Wikipedia talk:AutoEd/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive 1 Archive 2

Bug with *:

In this edit there was a bug where AutoEd changed *: to * : breaking the formatting. Powergate92Talk 22:40, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I will have a look. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:38, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
Okay, I believe I fixed it. Let me know if there are still problems. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:30, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

How to install?

This page lacks a clear instruction on how to start using it. For anybody not intimately familiar with wikis, it is a prohibitive barrier. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 18:09, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Do you have any suggestions? Do we need to provide a link to the user's monobook.js, vector.js, ... ? Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:00, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Sounds good. I'd start with a section "How to install" and explain what needs to be clicked / copied and so on. In the end, a good approach is to ask yourself: "would my parents be able to use this tool based on the description provided"? :) PS. I came here from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts/Formatter. The top of the talk page has a very simple instruction: "To install, simply include this line in your monobook.js: code follows". AutoEd has something similar in the wikEd section but... having read the AutoEd page again, I am still confused how should I install it -> I'd guess I should add the code from the "Basic" section? If so, this is quite unclear and I'd highly recommend copying the simple instruction I linked above to the lead. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 21:17, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

With the new Vector default, we will need to update the docs, so I will see if I can make this more clear. It looks like we could have something like:

  1. Edit your user JavasSript page. (Special:Mypage/skin.js redirects to your current skin's JavaScript file)

The hooks for vector and monobook are different but we should be able to handle both. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:13, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

So, I am back - and I still see there is no "how to install" section. I assume that to install AutoEd once adds the line here to their monobook, yes? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 16:51, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

AutoEd breaks link

In this edit, AutoEd broke a link by fixing some hex encoded characters but it converted a part of the hex encoded characters with a special character that breaks the link. Décembër21st2012Freâk Talk at 01:03, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I have seen problems with anchors. I have some ideas about how to fix this but it may take a few days. Plastikspork (talk) 04:17, 10 July 2010 (UTC)


Why doesn't Auto-ed (complete) run as bot, automatically fixing the Auto-ed indicated errors on Wiki Check or just on all pages? It works, rarely has errors, and is generally a great script. (talk) 10:42, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

AutoEd dating glitch?

Hello, User:Piotrus suggested I report this to you guys. Using the script, History of slavery was recently edited (diff), and a year "(c.450?)" was mistakenly converted to "(ce0?)" (with the number 0). Thanks!

-- Joren (talk) 18:57, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, this is the anchor conversion bug. I suppose we could remove this feature until I can figure out how to make it more robust. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:34, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Removal of section heading blank lines and blank spaces

I'd like to point out that some AutoEd changes to articles, such as this one in Telegraphy are actually regressive, making it harder for other editors with small monitors to properly edit in a cluttered edit box, as well as presenting issues for various spell checkers. Please refer to this MOS guideline on blank spacing/blank lines which states:

• Spaces between the == and the heading text are optional (==H2== is equivalent to == H2 ==). These extra spaces will not affect the way the the heading is displayed to readers; however, in the edit window, the spaces tend to be more compatible with browser spell-checking software.
• A blank line below the heading is optional; but do include one blank line above the heading, for readability in the edit window.... etc.... [referring on the need to declutter the edit box -hz]

Many years ago software writers habitually removed blank spacing due to the ancient very high cost of memory, which also resulted in the systemic removal of '19' from years stored in memory (e.g.: 1967 stored as only '67', thus saving two bytes). In the present day with ultra-low cost memory available, such byte-saving techniques are trumped by the need for more accurate, stress-free editing (and I'm willing to donate more to WP to that end!). I hope you'll be able to assist with improving Wikipedia's articles in this respect by modifying AutoEd to allow blank space and blank line insertions to persist within and below section headings. Thanks! Best: HarryZilber (talk) 16:17, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I believe you have a point, if nothing else, the removal of blank lines can create diffs that are hard to follow. We do have different varieties of this script, with different features enabled/disabled. If I can find some time, I will see if some of this can't be isolated a bit further, so that one is making a conscious decision to turn on this feature. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:28, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
You're very kind. [ folksy saying alert ] May you be in heaven half an hour before the devil knows your dead. [ / folksy saying alert ]. Best: HarryZilber (talk) 23:53, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Adding one user module

Hello, I want to add one module for AutoEd that one user created that, how can I add it? I read the instruction but it was a bit complicated. Nima1024 (talk) 16:48, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

What module are you trying to add. I may not be able to respond for a few days, but I am happy to help when I have a chance. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:01, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
Hey, that dash module contributed by one of the members. Nima1024 (talk) 15:56, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

ASCII art articles

The User:Alpha Quadrant made an edit at the Usenet article. The problem was that he oversaw that the article has an ASCII art picture integrated that was totally destroyed. Is it possible to exclude these "optimizations" in articles which are listed in Category:Wikipedia articles with ASCII art? mabdul 22:17, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes, this is a "use at your own risk" sort of thing, but I think we do something here. Basically, we could split the page into segments to isolate these sections delimited by , then only operate on stuff outside of these tags. Even this won't be fool proof, since there is the possibility of these tags being stuck inside of comment tags, but it could help. I have been swamped recently with other stuff, but hopefully I will have some time to look into this in the near future. The good news is that this only happened once, and it's not a regular problem. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:03, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
Will you give response if this problem is resolved? I find by accident more articles with ascii art and added them to the category - at least really less at the moment, but maybe there is any possibility to check ofter articles for ASCII art and give the user the choice add the category then? mabdul 17:56, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Not working in Minefield

AutoEd doesn't seem to be working in Minefield (the developers' version of Firefox). In my Error Console, I am getting the message, "autoEdUnicodify is not defined" on line 21. Any ideas? Logan Talk Contributions 06:33, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Actually, never mind, it seems to be working now. Logan Talk Contributions 06:40, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Whitespace before stub tags

Alerting you to this discussion I started at Talk:AWB: Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser#Whitespace before stub tags. In a nutshell, I'm concerned the programs are doing opposite things in this regard. Links on the AWB page will lead you to the current MOS discussion. Cheers, Valfontis (talk) 03:48, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Using AutoEd and GregU's dashes script simultaneously

I think I have followed the instructions to enable this at Wikipedia:AutoEd/Customization#Choosing your own modules, but it doesn't seem to work for me. I have my user JavaScript at User:CWenger/vector.js. I have also used User:GregU/dashes.js as a model to write a very simple script to remove the spaces around em dashes at User:CWenger/emDashes.js. –CWenger (talk) 03:40, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

I will see if I can find some time to look at this soon. Please ping me if you don't hear back in a day or two. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:30, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, Plastikspork, I would really appreciate it! –CWenger (talk) 01:54, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
I am also having problems with this. Allens (talk | contribs) 17:39, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
I figured out how to handle this; see User:Allens/vector.js. Allens (talk | contribs) 22:23, 20 May 2012 (UTC)


I added the paramter to make auto ed appear in the toolbar only, but the tab it was originally at still exists, the only change is that when I hover over it nothing happens. Since I use a lot of scripts, many of which use tabs I hoped that this would reduce clutter, instead I've got a link in the toolbar and a useless tab. Is there a way to fix this? My skin js page is User:Ancient Apparition/vector.js. Cheers, —James (TalkContribs)8:31pm 10:31, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

I have to sign off right now, but I will try to have a look soon. Please ping me if I don't respond in the next day or two (and if you haven't figured it out). Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 05:28, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
I still haven't found out the problem, I've removed that parameter in my vector.js, also with the html to wikitext script, it turned a table in raw HTML and converted it to wikitext, the only problem was the table didn't work with wikitext... I made sure to check the edits I made on other articles and changed the tables back to raw HTML where they didn't work. Is there a workaround? —James (TalkContribs)9:20pm 11:20, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Unproductive whitespace editing

To be honest, I am getting quite irritated with how this and other editing tools encourage useless editing of whitespace. For example, this recent edit does nothing but put an extra space between the header and the text, and if there is a visible difference to the reader, it is negligible. In this specific case, it make it difficult to determine if there was any vandalism or corruption of the text, and its a complete waste of server space since it creates an extra archival copy of the article. If anything, I see this as a tool for artificially inflating edit counts. Such edits—including others such as converting == Header == to ==Header== or removing double spaces after periods—do absolutely nothing to improve Wikipedia, and I feel the code should be modified to only address more important whitespace issues. I'm sorry if I sound pissy about this, but these kinds of edits happen a lot, and I'm tired to having to carefully scan text to try to figure out what the heck got changed, often never finding it. – VisionHolder « talk » 14:52, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

I agree the newline removal is problematic, when it comes to following diffs. I have this on my to do list to remove this particular feature (or at least move it out of the main code). Unfortunately, I don't have any time to work on it today, but I am hopeful for some time in the near future. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 14:55, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
I think it's OK as long as editors use their discretion. I think it should be a general rule to not AutoEd a page unless you see something which will visibly change in the article by doing so. In that case the whitespace cleanup is just an added bonus. (Though I do think the rules are a bit arbitrary, e.g. no spaces in section headers but spaces after asterisks?) –CWenger (^@) 18:28, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
I've had two editors send me comments about the whitespace editing. One seemed to be upset over unneeded space removal after periods and the other about blank line removal after headings. Both, as I recall, are admins. WP:MOSHEAD says the blank line after a heading is optional, but suggests a blank line for readability purposes. With this guidance in mind, I recommend that the blank line removal feature of auto ed be revised. Thanks. --S. Rich (talk) 05:30, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
Whitespace "cleanup" features should definitely be removed. If editors have whitespace disagreements, they should at least have to invest some effort to thrash the article. Dicklyon (talk) 05:34, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Suggestion for addition

Could AutoEd support maintenance tags such as {{no footnotes}}, {{unreferenced}} and {{primary sources}}, such that if an article lacks the <ref></ref> tags or has no section titled references or sources, or uses government sources then it tags the article accordingly as the use for these tags are obvious. —James (TalkContribs)8:54pm 10:54, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

[[Rugby league positions#Prop|Prop]] to {{rlp|PR}}?

Would it be possible for me to use AutoEd to change, e.g. [[Rugby league positions#Prop|Prop]] to {{rlp|PR}}? Best Regards. DynamoDegsy (talk) 14:30, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Changing breaks

I noticed recently that AutoEd seems to replace <br/> with <br /> and I recommend that it not do that. For one it doesn't change the rendering of anything and secondly I have seen other applications and users that take the space out so essentially its a self reproducing cycle of users changing the formatting of these breaks. --Kumioko (talk) 14:39, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

<br /> is an (X)HTML tag, and since Wikipedia uses XHTML served as HTML there is supposed to be a space (as with all self-closing XHTML tags, such as <img /> and <input />). Not having a space, although browsers render will render such code properly, goes against the W3C's guidelines on how to author XHTML pages which are served as HTML (if they were served as XML, not having a space would be correct). If you'd like, I can dig up the actual guideline/note/policy/standard/whatever-the-heck-the-W3C-wants-to-call-it. :) –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 16:03, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick reply. I understand what your saying and I agree that we should be cleaning up these HTML tage to some degree. I also know about the W3C guidelines but they are more guidelines than rules and most sites will work either way. My concern is really 2 fold:
  1. We have one application or user changing it from one thing to another thing and then a different application or user changes it back (or to something else completely) repeating the cycle over and over.
  2. Many users including myself find the extra spaces to be a waste of space and if you have an article with a lot of HTML tags the spaces can make the article harder to read and edit. Its much easier to read if the article isn't full of spaces after headers, html code, templates, etc. Again this is a subjective thing but my point is that I don't think we should change these if the have the / in them. I completely agree we should be changing things like <BR>, </br>, <br>, etc to <br/> or <br /> I just personally don't think we need to be changing <br/> to <br />.--Kumioko (talk) 16:17, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
Okay, fair enough. I still disagree on general principal as a web designer/developer, but I can understand your points. Problem is, I don't think I wrote the regex which it is using to make the replacement at Wikipedia:AutoEd/htmltowikitext.js. I'm thinking that it might actually be kind of tough because a lot of the BR-related regex takes shortcuts which it wouldn't be able to if it considered <br/> to be correct. As you can see from the page history, I had to do some finagling to get that code to work anyway. Are you familiar with regex? I'm just having trouble spotting which part of which rule is causing the space addition. (by the way, what tool is removing spaces? I'm just curious). –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 18:55, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
I completely understand your points too and I also understand how hard it is to try and account for every variation in coding. I tried to write some regex to clean up the talk page banners and in the end I had to write a seperate line for every project...and then some. I am not the greatest with regex either but if you asking Xeno, Rjwilmsi or GoingBatty they are all really good. Looking at the code though it appears to be that first group of break changes but I wouldn't worry about changing it. I just wanted to make you aware of it. I think one of the apps was Friendly but I can't remember off hand. Several AWB users also do this type of edit. I personally only change it if it doesn't contain the /, has \ instead of /, or shows as /br instead of br/. I have also found that programming it is easier without the spaces btw. Cheers. --Kumioko (talk) 19:21, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Choosing your own modules is very unclear

The section claims "selecting your own modules (sets of automatically-made changes) is actually pretty easy" - which is rubbish, as the "instructions" that follow are very much in some high codery that does not tell me how to use this script with AutoEd. I would like to use AutoEd with User talk:GregU/dashes.js, but I have no idea how to. (It would be nice if that script got incorporated into AutoEd, finally...). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 16:15, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

If you could get GregU to split his script into two js pages, then it would be much easier. Basically, take everything above the "import" part at the bottom, put that into a second script page, then import that page instead. This would allow you to import only that top part, without using the last part. Otherwise, I believe there is a collision between AutoEd and the repeated import. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:51, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Changing hyphens to dashes in DOIs breaks the link

Example diff is this edit. AutoEd must not change hyphens to endashes in DOIs as the links get broken. Thanks Rjwilmsi 20:50, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

That wasn't this script, see #Using_AutoEd_and_GregU.27s_dashes_script_simultaneously. I believe that user is using an additional dash script. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:15, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

script breaks Harvard citation links

This script can break Harvard citation links that deliberately use character encodings. See here (next-to-last part of the diff), and the manual fix. This use of encoding (.27 or &#39;) in citation bodies allows the use of apostrophes in template:sfn to italicise part of the footnote-text. The script unencoding it, breaks the links from the footnotes. Please don't do this inside sfn templates (or any of the harvnb family of templates). Thanks. One Ton Depot (talk) 04:44, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Scrunching complaint

AutoEd edits like this one that appear to do nothing but scrunch the source by removing optional white space are a bad idea. Why is that feature even in there? Dicklyon (talk) 23:43, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

I agree it can be problematic, see #Unproductive whitespace editing. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:12, 31 October 2011 (UTC)