In T193565#4497636, @tstarling wrote:

It doesn't have to be a LoadBalancer bug, it could just be some other extension calling reuseConnection() inappropriately. It's hard to debug without a reproduction procedure. I see in the logs that there was a series of these on 2018-08-06 with URL https://sat.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%E1%B1%9F%E1%B1%A5%E1%B1%9A%E1%B1%A0%E1%B1%9F%E1%B1%AD:Import&action=submit , and the failed query indicates that the user was @MF-Warburg , who did have successful file upload imports at that time in the logs: https://sat.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E1%B1%9F%E1%B1%A5%E1%B1%9A%E1%B1%A0%E1%B1%9F%E1%B1%AD:Log/import

I wasn't able to reproduce it by doing interwiki imports into testwiki, but maybe I wasn't hitting CentralAuth in the same way.

@MF-Warburg, to help us isolate this bug, can you tell us what kind of client you were using? If you used a browser, did you see errors when you did some of these imports, and was there anything special about the ones that failed?

Is there any progress on this? Would be much appreciated.

In T193028#4158568, @Urbanecm wrote:

The requirement from Langcom currently is to translate the most-used messages set (for the first project in a language).

Since when is this necessary?

Thanks, I was already subscribed and confirm this is a legitimate request.

This should be in Wiki-Setup (Create), however that works.

In T54971#3841692, @ChristianKl wrote:

I'm of the opinion, that it's not our role of Wikidata to create pseudo-fake websites. In most of the relevant cases it would make sense to actually have real websites.

The langcom policy that prevents the creation of those sites is the core problem and a meta RfC to change it would be the best way forward

I imported the pages. Can you please run the scripts to update the statistics etc.?

I deliberately omitted those as they won't conflict with the import.

Sorry, I didn't see the wiki already exists. I deleted the few pages which still were in it now.

That works.

Langcom has reviewed the concerns and found them unfounded. So please continue with the creation of the wiki.

Thanks for this reply. I think that settles it.

On 5 July.

Does "I would rather get mediawiki handle its deleting and all the related checks to be honest." mean you would like to have a function in MediaWiki that can delete the wiki's database? Or just that the pages in the wiki should be deleted using the normal MediaWiki interface?

How can we solve this? As it works for non-Wikipedias, can't we create an exception for Wikipedias that will fix the link for them?

So is creation the redirection without deleting the databases a reasonable way forward?

How is this blocked on global preferences? I'd say the first step would be
having a preference for this at all, then it could at least be set
individually, e.g. after getting the first such notification.

It is reported to me that the VisualEditor and the "2017 wikitext editor" don't work on the wiki.

But that is irrelevant for the bug:

All pages have been deleted.

In T168764#3382535, @Luke081515 wrote:

We can add .* to the TBL after removed from closed lists to prevent new pages before import finished.

In T168764#3381334, @Urbanecm wrote:

In that case I think the requestor (or somebody else) should delete all pages and import new pages from incubator. I'll create a patch for reopening the wiki after it (or, if it should be reopened before deleting/importing, let me know). Is it okay for all?

Ok. Please answer my question in return.

Yes.

It still isnt possible to enter Rangi content in Wikidata. How long does it take for this change to go live?

On the other hand, srwiki is quite old, whereas atjwiki was recently
created.

Why would consensus be needed for this simple localisation?

Sysop requests can be posted on m:SRP after a local discussion happened.
Bureaucrat rights will not immediately be granted on new wikis.

In T166132#3286304, @Nikerabbit wrote:

I'll state the perhaps obvious, that the other option is to lower the export threshold for core even further. Like, if we really want to go to the way of encouraging translators, we could lower the export threshold to much smaller, and guard their visibility with $wgShowLanguagesWithMinimalLocalisation, disabled by default, but could be enabled for Incubator and so on.

Langcom has no problem with this; in fact Baba_Tabita is himself a member of Langcom.

This task is not stalled. It is invalid as long as the project isn't approved by Langcom anymore.

I see you are right.
I suggest so, but if it only concerns the main category page and is limited to editinterface people, it is basically a non-issue. You can close this if you want.

Please don't proceed with the creation of the wiki at the moment.
A more detailed explanation will be given soon.

In T160868#3117377, @Dereckson wrote:

@MF-Warburg Wikimedia language engineering isn't currently happy with translation progress: they would like 100 more messages translated, as requested here last year.

I asked on https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Kabiye#Other_discussion

In T54971#3060413, @Candalua wrote:

The original request is that it should be possible to add sitelinks using any of the language codes that don't have a subdomain, which I guess is the difficult part. But can we just use one language code ("mul" seems a good candidate) to identify the Incubator / BetaVersity / MulSource projects, and add sitelinks using that code, and that code only? This should be easier to implement, I suppose. It would be much better than doing nothing, and it could be a first step towards the complete solution.

IIRC, Wikisources have the "Page", "Page talk", "Index", "Index talk" namespaces and the translation for those is usually given in the bug report to create the wiki, as they are not translatable on TWN. Correct?

Everything is already arranged about that.

Solution: It works correctly, except for the main category:
https://incubator.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Wp/olo&action=edit can be edited
https://incubator.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Wp/olo/Filosoufii&action=edit cannot be edited

Why is this even a separate bug?

In T151186#2814687, @Esc3300 wrote:

@MF-Warburg would you like to add something from the lang-co perspective?

In T149522#2755130, @Krenair wrote:

It doesn't look like this has language comittee approval

In T28725#2552717, @Liuxinyu970226 wrote:

Not sure if this is still needed or not, one user created Wp/syc on Incubator, which is probably planning to create a sycwiki