User talk:Roan Kattouw (WMF)

Welcome to Meta![edit]

Hello, Roan Kattouw (WMF). Welcome to the Wikimedia Meta-Wiki! This website is for coordinating and discussing all Wikimedia projects. You may find it useful to read our policy page. If you are interested in doing translations, visit Meta:Babylon. You can also leave a note on Meta:Babel or Wikimedia Forum if you need help with something (please read the instructions at the top of the page before posting there). Happy editing!

-- Meta-Wiki Welcome (talk) 21:09, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Flow[edit]

P.S. you should use frwiki_p;, not frwiki;. --Edgars2007 (talk) 11:11, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

D'oh! Thanks! --Roan Kattouw (WMF) (talk) 18:27, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Registered users and caching[edit]

Thanks for your points about slow experience for registered users at mw:Wikimedia_Developer_Summit/2018/Participants. They go hand in hand with Giuseppe's observations on how to best use our multiple datacenters. --Nemo 14:27, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pending pull requests of moment.js for localisation of StructuredDiscussions[edit]

Hello Roan Kattouw, For the purpose of localising Structured Discussions into Konkani, I had created a couple of pull requests for moment.js in GitHub, but they've been pending for a long time. Is there anything that can be done to speed up the process to get them into MediaWiki quickly? The Discoverer (talk) 05:13, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@The Discoverer: I wish I knew. I have my own pull request that's been pending for a long time. There also hasn't been a moment.js release since January, and no PRs have been merged since June. If the project continues to be dormant like this, we may have to create our own fork of it and use that in MediaWiki. I don't have time to work on that right now, but I'll probably do this in the next month or two if nothing changes. --Roan Kattouw (WMF) (talk) 17:51, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, @Roan Kattouw (WMF):. I'm curious to know whether it would be ok if we just update the respective locale files in MediaWiki using Gerrit for code review? The Discoverer (talk) 07:59, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@The Discoverer: Yeah, let's do that for now. Would you mind making a patch for your changes, and then I'll make a patch for my Croatian changes? Feel free to add me as a reviewer. --Roan Kattouw (WMF) (talk) 21:59, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Roan Kattouw (WMF), how can I generate the locale files from the source files ? Because it seems that the generated locale files are needed for MediaWiki. The Discoverer (talk) 12:37, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Input op het trainen van ML-systemen[edit]

Hi Roan,

Er wordt een paper geschreven over de samenwerking tussen de gemeenschap en ontwikkelaars voor het bouwen van een kwaliteitsmodel voor artikelen voor nlwp. Zou jij eens mee willen kijken met je kennis van nlwp, maar ook met je technische achtergrond, naar Research:On the collaboration with Wikimedia Communities in the context of building Machine Learning Systems? Zijn de stappen volledig beschreven denk je, of missen we nog iets? En heb je misschien leuke voorbeelden of ervaringen die je wilt delen op de overlegpagina?

Vriendelijke groet, Ciell (talk) 19:10, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dankjewel voor de link! Ik heb een opmerking achtergelaten op de overlegpagina. Ik vond namelijk dat nummer 3 niet heel compleet was, in de zin dat bij de ORES modellen daar het meeste werk en de grootste betrekking van de gemeenschap in zat. Roan Kattouw (WMF) (talk) 00:13, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hartelijk dank! Ciell (talk) 16:36, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A request[edit]

Hi Roan,

We have posted an open letter to the Foundation and Board of Trustees. It concerns the development of MediaWiki extensions and needs the personal attention of all concerned developers and managers. Please see it at:

Open_letter_from_English_Wikipedia_New_Page_Reviewers

and

en:Wikipedia:New_pages_patrol/Coordination/2022_WMF_letter

Your comments are welcome. Many thanks.

Kind regards,

On behalf of the English Wikipedia Community

Kudpung (talk) 09:51, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Link to CC license[edit]

I saw you edit to change the license link at Japanese Wikipedia. [1] Previously, the link lead to an internal copy at Japanese Wikipedia, but now creativecommons.org's page. As far as I can see, the content is the same. (The internal copy describes the 4.0 license, not the 3.0 license.) Is there any reason to prefer the external link? Would it cause any problem if it's changed back? whym (talk) 02:43, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think that at the time I edited it, it was still a red link, and the internal copy was renamed later. In general though, the license links across the various wikis were inconsistent in whether they linked to CC.org, or to an internal Wikipedia page. As part of the 3.0->4.0 migration, we decided to standardize on linking to CC, because they're the authoritative source of the license, and because they host translations of the license that you can easily switch between with a dropdown (the license link on jawiki now points to the Japanese translation of the license, whereas the internal copy is in English). Changing it back would direct readers of the Japanese Wikipedia to an English-language license without an easy way to view the Japanese-language version. Roan Kattouw (WMF) (talk) 23:22, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think about linking an internal Japanese-language copy? (As of now, there are two internal copies, in English and Japanese.) When using an internal page as an entry point / landing page, the page can then include pointers to CC.org pages in Japanese and in English, as well as related internal pages of Japanese Wikipedia related to copyright and licensing, and maybe the terms of use. We could use a template to highlight the CC.org link, if necessary. The same cannot be done if we link the CC.org page directly.

I'm not against standardization across different sites eventually, but I think that would have to be coordinated and consulted about, especially with sites that use(d) internal copies (including English Wikipedia, I believe). whym (talk) 11:17, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why do communities want to use an internal copy? Clearly it's something that people care about, given that we're having this conversation about Japanese Wikipedia and someone else requested the same change on English Wikipedia. But I don't understand the motivation behind it; why wouldn't we just link to the Creative Commons web site, which is the canonical source of information about their own licenses? Roan Kattouw (WMF) (talk) 22:57, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think the idea is to give additional context to the readers, and allow them to find more information related to Wikipedia and copyright, if they want. This page's blue box with a list of related Wikipedia policies on the right serves that purpose. If that doesn't seem to make a big difference, well, for me a small improvement is a good enough reason. The only downside seems to be the future maintenance cost in the event of CC.org tweaking the source text, and I would guess that's very rare. whym (talk) 13:19, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, again. I don't want to bother you too much, but I'm still not sure what conclusion should be drawn here in regard to my original question ("Would it cause any problem if it's changed back?"). If I should ask someone else, please let me know. whym (talk) 07:03, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]