Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Wikipedia:VP/T)
Jump to: navigation, search
  Policy   Technical   Proposals   Idea lab   Miscellaneous  
The technical section of the village pump is used to discuss technical issues about Wikipedia. Bug reports and feature requests should be made in Phabricator (see how to report a bug). Bugs with security implications should be reported differently (see how to report security bugs).

Newcomers to the technical village pump are encouraged to read these guidelines prior to posting here. Questions about MediaWiki in general should be posted at the MediaWiki support desk.

« Older discussions, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153
Centralized discussion
Proposals: policy other Discussions Ideas

For a listing of ongoing discussions, see the dashboard.


Can't log into Wikipedia sites using Safari browser on Apple devices[edit]

Beginning from a few days ago, I have been having trouble logging into all Wikipedia sites (specifically the English versions of Wikipedia, the Wikimedia Commons, and the Wiktionary) on my iPhone and iPad using the Safari browser (not sure which version – how do I check?). I get the error message:

There seems to be a problem with your login session; this action has been canceled as a precaution against session hijacking. Go back to the previous page, reload that page and then try again.

I cannot bypass this message, and neither reloading the page nor going to some other page helps. I do not know if Safari's built-in function for autofilling user-ids and passwords is causing the problem, but even if I manually enter the user-id and password the problem occurs. I tried reporting this issue to the Phabricator, but since it seems to be specific to Safari (the problem doesn't seem to occur with the Mozilla Firefox browser) I was told that it was not a problem on the Wikipedia side. Any idea how to solve this problem? — SMUconlaw (talk) 11:49, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

@Smuconlaw: try to clear your cookies (Wikimedia-related) in Safari. Stryn (talk) 18:09, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
I did try that, but it doesn't seem to have worked. — SMUconlaw (talk) 18:21, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
So no one else is experiencing this problem, and nothing can be done about it? I'm still unable to log in on my mobile devices, which is very annoying. — SMUconlaw (talk) 17:34, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

<br/> or <br>?[edit]

Is there any difference between <br/> and <br>? -- Magioladitis (talk) 18:50, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Line-break handling#.3Cbr.3E. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:01, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
Also, <br/> and <br /> are preferred for anyone who uses this syntax highlighter. kennethaw88talk 20:09, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
See this guide from W3Schools — both are valid in HTML, but <br> is considered invalid for XHTML purposes. Nyttend (talk) 02:28, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
I believe that consensus is that <br> should not be converted to <br/> unless there are substantive changes being made at the same time. I have no evidence to support this belief, however. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:41, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
You're probably thinking of the fact that bots are prohibited from making this kind of change, basically because they clog up a large number of edit histories with no visible effect. Since humans can't edit as fast, someone making such changes presumably wouldn't encounter opposition; the likely response would be something like "why do that; you're wasting your time". Nyttend (talk) 02:53, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
Or edit wars between two people who obstinately disagree on / or <br/> vs. <br />. I've seen that (elsewhere). --Unready (talk) 05:20, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
Nyttend, in most cases you would be right, but in this case, I was actually thinking that the OP needed to see the words I wrote above, given the situation in which he has placed himself recently. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:00, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
@Magioladitis: I am certain that I answered this question for you, some months ago. IIRC it was on a user talk page, not necessarily your own.
Anyway, the Wikimedia sites (including Wikipedia) serve HTML5, where (according to the W3C docs - don't believe all you read at W3Schools) the space and the slash of the <br /> tag are both optional. But when the tag has attributes, and the last attribute doesn't end with a quote character, for example
<br style="clear:both;" id=gap1 />
the space is mandatory if the slash is present. Even if there are no attributes, some browsers don't like the space to be omitted if the slash is present.
Until a few years ago, the Wikimedia sites served XHTML 1.0, where (regardless of attributes) the space is optional but the slash is mandatory. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:37, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
The last major browser to require a space before /> was Netscape 4.0, which was released almost 20 years ago. If anything since then can't handle a space, it's a browser bug. --Unready (talk) 01:39, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
@Unready: Consider a tag like <br id=gap1/> - is the slash part of the value of the id= attribute, or not? It might be; and so the unquoted attribute value syntax states

If an attribute using the unquoted attribute syntax is to be followed by another attribute or by the optional "/" (U+002F) character allowed in step 6 of the start tag syntax above, then there must be a space character separating the two.

It therefore requires a space to resolve the ambiguity between <br id=gap1/ > where it is part of the value, and <br id=gap1 /> where it is not. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 12:41, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
From the W3C HTML5 reference:

However, in the XHTML syntax, attribute values must always be quoted using either single or double quotes.

... which would apply to self-closed tags. In HTML syntax (not self-closed), quotes are optional. --Unready (talk) 21:54, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
Self-closed tags are not forbidden in HTML5 - see section 8.1.2.1 Start tags

Then, if the element is one of the void elements, or if the element is a foreign element, then there may be a single "/" (U+002F) character. This character has no effect on void elements, but on foreign elements it marks the start tag as self-closing.

So the presence of a slash before the greater-than sign does not make it XHTML, nor does it make quotes necessary; the self-closed form is both HTML and XHTML, and so if the document is declared as HTML in its <!DOCTYPE ... > (Wikipedia pages all begin with <!DOCTYPE html>), there is no need to observe the stricter XHTML rules. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 01:11, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
If I write <br> <br/> <br /> in a wiki page, all three of them get transformed by the MediaWiki software to <br />. So from a wikitext perspective, it doesn't matter which one you write, and there are no accessibility or compatibility considerations to worry about. WP:Line-break handling says "<br /> is preferred as it will be rendered correctly in all circumstances, including strict XHTML", which is nonsensical in view of the way these tags are actually processed by MediaWiki. — This, that and the other (talk) 00:55, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
@This, that and the other: The MediaWiki software doesn't touch it. The transformation is done by HTML Tidy, which we're on the point of dropping; partly because it doesn't understand those parts of HTML5 that weren't carried over from HTML 4.01. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 00:58, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
@Redrose64: That isn't the case. I tested this on my local MediaWiki installation, which definitely does not have Tidy installed, and the transformation occurred regardless. This is done by the slightly misleadingly named function Sanitizer::removeHTMLtags in MediaWiki's PHP code. — This, that and the other (talk) 01:30, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
Tidy isn't a separate installation. Sanitizer is Tidy, until Sanitizer becomes HTML5Depurate, which is "soon." --Unready (talk) 22:02, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
If you look into it you'll find Tidy is a distinct PHP extension that is called from MediaWiki code when enabled. (For interest, Tidy doesn't appear to be enabled at translatewiki:, so you might like to experiment in the sandbox there to see how things behave without Tidy.) In any case, suffice it to say that MediaWiki does more tidying that one might have thought. mw:Parsing/Replacing Tidy makes no mention of <br> tags, so we don't have anything to worry about in that regard. — This, that and the other (talk) 10:31, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

As far as I'm concerned, <br> is valid wikitext, and whether it's valid in any particular output format or version of HTML pretty much irrelevant. We'll make it keep working one way or another. I recommend using it in that form in wikitext, without the slash, because it's shorter. This was my position during the XHTML era, and is vindicated now in the HTML 5 era.

WHATWG (the body that made HTML 5) denigrates the idea of XHTML in a few different places. In the syntax section of the HTML 5 spec, it has a kind of joke definition of XHTML which seems to serve only as an argument against its existence. As Redrose64 says, MediaWiki does not output XHTML, we use <!DOCTYPE html> which means we are outputting HTML 5. In HTML 5, self-closing tags exist only as a very limited backwards compatibility concession. Except for foreign content like embedded SVG, self-closing slashes are only recognised in places where they are unnecessary. For example, <div/> is a parse error and is interpreted as if the slash were absent: <div>. Only in void elements like <br> are they allowed, but void elements by definition do not require, and cannot have, closing tags. The HTML 5 fragment serialization algorithm, which defines conversion of a DOM tree to a string, requires that br elements be represented as "<br>".

During the XHTML era, we never actually output XHTML, we declared our output to be "XHTML transitional" which was really just tag soup with aspirations. But XHTML had mindshare and so it made more sense to be arguing about writing wikitext as if it were XHTML. Those days are over, so I don't think that there are two defensible sides of this argument anymore.

We'll soon be getting rid of Tidy on WMF websites in favour of a pure PHP solution called RemexHtml that I recently wrote. It should eventually become the default for new MediaWiki installations as well. It accepts either form and will initially output "<br />" for compatibility with parser tests. -- Tim Starling (talk) 10:03, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Is there a way to hide edits that got reverted from watchlist?[edit]

You know, when someone edit the page but got reverted. Bertdrunk (talk) 00:45, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

No, because a revert is merely an edit that cancels out the effect of one or more previous edits. They're not marked in any special way, except that some reversion methods (such as WP:ROLLBACK) use a boilerplate edit summary. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 01:01, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
Users with the rollback privilege can mark edits and their rollback as a bot edits, even if it's interactive. That's as close as you're going to get. --Unready (talk) 04:07, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
"Users with the rollback privilege can mark edits and their rollback as a bot edits, even if it's interactive." UH? Since when (and how? but because of WP:BEANS, by email please) can you do that? That seems like a terrible idea too. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 12:49, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
It's not part of the rollback right (or the rollbackers group), it's the markbotedits right that sysops have. The "how" is documented at mw:Manual:Administrators#Rollback. As for "since when", apparently since December 2003, although back then it was just part of the sysop package. It was moved to the rollback right in October 2004, seemingly broken in November 2007 due to a typo, and took its modern use of the markbotedits right in August 2008. Anomie 13:47, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
That seems like a terrible idea... The idea, as the manual link above says, is to hide vandalism (which is when someone would/should use rollback) from Recent Changes, although it still doesn't hide it if users choose to show bot edits. Also, oops, it's a separate privilege associated with rollback, not rollback itself. --Unready (talk) 22:15, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
There's a project (by Analytics?) to mark reverted revisions. When that's finished, it might be possible to do something like that. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:21, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
For reference, phab:T152434 would allow to detect reverts in RC, but detecting (and even more so, filtering out) the edits that were reverted would be trickier. Cenarium (talk) 18:39, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Restricting Google book links from a specific publisher[edit]

From Wikipedia:Potentially_unreliable_sources#Wikipedia_mirrors and the next section covering SELFPUB companies, is there any way to automate stopping these additions? All of them seem to propagate via Google Books alone. More specific examples, at WT:INB, books by the Gyan publication keep getting used as references and Gyan is shown to be a mirror our articles without acknowledgement, even with their own authors and dates. Right now, dedicated editors have to keep a tab on their occurrences here via linksearch (routine cleanups), since they keep cropping back up.

Since they do not concern a single url, the usual Mw:Blacklist, filters or XlinkBot can't be used normally. The only thing playing in my head is making XlinkBot have this additional function which checks any edit with a GB link, uses the available GB citation tools to extract the publisher, compares that to its own blacklist and then acts. Is this feasible or are there any better ideas? Ugog Nizdast (talk) 07:46, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Shouldn't be hard for the bot to find it. Google Book webpages contain metadata in the page source, including a line labeled "publisher". Should be feasible for a bot to check new links to Google Books, pull out that metadata, and then if the publisher appears to be on a blacklist, add the diff to some page for review by a human. And of course if it's just amazingly efficient, enable the bot to just revert. Someguy1221 (talk) 08:35, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
I could add this, given time (which I don't have too much). I would however blacklist those on sight, it otherwise keeps eating editor's time. Today you see one, research and remove, tomorrow it is someone else who has to go through it, and the day after ... XLinkBot may however be a good detection. I need to have a look how to do this. --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:37, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
Can I have a couple of specific examples of this (preferably popular ones). I may already have this functionality, but am not sure if it was thoroughly tested). --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:45, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
Do you know more on how GB works? all I know is it's extremely unpredictable in terms of content and links. I've recently seen an old link to a history book take me a random book about my horoscope. In addition to that, catching each of the publication's books on sight would seem a big task compared to just blacklisting it by its name. This one-by-one method also wouldn't prevent future additions which will have to be "registered" to be prevented.
The most popular one is this Gyan publishing house, though in my watchlist, this is the most recent edit which removed one, links to this: "Fairs and Festivals of India: Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Kerala, Lakshadweep, Pondicherry, Tamil Nadu". I could search for more but I suspect Sitush and Utcursch have first-hand experience on this. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 01:29, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
@Beetstra: Some examples are listed at Wikipedia:Potentially unreliable sources/Books that plagiarize Wikipedia.
Nearly all the edits are in form of links to Google Books. E.g.
  • books.google.com/books?id=alllAwAAQBAJ&pg=1
  • books.google.co.in/books?printsec=frontcover&id=alllAwAAQBAJ
  • books.google.ca/books?id=alllAwAAQBAJ&lpg=PP1
Maybe we can use regex to ban anything that matches books.google.* and the unique id. utcursch | talk 02:05, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
I would indeed expect that each book has a unique and identifyable ID that we can match in the blacklist. If one book gets varying IDs then it becomes problematic. \bbooks.google.*?id=alllAwAAQBAJ\b should do that.
I will have a look at the content as well, and try to see what I can make XLinkBot do here. --Dirk Beetstra T C 02:55, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
I have brought the discussion to the spam blacklist, here, but I will leave that open for discussion until we decide that we really want to blacklist this stuff (I haven't seen any evidence of spamming, and I hence am somewhat reluctant to pull the trigger purely on an 'it is not reliable' reason, I'd prefer to have community input on that). --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:11, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
A couple of questions. We need evidence of spamming and discussion for the mw-blacklist, right? I feel we won't get any blatant and repeated instances because this isn't clear-cut spamming. This is more a slow but persistent problem which is usually done by AGF editors (mostly new) who didn't know better. Atleast two additional experienced editors whom I know of and who usually deal with this cleanup haven't been active enough for joining this discussion. For discussions, just typing that in the archives search of WP:RSN and WT:INB show a lot.
Can't get diffs but I can demonstrate its prevalence here, just use "insource:Gyan" for instance. However, maybe because being unfamiliar with this issue, I'm having my own doubts about this specific house, I just did the search and so many FAs and GA articles from the first result page itself have it! Earth, India, Cold War! @Fowler&fowler:, at India, this has been there for long, are you aware of this publication or it being used as a source? Also once again pinging (if available) Sitush and SpacemanSpiff about Gyan being is so many high quality articles?
About blacklisting it, it's a good immediate fix but won't it be a really big list in the end? Just this one publisher I mentioned above seems to have a lot of books, this list is going to swell and how can we be sure we've covered them all? And how permanent are these unique ids? Are we sure they won't change later to some other book? Ugog Nizdast (talk) 08:18, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
Hi, I've never heard of these publishers, and can't really speak to their reliability, or lack thereof. I typically only use established scholarly publishers, such as Oxford, Cambridge, Wiley, Routledge, Blackwell etc. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 11:51, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
Tyagi's Martial Races of Undivided India is perhaps the most notorious example from Gyan that I regularly clean up. There will be a couple of examples at User:Sitush/Common#Gyan. The problem is that Gyan were publishing before WP existed and some of there earlier things thus certainly cannot be mirrors, although they may still be violating the copyright of other authors/publishers. - Sitush (talk) 13:29, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

WP:HAITI[edit]

There is a gadget used (User:Kephir/gadgets/rater) that is inadvertently swapping out Project Haiti with its former parent Project Caribbean as seen here [1] This is a problem that reoccurs now-and-then even after several attempts to amend its code, which was previously reported by Meno25 shown here [2] but has appeared to go unresolved. After many manual assessments by myself and others within the project, to have it systemically change constantly via usage of a gadget by other editors that come in and contribute to articles in good faith, indirectly (and unknowingly) undermine the project and sets us back each time. Is there a way to change this code to make sure it is going to WP:HAITI? We would prefer to manually include Project Caribbean on a case-by-case basis where deemed applicable to its entirely, such as geography-based articles etc. Project Caribbean sadly is also largely inactive, which furthers our need for this code to be amended as soon as possible. I was referred here by Meno25, in hopes of resolving this issue. Please ping me in a response. Thank you kindly. Savvyjack23 (talk) 20:53, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

@Savvyjack23: User:Kephir/gadgets/rater is not what MediaWiki calls a gadget. It's a user script by User:Kephir who would be the natural person to ask. I looked around and found User:Kephir/gadgets/rater/aliases.js which says:
"WikiProject Haiti": "WikiProject Caribbean",
Removing that line would probably prevent such Haiti edits in the future. {{WikiProject Haiti}} hasn't redirected to {{WikiProject Caribbean}} since 2014.[3] User:Kephir/gadgets/rater/aliases.js might have other obsolete data but I haven't examined it. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:24, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
@Savvyjack23 and PrimeHunter: I removed that line and tested the script. It should be working correctly now. Thank you. --Meno25 (talk) 09:51, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Structured Data Errors[edit]

Hello. To whom it may concern, while running some random Wikipedia articles in Google's Structured Data Testing Tool there are errors which show up. Does anybody know if this poses an indexing problem on Google's Knowledge Graph and if so does anybody know how to fix them? --Omer Toledano (talk) 07:54, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

What are the exact "errors which show up"? --Malyacko (talk) 10:13, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Problem with citation generation[edit]

I have two questions -

  1. Can someone advise me on the best place to post this sort of concern?
  2. My actual concern is the below issue.

I tried to generate a citation from a PMID with the citation generator in what I think is the Wikipedia:RefToolbar.

Here is what I get With source editor, input is PMID (missing PMC link)

  • Yuk, SM; Han, KT; Kim, SJ; Kim, W; Sohn, TY; Jeon, B; Kim, YM; Park, EC (16 September 2015). "Consumption of pharmaceutical drugs in exception region of separation for drug prescribing and dispensing program in South Korea.". Substance abuse treatment, prevention, and policy. 10: 36. PMID 26376979. 

With visual editor, input is PMID (problem with PMC link)

This citation should have a PMC link, which would mean a correct number in the PMC field. The problem with the second citation is that it inserts the letters "PMC" before the number in the field. Removing those letters generates the correct citation, which is

Here is the request -

  • Harmonize the citation generators
  • PMC field should include PMC number without appending the letters PMC in the front

Thoughts? To whom should I direct this feedback? Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:17, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

This bug is being tracked in Phabricator bug report T157152. Until it is resolved, you'll need to remove the "PMC" characters manually. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:29, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
Resolved

from an English Wikipedia perspective. Blue Rasberry (talk) 20:34, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Thursday blues[edit]

The user interface in MonoBook skin has changed. When editing a page, the edit summary window takes up more space then it did before; and when creating a new section, the section heading box is bigger. Both have a blue border when they have focus. Blue border - good; more occupation of real estate - bad. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:55, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Seems to be the case in Vector as well. Eman235/talk 22:23, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
The following css placed on Special:MyPage/common.css (or skin-specific css page) will reduce the size of the box:
#wpSummary { padding: 0.2em !important; }
(you can play around with the number until it looks right for you) - Evad37 [talk] 00:07, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

I think the font size has changed too. Does anyone remember what the old one was? DaßWölf 01:13, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

The change was linked from Tech News above. Luckily, it was the first line of the many changes listed, T152025. The changes appear to have been made here, but I could very well be wrong. Does that help anyone? – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:04, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
Yes, it does. Much appreciated. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:08, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Hey, These actions are being made as a part of UI standardization. See phab:M101 and this. We are also changing the whole edit parts and modernize it. For screenshots see phab:T111088. Ladsgroupoverleg 17:51, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Can you please make some option to turn off all the animations? They are useless and annoying. And why the summary input is now always narrower than the available width? Even before the summary text was not always fitting in the visible area, but now it is even worse (and this meaningless arbitrary right margin does not seem to serve any purpose). — Mikhail Ryazanov (talk) 00:20, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
On Firefox I can only see the tops of letters in the edit summary, no problem with Chrome. Vector skin.Doug Weller talk 20:06, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
When using just Firefox, my edit summary box displays well; but when I have wikEd turned on , its edit summary window is now almost useless, which I assume is related to these changes. Dhtwiki (talk) 00:42, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Meantime, this is how my edit summary box is displaying text (Firefox). —ATS 🖖 talk 02:39, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Here is how it looks "plain" (default settings, without any gadgets):
Edit summary (plain) 2017-02-19.png
Very strange margins and a quite arbitrary vertical size, neither consistent with the text, nor with the buttons. — Mikhail Ryazanov (talk) 05:50, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Watchlist[edit]

Is there an ongoing issue with the 'mark all pages as visited' button? Appears when first clicking on watchlist but then vanishes as the page completes loading. (Using Chrome). Thanks. Eagleash (talk) 01:28, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Ditto. Mine disappeared completely. —ATS 🖖 talk 01:44, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Ditto -- ferret (talk) 02:25, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Same here: Mobile Safari on iPad: brief glimpse as page loads, then it's gone. I also noticed more spacious text boxes—the edit summary, for instance—that are very welcome! — Gorthian (talk) 02:28, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

It may be an issue with gadget loading order. It's hidden by "(This loads the base style for the watchlist. Please do not disable this option.)" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets. The code is in MediaWiki:Gadget-WatchlistBase.css:
#mw-watchlist-resetbutton {
    display: none;
}
It should then be unhidden if any of the two following gadgets are enabled: "Display green collapsible arrows and green bullets for changed pages in your watchlist, page history and recent changes" and "Display pages on your watchlist that have changed since your last visit in bold". They both include:
#mw-watchlist-resetbutton {
    display: block;
}
But something goes wrong and it stays hidden. It can be forced to display by placing the latter code in your CSS. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:32, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
That worked. My thanks! Now someone needs to fix the edit summary line that seems larger but covers up part of the text. Face-grin.svgATS 🖖 talk 02:38, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
Worked for me too. With regard to the ES box, the box for adding the heading after clicking 'new section' also appeared larger when starting this 'thread'. Thanks PrimeHunter Eagleash (talk) 02:58, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
@Eagleash: I don't think that the increased size of those boxes is anything to do with the 'mark all pages as visited' button problem. See the section above - the box change occurred by 21:55, 16 February 2017, some hours before Krinkle's edit (00:47, 17 February 2017). --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:40, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
@Redrose64: Probably not; it just appeared to me at the same time. Others (see above) noted it also. Not a problem as far as I'm concerned. Eagleash (talk) 21:53, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

PrimeHunter, i don't exactly understand. L.S. inc. (talk) 05:57, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

@L.S. inc.: Click "your CSS", create the page if it doesn't exist, copy the above three lines with display: block;, and save. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:05, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
Krinkle edited MediaWiki:Gadgets-definition 41 minutes before the first report.[4] That may be the cause. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:57, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
The gadget definitions have been corrected by Amire80 since, and this problem should be fixed now (it is for me at least on Vector). The new gadget feature that triggered this, gives lots of opportunities to remove the late changes to the UI changes when the page loads btw. So gadget authors can get to work :) —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 12:03, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
I removed my personal CSS and it also works for me now. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:23, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Don’t know if this is related, but for the first time in a while my watchilist is bolding unvisited pages. That’s as well as the green dots that are the advertised way of highlighting such pages. Tried clearing my browser cache in case but it made no difference. It’s happening whether or not I have 'Expand watchlist to show all changes, not just the most recent' enabled.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 12:38, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

PrimeHunter,thanks so much. L.S. inc. (talk) 14:17, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

JohnBlackburne, the "Display pages on your watchlist that have changed since your last visit in bold (see customizing watchlists for more options)" button at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets is on. if not, than ask again in detail. L.S. inc. (talk) 14:21, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Oh, and when you are done at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets, go to the bottom of the page and press the "save" button.L.S. inc. (talk) 14:28, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

No, that is off. I did not realise there was such an option, I must have turned it off a long time ago. So confirming: " Display pages on your watchlist that have changed since your last visit in bold" is off, but my watchlist is bolding all items I have not visited.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 14:30, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
You are not alone. My check box is unchecked (has always been unchecked); my watchlist has gone bold (before Thursday wasn't bold). Hasn't this just recently been broken and then fixed? And now is broken again? Why? How about fixing it and leaving it fixed? Is that so hard?
Trappist the monk (talk) 14:45, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Now the same with my watchlist.PrimeHunter, did the CSS thing have anything to do with this? L.S. inc. (talk) 14:51, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Trappist the monk, calm down. Nearly everyone has the same thing. L.S. inc. (talk) 14:54, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Why? You wrote in your reply to Editor JohnBlackburne that his "Display pages on your watchlist that have changed since your last visit in bold ..." button ... is on. You jumped to the conclusion that this problem was his fault. Clearly that is not true.
Is it not true that we have recently had this problem? Did it not recently get fixed? Is it unreasonable to ask why we are broken again? Is it unreasonable to ask that it get fixed and remain fixed?
Trappist the monk (talk) 15:09, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
Tried toggling that setting, in case it did something. Nope, no change switching it on or off. Yes, L.S. inc. was a bit presumptuous assuming it might be my fault, but they are a new user, may have just discovered how it worked themselves, so may have assumed it’s new to other people. L.S. inc., if you enable Navigation Popups on the same prefs panel you can easily see when editors have been around for a while and probably have a lot of experience of WP.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 15:42, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
" Is it unreasonable to ask why we are broken again? Is it unreasonable to ask that it get fixed and remain fixed?" not unreasonable, but yeah. gadgets and user scripts break. That's what they do. This one is easily fixable. Unfortunately i'm going on vacation, so I can't get around to this as fast as I would like... —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 16:57, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

This (the bolding of every unvisited page on my watchlist) is a bit annoying. But what a I really don't understand is why a gadget breaking effects me when I don't have that gadget enabled? Jenks24 (talk) 22:43, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Bolding is the default in MediaWiki itself. If no gadgets are enabled or work then you get bolding. The English Wikipedia has chosen to remove the bolding with a default gadget: "(This loads the base style for the watchlist. Please do not disable this option.)". Another gadget can add it back (if it works): "Display pages on your watchlist that have changed since your last visit in bold". PrimeHunter (talk) 23:15, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
OK, that makes sense. Though I suppose figuring out why it's the MediaWiki default isn't worth going into. And the bolding problem has now been fixed, thanks to whoever did that. Jenks24 (talk) 00:28, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Why exactly are we telling people not to disable that gadget? Surely watchlist style should be each individual editor's choice about whether they want green dots and/or bold-faced titles. "Please do not disable" makes it sound like we're discouraging people from having whatever style they want. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:32, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Module or other way to convert spaces to underscores in a string[edit]

I'm looking for a way to take a string like "John Doe" and convert it with a module or some other method to "John_Doe" for use in a URL.

Full disclosure of my goal: I stumbled across Template:Cite Banglapedia/testcases, created by Worldbruce, and I'm fiddling with the |url= and |title= parameters of the template. The title is added to the end of the URL; the title parameter should display with spaces in the citation, but it needs to have underscores when it is used in the URL. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:24, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

How about {{urlencode:John Doe|WIKI}} > John_Doe ? -- John of Reading (talk) 17:32, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
BTW, I created the testcases in part to highlight misgivings about certain aspects of the design of the recently created template, including its construction of a full url from a partial url (the title with underscores substituted for spaces). Since Banglapedia went online, they've gone through no less than eight different url schemes. Until the most recent one, they've all be more cryptic, like http://banglapedia.org/HT/C_0308.HTM being the url for their article titled "Comilla District" (although in an earlier or later scheme C_0308 might have been the code for a completely different article beginning with "C". Perhaps their current urls are regular enough and stable enough that Wikipedia can safely construct them from article titles. {{EB1911}} and similar templates construct urls for wikisource articles, but whereas we may have considerable influence over a sister project's urls, we have none over Banglapedia's.
I didn't expect this template to be of interest to anyone outside of the small Bangladesh-related-articles community, but the additional technical minds are very welcome. --Worldbruce (talk) 18:10, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, urlencode appears to work. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:16, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Grigori Rasputin archiving...[edit]

Could one of your techno-wizards take a look at the automatic-archiving set-up for this talkpage and figure out what is wrong?
I had already posted about this problem on the article's talkpage: on Talk:Grigori Rasputin at: Talk Archive with no responses but here is the issue:

  • The automatic-archiving is working for the talkpage but the linkage isn't showing up on the article's talk page. And yes, I do know there are two different Archives for the (merged)"Rasputin's penis" talkpage and for the main article talkpage plus that both of the (manually archived) archives are malformed according to the Bots' naming conventions, they are named "Talk:[article name]/Archive#" instead of "Talk:[article name]/Archive[sp]#. The bot is doing its work correctly - there is a Talk:Grigori Rasputin/Archive 6 that it is moving content to - but the article talk page doesn't know that Archive 6 exists. Oh! and there is no Talk: Grigori Rasputin/Archive5 or Talk:Grigori Rasputin/Archive 5. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 17:49, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
It's been fixed already (in the time it took for me to type this up). Thanks User:Joshua Jonathan! Cheers, everyone - Shearonink (talk) 17:52, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Why are Subject/headline and Edit summary wider?[edit]

Is this new?— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:43, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

See #Thursday blues. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:47, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Unable to see archives box where Template:Talk header used[edit]

Hi all, I raised a question on the talk page but am keen to see if this is a more general problem - on pages using {{Talk header}} I cannot see any archives box with links to the archives. For example: Talk:Rodrigues, Talk:Human body, or even Template talk:Talk header.

I cannot see any relevant changes to that template but don't know markup well enough to trace anything back to the transcluded templates. Is this just me and my setup (maybe I broke it with a preference change)? Thanks for looking. BW |→ Spaully ~talk~  09:17, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

I can see links to archives at all three of the links you posted. For example at Template talk:Talk header, the headers at the top of the page include the text "Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9" and a "Search archives" box. -- John of Reading (talk) 09:30, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, I still don't see them so will take a look through my preferences.
@Zupotachyon: has reported the same thing on their talk page, on which I also cannot see any archive links. I wonder if Zupotachyon have fixed the problem? BW |→ Spaully ~talk~  09:52, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
@Spaully and Zupotachyon: Zupotachyon's archives are named by year and month. As the documentation at {{Talk header}} says, that template only supports numeric archives. -- John of Reading (talk) 11:56, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done Thanks, all sorted - I had changed back to MonoBook but had a custom .css that I had last edited in 2009 including "#talkheader {display:none;}", funnily enough that suppressed the talk header. Please ignore my stupidity! |→ Spaully ~talk~  12:07, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Inkscape map[edit]

Hello. Does anyone knoww Inkscape or another svg edit software? I need help to make a map with the help of File:Cyprus adm location map.svg. Xaris333 (talk) 12:24, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

@Xaris333: It may be easier for you to find help at Wikipedia:Graphics Lab/Map workshop. Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}}
to reply to me
15:53, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Script request for checking sources[edit]

Not sure if this is the right place to post this, so please let me know if there's a WP:SCRIPTREQ or something similar. I just did a source review on Æthelflæd, part of which was a tedious manual process that I think could be partially automated. The citations look like this:

  • Keynes & Lapidge 1983, pp. 11–12.
  • Stenton 1971, pp. 246–248.
  • Williams 1991b; Williams 1991c.
  • ...

and the bibliography looks like this:

  • Abels, Richard (1998). Alfred the Great: War, Kingship and Culture in Anglo-Saxon England. Harlow, UK: Longman. ISBN 0-582-04047-7.
  • Bailey, Maggie (2001). "Ælfwynn, Second Lady of the Mercians". In Higham, Nick; Hill, David. Edward the Elder 899–924. Abingdon, UK: Routledge. pp. 112–27. ISBN 0-415-21497-1.
  • Baker, Nigel; Holt, Richard (2004). Urban Growth and the Medieval Church: Gloucester and Worcester. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate. ISBN 0-7546-0266-4.
  • ...

I dropped both lists in Excel, scraped off some unnecessary text, alphabetized both, and was then able to run down both lists at the same time and verify that every citation had a bibliographic line corresponding to it, and every work in the bibliography was used.

I don't think a script could reliably do the verification, because there are plenty of exceptions that will come up, but just the basics of alphabetizing the two lists and presenting them in such a way that an eyeball comparison could be done would be a huge time-saver. Is there a way to write a script to do this? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:20, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Does User:Ucucha/HarvErrors.js already do this? Jenks24 (talk) 04:38, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
For Harvard citations it does, but the need to do this is general to all forms of citation. (Thanks for pointing that out, though; I don't use Harvard citations myself and didn't know about the script.) Sino-Roman relations is an example of an article that doesn't use Harvard citations that needs this capability. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 10:36, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

WP:As_of[edit]

The tag is useful when dating a statement that is expected to change with the passage of time. Unfortunately, it is only useful at the beginning of a sentence, because it forces an upper case 'a'. If the editor tries to use it in mid-sentence, eg. "Many banknotes still carry his signature, As of February 2017, from his term as governor.", the upper case "A" is inappropriate. Is someone able & willing to modify the tag to follow the editor's intention for either 'a' or 'A'? Akld guy (talk) 04:14, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Akld guy, if you look at {{as of}}, you'll see that you can add the parameter |lc=y to make the "A" lowercase. For example, "as of February 2017". Huntster (t @ c) 04:28, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
Thank you. I think, though, that after reading about how to use the tag, I shouldn't have to also read the template article for a detail like that. That fact should be in the WP:As_of article itself. If nobody bothers to insert it, I will. Akld guy (talk) 04:42, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
By "the template article", I assume that you mean its documentation - the part of the template inside the green box that is headed "Template documentation". The template documentation should be the first place to look for information about the template's parameters. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:59, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
Yes, that's what I meant - the link is provided by Huntster above. In this edit, I've made it more obvious at WP:As_of that the template documentation needs to be referred to for optional parameters. Akld guy (talk) 11:34, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Name of the area on a map[edit]

Let's say that I am using the File:Administrative map of Cyprus.jpg. Some areas are yellow. Is there a way if someone move it's cursor above one of the yellow areas, to show the name of the area? It's not a locator map. Xaris333 (talk) 22:39, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

mw:Extension:ImageMap can do it but making an image map can be a lot of work. It also makes a clickable link for each defined area. I don't know whether the link can be disabled but if it's a link to a non-existing anchor on the same page then clicking may have no effect in browsers. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:32, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. Xaris333 (talk) 14:47, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Changing redirect after move.[edit]

Is there an automated or a simplified way to change redirects after moving a page. For example, I moved Peter Adamson to Peter Adamson (actor), and plan to turn the bare Peter Adamson to a disambigation page for the three current articles with that name. Before doing that I think it's better to replace all current link to Peter Adamson with links to Peter Adamson (actor). HaEr48 (talk) 08:56, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

I don’t think there is. A bot could be instructed to do such a task, but In most cases it makes no sense to do so. I mean, if you are moving the page to Peter Adamson (actor) to disambiguate the name, then some of the links to Peter Adamson might be ones which also need disambiguating, as people have linked to the actor but meaning to link to someone else. That is often the driver of disambiguation, when many incoming links are inappropriate. In which case automatically updating them makes no sense: better to manually check them and fix them on a case by case basis.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 13:45, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:WikiProject Disambiguation for some tools. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:14, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Tech News: 2017-08[edit]

19:25, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Quick way to find out how many GARs opened in a certain time period?[edit]

Is this possible?

The only way I have been able to find to count GARs is by opening all the pages in a category and checking the dates on each one individually. Are they arranged chronologically anywhere, even in an approximate manner like noticeboard archives?

The reason I ask is because the GAR instructions were radically altered last March, and I suspect this might have had the effect of making the process more difficult and thus discouraging its use. So I'd like to know how many GARs were opened since March 2016 compared to how many were opened in the previous eleven months.

Hijiri 88 (やや) 22:11, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Different IP (four tilde) compared to running Windows CMD tool - ipconfig[edit]

Background - I have moved (in the real world) and had hence to change my internet supplier. As I was about to change my e-mail address , I accidentally happened to see that my IP - made by the foure tilde signs, if one isn't logged on, differed from what my IPCONFIG tool state my IP is. And I have had 192.168.1.94 for longer than a fortnight now. But the tilde signs states my IP is 81.230.36.59 - at the one and same time !. Further, someone has (externally) mixed with my computer somway. I could't take screenshots - after in a mail recommended an other user to use the PrtSc keyboard button. Many effects, like sound were also delayed about 8-10 seconds. So I re-installed Windows. Could anyone please help me ? Am I under surveillance, by some one with admin-tools. Perhaps from an other Wiki ? Or do we get a new IP each time we use Wikipedia ? - simultaineously with the "normal IP", presented by the IPCONFIG-command ? I'm a programmer of embedded systems, but TCP/IP and networks are really not my cup of tea, if I may express myself in that way ? Any honest comments would be much appreciated. Boeing720 (talk) 00:53, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Your computer connects via a cable or wireless to your router which also acts as a modem to connect to the ISP (internet service provider). The network card in your computer has the 192.x.x.x IP address, but the connection to Wikipedia actually comes from your router (81.x.x.x) so that is what is shown at Wikipedia or sites which display your IP address like this. See network address translation for a lot of detail. Johnuniq (talk) 01:06, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
Hello and thanks , Johnuniq! A good explanation, and I will study your suggested information further. It was however, already through your reply, relieving to read. Thank you very much again ! Boeing720 (talk) 09:43, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Image map coordinates[edit]

Hello. I am trying to do an ImageMap . I am using polygon selection. Do you know if there is a software that can select an area (maybe by color or by magic wand) to find the coordinates? Polygon selection is not the best solution. Xaris333 (talk) 14:50, 21 February 2017 (UTC)