[01:33:41] <dmehus>	 hey quick-ish question...for abandoned wiki requests, when a user edits them, they apparently do not update back to 'inreview' status and go back into the queue (see also https://meta.miraheze.org/wiki/?diff=548766&oldid=548764&rcid=2057817#Accidentally_marked_request_as_abandoned). should that workflow be corrected in RequestWiki?
[03:16:51] <MirahezeRelay>	 <posix_memalign> That should be fixed. I think @reception123 worked on the original feature.
[03:36:20] <MirahezeRelay>	 <orduin> Worth a ticket I'd say, unless you've already got a patch going
[04:17:50] <MirahezeRelay>	 <posix_memalign, replying to orduin> [1/2] https://issue-tracker.miraheze.org/T15678
[04:17:50] <MirahezeRelay>	 <posix_memalign, replying to orduin> [2/2] Done
[04:26:23] <MirahezeRelay>	 <posix_memalign> Also filed https://issue-tracker.miraheze.org/T15679
[05:34:06] <RhinosF1>	 To answer Doug's question, no, you shouldn't restore my edit. That would still be incorrect.
[05:34:16] <RhinosF1>	 You should edit the page to be correct
[07:09:50] <MirahezeRelay>	 <reception123> hmm, for abandoned we wouldn't want to allow an infinite abandon/reopen cycle either
[07:10:09] <MirahezeRelay>	 <reception123> so if we do change it, we should probably allow for one reopen but then no longer allow users to abandon the request again somehow
[07:26:13] <MirahezeRelay>	 <sakurababochka> But since they can still effectively abandon even if they don't use the explicit functionality (by just ignoring the request, for example), would it make more sense to not allow them to reopen after the second abandon instead?
[08:25:35] <MirahezeRelay>	 <_arawynn> [1/3] I also think it might be useful to have a popup of sorts before people abandon their request. I sometimes think people abandon their requests because the AI doesn't re-review the request. 
[08:25:36] <MirahezeRelay>	 <_arawynn> [2/3] I see comments like 'bidding review' or basically asking if somebody is there to review their request when it's been in the queue for a couple hours.
[08:25:36] <MirahezeRelay>	 <_arawynn> [3/3] Or maybe have the AI add something that the request will be passed on for human review after their edit.
[08:31:46] <MirahezeRelay>	 <sakurababochka, replying to _arawynn> There's also that a few people come in here because they've accidentally abandoned requests, so a popup would make sense.
[08:35:17] <MirahezeRelay>	 <raidarr> seems like an intuitive change
[14:01:12] <MirahezeRelay>	 <reception123> Yeah, I think we should start with a warning popup
[14:01:24] <MirahezeRelay>	 <reception123> But the AI could also be a bit more clear, I'll take a look at that
[14:11:37] <dmehus>	 @reception123: sounds good. being able to change the status of a wiki request should be okay, I think. "abandoning" a request gets it out of the queue, but could always be reopened
[14:13:37] <dmehus>	 in the mean time, is it technically possible for a wiki reviewer reopen [[Special:RequestWikiQueue/85933]], or will NeoKnight need to begin a new request?
[14:13:52] <dmehus>	 @linkie on
[14:14:48] <dmehus>	 any objections to MacFan4000 enabling wm-bot's linkie function in this channel?
[14:15:13] <MirahezeRelay>	 <_arawynn> [1/2] yes but we need to know and that's the difficult part.
[14:15:13] <MirahezeRelay>	 <_arawynn> [2/2] A lot of the time, people comment/edit the request in an attempt to re-open it and if we don't happen to look at the request and see that comment it's not going to happen
[14:15:58] <dmehus>	 @_arawynn: for sure. I'll review the request and see what the issue was and respond to him
[14:18:45] <MacFan4000>	 dmehus: it was disabled I believe because wiki-bot on discord does the same thing
[14:19:00] <dmehus>	 MacFan4000: ah
[14:19:14] <dmehus>	 can IRC users call the commands of Wiki-Bot via the relay?
[14:19:14] <MacFan4000>	 There was desire for linkie to be disabled
[14:19:22] <MacFan4000>	 I don’t think so
[14:19:25] <dmehus>	 ah
[14:19:38] <dmehus>	 okay, fair enough
[14:19:51] <dmehus>	 yeah, we don't want bots talking to themselves in an infinite loop :P
[14:20:57] <MirahezeRelay>	 <finsanity, replying to _arawynn> i think just a static message that says something along the lines of "Your wiki request is now in the queue for a human reviewer to look at, and will take at least 2-3 days to be re-reviewed" would clear up a lot of confusion
[14:21:09] <dmehus>	 LGTM from having a very detailed purpose/topic/scope. Principle issue seems to be the occasional NSFW page, which they acknowledge the tone in which it will be written. Only thing seems to be missing is clarity on how the NSFW pages will be identified (i.e., with tags)?
[14:21:35] <dmehus>	 @finsanity: agree
[14:24:22] * dmehus is so happy we've mostly automated the custom domain process now with RequestCustomDomain. Greatly improved user experience overall
[14:25:41] <MirahezeRelay>	 <thewwrnerdguy, replying to dmehus> @dmehus it works in #offtopic but not otherwise
[14:26:02] <MirahezeRelay>	 <thewwrnerdguy, replying to dmehus> *principal :3
[14:28:22] <dmehus>	 @thewwrnerdguy: ack, thanks. oops, my bad on the wrong principal. I don't usually make that mistake either :P
[14:29:01] <MirahezeRelay>	 <reception123> I'll see if I can get a popup working and change the AI text
[14:29:13] <MirahezeRelay>	 <reception123> I forgot if we have it hard coded in the prompt, but I think we do
[14:30:20] <MirahezeRelay>	 <reception123> Oh nevermind, since here we're not talking about the AI message, we're talking about whenever a request is reopened after commenting
[14:30:31] <MirahezeRelay>	 <reception123> So that's easier to change
[14:37:28] <dmehus>	 reception123: cool, thanks :)
[14:37:30] <dmehus>	 yeah
[14:37:54] <dmehus>	 he just accidentally clicked abandon when trying to edit his request
[15:34:37] <MirahezeRelay>	 <posix_memalign, replying to posix_memalign> [1/3] Made a PR to ssl as well: https://github.com/miraheze/ssl/pull/923
[15:34:37] <MirahezeRelay>	 <posix_memalign, replying to posix_memalign> [2/3] If needed I can also automatically redirect all domains.
[15:34:38] <MirahezeRelay>	 <posix_memalign, replying to posix_memalign> [3/3] If the puppet review doesn't happen then this will become stale very soon with lots of merge conflicts. When that happens I can always rerun the bot, though.
[17:26:23] <MirahezeRelay>	 <rhinosf1> @posix_memalign has it been tested on beta?
[17:27:45] <MirahezeRelay>	 <rhinosf1> Actually it's just a script change isn't it
[17:27:53] <MirahezeRelay>	 <rhinosf1> So the output will just auto add it to ssl
[17:28:03] <MirahezeRelay>	 <rhinosf1> So I guess it should be safe as long as someone is around