User talk:Rjwilmsi/Archives/2009/May

Faulty persistent AWB corrections

I have now for the second time reverted this "correction" to bibliography entries (one other article listing these same titles also has required reverting once so far). In the first place, I know of no format standard that uses the bare numeral for the first but the ordinal abbreviation for the second date in a series separated by the word "to" (in this case, specifically "July 7 to 15th 2007", which ought to be either "July 7 to 15, 2007" or "July 7th to 15th 2007"). Secondly, this is part of the title of a book quoted in a bibliography, and it is improper to "correct" a format used on the book cover and half-title page, even if it were erroneous. Is there a way of protecting these entries from your AWB contraption?—Jerome Kohl (talk) 17:12, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I see. The AWB logic did not correctly handle date ranges in the American format. I'll have that fixed for the next release. In this article it appears the book titles you mention are translations of the official German titles, so is it okay to change the translations to use "July 7 to 15, 2007"? Thanks Rjwilmsi 17:23, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Not unless you write to the publisher and get them to issue a "corrected" edition. As I said previously, the book cover and half-title page have (in the official English titles) "July 7th to 15th 2007", et simil. If these were editorially added translations, they would necessarily be enclosed in square brackets.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 17:36, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

User:Rjwilmsi/Test

I'm cleaning out Category:Cite web templates using unusual accessdate parameters. As you can see, I finished all templates, files, portals, talk pages and userpages: everything except articles. Would you mind removing the section with accessmonthday parameters from your test page? Or putting it inside remark tags? It seems that you added most of them on November 3, 2008. Sorry to trouble you. If it were just a reference, I'd do it myself, but this is a purposefull testpage from an active editor, so I think I should ask you. Thanks, Debresser (talk) 23:07, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

No problem, I've put them in source tags. Please let me know if that didn't work. Rjwilmsi 07:03, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your cooperation. You missed another small section, so I took the liberty of adding the <source>...</source> tags there also, and that worked. All the best, Debresser (talk) 08:58, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi

Just to say, you have a lot of edits. --Spongefrog (talk) 19:24, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Area bombing directive

this edit changed a date within a book title --PBS (talk) 20:39, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Apologies, I've converted the article to use the appropriate citation templates so that the error won't be repeated (and it gains from the consistent formatting of the templates). Rjwilmsi 20:55, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Date edits

Good Day to you good Sir, I have a question regarding date edits that I was hoping you might be able to assist me with. I thought that I saw something a while ago that stated that months should not be abbreviated (I.e. Oct or Oct. vice October) but I cannot find anything now. Do you know anything about this?--Kumioko (talk) 15:19, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

You're basically right. The link is WP:MONTH. Rjwilmsi 16:39, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks.--Kumioko (talk) 17:01, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Article issues template

I don't suppose you remember if this was something AWB broke on its own or was your mistake? (the former needing a bug report filed, the later oh well) --Pascal⁶⁶⁶ 05:38, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Auto by AWB, nobody told me it had to handle extra arguments to {{Notability}}. What should the behaviour of AWB be? Rjwilmsi 07:19, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't think {{Articleissues}} can handle any {{Notability}} parameters other than "date". Any time AWB sees something it doesn't recognize it needs to leave it alone. --Pascal⁶⁶⁶ 08:45, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Any time AWB sees something it doesn't recognize is a logical contradiction. I can add logic to AWB to ignore the {{notability}} template where it has two parameters, if that's what you'd like? Rjwilmsi 08:51, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, didn't realize you actually worked on AWB itself. I was just gathering information to file a bug report. If you can fix it yourself, that would be great. I guess what I mean is anytime AWB sees a template or parameter it does not recognize I would expect it to leave it alone. In this case if it sees any parameter other than "date" I would expect it to do nothing. Thanks! --Pascal⁶⁶⁶ 09:31, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

rev 4303 AWB won't move cleanup templates with multiple parameters into {{article issues}}. The fix has missed today's new release. Rjwilmsi 19:06, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. --Pascal⁶⁶⁶ 19:37, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Any idea if one of the various bug fixes you just did for this template also fixed this (notice the "date" after "expand") problem? How do we cause another new release of AWB to go out tonight? The current one has major issues with this template and is breaking a lot of pages. --Pascal⁶⁶⁶ 00:12, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Please also see User talk:Rich Farmbrough#Article issues template for a couple more issues with this template Rich is saying are AWB bugs. --Pascal⁶⁶⁶ 08:31, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

It's the same two issues: removal of the date bit and templates with multiple parameters. I've fixed both of them. Rjwilmsi 09:36, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. How can we get your fixes pushed out as a required upgrade so pages stop getting broke like this? --Pascal⁶⁶⁶ 09:41, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Reedy controls the releases. I'm sure he'd be happy to upload a new snapshot for Smackbot and others to use. Rjwilmsi 09:42, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

I left Reedy a message. Thank you again for all your help. --Pascal⁶⁶⁶ 09:59, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Rob, you weren't on Skype, so couldn't ask you there. Is it just a svn snapshot that needs uploading, or the whole release? —Reedy 15:10, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Shirehampton Colts AFC

An article that you have been involved in editing, Shirehampton Colts AFC, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shirehampton Colts AFC. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Grutness...wha? 02:38, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Adding brackets to references

I know you have done a lot of work with cleaning up formatting and references so before I request this change to AWB I thought I would run it by you first. I have noticed a number of pages lately such as Elizabeth Jacobson, that have references in the references section but the references are not linked. Do you think it is possible or needed to add some edits to link these unlinked references?--Kumioko (talk) 18:06, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

WP guidelines favour having references integrated within the text, but this would have to be a manual task. Rjwilmsi 11:33, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Galactus Edit War Mediation

Hi. I'm trying to mediate an edit war over the Galactus article here. Can you chime in with your two cents? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 00:00, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I've no relation with that article, so won't be able to help. Rjwilmsi 11:30, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Yet Another award

		The "I am Rjwilmsi and I have lots and lots of edits" Barnstar
		Its for the reason in the title --Spongefrog (talk) 20:51, 19 May 2009 (UTC)|

Hey

Any chance you can drop me an email? (special/email user or whatever!)

Want to forward one i've been sent and see what you think.

Ta!

—Reedy 11:26, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

done Rjwilmsi 11:31, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

article issues template

rev 4303 AWB won't move cleanup templates with multiple parameters into {{article issues}}. Rjwilmsi 19:06, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Based on this edit, AWB appears to still be attempting to convert templates with parameters other than "date" to {{Article issues}}. --Pascal⁶⁶⁶ 21:12, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Okay, to explain:

• AWB doesn't move parameters with multiple parameters per my note, but the diff you cite is not about multiple parameters
• parameters such as 'expert' have values of a text explanation (i.e. other than just a date), so the conversion isn't wrong just for that
• the problem is the fact that the value of the 'update' parameter was moved into the {{article issues}} without checking for an '=' being present. rev 4369 resolves that.
• {{article issues}} doesn't seem to document its handling of the {{update}} template using a text explanation, query raised on AI talk page. Rjwilmsi 23:24, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

{{Expert}} will never have a text parameter. {{Expert-subject}} will. The "expert" parameter for {{Article issues}} is the only one that does not take a date as its value. The only time AWB should convert any tag to {{Article issues}} is if it has only a "date" parameter, or is {{Expert-subject}}. Any parameters other than date disqualify any templates other than {{Expert-subject}} from being converted. I apologize for not making this clearer during our previous discussion that resulted in rev 4303. --Pascal⁶⁶⁶ 03:20, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

What you say may be correct but contradicts the {{article issues}} documentation. Please raise this on the talk page so it's sorted out. I'll then further update AWB as needed. Rjwilmsi 07:00, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

What part of the documentation do you believe contradicts this? Look at the large table that starts about halfway down the page. Look at the column labeled "Optional format of value". The only parameter that has anything listed other than "month and year" is "expert". --Pascal⁶⁶⁶ 17:19, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

rev 4382 only move templates with a parameter into {{article issues}} if the parameter is the date one. Rjwilmsi 17:36, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. --Pascal⁶⁶⁶ 18:52, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Invitation to discussion

Since you have partaken in discussion on this subject at Wikipedia:AWB/FR#Category_and_stub_handling_enhancements, I would like you to have a look at Template_talk:Lifetime#Placement. Debresser (talk) 23:26, 26 May 2009 (UTC)