Were you intending your question (about activity) to be a reply to this (third set), or to fourth set, where I did make an activity argument?
The only extent to which activity is an argument is that we have been closing requests as stale if either:
* no test was ever created, or * a test only had a couple of pages created, and those pages were created around the same time the RFL request was made—but the test has been completely dormant since
Until I got up to the request for Wikipedia Tharu, all of these old requests either had
* no meaningful activity later than a month or two after the request was made, or * plenty of meaningful activity after the request was made.
So they were easy to decide. For Wikipedia Tharu, the test was dormant until a year ago. But since there was recent activity, I went ahead and said "eligible".
Is that a problem? I'd rather mark tests as eligible if possible. I'm marking tests as "rejected-stale" only if they would otherwise be "on hold" indefinitely. We decided a couple of months back that it was better in those cases to close the requests, with an invitation for a new one if a community reappeared.
Steven
Sent from Outlookhttp://aka.ms/weboutlook
Hoi, When a project uses a macro language code, the language is not eligible. Thanks, GerardM
On 2 April 2018 at 22:23, Steven White Koala19890@hotmail.com wrote:
Were you intending your question (about activity) to be a reply to this (third set), or to fourth set, where I did make an activity argument?
The only extent to which activity is an argument is that we have been closing requests as *stale *if either:
- no test was ever created, or
- a test only had a couple of pages created, and those pages were
created around the same time the RFL request was made—but the test has been completely dormant since
Until I got up to the request for Wikipedia Tharu, all of these old requests either had
- no meaningful activity later than a month or two after the request
was made, or
- plenty of meaningful activity after the request was made.
So they were easy to decide. For Wikipedia Tharu, the test was dormant until a year ago. But since there was recent activity, I went ahead and said "eligible".
Is that a problem? I'd rather mark tests as eligible if possible. I'm marking tests as "rejected-stale" only if they would otherwise be "on hold" indefinitely. We decided a couple of months back that it was better in those cases to close the requests, with an invitation for a new one if a community reappeared.
Steven
Sent from Outlook http://aka.ms/weboutlook
Langcom mailing list Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
Not quite. It's case by case. We approved "din".
בתאריך יום ג׳, 3 באפר׳ 2018, 07:14, מאת Gerard Meijssen < gerard.meijssen@gmail.com>:
Hoi, When a project uses a macro language code, the language is not eligible. Thanks, GerardM
On 2 April 2018 at 22:23, Steven White Koala19890@hotmail.com wrote:
Were you intending your question (about activity) to be a reply to this (third set), or to fourth set, where I did make an activity argument?
The only extent to which activity is an argument is that we have been closing requests as *stale *if either:
- no test was ever created, or
- a test only had a couple of pages created, and those pages were
created around the same time the RFL request was made—but the test has been completely dormant since
Until I got up to the request for Wikipedia Tharu, all of these old requests either had
- no meaningful activity later than a month or two after the request
was made, or
- plenty of meaningful activity after the request was made.
So they were easy to decide. For Wikipedia Tharu, the test was dormant until a year ago. But since there was recent activity, I went ahead and said "eligible".
Is that a problem? I'd rather mark tests as eligible if possible. I'm marking tests as "rejected-stale" only if they would otherwise be "on hold" indefinitely. We decided a couple of months back that it was better in those cases to close the requests, with an invitation for a new one if a community reappeared.
Steven
Sent from Outlook http://aka.ms/weboutlook
Langcom mailing list Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
Langcom mailing list Langcom@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom