See also https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/News/Trusty_deprecation

As JADE develops it is moving closer to a model where multiple people can collaborate on a single judgment for a given entity. This goes against the requirements that Wikilabels (a) allow different people to make multiple judgments on the same entity and (b) treat judgments as immutable actions. As such, it makes sense to recognize JADE and Wikilabels as separate products with separate purposes.

I think we can defer on articlequality for the time being. Let's get JADE out the door first, then we can worry about this.

I like option b the best, but I think then we would need a new/adjusted name, since "tool" in common parlance does not include "MediaWiki extension" (although we agree both are ways of fulfilling business requirements).

The extension is ready to be reviewed, having since been moved to Gerrit.

In the event of missing fields, the error should be handled through an error message generated by MediaWiki. It should not result in PHP-level exceptions.

Alternatively we could call the datatype strict-boolean.

In T202675#4533217, @dbarratt wrote:

Really though, I'm just looking for the HTTP domain name to be thegoodplace.wmflabs.org I couldn't care less what the project is called. :)

In T200297#4517617, @daniel wrote:

Delete the pages and drop the namespace. Note that storage isn't reclaimed, but this should be enough to unclutter search interfaces and so on.

As far as I know, dropping namespaces is not officially supported by MediaWiki at all, since it will likely trigger edge cases for stuff like viewing deleted user contribs, viewing deleted revisions, and viewing log entries for that namespace. Dropping a namespace declaration leaves a lot of dangling references to that namespace in the database.

I generally agree that it would be better to build bits of JADE into the interface, rather than create a monolithic editing interface.

I've worked with @awight on a document describing JADE's requirements and possible implementation strategies. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/JADE/Implementations

Wouldn't this be an ORES feature rather than a JADE feature?

In T200297#4464630, @jcrespo wrote:

You will not be able to join data on wiki storage and metadata either with your proposed schema, not have it available on wikireplicas.

Thank you for the summary, @mark. I am interested in this perspective that we can get the same user experience (i.e. a new content namespace) but with a different backend. One of the benefits of wiki pages is that researchers and other data consumers can benefit from the same APIs and tooling from other wiki pages. And because they are still wiki pages, the wiki communities can interact with them as they would interact with other wiki pages. This includes the ability to revert edits, delete judgments, suppress them – all functions that they need to be able to do. Would these affordances still be available with a new storage backend? Would it be possible to do this without spending years of engineering time fully abstracting storage from other pieces of logic?

We did recently just rename the namespace from Jade to Judgment since Judgment is better semantics (namespaces describe the thing they are, not the name of the software implementing them), but I am open to additional names as well. Personally I like Review or Score.