Core Feature Team's public mingle
  • the Core Feature Team's internal mailing-list
  • or just send an email to the product manager and other pertinent "1st-step" staffers.

Each of which has potential pros and cons I have to consider.

[I went with the latter, who bounced it off the legal dept, and entered it into mingle for project-management and further work.]

This is a problem that Wikimedians are familiar with - the profusion of places that Wikimedians have to obtain information. If I make the wrong choice, there are potential consequences. If I take it to the public discussion areas: how many editors are going to suggest an idea that doesn't get used (thereby frustrating them [cf. my years of redesign experiences]), and how many editors will be angry that I even bothered them with such an "obvious" decision (and take it as confirmation that "none of it will ever work! nosir!")? I also know:

  1. how prone to distraction many deep-thinkers are. ("Instead of fixing it simply/quickly, let's re-imagine the thing entirely!" [cf. my recent simple question about fixing something typographical at the design-mailing-list, which rapidly tangented into a "big-dreams" thread])
  2. How much TL;DR happens if I give ALL the background details. [All of this description so far, is of course just a fraction of what goes through my mind]

I also know how difficult design-by-committee is...

  • Eg. Since the last successful Main Page redesign in 2005/6 (which was quite acrimonious), all 4 subsequent attempts have stalled out - a few of them did so only after many-months-long-processes that embittered some previously-enthusiastic editors.]
  • [Eg.2. the 2006 site sidebar redesign took 7 talkpages and dozens of upset editors. The 2013 sidebar update RfC last month stalled out with no consensus on anything.

(And if I do take it to the public first, how do I phrase it - As an editor, or as a "liaison"? (How many hats can I wear in a single sentence or paragraph? Should I suggest things with one account ("Quiddity") and then reply with another account ("Quiddity (WMF)")? That direction leads to madness!) [I just asked, and found out that our unofficial styleguide for liaisons suggest that in onwiki communications we refer to the staff we work with as "they". It's all very zen and multiperspectival, which makes me happy!])

So, I have to decide "who do I want to bother with this decision?" as well as "how can I help this decision get made, and get the feature implemented, in the most well-considered, widely-acceptable, and efficient way possible?"

I do a lot of thinking about how to describe things. That includes myself, and my job. The latest job description I've devised is: "difficult questions, phrased cohesively". That's what I'm trying to do this week, at least. (and usually a lot briefer than this! It was even longer originally, but Maggie kindly re-arranged and deleted a few parts, to give it more coherence. :) Public or private feedback is welcome. –Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 20:51, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Help with bugzilla[edit]

Hey N (not sure if you use your name on-wiki). At WP:Village_pump_(technical)#Highlighting_within_an_article_from_a_list_of_regex_expressions, Kipod came up with the following bit of monobook.js code for a request of mine, which works great, as far as it goes:

if (mw.config.get( 'wgAction' ) === 'view')
mw.loader.using(['jquery.highlightText', 'jquery.tipsy'], function() {
   mw.util.$content.highlightText( 'interest lua');
   $('.highlight').tipsy({
       title: function() { 
           return 'See \[\[User:Dank/SomePage#' + $(this).text() + '\]\]';
       }
   });
});

That will bold the words "interest" and "lua" anywhere they appear, and when I hover over "interest" for instance, I get a popup saying "interest is highlighted" (see below). The purpose is to allow Wikipedians to bold the appearance of any word of interest (without making any actual changes to the text) and attach notes so they know why it's bolded, but in particular, I'm working on a big list of "common mistakes" that writers and reviewers want help catching (similar to WP:RETF, but more than just typos).

The problem is, the code doesn't allow regex; in fact, it won't even let me bold a two-word phrase (I've tried \ , \\ , \s, "two words", etc. to code the space, no luck). I imagine people who take bugzilla requests are more likely to respond to people they know, so I haven't tried bugzilla before ... could you help me submit this request? - Dank (push to talk) 13:31, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

P.S. I just inserted a more interesting popup message into the code. - Dank (push to talk) 13:55, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
It would also be helpful if it were possible to click on the link in the popup, as is the case for the popup gadget at Preferences/Gadgets. - Dank (push to talk) 14:04, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
Hey @Dank: (I prefer just using "Quiddity" everywhere onwiki, to prevent confusion :)
Regarding bugzilla requests, it's much like Wikipedia: Newcomers should be welcome and encouraged, and mistakes are expected and forgiven (and fixed or clarified by experienced users). So, file away at bugzilla, whenever needed (and if you don't already have an account there, bear in mind that it publicly displays your email address, so select that accordingly :)
Regarding the question itself, it looks like Matma Rex has given some newer feedback (and he's always good to listen to), so possibly that solves it? (Fwiw, examples/use-cases always make requests clearer. I found, and like the direction of, User:Dank/Highlighter/list!)
HTH. –Quiddity (talk) 20:04, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
Yep, and thanks much. - Dank (push to talk) 20:17, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

FLOW feedback[edit]

Thank you for soliciting my feedback on wp:Flow. I am sorry I cannot find the time to be more involved. As far as Wp:Breakf is concerned, I believe that if updates and improvements are posted at wt: breakf, more ediors would be engaged.

Here is the little I collected as feedback:

  1. I get no notification when someone replies to my post (I think?)
  2. No way to thank participants for a post
  3. Weird entry on my user contributions when I post on Flow
  4. No titles? (I think this one has been fixed?) – but I still cannot create a sub-thread with a new title
  5. Indenting is primitive (no reply to reply)
  6. Flow is only legible when I view it on a mobile device
  7. Why are dates on mobile showing up as “X days ago” while normal screens show a date (I prefer date)
  8. Icons need a legend in an obvious location (is there a legend somewhere?)
  9. The dot-dot-dot permalinks have disappeared for me – never got a chance to use them
  10. I like the idea of having archives with permalinks – is there one somewhere that editors can view? HTH XOttawahitech (talk) 00:25, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  11. Afterthought addition: I thought the idea was to have threads with recent replies bubble to the top? XOttawahitech (talk) 00:31, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
@Ottawahitech: Thanks. I fully (all too well) understand the difficulties with finding time for the thousands of interesting possibilities around here. :)
  1. You should get a Notification when someone clicks "reply" on your posts, or when someone Mentions/links your username (if you have those Echo Notifications enabled). Let me know if this isn't happening.
  2. The Thanks extension is being integrated with Flow by a couple of Facebook Open Academy students (mw:Flow/Thanks).
  3. The usercontribs/watchlist/Recentchanges elements are currently being overhauled, with more consistent ordering and link names, and an auto-excerpted edit-summary. Once that's in place, they'll ask for fresh feedback.
  4. There's a bug with some of the existing topic titles here (bugzilla:61939), but I think it's specific to the code-version that Enwiki is on. We'll see when it updates tomorrow.
    • Regarding subthreads, it's been suggested by myself and other editors, that we might be able to just use "===subheaders===" in root-level posts within a topic.
  5. A third level of indenting is on its way. Once we've had a chance to test that out, they'll ask us for further feedback.
  6. What do you mean by "Flow is only legible when I view it on a mobile device" ?
  7. The "Elapsed-time" (eg. 1 month ago), and "Exact-time" (eg 00:25, 25 February 2014 (UTC)) are an issue I've raised. Some people like the new Elapsed format, others prefer the standard Exact format. I'm hoping it will become a user-preference.
  8. Icon Legend: Hmm, that might be a good idea.
  9. the dot-dot-dot icons are still there, but darn hard to see, because they're so faint/pale gray. There's a fix (darker icon) on its way.
  10. The topics and posts all have permalinks (in the action menu (dotdotdot icon)). Those are real permalinks, which won't break if the topic-title is changed! There's a requested feature to also have "permalinks to topics within a historical context" (ie, we can see some of the topics above and below the targeted topic). They're already paginated, so that should be easy enough. (I say, not knowing anything about how it works! >.> )
  11. They're currently adding a "sort topics" mechanism, so that we can re-arrange the view, either by-time, or by-recent-activity. Suggestions for other "sorting methods" that could be implemented, are welcome.
HTH. :) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 22:40, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Flow newsletter?[edit]

Hi Quiddity. Is the November 2013 newsletter the most recent one? Just curious if I missed anything more recent. Also, any ETA on when we might be able to opt-in to test Flow on our user talk pages? Thanks, 28bytes (talk) 21:17, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi @28bytes: It is the most recent one. Partially because the team has been working on a large quantity of underlying-architecture-level code, rather than new features, and partially because there's a front-end overhaul that I was hoping to announce in the 'next' newsletter, but it has been much-delayed since work started on it in January, due to issues with javascript libraries (if I remember and understand correctly). However, getting a new copy of the Newsletter out is near the top of my priority list, and likely to be here by the end of next week, at the latest.
Re: Opt-in for user-pages, the brand-new and currently draft-state set of Annual Goals, mw:Wikimedia Engineering/2014-15 Goals#Editor Engagement - Core Features has "User talk:" as a focus for development, and hopefully opt-in deployment, in quarter 2.
HTH. Thanks again for your interest; More feedback/requests are always appreciated. :) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 21:53, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks! 28bytes (talk) 22:05, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Some stroopwafels for you![edit]

Gaufre biscuit.jpg No reason in particular, I've just been coming across a lot of your contributions recently and I'm glad you're on our side :D EdSaperia (talk) 20:58, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Maintenance script[edit]

A "dev" (??) wrote "If its really a problem to have them in contributions i can probably write up a maintenance script to change the owner". Would you please ask Dev to do that, and remove that from my contributions list? Sincere thanks Quiddity (WMF). Eddymason (talk) 13:21, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi Eddymason. Per the rest of what the developer wrote, "but generally its not considered a great idea to go back in time and change existing revisions." it would be best to just wait a month, at which point all of us who have these bug-entries will get them cleared automatically. (eg. I have some, too). Manually changing existing-revisions in the database table carries the risk of very-hard-to-fix mistakes, plus it would take time away from fixing other bugs, and creating new features. Would you be ok with waiting patiently for a month? Thanks for considering it. :) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 16:14, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Okay. It helps to know that these are present in the contributions lists of others, too. Thanks. Eddymason (talk) 16:55, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Flow in other wiki[edit]

Moved from User talk:Quiddity.

When Flow extension will be included in other wiki (2014, 2015, ....)? What we need to do to turn it on some pages in ru-wiki already now?Sunpriat (talk) 12:12, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Sunpriat. Sorry I didn't see this (at my other talkpage) earlier, and just missed you on IRC today.
Re: Timeline - Flow is getting rolled out very slowly, and currently just to pages that request it and seem like appropriate locations to help actively test Flow in a working environment, whilst it is developed - i.e. places that will give ongoing feedback on the many experimental features, and help report any new bugs (and be aware that new bugs will appear), and importantly to help suggest new features - We don't want to just end up with a replacement for talkpages - we want an improvement. (although, there's already a long (and needing an update) list collecting many of the planned/discussed features, that will be developed over the coming months).
Re: To turn it on in new locations: Technically - we currently have to ask the development team (who change a configuration file), and also get approval from the product manager. Practically - Ask your community to test out the sandbox at mw:Talk:Sandbox, and decide where you might want to have it turned on at Ruwiki to begin with. Once you've got consensus for a page (or a few) to be flow-enabled, let me know, and I'll add it to the list. From there, it would be up to the Flow product manager to decide on the exact timeline. It's a slow-but-steady process, just like the development of the software itself. ;)
Feel free to ping me again on IRC, I'm in the UTC-8 timezone. Or keep replying here. Thanks. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 16:35, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
@Quiddity (WMF): These two: ru:Википедия:Песочница/Flow, ru:Википедия:Форум/Новости/Flow. Our discussion - ru:Википедия:Форум/Предложения#Включить Flow. Sunpriat (talk) 10:49, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
@Quiddity (WMF): There is a ticket in Trello about the ruWP pages? Sunpriat (talk) 10:09, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
@Sunpriat: There is a ticket. I'll have to ask the product manager what the specific timeline is for the next rollouts, and it might be longer than desired (possibly a few months) because there's an upcoming staff change, but please do keep me uptodate with what the general and specific feedback is from Ruwiki. Thanks again, for all the information and details so far. :) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 02:33, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Quiddity (WMF): Then I copy the important question here from a letter: We have difficulty in understanding and accurate translation of the name "Flow" in translatewiki https://translatewiki.net/w/i.php?title=Special:Translate&group=ext-flow&language=ru&filter=!translated. The WMF has a requirement as it should look like - as a name or word? For example, a company called Apple (en), in a different language it is also called Apple (as a company, or use the transcription Orthographic transcription), but if they will translate it into they language as a fruit then it will be quite a different word. What can we do better - translate like a word or use the transcription or you have not requirement, and you leave the choice to ruWP community? Sunpriat (talk) 18:44, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

@Sunpriat: I've asked, and was given a fairly ambiguous answer: "Generally product names are retained, not translated. But there are variants by product and by language." - So, it appears to be up to the individual translators at translatewiki. You could either use the word "Flow", or a direct translation, or a translation that hints at "workflow" (which is partially where the name comes from), or something else. However, it is (most?) common to retain the original product name.
The same applies to the "Topic" namespace (which was chosen partially because "Thread" was already taken), which you asked about, elsewhere.
Hope that helps. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 19:53, 2 September 2014 (UTC)