[03:15:46] xtools is so rude... not recognising abstractwiki [07:47:16] Hi, I've requested for the translation admin rights, you can leave your comments here: https://abstract.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstract_Wikipedia:Requests_for_permissions#Translation_administrators_for_Tanbiruzzaman [08:24:07] Oh wow [09:27:50] The most important point now is to find a way to state a reference as a Wikidata item in the reference field in Statement with Reference. [09:27:57] Is there a way to do this. [09:29:30] Yes, see [[Wikifunctions:Status_updates/2026-03-06]] (re @Csisc1994: Is there a way to do this.) [10:12:50] This is not what I look for. (re @Jan_ainali: Yes, see [[Wikifunctions:Status_updates/2026-03-06]]) [10:12:50] What I look for is a way to call Wikifunctions in the HTML fragment of the reference. [10:12:52] What I need to be able to call Z__(Q__) and get the reference. [10:12:53] Thank you. [10:32:27] Retrieval of references from Wikidata is not currently enabled: T404652. (re @Csisc1994: What I need to be able to call Z_(Q_) and get the reference.) [10:33:35] We could easily make a "reference" (superscript link) to the actual wikidata page if that is enough. [10:34:47] I don’t think it will be enough, but we should definitely do it anyway 👍 (re @u99of9: We could easily make a "reference" (superscript link) to the actual wikidata page if that is enough.) [10:37:08] …and we can suffix the property type too, can’t we? (re @Al: I don’t think it will be enough, but we should definitely do it anyway 👍) [10:42:21] …like this (https://www.wikifunctions.org/view/en/Z30016?call=%7B%22Z1K1%22%3A%22Z7%22%2C%22Z7K1%22%3A%22Z30016%22%2C%22Z30016K1%22%3A%22https%3A%2F%2Fwww.wikidata.org%2Fwiki%2FQ145%23P1705%22%2C%22Z30016K2%22%3A%22Text%22%7D) (re @Al: …and we can suffix the property type too, can’t we?) [11:12:07] I seems that the translation extension doesn't work yet... (re @the_tanbir: Hi, I've requested for the translation admin rights, you can leave your comments here: https://abstract.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstr...) [11:13:01] but appart from this, yes, your help would be most welcome [11:22:35] Yes, two inputs, a QID and a PID (re @Al: …and we can suffix the property type too, can’t we?) [11:33:39] 🤔 …or an entity reference and an anchor string? I forget how Lexeme anchor links work 🤷‍♂️ [[d:Lexeme:L501#S1]], I think. (re @u99of9: Yes, two inputs, a QID and a PID) [11:45:40] Separate functions, I think. (re @Al: 🤔 …or an entity reference and an anchor string? I forget how Lexeme anchor links work 🤷‍♂️ [[d:Lexeme:L501#S1]], I think.) [13:05:52] Quick question: why is there a WASI time limit? For some reason now every time I try to run a function it fails due to this error [16:20:24] You also stole the content of contributors to enwiki by not attributing the content as the license requires when you didn't transform it. (re @Csisc1994: All statements should be replaced later to Abstract texts.) [17:06:02] I will attribute that to them. (re @Feeglgeef: You also stole the work of contributors to enwiki by not attributing the content as the license requires when you didn't transfo...) [17:06:30] I just wanted to find out the right function instead of hard-coding it. [17:07:04] How I stole it if I said here that I just transformed the work on enwiki. (re @Feeglgeef: You also stole the work of contributors to enwiki by not attributing the content as the license requires when you didn't transfo...) [17:07:59] As well, enwiki translated it from frwiki and I am the person who wrote that page on frwiki. Did they steal it from me too, as they did not state that it was translated from frwiki. [17:08:08] Please assume good faith on people. [17:09:22] "stole" is a strong word but technically you didn't give proper attribution onwiki (re @Csisc1994: How I stole it if I said here that I just transformed the work on enwiki.) [17:10:06] I said here a few lines before that I will do that later. (re @NicolasVIGNERON: "stole" is a strong word but technically you didn't give proper attribution onwiki) [17:11:08] yeah and thanks for that 🙏 [17:11:10] but doing it backward is really not the best way to do it (re @Csisc1994: I said here a few lines before that I will do that later.) [17:12:30] It seems that Feeglgeef did it himself. But, I wanted to find something better like a function. [17:14:09] I know. But, as I said here, it is just temporary. (re @NicolasVIGNERON: yeah and thanks for that 🙏 [17:14:10] but doing it backward is really not the best way to do it) [17:15:00] At least, we should try it to see limitations. [17:18:18] I think that all these points are details and not that useful here. The most useful point here is to see what the creation of this Page has taught us. This is a win. [17:19:29] Yes, I don’t think we have the ideal function for that, or even a good one. Z30016 is our starting point. And Z32053 is looking good, I think. (re @Csisc1994: It seems that Feeglgeef did it himself. But, I wanted to find something better like a function.) [17:19:54] Let me use this. Thank you. (re @wikilinksbot: Z30016 – generate HTML anchor tag (hyperlink) [17:19:55] Z32053 – English simple cite web) [17:29:30] Also Z31697… (re @Al: Yes, I don’t think we have the ideal function for that, or even a good one. Z30016 is our starting point. And Z32053 is looking ...) [17:33:15] That is better. [17:37:44] Al GrounderUK @NicolasVIGNERON I changed it now. At least, it is better. [17:38:39] https://tools-static.wmflabs.org/bridgebot/b86fab1b/file_78877.jpg [17:38:53] Paragraph then link then paragraph [17:38:59] Better than nothing. [17:48:23] Thank you. Feel free to suggest improvements or extensions on the function’s talk page. Based on what you said earlier, attribution to frwiki would also seem to be appropriate. I’m no expert, but I believe that conversion to abstract content is copyright in itself as a derivative work, and the ShareAlike licence would require a chain of attribution in any event. (re [17:48:23] @Csisc199 [17:48:25] 4: Al GrounderUK @NicolasVIGNERON I changed it now. At least, it is better.) [17:51:04] I think that, for now, the talk page, or ones own sandbox would be a much better place to temporarily store non-abstract content. (The same go for meta commentary about an article.) Can we make that the best practice? It will become confusing for new users joining, trying to understand what this project is aiming to do, if some articles are not using abstract [17:51:04] content. [18:07:59] But, we need to set up Draft as in the English Wikipedia. (re @Jan_ainali: I think that, for now, the talk page, or ones own sandbox would be a much better place to temporarily store non-abstract content...) [18:08:32] Or like Bozza in the Italian Wikipedia. [18:09:00] Do we really _need_ that? We do just fine with User:Name/sandbox on Swedish Wikipedia. (re @Csisc1994: But, we need to set up Draft as in the English Wikipedia.) [18:09:15] do we really need to? [18:09:16] from what I've seen Draft are where ideas go to die on enwp (re @Csisc1994: But, we need to set up Draft as in the English Wikipedia.) [18:09:36] Does this allow the person to have the same UI or just a wiki page to edit. (re @Jan_ainali: Do we really need that? We do just fine with User:Name/sandbox on Swedish Wikipedia.) [18:10:40] If it is a wiki page that does not have the same UI, this will absolutely be useless. [18:10:42] we could also use https://abstract.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q4115189 (since Q4115189 is the sandbox on Wikidata) [18:11:14] But, this is one item and we have many users. (re @NicolasVIGNERON: we could also use https://abstract.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q4115189 (since Q4115189 is the sandbox on Wikidata)) [18:11:36] It's not like they'll be all editing it at the same time? [18:11:52] just like on Wikidata... (re @Csisc1994: But, this is one item and we have many users.) [18:12:00] exactly (re @wmtelegram_bot: It's not like they'll be all editing it at the same time?) [18:13:15] But, this is not the use case, the Page for Moungi Bawendi is built to be extensively edited, as the project progresses so that I can flag problems if I meet ones. This is not just for a simple try. [18:13:34] This will literally take months. [18:13:51] Then couldn't you just copy the wikitext into your userspace? [18:14:45] and shouldn't you begin by writing the corresponding wikifunctions first? [18:14:48] It’s just hard! Currently we have to draft articles in the main namespace. If we consider “conversion” to be translation, we would want the edit history from the point when the licensed content was imported, since these are the contributions that will be licensed onward under ShareAlike. [18:14:49] It's just a wiki page. Which is perfectly fine because the only thing supposed to be there is content that is not in abstract form. If it's in abstract, _do_ use the main namespace. (re @Csisc1994: Does this allow the person to have the same UI or just a wiki page to edit.) [18:16:04] Let us keep it as such for six months. If it will not make it to a fully abstract layout, I will come here and ask that the Page is deleted. (re @Jan_ainali: It's just a wiki page. Which is perfectly fine because the only thing supposed to be there is content that is not in abstract fo...) [18:16:31] I vote against this (if there is a vote). (re @Csisc1994: Let us keep it as such for six months. If it will not make it to a fully abstract layout, I will come here and ask that the Page...) [18:17:00] I'm very confused but what is the idea or the goal here... [18:18:41] Let me explain this again. The goal is to create a fully abstract layout for Moungi Bawendi. What I will do is that, as we progress, I will find functions and build up abstract syntax that generates the same output as what exists in the Page. (re @NicolasVIGNERON: I'm very confused but what is the idea or the goal here...) [18:19:16] This can only be done statement-by-statement. [18:20:39] but this is the same goal for all pages (more or less) [18:20:40] what is the point of doing it backwards? and 99% of the wikifunctions you need don't exist yet (and some/most may never exist) (re @Csisc1994: Let me explain this again. The goal is to create a fully abstract layout for Moungi Bawendi. What I will do is that, as we progr...) [18:21:36] If we do not do it backwards, how we can know that we need a certain function to be created. (re @NicolasVIGNERON: but this is the same goal for all pages (more or less) [18:21:37] what is the point of doing it backwards? and 99% of the wikifunctions yo...) [18:22:50] You can say that we know all the possible functions for NLG. But, this is not always true. [18:23:52] Yes, I think we can say that will never be true! (re @Csisc1994: You can say that we know all the possible functions for NLG. But, this is not always true.) [18:25:03] Sentence by sentence. And by comparing it with your goal _elsewhere_. There is no one stopping you from having two parallel tabs open. (re @Csisc1994: If we do not do it backwards, how we can know that we need a certain function to be created.) [18:27:07] Just conceptually, I think it is valuable and relevant to see that a particular sentence was replaced by a particular function call. (re @Jan_ainali: Sentence by sentence. And by comparing it with your goal elsewhere. There is no one stopping you from having two parallel tabs o...) [18:32:02] On a different topic. Do we have any examples of articles where rendering of abstract content works (even if they are simple)? [18:35:30] This is not possible for me for personal reasons. It is a medical condition. (re @Jan_ainali: Sentence by sentence. And by comparing it with your goal elsewhere. There is no one stopping you from having two parallel tabs o...) [18:35:37] I don't see a good reason to do that in the namespace, or even in a draft space (re @Al: Just conceptually, I think it is valuable and relevant to see that a particular sentence was replaced by a particular function c...) [18:36:24] I can see it fit in the edit summary. (re @Al: Just conceptually, I think it is valuable and relevant to see that a particular sentence was replaced by a particular function c...) [18:36:34] then do a simple table on a subpage of your personnal page [18:36:34] and you can do it on Wikifunctions, no need to do it on Abstract Wikipedia (re @Csisc1994: This is not possible for me for personal reasons. It is a medical condition.) [18:37:10] Same problem here. I would need to have it on one page. (re @NicolasVIGNERON: then do a simple table on a subpage of your personnal page [18:37:11] and you can do it on Wikifunctions, no need to do it on Abstract Wiki...) [18:37:28] then do it on one page (re @Csisc1994: Same problem here. I would need to have it on one page.) [18:38:19] Abstract content is currently only available in the main namespace of abstract.wikipedia. (re @NicolasVIGNERON: then do a simple table on a subpage of your personnal page [18:38:20] and you can do it on Wikifunctions, no need to do it on Abstract Wiki...) [18:38:37] a bit like it's done on https://www.wikifunctions.org/wiki/Wikifunctions:Functions_GREL [18:38:38] the GREL function then next to it the corresponding wikifunction [18:38:40] That is the problem. (re @Al: Abstract content is currently only available in the main namespace of abstract.wikipedia.) [18:39:06] Why we complicate our lives when it can be solved as it is. [18:39:21] I don't any problem... (re @Csisc1994: That is the problem.) [18:39:52] I'm guessing that you can't change the content model to an Abstract article? [18:39:57] It is only one page. You can mark it as a sandbox or unreliable page or add something like {{travaux}}. [18:40:06] To me, mixing content is what complicates it. Especially when I am trying to show new users what this project is about. (re @Csisc1994: Why we complicate our lives when it can be solved as it is.) [18:41:06] You cannot show the Project, as it is now either. You need functions to let people contribute. We do not have ones. At least, I will implement ones for this Page to work. (re @Jan_ainali: To me, mixing content is what complicates it. Especially when I am trying to show new users what this project is about.) [18:41:52] I can show [[abstract:Q16]] [18:42:39] And I will do a livestream in Swedish in less than an hour :) [18:42:51] That is one sentence. [18:42:57] Without a reference. [18:43:24] Yes, that shows a function. Not wikitext. [18:43:42] @Csisc1994 here is an example: https://www.wikifunctions.org/wiki/User:Csisc/test [18:44:49] (and you could add a third column for running the wikifunction too if you want a display even closer to the actual result) [18:45:34] This is not how I work. Back in the old days of Wikipedia, I incrementally created Wikipedia Pages. [18:46:35] This is Learning by Doing. [18:46:41] and here you can incrementally created Wikfunctions pages [18:46:43] same difference... [18:47:14] But, not from scratch. Replacing things on the same page is easier than going from tab to tab. [18:47:31] then do it in the same tab (re @Csisc1994: But, not from scratch. Replacing things on the same page is easier than going from tab to tab.) [18:47:54] How... You would like to delete the Page. [18:48:03] You could also put both tabs side by side. [18:49:54] I do not know why we are discussing this now, if I promised to get everything in order, as soon as I can. [18:50:17] You did not give me a chance to see if I can do it. [18:51:02] It’s just because you are the first to try it this way. There are no great options here. (re @Csisc1994: I do not know why we are discussing this now, if I promised to get everything in order, as soon as I can.) [18:51:54] Please do not be discouraged. (re @Csisc1994: You did not give me a chance to see if I can do it.) [18:52:26] No one is talking about deletion [18:52:26] We are just confused by what you want to do... (re @Csisc1994: How... You would like to delete the Page.) [18:55:20] Conceptually it is just a translation. But working abstract content can only be created in the abstract.wikipedia main namespace, and only in the page with the subject’s Wikidata reference. (re @NicolasVIGNERON: No one is talking about deletion [18:55:22] We are just confused by what you want to do...) [19:27:21] “Even when not required, licensees are encouraged to indicate the material has been modified, and ideally (when reasonable) to describe or specify the changes made.” [19:27:22] Excerpt from https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/License_Versions#Modifications_and_adaptations_must_be_marked_as_such [19:27:23] Abstract.wikipedia edit summaries are a good way to indicate how the adaptation differs from the original. [19:27:25] I believe that sentence-by-sentence adaptations would require separate attribution for each published sentence, each indicating that the licensed original was modified and (“ideally”) in what way. (re @NicolasVIGNERON: I don't see a good reason to do that in the namespace, or even in a draft space) [20:04:48] Is there a ticket for this problem [20:06:59] When you click on a function on Abstract Wikipedia, it redirects you to abstract.wikipedia.org/view/en/Z... instead of Wikifunctions. [20:07:44] Yes [20:08:25] *T420666* (re @Csisc1994: When you click on a function on Abstract Wikipedia, it redirects you to abstract.wikipedia.org/view/en/Z... instead of Wikifunct...) [20:09:13] Also, when you search for an item in the search bar, it redirects you to /view/en/Qxxx instead of /wiki/Qxxx. [20:09:31] Or *T420670* (re @Csisc1994: When you click on a function on Abstract Wikipedia, it redirects you to abstract.wikipedia.org/view/en/Z... instead of Wikifunct...) [20:10:02] That is it. (re @wikilinksbot: T420670 – from Abstract Wikipedia, links to ZIDs should go to Wikifunctions [in progress]) [20:10:04] Thank you. [20:10:34] Yes the last one. I fixed it but waiting for deploy. Actually thought it was gonna go earlier today. But maybe i was mistaken. [20:11:37] Not a problem. The most important is to be deployed. (re @daphnesmit1986: Yes the last one. I fixed it but waiting for deploy. Actually thought it was gonna go earlier today. But maybe i was mistaken.) [20:12:21] @Jan_ainali Another point regarding the function you used Z26570, it lacks gender. [20:20:56] That is a problem. Monuments and countries are mostly misgendered in Wikidata. Some monuments can be masculine in one language and feminine in another language. (re @Csisc1994: @Jan_ainali Another point regarding the function you used Z26570, it lacks determinants in the beginning in French.) [20:21:08] I can assure you I have been nowhere near the function for French :) (re @Csisc1994: @Jan_ainali Another point regarding the function you used Z26570, it lacks determinants in the beginning in French.) [20:21:44] Just for your information. (re @Jan_ainali: I can assure you I have been nowhere near the function for French :)) [20:23:40] If you know French, please help fix it: Z32371 [20:24:45] Will do. (re @Jan_ainali: If you know French, please help fix it: Z32371) [20:24:47] Thank you. [20:25:29] Right now it only has one test that passes. Perhaps that is more coincidence then by design then? [20:25:58] Sure. (re @Jan_ainali: Right now it only has one test that passes. Perhaps that is more coincidence then by design then?) [20:26:08] This is unfortunately what has happened. [20:27:15] For Canada, the fault is minor. It missed the "The" Article (Le) before Canada. [20:28:20] In Romance Languages (e.g., French, English, Italian, and Spanish), the definite article is required before known places. [20:31:12] Exception: Cities. (re @Csisc1994: In Romance Languages (e.g., French, English, Italian, and Spanish), the definite article is required before known places.) [20:31:44] But, countries, monuments, markets, palaces, and so on are all there. [20:37:02] Not so much in English, which is more inclined to the Germanic in this regard, but the problem is being discussed at [[abstract: Abstract Wikipedia:Project chat#Z26039 and Z26095]]. (re @Csisc1994: In Romance Languages (e.g., French, English, Italian, and Spanish), the definite article is required before known places.) [23:44:15] I've been working on how to include this in our constructors. I think I have a plan. It will partially rely on this function Z32645. Please feel free to add test examples, especially from categories of items we have not yet covered. (re @Al: Not so much in English, which is more inclined to the Germanic in this regard, but the problem is being discussed at [[abstract [23:44:15] ...) [23:49:08] I am not sure whether this issue has been reported or not.When I want to click the hyperlink "Collective role sentence", it should bring me to https://wikifunctions.org/view/en/Z32326, however it brings me to https://abstract.wikipedia.org/view/en/Z32326 : https://tools-static.wmflabs.org/bridgebot/8dddfd88/file_78889.jpg [23:50:43] Like this one : https://tools-static.wmflabs.org/bridgebot/b6aa68e4/file_78890.jpg [23:51:34] Is this intended to be like this? (re @acanthamoeba_castellanii: I am not sure whether this issue has been reported or not. [23:51:34] When I want to click the hyperlink "Collective role sentence", it sh...) [23:55:34] @acanthamoeba_castellanii I think that’s this task (re @wikilinksbot: T420666 – Our /view/ URLs aren't working on abstract.wikipedia.org, so we're generating links for users that don't work [in prog...) [23:56:08] Thanks! I will follow closely the progress of this task (re @lucaswerkmeister: @acanthamoeba_castellanii I think that’s this task)