@DSaroyan_WMF sounds great, thank you!

@DSaroyan_WMF, really helpful conversation around this topic. Appreciate it.

@DSaroyan_WMF great and thank you!

@DSaroyan_WMF, thank you for the clarification, and yes, I was referring to the CEE Hub Rapid Funds, and not microgrants. Thank you for the correction. But also this makes alot of sense. We will just wait for @Daimona to respond to your earlier question to see how we move forward in resolving the matter at hand. Thank you so much Davit for weighing in with your insights.

@DSaroyan_WMF, thank you so much for both your action and insights. In response to your feedback;

@DSaroyan_WMF, ah that makes sense. Thank you for that helpful context. I believe both the clarification and recommendation are helpful for moving forward. Out of curiosity, the framing of the check conditions would cover all approved India projects, but would it also have the capacity to cater to similar funding resource projects in the future as they clearly unfold? I'm thinking about the NNFP and CEE microgrants if they ever get IDs subsequently, and if we would need to have this similar conversation around validation.

@Daimona thank you for your feedback. I believe they are granted in a way that is not necessarily the way Event Registration defines that maybe. @Rmaung, @Passimacopoulos, @SGill, and @DSaroyan_WMF might have some thoughts here to provide more clarity on the way forward

@Daimona thank you for the feedback. Please see the separate Phab ticket for reference and action T436837

@Daimona, we have a new community feedback regarding this ticket which has been integrated into T321823. Please see below:

New cases of this similar issue have surfaced.

@Daimona done. Please let me know if it all looks good now.

@Daimona Thank you. I would say that it deserves a separate ticket as you rightly said, because of more information needed. Parent task sounds good but do you mean this one being part of the epic task? Please, let me know what you mean or maybe go ahead to fix this as recommended if that is okay.

@Daimona thank you so much for the alignment and for clarifying the task description in the other ticket.

@Daimona, @Passimacopoulos, and @Rmaung This is to acknowledge that I have successfully added the Grant ID to the relevant event page. Thank you so much for both the work and support.

Hi @Daimona, I read T321823 before creating this ticket and saw that T321823 was more about making the feature available. This exact one is proposing a change in the current workflow of the feature. I felt it deserved a separate ticket especially since the earlier one seems to be resolved already. Please, let me know if this offered more clarity, whether you recommend this still remains closed or merged, and if the merge would reopen the conversation there in the direction of this new proposal. Thank you so much.

@Daimona acknowledged with thanks.

@Daimona thank you so much. Just to confirm - ''done, it will start working soon'', or ''done, it is working now''? I was excited already and tried it out but still giving the error message.

@Daimona thank you so much for the clarification. It might make sense to increase the period, but we would need to understand what is the maximum number of years a multiyear grant can take and use that to decide what a good window is. @Rmaung @Passimacopoulos might be the best to advise here. I also want to believe that validation would need to exist for grant IDs, and maybe the need for the restriction. But @Rmaung and @Passimacopoulos would need to confirm if this restriction is necessary or not.

Hello @fgiunchedi , I was just recently converted and I have changed euwandu-ctr@wikimedia.org to my new email euwandu@wikimedia.org. Please let me know if this solves it and allow you to move to the next action. Thank you for the support.

Hello @fgiunchedi , Please can you check again to see if it works now? Here is the screenshot of my sign-in with Uniquemia on Wikitech as well if it is helpful{F56297576}

In T366462#9856014, @Ragesoss wrote:

@Daimona yes, that sounds correct. The Dashboard should not allow changing the name (including the 'When' component) of a course after it has been connected to Event Registration. I will file an issue to make sure we get that fixed.

@Ragesoss would this action mean that regardless of making changes such as event dates, When/duration, facilitators, and tracked wikis on the dashboard after connecting it to Event Registration, the dashboard name would not change or otherwise?

We use course names as identifiers, but apparently they are not stable over time: the addition of the "When" information causes the name to change, but internally in the Dashboard it's still the same course.

Okay

I assume this failed because the linkage with event registration was moved over to the new name on the Dashboard side.

Trying to understand this. Since you mentioned above that although the additional information (e.g. When) causes the dashboard name to change but it is still the same course internally in the dashboard. And if this is the case, would the changed dashboard name not work with the page linkage? Not sure if this is what you are trying to say but would be happy to get further clarification.

There's a question of how this was done, as there are two ways this could have gone.

1. They tried to submit the form with the new link, it was rejected, then they changed the link and saved again. In this case, the event info would not be updated at all (because there was no change), so it's expected that you wouldn't get any errors.
2. They tried to submit the form with the new link, it was rejected, they removed the link, saved the event, then went to edit it again, added the new link, and saved. I don't think this is what happened based on your description. I don't know what would happen in this case.

It was the No.1 use case that was applied

The request here is made using the old name, so this seems expected.

Yes because the new name was rejected by the page

Can you please share this link?

Here are the links - https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Event:WikiForHumanRights_2024_in_Uganda ; https://outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org/courses/Wikimedia_Community_User_Group_Uganda/WikiForHumanRights_2024_in_Uganda_(May_to_June)

Was the course deleted on the Dashboard side by any chance?

From my understanding, changing parameters on their initial dashboard produced a new dashboard link which is the one I shared above. This action seem to have nullified the earlier dashboard they created - https://outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org/courses/Wikimedia_Community_User_Group_Uganda/WikiForHumanRights_2024_in_Uganda which now says ''does not exist''.

Could you share a specific example of something that they found difficult to understand? Was it an error message or something else? Or are you referring to the whole situation?

I was particularly referring to myself in this context. It was difficult to understand their explanation of the problem encountered and they did not have any form of documentation (e.g.. screenshots) that makes understanding easy. I had to run a dummy event page and PE dashboard for them to repeat the very steps they took to get to the problems in order to understand the challenge. So this is why I thought maybe having a feature in the tool that allows people to report issues by sharing relevant documentation would help us learn better. But this might also require support for communities to ensure its use in such circumstances.