For reference, copying an offline comment I made about the possibility of the feature helping users who come across improperly formatted quotes to correct them:

Along with location, date of creation is one of the other fairly important pieces of metadata that isn't currently being displayed for the example file. Is that part of the same issue?

Thanks for that clarification, @OKarakaya-WMF! The partial name link issue (which the Agricultural Bank of France edit is an example of) is really the main capitalization issue we've been encountering — it's also what happened in the examples I cited above reported by Rich Farmbrough and Kerry Raymond.

At en-WP, I'd suggest placing notices of the discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (WMF), Wikipedia talk:Editnotice, Wikipedia talk:Help Project, Wikipedia talk:User scripts, and the #general and #english-wikipedia Discord channels. For people who patrol edits, Wikipedia talk:Recent changes patrol might help, and people who patrol articles can be found at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation and Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers (for all of those, and explanation along with the invite of why we're particularly valuing their perspective might be helpful).

^ Spam, @Aklapper

English Wikipedia has 40,000 articles tagged as needing an update.

If I'm understanding it correctly, this task seems ripe for Wikidata integration of some sort.

On English Wikipedia, which articles should have an infobox is a surprisingly contentious question, with some editors very much opposed to having them everywhere.

@Chipmunkdavis has pointed to an additional instance of a partial name link in this edit.

Thanks, @C.Suthorn! This is a little beyond my depth technically. But if there are pieces of metadata that aren't being shown for webp files that ought to be, to match the behavior of image file types, then it'd be helpful for someone to file a ticket for that.

This is interesting, @MNeisler! People being more likely to complete an edit when the check is shown feels unexpected, since normally throwing warning notices at people causes some portion to give up and abandon the task. I'm curious, do we have any hypotheses that might explain this?

To read the metadata, I was just looking at the metadata section of the file page. Is there a reason that the coordinates (which per above do seem to be part of the file's metadata) — and every other piece of metadata apart from "software used" — might not show up there in the same way they do for photos? If so, perhaps the issue is with how we display metadata for video files rather than something Video2Commons is doing.

@Jdlrobson could you share more about why this was deemed not a priority?

@Amdrel , if you'd like another example of a V2C video, here's one (or take your pick from the category).

@AntiCompositeNumber, thanks for raising that. Does it apply to the place where the user creating the AI image is located, or to the place where the company generating it is located? The current wording of the template makes it seem like the law is generally that AI works are PD, with the U.K./Hong Kong just being two niche exceptions. Ideally, it would be nice to handle those separately rather than having them impact the default.

I think it may be that if I'm subscribed to a parent task, I get automatically subscribed to any subtasks. There are certainly plenty of tasks that I start getting notifications for that I've never actively touched, and that also don't have any mentions of me in the task history. For some of these, e.g. T399669, I can infer that I was likely added by the task creator because it's relevant to my work. But for others it's less clear. An interface that helps provide information to figure this out I think would make Phabricator a more intuitive platform to use.

Thanks for updating the task! "ask the user" implies that we'd use an opt-in approach, or one in which the user needs to make a choice. I'd say we could probably get away with an opt-out approach, in which the "Remember this choice" box is checked by default (and in the rare instance in which someone doesn't want to use the same license for all their uploads they could uncheck it).

@Aklapper, I do think the current approach carries a risk of confusion, since I've experienced that confusion myself. Before I figured out that being part of groups and being part of parent tasks could lead to me being autosubscribed to other tasks, I was often quite confused as to why I ended up being subscribed to certain tasks, since there was nothing in the feed indicating it. Among volunteers who don't use Phabricator all the time like you do, I'd be very surprised if this confusion was unique.

I share the intuition that presenting the check mid-edit will be a better user experience than pre-save. However, that depends on the rate of erroneous triggers — if there's a high chance of it triggering when the user hasn't actually moved on, that could be annoying enough to negate the usability benefit.

Ah yes, that does do what I'm looking to do. I agree that it'd be nice to surface that in the UI so that it's easier to find; not sure if it makes more sense to adjust this task to be about that or to close this and create a separate task for that.

@Kerry_Raymond has independently raised this issue and provided some further examples in this thread.

Now linked to my staff account.

Adding on to @Trizek-WMF's comment, I had a very similar thought to the one you did, @Kerry_Raymond: We could modify Twinkle so that, when delivering a level-1 (and maybe also level-2) warning, there is a box autochecked by default with "send along with welcome". WT:Twinkle might be the place to get consensus for that feature, after which it could be added to the Twinkle GitHub for the developers to implement.

I use my Phabricator account for both my volunteer and staff activities (with "Sdkb-WMF" as an alias). I'd be happy to add my WMF SUL to the login, but I'm not sure how/if it's possible to add it or change it.

In T404935#11195156, @TheDJ wrote:

In T404935#11194159, @Sdkb wrote:

I think subtitles are useful — I recently embedded a non-English file where my audience would have had no clue what was being said without them. So I'd prefer we just fix the sizing issue rather than removing them. That said, it does depend on the height setting — if it's small enough that there's no room for them, there's no room for them.

I dont see how we can fix the sizing issue in a way that is maintainable. But if someone has patches that make it so without breaking other situations, id be open to it.

In T376522#11199598, @Soda wrote:

@Matrix @Sdkb Would it be possible to revisit this? Adding an auto-patroller-only restriction seems like it will be a fair bit more work. (In particular, I'm wondering how this would interact with the campaign system?)

I think subtitles are useful — I recently embedded a non-English file where my audience would have had no clue what was being said without them. So I'd prefer we just fix the sizing issue rather than removing them. That said, it does depend on the height setting — if it's small enough that there's no room for them, there's no room for them.

Requested locally in that case here.

@KStoller-WMF, would having the number of edits on which milestone notifications trigger be a potential application of MediaWiki-extensions-CommunityConfiguration? Aside from the quirkier options Ladsgroup mentioned (which I love), the current notifications also miss many milestones that are socially considered a big deal (as @Kerry_Raymond recently pointed out). Adding notifications every 10,000 edits up to 100,000 and every 100,000 edits up to 1 million would probably be an improvement.

One small thing: Are we using sentence case or title case for the card title? Sentence case is the standard in most other places on-wiki, I think, and using that we'd have "Revise tone?" rather than "Revise Tone?" I could also see title case being fine, but we'd just want to have a reason for using it here and make sure it's consistent with other card titles.

@Jdlrobson-WMF, yeah, the thought was to use the same recommendations API that RelatedArticles is using to fetch its top result.

In T402555#11107841, @A_smart_kitten wrote:

FYI, the skin-view-create-local message seems like it's overridden on the English Wikipedia - its default value is "Add local description".

Maybe an override like that (or something similar) should be considered for upstreaming from enwiki to GlobalUserPage in general?

In T401276#11072350, @Novem_Linguae wrote:

Algorithm idea: scrape the article's text. Do a word count. So if the word "painter" appears in the article 10 times, note that, then sort by what words appear the most. Run a filter to eliminate common words, leaving only topical words that would be useful for figuring out the topic of the article. Then compare these keywords to the titles of other GAs and FAs.

The current article's title and categories would also be a great place to scrape keywords from.

It's not exclusive to the Hackathon.

Removing myself as assignee just since I don't have the technical knowledge needed to develop this myself.

Perhaps there should be another task for it, but as a related matter, I also wonder about the choice to display nothing rather than displaying "less than 30 watchers" for non-admins. Editors might otherwise wonder why they see the count on some pages but not others. And knowing that a page has few watchers is still useful info, even if one doesn't know exactly how few.

Has that first one been resolved? I saw "Done" rather than "Publish changes":

@Sgs, implemented! It looks like the code above was missing a closing bracket, which I added. If you see any other issues, please let me know right away.

As a small grammar thing, "your reason for keeping" would sound better to me than "your reason to keep".

en-WP currently has the template {{Failed verification}}.

@DLynch , I found this happening just now when I tried to click reply to Newyorkbrad's original comment at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AVillage_pump_%28proposals%29&dtnewcommentssince=c-Constant314-20250709164100-Welcome_message_for_new_editors_who%27s_initial_efforts_have_been_reverted.&dtsincethread=1#Proposal_for_discussion:_No-AI_Certification_in_Unblock_Requests I arrived at that URL I think by clicking a notification that there was a new topic on the Village Pump (Proposals) page (to which I subscribe).

Thanks for adding me as a subscriber on this, Kirsten. I think many more experienced editors will be glad to see this feature. Raising the cap to 10,000 is unlikely to be high enough to produce meaningful data for a lot of folks, though, as many active editors have significantly more edits than that.

@Aklapper it seems that OwenRB completed the work for the task, and it just needs to go through the code review process. Who would be doing the review who we could ping about that?

English Wikipedia has templates like {{Retired}}, where if an editor uses it it might make sense to mark them as inactive.

I've noticed some sort of error with the sticky table header here at Commons. It is sticky when I'm not logged in, but when I am logged in (even with a test account with no scripts/special settings), it is non-sticky.

@dchen I didn't have a chance to mention this yesterday, but this is one issue that topic subscriptions have created that comes up fairly often.

@dchen I mentioned this only briefly yesterday, but it'd definitely be one of the more helpful improvements that could be made to watchlists.

@dchen this is the task I mentioned yesterday.

Perfect!

@Jdlrobson-WMF, yes, that makes sense. We're on the same page then in terms of the preferred resolution. Given that, though, I'm not sure why the task is marked as invalid. Since the current behavior is that clicking opens, in the example, the lead section link. So something needs to change to produce the behavior we're both seeking.

@Jdlrobson-WMF, ah, I was also running into the issue of the overall banner not working, so appreciate you identifying the issue with that and creating a task for it! But I was asking above specifically about the linking issue from this ticket. Can you help me understand that better?

Oops, meant to tag your @Jdlrobson-WMF account.

@Jdlrobson, can you explain in simpler terms what your suggested resolution to this issue is? If I'm understanding correctly, you're suggesting that clicking on the banner on mobile should always just open up the full banner, not follow any of the links (and that if someone wants to follow a link they should click it once the full banner is open). That makes sense to me. But it's not how warning templates currently work, since right now you can click on links directly without opening the full banner. And it's not clear to me what needs to be changed so that you can no longer do so.

I proposed this change back in 2020, so nice to see some movement on it! However, I'm curious why the mockup moves it to the general Main Menu rather than the Contribute menu below it. It would seem to fit in the Contribute menu, and that less-prominent location would seem better because it's not a particularly important link (especially for non-editors).