@Lea_Lacroix_WMDE I could volunteer to facilitate the session, but only if it is scheduled on Friday: unfortunately I will not be able to participate neither on Saturday nor on Sunday :-(.

Well, why do we need a Wordpress website when we already have a wiki, after all? :-)

Well, the point is to have a simple way to avoid third-party resources; whatever is simpler is ok.

Nice! But wouldn't be simpler to just make a local of the fonts we use?

Well, not necessarily. Restricted access and restricted edit have different purposes. Confidential information exists; it may be stored on-wiki or off-wiki. If it cannot be stored on-wiki, it will go somewhere else. Having it read-only would not solve any problem because the problem is exactly with the "reading" part. For things that are not confidential, I do no see a strong case for read-only pages; it is true that, for instance, the text of approved resolutions cannot be changed, but there are still many reasons why one may want to edit the page without editing the text.

What would be the use case of a namespace read-only for some users?
There are things that should not be edited, but it is still annoying if you can't fix a typo or a link...

@valerio.bozzolan @Eripuk It is still down, at least from here.

By the way, passwords aside, there is a lot of confidential information in those namespaces. That's the whole point of having restricted-access namespaces.

In principle no password should be stored on the wiki, but what alternative has been choosen? Where are those passwords?

Most of the work in Italian Wikipedia is done.

It would be greatly helpful for Wiki Loves Monuments, at least in Italy. In the Italian contest all the monuments have an item on Wikidata, and we could easily add a "depicts" statement for each uploaded picture.

In T199252#4575757, @kaldari wrote:

Do we know how many pages are still affected? Where did the 500,000 figure come from?