User talk:Jonesey95 - Wikipedia

The signs in the infobox - the text is too large (to compare to real life sign). That's why I was doing that to decrease the size. Sorry if that caused any trouble. Pedroperezhumberto (talk) 16:04, 20 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

The infobox sets the size, and it is standard for all similar articles. There is no reason to make it smaller. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:06, 20 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Sorry about that, it's because I thought they should be at least similar to the real-life size. Pedroperezhumberto (talk) 16:12, 20 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

That doesn't make sense to me. This version before your edit and this version after your edit show only a small difference in the header size. The "real-life" sign labeling the station will be multiple feet across, not a few centimeters or inches like the infobox title. Meanwhile, all other railway station articles use a standard size. Deviating from the standard size introduces inconsistency among similar articles for no apparent good reason. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:34, 20 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

I think the remaining few dozen "42" Fostered content errors are beyond me (a little too templatey/functiony), so I'm done with that set. User:CaPslOcksBroKEn/sandbox (11 FCs) I know to be clean (Of all errors) as I've tested it in my sandbox twice in the last few months by saving it in 2-3 sections, but it's too damn big and won't purge or null edit for a clean result. Do you have any other ideas for clearing these ghosts? I've been aware of it for a few months, so not sure if waiting it out will allow it to self-correct, or if it needs to be pushed in some other way that I'm not thinking of.

Happy to have another bothersome error type pretty much eradicated from the list otherwise! Thanks for getting all of the pages you got to, hope you have a great weekend. Zinnober9 (talk) 18:20, 21 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

That was a fun project! I will poke at the remaining 42 every once in a while. Sometimes I have to sit and let ideas come to me. We can probably get it down to a dozen or so with a few tricks. I cheated on a few by wrapping the offending template code in <includeonly>...</includeonly> tags, since the code was working when transcluded. That trick will probably work on a few more pages, but it fails when there are already includeonly tags inside the code. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:55, 21 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Looks like today's new set of fostered content errors all seem to be related to <onlyinclude> or <noinclude> tags, either on the page themselves, or calling the {{Ranks and Insignia of Non NATO Armies/OR/Blank}} template. I'm not making heads or tails out of any of them at the moment. These tags *shouldn't*? be causing these issues. Zinnober9 (talk) 18:37, 4 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Me neither. I have seen those starting in the last few hours. They look like false positives. Post a new subthread at WT:Linter, in the "dark mode" thread I started at the bottom. I don't know if they are related to dark mode error detection, but something appears to have changed in the Linter detection and I think it might be a bug. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:38, 4 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Ok. I had changed this page Opinion polling for the 2020 Polish presidential election due to this, but only since they were so oddly added with 5x of them at the start of every? table, and the other pages looked like legitimate usage of these. I've seen this popup on a few pages before, but they always cleared up before I got bothered enough to deal with them/ask about them. Zinnober9 (talk) 19:13, 4 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

CaPslOcksBroKEn is now removed from the list. Might have been the two small templates that weren't closed correctly. Gonnym (talk) 12:46, 23 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hmm. Thank you, not sure why they didn't appear problematic in my tests. Huge pages are ripe pain. Appreciate your efforts.

As for User:Wtmitchell/Draft1 where you replaced all {{!}} code and the like with |, |-, etc ... my understanding is when things are transcluded, they have a habit of interacting with the calling page's code in odd cases. Using {{!}} tells it to stay in its lane and not mix and create mutants with the calling code. @Jonesey95 is there a better way to explain this since you have a greater knowledge of the more template-y language than I? Zinnober9 (talk) 20:02, 23 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

When pipe characters for table layout are used inside of #switch or #if statements, they can trigger the statements' logic instead of acting as table layout. The hazard of using the same character for two important functions. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:42, 24 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Wtmitchell seemed to have known that as well, given they had written a note stating "NOTE: The templated aliases (e.g., "{{!}}") are needed for transclusion. Don not disturb them", and Gonnym changed the page to use pipes and removed that note. I feel that's against the user's intentions, and since it is likely possible to clear the lint and keep the {{!}}, this was the wrong way to fix the page. Had there been no way to fix it with {{!}}, or justification (beyond "I checked all the transcluded pages and they are fine"), I'd be more supportive of this correction. Zinnober9 (talk) 13:48, 24 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

I just checked both of the places where that Draft1 page is transcluded, and the transcluded page looks fine in both places. I assume that Gonnym checked those pages as well and would have self-reverted if they had found any trouble. The page is three years old, so it appears to be no longer in active development. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:51, 24 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Just a little FYI, the gallery pages of Charlesjsharp that you edited in April (Insects and Frogs) in a similar corrective way to my May edits for their Mammals and Birds galleries have a few undesired display issues based on last night's discussion on my talk page. I take comfort in seeing that we made the same assumptions in regards to the intended display of these pages with the thought of "User wrote it this way, so it's presumed intended display is this" with how the captions of each image display. Unfortunately, this is not how the user wishes their pages to be, and they (as I understand it) wish for the captions to be centered, and for them to display with black text for all image captions (other than the countries' names which are blue), and for any white lines crossing the page to be nonexistent. And they do not want the three images at the top (under the star) to have a white box encircling them (so don't make it two tables). End result desired is essentially a "do as I had originally displayed, not as I had written".

Would you adjust these two pages sometime when it suites or makes sense? I don't think Charles would be too happy to see I'd edited them all. You may wish to wait until after we know whether or not I've gotten the Mammal page all squared away for him and there are no additional issues found. That way you have a one and done with no back and forth and everyone's pleased.

Thanks, Zinnober9 (talk) 21:52, 26 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the note. I adjusted the pages. You are welcome to copy my edits if the editor is happy with them. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:13, 27 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

You are welcome and thanks, we'll see how it goes. Zinnober9 (talk) 01:19, 27 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

I give up. I realized I left a fostered content error, so I fixed that, only to see the unwanted white box returned again. ARRRRRRG.

User:Charlesjsharp/Featured pictures of birds on English Wikipedia, User:Charlesjsharp/Featured pictures of mammals on English Wikipedia. Help. I know I can fix it and how to fix it, but I'm getting too into my head to perfect it that I've screwed it up again. Zinnober9 (talk) 04:07, 27 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Done. Sometimes it's not your day. You'll be able to return the favor for me someday. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:14, 27 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. I'm mad at myself at letting it occur and ticked off that such a simple little thing tripped me up. I appreciate you greatly today. Hopefully I'll sleep it off and tomorrow will be a better day. Zinnober9 (talk) 04:54, 27 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thank you both for attempting to resolve this. Looking at the Charlesjsharp/Featured pictures of reptiles and frogs on English Wikipedia: Revision history page it was Jonesey95's edit on 29 April that removed the align center layout not Zinnober9. The error has not been fixed. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:57, 27 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

And thanks for putting up with our edits (so far). I have tried five different things to get the snake gallery at User:Charlesjsharp/Featured pictures of reptiles and frogs on English Wikipedia to be centered, and I have had no luck so far. It looks like a bug so far, but I am going to try to make a simpler case to figure out what is going wrong. The documentation clearly states that mode="packed-hover" should center the gallery images, and copying that gallery to my sandbox results in centered images, but somehow, within the rest of the layout, the images are aligned to the left. It's frustrating. I'll keep working on it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:11, 27 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Does this give you the desired outcome? I added the statement text-align: center; to each gallery's style parameter, like I had with Birds and Mammals and that centered things up.

A small side note: I see the page has some duplicate style="color:black;" statements in some of those galleries (you may wish to clear those up). Zinnober9 (talk) 21:20, 27 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

See, I told you that you would be able to return the favor. That tweak should DEFINITELY not be necessary, but it works. F*** me. [edited to add: It looks like taking away class="wikitable" also works around the problem.] – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:39, 27 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Ah, that works too. Kinda figured there was something external to gallery dictating that, but class="wikitable" would not have come to mind. I kept running into centering needs with the removals of the tons of obsolete <center> tags used to center tables when I was clearing fostered content the last few months, so got used to using text-align: center; fairly often. Zinnober9 (talk) 01:30, 28 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

 Template:WikiProject TikTok/doc has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 09:31, 30 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

A tag has been placed on Category:Articles containing Dogrib-language text indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Gonnym (talk) 07:43, 1 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Just a quick question for you - a couple of days ago, you made this edit to {{AmFootballScoreSummaryEntry}}. I recently was looking over 2022 Liberty Bowl and saw that the score summary template's formatting was messed up, specifically in the vertical alignment of the home team's score in every row, making each row of the table significantly wider than it was normally. I didn't want to revert your edit just to see if that would work and so figured I'd just ask. Do you think something in your edit would have changed the way this template is formatted? Sorry to bother and thanks for your help! PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 16:15, 2 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

My edit did cause that extra whitespace, even though it should not have. I have fixed it. Thank you for coming to ask rather than simply reverting or freaking out. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:25, 2 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the fix and for such a quick response! Much appreciated. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 16:30, 2 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello, Your last contribution to Infobox royalty have made a major change to the template. After the edit, the infobox looks very ugly on Mobile app. I suggest you to revert it because from desktop, the above (name) text in black however, in mobile app it is white and does not match with the background color. MAL MALDIVE (talk) 15:21, 4 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

From desktop, it may look good but in the app it's not you expect. MAL MALDIVE (talk) 15:23, 4 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

This mobile view looks fine to me. I'm not sure how else to troubleshoot it. I have reported the problem at this thread. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:51, 4 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Your mobile view is on light mode? It works on light mode. Mine is on dark mode it's because of that. No worries. MAL MALDIVE (talk) 18:43, 5 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi Jonesey95, I come here because you are one of the people who know everything about references and templates. I'm looking at Gwendolyn Grant (activist) where the {{sfn}}s are broken because the references are using {{cite q}}, which is rendering the references with |author= rather than |last= and |first=. I would like to fix this by substituting the calls to cite q so that I get the call to {{citation}} that they're producing, and then fix them by hand, but I can't work out how to do that – simply substing the calls to cite q just gives me the invocation of the LUA (?) module, which isn't helpful. Do you know a way, or does this have to be fixed in a different way? Thanks in advance, Wham2001 (talk) 23:30, 4 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

{{cite Q|Q126281915|expand=yes}}

{{Citation |id=[[WDQ (identifier)|Wikidata]] [[:d:Q126281915|Q126281915]] |language=en |publisher=Urban League of Greater Kansas City |title=Urban League of Greater Kansas City - Our Team |url=https://www.ulkc.org/our-team-xxx}}

That is citing a website so |publisher=Urban League of Greater Kansas City should be changed to |website=Urban League of Greater Kansas City.

Yeah, there is a bug in the expansion; |url= should not include the template's closing }}.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 23:48, 4 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Excellent, thank-you very much Trappist the monk! Wham2001 (talk) 23:56, 4 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thanks TtM. Cite Q is junk. Expanding it so that articles can comply with CITEVAR is usually a good fix. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:42, 5 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, my general experience of Wikidata has been "this is a good idea which has been implemented so badly that it's a giant net negative", and cite q is a major part of that. Meanwhile, the article's author has reverted all my citation fixes 🙄 Best, Wham2001 (talk) 20:32, 5 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Well, your changes did contravene WP:CITEVAR, so the revert was justified. Cite Q is still a blight. I provided some options on the talk page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:57, 5 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the comments; they're helpful. Yes, I know that my changes weren't strictly defensible given CITEVAR – I was half expecting the revert, tbh. Best, Wham2001 (talk) 21:06, 5 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi Jonesey. In the recent discussion of "Release history" table, Andrew318 said that those are distributors, not labels. So if you have any further comments. Regards. 2001:D08:2960:6C1:17E0:21DE:4238:7DE2 (talk) 07:13, 8 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Hello, Jonesey95! You recently made an edit to another editor's user page despite the presence of a notice instructing otherwise. Please be mindful of page notices when contributing to Wikipedia — especially in another editor's user space.

9t5 (talk) 09:04, 9 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I did make this minor edit, as indicated and explained in my edit summary. I fixed ten syntax errors, including one high-priority error. Please let me know if I broke anything, and I'll be happy to fix it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:37, 9 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

 Template:Warsaw central stations/doc has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 09:37, 9 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

This diff was really confusing but I was reading it backwards -- don't know how the hell I managed to leave out the closing tags for those. Anyway, thanks for letting me know, I am currently reworking the render script so I will make sure to get this cleaned up. 👍 jp×g🗯️ 05:21, 11 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

I'm glad you figured it out and didn't get grumpy with me. It's all teamwork. It would be great if you could fix that script; it would fix hundreds of missing end tag errors. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:25, 11 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

I think everything is good now, take a look and lmk if anythings busted jp×g🗯️ 21:05, 12 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Oh, besides the center tags, I will fix those later jp×g🗯️ 21:07, 12 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

That page is still busted. This is the fix. And here's a list of all User/JPxG pages that are missing end tags. It should be pretty small after the bot is fixed and runs through the pages again. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:34, 14 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Times Top 100 Graduate Employers, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Times Top 100 Graduate Employers until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 14 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi there, Jonesey. We are watching Reno 911! lately so I think of that when I see your name. I'm sorry your computer is sad but I thought I'd let you know I posted you a message here. FYI. Is Template:Format price supposed to start with a big red error? Thanks! — Smuckola(talk) 20:09, 15 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

I've run across a slight quandary with a page due to Template talk:Infobox journal and the lint error on American River Review. The Website parameter does not allow "extras" to be written, just the website address and nothing else (a common theme of delinting for me the last few days). The stated website for ARR is now a dead link, so someone logically just added the {{Dead link}} template, but that is triggering a Link in link error.

The easy thing to do would just be to comment it all out, but I was wondering if a parameter like current_status = Active/Inactive like that on the {{Infobox website}} template would be beneficial, or if there was a better way of handling this one. Thoughts? Zinnober9 (talk) 22:02, 15 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

I just did a web search and found the new URL. It was the first hit. I'm not sure why Conkaan couldn't find it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:58, 15 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Had seen that site in the external links section, and thought that it was a supplementary link or a mirror and not the official. I see now that it was just added by Scott Crow in the edit prior to Conkaan (changed from a Facebook link) so possible Conkaan had the same thought I did. Thanks. Zinnober9 (talk) 00:15, 16 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

" Brazilian Romantic painting‎ diffhist −4‎ Jonesey95 talk contribs (Fix Linter obsolete tag errors. Where are people finding this invalid syntax? It has been removed from all articles.)" I expect the answer may be that this is an OKA machine translation from pt:wp. Johnbod (talk) 15:54, 16 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

That makes sense. Some Wikimedia sites are doing better than others at removing obsolete syntax. We still have three million total errors here, but only about 65,000 left in article space after six years of consistent work. German Wikipedia is essentially free of errors, of course. I did some work over at Commons a while ago and fixed a few million errors by editing a handful of templates, but there is a lot of bot work that needs to happen if that site is to get cleaned up. Other sites are even more neglected. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:47, 16 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

The remaining few link issues in Userspace (minus Marine 69-71's that I'll get to) are cases I'm not coming up with a clean solution for. They are predominantly a userbox situation that doesn't accept linked text, but the user has dictated a different pagelink instead. The quick and dirty answer would be to just remove the user linking, but I was wondering if you know a way to cleanly keep them the way the users intended.
For Jtmorgan's three pages, it's a difference scenario and is related to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Question-form. There are also three Wikipedia:Teahouse pages with similar issues. Feel like it's probably at the template and not the end user, but it isn't apparent to me. And for Disco's errors... well, who knows if there really was a cat at all. As for the remaining 550-some in Talk, I assume they won't put up much of a fight, but we'll see by the end of the week. Zinnober9 (talk) 00:49, 17 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

This fix usually does the trick for pre-linked userbox parameters where the editor missed the documentation or the template is not documented well enough. I fixed a couple of other pages. I posted a note at User talk:Discographer about their too-large page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:24, 17 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

A little surprised it was only Various–Music on that list since others of theirs I've come across have been too big for linthint unless I view the page in sections. As for the Good Article userboxes, thanks. That's a nice fix. Zinnober9 (talk) 06:12, 17 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Any idea why this bot's addition of a correctly written parameter is triggering a link in link error? The bot is adding it correctly as stated on Template:Infobox radio station, so I don't feel the issue's at the bot/page's end of things. Suspecting the template needs a minor adjustment given the language used in the descriptions for the |licensing_authority options all stating links. Zinnober9 (talk) 03:08, 22 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

One fix is to remove any wikilinks from the Facility ID parameter. There may be better fixes. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:48, 22 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

I just wanted to give you a massive THANK YOU for correcting the issues on my User Page, and for leaving such a kind comment. You are a fantastic user. Thank you. - Mike Longfellow (talk) 08:17, 21 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hey,

Thanks for the ping. I think the majority of these are actually the FCC ID field being filled in incorrectly (and this can now be blanked, as the bot is adding the relevant data to Wikidata so it should also be pulled through). I think technically these fields containing values other than a number should be a linter error anyway in these cases, just it's not flagged up by the template.

I'm happy to take out flagging the licencing body if needed, however this is what causes the data to be pulled from wikidata, so it's not a perfect solution. I don't want to mess with the FCCID field in the infobox, but may be able to blank this (but with 90% of the task done, I don't know what this buys at this point) Mdann52 (talk) 05:31, 22 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

I'm guessing that a tweak to the template, like using {{delink}} on the facility ID parameter, might help, but I haven't looked at it yet. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:01, 22 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Mdann52-- considering I've seen only 3 or so pages popup this month while you've been running this task, and I've been focused on this Link in Link error type for the past few weeks and fully eliminated it yesterday (had been 900 some userspace pages completely unrelated to you or Radio Stations), I don't see any need for the bot to stop or be adjusted at this point. Since it's a single run task with a limited population remaining, and very few popup cases, keep going and we'll address any few that do pop up (if any).

Jonesey95 and Mdann52-- Your reply to me, Jonesey95, (in the section two above this) surprised me a bit, but after some testing and thinking today, I've found that I had the culprit parameter wrong last night and it's a two pronged issue (sort of). This error exists in only two states-- If both the FACID and the licensing_authority parameters are wikilinked, or if FACID is wikilinked and LA contains anything. All other states have no error, so yes, delinking the FID parameter sounds like a valid course of action to prevent these errors since LA is intended to be populated and linked.

Summary of cases:

Both linked, ERROR

FID linked, LA gone, no error

FID linked, LA plaintext, ERROR

FID linked, LA empty but present, no error

FID plaintext, LA linked, no error

Both plaintext, no error

The only lingering question I had this evening was if there were any pages with FID linked and LA either gone or empty that could be a triggering case later that the bot might have left behind. However, you state above that the bot is adding a populated LA parameter for empty/nonexistant cases, so I believe there won't be any potential trigger cases later on (unless created later on by the random perfect storm editor), and that this bot task will have found all cases by the task's completion (correct me if any part of this understanding is incorrect).

Regardless of the bot, wikilinking of the FID parameter, if possible, should be disallowed or dissuaded in the use of this template. {{delink}} as you mentioned, Jonesey95, looks like a nice solution if it'll work well within this template, but I have no preference of how it is done so long as it's clean and effective, and I trust both of you in this regard. Zinnober9 (talk) 05:03, 23 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

The "nonexistent category" report is at Special:WantedCategories. To be honest, I genuinely don't recall ever having asked for it to be made daily; it runs every three days and thus isn't too onerous to get through. A daily version wouldn't be unwelcome, but isn't nearly as pressing as the polluted category reports (Wikipedia:Database reports/Polluted categories for userspace content and Wikipedia:Database reports/Polluted categories (2) for draftspace), because those only run once per week — I do recall having asked for them to run more often than they do, because running only once a week means that they feature hundreds of pages by the time they update, and thus require me to set aside hours and hours to get through, whereas a run of the redlinked category report rarely takes me more than 30-45 minutes to clean up.

But the draft report is currently broken, so I've been working around it with an ad hoc report that I can regenerate on the fly, and might keep using because that makes it better than the official report. (Wikipedia:Database reports/Drafts with categories helps somewhat, but I've found that it isn't consistently reliable at catching all categorized drafts, so it's never been my primary tool for that job, while the version I was given at WP:VPT when I reported that Dannybot hadn't updated the official report in weeks seems to work better.)

So, I mean, a daily version of the WantedCategories would certainly be appreciated, but it's never been the #1 thing on my wishlist; it's the polluted category reports where I've been more outspoken about wanting more frequent updates, while WantedCategories running every three days has been tolerable. Bearcat (talk) 22:12, 25 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Skip the Plants vs Plants outcropping of errors, (or really any page created by User:Ergobus). The pages will all be nuked soon. Zinnober9 (talk) 00:09, 27 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

I saw. I fixed a few typos in the user name, to reduce confusion among any admins who might be checking things before deleting. Copy and paste is every editor's friend, but sometimes we forget about our friends.... – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:11, 27 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Ok. I saw you had touched the China Template related to that, so thought it was worth mentioning the nuke conversation before you got invested in clearing the other pages. Zinnober9 (talk) 00:42, 27 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

They are gone now. BTW, the fostered content bug has been fixed, so there are a few new errors to fix now. I found a lot of junk edits that needed reverting in article space. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:44, 27 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Oh good, it was ticking me off that I had just cleared those off to 10 "unfixables", for it to balloon over 1000 on non-errors. I'll join you with those in a few moments. Zinnober9 (talk) 00:49, 27 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, accidentally rolled back your reversions. Fixing references; please leave for the next 15 minutes while I fix them! —Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 01:26, 27 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Ok, should be all fixed as of [1]: no harvtxt, all footnote links work. —Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 01:35, 27 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Much better. Nice fixes. Thanks for leaving a note. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:52, 27 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

The changes in and of themselves were fine, but next time you do things to someone's user page, give them a heads up. Just a courtesy thing, as people usually consider their user page as more of their personal space (as much as one can have here anyway.) Vjmlhds (talk) 17:52, 30 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the kind message. You received a heads-up in your Watchlist, and possibly in your notifications. I and other editors are fixing syntax errors in tens of thousands of User pages; it is simply impractical to notify every editor, many of whom are no longer active. Talk page notifications would create far too much noise for the affected editors as well as for anyone who is watching their talk pages. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:55, 30 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

At the end of the day, no harm, no foul...carry on. Vjmlhds (talk) 18:16, 30 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi Jonesey95. Thanks for the minor cleanup. I wondered, if you could do some some more work here? It would help a lot. Cheers. — Sadko (words are wind) 22:36, 30 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

I did some cleanup there. I don't have all of the tools that I need on sr.WP, but my edits may have helped a bit. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:59, 31 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thank you kindly. — Sadko (words are wind) 10:04, 31 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Mary_Bonham-Christie RobinClay (talk) 15:33, 31 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Oh, and No, I did not cut & paste - I transcribed part of images.

Amd please rephrase in English you comment "Mark claims as needing" Who is this "Mark" ? Do I know him ? RobinClay (talk) 15:44, 31 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

I can't tell if you are trolling me, but I will assume good faith. I marked some claims. It's a verb. If you are curious about the {{full citation needed}} templates that I added, it may help you to read WP:FULLCITE. Linking to a page where someone can do a search does not count as providing a verifiable citation. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:49, 31 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi, did the template look like this:

when you nominated it for speedy deletion as a test page? ★Trekker (talk) 13:11, 1 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

No. It just said "Template:Ronnie Wood". I come across stuff like this in the template space a few times per week. I have no objection to a real template at that location. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:14, 1 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thank you. Seems the original creator made some kind of mistake then.★Trekker (talk) 13:35, 1 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

That's fine. I copied all those photos from somewhere else, and if they were done wrong there, they should have been fixed.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:58, 1 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Its funny, I have been using Wikipedia for over 20 year, but there are still so many things I don't know how to do. I'd like to add some user boxes and make my page more informative, and to organize my images better. Would you be willing to help me or to make suggestions? Needsmoreritalin (talk) 01:18, 7 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Sure, I would be happy to help you. Post a note on your talk page and link to userboxes that you would like to include, or you can just say "I want the userbox about chess that I see at User:Example's page". I will see what I can do for you. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:18, 7 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

My edit count data for August 2024 has not registered on my page. Been editing since the beginning of the month. Seems odd. Can you explain? Lord Such&Such (talk) 17:25, 7 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

High replag means that all sorts of stuff that should update will not update until the replication lag goes back to zero. That is my first thought. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:27, 7 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

So it can't be induced? Or just let it go?--Lord Such&Such (talk) 17:51, 7 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

It's slowed by a server update task that is taking far longer than expected (T367856). Once that ends, the server traffic should start catching up. Nothing we can do about it in the meantime. I'm waiting for something to display updated data that hasn't changed since the wee hours of Saturday also. Zinnober9 (talk) 18:41, 7 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

You can count your edits manually at Special:Contributions/Lord_Such&Such until the server catches up. That page shows 68 edits in August. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:51, 7 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello there @Jonesey95. Thank you for fixing the lint error that was introduced while welcoming a new Wikipedia user. Just to clarify, I used the automatic welcome tool in Twinkle to do that. I was unaware of any lint errors. I also chose not to send a standard welcome message beause the editor that I welcomed has an apparent interest in physics. Currently I have scarce knowledge about what lint errors are; would you be willing to explain that to me? Also, can you please check if using the {{welcome-phys}} tag produces a lint error. If so, then it should be fixed in the template's source. Thank you. ❯❯❯ Raydann^(Talk) 20:23, 8 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

There was invalid table-generation code in Template:PhyInvitation, which I have just fixed. Thanks for explaining how you generated the welcome message. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:35, 9 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

(talk page watcher) @Raydann: As I expect you know, in HTML, each element has a opening tag and a closing tag, they normally occur in pairs like <b>...</b>. For some elements, the closing tag is optional (as with <li> or <td>) or even invalid (as with <br /> or <img />). But for most elements, the closing tag is mandatory; and moreover, when one element is nested inside another, each element must be closed in the opposite order to which they were opened. That is, <b><i>Some text</i></b> is valid, whereas <b><i>Some text</b></i> is not. Lint errors are, generally speaking, cases where a required tag is missing, or where closing tags occur in the wrong order. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:04, 8 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

(talk page watcher) @Redrose64

While closing <li> might be optional, leaving off a closing </ol> is not, and it's just safer to be in the habit of closing everything. I've seen and cleaned up enough table errors that I strongly object to the suggestion of not closing <td>. If they don't automatically cause a fostered content error, they often contribute to this, or other errors when things are not properly closed.

@Raydann I see how you did that, and it was with the expected actions, so there's something broken here that needs fixing. @Jonesey95, Do you know why going to the Twinkle Welcome menu, selecting/sending that template creates this Fostered content error? I see it does not cause an issue when the template is written manually as {{welcome-phys}} for some reason, but I also see that the Menu route writes the full text, when it could just add the shorter {{welcome-phys}} and get the same display result for less text on page and no error. Zinnober9 (talk) 21:51, 8 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Zinnober9: I didn't say that <br /> was invalid, I said that a closing tag is invalid for that element: that is, it is incorrect to write <br></br>. I'm not getting into the "<br>-versus-<br />" thing here, that's way off-topic.

I didn't mention the ol element at any point: of course </ol> is mandatory, it pairs with an opening <ol> tag. It's <li> for which a closing tag is optional - whilst a li element is explicitly closed by a </li> tag, it is also implicitly closed by (i) a <li> tag within the same list; (ii) a </ol> tag; (iii) a </ul> tag.

The td element is explicitly documented as one for which the closing tag is optional, so I don't know why you feel that it's an error. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:08, 8 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Redrose64 Oh... I didn't read it that way and thought you were saying <br /> (by itself) was an issue. My mistake. I agree with you on this then, so I've struck it above. I have no real opinion on "<br>-versus-<br />", just against the usage of </br> for the odd cases where it strips something. I mentioned <ol>, since I often see cases where the people who left <li> open left <ol> open also, and not closing OL is an issue. I just think the habit tends to cause some unintentional collateral damage in forgetting in which cases things are optional. Similar thinking behind my <td> stance. The people who I've seen leave them unclosed tend to not to close other tags that are important/required, or forget they need <tr> in addition to <td>. The other reason I close them all is it's also easier to identify where something went wrong when looking at linty pages using syntax highlighting turned on; pages that did close the optional closer tags don't have trailing correct tags displaying in red. Zinnober9 (talk) 00:28, 9 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Jonesey, I'm sure you mean well with your edits, but I really find remarks like "Fix Linter obsolete tag errors and restore noinclude tags. Where are people finding this invalid syntax? It has been removed from all articles and templates." distinctly off-hand, indeed offensive, made none the better for the knowledge that you sprinkle these remarks semi-automatically to all and sundry. There's really no need for semi-automated rudeness on Wikipedia. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:17, 11 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

I wrote that because I am legitimately curious. How did it occur to you to use obsolete <tt>...</tt> tags in that page? There should not be any valid examples of that long-obsolete syntax anywhere on Wikipedia. If that tag is documented somewhere, I want to fix that. Hence my question. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:20, 11 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

small refs. That's the really basic search for them, maybe a more sophisticated search could find similar instances (i.e. not right next to each other, or using {{small}} instead). Izno (talk) 19:47, 13 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. If I stumble across them, I'll fix them, but I already have dozens of browser tabs open with search results that need fix-it edits. There are so many things to fix! Every once in a while, I look at ref tags and sup tags and think to myself "Self, those tags are rendered at 80% of the default font size, which is contrary to MOS:SMALLFONT." And then I think to myself "Self, just walk away. Walk. Away." Some hornets' nests are best left unpoked. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:53, 13 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

I've successfully done this particular version before without annoyance. My memory was just that you like doing Small fixes. :P I haven't tried the same with in-wikitext sup/sub tags, though I fear even to look. Izno (talk) 19:59, 13 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

I have created anchors to link to the relevent sub sections for Flavour and Colour where there is detailed information is not working, please could you assist.ChefBear01 (talk) 21:32, 14 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Fixed – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:33, 14 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for fixing it and for your help with the article in general.ChefBear01 (talk) 21:35, 14 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Do not make changes to my profile page without FIRST contacting me about what you propose and why. If something is "invalid" ... link to where it states in Wikipedia that it is invalid. Do not take liberties with my profile page. WP:NOBAN. Pyxis Solitary (yak yak). Ol' homo. 22:27, 14 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Pyxis Solitary (talk page stalker) See Wikipedia:Extended image syntax#Detailed syntax. You can't specify both frame and size; if you use the former the latter is ignored and flagged as a Linter error. Visually, Jonesey95's edit made no difference on your user page. Mackensen (talk) 23:02, 14 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Pyxis Solitary, please assume good faith; no liberties were taken. Please see WP:UOWN, which explains that all pages belong to the wider community, and the edit summary that I carefully left for you. In it, I linked to the page where you could find more information; here's a direct link. Let me know if you have any questions, or if that explanation does not help you understand why I removed this error condition from a page in User space.

Reverting my helpful edit has added nine syntax errors to Wikipedia, including one invalid image option error; aside from three transient page errors in Portal space, your User page is now the only page in the entire English Wikipedia with an invalid image option. I encourage you to self-revert.

As for contacting you first, I and others have made hundreds of thousands of these edits. If we contacted the editor who created each syntax error before fixing it, the editors would receive twice as many notifications, people with the pages on their watchlists would see twice as many edits, and I guarantee you that I would have dozens of "why are you notifying me before making a trivial fix?" messages on my talk page. Explaining the edit in the edit summary is much better for everyone. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:15, 15 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Your summary says: "Fix Linter errors. Fix invalid image options. I hope you don't mind this minor cleanup edit in your user space." However, the Lint errors page does not provide an explanation for "invalid image options"; in fact, the word "image" does not appear in it. Regardless of WP:UOWN, WP:NOBAN states: "one should avoid substantially editing another's user and user talk pages, except when it is likely edits are expected and/or will be helpful. If unsure, ask." A-s-k. It's that simple. Pyxis Solitary (yak yak). Ol' homo. 01:35, 15 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Well, if we're going to rules lawyer this the part of WP:NOBAN you quoted includes "substantially" in the text, and also except when it is likely edits are expected and/or will be helpful (emphasis added). Jonesy95 probably believed that correcting a linter error, where doing so wouldn't change the appearance of your user page, was both insubstantial and helpful. You disagree, but he could hardly have known that ahead of time.

Anyway, I suppose this discussion counts as him asking, and I think it would be best if you reinstate his edit, or make it yourself. Leaving your userpage as-is means it stays in the linter error report, and some other well-meaning editor will come along later looking to fix it, and the cycle begins again. Mackensen (talk) 02:07, 15 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

(talk page stalker) I've tried the knock first technique, and I mostly got no responses. When I did get responses, I got mainly "Why are you bothering me? Just do it and get out" or had people who had very little idea of what I'm talking about and tended to object until there was an example shown. Jonesey95 was quite respectful in their conduct: they stated the specific error they came to your page to fix, and fixed the other known errors on your page in an appropriate and knowledgeable way while they were already there, and closed with well wishes. Clean, respectful, and informative. Can't get better than that. Zinnober9 (talk) 00:38, 15 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello. I'm contacting you because you've helped me with something else in the past when I had another account.

I've recently wasted many days of my life creating articles about video games just to see people attempt to get them deleted.

Guardian Force (video game) already has references that include:

• A full old magazine review about it
• A review from Hardcore Gaming 101, maybe the most respected English-language retro gaming site
• A review of the compilation by Nintendo Life, a current major gaming site

And since it's in a new compilation, any sensible human being is able to tell right away if they just Google its name, they are gonna find even more mentions of it in recent news articles and reviews.

Still, someone who's on Wikipedia just to destroy our hard work added a deletion template to it anyway.

Please watch this article and make sure they won't delete it. I won't waste my time creating any other articles due to these editors. I suspect they don't even click on the references I spent days searching for on Archive.org and other sites. They just want to delete all new articles while ignoring all the hundreds or thousands of video game articles with no proper references at all.

If you have the time, please watch all the other articles I've created too. Thank you. -- Beqwk (talk) 01:43, 16 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

It can be frustrating to add to Wikipedia, only to see your additions tagged as somehow wanting. I do not see any deletion templates or links to deletion discussions on Guardian Force (video game) or in the page's history; perhaps the person who added the notability template was a "sensible human being" who did a web search and found mentions of the game that you could have added before publishing the first version of this article. I encourage you to click on the links in the notability template at the top of the article, and in the edit summary (click on "View history") used when that template was added. They might help you understand what the article needs.

In the future, I recommend that you create new articles in the Draft namespace in order to receive more guidance than pushback. See Help:Your first article for instructions. You may also gain some insight by reading WP:OTHERSTUFF; arguing that "other articles are worse" holds no water around here. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:25, 16 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi again, Jonesy95! Will you take a look at this mass message to make sure I'm not making any errors? It's in a sandbox, here. I am going to send it as soon as you give me the OK. Thanks! JSFarman (talk) 06:48, 16 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Done. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:25, 16 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

I just sent it. Thank you! JSFarman (talk) 14:58, 16 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

what you might make of the mess at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Anthropology/Oral_tradition_taskforce - there have been attempts to get it up and running but inadequate tweaking so far...

cheers JarrahTree 14:56, 17 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

I fixed a bunch of formatting errors. Good luck! – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:38, 17 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for that JarrahTree 01:03, 18 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Is it accepted practice to put wikiproject templates in wikiproject pages / subpages as opposed to template space? I had no objection to your move but someone has reverted you, and broken the documentation in the process. It would be nice to read any guidelines on wikiproject templates etc. Thanks Polyamorph (talk) 17:52, 17 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Transcluded pages that are used only by one project typically live in project space. The "template" does not take any parameters, so it's really just a shared header for the WikiProject. There is no point in having it in template space. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:55, 18 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Yes, thanks for explaining. I'll move it back. Polyamorph (talk) 06:22, 18 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

This is really poor form on a module with 11 million transclusions. Make your edits to the sandbox please, test them properly, and then we can deploy with a more substantive edit. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:13, 20 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

I contemplated teasing apart the nest of transclusions, but with such a small change, I was pretty confident that it would be OK and that I could revert any problems easily. Did I break anything? – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:54, 20 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Well for a start it took you three edits to make one minor change. Secondly, if you do not make the same change to the sandbox then it will likely end up getting reverted when the next sync happens! Lastly, Gonnym has suggested that styles should be put into the stylesheet rather than hard-coding, so perhaps look into that? Not sure what you mean by nest of transclusions — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:24, 20 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi Jonesey. Regarding this revert, trust me, you're preaching to the choir. I agree templates need documentation. It's a constant challenge for me when trying categorize some of these templates when there is no description or even a hint of what their purpose is for. The only reason I removed the no doc tag in this case is because I noticed the author removing all the code at the bottom and I thought maybe it was the no doc tag they were objecting to, perhaps rationalizing that the purpose of a standings template is obvious. It was a 'choose your battle' move on my part. Sacrificing the doc tag for keeping the category so I didn't have watchlist the page and get into a conflict over something that was low priority in my view.

I would like to add documentation myself, and I have on a few occasions, but sometimes it's a mystery to me, like in this case. I don't remember ever seeing a sports table standings template that has documentation. Couldn't find an example just now, nor when I searched for one the other day. Could you link to an example? Ideally, in this particular case, what would it look like if it had it? I'm guessing the {{2024-25 Thai League 2 table}} usage syntax, maybe a See also section if applicable, the category, and anything else? --DB1729^talk 02:02, 29 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Templates require documentation. It's not my job to provide it, but if a template's creator (not you) disruptively removes valid tags that point out the lack of documentation instead of adding the documentation, I'm going to re-add those tags in the hope that the creator will document the template's proper usage and scope. I think that particular template is of dubious value. First, the template contains article content, which is contrary to our guidelines. Second, Wikipedia is not a live-updated sports database; a final standings table can be added to relevant articles after the season is over, using section transclusion. That said, I don't want to get into a whole TFD kerfuffle over something that some editors see as being appropriate, so I just tag it and move on. Thanks for adding a category; they are not my forte, and you do a great job with them. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:19, 29 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

So yeah. Polygnotus (talk) 14:54, 30 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

I was thinking that this might be clearer and simpler text:

Note: Per consensus and convention most route diagrams are single-use templates. Please see WP:NENAT and this discussion for more information.

Useddenim (talk) 20:26, 30 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the proposal, but IMO it is not better. Using "WP:NENAT" in what is supposed to be readable prose strikes me as less clear, not more. And I'd rather not link to the unsupported Rail routemap templates for example don't have to be deleted and result in substitution since they show the route map for certain railway lines. Substitution will be counterproductive as in order to update the route or fix an error would be harder on article space than on template space. It strikes me as a tautology and poorly justified. And the page is an essay, which many editors will look askance at. A consensus discussion is stronger. Anyway, proposed changes to that template page's content should be discussed on its talk page, not here. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:45, 30 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Then what about a shorter Note: Per consensus and convention most route diagrams are single-use templates. Please see this discussion for more information.? Useddenim (talk) 23:24, 30 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Again, I think that is less clear than the note that is there, and it uses different language from the rest of the template. I have incorporated a couple of ideas from your proposal to make the note more concise, though. Any further discussion should happen at Template talk:Railway-routemap. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:21, 31 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

I suspect I know the answer, but do you know of a better way to address the Wikilink errors from this week's Wikidata Newsletter than the following? It's using a nonexistant (on en) template "LangSwitch" as the link title, intended to display the link text in either French or English depending on user's settings. The quick and dirty way to fix it would be to remove the template phrase, keep the English title and remove the French, but I wondered if there's a template similar and does the intended cleanly. Zinnober9 (talk) 16:19, 2 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

I removed the French text, because this is the English Wikipedia. I also asked the sender to fix the messages. They should have received a warning message from the mass message tool, per T358818. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:22, 2 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

We are in agreement then. It's the second Wikidata newsletter in the past month to have a Wikilink error. #641 from two weeks ago had something simpler, so I fixed those real quick thinking it was a one off, but don't really want to do it again. Thanks for notifying them. Zinnober9 (talk) 18:11, 2 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

MediaWiki message delivery 01:03, 3 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

How are there still templates like Template:List of Egyptian hieroglyphs/testcases? Gonnym (talk) 12:28, 5 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

There will always be more. Hmm, we should be able to have a report that catches those: template subpages without a parent page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:30, 5 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

I found Template:Periodic table (discovery periods)/sandbox with a query. There are 15,000 parentless template pages. I will dig more. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:42, 5 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

I used https://quarry.wmcloud.org/query/86076 and some find+replace removals to create this table of 1,200 suspects. I am guessing based on scrolling through that fewer than 100 will be actionable. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:16, 5 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Ah, I wasn't talking about the parentless, I was referring to our friend, that still has templates being deleted. Gonnym (talk) 15:28, 5 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

I know, but that led me down a rabbit hole. The one I found above with a query was created by our friend. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:30, 5 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Ha! Amazing! I've looked at the list, I think a sizeable chunk can be fixed by moving the templates either per MOS:SLASH (and use "and" instead) or by matching the article is is used on (like some of the railway lines). I'll take a stab at more this week and see how many can be cleared. Gonnym (talk) 16:08, 5 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

I thought about that for some of them, but watch out for names that are reported with slashes in reliable sources or in their article names or leads. I'm looking at Template:Country data Campbell Island / Motu Ihupuku (click to the article) and Template:P.A.Th.E./P.. Be careful out there. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:41, 5 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

I go by what the community deemed the main title. In this case, it is Campbell Island, New Zealand and not Campbell Island / Motu Ihupuku. Templates and categories are always secondary and should follow. Gonnym (talk) 17:37, 5 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

 Template:Metal–organic frameworks/doc has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 12:30, 5 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

I noticed a bunch of new "transclusions of non-existing templates" pop-up pointing to User:Jonesey95/AutoEd/pmc.js. Would it be possible for you to add

at the top of that page, and

at the bottom of the page? This will prevent the backend software from thinking that the page is transcluding templates that don't exist here like Template:Tree chart\/start)\. Since the <nowiki>...</nowiki> is inside of javascript comments, it won't impact the functionality of the script. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 15:32, 7 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Done. That sure is a goofy layer cake of bugs that surfaced this issue. The page hasn't been edited since 28 July, and no report should see calls to templates on a .js page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:45, 7 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Any thoughts on the edit notices at Category:Expired editnotices? Gonnym (talk) 08:46, 9 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

I don't know anything about edit notices, let alone enough to know why this category exists. It does not appear to be explained on the category page or on the linked page (I searched for the string "expir" on the linked page). Maybe Redrose64, who created the category and is usually knowledgeable and helpful, knows what the category is for. – Jonesey95 (talk) 11:40, 9 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Ooof, I did, didn't I. A few days earlier, I had created a heap of editnotices in connection with the 2014 FIFA World Cup, which was ongoing. The request for these was on a talk page which has itself been deleted (if you're an admin, see Special:Undelete/Template talk:Editnotices/Page/2014 FIFA World Cup). Here is a portion of the original request:

... this [editnotice] template has been requested at Talk:2014 FIFA World Cup (link to section) and the visual of the template (and its inclusion) has been discussed and approved at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football (link to section).

There is also consensus at Talk:2014 FIFA World Cup (link to section) to include on the subarticles ...

The request was raised by Qed237 (talk · contribs) at 12:26, 11 June 2014 (UTC).Reply

All of these editnotices have since been deleted; but as an example, 2014 FIFA World Cup Group A had an editnotice that consisted of the code {{Livescores editnotice‎|expiry=22:00, 23 June 2014}}. You can check the docs for the |expiry= parameter at Template:Editnotice.

Three or so months later, discussions came up (now archived at Wikipedia talk:Editnotice/Archive 6#Category:Expired editnotice and Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 114#Category:Expired editnotice), soon after which the category Category:Expired editnotice was moved to its present title.

(TL,DR) Anyway, edit notices are normally built around {{editnotice}}, which has a parameter |expiry=. If this is set to a valid date, and that date is in the past, the edit notice is put in Category:Expired editnotices. It's mainly for things like ongoing events like sports competitions, where we may wish to discourage real-time updates until the event concludes. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:53, 9 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Redrose64 and when they appear in that category, are they used again or can I send them to TfD? Gonnym (talk) 18:03, 9 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

MediaWiki message delivery 18:49, 9 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Message sent by Baffle gab1978 (talk) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:53, 11 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for fixing Module:Infobox road/route. I was doing <p> errors and was able to track the last remaining group down to that module as well, but couldn't fix it myself due to not having template editor rights. So I left a message on the template talk page and was planning to get back to it eventually -- and I just saw you've relieved me of that self-imposed responsibility. :) Gamapamani (talk) 10:03, 13 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

You're welcome. I don't remember seeing your posting, but maybe I did. It is possible that someone else made a similar post elsewhere that caused me to fix that subpage. – Jonesey95 (talk) 12:00, 13 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

I saw you reverted my change to the American podcasters category for John Roderick (musician) and just wanted to say-- my bad. I've been doing a large-scale diffusion of that category and didn't realized I had already tried to diffuse Roderick. I was working off of a quote from Ken Jennings describing the podcast as advice to his past self, but after reviewing the podcast description, I agree with your reversion. Just wanted to provide the update.

Vegantics (talk) 15:00, 19 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. I was wondering how you got "advice podcaster" for this person, since the word "advice" does not appear in the article. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:36, 19 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hey Jonesey, thanks for reaching out to me.
I am trying to do a bit of work in the tennis sphere and I have a couple of different things that I would like to try. The first template is really a modification of an existing template. In this template: Template:DavisCupbox, I was wondering if you knew a way to make this collapsible so that only the heading would be displayed - that is the teams, scores, venue, date and surface were all showing and then the information of the matches were hidden. Secondary to that if there was a function to then display a result (ie. win or loss) with potentially a different background colour (e.g. colour appropriate green or red) would also be possible. This is all so that I can create teams results pages in a way that looks appealing. I have tried lots of different formats (e.g. on my sandbox User:Eccy89/sandbox2#Australia Davis Cup results again but they don't quite look as good as this original template. There were a few attempts that I was also not sure would pass MOS:ACCESSIBILITY with sizing issues as well. This is mainly as I want to overhaul the page I created List of Australia Davis Cup team results so that it can display the information of the individual matches. With a good base/created templates then I can go onto create similar pages for other nations. I hope this makes sense. There is a second template that I would be interested in trying to create but I think trying to figure this one out first would be nice.
Thanks again for reaching out. Much appreciated. Eccy89 (talk) 10:31, 20 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

I made some adjustments to the template and created {{DavisCupbox/testcases}}. If you fill in the testcases page with parameters and values, and more than one type of outcome for a set of matches, I can take a look at your other requests. FWIW, we often show the winner's score in bold, but I can't recall seeing the use of background colors for the same thing. It is discouraged by MOS, I believe. – Jonesey95 (talk) 12:07, 20 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

In terms of colours, I guess I mean like something akin to 2016–17 Sydney FC season#Matches and can be found in hundreds of football team seasons pages, though I am not sure if there was an issue with MOS raised well after all these were created.

The other template I was looking into doing was one for the current team e.g. Australia Davis Cup team#Current squad. Something with a header template e.g. titled something like "template:DCT team header" with the column headers from that article. Then have a second template where you input values for:

• DCT player

|name=

|dob=

|singlesrank=

|doublesrank=

|debut=

|ties=

|singlesH2H=

|doublesH2H=

|overallH2H=

|DCprofile= (In the example I have given you the reference is ATP profile, however I found a Davis Cup profile which I think is better, e.g. https://www.daviscup.com/en/players/player.aspx?id=800158756 )

with the ability to have up to five player inputs. Eccy89 (talk) 13:55, 20 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thanks so much for the Davis Cup template edit. That's exactly what I was thinking of.

It seems like with the addition of the [show/hide] it has put team1's flag of centre. Would that render properly and is just off in this test case or does it need more tinkering? Eccy89 (talk) 13:58, 20 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Oooooo, also just looking at 2003 Davis Cup#Final - would there be a way to create a default show/hide option - i think in pages like this it would be nice to have the Final default=show, but in the national team result pages have it default hide as many many matches would be too cumbersome to have shown (hence the asking for help creating the show/hide originally). :-) Eccy89 (talk) 14:08, 20 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

sorry to be asking so much of you but I've just realised since the change in format (2019), there was a new template created for the ties: Template:Davis Cup Finals box (as it's only three matches instead of five) - would it be possible to add the show/hide feature on this one too? Eccy89 (talk) 14:13, 20 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

One template at a time, please. If you want help, please fill in the templates at {{DavisCupbox/testcases}} with appropriate parameters so that we can see what the template looks like when it is filled in. I have added green and red colors for |result=W and |result=L, following the footballbox model. I also added a |collapsed= parameter that will collapse the template when it has any value; that behavior can be adjusted. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:20, 20 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hey Jonesey, I am sorry about second request - it seemed like your changes went live as they had been updated on all pages as far as I could tell. I didn't realised we were still testing it out. I am afraid to say I don't really know how templates work at all so when you say "fill in the templates" I don't quite understand what you mean. I have gone in to results and collapsed sections and filled it in for a match between Denmark and Italy (it this what you meant?) Regarding the collapsed parameter, that seems to be working as intended and the colours too – though the standard tennis colours that appear to be used for W/L are   Win (#98fb98) and   Loss (#ffa07a). I'm over in Australia so I must really be getting to sleep. Again thanks for all your help, it has already been invaluable. — Eccy89 (talk) 15:44, 20 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

When you first posted here, I thought that the template was something you were creating and that wasn't being used, because it had no sandbox or testcases page. I sloppily made changes to a live template being used in 500 articles. That was my mistake. I have removed the slightly broken collapsing code from the live template for now; it is still in {{DavisCupbox/sandbox}}. I don't know why the "[hide]" link is showing next to the left-hand flag instead of at the far right side of the template, but I'll experiment with it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:42, 20 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

ahhhh, OK. I see where the confusion has come from. Yep, no worries. I think reverting it back was a good idea :-) — Eccy89 (talk) 22:33, 20 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Jonesey95: Mate!!! Thanks for all your help and guidance through this process. It has allowed me to try create a new template myself. I had realised that for results we are going to need a "Round info" indicator which isn't present in the original (live) template. I also thought that we could condense it down to two lines instead of three by moving the score into the adjacent column. I have come up with this: User:Eccy89/Template:DavisCupbox result, the testcase is here: User:Eccy89/Template:DavisCupbox result/testcases -- this template is close to how I think it should look. If you have any time left to devote to this project, we just need to make a collapsible option and if you can help figure out a way to create more space between the score and information in the centre it will perfect. (And then I guess some advice around making this live so other users can follow how to use the template - something to do with the /doc I guess. I think I could figure it out by looking at the other template) — Eccy89 (talk) 10:10, 21 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Nothing wrong with your edit to Ivan Prokhanov, but I believe I left it in working condition, so I don't understand your comment "the bot will just come back if you leave it broken", as I don't believe I left it broken. —Anomalocaris (talk) 20:45, 20 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Nothing technically wrong with your edit either. "Broken" was probably an overstatement, or the bot's skewed point of view. I don't know what is going on, really. I couldn't figure out why IABot turned

[https://webcitation.org/70nWxCkCf?url=http://pharisai.at.ua/smuta/smuta5.htm Archive]:

into

[https://w {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190422030405/https://baptist.org.ru/news/main/view/article/1502498 |date=22 April 2019 }}ebcitation.org/70nWxCkCf?url=http://pharisai.at.ua/smuta/smuta5.htm Archive]:

but I have found that if I leave linked URLs lying around without corresponding archives, the bot will come by and mess them up again. I have reported link-in-link bugs to the bot's owner, but they are relatively rare and I don't think the owner wants to spend time on this edge case. I can't really blame them. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:26, 20 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

The reason I've been creating unused language templates like {{lang-oav}} lately is because it's nice to have certain language templates around, even if they end up being unused, and because I didn't think there was anything wrong with creating them. PK2 (talk; contributions) 10:54, 21 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hey there! Thanks for tacking on TD Header + template for Template:Infobox joke. I was chipping away at adding info to the docs and just used the stock "Edit Template Data" option to create the skeleton.

Your edit note about not being sure why copy/pasting wasn't used on an example caught my eye. I was looking around at WP:TDATA and WP:DOC for an example and didn't see any immediately suggested additions like this or something like Template:Format_TemplateData.

What sort of base example do you typically use as the starting point for carving out initial docs?

Thanks again for adding that in!

Cheers,

Pedantical (talk) 15:51, 21 September 2024 (UTC) Pedantical (talk) 15:51, 21 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

I feel like somewhere I saw a standard setup for that section, including a "TemplateData" section header and the {{templatedata header}} template that links to the monthly report. Maybe I just copied and pasted from other template /doc pages, though. I have added them to the example at Wikipedia:TemplateData. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:33, 21 September 2024 (UTC)Reply