Talk:Flow/Developer test page
Please test at [mw:Talk:Sandbox mw:Talk:Sandbox], instead. Thanks. (Board description edited by Quiddity (WMF) (talk), MZMcBride (talk), 192.195.83.38)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Why is this enabled here?
edit(Topic title edited by —MarcoAurelio, PiRSquared17 (talk))
I don't understand … PiRSquared17 (talk) 22:14, 2 November 2014 (UTC) (Edited by Vogone (talk))
Me neither! MF-W 22:46, 2 November 2014 (UTC) (Edited by Vogone (talk))
You can download the clip or download a player to play the clip in your browser.</audio>
Cool! Courcelles 23:27, 2 November 2014 (UTC) (Edited by Vogone (talk))
- I wanted to see how Flow dealt with a long score image and the resulting vorbis. When I edit the post I see weird stuff at the bottom:
- Strange. PiRSquared17 (talk) 00:50, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
- Re: the Score issue, I've filed bugzilla:72912. Thanks. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 19:11, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
Just, "Let it Flow, Let it Flow" ... :P Stemoc 03:14, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
This page was briefly enabled for testing in February, but then all the topics were deleted and it was fully-protected. I forgot that it had been unprotected, the month after. When I saw the 2 test topics here in August, I must have confused this page with Enwiki's identically titled page, else I would've investigated at the time.
I'd suggest fully-protecting this page, until later. (Probably in early 2015, I'll be more confident of re-discussing it all here; once some more design changes are made, and bugs are fixed, and features are added). I'll add a header, directing anyone curious to test at mediawiki instead. Thanks. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 19:14, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
I protected this page now. MF-W 20:20, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
This is awful
editI think Wikimedia is about building content, and we shoud attract contributors with tools to better add knowledge to our sites, not to convert talk pages on facebook feeds. —MarcoAurelio 22:53, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
I agree with MarcoAurelio, as nearly all the time. MF-W 23:09, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
Flow is still pretty rough, yeah. MZMcBride (talk) 12:47, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
At least it looks better than LiquidThreads. I think it still needs further development. I don't like, for example, those strange topic names, however I can understand that that way we avoid clases with duplicated titles. I'd like that deleted topics be shown for admins in a different color or something, so we know that those topics are deleted. Also, if this is used in a talk page, will we be able to archive the page, so the topic browser don't become very large? —MarcoAurelio 11:27, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
My first instinct was to "like" one of the comments above. 
Like 
Oh I can do that too. Ya, this is not for us.
Also, the UI needs some work here, clicking on any option below (link + mention user) brings up a floating panel that seems hard to navigate away from. It seems like its trying to emulate a stripped down version of Facebook comment system. I wonder how this hide function works.....And we have topics instead of sub-pages that direct each topic in a separate page. :| Theo10011 (talk) 13:14, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
My, my... Those templates also here? I have RfD'd both. —MarcoAurelio 12:13, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.