I feel the situation was a lot different back in 2013. It's 2020. We are not talking about XHTML any more. We use HTML 5, a "living standard". At this point, is this an academic discussion about the semantics of HTML, or does this have real-life consequences? If so, in which browsers? Is there a specific example we can look at? (Ideally with a revision ID and screenshot.)

On WMF wikis this can also be done with Petscan, on an aside.

This can be worked around by accessing ?action=delete directly, I would believe.

I don't know. It just seems bizarre that something we wanted 4 years ago apparently is no longer wanted, and no circumstances related to the original work have changed. :) I would expect that as part of the Vector rework we'll get to a responsive mode again, but maybe that's not an explicit requirement of that work? (I am fairly certain that is an objective/requirement.)

Probably shouldn't do this...

I have removed the reference to "including themselves" per the other work to remove self-unblocks generally.

I believe this is T208965: Partially blocked admins should be able to access Special:Block. Please feel free to merge.

In T151362#5795266, @Jonesey95 wrote:

I think this has been implemented via LintHint, if I understand the feature request.

Is this exact task still going to happen given PHP Parsoid? (One system being Javascript and the other PHP now.)

What discussion has been held regarding the fact we have multiple other Javascript libraries (some mentioned in the description) in use and/or is this framework intended to deprecate those? If it, what has been discussed about the process? For example, Jquery.ui is still in use, while that was on-paper deprecated some long time ago.

I honestly see the implementation of citation content (and other extensions) in Parsoid as technical debt to be cleaned up/removed eventually by the 1-parser-march. @ssastry should probably comment on the general plan for those extension reimplementations, if that has been considered previously (and if not, maybe it should be discussed somewhere more general).

The linked task says that @Cyberpower678 has access now.

Another report at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:Main#Template_not_working_in_mobile_version

In T241293#5775089, @matmarex wrote:

Note that the checking is done for manual citations (Cite → Manual → Website, etc.); it is only not done for automatic (Citoid) citations.

I don't see how this would work for automatic citations. There is no step in which you can edit the citation before you insert it [snip]

(Mind you, I support deprecation and removal too. There are only 10k uses on en.wp and that's the largest wiki. Only 2.8k of those are in the mainspace.

This is T39042: Remove <source> syntax from SyntaxHighlight (GeSHi), no?

On WMF wikis, [[Special:Search/insource:extends]] would probably do to start.

Just as a data point as a thread follower, I'm using an LG G5, Android 7.0, Firefox 68.3.0, on Timeless skin, and I cannot reproduce the problem on en.wp. Either a) the dropdown displays with notifications or b) I beat the JavaScript loading and get dumped on Special:Notifications, where the notifications also display.

I left this comment on the Promises task; not sure if it might be better suited for here.

IE11 is still some 3% of total views (7.6% of desktop) and is presently the only MS browser available on Win7 (mind you, an OS basically EOL in a month) and Win8. (Chromium Edge supports both but will be released more-or-less with the end of support for Win7; how it will end up on users's computers for Win7 when they won't be receiving updates, I do not know (voluntary download? for people using IE11...).)

We see behavior similar to this on-wiki today on occasion, where one person's edit obliterates someone who made a comment just before (and occasionally it is a longer time period--I think that is usually due to users who start an edit long before and then come back to finish it after someone else as made a comment in the same space, which for some reason the edit conflicter won't catch). I can't point to any diffs offhand.

I think silent failure, or using something other than class=error, might be preferable here if it's the case, and I already suggested it will be, the community will want support for such. I'd rather field questions of "why doesn't it work?" than "there's a big red error for something that should work". One might reasonably make a category for it though, without the red error.

Okay, that's what I thought.

In T151305#5723309, @awight wrote:

I think we should forbid extends inside the references tag.

Doing this in Javascript introduces accessibility concerns (someone with a reader isn't going to see the same table); doing this in PHP causes the same kinds of issue as auto-dates did.

See also T104926: Remove the old wikitext styling code from Cite and children tasks, and maybe also T156350: Add language-specific CSS modules for Parsoid's Cite output and children. I suspect @Jdforrester-WMF and possibly @ssastry will have some commentary about numbering.

In T200687#5712985, @Amire80 wrote:

What to do when the same style is shared by multiple templates is less clear.

I'm not sure why is this necessary in the first place.
Using the same style page by several templates is a reasonable scenario. I don't know how often does this actually happen, but it's the first issue I thought about when I saw this task's title, and it's mentioned in the task description, so I guess it's not preposterous.

Is this comment based on the beta feature for hover tooltips, the now-common gadget for the same, or some other hover?