@Discott you can contact me via Telegram, for sure. I'm thinking of people working on GLAM also. @GabrielLucas welcome!

Hello! I will be in Wikimania, I have other presentation plans, but I can help you with this, if there's appetite.

The secondary problem is that the '''"''' button is not very intuitive, as it could be mixed with the idea of a blockquote. References are not rendered as something between "symbols" but between [brackets]. Having the text helps, but yes, "Cite" is shorter than virtually any other language, so a bit more of space should be considered here, and/or change the icon to make it more evident.

Yes, I am using the new skin, but this happened yesterday. I have been using the new skin for two years.

Yes, it is happening, if I reduce the font-size to less than 90% or make it full-width, then it appears. Still, there's plenty of space and is not showing (it has showed always and I haven't changed my computer, resolution or screen).

Also notice, please, that Sitenotice and Centralnotice should be full-width, and this is not reflected in the proposal sections.

The problem with the prototype is that the right menu does not behave as we see here. It is narrower because the wide-option selector takes a full column in the right, instead of floating or taking a row in the bottom.

Thanks @alexhollender_WMF, the result is good. I would go even darker, but I think that this is not a topic now.

It seems that this crashes if there's another option below the Contributions section. This affects Growth Team created Mentor dashboard.

Will the Zebra #9 solve the obvious error of the sidebar's overflow scroll? This is pretty ugly now.

@aliu if something is working in version 1.1 and is not working in version 1.2 I think that is not a feature. Anyway, asking for features doesn't work in this platform, as they have exactly the same treatment: closing them or ignoring them.

Is it possible to do this by hand? The current order is completely illogical.

As this bug is in the way to be solved (today is the first day in a whole year where I didn't need to explain where the button is to a class full of students), I would like note how this topic was tried to be abandoned, closed and ridiculized from the start. The only motive for this to be solved is that Vector 2022 was deployed at English Wikipedia and there was great criticism.

Thanks for the update, Alex. I commented that I really liked the Zebra #9, and with the separation for the header it is even better. BUT... I have doubts with the right menu when it collapses. In the current live version, when the right menu is collapsed and the width set at maximum, there's no space in the right (which I personally don't like, but I know lot of people will choose). In the Zebra #9, the right space seems very empty when the right menu is collapsed.

Thanks Aklapper. I add that I checked with my account on Edge and it worked fine, and I also opened a private navigation window in Firefox and worked right. So the problem is really limited. I will see if there's any cookie interacting.

Cannot reproduce in Firefox 109. Which exact Firefox version is this about?

Is it possible to know which are the messages in this menu in Translatewiki? Thanks

Please, note that in the dropdown version there is an icon before the login link/button/option. Is interesting to note that we are using icons inside the dropdown menu and only there.

This is still happening... and taking too long.

Reducing the amount of clicks is the optimal solution. I have said this before, but I explain how Wikipedia works 2/3 times a week to a classroom, and I have to explain always where to login. When we create an account, the login is automatic, so there's no way to learn it if you don't click two times in a random ··· button.

Now that we are discussing this seriously, I leave here an idea to make things better in the right side: T328077. I think that I should note this here, because shades of grey may be relevant to the discussion.

The ticket was created 30 months ago.

@Legoktm could you help me with this at euwiki? Thanks!

Opened again, because of obvious UX errors without answer after 30 months.

Obviously, a huge problem for people with disabilities. And a mess for every daily user.

Today I learnt that this discussion, that was asked to move into Meta, was archived and hidden without even trying to solve it. Sad.

12 days have gone since the previous aknowledgement of the error. It is still happening.

Having something like Create language switcher templates for main page would go a way to starting a conversation about potentially raising the profile of these links, but I provide no guarantees and would probably rate effort spent on that, without discussion with affected communities, as being wasted.

The option to add interwiki links (not only to see them) for categories is gone.

I understand what the purpose is (telling the reader that some pages shouldn't have interwiki links). But... why? Why shouldnt a talk page be linked to another talk page? In which way is this good for our strategy? I would understand that the opposite is the good practice.

This change breaks ALL the interwiki links for, at least, categories: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia, portals (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Current_events) and templates (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Coord).

Thanks @alexhollender_WMF for trying to understand the core of the problem. You are right with the "this is what you want" image, the ORES quality should go in the left, as described there. We have been making some css tricks (some of them are documented in this task) but a stable solution would be the ideal thing here.

In T281974#8470232, @Theklan wrote:

This is still happening, making a mess in the right of the articls.

The regular thing is to categorize the talk pages itself, instead of the pages.

Ok, I have taken a couple of hours to see if the problem here is that English is not my first language and I'm not communicating exactly where the problem is. It may be the problem, I don't know whether I'm using the best words to describe it. I will try again, from the beginning.

No, it never got solved. And it doesn't seem there's a plan for even talking about that.

Yes, I'm asking the team who broke the design to unbreak it.

This is still happening, making a mess in the right of the articls.

I have asked one of the authors of the Module:NUMBEROF about writing something similar than can lookup for rows and columns: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discussion_utilisateur:Verdy_p#Using_something_like_NUMBEROF_to_query_.tab_data_at_Commons

I wonder... would this work? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Module:NUMBEROF

I have tried to add the graph to calculate Pi using the Montecarlo method to https://eu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Txantiloi:Graph:Pi_Montecarlo. But it doesn't seem to work because the last version of Vega is not deployed.

This is still happening.

This is also broken at cawiki: https://ca.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categoria:Ciutats_d%27Hisp%C3%A0nia

Last change (the watchlist star) breaks (again) the alignment of ORES quality prediction at euwiki.

It didn't work for about two hours, but then returned. I thought that this was related to a regression, but who knows.

Just for comment on this: in these last days I have been again showing how Wikipedia works to professors and students at the University. As the sidebar is now hidden, the general view of how Wikipedia works is reduced to the things happening inside the article. No menu is shown, so I have to show it on purpose to teach other features (recent changes, Wikimedia Commons link...) and students need an extra step to figure out what I'm talking about.

For sure, #9 is the best option here, because it makes the ToC way more evident.

Thanks @Func

Somehow, the solution given to floating elements in the left is broken: T317922

Related: T317922

But this breaks the solution given to the article quality text aligned in the left.

@jhsoby introduced some changes in the code, mainly changing lines 65 and 102 to

The opposite also happens. When you are in an article in Txikipedia, the links to the main tab disappear. When you are in the Citations tab, the main tab disappear: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Citations:planet

The same happens for "Citations" tab at Wiktionary: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/planet

A better example of this error can be seen here: https://eu.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hautespen_natural&oldid=9032843#Bibliografia

But, somehow, this solution breaks the visual-editor:

I have added .ns-0 to the css, so Txikipedia isn't affected while this is resolved.

You can check the problem with indicators and floating here:

Yes, I added the code because it was suggested here: T281974#7657925

I would say that T316095 is also related to this, because PAGEBANNER goes in content-sub, but I'm in doubts, because I can see it working at Wikivoyage.

Is not unrelated. Is can be completely related. Look at what has the removal of #contentSub broken at the Catalan Wikipedia, for example.

On the other side, this is a good moment to talk about the correct place to show info from our sister projects, now that we know that they will be deleted from the sight of the non logged-in users (and the discussion is stalled, because no one wants to talk about the elephant on the room).

I think this is related, but articles now at Basque Wikipedia and French Wikipedia are full width again.

I don't know if this is related, or it is another extra spacing issue, but I have noticed it today, so it may be recent.

There's no data about the usage of the cross-project links in those measurements. So, you can't know if this is used or not. Anyway, it doesn't matter if it is used or not, YOUR job is to make them more evident, because that is a main goal in our strategy. Hiding them is not the goal. Making them more evident if no one is clicking on them is. Hiding the problem makes it worse. Solving the problem (trying to, at least) makes it better.

Now we know that there's no data to support this change. Still, the main question remains unanswered. I made it one year ago, but again last month. https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T287609#8070494

As stated in the conversation, once we know that there is no data to know if the cross-wiki links are clicked or not, and noting that this was the main and only argument to hide the sidebar, a wise movement should be to just undo this change and propose one that respects the cross-wiki links and make them more prominent.

It was solved in some hours, so I thought someone managed to do it. Or, it could be a cache thing instead. Sorry for not notifying here the change.

I don't know if it is related, but the sitenotice is now shown in the left side, instead of the top: https://eu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berezi:Estatistikak

That's not true, Alex. The recommendation is not about incorporating content from sister projects within Wikipedia, because we have more projects that are not Wikipedia. There's no recommendation saying that WikiPedia should be the center of our project and all the others are hidden. Discoverability, cross-project links and diversity of content is essential. And I say this because I was in that discussion. I don't know if you were there, but I was. We discussed this for hours (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations/Iteration_2/Diversity/3)

In T287609#8120370, @Aklapper wrote:

@Theklan: If the Strategy Goals state that certain complexity must be exposed to the user immediately, then please point out so on the Talk page, not here. Thanks.

.
Exactly, here (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations/Improve_User_Experience):

After one click. Not directly. That's the point, and it has been all the time. But, as usual, when someone makes a point aligned with the Wikimedia Strategy, then it is ignored.