Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Check Wikipedia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
  Check Wikipedia   WMFLabs   List of Errors   Discussion



It would be very helpful if the check could recognize and ignore

  • ISBNistFormalFalsch=J
Example: de:Erich Burgener - {{Literatur | Autor=Bertrand Zimmermann | Titel=Erich Burgener | Verlag= Editions de la Thèle| Ort=Yverdon-les-Bains | Jahr=1987 | ISBN=2-8283-0024 | ISBNistFormalFalsch=J }}
  • http://xxxxx/isbn/282830024

--Tsor (talk) 09:09, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Tsor, as usual, I'm confused. Why give a bad ISBN in the first place? I did a Google search and only two non-Wikipedia derived websites give this number and one of them is Wikipedia. Bgwhite (talk) 23:43, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
Hello Bgwhite, this ist just a (bad) example. Sometimes we find in a book an ISBN which is formal wrong. Some guys use the template Vorlage:Literatur where they can mark such invalid ISBNs by "ISBNistFormalFalsch=J". There is another template Vorlage:Falsche ISBN which can mark such invalid ISBNs: {{Falsche ISBN|3-123-45678-9}} leads to "ISBN 3-123-45678-9 (formal falsche ISBN)". This template is used very often:
I will look for a better example for an invalid ISBN. --Tsor (talk) 10:10, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
PS: An additional column in the error-list "marked as invalid" would help. --Tsor (talk) 10:18, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Tsor, I'm slow, but I still fail to see what is wrong. It would be best to use a correct ISBN? A better example would help me understand. TMg, could you help me out.
There are whitelists in which articles can be added so they won't be raised as an error again. To many things can go wrong with "marked as invalid" button... Already a problem of vandalism by people clicking done when they have no intention of fixing errors. Bgwhite (talk) 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Here are 349 examples. --Tsor (talk) 11:10, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
I just looked at the first one in the list, de:Charles de Melun and I don't understand why the ISBN is qualified as bad: the checksum is correct. Is it normal to have "ISBNistFormalFalsch=J" with an ISBN that seems correct? Edit: idem for second example de:Bussard (Einheit). --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 12:26, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Hmm, you are right, in de:Charles de Melun ISBN is marked as bad but ist is ok. Same at your second example. I will have a closer look. --Tsor (talk) 13:26, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Please repeat your calculation. The checksum digit is false, if the first 9 digits are corect the checksum digit in the end should be a 1, so the ISBN should be 2902091311 and not 2902091312. --Cepheiden (talk) 19:15, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
Well, you're just not looking at the version as was looking at, the page was modified since my comment and changed completely about the ISBN: a ISBN-13 with a coherent checksum was replaced by a ISBN-10 with a non-coherent checksum. --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 20:21, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
I'm sorry, you are right i didn't notice the edit. --Cepheiden (talk) 17:48, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
I also looked at other, a lot seem in the same situation. There's also cases where the ISBN has indeed a wrong checksum, but the book can be found with the correct ISBN on the internet: de:Mare Imbrium and the corresponding book on google. I've spent quite some time on frwiki to fix ISBN reported by CW (still quite some work to do), but I've found very few situations where the ISBN with the incorrect checksum was confirmed as being the ISBN (it's usually fixed at some point). --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 15:51, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Yes, there are cases of ISBN's with false checksum digits used as the original ISBN (printed in book and listed in databases of libraries etc.). If someone cites this book with this ISBN we mark them as "formally false" like some libraries do. So what's the point here? --Cepheiden (talk) 19:15, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
My point was that I was surprised by the size of the list (349 pages), because as I said, I fixed a lot of ISBN on frwiki, and didn't find so much situations where the ISBN with the non-coherent checksum had to be kept. Given that the first hits in the search seemed to be mistakes, I was wondering if it was normal that you have so many page with ISBN tagged as formally false. --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 20:26, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
This was more a reply to Bgwhite (like Tsor already did). --Cepheiden (talk) 17:48, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Just an example for the second point: found in de:28 Stories über Aids in Afrika. --Tsor (talk) 22:08, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

It links to "Page not found", the correct link seems to be at (different last 2 digits ISBN). --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 22:29, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Adjacent references ?[edit]

Hi, what do you think of adding a detection for adjacent references, like <ref>...</ref><ref>...</ref><ref>...</ref> ? This error probably won't be of any interest for enwiki because reference numbers are put between square brackets [1][2][3]. But on frwiki reference numbers are displayed without any decoration so adjacent references may look like only one reference 123, so we're generally using a template {{,}} between references. --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 22:14, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

NicoV, could you get me some articles with the problem as test subjects. <maniacal laugh> Test Subjects </maniacal laugh> I take it I need to look for cases of: </ref><ref> and <ref name=ack /><ref ? I also saw your message above about adding to the done pages. Bgwhite (talk) 05:29, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
Ok, will try to find some... The subject was brought on WPCleaner's talk page for this modification, but the page is fixed now. --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 07:17, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
Bgwhite, I checked a lot of articles but I haven't found an other example yet... --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 12:16, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
fr:Utilisateur:Zetud/Pb Ref should have a list. --NicoV
Bgwhite, fr:Leetchi, with at least 2 problems in the introduction. --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 07:34, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

#14 false positives[edit]

Two false positives at plwiki are reported. To remove such cases, you might check only for "<source ", not "<source", and skip code which is in a <source> by itself. ToSter (talk) 19:20, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

The solution is again "<source[^a-z]". -- Magioladitis (talk) 06:13, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Magioladitis, Error #14 doesn't use a regex. It uses the same subroutine used for checking imbalanced nowiki, pre, comment, syntaxhighlight, code, math, hiero, and score. The regex also doesn't solve the problem with the articles ToSter mentioned. The problem with the articles... there are valid, unbalanced source tags inside source tags.
Following scenario is in ToSter's articles, where the second source is not an html source tag.
<source> [text] <source> [text] </source>
Problem is... how does one differentiate between ToSter's scenario and a scenario where the first <source> tag is actually missing a closing tag, especially when editors don't always put extra parameters inside source tags. Bgwhite (talk) 07:26, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
We also have false positives on frwiki, which doesn't seem to fall into the above category:
  • fr:Apache Ant: a <sourcePath> tag is detected as being a <source> tag
  • fr:Vidéo HTML5: there are 3 self-closing <source /> tags inside a <syntaxhighlight> tag. The third one is reported.
--NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 13:41, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Bgwhite is this fixed somehow? I haven't seen any false positives for a long time. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:33, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Stripping pre tags[edit]


<pre> tags are stripped only if they have no additional attributes. In pl:dmesg there's a pre block:

<pre style="height:20em; overflow-y:scroll">...</pre>

It's not getting stripped by (get_pre() function) so false positives are reported (like #56 in that case). ToSter (talk) 18:51, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

ToSter, personally, I'd remove the entire pre text. I don't see the benefit of a boot screen from a 6-year old version of Linux. Bgwhite (talk) 23:35, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
Bgwhite, that's right :) but still the problem can occur in another place. ToSter (talk) 06:13, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
ToSter, it can, but it is not. Also, this is what the whitelist is for. Bgwhite (talk) 21:54, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

AWB fixes/detects more of some errors[edit]

Add field with user edit[edit]

Hola, disculpas por escribir en español, se podría agregar un campo mas en el cual indique el nombre de usuario o ip que realizó la edición del error detectado. gracias buen trabojo.Sergio Andres Segovia (talk) 16:59, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

"Hi, I apologize for writing in Spanish, you could add an additional field which states the user name or ip who made the edition of the detected error. thanks good work."
Seems possible but would require a lot of processing to find the particular edit. Frietjes (talk) 17:58, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
Es una pena que requiera una gran cantidad de procesamiento, porque si se agregara ese campo iríamos directamente a las contribuciones del usuario o ip, y el que tenga el flag de reversor podría revertir las edición desde allí. En Wikipedia en español intentamos detectarlo con un filtro de ediciones pero arrojó muchos falsos positivos [1], saludos. Sergio Andres Segovia (talk) 19:05, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
"It's a shame that requires a lot of processing, because if that field we would be linked directly to user contributions or ip, and an editor with rollback could reverse the issue from there. At Spanish Wikipedia, we tried to detect issues with an edit filter but it resulted in many false positives[2], greetings."
I agree that it would be useful. You might be able to get a bot to do this for you? for example, I know that some bots like 'BracketBot' will warn you when you have introduced unbalanced brackets. of course, there is a difference between warning a user about 'breaking an article' and warning a user about using deprecated syntax. maybe you can ask the operator of BracketBot (A930913)? Frietjes (talk) 17:19, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
There is also Bracketbot's brother, ReferenceBot. Both are done by A930913. The two main differences between BracketBot and CheckWiki is: 1) Bracketbot checks articles in near real-time 2) Bracketbot informs the editor of the problem they created instead of reporting the error to a master database. In theory, CheckWiki can also be run in near real-time on individual articles. I would need help from A930913. His bot code would run normally except call CheckWiki to test an article instead of using the bot's checks. Bgwhite (talk) 19:53, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
@Bgwhite: Make a (web)script that I can ping with a pageid/title/diffid/oldid/user? ##930913 connect? 930913 {{ping}} 07:33, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

#69 additions[edit]

@Magioladitis and NicoV: Checkwiki *should* find cases of ISBN Pound-sign.... ISBN # Bgwhite (talk) 23:26, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

@Magioladitis and NicoV: {{Infobox comics character and title}} contains ISBN# as a parameter name. I need to put a fix in to avoid this, don't know about your programs. Bgwhite (talk) 05:18, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
ISBN# is not a valid parameter name. ISBN1, ISBN2, etc. are. ISBN# need to be replaced with ISBN1 is not empty, otherwise removed. -- Magioladitis (talk)

@Bgwhite and NicoV: I removed any instances of ISBN# from the Infobox and all other similar infoboxes. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:12, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

@Magioladitis and NicoV: Checkwiki *should* find cases of [[ISBN]] now.... [[ISBN]] 978-3948-3838-33, [[ISBN]]: 978-3949-3838-33, etc... Bgwhite (talk) 21:10, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Not everything of the cases above will be fixed by AWB. I am afraid of false positives. I do knot know whether Rjwilmsi could help us here. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:07, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

New error : empty titles ?[edit]

Hi, I was thinking about a new error for detecting empty titles, like the ones VE is creating on a regular basis (== <nowiki /> ==). --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 18:10, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

NicoV, I did a scan for enwiki and came up with 83 articles. The VE edits all appear old. I wonder if they have fixed the problem in new VE builds? Bgwhite (talk) 22:31, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Bgwhite, apparently it's still not fixed, the last VE edit I found with this problem is from last night. --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 09:10, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the list Bgwhite, I've added error #522 to detect empty titles and fixed all the occurrences. --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 12:21, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

And also, of the same kind, a new error for empty internal links, like in this edit ([[Boom Fm|<nowiki/>]] and [[Roger Blackburn|<nowiki/>]]). --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 10:11, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

This was fixed in Visual Editor. No new cases have been found over the past few months. Bgwhite (talk) 23:51, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
Bgwhite, not at all. A few examples just in the last 24h (nowiki tags):
And maybe another problem with things like that: [[XX|YY ]]<nowiki/>ZZ which could be easily replaced by [[XX|YY]] ZZ
--NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 13:02, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

@NicoV and Magioladitis: According to Tech News: 2015-14, the problem of nowiki in titles has been fixed. Of course, what new untold problems have arisen due to their fix has yet to be seen. Bgwhite (talk) 20:28, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Well, when you read in the same announcement that "VisualEditor is now the main editing tool on 53 more Wikipedias", you can't take it really seriously as even on wikis where it has been enabled by default for almost 2 years, it's still far away from from being the "main editing tool"... Face-wink.svg --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 20:56, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
NicoV When I read that sentence for the first time, thoughts of dread and pity for those 53 sites went thru my mind. I also wondered what "phase 5" meant. mw:VisualEditor/Rollouts explains what each phase means. They have enwiki as a phase 0, which is, "... wikipedias that have been closed or deprecated". Ahhh, Visual Editor... always good for a laugh and a cry. Bgwhite (talk) 21:25, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
You didn't know ? When enwiki made its push to make VE opt-in, they closed enwiki Face-wink.svg Currently, we're not editing enwiki, it's a decoy... In the rollouts, I also liked very much the sentence that wikis in phases 1 to 4 "are relatively easy for VE to support"... --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 21:35, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
VE is supporting phases 1 thru 4 very well. It's rather obvious. From day one, VE has supported goofs, foul-ups, mistakes and barfs. Bgwhite (talk) 21:45, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
I don't know if they deployed it, but empty titles are still created like here (without nowiki tag). --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 16:48, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
still nowiki in titles..., and frwiki is running 1.25wmf23, the version identified as fixing the problem in all bug reports... --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 15:54, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Category:Articles with links needing disambiguation from June 2011 is getting close[edit]

Category:Articles with links needing disambiguation from June 2011, containing the oldest dated links tagged as needing disambiguation, is now under a thousand. I am sure that with some teamwork, we can wipe it out this month. Cheers! bd2412 T 00:31, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Less than 600 pages! -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:26, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Summary of Changes made recently[edit]

Summary of Changes made recently:

  • Error 69: Now finds cases of ISBN in a wikilink ( [[ISBN]] 978-12345-6789-0) and # symbol (ISBN #978-12345-6789-0)
  • Error 2: Checks for <center/>, <small/> and <br clear
  • Error 85: Checks for <center></center> and <gallery></gallery>
  • Error 34: Catches more cases. See Instances of 'subst:' in articles

Bgwhite (talk) 06:01, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Bgwhite, I don't understand the rationale of grouping detection for center and small with #2. The br tag is a special tag in HTML5 (not necessarily XML compliant now), while center and small tags are more conventional tags (XML compliant). Wouldn't it be better to put them in a separate detection? --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 10:49, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
NicoV #2 is looking for bad or malformed tags. br and small are both elements, one just has a void end tag... just like hr, img, source, meta and a host of other tags. Wikipedia no long is XML compliant nor tries to be. I really don't want to go into the intricacies of HTML tags... just what is good or bad. Bgwhite (talk) 06:23, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
I understand, it's just that </br> is invalid while </center> is not... ;-) --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 16:19, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Add galician wikipedia?[edit]

Hi, could be it possible add galician wikipedia to this tool? Thanks!, Elisardojm (talk) 09:58, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Elisardojm. Each wiki requires a configuration page, based on Wikipedia:WikiProject Check Wikipedia/Translation. Could you create a similar page on galician wikipedia? --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 12:39, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi Elisardojm, I saw that you've started creating the configuration. If you're interested, I've modified WPCleaner for glwiki, it can help you check the configuration. --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 20:35, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
Yes :) NicoV, but I'm translating it too slow, I intended to notice it here when I had finished it :). How can I try the WPCleaner? --Elisardojm (talk) 17:00, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi Elisardojm, see Wikipedia:WPCleaner (general info), Wikipedia:WPCleaner/Installation for installation and Wikipedia:WPCleaner/Check wiki for usage with CW: the menus in the Check Wiki window will help you check what you have configured (error labels, error activation, ...). --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 22:24, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for starting the Galician translation :-) I've included the current translation. --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 17:43, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Possible false positives in Error #47[edit]

I think that the template errors (#47 and the like) ignore the characters between math tags. This is good. I think, though, that the formulas between math tags dont' get filtered out if:

  • Math tags are capitalized (like <Math>)
  • The tag has some attributes, like <math display="inline"> in ca:Gas ideal

Could you please check it out? --Joutbis (talk) 10:59, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Joutbis Anything between comment, math, nowiki, code, pre, source, hiero and score tags get removed before checks take place. Bgwhite (talk) 05:39, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Yes, that's fine, but I'm afraid that if the format is <Math> or <math display="inline">, then they are not removed, and the brace counter goes wild. Is this possible? Otherwise, I can't see what's wrong in ca:Gas ideal --Joutbis (talk) 19:50, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
Joutbis Ok, two things going on here.
  1. {{equació|1=<math display="block">P = \frac{N \cdot m \cdot \overline{v^2}}{3 \cdot V}</math>|2=3}} is one of the lines causing a #47 error. Checkwiki thinks there is an error because there is only one {{, while there are two }}. Math equations are a common false positive. On enwiki, we have whitelisted multiple articles with the majority being math related.
  2. The code is supposed remove anything between the math tags, thus the above line shouldn't be causing a #47 error. It does remove cases including <Math> and <math display="inline">. The lower/upper case does not matter and any parameter inside the math tag does not matter. However, in order to speed up the code, I check to see if there is a math tag in the article first. I was not checking cases of <math display>. As the article only contained <math display>, the checkwiki program "saw" no math tags, thus didn't remove anything between the math tags. Therefore, #47 showed up when it shouldn't have.
In theory, there shouldn't be cases of <math display> in any article, only <math alt> and <math style>. This is especially true when used inside the {{equació}} template, as dispaly=inline is redundant and display=block can be handled by the template. I did edit ca:Gas ideal to remove 'display'. I also edited the CheckWiki program to check for more cases of <math, so it won't matter what is inside the math tags when "seeing" for math tags in the article. Bgwhite (talk) 06:43, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Wow, thanks! --Joutbis (talk) 17:39, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

False positive in Error #85[edit]

In ca:Brainfuck, there are <code> tags between <center> tags. However, the tool is flagging it as if it were empty.

--Joutbis (talk) 11:20, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Same kind of false positive for frwiki: fr:Messiah with <score> tags between <center> tags, and fr:Tiret with <code> tags between <center> tags. --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 22:27, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
Joutbis NicoV See discussion two above this one... Anything between comment, math, nowiki, code, pre, source, hiero and score tags gets removed before checks take place.
All right, will do.--Joutbis (talk) 19:50, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
In ca:Brainfuck's case, <center> tags are not to be used like that in tables. This is a case of doing center properly. I did edit Brainfuck to do tables properly. fr:Tiret has the same problem, well actually, it is full of fail (scope="col" is redundant, <font> and <tt> are obsolete).
In the case of fr:Messiah, if it was on enwiki, I'd use the {{center}} template. That does the proper thing anyway instead of using the obsolete <center> tag. Bgwhite (talk) 06:38, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Whitelist ( for error #34[edit]

CanI get instances such as {{#expr:{{Stat/Finland/Kommuner/Befolkning|Föglö}}/{{Stat/Finland/Kommuner/Areal land|Föglö}} round 2}} whitelisted on svwp, since this is used to automatically update population numbers in articles such as sv:Föglö. I don't know how to do it, or what to do... (tJosve05a (c) 18:57, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Josve05a This can be handled two ways and it depends on how many article you are talking about. If it is not "alot", then add the articles to a whitelist. If there are alot, then I can added it to the code.
If you are using a whitelist, look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Check Wikipedia/Translation and see how it is done for enwiki (search for "whitelist"). #34 on enwiki does have a whitelist. Frwiki also has whitelists set up. Bgwhite (talk) 19:26, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
@Bgwhite: THis should be used a lot, at least for all populated places in Sweden with population numbers at Statistiska centralbyrån, since a bot updates those automaticle. Not all articles are using this system yet, but more and more are. (tJosve05a (c) 19:29, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
I've also seen constructions like that on frwiki, but I don't like having calculations in articles. An other solution would be to use a template to do the computation instead of putting the #expr directly in the article. --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 19:47, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

False positive on error #37[edit]

de:Bělá (Divoká Orlice) is stated as not bearing a sort key, but in fact this key is given with the parameter SORTNAME in template de:Vorlage:Infobox Fluss. Adding a defaultsort parameter to the article itself results in a warning message that the previous sort key has been overwritten. So the sort key seems to be valid. I don’t know if there are other templates affected which are listed in de:Kategorie:Vorlage:mit Kategorisierung. --Hadibe (talk) 17:29, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

@Magioladitis: Hadibe, grrrr.... sort values shouldn't be in Infoboxes. Magioladitis is the one to ask about this. Bgwhite (talk) 05:35, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

CHECKWIKI #81[edit]

I know that #81 was turned off on enwp due to the was amount of these errors, but is it possible to turn it on, even if only for one database scan or something, for me? (tJosve05a (c) 04:55, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Josve05a Yup, I can run it. The next enwiki dump should be out by the end of the week. I'll run it, which is when I run the regular dump scan. The big problem will be me remembering. Bgwhite (talk) 05:32, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Face-grin.svg (tJosve05a (c) 05:34, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Josve05a The list is at User:Bgwhite/Sandbox. It only contains the first 49,000 articles. The entire list (89,000) was too big to save. Bgwhite (talk) 17:13, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

List with empty title[edit]

Hi Bgwhite, at least on frwiki list for error #25, there was only one line, and it contains an empty title and time found 0000-00-00 00:00:00. The "Done" button does nothing. The "Set all articles as done" works, and the empty title appears now in the list of done articles. --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 19:41, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Same for error 59, but I left it as it is. --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 19:43, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
Same for error 85. --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 20:10, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

False positive for #31[edit]

Hi Bgwhite, on frwiki there are several false positives with things like <trl>, <trois>, <trk>, <transformers, <transmission, <traduction, <track>, ... Would it be possible to limit the detection ? For example, detect only <tr when followed by a space, a "/", a ">", ... but not by a letter ? --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 09:12, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

NicoV, I'll take a look, but it will be a couple of weeks till I can get to it. Bgwhite (talk) 05:10, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

False positives for error #103[edit]

Hi, I think that the script is not doing what user NicoV requested:

it should not detect articles where {{!}} is used in the displayed text of the link.

There are a few examples in cawiki: many train stations, like ca:Estació de Bogatell or ca:Llista de cançons del DJ Hero 2 (this one took several tries to fix error #32, and now it's back!).

I'm not sure if this would cover all the false positives, but I think that, if a | is already there, it should allow several {{!}}'s.

--Joutbis (talk) 09:35, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Joutbis Yes, those are false positives. The DJ Hero 2 article contains M|A|R|R|S, which is also in several English articles too. I've seen errors that also had | inside a wikilink. I'd say add it to the whitelist for now and I'll take a look at. I've been gone for the best part of 2 weeks, so I need to catch up on things first before diving into the code. Bgwhite (talk) 05:07, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
Bgwhite I fixed M|A|R|S using {{pipe}}. -- Magioladitis (talk) 20:08, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
Good idea, thanks! --Joutbis (talk) 19:54, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Joutbis I created the template in Catalan Wikipedia! 10 -- Magioladitis (talk) 20:10, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Magioladitis, thanks! However, it doesn't work 100% of the time. It's OK for the M|A|R|R|S thing, and for train stations, but not in some (brain-damaged, granted) templates, which wrap square brackets around some of the parameters. See ca:Papa Bonifaci II, at the end.--Joutbis (talk) 16:27, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Joutbis Hm... I can't fight with that.. -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:30, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Template programming element[edit]

I don't understand why this is classified as an error – I have never seen any rule that parser functions are restricted to templates, not, for instance in Help:Magic words. Is that (another) unwritten Law of Wiki? --Unbuttered parsnip (talk) mytime= Mon 08:56, wikitime= 00:56, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Unbuttered Parsnip, an example would be good. Bgwhite (talk) 04:59, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Errors #51 and #53[edit]

  • Error #51 Interwiki before last heading
  • Error #53 Interwiki before last category

Today, I first corrected all of the #53 errors. Then, I went to correct the #51 errors. To my initial surprise, I saw some of the same errors that I had corrected for #53 listed under #51 errors.

On further thought, I question why the Checkwiki software scans for two different "misplaced interwiki" errors. If an interwiki link does not appear after the last category, it's an error. No need to distinguish between "before last heading" and "before last category".

Knife-in-the-drawer (talk) 04:09, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Simple, see {{Uncategorized}} Jerodlycett (talk) 13:32, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
I saw. What is the relation of {{Uncategorized}} to my issue of two different Checkwiki errors flagging basically the same condition?
Let me add an additional dimension to the problem, and maybe you'll see the issue. Not only do #51 and #53 flag the same basic error, but they also fail to flag an error when an interwiki occurs after all categories but before any stubs. See this older and more detailed version of Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Layout. Why was "Interlanguage links" removed from the MOS? Because "Interlanguage links" should be placed in Wikidata now. However, they still occur in many articles--thus, Checkwiki errors #51 and #53. Knife-in-the-drawer (talk) 02:11, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, should have explained better. #51 gets triggered only if it's before the last heading. #53 only gets triggered if it's before the last category. There are several ways for #53 to occur without #51, if there are no headings (probably a stub) or if it's after the last heading, but before the last category. There are several ways to trigger #51 before #53, if the categories are misplaced (and put before the interwiki which is also misplaced, maybe a References section was added at the tail for example) or if the article is uncategorized (hence the reference to the template for that). If you have a situation like {{example]] you also get two errors (and it's disturbingly common), one for the template without a correct end, one for the square brackets without correct beginning. Correct one and the other is not updated. If you fix a bunch of errors in one article, you'll see it's still listed under all the other errors, which seems to me to be a missing feature in WPCleaner. Jerodlycett (talk) 03:12, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
Good--now, we're on the same page. Let me make a last pitch for "only one Checkwiki error is necessary"; then, we'll call the horse "dead" and stop beating it.
If interwiki at end of article
Then no error
If only stubs after interwiki
Then no error
Else Checkwiki error #onlyoneerror
Knife-in-the-drawer (talk) 04:23, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
I counter with if(interwiki) Error: Should be on meta Also with magic missle. That's also a good way to counter. Jerodlycett (talk) 04:31, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
Symbol question-rtl.svg Some editors and ips needlessly add interwiki links where Wikidata has already established a link e.g. [3]. It would seem that the #51 and #53 errors would be better directed towards the removal rather than relocation of interwikis in those cases. Dl2000 (talk) 03:05, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
I agree with both of you. It's what I actually wanted from the beginning, but I didn't want to ask for too much initially, so I opted for the two-step approach. :) Knife-in-the-drawer (talk) 23:38, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

@Dl2000, Jerodlycett, and Knife-in-the-drawer: three things:

  1. Some languages have one error turned off while the other is turned on. Different languages have different rules. Checkwiki was designed so each language can customize what errors to turn off and on.
  2. I personally remove any interwiki links that are on wikidata. A lot of the time, it is to the wrong item on Wikidata and I fix that. Also, bots do go around and delete valid interwiki links. There are two helpful scripts that one can use:
    1. To add a link to Wikidata under the article's name, add to your following .js file: importScriptURI("// rand/WikidataInfo.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript");
    2. To add a script that will automatically delete any interwiki links already in wikidata, add to your following .js file: mw.loader.load('//');
  3. Around 1/2 the time, the "interwiki link" isn't one. It is a wikilink, just formatted wrong. The most common case is a missing ":" at the beginning. For example [[de:Germany]] should be [[:de:Germany]]

One can look at my User:Bgwhite/vector.js file to see how I added the above scripts. The scripts are at the bottom of the file. Bgwhite (talk) 23:03, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

I think our suggestion would still be valid. It should still be removed, not moved. Whether that's through adding a colon, or just removing it. Jerod Lycett (talk) 17:54, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Error n°54 false positive[edit]

Yuri (genre) is a false positive. The break is in a reference. Jerodlycett (talk) 13:36, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

The mistake in de:Hilfsfrist. Is there any way else to avoid collecting these articles in WPSK than to separate the ref group entries? --Hadibe (talk) 10:47, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

List of errors > #500[edit]

As you probably know, WPCleaner can detect some errors that are not listed by Check Wiki, using error numbers > #500, without any link to a list of pages to fix.

I've modified WPCleaner to be able to manage a list for some of these errors:

If you know some way of getting a list of pages for other errors > #500, I can add it to WPCleaner. --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 19:22, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

The abuse filter extraneous markup is one. Checkwiki will catch some of these, such as this, but won't others. Bgwhite (talk) 07:05, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

False positive for #60 ?[edit]

Hi, I don't understand why fr:Liste des commandes et des livraisons de l'Airbus A380 keeps getting reported again and again. It seems that the following part is reported: {{#tag:ref|Singapore Airlines a commandé l'A380 en trois versions différentes, dont deux sont opérées : * 01 = 471 places{{#tag:ref|{{Lien web|url=|titre= Singapore Airlines Seat Maps (V1)|éditeur=}}|name=SIA_A}}, * 02 = 411 places{{#tag:ref|{{Lien web|url=|titre= Singapore Airlines Seat Maps (V2)|éditeur=}}|name=SIA_B}}, * 03 : ''configuration non encore connue'' |group=Note|name=SIAVersions}}

But in the notice, you have #tag:ref, Singapore Airlines a commandé l'A380 en trois versions différentes, dont deux sont opérées: note the comma after tag:ref instead of the actual pipe.

There is a similar construct before (Emirates) but it's not reported. --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 11:36, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Error #81 - what to do?[edit]

Is error 81 worth keeping around? I thought it was but upon being reverted Bgwhite says "it's deactivated for a reason" due to it being one of those errors that's very frequent and I don't disagree, only #70 or #72 get close to the level of backlog and while I've long seen them as prime examples of errors that'll never be fixed they're not the issue here. This dump of articles from March that Bgwhite provided shows it is a very big issue, something I wasn't aware of prior but that's my fault for not asking about it here. I'm going to assume the length is just cumulative from when it was deactivated until now but it was frequent at the time it was still active. I hear that AWB has an issue with parsing it automatically so it wouldn't be any good as a bot task and it's hard to see even a dedicated group of people going through the backlog even semi-manually. From what Bgwhite has said, this is a perennial issue and the rate of new entries is much higher than the fixing rate so I think that with the error list at a few hundred shy of 90,000 would it be wise to simply not have it as an error? Looking for consensus or simply input as to what we could do because I'm not convinced it's insurmountable but the tools we have to process them quickly have too high a margin of error. tutterMouse (talk) 09:22, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

tutterMouse, as Rjwilmsi may recall too, we had editors complaining of us merging references. AWB will merge references only if there is a merged reference in a given page. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:43, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
I'm a little confused, was it that there were complaints of either the fact AWB/WPC was merging references at all or that AWB only merged them when there were other merged references? tutterMouse (talk) 10:02, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
On frwiki, it's still active, but I'm not sure detections are correct because the list contains only 74 instances right now, which is clearly not the reality. WPCleaner can detect them in articles if the error is activated or if parameter error_081_bot_enwiki=true is added in the configuration (like #82 on frwiki) --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 09:52, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

tutterMouse not everybody likes merged references. We found a workaround to merge only if merged references exist in page. Check Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/General_fixes#Duplicate_Unnamed_References_.28DuplicateUnnamedReferences.29 for more. -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:45, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

I see so why do we have this if we've got editors complaining about it? I know we have some old hands who tend to complain about everything if it's not catering to them and oppose everything new but if it's only merging refs where merged refs already exist then why have this error if the solution is an error to someone else? It's made redundant by being hobbled. tutterMouse (talk) 13:04, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Reason is simple: complaints usually come after things being implemented, rather than before, and when the complaints come, we change configuration or behavior... And enwiki is not the only wiki where CW is running, other wikis are not necessarily complaining. --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 14:54, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Oh no, I know the reason and I find it a pretty stupid complaint. I do know CW runs on other wikis too as you did mention the error is active on but has a giant backlog no doubt hindered by complainers and we're resistant to change in a way that makes you think we'd be ten years back technologically if some of us were able to keep it that way seeing as the most prolific editors only consider their use case. I still think it's a worthwhile task but we're here to work out what we do about it, not what we did. tutterMouse (talk) 17:32, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

A few questions, and silly requests[edit]

Hi from; a few random things:

  1. Request: in the web interface the "more" link should be sortable, displaying how many errors are there ("1 more", "2 more" and so on); or at least don't display "more" if there isn't any other error; I'd love this so much :D
  2. Question: I'm testing two whitelists on; I'm supposed to wait the new dump to see those articles removed from the web interface?
  3. Request: it should be possible to whitelist a single ISBN instead of articles; in we have a parameter |ignoraisbn= inside the citation templates (doc here, it's part of the LUA module); article it:Jordan 195 has a wrong ISBN and it's not on our error lists[4]; but I don't know the details about this: is this "ignore" parameter working on every wiki due to the Lua module? Can we always use this instead of whitelists?
  4. Gadget proposal: when logged in Wikipedia, on Special:Watchlist there should be something like "Show errors in my whatchlisted articles", redirecting to our interface with a list of errors found; it should work like clicking on "more" for every article. I can do it already using the url, one article at a time. Similar gadgets can be done for a category, etc.
  5. Error 39, translation page: " Due to a Wikimedia bug</a> ": is there a missing url?
  6. Minor bug: in the interface, after clicking on "more", the "list" link is broken.
  7. Suggestion: in the translation, it'd be better to use &nbsp; for spaces inside the examples proposed, at least where spaces are the problem.

Sorry if I'm wasting your time, and thanks for maintaining this wonderful project! --Vittorioo (talk) 23:08, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Vittorioo There are no silly requests, but I may give silly answers. :)
  1. Good question. I'll look into it.
  2. The whitelist is updated at 0z everyday. Unfortunately, itwiki is only updated twice a month. From what you've already done, it looks good. I'll check it (my) tomorrow to see if the whitelists work just fine.
  3. It's not possible. enwiki has a similar parameter to ignoraisbn. Checkwiki is not checking ISBNs inside any cite template. The Lua module already checks for bad ISBNs. On enwiki, the errors are located at Category:Pages with ISBN errors. Checkwiki is only checking ISBNs that are not inside a cite type template.
  4. I haven't a clue when it comes to Gadgets. Gadgets are written in Javascript, a language I've never dealt with.
  5. I've removed the <a> tag. There was another Mediawiki bug that prevented newlines from being used in <blockquote> and several quote templates, thus <p> had to be used there. Those were fixed and the <a> tag was related to that.
  6. Will fix.
  7. Could you give me an example?
You are not wasting my time. Any suggestions or questions are always welcome. Bgwhite (talk) 23:49, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
7) For example on error 22, the [[Category : ABC]] and the like; but it's just me splitting windows; I've put no break spaces everywere :D Thanks again, will report on --Vittorioo (talk) 00:05, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
6) Fixed. -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:35, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
7) I've added a few myself [5]; regarding 1) and 4): I've found a way to use WPCleaner to find articles with multiple errors or to scan my whatchlisted articles, it's quite the same of what I've asked, so don't waste time on them. Even that bug in 6), it's really not essential, just archive all of this. Thanks. --Vittorioo (talk) 12:43, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Error 82 confusion and new error 104[edit]

Hi from again. I've problems with error 82 "Link to other wikiproject"; it's active in too.

  • A) Please exclude the "Wikipedia:" namespace from being detected by the script when it's checking a
  • B) Redirects to articles written like [[w:en:Article]] or [[:w:Article]] etc.:
    • from point of view they belong to error #68 "Link to other language";
    • from point of view they are internal links badly written, together with [[:en:Article]] and the like: I propose to transfer them to a new error #104;
  • C) There are redirects to articles using Meta or Mediawiki mixed syntax like [[m:en:Article]] or [[:en:mw:w:Article]] or [[meta:w:Article]] etc., and the script is not handling them correctly:
    • from point of view they belong to error #68 "Link to other language";
    • from point of view they belong to the error #104 I've proposed in point B above;
    • they belong to error #82 only when the script is checking Commons or other sister projects.

A more simple fix to the script would be renaming error 82 to something like "Links with mixed MediaWiki syntax" and heavily expand its description. But in this case you have to be sure that all the above cases and variants are checked.
Sorry for the headache and thanks again. --Vittorioo (talk) 20:02, 1 May 2015 (UTC) Edit: added "at least" in point C) + some minor fixes --Vittorioo (talk) 10:07, 2 May 2015 (UTC) PS: I've rewritten and simplified my proposal. --Vittorioo (talk) 20:49, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Vittorioo Sorry for ignoring you. I've been sick this past week. When I do edit, I'm trying just to keep up with fixing enwiki checkwiki errors. I'll get back to answering you next week. I've got an in-law gathering this weekend... so I'll probably be really nauseated for awhile. Bgwhite (talk) 21:44, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
Magioladitis Last month, I did the 2nd fewest edits in over four years and March was the 3rd fewest. Besides being sick the past two months, I wonder what else happened..... Bgwhite (talk) 00:01, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
Real life first of course! We have hundreds of years ahead to fix wiki. :D Take care. --Vittorioo (talk) 10:07, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
Pull request with a partial fix, basically an update for the list of projects: we are missing "species" because it's written "speciesi" in the script; also missing "voy" and many others. This is the list I've proposed when the script is checking a (that is, not Commons or other projects): b: c: d: n: q: s: species: v: voy: wikt: m: mw: meta: metawiki: metawikipedia: mediawikiwiki: commons: wikibooks: wikidata: wikinews: wikiquote: wikisource: wikispecies: wiktionary: wikivoyage: wikiversity: phabricator: wikitech: toollabs: testwiki: test2wiki: testwikidata: wmf: foundation: wikimedia: wmania: incubator: outreach:. There are more, but those are less used: see Help:Interwikimedia links. I've also proposed to add zh and bn language codes instead of fl (which doesn't exist) and gv (too small wiki). --Vittorioo (talk) 20:49, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Vittorioo I've updated the program with your changes. Bgwhite (talk) 18:01, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Slightly better. I've read your commit and you are still listing "fl" language code: as I said, it doesn't exist; also still listing "meta-wiki:" and labs:: they don't exist; re-read the list above please for the updated interwikimedia links: still missing c: for Commons and d: for Wikidata, etc. Also, is it really impossible to consider "Wikipedia:" a namespace, removing it from the list of projects? As I said in the pull request, error #82 is not active in our sister projects, so it's quite safe to remove "Wikipedia:" for now. I'd leave "w:" for a future fix, since that one is more complex to handle. I really appreciate your work, keep going. --Vittorioo (talk) 19:21, 27 May 2015 (UTC) Edited for grammar. --Vittorioo (talk) 12:43, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
With the last week commit it looks much better now. Thank you! --Vittorioo (talk) 10:03, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

CHECKWIKI #69 (2015-06-28)[edit]

On sv.wp CHECKWIKI detects the following false positives:

(tJosve05a (c) 13:13, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Josve05a can't you just use {{Not a typo}}? -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:16, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Will that help against CHECKWIKI errors? Also this is perhaps a common issue on svwp since we do tend to use dashes to merge words together. (tJosve05a (c) 13:30, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Error 4 false positive[edit]

Error 4 (HTML-tag <a>): matches <a throne dais>; it's wrong. Fix: add href= to regexp (talk) 23:17, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Improvement for #64[edit]

Yes check.svg Done

Hi, a user asked me to fix also links like [[Article|'''Article''']]. I've just added that to WPCleaner (bold and italics), maybe it could be nice to have it also in CW ? --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 10:44, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

NicoV. New code has been updated. It also catches cases of [[Article|'''''Article''''']] or any number of apostrophe's as long as there is a minimum of two on both sides of Article. The French dump is currently processing with the new code. Bgwhite (talk) 21:36, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Invalid color tracking[edit]

might not be feasible, but may be interesting to (1) parse an article, (2) grab any css style statements, (3) parse the background/foreground colors and compute the contrast ratio, (5) flag articles with really bad ratios. for the parsing part of the style statement, we have code in module:color contrast . for related discussion see Template talk:Episode list#Invalid color tracking category. of course, it would be pointless if there is no one interested in fixing them, but an idea for helping those of us with (partial) colour blindness. Frietjes (talk) 16:16, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

update arwiki[edit]

Please update the arwiki Last scanned dump 2015-06-02 (70 days old).

  • Last dump: 2015-06-02
  • Last update: 2015-06-30

--Zaher talk 10:21, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi Zaher, I think the problem is with the generation of the dumps, WMF hasn't been able to properly generate them for a long time... --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 11:53, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
The new arwiki dump is available now, but if you search for "checkwiki" in the Tool Labs Grid Status you'll find that arwiki-munch and arwiki-delay are stuck on the previous dump, wasting server time for weeks. Same happened with eswiki, but in this case the new dump is still partial: it should take few more days to complete hopefully, so I suggest to wait before restarting eswiki-munch. --Vittorioo (talk) 06:58, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
Zaher kadour I deleted all the old jobs. They were all hung. Some of them were on disabled queues. They are rebooting all the machines over the next few days to upgrade the kernel, so they may get hung again. Sometimes a machine will go down, but the job remains listed with the master queue, thus it looks hung.
FYI... A dump isn't copied over to the WMF Labs side until it is entirely finished. Bgwhite (talk) 07:52, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── @Zaher kadour and Meno25: Looks like arwiki and eswiki process got hung again. A couple of times with enwiki, it wouldn't process either. It turned out to be something weird in an article causing the problem. I have a feeling this is also happening here. I can usually narrow it down to a few suspect articles. It will take a bit to narrow down as I have to run checkwiki a few times. I'll be doing this on my laptop where I can control it better. I'll need help once I narrow it down as I haven't a clue when it comes to Arabic. Bgwhite (talk) 17:22, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

@Zaher kadour and Meno25: It ran ok on my laptop. I'm at a loss on what is happening. I updated the errors from the data generated on my laptop. Bgwhite (talk) 01:01, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
I ran the bot to fix all errors on arwiki. --Meno25 (talk) 11:19, 14 August 2015 (UTC)


Seems that the tool Vada would be useful to this project, particularly the A930913's Cleaner app. Eman235/talk 18:01, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

checkwiki error #69 (isbn) updated[edit]

Checkwiki will give off a #69 error if:

  1. Finds 10-ISBN or 13-ISBN
  2. Finds ISBN\d[-\d ][-\d] ie, ISBN9876543210. There are infobox parameters of isbn1 .. isbn14, so the regex tries to work around this.

From August's enwiki dump, there were 2,000 articles with the first problem and ~250 with the second. Bgwhite (talk) 09:29, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia:WikiProject Check Wikipedia/Translation[edit]

There is a dead link to the Toolserver ([[tools:~sk/checkwiki/enwiki/enwiki_translation.txt|toolserver]]) in Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia:WikiProject Check Wikipedia/Translation. Please update the link or remove it entirely if it is no longer needed. --Meno25 (talk) 14:24, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

At the same time, it should be updated to take into account the new elements that are managed by CW: whitelispage, ... --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 14:39, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
Meno25 I know nothing about this. What is this for and how is it used? Bgwhite (talk) 17:32, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
Removed. -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:38, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
Update this too: Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia:WikiProject Check Wikipedia. -- (talk) 18:27, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Enable in lvwiki[edit]

@Bgwhite: Can you please enable CHECKWIKI to -- Magioladitis (talk) 20:51, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Magioladitis Yes, I'll add it. Now I need to remember how.... Bgwhite (talk) 21:30, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
Magioladitis In theory, checkwiki is processing lvwiki's dump right now. Bgwhite (talk) 23:46, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
Magioladitis Everything ran ok. Some errors are very high, but that is due to needing to tune the errors.
  1. 3 is high, but I lvwiki uses there own template. Either need to remove #3 or add the template to their own translation page.
  2. 37 & #6 are high. What is lvwiki's stand on what can go into defaultsort? Some wiki have various characters with umlauts or accents that are ok.
  3. 61 is high, but relatively low. Is lvwiki at punctuation before or after the ref wiki? The error is relatively low in I'd think there would be more errors.
Bgwhite (talk) 06:02, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Bgwhite I asked the Latvian guys to translate everything and disactivate what they do not like it. We need to add instructions of how things are done for other projects that are interested to participate. -- Magioladitis (talk) 06:09, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Added lvwiki to WPCleaner also after request from Edgars2007. --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 19:31, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Daily scan[edit]

Resolved Moin Moin @Bgwhite:, since yesterday, when SSL was broken, the daily scan isn't running. Can you have a look at? SSL is fixed. King Regards --Crazy1880 (talk) 04:53, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Crazy1880 SSL only affected the web page and not any scans. dewiki did not run on the 14th or 15th, but did run on the 16th. As it didn't run for two days, the 16th processed three days and took longer. Today's run found ~10,000 errors. When I look at the errors, everyone is already listed and no new errors are listed on the web page. Very strange. Not sure what to say.
I noticed there are alot of #1, #2, #16, #22 and #64 errors. Most of these can be handled via a bot by AWB. Any interest in running a bot? Bgwhite (talk) 06:56, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
Bgwhite, Thanks for your assessments. I had only seen that two days a list was not filled, although there were always mistake expired. Interessiert bin ich immer. Regards --Crazy1880 (talk) 08:04, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
Bgwhite, was it running today? My feeling say no. Regards --Crazy1880 (talk) 04:44, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
Crazy1880 Yes, it ran. I'm running it again on any errors found in articles that were edited in the last 6 hours. Most of the errors are already listed, but I do see new errors showing up for #3. Bgwhite (talk) 06:04, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
Its running well. --Crazy1880 (talk) 18:37, 23 September 2015 (UTC)


@Bgwhite: Is it possible to enable Check Wikipedia on ScoWp, as well? Avicennasis @ 01:50, 11 Tishrei 5776 / 01:50, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Avicennasis Och aye! The defaults are going to be enwiki defaults. Enwiki config file is located Here. Copy this file somewhere on scowiki. Turn off/on any errors you need and do any necessary translating. When done, tell me where you put the file. Bgwhite (talk) 22:51, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Checkwiki updated errors #85, #90 and #91[edit]

Checkwiki has been updated to check for more cases of empty <gallery> tags in #85. Will also check for alot more cases of #90 and #91, especially when Wikipedia is used as a reference. Bgwhite (talk) 22:55, 24 September 2015 (UTC)


I think it would be good to put a link to this page somewhere on and also somewhere on WP:AWB. Personally I searched some (long) time such a page in AWB manual and on labs project pages, but I found it only now. Especially this can be useful for users with non-en.wp home wiki. --XXN, 19:35, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Last scanned dumps[edit]


It's been over 60 days since the last scanned dump for en.wp and 33 days dince the last scanned dump for sv.wp. Time for another? Face-smile.svg (tJosve05a (c) 13:03, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Josve05a enwiki ran on my laptop. Magioladitis and I fixed them all. They are having problems with dumps over the past several months. Only one dump of each language ran last month. Dumps just started up for this month. Bgwhite (talk) 21:17, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
Josve05a I've manually started Checkwiki's svwiki dump processing. They still are having problems. Oh joy. Bgwhite (talk) 00:02, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Ignore <graph>...</graph>[edit]

Yes check.svg Done

Hi, I think we should add <graph>...</graph> in the list of tags which contents is ignored : currently, on frwiki, both fr:Liste des plus longues cavités naturelles and fr:Liste des plus profondes cavités naturelles are detected by #47 (for }} without {{). --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 22:00, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

NicoV Done. I just manually started Checkwiki's frwiki dump processing. Entire dump creation process still isn't done because it keeps firing off errors. I had to send an email at the start of the month to ask why processing hadn't started. I've fired off two emails, with no response, on why the dumps aren't being copied to labs. It's been ~six months since they started fiddling with dump processing and it hasn't worked correctly since. Bgwhite (talk) 00:00, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Empty anchor tags - what to do?[edit]

See [6] (tJosve05a (c) 11:46, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Josve05a These are ok in this instance. It can be replaced with the {{anchor}} template. I see the same thing being used for notes or references, which I don't like. People will use <div id=> tags instead of <span id=> tags, which is incorrect on an HTML level and should be replaced with <span> or {{anchor}}. I recently ran a list of all empty span tag, minus those being used an anchor. They were located User:Bgwhite/Sandbox1. Frietjes just finished fixing them... see the history. Bgwhite (talk) 17:01, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Missing last run[edit]

Hello. There are about 10 days from the last dump on our wiki, but there wasn't still new run. And not just there. Something's wrong? Thank you, IKhitron (talk) 12:16, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

You mean hewiki, right? Link to dumps. --Meno25 (talk) 12:29, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
Exactly. Another link to dumps, 2015-10-10. IKhitron (talk) 12:36, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
Probably because dumps are not correctly copied to labs (see Bgwhite answer 2 subjects above). --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 13:46, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. I can see from that answer that there should be manual start. IKhitron (talk) 14:23, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
IKhitron What one are you after? Bgwhite (talk) 21:02, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, Bgwhite, i did not understand your question. IKhitron (talk) 12:27, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
IKhitron What language are you needing. Bgwhite (talk) 16:58, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
Do you mean which wiki? Hewiki, Bgwhite. Thank you. IKhitron (talk) 17:00, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
IKhitron It's running now. Bgwhite (talk) 21:13, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
It's done. Thanks a lot, Bgwhite. IKhitron (talk) 12:11, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Bgwhite, it's me again. I believe it happens again. There are hundreds of ready dumps and 7 checks only, with no change in this number in the last three days. Thank you, IKhitron (talk) 12:43, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
IKhitron All the runs should be starting up in the next day or two. The dumps are almost finished. Bgwhite (talk) 09:38, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
Tיhank you, Bgwhite. IKhitron (talk) 10:49, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
IKhitron Checkwiki is starting too process the dumps. A few dumps haven't been copied over to labs yet, but most have. 23:51, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Why positive?[edit]

Hello. Could you explain me, please, why ID 43 matches these two articles. I can see this month after month and can't understand what is the problem. Thank you in advance, IKhitron (talk) 18:21, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

IKhitron My right to left reading is horrible, but....
  1. With the first one, it has {{{1|}}}}. This is a template variable and normally shouldn't be there.
  2. It sees the following and thinks there are three braces together: {שגיאה לא אופיינית לאלוף העולם לשעבר. לאחר המסע 26. צד2 לא נותר לשחור אלא להיכנע}
Bgwhite (talk) 18:35, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, Bgwhite, but:
  1. I know it should not be here, and ID 34 indeed finds this problem. But what is about "Template without correct end"? It should not be unbalanced parentheses, shouldn't it?
  2. Indeed, this template uses "{..text..}" as code it's in hundreds of articles, but the problem is just here. Maybe it's indeed because this text is in the end' just before the "}}". But the bot should not ignore single balanced parentheses?
IKhitron (talk) 18:43, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
IKhitron The problem is Checkwiki counts in pairs. {{{1|}}} isn't a problem because it sees two pair of braces (three braces makes two sets of paired braces). So when Checkwiki sees {...text...}}}, it thinks something is off. There are pluses and minuses to this algorithm and you are seeing one of the minuses. It normally becomes a problem on math articles. Checkwiki does have a whitelist feature. For enwiki, #43's whitelist is here. You tell Checkwiki where to find the whitelist via the translation file. Bgwhite (talk) 19:01, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Thank you very much, Bgwhite. IKhitron (talk) 12:00, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
Could you tell me, please, Bgwhite, where can I find any manual for the translation page. I'd like to find a list of per error parameters, as "error_003_templates_enwiki". Thank you, IKhitron (talk) 17:09, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
IKhitron Not sure it exists, I've compiled one but I'm not sure it's complete for CW itself and it contains a lot of parameters that are only used by WPCleaner: Wikipedia:WPCleaner/Configuration/Help#Check_Wiki_configuration. --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 17:30, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Thank you, Nicov. It's a (very) good start. IKhitron (talk) 17:34, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Suggestion for fixing #91 in case of google translate ?[edit]


Hi, would any of you have an idea on how to fix #91 errors when they're about google translate links for automatically translating a page of an other wiki ? For example, in fr:Ameesha Patel, #91 is detected for which is a link to have a version of Rinke Khanna translated into French by google translate.

For information, I've added some parameters in WPCleaner to help fix #90 and #91, see error_090_link_templates_frwiki and error_091_link_templates_frwiki in fr:Projet:Correction syntaxique/Traduction. --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 20:22, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

I've decided to deal with this kind of links as if it was a direct link to Wikipedia, so WPC will suggest to replace it by an interwiki link. --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 17:17, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

New error in WPCleaner, #527 : reference tags with same name but different content[edit]

Hi, I've just added detection #527 to WPCleaner to detect reference tags with the same name but different content, like <ref name="A">A</ref> and <ref name="A">B</ref>. I've not activated it by default (just need to uncomment the error_527_bot_enwiki line in Wikipedia:WikiProject Check Wikipedia/Translation).

I've also prepared the configuration for #526 which detects incorrect links to years, like [[1985|2005]] (classic VE error..., still not fixed by the development team after so many time...). Same, it's not activated here.

A list of additional detection available in WPCleaner is described at Wikipedia:WPCleaner/Configuration/Help#Check Wiki configuration. --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 17:25, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

@NicoV: For those who want to fix this error, on enwiki, Category:Pages with duplicate reference names is the tracking category. Bgwhite (talk) 20:12, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
@Bgwhite: Thanks ! I've included it in WPCleaner's configuration, so the error #527 will look like a regular CW error (with list available).
Do you know how the category name is configured in Wikipedia ? On frwiki, we only have fr:Catégorie:Page avec des erreurs de référence (equivalent to Category:Pages with reference errors) which has all cite errors, not only the same name with different content. --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 20:28, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
NicoV, I'm not sure how all this works, but...
  1. MediaWiki:Cite error references duplicate key is what labels the error on MediaWiki's side.
  2. The default on enwiki is to place ref errors into Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting.
  3. On enwiki Template:Broken ref/cat controls what goes into a specific category or just passes into the default. It lists 3 specific errors not going into default.
The main reason this ref error does not going into the default category is because of bots. A bot works on trying to fix the ref errors in the default category, but it can't fix the duplicate reference name error. Bgwhite (talk) 20:44, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
Ok, thanks for the explanation. I've created a phab:T117099 to request that Cite extension can use specific categories depending on the error. --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 20:49, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Latvia(n Wikipedia) calling[edit]

Hi all! Have some stupid questions, so sorry if the answer is obvious :)

  1. Does Checkwiki catch up such problematic headings: "== Foo ==="?
  2. Heading "INFORMĀCIJA" isn't here. Bug or I'm missing something?
  3. Wikilinks... I usually mess up them :) Will [{Foo]] and {[Foo]] be catched? And what about something like this (OK, this is quite hypothetical):
    • Some text {[link]] and some more text and [[link]}

--Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 19:31, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Edgars2007 Now I have London Calling playing in my head.
  1. Only in a few cases. If there is only one "=" at the start of the heading or if it happens to be the first heading.
  2. Yes and no. It should catch it, but I don't have it catching all the different types of characters. Ā is not on that list. Another thing I need to fix.
  3. It should catch the first set ([{Foo]]), but will not catch the second {[link]].
Bgwhite (talk) 20:13, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
@Bgwhite: Isn't it the error #8 what Edgars2007 is referring to in the first question and the error #46 in the third question? (Anyway, you know the code better than me...) Matěj Suchánek (talk) 20:22, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
(edit conflict) OK, thanks. Then will try to do DB scan for 1st and 3rd. it would be LOL if I would listen to that song now - have all my music in computer in random order get played :) --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 20:25, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
Matěj Suchánek Edgars2007 #8 only catches headings that don't end in "=". So #8 doesn't apply to the first question. #19 and #83 are the exceptions I mentioned. For the third question, I check for how many [[ and ]] there are. The problem is there are the right amount of opening and closing brackets. I have to look at the code to remember what I did... why I didn't often eludes me :) Bgwhite (talk) 20:39, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Edgars2007 Checkwiki should now pick up cases of INFORMĀCIJA and any other cases of whacked out Latvian or other non-standard Latin letters. Bgwhite (talk) 00:32, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 10:00, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Oh, one more question. Does Checkwiki catch such URL: [url link text [[linked text]] some more], which should end up as "link text linked text some more". It's quite worse, when wikilink is the first thing after URL. --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 18:28, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Edgars2007 No, CW doesn't catch it. WPCleaner can if you configure error #513 (but WPC doesn't generate any list of pages with errors). --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 08:02, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
OK, thanks. --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 08:10, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

HTML links with { or } : #43 / #47[edit]


Hi, on frwiki, we have several articles with HTML links containing { or } (sometimes with double { or }) and they are detected by #47 (and probably #43). Example on fr:Circonscription d'Arta: [{%22cls%22:%22level%22,%22params%22:{%22level%22:%22ep%22,%22id%22:19}} Επικράτεια - Εκλ. Περιφέρεια Αρτας]. Should it really be detected by CW ? If yes, how can I fix them (without adding all the articles in the white list) ? --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 11:56, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

NicoV this Greek link is a mess. -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:02, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Magioladitis Yes, I know, but this entire web site seems to pass some sort of JSON parameters in the URL, hence the { and }. I don't know how to rewrite the URL so that it works but isn't detected by CW. --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 12:07, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
NicoV I have replaced many of them with elections results from a another site. -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:09, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
Ok, I found a way by replacing { by %7B and } by %7D. --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 12:27, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
I've modified WPC to suggest the replacement by %7B and %7D when the error #47 is triggered by an URL. --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 20:37, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Ask for check[edit]


Hello. Is the cite error phab:T118391 checked? If yes, which ID? If no, could you add this, please? Thank you, IKhitron (talk) 14:12, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

The regex could be something as </?ref(^>)*$ IKhitron (talk) 14:57, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
IKhitron, yes this is checked for. It shows up in #94. AWB does fix this automatically, not sure about WPCleaner.
WPC sees it also as #94, the opening ref tag has no counterpart. --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 04:06, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
Thank you. IKhitron (talk) 12:28, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Can't use whitelist[edit]


Hello. I tried to add whitelist as explained, but it does not work. Coud you tell me, please, what's wrong? id 95 results, translation page, whitelist. Thank you in advance, IKhitron (talk) 12:34, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

IKhitron I think it is a right-left issue. I'm looking for a line to start with * [[. I haven't run into this before, so I'm not sure what to do right now. Bgwhite (talk) 06:05, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
Bgwhite, but two another whitelists I created work fine. I can't understand what's the problem with that one. IKhitron (talk) 11:49, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
IKhitron Check the name of the parameter ;-) error_034_whitelistpage_hewiki=Wikipedia:Check_Wikipedia/Error_095_whitelist --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 15:16, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
Face-blush.svgFace-blush.svgFace-blush.svg IKhitron (talk) 16:32, 16 November 2015 (UTC)


Hello. Could you please expand the id 34 by tags (open, full or closed) noinclude, includeonly and onlyinclude? Thank you. IKhitron (talk) 14:35, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

IKhitron On several wikis, these are used in articles when it comes to using a part of one article into another. So, they are allowed in articles. Any particular reason you need them scanned on hewiki? Bgwhite (talk) 06:08, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
Wierd, Bgwhite. The reason is they should not be there and destroy the article structure. Is there a possibility to add the as new ID and set default prio 0 so wiki that wants it will change it? Thank you, IKhitron (talk) 11:52, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
Bgwhite? IKhitron (talk) 13:24, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
IKhitron Thanks for pinging me again. I see a ping, but don't have time at that moment and then end up forgetting. It is possible to do a separate, new error. NicoV, you see other wiki's, what do you think? Bgwhite (talk) 18:38, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
Yes, why not. I'm not sure we will use on frwiki because I'm pretty sure some articles are using it, but I will maybe activate it only as a detection. --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 13:39, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
It will be very nice, thank you. IKhitron (talk) 14:39, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Unbalanced attribute quote signs[edit]

See this revision, which contains: <ref name="reuterstimeline /> . Seems like something that might be in the purview of this project ? Quote signs for parser tags aren't mandatory right now in wikitext, but unbalanced is definitely problematic long term. —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 09:47, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

TheDJ you are the second person in as many days to request this. See here. It is actually causing a problem with VE, which is how the first request came to be. I'll be adding it at some point. Bgwhite (talk) 00:14, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
Ah, there was no note of that at the original VE report. —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 07:23, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
TheDJ They weren't going to fix it until your ticket (T118715), which is why it was originally requested that CheckWiki detect it. Magioladitis, NicoV and I have added 40+ tickets between us and do we have one of our issues fixed? You submit an issue that wasn't going to be fixed and its fixed within 24 hours. You are a God. Can you submit our tickets from now on? I'm going to go and bow down to the great and mighty TheDJ. Bgwhite (talk) 07:58, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
TheDJ I'm impressed too, I often even have no answer at all to the issues I'm submitting (a good example of that is about Content Translation tool : my reports are basically ignored and this tool continues to create articles with problems in 80-100% of them...). --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 08:36, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
This one was easy for them, as it was basically a missed edge case in previous work they had done a couple of weeks ago to improve attribute parsing in references. Besides, nowhere was said that they weren't going to fix it. User:Whatamidoing (WMF) had not made a ticket for it, but that is not uncommon. I often delay creating a ticket in order to get a better grip on the stated problem, so that I can write the best, least confusing, ticket possible. Or find a pre existing ticket that matches it.
And I have some 160 tickets authored tickets currently open, 200 tickets that I 'watch' are open, and that's besides the stuff that I myself maintain, because no one else does, which is another couple of 100 open tickets. so i'm not sure if you want to take me as a benchmark :) It's all relative..... —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 09:01, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
Finding pre-existing tickets is harder in Phab than in Bugzilla. These days, I often don't write a ticket until I've personally contacted one of the devs about it, to see whether someone else believes that a ticket about it already exists. It looks like about 20% of my closed Phab tasks (not all of which are bugs) are explicitly marked as duplicates, which isn't as bad as I thought. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:53, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Error #92 and special tags[edit]

CheckWiki detects headlines with <code>...</code> tags like

== <code>Whatever</code> ==


==  ==

and when there are more such headlines in one article which are not same, they are reported as same. Is there any possibility to adjust the algorithm, or should those just be put on whitelists? By the way, WPCleaner does not find this error in those articles. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 12:25, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Matěj Suchánek The program removes anything inside <code>, <nowiki>, <source>, <math> and a few other tags. The odds of broken brackets and other things are high in these tags. A whitelisting you shall go. Bgwhite (talk) 23:05, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Wrong localization[edit]

Hi. Romanian description for this page is wrong, unintelligible. Please put default English description instead. --XXN, 23:09, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

XXN The page that controls the descriptions is at ro:Wikipedia:WikiProject Check Wikipedia/Translation. Feel free to put in the correct translation. The web pages are updated at 0 UTC with the contents of the translation file. Bgwhite (talk) 23:08, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Thank you, I'll do some corrections. --XXN, 00:34, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Proposed error detection[edit]

I noticed some file-delinker bots (or even users) removing an image name leaves an incorrect syntax like [[File:|thumb|]]. Also, in image galleries I noticed that image title was removed, but caption remained (after pipe). It might be useful to detect these errors also. --XXN, 00:34, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

The example you provided looks like Double pipe in a link. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 14:34, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
Only in this particular example. But it can also be like: [[File:|thumb]] or [[File:|caption here]] or [[File:|some_size_px]] etc. --XXN, 13:33, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

Add linebreaks[edit]

I raised this at WP:BOTR, but someone sensibly suggested that I come here instead.

Perhaps someone's running a bot that already does this, but I thought I'd bring it up anyway, in case nobody was.

When text precedes a header, the header doesn't work, and the coding appears as normal text; run a Ctrl+F search for the equals sign at [7]. Fixing it is easy, because you just have to add a couple of new lines. If this isn't already being done, could someone's wikisyntax-fixing bot be given this as an additional task? Nyttend (talk) 15:31, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Nyttend It is and isn't the right place. Before it can fixed, one needs to find the articles with the problem. There is already CheckWiki error 8 that finds cases with crap after a section header. You want to find crap before the section header. This is not only reasonable, but just an extension of error 8. I'll code it up, but I'm busy at the moment and I also have another error I need to code up.
I'm not sure if a bot can do this without seeing more articles with the error. For error 8, it is usually one of two cases: vandalism or somebody didn't press enter. Majority of the time it is vandalism. A bot can't decided between deleting vandalism or just adding a line break. Bgwhite (talk) 23:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Wrong quotes[edit]

See this edit. Don't know how wide the problem is, but maybe it's worth including in Checkwiki? --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 09:58, 26 November 2015 (UTC)