[02:50:47] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> @vrandecic can Z20780 be connected as a renderer for Z20420?
[02:50:48] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> I've made some functions for it:
[02:50:49] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> Z20770 for Dagbani
[02:50:51] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> Z20773 for English
[02:50:52] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> Z20776 for German
[02:50:54] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> Z20782 for American English
[02:50:55] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> Z20785 for French
[02:50:57] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> Z20791 for Hungarian
[02:50:58] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> Z20794 for Spanish
[02:51:00] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> And more can be added, these are just the ones I know.
[03:19:46] <wm-bb>	 <Toby> Feeglgeef I think we should have a good set of tests before we nominate for FOTW (e.g. Z20756)
[03:21:01] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> Yeah; we probably do need more. (re @Toby: Feeglgeef I think we should have a good set of tests before we nominate for FOTW (e.g. Z20756))
[03:21:54] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> Oh, age doesn't even have a single test, I'll create a few.
[03:41:07] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> I've made 3, I'll likely add some more later.
[04:24:03] <wm-bb>	 <Toby> Thanks. Some spanning 1AD would help. (re @Feeglgeef: I've made 3, I'll likely add some more later.)
[05:03:52] <wm-bb>	 <athulvis> Why the test is passed even the output is wrong? (re @wikilinksbot: Z20756 – age)
[05:03:56] <wm-bb>	 <athulvis> https://tools-static.wmflabs.org/bridgebot/f8cd9ec0/file_67234.jpg
[05:04:10] <wm-bb>	 <athulvis> https://tools-static.wmflabs.org/bridgebot/85735649/file_67235.jpg
[05:04:23] <wm-bb>	 <athulvis> https://www.wikifunctions.org/view/en/Z20799
[05:48:43] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> I just fixed the error in the implementation. I don't know why it's showing up as passed (re @athulvis: Why the test is passed even the output is wrong?)
[05:53:57] <wm-bb>	 <athulvis> same issue with tests above also.. its showing passed inside and failed outside. (re @Feeglgeef: I just fixed the error in the implementation. I don't know why it was showing up as passed)
[06:07:50] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> @athulvis could you make one of these for Malayalam? All of them have similar python structures that you can copy/adapt. Thanks! (re @Feeglgeef: @vrandecic can Z20780 be connected as a renderer for Z20420?
[06:07:52] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> I've made some functions for it:
[06:07:54] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> Z20770 for Dagbani
[06:07:56] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> Z20773 for Engl...)
[08:00:17] <wm-bb>	 <Nicolas> Great, but do they to do with Wikipedias? Why not name them "date in English" instead of "date enwiki" ? (re @Feeglgeef: @vrandecic can Z20780 be connected as a renderer for Z20420?
[08:00:18] <wm-bb>	 <Nicolas> I've made some functions for it:
[08:00:19] <wm-bb>	 <Nicolas> Z20770 for Dagbani
[08:00:21] <wm-bb>	 <Nicolas> Z20773 for Engl...)
[08:02:04] <wm-bb>	 <Nicolas> Also Feeglgeef why not make one single broad function (as you advocate so often) it would be better and easier, no?
[12:52:02] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> I don't think that's possible,  there isn't a type converter from natural number yet (re @Nicolas: Great, but do they to do with Wikipedias? Why not name them "date in English" instead of "date enwiki" ?)
[12:54:19] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> Date representation can vary, and the target of this project is Wikipedia (re @Nicolas: Great, but do they to do with Wikipedias? Why not name them "date in English" instead of "date enwiki" ?)
[13:01:06] <wm-bb>	 <Nicolas> sure, but why not allow to do all representation on the functions? why choose *only* Wikipedia? (re @Feeglgeef: Date representation can vary, and the target of this project is Wikipedia)
[13:07:28] <wm-bb>	 <Nicolas> also, I noticed for instance that Z20786 used "aout" for August instead of the more common "août" (both in general French and on frwiki)
[13:13:08] <wm-bb>	 <Nicolas> also, why store explictly the name of the month an not using the objects like Z16108 (that does use "août")
[14:15:19] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> You can create an "informal" config if you want (re @Nicolas: sure, but why not allow to do all representation on the functions? why choose *only* Wikipedia?)
[14:16:24] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> Because that's not currently possible due to a bug in Z99 (re @Nicolas: also, why store explictly the name of the month an not using the objects like Z16108 (that does use "août"))
[15:04:57] <wm-bb>	 <Nicolas> what would that be/mean? (re @Feeglgeef: You can create an "informal" config if you want)
[15:05:23] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> Not wiki-connected (re @Nicolas: what would that be/mean?)
[15:05:48] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> Whatever the general population uses most of the time.
[15:06:20] <wm-bb>	 <Nicolas> yeah, but here the general population *and* wiki use the same spelling
[16:36:02] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> So why do you care if they are the same? (re @Nicolas: yeah, but here the general population *and* wiki use the same spelling)
[16:36:19] <wm-bb>	 <Nicolas> because it's not the spelling you used in the function (re @Feeglgeef: So why do you care if they are the same?)
[16:37:05] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> What do you mean? (re @Nicolas: because it's not the spelling you used in the function)
[16:38:01] <wm-bb>	 <Nicolas> "aout" is the more modern French but both in the general population and on Wikipedia (and basically everywhere) "août" is used (re @Feeglgeef: What do you mean?)
[16:38:33] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> I probably learned it wrong then, I'll fix it. (re @Nicolas: "aout" is the more modern French but both in the general population and on Wikipedia (and basically everywhere) "août" is used)
[16:41:05] <wm-bb>	 <Nicolas> "aout" is not wrong, it's just not the more common spelling (by far) (re @Feeglgeef: I probably learned it wrong then, I'll fix it.)
[16:41:28] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> Ahh ok.
[16:42:04] <wm-bb>	 <Nicolas> https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=ao%C3%BBt%2Caout&year_start=1800&year_end=2019&corpus=fr-2019&smoothing=0&case_insensitive=false
[16:43:03] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> I've changed it to août
[19:31:50] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> If you'd like to you can change them as long as you case them properly. I don't have any strong opinions on names (besides casing) (re @Nicolas: Great, but do they to do with Wikipedias? Why not name them "date in English" instead of "date enwiki" ?)
[21:14:04] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> @Sannita [[WF:Staff editing policy]] is still marked as a draft and has not been edited since August 2023. Staff have still made non-office-action and non-phabricator-tasked mainspace edits, which is unusual for the WMF. If staff will be able to make edits in this form, we should have a policy on it accepted by the community.
[21:37:52] <wm-bb>	 <Sannita> I'm not sure I understood your point (re @Feeglgeef: @Sannita [[WF:Staff editing policy]] is still marked as a draft and has not been edited since August 2023. Staff have still made...)
[21:38:37] <wm-bb>	 <Sannita> Do you want to propose to approve this draft, to modify it, or...?
[21:39:12] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> Yes (re @Sannita: Do you want to propose to approve this draft, to modify it, or...?)
[21:39:17] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> Or modify it
[21:40:21] <wm-bb>	 <Sannita> For me, it's community that should decide on the policy, whatever the outcome we'll abide by it
[21:41:32] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> I'll add something to the project chat.
[21:44:22] <wm-bb>	 <Ameisenigel> Is there a reason why we have staff with seperate admin rights? Wouldn't it be better to do it the Wikidata way (include admin rights directly within the staff rights)?
[21:47:30] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> IIRC the Wikifunctions Staff group already has the rights of admins (re @Ameisenigel: Is there a reason why we have staff with seperate admin rights? Wouldn't it be better to do it the Wikidata way (include admin r...)
[21:50:11] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> I think that we should give some of the admin rights to the Wikifunctions Staff group (the ones with clear reasoning to have), as I don't see why Abstract Wikipedia developers need "block", for example. (re @Ameisenigel: Is there a reason why we have staff with seperate admin rights? Wouldn't it be better to do it the Wikidata way (include admin r...)