User talk:Certes

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Autolinks - don't you just love 'em?[edit]

Yes! It's Template Time again!! Welcome to the Wonderful World of Infoboxes and Auto-Generated Links!!! This time, it's coats of arms and flags.

Yrs, in sorrow, Narky Blert (talk) 23:47, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Jerusalem: {{Infobox country}} has a "linking_name" parameter which it prefixes by "Flag of " etc. to make links. I set it to "Kingdom of Jerusalem". ("Narnia" would have worked too; the important thing is that there's no page called Coat of arms of Kingdom of Jerusalem.) This broke the population link, so I've had to fiddle that.
Ciudad Victoria: {{Infobox settlement}} has a "name" parameter which generates all the links. Setting it to "Ciudad Victoria" (or "Narnia") would fix this problem by removing the link, but it would create so many other problems that it's a bad idea. I believe that fixing this page requires a template change. The template is fundamentally flawed because it tries to find a page using the common name. Of course, "common" here means "popularly used", but sadly it's also "common" in the sense of being shared by other cities, so we get a link to the wrong city or to a dab.
Belgian Congo: It's the right image, according to Flag of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. I've added a flag_caption to {{Infobox country}} and applied the same trick of setting linking_name to something which looks plausible enough to avoid reversion but in fact won't generate any links.
Hope that helps. We may need to bother the maintainers of Infobox settlement, but it's one of Wikipedia's most widely used and long established templates so they may take some convincing. Certes (talk) 00:38, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Ciudad Victoria still calls DAB page Coat of arms of Victoria. The link looks circular.
Support your Narnia idea Face-wink.svg
This is not the first time I have come across WP:OWNers who should be told to get a grip. I have taken part in at least three discussions complaining to editors who thought that their templates which auto-generated links to DAB pages were the best thing since sliced bread. Narky Blert (talk) 22:29, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
I've edited Ciudad Victoria to replace the link to dab by a redlink, having failed to find a way to unlink it completely. I've raised a question at Template talk:Infobox settlement#Coat of arms link. Certes (talk) 00:55, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Portals WikiProject update #017, 22 Aug 2018 (eom)[edit]

Portals WikiProject update #018, 04 Sept 2018 (eom)[edit]

Disambiguating railway stations[edit]

Thanks for the heads up re Dab Solver & {{stnlink}} and {{rws}}. When I looked I saw what looked like the correct link & didn't go back to edit mode to see the template. Is there a better tool that overcomes this issue?— Rod talk 16:39, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

I've not found a better tool. Dab Solver is so good in other respects that I just try to remember to Show Changes (rather than just the perfectly good looking Show Preview) when disambiguating railway stations. Further discussion above. Certes (talk) 16:52, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

AWB task request: please help with the backlog[edit]

Hey...

If you have AWB laying around, please dust it off and crank it up! ;)

We have a growing backlog!

There are now 3,621 portals. Of those, 2,290 are of the new design.

Many of the new portals are orphaned or near orphaned, and need links pointing to them:

  1. A portal link at the bottom of corresponding navigation footer template. E.g., Template:Machines for Portal:Machines. See examples of a portals link at the bottom of Template:Robotics and Template:Forestry.
  2. A {{Portal}} box in the See also section of the corresponding root article for each portal. If there is no See also section, create one and place the portal template in that. (Rather than placing them in an external links section -- they're not external links).
  3. A {{Portal}} template placed at the top of the category page corresponding to each portal.

To make a list of corresponding templates, you can use AWB's make list feature to make a list of the pages in Category:Single-page portals. Then you copy that list to a sandbox, and replace \nPortal: with ]]\n* [[Template:, using WP:wikEd. That will give you a list of templates to work on. Then you set skip in AWB to skip the ones that already have the portal link.

To make a list of corresponding root articles, make a list of portal links, and then remove "Portal:" from the links.

To make a list of category links to process, make sure you use a leading colon (:) in the category links, like this: [[:Category:Blue Öyster Cult]].

All new and revamped portals can be found at Category:Single-page portals.

Thank you.    — The Transhumanist   20:43, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

@The Transhumanist: I've done the first few of 1. as an experiment. Example. I have a few concerns:
  1. Do you think we should consult more widely before changing 2,000 templates, articles and categories, especially when other editors are removing such links?
  2. Other project members may be doing the same job and we may be tripping over each other. Would it be better to put large requests like this in a central place for collaborative discussion rather than copy them to several user talk pages?
  3. Requests 1. and 2. may result in multiple ads for the portal on one page. For example 24 (TV series)#See also already links to its portal; my template change adds a second link.

Certes (talk) 12:07, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

  1. No, since the precedent is very strong for including portal links in those locations. (Unless there is a new consensus-establishing discussion somewhere that I don't know about). For example, the search insource:navbox insource:Portal: returns 3,096 navigation templates with a portal link, and insource:navbox insource:Portal: returns 904 more. Consensus lies with the existing situation, which is that portal links are standard on templates (in the "bottom" section, along with other navigation system links). In order to remove them en mass, a new community consensus must be established. The same applies to corresponding root articles and categories. Searching category namespace with insource:Portal shows 246,141 matches. Article space shows 456,330 matches. Keep in mind, that we are processing root-level only, piggyback riding on templates to take the links abroad. Thank you for asking. I hope my answer alleviates your concerns.
  2. AWB'ers don't trip over each other, they just skip on by. ;) I hope others are working on it. It'll go faster that way. Note that AWB was designed knowing that multiple users would be working on the same tasks at the same time. That's why AWB has so many auto skip features: so that you don't have to manually press "Skip" for those instances. You can also share the work by how you go about it. For example, you can avoid going over the same entries that others have already done by starting AWB at the end of the list, working bottom-up rather than top-down. Then you'll meet somewhere in the middle. Another approach is to run it in pre-parse mode first, to skip whatever anyone else has done. This helps catch situations where the task was abandoned and not completed. Since the list of portals is so small, there's no need to worry about how much of it was done by someone else. AWB will do 2,000 skips in preparse mode in 8 to 10 minutes, which covers all the single-page portals. That's much faster than a forum discussion, and you can be doing something in another window, or eating a snack/watching a show, while it does its thing.
  3. Think of the template links as secondary to whatever is in the See also section. And, because those links are less noticeable (due to font size, as well as competing links and footers), they should not be considered as replacements for the portal boxes in the See also sections of the eponymous pages (pages that share the portal's title -- corresponding root article, outline, category, glossary, and index.).
I hope you found my answers helpful.    — The Transhumanist   13:29, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
@The Transhumanist: Thanks; that's reassuring. I've done 1. for templates alphabetically up to Alabama, where I have a problem with an underlying protected template. Certes (talk) 15:54, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
@The Transhumanist: I'm finding more cases where the template uses a more generic template that doesn't permit footers. What do you think we should do about these? It may be a case of projects establishing a consistent format, i.e. consistently without portal links. Examples:
In both cases they're discarding the |below= parameter which is where we normally put the icon footer row. I've started a conversation at Template talk:US state navigation box#Below. Certes (talk) 16:27, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Short of editing the underlying lua code, placing the following at the end works, leaving the title blank; but it will replace an existing title9 section:

| title9 =
| body9 =

I couldn't figure out what the triple curlies meant, as are used in creating the capital section at the top.    — The Transhumanist   00:57, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

That's a backup plan but would put the portal and category as a section within the box rather than a distinctively styled footer. The triple curlies just substitute parameter values. {{US state navigation box|capital=Albany}} makes {{{capital}}} produce Albany, so the capital section produces Albany (capital). Certes (talk) 08:58, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
I didn't know triple curlies were used like that, thinking they were limited to {{{1}}}, {{{2}}}, etc. That's good to know. I'll take another look at the underlying source code to see if it makes more sense now.    — The Transhumanist   00:19, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Are we keeping a list of portals whose names clash with a template or category on a different subject? For example, we wouldn't want to link Portal:Apache from {{Apache}}. (I've put that template on my watchlist as a canary for anyone making the same mistake I nearly made.) Certes (talk) 11:05, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

No, but I keep running into templates on bands that usurp the root title. So, when I use the semi-auto method of portal creation (by first converting template links to portal links and ctrl-clicking on the red ones), a portal may look complete (in preview mode), except that it displays articles on the band named after the topic, rather than the topic. As I'm still primarily processing "low hanging fruit", I simply nuke the tab instead of save, and move onto the next tab.    — The Transhumanist   00:19, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
Another situation I run into a lot is a template with an extraneous "topics" or "navbox" in the title, when the main title for the template is unused. In such cases, I rename the template to match the topic, except where plurals are called for, in which case, I rename it to the plural form (if it is available). Then I restart the portal creation using the topic (or its plural) rather than the template's original title. Because, nobody wants a portal called "Portal:Metalworking navbox." :)    — The Transhumanist   00:19, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
Aluded to above, I've been working on a method for rapid portal creation — combining the use of list massage, template substitution, yours and Evad's transclusion templates, and a script — and have gotten it down to around 1 minute per portal, though many of the portals thus created need refinement of their search parameters and others have a redlinked category, which I need to go back and address. So with those issues and the placement of links leading to each portal, it's probably down to about 5 minutes each. I spent a good six hours yesterday brainstorming features to add to the script to tackle these and other tasks to shave even more time off of the creation process. Whether I can convert these ideas into workable JavaScript remains to be seen. :) The goal, of course is to get portal creation down to a few seconds rather than a few minutes. Wish me luck.    — The Transhumanist   00:27, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
One minute is excellent progress. The number of topics that lack a portal but are broad enough to merit one is limited. Multiplying that number by one minute gives the maximum time that further tuning could save, so the process may have already achieved its optimal point. It takes more than a minute just to add the template footers. (I'm also linking to books, categories and commons while I'm in there: it's useful and it's less likely to get reverted than if I took up a whole line just for the portal link.) The typing is automated but I need to integrate any existing footer, fit in with existing styles and fix any dodgy links. A good example is {{Bowerbirds}}. There's an exsting footer, and Commons:Category:Bowerbirds relates to a musical ensemble so we need Commons:Category:Ptilonorhynchidae instead. Certes (talk) 01:03, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
Good job on the templates. Keep up the great work. By the way, there are plenty more where those came from. ;)    — The Transhumanist   06:59, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

I implemented your suggested "intitle" fix for SearchSuite, to allow intitle to be anywhere in the search string, rather than just at the beginning.

Now, searches like insource:navbox intitle:France work like a charm.

Thank you.    — The Transhumanist   14:19, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Portals WikiProject update #019, 22 Sept 2018 (eom)[edit]