User talk:Robchurch/April 2006

Archives: Aug 05 | Sept 05 | Oct 05 | Nov 05 | Dec 05 | Jan 06 | Feb 06 | Mar 06 | Apr 06 || May 06 | Jun 06 | Jul 06 || New Message

Wikipedia survey

Hi. I'm doing a survey of Wikipedia editors as part of a class research project. It's quick, anonymous, and the data will be made available to the Wikipedia community later this month. Would you like to take part? More info here. Thanks! Nonplus 01:09, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you for your vote of confidence in my recent request for bureaucratship. Even though it didn't pass, I greatly appreciate your support and hope I will continue to have your respect. Thank you! Flcelloguy (A note?) 22:48, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Popo bug

Re: WP:AN/I:

Well, maybe you can fix the "Mr. Popo" bug then. Create an image named "Mr._Popo.jpg" and attempt to upload it: you'll get the error: File names must be at least three letters. The cause seems fairly obvious, and in many programming languages, the complete and entire fix for this would consist of adding a single character — a lowercase "r" — to the source code. Someone familiar with the source code could probably fix this in about 30 seconds (if we generously allot 25 seconds to loading the source code and grepping).

Yes I know this is a very trivial low-priority bug; I originally intended to write a different and longer response (for WP:AN/I or elsewhere) but will probably never get around to it. :-)

-- Curps 05:49, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Will poke. Rob Church (talk) 07:49, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Poked, fixed. Rob Church (talk) 19:40, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Namespace filtering in watchlist

Is very useful. Thanks – Gurch 16:30, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Rob Church (talk) 17:27, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. This is great. NoSeptember ^talk 18:44, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, thanks! Although it has presented me with a dilemma, since I can't make up my mind whether I prefer the new builtin filtering or my javascript hack. :-/ —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 21:44, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Scary/cool. Thanks for turning me on to that! ++Lar: t/c 03:45, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Useful indeed. Could you apply this same filter to Special:Whatlinkshere/? That would be very useful to my link-related edits. I tried adding &namespace=N, just to see if it was functionally undocumented, but the directive has no effect. — Apr. 8, '06 [16:57] <freakofnur_xture |talk>

This is filed as bug #4624, which happens to be assigned to me. So, it'll get done sooner or later. Rob Church (talk) 19:17, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad it exists, but I like my (unpublished, I think) greasemonkey hack better. For starters, it's instant! Interesting different takes on the problem though - mine "filters out", yours "filters in". That is, mine lets you *hide* talk spaces, project spaces etc. Incidentally, someone requested me to allow you to filter out all edits made by logged-in editors (ie, show only anon edits). They would probably find that useful on the official wikipedia version too. Stevage 13:52, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

From an undisclosed portion of Rob Church's to-do list:

Rewrite watchlists, recent changes, etc. so the code base is shared

This will add a lot more shared functionality. Rob Church (talk) 14:04, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

LDBot

Hi Rob, thanks for your comments on my bot approval, as I've mentioned on the page, it'll start it's trial run Friday evening. Then reason I'm writing here, is to direct your attention to another proposal for the bot, that I've listed on the request page here. I would appreciate your feedback. Thanks. --light darkness^(talk) 13:34, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My RFA

Hi Rob, you gave me a question in my RFA: In your view, do administrators hold a technical or political position? . Is there any chance you can rephrase that question? I've had a think and I've no idea how to answer it. --Dangherous 18:12, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it'll probably skew the result (I asked the question to test your understanding of something), but...do you think administrators are makers, or enforcers, of policies? Rob Church (talk) 02:00, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was looking at your question 4 for Dangherous "What do you understand will happen at the end of this five day discussion process?" don't you mean seven day discussion process? Jedi6 -(need help?) 19:41, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quite right. I do apologise and have corrected it. Rob Church (talk) 02:00, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

Thanks for the comment

Like you said, Wikipedia has the largest user base, but that means Wiktionary &, all the other projects have no representation. If maybe a link or, like the some how a centralized base of government/operations, or commitee, could be put on Wikimedia, that would be more representative of & INCUSIVE. Being the first really doesn't give special privilages. Indeed, Wikipedia has the most content BUT IT DOESN'T have ALL THE CONTENT.

Sorry don't have an account [since they haven't instituted the option to delete your account, made their own licence, or the GNUL hasn't changed yet, I haven't signed up], but you can send me an email (iooiioioo@hotmail.com)

thanks

peace

24.70.95.203 20:14, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Extra Space

I noticed that in wikihtml, when we edit, formating has extra space, for example, when we edit a comment, there's a space between the $Subject/headline:$ & the content of the message. Another example is $== Extra Space ==$ is also the same as $==Extra Space==$. Does this make comments larging in size as bytewise? Even if not, it could create confusion. So I guess Mediawiki needs to be tweaked/the devlopers\the codes needs a little editing?

Please leave one if you'd like more clarification on this issue. You could also contact me iooiioioo@hotmail.com [since they haven't instituted the option to delete your account, made their own licence, or the GNUL hasn't changed yet, I haven't signed up].

thanks

24.70.95.203 20:21, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This makes no sense to me whatsoever. Rob Church (talk) 20:44, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I seem to recall that someone once somewhere commented that "== Whatever ==" and "==Whatever==" rendered exactly the same so why not take the extra spaces around all the section headings out globally? ... as it would save several megabytes of disk space... the answer was that it wasn't worth the bother to actually do given what "several megabytes" cost these days (i.e.... almost nothing). Perhaps this is what is being suggested? Hope that helps. ++Lar: t/c 02:24, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To ++Lar: t/c

Yes that is EXCATLY what I mean, thank you. Wait, if you think that I want the Extra Space deleted, say in all the current articles, I believe that might be a too big of a task to do, but if the program could be programed so that it NO LONGER, I stress NO LONGER CREATES, or INCULDES white space, 'that's better'.

Please leave one if you'd like more clarification on this issue. You could also contact me iooiioioo@hotmail.com [since they haven't instituted the option to delete your account, made their own licence, or the GNUL hasn't changed yet, I haven't signed up].

thanks

24.70.95.203 19:26, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That interpretation makes sense, although I'm still none the wiser as to the reason the poster hasn't checked the archives of the Technical Village Pump, since that would reveal it was brought up not too long ago. In truth, there is a negligible amount of disk space taken up through a bit of extra whitespace, and since disk space is cheap, it's not something that should be worried over. Whitespace which is ignored in markup is often helpful to make the markup more readable. Converting from one form to the other would waste bandwidth and time, both of which aren't so cheap. Rob Church (talk) 15:16, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To Rob Church

Please tell me how '...whitespace which is ignored in markup is often helpful to make the markup more readable...'. & maybe, you could explain it in this case, since you said, '...often...'.

Please leave one if you'd like more clarification on this issue. You could also contact me iooiioioo@hotmail.com [since they haven't instituted the option to delete your account, made their own licence, or the GNUL hasn't changed yet, I haven't signed up].

thanks

24.70.95.203 19:26, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just Popping In

Hey Rob,

I haven't spoken to you in a while and I was wondering if you currently have any tasks you wish me to assist you with? Computerjoe 's talk 18:02, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Recentchanges "show new changes" bug

The Special:Recentchanges page has a link of the form:

Show new changes starting from 8 April 2006

When you click on this, it should give you the next set of recent changes, with no gaps or duplication. In other words, the bottom "recent change" on the new page should be precisely one change after the top "recent change" on the old page (unless too much time has elapsed).

If the top "recent change" on the old page has, say, version number "47530588", then the bottom "recent change" on the new page should have version number "47530589". However, in practice this is very often not the case. Sometimes it skips one or two and the bottom "recent change" on the new page is, say, "47530591". Verification by redoing "recent changes" with a bigger limit= parameter invariably shows that the missing "recent changes" really do exist (eg, "47530589" and "47530590" in this hypothetical example), it's just that they were skipped by the "Show new changes" link. More rarely, duplication occurs, so the bottom "recent change" on the new page is "47530588" again.

This is rather annoying and can certainly hinder recent changes patrolling, since there is a nonzero chance, maybe as high as 1% depending on what limit= parameter is used, that any given "recent change" will not be seen. I reported this bug some time ago to either Tim Starling or Brion Vibber or both, but it's still there.

PS, in addition to a from= parameter specifying a timestamp (eg, from=20060408085808), it might be useful to be able to specify the version ID directly, eg: fromversion=47530588. This might be useful if a vandalism edit is belatedly spotted and you want to see all the edits that took place immediately after, not necessarily by the same user or to the same article, as it might be an IP-hopping AOL user on a spree for instance). If this was implemented, then the "Show new changes" link URL should naturally use it instead of the current from= (timestamp-based) URL. -- Curps 09:25, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't wish to be rude here, but part of the problem is the bug being reported in the wrong place. Without elaborating upon it; please read the statement on my user page. 86.140.128.28 18:39, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Images name conflict

Another obvious longstanding issue is image name conflicts, eg Image:New.jpg history, inadvertent as here or intentional, and watchlists don't monitor this. It's bizarre that images can be replaced in place but can't even be moved out of the way to prevent this from recurring. There are plenty of other poorly chosen names like Image:Fox.jpg, etc. -- Curps 02:09, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As above, although I think this has been reported. 86.140.128.28 18:40, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Asking here as I can't access the IRC channel at present...

I was going to ask what's planned in respect of Wikiventory at present. I am apparently unable to ask in the IRC channel so am asking here. What is planned for Wikiventory?

(For some reason I can't access the IRC channel at the moment as I keep getting refused connections from the server :-( ) ShakespeareFan00 22:54, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know. What is planned for Wikiventory? 86.140.128.28 18:40, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ContiE's Administrator Abuse

Hi, I'm in a potentially awkward position with an Administrator. I have read the Wiki pages on dispute resolution but I'm still not sure how to proceed.

The Admin ContiE has a personal grudge against me for reasons I do not fully understand. He has been this way since I began frequenting wikipedia.

I have done work improving the furvert article. He has basically gone on a crusade against any edit I make. He controls every furry category article and several others ruthlessly. He is an iron fist and bans anyone he edit wars with. I had uploaded pictures and he deleted them with no talking. He seems to believe I am every person he has had an edit war against. He is always using personal attacks, calling me troll without reason. I uploaded them again and he voted them for deleted, but to his surprise the person who runs the images, thank you Nv8200p, found they were acceptable once I tagged them properly. Just recently he removed both the images without himself discussing it in the talk page (unless he was the same person who discussed only one) with the edit here [1] Then ContiE assumed bad faith, added his constant insult of troll in the talk page. It appears on a completed different wiki, a comedy one in all things, somebody else stole my username and I believe this was Conti himself and uploaded them. ContiE showed it as his reason. While vandalism like his, I would revert and mention it, he would ban me permanently if I undid his edit. That is why I am asking admins for help. He holds a couple of accounts on wikipedia and I think they are administrators so I have to be careful who I tell about this. Arights 06:11, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A KISS Rfa Thanks

Thank you, I've been promoted. psch e mp | talk 01:24, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Feature request

It seems the 1000 most active Wikipedes makes 65% of the daily edits – I read it on the statistics page of Wikipedia. Anyway, if there was a function where you could say “I trust this guy” and his edits henceforth wouldn’t be visible to you on the recent changes page unless you explicitly asked for it – well, it would make vandalfighting easier. On a whole, some form of sorting of users in this respect would be nice – be it based on adminship or a new function as described above is a matter of taste. Basically it’s about making the crap stand out. Keep up the good work, you’re an awesome man, you rock! Regards, Gardar Rurak 08:48, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please file a feature request in the appropriate location. See my user page for the explanation. 86.140.128.28 18:42, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RE:Signature

Sorry for taking so long to get on this. I've been very busy and haven't had much time for editing Wikipedia lately. How is this? - Mike (talk) 18:04, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fine. 86.140.128.28 18:42, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Spring celebration / Easter (as your preferences and beliefs dictate)

Here's hoping that if the bunny leaves you any beans they're this kind! ++Lar: t/c 15:03, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. 86.140.128.28 18:42, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ZsinjBot

Hey Rob. I've been running ZsinjBot periodically for the past few weeks under trial status. I would like your input as to whether or not you feel it had done a satisfactory job. I would like to put in a request for the bot flag on meta, but would like your opinion first. Thanks, Zsinj^Talk 16:42, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

00-99

Rob, I really want to talk this out. I don't know what time is good for you but believe me I will make time for you. John Reid 04:38, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

About 1.6.3 Template Infobox align

Hello, I want to ask you a question. The Template:Infobox Software is right here, but my 1.6.3 is left and no border. How can I do? Thanks. www.mediawiki.org User:Opentiss

Chocolates

Thanks for the Easter candy. If you're trying to bribe me... um, perhaps I'd better not say anything else! Mindspillage (spill yours?) 17:16, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hit counting

I saw your developer's comment about the Apache Logs. Do you have any suggestions about how to get page view data? My suggestion would be to re-instate the hit counters on Wikibooks but only call them on two or three pages at a time for sample periods of about a week. Robinhw 08:39, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

'Crats, bots and new pages

Thank you for the updates! Developers are cool because they have much more brains than I do. For example, I register an account that's a pun on my name, whip out AWB, then call it a robot. You guys could probably recreate Bender from Futurama and make him a functional Wikipedian. That's why developers exist. —THIS IS MESSEDOCKER (TALK) 23:57, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, of course. Rob Church (talk) 23:58, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Approvals group

Just wanted to let you know that I have removed references to the approvals group from both the main bots page and the approvals page. See Wikipedia Talk:Bots for my reasoning. Pegasus1138^{Talk | Contribs | Email} ---- 00:31, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sour grapes. Rob Church (talk) 00:42, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, not sour grapes, though part of this is the fact that the approvals group is acting cabalistic but there's also the fact that there is absolutely no consensus for it. It was recommended and inacted with only the support of a small group of people (several of which are now members of the group). Pegasus1138^{Talk | Contribs | Email} ---- 00:46, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps I spoke too soon, then. I think with respect to consensus, and with respect to exercising common sense:

The group who enacted it were those who monitor the bot procedures on a regular basis
Sometimes things don't scale, and sometimes we need to consider common sense; a bot that's running out of control or running without our knowledge could cause some serious damage before it was noticed
There was no intention for any hint of cabalism; care to elaborate?
Consensus doesn't need to be large, nor does it need to have a poll or be heralded with banners and announcements. You demonstrated opposition to what was previously an unchallenged way of doing things; now we're pausing to hear you out.

Rob Church (talk) 00:49, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The approvals group is acting cabalistic in the sense that they are exercising absolute control with no hint of authority, also waiting to hear me out is nice but I get the feeling that one of your colleagues will probably end up reverting me before joining the discussion or without waiting the discussion out. I'm gonna try to keep the rest of the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Bots for continuity. Pegasus1138^{Talk | Contribs | Email} ---- 00:53, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How do I fix my wikipedia skins?

I hope this is the right place to post this but, my defult skin has changed and it is really awful now and doesn't even work right anymore (i.e. I cannot click on a link when there are other links on the left of the screen.) It was hard and slow to change it to one that works (others are broken too). I'm now using classic mode but I dont like it. Please send for help. Greasysteve13 13:38, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Access //en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Preferences&useskin=monobook, which will force the Monobook skin to be loaded. This should allow a skin change. Rob Church (talk) 10:36, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm saying the Monobook skin (and others) has stoped functioning correctly on my computer.--Greasysteve13 05:20, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Minor request

Currently, the "enhanced RC" option shows up as:

Enhanced recent changes (JavaScript)

while the "enhanced watchlist option shows up as:

Enhanced watchlist

Shouldn't the latter also have "(JavaScript)" appended to the end, if for no other reason than for standardization? Ral315 (talk) 14:18, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Those aren't the same "enhancement" - enhanced recent changes refers to a different sort of "changes list" which uses JavaScript. The "enhanced watchlist" option refers to the watchlist behaving more like recent changes. I'd concede that the interface text needs altering however, so I'll do that in the core distribution now. Rob Church (talk) 15:14, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Grant Naylor

I think that User:Chriscf was referring to this. ;-) 17:28, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

rfa

I wanted to stop by and thank you for your constructive criticism of my RFA. It's helped, and is helping, to improve me as a wikipedian and an editor. I look forward to gaining your support in the future. Until then, keep on keepin on. ⇒ SWATJester ^Ready Aim _Fire! 19:33, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kindness

Hello Rob Church : ) Your approach was very kind and just what the situation needed. Thank you for doing it. regards, FloNight ^talk 23:04, 29 April 2006 (UTC) No reason to doubt this user's competence or good faith. Rob Church (talk) 22:39, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ShinmaBot

Thank you for the message regarding ShinmaBot. I've been forced to take a WikiVacation due to some personal issues. I shall be back and ShinmaBot will be turned on eventually. Thank you for touching base with me. -- ShinmaWa^(talk) 06:42, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's not a problem, of course. Hope the personal issues are resolved soon, and thanks for the response. Rob Church (talk) 14:31, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]