target of a redirect page from a Lua module
Reporting in Tech News: 2016-22 that "There is now a standard way to get the target of a redirect page from a Lua module" and linking to a page which doesn't tell you how seems singularly unhelpful. For (;;) (talk) 19:20, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
- It would be very helpful indeed. This feature is currently in beta. To activate beta version, go to the hamburger menu (the three lines on the upper left corner, click settings and check beta). The ticket here elaborates on the future of the feature. Thanks :) --Melamrawy (WMF) (talk) 23:39, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
Leading [ missing
- Yes samtar, and that's entirely my fault. I didn't checked what I4ve typed on the Global delivery field, and I've seen nothing on the preview. I'm really sorry about that. :( Trizek (WMF) (talk) 12:56, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
Missing delivery to community pages
- (Split out from section above)
- Gah, it looks like someone's error/spam earlier, caused it to not be delivered to any of the first section. I'll send it out to those separately, in a moment. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 20:03, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
Mentioning global rename outage
To bring it to the attention of the writers, global renames will be disabled from 00:00 9 December 2016 (UTC) to around 16 December 2016. This is due to phab:T148242, which I hear is supposed to make global watchlists possible. Global rename was actually disabled from November 20 to an originally scheduled date of November 27, but some technical issues postponed that date. The Phabricator task is not yet finalized, so the script will be run again for another week. Please put this in next week's publication. Thanks, —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 00:08, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
New years wish: A brief look into the future
Since the last Tech News requested for improvements wishes, here is mine: Tech News informs you great about what happened in the last week but it's still hard to keep an overview of bigger projects that are running. Maybe you could introduce a category in the Tech News where you keep a list of links to the ongoing/planned changes of the next year or so? -- MichaelSchoenitzer (talk) 12:14, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks MichaelSchoenitzer. I'll spend some time over the next few months trying to figure out how to improve Tech News; I'll add this to the things to think about how to do better. (: /Johan (WMF) (talk) 17:22, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
If there are any Tech News translators who are not on translators-l but are reading this: There's a new way to handle dates in the newsletter. The point is to make it easier for you, because you only need to translate it once and then it will be a 100% match in the translation memory in the future, so you won't have to manually change the days and months every week.
There are some explanations in a couple of emails:
If you don't know what to do, or feel confused – please just write here or ping me and I'll help. The point is to make it easier for you, not more difficult. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 17:18, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
More Extensive 'Changes this week?'
Recently I've started to get intrigued by 'The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from …. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from …. It will be on all wikis from … (calendar link).' item under 'Changes this week' (usually at/near the end) but not enough to go and wade through the ginormous list of changes included in the indicated release. Is there any chance that a summary of the most notable changes included in new WMF-internal MediaWiki versions mentioned in Tech News could be included in this section under the relevant bullet point?
- RandomDSdevel: Generally speaking, this is what I try to do! The main point of this item is to remind people of when the promised changes are happening: "Changes this week" haven't happened yet when the newsletter is delivered, so this is there to tell them roughly when they can expect them to take place. Then it includes a link to what's included, but as you've noticed, most of it isn't that relevant. If I understand you correctly, you'd like me to lower the bar for inclusion somewhat, by just mentioning a few things in one bullet point, even if they don't get their own item? /Johan (WMF) (talk) 08:35, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
- Yeah, a brief summary of what the upcoming changes will actually be would be great. You could include it either in the existing bullet point or one list level down under that (as sub–bullet points.) It might be a good idea to include such a summary on the actual changes page in addition to or instead of this, though…? In any case, just do what you think will best serve the community at large.
- — RandomDSdevel (talk) 22:39, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
- RandomDSdevel: Sorry for the late reply. This is what "changes this week" is supposed to do – take the very most important ones and bring them to light. Do you have anything in particular that's on your mind that would be an example of something that should have been mentioned but isn't? I'm not disagreeing with you – I'm pretty certain there are things that should be mention but aren't – just trying to better understand what you mean.
- As for the page itself, it's difficult for me to summarize it, I'm afraid, because it's actually created days after Tech News is finalized. Tech News is distributed in ~20 languages, so the issue is finalized on Friday afternoon/evening (UTC), and sent out to the translators so they'll have a couple of days to translate it, then distributed on Monday afternoon/evening (UTC). However, that page isn't created until Monday. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 16:05, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oh, then I suppose this scheduling difference would make summarizing MediaWiki release notes in 'Changes this week' rather difficult. That's a bit of a shame, as the changelings tend to be rather long and would definitely benefit from some kind of summary. Maybe this could end up at the top of the release notes instead since logistics currently prevent it from shipping as part of Tech News? Might you also consider copying the summary over into Tech News if the relevant timing issues ever get resolved? (Or maybe they could be grabbed automatically by the script/bot that uploads Tech News…? Just an idea…)
- — RandomDSdevel (talk) 23:36, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
Lego created this dashboard to track progress on one of the steps for mw:Parsing/Replacing Tidy: https://tools.wmflabs.org/wikitext-deprecation/ Most communities are set, but some have more than a thousand pages that need to be fixed. It's not a sortable table, so it's not easy to grab a list of the ten with the most problems, but at a quick glance, I believe that arwiki, fawiki, idwiki, kawiki, thwiki, euwiktionary, lawikitionary, and hewikisource all have more than 2,000 pages to fix – and ocwiki leads the list with an astonishing 37,000+ pages to fix, and mswiki is in second place with 17,000 pages in the category. (It's category-based, so the problem may actually be bigger than it looks.)
- This has now been added to the current Tech News draft. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 18:53, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
Tech/News/2017/08: "The edit summary box is now a little bit bigger"
- Mikhail Ryazanov: Badly phrased, yes. My apologies. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 00:38, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
Tech News: 2017-09
3D files: if I understand the Phabricator threads correctly, only STL format will be supported. The support for AMF format was dropped after some problems were revealed during the security review(s). See phab:T132063, phab:T157077. --220.127.116.11 21:27, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks. I'll check it out and, if so (and I see no reason to suspect you're wrong), I'll include a correction in next issue. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 22:22, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
Searching the Tech News archives
I'm wondering how best to search past Tech News issues, e.g. to find mentions of
<references /> tags like there are in the current issue. Any pointers? -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 00:53, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
- There's a search box at Tech/News/Archives, which should work. Though it is filled with the translated results, too, and it's not possible to filter those out (afaik). HTH. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 01:44, 14 March 2017 (UTC) @Daniel Mietchen: Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 01:45, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
Script error in 20 Mar 2017 edition of Tech News
This isn't a serious problem, but this week's edition of Tech News left some parser functions that added my enwiki talk page to Category:Pages with script errors. I only noticed this when a bot fixed the error. I don't think this had any effect on the output of the page. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 00:02, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
- Yep, please don't use Module:Template_translation in the messages. Most projects obviously don't have this module, so the page gets marked as containing a script error. Candalua (talk) 11:39, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
- Ack, my mistake, sorry. I removed the first set of parser functions from the item "The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis from [...]" and didn't realize there was a second one. I'm still trying to understand the new time&date setup. I will attempt to clean this up. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 18:11, 21 March 2017 (UTC)