[03:25:04] Is anyone else OCD enough to care enough to match the infobox width to the default image thumbnail width? : https://tools-static.wmflabs.org/bridgebot/a62d8f5a/file_83623.jpg [05:22:44] where is it [06:41:53] I guess here: Z33329 (re @sefehpisikler: where is it) [06:46:58] oh i mean the article (re @u99of9: I guess here: Z33329) [06:47:22] thanks for the func too btw [06:48:37] Any article that has both a picture an an infobox. I forget which one I sampled. Maybe the most recent new creation: https://abstract.wikipedia.org/view/en/Q57336 (re @sefehpisikler: oh i mean the article) [06:49:59] Am I wrong in thinking that preferably, there should never be an image above the infobox? (re @u99of9: Is anyone else OCD enough to care enough to match the infobox width to the default image thumbnail width?) [06:51:11] 🤷 I don't know. For me having the image up top reminds me of the typical wiki infobox where the image is near the top and all the details follow. (re @Jan_ainali: Am I wrong in thinking that, preferably, there should never be an image above the infobox?) [06:52:12] It does. But if someone has energy, wouldn't it be better to have the image show up in the infobox instead? [06:53:05] Ohh, that would definitely be better! But I don't think it's technically possible because the images come in inside a special thumb container. [06:54:23] Oh. I hope it is high priority to fix that, because I think that might be a blocker for some language Wikipedias. [06:56:04] For me an even higher image priority will be to allow captions under all the thumbs. This was discussed as the next step when images were released. [06:57:15] I'm not sure yours has been explicitly requested, so may need a new phab. (but is fairly clearly good/expected?) [06:57:17] Yeah, that would be a blocker too. [13:15:05] I'm trying out Z41482, a new CTA when Lexemes are needed to render properly but an approximate fallback is better than an error. You can see it in action at https://abstract.wikipedia.org/view/en/Q17198982. Speak up if you can see a way to improve it. The point that we need an automatic method to decompose these compound concepts into more atomic ones that have [13:15:05] lexemes is still unresolved, but I think this is an improvement anyway. : https://tools-static.wmflabs.org/bridgebot/c8529dfa/file_83634.jpg [13:23:42] Sometimes, Abstract Wikipedia fragments return a "permissiondenied" error with message: [13:23:42] You don't have permission to render unsaved Abstract Wikipedia fragments. [13:23:44] Which becomes this in the frontend: [13:23:45] Unable to render this fragment due to an unknown error. [13:25:25] I get different errors : https://tools-static.wmflabs.org/bridgebot/dcfe4072/file_83635.jpg [13:33:19] It doesn't necessarily apply to all NLG-lexeme-fragments until their compositions are adapted. Because those calls are grouped in paragraphs, if one fails all fail. I've already done it for Z41477, but not yet for Z32858. (re @Jan_ainali: I get different errors) [13:49:44] I've made the new composition at Z41529 and you can see what it does at Z41530, but I suppose it will take a while to clear the cache on the actual article. (re @u99of9: It doesn't necessarily apply to all NLG-lexeme-fragments until their compositions are adapted. Because those calls are grouped i...) [17:30:01] done! (re @Ameisenigel: Could one of our staff members please connect the test from Z140 ?) [17:34:02] Hi all! Our next *Volunteers' Corner* is happening now! If you have questions or ideas to discuss, or you want to get in touch with the dev team, please join us! The link to the meeting is https://meet.google.com/xuy-njxh-rkw [17:34:14] (also, sorry for forgetting to update here) [23:48:09] What were the main discussion items? I can't find the usual telltale editing pattern. (re @Sannita: Hi all! Our next Volunteers' Corner is happening now! If you have questions or ideas to discuss, or you want to get in touch wit...)