On enwiktionary, LQT was only ever enabled on a limited number of pages, mostly user talk pages. When pinged regarding the potential removal of LQT, these users did not comment (most of them are only sporadically active). I do not foresee any community concern if LQT were to be removed from enwiktionary.

My suggestion for undeploying LQT from enwiktionary is to write a script that converts LQT discussions back to standard wikitext discussions using == headers, : indentation, wikitext signatures and oldest-to-newest ordering of threads, and inserts them onto the user's talk page in the correct chronological ordering among the existing wikitext discussions. Then the Thread and Summary namespaces can simply be deleted.

Out of curiosity I decided to check how the other wikis are using LQT:

@KStoller-WMF is there a timeline for completing this work? It may affect our pilot wiki deployment.

The Editing team has taken over ownership of the Flow and Liquid Threads deprecation work. I believe they will be finalizing a timeline here: T370722: Set Flow and LQT sunsetting timeline and sequence.

Thank you Kirsten, Indeed, T370722: Set Flow and LQT sunsetting timeline and sequence tracks the project. We are defining a timeline now.
@kostajh, if you have other questions regarding Flow/LQT, you can contact me directly.

In T350164#10137691, @Trizek-WMF wrote:

Thank you Kirsten, Indeed, T370722: Set Flow and LQT sunsetting timeline and sequence tracks the project. We are defining a timeline now.
@kostajh, if you have other questions regarding Flow/LQT, you can contact me directly.

Thanks, both. @ppelberg could you please comment with a timeline for when Editing could do the work described in this task?

In T350164#10139057, @kostajh wrote:

In T350164#10137691, @Trizek-WMF wrote:

Thank you Kirsten, Indeed, T370722: Set Flow and LQT sunsetting timeline and sequence tracks the project. We are defining a timeline now.
@kostajh, if you have other questions regarding Flow/LQT, you can contact me directly.

Thanks, both. @ppelberg could you please comment with a timeline for when Editing could do the work described in this task?

Thank you for the nudge and I'm sorry for the lag, @kostajh.

Two questions for you:

1. Would it be accurate for me to think that – at a minimum – archiving pages that use LQT and setting these pages to read only at wikis where LQT is still active [1] is what y'all need to unblock Temp Account deployments at these wikis?
2. When are y'all currently planning to deploy Temp Accounts at the wikis where LQT is still active [1]? If this info. is already available in a timeline/document, please let me know!

1. enwikinews, enwiktionary, huwiki, ptwikibooks, svwikisource

I don't mean to interrupt, but I think, given that LQT remains in active use on a couple of wikis - indeed, it is still enabled by default on all talk pages on ptwikibooks - some further community engagement work is required before switching it off. (I would still prefer to see LQT pages frozen in wikitext, which would ultimately allow the extension to be undeployed altogether rather than just set to read-only mode. But I can understand that the resources to do this may not be there at present.)

For example, on enwikibooks here, SVTCobra wrote in February: "Our review tools automatically create a Commentary page in LiquidThreads style whenever we publish a new article. We may need @Bawolff to look at this." but this was not followed up.

In T350164#10314254, @ppelberg wrote:

In T350164#10139057, @kostajh wrote:

In T350164#10137691, @Trizek-WMF wrote:

Thank you Kirsten, Indeed, T370722: Set Flow and LQT sunsetting timeline and sequence tracks the project. We are defining a timeline now.
@kostajh, if you have other questions regarding Flow/LQT, you can contact me directly.

Thanks, both. @ppelberg could you please comment with a timeline for when Editing could do the work described in this task?

Thank you for the nudge and I'm sorry for the lag, @kostajh.

Two questions for you:

1. Would it be accurate for me to think that – at a minimum – archiving pages that use LQT and setting these pages to read only at wikis where LQT is still active [1] is what y'all need to unblock Temp Account deployments at these wikis?

Yes, that sounds right.

2. When are y'all currently planning to deploy Temp Accounts at the wikis where LQT is still active [1]? If this info. is already available in a timeline/document, please let me know!

---

1. enwikinews, enwiktionary, huwiki, ptwikibooks, svwikisource

I assume we could exclude them from our next round of deployments in February, but would need these wikis to be ready by May. (cc @sgrabarczuk @Niharika )

In T350164#10315278, @TTO wrote:

I don't mean to interrupt, but I think, given that LQT remains in active use on a couple of wikis - indeed, it is still enabled by default on all talk pages on ptwikibooks - some further community engagement work is required before switching it off. (I would still prefer to see LQT pages frozen in wikitext, which would ultimately allow the extension to be undeployed altogether rather than just set to read-only mode. But I can understand that the resources to do this may not be there at present.)

For example, on enwikibooks here, SVTCobra wrote in February: "Our review tools automatically create a Commentary page in LiquidThreads style whenever we publish a new article. We may need @Bawolff to look at this." but this was not followed up.

Thanks for this note. I assume that community consultation / notice would be part of this, similarly to how it was done for Flow. (cc @ppelberg)

List of wikis that have Flow installed, according to InitializeSettings.php

ptwikibooks is in a very messed up state, because LQT->Flow conversion was attempted several times but never properly finished. I suspect I'm just going to let the state become even more messed up by LQT being undeployed since the amount of work it would take to sort it out properly exceeds the extent to which I care about a wiki in a language I don't speak whose community seems to consist of one or two active users at most.

In T113682#2563729, @matthiasmullie wrote:

Since some topics have already been imported before and we don't have that sourcestore file, the import script has to be run with --force-recovery-conversion.

... and after doing a lot of code spelunking I think running that script with that argument just might, by magic, return things from a very messed-up state they are currently in to a less broken state (albeit still unideal because it needs /LQT Archive 1 pages deleted). It's smarter than I thought.

I know these comments are probably on the wrong ticket to be seen by whoever runs the script (T382435), but I needed to get them out there.

In T350164#10413956, @Pppery wrote:

I know these comments are probably on the wrong ticket to be seen by whoever runs the script (T382435), but I needed to get them out there.

Once again coming to my rescue, thank you :)

I'm tracking on T388099 as that's where the undeployment checklist is

This task has become a parent task of much of the LQT undeployment work. I propose we rename it to Undeploying LiquidThreads

I looked into how long the remaining migrations from LiquidThreads pages to Flow boards should take.

Approx. number of threads per wiki (at the time of writing):

...using SELECT table_rows FROM information_schema.tables WHERE table_schema = <wiki> AND table_name = 'thread';

During T405080: Convert LQT pages on enwiktionary to Flow, we've seen a rate of roughly 30 threads being migrated per minute, so the actual migrating should take less than a day.

In other words, actually migrating the threads won't cause a bottleneck, relative to debugging and fixing errors encountered during migration.

@Pppery I think it is now the right time to do this in translatewiki (refer to my new topic)

I've also informed the Rationalwiki community and the developer of Wikimini User:Lorangeo.

@Esanders please restore the edit history of my huwiki talk page (merge https://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Szerkeszt%C5%91vita:Tacsipacsi/LQT_Archive/LQT_Archive_1 into it). I used to use LQT for a short time over a decade ago, but since then I’ve been using plain wikitext (and DiscussionTools from day zero), so I’d like to see the edit history of the past decade where the edits were made: at Szerkesztővita:Tacsipacsi.

@Tacsipacsi : You could move your main user talk page out of the way, then move the /LQT_Archive/LQT_Archive_1 page to your main user talk page, then copy back in your most recent comments?

In T350164#11358174, @Esanders wrote:

@Tacsipacsi : You could move your main user talk page out of the way, then move the /LQT_Archive/LQT_Archive_1 page to your main user talk page, then copy back in your most recent comments?

That would only work for someone who has suppressredirect (or delete-redirect or delete) rights on the wiki. Tacsipacsi doesn't seem to have any of those.

Ok, I've have done this sequence of moves for you @Tacsipacsi