We could use my talk page as a test.

@Cyberpower678 Thank you!

Raised the priority because this case is pending since October 2018.

Note: I finished the translation (98%).

Because we voted for a test period/temporary time, not for default (currently this is the default setting).

I re-open it instead of creating a new ticket. I hope it is not a problem.

In T210224#4792557, @Aklapper wrote:

In T210224#4792481, @Bencemac wrote:

@Dereckson, who did it?

Who did what?

See below.

In T121995#4116887, @Stashbot wrote:

Mentioned in SAL (#wikimedia-operations) [2018-04-09T14:28:12Z] <dereckson@tin> Synchronized wmf-config/flaggedrevs.php: Always show latest revision even if not reviewed on hu.wikipedia (T121995) (duration: 00m 59s)

In T210224#4792005, @Aklapper wrote:

@Bencemac: If I interpret T210224#4771188 correctly: When you or someone else provides a configuration change patch.

@Cyberpower678:

• diff1
• diff2

One more week has passed. When can we expect any action?

In T210275#4791574, @Cyberpower678 wrote:

Unfortunately, this can't be acted on as the data is now in IABot. Please re-report if it happens again, and leave untouched so it ca be investigated.

@Aklapper All I can say is that the majority (who participated in the discussion) still want the reverting.

@Aklapper I do not agree. We discussed that we cannot answer the test's main question (like 'do we loose anons and new [non-trusted] editors because their changes do not appear immediately?') because we did not collect data for this (or for anything else, not at all). As a speaker, I am only repeating myself.

@Cyberpower678 Can we say that this is resolved by IABot and close it?

Asked the community to decide; should we revert it or is it the stable setting now?

@Dereckson The test period has ended, what's now?

I am a little bit disappointed because if I see right, TemplateWizard is much better and has more functions than VE's one.

TemplateWizard is enabled for me everywhere (Hungarian/English Wikipedia, Meta) but I cannot find anywhere the new icon, only VE's old one. Any idea about that what I am doing wrong? I have always wanted to test it.

@Cyberpower678 A gentle reminder. Could you give us a little update?

@Aklapper Per reports of the affected users, the problem has been resolved this week, which means somebody fixed it (by accident?).

@MusikAnimal Furthermore, links on Automated Edits are broken/wrong as well. For example, two links of three tools (undo and redirect) are broken on my stats (pointing to non-existing pages). Maybe we should use Meta pages instead of trying to find the local ones?

In T186653#4631172, @Niharika wrote:

In T186653#4622937, @Bencemac wrote:

@Niharika Do you have plan for beta (e.g. which wikis will participate)?

@Bencemac The wizard is ready and I asked users on the project talk page if there's interest in being early adopters. I didn't get much of a response so I have created T205290: Convert TemplateWizard into a beta feature instead. It will go out on all wikis as a beta feature and then be eventually converted to a regular tool on all wikis. Does that seem like a good idea?

@Niharika Do you have plan for beta (e.g. which wikis will participate)?

In T205180#4613713, @Aklapper wrote:

Does the problem also happen when using safemode=1 on Special:Watchlist?
If it does, please provide any non-default settings on https://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speciális:Beállításaim#mw-prefsection-watchlist to reproduce.

In T205180#4607856, @Aklapper wrote:

Can Misibacsi please try again with safemode=1? This allows you to test if a problem is because of your user scripts or personal gadgets without uninstalling them. See https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Locating_broken_scripts for more information.

@Ascilto You can do it here (I did it myself).

Editing a section of a huge page and saving the changes are very slow as well; you can try it on these pages.

Templates were fixed today, we are waiting for v2.0beta10.

In T197541#4564828, @Catrope wrote:

because NULL != 90 is false (that sounds strange, but any comparison involving null is false).

One more.

@alanajjar Please take a look.

@srishakatux Isn't this solved by DuplicateReferences gadget?

Yes, but these are because of our Labdarúgó-mérkőzés template, so IABot did not make any mistake. In summary, I cannot reproduce the problem either.

Sorry about that. Please watch this video. In my opinion, the software should format the second link (below text) like this
[[wikidata:User:Pasleim/Items for deletion/Page deleted]]

@Esanders Yes, it is correct. My problem is that simply inserting the link does not work like this. For example:

Not? In my opinion, internal links are nicer, shorter and indicate that better they are linking to a Wikimedia-related project (Wikidata, Commons, Phabricator, etc.)

Maybe these Wikidata items can help: AfD, RfD and RfPP.

I forgot to mention, but this was not the first time; I got likely and very likely before.

You are right, sorry for the false alarm. My bad.

Hmm, today IABot deleted them.

@matej_suchanek Hey! Can I ask that what's up with this task?

@Rjwilmsi I forgot to mention, but we use the same format for RFC links, see the configuration. Could you fix this too?

@Cirdan I did it before and this happened: any idea?

Furthermore, archives are available (e.g. from 2013)

@Cyberpower678 In the name of the Hungarian community, I would like to thank your effort and patient. We are very thankful. Keep it up!

In T199658#4427399, @KartikMistry wrote:

In T199658#4427202, @Bencemac wrote:

I am just curious: circa how many free space will we get?

Very less at this point, but advantage of this script run is: It will free those articles and make them available for translation for other users.

I am just curious: circa how many free space will we get?

It looks like everything is fine. Two little thing:

In T184856#4426166, @Cyberpower678 wrote:

50 edits finished

Just a wild idea; would it be possible that the bot fixes first only those dead links which are inside a template? As far I see, it works perfectly (after solving the date format problem).

In T184856#4426095, @Cyberpower678 wrote:

In T184856#4425713, @Bencemac wrote:

• [Link Text] links sometimes lose their end (1)

• ??? I'm not sure I understand what you mean?

In T184856#4426079, @Cyberpower678 wrote:

Are all months supposed to be in lowercase?

Date parameter of {{Dead link}} – {{Halott link}} should formated the following:

Some bug:

Request for flag.

Exactly.

Currently, I am in a big bot work (~21k pages). You can find (empty) examples on the Hungarian bot request page, but here is a current one: https://petscan.wmflabs.org/?psid=5105218

@Reedy My bad, I fixed the number. Would not be possible that we increase the limit only if a Wikipedia is chosen? Or are there any other options?

@Cyberpower678 I was planning that I manually check some edits of the bot (~50) and if everything is OK, then the bot would get trusted user right for e.g. 2 weeks. The main difference between a bot and trusted user is that trusted users' edits appear on everybody's watchlist: it would be enough time for us to find any problem.

Today, I accidentally pressed (or tapped?) the thanks button while I was reading a problematic edit. Its author was banned because of that edit; I think you can understand that I am not proud at all. We should do something.

Hmm, but it happened. I published the article and I made some changes. After that, I wanted to start a new translation, but it was not published (it appeared as a current translation). After I deleted, it disappeared (went to my finished translation).

@Amire80 That is strange, because when it happened with me, I was the only one who edited the page after creating. Does it mean "somebody" could mean myself too?

Whoa, I was the test subject for Wikidata? So cool! :) Anyway, thanks for your work!

@Pginer-WMF I think that {{Template name}} format without any parameter would be fine and we should not complicate it. Parameters (for x minutes, from till, etc.) are not necessary, a simple template would be enough. I think most of time the template would be removed in 24 hours (probably by the original user).

Something similar: T184323.