Talk:Trust and Safety Product/Temporary Accounts/2024/January
Latest comment: 9 months ago by Mathglot in topic Header improvements
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
As the username of the temporary account is start from ~, this task should be renamed to “Inform username accounts prefixed with "~"” if the plan of renaming all accounts start from ~ still exist. 132.234.229.68 02:13, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello! Thanks for bringing this up. We haven't changed this because we're not 100% sure what the prefix will finally be, whether it would be a ~, or ~2, or perhaps even ~20. We'll start announcing this months before making the changes on wikis. It seems that the first deployments will happen in April, May, or even a bit later (there's a delay compared to the dates shared in the latest update.) SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 13:23, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
- It seems that the first deployments will happen in April, May, or even a bit later First I've heard of this. Where else has this been shared, and what's causing the delay (insofar as you can disclose)? Nardog (talk) 12:26, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hey @Nardog. You're totally right to be hearing this first time, because it's the only time anyone has wrote exactly this so far :D
- The only source is a hint in the latest update. Specifically, the sentences: "This change to the structure may have an effect on the timeline of this project. We will have more updates to share as we develop a roadmap for the new team." The word "may" is used there because when we were drafting that, we didn't know what changes would happen, but we knew there may be some. Now we know that there will be some delay indeed. When we agree on a new roadmap with specific timelines for different projects, we'll post a new update.
- Thanks! SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 16:10, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- I get that any future date is subject to change. I also know the Earth is round. I asked specifically what the changes you now know will happen that are causing the delay are. If you can't divulge that then that's fine, say so, but frankly if what you've written is all you can say I wish you hadn't said anything because it's just condescending. Nardog (talk) 16:46, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- I'm sorry to read that. I didn't want my comment to feel condescending. We're discussing the new roadmap, and I don't have anything specific to share yet. SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 17:20, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- I get that any future date is subject to change. I also know the Earth is round. I asked specifically what the changes you now know will happen that are causing the delay are. If you can't divulge that then that's fine, say so, but frankly if what you've written is all you can say I wish you hadn't said anything because it's just condescending. Nardog (talk) 16:46, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- @SGrabarczuk (WMF): I would suggest that the prefix should still remain ~. If you set the prefix to ~2, there will be a problem when it approach to year 3000 (though there is still a long time) or year 2100 if using ~20 as the prefix. 132.234.228.96 03:15, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- It seems that the first deployments will happen in April, May, or even a bit later First I've heard of this. Where else has this been shared, and what's causing the delay (insofar as you can disclose)? Nardog (talk) 12:26, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hi @SGrabarczuk (WMF): What is the current plan of renaming those users? Are all users with prefix ~ will be renamed or just some of them will be renamed? And also what is the target names (or the target prefix) those users will be renamed to? 132.234.228.16 04:12, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, we finally have an answer to this question :) We've agreed to rename only those whose usernames begin with ~2. Last time we checked, there were only two such users. Timeline: before March. The relevant task on Phabricator is here: T349509. Thanks! SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 02:42, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
Header improvements
I started playing around with the header to fix a couple of things that seemed like they might've been bugs. Then I continued to make some improvements, with a vague game plan of where I wanted to go with it, but in the end I didn't have the time to go on, and had to abandon it halfway there. Maybe there's some useful stuff there, maybe not. If you want to have a look, it's in Template:Temporary Accounts/Header/sandbox. Thanks. Mathglot (talk) 09:43, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks @Mathglot! I appreciate your ideas. Just wanted to clarify one thing - why I have introduced the label "Legal". Currently, it's linked with the legal policy FAQ; that's not flawless, I take your point. Because the policy itself lives on a different wiki, the policy FAQ seems to be the main legal-related page here on Meta-Wiki. Perhaps this label should be linked to the legal updates instead... I'll think about it. Anyway, I wanted to make a strong indication that the background for this project is of legal nature. There is a set of legal-related pages, so there should be a label "Legal".
- Also this page will become the main FAQ about the project, esp. when it's expanded. (I may decide to transclude the legal FAQ into it.)
- What do you think about this? Thanks, SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 20:42, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
- Actually, you nailed the exact point I was mulling over, namely how to deal with the labels Legal and FAQ while trying to decide on a path forward, and realized it wouldn't make sense for me to pick one path over the other, not having been involved heretofore, thus missing the backstory, and likely future considerations. What you say about legal makes sense, and reminds me of how en-wiki does it wrt some "policies with legal considerations" (and I guess, all xx-wikis do, because it derives from terms of use related to legal issues), and I've always thought at en-wiki there isn't sufficient separation or tagging of policies with legal implications. A favorite peeve of mine, for example: you *must* provide copy or translate attribution in the edit summary because it's in ToU § 7; that's non-negotiable wrt consensus, Rfc, ArbCom, IAR, or anything else. But by the time you get to the policy pages, it kinda looks like any other policy that maybe you can skirt or ignore in extreme circumstances. Anyway, end-rant about my pet peeve...
- It's validating that you mentioned the FAQ/Legal thing, because that's exactly where I was. If I were to make one further change, it would probably be a hidden comment, separating the second-line labels that appear sometimes in smaller font below some of the major tabs, when they are active. Remind me later about your FAQ question, maybe I'll have time to look at it when it becomes germane. Keep up the good work! Mathglot (talk) 02:32, 13 January 2024 (UTC)