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

Would a mention to [1] go in this issue, or should it belong to the previous one? --Elitre (WMF) (talk) 12:18, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

It would have been better in the previous one because new issue is usually sent on Mondays (today it was 18:22 UTC). Matěj Suchánek (talk) 20:43, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
Thanks Matěj Suchánek, I believe that for this time of events short notice reminders work as well: I have put other reminders on wikis too. It's also going into the VE newsletter which is delivered this Friday.--Elitre (WMF) (talk) 20:46, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
I don't even know if the newsletter will have been sent out by 20:00 UTC on a specific Monday (could be many reasons, we've seen a number of MediWiki versions being rolled back lately, for example, which can create extra work on Mondays) so anything like this needs to go into the newsletter the week before the fact, I think. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 07:37, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
I removed it from the newsletter as it didn't go out to the wikis until after the talk had started. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 20:22, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Ad meetings[edit] Matěj Suchánek (talk) 20:23, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Just to clarify, maybe the "Executive director Lila Tretikov" should be adjusted to mirror the recent events. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 20:55, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for that suggestion, Matěj Suchánek.
Tech news is a technical newsletter. Lila Tretikov resignation is not a technical change, so that is out of TN's scope. That information should be handled by others medias.
Best, Trizek (WMF) (talk) 15:16, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
I don't think that's what he was suggesting. I think he correctly pointed out that the item about her should mention her as the "former", "resigning" or something like that, or be changed anyway. --Elitre (WMF) (talk) 15:24, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
As a general note about this and Tech News, by the way: this is when it becomes very apparent that we don't have a working general Wikimedia newsletter. It's certainly news. It should be available for the communities, in more languages than English. But as Trizek says, if this is technical, what isn't? We're a bunch of sites, after all. Everything we do is somehow related to technology. But then we have no place for Wikimedians to easily keep track of changes in software development. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 15:25, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
Again, I don't think that's what he meant, and anyway, the fact that she is no longer the ED doesn't necessarily need a reference, or maybe you just want to rephrase the KE FAQ item. --Elitre (WMF) (talk) 15:28, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
My suggestion was only to rephrase. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 15:38, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
Sorry Matěj Suchánek (and Elitre): I've rephrased it. Trizek (WMF) (talk) 15:49, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

New MediaWiki version[edit]

The version 1.27/wmf.15 wasn't announced in any previous Tech News, shouldn't it be in this issue? Matěj Suchánek (talk) 09:48, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Hrm. Yes. It should should have been, but very easy to miss when sending out to the translators if the recurrent item wasn't in the newsletter the week before and you (like Trizek) don't write Tech News regularly. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 20:22, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
@Johan (WMF):: Thanks for your open words! I can imagine how difficult it is to keep this in mind, if you've no trigger for it. I'll try to be more active in contributing this point to the tech news (I already added it for the next version), I also added a little reminder to the roadmap edit interface, because I usually edit it at least once a week (if I'm fast enough, I'll do it three times), so hopefully this helps me to remind myself to add the notice for the next week to the tech news :) *fingers crossed* that it helps :) Best --Florianschmidtwelzow (talk) 20:42, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
@Florianschmidtwelzow: Thanks. :) I've already made the mistake of forgetting it once, so I hope I can avoid making it again. This week's issue was written by Trizek, and since he almost never writes it, it's far more understandable when he makes these mistakes than when I make them, especially if it's not there the week before – it's bound to happen, and he and Quiddity has certainly never made any mistakes of the same calibre I did during my first weeks. But maybe we should get the commonly recurring items into the template from the very beginning and we'll have to remember to remove them instead, should need be. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 01:11, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

How well is it read?[edit]

Should this be included into some talk-page template? --Yurik (talk) 00:47, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

@Yurik: Are we talking about including Tech News (which is hardly read at all on this particular page, but it's currently weekly distributed to 533 talk pages and community pages on Wikimedia wikis, posted on Village Pumps, often included in the Signpost etc – while it has a few readers here, in practice, the page on Meta is mainly a workspace for the writers and translators), and you mean including the newsletter in templates? Or something else? /Johan (WMF) (talk) 01:07, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
@Johan (WMF): it seems it would be pointless to include a graph like this into a heavily transcluded page because people tend to read it via many different locations. I will withdraw this proposal :) Maybe someday this graph will be included in every wikipedia talk page infobox template (shown at the top), but i really hope it won't crash our servers when it is inserted :) --Yurik (talk) 02:42, 1 March 2016 (UTC)