[00:28:42] So someone should make an "infobox for a person with blood-type!" (re @Nikki: and if someone makes a function that makes an infobox for a person, it's likely that they wouldn't include blood type, because m...) [00:30:05] Or just a "Broad infobox of person" with more arguments than the general one. [00:32:28] Why do we even have a character limit? And why is it not enforced server side? (re @Toby: I'm away from a computer for this month, but reading the newsletter and listening to the volunteer's corner I have some suggesti...) [02:36:36] @Dnshitobu I've sent you a message on your Dagbani Wikipedia user page. Please reply! [03:11:43] I've created Z20767. It might be useful on Dagwiki. I will translate to Dagbani soon, I can't right now. [06:43:31] Have there been any development in the thoughts of where to store the abstract content for an article or a class? I know it was a bit up in the air a few years ago and one idea floated was a new tab on the Wikidata item. A question I get now is if there could be competing content or if we must collaborate? (I hope the latter.) [08:58:46] That's an anglo-centric (and even more a en.wo-centric) notions [08:58:48] For almost all cultures outside Europe it doesn't make sense (not enough for a special constructor) (re @Feeglgeef: Biography of a Living Person) [09:00:03] The cultural adaptation is very important but also very difficult. [09:00:04] I can't wait how it will really work, that's a fun challenge! [11:33:09] Sure, Globglogabgalabian is not all cultures (re @Nicolas: That's an anglo-centric (and even more a en.wo-centric) notions [11:33:10] For almost all cultures outside Europe it doesn't make sense (n...) [16:10:41] I think they should be stored in .awiki files or something for portability and extended use (re @Jan_ainali: Have there been any development in the thoughts of where to store the abstract content for an article or a class? I know it was ...) [16:12:04] I think we should store the ones that abstract wikipedia uses on some upload.wikimedia.org equivalent, maybe abstracts.wikimedia.org (or abstracts.wikipedia.org) [16:14:53] I'm not sure about forcing collaboration. On one hand, forcing collaboration means we can get more work done. On the other hand, as Nikki and Nicolas have pointed out, some cultures may have different needs and thus some groups of languages may justify their own articles (re @Jan_ainali: Have there been any development in the thoughts of where to store the abstract [16:14:53] content for an [16:14:54] article or a class? I know it was ...) [16:32:09] That's a fair point. But if we have competing content it also makes it harder for a community to say "give us all abstract content (for which we don't already have regular articles)" as it will yield duplicates. (re @Feeglgeef: I'm not sure about forcing collaboration. On one hand, forcing collaboration means we can get more work done. On the other hand,...) [17:08:13] Of course, one could imagine we store them as abstracts.wikipedia.org/Q3/Q3A.awiki and abstracts.wikipedia.org/Q3/Q3B.awiki, and whoever has the local user rights can choose which one to import. (re @Jan_ainali: That's a fair point. But if we have competing content it also makes it harder for a community to say "give us all abstract conte...) [17:11:56] Or abstracts.wikipedia.org/Q6247/blood-typed.awiki and abstracts.wikipedia.org/Q6247/main.awiki [19:06:55] I've created a category for the 6 Dagbani/dagwiki functions I have made, [[Category:Dagbani Wikipedia functions]]