User talk:Smith609

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

Please note: to avoid duplication, I'll reply to queries on this page.

Images by Friedrich Oltmanns on Commons[edit]

Hello! These drawings will soon be deleted since the author died only in 1945 and his works will be released to public domain on January, 1st. They may be automatically restored then. Mithril (talk) 20:25, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Have these images now been restored? 11:01, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

update toolbox.js to new stats system?[edit]

Hi. Your toolbox.js has become so much a part of my Wiki life that I'd forgotten that it wasn't actually part of Wikimedia. <g> Since has been down for a while now, perhaps the link in toolbox.js could be updated to use the new "official" stats tool? Cheers. Le Deluge (talk) 19:35, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

I've checked, it works if you just replace the URL with "" + - and whilst you're at it, the heading needs to be <h3> rather than <h5>. Looks like Wikidashboard has gone for good though. Le Deluge (talk) 19:55, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
Glad that you find the script useful. I've made the suggested changes. Martin (Smith609 – Talk) 10:56, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

RevisionSlider & WikEdDiff interaction[edit]

Hi! You are receiving this message as it looks like you have a copy of the WikEdDiff user script in your user space on this wiki.

When using the RevisionSlider and WikEdDiff together WikEdDiff will not function correctly when the RevisionSlider is used to load a new diff. This can be fixed by adding a simple hook listener to your copy.

During a deployment slot today the RevisionSlider extension will be turned on as a beta feature on all wikis.

For the first week the RevisionSlider will be deployed with a 'hack' that will mean WikEdDiff will continue to work, but on the 21st and 22nd of September this 'hack' will be removed.

You can find the relevant phabricator ticket here which contains the code that you will need to add to your copy of the script (in most cases). Please also use this ticket for further questions & discussion.

Addshore (talk) 09:20, 13 September 2016 (UTC)


Dear Smith609, I notice that you moved Camarotoechia Hall & Clarke, 1893 to Sinotectirostrum Sartenaer, 1961, based on Cherkesova (2007). However, I think you misinterpret the situation. Cherkesova reassigns two taxa, "radiata" and "omaliusi", that Nalivkin had placed in Camarotoechia, to Sinotectirostrum as a new combination for a species and a subspecies respectively. Neither of these taxa can be the type of Camarotoechia, which I presume is Atrypa congretata Conrad, 1841. This means Camarotoechia and Sinotectirostrum henceforth are recognised genera of their own. I'll leave this to you, regards, Dwergenpaartje (talk) 17:01, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for spotting the error. I'll reinstate Camarotoechia. In case I've missed the nuance of what you've said, it would be great if you could make any relevant changes. Martin (Smith609 – Talk) 09:42, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Your edit to Template:Taxonomy/Eumetazoa/?[edit]

Hi, {{taxon?}} doesn't work now (it hasn't since Wikid77 made changes to the system to allow hardcoding of ancestors to reduce expansion depth) – it causes an expansion depth error. So we currently use the 'standard' format with the ? in the link text. All uses of {{taxon?}} in taxonomy templates have been removed.

At present, |same_as= in a taxonomy template must be accompanied by |parent=. Peter coxhead (talk) 12:50, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

What a shame that breaking changes are being introduced, particularly if they make the job of editors more difficult. Martin (Smith609 – Talk) 15:28, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
The problem lies with the ridiculously deep taxonomic hierarchies, particularly for dinosaurs and for birds treated as avian dinosaurs. It just is not possible to process them with the current expansion depth limit of 40 (effectively 20 for templates since they count as 2 when inside a transcluded template). Picking up the parent by following up a same_as link adds to the depth and causes the system to break even sooner. The automated taxobox system would work really well if it used the Linnean ranks and a few extra clades. But look at Template:Taxonomy/Pteranodon – it can only be made to work properly by using a skip template (the ... line). Look at Template:Taxonomy/Tyrannosaurus – it works because some ranks are hard-coded (the downward arrows). I've spent about 3 days re-writing the colour determining subsystem just to save 2-3 expansion depths, which is essential to keep the system working.
There is a better solution – introduce "majorparent" to taxonomy templates to skip levels – but it needs someone with time to do all the work involved. Peter coxhead (talk) 17:54, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi, just thought I'd let you know that I'm working on what is by far the best solution to expansion depth limit problems, namely rewriting the parts of the code that traverse the taxonomic hierarchy in Lua. It avoids completely the need to have multiple templates with nesting (like the t^ family for example). You just write loops! The expansion depth drops dramatically, and hierarchies of 100+ levels should be no problem.

So far I've created Lua versions of the traversals needed to find the taxobox colour and to generate the table shown on the "Taxonomy/TAXON" pages. The final step is the traversal needed for the taxoboxes themselves, but it looks straightforward, although it's necessary to work slowly in view of the number of pages that would be affected by any error.

When converting traversals to Lua is finished, we should be able to restore the proper behaviour of |same_as= and some of the other bits of the system that were disabled as part of fudges to reduce expansion depth, and we won't need hardcoded or /skip templates purely to reduce the number of levels.

Ultimately I think that most of the automated taxonomy system can be moved to Lua, leaving only the raw data stored in the taxonomy templates, since this format is much easier for most editors to set up and modify.

If you're interested, Module:Autotaxobox/sandbox will have the latest version. Peter coxhead (talk) 10:25, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Template:Taxonomy/Eumetazoa/? and similar templates are now fixed and don't need the redundant |parent=. See WP:Automated taxobox system/notes for some notes for "old hands" on recent changes. Peter coxhead (talk) 10:35, 30 January 2017 (UTC)


Could you upload the newest citation bot source from GitHub to the developement version for testing please

Deletion of some of the T^ templates[edit]

Please see Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2016 December 17#T^ templates. Now that I have coded all the traversals of the taxonomic hierarchies encoded in taxobox templates in Lua at Module:Autotaxobox, these templates aren't used and I've nominated them for deletion. Peter coxhead (talk) 14:30, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Great, congratulations on coding this all in Lua, and good luck with the implementation! Martin (Smith609 – Talk) 17:19, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
As ever, the real thanks belong to you (and some of the other early editors, like Bob the Wikipedian) for creating and developing the automated taxobox system in the first place. I'm still full of admiration for how you managed to get it to work in the template language. It's a great asset to Wikipedia, and I'm only too pleased to be able to keep it running. Coding in Lua is so, so much easier.
I'm currently cleaning up the taxonomy templates, after which I want to look at restoring some of the functionality (like {{Taxon?}}) which was either deliberately or inadvertently rendered inoperable while editors were struggling to cope with the kind of taxonomic hierarchy shown at Template:Taxonomy/Pteranodon, which I doubt was envisaged back in 2010. Peter coxhead (talk) 17:36, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
As per my comment above, see WP:Automated taxobox system/notes for the way that the previous functionality of {{Taxon?}} is now provided. Peter coxhead (talk) 10:38, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

{{Graphical timeline}}[edit]

How much work would be involved in making a version of this template that produces horizontal, rather than vertical, timelines? Thanks, —swpbT 20:02, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

I vaguely remember creating such a template. Does {{Horizontal_timeline}} do the trick? Perhaps {{Fossil range}} calls a similar template? You might want to include a link to this discussion at Template talk:Graphical timeline and update the template documentation, if you get an answer to your question. Martin (Smith609 – Talk) 16:03, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Taxobot children[edit]

Do you have any opinion on Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Taxobot children. Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 23:11, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Some Help[edit]

How do you edit the information for the speciesboxes/automatic taxoboxes?--Mr Fink (talk) 23:48, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

@Apokryltaros: the best place to ask questions about the autotaxobox system now is at Wikipedia talk:Automated taxobox system. Please explain there exactly what you mean. If you mean "how do you edit taxonomy templates?", see Introduction to taxonomy templates. Peter coxhead (talk) 10:56, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Cite doi/subpage[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svgTemplate:Cite doi/subpage has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 21:44, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Null edit[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svgTemplate:Null edit has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 21:45, 25 March 2017 (UTC)