Hello - thank you for your persondata scraping work. I am wondering if you could look at the page and see if the script posted is the same as the one you have working. I copied it straight and wasn't able to get any output when using this against the current wikipedia download. I fixed the space in "substring-before" but still it doesn't work for me. Thanks for any assistance —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.120.207.201 (talk) 01:00, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What you need to do, rather than just copying and pasting the text as shown the page Wikipedia:Persondata/extractPersondata.stx, is to click the "edit the page" link at the top of that page, then copy the text which appears in the edit box. The reason there's a difference is that stx uses the strings > and < rather than the characters > and < when testing for inequality, however when your browser renders the code it displays the former as the latter. Dr pda (talk) 03:21, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I should probably update the stx file. The reason I didn't come across this issue was I tested the script on an old file. Dr pda (talk) 00:35, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Prose size script
Hi Dr pda, I discovered your prose size script today, and just wanted to say thank you for writing it. Working out numbers of words, minus footnotes, headers etc, has always been a pain, and is now a pleasure. One small niggle is that it doesn't seem to count words in blockquotes, or at least doesn't highlight them in yellow, which I assume means it's not counting them. It's a minor issue as it won't affect the word count that much in most articles, but I thought you might want to know about it anyway, in case you don't already. And again, thank you for writing it. :) SlimVirgintalk|contribs07:11, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the thanks! You are correct that the script doesn't count blockquotes. The reason is that when I first wrote the script, it turned out that simply counting the text which was in <p> </p> tags was almost exactly equivalent to determining the "readable prose". There are some occasions when this is not perfect, blockquotes are arguably one such. Indeed there was an argument (in which I didn't participate though my name was thrown around) in December 2008 at Wikipedia talk:Did you know/Archive 36#SIZE over whether blockquotes should be counted as readable prose for the purposes of determining if an article was eligible for DYK. I have just reread WP:SIZE and this doesn't exclude blockquotes from readable prose, so maybe I should make an effort to include them. One other reason I had for not including them was that people often use pullquotes instead of images, e.g. with templates like {{cquote}} or {{quote box2}}, which I thought used blockquote internally, and these should not be included in the readable prose. However on further inspection most of these templates seem to use HTML tables instead. So maybe I should modify the script to include blockquotes. One case where it would still fail would be where articles incorrectly use pull quotes instead of blockquotes, e.g. the lead of Apollo program. I'll see what I can do when I have time; I might just add an toggle to include blockquotes. Dr pda (talk) 00:35, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've read your reply, and also Awadewit's and Elcobbola's comments. It seems this is indeed a grey area. I was just about to add a comment on the FAC page saying that this issue has been satisfactorily addressed, but I found it had already been promoted. Congratulations! Dr pda (talk) 01:53, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Fewer reviewers in 2009
Thank you for such a clear presentation of the situation in the upcoming Signpost. Only one statement (in the pullquote) was somewhat confusing at first: "FAC nominators only up 250%". I did not immediately grasp that you were referring to those that only nominated but did not review. I thought you were saying that the FAC nominators (nominations) "only" increased by 250%. (As if that were a small increase!) But you mean those who nominated but did not contribute to reviewing. Sorry! It might help if you put that figure in the text also, as not all of us quickly realize that 2.5 times translates to 250%. Regards, —mattisse (Talk) 00:39, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your feedback. I used 'factor of 2.5' in the text, as percentages greater than 100% are often confusing, however in the summary box I wanted to be consistent so I used percentages for all the figures. I've now added 250% to the text as well. Regarding "nominators only up 250%", I was trying for brevity in the summary box, though it appears clarity suffered. I have since added quotes around 'nominators only' to make it clearer what I am referring to. Dr pda (talk) 01:20, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Good article; thanks for your work! I hope you don't mind that I tried to lift the title and opening of the article ... a bit more positive, even though from inside the house it's easy to see the negative side. Tony(talk)06:17, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Not at all. That paragraph was largely copied and pasted from the corresponding Dispatch I wrote about this time last year, and I had been in two minds about its tone anyway (introduction vs more journalistic lead). The fact that reviewers gain respect for their contributions is probably something which deserves mentioning, and may entice more people into reviewing! Finetooth's suggestion at WT:PR about a userbox for the number of peer reviews done is in the same vein. Dr pda (talk) 10:13, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I did get the Fahy et al review, too, and don't need the others. "Directional freezing is useful for macro-homogeneous tissue (e.g., whole single organs) but not heterogeneous collections of more than one organ at a time, so it's of little use for my purposes. Thanks again! 99.191.75.124 (talk) 19:40, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Page size script
Hey Dr pda, I just found your script today that shows page size in the toolbox. I recently switched to the beta version of Wikipedia, though, and the script doesn't work in beta. Is there any way to fix this? I don't know enough javascript to be able to do anything. Great tool! (I've gotten it to work on non-beta). Thanks! --Dudemanfellabra (talk) 23:01, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. The beta version of the Wikipedia interface uses a different skin (vector instead of monobook), therefore any scripts which you have in your monobook.js won't be picked up under beta. Instead you need to install them in User:yourusername/vector.js. I haven't explicitly tested the script for beta/vector but I think it should work without further modifications. Dr pda (talk) 23:45, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ah ok that explains it. I'd rather not create a new subpage, though.. Do you know if beta will switch over to monobook if it ever becomes umm.. non-beta? haha. If it will switch over, I'll just wait until the switch. --Dudemanfellabra (talk) 05:03, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
An alternative way to run the script without installing it is to go to the page you are interested in, then paste javascript:importScript('User:Dr pda/prosesize.js'); getDocumentSize(); into the address bar of your browser instead of the URL. It's also possible to make this a bookmark, to save having to type it out each time. Dr pda (talk) 10:20, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you use Page Size on a page such as a .js page, then it will return "Error: bodyContent.getElementsByTagName("p").item(0) is null". So it's probably best to just hide the link on pages where this might happen. Gary King (talk) 03:31, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I presume you're referring to the persondata script? (My first thought was that PD referred to public domain—too much time worrying about copyright issues apparently :) ) Yes it does work. It's possible to test it without installing it in vector.js by using the importScript trick I mentioned a couple of sections above: go to the article, then copy and paste javascript:importScript('User:Dr pda/persondata.js'); togglePersondata(); in the address bar of your browser. This will give you the "show/hide persondata" tab, though you will need to click on the drop-down arrow next to the search box to see it, since vector only shows a certain number of tabs. To get the "add persondata" tab, go into edit mode for the article, then paste javascript:importScript('User:Dr pda/persondata.js'); suggestPersonData(); in the address bar of your browser. Once again you have to click on the drop-down arrow to see the tab. Dr pda (talk) 22:08, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
User:Dr pda has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian,
and therefore, I've officially declared today as Dr pda's day!
For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian,
enjoy being the Star of the day, dear Dr pda!
I've downloaded the article on Windows Live. Thank you very, very much for it. Just out of curiosity, how did you access it? Thanks again, Mm40 (talk) 11:05, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
My library has access to (half a dozen titles in) the ProQuest Historical Newspapers database, one of which is the LA Times. Dr pda (talk) 11:21, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reminder. I'm not sure why I didn't get round to it at the time of the previous discussion. One reason might be that not all superscripts should be excluded e.g. in m2. However it turns out that most (all?) of the things like citation needed are made using {{fix}} which gives the <sup> tag a class of "noprint Inline-Template" by default (except for the case of {{Citation needed}} which uses instead "Template-Fact"; this seems to be the result of a misinterpretation, which I will point out on the talk page). Therefore I excluded all tags which have a class containing the string 'emplate' (to avoid being case-sensitive). There's nothing in shared.css or monobook/main.css which has the string "template" (except templates used, on an edit page), so this shouldn't have any unintended side effects. The script required a bit of tweaking to not highlight these excluded superscripts, because background-color is not an inherited property (it's transparent by default) so I ended up forcing the background-color to white, which may look a bit ugly on pages outside the article namespace, which don't have white backgrounds. Let me know if you experience any issues with the updated version of the script. Dr pda (talk) 11:10, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Works great, thanks! While I was testing I ran into two unrelated issues: 1) text that isn't displayed, like <span style="display:none">hidden</span> is also counted as prose. We could check if .style.cssText == 'display:none' 2) inline coordinates from {{coord}} are counted as prose (see the bottom of Upton-upon-Severn for an example). This one's minor, but we could check if .className.indexOf('geo-') != -1. Shubinator (talk) 16:37, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Dr pda - this no longer appears to work for me, insofar as the "Page size" link no longer appears on my sidebar. Is this my fault, your script's fault, or somebody else's? I'd be grateful for any assistance that you could provide, because I used to use your script constantly, and it's irritating to have it gone. Steve Smith (talk) 20:27, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The non-bytes version prosesize.js (which I use) is still working for me, so I wouldn't expect prosesizebytes to not be working. Have you recently changed skins, eg to vector? If so, since you currently have the script "installed" in your monobook.js rather than vector.js (or whatever), the page size link won't appear. Otherwise try bypassing your cache, or alternatively you can run the script by going to the article, then pasting javascript:importScript('User:Dr_pda/prosesizebytes.js');getDocumentSize(); in the address bar of your browser. This can also be saved as a bookmark. Dr pda (talk) 22:18, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I bypassed the cache and it did nothing. I also tried typing the text in my address bar, and it did nothing (once I hit enter the url of the page I was on just popped back up - I'm using Chrome, if that matters). But then I switched over to prosesize.js rather than prosesizebytes, and that works fine. I'm perfectly satisfied now, but there does appear to be some reason that one works for me and not the other. Steve Smith (talk) 22:39, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Same problem here. Prosesizebytes stopped working for me a couple of weeks ago on both of my computers. Wikipedia default skin was since changed to vector; I moved the content of monobook.js to vector.js, but to no avail. Also, pasting the above code to my address bar doesn't do anything, and neither does the corresponding bookmark. I haven't tried the other version. GregorB (talk) 21:10, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for posting the error message. There does appear to be an extra quote there, which I have now removed. Hopefully prosesizebytes will work after you bypass your cache. Not sure why the copy/paste doesn't work, it does for me in Firefox 3 (presumably you're correctly not copying the <code> and <nowiki> tags). Incidentally prosesize.js returns the size in bytes rather than kilobytes if the size is less than 10 kB. Dr pda (talk) 03:23, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I do not use Friendly, so I'm not sure why it would have this effect. My prosesize script does not do anything with the tags. I've just tried using Friendly to add a welcome template to my own userpage, and this worked. Since Friendly consists of seven separate scripts it's a bit difficult to track down any possible cause, especially since I can't reproduce the bug. Do you get any relevant javascript error messages (e.g. on the Error Console in Firefox, or similar in other browsers)? Alternatively you could run my script without installing it as mentioned in the section above this one. Dr pda (talk) 02:42, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It only happened on a new user page, when I tried to welcome this user[1]. The tabs disappeared from the window. When I uninstalled ProseSize and refreshed, they returned. I didn't have the error console on, so not sure if it was giving errors. I only use FireFox since Friendly only works in it :-) -- AnmaFinotera (talk·contribs) 02:44, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Prozesize error
I just noticed that I get an error when I use prozesize.js. I've got it installed in monobook, which is what I'm using. Once upon a time it did work for me, but I haven't used it in a while and just noticed it not working. The link is there in the sidebar, but when I click it, I get "Document statistics: (See here for details.)" followed by four blank bullets. I get an error notice from IE (8) saying:
As I was previewing this message, I happened to accidentally hit "Page size" and it did seem to work. So it seems to work when I'm on a page preview, but not when I'm on the actual page. Any ideas what's going on and how I might fix it? Thanks, cmadler (talk) 13:25, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I am not able to reproduce the error in IE 8. I notice that you're also getting an error from another script. Possibly in some weird way this causes an issue with the prose size script. The line number of the error message does correspond to a bit of code which does not get executed in preview mode, so that much is understandable, but the only thing this code is doing is checking the document.filesize property. Since the error from the other script related to an object not being present, I wonder if it somehow has done something to the javascript document object. However I notice that this other script was modified in the last couple of days with a fix of some sort, which may be related to your issue. Therefore I would suggest the following:
Bypass your cache, to get the latest versions of all scripts, and try prosesize again.
If that doesn't work, you could try temporarily removing the other script from your monobook.js to see if it is causing the problem.
Failing that, or as an alternative, you could try running the prose size script directly by copying and pasting a javascript url, as I mention a few sections above on my talk page. (Though that might still not work if the other script is being run when the page loads.)
Alternatively, try a browser which does not support the document.filesize property, e.g. Firefox.
I've downloaded the pdf. Thanks a lot for your help. Unfortunately my faith in the NYT being a reliable source has now gone out of the window! Smartse (talk) 13:36, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Dr pda! Can you provide above named article or page for me, please? This is very important, I think so at least. Or do you know anybody who can get it? It is also held by Butler Library in New York. I am already desperate ... Doc Taxon (talk) 06:43, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, the only editions of The Leeds Mercury in the databases I have access to are from 1807 onwards, or one single issue from 1784. I am neither in the UK, (where I might be able to consult the hard-copy versions) nor in the US (where I would be able to get to New York). Given that the Leeds Central Library holds a reasonably complete run of the newspaper, your best bet may be to try to find a Wikipedian in Leeds. A quick look in Category:Wikipedians in Yorkshire suggests User:Mtaylor848 may be a good person to contact. Dr pda (talk) 12:35, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Dr pda! Please correct the automatic archiving ClueBot III in Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request, the last archiving has been put to year 1999. So we have to put it back to 2010 manually. We have to edit the year 2010 into the archive template somehow, and the archiving should happen three days (at least) after setting "ok" or "done" ... Thank you and let me know, please, how you think about. Doc Taxon (talk) 06:26, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I have already filed a bug report with the bot operator about the 1999 issue here, but have had no response yet. (The format=Y setting I used for the bot should put it into the 2010 archive.) I will disable the automatic archiving until I get a reply. As to archiving at least 3 days after setting the request to 'resolved' or 'done', this does not seem possible with the archiving bots on English Wikipedia. Either one can archive all threads after a certain period of time, or one can archive threads with specific templates whenever the bot runs (usually daily). Dr pda (talk) 22:09, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
User:Dr pda/editrefs.js is a wonderful tool, except for one thing. The action buttons at the bottom are blank. Somehow I seem to keep pressing the wrong ones, because it keeps wiping out my revisions. Would there be any way of adding some text inside or below the buttons, to make their action clear? Will Bebacktalk00:22, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, I'm not sure why the buttons are blank for you; they are fine for me, and I have not edited this script for over two years. For reference, from left to right the buttons are "Apply changes and preview", "Cancel and return to edit" and "Reset fields". I have modified the script to also display these titles as tooltips when you hover the mouse pointer over the buttons. You will need to bypass your cache to pick up the modified version of the script. Note however that this script is known not to work if you have wikEd enabled. Dr pda (talk) 02:59, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for doing that. I just checked on a different browser, and they appear there so it looks like a browser problem. And again, it's a great tool for working on big articles with many disorganized refs. Will Bebacktalk03:14, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
BTW, if you're willing to make another improvement, it's be a big help to include named refs like <ref name=test1/>. Then it'd be easy to see where a named ref is used and change the name, as appropriate. Just a suggestion. Will Bebacktalk05:57, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Some work I have recently done to James Townley conflicts with something I believe you put on Charles Townley (officer of arms) quite a while a go. I have found some info that James was the younger brother of Charles and married a Jane Bonnin in about 1740. Now she would seem to be the Jane Boniro that their farther married after their mothers death. As I very much doubt that James married his step-mother, something must be wrong.
Goodness, that was some time ago, 2006! Since then I have encountered the opinion that Mark Noble's History of the College of Arms is not the most reliable source. I no longer have access to that work, so I can't double check its statement about Jane Boniro, however you would appear to be correct. Given that there were at least three generations of Charles Townley it is not hard to see how confusion could arise. A more reliable history of the College of Arms is The College of Arms, Queen Victoria Street : being the sixteenth and final monograph of the London Survey Committee, Walter H. Godfrey, assisted by Sir Anthony Wagner, with a complete list of the officers of arms, prepared by H. Stanford London, (London, 1963), but I don't know whether this would also go into detail of Sir Charles Townley's parents. I've just had a look in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography; both James and Charles have articles, but any remarriage of their father is not mentioned. In case you are interested, I've put a copy of the article on James here. I would be inclined to delete the offending sentence from Charles' article unless you can find another source to support/clarify it. Dr pda (talk) 11:00, 6 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I’m going to opt for Gertrude Kirkes. She is listed on [2] which (while not error free) I have come rely quite heavily on for my current wiki-project: Towneley (family). I can’t see much else about her on the web, but their eldest son Kirkes Townley occurs quite a lot. I too have also run into difficulty with the family’s tradition of calling their sons either Charles or Richard!
articlehistory.js does not go beyond last 200 changes?
Hi, I am still using monobook.js and have imported articlehistory.js into my monobook.js (importScript('User:Dr pda/articlehistory.js');). The script works as it should except that it doesn't detect anything beyond the first 200 lines. The instructions mention that there should be a Click for more at the bottom of the list to scan the next 200, but I don't see that. Would you be able to fix this? --İnfoCan (talk) 19:49, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I actually removed the "Click for more" button three years ago; instead the script automatically scans all the talk page revisions in chunks of 200. On articles which have a lot of events in their talk page history you should be able to see the results from successive chunks being added to the output. I suppose I should really update the documentation! Is the non-appearance of this button the only reason you think it's not reading more than 200 revisions? The script tells you the date and edit summary of the last revision read; you can check this against the earliest entry in the talk page history. Dr pda (talk) 09:51, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
articlehistory.js breaks when article title has non-ASCII characters
I am trying to adapt articlehistory.js for use on the Turkish wikipedia. I noticed that with certain articles it doesn't work and it seems these have titles containing non-ASCII characters (in Turkish these are öÖöÜıİçÇşŞ). Actually you can see this problem even here on the English Wikipedia, with the article Ngô Đình Cẩn. Would you be able to modify your script so it can handle such cases? --İnfoCan (talk) 16:23, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, when I wrote the script it correctly handled special characters. Obviously some interface or variable format has changed since then. I have updated the script to use the javascript encodeURIComponent function rather than a custom-written one. The script now seems to handle special characters correctly. Dr pda (talk) 00:25, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm noticing a different error. When I've checked articles the past two days or so, the references show a number in the 100-200 byte range, when it used to show a number far higher. For example, Bill Simmons now shows 852 B, when last week it showed 22 Kb. Is there a reason for the jump? WizardmanOperation Big Bear03:25, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed this issue, and commented at the above page. There was a change made to how the HTML of the references section was structured, on Dec 21 which caused this. The few hundred byte number was just the size of the reference marks ([101] etc). Dr pda (talk) 08:57, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Hopefully this year for Epikleros. I have been doing some (offline) work on it recently, now just a few books in French left to consult! Dr pda (talk) 08:57, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wayne Slam is having trouble with the prose size script. He can't get it to work. I've tried to help him as best as I can, but I haven't been successful. Could you perhaps give Wayne some advice about the script? Thanks, The UtahraptorTalk/Contribs17:38, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned non-free image File:CB military badge.jpg
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:CB military badge.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 06:17, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
GOCE drive newsletter
The Guild of Copy Editors – May 2011 Backlog Elimination Drive
The Guild of Copy Editors invite you to participate in the May 2011 Backlog Elimination Drive, a month-long effort to reduce the backlog of articles that require copy-editing. The drive began on May 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and will end on May 31 at 23:59 (UTC). The goals of this backlog elimination drive are to eliminate as many articles as possible from the 2009 backlog and to reduce the overall backlog by 15%. ! NEW ! In an effort to encourage the final elimination of all 2009 articles, we will be tracking them on the leaderboard for this drive.
Awards and barnstars
A range of barnstars will be awarded to active participants. Some are exclusive to GOCE drives. More information on awards can be found on the main drive page.
You are receiving a copy of this newsletter as you are a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, or have participated in one of our drives. If you do not wish to receive future newsletters, please add you name here.
Thanks for the articles! Sorry it took so long, but I was on vacation. Could you have a look at "A synopsis of the Castniidae (Lepidoptera) of Trinidad and Tobago" though? It seems you uploaded the abstract, not the complete article. Cheers and thanks! Ruigeroeland (talk) 18:26, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
With the recent MediaWiki upgrade and all the issues that have come along with it (WP:VPT#1.18 issues), User:Dr pda/prosesizebytes.js is no longer working for me (using Firefox 7.0 and the monobook skin, "Page size" simply no longer shows up in the toolbox). I haven't tried it with other browsers or in the Vector skin; just wanted to let you know about the issue. Best, rʨanaɢ (talk) 19:02, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As of late, clicking on "Page size" produces document statistics and highlights the text, as expected, but the second click does not restore the initial layout, i.e. highlight is not removed (although doc stats do disappear, as expected). Only a minor annoyance, since the script is otherwise functional. Might be related to the recent MediaWiki upgrade. Browser is Firefox 7.0.1. GregorB (talk) 22:15, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
One more thing that used to work IIRC, and now it doesn't: it is apparently not possible anymore to get a byte count on a particular section by clicking on Edit (for that section), then Preview, then Page size - nothing happens after the last step. GregorB (talk) 17:24, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Same here (I didn't notice until the November GOCE drive) in both Firefox and Chrome. Diannaa wonders if it may have to do with the recent mediawiki upgrade. BTW, many thanks for all your efforts!--Miniapolis (talk) 21:29, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I've just got back from vacation. The problem seemed to be related to the use of the document.fileSize property. Since this is IE-specific, I already have alternative code to use for other browsers, so I just changed the script to use this for IE as well. Everything seems to be working again now, I'm not sure why this affected IE9 and not earlier versions. You will probably need to Bypass your cache to get the corrected version of the script. Dr pda (talk) 01:40, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A kitten for you!
Thank you indeed for making this Lepidoptera paper available. I had not realised you had put it up till today . Thanks! Now that I have downloaded it, you may like to remove it from Sky Drive. A very Happy New Year to you!
We want to bring 100-150 people together, including lots of people who have not attended such events before. User scripts, gadgets, API use, Toolserver, Wikimedia Labs, mobile, structured data, templates -- if you are into any of these things, we want you to come!
I also thought you might want to know about other upcoming events where you can learn more about MediaWiki customization and development, how to best use the web API for bots, and various upcoming features and changes. We'd love to have power users, bot maintainers and writers, and template makers at these events so we can all learn from each other and chat about what needs doing.
I'll try to do this, but since there are now ~15 000 Good articles, it will take at least 10 hours of continuous running to generate the list with the readable prose size. I tried generating the list overnight, but my laptop went to sleep and stopped the process. Dr pda (talk) 05:07, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (companies) requirement. If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page in the form of "This article meets criteria A and B because..." and ping me back. Thank you. This proposed deletion was started by User:Piotrus
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oxford Society of Change Ringers until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Hello, Dr pda. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hi Dr pda, we are trying to port your script prosesize.js to Indic wikipedias on the request of many wikipedians. The code will be hosted on github so that others can collaborate on translating it. You will be duly credited for your work. I write this on behalf of the MediaWiki Club India which aims to port useful tools and gadgets from the English Wikipedia to the Indic Wikis among other things. Cheers, ƬheStrikeΣagle01:39, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I am beginning to suspect that your prose size script is NOT ALWAYS reliable. Usually it is, but not always. Forex, I suspect it overestimates the size of Photon by as much as 5 kb. It may be that math-heavy articles are not dealt with reliably. Still not sure; need to do more checking. ♦ Lingzhi2(talk)02:01, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
HI, Dr. Pda! i am still struggling for understanding the Prosesize script usage. Suppose, there are 4 new latest revisions on Javed Iqbal (admiral). As a part of copy edit guide, which of the following revisions should be used for wordcount? Every revision shows different word count. I am confused please help me. TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 06:51, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I have nominated Order of St Patrick for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Z1720 (talk) 21:20, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have nominated Coronation of the British monarch for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Z1720 (talk) 14:54, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
