In T374455#10134490, @Bugreporter wrote:

In T374455#10134344, @Ericliu1912 wrote:

not "arbcom", but "arbitrator".

The internal name of user groups should be consistent with other wikis that have such group (see T139246: Migrate local group names to WikimediaMessages). Currently six wikis have "arbcom" user group and no wiki have "arbitrator" user group.

not "arbcom", but "arbitrator".

In T368610#10039379, @kiryuukoko wrote:

The community reached a rough consensus that Stewards should be the scrutineers.

Though with no clear mention in policy and without precedent in RFDAs, I do think it is within their authority to extend the poll, in order to determine community consensus in a critical situation, just as RFAs, in which they had exercised the power to prolong the poll multiple times before.

Under current rules, local bureaucrats has the final say on whether the poll should be extended. It is always possible to deal with other problems (including the legitamacy of the extended poll itself) after the whole procedure had concluded, so there's no reason not to go forward with it.

I've fixed it.

Maybe the (global) community can try to host some sort of "competition" to propose better design of Homepages?

2022年5月6日 (五) 07:57 Jon Harald Søby 刪除頁面Wikimedia:Portals-wikinews.name/zh （delete /zh subpages for Wikimedia:Portals）

As variants of Chinese are unified as a site, please consider using (restoring) zh.json for all zh-language sites.

Well that's a terrible system for RfAs...

According to the consensus reached by the community under current circumstances, "abusefilter-log-private" should not be removed (yet).

logo-Wikimedia.svg

I just found out there are pre-existed sister project icons, though it has not been uploaded to Commons yet?

I think that it look great. Should be a good idea. Though is it possible to add an icon for Sister projects button like the Languages one?

(Personally, I think we should not regularly split "Wikivoyage" of any language in half...? I mean, it is obviously not very appropriate to always split "Wikipedia" into something like "Wiki-pedia", right?)

In T339287#9001711, @Sneha wrote:

I am also not familiar with these scripts. However some of these scripts can be read vertically too and if we align it exactly with the character above I wonder if it would create some confusion in reading. Perhaps those who can read the script may not find it confusing but I think having a little offset might be better to avoid any potential confusion. We are already increasing the indentation as @Jdrewniak mentioned so hopefully that alone will help. Could we try that first and see if that satisfies the request before aligning it to the character?

By the way, I think that the design of the mobile interface should be consistent with the desktop one. Currently all variants belong to the "recommended languages" area in the language selector.

I guess that this is stalled.

How is it going?

There are clearly no definitive consensus to deploy the skin yet, and there are still some problems to be addressed. It is not wise to deploy the skin under current circumstances, please don't rush it for the sake of the autonomy and willing of the Chinese Wikipedia community.

There are no consensus among the local community about creating such a post. I strongly condemn Jusjih for bypassing local procedures on this issue, especially that Chinese Wikisource have no local bureaucrat since about a decade ago, thus clear consensus should be needed for pushing any changes related to bureaucrats forward.

A small note, personally I think it would be better to rename elections like "2022年9月中文维基百科管理员选举-Stang" to be "2022年9月中文维基百科管理员选举（Stang）".

In T318147#8265513, @jrbs wrote:

In T318147#8263303, @Ericliu1912 wrote:

Great enough! Glad to see that SecurePoll has the capability of handling large collective elections.

Does this mean you would like to run ten separate votes?

Great enough! Glad to see that SecurePoll has the capability of handling large collective elections.

In T318147#8257084, @jrbs wrote:

I will get this initially set up on Monday.

In T318147#8248534, @Ericliu1912 wrote:

Each candidates' voting entry should be saparated, or they could not vote for other candidates, thus breach the rights granted by the local policy.

For example, if A and B were in the same ballot, A could not vote for or against B (since they could also vote for themselves in the ballot), though they should lawfully be allowed to.

I am not sure how this could be enforced, since the votes are secret, so it will not be possible to know if A voted for B.

In T318147#8257215, @1233thehongkonger wrote:

I am just asking if it is possible to create four options at poll - Support, Neutral, Oppose, Candidate?

Each candidates' voting entry should be saparated, or they could not vote for other candidates, thus breach the rights granted by the local policy.

I oppose the deployment of the Vector 2022 skin on zhwikinews before T306862 gets resolved. Though maybe it's too late.

Thanks for the clarification. Though I think it would be better to close this task as resolved after the changes formally deploys.

https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:活躍使用者 isn't correctly redirected yet.

According to a recent query, There are at least 200 user talk pages not moved just on zhwiki alone, so this is definitely not a minor issue.

Hasn't seen Chinese Wiktionary yet.

Is it possible to have multiple variants (zh-tw, zh-cn, etc.) of text available, or there could be only one zh version across the board?

In that case, I suggest making the Flow talk page manager do that automatically when global renamers rename users.

And also, their appearances should all be updated respectively as Wikipedia.org and Wiktionary.org look like, if could.

I mean, basically every sister project portal besides Wikipedia.org does not have proper translation at this point, so...

The ideal way should be taking all users to '/wiki/' pages, and not only apply variant based on user preferences, but also apply mobile version of the site on mobile device if possible.

I think the languages on the upper circle of the portal can be adjusted over time? For example, the Chinese Wiktionary has over 1.2M entries nowadays, which is quite a lot, but it is not on the upper circle of the portal.

Is this still possible?

I see. Thanks for the explanation. Does the related change happened recently though? Since I can't remember encountering the bug even as late as just a week ago.

Though not a priority under current circumstances, is it possible to produce a list of renamed user impacted by this problem throughout the years for future fixing or tracing? There should be a reasonable amount of users affected over time.

In T298426#7724109, @Urbanecm_WMF wrote:

Thanks @Ericliu1912 -- I tried to do the move from my WMF account, and it appears to be successful. Can you check the move is okay (and let me know if I need to do anything else)?

In T298426#7721139, @Urbanecm_WMF wrote:

In T298426#7721071, @Ericliu1912 wrote:

[...]

It should be possible to do that. Can you try moving the talk page to a subpage and then switch off the Structured Discussions feature for your talk page in preferences? I know that @Urbanecm_WMF was able to do this on Wikidata (diff).

I think only administrators have the right to create Structured Discussions boards in any location. Therefore I can't move the page myself.

That edit was made by me disabling the flow talk page beta function in my own preferences. I can try to move it for you manually, but I think it's best if the beta feature is first off in any case.

In T298426#7720664, @kostajh wrote:

In T298426#7720387, @Ericliu1912 wrote:

:(

Sorry for the delay in getting back to you.

In T298426#7642193, @Ericliu1912 wrote:

Well now I just want to safely disable my Structured Discussion user talk page, have it peacefully moved to the archive, and never turn it back on ever again. can anyone help?

It should be possible to do that. Can you try moving the talk page to a subpage and then switch off the Structured Discussions feature for your talk page in preferences? I know that @Urbanecm_WMF was able to do this on Wikidata (diff).

:(

Well now I just want to safely disable my Structured Discussion user talk page, have it peacefully moved to the archive, and never turn it back on ever again. can anyone help?

Happened again on zhwiki.

In T298550#7606234, @Juan90264 wrote:

In T298550#7603468, @Ericliu1912 wrote:

Currently it is still not consistent. In fact through the method you provide, it is very clear that the picture change halfway through zooming (just like before), which should not happen since each sizes of the logo should had already be updated to be the same picture per the Gerrit patch. Purging the page didn't make a difference. (By the way I use zh-tw)

Hi Ericliu1912, I asked you to purge the change and you've already done it, can you let me know if you can see the proposed logo now? If you can't see it, be aware that files in /static usually take weeks to take effect everywhere, before any and all browser caches expire.

Currently it is still not consistent. In fact through the method you provide, it is very clear that the picture change halfway through zooming (just like before), which should not happen since each sizes of the logo should had already be updated to be the same picture per the Gerrit patch. Purging the page didn't make a difference. (By the way I use zh-tw)

I've notified an administrator locally about the CSS issue. But was the deployment really successful? Currently there seems to be no visible change whatsoever.

I think one reason could be that I'd moved my Wikitext talk page archive from User talk:Ericliu1912/存档 2 (the default) to User talk:Ericliu1912/存檔 2 to User talk:Ericliu1912/存檔 3, which made the Flow talk page manager very confused when trying to revert the Wikitext talk page back since User talk:Ericliu1912/存档 2 is a redirect now, and just decide to give up halfway through (as my Structured Discussion description did have the archive template, I'd say that the convert script is not completely broken). Maybe.

In T298426#7601163, @kostajh wrote:

In T298426#7601140, @Ericliu1912 wrote:

Thanks a lot! That at least made my talk page not broken as for now. But am I able to disable Structured Discussions? It would probably break down again if I do that.

@Ericliu1912 maybe try it and see? If if breaks, I can re-run the script so it's unbroken, and then we will have to figure out what to do next.

Thanks a lot! That at least made my talk page not broken as for now. But am I able to disable Structured Discussions? It would probably break down again if I do that.

I just want to get my talk page back... Can anyone help?

I think it's because that you had moved the archive page? (as the page history shows)

I have a messy talk page moving history, turn on/off Flow/Structured Discussion more than one time, and the change of my Username in between has made this worse.

In T136561#6280740, @VulpesVulpes825 wrote:

As Mediaiwki has switched to 57.1 (which is still way behind the current stable version of ICU), is it still the case?

In T287884#7468267, @MilkyDefer wrote:

In T287884#7467354, @Ericliu1912 wrote:

「声明新用户」may not be an accurate translation for "Claim (a) Mentee". 「主页」could be confused with the regular Main Page, since Wikipedia:主页 redirects to Wikipedia:首页 (the Main Page) on zhwiki.

Maybe we rename 「声明」 to 「抢单」 or something similar? As for 「主页」, maybe something like 「用户中心」 would be accurate?

「声明新用户」may not be an accurate translation for "Claim (a) Mentee". 「主页」could be confused with the regular Main Page, since Wikipedia:主页 redirects to Wikipedia:首页 (the Main Page) on zhwiki.

Btw, I tried to import the page again recently, and got an error message "Expected <mediawiki> tag, got".