[00:26:40] 10Scoring-platform-team, 10MediaWiki-extensions-ORES, 10MediaWiki-extensions-PageCuration, 10Growth-Team (Current Sprint), 10Patch-For-Review: PageTriage role on Vagrant should have ORES as dependency - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T200043 (10Etonkovidova) 05Open>03Resolved [00:36:04] 10Scoring-platform-team (Current), 10JADE: JADE literature review - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T201887 (10awight) [00:36:48] 10Scoring-platform-team (Current), 10JADE: JADE literature review - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T201887 (10awight) [00:44:29] harej: I think we should blast our list https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_message_delivery/Targets/JADE [00:45:11] Unless it’s a better use of social capital to wait until we have a concrete deployment date? [00:45:30] awight: I’m trying to think of what we’d be asking of them at this point [00:45:48] What I’m thinking is that quick survey of stakeholders, if worded correctly, might guide our understanding of use cases. [00:45:58] Would they in fact edit each other’s judgments? [00:46:34] But of course, we have a chicken and egg problem, it would be best if we already had user test results in hand. [00:52:46] There's not a lot of people on our JADE list. But in any case, it'd be good to have discussions with communities about JADE. [00:53:09] Now that we're not so blocked on deployment, I suppose it'd be good to start thinking more about this. [01:05:49] harej: Netsplit, I just saw your backscroll. [01:05:59] +1, I guess we’re seeking partners for the pilot deployment [01:06:14] and should be testing our JSON page theory against humans [01:06:58] I'll want to work with developers to pitch potential JADE integrations [01:07:06] Hmmm [01:07:08] Including the Growth team [01:09:17] Cool! [01:09:32] I wonder if that can be presented in a way that makes sense to do ahead of next Wednesday’s TechCom chat? [01:09:42] It might be useful data to feed into that conversation [01:09:50] Thank you for prompting me to think about this, by the way [01:09:53] although the time frame is really tight [01:10:01] I'm thinking about this strategically. I'm not sure JADE, by itself, is all that... relatable? [01:10:04] :-) I’m sure you were already thinking about it [01:10:07] hehe [01:10:17] I’m working on a story to make relatable since you mention it [01:10:23] https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/scoring_current_work [01:10:25] L43 [01:11:00] The underlying story is pretty compelling. The actual implementation is a bit more obscure. [01:11:24] It’s funny though, cos we’ve all tried to humanize JADE and it keeps coming out still sort of unrelatable, I think you’re right. [01:12:18] Ah I see what you mean, yeah JSON is not that cool, but prtksxna’s UI would be a solid first step IMO [01:12:31] In my opinion we need *some* reference UI built in. [01:12:38] Then controversy could take place in JSON-land, but not the majority of interactions. [01:12:39] +1 [01:12:57] I have trouble with the Scoring Platform philosphy of leaving out a UI [01:12:59] *however* [01:13:01] I'm thinking along the lines of the default Wikibase experience – it's barebones but you don't have to touch JSON [01:13:10] … it’s all we have the resources for, so ultimately I support [01:13:57] harej: IMO it makes sense for the MVP to not include a UI [01:14:01] We should definitely stay out of the business of trying to make refined consumer-friendly products. [01:14:37] UI is not quite orthogonal since it would teach us so much about JADE itself, but I think the MediaWiki MVP will attract some real integrations, which serve as our UI. [01:15:17] Sure, if someone beats us to building a worthwhile UI, it frees us from having to deliver one. [01:15:27] hehe good way to put it [01:15:50] I want at least a minimal UI, I don't particularly care who builds it, and I won't block deployment over it. [01:16:22] y you don’t like https://en.wikipedia.beta.wmflabs.org/wiki/Judgment:Revision/376901 [01:16:42] Technically a UI :-/ [01:17:14] harej: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Harej/common.js [01:17:24] Have you tried prtksxna’s UI? [01:17:36] I have! [01:17:44] ah good sorry I couldn’t remember. [01:17:53] Would that be a good-enuf reference UI? [01:18:18] That would be suitable. I'm also thinking of a UI in terms of presentation of the contents of the page itself [01:18:21] Cos we can easily distribute that as a ResourceLoader module, when it’s been tried and is a hair more mature. [01:18:29] It could literally be like dropdown menus and such [01:18:34] +1 yes I’m fully in favor of it [01:18:39] Even if it’s just a mockup [01:18:50] Want to draw? [01:19:26] This took me a day or two, https://adamwight.github.io/ores-reference-ui/dist/ [01:20:25] I can knock out the reference UI implementation, once we have some agreement about how it should work. [01:20:55] I'm happy to draw some mockups [01:21:03] Should we have a Phabricator task for this? [01:21:19] 8D [01:21:28] * awight pockets rabbit foot [01:22:02] harej: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T168993 [01:22:22] 10Scoring-platform-team, 10JADE, 10Design: Discuss and create a UI mockup for the JADE editor interface - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T168993 (10awight) [01:24:00] 10Scoring-platform-team, 10JADE: Create overlay UI for editing Judgement pages - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T199128 (10awight) This could also look like a set of supported use cases rather than a monolothic edit interface. For example, an "append new judgment" action somewhere, a "view history of this... [01:27:35] 10Scoring-platform-team, 10JADE: Create overlay UI for editing Judgement pages - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T199128 (10Harej) I generally agree that it would be better to build bits of JADE into the interface, rather than create a monolithic editing interface. [01:31:48] harej: Sorry to get into the minutiae here, but looking at these UI bugs I think we need to phab-ize the user test and set it as a dependency [01:32:03] if you agree [01:32:21] Basically do a user test with the UI that Prateek came up with and then proceed based on that? [01:33:17] That’s what I think. [01:33:41] I mean, proceed with whatever Prateek and Daisy have in mind… [01:34:35] Do they manage the testing? I'm not sure how product testing works at WMF [01:35:01] I think if you want anything to happen at WMF, you need to stomp around and cry about it a lot [01:35:08] At least, that’s how I see it done [01:35:21] <3 [07:19:58] 10Scoring-platform-team, 10ORES, 10Performance-Team (Radar), 10Wikimedia-log-errors: ORES Storage::SqlScoreStorage exception every 2-3 minutes: Model contains an error for [id]: TimeoutError - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T201412 (10jcrespo) p:05Triage>03High More ongoing issues with ores storage... [12:04:48] o/ [12:05:09] I'm here early today. I'm starting my sleep cycle transition to Paris for next week :) [12:05:35] I have a bike race inbetween that starts at midnight MN time == 7AM Paris time which is perfect :D [12:29:04] 10Scoring-platform-team, 10ORES, 10Performance-Team (Radar), 10Wikimedia-log-errors: ORES Storage::SqlScoreStorage exception every 2-3 minutes: Model contains an error for [id]: TimeoutError - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T201412 (10Halfak) If I'm understanding right, this is a completely separate iss... [13:07:53] 10Scoring-platform-team (Current), 10MediaWiki-extensions-ORES, 10User-Ladsgroup: ORES blocking itself on insert and delete - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T201918 (10Halfak) [13:08:18] 10Scoring-platform-team, 10ORES, 10Performance-Team (Radar), 10Wikimedia-log-errors: ORES Storage::SqlScoreStorage exception every 2-3 minutes: Model contains an error for [id]: TimeoutError - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T201412 (10Halfak) I've created {T201918} to track this issue. [13:10:40] 10Scoring-platform-team, 10ORES, 10Performance-Team (Radar), 10Wikimedia-log-errors: ORES Storage::SqlScoreStorage exception every 2-3 minutes: Model contains an error for [id]: TimeoutError - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T201412 (10Halfak) @jcrespo, in reviewing your last post, it seems that the "Lon... [13:11:14] 10Scoring-platform-team, 10ORES, 10Performance-Team (Radar), 10Wikimedia-log-errors: ORES Storage::SqlScoreStorage exception every 2-3 minutes: Model contains an error for [id]: TimeoutError - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T201412 (10jcrespo) I will create a separate task. [13:26:02] brb. Looks like I need a reboot. [14:06:39] ARG. Took me a long time to figure out that my docking station needed a capacitor-draining reboot. [14:07:03] I.e. unplug, turn it one to drain the capacitors, plug back in. [14:07:07] *on [14:15:49] 10Scoring-platform-team, 10Gadgets, 10ORES: Implement ORES gadget for article quality - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T201927 (10Halfak) [14:33:55] srrodlund, are we having this docs meeting? [14:45:27] Maybe we need to reschedule these. It seems like they haven't been working for a while. [15:10:46] I'm heading out for lunch. Will be back in an hour or so [16:00:37] 10Scoring-platform-team, 10Gadgets, 10ORES: Implement ORES gadget for article quality - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T201927 (10Halfak) Last week, I refactored https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:EpochFail/ArticleQuality-system.js and made it work nicely on enwiki and euwiki: * https://eu.wikipedia.or... [16:31:03] Hey sorry. Yes. Let's move these to a later time. We had switched them when folks were coming and going from Europe for a bit, but I think they could stand to be a later time now [16:33:25] heh. I'm going to be in Europe next week :P [17:17:55] awight: hey, this is not fixed yet :D https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/c/mediawiki/extensions/JADE/+/442885/27/includes/ContentHandlers/JudgmentContent.php [17:18:22] You need to remove the use JADE\JADEServices; and move it at the top of all use statements [17:18:52] mediawiki coding convention, all use statement should be together, ordered alphabetically (unlike python) [17:19:26] will do! [17:20:18] back to wikidata stuff, will be working more tomorrow [17:20:30] (03PS28) 10Awight: JADE API to store judgments [extensions/JADE] - 10https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/442885 (https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T198207) [17:21:15] Okay, let's keep it at 7:30 for the next week and see if it works. I totally just didn't look at my calendar last night because I totally compartmentalized worklife as soon as I got home... [17:21:28] halfak: where are you going? [17:21:49] hargh, 7:30 [17:22:00] okay but just that one week :p [17:27:23] halfak: Amir1 and I just had a good chat about JADE implementation, and I realized that we should actually back up a few steps and do a quick review of JADE design decisions, for example why there’s a judgment.comment field, why a Judgment_talk namespace, etc. The goals are both to get on the same page, and to explore which requirements are important and which could be relaxed or changed if needed. Would you like to be part of that meeting? [17:27:56] Here are notes from our talk this morning: https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/JADE_design_sync [17:29:56] Wait... really? [17:30:10] hmm really what [17:30:10] awight, ^ [17:30:20] Oh... revisiting these things. [17:30:20] yes really, I guess. [17:30:36] Um. It seems kind of late in the process. What's your thinking? [17:30:43] Will this maybe buy us something? [17:32:02] * Get the team on the same page and * See if there are tweaks to make [17:32:24] Gotcha. I misunderstood. [17:33:04] No worries, I dropped a murky paragraph with no preliminaries ;-) [17:36:24] awight: good to know about the design sync; I will want to read those notes [17:36:57] +1! In fact, harej maybe you should be at the meeting? [17:37:03] Is it going on now? [17:37:10] Naw I was thinking Thursday AM [17:37:20] That should work [17:38:53] Cool! My thought is that we don’t dwell on just the controversial stuff, but look at everything, the requirements, schema, and implementation. [17:40:28] This is going to be hard for me to attend. I'm cramming for my trip next week [17:40:32] Hmm. [17:42:15] awight: https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/c/operations/puppet/+/452716 [17:42:17] :D [17:42:19] This is hard because I did a lot of the ground work and theoretical motivation behind JADE. [17:42:51] Ground *design* work. [17:42:57] I did very little of the engineering work ^_^ [17:43:45] My “which requirements could be changed” comment must have sounded ominous to halfak, who has had to go through this with me 100x already, so I’ll illustrate with the decision to have a Judgment_talk namespace. The motivation was for users to have a natural space to generate consensus, but the specific implementation was informed by our desire to have the “data” about conversations available in an easy-to-analyze location. For Page judgmen [17:43:46] this could be the wrong place, since it can be argued that the “Article talk” namespace is more appropriate. For Diff judgments, I’d say it’s a toss-up whether Judgment talk or article talk is better. For “Log” judgments (TBA), the Judgment talk would be the *only* place to have a discussion in some cases, in others maybe article talk makes sense. Problematizing as a group might be healthy. [17:44:40] halfak: I appreciate the sentiment, and understand if it’s too tedious. We would love to have your systematic approach, but can make it through the material w/o you in case you don’t attend. [17:45:16] It's not that it is too tedious as much as the timing is difficult. [17:45:56] ah yeah, sorry about that. I wanted to do this before the TechCom discussion just cos [17:48:03] Re. "why would we have Judgement_talk", I can't imagine any situation where Talk is a more apt namespace. E.g. for article quality, a judgment is about a specific version of the page. Also, it's strange. If we have a content page for JADE, it would be unusual (I can't think of another example) to not have an associated discussion space. [17:50:07] halfak: I’ve been drinking from the same trough of Kool-Aid so it makes sense to me, but there are other people who would disagree: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T196547#4296657 [17:52:06] Yeah. I think Daniel doesn't understand what a JADE judgment is when he makes that assertion. I can see how clearing his confusion would be helpful. [17:52:55] In the end, what would it achieve to discuss an edit in an article talk page? We'd have the same number of revisions. [17:57:13] I’m staying away from optimizations or scalability concerns here, just using as an example of a design decision that should probably be summarized for posterity. It seemed like a good example because there are legitimate arguments against what we’ve chosen, but other factors such as planning for “Log” judgments which make it a necessity. [17:58:14] Ahh yes. That's a good point that I didn't consider. There are some types of wiki-entities that do not have talk pages. [17:58:41] There's a general argument in there too. Don't surprise your users. [18:00:16] I can imagine that last one cutting both ways: don’t split up conversation among pages that nobody is looking for, vs. don’t use different mechanisms depending on wiki entity type… [18:05:26] awight, right. I just think that one is easy to knock down. The judgment of an edit in an article != the article. [18:06:52] It feels tricky though, because before JADE existed (hehe it still doesn’t), edits to an article would be discussed in the article talk page AFAIK [18:09:38] {{fact}} that JADE doesn't exist :) [18:09:38] 10[6] 1010https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Citation_needed - Redirección desde 10https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:fact?redirect=no [18:10:53] (03CR) 10Ladsgroup: [C: 032] JADE API to store judgments [extensions/JADE] - 10https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/442885 (https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T198207) (owner: 10Awight) [18:13:51] Hauskatze: lol I had actually considered dragging you into this discussion, curious how you as a patroller (if that’s how you see yourself?) feel about ^ creating a new talk page to focus discussion around judgments. What if we were able to integrate with watchlist notifications for the article whose edit is being judged? [18:14:37] I see myself as an useless pathetic idiot most of the time awight ;) [18:14:42] baahahaha [18:14:52] that’s a healthy place [18:15:24] you mean, a new talk page for discussing judgements on the article's talk page? [18:15:42] or Jade_talk stuff [18:17:39] Basically, having a talk page associated with each Judgment for discussion of the judgment. [18:18:00] ^ that. Judgment_talk: [18:18:49] I.e. would you rather start that discussion on the article in which the edit was saved (possibly a while ago) or would you rather start that discussion on a talk page next to the judgment data (the thing you edited)? [18:20:15] & what would make that more palatable, e.g. watchlist integration? For context, we expect this talk page to be used for !votes and other consensus practices about the judgment content [18:20:43] - damaging. - not damaging. - well this isn’t an argument, just simple contradiction! [18:20:49] Most judgment will need no discussion, I expect. They just won't be contentious. [18:21:34] halfak: I’m dying to know how often there’s discussion, and when it happens, why. [18:21:47] Talk about [[w:active learning]]… [18:21:47] 10[7] 10https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/active_learning [18:21:52] Right. That'll be a fun study when JADE is online. [18:22:12] Right! I'll be very interesting to have people re-review judgments that look wrong or inconsistent. [18:25:01] I'd say Jade_talk, but more people should be asked I think [18:31:33] Hauskatze: What I’m wondering is whether you see people using such a talk page. Is it a nice cleanup to keep tangential topics like patrolling for bad faith out of the main article talk, or are we diluting the community? [18:33:05] I like to keep stuff ordered. As such I think if we're discussing a JADE, I think the better place is on it's JADE talk [18:33:38] that said, I still have a vague idea of ORES/JADE mechanics so feel free to ignore me :) [18:33:55] I think to the extent that a judgment namespace page is the artifact created there should be a corresponding talk. [18:34:14] Community members can organize discussions how they choose within the software [18:34:40] Hauskatze: No it’s very helpful, thank you. This is insight into the mind of a Steward that I would not have without the chance to hear you opinion! [18:36:01] ... we should have more Stewards and patrollers in this channel. [18:36:18] Failing that, it should be my job to hunt for them :) [18:36:23] "Hunt" is a strong word. [18:37:04] halfak: you mentioned the Wikimedia AI Community as the task that is a quarterly goal, but looking at the goals written down it says to build a focus group around JADE. Do you view that as a subset of building an AI Community? [18:48:44] awight: I'm glad I could be of help. [18:54:46] Also, do we really do work outside of Wikipedia and Wikidata? [18:54:57] Is machine recognition of images firmly within the realm of Research? [19:07:28] awight: aha! the user test [19:07:34] that is the Ask we can make of our newsletter cohort [19:07:40] *woot* [19:07:46] And others, I imagine [19:12:37] Also, assuming the whole production thing is figured out we get to go back to pondering over whether to support multiple judgments [19:13:33] hahaha solil [19:13:35] *solid [19:13:41] also, “endorsements” [19:20:40] awight: if I wanted to use your ORES reference UI to figure out whether https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Delhi_Airport_Metro_Express&diff=839712756&oldid=838620306&diffmode=source was damaging/not good faith/not, do I want to enter the diff number or the oldid number? [19:32:22] harej: diff number. oldid is the parent revision id [19:32:30] terrrrible names [19:35:54] So to make sure I have it right, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Delhi_Airport_Metro_Express&diff=839712756&oldid=838620306&diffmode=source should yield a very high probability of being non-damaging and good faith [19:37:07] I would think so [19:37:34] also, these fake judgments... where are they being stored? [19:48:20] OIC sorry, so the fake judgments are just a module of the rev_id, take a peek at the JS [19:48:41] *modulo [19:49:05] is this some mediawiki dark magic i don't know about? :) [19:51:04] hehe lemme paste line # [19:51:19] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Prtksxna/jade-test.js [19:51:38] (03Merged) 10jenkins-bot: JADE API to store judgments [extensions/JADE] - 10https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/442885 (https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T198207) (owner: 10Awight) [19:52:23] harej: sorry, random and not modulo. It’s the last function, getRandomJudgement [19:52:32] ohhh, it's not real content :) [19:52:47] eso [19:59:52] My bias is to recruit participants from English Wikipedia, since I know them. But we're at least a year from ever deploying to there... [20:00:32] (I might get some from English Wikipedia but my goal is to have a majority *not* be from there.) [20:00:51] hehe good to know your biases [20:01:38] Amir1 was thinking we want to pilot to a medium-size wiki, that sounds right to me although I would also be okay waiting a month or two between small- and medium-size pilots [20:03:05] The wikis we pilot on have to be large enough to actually use the things. I'd want to pair a supported tool with a community that supports that tool. [20:03:35] For picking wikis to deploy I may want to go in the order of supporting a tool THEN supporting that wiki, rather than wait for people to come along and do things. [20:04:34] I think I see what you mean, that makes sense. [20:04:52] Any thoughts about which workflow, or how to make that decision? [20:07:03] It'll probably be based on whatever we can get [20:12:05] (03CR) 10jenkins-bot: JADE API to store judgments [extensions/JADE] - 10https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/442885 (https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T198207) (owner: 10Awight) [20:13:35] harej: 8D that’s real [20:15:08] IMO it’ll be a very different thing to integrate as a write-only workflow, like mirroring damaging judgments during patrolling, vs. reading and interacting with existing judgments. [20:15:25] We should consider that the latter makes it much more difficult to revert the integration later. [20:17:00] also, have you worked with Daisy on a design research project before? I haven't done one within the Wikimedia Foundation so I am not sure what I should prepare for them. [20:20:12] No, I haven’t unfortunately. [20:28:23] OK I'm out of here folks. [20:28:33] See you when? [20:28:37] Tomorrow i'll be online 2 hours earlier and leaving 2 hours earlier. [20:29:03] But I won't be around for Staff (scheduled something in the WMF Holiday) [20:29:16] You [20:29:50] *You'll see me around at ~1000 UTC and I'm hoping to be done for the day at 1800 UTC [20:30:26] On Thursday, I'll show up at 0900 UTC and finish at 1700 UTC [20:32:08] I added my sleep transition to my calendar to make this less confusing :D [20:32:10] o/ [20:37:09] halAFK: You’re working tomorrow? I thought u taking the holiday [20:55:33] 10Scoring-platform-team (Current), 10JADE, 10MW-1.32-release-notes (WMF-deploy-2018-08-21 (1.32.0-wmf.18)): Write JADE internal APIs to simplify integrations - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T198207 (10Jdforrester-WMF) [22:02:14] Do we have any good examples of edits that are 50/50 in ORES? Where ORES can't really make up its mind as to whether an edit is damaging/otherwise, or made in good/bad faith? [22:02:49] I can run a query for that… one moment please [22:04:18] select * from ores_classification where oresc_probability between 0.49 and 0.51 order by oresc_id desc limit 10; [22:04:20] I'm thinking of using them in the user test so that there's a good chance someone will actually disagree with the edit they judge [22:04:44] https://en.wikipedia.org/?diff=854951397&diffmode=source [22:05:04] https://en.wikipedia.org/?diff=854951399&diffmode=source [22:05:21] well copy that query somewhere :-) [22:05:40] I think that second edit is a better example of it being ambiguous [22:05:48] The first example may have just been ORES getting confused [22:05:56] I think borderline examples are a good idea, we’ll be finding a lot of them for “active learning" [22:06:22] whew “List of K-pop albums on the Billboard charts” I was confused too [22:07:50] select group_concat(oresc_rev separator ', ') from ores_classification where oresc_probability between 0.49 and 0.51 order by oresc_id desc limit 20; [22:07:58] 852485605, 852683654, 852682830, 852082886, 852082903, 852103653, 852079860, 852133916, 852083083, 852682870, 852173276, 852227901, 852333687, 852683031, 854501900, 852484416, 852084026, 852895025, 852682143, 852530684, 852683723, 852523505, 852681947, 852683752, 852482207, 852482690, 852684508, 852482821, 852078563, 854114542, 852484228, 852684745, 852483495, 852080234, 852079022, 852080515, 853007326, 852085125, 853007532, 852682625, 852686475, [22:07:59] 852081002, 852685579, 852229580, 852485490, 852119038, 852081957, 852085720, 854032591, 852076800, 854807255, 854026315, 852077211, 852686554, 854026676, 853051839, 852931411, 853011487, 852085411, 852691088, 853008751, 852899800, 853009288, 852687528, 853009509, 852687687, 854027721, 854027479, 854028177, 854032560, 852090698, 852085035, 852093108, 854029179, 854030767, 852512433, 851167844, 852486435, 853009671, 852076075, 852297016, 852283040, [22:08:00] 854033127, 854030217, 854030129, 854583675, 854040693, 854039993, 854598624, 852492830, 852488946, 852488229, 854045162 [22:09:23] * awight looks suspiciously at group_contact [22:09:31] ooh the “limit” won’t work like that [22:09:53] need to add a condition like oresc_id > N [22:40:00] (03CR) 10jenkins-bot: JADE API to store judgments [extensions/JADE] - 10https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/442885 (https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T198207) (owner: 10Awight) [23:45:16] 10Scoring-platform-team (Current), 10ORES, 10Patch-For-Review: ORES deployment (Early August) - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T201518 (10awight) [23:45:18] 10Scoring-platform-team (Current), 10ORES, 10editquality-modeling, 10artificial-intelligence: Duplicated feature name in editquality - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T197679 (10awight) 05Open>03Resolved [23:45:26] 10Scoring-platform-team, 10JADE: Integrate JADE with MediaWiki "patrol" action - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T198085 (10awight) [23:45:29] 10Scoring-platform-team, 10Huggle, 10JADE: Use JADE as a repository for ORES counterexamples - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T197098 (10awight) [23:45:32] 10Scoring-platform-team (Current), 10JADE, 10MW-1.32-release-notes (WMF-deploy-2018-08-21 (1.32.0-wmf.18)): Write JADE internal APIs to simplify integrations - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T198207 (10awight) 05Open>03Resolved [23:45:38] 10Scoring-platform-team (Current), 10JADE, 10I18n, 10MW-1.32-release-notes (WMF-deploy-2018-07-10 (1.32.0-wmf.12)), 10Patch-For-Review: Copy Wiki Labels translations over to Extension:JADE - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T198302 (10awight) 05Open>03Resolved