Open main menu

− (Note: The Board header diff history is accessible (from the main history).) (Board description edited by Fram (talk), JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds, Mattflaschen-WMF (talk), 204.27.61.36 (talk), Michael Unwonain (talk), Oiyarbepsy (talk), 31.171.249.127 (talk), Milanarashidova3 (talk), Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions), ZOKIDIN5 (talk), ZOKIDIN4 (talk), Quiddity (WMF) (talk), Anders Feder (talk), DannyH (WMF) (talk), EBernhardson (WMF) (talk), — HHHIPPO, SPage (WMF) (talk), 204.28.117.208 (talk), Dan Garry, Wikimedia Foundation (talk), Gilderien Talk|List of good deeds, Graywash (talk), FDMS 4 , Maryana (WMF) (talk), Jorm (WMF) (talk), MZMcBride (talk))

Contents

Another test pageEdit

enwiki is usually earlier code than mediawiki.org , so check bugs there (mw:Talk:Sandbox). And Flow team's test server is more bleeding-edge. SPage (WMF) (talk) 21:38, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

S Page (WMF):
 
 
 
  MZMcBride (talk) 06:59, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

TestEdit

Here is another test post. Tito Dutta (talk) 22:03, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Titodutta: Looks good. Tito Dutta (talk) 22:03, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
  1. Number 1
  2. Number 2 Tito Dutta (talk) 22:04, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
Long text deleted Tito Dutta (talk) 22:05, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
Titodutta: one more test Tito Dutta (talk) 22:06, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
Titodutta: Why can I not view the content of your deleted text? As an administrator, I should be able to do that. Risker (talk) 05:24, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Titodutta: So, can you figure out which one of your posts I am replying to here? Andreas JN466 16:15, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Jayen466: Yes, I just found out now. Tito Dutta (talk) 18:24, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Titodutta: How? Andreas JN466 19:09, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Jayen466: click anywhere else in the notification "Titodutta has replied to your post", but not on the "post" and "view boards". Following my "View diff" habit, I was clicking on "View board" :) Tito Dutta (talk) 19:13, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Titodutta: I get the same result whether I click on post or anywhere in the grey space of the notification. I am then directed to your post, which is helpfully marked in green. So far, so good. But you made half a dozen posts above in this thread. How do you know which one is the post I clicked Reply on?
This is rather important if I were to say something like, "Well put." Andreas JN466 19:52, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Jayen466: Yes when I click on anywhere but not on "post" and "view board" it automatically scrolls down to your last post. Tito Dutta (talk) 20:16, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Titodutta: The point is that this doesn't tell you which one of your posts my reply relates to, as any new post of mine will always be listed at the bottom, regardless of whether it is a reply to your first, second, third ... or eighth post on this page. Do you not think that this is a problem? I do, and a severe one. On talk pages, you can place your post under the one you are replying to, and indent it accordingly. Here you have no influence over where your post appears. It always appears at the bottom of the subthread. Imagine twelve people taking part, wishing to reply to an individual point someone has made. You end up with a huge mess, without any idea which comment relates to which. Andreas JN466 22:59, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Jayen466:
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Integer nec odio. Praesent libero. Sed cursus ante dapibus diam. Sed nisi. Nulla quis sem at nibh elementum imperdiet. Duis sagittis ipsum. Praesent mauris. Fusce nec tellus sed augue semper porta. Mauris massa. Vestibulum lacinia arcu eget nulla. Class aptent taciti sociosqu ad litora torquent per conubia nostra, per inceptos himenaeos. Curabitur sodales ligula in libero. Sed dignissim lacinia nunc.
Curabitur tortor. Pellentesque nibh. Aenean quam. In scelerisque sem at dolor. Maecenas mattis. Sed convallis tristique sem. Proin ut ligula vel nunc egestas porttitor. Morbi lectus risus, iaculis vel, suscipit quis, luctus non, massa. Fusce ac turpis quis ligula lacinia aliquet. Mauris ipsum. Nulla metus metus, ullamcorper vel, tincidunt sed, euismod in, nibh. Quisque volutpat condimentum velit. Grüße vom Sänger ♫ (talk) 16:20, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
Sänger S.G:
2nd test
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Integer nec odio. Praesent libero. Sed cursus ante dapibus diam. Sed nisi. Nulla quis sem at nibh elementum imperdiet. Duis sagittis ipsum. Praesent mauris. Fusce nec tellus sed augue semper porta. Mauris massa. Vestibulum lacinia arcu eget nulla. Class aptent taciti sociosqu ad litora torquent per conubia nostra, per inceptos himenaeos. Curabitur sodales ligula in libero. Sed dignissim lacinia nunc. Grüße vom Sänger ♫ (talk) 16:20, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
Sänger S.G:
3rd one
This one was a reply to my first one Grüße vom Sänger ♫ (talk) 16:21, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
Testing without mention. Tito Dutta (talk) 00:31, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Jayen466: The point is that this doesn't tell you which one of your posts my reply relates to, as any new post of mine will always be listed at the bottom, — True. It is like email/mailing list conversation where one needs to "quote" context. Tito Dutta (talk) 00:32, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Killiondude: With God, all things are possible. Remember that, please. MZMcBride (talk) 07:06, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

MZMcBride: God is dead. Testing Risker's ability to modify the post of another user.
(Testing this myself; Fram (previous was a test :-)) MZMcBride (talk) 07:06, 4 February 2014 (UTC) (Edited by Fram (talk), Courcelles (talk), Risker (talk))

How can I put a gallery here? Micha 21:44, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Micha L. Rieser:
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Integer nec odio. Praesent libero. Sed cursus ante dapibus diam. Sed nisi. Nulla quis sem at nibh elementum imperdiet. Duis sagittis ipsum. Praesent mauris. Fusce nec tellus sed augue semper porta. Mauris massa. Vestibulum lacinia arcu eget nulla. Class aptent taciti sociosqu ad litora torquent per conubia nostra, per inceptos himenaeos. Curabitur sodales ligula in libero. Sed dignissim lacinia nunc. Curabitur tortor. Pellentesque nibh. Aenean quam. In scelerisque sem at dolor. Maecenas mattis. Sed convallis tristique sem. Proin ut ligula vel nunc egestas porttitor. Morbi lectus risus, iaculis vel, suscipit quis, luctus non, massa. Fusce ac turpis quis ligula lacinia aliquet. Mauris ipsum. Nulla metus metus, ullamcorper vel, tincidunt sed, euismod in, nibh. Quisque volutpat condimentum velit. Class aptent taciti sociosqu ad litora torquent per conubia nostra, per inceptos himenaeos. Nam nec ante. Sed lacinia, urna non tincidunt mattis, tortor neque adipiscing diam, a cursus ipsum ante quis turpis. Nulla facilisi. Ut fringilla. Suspendisse potenti. Nunc feugiat mi a tellus consequat imperdiet. Vestibulum sapien. Proin quam. Etiam ultrices. Suspendisse in justo eu magna luctus suscipit. Sed lectus. Integer euismod lacus luctus magna. Quisque cursus, metus vitae pharetra auctor, sem massa mattis sem, at interdum magna augue eget diam. Vestibulum ante ipsum primis in faucibus orci luctus et ultrices posuere cubilia Curae; Morbi lacinia molestie dui. Praesent blandit dolor. Sed non quam. In vel mi sit amet augue congue elementum. Morbi in ipsum sit amet pede facilisis laoreet. Donec lacus nunc, viverra nec, blandit vel, egestas et, augue. Vestibulum tincidunt malesuada tellus. Ut ultrices ultrices enim. Curabitur sit amet mauris. Morbi in dui quis est pulvinar ullamcorper. Grüße vom Sänger ♫ (talk) 16:18, 6 September 2014 (UTC)


I wonder if I'll get complaints about testing here...Edit

  MZMcBride (talk) 05:56, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

MZMcBride: Behave. MZMcBride (talk) 05:57, 4 February 2014 (UTC) (Edited by Legoktm (talk))

Chocolate strawberries for breakfast?[1]

  1. ^ hello

MZMcBride (talk) 05:59, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

MZMcBride (talk) 06:38, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
 
Pampa mesa in Parcoloma, Ecuador
 
ArchiveStart a new articleNominate an article
 
ArchiveStart a new articleNominate an article
 
ArchiveStart a new articleNominate an article
Killiondude is editing this comment. ~~~~
 
Pampa mesa in Parcoloma, Ecuador
 
ArchiveStart a new articleNominate an article
MZMcBride (talk) 06:39, 4 February 2014 (UTC) (Edited by Killiondude (talk))

Enough. Killiondude (talk) 06:39, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Killiondude: Yes, hello. I'm here. MZMcBride (talk) 06:41, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Killiondude: HELLO. I'M HERE. MZMcBride (talk) 06:42, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Killiondude:
 
Ural Airlines Airbus A321 in 2013
Recent deaths: Maximilian Schell Arthur Rankin, Jr. Pete Seeger
MZMcBride (talk) 06:42, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Legoktm: Such diffs. MZMcBride (talk) 06:43, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
MZMcBride, Legoktm:
CAN WE CAUSE INCEPTION?>
{{Wikipedia talk:Flow/Developer test page}}
MZMcBride (talk) 06:47, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Closedmouth, Nemo: Hello. MZMcBride (talk) 06:51, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
MZMcBride: I hate you. Closedmouth (talk) 06:53, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
<script type="text/javascript">alert('hi');</script>
whatttttttt
[<a href="http://google.com/"><head> MZMcBride (talk) 06:55, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Closedmouth: Say it ain’t so! MZMcBride (talk) 06:56, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
User:Killiondude: Well, MZMcBride (talk) 06:57, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
MZMcBride: God-den. Killiondude (talk) 07:04, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Flow/Developer test page

what is this
i don't even

MZMcBride (talk) 06:50, 4 February 2014 (UTC)


Interesting tool you got here...Edit

  MZMcBride (talk) 07:00, 4 February 2014 (UTC)


Wikipedia talk:Flow/Developer test pageEdit

,
, MZMcBride (talk) 07:05, 4 February 2014 (UTC)


(empty header)Edit

hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this hello what is this

MZMcBride (talk) 07:11, 4 February 2014 (UTC) (Edited by Sitic (talk))


test bug 60785Edit

I tried pasting in most of the templates in bug 60785http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=60785, couldn't see where the duplicate ID is coming from. SPage (WMF) (talk) 07:19, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Levels of nestingEdit

Testing nesting KonveyorBelt 20:00, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Konveyor Belt: Replying to post #1 KonveyorBelt 20:00, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Konveyor Belt: Replying to post #2 KonveyorBelt 20:01, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Replying to post #2 Sitic (talk) 20:01, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Konveyor Belt: For all anyone else is concerned, I could be responding to any one of the above comments, which will be confusing with users responding multiple times in the same topic KonveyorBelt 20:03, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Konveyor Belt: replying to post 2 Ross HillTalk to me! 02:52, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

At this point, or after just one reply, the discussion becomes muddled and there is no real indication who anybody is replying to. This is VERY unintuitive and should be fixed. Especially on large boards like ANI. KonveyorBelt 20:02, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Am I replying to the post above ("At this point...") or the parent post? No idea!  — Scott talk 23:30, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Looks like it was the parent post. As the reply box was directly underneath the last post on the parent, that's contrary to what I expected.  — Scott talk 23:32, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

TestEdit

I actually agree with Konveyor, it seems like it would get rather confusing. NativeForeigner Talk 22:08, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Testing this again Risker (talk) 01:02, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

This is a test, adding my own timestamp. -Wikid77, 22:23, 6 February 2014 (UTC) Wikid77 (talk) 22:21, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Recent changes?Edit

Does this appear in recent changes? Fram (talk) 11:39, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Fram: And this? Fram (talk) 11:39, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

testEdit

[Subst. content removed. Let's see if this works.] ~~~~ Fram (talk) 11:58, 5 February 2014 (UTC) (Edited by postdlf (talk))

I got an mw:Echo notification that I was mentioned here. Any idea why I got that notification? Stefan2 (talk) 13:56, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Stefan2: I transcluded a page above (Wikiproject:Comics) as a test, to see what would happen. Apparently everyone who is linked on that page has now received a notification, and is unable to remove that notification from the list (They can't get the red "1" to become a grey "0" again). So far you are the third editor with this problem.
One of the many problems with testing Flow in Enwiki when it is so far from ready. We are discussing this at Wikipedia talk:Flow#Flow + Echo = Error?. Fram (talk) 14:01, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Fram: I checked that page but couldn't find my username anywhere. However, now I see that Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics transcludes a page with a list of FFD nominations, and apparently I nominated some of those files for deletion, meaning that I am mentioned in that list. Thanks for clarifying this for me and also for explaining why I am suddenly unable to use Special:Notifications. Stefan2 (talk) 14:16, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Fram: please can you delete your comment, or edit out the transclusion, or ask some technical person to delete it for you? The notification system is very useful, but your test has broken it for me.
It was silly to test transclusion using a page which you can't blank. Please can you fix this? --~~~~ BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:25, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

I actually got an e-mail notification, not sure why because I never get any e-mail notifications for anything that happens at en.wiki. postdlf (talk) 16:37, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

My notifications are also broken. There are plenty of other Wikimedia domains to test this that don't interfere with editor functionality and capability here.

Less seriously, no page name shows up for my comments here in my contribution history. postdlf (talk) 16:45, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

I've never been so confused. ~~~~ Honestly, the wheel on my mouse is getting hot from rolling it up and down. I have no clue where I am. ~~~~ Anna Frodesiak (talk) 17:42, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Anna Frodesiak: I've had the same problem. Font too large, way too much whitespace, but it looks pretty on a phone. As if. Risker (talk) 18:05, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

I edited Fram's original post above there to remove the subst. content. But it looks like the damage has already been done to the notifications, as that is still broken for me. Let's get that fixed shortly, hmm?

Also, I cannot find a way to undo or revert my change to Fram's comment as there doesn't appear to be any history for the comment or this page as a whole even though I could edit others' comments (I could see the diff of the change I applied, but that's it). Which I hope we can all agree is completely unacceptable for a final version. Flow also did not allow me to apply a signature with tildes, and instead applied nowiki to my comment.

I honestly don't see the point of any of this Flow nonsense, even setting aside for the moment that this test has broken notifications for me and a few other editors. postdlf (talk) 18:13, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Like others, I'd prefer to have my notifications back, if the current error message is related to this test. ~~~~ Charles Matthews (talk) 18:53, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Stefan2, BrownHairedGirl, Postdlf We deployed a fix, can you see whether Special:Notifications works for you?

The bad notification from the large Flow post is still there, so your Echo notification counter may stick at 1. We're working on that too.

Thanks. I'll post to Wikipedia talk:Flow#Flow .2B_Echo 3D Error.3F SPage (WMF) (talk) 00:50, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Test 2Edit

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion

User:Fram Template loop detected: User:EngFram/sandbox

User:EngFram Fram (talk) 20:48, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Fram: Further... Fram (talk) 11:09, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. Fram (talk) 11:09, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

TestEdit

Nothing important, just testing something Resolute 21:07, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Resolute: One reply Resolute 21:07, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Resolute: The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog. Resolute 21:08, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Resolute: reply reply. Resolute 21:08, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Resolute: So if every reply begins on the same vertical plane, how on earth is someone supposed to know what specific comment is being responded to when one editor has multiple comments in the same thread? This is going to result in a great deal of quoting, and therefore mass bloating of discussions. Resolute 21:09, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Resolute: I agree (but what do I agree with?) Fram (talk) 21:26, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
Resolute: Oh there are no multiple indentions??? Gnom (talk) 21:10, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
Gnom: Hm. I don't think I like this. But I guess it will still come?! Gnom (talk) 21:10, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
 
He shoots, he scores!

Resolute 21:25, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

TestEdit

Test Fram (talk) 07:56, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Fram: Test Test Test!!!1 Gnom (talk) 21:09, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Testing 1 2 3 Carnildo (talk) 01:34, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Carnildo: very strange, I got the Echo message
Carnildo and 1 other replied to your post in Test on "Wikipedia talk:Flow/Developer test page".
Testing 1 2 3
No idea who the "1 other" is supposed to be, no way of seeing this... Fram (talk) 07:27, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

How to see which page this page transclude?Edit

Erm... what? Simply south ...... time, deparment skies for just 10 years 15:17, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

If I use a template, then the template is transcluded into this page. I presume this page is refreshed when the template is changed. Normal pages has a list in the bottom when the edit window is open. A
2
Christian75 (talk) 15:37, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

No, template changes won't affect a Flow post using that template. Flow stores the HTML of the parsed wikitext and renders that, so posts don't update until you edit them. There are pros and cons, on balance we think this is good. See mw:Flow/FAQ#posts dont update.
A Flow board is more like a window onto a set of topics created at the page (in this case, Flow/Developer test page), so "show me every template that set of posts use" is non-trivial. We're aware that "What links here" doesn't work for the header area and posts. SPage (WMF) (talk) 23:53, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

TestEdit

testing a thing WK's Other Throwaway Account (talk) 21:36, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

cf. bugzilla:58012 (and bugzilla:57153)Edit

  MZMcBride (talk) 02:49, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

cf. bugzilla:58012 (and bugzilla:57153)Edit

  MZMcBride (talk) 02:49, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Edit

(Topic title edited by MZMcBride (talk), Quiddity (WMF) (talk))

  MZMcBride (talk) 02:51, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

cf. bugzilla:58012 (and bugzilla:57153)Edit

(Topic title edited by MZMcBride (talk), Quiddity (WMF) (talk))

  MZMcBride (talk) 02:54, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

cf. bugzilla:58012 (and bugzilla:57153)Edit

(Topic title edited by MZMcBride (talk), Quiddity (WMF) (talk))

  MZMcBride (talk) 02:54, 7 February 2014 (UTC) (Edited by Fram (talk))

MZMcBride: I ruined this one, no idea how to make it right again ;-) Fram (talk) 08:55, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

cf. bugzilla:58012 (and bugzilla:57153)Edit

(Topic title edited by MZMcBride (talk), Quiddity (WMF) (talk))

  MZMcBride (talk) 02:54, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

cf. bugzilla:58012 (and bugzilla:57153)Edit

(Topic title edited by MZMcBride (talk), Quiddity (WMF) (talk))

  MZMcBride (talk) 02:54, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

MZMcBride: hi Killiondude (talk) 22:04, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
Killiondude: Hi. MZMcBride (talk) 03:04, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Test hide and so onEdit

Test comment 2 Fram (talk) 09:11, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Why not displaying full width?Edit

Self explanatory - and wasting half my screen space. Thanks. ukexpat (talk) 15:23, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Ukexpat: My guess is it's so it looks the same in every possible screen size. Ypnypn (talk) 17:39, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
Ukexpat: As Ypnypn says, the idea is partially consistency. However it's also intended to make reading easier, as very long lines are harder to read. There are details in the Design FAQ here.
Relatedly, see the current iteration of the "Typography refresh" Beta Feature, which uses a fixed-width. Details and references are at mw:Talk:Typography Update#Update to Typography refresh, with much discussion below. HTH. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 00:31, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
I read and draft contracts for a living and I have no problem reading long lines (is this really a problem for some people?) . I would strongly suggest that there be an opt out to display full width - imposing narrow width without an opt-out will not be well received. ukexpat (talk) 00:55, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
Ukexpat: Apparently so! (I'm personally a fan of wide-pages with small-type, so am not great at talking up the benefits, but I can understand the nature of the conclusion...) It's to do with the increased (tiny but real) cognitive load of eye-tracking back to the beginning of the next line. Similar to the tiny strain of eye-squinting involved with small-type (hence the larger fonts here).
I imagine it's more significant for people who don't spend 95% of their lives reading text... >.> (crazy people!)
Anyway, I do believe (based on what the product manager has said before) that these things will eventually become user-preferences. The general idea is to: design the defaults for the widest-audience (high accessibility), and then offer additional optional settings when absolutely necessary (for the long-tail). (Because: any user-preferences both bulk up the existing Special:Preferences, and add great complexity to the code base and future maintenance). HTH. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 03:32, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
Ukexpat: Hold on....why is this showing that I am replying to Ukexpat, when I intended to reply to Quiddity in the post directly above?
In any case, the theory that shorter lines are easier to read so the best thing to do is control the length of the lines is not actually being put in place here. It would only work if the length of the line was determined to be xx% of the width of any screen. For example, as I write this I am using a much smaller screen than I used yesterday, and the length of the line is about 60% of the screen width; on the larger screen yesterday, it was barely 40% of screen width.
I'd suggest the default parameter be for 60% of screen width, and forget the precise length of the line. It's much easier to read than having that mass of useless whitespace, which is physically painful to look at when editing in less than full light situations, but also accommodates smaller screens including tablets. Risker (talk) 17:36, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
Risker: Re: wrong reply name: That's bugzilla:56811 (fixed in code, and should be live here on Thursday).
Re: Content width / line-length: Currently the .flow-container CSS uses min-width: 400px; max-width: 800px; to determine the width overall (plus: 44px right-padding from Flow, and 24px right-padding from the site default). Hence you'll see width variations on any smaller screens (or if you resize the browser-window), but all large screens (with maximized-window) will hypothetically see the same thing (with variations for zoom, or personal CSS, or browser/OS font defaults (unless you're using the current iteration of the Typography refresh BetaFeature, in which case it gets even more complicated!), etc).
There's more discussion about this, at Wikipedia_talk:Flow/Design_FAQ#Line_length.2Fmeasure (which is where the future preference possibility, is mentioned). HTH. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 20:40, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Surely that can be done by automatically adjusting to fit the screen, like any other Wikipedia page? This needs to be fixed. ukexpat (talk) 18:30, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

New Test with signatureEdit

I have noticed, you ask 50 people to randomly type few letters in keyboard, they'll include "asdf" in it. Similarly, if you ask editors to make a test of something (or create a test post), they'll use the title "Test"   -- TitoDutta Tito Dutta (talk) 20:09, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Titodutta: Sorry for the ping. This is testing to see if the screen is still quivering for me. And it is. Although it doesn't seem to be affecting the words I am typing, everything below the letters I am typing is quivering. The quivering can be seen from 3 meters away. The quiver directly relates to keystrokes - for each keystroke, there is a slight bounce or quiver. The screen below bounces up then returns to its previous location. Doesn't matter what I type. Risker (talk) 03:08, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Testing again on a different computer. It does not seem to be quivering with this computer, although using the same OS, same browser (Win 7, FF 26.0), and no other obvious variables (both computers have the same add-ons and scripts). I did see it earlier today using a third computer using Win 7 and IE9. Risker (talk) 03:52, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Test topicEdit

test foo

squirrel monkey cat dog Quiddity (talk) 21:54, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Quiddity: Test foo 3 Quiddity II (talk) 20:11, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
Quiddity: More test Quiddity II (talk) 20:14, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Also test, so much test. very test, wow. Quiddity II (talk) 20:12, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Quiddity II: Triple test Quiddity II (talk) 20:13, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

category tree testEdit

History?Edit

The history tab doesn't seem to record posts? Gilderien Talk|List of good deeds 14:12, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

it does apparently Ad Huikeshoven (talk) 20:06, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Where? I cannot see anywhere that you added that comment. Gilderien Talk|List of good deeds 22:45, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Gilderien and Ad Huikeshoven : Currently the Board-history is separate from the Topic-history. Ie. 1 vs 2
This is indeed confusing, and is being changed in the code at the moment. That, along with a number of History-page improvements, should be live within the next few weeks.
Specifically: They're merging the Topic-history into the Board-history (whilst keeping the separate Topic-history view also available). They're also fixing some of the ordering issues (bugzilla:61046), and changing the layout and elements contained in the history pages so that it is closer to what we're used to. HTH. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 20:22, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Top PostingEdit

Posting on Top turns talk pages upside down. Revolution! Ad Huikeshoven (talk) 20:08, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

WatchlistEdit

It comes up in my watchlist as already viewed, even when I haven't. Gilderien Talk|List of good deeds 18:48, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Gilderien: There are quite a few elements of the watchlist-integration that need to be worked on, and this is one of them. Thanks for the reminder. (For context: it's not working automagically partially because the Flow-database is separate from this wiki's database, to allow future cross-wiki communication to work smoothly. Hence, complications ensue.) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 20:56, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
user:Quiddity (WMF): this seems to be another example of the rare exception (cross-wiki communication) coming in the way of the normal. The same approach has seriously hampered VisualEditor, please don't repeat too many of their mistakes. Fram (talk) 09:34, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Testing thread closingEdit

Testing Wikipedia_talk:Flow#How_will_we_close_discussions.3F @Dougweller and Fram:

A sample message. Roan Kattouw (WMF) (talk) 23:50, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

A quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog. A quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog. A quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog. A quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog. A quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog. A quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog.


The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Tito Dutta (talk) 19:16, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Titodutta: That's closing a post, a comment. There is no way to visually or practically close a whole thread, or part of a thread. In current talk pages, you can also not "force" a close, but you can make it much clearer that the full thread, or a subsection, is closed, than it currently is in Flow. Fram (talk) 07:46, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

That's fine then I think. Thanks very much. Doug Weller talk 06:20, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Dougweller: No it's not if we can't close a thread or partial thread. Can we see an example of an actual thread being closed? Doug Weller talk 16:24, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
Dougweller: As far as I know, that's currently not possible. Fram (talk) 09:15, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
Fram: Not good, really not acceptable for talk pages other than user talk pages. I just discovered IPs can't delete their comments. Doug Weller talk 11:50, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
Dougweller: And non-admins? EngFram (talk) 11:53, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
EngFram: Nope, non admins can't delete their edits, they can hide or edit them, but that's hardly the same of course. "Oops, wrong thread" now remains in the thread (not just the history) for ever, either as a hidden post or as an edited/blanked post. It's different, I don't think it is better though, but it isn't necessarily wrong to do it this way. No idea whether this change has been discussed though. Perhaps once "undo" and "rollback" are implemented, we will get more choices. EngFram (talk) 11:56, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

test redlink / bluelinkEdit

blla nbdfnbndfnfg Fram (talk) 11:31, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Note that the above redlink was a bluelink in preview, same problem (and cause probably) as in VisualEditor, error there noted more than 1 1/2 years ago... Fram (talk) 12:08, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Fram: Not exactly sure about the bug in VE.
As for Flow, there's a bug report on this already (https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=60983), and a patch to fix it. Mmullie (WMF) (talk) 19:14, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Signatures and timestamps and otherEdit

(Topic title edited by Quiddity (WMF) (talk), epicgenius - (talk))

test redlink and signature ~~~~ epicgenius - (talk) 15:39, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Note: Signature doesn't work on Flow,, and neither does linking in the title. epicgenius - (talk) 15:40, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Epicgenius: Signatures aren't needed in Flow, because posts are auto-attributed. No more {{unsigned}}!
Linking in the title is a bit more complicated. There are details at bugzilla:57950 and bugzilla:57153 (note: bugzilla is down for maintenance this afternoon, so I can't easily remind myself of what it contains exactly). Basically, it requires a "limited parser" to only accept certain things (not output full templates, or magicwords, etc), just like the "edit-summary" field does. So, not yet, but probably in the future. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 22:46, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
Quiddity (WMF): Signatures are not the same as attribution, and 'not needed' is not the same as 'no reason to have it'. I don't think it's urgent to have signatures in Flow, but I don't see a reason for disallowing them either. — HHHIPPO 23:28, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
Hhhippo: Hmm, signatures are one of those mine-fields where everyone has strong opinions.
Personally (not officially), I follow Wikipedia:Use the default signature for all the reasons there.
Tangentially, I've heard that the Japanese (?) Wikipedia has a strong culture of regulars-editing-talkpages-as-anon, partially because it helps emphasize that what is being written, is (or should be) more important than who wrote it. Just an interesting observation. :)
Officially, I believe that the reason for disabling the 4tilde code entirely in Flow, is mainly so that editors don't double-sign their posts (thereby adding extra length, and their username a second time, without need).
There's more discussion at WT:Flow#Custom signature, but it veers off-topic halfway in. Quiddity (talk) 20:40, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
Quiddity: What about timestamps? They don't seem to appear on posts. The posts only seem to be marked in terms of how recently the post was edited (5 minutes ago, 1 day ago, etc). epicgenius - (talk) 20:47, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
Epicgenius: If you mouseover the "elapsed" timestamp, it will change into an "exact" timestamp.
  • A few editors have requested that this be reversed, as they dislike the elapsed-as-default.
  • A few editors have expressed joy at the elapsed timestamps, as it's clearer to them than the UTC timestamp.
  • Personally, I'm hoping for a user-preference to change our own default - but the less user-preferences there are the better (because they add: code-complexity (both initial-creation and future-maintenance), server-load, and editor-view inconsistencies), so that is uncertain.
(Sidenote: the GMT instead of UTC in the exact timestamp, is bugzilla:59919) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 20:56, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
Quiddity (WMF): Okay, thanks. Now I know where to find the "time" timestamps (I prefer these over the "elapsed" timestamps, as they are relatively fixed). epicgenius - (talk) 21:02, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
Quiddity: Yes, it's a complicated topic. If you ask ten people you will get at least twenty opinions, and entire communities might come to different conclusions. I think this is one of the cases where the software should leave the decision to each community. — HHHIPPO — HHHIPPO 21:34, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
Quiddity (WMF): I'm fine with UTC, and can live with either relative and absolute time as defult. What I'm really missing is an easy way to spot unread posts.
Regarding user preferences: there is a time zone setting already, so in principle that could be used instead of server time.
Regarding mouseovers: don't all the nice mouseover effects imply that the same interface is not intended for mobile? If that's the case we should have enough space for more nesting levels, right? ;-) — HHHIPPO 21:43, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Now can you figure out which of my two comments above is a reply to what, apart from the content? And if yes, can you tell me how? — HHHIPPO 21:45, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Size issuesEdit

testing editing Fram (talk) 09:13, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Fram: Is this supposed to be the smaller version? Because it's still massively overloaded with whiltespace to the point of making it difficult to read.
As well, it fails to take into account the fact that switching back and forth between such radically different fonts and font sizes (for example, the font being used in the typing window is less than half the size of the font that will be posted) is significantly stressful to the eyes.
Seriously, folks....if you want a larger font than is standard on Wikipedia on this page, the editing window would be the place to put it. Risker (talk) 23:08, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
Risker: No, I was just testing what happened if I included a large page. I transcluded a 100K page, which automatically got substituted to the bone, resulting in a 800K diff size (in old-fashioned talk pages, it would have been a 20byte addition or so, that's progress for you!). I agree with your comments, but they are not what my tests were about. Fram (talk) 09:12, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
Risker: I strongly agree that the whitespace is excessive. The extra sections for your own comments (to some editors make it worse - I have sections set aside breaking up the "flow" of the text so I can reply to Fram, but not to you. (This is especially annoying with Javascript off as I usually view pages, because the full edit box is there at every section) But just the space around the titles and the various indents and paddings is already enough to be annoying. I can compare these serial depredations only to tax policy. Wnt (talk) 18:54, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
Wnt: The non-javascript version has gotten minimal attention thus far. It will be improved, and is firmly in mind. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 04:49, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

FlowEdit

Wow this is cool Kangaroopowah 19:05, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Kangaroopower: so it is Mz7 (talk) 16:20, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Yikes, where's the HISTORY?Edit

I just added a comment, and what I get in my contributions is just that I "added a comment" -- not that I added it to Wikipedia talk:Flow/Developer test page! -- and when I view the history of that page [1] I don't see it. This seems like a really fundamentally bad thing to break on a Wiki - I'm surprised you're not afraid to have these edits in the regular database at all, out of fear of breaking something.

Next up... what happens to these diffless entries when I edit a post? Answer: it gives me a contribution of "editing a comment" with a link here, and the change in size, HOWEVER, the contribution "added a comment" now points to the REVISED comment, so there's no way for anyone to see what the original comment was. That should add an element of high Wiki-drama... tell us, do the admins have some kind of secret "view the history really" function, or are they going to be going by eyewitness testimony as to who said what before they revised their nasty "personal attacks"? I see that there actually is an entry in the history I'm getting at the top for when i created the topic, though. Wnt (talk) 19:01, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Wnt: There was (perhaps still is) a way to see the different iterations of a post, but I can't find it at the moment. There is no undo to get back to an earlier version either, so if you screw up your post, bad luck! I agree that it seems highly irresponsible to have this thing live, and it was asked, repeatedly and clearly, to wait with the depolyment until the different aspects of the history were solved; but to no avail. There are worse bugs to come when this becomes a usertalkpage opt-in (March 2014 normally), but no one seems inclined to take this seriously. Fram (talk) 07:35, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Wnt: Note that, since a week or so, the "older topics" at the bottom of this page is totally broken, so that there is no easy way to see a whole number of posts on this page, and on the two wikiproject talk pages where this Flow is live... Fram (talk) 07:38, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Wnt: I can tell that you edited a comment, but that's all. I hate to be negative but this isn't acceptable to me. Admins need to be able to see everything that hasn't been oversighted. Doug Weller talk 09:27, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Dougweller: You can even tell when and how often he edited it, from here. And on that page, when you click on the "14 hours ago" (by the time you see this, this may have changed, don't you love relative timestamps?), you can see the exact state of a comment at that time. So the information is there, but no one without a degree in unintuition will be able to find it :-) Fram (talk) 09:38, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Dougweller: Mind you, when you go to a specific version, like I described above, and try to restore it, you still are out of luck: "edit" opens the current version, not the one that is shown and you may want to use. So at the moment, restoring an older version is completely impossible, as far as I can tell. Fram (talk) 09:40, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Fram: That's so clumsy it's almost worse than useless. You need to see changes much more clearly. Doug Weller talk 11:00, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Wnt, Fram, and Dougweller: The Board-history and the Topic-history (click the "..." icon (aka. action menu) in the top-right of each topic/post - and yes, those icons are way too light-gray, but that's being changed soon :) are currently separate, but the devs are in the process of merging the latter into the former (whilst still retaining the separate per-topic-history view - which is a nice improvement to the current page-history chaos), so we'll soon be able to view everything in one location, but hopefully more clearly than in pages like this.
As for timestamps - a few editors have commented on loving the new "elapsed" timestamps, and a few editors have commented on preferring the old/standard "exact" timestamps. Personally, I'd like it to be a preference, but everyone is trying to minimize the number of userpreferences in general (See mw:Requests for comment/Core user preferences and etc) - (because: they add code-complexity (both initial-creation and future-maintenance), and server-load, and editor-view inconsistencies). So, we shall see. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 22:51, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Where does the text at the top of the page come from?Edit

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Breakfast has some tabs and an image at the top of the page. Where is that text coming from? Suppose you want to replace the image near the top of that page - can you do it? Perhaps one day you log in and find some wag has replaced it with a vulva. Can you tell who edited it? Wnt (talk) 14:25, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Wnt: At the bottom right of the header appears a pencil icon when your mouse is somewhere over there (no idea how to get there for those people who only use their keyboard, but that's not the main issue here). This is just to the right of the "text area", i.e. at the left side of the large wide space you get on the right half of your page in Flow.
In the page history, you find entries like
FDMS4 (talk | contribs | block) edited the board header.
8 days ago Sun, 09 Feb 2014 16:33:06 GMT
So it is traceable who did what. It is AFAIK not revertable though, you have to make a new edit to override the previous one. So far, WMF devs seem to think that undo / rollback are not needed for Flow pages like this one. They're wrong, but it will take a while to convince them probably. Fram (talk) 14:46, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Wnt: Note also that "thanks" to the immediate substitution of every page that is included in the header (and elsewhere), vandalism to a template won't be immediately visible here (good!), but once template vandalism is visible here, it will also require a change at both the offending page (template, whatever) and here. Fram (talk) 14:52, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Wnt: If you go now at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Breakfast, click on "edit" for the header, and then use "preview" (please DO NOT SAVE), you will see a rather different result than the current version. I don't believe this is a useful or wanted feature. Others may like this, I don't know, but I see no use for it. A change in a template becomes meaningless, since every page needs to be refreshed before the change gets shown. Good to counter vandalism, bad for constructive edits! Fram (talk) 14:57, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Fram: Agreed. It's also hard to debug, because there's some weirdness about stacking more and more "an unexpected error occurs" results each time you preview - you have to start over from scratch each time. I don't really know why
<s>{{Wikipedia:WikiProject Breakfast/Tabbed header}}
{{WikiProject Breakfast|class=project}}</s>
causes that error [I've nowikied it now] ... I wonder if it'll cause it here? Yeah -- and actually it gives the useful text "Exception Caught: Unexpected end tag : strike". Pity it didn't do that until I hit the _green_ button. Wnt (talk) 16:28, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Wnt: LOL, replying to myself I get two "an unexpected error occurred" the second I hit the button. I guess it didn't keep out the bad text after all (maybe it forgot about the nowiki?) Wnt (talk) 16:30, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Wnt: Actually no, that wasn't it -- the page was just infected with "an unexpected error occurred" until I reloaded it, from the first time I previewed. Unlike with a regular wiki page, the preview is the same page.
Note also there's a distinction between "regular" wikitext, in which can be left in place without an escape, and this version of wikitext, which apparently has a different list of things that have to be escaped.
(Note the above /strike simply didn't display ... but without an error. Hmmm, every time you throw you hit something different. Wnt (talk) 16:33, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Wnt: Test:
<s>{{Wikipedia:WikiProject Breakfast/Tabbed header}}
{{WikiProject Breakfast|class=project}}</s> Fram (talk) 19:25, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Fram: No error there. But when I remove the "nowikis", I also get an "unexpected error". Without the "strike"s, it works.
{{Wikipedia:WikiProject Breakfast/Tabbed header}}
[[Category:WikiProject Breakfast|header]]
{{WikiProject Breakfast|class=project}}
[[Category:WikiProject Breakfast articles]] Fram (talk) 19:26, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
I briefly experimented with some simulated vandal advertising, but its effect is actually too obnoxious, interfering with the navigation buttons. The code I used was <div style="position:fixed;top:0px;left:0px;width:100%;height:40px;background:#000000;"> :[[File:"Buy War Bonds or Stamps Every Pay Day" - NARA - 514011.jpg|225px|link=File:%22Buy_War_Bonds_or_Stamps_Every_Pay_Day%22_-_NARA_-_514011.jpg]][[File:Available_on_the_App_Store_(black)_SVG.svg|125px]] <span style="color:yellow;">Please support Wikipedia by rewarding our sponsors!</span><span style="color:white;font-size:80%;">And can you track down where this was added?</span> :</div> The point is: this could be present in any post in a thread, and someone needs to be able to actually view wikitext to tell which (you could guess from the size increase, but it wouldn't be hard to cover that up in a real adverspam situation. Wnt (talk) 05:23, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Fram (talk) 14:53, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Fram: Another problem is that "what links here" doesn't seem to work when you use templates in Flow pages, which is rather annoying (e.g. when templates are nominated for deletion or need a change in parameter names). Fram (talk) 14:54, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
test {{Rebbie Jackson}}
and {{Rebbie Jackson |state=expanded}}
Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 00:49, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Quiddity (WMF): Looking at the thread in isolation shows one "show" or "hide" link per template, but looking at it on the whole page (when one finally has scrolled down to here) gives 11 of each... Oh, and was the font in the reply box always this annoying pale grey? Or is it just the kind of thing that annoys more each time you use it? I can hardly read what I am typing here, which is not user-friendly or more restful for the eyes or whatever PR-speak is used to defend it. We seem to have heard for months that something will be done about the font colour, but if even this takes this long, I have little hope for the future of Flow.
"By clicking "Reply", you agree to our illegible piece of too small, too pale text and agree to irrevocably release your text under the something and something" No thanks... Fram (talk) 07:15, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Fram: re ""what links here" doesn't seem to work when you use templates in Flow pages"
Look at what links to Template:Requested move/dated. You should find:
  • Wikipedia talk:Flow/Developer test page (transclusion; from a post; from a post) ‎ (links)
Looking at those two "from a post" links, do you actually see anything that would be causing a WP:transclusion?
So apparently Flow and Editor are two independent development teams who don't coordinate with each other. While one seems totally fundamentalist in their desire to eradicate wikitext, the other
  1. Has
  2. No
  3. problems with continuing to support it.
They just have don't feel the need to flow on widescreens, as editors are supposed to be chatting it up on their little mobile devices while they work on this supposedly serious encyclopedia.
Now I see that this message or post, or whatever it's supposed to be called, which I am now editing, is showing as a third "transclusion" on this page. All I did was add a link, I didn't transclude it. wbm1058 (talk) 12:42, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Fram: Indeed! And in the topic near the top, where you've tested the same template, the same bug is triggered if we scroll-down to load a single set of topics, and then scroll back up to that topic. Most odd. I've pointed someone towards it..
Re: the grey-text in the reply box, that's always been that way, but (along with many other aspects of the typography in Flow) is changed to use the default mediawiki styling. (The styling changes were in hiatus, whilst the devs concentrated on backend improvements and the frontend overhaul). That fix will be live in ~10 days.
Re: the Terms of Use text, I believe the Legal dept has cleared the font-size and font-color and message-content brevity, but I will re-confirm. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 20:30, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Wbm1058: Thanks for the pointer to that bug. :/ Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 20:33, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

testtesttest this is cool Victor Grigas (talk) 19:31, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

This is some things.Edit

Hello. (ʞɿɐʇ) ɐuɐʞsǝp 01:06, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Edit comment. {{GA icon}} Graywash (talk) 06:43, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Board headerEdit

Some three quarters ago, User:Graywash edited the board header (no problem with that, it is a test page after all). While in this case, his changes are small and easy to undo manually, I wondered how one would return to the pre-changed state if the changes weren't so small or obvious.

In his contributions, I find:

06:43, 19 February 2014 . . (+1,913)‎ . . Graywash (talk | contribs | block) edited the board header.

without a link to even what board. Totally useless (and note the completely incorrect change size).

In the page history, we have

   Graywash (talk | contribs | block) edited the board header.
   45 minutes ago Wed, 19 Feb 2014 06:43:53 GMT

The timestamp links to the current state of the header, no indication of what was changed

The header itself only has the "edit" icon, no history button or anything.

So, how can one see what has been changed, and how can one undo these changes to get back to the exact state it was in before? Fram (talk) 07:32, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Fram: That's bugzilla:57163, currently awaiting code-review. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 21:43, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

By the way, apparently one can not remove or empty a page header, even though not every page needs one. Fram (talk) 07:33, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

So, I have now changed the header:

  • How can one see what the change was that Graywash made?
  • How do you find and restore the original text? Fram (talk) 07:35, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Test....blah blah blah blahEdit

(Topic title edited by Smtchahal (talk), — regards, Revi)

ABCDEFG.... ~~~~ — regards, Revi 10:58, 19 February 2014 (UTC) (Edited by Сунприат (talk))

Just testing comment reply, and the Hide feature (above). (Hide seems broken to me; see reply below.) -m Memetics (talk) 15:14, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Well if I'd known that I couldn't *unhide* a comment, or couldn't hide it *just for me*, then I would have hidden my own test comment, and not Smtchahal's comment. Yeeks!
Also, once a comment is hidden, there's no way to Reply to it. Doesn't seem ... intuitive.
-m Memetics (talk) 15:16, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

bad image listEdit

(Topic title edited by Fram (talk), Quiddity (WMF) (talk), EngFram (talk))

NSFW! File:L'atelier faiminette.ogv EngFram (talk) 13:13, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

thumb|200px EngFram (talk) 13:18, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Hidden titleEdit

The topic https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Flow/Developer_test_page&topic_postId=rpgca5e9yyrhoqq5&workflow=rpgca5e9yyrhoqq5 has no visible title, but when I click "edit title", the text "false" appears. This is strange... Fram (talk) 07:51, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

And now the topic below suddenly had the same problem. Something going wrong with the Flow software or database? Fram (talk) 07:52, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Flow/Developer_test_page&topic_postId=rpcbhk1f6mn3feux&workflow=rpcbhk1f6mn3feux

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Flow/Developer_test_page&topic_postId=rp4pxylhbmoozq7e&workflow=rp4pxylhbmoozq7e

Both have the same problem as well. Fram (talk) 07:53, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Fram: Submitted as bugzilla:61939. Thanks. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 01:57, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

go goa goneEdit

Indian film Nizil (talk) 19:06, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Nizil Shah: hi 180.174.203.22 (talk) 01:56, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Just one, in a long family of test postsEdit

Very history. Much ancestry. Wow. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 22:17, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

TransclusionsEdit

{{Wikipedia talk:Flow/Developer test page}} Gilderien Talk|List of good deeds 20:03, 27 February 2014 (UTC)


 

5x expanded by Gilderien (talk). Self nominated at 02:49, 1 January 2014 (UTC).

  • Comment - in what actual way is this a nomination? I'd assumed that a DYK nomination would actually have a hook, an article to link to and so on - this doesn't quite seem to qualify. --Bcp67 (talk) 14:00, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
  • When I nominated it I hadn't finished work on it, so I didn't suggest a hook because I might find something more interesting in my research. The article is Càrn Eige.--Gilderien Chat|Contributions 14:13, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
  • That's fair enough. You could have waited a little for the nomination if you'd wanted, with the expansion beginning on 1 January 2014 it could have been nominated up to 6 January. Any ideas on the hook yet? Maybe the mountain's remoteness or the fact that it is Britain's second-highest mountain by relative height? --Bcp67 (talk) 14:25, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

  •   Full review needed. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:57, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
    •   Expansion and date ok. Article is a bit of a 'how-to-guide'. The sentence supporting the hook claim needs a reference directly after it. --Soman (talk) 04:58, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

  •   I trimmed some guidebook-style content from the article, but I cannot approve the hook. I don't like the way the proposed hook obscures the fact that this mountain is second in topographic prominence and not in absolute height. Also, when I tried to verify the hook fact in the source cited (i.e., Dawson 1992), I had no luck. (When I searched separately on "Eige" and "1183" in the online text, I found confirmation of this Munro's elevation, but not of its relative height, and I didn't see indication of any table discussing that topic.) This is a 256-page book, so the citation for a specific fact needs a page number. I did find that http://munro-madness.com/hills/carn-eige supports the hook fact, but that's not the sort of reliable source we need for a DYK hook fact. If the hook fact can be verified via a reliable source, please reword the hook:
If that hook can't be verified satisfactorily, I suggest:
  • ALT2 ... that Càrn Eige (pictured) is the highest mountain in northern Scotland? --Orlady (talk) 06:08, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
  • I found an online version (which is a derivative work) which I believe to be reliable - [] (page 27)? Is this acceptable? It is published on the rhb website as an extension to the original work.--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 13:08, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
  •   Thanks. That source (which is not yet cited in the article) does provide the basis for the statement that this mountain is second in topographic prominence. However, a citation to page 27 is hardly adequate. That's part of a table that spans pages 22 to 28; you are saying that a person could scan the entire table to verify that Càrn Eige is listed with the second largest "drop," which is the measure of topographic prominence. There are also lists on page 213 and 214 of the "highest twelve HuMPs" and the "ten most prominent HuMPs", with an indication that Wikipedia is the only place where the "most prominent" list was previously published. We can't expect Wikipedia readers to be able to figure all that out based solely on a reference to an entire 256-page book that did not include such lists. (Explaining this to me on a DYK nominations page does not substitute for citing sources in an article.)
If the article's lead section is going to list this and other of this mountain's superlatives (highest in northern Scotland, 12th highest in the British Isles, and second to Ben Nevis in topographic prominence), the rankings should not be based on a citation to a book of tables from which a reader might eventually be able to draw the same conclusion -- but only after immersing themselves in the esoteric argot of hillwalking/mountaineering hobbyists. Rather, the article needs to present and explain the data on which the ranking is based. The details of elevation and "drop" -- and the logic of measuring "drop" for this mountain -- need to be presented in the Topography section of the article (the article text should present the statistic for this mountain's drop -- an unsourced entry in the infobox is not sufficient -- and the infobox number differs by 1 m from the number given in the source you cited here), and there need to be reference citations to places where the data can be found without extreme effort by a reader who has access to those sources. The online book by Jackson that you directed me to here, as well as the various databases of Hills and Mountains of Britain and Ireland, would appear to be appropriate sources for the data. Further to the above, please don't toss the term "parent peak" into the description of Ben Nevis in the article lead -- save that information (which is part of that specialized hillwalking/mountaineering argot that I refer to here, not a term that people in general will associate with Ben Nevis) for the explanation of "drop" in the Topography section. --Orlady (talk) 15:33, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
It's been more than two weeks. Are you going to add citations to the article so this can pass? --Orlady (talk) 15:07, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, I've been very busy recently. I'll see what I can do. I might add some more content if I get home tomorrow.--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 19:51, 27 February 2014 (UTC) Gilderien Talk|List of good deeds 20:11, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

{{WP:Sandbox}}

Hello there Benny!.. Gilderien Talk|List of good deeds 20:15, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Just testingEdit

This is my first testing with flow, after reading an ongoing discussion at WT:INB. Dwaipayan (talk) 03:17, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Quiddity (WMF): the thank link is not working here and going to top of the page # Tito Dutta (talk) 02:00, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
I see, it is not working in the all post view, but in individual post, it is working. Tito Dutta (talk) 02:01, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
Titodutta: That one is an erratic bug, that we've been unable to consistently reproduce. Tracked at bugzilla:63205.
Actually, I think I've figured it out (notes added at the bug). Thanks for the nudge! Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 19:12, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

ha ha User:Vigyani 05:07, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

ha ha User:Vigyani 05:07, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

TestingEdit

Testing flow . Looks good. One more step towards future. Need some improvements. We are having some discussion here regarding flow. You may join the discussion. Jim Carter 10:08, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Another query. While submitting this topic. I have seen this message – There seems to be a problem with your login session; this action has been canceled as a precaution against session hijacking. Go back to the previous page, reload that page and then try again. Is there any reason why this is happening. Jim Carter 10:26, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Another query. While submitting this topic. I have seen this message – There seems to be a problem with your login session; this action has been canceled as a precaution against session hijacking. Go back to the previous page, reload that page and then try again. Is there any reason why this is happening. Jim Carter 10:27, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Another query. While submitting this topic. I have seen this message – There seems to be a problem with your login session; this action has been canceled as a precaution against session hijacking. Go back to the previous page, reload that page and then try again. Is there any reason why this is happening. Jim Carter 10:28, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Another query. While submitting this topic. I have seen this message – There seems to be a problem with your login session; this action has been canceled as a precaution against session hijacking. Go back to the previous page, reload that page and then try again. Is there any reason why this is happening. Jim Carter 10:29, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Javascript?Edit

Does this work without Javascript too? 78.35.196.38 (talk) 14:04, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

mic check 123....Edit

Add some details if you like.... User:Vigyani 05:06, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

What if I ~~~~ Fauzan✆ talk✉ mail 04:27, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

~~~~ Mz7 (talk) 16:18, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Mz7: Mz7 (talk) 16:19, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Board header diff historyEdit

Took me a while to find that: The timestamps of header edits in the board history lead to a permalink to a specific version of the header. The text at the top of that page, even though it looks very much like it's part of the header, contains a link to one single diff. In the current incarnation I would call that nothing more than an easter egg, but I assume it's being worked on. Btw: on the way I found these:

  • The diff link in a watchlist entry regarding a header edit just takes me to the board, no diff
  • The hist link in the same watchlist entry yields a "Fatal exception of type Flow\Exception\InvalidActionException"
  • The diff link in the corresponding user contributions yields a similar error.

— HHHIPPO — HHHIPPO 08:06, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Hhhippo: Yup, all those are being worked on, with much cursing (and documenting of the pain points) at mediawiki's many systems that are almost-identical-but-not-quite. Thanks for the specific notes. :) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 23:55, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

ErrorEdit

I tried to preview a template in a post, but now get "An error occurred while contacting the server. " errors...

Anyway, when I have an image and a template in my post, preview no longer seems to work... Having only the image, or only the template, gives no problems. Bizarre!

{{unsourced}} Fram (talk) 15:32, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Fram: Testing this again, it now seems to work. Some glitch apparently... Fram (talk) 15:36, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

And the title of the next topic now has disappeared. This problem was noted a few weeks ago as well, doesn't seem to be improved yet. Rather disturbing that. Fram (talk) 15:34, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Fram: It's being tracked and discussed at bugzilla:61939, and I've noted this latest example. Ty :) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 23:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Quiddity (WMF): thanks, testing square brackets in URLs here now ;-) Fram (talk) 08:15, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

New test thread in PolishEdit

ĄĘĆŹ Łapiński PMG (talk) 17:29, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Sebastianowy threadEdit

detale threada 217.168.136.164 (talk) 17:38, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

odpowiedz na threada 217.168.136.164 (talk) 17:38, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

test, sorry SPage (WMF) (talk) 00:57, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

test without jsEdit

(Topic title edited by Wnt (talk), Quiddity (WMF) (talk), Thesquirrelsareattackingagain (talk))

test foo Thesquirrelsareattackingagain (talk) 18:43, 24 March 2014 (UTC) (Edited by Quiddity (WMF) (talk))

This is just a test. Hi everybody. 173.164.185.245 (talk) 21:12, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

173.164.185.245: I thought I might reply to my reply. That seems only right and proper. 173.164.185.245 (talk) 21:12, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

r Tito Dutta (talk) 01:57, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

~~~~ Tito Dutta (talk) 01:57, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Testing user templatesEdit

NativeForeigner (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · checkuser (log)) NativeForeigner Talk 04:27, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Long tail Ad Huikeshoven (talk) 17:56, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

with thieEdit

oceans

lakes
rivers
streams
water
water
wate
)))))))) ~Helicopter Llama~ 20:16, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Test of SummarizeEdit

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Cras et purus pulvinar, sagittis felis vel, ornare nisi. Pellentesque ut est nec quam auctor blandit. Etiam ac suscipit quam. Pellentesque sollicitudin, nisi nec adipiscing mattis, quam ligula ornare purus, et imperdiet risus purus sed est. Ut euismod sit amet risus sit amet consequat. Maecenas eget odio ac lectus congue aliquam at non augue. Vivamus ut nibh nulla. Cras at volutpat est. Nullam nisl ipsum, lacinia ac justo sit amet, ornare aliquet justo. Aliquam suscipit dapibus massa, vel accumsan justo consequat id. Aliquam et erat eu libero ultrices sagittis. Vivamus luctus lacus scelerisque, lobortis tellus vel, vulputate nisl. Mauris hendrerit justo ut dolor condimentum, malesuada facilisis sapien suscipit.

Proin nec nisi ac sem sollicitudin dignissim vel a neque. Mauris vulputate neque nec mauris sodales hendrerit. In commodo elit purus, nec vestibulum dui posuere quis. Aliquam imperdiet velit in urna pellentesque, et hendrerit dui ullamcorper. Nulla fermentum aliquet velit, at dapibus nunc vestibulum et. Duis nulla purus, pretium id hendrerit ut, adipiscing in arcu. Phasellus at tellus vitae dolor feugiat congue ut eget diam. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 18:06, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Test of Close and SummarizeEdit

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Cras et purus pulvinar, sagittis felis vel, ornare nisi. Pellentesque ut est nec quam auctor blandit. Etiam ac suscipit quam. Pellentesque sollicitudin, nisi nec adipiscing mattis, quam ligula ornare purus, et imperdiet risus purus sed est. Ut euismod sit amet risus sit amet consequat. Maecenas eget odio ac lectus congue aliquam at non augue. Vivamus ut nibh nulla. Cras at volutpat est. Nullam nisl ipsum, lacinia ac justo sit amet, ornare aliquet justo. Aliquam suscipit dapibus massa, vel accumsan justo consequat id. Aliquam et erat eu libero ultrices sagittis. Vivamus luctus lacus scelerisque, lobortis tellus vel, vulputate nisl. Mauris hendrerit justo ut dolor condimentum, malesuada facilisis sapien suscipit.

Proin nec nisi ac sem sollicitudin dignissim vel a neque. Mauris vulputate neque nec mauris sodales hendrerit. In commodo elit purus, nec vestibulum dui posuere quis. Aliquam imperdiet velit in urna pellentesque, et hendrerit dui ullamcorper. Nulla fermentum aliquet velit, at dapibus nunc vestibulum et. Duis nulla purus, pretium id hendrerit ut, adipiscing in arcu. Phasellus at tellus vitae dolor feugiat congue ut eget diam. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 18:07, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Chinese: 不知道; pinyin: is this thing on?Edit

Interesting. I see the template code in the heading, the raw output in the 'comment on' before typing this. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 01:00, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Does it work in the actual content? Chinese: 不知道; pinyin: is this thing on? JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 01:01, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Yes. Makes for a fun way to test templates I guess. edit. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 01:01, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Also interesting how it looks in the history/contribution record. The template code for the post being created, the template as seen in a page, i.e. formatted with links and all HTML the template outputs, for replies. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 01:17, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

JohnBlackburne: Yeah, it seems something came out backwards. (See "bug 64943" thread above for details). Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 03:28, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

The problem of template output in history and contributions seems fixed. I now see the template source, which is my own fault for putting it there. But I still see the raw HTML output in this edit window before typing. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 04:28, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

JohnBlackburne: When I check the history of a few pages with a template in the header, I get a Wikimedia error. Not really fixed yet apparently... Fram (talk) 07:19, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
Fram: The patch for bugzilla:65051 was merged on Friday, so will roll-out on Thursday at mediawikiwiki. I'll ask if it's possible to speed up deployment to the "set 2" wikis (ie. here). Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 20:48, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
Quiddity (WMF): Thanks Fram (talk) 06:38, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Green tickYEdit

Can I add a tick to my contributions? Yep that worked. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 01:19, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

JohnBlackburne: See "bug 64943" above. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 03:25, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Yes. Glad to have provided an example. I had no idea what including {{zh}} in a topic would do but it was worth trying. I was then tempted to try a template with a big image but luckily thought of {{ok}} first. A more creative mind could have broken the page history with this. Oops I see the history is' [sic - formatting test] broken. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 03:46, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

☒NEdit

(Topic title edited by Fram (talk), Quiddity (WMF) (talk), Tito Dutta (talk), Outriggr (talk))

what shows in the edit summary? Outriggr (talk) 02:35, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

I guess you'll wanna fix that. Hehe. Outriggr (talk) 02:36, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Riggr Mortis: What are you doing? It is a big image file in watchlist now, User:Quiddity (WMF) Tito Dutta (talk) 03:08, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
Titodutta: Changed title to  N Tito Dutta (talk) 03:08, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
I was testing the "Flow/Developer test page", presently live on WP in recent changes, contribs, and watchlists, I guess. Outriggr (talk) 03:32, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

That's bugzilla:64943, which has been fixed, but the patch is riding the deploy-train so probably won't arrive till Thursday. However, I'll ask if it's practical to deploy a quicker fix. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 03:24, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

I have changed the title back, so that we can actually "see" if and when anything and/or everything is fixed. Hiding problems isn't the purpose of a test page.

And I just love to see

"[[File:X mark.svg|15px|link=|alt=]]<span style="display:none">N</span>" topic history

when you click on the history of this topic :-) Fram (talk) 06:55, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Fram: What did you change? It is still 15 px.
It was 400 px before and was covering half of watchlist, when I changed it. Tito Dutta (talk) 07:52, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
Titodutta: Quiddity (IIRC) had it changed to "bug 69643", plain text, so I changed it back to the 15px version. We can always change it back to the 400px version once the bug fix is supposed to be in place, but no need to be too obnoxious for now :-) But in this (i.e. your) version, we can check the results of this thing quite easily. Fram (talk) 08:45, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
Fram: it does not matter, Very recently I reported an issue at AN, once the report is properly submitted, my work is done (here). I am not going to monitor all their discussions, there are people who'll take it forward.
Here too, the bug has been reported and listed. Now it is their work to fix it.
But it is also fine to change the article title back to the problematic one. You may make it slightly larger so that people notice it in their watchlist, but don't make it 400px. :) Tito Dutta (talk) 09:25, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
Fram: BTW, looks like we are quickly catching "Flow's" "no signature" practice. I have not seen anyone mistakenly adding signature.
Another funny thing: at viallage pump proposals, they say "proposal to disallow personalized signature" is a perennial proposal, have been suggested many times and it is not going to be implemented.
Now, at Flow, they are saying exactly the same points for not having signature option at Flow. Those were already rejected by community at Village Pump
Moral: If it is a suggestion at Village Pump, the points are invalid, if the same points are given by Wikimedia, those become "extra-ordinary". He He   Tito Dutta (talk) 09:32, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
Titodutta: Oh yes, individually, some WMF members are truly interested in and concerned about respecting community consensus. As a group, well, less so... I personally don't care for personalised signatures, but not having them will mean that a lot of people will complain at Flow for that reason alone (while there are many more valid reasons to do so instead :-D ) Fram (talk) 10:29, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

testEdit

:Jay8g [?VTE?] 04:01, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

  Salix alba (talk): 22:28, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

OK, so how do you quote someone's post? I mean how do you look at the source to see what they've entered? You can see the output but suppose you want to copy the HTML/wikitext. You might see something produced by a template and be curious which one or what parameters. It might be an image but with the default link replaced, some math formatting as above (though I can guess that), or anything really.
It's important as it's how many of us learn. We learn how to edit articles by looking at the source of them. We learn how to edit talk pages by looking at the source of them. Without this it's going to be far harder to learn many things: talk page templates like   Done, {{tlx}} for example. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 22:57, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
JohnBlackburne: You can't. Major shortcoming of Flow so far. But at the speed Flow is progressing since the initial (yay, we met our deadline!) rollout, I don't think we should worry about it too much. Give them another four or five years and it may come to resemble a working environment like LiquidThreads (oh, wait, nevermind...) Fram (talk) 06:28, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
JohnBlackburne: This missing-feature is tracked at bugzilla:60465. Thanks for the reminder. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 20:25, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

An odd bugEdit

An odd, if minor, bug: this page didn't get added to my watch list after I edited it, as other pages do. I had to manually add it. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 04:30, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

JohnBlackburne: Logged as bugzilla:65556. Thanks :) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 23:24, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Links and external linksEdit

Show/hide, but...❓Edit

Noticed that clicking anywhere in the grey area (except the ... for the popup menu & the '1 comment', which expands the comment form) shows and hides. This is non-obvious and seems excessive. And leaves you no way to navigate to the subtopic which I was trying to do – the view I see when clicking e.g. on a link in my watchlist. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 01:51, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

JohnBlackburne: Found the link I was looking for: under 'permalink' in the '...' menu. Neither of those are obvious or intuitive. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 12:17, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Actually it's odder than that. The comment boxes seem sticky. Expand one and it stays expanded even if you hide it's thread and expand another. It's like Facebook's annoying status box (click on that and it expands and there's no way to shrink it, you have to close/reload the page to get it back to normal, at least in my experience) JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 01:54, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

List of countries by populationEdit

Hey, finally the talk page flows! It almost looks like you've added https://disqus.com/ to the site! So great. Ad Huikeshoven (talk) 10:12, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Ad Huikeshoven: I've been increasingly thinking the same thing, that Flow essentially looks like the "comment on this article" section of just about every newspaper around. And I note that the "invitation" asks for comments, not for anything like "discuss how to improve this article". Function follows form, and if it looks like a comment page, it will be treated as a comment page. It's a fundamental disconnect from what talk pages are for. Risker (talk) 06:04, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Test subst:Requested move problemEdit

Requested move 3 November 2016Edit

{{requested move/dated|Wikipedia:WikiProject Meals}}

Wikipedia:Flow/Developer test pageWikipedia:WikiProject Meals – Testing problem reported at . Roan Kattouw (WMF) (talk) 23:50, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Here, seems like it just appeared. Hmmm. SPage (WMF) (talk) 02:13, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

S Page (WMF): == Welcome! ==

Hello, Flow, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 05:17, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Filed as bugzilla:66307 Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 05:35, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Topic with just a link to Template:Rebbie Jackson Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 23:03, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Requested move 8 June 2014Edit

(Topic title edited by Quiddity (WMF) (talk), wbm1058 (talk))

The notice doesn't seem to have added the page to WP:RMC within 30 mins. Nor has it been added to CAT:RM that I can see. If this isn't a test you maybe want to post the RM somewhere else so it can be properly noted, categorised etc. I don't think you're meant to sign your posts here either. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 01:46, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

JohnBlackburne: Well, this IS a test of course. Otherwise I would have made my edit over at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Breakfast wbm1058 (talk) 01:53, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

All I did was click edit and save. This *should* be just a null edit wbm1058 (talk) 03:23, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

This shows up as an undated, untargetted RM in the backlog.

Wikipedia:Requested_moves#Backlog  · Salvidrim! ·  16:18, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Salvidrim!: Actually it is in the section WP:Requested moves#Time could not be ascertained, because it is malformed. A signature and timestamp are part of a correctly formed request. wbm1058 (talk) 18:57, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
Wbm1058: That is the "double encoding" or "double escaping" bug that seems to occasionally re-appear. The current bug should be fixed by https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/141614/ and arriving on July 10 (if I've got the timing right). Until then, apologies. (Apologies also, for my late reply here. I'll answer your other questions, further up this thread, on Monday.)
In the future, yup, there are hundreds of things like this that will need to be tweaked, to copy with the Flow API. (The API itself is apparently stable, but the documentation still needs work - see mw:Extension:Flow/API etc). I'll let you know when new/better info is available. Thanks for the link to the User:RMCD bot/requestedmoves.php - I'll direct the curious devs towards that, as they're going to be working on Page Moves soonish.
In the meantime, possibly it would be helpful to remove whatever is causing the broken section at WP:RM, from your top-post in this topic? (We've got the old diff for later reference.). Thanks, and hope that helps. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 20:30, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
Quiddity (WMF):   Done wbm1058 (talk) 22:37, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
Quiddity (WMF): Oops, that wasn't enough to get this page off of WP:RM. User:Crisco 1492 also has a "requested move/dated" template on this page. I guess we need to ask them to remove it? What if they were a vandal, or chose to ignore me, or refused to remove the template? Actually, the normal process is for impartial closers to remove the template, not the editor who placed it. wbm1058 (talk) 01:14, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Wbm1058: Is that mess of a template even working?  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:16, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Crisco 1492: Something on this page is still transcluding the template. I'm not sure that it's your edit. Since I can't look at the (wikitext) source of the entire page this could be difficult for me to debug. wbm1058 (talk) 01:23, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Wbm1058: Alright, I'll delete it.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:25, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Crisco 1492: I guess that wasn't it. Something is still transcluding "requested move/dated" @S Page (WMF): Can you remove the {{subst:Requested move... line from your message in the next section? Though since subst: wasn't working I don't know whether that is it. wbm1058 (talk) 02:37, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Wbm1058: Per this, I think it is my message that is somehow still guilty of transclusion. Apparently twice, though both links are to the same message. wbm1058 (talk) 03:06, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
I've filed part of this as bugzilla:67398. I've coordinate with S Page to look at the rest of it. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 22:19, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Broken WikimarkupEdit

Just look at that move request.

(Malformed move request removed)

Ouch. Eh?  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 06:10, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Crisco 1492: Are you trying to make a point about Flow, or the template? If the latter, I know the system could be improved, but see nothing to indicate that any Flow developers have spent 5 mins. considering the issue. Implementation of Flow in its current form would break the RM process. Do the Flow developers want to rewrite the Lua code in module:Requested move in some new "Flow procedural language"? wbm1058 (talk) 02:35, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Wbm1058: Flow. I don't know what happened to the thread below this one, but that's a lot of HTML code showing up.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:38, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Crisco 1492: Yeah, it looked OK when I first posted it. Then I went back and edited my comment (twice), each time I edited it added another block of that HTML. Try editing your "Just look at that move request." message above. Just add a single character to the end of it and then re-save it. wbm1058 (talk) 02:43, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Wbm1058: And it's broken. *argh*
  • Floooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooowwwww*  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:44, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Or... wait? It works here, but not below? Odd.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 07:46, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Crisco 1492: See now, my problem is that by following the "comment" link that showed up in my watchlist, I have no idea what's supposed to be "below". There's no "below" here, my comment is going at the very bottom of the page. Risker (talk) 02:48, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Risker: Here's the page I posted on. Wikipedia_talk:Flow/Developer_test_page. I have no idea how to link that thread directly.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:49, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Crisco 1492: Click the "..." icon at the top-right of every post and topic, to obtain permalinks to each of those things.
Re: the wikitext mangling, see my comment here for the explanation. (TL;DR: It's a bug, that struck both posts. Should be fixed soon.) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 21:17, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
Risker: that's a good point. They're currently discussing where "permalinks" should lead - whether to the individual topic (as they do now) or to the board as a whole... Eg. This topic can be accessed via
  1. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Flow/Developer_test_page&workflow=rwau9p89romw1ffl
  2. or Special:Flow/workflow/rwau9p89romw1ffl
  3. or - not-officially, but by hacking the URL - at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Flow/Developer_test_page#flow-topic-rwau9p89romw1ffl
That 3rd option, will load the page, and scroll down to the right section - but only if the section is still on the front-page. (That's the same as with current wiki talkpages: If the section has been archived, the "#section-id" won't do anything useful).
The question applies to both:
  • The permalinks that are linked from within the topic (the "..." actionmenu),
  • and also the links that come here from Watchlists/RC/Contribs/History, and via Notifications
In current watchlists, to get to the subsection, we have to click the "→‎" next to the edit-summary.
(In LQT, the thread's menu provides links to the standalone thread page, but everything else links to the thread-within-page. eg mw:Thread:Extension talk:Poem/Pointer to discussion about "lines" vs https://www.mediawiki.org/w/index.php?title=Extension_talk:Poem&offset=20140630184157&lqt_mustshow=44901#Pointer_to_discussion_about_.22lines.22_44901
----
It's possible, but more complicated code-wise, to have the Flow permalinks target: "The topic within the board, with the newer/older topics appearing above/below it". (As they do with current talkpages, if we link to the archived subsection, eg w:Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)/Archive_56#Wikipedia:Honesty)
Apart from the complexity, the other slight problem with #3, is that we're soon going to be able to sort topics (clickable button, for our own view only), so that they're either by "Newest topics" or by "Recently active topics". (test at ee-flow.wmflabs.org) - This will make "above" and "below" ambiguous/variable.
Overall, some of the best thinking on this is at [w:User:Hhhippo/Flow w:User:Hhhippo/Flow], though it only mentions "sort" briefly, and concentrates on "Filters", which along with Search will probably be the other main steps in bringing a measure of individual control, to the firehoses of content.
[Sorry for the length. Hope that helps and is somewhat clear.] Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 22:16, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Test garbleEdit

See Protagoras 358a[1]

NotesEdit

  1. ^ Fine 1999, p. 8.

ReferencesEdit

  • Fine (1999). "Introduction". Plato 2. OUP. pp. 1–33. Atethnekos (DiscussionContributions) 20:51, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Else.[1] Edit 2. Atethnekos (DiscussionContributions) 21:08, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Atethnekos: Reply. Atethnekos (DiscussionContributions) 21:31, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Atethnekos: 4 Atethnekos (DiscussionContributions) 09:12, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
Atethnekos: 5 Atethnekos (DiscussionContributions) 09:12, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
Atethnekos: 6 to 4 Atethnekos (DiscussionContributions) 09:12, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
Atethnekos: 7 to 5 Atethnekos (DiscussionContributions) 09:12, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
Atethnekos: :) TheWanderer1357 (talk) 10:57, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

So I can reply here? (edited) LukeSurl t c 09:16, 12 June 2014 (UTC)



RESOLVED
Closing this, as a demo. SPage (WMF) (talk) 00:01, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

TestEdit

(Topic title edited by SPage (WMF) (talk), TheWanderer1357 (talk))

Hello, world! TheWanderer1357 (talk) 10:57, 19 June 2014 (UTC)



The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Trying FlowEdit

Like Andy Capp William Avery (talk) 20:51, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Wibble, wibble... William Avery (talk) 20:52, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Test templateEdit

Fram (talk) 13:17, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

I just "thanked" you - other pages says "Do you want to thank Fram for this edit?" - but not here... Christian75 (talk) 11:37, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Christian75: It worked, thanks! No idea why you didn't get the confirmation screen first, Flow works (or not) in mysterious ways... Fram (talk) 12:13, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
Christian75 and Fram: The confirmation-dialog was added to the Thank-links that appear in the History-pages, because it was so close to the "undo/rollback" links, and some editors gave the feedback that they were occasionally clicking on Thank by accident. See this very long thread for details and more links.
(Sidenote: The Thank link in Flow will be briefly disappearing, in the upcoming update, but shall return soon thereafter. More on that, early next week.) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 19:31, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Testing what happens with older topics when new ones get addedEdit

See above... Fram (talk) 13:53, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Testing to see if I can add wiki mark-up, to demonstrate things.

Hi, to link to the article Bath with a pipe, you type [[Bath (city)|Bath]]. ~~~~ 86.129.13.205 (talk) 17:15, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Ah, and is there no way to edit comments? And no real timestamp? 86.129.13.205 (talk) 17:17, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

86.129.13.205: There's an 'edit' link next to my comments, and only my comments, for me. Looks like it's associated with/tracked by account, so you probably need to get one to edit your own comments.
Edit: as for the missing time stamp it has the time since in minutes, hours etc. so it clearly storing the actual time. Maybe it will be a preference what it shows. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 12:44, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
86.129.13.205 and JohnBlackburne: Mouseover the "relative" timestamp, to get the "exact" timestamp. There's more discussion about this, at this thread Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 19:24, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Flow test for the User Analysis ToolEdit

I am testing the flow extension to see how the User Analysis Tool will pick up Flow edits. Question for the devs to answer. These edits are not recorded on the revision table are they? —cyberpowerChat:Offline 18:43, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Cyberpower678: NotADev but see your revision here and of course history. So, revisions are recorded! in the comment below Ad Huikeshoven (talk) 19:56, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

NotADev but see your revision here and of course history. So, revisions are recorded! Ad Huikeshoven (talk) 19:55, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Ad Huikeshoven: Actually I was talking about the way they are saved on the DB. It isn't being recorded on the local DB, but rather on a separate one. So they aren't appearing as revisions on any edit counter. —cyberpowerChat:Offline 20:00, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Is flow always going to appear...Edit

Like it does on this page for me: a left justified, far longer than it need to be, tube down the side of the page leaving half the width of the page blank? Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:13, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Fuhghettaboutit: If the devs want to make sure that it will get the same response VE got, then yes, this will remain like this. Hardly anybody likes it, certainly not when it is forced (I don't mind that this look is given as an option, but like many others, I don't like it when devs decide that this is really really better for me and makes for easier reading and so on, and that my preference is not relevant). Same goes for font size, font color, and so on. Mind you, the first appearance of Flow was even worse, with about twice as much whitespace (vertically) as you get now. No idea who thought that that was a useful look... Fram (talk) 07:39, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
Testing a template's functionality: @Fram: Thanks for responding Fram. To the devs: mind you I will detest the fixed-width in any flavor it comes in but forcing users to focus on one side of the page is a painful non-starter. Turning away from that issue, the whole thing feels like I'm in jail. God, the giant headers listing each person. The busy clutter of the whole thing. And the data between each post is highly disruptive to conversation. It's like if me and you were talking in person and every time I got to the end of a sentence a tinny loudspeaker would come on before you could reply "user fuhghettaboutit has just finished his sentence, it happened 1 second ago, you have the option of replying, editing or thanking him, please continue". I'm sorry to be so negative. I know people have worked hard on this. Sometimes though you have to step back and say it just didn't work. I occasionally will have to do this with hard fought projects at work and that too is painful but necessary. I actually think that our current organic talk system is wonderful. This whole push feels like an attempt to replace a treasured community garden with a sterile corporate park. Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 11:30, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
Fuhghettaboutit: Sorry I didn't answer your question earlier. I did just finish replies to the related questions at Full width and at Wouldn't a forum-style look make more sense?, which should help. Additionally to the info in those 2 posts: the profusion of metadata in the Titlebar is partially intended to demonstrate to us some of the new things that can be done - it could be available in a different location, or as a togglable layer, or hidden entirely. (Personally, I'm advocating for what a few users have suggested, which is to 1) move the reply/edit/thank buttons into the right-margin, 2) enable users to customize the fixed-width easily. 3) move the metadata into a toggleable layer for powerusers who want the infodeluge. But the more suggestions/input from other people, the better.) HTH. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 03:16, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

AvatarEdit

Hi guys! Keep up the good spirit. Even the https://disqus.com/ system has a flowing talk AND an avatar preceding the "user name", "account name", whatever, a pic of a person talking. When will that happen on WikipediA @jorm jorm? And when will visual editor ever been turned on for flow? Ok, can some one connect the dots between agile/scrum, lean-startup (Eric Reis/Steve Blank) and Effectuation Method (Saras Saravathy)? Ad Huikeshoven (talk) 10:17, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Ad Huikeshoven: Re: pictures: The last brief discussion about that, was at Wikipedia talk:Flow/Design FAQ#Flow and avatars (with just 1 proposer, and myself replying).
Re: VisualEditor: Flow is using the mw:Parsoid application as a parser by default, so VisualEditor could be turned on relatively easily, once any necessary design tweaks were addressed. However, they're starting off by designing just the wikitext-system as the priority. Many of us powerusers still prefer it, and are more likely to beta-test the software over the months if we can use wikitext. Yes, both will eventually be available. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 03:07, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Wouldn't a forum-style look make more sense?Edit

(Topic title edited by Ego White Tray (talk), 46.116.179.54 (talk))

E.g. "topics" are shown in a table, clicking a topic takes the user to a new page where all the discussion takes place. 46.116.179.54 (talk) 08:43, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Agreed, the current layout is both cumbersome and unaesthetic. TheWanderer1357 (talk) 08:44, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Oh, Clicking "small view" gives it a more forum-like style. I think "small view" should be the default. TheWanderer1357 (talk) 08:45, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Softwatt: "Small view"?
And why "forum-like" style? What is the advantage of that? Forums tend to have unrelated posts following one after the other, under a single heading. Risker (talk) 03:35, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Risker: See the 3 small "hamburger" icons in a row, at the top-right of the upper topic? The 3rd one is the "small view" button. - (Note: it's going to change in tomorrow's update, into a single button with 3-states.)
Those view-state buttons are an experiment seeking to solve two issues: 1) requests for a ToC. 2) requests for greater density (less vertical whitespace) in the interface.
Conclusion: 1) They are going to add a separate ToC, as the view-state buttons haven't successfully solved that need; designs are ongoing, and there was a suggestion today to have a nice simple ToC as the default, with some togglable metadata-additions for those of us who enjoy an infodeluge. 2) The buttons aren't perfect at this, but they do help somewhat, at least for now. Possibly the core idea can be adapted into something better? Input appreciated. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 02:42, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Quiddity (WMF): I won't worry too much about it since it's going to change, but I'm assuming you're referring to the three large "dots" at the upper right? I get exactly the same dropdown when I click any of them. (Edit title/permalink/history/summarize then a horizontal line, then hide topic/delete topic/suppress topic/close topic) I wonder if being an oversighter is giving me a different result than others might be seeing.
<edit> Oh, I see. I had to go to the "full talk page" view instead of the "thread view" to see those three buttons. Gonna say I didn't find them particularly useful, probably just as well to drop them.
The core problem remains the fact that the developers seem to be married to the idea of keeping everything in one gigantic long train instead of allowing people to archive - we've had the ability to create and use searchable talk page archives for years, this is perhaps just one more manifestation of "fixing" something that wasn't broken. To me, it shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the purpose of talk pages - or of discussions, for that matter. Risker (talk) 04:58, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Risker: Oh, I should've specified, they're only visible/needed on the Board view, i.e. Wikipedia talk:Flow/Developer test page, not at the individual topicpages. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 05:01, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
It is logical and aesthetic to have all the topic *titles* in one page (like we currently have), but each topic body should be in a separate page because it's..well, a separate thread talking about a separate topic. That's what I meant by "forum like". I didn't mean "a chain of all the posts one after another". I'm just saying, put each topic body in a separate page and keep the rest as it is. The closest thing we have is the "small view", but clicking a topic should take us to a new page instead of expanding it in the current page. TheWanderer1357 (talk) 11:11, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

In other words, I couldn't search for something because it might be on a different page. The ability to search a talk page is in my opinion vital. It's already hard enough because of the ability to collapse things. Doug Weller talk 07:42, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Dougweller: Two of the developers who work on mw:Search (specifically the new CirrusSearch backend) are currently working on wiring Flow into Search, so that: 1) Flow Boards each have their own separate search box (much like {{archive box}} provides, and that will search through both Flow content and older archived-wikitalkpages), and 2) getting Flow content into the regular sitesearch. So, it's coming as soon as possible. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 17:44, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Quiddity (WMF): Excellent, thanks. Doug Weller talk 09:38, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

testEdit

Spam responseEdit

It seems to me that this is really gonna need a "report abuse" button that would bring this to attention of administrators. Once this system is used on more pages, people are certainly gonna spam it, so we need a way to get administrator's attention to it on little-used talk pages so it doesn't stay that way, unseen by someone that can fix it, forever. Ego White Tray (talk) 01:38, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Ego White Tray: They're planning on re-examining the "hide" function, as well as changing some of the internals to for wiring it together with the revdelete system. iirc, this will enable the backend functionality needed for things like (undo|rollback). In the meantime, at these few test locations, we've got the "hide" button. :) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 02:21, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Quiddity (WMF): My observation so far is that nearly anybody can hide - or is that only autoconfirmed, or could that be chosen by the particular wiki? I was able to hide and then unhide a post a couple days ago. However, some things, like spam, or even worse, outings, need to be outright deleted, even suppressed in some cases - and we need a way to get people's attention quickly in such cases. I know you're working hard on this, so this might be something for the to-do list. Ego White Tray (talk) 03:31, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Full widthEdit

Why so narrow? Why not fill the entire screen width? Ego White Tray (talk) 02:03, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Ego White Tray: The first section at Wikipedia:Flow/Design FAQ details the reasons for the fixed width.
Also, it won't be empty for long, because they're currently working on a Table of Contents to go in that space. There have been variety of design mockups, but there was a meeting with further discussion on it today, with many changes proposed, so I'll wait to link to the new version. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 02:14, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Quiddity (WMF): What about a draggable width adjuster? So, it's this width by default, but any user can drag it back and forth to change the width.
As far as filling the space, I suggest the page being discussed - so the area on the right of Talk:Fish would be the content of Fish, allowing a user placing a comment to view the article as they place it. Ego White Tray (talk) 03:38, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Ego White Tray: Great minds think alike. ;)
Re: the second part, I was brainstorming privately about the opposite scenario, whereby editors could potentially toggle either the entire talkpage, or topics from the talkpage, in a "side view" within articles. See https://imgur.com/a/Kn3HZ#0 for some (very) rough ideas from October. There are some good possibilities somewhere in our ideas... :) Keep 'em coming! Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 05:08, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Argh, no. Please don't turn this into what would essentially be a page with columns. Don't put stuff beside this, let us have this 3/4 width of a page. Anything you do like that is only going to make Flow look ridiculous on mobile.

Am I correct in understanding that the upgrades will not have me typing in another shade of grey?

Incidentally...that study of the great benefits of whitespace...involves 20 participants, has not been peer reviewed, has not been reproduced, and (this part is the best)...take a look at how the authors use whitespace themselves: http://psychology.wichita.edu/surl/usabilitynews/62/whitespace.htm

(Note that the samples actually only have about an inch of white space, and the purpose of the test was to demonstrate reading speed and comprehension. ) Risker (talk) 06:10, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Risker: Or you could have user options on this. Something like "on right side of discussion pages show: - Page being discussed - Table of Contents - Nothing" - I'd lean towards the corresponding page being the default, but any logged-in user could change it to some other option. Ego White Tray (talk) 14:09, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Ego White Tray: The default should be the one that is most easily understood by newcomers, which should be the one that most closely mimics *all other pages* on the project, i.e., not like columns. I'm fine with the idea of other options, but the default should be closest to our content pages using the default skin.
It's actually quite a problem in my mind right now that Flow pages most closely mimic the "comment on this article" sections in online news media, because we all see how the "discussion" turns out to be opinion and people calling each other names. The more that Flow looks like that, the more likely people will use "Flow talk pages" in that way; function follows form. I'm actually kind of concerned that there seems to be such a disconnect between the team developing and designing Flow and the actual, intended, desired use of talk pages. People will stop using the discussion pages of articles if they're full of snotty comments that don't help improve articles. Risker (talk) 15:34, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Risker: Well, unproductive comments like that are easy to hide. Editors will quickly get the hint. After all, there is wide variation in levels of courtesy on websites that use similar discussion formats - compare YouTube with Slate Ego White Tray (talk) 22:55, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Ego White Tray: "Easy to hide" is not a criterion for trying to develop software that will attract the kinds of discussion we want and deter the kinds of driveby comments that we don't want. We do not have endless volunteer hours to devote to cleaning up the BLP violations, personal attacks, gross incivility, and off-topic posts that will be attracted like flies to honey using a format that almost exactly duplicates forums that attract those very kinds of comments. We didn't have it with AFT, we barely have enough volunteer hours to manage most of it in article space (at least we hope so), and there's no basis at all to think that random editors will "get the hint" - they'll be drive-by comments. Slate has people who are *paid* to moderate their discussion forums, and I'll lay odds they don't get as many posts in a week on average across all their active discussion forums than we get in about four hours (that would be about 650-700 talk page edits). One of the key purposes of Flow is to encourage more "discussion", so we should expect the workload to review and curate talk page edits to increase significantly. This is adding to the workload of the already strained editing community. It's the reason that AFT failed - more time was spent curating the comments than in utilizing the information in the AFT comments because so few were actually useful. Every time someone has to "hide" something on a talk page, it's more work. It will change the culture so that hiding anything one doesn't want to deal with becomes the norm; now it's a significant "statement" action to actively remove something from a talk page. Risker (talk) 03:04, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
Risker: I have no idea what AFT means Ego White Tray (talk) 04:26, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
Ego White Tray: Sorry about that! it is Wikipedia:Article feedback, a tool that invited readers to provide feedback and suggestions for article improvement. It got a fair number of uses from the readers, but only a small percentage of comments got reviewed by anyone, and so few had usable suggestions that I believe at one point we figured we were hiding/suppressing more comments than were being used to improve content. It created work that nobody was particularly interested in doing, but at least then the "drive-by" comments were separate from the "working" talk page. Risker (talk) 04:35, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
Risker: There are simple measures that could reduce talk page misuse. First, having to click the discussion tab only seems to greatly reduce how many comment, as opposed to article feedback which explicitly invited people to comment. Second, one simple measure is requiring accounts before commenting. While this might go against the wiki-philosophy, it is a common measure used by sites with more civil commentators. Finally, the hiding will work - it sets the tone and most users will follow the tone. Ego White Tray (talk) 05:41, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
Ego White Tray: We're not those sites. We're a site that openly and happily accepts contributions from unregistered users. They need access to the discussion space to make edit requests on protected and semi-protected pages. They need access so we have someplace to redirect them in order to stop edit wars - to discuss the edits and come to a mutually acceptable resolution. They need access to ask questions about content decisions before ploughing in willy-nilly. They need access because this is supposed to be the single method of discussion on the project by the time it's completely rolled out.
Hiding is possibly the worst solution that we've come up with for addressing inappropriate posts on a discussion page. Right now, if it's useless, we just blank it out and save the page; while it's still there in the history, it doesn't create distractions or clutter up the page in any way. If it's really problematic (e.g., BLP violations), it can be deleted - again still in the deletion history, but not distracting or cluttering up the page (admins still see all the places where stuff has been deleted). If it's really horrible and meets the necessary requirements, it's suppressed - clearly marked in the history, but invisible to everyone but oversighters (for whom the page would still be cluttered, but I guess I can live with that). The inability to archive or otherwise blank material from a flow page is a continuing problem, and one for which there is no clutter-free solution for non-admins. Oh, and we still haven't worked out who gets to hide things; right now, it's all users, but then it makes the page susceptible to inappropriate use of hiding. Risker (talk) 06:00, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

PermalinkEdit

Permalink test [2]

Is there some way to have a shorter wikilink version of this? Ego White Tray (talk) 02:05, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Ego White Tray: "Yes", but it might change in the future, hence the current alternative isn't widely advertised; the current (and perhaps temporary) method, is Special:Flow/workflow/ry5ah1y18hzdgc41 for this particular topic.
However, they're currently working on making a custom namespace for individual topics, and are planning to upgrade that "Permalink" button in the Actionmenu [...] One idea: Clicking "permalink" could automatically copy something useful to our clipboard, such as "a wikilink with the current-title appended" for clearer identification. E.g. this topic would be something like "Topic:ry5ah1y18hzdgc41/Permalink" - and then we could also |pipe that however desired, perhaps including the associated page name(s). Suggestions welcome! Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 22:34, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Quiddity (WMF): A copy-pasteable version would be nice. So the text will appear in the corner: "Wikilink to this post: Topic:arg78o4a85gh750" that I could copy without having to click a button first. Ego White Tray (talk) 22:41, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Ego White Tray: Then I could use it like any other wikilink: "{{User|Example}} said on [[Topic:arg78o4a85gh750|this post]] that this whole thing is made up and also insane", resulting in "Example (talk · contribs) said on this post that this whole thing is made up and also insane" Ego White Tray (talk) 03:35, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

July 10 Flow UpdateEdit

Please see News and Notes, at Wikipedia talk:Flow#July 10 Flow Update, for the major update coming today. Feedback there is appreciated. Thanks. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 18:43, 10 July 2014 (UTC)



RESOLVED
I would however want the discussions/talks in "full screen". This just hurts my eyes! (tJosve05a (c) 01:00, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I'm sorryEdit

But I needed to test how this would work. (I would however want the discussions/talks in "full screen". This just hurts my eyes!) (tJosve05a (c) 00:59, 17 July 2014 (UTC)



The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


TestEdit

Is there any reason I am not allowed to test this? Go Phightins! 02:56, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Go Phightins!: Please, test away!
There are plenty of small bugs, and many many features to add, but hopefully the possibilities are starting to become clear. :) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 02:35, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

It's been determined that Go Phightins! is allowed to test this, I didn't want to click Close Topic because I'm not sure what will happen. Will WP crash?? Really though, will topics be closeable only by admins? Topic creators? Would a creator then prematurely close a topic? cliffsteinman -- Discuss 20:56, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Cliffsteinman: "Close" is currently equivalent to {{Collapse_top}} or {{Hidden archive top}} (aka "hat").
We'll probably need to add an option for an unclosed-variant, equivalent to {{Closed}}, or {{Archive top}}, or pt:Predefinição:Respondido. (etc. There are many existing variants in enwiki, most of which just have slightly different styling, and default messages. Eg. {{Discussion_top}} and {{Poll_top}}.)
(Or, change the default "Close" to be uncollapsed, and make a new variant that collapses. I've suggested this and they'll be looking at it soon).
Go ahead and experiment. We can only see buttons for actions that we're technically-enabled to use, so admins already see extra links for "delete", and oversighters already see extra links for "suppress". Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 00:34, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Right on! Good work so far, I'm curious to see this test page continue, mainly for dedents/outdents. Is it an automatic outdent at a certain number? cliffsteinman -- Discuss 02:04, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Cliffsteinman: Currently the indenting is limited to 3 levels. Eg, if you click "reply" to my post above, it will be at the 3rd level.
The rationale for that current setting, is explained at mw:Flow/FAQ#Why is there limited indenting/threading of comments?, but as the top row in the table at mw:Flow/FAQ#Components of the discussion system notes, that is an experimental setting. HTH. :) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 19:19, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

WonderingEdit

I'm not sure if someone already asked this (part 2), which brought me to part 1, searchable? I wanted to know if anyone mentioned archive pages for these or if the page will continue on. Also, does this module remove my ~~~~? I'm very used to signing all comments. cliffsteinman -- Discuss 20:54, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Cliffsteinman: Search within a Flow board is an upcoming feature. A Flow board is a window into the set of topics created on that board, so the conventional notion of archive pages doesn't apply. You don't need to sign posts; Flow uses mw:Parsoid to transform wikitext and Parsoid doesn't render ~~~~ SPage (WMF) (talk) 19:58, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

I am also wondering how flow works. :) 92.224.249.122 (talk) 14:51, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

testes. testes. 1. 2. 3???!Edit

Error: no text specified (help).

Hmm.. in Firefox seems to be constrained to only two-thirds of the screen.. the whole right side of the page is blank.. zooming in and out doesn't make any difference.. why? why??! whyyyyyy œ 06:23, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

OlEnglish: indeed œ 06:24, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
OlEnglish: i like the threading and autosigning.. what about templates like To OlEnglish: testes testes œ 06:27, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
To OlEnglish: using Template:To in this reply œ 06:28, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
To Example: example man hey œ 06:29, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
OlEnglish: This is in Chrome too. It seems deliberate. In the stylesheet (from some weird load.php URL), it is declaring:
.flow-board-header, .flow-board {
width: 100%;
max-width: 915px;
}
My guess is they don't want full width discussions, because it's hard to read very wide paragraphs (your eyes have to move more). --Rpresser 11:11, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Rpresser: or maybe they're planning on filling that side of the screen with ads! <gasp> œ 14:43, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

HovercardsEdit

In the Topic history and/or the main history, with Hovercards enabled in Preferences, hovering over the "Topic" link still brings up the [w:Topic Topic] disambig page.. probably shouldn't be doing that huh œ 06:41, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

OlEnglish: bugzilla:63181 should solve this. (Hovercards will only be active for links to the content namespace(s).)
Relatedly, getting Flow to work with Navpopups is bugzilla:63713. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 21:01, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
OlEnglish: Now hovering over Thank or Permalink in the topic or post action menu bring up the enwiki hovercard for Gratitude, Topic, and Post respectively. Fun times :-)
@Quiddity (WMF): Hovercards currently considers the title attribute of the link, relying on the MW linker's behavior of prepending the namespace in the title. Flow's action links have title attributes "Post", "Thank", etc. so they look like pages in the main namespace, so bug 63181http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=63181 won't help. Hovercards needs to examine the href of the link instead of its title to determine if it's a simple link to an article, which is bug 67466http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=67466.
Meanwhile Flow isn't helping by mindlessly repeating the text of each action in its title attribute. Actions should have proper title tooltips that provide additional information or none at all, bug 69213http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=69213. SPage (WMF) (talk) 02:49, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

SnickerdoodlesEdit

I'm into snickerdoodles. Don't make too much of this thread. I'm making some tests for development purposes. However, feel free to chime in if you like snickerdoodles too. :-) —cyberpowerChat:Offline 15:31, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Cyberpower678: Test 87.60.145.167 (talk) 16:50, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
87.60.145.167: Test 87.60.145.167 (talk) 16:50, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

I like them too and am totally not Cyberpower678 posting this. :p —cyberpowerChat:Offline 15:34, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

I don't much care for snickerdoodles. 71.168.140.56 (talk) 11:02, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

List of countries by populationEdit

This should be renamed because: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 08:49, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

interesting 84.112.229.107 (talk) 19:13, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Example discussion titleEdit

Just testing out flow as I'm a big user of the talk-pages on my local wiki and I want to see what the new experience is like. 87.60.145.167 (talk) 16:49, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

87.60.145.167: Indent test 87.60.145.167 (talk) 16:54, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
87.60.145.167: Double indent test 87.60.145.167 (talk) 16:54, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
87.60.145.167: Triple indent test 87.60.145.167 (talk) 16:54, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
4 Сунприат (talk) 13:31, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
test — xaosflux Talk 18
50, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Test caching with new postEdit

Does bug 69987http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=69987 happen here? SPage (WMF) (talk) 20:09, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

It seems to be less of a problem here than on Beta labs. SPage (WMF) (talk) 21:44, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

i like itEdit

great idea! 84.112.229.107 (talk) 19:19, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

agree 84.112.229.107 (talk) 19:19, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

oui 84.112.229.107 (talk) 19:20, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

test Orlodrim (talk) 21:23, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

test2 Orlodrim (talk) 21:24, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

remove some text textEdit

(Topic title edited by wdwd (talk), Fram (talk))

Yaddayaddayadda Fram (talk) 19:49, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

test wdwd (talk) 13:38, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

lets try break somethingEdit

lets try break something

So what does bad wikitext do in the title and body? JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 21:20, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Interesting: the broken wikitext did nothing but a working [red] link doesn't work in the title, after editing JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 21:22, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Can any vandal that feels like it still break loads of stuff in one go?Edit

(Topic title edited by Doug Weller talk, Fram (talk))

File:Test.jpg

This image name or media file name is protected.

When uploading files to Wikipedia, please use a file name that describes the content of the image or media file you're uploading and is sufficiently distinctive that no-one else is likely to pick the same name by accident.

Examples of good file names:

  "City of London skyline from London City Hall - Oct 2008.jpg"
  "KDE Kicker config screenshot.png"
  "1863 Meeting of Settlers and Maoris at Hawke's Bay, New Zealand.jpg"
  "Polyhedron with no vertex visible from center.png"

Examples of bad file names:

  "Image01.png"
  "Joe.jpg"
  "DSC00001.JPG"
  "30996951316264l.jpg"

For more information, please see Wikipedia:Image file names. If you have a good reason for uploading a file with this name, or if you receive this message when attempting to upload a new version of an existing file, please let us know at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. Be sure to specify the exact name of the file you are trying to upload. Thank you.

[[Category:Wikipedia image placeholders for image namespace]] Fram (talk) 09:03, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Fram: File:Test2.jpg Fram (talk) 09:04, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
Fram: I also got an ECHO notification. Same thing happened about a week ago. No idea why. Jayron32 00:22, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
Fram: I got an Echo notification for this, somehow, if it means something to you.  · Salvidrim! ·  15:04, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
Fram: I also noticed that my Echo is now split between "Activity" and "Messages", the latter of which include these Flow notifications.  · Salvidrim! ·  02:28, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
Fram: I received another as well. I'm guessing the answer to your question then is yes. :p Mike VTalk 23:43, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Please stop testing with "live" content that links real usernames. Lots of us are getting tired of receiving bogus notifications of being mentioned in discussions when you're just doing tests that should have been done with lorem content.  — SMcCandlish ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ʌ≼  18:44, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

SMcCandlish: To stop receiving notifications, you can deselect the green star at the top of the thread. Mike VTalk 19:43, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
Mike V: That's not the point. It amounts to "you can sleep peacefully again and not be woken by the sound of my garage band practicing at 3am if you wear ear plugs". And I may actually want to receive notifications if someone mentioned me on purpose, as you did yourself; if I'd already de-selected the silly green star, I would not have known you'd legitimately replied to me. The point is: Don't use test data that kicks other people in the teeth for no reason. It's no different from using my actual real e-mail address as test input in some form you're working on at your website. NB: I've already had a number of people use the "Thank" function in response to my earlier post on this matter, so don't take it from me alone. PS: The history of this page demonstrate quite a number of similar complaints already.  — SMcCandlish ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ʌ≼  20:35, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Testing a few things...Edit

Suspendisse malesuada felis at libero sodales fermentum. Nunc cursus ut libero ac placerat. Proin vulputate leo sed tortor commodo, et tempor lorem auctor. In laoreet turpis enim, sed rutrum enim placerat ac. Suspendisse vitae lectus dapibus, sodales massa at, porttitor arcu. Morbi ullamcorper id mi et ultrices. Sed cursus metus et enim tincidunt eleifend. Suspendisse accumsan sapien eget gravida interdum. Duis at tortor quis lacus pretium mollis id non urna. Aliquam euismod mattis molestie. Maecenas mi mauris, pretium a eros a, vulputate suscipit nunc. Nulla facilisi. Suspendisse laoreet nisi mauris, in efficitur nulla hendrerit vitae. Pellentesque tristique semper augue, et venenatis eros vestibulum a. Morbi a magna sit amet velit venenatis maximus.

WhathappensifIwriteonecontinuoussentencewithoutspacesIwonderifitwillcausethecontainertostretchorifthetextwillbehiddenorifitwillbewrappped. - MrX 18:07, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

This looks very strange. If I click on the image, I end up on Wikipedia talk:Flow/File:John William Waterhouse - Pandora, 1896.jpg, not File:John William Waterhouse - Pandora, 1896.jpg. The file is not indicated as used and doesn't show up in Special:WhatLinksHere, neither under the correct name nor under the "Wikipedia talk" name. This is probably likely to cause trouble, such as files violating WP:NFCC#9 for ages or files being deleted as "unused" although they in fact are in use. Stefan2 (talk) 16:43, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Arbitrary breakEdit

This is what I think. MrExternal 18:55, 30 August 2014 (UTC)


Excessive notificationsEdit

Testing 1.24wmf19 SPage (WMF) (talk) 23:05, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

I got notified about this, as a message (in the popup next to my username). Not obvious why. The page is on my Watchlist so I should see activity on that. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 23:21, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

I was notified also. WTH? Doug Weller talk 09:38, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Gee thanks. Now I am permanently notified, and even after un-watching this page, I am still permanently notified. Please make the notification go away. ~~~~ wbm1058 (talk) 11:51, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Hm. There was a filled star at the top of the topic. Clicking on it made it unfilled, much like the page watchlist icon. So maybe that's how/why notifications are happening, a new thread-based notification mechanism. Apologies to anyone who gets a message from this reply but if I'm right it's at least possible to stop them.

Why they started? Did someone manually add people, or is it automatic if you're also watching the page? If the latter which seems most likely it's unnecessary as the Watchlist already does that job (if imperfectly for Flow pages). JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 12:01, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Bah. It's now filled again. Replying to a thread adds me to the notification-based watchlist for that individual thread? No thanks. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 12:02, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Oh, I see There was another notification waiting for me at Module_talk:Redirect_hatnote#Request_a_new_tracking_category because I was pinged there. But that was not showing in my new notifications. I had to open "All notifications" to see it! Then the red 1 in the box finally went away. wbm1058 (talk) 12:09, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

And yea, just replying here **automatically** activates the green star? Hmmm, I'll have to chew on whether that default is actually desirable. ~~~~ wbm1058 (talk) 12:11, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

I got an email. I don't want to get an email, every time a topic gets created. Please kill this function with fire. —cyberpowerChat:Offline 12:30, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

The short-term solution is to either unwatch this page, or to toggle your settings at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-echo.

For next week, the devs are working on a few related bugs, particularly better bundling of topics, and bugzilla:70461 (not opening the right section of the flyout, when we just have non-Flow notifications).

Longer-term we'll probably want more options (possibly quite a few more options?), to account for the various types of people who do want notifications for discussion updates (or certain ones), as well as people who don't. There are a few threads at WT:Flow discussing this currently. But it'll inevitably take many months to hammer out details.

HTH. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 21:48, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Quiddity (WMF): I found a flow notification toggle that had me opted in to echoes, and emails. If you ask me, that shouldn't be toggled on by default, but at least I can turn it off. :-) —cyberpowerChat:Offline 23:47, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
Quiddity (WMF): "But it'll inevitably take many months to hammer out details." Logical. Feel free to ask the community if there is consensus to reintroduce this at enwiki after these months. Until then, keep it at mediawiki and test it out there, not in a life environment where it is only a very annoying distraction which has wasted lots of time for many people. Fram (talk) 06:55, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
According to what I've been told: Due to the way the wikitech:Deployment works - a rolling weekly update, for all the wikis - and due to the fact that bug-fixes need to keep coming in - for all the related/interconnected extensions, core, and databases - it is immensely (impractically) difficult to have separate branches of the software at just Enwiki. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 23:55, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
Doesn't bother me too much. The many people are people who have posted here, in effect volunteering as testers. This has meant problems in the past that have gone outside of this page: when template output appeared in History/Watchlist listings, including a 250px high   Not done cross. It's pre-alpha software and so will have serious bugs. If this sort of thing bothers you too much you can always unwatch this page. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 00:20, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
Hmm, when I use "reply", your name doesn't appear at the start. Bug? Anyway, many people who have never edited a Flow page have been bugged by this, the notifications and so on, because they have been mentioned on a page transcluded (not substituted!) to a Flow test page. This issue affects not only people volunteering to test, but everyone.
But of course, if you only keep the enthusiastic people as testers, then you'll only get positive feedback. Fram (talk) 04:36, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
The auto-inserted username was removed because it was superfluous and distracting. (I've got a longer reply re: how it impacts threading, but I'll put that elsewhere.) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 19:18, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. It was superfluous and distracting, as long as you got proper indentation or placement of replies or quoting, or anything that indicates what you are replying to. In this case, I'm replying to the post right above me, but that's obviously not always the case. Fram (talk) 06:32, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

@JohnBlackburne. Calling this crap "pre-alpha software" is like calling a scratched Edison cylinder "pre-digital audio." Carrite (talk) 23:28, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

But such is pre-digital, as are many things. Pre-alpha was meant to imply it's too early to expect anything to be working properly or fully; it's still missing major areas of functionality, many things simply don't work, other things such as the layout will probably be completely redone. You don't expect everything working in an alpha release but it's got to work something like the finished product. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 00:28, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
And another bug. Replying above, and again here, the edit box is only one line high. As I type now everything is scrolling off the left edge so I can only see a dozen or so words at once. If I insert text it pushes text off the right. I would try inserting manual line breaks except when i hit return it submits. So no multi-paragraph entries now.
Not a problem when I edit: now I can hit return and get line breaks, and so start another paragraph, though the box is far too small relative to e.g. the edit window on normal pages, maybe 1/4 the size with text twice as big so I can see only 1/8 as much, if that, text, and I can only see one paragraph at once. Yes I can grow it but the control is non-obvious and many editors will miss it being used to edit fields in web pages being fixed sized. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 00:32, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
This is a new (and serious) bug in Topic mode (where I can no longer reply at all), but (for me) not in page (board, whatever) mode. Of course, Flow is completely build around the topic mode, so not a good situation.
On the other hand, you claim that you can grow the edit window. I know that that option existed at the beginning of Flow, but as fas as I know it has long been discarded, I certainly can't find it. Now you get this fixed window, and that's it. I don't even get a scrollbar when my text is longer than this window... Fram (talk) 13:15, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
The ability to grow the edit window may be one my browser (Safari) adds to multi-line edit boxes; I seem to remember it being a feature. Not available now though as this is again a single line scrolling to the left like a ticker-tape so I can see only a dozen words at a time. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 13:27, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
That's in topic mode, I guess? The one you reach when you follow the Echo notification? yeah, I simply can't use that at the moment, can't push the "reply" button since it isn't even visible :-D Probably a simple enough bug to fix, but should be a wake-up call that further roll-out, e;g. to user or article talk pages, should really be shelved for the time being. Fram (talk) 13:30, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
And for some reason your post here remains on my watchlist, which normally only shows the last post to any page, and despite my post being clearly more recent... " There's something happening here, what it is ain't exactly clear..." Fram (talk) 13:35, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Test reply - Test edit
Posting a reply pops browser warning of "leaving page" — xaosflux Talk 16:09, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Stop, editors, look around, Flow is going down wbm1058 (talk) 16:19, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
OK now I can't reply to individual posts: click on the 'Reply' underneath either of the above posts and nothing happens (or more precisely the page refreshes but nothing changes). So I can only type in the ticker-tape edit box here. So no proper threading despite it working earlier. If it's a limit on indentation it's a ridiculous one, caused perhaps by the much too wide margins to the left of indented blocks. And yes, hitting 'return' to submit also gives me a warning about leaving the page, though it does submit. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 16:37, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
test — xaosflux Talk 22:26, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
test — xaosflux Talk 22:26, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, there's a bug that's affecting topic pages -- the JS isn't working properly. It's working correctly on the board pages, so you can reply as usual. Sorry about the bug. We're getting a fix out as soon as we can. DannyH (WMF) (talk) 17:57, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

test — xaosflux Talk 22:26, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Okay, this is fixed now. Topic pages are functional again. Sorry that it happened. DannyH (WMF) (talk) 23:06, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Giving it another a tryEdit

Xyz Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 14:55, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

FFS. Please kill the notifications. —cyberpowerChat:Offline 14:56, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Cyberpower, I can't help you with that. Try asking at Wikipedia talk:Flow. Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 15:07, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
The short-term solution is to either unwatch this page, or to toggle your settings at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-echo.
For next week, the devs are working on a few related bugs, particularly better bundling of topics, and bugzilla:70461 (not opening the right section of the flyout, when we just have non-Flow notifications).
Longer-term we'll probably want more options (possibly quite a few more options?), to account for the various types of people who do want notifications for discussion updates (or certain ones), as well as people who don't. There are a few threads at WT:Flow discussing this currently. But it'll inevitably take many months to hammer out details.
HTH. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 21:44, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
Quiddity (WMF): Any reason why you don't just revert the Flow - Echo changes instead of tinkering in the margin? Remove the "messages" completely, take your months (or years) to hammer out the details, and until then let Flow Echo work like any other talk page does at the moment. What you (WMF) have implemented with the Flow Echo is almost universally condemned in all reactions I have seen, and no tweaks wil solve this. Get rid of it, try again at mediawiki, and only roll it out to here after you have consensus here. Fram (talk) 10:37, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Test topicEdit

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 22:51, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Quiddity (WMF): test Quiddity II (talk) 22:52, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
User:DannyH (WMF) test Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 16:50, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
Bananatest: test Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 19:12, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
User:DannyH (WMF) test2 Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 16:55, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

(copied from Wikipedia:Extended_image_syntax#New syntax for images)

 
The Palace of Westminster

The new syntax is backward compatible, so articles don't have to be changed. In the syntax [[File:filename|options]] (e.g., [[File:Westminstpalace.jpg|thumb|100px|left|alt=A large clock tower and other buildings line a great river.|The Palace of Westminster]] shown in the left), several options can be set when including an image. Those affect the placing of the image, its size or the way the image will be presented. The options are right, left, center, none, sizepx, thumbnail (thumb), frame, and alternate (caption) text.

 
From the Thames
  • The options can be combined, and vertical bars ("|") are used to separate options from each other.
  • Do not put spaces around the vertical bars for readability – options will not be interpreted correctly.
  • The options can be put in any order.
  • An unknown option is taken as the caption text, but this will appear only if thumbnail or frame are specified.
  • If there are two or more unknown options, the last one upstages the rest: [[File:Westminstpalace.jpg|thumb|alt=A large clock tower and other buildings line a great river.|The Palace of Westminster|200px|right|From the Thames]] (shown on the right).
    Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 23:04, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello all you Quiddities. DannyH (WMF) (talk) 23:05, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Testing. 123. Biblio (talk) Reform project. 19:46, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

  1. Baffle gab1978 (talk) 06:14, 28 December 2014 (UTC)



RESOLVED
The testpage has been found and is marked for deletion. Ad Huikeshoven (talk) 21:20, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Where is the Teahouse testpage or the Co-op page?Edit

I would like to see Flow enabled for Teahouse - where can I see it? Ad Huikeshoven (talk) 19:18, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

It will be here for some time: Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Flow_test Ad Huikeshoven (talk) 21:41, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Apart from editing some biographies of WMF people, you hardly ever edit here (you have 18 mainspace edits in total!). You haven't edited the Teahouse in over a year. What is your sudden interest in this? It is very strange that the only one advocating to have this page is someone with WMF ties but with virtually no reason to be interested in or participating at enwiki and its Teahouse. Fram (talk) 08:11, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Fram: Thanks for asking. This is my real name account. I switched from nick to real name when I became board member of Wikimedia Nederland, which happens to be legally independent of the Wikimedia Foundation. What you Fram and I share is that we both happen to share space provided by the Wikimedia Foundation. So you have as much ties to the Wikimedia Foundation as I do.
A year ago I thought about setting up a Teahouse on the Dutch Wikipedia. Before starting the project I participated a while in the Teahouse to get a feel what is for real.
I have seen prototypes of Flow in the summer of 2013, and seen the presentation by Jorm at Wikimania Hong Kong. The prototypes a year ago were really ugly. The version of Flow you are now interacting with me here works as designed. You can stat topics and reply to them easily. A year ago I imagined Flow to be a perfect fit for the Teahouse. For novice users it is quite awkward to ask them to enter ~~~~ to sign a message. Signing is automatic in Flow.
Some projects on enwiki have asked to enable Flow on their talk pages, and have Flow enabled. To me it is rather strange this new room in the Teahouse is on Articles for Deletion. Maybe it could have a better name. Maybe a move or rename is possible. I frankly don't understand the protest against allowing Teahouse experiment in a new room.
So I do have very good reasons to participate both at enwiki and its Teahouse. As an experienced users you are supposed to be welcoming new users. So Fram: welcome to the Teahouse, welcome to enwiki, welcome to Flow. Ad Huikeshoven (talk) 20:41, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
Ad Huikeshoven: Actually, one nearly dormant project asked to have it, and one project largely run by a WMF employee. No really active or independent project wants this.
The Teahouse however was asked about this, and soundly rejected it. If the WMF then enables a page a few months later, without prior discussion and only mentioning it after the fact, then it shouldn't come as a surprise that they get a backlash.
Nothing in your post indicates though your "very good reasons to participate both at enwiki and its Teahouse".
And please keep your welcomes to yourself, you are making a fool of yourself. Not only here, at other Flow discussions as well. Are you trolling or simply completely lacking the necessary competence to edit here? Both are worrying for a Wikimedia board member... Fram (talk) 20:48, 9 September 2014 (UTC)



The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


I got a notification - but its gone?Edit

I got a notification "I hate flow created a new topic on Wikipedia talk:Flow/Developer test page" ten minutes ago - but where is the post? (When I try to hit it, I get "Insufficient permission to access the content. Return to Main Page. [e2f632bb] 2014-09-10 10:33:31: Fatal exception of type Flow\Exception\PermissionException"

Deleted? I think its really really bad if posts are just gone without normal users can see its gone (if I didnt had the notification I wouldnt know about it).

[edit] ~~~~ I didnt add nowiki - hmm it mess with my post Christian75 (talk) 10:35, 10 September 2014 (UTC) Christian75 (talk) 10:36, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

yes, the topic was deleted. Normally, I would have used rollback, but that option doesn't exist for Flow discussions. Fram (talk) 14:45, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

test topicEdit

just making sure DannyH (WMF) (talk) 16:41, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

answer DannyH (WMF) (talk) 17:02, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Feel free to join WT:Flow when you have a minute to spare, there are some minor issues there that might interest you, like the utter failure of Flow. Fram (talk) 17:32, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Your link WT:Flow doesn't work, though it works in the search box. No idea if you piped it and made a mistake, Flow's inability to see the wiki source of other editors' posts stopped me looking.
OK, it doesn't work for me either. It works in preview but when I save something very odd happens to it. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 23:36, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
Doesn't seem to interest the Product Manager that his product doesn't work though. One should think that that would be the first line in his job description... Fram (talk) 04:32, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
That's bugzilla:70589 Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 20:20, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

  DannyH (WMF) (talk) 20:41, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Header / historyEdit

I just came here by clicking on the notification about new topics in the Echo flyout, and that did mark the message as read and reset the counter. Should the header here be updated, or do other people still have that problem? Btw:

  • Is there a way to see the header's history?
  • The link above to "main history" leads nowhere.
  • The usual "history" tab on this page is not a link.
  • The "project page" tab neither.
  • When finding the board history on foot, that page has a working "talk" tab, but a dysfunctional "project page" tab.

— HHHIPPO — HHHIPPO 19:37, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

What skin are you using? We have a known issue where the watchlist star interferes with other elements at the top of the page. The links and tabs work for me in Vector.
The header history should be part of the board history, which is in accessible from the normal History tab and is the usual ?action=history. I fixed the bad link to "main history" in the Flow board header, and my edit appears in the history, so perhaps that comment is obsolete.
Thanks for trying Flow. SPage (WMF) (talk) 23:25, 10 September 2014 (UTC) (Edited by Fram (talk))
I'm using MonoBook, should have mentioned that. I think the tabs are a known issue there. Yes, the watchlist star's positioning can be problematic, too. Plus, it's just a green star, no sign that it's a link or a button, and why green? But I guess that's a design decision.
Yes, found the header history entries in the board history. At some point it would be nice to have, as an alternative to the full board history, histories per topic, and one for only the header. And also prev/next links in the diff view. But that's really not urgent now.
About my original comment: I tried again, and "new topic" notifications get marked as read if you click them, but not if you visit the new topic or the board by other means. Maybe that's what the header means by "they don't get automatically marked as read". I'm not sure they should though. — HHHIPPO 06:42, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
We do already have per-topic history pages, eg this topic. :) The link is in the topic's action-menu.
A just-header-history section is planned, as well as the needed prev/next links in the diff view.
Yup, the monobook tab issue is getting fixed right now, by removing the custom watchlist-star.
I've updated the header message with a more complete explanation of the 3 ways to mark a flow-notification as read. (Note that just visiting the board will not mark anything as read, because they don't want to accidentally mark something that you merely scrolled-past as being read.) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 20:15, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
Great, thanks. About clearing the notifications: Do alerts really get cleared now just by viewing the flyout? Is that a good idea? I feel another OBOD discussion coming up... — HHHIPPO 20:59, 11 September 2014 (UTC) (Edited by Fram (talk))
Hmm, I got a notification about a new topic, so I purposely went to the page via another notification, so viewing another topic: counter still at "1". Then I went up to the board using the breadcrumbs, and that marked the notification as read, even though I didn't explicitly visit the new topic.
I'm not sure what would be the optimal behaviour, just letting you know that what you describe and what I see is not exactly the same. — HHHIPPO 06:37, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
Hmm, I had a notification about "User created a new topic". Viewing the board didn't mark it as read. Visiting the topic alone did mark it as read and the Echo badge counter decremented. So it works for me.
If you want to troubleshoot further, right-click > Copy Link Location of the URLs you're visiting. Also, on each page click the Echo [NN] badge to display the flyout, because a) its two counts in parentheses are rebuilt on the fly so may be more accurate than cached page state; and b) we're trying to track down situations where the JavaScript fails to run and the flyout doesn't appear.
Thanks for trying it out. SPage (WMF) (talk) 00:51, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
I just tried it with a new topic over at mediawiki.org, and there the 'marking as read' worked as you describe. So either I was mistaken about my observation here, or it's due to the newer version there. Either way, probably nothing to worry about.
What I noticed again is that on mw, but not on enwiki, when viewing a single topic, clicking the echo counter skips the flyout and directly goes to Special:Notifications. (FF 32.0, same for MonoBook and Vector). A new bug coming to enwiki soon? ;-)
At the time of these tests the Flow versions were
  • MW: – (0e560b8) 01:41, 13 September 2014
  • EN: – (d88dfb6) 01:37, 13 September 2014
Oh, and wouldn't it be nice to be able to see the preview and the edit box at the same time? — HHHIPPO 20:32, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
FWIW: I managed to reproduce the behaviour described above on enwiki:
  • got 1 new notification, flyout says 1 message, 0 alerts, the new message is about a new topic on WT:Flow/Developer test page
  • Visited a couple of non-Flow pages, no change.
  • Visited another topic on the same board: no change
  • Went to the board via the breadcrumbs on the topic view: notification counter reset, flyout changed to all read.
But as I said above, it's working as intended on MW, so it will probably work here tomorrow. — HHHIPPO 20:37, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
Re: "able to see the preview and the edit box at the same time?" - that's filed at bugzilla:67258 Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 18:56, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

User talk opt-inEdit

Can I opt in my user talk page to Flow? Perhaps you should allow any user to do this. I work with new editors quite a lot and making conversations easier would help a lot with this. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 01:58, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Not currently, but that is a potential method that has been considered for the future. There are quite a few features to add, and bugs to fix, before anything on that scale is practical.
Thanks for seeing the possibilities :) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 20:30, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Location of the watchlist buttonEdit

I notice that the watchlist star for a flow talk page is not next to the edit tabs like on other pages. Shouldn't it be up there like any other page? Oiyarbepsy (talk) 02:03, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

That experiment is in the process of being undone, as it was causing more difficulties than it was originally intended to solve. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 20:05, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

TestEdit

{{User admin}} {{User Alternate Acct Name|EngFram}}


WP:HONESTEdit

"I am not, ocntrary [sic] to the false headline, engaged in any search." ( "Jimmy Wales" in a comment to the ITpro article[3])

In reality though:

"I looked for a couple of variant spellings and found nothing, so I asked to see if others could find anything." (a post by User:Jimbo Wales [4] on his talk page, after he had been warned about the potential of violating outing in that thread)

Still, in his own opinion (On Slashdot), "My actions at Wikipedia around this were perfectly honorable and noble and did not violate any rules of any kind." YMMV...

Like the Signpost said: "According to Der Spiegel, Wales told them it was the community that had asked questions about Snowden's activities on Wikipedia, while he himself had warned against an outing – a statement that seems hard to reconcile with the discussions that took place on his talk page and at the administrators' noticeboard."

Honesty can be fun as well thoughEdit

From an article I recently edited; "Getting to [...] is very easy. One can hire a taxi, mini bus, auto rickshaw or a metro taxi from anywhere in the city to reach there." Well duh :-D Fram (talk) 06:42, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

dagfagreah Oiyarbepsy (talk) 14:12, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

It's roughly 40% of the way across the top (tab) level of the screen for me, outside the "page box". I had Twinkle turned on and it overlapped the twinkle tabs, and remains in the same place now that I have turned twinkle off. An inflexibly located symbol is not an appropriate replacement for watch/unwatch tab. First off, the default should always be words, with the option of going to symbols (haven't we learned that from VE?). Secondly the fact that it doesn't move depending on what other tabs exist is always a problem; it needs to interact appropriately with other tabs. Where's my delete button? It needs to be there. Risker (talk) 15:35, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Ummm...so I edited the message above. and weirdly, the "Edited xx seconds ago" went to a negative number. That should never happen, should it? Risker (talk) 15:38, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

@Risker: I think you wanted to reply to a different topic, "location of the watchlist button". Did you reply here on purpose, or wasn't it clear where to respond, or did you in fact respond there and has Flow somehow mixed up your post or its location? It's rather confusing. And, of course, in Flow, no helpful editor can move your post to the right discussion in any possible way :-D Fram (talk) 18:17, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Wow, you're right, Fram. When I typed the original response out, that is where I thought I was putting it, but I was doing so from the "whole" page... Risker (talk) 03:07, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Header editing and edit summariesEdit

(Topic title edited by Swarm , Oiyarbepsy (talk))

I just tested editing the header and noticed that there doesn't seem to be a way to enter edit summaries. This seems like a necessary thing to me. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 14:29, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

I agree. It's frustrating that you can't. Origamite 16:55, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Twinkle and speedy deletesEdit

Interesting - I just told Twinkle to nominate this for speedy delete (no serious, just testing), and nothing's here. Twinkle, however, didn't seem to notice that it didn't work. I apologize to the WMF employee who might have gotten the warning. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 21:52, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Actually it did work. You just can't see it. Believe it or not, if my understanding of Flow is correct, there is wikicode here, but Flow is covering all of it up. —cyberpowerChat:Offline 02:40, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Are you sure? I looked at the page info and it didn't list any speedy-delete related templates as being on the page - it's not listing categories either. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 03:09, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
It's not in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion either Oiyarbepsy (talk) 03:11, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
As flow was still earlier in it's development, this board was placed over a page with wikitext in it. I decided out of curiousity to attempt to move that page, and I ended up moving the wikitext instead of the flow board. Now it's not possible to move any of it, but back then it still worked, so my logic is, the page exists with the tag in it, but flow is covering it up. —cyberpowerChat:Offline 17:47, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
Where did you move it? Oiyarbepsy (talk) 18:29, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&action=view&type=move&page=Wikipedia_talk%3AFlow%2FDeveloper_test_pagecyberpowerChat:Offline 01:04, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
Oh I see - this isn't the on with the speedy notice. So, if I move this, will the speedy delete notice appear on the resulting page? Oiyarbepsy (talk) 04:05, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
You can't move it now, because it seems a technical restriction has been added disallowing page moves with flow boards on it. But the move lot I linked you to, was when this board was active and the restriction was not. —cyberpowerChat:Offline 04:39, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
Hmm, yes, that's not good, no idea why they added that restriction. Move didn't work anyway, but now it's even worse. They should have made it that you can't move pages with a flow page attached to it, then at least the page and talk page stay together. Now, I have moved the page, the talk page archives, but not this Flow page, but I only got that information after the move was done. No idea what they were thinking, when the actual work should happen in the opposite direction, i.e. Flow pages must be movable just like other pages. Fram (talk) 07:45, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Just a testEdit

Just a test Oiyarbepsy (talk) 14:38, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Getting pinged automatically is awesome, isn't it? Carrite (talk) 23:14, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

It's quite nice. I know when someone responded to me and they know that I responded to them without having to use that stupid template. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 05:28, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Burn with fire (aka O. proves my point and I get three pings and can't reply after 3 levels)Edit

This software is non-intuitive garbage, plain and simple. If it is meant to simplify the talk page process for newcomers it fails. If it is meant to organize and archive serious discussions for veteran volunteers, it fails miserably. ~~~~ Carrite (talk) 06:06, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Well, I didn't have to click edit, find your post a second time, and then count colons. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 14:23, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
And I would say clicking "reply" is a lot more intuitive than clicking "edit section", scrolling thru wikitext, placing colons, tying a response, and then typing four tildes. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 22:36, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
Bug report - Quiddity just thanked me for something in this thread, but I don't know what post they thanked me for. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 23:00, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
The missing highlights are now fixed (it was bugzilla:71059). Thanks. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 21:04, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
I'm not sure how I proved your point. And BTW, limiting to three indents is good, it keep discussions on topic. Compare to this where the discussion meanders all over the damn place. Since the discussion should be about good arguments, it shouldn't matter who you're responding to anyway. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 05:31, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
I get that you like short, simple discussions, no matter how complex the question or problem. I don't get why you believe that such short, simple discussions are any use in solving such complex questions or problems though. Or how having only three indent levels is supposed to keep discussions on topic. I don't see a difference in the quality of the discussions at the few Flow pages so far, only a difference in readability, which is comparable for very short discussions but fast deteriorates in Flow for longer or more complex discussions.
And while it doesn't matter who you are responding to, it does matter what post you are responding to, which is often impossible to see in Flow. Fram (talk) 13:10, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Don't strawman me. There is a huge difference between a simple discussion and a readable one. We can have complex discussions like we do here and have them be a lot more readable than they are now. The indentation is part of why complex discussions are so hard to read. Indicating the post can be easily done by doing this, something currently impossible to do.
Besides, my understanding is that changing the number of indent levels is a trivial thing, and could possibly be done at the wiki level. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 14:14, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
And apparently splitting topics isn't supported yet, otherwise I would have done that. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 14:15, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
It can be easily done, and then you link to a topic, not a post :-D Section links are just as easy, and are readable by humans. Your link goes to Topic:qjndfjhjqffn or whatever, I don't get either the page or the topic it is about. By the way, this is not a reply to your last post but the one above, but the 'reply" button puts it here. I can add a permalink [5], but it seems that that one doesn't indicate what post I'm referring to either, so I have no idea what use that permalink is supposed to have. I can use [6] but getting there is not easier than getting the right diff by far...
Apart from all that technical stuff that doesn't work, what strawman? It is clear that you want discussions to be short, you have just said that you would have split this discussion if it had been technically possible. So what was exactly the strawman argument I am supposed to have used? Or don't you believe that talk page discussions can ever solve complex problems? That would explain a lot, but I guess it isn't the right explanation. Fram (talk) 14:26, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
As far as the technical stuff, I believe this covers at least part of it, so I also would like them to change it.
The strawman was that you said I wanted short, simple discussions. No - I want on-topic discussions. It's easy for discussions to go off-topic enough that they belong in another section but still on-topic enough that they shouldn't be hidden from the page. Infinite indenting makes the problem worse by letting people do this instead of forcing them to start a new topic like they should. FWIW, I also sometimes create new section headings for portions of wikitalk discussions, too, and it's the same idea. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 14:33, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
A new section is still in the same topic, easy to see and digest. Different topics will get spread over the page, making it much harder to see the relations between them. And will cause less trouble with "I split this off' "no, it belongs with the previous topic" edit wars. Fram (talk) 14:39, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
I don't see how restricting the number of indentation levels is forcing people to stay on topic, or to split off new topics. People just stay on the third level and stop caring about the actual structure. In the worst case they'll get used to not caring about the structure from the beginning. They just add a comment at the end, just like you do in verbal discussions, which are intrinsically one-dimensional.
For a written discussion, and with a software that's just being built, we would in principle have the chance to do much better than just a linear string of comments, we're just lacking a brilliant idea on how to do it. More indentation levels would help, but it doesn't fell like the optimal solution either. — HHHIPPO 20:46, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
@Hhhippo I'd say we can give a chance at collapsing replies beyond the third level by default, with buttons for instant expanding the next level in full or all levels hanging from the current comment.
This is done at Slashdot and works reasonably well, although there you can set "important" messages to auto-show by default (based on the number of positive moderation received).
Also, based on my experience with LiquidThreads, there should be a way to get a diff of only those comments (with edit summaries!) that have been written/edited since the last visit, irregardless of where they're placed. Diego (talk) 09:22, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
About collapsing: yes, that would be great. As a first step, to be able to collapse on any level when reading. An then one could think of various additional features: remember what I collapsed, set default state by level or by editor's choice, uncollapse chains with new comments...
About diffs for unvisited changes: yes, either a diff, or having all new/changed comments marked with a colored bar, and a button 'jump to next unread'. That would be a killer feature, at least for people like me, who currently tend to read only the diffs for high-traffic pages, and try to imagine the rendered version. — HHHIPPO 18:55, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Adjustment might be needed to Topic linksEdit

In the last discussion I placed the link Topic:S2jtnhujc0f480sf#flow-post-s2mph1a7euzh0nus. I see a future issue with how this is done. I was also thinking of splitting off a portion of the topic, although this isn't supported yet. Anyways, if I had done that, it would have moved those posts into a new topic, and I suspect it would have broken that link. I think that each individual post needs a topic link and that #-sign links shouldn't be part of the linking system. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 14:22, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

The links are horribly broken at the moment. It's just good Web and UI design to have the interface, in this case the links, correspond to what they're linking to. If I link to a an article, a (normal) talk page, a section of either all that information is contained in the link in human readable form.
It also relates to Wikilinks. It's easy to turn a WP URL into a Wikilink, not much more work to do the reverse. It's impossible to do that with Flow links, unless you're happy to see a line of gobbledygook like appears in your text, which could link to anything (e.g. to a discussion on a page on a topic I find offensive). So they need to be piped which is much more work for the editor and for anyone trying to copy them (you can't just copy the text to quote the link for example). JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 14:46, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
I agree the URL should be readable and include the topic title, that doesn't preclude having also a unique ID; if the title changes or the post is moved to a different topic, Flow could still find the individual comment by ID. Diego (talk) 15:26, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
One example is how Amazon does it. It has both the item name so you know what's linked and a short ID, though long enough to allow for probably a billion unique IDs. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 16:44, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Diego, the downside to including the topic title is that either the link is wrong or broken if the topic title changes. An auto-redirect might be a solution. That said, you are absolutely right about a more human-readable link. I would think Topic:Title (#5) Post #12, where the numbers are only used if that title has been used before, and the numbers starts at 1 (not ab487597fe98752) Oiyarbepsy (talk) 17:26, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Olyarbepsy, that is a problem today on WP. Except it's a problem almost no-one is concerned about. For articles which are in theory permanent anchors can be used and links updated but talk page or other discussions which go out of date very quickly? Not so much.
I.e. this is a case where the solution is far worse than the problem. Instead of a few section links not working, but they take you to the page and you can probably work out or find the relevant section from what's after the hash, [b]all[/b] links are incomprehensible. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 18:39, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Actually, it is a problem on talk pages, and a major one. At least every month I encounter a link to a relevant discussion about something I'm reading that doesn't work because the discussion has been archived. This is not a case of being able to find the link on the page, but of searching through sometimes hundreds of archives, and the search box doesn't always work, and it never will always work.
Changing the topic links as I described above will fix the incomprehensible links problem, with auto-generated topic redirects for renames and topic splits. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 18:50, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Well it's not been a problem for me. I search through archives occasionally, but don't often find it necessary. For e.g. old discussions 'what links here' can help; searching old ANI discussions for a thread I or another editor contributed to. You can also link to a particular revision of a page, for a link that works permanently and reliably - archives can be modified and don't always reflect the contents of the original page accurately.
Perhaps that's what's needed here. Human readable titles and links, perhaps with short IDs to help the software find them when moved. And permanent persistent links to particular revisions, references to the particular revision in the page history, for when something more reliable is needed. Of course I've just described how it works now, which suggests Flow's approach is massive overkill, trying to solve a problem which isn't there for the majority of discussions. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 19:47, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
The thing about software is that you include the permalinks for the small number of pages that do need it and it doesn't harm the large number that don't. I suspect it isn't a lot of effort either, since the software probably has to generate post IDs anyway.
And you shouldn't have to dig into history for a task as basic as giving someone a link that works. History should be mostly for advanced users, never force that on new editors. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 19:50, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
There are plans to investigate how they can improve topic-links, both within the URL, and for internal links.
The ideal is something like what is suggested above, but with the addition of automagic piping/transformation upon save. E.g. Perhaps the text {{topic:S2mti8w8pww07s5t}} would save as [[topic:S2mti8w8pww07s5t|Adjustment might be needed to Topic links (on Wikipedia talk:Flow/Developer test page)]], or something similar?
There are notes at
Reddit does a similar thing to what is suggested above, e.g. these 3 links all go to exactly the same place:
However, Oiyarbepsy makes a good point, about how will this work for permalinks to Posts, once the feature for Topic merging/splitting is developed. I've noted that potential problem at https://trello.com/c/oJHPeRvq/9-split-topic for now. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 20:50, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Re: Links breaking when threads are archived, or titles are changed:
Currently, at Enwiki, one of the tasks of User:ClueBot III is "Fixing links to archived content", E.g. but afaik it only does it for sections that ClueBot III itself has archived.
We tend to not clarify or change titles in existing talkpage threads, for exactly that reason -- whereas we all feel totally free to clarify section titles within articles.
E.g. I often want to improve a badly written title in a VillagePump thread, so that more people might read it, but I don't for fear of breaking incoming links to a highly active discussion.
If I did it 'properly' -- searching for incoming links in all namespaces (and updating any I found), or adding an {{anchor}} tag with the old heading (with the hopes that it works properly for any non-ascii characters) -- that would turn a simple title-change into a multistep and potentially troublesome task. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 21:04, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Another attempt at replying in a ticker-tape box so excuse any errors. That 'properly' sounds like a job for a tool/gadget that would take care of renaming while leaving behind an anchor properly formatted including any non-ascii characters, much like Twinkle takes care of all of the (far more complex) steps when e.g. nominating for deletion. It could even be added to Twinkle, probably quite easily. That it's not happened (that I know of) suggests that it's not something people have considered a problem that needs fixing. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 21:22, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
You get a 'proper' edit box when viewing the board rather then only the topic. — HHHIPPO 21:28, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
But then I have to wade through all the threads to find the right one; with no index and thread titles being less than helpful it's harder than it should be. Besides the links on my watchlist bring me here. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 21:38, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Sure, it's a bug that needs to be fixed. I just wanted to point out the possibility, so you can pick your poison ;-) — HHHIPPO 21:56, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

I agree that the current solutions are not optimal, Flow links because they're not human-readable and wikilinks because they're not permanent. The amazon model is interesting, but somehow just an ugly way of piping. It doesn't protect you from offensive content since the poster might hide it behind a nice, made-up topic title, which is ignored by the software.

How about this: we use the Flow links we have now, but teach the software to display them using the current topic title instead of the ID, some kind of implicit piping. — HHHIPPO 20:35, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

I say not have the cryptic numbers in links at all. All would be Topic:Name. Changing the topic would rename the link and leave a redirect, which could be deleted through Redirects for Discussion if need be. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 20:38, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Would that mean we can use each topic title only once, over all WMF wikis? — HHHIPPO 20:53, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
No - if it's a repeat, the software would automatically add (2), or whatever number, to the end, just like MS Windows does when you copy a file with the same name. The vast majority of topic titles probably wouldn't see more than 10. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 21:12, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Yes, that could work. It's like using the actual topic title as the topic ID, and only adding as much of software-generated code as needed. One could even think of adding a link somewhere that lists all topics with the same title, preferably available already in the preview step. So when starting a new topic one could easily review related topics that might answer the same question before actually posting the question. — HHHIPPO 21:26, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
A disambiguation page, if you will :) Oiyarbepsy (talk) 21:32, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
So how about this:
  • When starting a new topic, say Lorem ipsum, the software will append (n), where n is the smallest natural number that will make the full title unique across all wikis.
  • This full title will be used both for wikilinks and URLs (the latter will replace spaces by underscores, just like normal wikipages).
  • In the topic header, the (n) part will be shown on the same line as the title, but in the same size and color as the meta-information in the second line, to avoid obstruction but enable copying the full title.
  • A mouseover over the (n) part will expand it to explain what it means, e.g. (n topics with this title), and style it as a link.
  • Klicking that link leads to the page Topic:Lorem ipsum, without the (n), which is the 'disambiguation page', a virtual board listing all topics with this title. This should work already when previewing a newly started topic, before saving it.
  • Since changing a section/topic title is much more common than moving a page, it might be good to (on the back-end) avoid redirects, but instead have an additional table in the database which holds the topic title, n, and the internal topic ID. After a title change, both the old and the new title would point to the same ID, a bit like hardlinks instead of softlinks in a file system. There should be a way to list all titles a given topic is known under, and separate actions to delete individual titles and the topic itself. The table could be initially populated with our existing topics, with both the human readable titles and the cryptic URLs becoming pointers to these topics.
An alternative would be skipping the (n) part for n=1, and finding another title suffix for the 'homonymous topics list', but I think always adding a number, starting from one, might be a cleaner concept.
I think something like this will be much better than using IDs in URLs and wikilinks, as FLow does now. It's a bit like IP numbers versus human-readable URLs: one can use the URL directly, not just as a link text with the link target being an IP number. We should have a DNS for Flow, too. — HHHIPPO 22:31, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
Great post. One little thing to add - for very common titles, allow individual wikis to decide a different way to disambiguate instead of numbers. For example "Requested move (article name)" or "Welcome (to username)" or "Don't delete (by username)" Oiyarbepsy (talk) 23:55, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
This alternative idea had been partially discussed by the team, possibly even as a lookup-table on top of the existing UUID structure. I've linked these additional notes at https://trello.com/c/7d2CciSA/ - Thanks :) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 00:11, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Quiddity, the Trello you linked to seems to miss the point entirely. We not saying the links should be "Topic:768f09a77696#My discussion" - it should be "Topic:My discussion". The technical id shouldn't appear in the link at all. I'm sure all the other pages on Wikipedia have some hidden technical identifier, but we never seem them, and we shouldn't for topics either. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 19:19, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
I think what Quiddity means by the alternative idea of "Topic:Human readable name (n)" is to skip the UUID in the URL/wikilink (please confirm).
Yes, normal pages have IDs, see mw:Page table. What we want is a similar table, just with the option to have several titles point at the same ID, which is possible since we won't re-use the old title after a rename for another page. The table should probably also store the actual topic title and the (counter) in separate fields, to make it easier to generate the disambiguation page and to find the next free counter. — HHHIPPO 20:36, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Confirmed. :) (Sorry I wasn't clearer. I just added a comment at that card, I didn't alter the existing main description.) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 21:38, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Hhh, I think redirects are a better idea than an ID code table - we are already familiar with redirects, you could have the "redirected from" text appear on the Topic's current name, and all of our current redirect practices could be applied to Topic redirects just like any other. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 19:42, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
I guess we can leave it to the devs to decide on the details of the technical implementation. I just wanted to point out that there are other options besides redirects. And I think a lookup table would have advantages given that we want new features like generating the counter added to the topic title, or the 'disambiguation page'.
I agree something like "redirected from" would be nice, and also our current practices. (We should maybe check, though, if any of those are workarounds for software deficiencies that could be solved in a better way, now that we're at it.)
And I think those features can be implemented no matter how the backend works.
It would be nice, at some point, to get a bit more feedback from WMF than "Quiddity finds this interesting". Something like "we are working on it" (ideal :-) or we "will look into it" (when?) or "Wontfix" (why not?). — HHHIPPO 20:18, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
A misleading title on e.g. a talk page is a TPG issue which we already have ways to deal with (editors can fix it themselves, transgressors advised, warned and eventually sanctioned if it rises to the level of or is part of general disruptive editing). Links to discussions on pages I don't want to view should be obvious; redirects should be obvious and not misleading. I don't need protecting especially but "WP is not censored" only makes sense if we offer some sort of reassurance to readers that they can avoid the unpleasant stuff if they want. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 20:45, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Agreed. Malevolent mislabelling van be dealt with our established procedures. That should indeed not be a problem. — HHHIPPO 20:51, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Hide, collapse, undo, ...Edit

It would be good if a topic like this one could be collapsed (NOT hidden or whatever), so that when you scroll the whole page, you see only the title and summary, and can open it with a single click; while leaving at the same time open discussions, well, open. "Locked" is not the same as this, it may have been intended as a replacement (or perhaps "hidden" was intended as the replacement?) but it works differently and more aggressively. Fram (talk) 07:58, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

You know you can click the topic title to collapse a topic, right? Well, it's kind of an Easter egg, no indication that the title is a link and what it does, but I guess you've found it.
So you mean setting the default state to collapsed? I agree, that would be useful.
I don't get your last sentence: replacement for what? Hatting? — HHHIPPO 19:02, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Yes, a replacement for hatting, which is persistent and for all users, not on an individual basis, but is less obtrusive than "hidden" or "locked". Fram (talk) 19:10, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
I agree, wee need that. I'm not sure what "hiding" or "locking" are actually doing / intended to do. Is there a discussion somewhere about what functions of that kind we need and what we should call them? — HHHIPPO 20:42, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Hide: Is intended to be (once current changes are finished) equivalent to "undo", in that it will remove the content completely from the live views. The current in-development changes/specifications are at mw:Flow/Hide spec. (Comments on that spec, at mw:Topic:S283xbi3ad8p1gw3, would be appreciated.)
Lock: The current feature is most clearly explained at this mailing list post. I agree that we'll need to further tweak this, and add at least one more option. I left notes on the styles and differences between the various "collapse templates" at https://trello.com/c/x8lHHkA6/ -- Perhaps what might work, is a single "summarise" function, with a few optional fields/checkboxes (to be equivalent to the 7+ near-identical templates with various parameters, currently at Enwiki).
Sidenote: Danny is at this minute working on clearer docs, to point towards ongoing discussions (so that we can potentially collaborate on a few changes/features at a time, rather than everything-at-once), and to collate future plans and suggested alternatives/possibilities. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 23:24, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Hide isn't the same as undo, in that it doesn't work on page headers, topic titles, topic summaries, ... nor on multiple edits at once. I don't get why the Flow team insists on reinventing the wheel even for things that work perfectly allright at the moment. Fram (talk) 04:29, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
I second the idea of a single Summarize funciton as the main action, with separate and independent modifiers as options for "collapsed", "resolved" and "locked" (i.e. a topic can be locked but not collapsed, as it's typical for RfCs and other discussions which are closed by an admin). Diego (talk) 10:27, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
Fram is right that the editor performing a Summary, Hide, Revdel, Oversight... should have precise control on the exact posts and other elements of the discussion that are included in the action, so that elements that should not be hidden can be moved out of the action's "area of effect".
This is easy to do now that all comments are stored as a single stream of text. It should not be made worse in the new system.
(It might be based on the refactoring/moving tools, though, so that the editor who wants to perform an advanced hide for only selected parts need to manually move out of the way the parts that should be kept.) Diego (talk) 10:32, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
Plus, hide (as it is currently set up) only removes text one-click from viewing. With "undo", people have to actively search the history to find the "offensive" post (spam, whatever). With "hide", they just have to click once, making it much less effective.
Finally (for now at least), are "hidden" posts still Google-indexed and so on? If so then hiding comlpletely defeats the purpose. There are many posts not bad enough for revdel (does that work yet for Flow posts?) or oversight, but bad enough to remove from sight and from the current page? "Hidden" does not do that.
Claiming that "Hidden" is equivalent to "Undo" shows that either what we now have for "hidden" will not resemble the eventual result at all, or a complete misunderstanding of all the things "undo" is used for. Fram (talk) 10:37, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
Looking at that Flow page on mediawiki (linked by Quiddity above), it seems that indeed, what we now get for "Hidden" will not resemble the final version of Hidden at all. No idea why it took so long to realise that what we had was much better than what was created, but at least some return to normalcy and usefulness is being contemplated or implemented. Fram (talk) 10:42, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Requested change: print the topic link in the header of each postEdit

It would be helpful to have the Topic link printed in the header of each post. Right now, if I want to link to a topic on the screen while typing a post, the only way is to open a topic (that I'm staring at) in a new tab and then copy the link from the URL. I would like to see the Topic link on the screen, next to the menu button, so I could simply copy and paste it while writing a post. Thank you Oiyarbepsy (talk) 14:26, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Why would you want a post to link to its own topic? When is that ever useful? Or why is it so often useful that it needs to be a permanent fixture of the header? You are already in a topic when you read a post... How often do current talk discussions include a link to the very same section? Fram (talk) 14:28, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

That's not the point. Two sections below, I linked to this topic. It would have been easier if I could have scrolled up the page, copies the link, and then went back down to paste it. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 14:34, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
But for the few times that this is needed, it would be serious overkill to add it to the header. use the "three dots", rightclick on Permalink, open in new tab, and copy the URL from there. The header is already rather crowded, adding less useful things will not make Flow better. Fram (talk) 14:38, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
I could live with that, as long as I didn't have to copy it out of the URL, which is a big pain, Oiyarbepsy (talk) 17:23, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
You could also right-click on permalink, and then chose 'copy link location' in the context menu (at least in FF, probably similar in other browsers). I agree with Fram that a one-click feature would probably be overkill and unnecessary interface clutter. Maybe some custom js for people who'd like such a button? — HHHIPPO 20:22, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
There are notes on a potential menu for accessing a permalink, at https://trello.com/c/zdt35anb/107-permalink-flyout It could be something like the "More->Link to" menu in LQT.
Fwiw, my current method for linking to a section on any page (article or talkpage or other) is to either:
  1. copy the URL from after the "wiki/" part, and then manually replace all the underscores with spaces (and %28 %29 with brackets, etc)
  2. copy the page-heading (H1), and paste that, then type #, then copy the section-heading, and paste that.
(See also: the related discussion (and links to notes) at Adjustment might be needed to Topic links regarding how links might automagically expand, without manual piping needed.) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 21:42, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Test topicEdit

lorem ipsum Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 17:36, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

qqqqq EBernhardson (WMF) (talk) 17:53, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

test 2 Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 22:03, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
test, too — HHHIPPO 08:47, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
Do you really want to leave me? — HHHIPPO 09:13, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
From an unread notification link — HHHIPPO 19:07, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Now is the time Deltahedron (talk) 18:01, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Konnichiwa to the world. Taku (talk) 11:30, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Redirects to Topic pages don't say "redirect from..."Edit

See here: User:Oiyarbepsy/flow redirect test Oiyarbepsy (talk) 18:58, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Yes, bug 69320http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=69320. SPage (WMF) (talk) 18:23, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

And redirects from Flow pages don't work (i.e. change the header to a redirect, doesn't work). So any page that was Flow enabled and needs to be turned into a redirect for some reason (e.g. user renames) will have a problem. Fram (talk) 07:53, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Thus this idea: Wikipedia Talk:Flow#Flow talk pages as transcluded topics Oiyarbepsy (talk) 14:13, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Which has a lot of problems. E.g. I am on a talk page, see a discussion I want to respond to (which happens to be a Flow post), I click "reply", post, and am no longer on the talk page but on the topic only. This seems to be rather confusing for inexperienced editors, and probably annoying for every editor. The same happens on the few "pages of mass transclusion" we already have, but to institutionalize this to every talk page seems a step backwards. Fram (talk) 14:24, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Well, since they're writing a big pile of new code for this, they certainly could write some that would put the user back at the same talk page after posting. The point is to makes the fact that it's a bunch of transclusions invisible to the editor, unless they click the edit source button. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 14:33, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
But they want topics to be available from multiple pages (and even across wikis), so that would make the transclusion solution (and the auto-return) considerably harder. Of course, the stated goal of having a topic linked from everywhere / embedded in everything makes about everything they design lots harder, and it's no surprise that we have seen nothing yet of this supposed killer feature (which will rarely be used anyway IMO). They can't deliver it, as it is way too hard to develop correctly for the WMF, and they can't declare that they won't deliver it, as it is one of the main selling points of Flow... Fram (talk) 14:37, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
The transclusion idea makes it incredibly easy for topics to be on multiple pages - even before the software is complete, you can just transclude it to another page, and now the topic is in multiple places.
It won't be rarely used - merge discussions need to appear on both talk pages, deletion discussions on both the xfd page and the page being deleted, and a policy discussion could take place at multiple forums, instead of posting the "discuss it here" notice. There are tons of cases where topics should be on multiple pages, they don't now because it's difficult and doesn't work quite right when you do it. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 14:43, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
E.g. AfD's can be transcluded to the article talk page now already. We just don't do it because it isn't worth it. You have a link on the article, and directing people to the AfD or to the talk page is just as much effort for everyone involved. So at least for XfD's, there is no good reason to have those in multiple locations. Never mind that Flow is specifically designed to disallow transclusion. Fram (talk) 18:33, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
I don't see why you would have to leave the host page when replying to a transcluded Flow topic. I'm right now replying to a topic on the board page, not the topic page, and AFAIK I'll still be on that page when I'm done. — HHHIPPO 18:46, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Fram, I don't think it's designed to disallow transclusion, I think it's just not implemented yet. I created a test page in userspace that attempted just that and got the message "embedding discussions is not supported yet" or something like that. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 18:54, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
It's not something they have to implement, it's something they have to actively dis-implement. They can allow it again, probably, but it is clear that at least some people at the WMF don't want this. No idea why though. Fram (talk) 19:12, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Hhhippo, that's because a topic is now limited to one talk page. Fram (talk) 19:13, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Are you sure? Why shouldn't it be possible to submit a change to a topic without leaving (and then returning to) the board/page? — HHHIPPO 20:46, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
I'm not sure about anything about Flow (no one is, I think). I am quite sure though that these discussions get very hard to follow in this format (who is responding to what exactly?) Fram (talk) 21:15, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Agreed. Now that we use Flow for actual discussions it becomes pretty obvious that three levels of indentation are not enough, and that nobody feels that force to start a new Topic when a new topic comes up. The new topics are even suffocating the original topics, which is not what we need. — HHHIPPO 21:34, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Subsections. They wouldn't solve everything, but they would solve a lot. Fram (talk) 04:30, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
Hhh, the ability to split a comment into a new topic will help a lot. This thread went way off-topic a long time ago and it would sure have helped to split it off. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 04:39, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
And would you give the ability to split posts of into new sections to only the person who made that post, or anyone who felt like it? Cause, having your post set in a subsection isn't a problem for me, but someone just moving your post to a different topic is rather drastic. I try to see how you would do it in this discussion, which posts would you move to a different topic? Fram (talk) 06:32, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
Probably my own post linking to the transclusion idea at the flow talk page. In conclusion, it's all my fault. :) Oiyarbepsy (talk) 14:30, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Not user friendlyEdit

When you start a new topic, you have the cursor in the title box. You type your text, and you can't do anything. Only when you type in the box below as well appear the "preview" and "add topic" buttons. It is not clear to new editors that they need to put something in both boxes (only a text and no title also doesn't work) Fram (talk) 06:58, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

You can at least Cancel Deltahedron (talk) 21:50, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

And then getting two lines in your watchlist, which is set to "hide my edits" anyway, is not helpful either. Fram (talk) 07:01, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

The "hide my edits" bug is now filed as bugzilla:71138. Thanks.

Re: not being clear that something needs to be put in both boxes, is there anything you'd suggest? (The only standard I can think of, is the old * (red asterisk) next to each required box) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 00:00, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Now, you get a box with "start a new topic" (large) and below a box with "post a new message...". Perhaps something like "Your title" and "Your post" would be better?
And "preview" certainly and "add topic" preferably as well should be clickable, but when you use them, you should get "please add a title" or "please add text" warnings (with the cursor at the right place).
The newbie should get some guidance on what he has forgotten, without annoying the editors who know what to do, so messages after you have forgotten something are perfect. Now you get nothing. Fram (talk) 06:31, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Notes added at bugzilla:67103 Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 02:47, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

This is a new topicEdit

Hello Taku (talk) 14:48, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Reply to myself. Taku (talk) 21:59, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

TestEdit

(Topic title edited by Oiyarbepsy (talk), Fram (talk))

Test Fram (talk) 07:55, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Is there a version that only admins could unlock? Oiyarbepsy (talk) 19:44, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

We renamed "Close" to "Lock" because people were Closing topics when really they could just Summarize them. Lock is tied to Summarize in that when you lock a topic (so people can't add replies), you probably want to provide a summary of the topic with an {{answered}}, {{complete}}, etc. template.

Lock/unlock is a permission like others, wikis can decide who gets the right. Again, try using a template like {{done}} in the topic summary instead. SPage (WMF) (talk) 23:17, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

As long as summaries are not signed, they are rather useless. Fram (talk) 04:31, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Good call. It should say "summarized by Example" Oiyarbepsy (talk) 15:02, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Test topic testEdit

Okay, so I'm testing this right now, and someone please correct me if I'm wrong ... since I'm trying to edit a related template. This new "Topic" namespace ... it's not going to have talk pages or the ability to use an actual "edit" function? Also, can the actual "Topic" page be added to the watchlist, or is that exclusive to individual topics on the "Topic" page? Steel1943 (talk) 13:33, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

So, when I created this topic, I just created a new page: Topic:S32c3vyqzrrpkecf. The naming convention for these pages makes absolutely no sense. Steel1943 (talk) 13:36, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
The naming has been discussed here, with this post particularly helpful. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 16:40, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
The purpose of the Topic namespace is to have permanent links to relevant discussions. They aren't editable in the same way as an article is, but you can post while on a topic page just like you can on a talk page. It doesn't have talk pages, since it exists for technical reasons, similar to the Special namespace. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 16:43, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

...and now, it looks like these "Topic:" namespace pages are watchlisted by the star in the top right corner of the individual topic. Odd. Steel1943 (talk) 13:57, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

I get you - so when looking at a topic page, the star should be next to the history button - but when it's shown on a talk page, it's where it should be. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 16:36, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
That's a feature. You can elect to watch a particular topic on a board by clicking the star in its titlebar, and you'll only be notified of changes to that topic.
Then, when viewing the topic, we decided to keep the star in the titlebar and remove it from the skin's page tabs to avoid duplication. SPage (WMF) (talk) 23:09, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

History page brokenEdit

The history for this page only goes back to September 5 and there is no older history button. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 16:45, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Yes, this has been notde months ago but not corrected yet, Flow history pages everywhere only display X hundred edits and then end. Apparently pagination is needed but hard to implement (or very low priority) Fram (talk) 07:35, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Clicking on a titleEdit

Adding a comment to a topic with a suppressed comment Deltahedron (talk) 20:28, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Isn't it normal for a user to be notified when suppressed? Oiyarbepsy (talk) 23:38, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Enough with the long titles alreadyEdit

(Topic title edited by Oiyarbepsy (talk), Deltahedron (talk))

Long title test Deltahedron (talk) 19:00, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, umm, maybe the name needs to be cut off with ... added when collapsed. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 19:34, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

And the cutoff name needs to be used on the watchlist too. Deltahedron just made a huge mess of my watchlist with this :P Oiyarbepsy (talk) 19:47, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Excuse me, I did nothing to your watchlist. The Flow system interacted badly with your watchlist. Credit where it is due, please. Deltahedron (talk) 21:36, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

The current byte limit in Flow titles is 260bytes.

The current byte limit in the titles of the "New section" function for Talkpages, is 250bytes.

So, whilst Flow should allow 10 characters less, the normal talkpages also allow very long headings, and will similarly mess up a watchlist if one adds a string without any spaces. See https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Quiddity_%28WMF%29/sandbox&action=history for example.

Hence, not a flow-specific bug. :) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 02:39, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Not a Flow-specific bug, but nonetheless a legitimate complaint about the user experience, exposed by a legitimate use of Flow. Presumably it looks even worse on these new-fangled mobile devices I hear about, which are already dictating design decisions on the Flow interface.
Meanwhile there is a Flow-specific bug in the handling of long titles, reported here but not acknowledged, and still present here, as I just checked. Deltahedron (talk) 06:36, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

draftEdit

(Topic title edited by Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk), Deltahedron (talk))

template test Deltahedron (talk) 19:02, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

0 Deltahedron (talk) 19:04, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
Deltahedron (talk) 19:04, 27 September 2014 (UTC)



RESOLVED
The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived.
Well, if you all insist, I'll except that's its sphere-ish.
SPage (WMF) (talk) 00:46, 3 October 2014 (UTC) (Edited by Oiyarbepsy (talk))
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Is the earth round?Edit

(Topic title edited by SPage (WMF) (talk), Oiyarbepsy (talk), 198.73.209.2 (talk))

I heard it's flat. 198.73.209.2 (talk) 00:44, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Despite Flat Earth Society, it is widespread knowledge that the earth is a sphere since the Middle Ages. SPage (WMF) (talk) 00:46, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

How about "discussion closed" instead of "discussion locked"? We use "closed" for all our existing processes. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 02:39, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Lock topic is a signal you don't want people engaging on a topic, and it can be undone. Adding a template like {{discussion closed}} in the summary is a similar signal, and it can be edited out. I think it's OK to have an open-ended summarize action and a specific lock action, and communities will decide what combination to use. SPage (WMF) (talk) 04:31, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Heh, in {{discussion closed}}
The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived.
, the bit about "and will soon be archived" doesn't apply to Flow boards. If nobody modifies, in either "Newest topics" or "Recently active topics" sort order it will naturally drift out of view. SPage (WMF) (talk) 19:42, 3 October 2014 (UTC)



The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


testEdit

foo Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 01:04, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Categories don't workEdit

So, categories don't seem to work - I edited the header to add this page to Category:Wikipedia Flow, purged the category, and it's not there. Could be server lag, but I suspect it's just something not implemented yet. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 15:54, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Yes, bug 60510http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=60510 SPage (WMF) (talk) 19:38, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

New topics as two editsEdit

I notice that when I start a new topic is appears on my watchlist as two different edits. At least I think that's what's happening. What's going on here? Oiyarbepsy (talk) 15:55, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

The topic creation and mandatory first comment appear as two separate entries in Special:Watchlist. If you click _hist_, it has
  • YOU commented on "Topic Name" (Comment snippet) ...
  • YOU created the topic "Topic Name" .
it could be handled better, I filed bug 71619http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=71619. SPage (WMF) (talk) 19:35, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Locking vs. closing vs. summarizingEdit

@SPage (WMF): Regarding this topic: My intuition disagrees with yours on what "locking" symbolizes:

  • If I see that something is "locked", I assume that I can't open it. This is inspired in the mediawiki world by the padlock symbols on protected pages and the idea of a database being locked for maintenance, and of course by the real world example of a locked door. I would not immediately assume that a locked discussion is finished, I would rather think that it will resume when the reason for locking has passed.
  • Contrary to that, I would consider a "closed" discussion as one that has come to an end, such that it's pointless, and possibly forbidden, but not technically impossible to add comments to it. The real-world analogy would be a closed door (which I can open again unless it's locked in addition to being closed).
  • Summarizing is a third concept which goes well with the first two, but could also have other applications. Putting a bit of extra text in the topic header, supplementing the title but not in itself being a comment could be useful in a number of workflows, with or without closing or locking the topic.

I think to cover all use cases, these three concepts should be independent of each other: closing should indicate the end of a discussion, without enforcing that (like hatting on wikitext talk pages). Locking should put technical obstacles in the way of submitting further comments, like the need for unlocking before posting, with the option to require certain user rights for unlocking. Summarizing should just create a topic header that goes beyond the topic title (and could then probably benefit from a better name).

Apart from that, I don't get why you guys portray the properties "round" and "flat" as mutually exclusive: common knowledge tells me that you as people interested in software development should be very familiar with items that are both flat and round ;-) — HHHIPPO 20:50, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

The way I see it, "lock" should be an admin-only right, with only admins able to lock and only admins able to unlock. This would be the practice for articles for deletion and other time-limited discussions - and might occasionally be needed temporarily to prevent misconduct, so there would need to be a time-limited option like for page protection (locked for the next 3 days and such)

A weaker "close" option should be available to all editors, and unclosable by all editors, no time limits required.

Hide is good as is, and is handy for off-topic posts. If a series of posts is off-topic, you could split it off in a new topic and then hide that, with the hide summary of off-topic. The split topic could instead be moved to another talk page if appropriate there. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 22:37, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Will there be a TOC?Edit

Scanning for topics of interest is much harder than with the current Talk page format. Thus it's really important to have a table of contents. Are there plans to have TOC for Flow pages? If so, could you implement it here so we can see what it looks like? Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 22:43, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Yes, part of the team is working on ToC at the moment. Details (and some rough wireframes) are at mw:Flow/Table of Contents spec, with a few of the questions/complexities noted in the bottom section. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 19:03, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
For what it's worth, Short Brigade, the button to the right of "Newest topics" let's you collapse the discussions so you can see more topic titles on the screen. Not quite a TOC, obviously. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 20:06, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Testing againEdit

Regular text Small text Big text Oiyarbepsy (talk) 22:55, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Test new post metadata Mattflaschen-WMF (talk) 20:37, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Will this replace talk pagesEdit

The title says it all 65.175.250.58 (talk) 09:52, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

That is what the Wiki Foundation plans, after a lot more development work, of course. I would assume that once they implement it everywhere, it will simply be called "talk" and the flow name will be mostly dropped. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 14:19, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Testing real article talk page commentsEdit

The reasion I say they are parsing expression grammars, is simply that when you write a grammar rule it is executed in the order you write it. In the meta language a parsing rule is a conditional expression. You as the compiler writer control the order of parsing. If you write as one would in bnf it wont work. For example the following left recursive rule:

 expr = expr | expr '+' term;

will be an infinite loop. Rules are made up of tests and control structures with occasional calls to code productions. A rule is a test, a function that return success or failure. As a programmer you are programming tests against the input stream. And like most programming languages it does exactly what you tell it to do. That may not be what you intended. For illustration say we compile expr above, as a meta compiler would do, to C++ naked asm function. It would generate code (not the comments) exactly following the rule testing sequance as written. (inside _asm{} C++ // commenting is used for better explanaton)

 static char plus_OPR[]  = "+";

 __declspec(naked) void expr () {  _asm { //  = expr | expr '+' term;
	call	expr		// expr   <<<<<<======== Bad news here.
	je	l2
	call	expr		// | expr
	jne	l2
	push	offset plus_OPR	// '+'
	call	_CmpStr
	jne	l2
	call	term		// term
 l2:	ret			// ;
 }}				// Hand compile time as fast as I could type it. Extra time for comments!!

In the above example generated code the first thing expr does is call it's self a never ending recursive loop. Not really as it would quickly run out of stack and generate an exception. This specific blunder can easily be detected at compile time. These language do not interpret your intentions. The simply and rightfully compile the expression as written. The programmer decide how the source is to be parsed. Right or wrong.

The programmer has control of the parsing order. expr in CWIC would be written as:

 expr = term (('+':ADD|'-':SUB) expr !2 |.empty);

The :ADD, :SUB and !2 are tree generation elements of CWIC. Above expr is defined as a term followed by a plus or minus term or just a term by the empty alternate. After recognizing term. The parser function then looks for a (+|-) The grouping says that if neither a + or - is recognized the .empty alternate is taken. .empty is always successful, allowing a single term to be recognized. But if a + or - is recognized a turm must follow. If the second term is not recognized it would be a backtrack failure. Not only would term fail but all rules back to a back track point. Probably the whole statement containing the error-ed expression.

Generating:

__declspec(naked) void expr () {  _asm { 	//  = (('+':ADD|'-':SUB) expr !2 |.empty);
	call	term		// = term
	je	l2		// succes | failure retuned  in processor status z flag
l1:	ret			// returns failure
l2:	push	offset plus_OPR	// (('+'
	call	_CmpStr		// matchs a string skiping white space
	jne	l3
	push	offser ADD_Node	//  :ADD
	jmp	l5
l3:	push	offset dash_OPR	// | '-'
	call	_CmpStr		//
	je	l4
	cmp	al,al
	ret			//  return success
l4:	push	offser ADD_Node	//  :SUB
l5:	call	_node
	call	expr		// expr)
	je	l6
	mov	esp,ebp		// long backtrack fail
	ret			// return
l6:	mov	ecx,2
	jmp	_tree		// !2
}}// With all the generated tags l1: l2: etc this took a bit longer aa I was trying to make it readable.

The right recursion generates a right handed tree. Given a+b-c would produce: ADD[a,SUB[b,c]]

     ADD
    /   \
   a    SUB
       /    \
      b      c

It can be written to generate a left handed tree using the zero or more $ operator:

 expr = term $(('+':ADD|'-':SUB) term !2);

Given the same expression a+b-c would generate a left handed tree, SUB[ADD[a,b],c]

        SUB
       /   \
    ADD     c
   /   \
  a     b

Both of the above generate a tree. The programmer has program control parsing and production. A list can be generated of desired:

 expr = <term $(('+'|'-':MNS) term !1)>:SUM!1;

Produces:

  SUM[[a,b,MNS[c]]]

       SUM
        |
       [ ]
      / |  \
    a   b  MNS
            |
            b

Concerning the "meta compiler" I think that because their documentation describes the parser language as bnf like has confused the issue. I have been using these meta compiler concepts for a lot of years. Never used yacc. Why would I. It's primitive. The first compiler I wrote, based on CWIC (Compiler for Writing and Implementing Compilers), was SLIC (System of Languages for Writing Compiler) which I extended adding languages to do in sequence optimizations and produce code for any computer. Other compilers I worked on were implemented in PASCAL and or assembly on a early micro computers. A lot of concepts I used writing compilers in PASCAL were from my experience with SLIC. That brings me to my point. Everybody I know, that has used one of the meta compilers, has worked on them. That's the nature of these beasts. That makes for possible conflict of interest to be raised. I think that the compiler technology should not be lost. The secret classification that was slapper on CWIC by the U.S. government in the early 70s probably is the reason this technology isn't known well today.

The meta compiler do not use a contest free grammer. The programmer had control. The grammer is a recursive decent LR grammar.

As an example here is an example of the meta description of a meta compiler. Meta compilers are recursive decent top down compilers. There is a top level driving rule. In the following example program is that top rule. This is no different then main in c or C++. Here program is equivalent to main.

/*

  CC  (COMPILER COMPILERS)

   Mine compiler driver starts with Program.

*/

program =  $ declarations;

declarations =	"#" dirictive
		| comment
		| global		DECLAR(*1)
		|(id (grammar	PARSER(*1)
		    | sequencer	GENERATOR(*1)
		    | optimizer	ISO(*1)
		    | pseudo_op	PRODUCTION(*1)
		    | emitor_op	MACHOP(*1)))
		|| ERRORX("!Grammer error") garbol);

grammar =	( ':'  class	:CLASS   // parse character class rule
		| ".." token	:TOKEN   // parse token rule
		| "==" grammar	:BCKTRAK // parse a ankered grammar rule
		| '='  grammar	:GRAMMAR // this grammar can long fail.
		)';'!2			 // Combine name and rule tree
			$(-break -"/*" .any);

-- Fram (talk) 13:13, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

The above came from Talk:Metacompiler. Not really useful, e.g. the fact that you first have to scroll to the bottom to be able to scroll to the right, and then have to scroll back up to actually read the previously obscured text... Fram (talk) 13:14, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
This page is for testing. Please report feedback at WT:Flow.
However, I think this works reasonably well for an edge case (most talk page comments do not have wide embedded computer code). I can see the entire text, except for part of a couple comments, without horizontally scrolling. You can also horizontally scroll in many browsers by clicking inside and pressing left/right keys. Mattflaschen-WMF (talk) 20:42, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Why would anyone want to replace a system that works well for such comments, for one that works "reasonably well"? Many talk page comments have tables in them, the above doesn't only apply to computer code. A talk page system that only works for easy cases may be good enough for mediawiki, but it won't be sufficient here.
In the above text; I can scroll left-right by clicking inside and using the arrows, but then I can't scroll up-down by using the arrows. Not user-friendly. It's not the most problematic aspect of Flow, it's just one thing in a long list of problems. Fram (talk) 20:48, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
We are not making a talk page system that only works for "easy cases", and that's not what I meant.
Flow is not done, and I also don't claim that the Flow experience for that type of post is optimal currently. Mattflaschen-WMF (talk) 20:55, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Matt, feedback on a topic like this isn't practical to post at WT:Flow since it doesn't make sense if the post isn't in front of you. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 21:17, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

I see scroll bars on mine; should probably make use of the empty space I have to the right of this Pizza1016 (talk | contribs) 13:16, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I also have scroll bars (right and bottom), but one can only use the bottom scroll bar once one has reached the bottom, while the text one wants to see is actually near the top... Using the empty space on the right would be my preference as well, but having useful scrollbars would be a minimum. Oh well, at least they scroll, in VisualEditor they use scroll bars as close buttons (seriously! It's not even a bug, it's a "design problem" for which they need suggestions on how to close a window or box apparently) Flow sucks, but it only sucks on a few pages. VE sucks everywhere. Fram (talk) 13:21, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Yep. That needs to be fixed. The way Flow reacts to resizing the browser window or the font doesn't help either. There should be at least an option to use all the available horizontal space in such cases.

I don't get the point of the vertical scroll bar at all. My browser has one already, and I use it a lot on Flow boards... — HHHIPPO 13:31, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Interesting, my experience is different than everyone else's. I don't see a horizontal scroll bar at all, just a vertical one. What does need to be eliminated, in my opinion, is to not have scroll bars within scroll bars, which causes problems for those using mouses or trackpads to scroll. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 14:18, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

And can you see the full text of the page (including the grey bits), or is part of the text simply inaccessible? Fram (talk) 14:21, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Yup, I see everything - in fact, the code portions are word-wrapping, which is something I don't ever see on other pages. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 14:24, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Strange (not doubting you, just strange that people gets such different results). I'm using Vector, W7 and FF32, what are your specifications? Fram (talk) 14:26, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Chrome, Mac 10.7, and whatever the default view is. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 14:30, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Hey, IE11 on Windows 8.1 word-wraps too; there's no horizontal scroll bar. Is it a Firefox-specific issue? I was earlier using Firefox 35.0a1 Pizza1016 (talk | contribs) 14:33, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Bug-wise:

  • I've filed bugzilla:71844 for the inconsistent <pre> line-wrap issue in Chrome/IE vs Firefox. (Possibly a Parsoid bug? Possibly a browser bug? They shall investigate...) Thanks!

Design-wise:

  • For the Vertical Scrollbars: I've tested, and they appear after 150 lines (but that includes linewrap, so they appear after 15 paragraphs of lorem ipsum). I've asked Danny, and he says the limited height precedes his involvement, and it doesn't make sense to him either - so, that'll be removed, forthwith! (Unless we come up with a good reason to retain-but-increase the limit, in which case we could do that instead)
  • For the Horizontal Scrollbars: They should appear, if the width of the page is narrow enough. (Per my comments at the bug, that original text at Talk:Metacompiler#More explanatiion of why a meta compiler is a PEG does cause horizontal scrollbars in Chromium (and presumably IE?), once the window is thin).
    As far as I know, the current plan is to investigate/build a width-toggle, so that people who have widescreen monitors can easily limit the width when they want to, and nobody else will be inconvenienced/frustrated. That's what I'm still recommending, at least. (And for the default to be either full-wdith, or significantly wider than it is now.) (I love full-width. At least until ~2 weeks ago when I got my first brand-new monitor in a decade... 24" is bloody wide! I still love full-width most of the time, but I do now occasionally find myself un-maximizing the window for a slightly thinner column of text. I've left notes related to that at mw:Talk:Requests for comment/Redesign user preferences#The Appearance menu</ramble>) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 23:48, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Bug reportEdit

Follow these steps: 1) Go to a flow page 2) Click to switch to a topics-only or small topics view 3) Pick a topic and follow the permalink.

The topic page will be on the topics-only view and you will not be able to expand it. MacOS 10.7 with latest version of Chrome. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 07:21, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Looks like a fix is on the way: bug 71593http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=71593. — HHHIPPO 13:05, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Test postEdit

Modified test Mattflaschen-WMF (talk) 21:09, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Separate post in topic Mattflaschen-WMF (talk) 21:23, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Articles for deletion - hell (test only)Edit

{{afd2 | pg=PageName | cat=Category | text=We are much better off without this}}

{{subst:#ifeq:{{subst:#titleparts:{{subst:FULLPAGENAME}}|0|2}}|PageName||

}}

PageName ([ edit] | talk | [ history] | [ protect] | [ delete] | [ links] | [ watch] | [ logs] | [ views]) – ([[{{subst:FULLPAGENAME}}|View AfD]] · Stats)
(Find sources: [ "PageName"] – [ news] · [ newspapers] · [ books] · [ scholar] · [ JSTOR])

We are much better off without this Oiyarbepsy (talk) 02:47, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Needless to say, we will need to re-write our templates for this to work Oiyarbepsy (talk) 02:51, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

{{uw-vandal1}} Oiyarbepsy (talk) 06:10, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Actually, they need to change the template code so that substituting works. Those templates above should never appear as template code and should always appear expanded. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 20:21, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Note, these pages (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Page) are not in a talk namespace (it's more of a process than an unstructured discussion). Even when Flow is ready to roll out more widely to talk pages, I don't think it will include such non-talk pages at that stage. Mattflaschen-WMF (talk) 21:59, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Well, they're not talk pages only on a technicality, so they have to be rolled out eventually. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 22:54, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

While designing Flow, we've looked at eventually supporting dedicated workflows beyond basic discussion. The idea of workflows is that they would include custom processes, not simply the same kind of Flow threads as everywhere else.

Deletion discussions are mentioned explicitly as a use case for Flow, and it may be one of those workflows.

However, we're not at that stage yet. Mattflaschen-WMF (talk) 23:44, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

stratus testEdit

(Topic title edited by Vanjagenije (talk), Grognard Extraordinaire Chess (talk) Ping when replying, Quiddity (WMF) (talk))

clouds Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 23:04, 28 October 2014 (UTC) (Edited by Grognard Extraordinaire Chess (talk) Ping when replying)

Mr. WMF with your pro cloud agenda, is the WMF taking money from the cloud lobby? Grognard Extraordinaire Chess (talk) Ping when replying 07:37, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
I always suspected as much. –Prototime (talk · contribs) 17:35, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
But now, it is confirmed. –Prototime (talk · contribs) 17:35, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
Well.... Cloud Gate is kinda wonderful... Cloud Atlas is on my want-to-read list... Cloud (video game) is on my want-to-play list... Cloud forests are beautiful... Cloud chambers are intriguing
But the real clincher is Cloud Appreciation Society (a stub I've always liked). ;-) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 21:12, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
Coincidence? Grognard Extraordinaire Chess (talk) Ping when replying 21:17, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Clouds are evil Grognard Extraordinaire Chess (talk) Ping when replying 07:34, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Evil, or just considered harmful? >.> Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 21:13, 18 November 2014 (UTC) (Edited by Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk))

Which clouds? Vanjagenije (talk) 00:10, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

TestEdit

Lorem ipsum -Fimatic (talk | contribs) 01:44, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Well, isn't this interesting...Edit

I am a leaf on the wind. Watch how I flow. Prototime ~~~~ ~~~ ~~~~~ –Prototime (talk · contribs) 17:38, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Nooooo –Prototime (talk · contribs) 17:45, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
Yessss –Prototime (talk · contribs) 17:45, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
Mayyyybe –Prototime (talk · contribs) 17:45, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

The timestamp is merely "active 2 minutes ago" and "edited 2 minutes ago"? No bueno. From the below topics, it looks like conversations eventually obtain an actual timestamp, but I'd prefer that right away, with any "x minutes ago" or x weeks ago" message being supplementary. –Prototime (talk · contribs) 17:42, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

"Two minutes ago" is much more useful than a timestamp for a very new post. Once it's been more than a couple of days, the timestamp makes more sense. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 18:34, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
I disagree entirely. It's much more useful to know when people responded relative to one another, not that two people responded "1 day ago". That said, I'm also happy having learned that a planned feature addition will allow users to see true timestamps without hovering over the minutes/day/week stamp. –Prototime (talk · contribs) 18:44, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

If you hover over the 'x minutes ago' you get an actual timestamp, and ISTR that which shows may be made into a preference, or at least that's a planned feature addition. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 17:51, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Good to know! Thanks. –Prototime (talk · contribs) 17:53, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
I'm personally hoping it will become a preference...
However, user-preferences are notoriously difficult to add (because they add complexity to our already quite complex options menus). Also, features are prioritized based on (very roughly) urgency, utility, and demand - so a minor enhancement like this might take a while (unless a volunteer writes the patch, or a deluge of editors also request it). So, more feedback encouraging a specific feature is always welcomed. :) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 21:13, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
Agreed. I like the current talk system better, so I'm hoping that it'll just become a preference. -Fimatic (talk | contribs) 00:03, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
The nature of flow is that it's either on or off. If the WMF moves more forward on this, my understanding is that they would start by allowing us to activate it for our own user talk pages, something that I might do. Our wikitalk system has some serious problems (archives breaking links, user talk discussions split on multiple pages, etc) that would be difficult to solve while still maintaining wikitalk. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 01:28, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
We were discussing the timestamps, and Exact vs Elapsed as default/mouseover. That's what I'm hoping becomes a preference. ;-) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 17:11, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Just testing..Edit

Hi. I just edited this comment. CamelCase (Talk | Contribs) 03:38, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Why does this say I made this comment 45 years ago? CamelCase (Talk | Contribs) 03:39, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

The software was temporarily hypnotised to believe that it itself existed that long ago :P Pizza1016 (talk | contribs) 09:17, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Fixed now. CamelCase (Talk | Contribs) 03:46, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Comment -Fimatic (talk | contribs) 15:40, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

TestEdit

test Hinmatóowyalahtqit (talk) 11:56, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Test reply Hinmatóowyalahtqit (talk) 11:57, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

ThingEdit

Creating a top level node; so of course it's named after the hand in the Adams Family MadScientistX11 (talk) 00:24, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

You rang? MadScientistX11 (talk) 00:24, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
Ughhhhhhh..... MadScientistX11 (talk) 00:25, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The Divine Comedy: Heaven, Purgatory and Hell Revisited by Contemporary African Artists (1)Edit

User talk:Oiyarbepsy/The Divine Comedy: Heaven, Purgatory and Hell Revisited by Contemporary African Artists (1)

The Divine Comedy: Heaven, Purgatory and Hell Revisited by Contemporary African ArtistsEdit

Hi Oiyarbepsy, is it possible to point out the aspects of the article that come across as 'promo-y'? (I've read the guidelines and I was warned pretty strongly against promotional edits by the Wikipedian who gave me a brief talk on Wikipedia & its' aims, I obsessed for quite a while before I uploaded this version, I considered that upcoming dates would be an issue...is that it?) OsizUrUnkle (talk) 16:31, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Actually in hindsight I shouldn't have got most of my info from press releases...I've tried to do some damage control now, I hope it's better OsizUrUnkle (talk) 16:43, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

@OsizUrUnkle:Unfortunately, it is nearly impossible to write about a current art exhibit without it sounding like an advertisement for it. For example, even the list of artists sounds promotional, and Wikipedia doesn't include nuts-and-bolts details like times and locations for most scheduled events. A better target of your efforts would be improving articles on the individual artists, starting with those that already have articles. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 19:47, 26 November 2014 (UTC) Oiyarbepsy (talk) 02:57, 6 December 2014 (UTC)



The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

December 2014 (1)Edit

User talk:Oiyarbepsy/December 2014 (1)

December 2014Edit

  Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, talk pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments, as you did at Talk:Mark Halperin, is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Even making spelling and grammatical corrections in others' comments is generally frowned upon, as it tends to irritate the users whose comments you are correcting. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. SummerPhD (talk) 13:45, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

@SummerPhD:By updating the link, I was ensuring that the meaning of the editor's comment doesn't change. By reverting me, you have changed the actual meaning of what that editor said. Also, you are supposed to update links when you move a page, and that is exactly what I was doing. Editing a comment to ensure that their links are what was intended is good practice, not bad practice. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 15:41, 1 December 2014 (UTC) Oiyarbepsy (talk) 02:58, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

I guess this (and the thread below (as I write)) counts as a mis-use of Flow. It looks like two contributions, has two sigs, but also has a Flow user 'sig' and time stamp, but only one. It took me a few seconds looking at it to realise all that, but I that's as I'm used to looking at threaded conversations like that copied so it looks very natural. If Flow is ever rolled out probably guidelines will be needed on how to best quote/copy old style threads so it's clear they are quotes/copies. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 03:14, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Yes it is a misuse - I created both Topic so I could create a mock-up of an idea I have. Feel free to completely disregard. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 03:43, 6 December 2014 (UTC)


The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


TestEdit

Just testing 85.212.17.126 (talk) 18:47, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

This lasted very long. 85.212.17.126 (talk) 18:47, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

How can I replay to level 2 comment? 85.212.17.126 (talk) 18:47, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Ah, got it. 85.212.17.126 (talk) 18:51, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Comment on comment. 85.212.17.126 (talk) 18:51, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
But, as you can see, replies are currently limited to three levels. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 21:22, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
I am trying to see. Biosthmors (talk) pls notify me (i.e. {{U}}) while signing a reply, thx 15:08, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
Reply (3 levels) — Andy W. (talk) 02:23, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

  Hello. I just wanted to let you know that when you add the title of a book, film, album, magazine, or TV series to an article, it should be italicized by adding two single apostrophes on either side ('' ''). Titles of television episodes, short stories and songs should be placed within quotation marks. More detail can be found in the Wikipedia Manual of Style. Thank you. Vanjagenije (talk) 00:18, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Why templates do not work? Vanjagenije (talk) 00:20, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
substituting doesn't work. Standard templates do. But transclusions only update when a post is edited. I understand that the developers are reconsidering. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 01:05, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

  Hello. I just wanted to let you know that when you add the title of a book, film, album, magazine, or TV series to an article, it should be italicized by adding two single apostrophes on either side ('' ''). Titles of television episodes, short stories and songs should be placed within quotation marks. More detail can be found in the Wikipedia Manual of Style. Thank you. Vanjagenije (talk) 01:06, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I see. Transclusion works (I just used a random template for test). Thanks, User:Oiyarbepsy! Vanjagenije (talk) 01:07, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

LaTeX?Edit

Does tex work? Testing:   85.212.17.126 (talk) 18:50, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Cool, it works and looks nice :) 85.212.17.126 (talk) 18:51, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Test bananaEdit

fruit everywhere. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 17:31, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Just tried replying with {{banana}} and get an error:

  • The content is too large. Content after expansion is limited to 25600 bytes.

A remarkably low limit. Editors often e.g. copy and paste chunks of pages or discussions onto talk pages which can easily be larger than that. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 18:07, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Yup, the limit needs to be increased a lot. Filed as phab:T78322 (with context/background). Thanks for reminding me! Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 19:48, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

test orangeEdit

Also, apples. Quiddity II (talk) 19:05, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

First the cloud lobby and now the fruit lobby? Oiyarbepsy (talk) 19:51, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
Testing, attention please. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 09:34, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Another test. 69.105.137.146 (talk) 10:07, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

This is another test, also of   mathematics. 69.105.137.146 (talk) 10:08, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Is there a place to look up how that was formatted? DonaldKronos (talk) 21:49, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
The ability to edit each others posts is planned for the near future (and "view source" for protected content, later on). The tasks they need to complete first are phab:T89198 and phab:T89187.
For the particular instance above, we can just copy the text, and surround the pasted content in math tags. e.g. <math>x=y+z+\int_0^1 t \, dt</math>
becomes   Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 22:07, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. I do wish I could figure out how to log in on that site, but I suppose I have too much to do already. I do appreciate the answer about the formatted math. :) DonaldKronos (talk) 23:28, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
Phabricator's login (https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/auth/start/) is confusing, because the box at the top is for something that mainly developers use (LDAP). We editors, should instead use the "mediawiki" button underneath (flower icon). Click that, and you'll be prompted to automagically get logged in with OAuth. (Wikimedians always have too much to do! ;-) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 00:42, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. Yes, I agree that is confusing. I would NEVER have thought to try clicking on that "flower icon" to log in or sign up.... not with that other stuff so prominent on the page. Thanks. DonaldKronos (talk) 19:43, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Test preview fixEdit

phab:T78725 SPage (WMF) (talk) 23:53, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Seems fixed \o/ SPage (WMF) (talk) 23:53, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

TestEdit

TestEdit

Baffle gab1978 (talk) 14:40, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

{{Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors}}

Requests Drives Blitzes Mailing list Newsletters

Template:/Top

Template:/Ombox

Template:/Left panel Template:/Right panel

[[Category:Wikipedia copy editing]] [[Category:Wikipedia WikiProjects|Guild]] [[Category:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors| ]] Baffle gab1978 (talk) 14:41, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

{{GOCE-ab-noedits|article=Banana|1=23:12 on 31 February 1984|sign=[[User:Roan Kattouw (WMF)|Roan Kattouw (WMF)]] ([[User talk:Roan Kattouw (WMF)|talk]]) 23:50, 3 November 2016 (UTC)}}
Baffle gab1978 (talk) 14:54, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

{{GOCE award|award=articles|place=2|number=32}} Baffle gab1978 (talk) 17:32, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

{{User:Quiddity (WMF)/sandbox2|article=test}} Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 21:27, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

{{User:Quiddity (WMF)/sandbox|article=test}}

Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 21:50, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Evolution in ActionEdit

This is good to see. I got it pointed out to me ironically after I tried to improve the top of the Evolution page by pointing out that evolution is not strictly a biological process. Well, to make a long story short, that didn't go over so well, I ended up banned for a few days, and the page (and it's disambiguation page) continue to evolve... in spite of not being biological. Just like this project is obviously doing. :) Keep up the good work. DonaldKronos (talk) 18:54, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Now, I don't know if replying to one's self is the best way to add something to the thread of a topic once started, but I just wanted to throw in a thought. I know the signatures don't work in this new feature (nor are the needed) but I'm not sure what else does or doesn't work. I was thinking, perhaps in addition to the Reply and Thank links (and by the way, I think it's cool that thanking someone has been given such a priority) perhaps a way could be added to see the way something looked to the person who wrote it, so that people could learn from what other people write. DonaldKronos (talk) 19:04, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
Re: replying versus editing ones own comment: Either works. We're discovering best-practices as we go, and as the software evolves. ;-)
They're planning on changing the ability to edit anyone's post from just-admins to anyone, at some point soon. (with "view source" for any locked/protected topics). There has also been discussion of a topic-level "view topic's source" to see everything at once. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 22:27, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
Well, sounds like they're trying out new traits. We're part of the environment they have to survive in.... so I wonder if we will get to suggest as well as help test and select.
If anyone's reading this who takes suggestions, perhaps they can note one I'm trying to make. That a person may have an obvious way to add something without choosing between additional indent and the possibility that the change will not be seen by the intended recipient. Perhaps, an option after an edit, to refresh the notifications already sent out. DonaldKronos (talk) 10:02, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
Suggestions are strongly encouraged!
Re: notifications - the current configuration, is for all editors who have watchlisted the topic, to be sent an echo message, according to their Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-echo settings. So, it is possible for an editor that has a topic watchlisted, to get various combinations of: watchlist entry, echo flyout notification, email notification. However, just as with "mention" notifications (which apply to wikitext and flow), it is possible for an editor to opt-out of flow's echo-flyout/email notifications, but there's no easy solution for telling this to the user who is trying to ping them. (there is some discussion of this, at phab:T68078, which points out the difficulties because of the preference being private :/ ). Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 21:01, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
Well, I don't know where to put suggestions, but I'll mention a couple here, and maybe you (or someone) can suggest where I should copy them to, or simply do the honors. :)
First, with regard to notifications, perhaps when a person opts out of notifications in certain ways, (or better yet, regardless), they could be given a way to see a list of who all has apparently tried to contact them (rather than the actual apparent attempted contact) , with each entry expandable to see such attempted contact., and an easy way to clear an entry or all entries once viewed, and perhaps to optionally add the person to a contact list in the process. Okay, so its a crude suggestion... but it can perhaps evolve from there.
The other suggestion has to do with Flow, and how to test it with the general population of editors, and perhaps with people who might become editors if such a thing were easily available to them. I see two major possibilities along this line. One being to add a "Converse" tab or "Community" or "Discuss" or something to that effect, right after the "Article" tab and the "Talk" tab... and allow the two modes of communication to live side-by-side for each article. The other may be more complicated to implement and a little more vague, and probably not as valuable, but it's basically to allow a user to turn Flow on and off from any page with a simple check box. What it would be labeled, I have no idea. DonaldKronos (talk) 22:21, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Simply a testEdit

Hello, fellow editors testing Flow! MJ94 (talk) 06:11, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Seems to have worked. Welcome. :) DonaldKronos (talk) 20:50, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
I appreciate it. I like Flow – my hope is that it will be easier for new users to communicate. Indentation can be a hard concept for beginning editors. MJ94 (talk) 22:09, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I had known how to indent for a very long time, and had even done some advanced editing, and did not know how to post a reply to someone... so I certainly feel this is an improvement. Still needs work though, but that's to be expected. DonaldKronos (talk) 01:54, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
I agree. I'm not a big fan of how it looks in my contributions, but that's okay. I think Flow will be an improvement. As always, it's a work in progress. Thanks for testing it out with me! MJ94 (talk) 02:10, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
You're quite welcome. I notice the "Edit summary" is hidden and not editable. Perhaps that will change in time, to allow some customization of it. It is cool though, not having to remember to end every comment (but not other contributions) with ~~~~ DonaldKronos (talk) 02:51, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Test Test! Sbaghdady (talk) 14:17, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

test Sbaghdady (talk) 14:17, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
Seems to have worked. I see your reply test also. DonaldKronos (talk) 14:24, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
Intent Ypnypn (talk) 21:58, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
Indent Ypnypn (talk) 21:58, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
Weird: can't seem to indent more than three Ypnypn (talk) 21:59, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
Hmmm. I'll see if I can.... DonaldKronos (talk) 09:05, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Nope. DonaldKronos (talk) 09:05, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Oh, but the colon indentation works... so we could simulate it. :) Somewhat. DonaldKronos (talk) 09:06, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Deeper indent is on the plan (and has been for ages). The designer will actually be discussing it with the team, next week, so we should have updates on that in the near future. :) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 18:29, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for all your work! MJ94 (talk) 22:16, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Yet another test topic!Edit

(Topic title edited by Tony Tan · talk, Sbaghdady (talk))

Just another topic for testing Sbaghdady (talk) 14:18, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Test reply

Edit: test Sbaghdady (talk) 14:19, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Yep. That worked too. :) DonaldKronos (talk) 14:26, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

TestingEdit

(Topic title edited by Risker (talk), Pizza1016 (talk | contribs))

Wonderful testing Pizza1016 (talk | contribs) 03:12, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Hmmm.... Testing boldly ? DonaldKronos (talk) 09:04, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

does it really work? DF5GO • 16:01, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

yay! DF5GO • 16:01, 21 January 2015 (UTC) (Edited by Tony Tan · talk)
Yep. Looks like it really works. You know, I was thinking.... perhaps this new communication model could be implemented along-side of the old one, rather than replacing it, giving people a choice of which one to use at any given time. Maybe leave the old one as the "Talk" page, just like it is, and add a new "Discuss" or "Converse" or "Communicate" page to go along with each topic page. Any thoughts? DonaldKronos (talk) 22:03, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

... Tony Tan · talk 20:03, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Serious bugEdit

(Topic title edited by 87.151.41.17 (talk), — RHaworth (talk · contribs))

A disruptive editor has moved Kuttiattoor Thittayil Sree Daivathar Temple to Topic:Kuttiattoor Thittayil Sree Daivathar Temple. But there seems to be no way of moving it back!

Clearly a block must be placed immediately on moving stuff into the topic: namespace. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:12, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

An edit filter has been added to disallow this type of move. MusikAnimal talk 23:32, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

It's up for deletion, and will hopefully be speedied: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kuttiattoor Thittayil Sree Daivathar Temple (2nd nomination). Hopefully the closing admin will be able to delete it despite its location. Agree though being able to move stuff into and out of this namespace should not be possible. Either that or make it work both ways so disruptive or accidental moves can be undone, but that's probably much more work. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 22:23, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

The Topic page apparently is no more... just says Bad title. That being said I guess we can close the AfD? Should I instead wait for Flow staff to move the page back (then move protect!) and allow the AfD to play out? MusikAnimal talk 23:34, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
No. You certainly may not close the AfD. This history says that the page is still there - it is just that we cannot view it or move it. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:40, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
No problem waiting by me. I hate the AfD is active yet no one can evaluate the article in any capacity. My other thought was somehow placing it "on hold". I just restored the original mainspace page to see if I could somehow bypass this software glitch and merge the histories back, but no dice. I'll leave it as-is for now. MusikAnimal talk 01:31, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes, but the AfD was only started today and it is supposed to run for a week during which time people look at the article and contribute to the AfD discussion. Also if the decision is to delete, the deleted edits should be visible to admins, preferably on the right title. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:38, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Use the Reply link! I guess they didn't design this to be a smooth transition for experienced Wikipedians =P MusikAnimal talk 23:37, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Well, also the fact that this is alpha-level software that only is in use on three(?) pages on the entire English Wikipedia. Usually only those who use those three pages notice anything, but occasionally a bug affects other parts of the project. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 23:57, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

@Quiddity (WMF): We need a WMF developer to fix this. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 22:56, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Short-term, the editfilter (Special:AbuseFilter/658) will prevent any further problems. Tomorrow, the Flow devs plan on moving the page back into mainspace. They'll also look into other solutions, for long-term. Thanks again, all. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 05:09, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Thinking a little more long-term than this current crisis:

This isn't the first time Topic namespace has caused problems. See Wikipedia talk:Flow/Archive 14#Move not listed in the logs?, where we have an article about a journal whose title begins with "Topic:".

The answer is that Flow needs to be changed so that all Topic pages, whether having discussions or not, can have wikitext headers, that can be placed by any Wikipedia editor (unless, of course, an admin protects it). This would allow the article on the journal to have a link pointing to its current title, and would allow the Daivathar article to be recovered, by copy and paste if necessary. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 23:07, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Mobile usersEdit

I'm having trouble to access this page from phone. It is totally not working in Wikipedia app (android). Jim Carter 09:24, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 19:41, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

More testingEdit

This is more testing. Hello World! Tony Tan · talk 20:01, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

For some reason, made me think of this old song... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whmzEXywq40 :) DonaldKronos (talk) 21:53, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
Haha, interesting. I see that you had some issues with editing Evolution. I am sorry for the way you felt about how things were handled. Has the issues been resolved? Is there any way I can help? Tony Tan · talk 02:27, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
In MY opinion, no, the issue has NOT been resolved. Thanks for asking. There are a few VERY PUSHY PEOPLE who seem to think they speak for everyone, and have each other's backs when it comes to undoing hard work enough times to prevent the work from being allowed. It is bad enough in my opinion that the evolution page is not actually about evolution but rather about biological evolution ...but they will not even allow the adjective "biological" to be attached to the term "evolution" in the definition of "biological evolution" passed off near the top of the page as a definition of "evolution".
Personally, I think that whole evolution page about biological evolution should be moved to biological evolution and replaced at evolution with a page that is actually about evolution, rather than strictly the biological variety, and be given a prominent message at the top telling where to find the biological evolution page, and the disambiguation page which lists that and other kinds of evolution along with other uses of the word "evolution". However, I highly doubt that is going to be allowed to take place, or even the adjective "biological" allowed to be added to the term being defined, because there are obviously people who want evolution to look complicated so that religious people are less likely to begin to understand it.
Evolution is no more "biological evolution" than an ellipse is a circle. Sure, a circle is an ellipse, and biological evolution is evolution, but that's not the same thing. It doesn't work in the other direction. A broad term or concept can not be summed up in a narrow fraction of itself. Evolution is the process of rolling out change or accumulating change, regardless of whether such change happen in a biological system, a chemical system, a mathematical system, a computational system, a linguistic system, or anything else for that matter. Passing off a definition of "biological evolution" as a definition of "evolution" is in my opinion, no different than religions trying to fool their followers into thinking there's only one "god" concept, and that it's defined by their own favorite "God" character from their own favorite variant of whatever scriptures they happen to claim embody the truth. That's not science. It's not honesty. It's deception. DonaldKronos (talk) 20:03, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.  pablo 14:22, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
Consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Tony Tan · talk 14:58, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
LOL! My Latin's a little rusty. When the truth follows follow from the discipline, but they give the same kind of time, and low effort, as the obese? I know that's not right. :) Care to translate? DonaldKronos (talk) 21:05, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
See Lorem ipsum. Tony Tan · talk 02:12, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
A Tony Tan · talk 20:02, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

I am the Gotham .I have one model [R.m.s of model of atom] 59.97.40.151 (talk) 09:29, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Test lockEdit

(Topic title edited by JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds,  pablo, Mattflaschen-WMF (talk))

Test Mattflaschen-WMF (talk) 01:21, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Image testEdit

(Changed back to normal size after screenshots were taken showing problem). Mattflaschen-WMF (talk) 21:41, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

It works but it's rather large. Something like this would be better. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 22:01, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, the point of the test above was to demonstrate the interaction with the limited width and lack of media viewer. Mattflaschen-WMF (talk) 22:11, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

And this is another reason why paths need fixing in Flow. Anyone looking at 'what links here' for this image now sees the utterly confusing "Topic:Sdf3qvfyxvn5r4lo", with no indication of the thread title, page title or even what namespace it's in. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 22:04, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, tracked as phab:T92571. We've been making improvements in this area. We recently fixed the logs to show full information. See http://en.wikipedia.beta.wmflabs.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=delete&user=Mattflaschen&page=Topic%3ASd8cifjpamo6hegb&year=&month=-1&tagfilter= ("Title of Flow topic0.15866284661529662 browsertest edit" is the topic title, the weird name is just because it's an automated post) Mattflaschen-WMF (talk) 22:19, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

somethingEdit

other thing

Hey I can edit posts (thanks EBernhardson)! EBernhardson (WMF) (talk) 00:02, 24 March 2015 (UTC) (Edited by -24Talk)

aaaaaa EBernhardson (WMF) (talk) 00:02, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Something I've been wanting to testEdit

Everything I say is true![2]

  1. ^ Fine 1999, p. 26.
  2. ^ says me

Oiyarbepsy (talk) 01:50, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

I request this article!Edit

We do not have an article on Barack Obama, the 44th president of the United States. A glaring omission if you ask me!

(This is a test for a potential use case of Flow as a means of requesting the creation of new articles. Let's see this works.) Harej (talk) 20:31, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

I have now created a template to demonstrate how triaging would work. It is currently located at User:Harej/ARW triage. Note that the template should use Lua sauce to allow tagging of multiple WikiProjects; right now it only supports one because I am not very good at Lua.
Also, as a general note, on the actual Article Request Workshop page, the name of the topic would ideally be the name of the proposed article, not a generic "article request" header.
For more information see Phabricator. Harej (talk) 02:46, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
So essentially we need three cases:
  • Request accepted and forwarded to a wikiproject
  • Request denied (and a provided reason, i.e. not notable)
  • Request incomplete, please enter the required information Kharkiv07 (T) 02:49, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
No need to forward to a WikiProject. The request is accepted when the article is created (and will indeed be automatically marked as such once the link turns blue). Through WikiProject tagging the proposal will show up in the WikiProject's workflow, and a category-based system allows a single article proposal to be shared by multiple WikiProjects.
Should the rejection reason be a part of the topic summary or as a response to a proposal?
The draft template I have does not have "incomplete" as an option, but I am not necessarily opposed to it either, depending on how it is used. We should not burden the original proposer with having a fully fleshed out proposal; it is perfectly within the wiki spirit to have some people contribute a little at a time (more so since these are not actual articles, but recommendations for articles). However, it may be useful to have a category in between "pending triage" and "live article," for proposals that are not immediately rejected ("no, we are not writing an article about your garage band") but still need more work before an article is possible. Perhaps "in progress" or something like that. Harej (talk) 03:06, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
One more thing that needs to happen is if the title already exists whoever is reviewing it needs to be able to change it (i.e. they request "Mouse" and it needs to be "Mouse (band)"), which means that a system can't automatically discard existing articles before that's changed.
I think as a response to the proposal is best.
And you're not necessarily burdening the original editor, we can't have a million requests sitting open with no sources or no details, it has to be an efficient system, that being said they can hypothetically re-open things. Kharkiv07 (T) 03:13, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Flow topic titles can be changed, as can the template parameter in the topic summary. Harej (talk) 03:21, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
I have updated the template. If an article exists at the stated title, it will be marked "article is live." Note that the triage template is added after the submission. Presumably the topic title will serve as the basis for the article title used in the triage template, but the volunteer adding the triage template can adjust the title as needed to prevent article name conflicts.
If the article does not exist at the stated title, the default is "pending triage." It can then be sorted into "rejected" for submissions that don't stand a chance, or "under development" for submissions that could become articles. (They will then be automatically marked "article is live" once the article is created.)
For WikiProject tagging, submissions will be tagged into WikiProject-specific approved/pending/developing/rejected categories. Harej (talk) 14:32, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Category testEdit

Error: no text specified (help).

This should go in the Xn category. Mattflaschen-WMF (talk) 20:33, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Seems to be working. It lists the topic not the page though. This is a major break from how categories normally work, by page. Talk pages for example are usually in talk page + project categories. Anyway wonder what happens if I add another with a key?

[[Category:X1|大家好]] JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 20:41, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Ah, you have to add it to the summary. And it's sorting them under 's' for some unclear reason. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 20:44, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Ah, probably the sort under 's' is as the topic is 'Selbmxmvhx79462g'. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 22:18, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
You can actually categorize either the board (Wikipedia talk:Flow/Developer test page) or topic (Category test). I've now done both as a demo.
Sort bug was just filed (by User:Harej) as phab:T94532 Mattflaschen-WMF (talk) 22:40, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
One problem with adding a category to the board (i.e. page) is the end of the page is not fixed. Scroll down and more discussions are loaded. Depending on the speed you scroll, or where you stop, they may load and push the category down before you see it. Even if you jump to the end you have little time to read the category or categories, perhaps click on the one you want. This is probably even harder for mobile users. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 23:03, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Yes. We are probably going to solve this problem by putting board categories in a right rail. See phab:T92874. Mattflaschen-WMF (talk) 23:53, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Tangentially: For displaying the categories used within a topic (as seen in a board), there's phab:T92897. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 16:32, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
My thought - if the talk page belongs in a category, it belongs in the header, not in the discussion. Putting categories in a discussion should only categorize that discussion. This would make our talk pages 500x more useful, actually, you could create categories like Category:Discussion topics about deleting public domain images and the like. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 20:47, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Discussion (topic in flow, thread on a traditional page) specific categories are an interesting idea but I'm not sure how useful. E.g. something like Category:Discussion topics about deleting public domain images might quickly get filled with stale discussions, unless there was some way to remove entries older than a month (say), or sort entries by date last edited on a category page. This perhaps comes under the heading of 'what to do with old discussions', as archiving as it's now done will not work. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 21:02, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
It wouldn't necessarily have to be an active discussion. If a person what's to research previous discussions on a particular topic, it gives them a way to do that. Some way to indicate how active discussions are would certainly be nice, though. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 22:14, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Note, for consistent terminology, "Category test" is a topic, and the free-form area at the top of a topic is called the 'summary'. The free-form area at the top of a board is called the 'header'. Mattflaschen-WMF (talk) 22:44, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
That's exactly the way it does now work. :-) Putting a Category in the Topic-summary, adds the topic to the category. Putting a Category in the Board's Header-area, adds the Board to the category.
For interesting ways that other wikis are starting to use the summary area, check out frwiki's templates on their helpdesk: [:fr:Sujet:Scablgykzui9s3fv "needs info"] versus [:fr:Sujet:Sbutpsyd4mcz7gg1 "answered"] versus [:fr:Sujet:Sdjhj58o7jsv4d22 "wrong forum"].
See also the topic that Harej is experimenting with, at Topic:Sej3daex9w9p6zu0.
It's all API accessible, so bots/scripts/gadgets should be able to easily interact with Topic-Titles/Summaries/Posts and Board-Headers, once phab:T67119 and phab:T92470 are further along. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 22:54, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

More observations. Summary changes don't appear in the history. If summaries do anything meaningful such as add to categories, or probably even if they don't, they need to be listed in the history. Also I mistakenly used 'Z1' not 'X1' the first time I tried adding another cat to the summary. Oddly both are now listed. And if I hover over 'Z1' I see this listed as 'Topic:Selbmxmvhx79462g' in popups. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 20:48, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Summary changes are in the board history, but you're quite right they should be in topic. This is already tracked as phab:T90260.
Removing category issue was also coincidentally just filed as phab:T94569. Mattflaschen-WMF (talk) 22:43, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
I found the summary changes in the page history. While looking another observation: the topic history (not the page history) wraps to it looks like the same width as the topic, and so looks very odd. Better to use the full page width: I often find myself widening the page to view histories and history-like lists such as my watchlist, contributions etc., as they are often much more readable like that. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 01:08, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
Harej filed this as phab:T94569. (Whoops, duplicate answer. I'd rather a duplicate than an edit-conflicts though!) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 22:43, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for all the great feedback. Mattflaschen-WMF (talk) 22:47, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Time to test this new conversation modelEdit

Blah blah blah Oiyarbepsy (talk) 02:21, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Insert Blah Oiyarbepsy (talk) 02:21, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
Insert blah again Oiyarbepsy (talk) 02:21, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
reply to number 2 Christian75 (talk) 08:54, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
There should be a compact layout like Gmail has Christian75 (talk) 08:55, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
How do I move a reply? Christian75 (talk) 08:55, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
The answer probably is that you can't do that yet. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 14:19, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Reply to "How do I move a reply"? Diego (talk) 09:50, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Some more blah Oiyarbepsy (talk) 02:21, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Blah again Oiyarbepsy (talk) 02:21, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

More blah Oiyarbepsy (talk) 02:21, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

This is something I've often wanted to do on wikitalk pages, but then you can't see where one post ends and the next begins, so I've felt forced to indent when it wasn't really necessary. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 02:24, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

How would Flow work for really complicated talk pages?Edit

The most complicated talk page I've ever seen is the one at Phineas Gage. How would Flow cope with that beast? (I would link to the page, but there are no tools here to add a link. I suppose I could use wikitext markup, but that would be so retro. Oh, go on then, here it is Talk:Phineas Gage ) Talk to SageGreenRider 02:06, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

All Flow pages have a header section (like at the top of this one), so all that yellow stuff at the top would go in there. Since all wikitext is supported, collapsing a large chunk of content is easy using the templates we have. The Lock Topic option could be used to collapse a series of posts, as was done several times on that talk page. The big thing missing at the moment is sub-headings. I don't know if they're planning on adding this, but it's hard to imagine how it can happen on some of our pages without it. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 15:14, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! Talk to SageGreenRider 17:26, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

There's no link to the topicEdit

Often when I navigate to this page it's to a topic: that's just what I see in my talk page and I follow the link, read what's there, then use the 'up' link at the top of the page to go up a level to the whole talk page. But then how do I do the opposite? I can use back for the topic I've come from but there's no link to it, nor to any other topic.

Also while here, there's no obvious hide/collapse link, as you see on some forums (reddit for example). The ... has a 'hide' option but that's both non-obvious and an extra click. With all this white space it should be possible to add a link, so you can e.g. go down the topics clicking to hide/minimise them as you go. Again see Reddit where sub-threads within topics can become arbitrarily big so being able to hide them saves a lot of scrolling. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 02:28, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

And Hide doesn't mean to temporarily hide it from yourself, it removes it from the discussion from everybody, unless someone restores it. Think if hide as being like revert, so you'd use hide to remove spam and other inappropriate content. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 15:10, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Ah, I didn't know. And yes that works as you describe – see above. What it needs is a way to collapse a thread, temporarily and personally, i.e. just for yourself while reading, to save scrolling. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 15:35, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Hmm, you used to be able to click on the title and shrink it. I guess they changed that? Oiyarbepsy (talk) 20:00, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes, it was disabled when the table of contents was introduced. Supposedly no longer needed, but I would still like to have it. Ways to collapse a part of a topic I suggested a long time ago, never got any reply.

Btw: The text indicating a hidden comment is, err, suboptimal: "This comment..." what comment? The one above, the one below, a different one that we don't see? Probably the latter, but it doesn't make sense to use "this" to refer to something that's not there.

What's the rationale for mentioning the hiding editor here, rather than just in the history? Why not just "1 hidden comment (history)" ?

And while we're at it: "Wikitext uses markup." If I don't know that, then I don't know what wikitext is, so this sentence is either redundant or meaningless for anybody who reads it. A useful bit of information would be the fact that Flow uses wikitext (or something similar), but that's not said here.

Hmm. Didn't we have a preview button?

Is it a good idea to use the same label for a button that starts a reply (looks like a greyed out link, but works like a button), and for the one that submits the reply? To which of those does the license notice refer? — HHHIPPO 23:42, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Hippo, I don't see any confusion about the hidden comment notice. It's pretty obvious to me that the hidden comment was right where the note is now. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 01:05, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Maybe it's just me then. Of course I know what it means but I don't find it obvious at all for someone who doesn't. Anyway, this detail should have low priority. I still hope we'll get a way to collapse sub-threads while reading without hiding them for others, and also better visual clues that make the new indentation system more intuitive and less ambiguous. Any of those changes will likely involve a redesign of the hidden comment notice anyway, so we can discuss it then. — HHHIPPO 14:53, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Browse topics doesn't work for old topicsEdit

As the heading says, if you try using Browse topics to jump to an old enough topic nothing happens. There's no indication of the cut off in the list, and the link that appears in the status bar is "Run script "void(0);" so no help at all. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 17:36, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Notice: Data loss and recoveryEdit

Hi all. Investigation is ongoing into a data-loss that was reported yesterday (phab:T95580), which seems to have been caused by a maintenance script updating the database. This affects all topic titles and post contents on this board prior to 11 February 2015. The Operations team is currently assisting with data-recovery from backups. We'll post more information here when we have it. We apologize for not having full information for you right now. Post here if you have any questions; we'll keep this Topic updated when we know more. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 02:39, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Update: The developers have a plan for recovery. They're going to talk to a few more members of the Operations team, to confirm the exact details, and various options, before proceeding. That is estimated to be Monday at this point, due to various people being away for the weekend. For the current discussions, please continue as normal! I'll update this topic again, when we have more information. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 04:49, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Cool thanks (testing the new indentation II) JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 23:44, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Hello! I'm happy to say that all of the data has been restored, so all of the old conversations on this page are back where they belong. We've fixed the problem that allowed the data loss to happen, so it won't happen again. Thanks for your patience, and let me know if you have any questions! DannyH (WMF) (talk) 18:17, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Cool thanks (testing the new indentation) JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 23:43, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Doesn't workEdit

Whenever I click a link on this page a Infobox appears asking wether I am sure I wish to leave the page since I have umcommited data even though I have not used the keyboard.

Data error on leaving comment. Comment was made on 16.04.2015, not 01.01.1970. Arcudaki (talk) 11:06, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Some kind of markup language in subtitle visible. Arcudaki (talk) 11:09, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Hmm, could you elaborate on this one, or take a screenshot? Thank you. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 21:27, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Date error appears to be 45 years old: [7] Arcudaki (talk) 11:11, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

I'm sure they're gonna need details on your system and browser, since I'm seeing proper dates and no markup. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 12:56, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Testing Reply to reproduce wrong time. Arcudaki (talk) 12:20, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Trying out this Flow thing. Izkala (talk) 20:50, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

There you go:

 
Screenshot of Flow, showing an error

Happens after posting a reply. Arcudaki (talk) 12:26, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Again, post your browser and OS, cause I'm not seeing it. The developers need as many details as possible to fix bugs. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 16:17, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

The first bug (Leaving page confirmation) is Internet Explorer specific: [phab:T95909]]. -- If you're not using IE, please leave a note here or at phab:T72586 with details on your Operating System and browser (+version).

The second ("45 years ago)" should be fixed (but the fix isn't rolled out to here until next week) per phab:T92917.

Thanks for the reports. :-) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 21:26, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Start testingEdit

Testing effect of F5 192.166.53.199 (talk) 12:21, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Large timelap between click on button and button disabeling. Check wether the after click image should be fetched earlier. 192.166.53.199 (talk) 12:25, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Origianl post shows correct time. Reply post shows "45 years ago". Has the fix for IE been deployed ? 192.166.53.199 (talk) 12:27, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Hello World modifiedEdit

replied 2003:70:CE14:D30C:45C3:F41F:8729:79B5 (talk) 21:17, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

My feelings on the topic are warming somewhatEdit

(Topic title edited by Origamite, 115.64.79.207 (talk))

I really don't, but I'm willing to test it. Reply Origamite 01:20, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

So--you can't indent the current bottom post? What? Origamite 01:27, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Here is a reply in the middle. This indents, since without indenting, you wouldn't know what it was replying to. I've actually started doing this on the wikitalk pages since the indenting on those gets ridiculous sometimes. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 01:27, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Reply to this Origamite 01:21, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

So this indents it, right? Does the username really have to be on top, instead of on the end of the message? Origamite 01:22, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Here's another one that indents. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 01:27, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
It doesn't indent? Why? Origamite 01:22, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

It only indents if you reply to something in the middle - that is, it only indents if it truly needs to indent. So, when you read it, a discussion between two users naturally reads as a conversation. A reply placed in the middle will indent, as I'll demonstrate in a second.

Testing what happens when I change someone else's post (this sentence added by SV).

So you can't tell what part of someone's edit was changed, or that SV edited the post at all? This is...problematic. -Origamite
No different than wikitalk. oiy
Yes, but I think that having the name at the top makes it seem more like everything done to the post is by the person. I'm not sure how to feel about that. -Origamite Oiyarbepsy (talk) 01:26, 30 April 2015 (UTC) (Edited by Origamite, SarahSV (talk))
Replying here to see what it will look like. SarahSV (talk) 01:40, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
replying also Peter Damian (talk) 18:41, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
which took ages (trying again) Peter Damian (talk) 18:41, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Yup it takes ages to accept the edit. But the format is somewhat better than liquid threads, which was an abomination. Peter Damian (talk) 18:42, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
It does seem slow, but I would not worry about it: there are probably lots of rounds of optimisation to go before deployment. And anyway replying on a more traditional page, especially a long one, is hardly fast as it regenerates the page. We just accept it and have gotten used to it as it's clearly doing a lot of work. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 18:46, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
I see it uses my user name, not the name I've added to my sig (Sarah (SV)). Is that an option Flow will remove? ~~~~ SarahSV (talk) 01:42, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Displaying a different (alternate) name is phab:T90055 and autocompleting (with mentions in VE-mode) to the alternate name is phab:T95759.
Note that for the display of the alternate names, the current suggestion is to add the username in brackets afterwards (i.e. your posts would be tagged as "Sarah (SlimVirgin)") - mainly because it is very confusing when someone's signature doesn't match their username at all. E.g. all the people who tried to find "Doc James" in the history logs, prior to his rename from Jmh649. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 03:25, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
I think that's one of many things that aren't decided yet - or maybe planned but not finished yet. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 02:05, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
I see your reply to me isn't indented, Oiyarbepsy. Is that something you did, or Flow did? Also, I received a notification that you had left a post. It wouldn't be good to receive a notification whenever someone posts on a page I've posted to (or even a conversation I've posted to).
I find it a little confusing to have the name of the poster at the top. It would be good to indent the name a little and have it at the end. SarahSV (talk) 02:08, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
And now my reply to you isn't indented, so it's obviously Flow doing this. That will make pages harder to read. SarahSV (talk) 02:09, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
It's not indented because it doesn't need to be. Until this post, we were having a two-person conversation, and indentation is not necessary to see that. This post, being inserted into the middle, does need indentation to understand what's happening. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 02:14, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
But reading this thread, its very diffucult to figuere out if its a reply or a new topic (this was a reply to Oiyarbepsy - but it looks like I wrote to SlimVirgin ) Christian75 (talk) 07:04, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
@Christian75:, is there really a substantial difference? By the order of your post, it's clear that you've read both SlimVirgin's and Oiyarbepsy's comments and therefore are taking both into consideration when drafting your reply.
When reading the full conversation in order, it should be clear most of the time who's replying to whom by the content of the message. In cases where there's ambiguity, it's still possible to add an explicit mention of the user you're replying to. Knowing the exact post to which each editor is replying to is a nice-to-have feature, but I don't think it's always essential. Diego (talk) 10:27, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
It won't let me delete my post. We need to be able to delete our own and other people's posts, which people often do so long as no one has replied. Also important to be able to do it with BLP violations. All editors have to be able to do that. SarahSV (talk) 02:09, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Click the three dots at the top-right of your post and you will see the option "hide". This is the same as erasing a post on a wikitalk page - but not the same as deleting, which requires an admin. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 02:15, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Apologies, it did let me delete it, though it asked why I want to. No reason to ask why. Sometimes things are deleted, sometimes moved and rearranged. Talk pages aren't chats; they're work spaces, often mini-articles, reviews, etc. We often need to move things into different bits of the filing cabinet, or to different cabinets altogether. SarahSV (talk) 02:16, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
"No reason to ask why." This is probably because providing edit summaries for changes was early on identified as a critical elements of talk page discussions. I remember someone explicitly requested it at some point. Perhaps the wording should be made more 'optional' ? —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 18:16, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
I think the reason is intended as an edit summary Oiyarbepsy (talk) 02:37, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
A post appeared on my watchlist saying 02:37 . . (+49)‎ . . Oiyarbepsy but without a diff. To read it I had to come here. But here there are no times, just one hour ago, two hours ago (my posts said one hour ago immediately). When I clicked on history to try to find the post, it said "A database query error has occurred. This may indicate a bug in the software."
Is there no way to read diffs or find individual posts? SarahSV (talk) 02:51, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Hmm, from a look around phabricator, I would guess you might have your "Number of edits to show in recent changes, page histories, and in logs, by default:" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rc set to 500 or more (the default is 50). If so, that bug is phab:T91916 (and I just tested and reproduced/confirmed the bug). If not, please let me know what unique preferences or gadgets/scripts you recall having set, which might affect this? Thanks :) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 03:56, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Mouseover the "x minutes ago" and it will show the timestamp. In the future, they will probably add a user preference to always show the timestamp. Not sure why history isn't working. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 03:01, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
If we're looking for a particular post, we can't mouseover every single one. How would we ever find old posts? SarahSV (talk) 03:12, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
The preference (or alternatively showing them both at once) is tracked at phab:T94648. (See the first line of the description in particular, for the updated summary) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 03:47, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
The diff you posted above works for me. Not sure why it's not working for you. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 03:14, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
There's no diff on my watchlist, so when a post comes up, I have to open this page to see it. I can't click on a diff, and without diffs it's going to be hard to find things later. Diffs and timestamps make things easy to find. SarahSV (talk) 03:18, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
The log pages (history/watchlist/contribs/RC) are slated for an overhaul/re-examination, because they do need a few changes and tweaks. I've been wanting to put together a table/spreadsheet for a while -- to compare (1) current-defaults, (2) current-in-flow (3) desired-in-flow (i.e. as close as possible to current-defaults), (4) historic-requests-for-changes-to-defaults (i.e. keeping an eye on what could potentially be changing globally, and making things easier given the power of structured discussions) -- but the lack of anything simpler than mw:Manual:Watchlist table and mw:API:Watchlist keeps overwhelming me, especially as I know all the preferences/gadgets/userscripts that also need to be considered... Ideally, we'll get that started next week. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 03:42, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, Quiddity. So there will be diffs? At the moment when I see a new post, I have to come here and scroll down to read it. Lots of people read diffs on their watchlists without wanting to join in the discussion. Also, how do I stop being sent notifications that someone has added a new post here? SarahSV (talk) 04:04, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
There will be: whatever is most widely needed + whatever we can imagine & suggest -- but minus any restrictions due to our expectations; and minus any restrictions from technological limits our imaginings run into.
(e.g. I love preferences and think this is awesome, but preferences are bad for caching and code-complexity and etc, so my idealism has to balance with technical pragmatism)
There are currently a large number of ways that editors keep uptodate with page changes (whether articles, or discussions or etc).
Some use the "email me when a page is changed" feature. Some (like me) use navpopups over diff links. Some open the diff links in new tabs. Some just use RecentChanges (especially on small wikis). I think some use WP:RSS, but I've never seen that in action (aside from the demo link). Some don't use a watchlist at all and just have astoundingly good memories and personal routines. Some use the grouped&expanded preferences, and click the "19 changes" link. Some go to history pages and click the "cur" links. Some have userscripts, that expand diffs within the watchlist page, 1 by 1. Etc.
This plethora of systems (and many more that I'm leaving out, or forgetting, or haven't encountered) is something most of us have grown used to, and (hopefully) found the solution that works well enough for us. But it's not enticing to all people; many look at this sort of thing (24hrs of VPT changes) as sub-optimal (or even kinda-horrifying) for tracking multiple discussions.
If you could have a few ways for accessing discussion-updates, what might they be? Think bigger than what we're currently stuck with. Improve upon it. Dream of upgrades to the Notification Flyout, of upgrades to the watchlist page & system, of new "Feed" type pages, of systems from other sites and software. Dream of crosswiki integration (a mountain of complexity and possible growth).
(Re: Notifications: To stop being notified of new topics on this page, unwatch the page. To stop being notified of new replies to this particular topic, unwatch the topic (but that will take it off your watchlist, too). However, there's a big discussion about improvements to notifications coming soon - we do need more fine-grained control, and some preliminary ideas will be presented for discussion once they're a bit more polished.) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 01:33, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
@Quiddity (WMF): thanks for the reply. I'll try to reply soon, but for now how do I stop being notified whenever anyone posts? I didn't put the page or topic on my watchlist and can't see how to remove it. Also, it would be a bad idea to force people to remove pages from watchlists just to avoid all these notifications. SarahSV (talk) 02:59, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
@Quiddity (WMF): I've just checked my raw watchlist and neither the page nor topic are on it. SarahSV (talk) 03:02, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
This topic is on mine, as Topic:Sged8wqztnvjzv56. The entries in a watchlist (at least on mine and I assume on yours) are sorted by namespace with the Topics appearing after Modules and Portals, which is where I found it. Or search on the string. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 03:29, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
Okay, thanks, I've removed it. But I didn't put it there in the first place, and could see no easy way to remove (I had to go into my raw watchlist and search for Topic and that sequence). How is it normally done? SarahSV (talk) 03:43, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
You can click on the star at the top. Hard to do and not click on the three dots for the menu instead which seems to have an overlarge focus area, but I was able to unwatch and watch just by clicking on it. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 16:15, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
@Quiddity (WMF): You might want to have an option to force an indent in some cases. This is a reply to the multiply-edited post way up the page, but it's not clear at all that it's the case. Also, an edited post should specify either "edited by original poster" or "edited by other users"
I'm pretty sure that it does. SV's timestamp above reads "Edited [time] ago", while this timestamp will read "Edited by Origamite [other time] ago". -Origamite Oiyarbepsy (talk) 02:52, 1 May 2015 (UTC) (Edited by Origamite)
Oh yeah, you're right. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 15:25, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
I think editing other people's comments is an admin-esque user right that won't be available to all users. WaggersTALK 13:34, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
For now, anyone can (just like they can on oldfashioned wiki talk pages). I don't think it's difficult to change Oiyarbepsy (talk) 15:57, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
It's the (flow-edit-post) flag, which is currently given by default (on all wikis) to autoconfirmed+ (per Special:ListGroupRights) and also if it's your own post for registered-but-not-autoconfirmed editors (per phab:T90670).
The only remaining group is unregistered editors, and some thinking has gone into how to allow them to edit their own posts (given the complexities of shared IPs, etc), but no solution yet. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 22:25, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

I guess, but sometimes I want to go off on a slight tangent, even though I know that other editors will be responding to the topic full-on. That's a good time to use end-of-conversation indentation, I think. Origamite 01:33, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

I really like the new indentation method, as one of those editors occasionally dealing with the question "now, at six levels of indentation, do I add another or use {{od}} ?". Probably though it would not be too hard to get it introduced to existing talk pages, given enough time. Already it sort of exists in places like AfD discussions where editors post !votes and comments in order, only sometimes replying to an earlier contribution. Enough editors are fed up with the current approach, which is only a convention, to try something new I think. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 23:15, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

But how do we add a section heading? Peter Damian (talk) 18:44, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Adds double equals as an experiment
==new heading==
other stuff Peter Damian (talk) 18:45, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
===interesting=== Peter Damian (talk) 18:46, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Are the blue-line indents meant to show what's new since the last time I opened the page? That's a feature I do like. Origamite 03:06, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I think it highlights the post you're linked to with a permalink and the more recent ones. I've requested a navigation button to jump right to those unread posts and skip the rest, and I think they liked it so maybe they will include it in some future update. Diego (talk) 20:35, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

You see a blue/green line next to a post if you follow a link directly to a post: any of the links labelled 'comment' in the topic history. So an improvement over traditional talk pages which only take you to the section within the talk page (if it works as numerous things can break it). JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 19:51, 3 May 2015 (UTC) (Edited by Oiyarbepsy (talk), Peter Damian (talk))

As you can see, I edited John's post. Which you can do in ordinary talk pages, of course, but would get slapped for it. Peter Damian (talk) 18:48, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
It's enabled for testing. I think the plan is to have some way to restrict it, using a maybe new user right. Then it would be up to those running the particular wiki how they handled it: admins only, or any auto-registered user, or another class of 'moderator' users.
Anyway I can see you edited it: it's in the time stamp. With better histories, or at least histories better integrated into existing watchlists and contribution lists (including things like popups, twinkle) it will be if anything easier to spot unwelcome edits to other users posts, easier to reverse or repair them.
edit:Now I can see Oiyarbepsy has presumably reverted it. What would be useful would be a way to get the history of an individual post. Not so much for this but for times when e.g. a number of editors are working on an item within a thread; a DYK nomination for example. For a very active topic it might be hard to isolate such edits, arguably useful for proper attribution. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 18:58, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
And I reverted you. Neener neener. Here's your slap, certified fresh. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 18:58, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
OK show me the diff where you reverted me (just checking). Peter Damian (talk) 19:22, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
this was it. It doesn't say 'reverted' but in normal edits that's optional anyway: if you want to use another edit summary it's up to you. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 19:25, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Was it easy to find? [edit] I see there is a permalink button on the right. Peter Damian (talk) 19:42, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
I just looked in the thread history then opened the most likely looking diff. I don't know what the permalink does: presumably not track revisions to an individual post. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 20:06, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, there is ambiguity in the word "permalink", which means (roughly) "an eternal link to this page's current state" in wiki-terminology, but is generally used for "a link to this sub-location, regardless of changes" elsewhere on the web. It's on the list of things to re-examine at some point. (Is there a good alternative word, for the locative-type of permalink?) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 00:01, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

That is a nice improvement; it's helpful when I'm getting linked from the alert. (Also, why does Flow have to look the same as a ping when I first log on? It's a bit nerve-wracking, only to find a glorified watchlist-entry.) Origamite 23:19, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

That is on the list of things being worked on in the notification system, i.e. Echo. See Phabricator T57359.

And you can disable the notifications for Flow if you want, and just have them e.g. for direct mentions, at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-echo JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 23:24, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

And how do we 'diff' to someone's edit? You can only do it via the contribution history, AFAICS https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Topic:Sged8wqztnvjzv56&topic_postId=sgr4ljbemzhg5h5w&topic_revId=sgr4ljbemzhg5h5w&action=single-view Peter Damian (talk) 18:51, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

The "prev" links in history pages, and "diff" links in usercontribs pages (both of which are only clickable links when there is a diff to see - i.e. if the original content was edited) are the current route. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 23:54, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Well, that'll end the use of Special:Diff/1234567890. Don't think that's a good idea, but...I link through URLs generally anyways. Origamite 22:32, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Facebook, againEdit

Thought I'd add this to my watchlist to see how watchlisting works with Flow. It popped up with a message "You've subscribed to this discussion board!" This language only reinforces the view that WMF is trying to turn Talk pages into generic social media "discussion boards" and has no clue (or simply doesn't care) about the purpose of Wikipedia Talk pages. That may not have been your intent, but words matter. Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 17:54, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

What are you talking about ? Facebook calls things either a discussion forum OR a message board... If anything your reaction shows how prejudiced people are about any improvements that the WMF is trying to make for all of us. Have you ever considered that no one in the whole wide world understands what a 'watch list' is ? Language is indeed REALLY important, and this shows that the WMF understands that.

Just because social media is so central and visible on so many different fronts doesn't make everything that uses HTML and/or Javascript 'social'. —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 18:12, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Many of the Talk pages on articles that I edit say at the top "This is not a forum for general discussion about (the topic)." Use of the term "discussion boards" implies WMF wants to change that emphasis. You may consider that an improvement, but I'm not altogether convinced.

I'm sorry, but I don't understand the point of your comments about HTML and Javascript. (FWIW I've been writing HTML for many, many years, though I've never had any need for Javascript.) Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 18:44, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

I support using the word "subscribe" since, unlike watchlist, people outside Wikipedia actually knows what it means. "Subscribed to this talk page topic" might be better, perhaps. And while our talk pages are not forums for discussion about the topic, they are forums for discussion about the article, so either way they are still forums, even if we use a different name than the rest of the web. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 21:15, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. Using "subscribe" is a good idea. I doubt many people would insist on keeping the Wikispeak "watchlist" instead.

The concern is over the basic purposes of Talk pages. Do we want them to be tools for article improvement, or open-ended "discussion boards" for anyone and everyone to give their opinions about the general topic? Certainly more people are familiar with the concept of discussion boards than talk pages. But do we want Talk pages to be just like discussion boards at other sites? If not, a different name could help make the distinction. Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 22:02, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

The technical operation and appearance of a board says pretty much zilch about the nature of the discussion. Pretty much every website has the same basic design for their forums, yet there is a huge difference between the discussions on YouTube versus Slate. Whatever we call it, by immediately hiding (meaning reverting) inappropriate posts, we'll make the point pretty damn quickly and new users will catch on. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 03:26, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Why is it that when I reply here, my reply is indented... Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 00:16, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
Your reply above was in the middle of a conversation, so the indent is used to indicate that your post is interrupting, so to speak, and to show where you replied. Below, you posted at the end, so indenting is not needed to show what you were replying to. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 00:23, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
If I reply here - then it looks like the next reply was to Oyarbepsy' "The technical operation [...]" and not to the one I reply to. Christian75 (talk) 14:09, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
No, it doesn't. There is a straight vertical line which visuallly connects "Your reply above..." with "I find the difference..." which shows that the later is a reply to the former. Diego (talk) 09:49, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
I am not sure. This subthread is Oiyarbepsy <-- Short Brigade <-- Oiyarbepsy <-- Christian75 ?? <-- Diego <-- Christian75
But its imposible to see, you have to read the text first.
The straight vertical line indicates that the message is new since you last visit (its coded with the url from your "your nitifications" counter) Christian75 (talk) 10:39, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
There's a subtler light grey vertical line that connects all posts at the same depth level. Maybe you can't see it because of the contrast in your screen?
Here I've created a small script that makes that line more visible on mouse over, and a second script to highlight threads with a zebra pattern. You may try it to see if it improves your understanding of the subthreads ordering. Diego (talk) 11:37, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
Okey thanks. I can see the line now (because my head is 2 cm from the screen) Christian75 (talk) 11:44, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
I find the difference confusing. In particular, if I were to add a new observation on the topic it would be indistinguishable from a reply to the most recent comment.
Consistency is widely held to be a virtue in interface design. A reply to a previous comment should correspond to the same visual cues regardless of where it is placed. Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 00:39, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
A part of the intent of the current configuration, is to reduce the number of
long
diagonal
indented
sub-threads
with
only
a few people talking to each other
that end up needing an {{outdent}}
and to instead encourage group discussions, where people read everything in the thread, before responding to the topic as a whole.
(Personally, out of the many communication platforms I've tried over the years, the only systems that appeal to me as much as our idiosyncratic onwiki traditions are:
  • the infinite indent (but with oh-how-I-hate-it collapsed-comments if depth>10) of reddit,
  • and the system that stackexchange has, of "Question (w/ comments...), and Answers (w/ comments...)".
    (There's a somewhat similar system in medium.com, but that's less relevant as a comparison).
I'm cautiously optimistic that the current configuration is something (or close to) that we could all adapt to, and a few editors have said exactly that. It might turn out to be the kind of thing that works well for most talkpages, but that a different threading system is needed at extremely high-turnover pages like ANI. I've still never seen a system that works great for many hundreds of posts in a single page.)
Thanks for your feedback. I hope this and the earlier reply, help. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 02:10, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
When two people are talking you do not know that they are talking that way, e.g. A and B are speaking about something:
A
--B
----A
------B
and so on.
It coule be flat ....
A (written as A2) remember something and reply to an earlier reply from B,
A
--B
----A2
------B2
--------A2
----------and so on
----A
------B
--------....
(edit: Had to add something - added "-" - the WYSIWYG-look alike removed my spaces) Christian75 (talk) 14:04, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
Yes, it does help. Thanks.
This issue relates to a broader point I've been meaning to bring up: to a large extent talk pages are scanned, rather than read. I'm not sure Flow developers fully appreciate the consequences of this distinction. For example, visual cues (as to replies, etc) are especially important when scanning. As well, some of the principles that are good for reading extended text (such as the benefits of whitespace) are less helpful or even unhelpful when scanning . Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 02:33, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
You are right about scanning. On our wikitext pages, if you don't indent, scanning is impossible since you can't see where one post ends and the next begins. Here, it is clear, whether indented or not. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 01:17, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
There's also the need to scan the beginning and end of subthreads, to skip a back-and-forth exchange of ideas between two editors for example.
Giving each thread its own indentation level provides such capability which is lost if the subthread is merged at the same level with the main thread.
I won't defend the lame indentation of one level for each comment, but indenting one level each subthread and making it flat would be a good match for our style of discussion. Diego (talk) 10:02, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

@Short Brigade Harvester Boris: I believe the word "board" was originally chosen, primarily to indicate that it works differently from a "page", in that a "flow board" is technically just a container for various components - currently just two types: "header/description" (1 per board) and "topic" (unlimited per board, and might be shared between boards (future feature) or wikis (future feature)); but other more complicated workflow components will be developed later.

[The plan, once the backend (which ties into our myriad other systems) and discussion component is a bit further along, is to make general-purpose non-restrictive components, with broad usage possibilities and variables, that each of the communities can then use as they wish, at various locations/location-types. Possibilities include: E.g. some sort of "checklist" component that is adaptable for the various types of peer review; E.g. some sort of !voting/consensus-finding component, which could be configured one way at Enwiki's RfA, and another way at Enwiki's AfD, (and etc), and which could perhaps show/group/sort/count the individual responses in various ways. -- I.e. Less complexity for editors to engage in processes, without having to memorize (or look-up every time) dozens of templates+variables. More time to re-read the policies/guidelines and editors' comments, and less time re-reading the process instructions.]

Re: "Board", a few people, including WMF staff, have suggested changing this bit of terminology. (and also "topic" and even "flow"). Naming Things is one of those complicated issues, that everyone has an opinion on! ;-)

Re: "Do we want them to be tools for article improvement [...]" - Yes. That is 100% the goal. (And to support more of the hundreds of related-types of discussion/process that take place around that central goal). For example, one idea that I like (which might be investigated more in the future), is to have topics able to be more closely associated with a specific piece of article-content - that could take the form of something like: a {{clarify}} tag, which when clicked pops open a discussion in a modular-dialogue-window directly on the article page itself, inside which the unclear aspect would (ideally) be explained and discussed and resolved. This would help our discussions to be more closely connected to the development of the live version of the article itself, without everyone having to constantly flip back and forth between tabs, and keep track of the current wording via diffs, quite so much. (Hopefully that imagined feature is somewhat clearly explained. But if not, just dream it into a shape that you think would be good and achievable, and describe it! With the obvious caveat that any powerful new feature often comes hand-in-hand with new mis-use possibilities, and those will obviously need to be thought about and dealt/coped with, either socially or technically.)

Hope that helps. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 20:56, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

...but when I reply here, my edit is not indented? Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 00:17, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

The problem with no indent is the reader has no clue to what I am answering... I agree with you btw (removing text again - but I cant tell why - no edit summary) Christian75 (talk) 22:54, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Automated message deliveryEdit

From Special:Log/massmessage:

16:22, 4 May 2015 Delivery of "Tech News: 2015-19" to Wikipedia talk:Flow/Developer test page failed with an error code of ntspamfilter

Interesting that someone added this page to its list. It clearly won’t work, or not the same way as it does on normal talk pages where it just dumps its content including heading on the page. (edit: seems to be deliberate to do with a task, so someone is looking into this already.)

But it does raise the point of how this and other automated messages will be handled. Arguably they don’t need a topic each, as they just need to be read and archived or deleted. Unless there was some way of marking them as automated, so users could hide them en-masse or have them auto-hide (or archive or delete) after they have been read. Or have them all added to a special topic, or even multiple special topics, so a user's talk page can have a 'tech news' topic, a 'signpost' topic, etc.. This would ease management by keeping them separate from normal topics. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 15:46, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

MassMessage supports Flow. We're just having a problem with a spam filter (AbuseFilter or ConfirmEdit or something like that; we need to add logging to figure out which). Mattflaschen-WMF (talk) 16:05, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

The answer is cross-posting, that is, having a single topic appear on multiple talk pages. There would be a master page like Wikipedia:Talk/Tech News, and the topic would be initially posted there, and then immediately posted to all other flow pages that have requested to receive it. Individual users could elect to remove them from their talk pages when done, but they will remain on the master page no matter what. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 19:28, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Re: having a single topic appear on multiple talk pages - In the long-term, that's probably a good use-case for the newsletters and Flow.

In the shorter-term, there's an ongoing GSOC project to make a more powerful newsletter system: phab:T76199 ("Newsletter Extension for Mediawiki"). :-) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 23:14, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Cross-posting is the killer app. Better to implement sooner than later. Huge potential, that can solve are number one biggest talk page problem (which no one pro or anti flow has even mentioned once as far as I know) which is forgotten talk pages that get no responses. Automatically cross-posting to a notice board would solve this problem. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 02:39, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Failed again. Here's the log entry:

Delivery of "Tech News: 2015-20" to Wikipedia talk:Flow/Developer test page failed with an error code of ntspamfilter JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 16:11, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

subst testEdit

Empty citation (help) Mattflaschen-WMF (talk) 16:06, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 16:23, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Chinese: 中国 JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 16:24, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Another thing not working. Visual editor seems to be though, including templates. But it is odd in a couple of ways. It seems to default or change to visual editor unexpectedly, at least for me. Possibly as I used 'preview the result' which is normally an entirely different operation. Also the toggle for the visual editor is far from obvious, both the label of it and how it indicate on and off. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 16:29, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, right now it saves your VE/wikitext preference based on your last state, which means that if you switch to VE as the preview, then it stays there when you open your next post. We're going to fix that, so that if you switch to VE and don't make any changes, your preference will stay wikitext. That'll be coming up in a little bit.

Thanks for your thoughts about the toggle -- we have a lot of different opinions about that in the team, and it's helpful to hear that this version doesn't work for you. :) DannyH (WMF) (talk) 21:54, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

just testing... (However, the topic titles are waaaaaay to big for my liking) dudeprgmtalkϝɑɼĸ 16:58, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

metadataonlyEdit

test Mattflaschen-WMF (talk) 23:37, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

test DannyH (WMF) (talk) 22:43, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

New topic perf testEdit

Test Mattflaschen-WMF (talk) 22:47, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Test postEdit

test w/ sandwich DannyH (WMF) (talk) 22:48, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

twice DannyH (WMF) (talk) 22:49, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

TrialEdit

of the century, test DannyH (WMF) (talk) 22:50, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

currants DannyH (WMF) (talk) 22:51, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

@DannyH (WMF): very trial, so wow 89.0.241.109 (talk) 15:27, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

so no sub-threads anymore to a thread? 89.0.241.109 (talk) 15:29, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
or yes? at least it is obviously indenting 89.0.241.109 (talk) 15:29, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

ah, some mark up 89.0.241.109 (talk) 15:31, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

revertEdit

How to tell people why their edits are reverted without edit summaries? Christian75 (talk) 22:58, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Adding edit summaries to any "Content change", is task phab:T59894.

(Oh, and thanks for the feedback. Note that I only saw it here at this test page by chance. Placing feedback/questions/suggestions/requests/etc at the main WT:Flow would be ideal. :-) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 21:20, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Width reduxEdit

I commented here: Wikipedia talk:Flow#I can't see the board right now but worth mentioning also here. Seems the header is doing new and interesting things, if the page is wide enough. Problems

  • the box takes up a lot of space all the way down if maximised.
  • the text in that state is rather small and aggressively wrapped so hard to read. The icons don't help.
  • minimised it looks like a design feature. The icon could even be part of the design and it's certainly unclear what it does (though you can guess if you minimised it). Will minimising be remembered for a user per-board or globally?
  • with the header in that position the page content is no longer fixed width but as wide as the space. I like this but it seems contrary to the design of Flow. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 15:07, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

More about that bug - it works fine on a topic page, since there's no header, but on the main talk page, it don't work. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 15:29, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

It doesn't look as if it affects the topic page, or at least I can't see any difference.

Probably it's something that needs to be configurable per page. I mean right now on a normal page if you want headers across the top, or down the side, or more likely headers across the top and navigation links down the side, then you can achieve it with wikitext. This is used on many discussion based project pages – WP:A/R for example. Editors will want to be able to do something similar on Flow pages. And also on topic pages where appropriate. Having an automatic header for each topic would greatly facilitate some sorts of discussions. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 18:09, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

So, I removed that script and it's working now. Now if I hit that close box, the header info disappears and I have the full width for discussion. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 20:03, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

@JohnBlackburne: Quick replies:

  • The new Flow side rail is best explained over here.
  • The text size is a mistake, and fixed in phab:T99856
  • A sticky-preference for minimizing it, is coming soon, filed as phab:T97367
  • Long-term, I'm advocating for some fixed-width variables, much like wikiwand's userpreference panel has. For now, I believe this current design is to fix the pain points for us editors who really really wanted a full-width option, whilst also being a part of the first iteration of the new side rail.

@Oiyarbepsy: Sorry the script caused confusion. I had removed my own copy a while ago, to test other things. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 22:41, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Quiddity, I think it might be a good idea to have a header at the top and the side. The top header would be reserved for extremely important messages that are specific to the page, things like "This is not the place to contest a page deletion. Please see blah blah blah." The side would be for lower-importance things like wikiprojects and merge notices.

There also might be case where we want the sidebar to appear on topic pages, which would be a nice option. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 23:10, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

A per-topic header and/or sidebar would actually have significant benefits. There are many noticeboards and similar which consist of lots of sections with identical headers. AfD, TfD, CfD, MfD, RfD, Arb/R, DYK nominations. Some of these exist all one one page, some on separate pages which get transcluded into a index page.

Flow already has a cleaner split between topic and index, without requiring lots of little pages. Adding topic headers, that get added to every topic on page, would make it much easier to build and maintain such noticeboards by generating the per-AFD, per-RFD, per-DYK headers automatically. These could appear one way on the topic, another way in the index, using something like the noinclude/includeonly mechanism used by templates like {{tfd}} JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 00:10, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Some people had my flowidth script installed. That was really messing up the layout. I have now disabled the logic of my script, since it cannot easily be fixed.

All it's users now do get my CSS changes, however, so that's also nice :) —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 12:06, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

trolololEdit

niec Anders Feder (talk) 15:01, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Bloody Hell. Utopiantos (talk) 20:16, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

tmbox stylingEdit

I experimented a bit with the tmbox styling, now that we have the side rail:

Add @import url( '//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:TheDJ/flowheader.css&action=raw&ctype=text/css' ) as the first line in your common.css file. —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 12:00, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

tumdidum 89.0.241.109 (talk) 15:18, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

reply to test indendation WaggersTALK 15:12, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
ditto WaggersTALK 15:12, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
ditto WaggersTALK 15:12, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

After & Before screenshot: https://i.imgur.com/KZ7O5nJ.png

Thanks, TheDJ. :) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 20:46, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

a new topic, just for testing new topicsEdit

(Topic title edited by JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds, 89.0.241.109 (talk))

it's indeed a new topic 89.0.241.109 (talk) 15:34, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Hmm... is it indeed new? Maybe I am just being too skeptic.

BTW: Linking by selecting from the Link menu does not seem to work...

Edit: Ahh... they do work afterwords, but while editing you cannot check them because they point to the wrong namespace! Antilope (talk) 23:30, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

qwertyuiop ~~~~ 188.31.3.119 (talk) 00:53, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

MWTTT Flow testEdit

(Topic title edited by Tito Dutta (talk), Jim Carter)

MWTTT Jim Carter 10:02, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Hey Tito Dutta (talk) 10:08, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Just testing... you know. Jim Carter 10:09, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

test Shiti (talk) 10:06, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Testing the setting. Jnanaranjan Sahu (ଜ୍ଞାନ) talk 10:07, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Hello Tito Dutta (talk) 10:08, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
hello3 Shiti (talk) 10:08, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Yes its working... :D 106.51.138.41 (talk) 10:10, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
hello Shiti (talk) 10:08, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
testing the tests. Psubhashish (talk) 10:09, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello World! Pavanaja (talk) 10:06, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello World! Anuragbihani94 (talk) 10:07, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

test2 Shiti (talk) 10:06, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

  Tito Dutta (talk) 10:06, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello World! Anuragbihani94 (talk) 10:07, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello! Psubhashish (talk) 10:08, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
hi @Anuragbihani94: Csyogi (talk) 10:08, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

test again Jim Carter 10:07, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

नमस्कार :) Suyogtalk to me! 10:07, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Namasker! Jim Carter 10:09, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

ನಮಸ್ಕಾರ. :) Csyogi (talk) 10:07, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

ನಮಸ್ತೆ Pavithrah (talk) 10:08, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
ಥ್ಯಾಂಕ್ಸ್! :) Psubhashish (talk) 10:13, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

HI Everyone. Jnana here. Jnanaranjan Sahu (ଜ୍ଞାନ) talk 10:07, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

This is so awesome! Psubhashish (talk) 10:07, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Ya Tito Dutta (talk) 10:09, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Everything is Awesome,
Everything is cool when you're part of a team Suyogtalk to me! 10:10, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

hey Ananth subray (talk) 10:07, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

what r u doing man Madhusarthij (talk) 10:10, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

hi everyone Madhusarthij (talk) 10:08, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello everyone,my name is Jim Carter and you already know it. Jim Carter 10:08, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

hello Nachhattardhammu (talk) 10:09, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

hello Nachhattardhammu (talk) 10:08, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi All 106.206.138.169 (talk) 10:09, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Who is this? Please sign in if you have an account. Tito Dutta (talk) 10:09, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

While Flow is good but it's not totally working in the mobile websites. Besides, did anyone tried opening this page on mobile Wikipedia app. Jim Carter 10:11, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

No I am not going to sign in. 106.51.138.41 (talk) 10:11, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Who is ths? Jim Carter 10:12, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
I am Barack Obama. 106.51.138.41 (talk) 10:17, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

@Jnanaranjan sahu: କଣ କରୁଛ :P Shiti (talk) 10:11, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

କଣ କଲା ସେ!
କସ ଜିନିଷଟେ, ଆମର ଓଡ଼ିଆରେ ଏଇଟାକୁ ଏନେବଲ କରିବାକୁ ହବ । ଶୁଣୁଛ: @ଶିତିକଣ୍ଠ ଦାଶ:? Psubhashish (talk) 10:17, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
ହଁ ନିଶ୍ଚୟ .... Shiti (talk) 06:02, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

@Satdeep Gill:hello Nachhattardhammu (talk) 10:12, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

@Nachhattardhammu: hello Dhammu ji..... Satdeep Gill (talkcontribs 10:39, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

hello @Anuragbihani94: Abhinavgarule (talk) 10:19, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Just now I tried Dineshkumar Ponnusamy (talk) 17:42, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

hi everyone Madhusarthij (talk) 05:36, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello Abhinavgarule (talk) 11:37, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

test 170.29.64.4 (talk) 21:00, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

RESOLVED
The Moon is made of cheese. No it isn't! Yes it is! Anders Feder (talk) 19:07, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hello!Edit

(Topic title edited by Anders Feder (talk), Dan Garry, Wikimedia Foundation (talk))

I'm just testing Flow. Nothing Something particularly interesting. Dan Garry, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 23:32, 2 July 2015 (UTC) (Edited by Anders Feder (talk))

Hello, world! Kevin12xd 17:55, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Edited twice Mattflaschen-WMF (talk) 01:20, 9 July 2015 (UTC)


The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I can't see what I'm typing.Edit

As I noted in my last edit, I can't see what I'm typing. Please fix that.

09:35, July 13, 2015 Elvey(tc) 16:45, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Filed as phab:T105759. Thanks. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 23:24, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

I can't type here for a while. And I can't tell if anyone replied by looking at my contributions page. Elvey(tc) 17:09, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Re: the "(Current)" label, that issue is tracked at phab:T69325, and I've now updated it with many more details. Thanks for the reminder.

When you write "I can't type here for a while." - does that refer to a separate issue, or to the aforementioned contrast issue? Thanks. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 15:07, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

That's a separate issue. Just takes a while for the javascript to run to make tthis edit window appear. It displays moving diagonal lines while it's loading. Sometimes it's slow, sometimes not. I guess you're already aware of it. Probably faster than a full page load after an [edit] click by far. (And yes, I'm typing this blind.) Sorry for any typos... Elvey(tc) 16:46, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

...andThanks! Elvey(tc) 16:46, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Just testing codeEdit

This is my first time using Flow. On talk pages, I tend to propose a lot of wiki code, so that's what I'm here to test. Here goes:

=== Example heading ===

Feedback: As soon as I started typing <code>, a popup appeared in the upper right corner of my browser window explaining that wiki code has been detected and providing instructions to switch to Wikitext editor. However, I see three problems immediately. First, that popup disappeared after about five seconds--half the time required to see it and read it. Second, it suggested that I select Wikitext editor from the dropdown next to the "Save page" button, but there is no such button--only an "Add topic" button because I'm making the first thread post. Thirdly, there's no dropdown next to the "Add topic" button either; all that's needed is a click of the </> button. – voidxor 17:22, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! I've filed this as phab:T107100 Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 23:00, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Testing out what will happenEdit

if I leave the <code> ]]unclosed like that. </code>

<s>I can't wish there was a strikethrough oprion in the menue (and other typographical thing which exist in VisualEditor).</s>

Anyways... I press italics above, then wrote somethings, and press enter, which cased the italics to be turned off automatily for the text which i'm writing in this paragraph, not sure if I wanted that....Te

sting. (tJosve05a (c) 22:17, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Customizable colorsEdit

One reason againt Flow is that it is impossible to customiz the page (much), therefore I'm suggesting if it were possible to perhaps let user chose which colors everything on the page has, froma list of colorpalets, like "a green theme, different shades of green", or ...you get my drift. Pre-made color palets, but let the user chose which s/he wants? (tJosve05a (c) 22:21, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

(This is a test page, as the board header says We need your suggestions and feedback at WT:Flow (not on this page, please!)

Anyway, customization is already doable. It's HTML styled with CSS, so you could change the appearance in Special:MyPage/common.css . I just changed the topic titlebar with

.flow-topic-titlebar {
	background: goldenrod;
}

If someone came up with a nice palette, others could @import url() it or develop a gadget to enable it. But that's pretty geeky. Every official preference or theme adds complexity and support burden (I'm going to forget I did the above and wonder why Flow looks weird to me :-) ).

(Disclaimer: I don't work on the fine WMF Collaboration team developing Flow.) SPage (WMF) (talk) 05:04, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

RE: We need your suggestions and feedback at WT:Flow: It wasn't really a real suggestiong, just trying out Flow, and then if someone saw it at the same time, then great :)

Thanks for the code BTW, gotta earn how to code in css... bah! (tJosve05a (c) 06:27, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Testing a new topicEdit

Testing a new reply. I must say, while it does have at least several small improvements, I am not a fan of this new flow discussion system. Maybe it just takes a while to get used to, but I miss the simplistic code writing, like in the old present normal standard Wikipedia.

How do I delete this topic and reply? Do not delete it, just tell me how to do it, please. Utopiantos (talk) 20:15, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

It's not just us getting used to Flow, but also Flow getting used to us as it's further developed ;-)

With the </> 'button' you can change the edit field to use wiki markup, if that's what your missing.

Deleting a topic or post is called 'hide' in the '...' menus. Nothing is ever actually deleted from the database, just like with normal wiki pages, so 'hide' is maybe not too bad a name. — HHHIPPO 21:19, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

To clarify, an administrator can actually delete a post. Think of hide like "revert" and delete like "revision delete" on wikitalk pages. If you hide your post, any user could unhide it, but if an admin deletes it, only an admin could restore it. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 21:46, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

And the admin can restore it because it's not actually deleted from the database, only hidden from normal users. But you're right, that action is most similar to what we usually call 'delete'. — HHHIPPO 06:26, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

New topic testEdit

test Notification test 2015-08-13 (talk) 02:23, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Another new topicEdit

Test Notification test 2015-08-13 (talk) 02:24, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

test refEdit

test. [1]

  1. ^ Adams, Douglas (September 27, 1995). The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. Valley View, Calif.: Del Rey. ISBN 9780345391803.

Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 19:33, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

[1]

  1. ^ Adams, Douglas (September 27, 1995). The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. Valley View, Calif.: Del Rey. ISBN 9780345391803. Retrieved Thu Jul 31 2014. Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)

(tJosve05a (c) 19:35, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Impressive, well doneEdit

So, this is what the future of Wiki Discussions looks like ... I'm actually impressed. Much better than the old text system though at least you got to learn a small bit of coding ;P Testing - @Drcrazy102:, and now we can even search users instead of having to Cut-and-paste their User name.

Hope this passes onto the main site soon! Nice job WikiDevs! Doctor Crazy in Room 102 of The Mental Asylum 09:20, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

It looks like you have to search, otherwise it looks like this Drcrazy102 (links are copied in my browser) - but I cant search for non-latin letters... (I know I could unlink it again, but ... btw I cant figure out how to fix the link so its only links to DRcrazy102 without loosing the first text) and another issue. When pressing the link to remove it, I cant see remove because a suggestion box appears and hide the "remove" button, but I can see the cancel bottom (which means I would cancel and think that its impossible to remove just the link). Christian75 (talk) 09:34, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Well, Christian75, this has just shown me a small problem in replying. I can't use the "+[image of person]"/"user search" to insert a user-link.

I am assuming when you say "otherwise it looks like this", that you mean you have to do a "link search" opposed to a "user search"? That seems to be the same problem as what I just experienced, so it may be a problem with the reply coding (at a guess, I don't really know quite how coding works, so *shrugs*).

In regards to the "remove link". Have you tried clicking outside of the search box and then seeing what happens? Since the search box seems to use an auto-pop-up function, the common work around is clicking somewhere else on the 'dialog' box (I think is the correct term), in this case the "link search" box. Give it a try and see if that works, though I would think that the Devs would probably change the layout to avoid that problem though they may not be aware of it, at this stage.

Still looks better than the current dialog box though, yes? Seems to have, or at least aims to have once bugs are dealt with, the same functionality as the old but with a much nicer UI.

And I just realised what the "</>" was for: switching between the text-based version of the message and the pretty version. ^V^

Damnit, now I have to go and use the old system. At least, the old system has a list of functions which helps me a lot, just another thought for the Devs to consider amongst many. Doctor Crazy in Room 102 of The Mental Asylum 10:21, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

test topicEdit

Oranges Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 23:12, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Another test topicEdit

Foo Test 2015-08-18 (talk) 00:46, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

TopicEdit

Foo Test 2015-08-18 (talk) 00:56, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

RetestEdit

Bar Mattflaschen-WMF (talk) 01:09, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

RetestEdit

Baz Test 2015-08-18 (talk) 01:24, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

testEdit

ing Mattflaschen-WMF (talk) 02:31, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

When will this new talk page interface be enabled on other Wikimedia talk pages? Jarble (talk) 02:21, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

It is rolling out gradually to various projects For instance, we recently converted all of the LiquidThreads pages on MediaWiki.org to Flow, so there are now a significant number of Flow boards there. It's also on a namespace on Catalan Wikipedia. If you're interested in using it, please see mw:Flow/Request_Flow_on_a_page or contact us. Mattflaschen-WMF (talk) 02:47, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Once moreEdit

With feeling Test 2015-08-18 (talk) 03:45, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Mention @Mattflaschen-WMF: Test 2015-08-19 (talk) 00:34, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

TestEdit

After deploying end the occupation wgFlowOccupyPages patch. Mattflaschen-WMF (talk) 00:27, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Test CAPTCHAEdit

External link: http://www.google.com 195.144.78.222 (talk) 15:07, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

External link: http://www.google.com 195.144.78.222 (talk) 15:09, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

External link: http://www.google.com 195.144.78.222 (talk) 15:12, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

External link: http://www.google.com 195.144.78.222 (talk) 15:12, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

External link: http://www.google.com 195.144.78.222 (talk) 15:12, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Do you still need testing?Edit

test of article content - from Googol ledeEdit

content copied from the lede of googol


A googol is the large number 10100. In decimal notation, it is written as the digit 1 followed by one hundred 0s:

10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000.

The term was coined in 1920 by 9-year-old Milton Sirotta (1911–1981), nephew of American mathematician Edward Kasner.[1] Kasner popularized the concept in his 1940 book Mathematics and the Imagination.[2] Other names for googol include ten duotrigintillion on the short scale, ten thousand sexdecillion on the long scale, or ten sexdecilliard on the Peletier long scale.

  1. ^ Bialik, Carl (June 14, 2004). "There Could Be No Google Without Edward Kasner". The Wall Street Journal Online. (retrieved March 17, 2015)
  2. ^ Kasner, Edward and Newman, James R. (1940). Mathematics and the Imagination. Simon and Schuster, New York. ISBN 0-486-41703-4.CS1 maint: Multiple names: authors list (link) The relevant passage about the googol and googolplex, attributing both of these names to Kasner's nine-year-old nephew, is available in James R. Newman, ed. (2000) [1956]. The world of mathematics, volume 3. Mineola, New York: Dover Publications. pp. 2007–2010. ISBN 978-0-486-41151-4.

Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 20:34, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

(and now a paste, using a copy direct from the article (whilst not in editing mode), into Flow's VisualEditor editing-mode.)

A googol is the large number 10100. In decimal notation, it is written as the digit 1 followed by one hundred 0s:

10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000.

The term was coined in 1920 by 9-year-old Milton Sirotta (1911–1981), nephew of American mathematician Edward Kasner.[1] Kasner popularized the concept in his 1940 book Mathematics and the Imagination.[2] Other names for googol include ten duotrigintillion on the short scale, ten thousand sexdecillion on the long scale, or ten sexdecilliard on the Peletier long scale. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 20:53, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

Test, copied from Executive Director's Talk ArchiveEdit

== User profiles for Mobiles == Hi Lila! Today, I discovered for the first time a Special Page "user profile" at deWP. It is, sadly, not listed at [[:de:Special:SpecialPages]] so that I do not know if the same exists The feature seems to exist at all Wikimedia projects (see i.e. [[Special:UserProfile/Martina Nolte|here]] and at [[c:Special:UserProfile/Martina_Nolte|Commons]]). This "user profile" shows your last edit in the project including an article's first image, your last upload at Wikimedia Commons, the last "Thank you" to that user, his or her amount of uploads at Commons, the amount of edits in the particular project. The results of such a "profile" can be very puzzling and even somehow misleading like in [https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spezial:Benutzerprofil/Achim_Raschka this example] (derived from [[:de:Spezial:Benutzerprofil/Achim_Raschka]]). In [[:de:Wikipedia_Diskussion:Kurier#nur_nicht_aufregen.2C_denn_...|a discussion]] at the German ''Signpost'' equivalent "Kurier", we wonder if we could deactivate these profiles if the communty would decide to do so? Whom would we have to address? Thanks for your time and consideration. -- ) 19:49, 24 February 2015 (UTC)/21:38, 24 February 2015 (UTC)(((Name removed to avoid ping))) {{collapse top|NSFW images used as example}} [[File:WP Profile Example1.PNG|thumb|Example (1) of a user profile]] [[File:WP Profile Example2.PNG|thumb|Example (2) of a user profile]] {{collapse bottom}} : Hey Lila. I want to keep myself short, but still it's some more words I want to speak out related to the "user profile" issue pointed out by Martina in particular and based on that some more general words on the WMF's software development process. Alsee (talk) 00:56, 11 September 2015 (UTC) (Edited by Oiyarbepsy (talk))

Problem: Flow locked the show/hide template in SHOW mode, locking in the display of phonographic images. As I understand it this is "by design", so it's a design bug and not a software bug.

The next user to come along (very reasonably) considered the images to be potentially disruptive. The only way to fix the Flow failure was to DELETE the content From Flow.

BUG: I tried to view the original version in history. The version in displayed by history did not match what was actually displayed at that time. This is real problem. It rendered with the images HIDDEN, and I was shocked to find that the show/hide button worked.

BUG: I tested reverting that deletion. Flow completely mangled the revert. The images are gone, the links are gone, the template is gone. Alsee (talk) 18:17, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi Alsee, thanks for the notes. The collapse template seems to be locked in "show" mode upon the initial save, but if I refresh the page, it is properly showing as collapsed. Hence the disparity you saw when looking at the old revision. I've filed a bug for this as phab:T112332.

Re: reverting. After much further testing, I've narrowed down the problem, and filed phab:T112338. This was working the last time I tried it, so is a new bug; thanks for discovering it. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 21:51, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

test collapse templatesEdit

test collapse

foo bar

Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 21:03, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

test collapse

foo bar

Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 21:06, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

test Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 21:10, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

test revertingEdit

foo bar test.

test collapse

foo bar

foo bar. test edit. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 21:17, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

test edit in wikitext mode Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 21:21, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

testEdit

test
yada yada yada|} Alsee (talk) 02:58, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Sample of actual Talk page work. Flow craps out bad.Edit

RFCEdit

Hello Everyone,I prepared a table for Fields Medal page which,in my opinion,would help us to reach a consensus about edits which have to be done to the page.Of course,I did my best to make it as complete as I could.I think it can be replaced with existing table in the article.(I must greatly thank User:Dcljr|dcljr for proposing a new and excellent table format): RfC started 14:12, 17 August 2014 (UTC) (((username de-linked to avoid ping)))

Lars Ahlfors University of Helsinki, Finland Finland Harvard University, US[1][2]| "Awarded medal for research on covering surfaces related to Riemann surfaces of inverse functions of entire and meromorphic functions. Opened up a new fileds of analysis."|- Jesse Douglas Massachusetts Institute of Technology, US United States City College of New York, US[3][4] "Did important work of the Plateau problem which is concerned with finding minimal surfaces connecting and determined by some fixed boundary." |-|rowspan=2| 1950|rowspan=2| Cambridge, US| Laurent Schwartz| University of Nancy, France| France| University of Paris VII, France[5][6]| "Developed the theory of distributions, a new notion of generalized function motivated by the Dirac delta-function of theoretical physics."|-| Atle Selberg| Institute for Advanced Study, US| Norway| Institute for Advanced Study, US[7]| "Developed generalizations of the sieve methods of Viggo Brun; achieved major results on zeros of the Riemann zeta function; gave an elementary proof of the prime number theorem (with P. Erdös), with a generalization to prime numbers in an arbitrary arithmetic progression."
Kunihiko Kodaira Institute for Advanced Study, USPrinceton University, US Japan University of Tokyo, Japan[8]| "Achieved major results in the theory of harmonic integrals and numerous applications to Kählerian and more specifically to algebraic varieties. He demonstrated, by sheaf cohomology, that such varieties are Hodge manifolds."|- Jean-Pierre Serre University of Nancy, France France Collège de France, France[9][10]| "Achieved major results on the homotopy groups of spheres, especially in his use of the method of spectral sequences. Reformulated and exented some of the main results of complex variable theory in terms of sheaves."|-|rowspan=2| 1958|rowspan=2| Edinburgh, UK Klaus Roth University College London, UK Weimar Republic Imperial College London, UK[11]| "Solved in 1955 the famous Thue-Siegel problem concerning the approximation to algebraic numbers by rational numbers and proved in 1952 that a sequence with no three numbers in arithmetic progression has zero density (a conjecture of Erdös and Turán of 1935)."|-| René Thom University of Strasbourg, France France Institut des Hautes Études Scientifiques, France[12]| "In 1954 invented and developed the theory of cobordism in algebraic topology. This classification of manifolds used homotopy theory in a fundamental way and became a prime example of a general cohomology theory."|-|rowspan=2| 1962|rowspan=2| Stockholm, Sweden| Lars Hörmander| University of Stockholm, Sweden| Sweden| Lund University, Sweden[13]| "Worked in partial diffential equations. Specifically, contributed to the general theory of linear differential operators. The questions go back to one of Hilbert's problems at the 1900 congress."|-| John Milnor Princeton University, US United States Stony Brook University, US[14]| "Proved that a 7-dimensional sphere can have several differential structures; this led to the creation of the field of differential topology."|-|rowspan=4| 1966|rowspan=4| Moscow, USSR Michael Atiyah University of Oxford, UK United Kingdom University of Edinburgh, UK[15]| "Did joint work with Hirzebruch in K-theory; proved jointly with Singer the index theorem of elliptic operators on complex manifolds; worked in collaboration with Bott to prove a fixed point theorem related to the "Lefschetz formula"."|- Paul Joseph Cohen Stanford University, US United States Stanford University, US[16]| "Used technique called "forcing" to prove the independence in set theory of the axiom of choice and of the generalized continuum hypothesis. The latter problem was the first of Hilbert's problems of the 1900 Congress."
Alexander Grothendieck Institut des Hautes Études Scientifiques, France Weimar Republic Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique , France[17]| "Built on work of Weil and Zariski and effected fundamental advances in algebraic geometry. He introduced the idea of K-theory (the Grothendieck groups and rings). Revolutionized homological algebra in his celebrated "Tohoku paper""
Stephen Smale University of California, Berkeley, US United States City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong[18]| "Worked in differential topology where he proved the generalized Poincaré conjecture in dimension n>=5: Every closed, n-dimensional manifold homotopy-equivalent to the n-dimensional sphere is homeomorphic to it. Introduced the method of handle-bodies to solve this and related problems."|-|rowspan=4| 1970|rowspan=4| Nice, France| Alan Baker| University of Cambridge, UK| United Kingdom| Trinity College, Cambridge, UK[19]| "Generalized the Gelfond-Schneider theorem (the solution to Hilbert's seventh problem). From this work he generated transcendental numbers not previously identified."|- Heisuke Hironaka Harvard University, US Japan Kyoto University, Japan[20][21]| "Generalized work of Zariski who had proved for dimension"
John G. Thompson University of Cambridge, UK United States University of Cambridge, UK [22]| "Proved jointly with W. Feit that all non-cyclic finite simple groups have even order. The extension of this work by Thompson determined the minimal simple finite groups, that is, the simple finite groups whose proper subgroups are solvable."|- Sergei Novikov Moscow State University, USSR| USSR| Steklov Mathematical Institute, Russia

Moscow State University, Russia University of Maryland-College Park, US[23][24]| "Made important advances in topology, the most well-known being his proof of the topological invariance of the Pontrjagin classes of the differentiable manifold. His work included a study of the cohomology and homotopy of Thom spaces."|-|rowspan=2| 1974|rowspan=2| Vancouver, Canada| Enrico Bombieri| University of Pisa, Italy| Italy| Institute for Advanced Study, US[25]| "Major contributions in the primes, in univalent functions and the local Bieberbach conjecture, in theory of functions of several complex variables, and in theory of partial differential equations and minimal surfaces - in particular, to the solution of Bernstein's problem in higher dimensions."|-

David Mumford| Harvard University, US| United States| Brown University, US[26]| "Contributed to problems of the existence and structure of varieties of moduli, varieties whose points parametrize isomorphism classes of some type of geometric object. Also made several important contributions to the theory of algebraic surfaces."
Charles Fefferman Princeton University, US United States Princeton University, US[27]| "Contributed several innovations that revised the study of multidimensional complex analysis by finding correct generalizations of classical (low-dimensional) results."
Daniel Quillen Massachusetts Institute of Technology, US United States University of Oxford, UK[28]| "The prime architect of the higher algebraic K-theory, a new tool that successfully employed geometric and topological methods and ideas to formulate and solve major problems in algebra, particularly ring theory and module theory."|- Grigori Margulis Princeton University, US USSR Yale University, US[29]| "Provided innovative analysis of the structure of Lie groups. His work belongs to combinatorics, differential geometry, ergodic theory, dynamical systems, and Lie groups."|-|rowspan=3| 1982|rowspan=3| Warsaw, Poland| Alain Connes| Institut des Hautes Études Scientifiques, France| France| Institut des Hautes Études Scientifiques, FranceCollège de France, France

Ohio State University, US[30]| "Contributed to the theory of operator algebras, particularly the general classification and structure theorem of factors of type III, classification of automorphisms of the hyperfinite factor, classification of injective factors, and applications of the theory of C*-algebras to foliations and differential geometry in general."

Simon Donaldson University of Oxford, UK United Kingdom Imperial College London, UK[31]| "Received medal primarily for his work on topology of four-manifolds, especially for showing that there is a differential structure on euclidian four-space which is different from the usual structure."|-| Gerd Faltings| Princeton University, US| West Germany| Max Planck Institute for Mathematics, Germany[32]| "Using methods of arithmetic algebraic geometry, he received medal primarily for his proof of the Mordell Conjecture."|- Michael Freedman University of California, San Diego, US United States  Microsoft Station Q[33]| "Developed new methods for topological analysis of four-manifolds. One of his results is a proof of the four-dimensional Poincaré Conjecture."|-|rowspan=4| 1990|rowspan=4| Kyoto, Japan| Vladimir Drinfeld| University of Kharkiv, USSR| USSR| University of Chicago, US[34]| "For his work on quantum groups and for his work in number theory."|-| Vaughan F. R. Jones University of California, Berkeley, US New Zealand University of California, Berkeley, US[35],Vanderbilt University, US[36]| "for his discovery of an unexpected link between the mathematical study of knots – a field that dates back to the 19th century – and statistical mechanics, a form of mathematics used to study complex systems with large numbers of components."
Shigefumi Mori Kyoto University, Japan Japan Kyoto University, Japan[37]| "for the proof of Hartshorne’s conjecture and his work on the classification of three-dimensional algebraic varieties."
Edward Witten Institute for Advanced Study, US United States Institute for Advanced Study, US[38]| "... his ability to interpret physical ideas in mathematical form is quite unique."[39]|-|rowspan=4| 1994|rowspan=4| Zurich, Switzerland Jean Bourgain Institut des Hautes Études Scientifiques, France Belgium Institute for Advanced Study, France[40]| "Bourgain's work touches on several central topics of mathematical analysis: the geometry of Banach spaces, convexity in high dimensions, harmonic analysis, ergodic theory, and finally, nonlinear partial differential equations from mathematical physics."|- Pierre-Louis Lions Paris Dauphine University, France France Collège de France, FranceÉcole polytechnique, France[41]| "... such nonlinear partial differential equation simply do not have smooth or even C1 solutions existing after short times. ... The only option is therefore to search for some kind of "weak" solution. This undertaking is in effect to figure out how to allow for certain kinds of "physically correct" singularities and how to forbid others. ... Lions and Crandall at last broke open the problem by focusing attention on viscosity solutions, which are defined in terms of certain inequalities holding wherever the graph of the solution is touched on one side or the other by a smooth test function."
Paris-Sud 11 University, France France Collège de France, France[42]| "proving stability properties - dynamic stability, such as that sought for the solar system, or structural stability, meaning persistence under parameter changes of the global properties of the system."
Efim Zelmanov University of California, San Diego, US USSR Steklov Mathematical Institute, Russia,University of California, San Diego, US[43] "For his solution to the restricted Burnside problem."|-|rowspan=4| 1998|rowspan=4| Berlin, Germany| Richard Borcherds| University of California, Berkeley, USUniversity of Cambridge, UK| South Africa| University of California, Berkeley, US[44]| "for his work on the introduction of vertex algebras, the proof of the Moonshine conjecture and for his discovery of a new class of automorphic infinite products"|- Timothy Gowers University of Cambridge, UK United Kingdom University of Cambridge, UK[45]| "William Timothy Gowers has provided important contributions to functional analysis, making extensive use of methods from combination theory. These two fields apparently have little to do with each other, and a significant achievement of Gowers has been to combine these fruitfully."|- Maxim Kontsevich Institut des Hautes Études Scientifiques, FranceRutgers University, US USSR Institut des Hautes Études Scientifiques, FranceRutgers University, US[46]| "contributions to four problems of geometry"
Curtis T. McMullen Harvard University, US United States Harvard University, US[47]| "He has made important contributions to various branches of the theory of dynamical systems, such as the algorithmic study of polynomial equations, the study of the distribution of the points of a lattice of a Lie group, hyperbolic geometry, holomorphic dynamics and the renormalization of maps of the interval."|-|rowspan=2| 2002|rowspan=2| Beijing, China Laurent Lafforgue Institut des Hautes Études Scientifiques, France France Institut des Hautes Études Scientifiques, France[48]| "Laurent Lafforgue has been awarded the Fields Medal for his proof of the Langlands correspondence for the full linear groups GLr (r≥1

) over function fields."|-

Vladimir Voevodsky Institute for Advanced Study, US USSR Institute for Advanced Study, US[49]| " he defined and developed motivic cohomology and the A1-homotopy theory of algebraic varieties; he proved the Milnor conjectures on the K-theory of fields"|-|rowspan=4| 2006|rowspan=4| Madrid, Spain Andrei Okounkov Princeton University, US USSR Columbia University, US[50]| "for his contributions bridging probability, representation theory and algebraic geometry"|- Grigori Perelman None USSR Steklov Mathematical Institute, Russia[51]| "for his contributions to geometry and his revolutionary insights into the analytical and geometric structure of the Ricci flow"
Terence Tao University of California, Los Angeles, US Australia University of California, Los Angeles, US[52]| "for his contributions to partial differential equations, combinatorics, harmonic analysis and additive number theory "
Wendelin Werner Paris-Sud 11 University, France West Germany ETH Zurich, Switzerland[53]| "for his contributions to the development of stochastic Loewner evolution, the geometry of two-dimensional Brownian motion, and conformal field theory"
Hebrew University of Jerusalem, IsraelPrinceton University, US Israel Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel[54]| "For his results on measure rigidity in ergodic theory, and their applications to number theory."
Ngô Bảo Châu| Paris-Sud 11 University, FranceInstitute for Advanced Study, US| North Vietnam| Paris-Sud 11 University, FranceUniversity of Chicago, US

Vietnam Institute for Advanced Study, Vietnam[55]| "For his proof of the Fundamental Lemma in the theory of automorphic forms through the introduction of new algebro-geometric methods"

Cédric Villani École Normale Supérieure de Lyon, FranceInstitut Henri Poincaré, France France Lyon University, FranceInstitut Henri Poincaré, France[56]| "For his proofs of nonlinear Landau damping and convergence to equilibrium for the Boltzmann equation."
Artur Avila Paris Diderot University, FranceCNRS, France

Instituto Nacional de Matemática Pura e Aplicada, Brazil

Brazil Paris Diderot University, FranceCNRS, France

Instituto Nacional de Matemática Pura e Aplicada, Brazil[57]| "is awarded a Fields Medal for his profound contributions to dynamical systems theory, which have changed the face of the field, using the powerful idea of renormalization as a unifying principle."

Manjul Bhargava Princeton University, US Canada Princeton University, US[58][59]| "is awarded a Fields Medal for developing powerful new methods in the geometry of numbers, which he applied to count rings of small rank and to bound the average rank of elliptic curves."
Martin Hairer University of Warwick, UK Austria University of Warwick, UK[60][61][62]| "is awarded a Fields Medal for his outstanding contributions to the theory of stochastic partial differential equations, and in particular for the creation of a theory of regularity structures for such equations."
Maryam Mirzakhani Stanford University, US Iran Stanford University, US[63][64]| "is awarded the Fields Medal for her outstanding contributions to the dynamics and geometry of Riemann surfaces and their moduli spaces."
n/a n/a n/a n/a| n/a|}
  1. ^ http://www.ams.org/notices/199802/comm-krantz.pdf
  2. ^ "Lars Ahlfors (1907-1996)". Harvard University, Dept. of Math. 7 November 2004. Retrieved 19 August 2014.
  3. ^ "Jesse Douglas". Encyclopedia Britannica. 28 May 2010. Retrieved 19 August 2014.
  4. ^ http://wdb.ugr.es/~geometry/seminar/files/talks/MMicallef20130207.pdf
  5. ^ "Laurent Moise Schwartz". School of Mathematics and Statistics University of St Andrews, Scotland. 24 June 2007. Retrieved 19 August 2014.
  6. ^ Schwartz, Laurent (1 Feb 2001). Un mathématicien aux prises avec le siècle. AMS: Birkhäuser. ISBN 978-3-0348-7584-4. Retrieved 21 August 2014. Unknown parameter |trans_title= ignored (help)
  7. ^ http://www.ams.org/notices/200906/rtx090600692p-corrected.pdf
  8. ^ http://www.ams.org/notices/199803/comm-obit-spencer.pdf
  9. ^ http://www.math.rug.nl/~top/lectures/delft.pdf
  10. ^ "Jean-Pierre Serre". Encyclopedia Britannica. 5 Feb 1997. Retrieved 19 August 2014.
  11. ^ Mckinnon Riehm, Elaine; Hoffman, Frances (3 November 2011). Turbulent Times in Mathematics: The Life of J.C. Fields and the History of the Fields Medal. American Math Society: American Mathematical Society. p. 212. ISBN 978-0821869147. Retrieved 16 August 2014.
  12. ^ http://www.robertnowlan.com/pdfs/Thom,%20Rene.pdf
  13. ^ http://smai.emath.fr/IMG/pdf/matapli100_Hormander.pdf
  14. ^ "John W. Milnor". Stony Brook University. 5 March 1997. Retrieved 17 August 2014.
  15. ^ http://upcommons.upc.edu/video/bitstream/2099.2/946/17/Poster05-AbelPrize-CV.pdf
  16. ^ http://historicalsociety.stanford.edu/pdfmem/Cohen_P.pdf
  17. ^ http://www.math.ucdenver.edu/~jloats/StudentCELEBS/Grothendieck_Trenkamp.pdf
  18. ^ "Prof. Stephen SMALE (史梅爾)". City University of Hong Kong. 5 April 2012. Retrieved 18 August 2014.
  19. ^ "The Laureates". Heidelberg Laureate Forum Foundation (HLFF). 25 September 2013. Retrieved 16 August 2014.
  20. ^ http://www.ams.org/notices/200509/fea-hironaka.pdf
  21. ^ "No title". Research Institute for Mathematical Sciences,Kyoto,Japan. 26 May 2007. Retrieved 16 August 2014.
  22. ^ http://www.abelprize.no/c53860/binfil/download.php?tid=53792
  23. ^ http://www.mi.ras.ru/~snovikov/998.pdf
  24. ^ "Novikov, Sergei Petrovich". Russian Academy of Science. 1 January 2012. Retrieved 20 August 2014.
  25. ^ BARTOCCI, CLAUDIO; Betti, Renato; Guerraggio, Angelo; Lucchetti, Roberto Lucchetti, eds. (2011 pages=2013-2014). (2011 ed.). Springer. ISBN 978-3642136054 http://www.amazon.com/Mathematical-Lives-Protagonists-Twentieth-Century/dp/3642136052. Retrieved 18 August 2014. Missing pipe in: |publication-date= (help); Unknown parameter |trans_title= ignored (help); Check date values in: |publication-date= (help); Missing or empty |title= (help)
  26. ^ "David Mumford=12 May 2006". The Division of Applied Mathematics, Brown University. Retrieved 18 August 2014.
  27. ^ http://web.math.princeton.edu/WebCV/FeffermanCV.pdf
  28. ^ http://www.ams.org/notices/201210/rtx121001392p.pdf
  29. ^ http://users.math.yale.edu/public_html/People/gam3.html
  30. ^ "Alain Connes". 25 May 2012. Retrieved 18 August 2014.
  31. ^ "Simon Donaldson (Royal Society Research Professor)". Department of Mathematics, Imperial College, Queen's Gate, London. 16 January 2008. Retrieved 16 August 2014.
  32. ^ "The Laureates". Heidelberg Laureate Forum Foundation (HLFF). 6 October 2013. Retrieved 16 August 2014.
  33. ^ http://celebratio.org/cmmedia/essaypdf/19_main_3.pdf
  34. ^ "Vladimir Gershonovich Drinfeld". School of Mathematics and Statistics, University of St Andrews, Scotland. 18 August 2009. Retrieved 16 August 2014.
  35. ^ "Curriculum Vitae: Vaughan F. R. Jones". University of California, Berkeley. 10 November 2001. Retrieved 16 August 2014.
  36. ^ Salisbury, David (6 April 2011). "Fields Medalist joins Vanderbilt faculty". Vanderbilt University. Retrieved 17 May 2011.
  37. ^ "The Laureates". Heidelberg Laureate Forum Foundation (HLFF). 10 April 2014. Retrieved 16 August 2014.
  38. ^ http://www.sns.ias.edu/~witten/CurrentCV.pdf
  39. ^ http://www.mathunion.org/ICM/ICM1990.1/Main/icm1990.1.0031.0036.ocr.pdf
  40. ^ https://www.math.ias.edu/files/bourgain/CVBourgain.pdf
  41. ^ "Collège de France". 16 December 2013. Retrieved 18 August 2014.
  42. ^ "Collège de France". 16 December 2013. Retrieved 18 August 2014.
  43. ^ http://www.ime.usp.br/~grishkov/papers/CV.Zelm..pdf
  44. ^ "The Laureates". Heidelberg Laureate Forum Foundation (HLFF). 10 April 2014. Retrieved 16 August 2014.
  45. ^ "William Timothy Gowers". Encyclopedia Britannica. 28 March 2009. Retrieved 16 August 2014.
  46. ^ "CURRICULUM VITAE". ihes. 22 November 2009. Retrieved 16 August 2014.
  47. ^ http://abel.math.harvard.edu/~ctm/vita/resume.pdf
  48. ^ "Curriculum Vitae". ihes. 6 December 2005. Retrieved 19 August 2014.
  49. ^ http://www.math.ias.edu/~vladimir/Site3/home_files/mitcv12.pdf
  50. ^ "Department of Mathematics". University of Columbia, Department of Mathematics. 20 December 2012. Retrieved 19 August 2014.
  51. ^ "Encylopedia Britannica". Encylopedia Britannica. 28 May 2008. Retrieved 19 August 2014.
  52. ^ "Vitae and Bibliography for Terence Tao". UCLA Dept. of Math. 16 March 2010. Retrieved 19 August 2014.
  53. ^ "Wendelin WERNER". ETH Zurich. 18 September 2013. Retrieved 19 August 2014.
  54. ^ "Nobel at HU". The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. 5 July 2011. Retrieved 16 August 2014.
  55. ^ http://www.heidelberg-laureate-forum.org/blog/laureate/bao-chau-ngo/
  56. ^ http://cedricvillani.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/cv-2012.pdf
  57. ^ https://www.imj-prg.fr/~artur.avila/cur.pdf
  58. ^ http://www2.maths.ox.ac.uk/cmi/library/research_award/Bhargava/CV.pdf
  59. ^ http://www.mathunion.org/fileadmin/IMU/Prizes/2014/news_release_bhargava.pdf
  60. ^ http://www.mathunion.org/fileadmin/IMU/Prizes/2014/news_release_hairer.pdf
  61. ^ http://www.hairer.org/cv.pdf
  62. ^ http://homepages.warwick.ac.uk/~masdbd/cv.pdf
  63. ^ http://www2.maths.ox.ac.uk/cmi/library/annual_report/ar2008/08Interview.pdf
  64. ^ "Department of Mathematics". Stanford University. 22 January 2009. Retrieved 19 August 2014.

about above tableEdit

There are other tables in the article in which they contain information about fields medalists.Should the above table replace with them? User:Rezameyqani|Rezameyqani (User talk:Rezameyqani|talk) 14:12, 17 August 2014 (UTC) (((username de-linked to avoid ping)))

Alsee (talk) 03:03, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

There's a button you can click at the top right that makes it full-width, which makes a huge difference. Also, there is talk of getting rid of the scrollbar in a scrollbar, but it's probably a little down on the priorities list. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 03:09, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Expanding the width does not fix it. The content is butchered. Alsee (talk) 03:38, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Removing the scrollbar is phab:T76821.

Re: the table:

  • The first test I made, copying the raw wikitext from the origin, into the wikitext-editor of Flow, worked well. See 1st post in Topic:Sosjy6pjhih092j2.
  • The second test I made (underneath), copying that section of the rendered page into VE-editor mode, almost worked, but skipped two |- strings, which broke (misaligned) the first 2 rows of table content, but everything else displays normally. However, this is identical with the outcome if I copy the same thing into a VE sandbox (not Flow). I've filed a bug for parsoid at Phab:T112394.
  • The third test, pasting wikitext into VE editor-mode (checking the autoconversion) also worked well. See 3rd post.

Please could you describe what steps you followed, to create the above table? (I.e. Which source version you used, which edit-mode in Flow you pasted it into, and what tweaks you did before saving aside from unlinking the username). It seems to be missing the entire header row, and has the closing |} after the "about above table" section, but I cannot reproduce this outcome. Thanks! Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 17:38, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

I don't use VE. I went to the Talk page. I copied, including text from above the table. I copied down, including text from below the table. I don't touch the table at all. The table was safely between normal sentences that I copied as a single chunk. I pasted. I unlinked. I saved. (Actually I think the last time I tried this I pasted it into WindowsNotepad to preform the unlink edit, then recopied and pasted here).

In my more recent thread on the same board, I needed to paste in smaller tables. (Copied from lower in the same Field's Medal RFC discussion). I tried toggling </> to paste each way, neither seemed to work. I deleted the smaller table before saving.

P.S. I Told Danny I had Twinkle and probably something else - I just remembered that the "something else" is WikiEd.I'm pretty sure I have nothing unusual. Alsee (talk) 19:55, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

replication of an actual talk page discussionEdit

Hello Everyone,I prepared a table for Fields Medal page which,in my opinion,would help us to reach a consensus about edits which have to be done to the page.Of course,I did my best to make it as complete as I could.I think it can be replaced with existing table in the article.(I must greatly thank dcljr for proposing a new and excellent table format)

(Large table for discussion - not included here) Alsee (talk) 17:01, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

I will be glad to hear your valuable comments. Alsee (talk) 17:04, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Looks good to me Alsee (talk) 17:05, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
No flags at all please. I am not sure the "Country of origin" field is
particularly useful anyway, as it makes it look as if Grothendieck and
Werner are mathematically German, while they are definitely
mathematically French (not to mention their citizenship). Alsee (talk) 17:36, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
I vote for dcljr's suggestion with flags Alsee (talk) 17:39, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
If by saying "I am not sure the "Country of origin" field is
particularly useful anyway, as it makes it look as if Grothendieck and
Werner are mathematically German, while they are definitely
mathematically French (not to mention their citizenship)" You mean that
we should remove this field,I completely agree with you.In my opinion,It
suffices to have the above table which we are discussing about,and list
of the medalists by affiliation Alsee (talk) 17:52, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello there. I just updated the above table,with respect to the concerns which has been addressed by @Brightnsalty, Joseluismb.I also de-linked the countries in the birthplace referring to Jitse Niesen proposal. Yet I modified the flags regarding dcljr's proposal,since the current table is based on his efforts,though my opinion is to remove all of the flags,just like what JohnBlackburne said.I'll be glad to hear your invaluable comments. Cheers. Alsee (talk) 17:53, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Rather than Nobel prize, which has a full article about winner's nationality, in other academic awards flags are used (e.g. Turing Award) and it make more clear and can get lots of information with one look. another issue: I suggest Venue instead of Location. Alsee (talk) 17:38, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
I want to thank you all,for your time and vigorous efforts to make the
table as the best possible. As I mentioned above,I cannot come here
often in next days,So I: believe any of you who feels that he/she can
contribute to this table,I appreciate it.Of course,Since the above table
is mainly based on dcljr's proposal,I think probably it'd be better to
consult with dcljr,before make any changes to the table.Finally,my
opinion about the table is close with what John Blackburn has suggested,though I think it'd be better,in current/last
affiliation, to put flags before affiliation name(s)(just like the
second table which is propposed by dcljr).In case of any deadlock(s),my
vote goes for John Blackburn. Thanks Alsee (talk) 17:51, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Comment Watch out, folks! This is getting into the thin end of the committee design phase, where everyone spoils everyone else's efforts by tinkering and bickering over details. Quit while you are ahead. I have just come on on the RFC, and already like Dcljr, and probably for the same reason, I'm outtahere immediately. Good luck all! Alsee (talk) 17:54, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
For the record, I'm leaving this for others to hash out. Please don't involve me in the conversation anymore. Thanks. Alsee (talk) 17:54, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Looks great to me Alsee (talk) 17:05, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Yau was not born in Hong Kong. He was born in mainland China shortly
before the government of the Republic of China was overthrown, according
to his website. Alsee (talk) 17:05, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Yes,You are right. I've just corrected it. If you have any other ideas
about this table,please don't be afraid to inform me.Thank You Alsee (talk) 17:06, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
At the risk of delaying consensus, I'm wondering whether it might make
more sense for the birthplace info to use the format "country-at-birth
(country-now)" instead of "country-now (country-at-birth)". Alsee (talk) 17:06, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
As for the actual RFC: If the relevant columns of the table are made sortable, then, yes, the other tables (by country of origin and by working institutions) should be removed, IMO. Alsee (talk) 17:06, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
I just changed the format of birthplace coloumn to "country-at-birth (country-now)". Alsee (talk) 17:07, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Yes,I discussed with other editors,and they suggested this:USSR was
consisted of several Soviets, and all of theses soviet albeit
autonomous,was representing under USSR flag.So I changed those
flags(i.e.Russian SFSR,Ukrainian USS,etc). Alsee (talk) 17:12, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Re: the hidden comment, and your edit summary "(In wikitext I'd have simply deleted it. Flow won't let me.") -- A few thoughts: This is somewhat similar to the "Edited by Foo" that is shown on Flow posts, if someone other than the original author edits it. It is added transparency which might be considered good in many circumstances. E.g. I don't regularly check the history of talkpages, to make sure that no lightweight deletion-vandalism has ever occurred, but it does occur, and on unwatched pages it is very likely to go unnoticed and unfixed. It has also been a cause of confusion for newcomers, when their imperfect comments are simply reverted, without any remnant or message.
(I hope that helps add an additional perspective, and that you're having a good weekend. I'm going to try to get out of my apt now, into the last of the Canadian Summer! :) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 18:25, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Quid, thanks for trying to help, but you didn't say anything I hadn't already run over in my head. It's still one of the items I'll be covering in a feedback list I'm working on. Alsee (talk) 23:12, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
you accidentally left two "former"s in there, which I have changed to "now"s. Also, I've converted the Moscow entry in the "ICM location" column. I see that in Vladimir Drinfeld's entry, "{{flagicon|Ukraine}}(former {{flagicon|Ukrainian SSR}})" was changed to "{{flagicon|USSR}}(now {{flagicon|Ukraine}})". Was that a mistake? Alsee (talk) 17:59, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
I originally came back here to lament that a table using "rowspan"s
couldn't be sorted, but I guess I was wrong! In my FF 17.0.9, anyway,
the rows get sorted properly with the "rowspan" info duplicated in the
right places. Cool beans! I had no idea... Alsee (talk) 17:07, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
The Australian Academy of Science should be removed from Terence Tao's
listing. He is a member, but this is not the kind of affiliation that
belongs in the table. Listing all the academies of science that Fields
medallists belong to would be a mess -- indeed Tao is also a member of
American Academy of Science and the Royal Swedish Academy of Science. Alsee (talk) 17:12, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Yours assessment is right.I changed that.any further comments? Alsee (talk) 17:13, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Why there is no flag in "Affiliation (At the time of receiving the
medal)"? I suggest if we use just "Affiliation", it means Affiliation at
the time, and then if it has never changed, no need to mention it again
in "Current/Last Affiliation" Alsee (talk) 17:15, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
There is a consensus to not to put flag in "Affiliation (At the time of
receiving the medal.Also I believe It will make the table messy
and,furthermore,disrupt the way the table looks like now.Yet if you can
convince other editors on your suggestions,I'm ready to make changes
immediately.Thank You. Alsee (talk) 17:15, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
IMO, it makes more sense to have flags in the "Affiliation (At time of
receiving the medal)" column (the name of which should probably be
shortened to something like "Affiliation (When Awarded)") than in the
"Current/Last Affiliation" column, although I could personally do
without either. On another topic, why were the present-day-country
indications ("now X") removed from the table? - Alsee (talk) 17:16, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
To be honest, I would prefer to see the name of the country written out
instead of the flags if country information is to be included. There are
some flags that I do not readily recognize, and as Rezameyqani says, it
does make the table rather messy (see WP:MOSFLAG
for general arguments along those lines). It also encourages
nationalistic flag waving which this page seem to suffer already too
much from. Shortening the column name seems a good suggestion and I also
agree to include country info with affiliation at time of award if it
is included in current/last affiliation. Alsee (talk) 17:16, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Considering that User:JohnBlackburne in the discussion at WT:WPM#Fields Medal Table has come down rather strongly against the idea of including flags, under the explicit recommendations of MOS:FLAG, it seems like the only thing for it is to remove the flags entirely. Alsee (talk) 17:16, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
@dcjlr,@Jitse Niesen .I just made some changes. "now X" has been removed because all of the medalists explicitly cite their birth place as for example France,US,USSR or West Germany. I believe we should preserve what they have cited about it. Alsee (talk) 17:21, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Fair enough. But I'm not sure the current state of the table is what Jitse Niesen had in mind. (Sorry to make you go round in circles, Rezameyqani
— hold off implementing any changes based on this comment until JN, at
least, weighs in.) Now that I've seen several options, I guess my
"ultimate preference" would be to do something like this:
((((I still cant paste in tables without Flow mangling it. I'll reserve lines to replicate the table size))))
((((I still cant paste in tables without Flow mangling it. I'll reserve lines to replicate the table size))))
((((I still cant paste in tables without Flow mangling it. I'll reserve lines to replicate the table size))))
((((I still cant paste in tables without Flow mangling it. I'll reserve lines to replicate the table size))))
((((I still cant paste in tables without Flow mangling it. I'll reserve lines to replicate the table size))))
((((I still cant paste in tables without Flow mangling it. I'll reserve lines to replicate the table size))))
((((I still cant paste in tables without Flow mangling it. I'll reserve lines to replicate the table size))))
((((I still cant paste in tables without Flow mangling it. I'll reserve lines to replicate the table size))))
((((I still cant paste in tables without Flow mangling it. I'll reserve lines to replicate the table size))))
((((I still cant paste in tables without Flow mangling it. I'll reserve lines to replicate the table size))))
((((I still cant paste in tables without Flow mangling it. I'll reserve lines to replicate the table size)))) (approximate size match?)
Notice how it looks cleaner to have the flags in front of the
institutions; in addition, they result in more logical sorting of
institutions by country, which I believe can serve as justification for
their inclusion in this table. The spelling out of the country names in
the Birthplace column, OTOH (a big improvement, IMO) make flags there
completely unnecessary. Alsee (talk) 17:29, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
You can make changes in the table,since it's based on your proposal.Of
course,Your suggested version is much more cleaner.I was looking for a
way to make it looks like this.I gonna leave for couple of days,so if
you'd take responsibility for making changes(not substantial ones, of
course!),I'd be really glad!remember,please do not make any substantial
changes to the above table,unless you can reach a consensus.Thanks Alsee (talk) 17:33, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Uh, OK... well, I'll leave this little version of the table for a day or
two to get people's immediate impressions, then if it seems appropriate
I'll convert the entire table above. Alsee (talk) 17:33, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
My preference would be no flags at all (in common with Sławomir Biały
and JohnBlackburne, it seems). That does indeed make the sorting
useless, so I would also remove that possibility. I would also de-link
the country names. Concretely, this gives the table immediately below
(where I removed the references to avoid messing up this talk page, but
they should of course be included in the version going live.).
((((I still cant paste in tables without Flow mangling it. I'll reserve lines to replicate the table size))))
((((I still cant paste in tables without Flow mangling it. I'll reserve lines to replicate the table size))))
((((I still cant paste in tables without Flow mangling it. I'll reserve lines to replicate the table size))))
((((I still cant paste in tables without Flow mangling it. I'll reserve lines to replicate the table size))))
((((I still cant paste in tables without Flow mangling it. I'll reserve lines to replicate the table size)))) Alsee (talk) 17:35, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Yes, no flags. I gave full reasons at the maths project but basically MOS:FLAG
is clear and the flags are just decorative clutter and don't belong. As
an added benefit the question over which flag to use no longer needs to
be dealt with. Alsee (talk) 17:35, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
I am only now seeing the discussion over there for the first time. It
would have been better to keep the discussion on this talk page.... Alsee (talk) 17:17, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Per WP:MULTI, there should not be parallel discussions. What happens if their final outcomes are opposite? Alsee (talk) 17:17, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
I think Current/Last Institution should be change to Affiliation because this is the standard word in academic area. Alsee (talk) 17:13, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
To make it more readable and reliable,I just changed that. Thank you for your precise assessment. Alsee (talk) 17:14, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
I think it should be "Current/last affiliation". The last column is not
the person's affiliation at the time of the medal. Probably the word
Institution should also be changed in the "Institution (At the time of
the medal)" column. Alsee (talk) 17:14, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
I just corrected the table. Also there was an error regarding Columbia University.It's corrected by now.Many Thanks. Alsee (talk) 17:14, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

about above tableEdit

There are other tables in the article in which they contain information about fields medalists.Should the above table replace with them? Alsee (talk) 17:04, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Test results:

You cannot mix top posting and bottom posting.

The result is an incoherent spaghetti. Alsee (talk) 17:11, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Test results:

Flow information density, assuming Wikitext =100%

Default mode = 41%

Wide mode = 48%

Awful.

Yeah yeah, I read the FAQ:Why does it look like Facebook. I'm telling you, it's wrong. I've seen people citing this as a comical example of how out of touch the WMF and Flow are. Go to your programmers, tell them you're giving them a new development environment. Tell them that the new programming environment only displays 48% as much code on the screen at a time. Then tell them that the decision is based on "elaborate [Facebook] user research and A/B testing to find what works best". They won't be amused. Alsee (talk) 17:13, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

large table and pasting testsEdit

test pasting raw wikitext, from Talk:Fields Medal/Archive1, into Flow's wikitext editor-mode. (and unlinking username to prevent ping)

RFCEdit

Hello Everyone,I prepared a table for Fields Medal page which,in my opinion,would help us to reach a consensus about edits which have to be done to the page.Of course,I did my best to make it as complete as I could.I think it can be replaced with existing table in the article.(I must greatly thank User:Dcljr|dcljr for proposing a new and excellent table format): RfC started 14:12, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Year ICM Location Medalists[1] Affiliation (When Awarded) Birthplace Current/Last Affiliation Citation
1936 Oslo, Norway Lars Ahlfors University of Helsinki, Finland Finland Harvard University, US[2][3] "Awarded medal for research on covering surfaces related to Riemann surfaces of inverse functions of entire and meromorphic functions. Opened up a new fileds of analysis."
Jesse Douglas Massachusetts Institute of Technology, US United States City College of New York, US[4][5] "Did important work of the Plateau problem which is concerned with finding minimal surfaces connecting and determined by some fixed boundary."
1950 Cambridge, US Laurent Schwartz University of Nancy, France France University of Paris VII, France[6][7] "Developed the theory of distributions, a new notion of generalized function motivated by the Dirac delta-function of theoretical physics."
Atle Selberg Institute for Advanced Study, US Norway Institute for Advanced Study, US[8] "Developed generalizations of the sieve methods of Viggo Brun; achieved major results on zeros of the Riemann zeta function; gave an elementary proof of the prime number theorem (with P. Erdös), with a generalization to prime numbers in an arbitrary arithmetic progression."
1954 Amsterdam, Netherland Kunihiko Kodaira Institute for Advanced Study, US

Princeton University, US

Japan University of Tokyo, Japan[9] "Achieved major results in the theory of harmonic integrals and numerous applications to Kählerian and more specifically to algebraic varieties. He demonstrated, by sheaf cohomology, that such varieties are Hodge manifolds."
Jean-Pierre Serre University of Nancy, France France Collège de France, France[10][11] "Achieved major results on the homotopy groups of spheres, especially in his use of the method of spectral sequences. Reformulated and exented some of the main results of complex variable theory in terms of sheaves."
1958 Edinburgh, UK Klaus Roth University College London, UK Weimar Republic Imperial College London, UK[12] "Solved in 1955 the famous Thue-Siegel problem concerning the approximation to algebraic numbers by rational numbers and proved in 1952 that a sequence with no three numbers in arithmetic progression has zero density (a conjecture of Erdös and Turán of 1935)."
René Thom University of Strasbourg, France France Institut des Hautes Études Scientifiques, France[13] "In 1954 invented and developed the theory of cobordism in algebraic topology. This classification of manifolds used homotopy theory in a fundamental way and became a prime example of a general cohomology theory."
1962 Stockholm, Sweden Lars Hörmander University of Stockholm, Sweden Sweden Lund University, Sweden[14] "Worked in partial diffential equations. Specifically, contributed to the general theory of linear differential operators. The questions go back to one of Hilbert's problems at the 1900 congress."
John Milnor Princeton University, US United States Stony Brook University, US[15] "Proved that a 7-dimensional sphere can have several differential structures; this led to the creation of the field of differential topology."
1966 Moscow, USSR Michael Atiyah University of Oxford, UK United Kingdom University of Edinburgh, UK[16] "Did joint work with Hirzebruch in K-theory; proved jointly with Singer the index theorem of elliptic operators on complex manifolds; worked in collaboration with Bott to prove a fixed point theorem related to the "Lefschetz formula"."
Paul Joseph Cohen Stanford University, US United States Stanford University, US[17] "Used technique called "forcing" to prove the independence in set theory of the axiom of choice and of the generalized continuum hypothesis. The latter problem was the first of Hilbert's problems of the 1900 Congress."
Alexander Grothendieck Institut des Hautes Études Scientifiques, France Weimar Republic Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique , France[18] "Built on work of Weil and Zariski and effected fundamental advances in algebraic geometry. He introduced the idea of K-theory (the Grothendieck groups and rings). Revolutionized homological algebra in his celebrated "Tohoku paper""
Stephen Smale University of California, Berkeley, US United States City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong[19] "Worked in differential topology where he proved the generalized Poincaré conjecture in dimension n>=5: Every closed, n-dimensional manifold homotopy-equivalent to the n-dimensional sphere is homeomorphic to it. Introduced the method of handle-bodies to solve this and related problems."
1970 Nice, France Alan Baker University of Cambridge, UK United Kingdom Trinity College, Cambridge, UK[20] "Generalized the Gelfond-Schneider theorem (the solution to Hilbert's seventh problem). From this work he generated transcendental numbers not previously identified."
Heisuke Hironaka Harvard University, US Japan Kyoto University, Japan[21][22] "Generalized work of Zariski who had proved for dimension"
John G. Thompson University of Cambridge, UK United States University of Cambridge, UK [23] "Proved jointly with W. Feit that all non-cyclic finite simple groups have even order. The extension of this work by Thompson determined the minimal simple finite groups, that is, the simple finite groups whose proper subgroups are solvable."
Sergei Novikov Moscow State University, USSR USSR Steklov Mathematical Institute, Russia

Moscow State University, Russia

University of Maryland-College Park, US[24][25]

"Made important advances in topology, the most well-known being his proof of the topological invariance of the Pontrjagin classes of the differentiable manifold. His work included a study of the cohomology and homotopy of Thom spaces."
1974 Vancouver, Canada Enrico Bombieri University of Pisa, Italy Italy Institute for Advanced Study, US[26] "Major contributions in the primes, in univalent functions and the local Bieberbach conjecture, in theory of functions of several complex variables, and in theory of partial differential equations and minimal surfaces - in particular, to the solution of Bernstein's problem in higher dimensions."
David Mumford Harvard University, US United States Brown University, US[27] "Contributed to problems of the existence and structure of varieties of moduli, varieties whose points parametrize isomorphism classes of some type of geometric object. Also made several important contributions to the theory of algebraic surfaces."
1978 Helsinki, Finland Pierre Deligne Institut des Hautes Études Scientifiques, France Belgium Institute for Advanced Study, US[28] "Gave solution of the three Weil conjectures concerning generalizations of the Riemann hypothesis to finite fields. His work did much to unify algebraic geometry and algebraic number theory."
Charles Fefferman Princeton University, US United States Princeton University, US[29] "Contributed several innovations that revised the study of multidimensional complex analysis by finding correct generalizations of classical (low-dimensional) results."
Daniel Quillen Massachusetts Institute of Technology, US United States University of Oxford, UK[30] "The prime architect of the higher algebraic K-theory, a new tool that successfully employed geometric and topological methods and ideas to formulate and solve major problems in algebra, particularly ring theory and module theory."
Grigori Margulis Princeton University, US USSR Yale University, US[31] "Provided innovative analysis of the structure of Lie groups. His work belongs to combinatorics, differential geometry, ergodic theory, dynamical systems, and Lie groups."
1982 Warsaw, Poland Alain Connes Institut des Hautes Études Scientifiques, France France Institut des Hautes Études Scientifiques, France

Collège de France, France

Ohio State University, US[32]

"Contributed to the theory of operator algebras, particularly the general classification and structure theorem of factors of type III, classification of automorphisms of the hyperfinite factor, classification of injective factors, and applications of the theory of C*-algebras to foliations and differential geometry in general."
William Thurston Princeton University, US United States Cornell University, US[33] "Revolutionized study of topology in 2 and 3 dimensions, showing interplay between analysis, topology, and geometry. Contributed idea that a very large class of closed 3-manifolds carry a hyperbolic structure."
Shing-Tung Yau Institute for Advanced Study, US China Harvard University, US[34] "Made contributions in differential equations, also to the Calabi conjecture in algebraic geometry, to the positive mass conjecture of general relativity theory, and to real and complex Monge-Ampère equations."
1986 Berkeley, US Simon Donaldson University of Oxford, UK United Kingdom Imperial College London, UK[35] "Received medal primarily for his work on topology of four-manifolds, especially for showing that there is a differential structure on euclidian four-space which is different from the usual structure."
Gerd Faltings Princeton University, US West Germany Max Planck Institute for Mathematics, Germany[36] "Using methods of arithmetic algebraic geometry, he received medal primarily for his proof of the Mordell Conjecture."
Michael Freedman University of California, San Diego, US United States  Microsoft Station Q[37] "Developed new methods for topological analysis of four-manifolds. One of his results is a proof of the four-dimensional Poincaré Conjecture."
1990 Kyoto, Japan Vladimir Drinfeld University of Kharkiv, USSR USSR University of Chicago, US[38] "For his work on quantum groups and for his