That sounds correct to me. Resolving. Thanks all!

@Mrjohncummings In the sidebar at right,

1. click "Edit related tasks" and then click "Close as duplicate"
2. in the box, paste T242489
3. click "Merge"

:)

I believe this configuration is used in 3rd party wikis. Perhaps Izno can provide specific examples or further details?

John asked here, which has the complete details. :) https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Project_chat#Is_there_documentation_for_how_to_create_Wikidata_Tours%3F (permalink)

Hi Nav and John. Is this proposal intended to supplement, or to replace, the existing Item Tour listed at https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Tours ?
Or intended for some other use-case or demographic, perhaps offline instruction?

I suggest looking at Frwiki's main page. They overhauled it a couple of years ago, and it's responsive, and I believe (but not sure) it has been checked for accessibility. Here are the links I can find, but I'll ping @Trizek-WMF in case he knows of further links.
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Accueil_principal
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Refonte_de_2017_de_l%27Accueil_principal_(FAQ)

@DannyS712 How would you summarize this new feature for Tech News? IIUC, something like...

Changes this week:
If you try to move a page to a title that already exists, there will now be a direct link to that existing title.

Re: user-notice - please help drafting a 1-2 sentence simple summary for Tech News. IIUC it would be something like this:

"[[Special:NewPages]] has a new drop-down menu interface for selecting the Tag filter. You do not need to type the tag from memory anymore."

(corrections welcome!)

@DannyS712 Yes to everything else (as far as I understand it), but I suggest removing/rewriting the part of the description that says "... merging with local stewards ...", because there is still a hope/plan to make wikitech part of SUL someday (T161859 et al), in which case that merge would cause an additional & unnecessary complication.

Is this feature available and enabled? I can't see the link in the English Wikipedia's sidebar Toolbox.
If not, should we re-open this task, or T222360: Add new "button" for Wiki URL shortener in the menu in Wikipedia instead?

In T140703#2693831, @Esanders wrote:

How about a dialog that says "VE is not supported on this page, switch to source editing: [OK] | [No, I want to try VE anyway, even though there be dragons]"

It was updated a couple of hours before this was filed! cf T240491: [SPIKE] Update the Compatibility#Mobile table
Oh, but I see no edits were made directly to the table in https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Template:Compatibility_browser/mobile so yes that still needs updating.

You've got that address listed in the "List of non-member addresses whose postings should be automatically accepted." section ("Lista adresów osób nie będących prenumeratorami, których wiadomości powinny być automatycznie akceptowane."), hence this is working as expected.
Re: How it happened: I would guess that a list-moderator simply selected the wrong checkbox in the moderation screen, in the past. An easy mistake to make.
I have not changed it, or anything else, but it looks like there might be other entries that perhaps should not be listed there?
I suggest you take a close look at the entries in this page: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/admin/wikimediapl-l/privacy/sender

Additional notes on gadgets:

In T46787#5640173, @kostajh wrote:

I agree that there are many nice UX possibilities proposed here but as someone who might work on this with pretty limited time (or for any other developer interested in this), it would be really nice to see the phab task description updated with a consensus on exactly what to implement.

Related/possible duplicate, I think it should be indicated for ALL preferences: T70689: User Preference's default options/values should be automatically marked in the special page itself

IIRC , we're not meant to create aliases for valid language codes, of which TEM is the one for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temne_language
(I can't quickly find if/where that general rule is documented.)
MOD should be ok, as it's the code for the extinct language https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobilian per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_639:m

In T46787#5620984, @kostajh wrote:

Do you have any thoughts on what the UX for this feature could look like?

Another mockup idea in https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Reading/Web/Desktop_Improvements/Wikimania_Stockholm_research_report#/media/File:Sketch_of_reading_preferences_panel_for_the_Desktop_improvements_project.png

In T234634#5578955, @josephine_l wrote:

Hey all, we are still looking for session leaders in order for this session to go ahead. :) Would anyone like to take it up? @Tgr @Addshore @Quiddity ?

Message drafted, translated, and delivered to the Global message delivery, with nuances in T233929: Identify and reach out to potential test wikis
Message: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Reading/Web/Desktop_Improvements/Outreach

Initial outreach to see if some specific wikis are interested, is being done via an addition paragraph in the massmessage outreach.
The bolded section in this message https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Reading/Web/Desktop_Improvements/Outreach
is being delivered to the wikis in this list https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Quiddity_(WMF)/Global_message_delivery_split_3
These wikis were chosen based on prior interest in this project or related projects, or uniquely relevant features at those wikis.
Further outreach will be done based on the initial responses here.

In T18691#5574534, @Pigsonthewing wrote:

If the page is long, a reader would have to scroll all the way to the top to copy the link and remember the name of the section they wanted to share.

A radical proposal: Instead of a "share" link, have a "TOC" link that links to the relvant line in the TOC (rather like links from citations to where the citation lies in the body text).

In T234957#5571404, @Tgr wrote:

Would it be useful to create some sort of inventory of gadgets (not necessarily names/URLs of the most used/important user scripts, but possibly an inventory of functionalities and workflows that editors use gadgets for)?

Very useful, and not primarily for interaction with MediaWiki changes (although that's useful as well). The increased discoverability of gadgets used by other communities would be a huge boon in itself.

Thoughts (with obligatory "i am not a dev" disclaimer, and a "sorry for the linkdump, this probably belongs elsewhere, but since you asked..." apology):

• The Documentation tag's workboard has benefited from a recent major sorting effort by @srodlund (ty!). Other people assisting with that, regularly, and thus also becoming familiar with the individual tasks in the backlogs and offering input on them (or pointing other people towards them), would be great.
• High-level on-wiki documentation overviews: There are various ongoing and past efforts to create hubs - organized overviews of the most fundamental/important pages. More people assisting with those would be great (give ideas, ask questions, give feedback, etc).
  • Existing wikipage efforts
    • The mainpage at mw.o was overhauled recently. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/MediaWiki
    • The developer hub is important and could always use more eyeballs/watchlisters/editors. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Developer_hub
    • The page https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/How_to_become_a_MediaWiki_hacker is the 3rd crucial hub, one that most newcomers are directed towards.
    • All would benefit from improvements to all the pages they link to.
  • Ongoing/future/historic wikipage efforts
    • The six "User pages" links at the bottom of https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:APaskulin_(WMF) are among the most useful/relevant.
    • The ongoing GSoD work of https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Pavithraes/Sandbox/ is also very important
    • I made a list a couple of years ago at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Quiddity_(WMF)/Hubs_and_docs which might be useful
• Individual wikipages:
  • It can be hard for a user to determine how uptodate a page is. It might help if we create & standardize a way we indicate a doc-page's quality and importance?
    • Currently we just use these generic cleanup templates: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Documentation/Style_guide/templates
    • Perhaps we want to use some sort of scoring-system, like the Wikipedia's sometimes use "stub/start/c/b/a/good/featured" (quality) and "top/high/mid/low" (importance) type ratings?
    • See also https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Pavithraes/Sandbox/Technical_documentation_prioritization
• Off-wiki and Cross-wiki docs and tools:
  • Self-documenting code, annotated source-code, docs.wikimedia.org, etc - I don't know anything about these.
  • Wikitech vs Mediawiki - this is always complicated, due to the historical/idealistic split of wiki-roles. Nothing that can be done, for now. Wikitech should be SUL eventually, which will improve things a bit.
  • I keep a list of seemingly-important links & subdomains at https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Quiddity#Bookmarks (which might be relevant here. I regularly forget what they're all for!)
• Other:
  • There's probably still some good ideas worth more discussion/effort at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Developer_Wishlist/2017/Documentation
  • This group was recently renamed/rebooted/opened-up, and everyone should watchlist it (for now. More info/outreach soon): https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_technical_documentation:_friends_of_the_docs
    • There's a listing of external "good docs examples" reference material that anyone can add to at (the group's old name) https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Technical_Document_Re-working_Group/Resources
• Support channels:
  • Complicated, because different methods/platforms are best suited to (A) different types of questions, (B) different archetypes of users. Plus (C) the people with the knowledge to answer a question might not be in (nor want to be in) the chosen platform. E.g. An inexperienced newcomer who is slowly learning how a code-review system works, needs different support from an experienced newcomer who needs to understand how our platforms relate to what they learned elsewhere. -- The platforms themselves (Onwiki/Discourse discussion; VS Mailing-list discussion; VS IRC/Telegram/Zulip discussion) each have different pros/cons, too, such as searchability, filterability (the usual cause of channel-fragmentation or an individual just leaving a channel, is trying improve the signal-to-noise ratio for themselves), difficulty of joining-in, and speed-of-average-response.
• Conference idea:
  • Perhaps discussing the specific types of documentation that we're most in need of (improving or creating), would be helpful?
    • See TLDR of the types at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Documentation/Style_guide#Deciding_on_a_document_type
    • and a list of accurate & distinct terminology (with examples) at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Pavithraes/Sandbox/Technical_documentation_templates_and_suggestions#Tips_for_writing_in_genres

Hopefully something in there helps, and doesn't just distract/tangent! Sorry again. >.>

Onboarding thoughts (with obligatory "i am not a dev" disclaimer):

• Primary existing pages:
  • https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/New_Developers
  • https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/How_to_become_a_MediaWiki_hacker
  • https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/How_to_contribute (also lists the non-development-related areas)
• Personas: Overall, I think we need to constantly keep in mind the various demographics/target-audiences, because their needs often wildly differ from each other, with some overlap.
  • E.g. new gadget-authors -- vs -- new SRE staff -- vs -- new external-researchers -- vs -- new external wikidata collaborators
  • Past attempts at defining them include:
    • https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:APaskulin_(WMF)/Docs_Personas
    • https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Cloud_Services_team/Our_audiences
    • https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Growth_and_diversity_of_Technology_team_audiences#Results
    • https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Product_Development/Person%C3%A6#Technical_contributors_and_software_or_content_re-users
    • https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Web_APIs_hub#Personas
• Existing per-person onboarding docs examples: There are (some quite old) examples from various WMF Product/Tech dept teams. Similar to the gitlab template linked by TheDJ above. E.g.
  • https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Cloud_Services_team/Onboarding_Hieu
  • https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Release_Engineering_Team/Onboarding (e.g. T214556: Onboarding Brennen)
  • https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Discovery/Team/Onboarding
  • https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Team_Practices_Group/Onboarding (historic)
• Collecting more info (pre-TechConf?):
  • I think it would be useful for other groups/affiliates/teams to share what they currently use (e.g. WMDE?)
  • It might be useful for any recent newcomers to the movement to explain what pain points they remember being specifically confused/frustrated by. (ideally right here, and before TechConf!)

Might this be related to T235027: Translate does not update content page when saving units ?

I agree that we need a different interface option for galleries where there are dozens of images in the slideshow.

Done. Thanks for the reminder, and for making it work. :)