[07:03:28] <wm-bb>	 <u99of9> In no particular rush it took me about 30 minutes to make this. Some of my time was spent looking up items to link. A fair bit of my time was waiting for the statements to re-render as I went in and out of edit mode. : https://tools-static.wmflabs.org/bridgebot/1a92577e/file_81429.jpg
[11:10:24] <wm-bb>	 <u99of9> Al have I misunderstood what Z29554 can do? Is Z37132 supposed to work?
[11:17:29] <wm-bb>	 <Al> There’s a limitation in the description. There was also a UI (?) bug with a quoted reference. But if you can quote a reference or provide a ZID, you probably don’t need the function 🤷‍♂️ (re @u99of9: Al have I misunderstood what Z29554 can do? Is Z37132 supposed to work?)
[11:23:35] <wm-bb>	 <u99of9> the limitation "if such an object exists"? So Z37122 doesn't exist? or isn't persistent? My broader context is that I'm trying to make Z37130 work, with just a tick and some kind of label or ZID or link to the config that was tested. (re @Al: There’s a limitation in the description. There was also a UI (?) bug with a quoted reference. But if you can quote a reference
[11:23:36] <wm-bb>	 o...)
[11:29:51] <wm-bb>	 <Al> It explicitly doesn’t work for test cases (Z37132). It won’t work for a Configuration either, or any object that has no identity key (when dereferenced) like a Z60. Sorry.
[11:34:20] <wm-bb>	 <u99of9> I didn't try it on a test case I don't think. But if configurations are out, I'll have to find a new approach. (re @Al: It explicitly doesn’t work for test cases (Z37132). It won’t work for a Configuration either, or any object that has no identity...)
[11:37:33] <wm-bb>	 <Al> Yes, I’m out and about… I just looked at the test case as an object rather than a composition. Sorry 😎 (re @u99of9: I don't think I tried it on a test case. But if configurations are out, I'll have to find a new approach.)
[12:19:58] <wm-bb>	 <u99of9> I got something working. If you visit [[User:99of9/Sandbox3]] you should whether each config is configured (in your language I hope). It works for English except when a call fails. (re @u99of9: the limitation "if such an object exists"?  So Z37122 doesn't exist? or isn't persistent?  My broader context is that I'm trying...)
[17:15:46] <wm-bb>	 <vrandecic> *Abstract Wikipedia Newsletter #255
[17:15:47] <wm-bb>	 <vrandecic> *
[17:15:49] <wm-bb>	 <vrandecic> * Integration of Abstract Wikipedia on Test wiki
[17:15:50] <wm-bb>	 <vrandecic> * The year ahead of us
[17:15:51] <wm-bb>	 <vrandecic> * Recent Changes in the software
[17:15:53] <wm-bb>	 <vrandecic> * Volunteers’ Corner on July 6
[17:15:54] <wm-bb>	 <vrandecic> * Wikifunctions and Abstract Wikipedia at Wikimania 2026
[17:15:56] <wm-bb>	 <vrandecic> * Fresh Functions weekly: 76 new Functions
[17:15:57] <wm-bb>	 <vrandecic> https://www.wikifunctions.org/wiki/Wikifunctions:Status_updates/2026-07-01
[17:37:22] <wm-bb>	 <Jan_ainali> Is the confusing title intentional? : https://tools-static.wmflabs.org/bridgebot/bfec6197/file_81439.jpg
[17:37:56] <wm-bb>	 <vrandecic> no, that's because test wikipedia is connected to test wikidata
[17:38:07] <wm-bb>	 <vrandecic> known issue, probably won't get fixed
[17:38:23] <wm-bb>	 <Jan_ainali> Ah, and it would be very unlikely to have to Qids match :)
[17:40:47] <wm-bb>	 <vrandecic> yes
[17:45:45] <wm-bb>	 <Jan_ainali> But we do have https://test.wikidata.org/wiki/Q42 :)
[17:46:28] <wm-bb>	 <vrandecic> we always have Q42
[17:47:13] <wm-bb>	 <Jan_ainali> I didn't read all the way to the note in your email before clicking the link 🤦‍♂️ (re @Jan_ainali: Is the confusing title intentional?)
[17:50:31] <wm-bb>	 <Jan_ainali> How will the page Special:CommunityConfiguration/AbstractWikiOptedInArticles look and behave when there are _many_ articles opted in?
[17:51:32] <wm-bb>	 <Jan_ainali> By the way, I love that it is under CommunityConfiguration!
[21:51:30] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> I don't think limiting it to sysops is a good decision long-term (re @Jan_ainali: By the way, I love that it is under CommunityConfiguration!)
[21:52:18] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> Not giving users the right to do something automatically will cause them to do it themselves. Copying over an abstract article is bad because attribution is lost and updates won't be received
[21:53:37] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> I'd like to reiterate that I implore you not to launch on any non-test wiki without a consensus on *both* abstractwiki and the destination wiki (re @vrandecic: Abstract Wikipedia Newsletter #255
[21:53:38] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> * Integration of Abstract Wikipedia on Test wiki
[21:53:39] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> * The year ahead of us
[21:53:41] <wm-bb>	 <Feeglgeef> * Recent Changes in ...)
[23:23:39] <wm-bb>	 <u99of9> Does this refresh button resend all pending requests simultaneously? They almost all fail (and then seem to be cached as failing). I suggest sending them progressively as was done previously on load. : https://tools-static.wmflabs.org/bridgebot/829b5218/file_81448.jpg
[23:27:56] <wm-bb>	 <u99of9> Actually, the retries perform badly even if they are pressed individually. : https://tools-static.wmflabs.org/bridgebot/a3049aa4/file_81449.jpg
[23:29:35] <wm-bb>	 <u99of9> Great to have the newsletter out while testing the new features! Much appreciated. (re @vrandecic: Abstract Wikipedia Newsletter #255
[23:29:36] <wm-bb>	 <u99of9> * Integration of Abstract Wikipedia on Test wiki
[23:29:38] <wm-bb>	 <u99of9> * The year ahead of us
[23:29:39] <wm-bb>	 <u99of9> * Recent Changes in ...)
[23:51:36] <wm-bb>	 <acanthamoeba_castellanii> The testing on big abstract articles are must faster now. Although there is still this problem currently (re @u99of9: Actually, the retries perform badly even if they are pressed individually.)