In T226914#5331629, @DannyS712 wrote:

The easiest would be to add a new readonly field, and it would (in my view) also be the least confusion. There are currently 3 fields to the form: the page title (read only), the new content model (dropdown menu) and the reason (text field). I suggest adding a readonly field with the current content model directly below the page title, both to group the readonly fields together and so that the current model is visible when the menu is opened. Thoughts?

In T227199#5321999, @Tchanders wrote:

@RhinosF1 Thanks for the screenshots. It looks like the site is using MediaWiki version 1.33.0 (https://publictestwiki.com/wiki/Special:Version) - we fixed the checkbox to become disabled since then in T224032.

Yes, they're all on latest stable

I think we should keep this open, because it is still technically possible to make this type of block with JavaScript disabled.

In T227199#5321559, @Tchanders wrote:

Without JavaScript it is possible for the form to be in a state where "Editing" is unchecked but "Editing their own talk page" is checked (and not disabled). In that case, we should probably throw an error instead of making the block.
@RhinosF1 Are you seeing the form in this state with JavaScript enabled?

I honestly don't know. I'll test now on Chrome for iOS (All latest stable version)

Like @Prtksxna and @dmaza I can't reproduce this, except by disabling JavaScript.
I agree that fixing T221117 will make this checkbox less confusing, and should negate the need to move the checkbox up.

Thanks Andre

In T227227#5311697, @Jasper wrote:

I oppose this, due to RhinosF1's recent sockpuppetry both on-wiki and on IRC. He is currently globally banned from all Wikimedia IRC channels.

In T227199#5309479, @dbarratt wrote:

I think a better solution might be to rename "Editing their own talk page" to "Their own talk page" and move it under "Editing". That way it is clear that it needs to be enabled.
What do you think @Prtksxna?

Adding these, don't believe there's a specific tag

In T227227#5311527, @Aklapper wrote:

the group that potentially will need to join / edit the project is small

It's not about needing to join a project but allowing anyone to join. :) (What is an example for "editing the project"?

I mean the Phab project so like Changing the description

They are 3rd party wikis running the latest stable version of Mediawiki.

Let me rephrase: Would this project tag be used on tasks which also have another project tag, so your tag is more of a list of bookmarks of MediaWiki tasks which interest you?

This top one

Or is this more of a "Update our 3rd party MediaWiki installation to version 1.64" with only your tag on those tasks, specifically about your sites only? Asking as the latter might be out of scope.

In T227227#5305546, @Aklapper wrote:

This project only please that can edit and restricted to only existing members being able to add other users.

Please explain which problem that would solve.
There is no good reason why edit policies should be restricted. See https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Phabricator/Creating_and_renaming_projects#Project_policies

If this isn't ideal then forget this point but the group that potentially will need to join / edit the project is small and I can't see anyone who doesn't know a member well enough to just ask ever really needing to join / edit the project.

I want to use it to track things for the Wikis that I run

Are those things related to MediaWiki? Or completely third-party only?

They are 3rd party wikis running the latest stable version of Mediawiki.

Don't think so

In T227400#5311465, @Varnent wrote:

So I know - who on Phabricator needs to know and should be tagged?

Noting for the record per pm with @Varnent that next time idea of a phab task to show information will be noted.

@Varnent - msg'd you on IRC

@Varnent: ^

Ah, Probably offtopic for this ticket but communication is a good thing. You say 'handled differently' but does that mean not publicly? Or is there a better place to look and file problems?

@Varnent: Was this tracked anywhere?

@Aklapper : Whats stalling this?

Site is down - if this isn't planned then it should probably be UBN!

Yes the wikis run using Mediawiki so I'd likely put the tag on bugs that required my attention for some reason on my wiki

@Ineuw - Do you want this closing?

In T226109#5280038, @Reedy wrote:

In T226109#5280036, @RhinosF1 wrote:

In T226109#5280026, @Reedy wrote:

In T226109#5279998, @RhinosF1 wrote:

I think there was one at some point

Pretty sure there wasn't

I don't know what Ive read but I'm certain I've read a incident report and I'm sure it referenced @Elitre and mass messages

That might've be the last breakage, but the cause is different

In T226109#5280026, @Reedy wrote:

In T226109#5279998, @RhinosF1 wrote:

I think there was one at some point

Pretty sure there wasn't

In T226109#5279992, @CDanis wrote:

Am I alone in feeling like this probably deserves an incident report?
I'd be very happy to be wrong about this, but it seems like there are no mechanisms in place to prevent this kind of error from happening again, or even to detect it if/when it does.

From John on Miraheze Phab (https://phabricator.miraheze.org/T4477#85085):

A matrix of radio buttons is an extremely common survey feature and is desirable in the situation we’ve used them in place.

In T225982#5264755, @Mainframe98 wrote:

Isn't this exactly what a radio button does?

In T226109#5271297, @Agusbou2015 wrote:

In T226109#5271108, @Reedy wrote:

In T226109#5271093, @Agusbou2015 wrote:

When will the fix be ready?

Sometime after someone works out what's broken

Could someone investigate what's broken?

The email has arrived to us for may now @Marostegui

In T224930#5246958, @alanajjar wrote:

In T224930#5246946, @RhinosF1 wrote:

@alanajjar - Is there any reason for the name change? The old title is more descriptive

I don't think it's "more descriptive", as users searching about (Global user contribution) or (GUC) not (No contributions shown for any user)!

I see but saying 'it's down' could mean anything to developers, 'no contributions showing' says it as it is. A user should be able

probably we can make it (No contributions shown for any user in Global user contribution tool)

That's fine

@alanajjar - Is there any reason for the name change? The old title is more descriptive

Per guide linked

In T222533#5233449, @EvanProdromou wrote:

So, it sounds like we've got a good split on this task. IMHO, the right way to do this is:

• Set a flag that the watchlist deletion has been queued.
• If this flag is set, show a message in Special:Watchlist.
• If this flag is set, disallow adding any new items to the watchlist (this is probably the easiest way to handle it).
• In the job queue, when the last batch of watchlist items is deleted, also unset the flag.

Does this sound about right?

In T224516#5231674, @Marostegui wrote:

No, only writes to commonswiki (and tesrcommons) will be affected. But reads won't be affected, they will work normally.

In P8580#51478, @RhinosF1 wrote:

In P8580#51477, @LakesideMiners wrote:

Okay, will be a while tho. I have some other stuff IRL I need to deal with right now, should be done in at least 3 days tho.

That's fine

In P8580#51477, @LakesideMiners wrote:

Okay, will be a while tho. I have some other stuff IRL I need to deal with right now, should be done in at least 3 days tho.

I will set up the export files if you confirm the list @LakesideMiners .

In P8580#51473, @LakesideMiners wrote:

Sorry, was offline for a bit. Going to be of of my computer for the rest of the day as well. I take it that some pages timed out while importing them?

@LakesideMiners / @Examknow - Thoughts? Please comment on the miraheze task

Note to self: Phab diffs are not very useful on pastes.

Actual task to import these is https://phabricator.miraheze.org/T4436

Removed quite a few without thinking

@LakesideMiners This is the full list of Templates that Twinkle users + some userlinks / ping templates.

In T223315#5210072, @Aklapper wrote:

In T223315#5188492, @RhinosF1 wrote:

What do I see/expect is answered in the parent task.

@RhinosF1: It should be summarized and answered here (in the task description) so people don't have to read through discussions in some other task, including clear objective criteria that allow defining when to call this task resolved.

@Krinkle T216496 shows a misleading error (not sure if that qualifies under this

In T223315#5188396, @Aklapper wrote:

@RhinosF1: You seem to have posted a few comments from the other task, but no answer to my question?

In T222533#5167080, @kostajh wrote:

Also, the "too many pages to display" message is no longer accurate and shouldn't be displayed.

@kostajh - Does this need a sub task or is it being handled via this task

In T223315#5186548, @Aklapper wrote:

(Removing team tags as it is up to teams what they plan to work on.)

Copied exactly from parent task - Based on discussion there adding Core Platform Team seems appropriate

@RhinosF1: Unfortunately this report lacks some information. What do you expect to see? What do you see currently? Which specific criteria to apply which allow judging whether this task is done and successfully resolved at some point? Unspecific "make everything faster somehow" tasks are not helpful. :)

! In T222533#5168793, @MMiller_WMF wrote:

@RhinosF1 -- would you say that the larger issue is that the watchlist takes a long time to clear, or that the user doesn't have any warning that it will take a long time? The latter is obviously faster and easier to fix than the former.

! In T222533#5182114, @JTannerWMF wrote:

We will fix the message on this, however the speed is not within scope of this team. We believe the Core Platform Team would be responsible for the speed. We will use this Phab task for the message and Core Platform Team can use another for the speed.

See the above posts from the parent task that is being used to add a message alerting users temporarily while Core Platform Team improve the performance of clearing through an improved system

@JTannerWMF - Does the set up of the task I've done seem okay to you?