This is an archive of past discussions with User:Primefac. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Can you please give me more information on why you deleted my edit? In particular, why you did so with any contact or notice to me? The reverse ELISA is a legitimate test. It is not advertising as the first of the two cited patents has already reverted to the public domain and the second will so within a year or so. The company to which they have been assigned is being closed with any assets returned to the State of Texas. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dcharbonnet (talk • contribs) 02:47, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
@Dcharbonnet: There are a few issues with what you added to ELISA. First, any biomedical information needs to have WP:MEDRS-compliant sources, which means we do not use primary sources, including patents. Second, ELISA is a very broad type of assay, and only the most directly related and widely used forms are covered in the ELISA article. If we were to include all variations of the assay, we could fill an encyclopedia of just that. Third, a more minor point is that adding information about the advantages of something without acknowledging the drawbacks tends to look promotional. If you have any more questions, feel free to leave a message on my talk page. Natureium (talk) 17:45, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
request for help with an IP removing redirects
Hi I came across a load of old redirects that had been removed by an IP user on "Now that's what I call music" albums without adding sources. They have been reverted several times by another editor notably [1][2]. I saw that you recently closed a deletion discussion on a load of these albums Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Now That's What I Call Music! 67 (UK series). I was wondering if there is not a way of removing the history to leave just the redirects which will stop the reverting to a previous version and force the disruptive editors to recreate from scratch the pages or protecting these redirects. --Dom from Paris (talk) 12:59, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
I've blocked the IP for now, but for now I'd say it's not proper to delete the entire history just to keep a vandal from reverting the change from a non-notable article to a redirect. Primefac (talk) 16:11, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
Hey Primefac, thanks for helping out again. The updates required to be to all articles transcluding {{Japanese episode list/sublist}}, and (basically the same as last time) the replacements are:
About a year ago you deleted an article MASCARA created by me due to copyright violation. Just for your knowledge for the future. The text has been borrowed from the official website of ESO, particularly, form this press-release. According to ESO copyright terms: "Unless specifically noted... the texts of press releases... are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License." and according to Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright, CC-BY 4.0 is legible license for using the work in the WP. So there were no copyright voilation. And I am sure this has been said in a comment to the first edit of the article. Plese, be more careful in the future. Artem Korzhimanov (talk) 13:26, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
I see you protected the template from editing. However, i discovered an editor of that template, sabotaged the code , which the data in |j= (for Jyutping) never able to switch on using |showflag=j, but |y= (for Yue Yale) using |showflag=y work normally, even |showflag=py and |showflag=pj were in same outcome: switch on pinyin and Yue Yale but not Jyutping. He also admitted in Template:Infobox Chinese/doc as not a typo. Since the coding was so serious complex and |cy= and |j= are also different switch in Template:Lang-zh. Where should i see expert support on fixing the code, as well as dealing with his "good faith" behaviour? Matthew_hktc23:47, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
Or a more detailed explanation, when |j= and |y= was filled as different data from different romanization system, his sabotage would make only Yale would be displayed. When only |j= was filled then even the correct value in |showflag=, would not be able to display the data in |j=.
There is no conflict of interest between me and La Excelencia nor Orquesta SCC. I am a long time fan and music historian/collector. For the past several years I have seen the history of La Excelencia altered by individuals, including ChinoChong, with vested interest in altering the facts in their favor. All of the edits that I have added to the pages have been accompanied by references. These are not my personal statements. It is obvious that ChinoChong has a COI due to the fact that he has been responsible for 90% of the destructive edits made to the La Excelencia page and is also responsible to the majority of the edits related to Orquesta SCC and Jose Vazquez-Cofresi. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RoDog18 (talk • contribs) 17:13, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
I take offense to the notion that I am only pro-La Excelencia. As a historian I am always interested in the facts. Having accurate information is vital to preserving the truth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RoDog18 (talk • contribs) 19:06, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
RoDog18, no offense was intended, but my main point is that we are now in the "discussion" phase of proceedings. If you think certain content should be added, you will need to get a consensus for it on the talk page before re-adding it to the article. Primefac (talk) 19:16, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
Thank you. I attempted to add content to the Orquesta SCC page referring to information currently available on the band website that mentions their acknowledgement to their attempt to pass off at La Exclencia. I would like to add a new section called "infringement" and briefly site this information and reference their website. This is relevant information that encompasses part of the bands history. In addition, the bands owner, Jose Vazquez-Cofresi, was sued for infringement and lost that law suit. I have not added any of that information because I don't currently have exact references to site, except for the bands actual website. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RoDog18 (talk • contribs) 19:26, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
Things happen to groups/bands/people/companies all the time. We do not need to report on everything that happens to them. Is a group going on tour? That would be an okay thing to write about and only reference their own website. Did a group get sued by a former colleague, and the only place it's mentioned is on the official website? That's something that doesn't need to be on Wikipedia. Primefac (talk) 19:34, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
You moved the original page, so while you get "credit" for creating the redirect you did not actually create the page itself. Unless you create a page and move it, then the redirect is not "yours" to G7. Primefac (talk) 15:11, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.
Refund
Could you please restore Template:Ltb? Yes, authors are free to G7 things they've created, but this has already been objected to. The template is in use on several pages, which are now broken, and the template was already restored once. – Uanfala (talk)14:40, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
Hi Primefac. Would you mind taking a look at this draft? The creator is transcluding entire articles into it, which is causing non-free images and categories to be transcluded as well. I tried tweaking the files using "noinclude" tags, but that didn't seem to work and I'm not sure how to disable categories added like this. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:36, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
The image tweak actually did work; it just took some time to do so. Still not sure how to disable the categories. FWIW, this seems like a really really bad way to try and create a draft for a new article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:40, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
If you look at other "list of X episodes" pages (for example NCIS) you'll see that they're all set up that way. But yes, the source articles needed the <noinclude> tags to keep things from getting hairy. Primefac (talk) 10:14, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
Partial blocks is now available for testing on the Test Wikipedia. The new functionality allows you to block users from editing specific pages. Bugs may exist and can be reported on the local talk page or on Meta. A discussion regarding deployment to English Wikipedia will be started by community liaisons sometime in the near future.
A user script is now available to quickly review unblock requests.
The 2019 Community Wishlist Survey is now accepting new proposals until November 11, 2018. The results of this survey will determine what software the Wikimedia Foundation's Community Tech team will work on next year. Voting on the proposals will take place from November 16 to November 30, 2018. Specifically, there is a proposal category for admins and stewards that may be of interest.
Arbitration
Eligible editors will be invited to nominate themselves as candidates in the 2018 Arbitration Committee Elections starting on November 4 until November 13. Voting will begin on November 19 and last until December 2.
The Arbitration Committee's email address has changed to arbcom-enwikimedia.org. Other email lists, such as functionaries-en and clerks-l, remain unchanged.
I have converted this template to a wrapper of Template:Infobox school per your TfD closure in January. Would the intention be eventually to replace all these instances so that they call {{Infobox school}} directly. Or do we normally retain these wrappers indefinitely? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:53, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
There are three (ish) ways to deal with a template merger.
If there is a large similarity between the templates (i.e. only a few different params) it's generally easiest to just add the differences as alt params and redirect to the final target.
If there are a lot of differences, I've done bot runs to replace all of the different parameters, followed by redirecting the template itself.
The third (and personally least liked) is to convert the template into a properly substable template and subst it out of existence. This is probably the most disruptive way.
UK school falls kind of halfway between the first two options (mostly because of the switches for plural/singular), so I'll have to give a think as to the best way to proceed. In the meantime, though, a wrapper is perfectly acceptable and I thank you for doing that! Primefac (talk) 16:02, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
So to clarify, I take it from your answer that it is not common practice to leave template wrappers indefinitely? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:56, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
Correct, especially if it was created post-TFD. Creates less confusion in the long run and avoids having the wrapper further modified/convoluted. Primefac (talk) 11:05, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
Hi Primefac, I see MSGJ has posted here, that's good. Can have you both to read on this and let me know. So I was thinking once everything has been merged and documentation updated etc. Can Infobox UK school be redirected to Infobox school as was the case with other templates that were merged and can its talk page be moved/archived with a link under "Merged template archives" stack that is currently present on the Infobox school talk page? I'm thinking of producing a list of parameters to be changed and parameters to removed, would you be up for running a bot again? I know we got a lot of unsupported params removed and changed before. Please let me know, thank you :) Steven (Editor) (talk) 17:42, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
That was basically the gist of my original reply - I'll take a look and see what will be the most effective method of converting the wrapper into a redirect. Primefac (talk) 18:36, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
Hi Primefac, hope things are well, just wanted to ask a question, if you were to run a bot, would it be able to go through articles using Infobox UK school only? Steven (Editor) (talk) 02:48, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
Hi Primefac. It looks like somebody wanted to create a userbox and just did so just by tweaking the syntax or another userbox. A non-free image was being used in the template which I removed, but there seem to be other issues as well and I'm not sure how to resolve them. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:45, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
Contacting the user first might be a good idea, if only to clear up any potential misunderstandings. Of course, if you think the issue needs wider discussion there's always the folks at WP:WPT, WP:UBX, or WP:WPUBX. If you can find the original template they copied from, then attribution can be given, though with a UBX they're all so similar I would probably be hard-pressed to find the specific template it came from. Primefac (talk) 11:44, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for taking a look. I wasn't concerned so much with there being a copyright violation involving the template syntax, but rather that I wasn't able to see the template at all. However, you seem to have fixed that so now it's visible on its page. The creator seems to have created lots of userboxes, so I'm sure they know more about them than I do. As long as they don't re-add that non-free image, I probably never look at the page again. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:50, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
Now for some reason the creator has made the template unable to be seen again. It seems like it would be beneficial for anyone wanting to use the template so be able to see it. Maybe there's a coding reason or something else for doing this? -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:51, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
Howdy! I wanted to see if you might be willing to give me some advice. Your insight on the Brandon issue makes me interested in your take on a situation I'm involved in. I'm trying to make sure I avoid WP:CANVAS so let me be clear, not looking for someone to just pat me on the back and agree with me... I'm turning to you because you are an admin who's opinion I value. I'm hoping that you will give a neutral opinion on the matter including pointing out areas where I am in the wrong.
The issue stems from converting Briarcliff Manor, New York to use {{Infobox settlement}} over {{Geobox}}. Currently that page is the only settlement page to use the Geobox. Every other page has been converted. There is a user who has worked hard to make that article a FA. They feel strongly that the page should keep the Geobox. I obviously disagree. This has led to a WP:AIV report by me and the page being protected. I would like to get your advice on the matter on what the best way forward is. If you could, please read this thread for some insight. I'll hold off on saying more on the matter for now. If this isn't an issue you are interested in getting involved with, just let me know. I'll understand that. But if you have the time, would greatly appreciate your advice! Thanks in advance. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 18:13, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
Sorry, didn't see this until just now. I'd agree with the convo at Ed's page, in that TFD is the way to go to "formally" show that it's a deprecated template and can/should be removed from any extant use. Primefac (talk) 19:49, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
Well, in light of a speedy-closed TFD which said that the template shouldn't be used, continued insistence of its use is grounds for a report at AN3 or ANI, depending on how much of a nuicance they're being. Primefac (talk) 01:50, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
Greetings from the Arbcom Recruitment Kittens!
No catfights, we promise!
We've got some former arbs in the mix for WP:ACE2018, but we need more fresh blood bright-eyed and bushy-tailed first-time candidates! If you love all the functionaries email, think how much more you could have in your inbox! ;) Opabinia regalis (talk) 06:24, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
Aaagh, it's so tempting (and the kittens insanely cute), but being a responsible adult (gasp!) I must decline to put my hat into the ring this year; I find myself with very little personal time and it would be a disservice to ArbCom to be able to devote so little time to it. Maybe next year? Primefac (talk) 01:52, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
Well, keep an eye on the candidates page and see if you change your mind on Tuesday...? I mean, "tempted but" is a much better response than the usual "keep your flaming bag of shit off my front steps thankyouverymuch" ;) Opabinia regalis (talk) 08:43, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
Infobox school
Hi Primefac, I can see you're doing a bot run, awesome work. I've noticed that you are changing |type= to |schooltype= but this doesn't need changing, type is perfectly fine :) Steven (Editor) (talk) 03:55, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
Okay, thank you. How are you dealing with |image= and |image2= because of a slight variation between the two infoboxes for this. I came up with a solution where |image2= and its respective parameters can be deleted, and I'm currently going through and doing the necessary changes. You can see what I mean here (at the bottom where I've put "I have a solution"). Please let me know, thank you Steven (Editor) (talk) 04:05, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
Ah that's right anyway haha - We're still discussing other parameters with possible deletion and there's some already in a list to delete and some to rename. Would you be willing to do a bot for them once we've finished the discussion? Steven (Editor) (talk) 04:13, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
I am surprised to see this bot running already. We should have had a detailed discussion about parameters to remove and change. For example, |approx, |c_approx=, and multiple other parameters could be removed, even if they are blank, since they are not supported. Also, |enrollment= does not need to change to |students=, |dfeno= should be removed, and more. Perhaps it would be better for the bot to pause while we have a brief discussion on the template's talk page. Also, the bot appears to be doing something incorrectly with |website=.
How is it that you are referencing a WP:BRFA from February for this task?? @Cyberpower678: you approved that WP:BRFA can you shed some light? It seems to me that this is a new task and should have required a new BRFA. So far approx 2,000 pages have been broken by this task and the bot is still running... --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 07:09, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
The "website=" parameter in the infobox is being mangled in a variety of different ways - see the bot's talkpage. Please stop, and revert the damage. PamD10:11, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
My comments copied from User talk:PrimeBOT, as this seems to be the better discussion venue:
Yes, the bot is malfunctioning. The school website should be left visible, not hidden using the 2-parameter version of {{URL}}. And some are completely broken - will mend Sutton High School, London now, but please revert this damage to all the others. Thanks. PamD09:43, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
And just one more different example - I had a look at the bot's contributions list (enormous), clicked one at random and found {{URL|1=|2=| box_style =}}n added to a page which didn't have a URL in the infobox - producing this mess. Actually the school does have a website as an EL so I'll add it to the infobox. But what a mess this bot has caused. PamD10:07, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
School websites are being mangled. The bot is generating output such as: {{URL|1={{url|http://www.holcombegrammar.org.uk}}|2=http://www.holcombegrammar.org.uk}} which displays as: [<span%20class="url">.holcombegrammar.org.uk http://www.holcombegrammar.org.uk]. Not all schools are affected though, the issue appears to be when the bot uses a full URL including the protocol and separator in the second (deprecated) parameter. Regards, Martin of Sheffield (talk) 09:17, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
Yes, the bot is malfunctioning. The school website should be left visible, not hidden using the 2-parameter version of {{URL}}. And some are completely broken - will mend Sutton High School, London now, but please revert this damage to all the others. Thanks. PamD09:43, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
And just one more different example - I had a look at the bot's contributions list (enormous), clicked one at random and found {{URL|1=|2=| box_style =}}n added to a page which didn't have a URL in the infobox - producing this mess. Actually the school does have a website as an EL so I'll add it to the infobox. But what a mess this bot has caused. PamD10:07, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
Yes, the bot was malfunctioning. This was an oversight on my part mainly because I did not see this situtation pop up in the 100 or so manual edits I made before going fully-auto. I deeply apologize, will fix my mistakes, and in the future not assume that multiple posts on my page asking me about performing a Bot Run means that a bot run is ready to be performed (which is what happens when one assumes...). Primefac (talk) 13:34, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
Please read through Template talk:Infobox school, or at least the last couple of sections, before proceeding. Ask questions if you have them. Thanks. Please let us know your plan to fix the bot's edits before you start. We'll be happy to take a look at a couple of test batches of edits. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:27, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
Hey Primefac, I'm here to give you credit. First of all, it was around 4am UK time for me when I noticed Primefac was online and doing a bot run as you can see from my comments at the start of this section (was offline after replying). I mentioned "awesome work" (pretty much a backing of the bot run) and the short convo looks like everything is well; the bot was running properly, it was changing the parameters to the right ones, such as |religion= to |religious_affiliation= etc. The only thing I noticed was the changing of |type= to |schooltype= which I said above was not needed, which Primefac had rectified. I did query how |image= and |image2= was being handled, however, I failed to notice the adding of another caption parameter which I'm pretty sure was not there in the first few articles I checked (should have checked more), and which is mostly the reason for the large increase in the duplicate template arguments. Ok the bot should have run after we had finished the parameter discussion on the talk page, but Primefac was willing to do another bot run for the other params which you can see above. So I can say I'm also partly responsible and for that I apologise. In terms of parameter issues, I can see it's mainly just the |website= parameter where |website_name= should have been deleted instead (an issue with UK schools that are using this parameter for adding custom text to the URL, with many having unhelpful names, predominantly the school name and as you can see noted by PamD "Ilkley Grammar School unhelpfullly gave the school name" (already there before) and "Lawnswood School displayed "School website" (already there before). My only concern is why Zackmann08 had taken this to ANI, very disappointed. I'm sure there's a workaround, I'm sure Primefac will have a solution (maybe doing another bot run and removing the duplicate caption and the 2= in the URL? I don't know), but Primefac has done 2-3 bot runs for me in the past for Infobox school, removing and renaming parameters and had reduced 7,000+ in the unsupported and deprecated categories, with the unsupported one reducing to around 1,000+ (because there was a lot of single-use/very low ones that didn't require bot removal and can be done manually) and the latter which I think became empty - this was excellent. I appreciate your help, always friendly to work with and I hope this doesn't affect you wanting to do another bot run for when we finish the parameter discussion on the talk page, hope all is well, Steven :) Steven (Editor) (talk) 18:25, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
Oh yeah, no worries. We'll get through this. No articles appear to have been harmed (much) in this process, just a couple of maintenance categories and their watcher gnomes. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:46, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
That's good and haha, oh I'll let you know on the talk page when I'm done regarding the image/image2 approach, I'm almost there just taking a bit of time because I'm also doing that tedious part I mentioned Steven (Editor) (talk) 18:56, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
rugby league template help
Hi, I'm trying to create a template {{rlnt}} which if you input a country name like Australia or the iso code AUS will return [[Australia national rugby league team|Australia]] I've got all the data at {{rlnt/nations}} and I thought is would be a simple use of #switch so while I can get it to work (apparently), every example seems to be followed by a line break - see the Examples section at Template:Rlnt/doc. Any idea what I'm missing? Nthep (talk) 17:48, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
I guess you are not going to respond to me, that's fine, I will ask someone else for assistance, I can see you are very busy fixing your bot and other matters. Octoberwoodland (talk) 01:18, 12 November 2018 (UTC).
My apologies, I saw this post and was reading through the discussion and kept getting sidetracked. If I get to it, I'll close it, but letting a second set of eyes take a look might be a good idea. Primefac (talk) 02:33, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
You are a very wise and intelligent man my friend, I think there already are a bunch of eyes on it, but I think they are all waiting for you to review it. The rest of us are involved on it and are not allowed to close it. God Bless and thanks. Octoberwoodland (talk) 03:52, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
Assassination has been confirmed by WP:RS based on the released recordings of Khashoggi's killing which state that the Saudi Royal Family ordered the killing. Time to rename the article. [1]Octoberwoodland (talk) 02:25, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
Hrm... currently his cabinet only has one blue-linked member, meaning that it's probably not a good time right now to create a template. When/if the other cabinet members get Wikipedia pages then the possibility of a template can be discussed further. Primefac (talk) 17:14, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Primefac. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
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.
Wbm1058, thanks, I was using that switch (removing duplicate pipes) as a general infobox cleanup, but I didn't think about that usage. I've disabled that particular task.
All of the above issues have been dealt with (and I've fixed the remaining expression errors). Thank you both for the heads up! Primefac (talk) 23:05, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
Was wondering how you were finding them so fast. Turns out AWB is smarter than its own good, but I think that particular error has been handled now. Primefac (talk) 00:08, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
re: [5] - see WP:WEBARCHIVES for technical documentation on the web archive providers in use on Enwiki. There are two types of web archive URLs. The standard archive.org where the URL is preceded by a "/". And the WebCite/WikiWix/Freezepage type where it is preceded by a "?url=". Can both of these types be checked for? -- GreenC21:29, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
I believe I checked/changed the code at the time it was mentioned, but I just checked my on-wiki code updates and it doesn't appear to be, but there's also a good chance I didn't update that page. Will give it a look next time I'm looking at the actual AWB code. Primefac (talk) 21:32, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
I had a database lag error round about that time, must have been what did it. It happens every so often with AWB bot runs. Haven't had one in a while though! Primefac (talk) 02:11, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
I believe this is an AWB bug. I've had similar and never could isolate. Eventually the solution I came up with is "Skip -> Contains" with "Regex" and "Check after" set. That way it will skip if it can't find any text on the page after the edit. -- GreenC17:42, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
Based on the issues that arose last time I messed around with the website parameter I made an executive decision to not change anything with that param. If all instances of |website={{url|XYZ}} have been taken care of, then I'm happy to add the {{URL}} functionality into the edit run.
Thanks Jonesey95, erm, do we have to add |1= to the URL as this is if the URL contains an equals sign? I don't think there will be a problem this time because |website_name= is being removed rather than added as |2= in URL. But fine with me too and once the bot run is complete, Infobox UK school will be redirected/deleted right? I also want to say thank you so much and for your patience, really appreciate it :) Steven (Editor) (talk) 19:38, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
I've been thinking about it. Apologies for the delay, but there's enough to think about that it's taking a bit longer than usual. I've also been busy. Primefac (talk) 01:18, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
Just saw the message (since I was not pinged), and saw I was accepted on probation. Thank you! I will try to do my best. I have already started with some drafts submissions and have been helping with moving sandboxes to proper draft locations. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 11:58, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
Editor of the Week Hall of Fame
As 2018 draws to a close and 2019 is just around the corner, I wonder if I could impose on you to once again create the #ifexist: grid for the Hall of Fame as you have in the past. I've tried to replicate it but mess up each time. I hope this is not too much of a burden or imposition on your time. Much Appreciated. ―Buster7☎16:31, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
Amazing! So fast and efficient. So...when the new year starts I just remove the arrow/exclamationmark thingy just above the 2019 subthread, right?.―Buster7☎17:09, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
And also, I think you're taking things frontside back here. The page has no history of vandalism of any kind, and if it weren't protected and a protection were requested at RFPP it probably wouldn't have stood a chance. – Uanfala (talk)23:06, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
I suspect you're forgetting the Main Page vandalism that happened a few days ago, but if you're willing to keep an eye on it be my guest. Done. Primefac (talk) 00:50, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for this. Didn't even know it happened. What a strange editor...I reverted them on one article in September, warned them on their talk page once, they call that "harassment" and are still bothered by it in November. I don't get it. Ss11218:49, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
Hello, the Geobox template was still actively being used for the purpose of reviewing the recent script-driven conversion of several thousand articles, as discussed here. Is there any way the deletion can be revisited/delayed for a couple of weeks, as agreed to at that discussion? The conversion work is still undergoing active review, and we can't identify errors when the template is gone. Thanks. --TimK MSI (talk) 16:44, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
Was not aware of that discussion, just the various ones saying that it was ready for deletion. I will restore; please let me know when the checks are complete. Primefac (talk) 17:13, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
A request for comment is in progress to determine whether members of the Bot Approvals Group should satisfy activity requirements in order to remain in that role.
A request for comment is in progress regarding whether to change the administrator inactivity policy, such that administrators "who have made no logged administrative actions for at least 12 months may be desysopped". Currently, the policy states that administrators "who have made neither edits nor administrative actions for at least 12 months may be desysopped".
Administrators and bureaucrats can no longer unblock themselves unless they placed the block initially. This change has been implemented globally. See also this ongoing village pump discussion (permalink).
To complement the aforementioned change, blocked administrators will soon have the ability to block the administrator that placed their block to mitigate the possibility of a compromised administrator account blocking all other active administrators.
In late November, an attacker compromised multiple accounts, including at least four administrator accounts, and used them to vandalize Wikipedia. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately. Sharing the same password across multiple websites makes your account vulnerable, especially if your password was used on a website that suffered a data breach. As these incidents have shown, these concerns are not pure fantasies.
Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (Raymond Arritt) passed away on 14 November 2018. Boris joined Wikipedia as Raymond arritt on 8 May 2006 and was an administrator from 30 July 2007 to 2 June 2008.
I have done what I think was wanted and removed the entry at WP:TFD/HC. There are some quirks which I'll think about. I noticed these subpages which I'm glad to leave for you to ponder!
Hi Primefac. Hope you're doing well. Since you know a lot about templates, etc., I'm wondering if you know if there's a way to stop non-free files from being transcluded into portals. I've been noticing this happening more than usual lately and it seems to have something to do with the syntax being used for portals. The latest example I've come across is Portal:University of New Hampshire and File:UNewHampshire seal.png. The portal is calling up the infobox to University of New Hampshire and was transcluding infobox image as well. I think I fixed things by adding "noinclude" syntax for the image, but that might just be a work-around for the time being.
Was there some recent change to the general syntax generally used for portal pages which now makes transcluding non-free content more common? There is a single mention about non-free images and portals in Wikipedia:Portal guidelines, but it's buried in the middle and most likely not many people bother to read that far anyway; some may even think that transcluding the file is OK because technically they haven't added a file directly to the portal. I guess it's also possible that there's something about the wikidata of these files which is telling the system that they are not non-free, so the system treats them as a free image. Anyway, just curious about it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:37, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
Hey P, the parameter logo_padding is deprecated from {{Infobox company}}; any way you could set PrimeBOT loose to remove it from the ~160 or so articles that still have it? Would sure be easier than my having to go in and pull it out of every one of them. Thanks! UnitedStatesian (talk) 21:20, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
Probably a bit unnecessary for a bot run for 160 articles, but when I get a chance I'll do a manual AWB run to get rid of them. Primefac (talk) 21:59, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
Big spelling mistake jock not joke routledge all routledges rutledge are from the same family fact if this carrys on i will seek legal advice Daisy5867 (talk) 09:08, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Daisy5867, I highly suggest you read through our article about No legal threats; Wikipedia is not the place for legal disputes. If you wish to discuss spelling mistakes or other issues, you should do so on the talk page(s) of the article(s) you wish to make edits to, or discuss it with the editor(s) with whom you are having the dispute on their user talk pages. Primefac (talk) 11:18, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Hey Primefac, really glad the bot was approved, when would you be able to do the bot run for Infobox UK school? Eager to get it redirected and out of the way, please let me know, thank you :) Steven (Editor) (talk) 18:50, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
I was really hoping to get it done this weekend but ended up getting swamped with a ton of housework. I'll do my best to get to it in the next few days. Primefac (talk) 20:29, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
I checked some of the bot edits here and then, and not seen any problems, all looks good. That was really quick, did the bot go through the entire 5,000+ transclusions? I think you should redirect it now, the categories will populate if there's a problem but I don't think there will be any and if there is, you can just undo the redirect? Steven (Editor) (talk) 02:54, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
OK, I figured I was missing something. I was thinking that the bot would rename the template. In that case, well done! There were three or four UK school articles in the Infobox school unsupported parameters category, and only one of them appeared to be some sort of minor bot error, so I just fixed them rather than investigate. One possible error out of almost 6,000 edits is very impressive! – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:29, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
You did a good job Primefac :) - Primefac and Jonesey95, what to do with these subpages? I think the "sep2018version" and doc can be deleted as this was to aid in the merge discussion, can the others be deleted or should it be redirected to its equivalent Infobox school subpage? Steven (Editor) (talk) 18:03, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
It's not really that big a deal, but I'll take a look at the subpages and see if there's anything worth keeping (for historical/attribution sake). Primefac (talk) 20:12, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
The short answer is that I think {{NUMBEROFSECTIONS}} is broken. The example values given in the /doc do not match the actual (live) values found on those pages. I don't have time to dig into the module, but based on some digging that's the only thing I can think of. Primefac (talk) 17:12, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
Hi Primefac and Flooded with them hundreds. I've implemented a possible fix (waiting to see results (caching is useful but takes a while to update) but it seems to be working). Be aware that the module is only capable of understanding headings/sections denoted with wiki-markup i.e. "===" not "<h3>...</h3>", so may still give inaccurate results sometimes. I'll keep my eye on the results of my "fix" and am watching this thread. In the future; if a problem with a template of module is discovered, it's a good idea to contact the person most familiar with it, or at least open a thread on its talk page to get some attention. I only noticed this issue when it was unexpectedly protected. Fred Gandt · talk · contribs12:22, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the note and the fix. I didn't have time when this was left to properly look into it, which is why I didn't reach out. Primefac (talk) 14:20, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
No problem Primefac; I understand :) I just checked, and unfortunately the "fix" doesn't seem to have worked quite right; all the pages have been removed from the category now *facepalm*. I've been trying to debug a Chrome extension all morning and need some lunch. I'll come back and try again later. Placing NUMBEROFSECTIONS directly on Drafts yields "0" even if they have some, whereas calling it with a Draft's name works correctly. See ya later :) Fred Gandt · talk · contribs15:02, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
I've quadruple checked, because it's quite hard to fathom, and can confirm that for some reason, the problem is in its use in the "Draft" namespace. Placing it directly (by transclusion or physically) on a Draft page yields "0" (zero) sections, whilst the results for the same page when retrieved via something like {{NUMBEROFSECTIONS|Draft:Not a daft draft}} will be accurate. Direct or transcluded placement without specifically naming the page(s) utilises {{FULLPAGENAME}} to establish ... wait for it ... the full page name ;) to pass to the Module to parse for the count. {{FULLPAGENAME}} works as expected on a Draft pages. I can't figure this out. I'll admit to being a bit rusty dealing with lua again but have a hunch that due to the unusual nature of Draft pages, there may be dark magic afoot requiring a special workaround. I mean really; for the lolz if no other reason try previewing {{NUMBEROFSECTIONS|}} in the page it states (or another draft if it gets promoted in the meantime) and you'll get correct results but remove the specificity and suddenly it's zero! Fred Gandt · talk · contribs19:08, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
I'm going to boldly ping @Mr. Stradivarius: as (although we've not spoken for ages) he's my first thought when anything involving lua (Module:NUMBEROF drives the template) goes wrong and needs an expert eye. I can't figure it out; on the Draft pages that are correctly filtered, {{NUMOF... behaves correctly, and on those that are filtered incorrectly, it behaves incorrectly. This may seem like a pointless tautology, but it means it's actually working as expected insofar that the implementation of it is fine. As for why it's not correctly reading some Drafts on site, but correctly reads them remotely - I'm baffled. I'm spent and not nearly expert enough (apparently) to be of further use. I'm watching the issue to learn and if I do think of anything useful, I'll pipe up. Fred Gandt · talk · contribs21:29, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
@Fred Gandt and Flooded with them hundreds: I added a workaround to fix the problem which is beyond belief. It turns out that {{FULLPAGENAME}} generates "'" for apostrophe! The problem had nothing to do with "Draft:". It was the fact that the title contained an apostrophe. The module splits the title on "#" which breaks with '. I'll report the issue somewhere in due course but I have to go now. I noticed a couple of things in the module which I might mention and/or tweak in a day or two. Please check what the module does now. Is the problem fixed? Johnuniq (talk) 09:50, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
edit conflict I was trying to deduce the root of the problem in thought and just tested my hypothesis; Previewing {{NUMBEROFSECTIONS}} on Draft:Delaware Fightin' Blue Hens football, 1910-19 results in an output of 0. Previewing {{NUMBEROFSECTIONS|Draft:Delaware Fightin' Blue Hens football, 1910-19}} results in an output of 13. Previewing {{FULLPAGENAME}} (the way NUMOF gets the info) there results in an output of "Draft:Delaware Fightin' Blue Hens football, 1910-19" but {{NUMBEROFSECTIONS|{{FULLPAGENAME}}}} results in 0. I was right (in my thinking) that NUMOF is working with bad data; for some reason (shrug) some (but not all) Drafts' FULLPAGENAMEs aren't delivered to NUMOF correctly. Hope this analysis helps someone else who may attempt to debug for a fix but I'm still drawing a blank. At least it seems to be getting it right as often as it can, and only a handful of false positives are getting through. Fred Gandt · talk · contribs09:59, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
@Johnuniq: Good catch :) Feel free to fix everything bad I did. I was learning lua as I wrote it and haven't touched it since. I've completely forgotten how to debug it as well as write it :D I remember at the time selecting "#" as a delimiter because it wouldn't be in any page titles or namespaces for certain. If there's a more suitable char, please do what's needed :) Fred Gandt · talk · contribs10:07, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
I just noticed that Draft:Gudmar Olovson has no lead before a level 2 section and is categorized as sectionless. This is because NUMOF is looking for \n={2}\w={2} (roughly) but without a lead, there is no newline before the section. Being unfamiliar with lua's regex, I have yet to figure out how to tell it to also capture sections that have nothing before them. I will try and figure it out, but if someone watching this thread knows how to fix it before me, please do. At least a page with a section used this way is kinda doing it wrong, so it's not all bad :) Fred Gandt · talk · contribs09:51, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
Various fixes are available but I did the simplest, namely to insert a newline before the content. I tweaked something else but haven't got around to looking at what I mentioned earlier. By the way, the place to ask for Lua help is WT:Lua. Johnuniq (talk) 10:17, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
Hello P,
Early in A Child's Christmas in Wales the young Dylan and his friend Jim Prothero witness smoke pouring from Jim's home. After the conflagration has been extinguished Dylan writes that
Nobody could have had a noisier Christmas Eve. And when the firemen turned off the hose and were standing in the wet, smoky room, Jim's Aunt, Miss. Prothero, came downstairs and peered in at them. Jim and I waited, very quietly, to hear what she would say to them. She said the right thing, always. She looked at the three tall firemen in their shining helmets, standing among the smoke and cinders and dissolving snowballs, and she said, "Would you like anything to read?"
My thanks to you for your efforts to keep the 'pedia readable in case the firemen chose one of our articles :-) Best wishes to you and yours and happy editing in 2019. MarnetteD|Talk19:43, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
Noël ~ καλά Χριστούγεννα ~ З Калядамі ~ חנוכה שמח ~ Gott nytt år!
Seasonal Greetings!
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2019!
Hello Primefac, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2019. Happy editing, ★Trekker (talk) 18:49, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
Hey Primefac, i lOvE yOu and wish you a pleasant Merry Christmas and a wonderful New Year. Thanks for all you do on Wikipedia. 🐇🐇🐇 Flooded with them hundreds09:34, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
Merry Christmas!
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2019!
Hello Primefac, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2019. Happy editing, Hhkohh (talk) 12:59, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Merry Christmas!
We wish you a Merry Christmas, We wish you a Merry Christmas, We wish you a Merry Christmas, And a Happy New Year!
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
,_cropped.jpg)
.jpeg)
.jpg){kind=link}