On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 5:38 PM, Jon Robson <jdlrobson(a)gmail.com> wrote: They work fine for me. Do you have any specific examples where it fails? Helder _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 4:38 PM, Jon Robson <jdlrobson(a)gmail.com> wrote: Flow doesn't support actual threaded discussions beyond a very limited depth,[1] meaning that a real threaded discussion is likely to turn into a morass of comments without clear indication of what is replying to what unless people actively work around it.[2] Since converted LQT threads are likely to lack the quoting necessary to work around this misfeature, they're particularly liable to wind up unreadable if they're at all complex. Also, bug 57512 comment 31 could use a reply.[3] [1]: Although this is a matter of configuration rather than something hard-coded, I doubt the configuration is going to be changed. [2]: I won't go into more detail here about this or about why pings (as Flow encourages to work around the misfeature) aren't sufficient. [3]: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57512#c31 _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

On 6 June 2014 19:17, Brian Wolff <bawolff(a)gmail.com> wrote: YMMV. Wikipedia is pretty much enculturated, but RationalWiki gets n00bs *all the time* who object to something on a page. You know what the most frequent reply involves? "Please learn to sign your comments."

Talk pages really aren't a great communication mechanism for non-geeks. (RW also suffers under a LQT installation that I desperately want to kill and would be most pleased to replace with Flow. I'm going to take us from 1.19 to 1.23 when that's out and stable. Possibly with the VE faff. Will Flow be able to be bolted onto an existing 1.23?) - d. _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

From: dgerard(a)gmail.com Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2014 20:48:03 +0100 To: wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] LiquidThreads - how do we kill it? On 6 June 2014 20:12, Martijn Hoekstra <martijnhoekstra(a)gmail.com> wrote: That would be a distortion of my point :-) I have mostly found LQT annoying as a user, but I can see the attraction of a discussion where the threading is clearly visible, and I'm presuming extensive user testing will be done - typical mind fallacy is a serious hazard, and not one Wikimedia can afford.[1] This is why software changes on WMF wikis are ultimately up to WMF, not the wiki communities. (Of course, debacles like the introduction of VE show why caution is still sensible. And I say that as a huge fan and advocate of VE.) - d. [1] http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Typical_mind_fallacy What works for you or me cannot be presumed to work for the world. Geeks are regularly *shocked* at what ordinary people make of things. _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Le 06/06/2014 20:17, Brian Wolff a écrit : Hello, On the other side, the super long wikitext garbage on long talk pages is the exact reason I stopped being involved in the community and never ever read talk pages. Receiving a watchlist notification because some other part of the talk page got changed (albeit I never contributed to that sub discussion) makes it nearly impossible to follow-up on replies. And I am probably not the only one. Structuring the conversations will let us add worthwhile features such as ignoring/hiding a sub thread, getting notifications. Or heck even a talk page / mail gateway to reply by email! -- Antoine "hashar" Musso _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

On 6/6/14, Brad Jorsch (Anomie) <bjorsch(a)wikimedia.org> wrote: Personally I have yet to see a discussion system that surpasses (or really even comes close) to standard talk page ":::comment here. ~~~~" syntax. Honestly it would make me happy if we just used that in general.

The exception being pages with large influxes of newbies, like Project:Support_desk. In those pages LQT really does make a difference to ensure things are well organized. --bawolff _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

(1) nothing lines up like it does on normal history pages, and (2) I can't see everything that changed since I last looked. Yes, I'm probably atypical in that I like reading wikitext diffs for discussion pages. But I'd find

On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 11:33 AM, Brad Jorsch (Anomie) < bjorsch(a)wikimedia.org We're going to revise topic history. You can view the diff between revisions of a post, but editing posts is somewhat rare. Generating a diff of an entire topic with new posts, updates, hide operations, etc. seems challenging. As a second datapoint, I too am a "diff reader" to read discussions too.

-- =S Page Features engineer _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l