Hi there, On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 11:33 PM, MZMcBride <z(a)mzmcbride.com> wrote: Great question, and it's one I've wrested with personally and in meetings. Ultimately the timeline that is chosen is arbitrary. We can look at the data of the accounts like the number of edits v. age, potentially how much time does the average person with a conflicting account login based on user_touched, and several other metrics, but in the end there is no science to come up with a predictive timeframe. Another arbitrary number is how many of these accounts will show up to request a rename, no matter the timeframe. I can set this to take place six months from now but that's not predictive of behavior. As you can imagine, there's many more scenarios :) So, given that, in my opinion the biggest tell is going to be what happens in the first two weeks. There are two potential bottlenecks: technical and in personnel. If the job queue or any other sort of technical function is regularly getting stuck, we'll revisit the month time frame. If the technical side is holding up but there are too many rename requests to fulfill before the deadline, we'll revisit the deadline. I'm willing to be flexible depending on the circumstance. The bottom line is that this is something that we're only doing once, and it's something that I want to do right. I'd be willing to postpone if major technical and/or personnel blockers show up. However, I'm committed to the month deadline as much as I can be - at some point this has to be done, we clearly can come up with blockers for over a decade. 2.8 million accounts could create a flood, or a trickle. We're going to see, and very soon :) -- Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Product Wikimedia Foundation

On 17 March 2015 at 21:54, John Mark Vandenberg <jayvdb(a)gmail.com> wrote: As far as I know, that list is only updated periodically. Either way, when the SUL finalisation begins, if you own a global account then you'll get to keep it irrespective of whether you still appear on that list or not. Dan -- Dan Garry Associate Product Manager, Mobile Apps Wikimedia Foundation

On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 4:24 PM, Legoktm <legoktm.wikipedia(a)gmail.com> wrote: Much appreciated. Can the global message be updated to mention that SUL'ing accounts is an appropriate action to take? I've already received 160 user talk enotif's from this message system delivery, and from quickly scanning those emails I recognise many usernames, so there seems to be many cases of un-SUL'd yet long standing accounts of irregularly active people. Also, lots of unanswered queries appearing quickly on https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Keegan_%28WMF%29 , which is the talk page linked in the global message that was sent out. It would be good to have extra hands assisting answering those queries accurately so users dont make the wrong choice about the identity. -- John Vandenberg

Hi Keegan, Just a thought: you could invite WMFers to have SUL finalization parties during a few lunch hours. Invite people out of their silos to work with you and interact with the community to answer account-owner FAQs, translate the Q&A, and interact with WMF's "customers". While this is a little different from face-time, I still think that some of the 1:1 interaction would be nice for everybody while helping move the SUL process along. Thanks for working on SUL. Pine On Mar 17, 2015 10:44 PM, "Keegan Peterzell" <kpeterzell(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:

Thanks for moving this close to completion. I hope finalization goes well. However, It found Special:UsersWhoWillBeRenamed totally useless at Wiktionary, as I'm sure it is at any mature project. Only 25 names appear at time. On Wiktionary the first page only includes names using exclusively exclamation marks. It takes several pageforwards to get to the first "A". It is not searchable. There is not even a count of how many there are in total. I'm not sure why the list is provided. What is a use case for it? It would be useful for those reviewing entries (articles) to have lists of old and new names for contributors (with unreverted contributions) so as to take advantage of hard-won knowledge about typical user contribution quality, etc. Are there plans for this? On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 2:05 AM, Keegan Peterzell <kpeterzell(a)wikimedia.org> wrote: -- Dennis C. During

Correction. This link lists backwards from "Fae" but misses out "Fae": https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:UsersWhoWillBeRenam… This link lists forwards from "Fae" but again misses out "Fae"!: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:UsersWhoWillBeRenam… So yes, you can guess which name might be just before the name you are actually searching for, or wait until this special page is debugged. I suspect there was not much testing of it before the notices went out. Fae On 18 March 2015 at 15:27, Fæ <faewik(a)gmail.com> wrote:

Hello, On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 5:42 PM, Dennis During <dcduring(a)gmail.com> wrote: Just like renames work now, the user's new name will show up in edit histories. -- Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Product Wikimedia Foundation

Special:Log/renameuser Am 19.03.2015 00:59 schrieb "Dennis During" <dcduring(a)gmail.com>om>: