Comments:Wikipedia and sister projects prepare new, easier interface

Back to article

This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. Please remain on topic and avoid offensive or inflammatory comments where possible. Try thought-provoking, insightful, or controversial. Civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.

Comments on this page were originally made using the LiquidThreads extension, which is no longer supported. It has since been exported to wikitext, but the export process was not perfect so comments may appear slightly oddly.

Start a new discussion

We already watch articles

"in addition to editing an article while watching it" — Don't we already have the capability to watch pages in the editing box? All you have to do is click the check box for "Watch this page" Benny the mascot (talk) 15:46, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Meh.

I still prefer WikED to edit with. Although, Vector is an awesome skin. Goodbye Monobook, hello Vector. Patrick M (TUFKAAP) (talk) 15:46, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

hmmmmmm

It took me long enough to get us to our change - thus it would be good to see 'pedia finally catching up :P Brian | (Talk) | ^{New Zealand Portal} 08:00, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

April 5 already passed

Thread summary:

Wikinews discovers a factual error in the article.

Wikipedia still hasn't used Vector as the default! Benny the mascot (talk) 05:01, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Commons is april 5, wikipedia is end of april. Bawolff ☺☻ 05:04, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

So the article is wrong :( Benny the mascot (talk) 05:05, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

yeah, which is kind of sad considering its essentially about us. Should we put a correction note? (announcement was http://techblog.wikimedia.org/2010/03/the-change-in-interface-is-coming/ ) Bawolff ☺☻ 05:11, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

No. It ain't our fault they can't get their shit together. ShakataGaNai ^{^_^} 05:16, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

We probably should. What is it? {{correction}}? Mikemoral♪♫ 05:18, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

hmmm...well it seems that the sources were properly summarized. See [1]. I'm not exactly sure what to do when the sources themselves turn out to be wrong after the fact Benny the mascot (talk) 05:19, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Tell the source they failed and correct ourselves? Mikemoral♪♫ 05:21, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Not necessarily: maybe the original date was April 5 and then got postponed??? Benny the mascot (talk) 05:23, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

The blog post was published on March 25; the article March 28. Mikemoral♪♫ 05:25, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Shoot...I didn't see that. The correction is in order then, yes? Benny the mascot (talk) 05:26, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I'll go ahead and do so.

And wouldn't lqt be great for the other talk namepsaces? Mikemoral♪♫ 05:28, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I personally don't like lqt for normal talk namespaces, i find it works better for conversation where there isn't an explicit goal, but thats just me. We can probably enable it on other talk namespaces using {{#useliquidthreads}}. Bawolff ☺☻ 05:38, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

It doesn't work. I tried on my talk page. Mikemoral♪♫ 05:41, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Sorry I lied, I just looked up the configuration settings [2] (wmgLQTUserControlNamespaces being the relevent line) only works on namespace 102 (comments). Bawolff ☺☻ 06:30, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Can we poke someone to enable the user talk namespace? Mikemoral♪♫ 22:35, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Bleh, that banner looks hideous at the top. Mikemoral♪♫ 05:34, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Really for stories such as these, we should be reading our own announcements Bawolff ☺☻ 05:33, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Comments from feedback form - "Reads like it's trying to sell..."

Reads like it's trying to sell the skin 128.135.98.210 (talk) 02:41, 8 May 2010 (UTC)