Wikifunctions:Project chat

Welcome to the Project chat, a place to discuss any and all aspects of Wikifunctions: the project itself, policy and proposals, individual data items, technical issues, etc.

Other places to find help:

• Wikifunctions:Administrators' noticeboard
• Wikifunctions:Report a technical problem
• Wikifunctions:FAQ

SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 1 day and sections whose most recent comment is older than 30 days.

edit
Archives
2023/08 2023/09 2023/1 2023/10 2023/11 2023/12 2024/01 2024/02 2024/03 2024/04 2024/05 2024/06 2024/07 2024/08 2024/09 2024/10 2024/11 2024/12

Wikifunctions & Abstract Wikipedia Newsletter #183 is out: Sketching a path to Abstract Wikipedia; Team offsite in Lisbon; and much more

There is a new update for Abstract Wikipedia and Wikifunctions. Please, come and read it!

In this issue, we discuss how natural language generation for Abstract Wikipedia might develop, and we share news on tools and types on Wikifunctions.

Want to catch up with the previous updates? Check our archive!

Enjoy the reading! -- User:Sannita (WMF) (talk) 18:52, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Wikifunctions & Abstract Wikipedia Newsletter #184 is out: Function of the Week: age; Intros for year articles; New Type: Floating-point number

There is a new update for Abstract Wikipedia and Wikifunctions. Please, come and read it!

In the last issue for 2024, we discuss functions to create introductions for articles about years, we showcase one of the 23 functions with the Gregorian year type, we introduce a new type, and finally we take a look at the latest software developments.

Want to catch up with the previous updates? Check our archive!

Enjoy the reading! -- User:Sannita (WMF) (talk) 22:06, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

Need help with JS implementation?

Hi! I created a Python implementation of a Spanish cardinal function and wanted to write a Javascript implementation for it as well. However, after creating it, I noticed that one of the tests doesn't pass and, in fact, it doesn't pass on my local machine either. I added a console.log before line 48 to see the value of count and it is indeed greater than 999,999 but the following conditional (count > 999999) doesn't trigger for some reason. I'm not sure where else I could ask (my friends don't use JS) so I was wondering if anyone could help me. Apologies if this isn't the best place to ask for help. Moon motif (talk) 10:09, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

You really should throw instead of returning a string. Feeglgeef (talk) 14:41, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Fair enough. Actually, I changed it and saw that the result actually did change to the expected error too! Turns out, the forEach() function doesn't act exactly like iterating with a for loop. If a return statement is hit in the latter, the function terminates but in the former, it just continues. Another reason to use throw instead of returning a string :)

I'm not sure how I would change the corresponding test case to match though, the corresponding English cardinal function test has both connected Python and JS implementations failing as well. Moon motif (talk) 18:18, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

This is phab:T381361 (which even mentions the cardinal function). Feeglgeef (talk) 18:39, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

And, in errors and forEach(), our programming languages have an error system. Why try to implement our own and have to deal with how the language natively handles it? That's why I recommend you always throw (especially if phab:T381361 is fixed) Feeglgeef (talk) 18:44, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Problem editing Wikifunctions

Hi! I made the Finnish nominative plural, Python Z11207 some time ago. I tried to edit it, but I couldn't. It gave this error message: "You don't have permission to edit Implementation that is connected to a Function." What did I do wrong? --Teromakotero (talk) 16:08, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

The functioneer permission is required to edit connected implementations. Someone (also with the functioneer permission) must have connected it. I will disconnect it for you, and you can let me know here if you would like me to reconnect it. Feeglgeef (talk) 16:59, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Ahh, your functioneer was only temporary and expired. You can apply for permanent renewal here Feeglgeef (talk) 17:00, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Main page changes

Hello! Just letting everyone here know that I made some pretty big changes to the main page. Let me know if anyone objects to anything. Thanks! Feeglgeef (talk) 08:13, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Honestly, it's really nice. The only issue I have with it is that it feels inconsistent with the UI of other pages? It's good but it feels a bit disjointed. infernostars (talk) (contribs) 08:17, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

That's fair. I was going for more of a modern look, but that really does look a little out of place with the rest of the wiki. Thanks for the feedback! Feeglgeef (talk) 08:20, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

I've dropped the hover animations. This looks better to me. Feeglgeef (talk) 08:24, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, looks good to me. Although, maybe the example functions could use a bit of a darkening when you hover over their background? Or some other way of making it feel animated, i 'unno. For me it's 1:30 am, haha infernostars (talk) (contribs) 08:31, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Also late for me :/. Will look at darkening them, I liked that. Feeglgeef (talk) 08:33, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Done, thanks! Feeglgeef (talk) 08:36, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Actually should also darken in the Wikimedia family footer, probably infernostars (talk) (contribs) 08:38, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Done, thanks again! Feeglgeef (talk) 08:42, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Looks nice, thanks. Small thing: * [[Special:RunFunction|Run a Function]] to (lower case) * [[Special:RunFunction|Run a function]]. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 11:14, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for amending it. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:13, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. Links are a bit bright. I can live with that, but I do think that followed links should be a distinguished from those that have not yet been followed, especially when the page is a hub. GrounderUK (talk) 12:30, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

K, will try that Feeglgeef (talk) 17:03, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Done, links should now all be the browser default. Thanks! Feeglgeef (talk) 17:06, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Really nice design! I appreciate simple and clean layouts. However, I noticed that the gradient style at the top of the page doesn’t apply when using the Dark Mode gadget; it appears completely black. I also have a suggestion (not a request): in the "Functions to try out" section, how about using the en:Zebra striping style? Aram (talk) 17:47, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

I'm not sure how to make it work well with the dark mode gadget. I'll try out Zebra striping in the sandbox and see how it goes. Thanks! Feeglgeef (talk) 18:00, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

I think this will help make the main page more compatible with dark mode. Asked42 (talk) 09:07, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

@Feeglgeef: Can you explain why you thought to re-design and publish it first, and only then post here that had been done, without asking for any input or agreement? This feels rather uncollegiate and surprising to me.

On the content point, rather than the process, I am sad to see the logo go. Why did you get rid of it? What was the overall purpose of the re-design? Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 17:01, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

On getting input, IIRC my RfA that got 100% support in 5 votes mentioned main page changes, and I also asked in the telegram if anyone has any objections. The purpose of the redesign was because the old version looked really ugly and was really annoying to use on mobile. The logo is gone because:

1. It takes up a bunch of space that requires more scrolling than neccesary
2. It communicates no information
3. The logo already appears on the users screen in the top corner, no reason to show it twice
4. This is consistent will other projects.

Also, I don't see what need you saw in pinging me twice within 2 minutes, but whatever. Feeglgeef (talk) 19:41, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

I feel it might be a good practice to first work on the design in the sandbox to ensure everything looks and functions as intended before moving it to the main template. This approach could help avoid multiple edits on the live version. Additionally, for the text, it might be helpful to finalize the content first before adding it to the live version. This way, we can minimize the need for repeated translations again and again, and ensure consistency. Asked42 (talk) 14:23, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Yea, I'm sorry about the frequent text changes. I won't be touching anything in translate tags anymore. Feeglgeef (talk) 21:10, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Concerning administrator activity by Feeglgeef

I would like to bring an issue to the community’s attention. Earlier today (UTC), Feeglgeef removed my functioneer right, ostensibly per the inactivity policy on WF:Functioneers. However, in Special:Diff/87213, less than a year ago, I still used my functioneer right to connect a test case, making the removal unjustified. As such, it is clear to me that Feeglgeef’s behavior is in fact a retaliation against my opposing their request for interface administrator rights (permalink) – that is to say, a blatant abuse of admin powers. (Even if I had not used my functioneer right for more than a year, Feeglgeef should have recognized the conflict of interest – they replied to the oppose vote several hours before the rights change, so they clearly were aware of it – and recused themself.) As we do not have a de-sysop policy yet AFAICT, I think the project chat is the best place ask for the community’s guidance in this matter. Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 08:39, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

I would just like you to keep in mind that I was systematically checking for users who were inactive (I removed it from one or two others). I hadn't even taken the time to process who it was that I was changing the rights for. I also left a note that it would be granted back to you immediately should you request it. I've regranted your functioneer right. I was looking for the semi-automated edit summary, which you edits did not have (for some reason??) Feeglgeef (talk) 08:49, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

@Ameisenigel and 99of9: Pinging for thoughts, will voluntarily give up should they ask me to. I do apologize for failing to adequately check for activity and to adequately check for conflicts of intrest. I do promise to try to do better in the future. Feeglgeef (talk) 19:30, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

This is very disappointing.

In any event, I don’t see any value in this inactivity policy, so I propose we remove it. Inactivity can still be cited within the rationale for proposed removal of functioneer rights by community consensus. GrounderUK (talk) 20:51, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Was not too sure about it either. Why remove a right just to grant it back immediately upon request? Feeglgeef (talk) 21:00, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Typically, the rationale is that leaving accounts with advanced permissions that are inactive creates a security vulnerability if someone steals that person's credentials. The "grant it back immediately" part usually comes from the thinking that this person was granted these rights for a good reason and shouldn't have to go thru the full approval process all over again. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:27, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Right, but if someone steals the person's credentials, they could just request it back. Feeglgeef (talk) 21:35, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Okay, but the specified criterion is failure to use the rights specific to the Functioneer user group, not complete inactivity on the account. (Although connections and disconnections can now be seen in the edit summary, this was not the case a year ago. Also, detecting an edit to a connected implementation or test must be tricky.) GrounderUK (talk) 21:57, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Can certainly attest to that :) Feeglgeef (talk) 22:01, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Have submitted the request at m:Steward_requests/Permissions. T'was fun. Sorry about the trouble. Feeglgeef (talk) 21:49, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

I think you do not need to resign. It is not that unusual that someone who is new to the job is making a mistake. The important thing is just not to repeat the mistakes. --Ameisenigel (talk) 22:03, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Alright, I've withdrawn it. Thanks! Feeglgeef (talk) 22:07, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

It has been brought to my attention that @Feeglgeef also edited their user JS to mark me (along with all my alt accounts and also one other user whom I don’t know, none of which have ever been active on Wikifunctions) as “annoying”. On Telegram, they wrote that they forgot that everyone can see such edits. (I’ll point out that the edit interface for user JS pages shows a red warning that JavaScript subpages should not contain confidential data as they are viewable by other users.) I really don’t think this is appropriate behavior for an administrator – both on the grounds of it frankly being childish, and also indicative of plain incompetence, just like the incorrect removal of my Functioneer right. Why are we trusting someone with sysop rights who is seemingly incapable of exercising them correctly and responsibly, or even understanding basic wiki principles like “your edits will be public”? Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 09:15, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Stop outing my telegram account smfh. Feeglgeef (talk) 14:23, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

This is literally what I've been telling everyone this whole time. "never attribute to malice what can be attributed to incompetence." Next time, please do a better job at assuming stupidity first. Thanks! Feeglgeef (talk) 20:08, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Also, on being incapable of exercising them correctly and responsibly, here are some I'm fairly proud of: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]. I've also only been doing this for less than a week. Feeglgeef (talk) 20:21, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

On Special:AbuseLog/479, my change to the LTA filter caught oneǃ I'm really proud of that. Hopefully the spammer leaves us alone now SMFH. Feeglgeef (talk) 00:17, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I have to concur with @Lucas Werkmeister's complaints.

Earlier today, already after the previous discussion in this section, and other users' strong recommendation not to repeat mistakes, Feeglgeef reverted the sidebar several times in a way that first broke localization, and later broke the sidebar's appearance in general in many languages (possibly most). You can see the details in the history of MediaWiki:Sidebar and on the talk page MediaWiki talk:Sidebar. Because of that, you may still see two broken items in the sidebar in some user interface languages, like fr, nl, sl, and probably some others; it should get fixed some time soon, but caching seems to be working extra hard here.

In that discussion, Feeglgeef also used disrespectful and uncivil language. I see that similar language was used in this here discussion, too, and even though it was less personal here, such behavior is grossly inappropriate for an administrator. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 02:43, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

I didn't use any uncivil language and I'm not sure what your talking about, please provide some diffs :) Feeglgeef (talk) 02:54, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

I've found the issue with the thingys and fixed. I'll resign when I get the chance (as long as you don't mess with the sidebar again, if you do I'm not going down without a fight) Feeglgeef (talk) 04:35, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

I've been trying to resign but they keep not letting me. Hopefully it gets done soon. Feeglgeef (talk) 08:33, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

If they want to make an (unconditional) resgination, they can do it on Wikifunctions and a neutral community member can post here for removal y'all can someone do this? Thanks! Feeglgeef (talk) 08:35, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

I'm desysoped! Took a while :/. Feeglgeef (talk) 08:45, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
For your information I've "emergency" de-sysopped Feeglgeef, based on an abusive block here on Wikifunctions combined with an own resignation. Let me know if you have any questions or concerns about that action. EPIC (talk) 08:49, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, buddy! Not sure why you had to take 2 hours but whatever, what's in the past is in the past. Feeglgeef (talk) 08:50, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. It looks like things were getting out of hand and likely to escalate if no action were taken. That said, I think the abuse of rights occurred after the attempted “own resignation” and, although entirely inappropriate, should be seen as a secondary reason for removal of the rights, with the primary reason being “own resignation”. This comment is just “for the record” and should not be interpreted as a concern about the action taken. Thanks again. GrounderUK (talk) 11:21, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

re: current status of discovery UX

Am I correct in thinking that linking/categorisation of related functions doesn't exist yet? YoshiRulz (talk) 17:26, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

You can create categories on talk pages and mention related functions on talk pages or in the description. Feeglgeef (talk) 17:34, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

You can also add functions to Wikifunctions:Catalogue. Please also see Talk:Z20342 for example searches based on input and output types. Wikifunctions:Find is work in progress. GrounderUK (talk) 13:15, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Update: I started a WF:MediaWiki parser functions like the Excel formula list. I'll hold off on trying to categorise talk pages for now. YoshiRulz (talk) 02:42, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Removal of the general-ban for ClaudeBot

The result of phab:T374318 was the ban of ClaudeBot via MediaWiki:Robots.txt. I'm fairly certain that ClaudeBot was not the issue here, and we don't ban unless needed to prevent disruption. Therefore, I'd like to remove the ban of ClaudeBot, and am seeking opinions on doing so. @Jdforrester (WMF): courtesy ping. Thanks! Feeglgeef (talk) 03:36, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

I'd want to see the team's response: it's not implausible that ClaudeBot is worse (100,000 per week is 9 per minute, or about once per 6 seconds). —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 04:04, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

I'm fine with waiting for the team's response. I'll raise the issue at the Volunteer's corner and if nobody objects there or until then I'll remove it. Feeglgeef (talk) 04:28, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Also, not very relevant but can we also remove the sitenotice? It's very annoying. Feeglgeef (talk) 04:36, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

You can "[hide]" it Nemoralis (talk) 17:35, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Fine for me, if James agrees with it --Ameisenigel (talk) 19:11, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

@Feeglgeef: "I'm fairly certain that ClaudeBot was not the issue here". That's fascinating. I watched as ClaudeBot took down production in front of my eyes. How are you so certain? Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 17:00, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Because of my waste of resources featured tool. Feeglgeef (talk) 19:34, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Naming conventions recommendations

As we get closer to integrate Wikifunctions with Wikipedia, the Abstract Wikipedia team wants to share a few suggestions to ensure that Wikifunctions content is accessible, inclusive, and cohesive across projects. You can read more on this page Wikifunctions:Design/Naming conventions recommendations. Feel free to share your thoughts and ideas! AAlhazwani (WMF) (talk) 16:52, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Next Wikifunctions & Abstract Wikipedia Volunteers' Corner will be on January 13

Hi, we remind you that, if you have questions or ideas to discuss about Wikifunctions & Abstract Wikipedia, you can participate to the next Volunteers' Corner, that will be held on January 13, at 18:30 UTC (link to the meeting).

We hope to see you there! -- User:Sannita (WMF) (talk) 17:44, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

The recording of the Corner is now available on Commons. Enjoy! Sannita (WMF) (talk) 10:12, 15 January 2025 (UTC)