community has feelings about the name of this and I think the name choice should be a community discussion

see past conversation with lots of participation

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:OTRS/Archives/2019#Proposal_for_name_change_-_%22Wiki_client_services%22

propose that there be a conversation before anyone takes action at scale

In T280392#7031243, @Bluerasberry wrote:

community has feelings about the name of this and I think the name choice should be a community discussion

see past conversation with lots of participation

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:OTRS/Archives/2019#Proposal_for_name_change_-_%22Wiki_client_services%22

propose that there be a conversation before anyone takes action at scale

(VRT Admin hat) Since we are no longer using the OTRS software, we will need to change the name. And this needs to happen sooner rather than later. In the discussion you linked, VRT is well-supported and already been discussed on the wiki.

I see no need to open a new discussion at meta (which will move at a glacial pace) and re-hash an issue that has been resolved.

Just to complete the answer above. As said in https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:OTRS :
The VRT name is already adopted by the English speaking community (see [[Wikipedia:Volunteer_Response_Team]] on en.wiki), at least since October 2009. Of course we intend that other language communities continue to use their own names, if they wish. But not "OTRS" or "Znuny" because they are trademarks we do not own, and "would become obsolete if we ever started using a different ticket management system" (cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Volunteer_Response_Team&oldid=318124031).

We're making progress on our to-do list, we're nearly done with Phase 2 on schedule and getting an early start on some Phase 3 items. I plan to start drafting naming convention guidelines this week for sharing within the next two-to-three weeks.

Status update:

We're approaching completion for Phase 2.

There is a bot written to take care of Commons with a bot approval request in, so that work should begin soon.

I spent some time reviewing the phase plans, and we're still in good shape. Renaming Meta is blocked, however, on renaming the wiki (which should happen automatically next week, I believe) and renaming the mailing lists. As I set to file a task to rename the lists and plan messaging the groups, I realized that we do need the naming convention page sooner rather than later. It needs to be up and translated before I can write to the mailing lists, a message that will need translated itself, and that has to occur before the lists are renamed, and that has to occur before the page on Meta can be moved, and that has to occur before we move on.

I'm reorganizing the work to get these messages and translations as a priority. I've drafted the first pass at the naming conventions page on the VRT wiki for first review. I hope to get this posted in public to Meta for translation by Wednesday afternoon, American time. Following that, I'll get the message up for the mailing lists to be translated by the following Monday (17 May). Once that's out, we can proceed with renaming the lists and moving the page on Meta.

Naming convention page is published. I will be notifying translators shortly. If you're reading this and can contribute a translation, please help out.

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/OTRS/Naming_convention

The bot on Commons is working to complete its template replacement task, it should take a few weeks. While this is going on, the migration organizing group will be slowing things down for a few weeks as we organize for the next steps needed to replace text on wikis and rename pages/have pages renamed. I'll update the task further at the end of the month.

I’ve just noticed that the group name in Commons’ {{TemplateBox}} is broken, because the group name message was renamed almost three years ago from group-OTRS-member to group-otrs-member. I could fix it now, but I’d like to avoid editing a template used on tens of thousands of pages twice within a short time. Do you know when—or whether—the MediaWiki message will be renamed?

In T280392#7107471, @Tacsipacsi wrote:

I’ve just noticed that the group name in Commons’ {{TemplateBox}} is broken, because the group name message was renamed almost three years ago from group-OTRS-member to group-otrs-member. I could fix it now, but I’d like to avoid editing a template used on tens of thousands of pages twice within a short time. Do you know when—or whether—the MediaWiki message will be renamed?

It is being renamed, T280615: Rename OTRS member global group. I'm not sure the exact date, but it should be within the next week or two.

As IRC migrates to Libera.chat, this might be a good opportunity to do the channel renames, and potentially add renames to the list of "channels who are taking this opportunity to rename".

In T280392#7108009, @EpicPupper wrote:

As IRC migrates to Libera.chat, this might be a good opportunity to do the channel renames, and potentially add renames to the list of "channels who are taking this opportunity to rename".

see T283400: Rename OTRS IRC channels

In T280392#7107645, @Keegan wrote:

In T280392#7107471, @Tacsipacsi wrote:

I’ve just noticed that the group name in Commons’ {{TemplateBox}} is broken, because the group name message was renamed almost three years ago from group-OTRS-member to group-otrs-member. I could fix it now, but I’d like to avoid editing a template used on tens of thousands of pages twice within a short time. Do you know when—or whether—the MediaWiki message will be renamed?

It is being renamed, T280615: Rename OTRS member global group. I'm not sure the exact date, but it should be within the next week or two.

Thanks, I forgot to check the subtasks. A few weeks is totally okay, I just wanted to avoid waiting for months (as the process is ongoing for months now, and there’s no set end date yet).

Mentioned in SAL (#wikimedia-operations) [2021-06-02T09:14:38Z] <urbanecm> [urbanecm@mwmaint1002 ~]$ mwscript extensions/Translate/scripts/moveTranslatablePage.php --wiki=metawiki --reason='OTRS -> VRTS renaming process; see [[Phab:T280392]] and [[Phab:T280396]] ([[:phab:T284118|request]])' 'OTRS' 'VRT' 'Quiddity (WMF)' # T284118

I’ve created Commons:VRT permissions agents so that the new message added in T280615 doesn’t cause a red link, but Commons:Global OTRS group should probably moved there, or to some other new name. I’ll let someone else do that.

Update (21 June 2021)

The initial big tasks are just about completed. The wiki is moved, pages and templates on the "big wikis" are moved/replaced or in the process of being so, Commons is just about sorted out as well as Meta. New logos are in the works but if they don't happen soon we'll use the Community logo or something like that as a placeholder.

After the migration team's next meeting on 1 July, we'll be sending out information to all agents about the remaining work and how people can help out finish cleaning the "long tail" of wiki pages and templates to sort through beyond what's been done already.

@Keegan
Logo following the Wikimedia visual identity guidelines:

• https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikimedia_VRT_logo_-_vertical.svg

If we need a colored version (which was the visual identity until 2018 I believe), like https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikimedia_OTRS_logo.svg, it can be done.

https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/project/view/2406/

The all-black logo represents the Wikimedia Foundation. The Wikimedia VRT is not the foundation, so I feel using the all-black logo would be inappropriate here. The Wikimedia OTRS logo was based on the Wikimedia Movement logo (the red greed and blue), and that is more appropriate.

@Keegan @AntiCompositeNumber
Here's the new version:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikimedia_VRT_RGB_logo.svg

Side note: If you feel that the black logo is misleading and that it will never be used, it can be speedy deleted.

In T280392#7166842, @Keegan wrote:

After the migration team's next meeting on 1 July, we'll be sending out information to all agents about the remaining work and how people can help out finish cleaning the "long tail" of wiki pages and templates to sort through beyond what's been done already.

When we should expect the information coming?

In T280392#7198417, @Stryn wrote:

In T280392#7166842, @Keegan wrote:

After the migration team's next meeting on 1 July, we'll be sending out information to all agents about the remaining work and how people can help out finish cleaning the "long tail" of wiki pages and templates to sort through beyond what's been done already.

When we should expect the information coming?

I'm starting a draft tomorrow on the VRT wiki, it should be ready to send to everyone by late next week.

Just found out about this name change. It seems really daft: OTRS was a bad acronym to use, but at least people got used to it. Now, VRTS is equally confusing, and no-one knows what it means (something about virtual reality?) - but I guess they'll get used to it again...

Couldn't you have picked something more simple and obvious, without using an acronym? Something like 'Wikimedia Permissions' would have been really nice...

@Mike_Peel: Did you read previous comments like T280392#7031818 before?

In T280392#7226575, @Aklapper wrote:

@Mike_Peel: Did you read previous comments like T280392#7031818 before?

No, but looking back they don't help much. Yes, "Volunteer Response Team" has been around for a long time, but not "VRT" as an acrynom. And the opportunity to make this public-facing service more easy to understand by not having it as an acronym, has been missed.

In T280392#7227497, @Mike_Peel wrote:

In T280392#7226575, @Aklapper wrote:

@Mike_Peel: Did you read previous comments like T280392#7031818 before?

No, but looking back they don't help much. Yes, "Volunteer Response Team" has been around for a long time, but not "VRT" as an acrynom. And the opportunity to make this public-facing service more easy to understand by not having it as an acronym, has been missed.

I don't think we're using the acronym in our public-facing email footers or templates, and our email "From:" fields use descriptive names: "Wikipedia Volunteer Response Team" for info-en, "Permissions - Wikimedia Commons" for permissions-commons, etc.

The Meta page is currently at the title [[VRT]], which I think we did because it was previously at [[OTRS]]. I wouldn't be automatically opposed to moving it to [[Volunteer Response Team]] like it is on Wikipedia instead.

Ultimately, Wikimedians like acronyms, so we designated one for internal/internalish use.

In T280392#7229036, @Emufarmers wrote:

I don't think we're using the acronym in our public-facing email footers or templates, and our email "From:" fields use descriptive names: "Wikipedia Volunteer Response Team" for info-en, "Permissions - Wikimedia Commons" for permissions-commons, etc.

The Meta page is currently at the title [[VRT]], which I think we did because it was previously at [[OTRS]]. I wouldn't be automatically opposed to moving it to [[Volunteer Response Team]] like it is on Wikipedia instead.

Ultimately, Wikimedians like acronyms, so we designated one for internal/internalish use.

OK, that helps a lot. It would be good to rename the Meta page, and generally avoid using the acronym if possible. In general, Wikimedians use acronyms ([[:en:WP:TMA]]), but for page names etc. it's secondary/just a shortcut.

In T280392#7229377, @Mike_Peel wrote:

In T280392#7229036, @Emufarmers wrote:

I don't think we're using the acronym in our public-facing email footers or templates, and our email "From:" fields use descriptive names: "Wikipedia Volunteer Response Team" for info-en, "Permissions - Wikimedia Commons" for permissions-commons, etc.

The Meta page is currently at the title [[VRT]], which I think we did because it was previously at [[OTRS]]. I wouldn't be automatically opposed to moving it to [[Volunteer Response Team]] like it is on Wikipedia instead.

Ultimately, Wikimedians like acronyms, so we designated one for internal/internalish use.

OK, that helps a lot. It would be good to rename the Meta page, and generally avoid using the acronym if possible. In general, Wikimedians use acronyms ([[:en:WP:TMA]]), but for page names etc. it's secondary/just a shortcut.

Your points are completely understandable, @Mike_Peel . This is one of those choices where either way may cause some concern. The transition team discussed this point (among your others) during a meeting, and while generally speaking your point is true, OTRS is an exception to the rule–the acronym was widely regarded as the name for the entirety of the team and its processes in our international community. In the end I made the decision to preserve the acronym for the page name on Meta, my reason for doing so being that renaming the page from OTRS to VRTS is the path that most resembles the previous status quo while simultaneously pushing people towards understanding, accepting, and using the change in names. If the Meta page name hadn't already been called "OTRS," and if the community didn't use the acronym so casually as longstanding international tradition, we'd likely have come to a different conclusion and result.

OK, I've proposed moving https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/VRT on that page, I hope that's OK / a good place to raise this on-wiki.

Mentioned in SAL (#wikimedia-operations) [2021-07-24T11:04:15Z] <urbanecm> [urbanecm@mwmaint2002 ~]$ mwscript extensions/Translate/scripts/moveTranslatablePage.php --wiki=commonswiki --reason='OTRS -> VRTS renaming process; see [[Phab:T280392]] and [[Phab:T280397]]' --move-subpages 'Commons:OTRS' 'Commons:Volunteer Response Team' 'Martin Urbanec' # T287321

https://ticket.wikimedia.org/ redirects to https://ticket.wikimedia.org/otrs/index.pl which contains "otrs". Does this have to be changed, too?

We also have https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/project/view/2406/ (acl*otrs-admins)

@whym : It has been mentioned in one of our meeting, if I remember correctly. The answer is no, this 'otrs' in the url doesn't need to be changed.

Per @Mike_Peel request on meta to move VRT to Volunteer Request Team, I had closed the RM discussion as successful per onwiki consensus. I know there are some other opinions here. The move also need system admin attention. Attached the link below. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:VRT

For advice please, thanks much

@Cohaf @Mike_Peel Please go ahead. Mind that you'll need to

• File a task on phabricator asking to automatically move a translatable page on Meta-wiki that has over 500 subpages. Please refer to T284118
• After moving, please check the double redirects (or use a bot to fix them)
• Check that the talk pages have been moved as well
• Please maintain the pages https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/VRT and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:VRT as redirects.

In T280392#7321363, @Ruthven wrote:

• After moving, please check the double redirects (or use a bot to fix them)
• Please maintain the pages https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/VRT and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:VRT as redirects.

As a reminder, moving translatable pages does not automatically create redirects (T41023). You'll have to create any appropriate redirects yourself and fix any broken redirects.