User talk:MZMcBride/watcher

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

Fewer than 30 watchers[edit]

(Copied here from User talk:MZMcBride.)

Well, it seems that in the last couple of hours someone has modified Watcher so that it no longer provides a count if a page has fewer than 30 watchers. That probably pretty much eliminates most of wiktionary. [...] -- WikiPedant (talk) 04:36, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm kind of finding that to be an unfortunate change as well. I added a few pages to my watchlist yesterday after getting counts of 2, 4, and 6, but I won't be anywhere near as likely to do so if the page might be being watched by 29 people. I had been considering it a better version of unwatchedpages, but that function is mostly gone now. Was it necessary? Dekimasuよ! 11:52, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
The Toolserver administrators said that allowing people to find unwatched pages bypassed MediaWiki's security (Special:UnwatchedPages). The 30 limit was put in place as a compromise. I agree that it sucks for smaller projects. I'm not sure if there's a better compromise solution. You're of course free to contact the Toolserver admins if you'd like, though ( --MZMcBride (talk) 15:09, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
This is certainly something I would like to lobby for, too. If there is a security concern, then the right approach is to limit access, not render the tool useless. — Sebastian 18:24, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
<- If the security concern is for unwatched mainspace pages, perhaps removing the limit for pages in the projectspace and userspace spheres would address their concerns? –Whitehorse1 21:29, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
On second thoughts, that wouldn't affect much. Just took a look at the counts of my watchlisted pages which I copied into a textfile last night. While very few have only 1, many are <10/20. –Whitehorse1 22:17, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
But why 30? If it is just about hiding unwatched pages, a limit of 3 should be fine too? --Alexrk2 (talk) 11:59, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
Could you consider lifting the less than 30 restriction on pages outside of the article namespace? HiDrNick! 19:31, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Sorry for the delayed reply. Personally, I would like to see the limit reduced to something more reasonable like 5. However, the Toolserver administrators have made it clear that they want a higher limit. It's their server and they make the rules; there isn't anything I can do without risking having my access revoked. You're free to e-mail them at, but unfortunately there's nothing I can do at this time. --MZMcBride (talk) 00:47, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
Sorry to pester but would you happen to know the reasoning behind the Toolserver folk's decision? My talkpage squeaks by the limit (barely) but this would be such a great tool to identify and watchlist some of our more obscure BLP articles. Anyway, thank you very much for the tool, I'm quite fond of it now. Cheers. L0b0t (talk) 12:34, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
The limit was put in place to avoid "bypassing MediaWiki's security" (specifically Special:UnwatchedPages). The 30 figure is completely arbitrary and was determined by the Toolserver roots. --MZMcBride (talk) 20:30, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
Is it technically possible to have different limits for different status users? I was thinking along the lines of a scheme like (just an example, not a firm proposal);
  • Unconfirmed users and IPs: not available
  • Confirmed users: limit=30
  • Admins and users with >1,000 edits: unrestricted
I know you cannot act on this, but it would be nice to know if it was do-able before suggesting to ts-admin. SpinningSpark 22:28, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
The issue is that you're making an anonymous web request, so the script ( has no idea if you're an admin, a steward, or a blocked vandal. Toolserver rules require that no Wikimedia user authentication data be used on the Toolserver, which means that it would require linking separate usernames / passwords to the Wikimedia ones. Pretty nasty overhead. I am thinking of a better way to not screw over the smaller projects with a hard limit. Perhaps switching to a number based on the number of articles. The 30 limit is arbitrary, but it's ten times more arbitrary on a site with 100 users.... It would still require an okay from the TS roots, though (if anyone is interested, feel free to e-mail them). --MZMcBride (talk) 23:52, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
What about using TUSC for authentication? --Flominator (talk) 13:23, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
yes, can you consider using TUSC and a lookup of the user to see what permissions are available? Thanks. ++Lar: t/c 19:53, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
So? What do you think about TUSC? --Flominator (talk) 15:41, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
In general, I think TUSC is a pretty hackish system, but as I'm not inclined to write something better, I don't have a strong objection to implementing it. However, it should be noted that TUSC is really only half of the issue. TUSC ensures that a person accessing the script is the same person on a Wikimedia site. It does not ensure that the person should have access to this data. That requires a separate list to maintain (and separate requirements). Should all admins have access? Certain non-admins? Etc. Bit of a mess. And, it would be nice if you only had to login rarely, so somebody will need to implement cookie support somewhere. If anyone is willing, I can gladly post the source (there may be a copy floating around on this page or my user talk page, even). --MZMcBride (talk) 21:52, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

The real number of watchers should be shown. The problems related to vandalism could easily be countered by showing a warning on recent changes for articles that has few watchers, like below 5 or 10 or 30 for that sake. Ulflarsen (talk) 09:56, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Length restriction?[edit]

Is there a problem with long names? South Asian Institute of Technology and Management‎ shows up in red. — Sebastian 21:39, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I think your link has some nasty invisible Unicode character in it, specifically \u200E. This link works as expected. And, no, there's no length restriction in the script (though at some point the URL size maxes out). --MZMcBride (talk) 21:58, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Weird, I don't know how that got in there. I I just used the autosuggest dropdown in Mozilla; and I don't think I copied this from BiDi text when I put it there in the first place. It's also strange that the link above works correctly without turning red. I'll add that to the project page. — Sebastian 22:19, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
I've fixed this more permanently by silently stripping these characters from page titles. They're no longer valid since rev:55382 anyway. --MZMcBride (talk) 18:38, 9 March 2010 (UTC)


Seems to fail for any article with an apostrophe in the title;

That's from the link as displayed on the history page, but if I type straight into the browser address window it works fine; Rubik's Cube, Ohm's law, Schrödinger's cat. SpinningSpark 22:12, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Ha! Didn't know someone had put it in the history links.

This isn't a bug in watcher, it's a bug in MediaWiki. Worked around it with this edit. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 23:37, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Amazing, that's where I found it. How is it normally accessed? SpinningSpark 23:41, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
I think most people just use the input form here. --MZMcBride (talk) 23:43, 10 October 2009 (UTC)


Hey -

I saw your watchers per article tool. I am doing research on how wiki features affect editing, and I was wondering if there is any way I could get a list of watchers per page for the English wikipedia (to merge it with the data dumps).

Thanks a lot for the tool, and for reading my message!

Best, Buburuza (talk) 17:16, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

There is a list of most-watched pages available here: Wikipedia:Database reports/Most-watched pages. Due to the nature of vandalism and the surrounding concerns about unwatched articles (especially biographies of living people), I can't publicly release a full list of pages by number of watchers. It may be possible if you're interested to privately give you the data, though. --MZMcBride (talk) 20:03, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Preselection of wiki[edit]

Hi MZMcBride. I would appreciate if the preselection of a wiki other than enwiki would be possible, e.g. like this. --Leyo 13:22, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Fixed! --MZMcBride (talk) 06:21, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
Great, thanks! --Leyo 08:28, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Mixing user and user/talk namespace?[edit]

I get the same number of watchers on my user and user talk (289), and the same number on your user and user talk (243), SmackBot's (101) and Jimbo's (1932). Rich Farmbrough, 10:34, 20 November 2009 (UTC).

Well I have noticed that if you watch something, you also watch the talk page and vice versa, so I would say this is no surprise. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:56, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
You can't watch a subject-space page without watching the corresponding talk page. --MZMcBride (talk) 12:00, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Oh.. learn something every day. Rich Farmbrough, 12:39, 22 November 2009 (UTC).

User auth and cookies[edit]

I've now implemented a rudimentary user auth system into watcher. It requires two pieces to work:

  1. you must have a TUSC login;
  2. you must be listed at m:Toolserver/watcher.

Once you've fulfilled both requirements, you simply proceed to tools:~mzmcbride/cgi-bin/, log in, and you'll get a cookie set that will allow you access to the data.

I will have no part in determining who is listed at m:Toolserver/watcher. The page is protected—find a Meta admin. --MZMcBride (talk) 20:29, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

I can't log in. What does this mean? — Jake Wartenberg 22:48, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
Got it now. You might want to make it fail a bit more gracefully, though. — Jake Wartenberg 22:51, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
This was caused by using language:commons and project:commons, which TUSC returns as "Wrong project" instead of the (more correct) "0". I've fixed to now catch this error in a more elegant manner. --MZMcBride (talk) 23:47, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Active watchers?[edit]

I'm surprised and pleased to see that this was added, though I see that they did cripple it with the 30-users limit. One problem I can think of: very old pages are sure to have more watchers, but only because they're on the lists of more retired editors. Is there a way to filter for only autoconfirmed users active in the last 7 days/30 days?

If the watcher data could be combined with the recent changes data, you would have a very useful tool indeed. I listed a proposal back in April 09 which finally fell off the VPP in September 09 after a lot of enthusiastic support (42-3), but not much action (see bug 18790). If you have the tool show recent changes to pages with under 30 watchers, recent changes patrol would have a much, much easier time doing their job. You would also soon be able to get rid of the 30-users restriction: any time a vandal uses this information to vandalize unwatched pages, their edit would appear front-and-center on the list.   M   06:08, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

The Toolserver masks the necessary field to look up which users are viewing a particular page. So it's impossible to assess whether a page is being watched by all active, inactive, or even bot users. A proper solution could possibly be coded into MediaWiki, though you'd have to find someone willing and get developer consensus that it's a good idea. --MZMcBride (talk) 06:10, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Foiled again!   M   15:32, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

You could take the date of the last edit. That is how the watcher counts in FlagRev special pages are calculated AFAIK. --Tgr (talk) 15:11, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

What? --MZMcBride (talk) 20:36, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Count the user as active iff his last edit on that wiki was within a month. Not as good as checking whether he actually looked at his watchlist, but close enough, and easy to do on the toolserver. (Also, edit data is public, so less privacy problems.) --Tgr (talk) 21:17, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Why 30?[edit]

No bugs to report. (Good app.)
But I am wondering why 30, rather than 25 or 20? 15?
Most of the pages of interest to me show — watchers consistently.
How about a range if you want to avoid specificity for whatever reason:
then above that do what you're doing now.

It's at the low end of the scale where a tiny delta makes a difference.
If a page has 1012 watchers or 1014, what difference does it really make?
Yet that distinction gets reported.
But at the low end, where a delta of 2 is huge, there is no data at all forthcoming.
Cheers, Varlaam (talk) 05:59, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

BUG when using Polish chars[edit]

<type 'exceptions.UnicodeDecodeError'>: 'utf8' codec can't decode byte 0xb3 in position 20: unexpected code byte
     args = ('utf8', 'Wikipedia:Tablica og\xb3osze\xf1', 20, 21, 'unexpected code byte')
     encoding = 'utf8'
     end = 21
     message = 
     object = 'Wikipedia:Tablica og\xb3osze\xf1'
     reason = 'unexpected code byte'
     start = 20

Thanks in advance for fixing :) Patrol110 (talk) 11:46, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

I forgot to mention that I typed the name of this article [4] and after that I got the crash. Patrol110 (talk) 11:51, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
This works for me. Do you have an example URL that breaks? Or steps to reproduce the breakage? --MZMcBride (talk) 21:19, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
That isn't in the standard UTF-8 or latin-1, which browser are you using and which character encoding is page set to? There is possible a workaround using the accept-charset in the form. — Dispenser 03:53, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

A minor fix[edit]

It took me about an hour to implement, but the "log in" and "log out" links should now preserve your URL parameters. This wasn't a major bug, but certainly an annoying one. :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 05:08, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Pages with colons in title are broken[edit]

Any page using a colon in its title (e.g. Wikipedia talk:Special:Preferences) doesn't work: the title is truncated to before the second colon. — This, that, and the other (talk) 02:46, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Should be fixed now. --MZMcBride (talk) 11:28, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

watcher indicates article redlinked[edit]

I'm going a bit wonky wondering if it's me or watcher. I know I have Hexadecimal and Channel Tunnel on my watchlist, so watcher should report at least one, but it's showing redlinks and zero.

Never mind. The URL has some stray characters in it, easily removed. Kind of looks like the right-to-left nonsense I was cursed with a couple years ago. Somehow a copy and paste off My watchlist introduces those. —EncMstr (talk) 17:50, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

See the Length restriction? section above. --MZMcBride (talk) 18:39, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Log in bug[edit]

I logged into my TUSC account on your watcher tool. As soon as I click on the proceed to watcher button, it logs me off. Is this a bug? NERDYSCIENCEDUDE (✉ msgchanges) 15:17, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

I think I've seen this bug. I'm not sure if it's caching or what. Try restarting your browser? --MZMcBride (talk) 15:23, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
I restarted my browser and it still logged me off after I logged in. NERDYSCIENCEDUDE (✉ msgchanges) 15:42, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
Hmm, I think it's just caching. After it says you're logged in, click the "proceed to watcher" link, and then bypass your cache. See if that updates the log in / log out link. Or, try looking up "Foo", regardless of what the log in / log out link says. --MZMcBride (talk) 15:46, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
(e/c) Suggestions: Clear your browser cache, make sure its security settings aren't set too high and cookies are enabled including third-party ones; double-check any firewall software if you use one as a possible cause; last, check if it works with browser extensions disabled or with a different browser, as a troubleshooting step. By the way, quick question MZMcBride: Are pwds entered at log-in logged? Thanks. –Whitehorse1 15:50, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
Nope. watcher makes a POST request to Magnus' TUSC tool, but none of the log in data is stored or logged. That said, a user's TUSC password should never be the same as their Wikimedia password, for a variety of reasons.
I've been meaning to publish the source code to watcher eventually, just haven't gotten around to it. Eventually the code will end up here, for anyone interested. --MZMcBride (talk) 15:56, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
Cool, thanks. –Whitehorse1 16:07, 19 March 2010 (UTC) not respecting login?[edit]

hello MZMcBridge, until lately (a few days ago, i suppose), your superb script did also list counts <30 for me (complying with my account listed here and me being logged in to TUSC). but sadly, it does not do so currently. in case it is not just again some general toolserver issue, could you please have a quick look at this? (especially in case you changed the script's code in the last few days. my suspicion is that the $ sign might cause problems, or maybe that i want to see counts on, where i most of all contribute.) thank you very much, Ca$e (talk) 22:00, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

I haven't changed the code lately and I just tried to log in and was successful. Can you describe what steps you take and what happens? You can also try clearing your browser cache or trying a different browser. --MZMcBride (talk) 03:23, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
thanks. you were, indeed, quite right: it was a browser (in this case, latest firefox) problem (actually, it still is, as i could not find out what causes it; but that's definitely no business of yours ;). thanks alot, Ca$e (talk) 10:58, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Question about watcher?[edit]

Hi mzmcbride,

Apologies if this is in the wrong place.

I was wondering if there is any documentation about how watcher works? More specifically I'm interested in aggregate statistics of watchlist behavior (I'm an academic researcher); the dumps available for academics understandably have specifics of watchlists turned off.

Do you have any suggestions for how I might be able to get a general idea of the distribution of watchlisting, ie what proportion of editors (and non-editors) of a page add that page to their watchlist, and how long do they keep it there?

Thanks --Jameshowison (talk) 19:42, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Specifics are not available to Toolserver users, only aggregate information is. So it's not possible to see how long someone has kept an entry on their watchlist or who is even watching a page. I have released full lists to academic researchers in the past (a nice woman from Harvard asked), so if you were interested in that, just shoot me an e-mail. That would allow you to do broader analysis of certain types of articles and (obviously) bypasses any restrictions on the public tool. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:19, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
Did my email reach you? Of course it is a US holiday weekend, so don't mean to hassle you.--Jameshowison (talk) 15:27, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
Just responded. Apologies for the delay. --MZMcBride (talk) 00:41, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Watchers of red link pages[edit]

Considering the vandalism argument is effectively moot on these pages and that the "MediaWiki security feature" only apply to pages which exist, can this functionality be restored? — Dispenser 02:03, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

watcher works for red-linked pages if there are over 30 watchers, just the same as it does for blue-linked pages. You want the 30 limit removed for non-existent pages? Ask DaB. --MZMcBride (talk) 05:26, 16 July 2010 (UTC)


Hi. I just tried to log in and got the message: Sorry, you're not on the access list. or Sorry, there's something wrong with your TUSC info. I tried with clearing my browser (FF4) cache and also tried with IE8 just to make sure that the problem is not caused by my default browser. mickit 22:44, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Strange. It's working fine for me. Perhaps a fluke in Magnus' tool? The second error message in particular can only occur if Magnus' tool returns a 0 (indicating a failed login). I assume it worked before today? Try again and let me know if it's working now. --MZMcBride (talk) 04:30, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
Still the same. When I tried with: "en/wikipedia/micki/mypassword/watcher" or "meta/wikimedia/micki/mypassword/watcher" got Sorry, there's something wrong with your TUSC info. When I tried with: "sr/wikipedia/micki/mypassword/watcher" got Sorry, you're not on the access list. I often use CommonsHelper, so I am sure that my username and password aren't wrong. I didn't use the Watcher for some time, so I don't know since when I have this problem. mickit 09:21, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Título gramaticalmente erróneo: "Diseñador Automotriz del Siglo".[edit]

En el idioma español los adjetivos "automotriz" y "motriz" son ambos de género femenino (siendo sus equivalentes masculinos "automotor" y "motor"). Por ello, la expresión "diseñador automotriz" es errónea, al no respetarse la debida concordancia de género entre "diseñador" (masculino) y "automotriz" (femenino).

Sugiero por tanto el cambio de título a otro como "Diseñador automovilístico del siglo" (o, simplemente, "Diseñador carrocero del siglo"), así como las correcciones correspondientes en el cuerpo del texto. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:30, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Claro. Si usted nos da una cadena a la pagina donde dice este error, podemos investigar más. Está en "watcher"? Killiondude (talk) 16:18, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

female userpages[edit]

If the gender is set as female in the preferences, there is a red link to the userpage in the tool although there is an existing userpage. example: Benutzerin:Knopfkind is red but I have a userpage. --Knopfkind (talk) 21:02, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

It's not only the link. I think the watcher doesn't work at all for userpages of female users. --Knopfkind (talk) 10:09, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Cross-reference: --MZMcBride (talk) 01:55, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

can I be declared as the User who “suit la page” of the Page Louis Soutter ?[edit]

hello, I'm Buster Keaton, User working essentially in French Wikipedia ; I wish to be declared as the User who “suit la page” of the Page Louis Soutter ; I'm working on this Page for a long time as author of the text, list of exhibitions, notes & references, internal and external links, wikifikation of bibliography, and details I will verify, helped by a lot of Users for details and errors in punctuation, orthography, balises, wikif., and so on ;

is it possible ?

thank you in advance for your answer ; with my best salutations, Buster Keaton (talk) 19:27, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

What in God's name is this section about? --MZMcBride (talk) 01:52, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Parameter measure is undocumented[edit]

The parameter measure (e.g. &measure=centijimbos) is undocumented. What are possible other parameters? --Leyo 12:59, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

The "measure" parameter is an Easter egg. I don't believe there are any other undocumented parameters. The only other feature that people seem to miss sometimes is that you can input multiple titles by separating them with a "|"; e.g. <>. --MZMcBride (talk) 13:20, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the explanation. --Leyo 13:51, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Datos erróneos en artículo "Fontana Rosa"[edit]

La novela Mare Nostrum no se escribió en Fontana Rosa, sino en París, entre agosto y diciembre de 1917, tal como figura en la página 446 de la edición de 1919, publicada en Valencia por la editorial Prometeo. Además, en esos años Fontana Rosa todavía no existía. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 08:02, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Sí se puede. --MZMcBride (talk) 17:09, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Minuimum Watchers[edit]

Hi, was wondering whether the number of minimum watchers could be reduced here? Especialli for the wikis like mine ( where there are not many active users, most of the articles won't show any definite number of watches, as there will be mostly less than 30. Don't know whether this number is configurable, if so, it will help smaller wikis like mine.-- DhavalTalk 18:46, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi. The watcher tool is now deprecated in favor of the native "info" action. You can request a wiki configuration change to the $wgUnwatchedPageThreshold configuration variable for your particular wiki. --MZMcBride (talk) 17:15, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Number of page watchers tool deprecated[edit]

Hi. It's now possible to view the number of page watchers via the "info" action. For example, at <>, you can see that Main Page has over 76,500 page watchers. In the coming weeks, I'll be deprecating the watcher tool. --MZMcBride (talk) 17:08, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Incorrect Hypertext link made[edit]

The link made on the term Camp Fremont points o a WWI camp in California. Camp Fremont for the USCT was in Indiana. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:55, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi. So I guess the order here is something like this:
  1. Arrive at Camp Fremont.
  2. Click the "View history" page tab.
  3. Click the "Number of watchers" link.
  4. Click the "bugs" link.
And here we are. Hmm.
It sounds like you're looking for a disambiguation page or perhaps the creation of a separate article? I'm not really sure. --MZMcBride (talk) 23:59, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Watching the watchers[edit]

Hey, first -- sorry I missed you the other day, but glad you were able to come by.

I love the new(ish?) "page information" link in the lefthand nav, which I learned about from a comment above here on your talk page. I'm curious, though: your original Toolserver tool only reports the number of watchers when it's >30. It seems to me that from some past discussion, this was out of respect for user privacy -- that when there's a very small number of watchers, it might be pretty easy to infer who is on the list. I'm not sure if I agree the threshold needs to be as high as 30, but it does seem like a pretty reasonable point. But the new tool does not seem to have any threshold: I have seen numbers as low as 6, anyway. Has this been discussed, or do you think it was maybe just an oversight? -Pete (talk) 21:33, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Yeah, it was a shame we didn't get to chat. It was a nice event, thanks for the invite. :-)
As a local admin, you have the "unwatchedpages" user right (cf. Special:ListGroupRights). So while you can see figures below 30, others (non-admins) cannot. The threshold is configurable per-wiki. I think the German Wikipedia will actually be eliminating the threshold altogether soon. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:37, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

List of Prime Ministers of the Bahamas: Is this table structured correctly ?[edit]

This page seems to flip from time to time between a conventional table structure and the current one, which I can't follow at all. Could someone with a bit more expertise than me please sort it out again ? Thank you, RogerMPickering (talk) 09:04, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Roger. This page ("User:MZMcBride/watcher") probably isn't the best place to discuss the article List of Prime Ministers of the Bahamas. :-) You probably want Talk:List of Prime Ministers of the Bahamas (every article has an associated discussion/talk page). --MZMcBride (talk) 14:50, 27 June 2013 (UTC)