User talk:Magioladitis

„,Woran arbeiten Sie?‘, wurde Herr K. gefragt. Herr K. antwortete: ,Ich habe viel Mühe, ich bereite meinen nächsten Irrtum vor.“

If you are interested in attending Wikimedia webinars please contact me via Wikipedia email

Corfupedia school project

Looking for an AWB source file

Hi. I'm looking for the source code that handles the MoveMaintenanceTags function, to help me fix my bot to comply with MOS:ORDER. It was requested that I do this on my bot's talk page: User talk:RMCD bot#The subject notice template should be placed underneath disambiguation hatnotes. While my bot is written in PHP, I'd like to match the AWB algorithm for this as best as I can (how to recognize all the various hatnotes and not miss any). So hoping I can translate the needed code to PHP. A lot of files to search through here. Can you point me to the right one? Thanks, wbm1058 (talk) 01:10, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @Wbm1058: It is in MetaDataSorter.cs (Dablinks above maintance tags per [[WP:LAYOUT]]). The list of templates is in WikiRegexes.cs (public static readonly Regex Dablinks). Tools.cs has many supporting items. — JJMC89 (T·C) 23:55, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, wow it's more complicated than I expected. NestedTemplateRegex supports nested templates and comments at end of template name. Would be nice if there was a library function I could just pass in the entire page contents and get back the properly sorted page. User:RMCD bot/botclasses.php doesn't have anything that fancy. A complete "general fixes" function even. Then my bot could apply all general fixes at the same time it posted its requested-page-move notice. Including putting the hatnotes above the bot's notice. wbm1058 (talk) 13:57, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Even better than a library function would be an API to accomplish the "general fixes" task. Then a programmer could just write an interface to the API in whatever language they were using. An API interface to AWB general fixes would be programming language-independent. – wbm1058 (talk) 14:13, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Stop your disruption

Changing a link to the English-language official website back to a link to the Swedish-language homepage, on the English wikipedia, is disruption.[1] Making enwiki worse to prove a point really is a bad idea. Please don't revert this again, and in general only make edits that make enwiki actually better for our readers. Fram (talk) 12:48, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

@Fram: [2] is the series of edits that should have been made rather than to edit war over Magio's change. That said, your discussion lead me to identify an error in Module:Official website which I'll be pinging you in shortly on Template talk:Official website. --Izno (talk) 13:17, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

No. We should never have to edit Wikidata to correct an issue on enwiki, and to suggest otherwise is insulting. Furthermore, this wuold still leave the "In Swedish" description on enwiki. That you want to improve Wikidata and templates fetching data from there is no problem of course, but to claim that changing Wikidata would have been the right course of action here is totally wrong. This only makes life a lot harder for the casual editor (and even most experienced editors), for no gain at all. What Magioladitis first did was changing the page for no benefit. I then actually improved it, with Magioladitis making it worse again. Please then don't lecture me about what I should have done when the problem is with someone else's edits. Fram (talk) 13:27, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

@Fram: The change I made actually fixes the problem (and perhaps educates you and Magioladitis), barring a change to the official website module which I've already noted as a separate issue. You simply take him to task. Good luck with that attitude I guess, because while he's been a problematic editor in some ways, this is at-best for you, not obviously one of those ways. --Izno (talk) 13:32, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

How did the change I made not fix the problem (and did so with one edit, easily readable by every enwiki editor)? Your edit changed nothing at Medevi at all, and would at best (when the template eventually gets changed) have resulted in a link to the English page, with a label indicating "In Swedish". Thanks, but I prefer my fix to yours any time. No idea if you have educated Magioladitis, you do have educated me that avoiding the "official website" template is the best solution. That you don't consider someone blindly reverting a page to a worse version as obviously "problematic" is your choice. Fram (talk) 13:40, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

@Izno:, Wikipedia editors are not bound to fix crap data in Wikidata. If Wikidatans want to use templates that draw from Wikidata on Wikipedia, then they need to ensure Wikidata is correct before using those templates. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 14:19, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

@Headbomb: The Us Versus Them is very tiring; besides which, it's not even a valid comment in this case, since I would not characterize Magioladitis as a Wikidata editor first and an English Wikipedia editor second. But perhaps you have a different impression. --Izno (talk) 14:35, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Izno I consider myself as global wikignome. I have more than 1,000 contributions in Wikidata; the most receent of them are of the addition of official website. Before I was fixing ISBNs in Wikidata till a person provided me with a list and a bot did the fixes. -- Magioladitis (talk) 14:54, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

1k contributions in Wikidata? You newb. I have 30k! :) --Izno (talk) 15:02, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Izno You are a machine!!! :) -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:11, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Then stop giving 'us' a reason to consider you 'them', and work within Wikipedian standards rather than Wikidatan standards. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 17:14, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

@Headbomb: I am "us"--so your "do it our way" is an already-fulfilled request. The way I told Magio and Fram to do it actually enables "Wikipedian" standards. --Izno (talk) 17:19, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Your multiple changes which had no effect here? Your changes which, when they eventually would have an effect, then would have had an English site with an "in Swedish" label? Your changes which, even if you would then have removed the label, only had the same end result as my simple change here? Yes, you told us how to do it, but I see no reason to ever use that method. Your approach in this case is a clear "Wikidata first" approach with no benefits for enwiki or its editors, only making things a lot more complicated. Fram (talk) 17:39, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

I'll save you the burden of saying it: Don't reply to me again unless obviously invited. --Izno (talk) 17:46, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Fuck off, Izno. You are inserting yourself in a discussion I started on Magioladitis' talk page. You are then giving wrong advice and pretending that you fixed an issue when you did nothing of the sort. I'll reply to you here and in every discussion you come along uninvited and disruptively as long as I want to, and as often as I want to. Keep your fake righteousness and lack of actual responses to yourself and crawl back to your own corner instead of pushing your pro-Wikidata agenda here and supporting disruptive edits because they fit your distorted view of what enwiki should become. If you don't like the responses you get, then stop spouting nonsense. Fram (talk) 19:59, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

WP:LASTWORD much? --Izno (talk) 20:53, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

In fact, I like the idea that Wikidata will autodetect the Wikipdia and provide customised information. Wikidata is Wikipedia's future. -- Magioladitis (talk) 14:55, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

This is how Wikidata could be useful to Wikipedia: as another tool in our vandalism detection and reverting arsenal. Wikidata maintains a redundant copy of the official website URL. Wikipedia should never pull data from Wikidata, there should only be one-way data extraction in the other direction. But templates like {{official website}} should check the Wikidata entry, compare it to the URL specified as parameter {{{1}}}, and throw a "red flag" when the URLs are different. Then it will be up to a human editor to determine which is correct and then fix the value in either Wikipedia or Wikidata. Most vandals won't have the BEANS to know that they must vandalize simultaneously in two places to get their vandalism to stick. This redundancy is good, in wikis that "anyone can edit". wbm1058 (talk) 18:03, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

• Mags, I noticed this example at Haakon Graf at the time you did it, but didn't say anything because it was when the ArbCom case was ending. The website link worked, then you changed it to {{Official website}} and that swapped the live link for a dead one.

There are always lots of objections to using that template whenever the issue arises. If you want to keep adding it, would it not make sense to hold an RfC? SarahSV ^(talk) 20:15, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Yep, an RfC is the way to go here. Fram (talk) 04:33, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

File:Seleccionada3.JPG

I would like to know several things

1. How you found this file.
2. Why did you start editing image files today. You've made no image edits for the past 2 months, it seems very strange to make a single file edit (you only de-PRODed one file today and it looks like this is the first time you've ever done so).
3. What is your precise rationale for deciding to de-PROD the file. What is wrong with allowing the file to remain tagged for deletion for one week, and why do you think FfD would be a better venue (taking into account the low traffic FfD also receives).
4. Why you think the file would be suitable to Commons.
5. Why you think an editor who hasn't edited for 12 years would be able to move the file to Commons.
6. Why you didn't move the file yourself, if you believe it should be moved to Commons.

Now, speaking as a Commons administrator in addition to being an administrator here, it's a poor quality photograph and I think PRODing was absolutely the correct course of action; whilst we appreciate all photographs and the efforts of all photographers, there comes a time where the old low resolution photographs can be removed when we have sufficient high resolution files to take their place. I can say with a high degree of certainty had the file been moved to Commons, a deletion request would occur and deletion would be the outcome.

-- Nick (talk) 22:13, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Nick So you basically say that if the file goes to FfD will be deleted. Please send it there and make your rationale there. I am not sure why you write here the arguments. The file has been around for 12 years. Have you checked if there are any incoming external links? I am not expert in Commons and never been admin there so I am not sure whether there are specific quality rules this file does not cover or if the photo theme is already covered by better quality photos. I used to uplod photos from events by making very little job in selecting the best of them. "Why you didn't move the file yourself, if you believe it should be moved to Commons." Eh? Can yοu please do it then? I am not familiar with Commons as you are. I would like to see the editor that uploaded the photo to become active again. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:03, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Nick I replied #3 and on. I don't like question #2. I have very few edits these two months but in general I have edits in all namespaces. I have been working with TfDs, Mfds and RfDs for a long time with thousand of edits. On #1: Why? How did yo come to this discussion anyway? Do you have my talk page in your watchlist and what for? -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:22, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

I do have your talk page on my watchlist from previously dealing with an ANI thread concerning your automated editing, and from further back, when we both submitted evidence concerning OccultZone for his Arbitration case. The reason I am here, however, is Rob expressed a concern that you could perhaps be stalking his edits and wanted additional opinions on the situation. That's why I asked a series of questions, to ascertain if it was an unhappy and unfortunate coincidence or something more deliberate. It would be helpful if you answered those remaining questions, because at the moment, it does look very much like you've gone through Rob's edits and decided to be antagonistic towards him with an unhelpful edit. If you are stalking him, at this stage, all I would ask is that you stop and avoid Rob except in situations where it's genuinely unavoidable. It would be unfortunate and I think given your overlapping interests, really unhelpful, to have to pursue a more rigid, formal interaction ban. Nick (talk) 07:38, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Nick I 've been working with items for deletion long before bots. You can check my record to Rfds (before I even become admin), TfDs and Mfds. I think it's normal for a person that wants to re-apply for admin to resume working in that area. Due to uploader's inactivity a file that I think it's not 100% clear that needs to be deleted, was up to deletion. I expressed (weak) concerns for the prod. I think it's totally OK. The are more files up to deletion with a similar rationale but exactly for not giving the impression I am after Rob I did not pursuit further in addition to the fact that at least one more photo I checked seemed to me of no importance. Check also that all my latest admin actions have to do with pages tagged for deletion.

I have been working with bots, AWB, BAG, sysop long before Rob appeared as a registered account an still I did not interpret his actions as stalking. I started to be really afraid of him when he started contacting my contacts onwiki. When I noticed that the file in question was prodded by him I hesitated a bit to act but I can't live in fear because a person keeps stalking my actions and may want to disappoint me enough that I quit editing.

By the way, I tried to provide evidence that I working with items for deletion for a long time but due to the huge number of my edits Mediawiki yields a database error.

I assure you that have no intention to stalk this person. I 've been to Wikipedia more than 11 years with a registered account, almost 9 of them as admin. My email is enabled for furter communication. -- Magioladitis (talk) 10:03, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Note to self: Trying to check my edits, I get a bug "A database query error has occurred. This may indicate a bug in the software.[Wd1VbwpAIC0AALVBRcQAAABL] 2017-10-10 23:20:12: Fatal exception of type "Wikimedia\Rdbms\DBQueryTimeoutError"" -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:24, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Useful edit summaries

Hello Magio, thank you for responding to other editors feedback about using the URL in {{official website}}. It is really helpful to other editors when the edit summary is used. These edit pairs were self-revision—and the standard edit summary would normally have shown this:

• Special:Diff/805124630 + Special:Diff/805124641
• Special:Diff/805128253 + Special:Diff/805128273
• Special:Diff/805130326 + Special:Diff/805130341 (*addition of missing space)

Hope it helps, —Sladen (talk) 08:42, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Sladen Yes, I did some edits to test how it shows to my mobile and then I did not like them. Is any problem with that? -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:46, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Perhaps a good edit summary would be "edits to test how it shows to my mobile" and "self-revert: did not like them". This would keep the explanation with the edit in the correct place. —Sladen (talk) 09:01, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Sladen I try to use the edit ummary as possible. When the edit is so minor I am not sure what exactly to write. Maybe something like "fix indent"? An what happens if I do mixed edits which I usuall do. Edit summaries were always my kryptonite. Thanks for the advice! -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:03, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Educator's meeting tonight

For the Greek educators that would like to meet me today, please use the contact info found at the Education website. We will discussing about the Wikipedia Onine school and Digital humanities today at the Conference. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:05, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Workshop on gender gap

Dear female editors! The scheduled workshop in Rethymno on gender gap is tomorrow. Find details on the gender gap page. The orientation slides are already posted on my user page! Looking forward to meet you tomorrow in person! Bring your own laptop :) -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:19, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

WikiFemHack

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

Thanks everyone who joined us. -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:38, 13 October 2017 (UTC)