[20:16:59] <nikki>	 who was it who wanted to be able to add a summary manually when editing something?
[20:17:12] <nikki>	 I just discovered we have a ticket for it - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T47224
[20:17:33] <nikki>	 and that I apparently already knew about it since I'm subscribed to it :P
[21:01:37] <reosarevok>	 nikki: everyone, probably!
[21:01:42] <reosarevok>	 Me, at least :p
[21:02:24] <SothoTalKer>	 nikki: me
[21:02:57] <reosarevok>	 "It needs to give about 5 to 7 default explanations to chose from so they're still translatable. This list should depend on edit context - so for example be specific to edits in sitelinks." seems pretty... pointless though?
[21:03:13] <reosarevok>	 If it's easy enough one of 5-7 default explanations will cover it, I suspect it doesn't need one
[21:03:23] <nikki>	 yeah, I thought that
[21:03:42] <nikki>	 but that's a really old comment
[21:03:56] <reosarevok>	 Well that's in the story
[21:04:06] <nikki>	 oh right
[21:05:50] <SothoTalKer>	 "In my opinion this is a wrong approach, the user should never write edit summaries manually." - just create a talk page and justify your edits there, no need for custom edit summaries, it's too complicated to implement, anyway
[21:06:03] * reosarevok comments
[21:06:10] <reosarevok>	 But it's already implemented? 
[21:06:15] <reosarevok>	 It works from the API
[21:06:24] <reosarevok>	 My bots leave them all the time
[21:06:34] <SothoTalKer>	 the API can, but not the UI
[21:06:58] <reosarevok>	 The UI also allows it, in some specific cases
[21:07:40] <SothoTalKer>	 like undoing an edit, which uses the basic mediawiki process. not the fancy AJAX stuff
[21:07:45] <reosarevok>	 Just have some "I want to leave a summary with this change" toggle, if you click it you get a summary line, most people won't need to click it almost ever, but
[21:08:06] <SothoTalKer>	 NO, YOU CREATE A TALK PAGE!
[21:08:20] <reosarevok>	 But talk pages are pointless! :p
[21:08:32] <SothoTalKer>	 well, no? :)
[21:08:35] <reosarevok>	 I mean, they're great if I want to have a discussion about whether we should do something
[21:08:52] <reosarevok>	 They're pointless if what I actually want to do is specify why a specific edit exists
[21:09:17] <SothoTalKer>	 but implementing it is too complicated!!
[21:09:23] <reosarevok>	 I don't need anyone to see this in a talk page, just a way for someone to look, if this change feels weird, at my motivation to do it :p
[21:09:54] <SothoTalKer>	 it's easy, if you see a "controversial" edit, just look at the talk page.
[21:09:57] <reosarevok>	 Well, then the answer might be "not doable" (unlikely, but maybe!). But it's not "use talk pages instead", because they're a completely different tool
[21:10:22] <nikki>	 having to go to the talk page every time is a bit overkill
[21:10:42] <reosarevok>	 It doesn't even need to be controversial - 90% of label changes could use a field "I changed this because of X"
[21:10:47] <reosarevok>	 Since they have no references
[21:10:54] <reosarevok>	 (even better, they could have references, but)
[21:10:55] <SothoTalKer>	 nope, implementing a reasonable UI for adding edit summaries is overkill, as every resourceful programmer knows.
[21:11:09] <nikki>	 oh man I would love references for labels and aliases
[21:11:14] <SothoTalKer>	 why else would that ticket be open for 3 years?
[21:11:33] <nikki>	 because we all wants ponies and unicorns and they're busy doing a zillion things? :P
[21:11:41] <SothoTalKer>	 *five
[21:11:43] <reosarevok>	 But what about uniponies.
[21:11:51] <nikki>	 I swear I can do grammar
[21:12:29] <SothoTalKer>	 well, wikidata was made to be edited by bots, not humans, so hush :)
[21:12:57] <nikki>	 haha
[21:13:18] <SothoTalKer>	 just do all your edits via the API and you get your needed edit commentaries :x
[21:16:46] <nikki>	 adding lexemes for languages not in the supported list is awkward...
[21:17:15] <nikki>	 it pops up an additional field *before* the one I'm in
[21:18:19] <nikki>	 and then I have to go tell it to use "mis" because it's not like it could possibly figure that out itself, if only we had some machine readable data attached to the things in the search results... :P
[21:18:45] <WiseWoman>	 SothoTalKer: Bots can do a lot of damage …. :) And humans can actually add value :)
[21:19:00] <nikki>	 or even better, it could stop requiring "mis" when it already has the data saying what the right language code is
[21:19:08] <SothoTalKer>	 bots can only do what humans told them to do :D
[21:19:37] <WiseWoman>	 Humans are really bad at communicating with bots :)
[21:19:58] <SothoTalKer>	 or its the other way around.
[21:20:05] <nikki>	 it's a two-way thing!
[21:20:33] <SothoTalKer>	 nope. humans are infallible
[21:23:02] <WiseWoman>	 Somehow I keep getting thrown out of #wikidata. Adium tells me I am banned, and then when I list the bans I'm back in. Zat you, SothoTalKer? ;)
[21:23:27] <SothoTalKer>	 no, ma'am :)
[21:23:47] <SothoTalKer>	 i suspect it's your client.
[21:24:04] <WiseWoman>	 Adium swears it is up-to-date
[21:24:28] <nikki>	 the quit thing says "Remote host closed the connection"
[21:24:37] <SothoTalKer>	 well, if it's badly programmed, it can be as up-to-date like it wants :D
[21:25:19] <WiseWoman>	 Thanks, nikki, I've wondered what message gets left.
[21:29:40] <SothoTalKer>	 can also be your connection (:
[21:46:23] <reosarevok>	 nikki: what is that supposed to be about anyway? I've gotten that stuff with Asturian IIRC, where I selected it and then I had to enter the code separately anyway
[21:46:39] <reosarevok>	 It was weird and strangely unintuitive
[22:03:47] <nikki>	 the first thing lets you select any language, but it wants a language code it knows about (i.e. a language that's supported for labels)
[22:04:09] <nikki>	 so if you pick something that isn't supported for labels, it's like ??? and shows the other field so you can pick it manually
[22:04:26] <nikki>	 it shouldn't happen for asturian, unless you picked the wrong item, or found a bug