Talk:Single User Login finalisation announcement/Personal announcement

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Page for requesting renaming[edit]

Is it possible to not only translate it to different languages but to have different versions for different wikis? I don't think it's a good idea to only point to a list of bureaucrats on large wikis, but to point to the rename request page (e.g. de:Wikipedia:Benutzernamen ändern at de.wikipedia). --APPER (talk) 13:17, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Unofficial answer: I doubt it's possible to customise per wiki. (Well, theoretically, on talk pages, they could transclude a template with a standard name only if existing locally, and you'd fill it with whatever you need... Sounds overkill.)
The second link provided is to Steward requests/Username changes, where probably all instructions should be: it already has a link to that de.wiki page, for instance, but much more is needed. We need the help of everyone to improve such pages in the next few weeks, while the notification will be sent out very soon (I hope; only James knows). --Nemo 13:33, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

E-mail notifications[edit]

Didn't it say somewhere that there are going to be notifications both per e-mail and as a talkpage message? This page works fine on a talk page, but it contains wikicode, so it wouldn't work very well if sent unaltered in an e-mail. Is there a separate e-mail version of this notification which needs to be translated, or will that be arranged in some other way? --Stefan2 (talk) 17:25, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

The e-mails will have the wikitext substituted before being sent. Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 18:23, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

"Any" → "some" change[edit]

User:Jdforrester (WMF) changed "Your account will be renamed in August 2013, along with any other accounts that currently use the same name." into "Your account will be renamed in August 2013, along with some other accounts that currently use the same name." The use of the word "some" seems to imply to me that there are at least two accounts with the conflicting user name which will be renamed. This will be the case for some user names with conflicting accounts, but not for all of them. "Some" seems to work if there are two accounts called "John" which can't be attached to the SUL account "John" but not if there only is one "John" which can't be attached to the SUL account "John". Am I misunderstanding something, or am I just bad at English? --Stefan2 (talk) 21:42, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

It was broken by Tony1 in the name of making it "easier" to translate. Easier, but incorrect; it was deliberately written before to not try to explain whether the recipient was one of multiple accounts being moved out of the way, or the only one. Unfortunately it was then wrongly marked as OK for translation. I felt that the smallest change possible to not disrupt translations would make sense, but I am tempted to revert Tony1's change completely on this line. You're right that it now reads a little oddly; happy for you to steer. Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 22:16, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Having just discovered Forrester's change, and written on his talk page, I've discovered this thread. "Some other" should urgently be changed back to "any". "Some other" is plural; "any other" does not select for number. This is bound to damage translations. I'm changing it back now to avoid this.

I note the use of the word "some" at the opening; I might have simply removed it as a typical redundancy in my original edit, but on balance decided to leave it. "is making changes to how accounts work" is the preferred wording, not "is making some changes to how accounts work". Just saying for the future. Tony (talk) 03:45, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Please do not edit war like this, especially on documents that need to be translated.
The original text was:
Your account will be renamed in August 2013, along with a number of others'.
This was entirely correct - the recipient's account will be renamed, and so will a number of other people's accounts that also have the same name, but not all, and a number of other accounts, but not all.
It was changed to:
Your account will be renamed in August 2013, along with any other accounts that currently use the same name.
This is flatly wrong. At least one account (and in practice, quite a few accounts) that also has this name will not be renamed, as it is the "winning" global account. This text is horrendously misleading to the level that it makes these e-mail lie to our users.
I changed it to:
Your account will be renamed in August 2013, along with some other accounts that currently use the same name.
This is correct, if inelegantly worded.
Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 18:25, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
Talk discussion

"along with some other accounts"

Moved from User talk:Jdforrester (WMF)

It can't possibly be right.

To start with, the presumably common instance where there is one other account is excluded by "some other accounts", which is plural; "any other accounts does not select for number.

Why is "any" not correct?

I don't understand, in any case, why you said in the edit-summary that "any" is simpler. It doesn't seem to be simpler to me, and simplicity is not the issue: accuracy is the issue. I think you're going to get mistranslations by using plural "some". Tony (talk) 03:43, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

  • any: This is wrong because this implies that no one will keep the user name.
  • some: This is wrong because this implies that at least two accounts with this name will be renamed. Sometimes, there will only be one account to rename.

I don't like the idea of having an edit war on a document which needs to be translated to lots of languages, and I would prefer if it is somewhat stable so that the translations don't need to be updated before the notifications are sent out. --Stefan2 (talk) 18:44, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

  • James Forrester, you've chosen a really weird wording now ... an number of other accounts ... now we're indicating three at least. Is this the case for everyone who reads this? If Stefan is correct, that any is wrong because it implies that no one will keep their current username, why is a number of correct? Totally misleading now. I'm confused; how will the translators react? Tony (talk) 08:12, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Yes. "A number of accounts". Not "a number of accounts with the same name". Not "a number of accounts also owned by other humans. Not "a number of accounts on this wiki". Just "a number of accounts". I'm not sure how many times I need to spell this out before it's clear. :-( Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 15:34, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Selection of global account where none exists[edit]

You wrote, "At least one account (...) that also has this name will not be renamed, as it is the "winning" global account." What happens if none of the users of an account name makes the effort of 'globalizing' their account? There would be no SUL account with that name to start with, would there? Or will the people who manage this transition assign the global status to one of these users? Best regards, Bever (using this name on nl and en) Bever (talk) 22:03, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

[Splitting this off].
Yes, for this scenario we are automatically selecting one of the users to be the winning account and marking them as globalised. Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 11:50, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

enotiftalk[edit]

For the records, the email notification I just received for one of my accounts at testwiki was like this:

Subject: MediaWiki message delivery left you a message on Wikipedia
From: Wikipedia <wiki@wikimedia.org>
Body: «MediaWiki message delivery left a message on your talk page:
View message View changes»

Except the "From", quite ugly and useless!

  • Is there any trick to make Echo fetch something useful, in particular the edit summary (ideally for the subject as well)?
  • If not, can we disable Echo email notifications for a few minutes while these messages are delivered? The standard enotiftalk at least mentions (in the body) the edit summary, which MassMessage sets correctly ("Your account will be renamed"). --Nemo 06:42, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
I will agree that it's ugly, but not that it's useless. It could be better, but trying to rework the messaging system for this would likely delay finalization even further and I can't justify that on things that are not blockers at this point :/ This will be about as practical as emailing the orange bar of doom but without the sense of urgency, unfortunately. Keegan (WMF) (talk) 19:43, 16 March 2015 (UTC)