User talk:JJMC89

This user has opted out of talkbacks

Widowmaker

I have no clue why you decided to move a character from Image Comics to the ambiguation (comic book) when there was an actual comic book by the name Widowmaker by Marvel.★Trekker (talk) 05:58, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

@*Treker: I swapped Widowmaker (comic book) with Widowmaker (comics) and then reverted myself once I realized that I processed a different request than I had intended and this one didn't seem like a good idea. When I processed the request at WP:RM/TR, there were multiple requests from Karmeow for similar moves. (You may want to take a look at his outstanding requests there.) Karmeow moved the article from Widowmaker (Image Comics) to Widowmaker (comic book). If you want the article back at Widowmaker (Image Comics) I can do that. — JJMC89 06:21, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Yeah that would make sense.

Or move it to (character), since it's about a character and the Comic Project recently revised their standards on stuff like this to be like that. If anything the Marvel Comcis article should be at (comic book).★Trekker (talk) 06:25, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

@*Treker: Moved to Widowmaker (character). — JJMC89 06:36, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks man, that makes much more sense.★Trekker (talk) 06:48, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Tomasz Wójcik

Many, many sincere thanks for helping to improve the Tomasz Wójcik website.

I work mainly in German and Polish Wikipedia and have very little experience in the English-language Wikipedia. I want very much to save Tomasz Wójcik website from deletion. I had many difficulties in obtaining the necessary documents from the artist.

I would be infinitely grateful for your help in saving the website. Best greetings from Warsaw, Poland --Szczebrzeszynski (talk) 13:38, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

It is a draft, so it shouldn't be in danger of being deleted. You shouldn't be getting information fro the artist. Information in the article should be from third-party reliable sources. — JJMC89 19:34, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Expert testimony

Sorry. I had meant to apply that to another article, and I searched all day for it and couldn't find it. I am so embarrassed that I copied and pasted it to the wrong article. Thanks for the correction. MaynardClark (talk) 22:52, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

No problem! — JJMC89 22:53, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Infoboxes

• How do we request new infoboxes and improved infoboxes?
• How do we request a better and more searchable index for finding infoboxes appropriate for the Wikipedia articles we are developing?
• My most frequently-started and frequently-developed articles are (a) university faculty, (b) journalists, (c) scientists, (d) thought leaders, including philosophers and other intellectual leaders, and (e) politicians and elected officials. MaynardClark (talk) 03:33, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

@MaynardClark: Chances are there is already an infobox that that will suit your needs. If there isn't, you could ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Infoboxes. For improvements, post on the infobox's talk page. To find infoboxes take a look at WP:IB, Category:Infobox templates, or this index. For your popular subjects (a) possibly {{Infobox academic}}, (b) {{Infobox person}}, (c) {{Infobox scientist}}, (d) possibly {{Infobox philosopher}}, (e) {{Infobox officeholder}}. For people I would look at Category:People and person infobox templates and use {{Infobox person}} when none of the others fit. — JJMC89 04:14, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

@JJMC89: Thank you. I found a long inclusive list of infoboxes and one that claimed to have 'all fields' of the Person infobox. I can 'surgically' insert any fields I want/need as long as they are 'in sequence' or 'in order' so that I can include all the information I want to display in the article's infobox. Clever, eh? Thanks, again! BTW, in the Carter article, the Defense claimed that the judge was a third cousin of the Roy family. MaynardClark (talk) 04:19, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Are the regex for the ISBN/PMID replacements in the BRFA still valid?

Specifically, those listed in Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/Magic_links_bot

• Find: \b(ISBN)((?:[^\S\n]| |&\#0*160;|&\#[Xx]0*[Aa]0;)+)((?:97[89](?:-|(?:[^\S\n]| |&\#0*160;|&\#[Xx]0*[Aa]0;))?)?(?:[0-9](?:-|(?:[^\S\n]| |&\#0*160;|&\#[Xx]0*[Aa]0;))?){9}[0-9Xx])\b
• Replace {{ISBN|\3}}
• Find: \b(PMID)((?:[^\S\n]| |&\#0*160;|&\#[Xx]0*[Aa]0;)+)([0-9]+)\b
• Replace {{PMID|\3}}

? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 01:01, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

@Headbomb: I've modified them to use named groups, but they are otherwise the same (current find and replace). — JJMC89 01:26, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Yemeni Civil War infobox

There has been an edit war going on at Yemeni Civil War (2015–present) over the use of the above newly-created template and the standard template, {{Infobox military conflict}}. It strikes me that the new template, even if not a policy violation, is an inappropriate use of a template. Putting aside how ugly it looks when used in the article, it hard-codes sources, meaning you'd have to change the sources in the template rather than the article every time you wanted to do something that involved the rather extensive infobox. Am I wrong?--Bbb23 (talk) 15:52, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

@Bbb23: You're not wrong. I'm inclined to WP:T3 {{Yemeni Civil War infobox}} as a hardcoded instance of {{infobox military conflict}}. — JJMC89 16:09, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Geobox coor

FYI, the geobox coor series has been deleted at TfD. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:20, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Please stop operating bots at WP

You just reverted my query on your bot talk page, without explanation, and marked it "minor". If you cannot address questions or negative feedback more constructively, please stop operating WP bots. My discussion with the admin who closed the RfC was much more constructive. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 00:58, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

@Hobbes Goodyear: If you paid attention to the page, you'd see that it is a soft redirect to meta:User talk:Magic links bot. This means that any questions or comments belong there, not where you put them. Please pay closer attention when trying to leave comments for someone. Redirect pages are rarely watched closely. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 01:05, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

@Nihonjoe: Are you for real? I went to to the specified bot page and left my comment at the talk page and received a (non-)response a half-hour later. Your silence on what I actually posted makes me think that you agree that JJMC89 should not be operating WP bots. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 01:45, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

@Hobbes Goodyear: Please go back and reread what I wrote. You'll see I clearly told you where you should have posted your comment. The bot talk page clearly had a redirect notice as well as a notice when you went to edit that you should post all comments over at meta:User talk:Magic links bot. It's not a hard concept. I suspect if you post your comment over where you're supposed to post it, you may receive a response. As for whether JJMC89 should be operating a bot, that's a load of bollocks. Please don't attribute opinions to someone when they clearly have not expressed that opinion. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 03:25, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Could you please quote for me this "notice when you went to edit that you should post all comments over at meta:User talk:Magic links bot"? Thanks. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 03:41, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

@Nihonjoe:Sorry, Nihonjoe, perhaps you missed this without a ping. Whenever you have chance. Thanks. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 02:00, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for attending to this Joe. — JJMC89 09:59, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

No problem. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 15:46, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

If you had bothered to post on the correct page, then I would have responded there. — JJMC89 09:59, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

I assume (just my opinion, Nihonjoe, just my opinion), that it would be unproductive at this point to discuss whether this bot's edit summary was sufficiently clear. But if you persist in running bots, then please make future edit summaries clear for a broad audience of editors. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 03:41, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

What is your specific problem with the edit summary, and what is your suggestion for a better edit summary? Give us an example, please. SQL^{Query me!} 03:50, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

@Hobbes Goodyear: - would you be able to articulate what is wrong with the edit summary the bot uses presently, and give us an example of a more helpful summary, please? SQL^{Query me!} 03:58, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

@SQL:@SkyWarrior:What is wrong: The summary was not understandable by me or (would you honestly disagree?) by a random editor. The links provided did not provide much help, absent an investigation. A condensed version of this explanation plus a link to the full explanation would have done the trick. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 02:13, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

@Hobbes Goodyear: OK - please give me an example edit summary that you think is clearer. SQL^{Query me!} 02:50, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

@Hobbes Goodyear: most editors would understand that the edits were being made per the result of an RfC (or two, in the case), even if they don't know what the RfCs were about. It really is that simple; just simply saying that the edits were being made per the result of a discussion is sufficient, just as long as the discussion is linked to. No need to explain in specifics. Most editors don't need an explanation beyond that. SkyWarrior 02:21, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Hobbes Goodyear, I think that the edit summary was sufficiently clear, that the bot was making changes per the result of two RfCs, which were both linked in the edit summary. Edit summaries don't always need to explain everything in great detail, especially when there is something else to link to. SkyWarrior 04:02, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

@Hobbes Goodyear:I agree. Please provide an example of an edit summary that wasn't clear. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 04:41, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

@Nihonjoe:Here's how you do it: Go to the bot's user page and, on the left, click on User Contributions link. This will bring up a list of changes, with links to the articles and the edit summaries to the right of them, in parentheses. I think you will find that they are all the same. Please see this diff for an example of an unclear edit summary. It says (minus links), "(Replace magic links with templates per local RfC and MediaWiki RfC). --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 01:57, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Transwikiing the BSicon replacement script

I'd like to implement the BSicon replacement script on several other wikis (the existing code should be sufficient). Should I run these myself, should you run them, should I join the Tool Labs account for your bot, or…? Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}}
to reply to me 11:59, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

@Jc86035: I'm happy to run it on other wikis. Just let me know which ones and where I can find the bot policy/approvals process. — JJMC89 18:44, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. The list of all BRFA pages on other wikis is on Wikidata AFAIK. I think that should cover most of the wikis that should have the bot.

Start with zh, fr, es, de, hu, it, ja, ko, ru, no, pt and ca. I think any more of them should be the wikis which are linked to from here and here. Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}}
to reply to me 00:51, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

@Jc86035: Since you're more familiar with the templates, please create configs (User:JJMC89 bot/config/BSiconsReplacer) on each of those. I started one on frwiki, which is probably wrong since frwiki has {{LCF ...}} inside some BS templates. I will probably need to add standard image syntax to handle replacement in the {{LCF ...}}. Example config:

{
    "repository": true,
    "redirects": "-links:User:JJMC89 bot/report/BSicons/redirects",
    "blacklist": [
        "-catr:Icons for railway descriptions/Exceptional permanent redirects"
    ],
    "replacement_map": "User:JJMC89 bot/config/BSiconsReplacer/replacementMap",
    "BS_templates": [
        "BS",
        "BS1",
        "BS2",
        "BS3",
        "BS4"
    ],
    "routemap_templates": "Routemap"
}

— JJMC89 04:48, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

We don't need to handle the LCF templates, since they're just images and CommonsDelinker can do those. Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}}
to reply to me 04:58, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Note that the German Wikipedia's Template:BSu and Template:BSue add the prefixes and respectively to the icon name, so this should be handled in the script. (BS1e, BS1u and BS1ue might also need to be accepted as valid template names even if they don't necessarily exist.) Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}}
to reply to me 07:24, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

I am unable to create the jawiki page due to local userspace restrictions (it seems the bot account must be used to create it). The text is below. Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}}
to reply to me 07:44, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Japanese Wikipedia config

{ "repository": true, "summary_prefix": "BSアイコンを置き換える", "redirects": "-links:User:JJMC89 bot/report/BSicons/redirects", "blacklist": [ "-catr:Icons for railway descriptions/Exceptional permanent redirects" ], "replacement_map": "User:JJMC89 bot/config/BSiconsReplacer/replacementMap", "BS_templates": [ "BS", "BS/sandbox", "BS1", "BS-2", "BS-2-2", "BS-2/sandbox", "BS-startCollapsible", "BS2", "BS2/sandbox", "BS2-2", "BS2-2/sandbox", "BS2-startCollapsible", "BS2-startCollapsible-2", "BS3", "BS3-2", "BS3-2/sandbox", "BS3-replace", "BS3-startCollapsible", "BS3-startCollapsible-2", "BS3/sandbox", "BS4", "BS4-2", "BS4-2/sandbox", "BS4-startCollapsible", "BS4/sandbox", "BS5", "BS5-2", "BS5-2/sandbox", "BS5-22", "BS5-startCollapsible", "BS5/sandbox", "BS6", "BS6-2", "BS6-2/sandbox", "BS6-startCollapsible", "BS6-startCollapsible-2", "BS6/sandbox", "BS7", "BS7-2", "BS7-2-2", "BS7-2/sandbox", "BS7-2text", "BS7-replace", "BS7-startCollapsible", "BS7/sandbox", "BS8", "BS8-2", "BS8-startCollapsible", "BS9", "BS9-2", "BS9-startCollapsible", "BS10", "BS10-2", "BS11", "BS11-2", "BS12", "BS12-2", "BS13", "BS13-2", "BS14", "BS14-2", "BS15", "BS15-2", "BS16", "BS16-2" ], "routemap_templates": "Routemap" }

I've implemented the change for {{BSu}} and {{BSue}}. I'll start on BRFAs next. zhwiki requires (auto)confirmed to be able to create the BRFA page. — JJMC89 04:41, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Done the 12 above. Ping me when/if I should create more. Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}}
to reply to me 10:19, 28 June 2017 (UTC)