Contents
- 1 COI edit request: follow up
- 2 Lua, Modules and my headache.
- 3 COI edit request followup
- 4 Santiago (Philippine city)
- 5 Regarding this
- 6 COI edit request followup 2
- 7 Newbie Template Editor - am I doing this right?
- 8 Template:WikiProject_India/sandbox
- 9 Explanation of revert on the ROBLOX article
- 10 Lua console testing - invoke and frame
- 11 IP block
- 12 Japanese
- 13 Frank Sinatra, Jr.
- 14 Regarding the Page - Jackky Bhagnani
COI edit request: follow up
Hi there
Thanks so much for your feedback on my COI edit request to George Institute for Global Health on 5 Feb 2016. I've submitted a new revision in response to your points on the talk page, please let me know if you'd like to see anything else!
Ktr183 (talk) 10:48, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
Lua, Modules and my headache.
Hello, sorry for the unsolicited invasion of your talk-page, but you seem to be a recurring name on the module pages.
I'm sprucing up a smaller independent wiki and am playing around with the idea of having some random facts pulled onto the main page, to this end, I've been making a list of facts on a project page and using labelled section transclusion as a means to mark them individually. I believe the next step is to use a Module such as Module:Random to pull one (or a few of these) to the front page dynamically. The theory is sound in my mind, but I've never added a module to mediawiki before. I assume I'll need a Lua extension. Could you please recommend the best one to use? Are there any more dependencies to get Module:Random to work?
Thank you very much for your time!
Alex J Fox(Talk)(Contribs) 18:45, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
- @AlexJFox: No problem - you can message me any time you like. To use Module:Random you will need to install Scribunto, which is the Wikimedia Foundation's official Lua extension. The current version of Module:Random also depends on Module:Yesno, Module:List and Module:TableTools, so you will need to copy those over to your wiki as well.
Note, however, that you can simulate random numbers in pure template code if you don't want to install any extensions. For a quasi-random number from 1 to 10 you could use something like
{{#expr: ({{NUMBEROFEDITS:R}} mod 10) + 1}}
(output: 9). If your wiki doesn't get many edits then you could do the same thing with the current time in Unix time:{{#expr: ({{#time:U}} mod 10) + 1}}
(output: 8). Using Module:Random will give you better randomness and means that you don't have to keep track of how many items you want to rotate through. (To rotate through 11 items in the template code above you needmod 11
, and to rotate through 12 items you needmod 12
, etc.) Using pure template code will probably be a lot easier to get working, though.Also, whichever of these you use, you may need to purge your main page for the changes to show up, depending on how you have your caching set up. Let me know if there's anything else you need to know, and I'll be happy to help. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 03:20, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
- I can't tell you how happy I am to see that this is possible with template code! There will be an initial 'surge' of edits as we move all of the relevant content from an old wiki version/server to the new one, but after that edits will be sporadic, so in time I shall probably move to using the module anyway, but for testing purposes the template code is great! Also, I don't anticipate heavy traffic at all on this wiki so the main page probably won't need to cache at all, I think I'll be able to figure out how to set that up, but thank you so SO much for the help! Alex J Fox(Talk)(Contribs) 03:23, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
COI edit request followup
Hi there
Sorry to invade your Talk page again but thanks so much for your feedback on my COI edit request to George Institute for Global Health on 5 Feb 2016. I submitted a new revision on 22 Feb in response to your points, please let me know if you'd like to see anything else!
Ktr183 (talk) 07:02, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
Santiago (Philippine city)
So many IP edits have not been accepted. Upgrade to semi or renew pending changes? --George Ho (talk) 05:53, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
- @George Ho: None of the edits have really been vandalism, BLP violations or copyright violations. I don't think that the page is eligible for pending changes protection now per the wording of WP:PCPP. Also, asking me here seems a little like trying to get the result you want, rather than an impartial one (although I'm aware I was the one who originally protected the page). I think it would be better to make a request at WP:RFPP. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 01:52, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
- Shall I next time post a request at an administrator's page or RFPP? --George Ho (talk) 03:08, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
- I think RFPP would be a better bet, but there's nothing wrong with using WP:AN for cases that might need debate, etc. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 04:42, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
- Shall I next time post a request at an administrator's page or RFPP? --George Ho (talk) 03:08, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
Regarding this
[1] - in what way can less than 7 hours be regarded as a "reasonable time" given that Wikipedia is edited by editors who live in all locations of the globe? A minimum period of 24 hours is surely essential. Please unblank the request, ideally for a 24 hour period, so that I can read it and the reasons for its rejection. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 00:36, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
- @Tiptoethrutheminefield: It's not about 7 hours being a "reasonable time" or not. It's about the case being used as evidence in an arbitration case, which goes against the priveleged nature of mediation. Besides, I just pushed the button - the person who made the decision is actually User:TransporterMan, the mediation committee chair. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 00:49, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
- But it is about what constitutes a "reasonable time". I would like to read the blanked request, the text that was left here [2] implies that a "reasonable time" should have been available for this to have be done, and I do not think a time period of less than 7 hours was reasonable. Are you saying you can't unpush the button, won't unpush the button, want more of a reason to unpush the button, or that I should ask TransporterMan? Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 00:57, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
- @Tiptoethrutheminefield: As far as I know, the reason to delete the page has nothing to do with how long the request was open for. I can technically unpush the button, yes, but I don't have the authority to do so. It would take a decision by the mediation committee as a whole to undo this action. If you want to take it up with someone, you should ask TransporterMan or email the committee's (private) mailing list via User:Mediation Committee. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 01:38, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
- Tiptoethrutheminefield, those closing notices are automatically generated and only have a single form, unfortunately. As Mr. Stradivarius has said, the case was closed due to it bleeding over into the ARBCOM case and to preserve the privilege of mediation. Specifically, my closing statement was, "Complete reject. Since allegations about what is happening here have now inappropriately bled over into the ARBCOM case, this case is being rejected so as to preserve the privileged nature of mediation. This case may, if needed, be refiled once the ARBCOM case is complete. For the Mediation Committee, TransporterMan (TALK) 17:42, 5 March 2016 (UTC)" If the case were still up, that's all that there would be to see. For the Mediation Committee, TransporterMan (TALK) 16:57, 7 March 2016 (UTC) (Chairperson)
- Thanks, I understand and accept that explanation. Though it's a flaw that the standard notice refers to things that are not applicable for all the functions the notice is used for. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 20:12, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
- Tiptoethrutheminefield, those closing notices are automatically generated and only have a single form, unfortunately. As Mr. Stradivarius has said, the case was closed due to it bleeding over into the ARBCOM case and to preserve the privilege of mediation. Specifically, my closing statement was, "Complete reject. Since allegations about what is happening here have now inappropriately bled over into the ARBCOM case, this case is being rejected so as to preserve the privileged nature of mediation. This case may, if needed, be refiled once the ARBCOM case is complete. For the Mediation Committee, TransporterMan (TALK) 17:42, 5 March 2016 (UTC)" If the case were still up, that's all that there would be to see. For the Mediation Committee, TransporterMan (TALK) 16:57, 7 March 2016 (UTC) (Chairperson)
- @Tiptoethrutheminefield: As far as I know, the reason to delete the page has nothing to do with how long the request was open for. I can technically unpush the button, yes, but I don't have the authority to do so. It would take a decision by the mediation committee as a whole to undo this action. If you want to take it up with someone, you should ask TransporterMan or email the committee's (private) mailing list via User:Mediation Committee. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 01:38, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
- But it is about what constitutes a "reasonable time". I would like to read the blanked request, the text that was left here [2] implies that a "reasonable time" should have been available for this to have be done, and I do not think a time period of less than 7 hours was reasonable. Are you saying you can't unpush the button, won't unpush the button, want more of a reason to unpush the button, or that I should ask TransporterMan? Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 00:57, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
COI edit request followup 2
Hi there
Thanks for your feedback to my request on George Institute for Global Health and I'm so sorry for those issues. Obviously I'm still learning what is acceptable and what isn't, but I definitely want to and will comply with all the rules. I've stripped the proposed text right back to basics, please let me know what else I should do.
Ktr183 (talk) 06:02, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
Newbie Template Editor - am I doing this right?
Hi. I don't want to load the question too much, so simply: Am I doing this right? Please. fredgandt 01:45, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
- @Fred Gandt: Stefan2 usually knows what he is doing with template code, so I went ahead and made him a template editor as well. He really should have been one quite a while ago, in my opinion. As for the edit request itself, there's nothing wrong with disagreeing with people about how a template edit should be implemented. If you can't come to an agreement on the template talk page, then consider asking other editors, perhaps on WP:VPT. Myself, I tend to side with Stefan2 - templates should be easy to use for users, even if the resulting template code gets a little complicated. (That's just my opinion, not official advice, by the way.) If you really want to have clear, well-indented code that also does everything that Stefan2's version does, you can always convert it to Lua. :) — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 05:30, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you. I appreciate the feedback. I'm a better safe than sorry kinda guy, and just want to be safe. fredgandt 12:54, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
- User:Fred Gandt: Well, if a page is protected, then there is always a reason for the protection, so it's appropriate to carefully check any edit requests before fulfilling them. Nothing wrong with that. --Stefan2 (talk) 13:23, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
- Mhmm :-) And we're getting there. I'd say the first batch (not including mergers and redirects etc) is ready to roll. fredgandt
- User:Fred Gandt: Well, if a page is protected, then there is always a reason for the protection, so it's appropriate to carefully check any edit requests before fulfilling them. Nothing wrong with that. --Stefan2 (talk) 13:23, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
- I'll not be doing much Lua work until I've familiarised myself with it a bit more, and then it'll be on less contentious templates to settle in. fredgandt 03:38, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you. I appreciate the feedback. I'm a better safe than sorry kinda guy, and just want to be safe. fredgandt 12:54, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
Template:WikiProject_India/sandbox
At Template:WikiProject_India/sandbox I've added WikiProject Telangana earlier, but couldn't add WikiProject Visakhapatnam.--Vin09 (talk) 06:30, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
- @Vin09: What do you mean you've added WikiProject Telangana? You've never edited Template:WikiProject India/sandbox before. Did you add it to another page? — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 06:36, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, I've added. Don't know if it was the same page.--Vin09 (talk) 06:39, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
- @Vin09: Well, you need to put the template code for WikiProject Telangana and WikiProject Visakhapatnam into Template:WikiProject_India/sandbox, or get somebody to do it for you. Do you want me to do it, or would you like to try yourself? — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 08:53, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
- @Mr. Stradivarius: Could you do it?--Vin09 (talk) 11:05, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
- @Vin09: I've been looking into this, and I see you haven't asked WikiProject India about adding the WikiProject to the template yet. I've asked here for you. Let's leave that discussion open for a week and see what the consensus is. (Because it might affect WikiProject India's work, we need to ask the project members before just adding WikiProject Visakhapatnam to the template.) Best — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 08:26, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
- @Mr. Stradivarius: Could you do it?--Vin09 (talk) 11:05, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
- @Vin09: Well, you need to put the template code for WikiProject Telangana and WikiProject Visakhapatnam into Template:WikiProject_India/sandbox, or get somebody to do it for you. Do you want me to do it, or would you like to try yourself? — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 08:53, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, I've added. Don't know if it was the same page.--Vin09 (talk) 06:39, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Explanation of revert on the ROBLOX article
I reverted it because you are suppose to name the file specifically, "ROBLOX studio 2016" is way to general
Thanks,
Pastorma (talk) 01:20, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
- @Pastorma: You have the wrong user. It was User:Codename Lisa who made the edit that you reverted. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 02:48, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
Lua console testing - invoke and frame
Hi. I'm confused by the docs at mw:Extension:Scribunto/Lua_reference_manual#frame:newChild which indicates that it's possible to test what would normally be #invoked within the console. Can you help me understand please? The current mess I'm learning on is at Module:User:Fred_Gandt/sandbox - if you could add the required code to make p.params(frame)
work as if it were invoked when called from the console, that'd really help. I realise I can change the code to not use frame, but that starts getting way off point for testing, especially when I get around to trying more complex things. fredgandt 01:02, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
- @Fred Gandt: You have two options here. The first is to fake the structure of the frame object by doing this:
=p.params{args={"pre"}}
- This will work for code that just uses the args table, but will fail if the code tries to use any of the frame object methods like
preprocess
, etc. Your other option is to use frame:newChild to make a proper frame object, and then pass that into your function. That would work something like this:
local cf = mw.getCurrentFrame()
local frame = cf:newChild{args={"pre"}}
=p.params(frame)
- You need to press enter before the last line for that to work properly. Or you could use mw.log if you want to copy and paste it all at once:
local cf = mw.getCurrentFrame()
local frame = cf:newChild{args={"pre"}}
mw.log(p.params(frame))
- Or just do it all on one line:
=p.params(mw.getCurrentFrame():newChild{args={"pre"}})
- By the way, zero in Lua is a truthy value, so things like
won't work as expected. E.g. this comes out as "foo":if #args then x end
if 0 then
mw.log('foo')
else
mw.log('bar')
end
- One last protip: use mw.logObject all the time, because it's awesome. Hope this helps. :) — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 02:13, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
-
- That helps a lot Mr. Stradivarius, thank you. I had it all arse about face (as we say in Blighty).
- "zero in Lua is a truthy value" <-- that however doesn't help at all! >.<
- I'm sure to get a lot wrong for a while.
- I really appreciate you taking the time to help me; I'm sure you have better things to do. Hopefully, I'll get good at it and be useful. fredgandt 02:29, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
IP block
Hi I commenced the not inconsiderable task of joining your community today with a view to editing, and before I have even gained confidence and launched an inaugural edit, I understand I am blocked.
This user is currently blocked. The latest block log entry is provided below for reference:
00:26, 26 April 2015 Mr. Stradivarius (talk | contribs) blocked 195.147.0.0/18 (talk) with an expiration time of 1 year (anon. only) (Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sardanaphalus)
Please advise if this is an issue with the IP address or another User ghosting. I would be grateful if you could remove the block so that I might practice and eventually publish. I have as you can see created the account. I look forward to your response. Superangulon210 (talk) 17:22, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
- @Superangulon210: It looks like you just had bad luck. Your IP address was included in a range that I blocked because it was being used disruptively by another user a while back - it isn't anything to do with you. You shouldn't have any problems editing if you are logged into your account, but if you do, feel free to ask for help, either here, by email or on IRC. Creating an account is a good first step anyway, as other editors have a way of recognising you, and this will likely work in your favour in discussions etc. As for the block, I'd rather not lift it just yet - I'll wait for the full year to expire and then see if the disruption reoccurs. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 23:26, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
- I had the same problem many years ago with a different account (declared (properly?)). I've learned since that Wikipedians are well aware of the fact that IPs do not maketh the editor, and all are judged by the content of their contributions and not by the numbers in their user names
fredgandt 05:47, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
Japanese
Hello! I can't remember whether I told you that the latest set of updates for Japanese language support in the visual editor finally landed. The devs seem to believe that it's all working now, and that the visual editor could safely be offered as an option to all editors there. That won't happen during (at least) the next few weeks because of other things that are distracting me, but if you have any feedback, and in particular if you become aware of any problems or unnatural-feeling behaviors with the IME, please {{ping}} me. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:12, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
- Ok, I'll have another play around with it later on. :) — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 23:32, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
Frank Sinatra, Jr.
Please see WP:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:2605:E000:364F:4000:C4A8:F108:65C2:367F reported by User:Winterysteppe (Result: Semi). You semiprotected for two days. Since there is a BLP issue, would you consider a longer period? Such as three months? Whether Frank Sinatra, Jr. had a second son ought not to be sourced to a unfamiliar web site that shows the scan of a page from a court decision. We don't like to use raw court papers, except to expand or corroborate something already known from a regular source. If my recollection of the policy is correct then the IPv6's last edit has the correct version of the article. There was a 2012 interview of Sinatra Jr. in the Guardian where he denies having a second son. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 04:22, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
- @EdJohnston: You're quite right, and I've extended the protection to 3 months. I did notice the dubiousness of the source earlier, but I was most concerned with stopping the edit war - at 14 reverts in just over an hour, it didn't look like they were going to stop any time soon. :) — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 04:52, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
Regarding the Page - Jackky Bhagnani
Hi,
I notice that the page has been locked till 6th April 2016. The changes done by me included change of the profile picture and removal of slanderous content which made fun of the person concerned.
Though I see multiple changes there after done by others, I want to request the page to be reinstated to the changes I did. Thanks for reading and considering the request.
Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Superfan32389 (talk • contribs) 05:26, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
- @Superfan32389: Hi, and welcome to Wikipedia. :) Unfortunately, we can't use the photo that you uploaded, as it isn't available under a free licence. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content, and Wikipedia will only accept non-free images under strict criteria, which doesn't include portrait photos of living people. As for the content you removed, I agree that it does seem overly negative, and at the least it could do with redrafting. Try making a proposal on Talk:Jackky Bhagnani as to what you think the section should say instead of the current text. You can use the {{edit semi-protected}} template to attract the attention of other editors. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 05:37, 23 March 2016 (UTC)