In T104566#7164841, @thiemowmde wrote:

<noinclude> doesn't apply here. I would not reuse it for another purpose. But yes, the basic idea is the same as the one with the CSS classes I described.

I'm afraid I don't understand how this is related to ProofreadPage. I would avoid complex solutions like new hooks or anything that creates dependencies between two extensions.

In T104566#4981215, @Ninovolador wrote:

Any chance with this change working on cross-page references?

<ref name="note">hyphen-</ref><ref follow="note">ated</ref> currently outputs as hyphen- ated

This isn't the space for the enWS <=> Commons interactions discussions, nor to rehash the enWS discussion and clarification about pywikibot scripts.

Which bit of the conversation at enWS was unclear that the community wished to control who undertook the operation? I would thought that it would be reasonably obvious why that is not a great idea to grant it to all autoconfirmed users, especially seeing that by default it is a restricted right to administrators at this time.

Do you know what you are talking about? That is not the proposal nor the consensus of the community. The purpose *is* to create a limited scope for the right.

Thanks. One never knows whether the use of the term "Wikipedia" is purposeful or not. It is confusing when sometimes it is used interchangeably and sometimes not.

@Johan This appeared in TechNews and said

In T36928#7136599, @Fae wrote:

Just a reminder, as someone who has several times run upload projects with over 100,000 files, with names automatically created with sensible and published naming rules, Commons is routinely losing out on content because of bizarre matches to things like a repeated name in the title of a book in Latin; this happens so often I just never return to these skipped uploads. Even if the right was limited to users with over 100,000 edits, it would be a great improvement and avoid wasting significant volunteer time writing scripts to work around a badly designed or untested blacklist.

Think that if there are core logic components available, happy to utilise them as the next step development, and see how it works, this is about getting a good "last 100" for reasonable comparison.

I presuming that this will be mentioned in Wikidata weekly summary, It would be great to have this mentioned in a relevant Tech News @Johan that multi-language Wikisource will finally be having active interwiki links from Wikidata.

In T283249#7101108, @Legoktm wrote:

It looks like https://openstack-browser.toolforge.org/project/wm-bot Andrew, David (WMCS staff) are the only other people with access besides Petrb. We need to add more maintainers to keep wm-bot sustainable.

When we do this, could we also consider standarising the nomenclature on a hyphen separator?

In T196740#7092564, @Aklapper wrote:

I boldly renamed; see last comment.

Then you should keep looking, the others are there somewhere. They are not defined at metawiki.

In T282624#7087157, @jrbs wrote:

In T282624#7087006, @Billinghurst wrote:

It is not WMF's role to make community's operational decisions, as in what stewards alone can do. T&S does a disservice to the community when it so simply ignores the years of community operation. The stewards were not set up to be, and should not be, your sole point of community consultation on these matters. Read the scope of their role. For matters of this significance it is simply wrong for WMF to think that they get to impose their solutions, especially only in consultation with stewards. I am a little disappointed that stewards are not kicking back on this issue telling you that this is not for their decision, and saying that the community needs to be consulted.

WHAT ARE WE DOING HERE IN PHABRICATOR??? That we are having to have this discussion on a phabricator speaks volume to the problem of staff isolating from community on general matters, and increasingly on so many matters. Do you not see this particularly as an issue? This is a technical forum, not the place for our social conversations.

I ask that you bring the social issues to metawiki. Set out the problem, set out the exact principles, set out the non-negotiables, and then what is negotiable. Please stop the change the methodology of benevolent dictatorship. I, personally, don't mind temporary measures to fix immediate concerns, but if this is months of existing discussion, it seems that you lost that opportunity.

Please calm down. I think I made it quite clear that this was a misstep. I am human and make mistakes.

In T282624#7083246, @jrbs wrote:

Hi all. Thanks for your input. I apologise for the hasty implementation here.

Taking into account the feedback provided here, T&S will put together a more comprehensive communications plan around this change.

In T282624#7081664, @Leaderboard wrote:

Also, I am not happy with the practice of WMF delegating everything it wants to stewards - why can't the WMF do it themselves if it's really that important? Remember that stewards are often overworked (T162297).

I would like to clarify that this change was not made alone. We have been discussing this with the Stewards for months. This is not a case of a random decision by a rogue staffer, it's just a staffer who made some communications mistakes.

In any case - please allow us some time to come up with a better way to communicate how this change will happen, what it will look like from a practical perspective, etc. I would like to ask @Quiddity to remove or potentially reword the Tech News item about this task too please. :)

@bd808 Can I bring you in here Brian? Not only out of my grade, put different planet

What I have found is that I had a symlink to one path .../core/ and Legotkm pointed me to this other path. I see that the documentation at wikitech for pywikibot was changed to a .../stable/ path and it was not something noticed. I have changed my symlink. So it is an artefact of a change to how wikitech deployed pywikibot. I am guessing that it came in the change to python3.

The central version on toolforge, I just use whatever is there

In T266584#6585860, @Huji wrote:

@Strainu I did not know that.
I'm going to visit all those wikis so that CentralAuth generates as account for me.
When I will review the list in ~2 weeks, I will recheck those wikis not checked off to make sure I did not miss a notification.

In T269518#7032126, @Languageseeker wrote:

The IA tool did not warn me when creating duplicates yesterday leading to duplicate indexes. I caught them by mistake, but I want to flag this as an issue. If want to permit the creation of duplicate files albeit in different formats, them the warning needs to be in place and require confirmation to override.

Tell us more.

Aren't the UniversalLanguageSelector webfonts exporting?

Here is a -verbose output with and without the mention of file

just noting that all the archived files need to have their git repository links updated at mediawikiwiki

<s>I am guessing that this is now https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/g/pywikibot/core/+/HEAD/scripts/pagefromfile.py</s>

Concur, as much as my brain can get to anything today

Please be wary of the usage of "duplicate" as it has a jargon meaning at Commons. If we are talking for works of the same file type from the same source of the same scale or less, then it will typically considered a duplicate. If it is of a different file type, or of a higher quality, then it isn't a duplicate. Of course it it is of same source, and file type, and better quality, then it should overwrite the existing file. Just want to ensure that we are keeping the jargon aligned.

In T45761#6979009, @Bugreporter wrote:

Global AbuseFilter is not manageable by local community.

Noting that it is now possible for global filters to be easily coded to limit/omit based on language or sister type, so omitting certain wikis is relatively easy

In T267868#6622561, @Ammarpad wrote:

Security warning/app verification should ideally be resolved before inviting people to start using it.

Any information?

Would also be looking to use it to tag category redirect pages which show up, though generally would not be getting a WD item

In T279275#6971526, @Jdforrester-WMF wrote:

In T279275#6971523, @Billinghurst wrote:

Would like to understand to what "functionality" refers.

Their existence.

The blacklists/whitelists as lists are very simple, abusefilters are not so.

AF allows much more control, that's true, but to my mind providing a simple single-page editing paradigm as currently provided is sufficiently similar that we can lift+shift for now, and then possibly re-factor later over the next few years (e.g. logging of hit rates, thresholds for activity, more complex response options than pass/fail, CheckUser integration, etc.) if there's demand.

This is a very technical expression of a requirement, though not certain what it actually means, or the actual impact. A pointer to what is envisaged, or what change it would make to implementers, rather than hackers, would be great.

Would like to understand to what "functionality" refers. The blacklists/whitelists as lists are very simple, abusefilters are not so.

In T149637#6970781, @Peachey88 wrote:

I would recommend a dedicated documentation task be opened for this, that has a clear scoped and doesn't get lost in a resolved task.

In T149637#6970777, @Billinghurst wrote:

This information needs to be transferred to Mediawikwiki, the only information that I could find about the functionality is slim pickings in scrum of scrums notes, and one-liner statements in release notes.

It would also be useful for noting that these are globally set and not wiki level configurable (Thanks @Reedy for checking).

This information needs to be transferred to Mediawikwiki, the only information that I could find about the functionality is slim pickings in scrum of scrums notes, and one-liner statements in release notes.

(Noting that I have already shifted the previously mentioned file and deleted at Commons as it was a copyright violation)

In T279232#6970429, @Xqt wrote:

See also: T267535

@MusikAnimal <dancing> logged in for a couple of days now

Tried {{#tag:poem}} ?

As I said earlier, this is an immature proposal where you are not certain what you are wanting, or how to achieve it.

It is still nothing to do with WS-EXPORT, which does nothing with scans, and nothing particularly to do with Wikisource that is reproducing CORRECTED text. WS does just uses the images for proofreading, nothing else. If it is a task then if it belongs anywhere, then it belongs at Commons related to the images.

Isn't this just downloading the file from archive.org (https://archive.org/details/popularsciencemo02newy) or wikicommons. Why would this be part of wikisource and wsexport when we are talking original images, it seems out of scope.

In T276899#6900714, @Johan wrote:

I've taken care of Tech News for this.

In T274495#6822445, @Koavf wrote:

In T274495#6822219, @Billinghurst wrote:

But it is for Kindles. We want to make things as easy as possible for those who just want to download. I reckon just leave it.

There are many devices from many manufacturers that can process this content. Instead of giving an advertisement for a Big Tech abuser, just make it generic. If you have one of their proprietary jails, you know which file types it uses.

They were different versions of projects if I remember correctly, @MusikAnimal and EBernhardson did something new with their version 2. Where it belongs? <shrug>

But it is for Kindles. We want to make things as easy as possible for those who just want to download. I reckon just leave it.

If they want to build a work, wouldn't we encourage them to use the old PDF build tool.

@Xqt success! Thanks. Then just the usual hassle of parantheses in filenames and my forgetfulness of which ways they are handled, and fighting Commons existing filename blocking upload., but only after it has taken all the time to upload the file before it says YEAHNAH

Still failing

In T264788#6718839, @dom_walden wrote:

I compared the appearance of ebooks generated on test and production for a number of different ebooks, including those in the recently popular list.

I found a number of differences before and after this change. Many of these are not likely to be troubling to users. For example, margins between paragraphs sometimes differ, some text is aligned differently, some text is of different size.

Before	After

That may related to a missing class "ws-summary", I know that was added way back to ensure that things were generated properly with a table of contents. I remember nothing else. Never have found it where it is defined.

Some comments as a global abuse filter writer.

@Ankry @Zyephyrus @Mahagaja @-jkb- care to make comment for your community? To me it is imperfect though better than not having a link. My biggest concern is that it won't be obvious to users to where to add mulWS links.

@Xqt There seem to be quite a load of blockers within the system to this process, and think that they have been increasing in number, especially more recently. @Jdforrester-WMF may be able to comment or find someone who can.

They are the one static message from WMF messages—I am guessing they are translated at translatewiki

Have you looked to utilise @MusikAnimal 's AbuseFilterIRC

[Thought bubble too, not sure of whether it can be included or not.]

What would be the purpose of retaining them? In the scheme of things these wikis are tiny and the space and infrastructure debt would presumably be negligible, so the issue would be the value of keeping them as separate copies.

@dom_walden that is part of each wiki's MediaWiki:Gadget-WSexport.js and in production at enWS it is now

//wsexport.wmflabs.org/wsexport/tool/book.php

Actually can we please get the documentation updated in to remove pwb.py. [I had removed it from my commands.]

Duh python3

duh python3