Opinions on Reading List edit
I am a GSoC applicant, and I hope to work on the Reading List. As the phabricator task does not give much description on the project, I am right now trying to collect more information how Reading List should look like. I am guided by Joaquin and we have thought of a few suggestions like, implemrnting as a cross-wiki list, sorting using dates. Could you describe how you would wish the project to be? Would you be interested in desiging Reading List as an Extension or as an external tool? Your suggestions could help us improve our project ideas.
 : https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T120756 --Harithaharikumar
Cross-wiki watchlist edit
Hi! You voted for the cross-wiki watchlist as an important suggestions in the community wishlist survey last year. I'm pinging editors who showed interest in that task to tell them we have some suggestions for how things could look, if you'd like to glance at them and give us some feedback. You can find them on the project page on Meta. If you'd like to share any comments, you're very welcome to do so on the talk page. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 00:57, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
2016 Community Wishlist Survey edit
You’re getting this message because you participated in the 2015 Community Wishlist Survey and we want to make sure you don't miss it this year – or at least can make the conscious choice to ignore if it you want to. The 2015 survey decided what the Community Tech team should work on during 2016. It was also the focus of Wikimedia hackathons and work by other developers. You can see the status of wishes from the 2015 wishlist at 2015 Community Wishlist Survey/Results.
The 2016 Community Wishlist Survey is now open for wishes. You can create proposals until November 20. You will be able to vote on which wishes you think are best or most important between November 28 and December 12. /Johan (WMF) (talk) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:17, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Invitation to discussion about Per-user page blocking edit
We’re inviting you to join the discussion because you voted or commented in the 2015 Community Wishlist Survey about Enhanced per-user / per-article protection / blocking vote.
For the Anti-Harassment Tools team SPoore (WMF), Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 17:03, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
Please let us know if you wish to opt-out of all massmessage mailings from the Anti-harassment tools team.
Help us design granular blocks! edit
Hello :-) The Anti-Harassment Tools team at the Wikimedia Foundation will start building these granular blocking tools in a few weeks and we've asked WMF designer Alex Hollender to help us make some wireframes so the tools are intuitive to MediaWiki users.
We have a first draft of how we think this tool should work. You can read the full proposed implementation here but here are the significant parts:
- Granular blocks (page, category, namespace, and file uploading) will be built on top of Special:Block. These blocks will function as if they were regular blocks and allow for the same options, but only take effect on specific pages.
- We will add a new checkbox for "Block this user from the whole site" which will be checked by default. When it is unchecked the admin will be able to specify which pages, categories, and/or namespaces the user should be blocked from editing.
- Granular blocks can be combined and/or overlap. (For example, a user could be simultaneously blocked from editing the articles Rain, Thunder, Lightning, and all pages inside the Category:Weather.)
- Only one block is set at a time, to adjust what the user is blocked from the administrator would have to modify the existing block.
- Block logs should display information about the granular block
- When a blocked user attempts to edit an applicable page, they should see a block warning message which include information on their block (reason, expiration, what they are blocked from, etc.)
- If a category is provided, the blocked user cannot edit either the category page itself and all pages within the category.
- If the File: namespace is blocked, the user should not be allowed to upload files.
We like this direction because it builds on top of the existing block system, both a technical and usability wise. Before we get too far along with designs and development we'd like to hear from you about our prosposal:
- What do you think of the proposed implementation?
- We believe this should be an expansion of Special:Block, but it has been suggested that this be a new special page. What are your thoughts?
- Should uploading files be combined with a File namespace block, or as a separate option? (For example, if combined, when a user is blocked from the File namespace, they would neither be able to edit any existing pages in the File namespace nor upload new files.)
- Should there be a maximum number of things to be blocked from? Or should we leave it up to admin discretion?
We appreciate your feedback on this project's talk page or by email. For the Anti-Harassment Tools team, SPoore (WMF) (talk) , Trust and Safety Specialist, Community health initiative (talk) 20:49, 9 May 2018 (UTC)