[05:46:27] I've been optimising a bit, and found that Z19724 and Z19722 seem a bit slower than I expected (both py and js). I guess this is due to the speed of code conversion? [08:21:09] I think it’s quite variable over time, which suggests it’s not the actual conversion so much as the overhead of handling the type objects beforehand. (re @u99of9: I've been optimising a bit, and found that Z19724 and Z19722 seem a bit slower than I expected (both py and js). I guess this is...) [09:07:16] Hi all. Does anyone know the reasoning behind the current page organization of the ongoing naming contest? I find it quite awkward, and proposed a reorganization to make it easier to navigate and to make/edit proposals: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Abstract\_Wikipedia/Abstract\_Wikipedia\_naming\_contest/More\_proposals#Page\_organization (https [09:07:17] //meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/ [09:07:18] Talk:Abstract%5C_Wikipedia/Abstract%5C_Wikipedia%5C_naming%5C_contest/More%5C_proposals#Page%5C_organization) [09:07:38] Please comment there if you have any opinions on the matter :) [09:09:32] Broken link 😎 (re @waldyrious: Hi all. Does anyone know the reasoning behind the current page organization of the ongoing naming contest? I find it quite awkwa...) [09:11:30] Oh, weird, the chat client I'm using seems to be adding backslashes to the link ☹️ let me try the browser. [09:14:30] Ok, should be fixed now. Thanks for the heads-up! [12:29:56] answered there [15:57:20] I want to suggest a change to the engagement rules for the naming contest by adding "This contest is for naming the project, not to be used as a soapbox to discuss this or other projects in general. If you want to discuss the project, please go here. Discussion that are not about the name, but about the project, may be moved to that page." [15:57:21] Please leave a message here what you think about the proposal. I would appreciate input in order to figure out how to proceed: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Abstract_Wikipedia/Abstract_Wikipedia_naming_contest [19:06:51] Is this in response to certain bad faith proposals? I support that. And hard penalties for wilfully spreading misinformation [19:12:36] let's not go there for the moment (re @harej: Is this in response to certain bad faith proposals? I support that. And hard penalties for wilfully spreading misinformation) [19:12:59] definitely the proposals done with a provocative sense will be moved to the talk page [21:33:06] Thanks, replied! (re @vrandecic: answered there) [22:54:58] Btw, I've left opposing comments in several name proposals that contain "Wikipedia" or "pedia", under the assumption that the new wiki will be a place to centrally host abstract content (like files in Commons) which will then be shown/rendered in the language-specific wikis — rather than having a separate wiki to host abstract encyclopedic articles, another for [22:54:58] abstract wikivo [22:54:58] yage guides, etc. Am I misguided, in that this direction is still a possibility? Or is it OK to assume that the plan is to have a single wiki hosting abstract content?