1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29 |
Backlog
Transcluded from User talk:Wugapodes/Tasks
GAN report: mystery solved?
Wugapodes, you may recall that in the GAN report's Malformed nominations sections, an "Unknown nomination" link to the Film section of the page, but with no other information beyond that, showed up for this first time on June 1, 2019. It finally disappeared last night, and I have a tentative diagnosis.
I believe the nomination in question was for Rushmore (film), which was originally made on May 31, 2019, during the day and with a subtopic of "Film". It was clearly a handmade GA nominee template (people are supposed to substitute the GAN template): what I thought was the problem here was that there were no links for the nominator or their talk page, which I fixed. What I missed when I finally started investigating in mid-June—and what I think caused your bot to pick up on the error—was that the date/time field was malformed: all times are supposed to have two digits for the hour and two for the minutes, and this was formatted "8:20, 31 May 2019 (UTC)" rather than "08:20, 31 May 2019 (UTC)", something I didn't notice until today, when I was trying to figure out what went wrong.
I think it was the problematic date that caused the problem, though there may have been something else about this nomination that caused it—this is a tentative diagnosis, after all, and it may be accurate, partially accurate, or not the actual issue at all. Still, this info might help you track down where in the code the error might have been generated, and why the link was to the section rather than the actual (problematic) nomination.
Hope all is well, and best of luck tracking this down. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:15, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
- Wow, yeah, that's probably it. The regular expression which parses the noms assumes that the timestamp has two digits for the hour, so that's an easy fix. Wug·a·po·des 18:46, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
GANs to do
- Talk:Park Avenue main line/GA1
- Talk:Martin Scorsese/GA1 (unless someone gets there first)
New Years Greetings
I've noticed that some of these GANs directly above are either done or on hold. In case you might be interested, I've recently listed the biography for the film director Martin Scorsese as a nomination. He is nominated for an Oscar this year and I thought it might be nice if his article could be brought to peer review quality before the Oscars next month, if you might be inclined to look at it. CodexJustin (talk) 17:12, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
More readable article
Thanks for listening to me and making the changes. May I also suggest you consider changing the rather long sentence: "It used to be only the study of the systems of phonemes in spoken languages, but it now may also cover any linguistic analysis either at a level beneath the word (including syllable, onset and rime, articulatory gestures, articulatory features, mora, etc.) or at all levels of language where sound or signs are structured to convey linguistic meaning." I count about 66 words which requires a grade 31 to read (how many PHDs is that :). Here is a suggested revision: At one time it only related to the study of the systems of phonemes in spoken languages. Now it may cover either a) any linguistic analysis either at a level beneath the word (including syllable, onset and rime, articulatory gestures, articulatory features, mora, etc.), or b) all levels of language where sound or signs are structured to convey linguistic meaning. I will leave it too you. Cheers. John (talk) 22:29, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
Question from 7forward on Draft:Jessica Matten (18:13, 12 June 2022)
Hi there, I am having trouble publishing my wiki page and making it go live. May you help? --7forward (talk) 18:14, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hi 7forward, thanks for your contribution! There were some problems in your wikicode that I fixed for you. As a helpful tip, the code is {{subst:submit}}, and the "nowiki" tags are only used to prevent the template from actually being used when we just want to mention it. You can read more at WP:SUBST and WP:NOWIKI if you're interested. — Wug·a·po·des 17:32, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Tech News: 2022-24
16:57, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: Jessica Matten (June 14)
- If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Jessica Matten and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Jessica Matten, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
- If you do not make any further changes to your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
- If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the , on the or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.
Hello, Wugapodes!
Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Gusfriend (talk) 11:52, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
|
- Hi Gusfriend I submitted this on behalf of 7forward who was having some technical difficulties (see discussion above). Sorry for messing with your workflow. I've just pinged 7forward, but you might want to leave these messages on their talk page as well. — Wug·a·po·des 21:53, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Regarding your thoughts on RfXs
I agree with many of the issues you have raised during your RfB nom. If you ever decide to write up some new proposals or some sort of campaign (can't find a good word for that) to implement previous reform consensus I'd be happy to help, so feel free to ping if such is the case in the future. In any case, good luck with the rest of your RfB :) — Ixtal ( T / C ) ⁂ Join WP:FINANCE! 17:40, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Ixtal I'm glad you found them interesting, and I appreciate your thoughtful consideration of them at the RfB. Personally I've had my fill of proposals for a while, so I think it's better if these conversations were led by others. Plus I've got the signpost thing and likely an arbitration case so I'm not champing at the bit to run an RfC. — Wug·a·po·des 19:13, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- I wasn't expecting any proposals in the near future, but thought I'd offer my help. I hope you enjoy the rest of the week :D — Ixtal ( T / C ) ⁂ Join WP:FINANCE! 20:31, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Your request for bureaucratship has closed unsuccessfully
I have closed your request for bureaucratship as unsuccessful. There were a number of concerns brought up in the oppose section, and I recommend carefully reviewing them to see if there is anything that may improve your chances in the future, should you choose to run again. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask me on my user talk page or post on the bureaucrat noticeboard. Thank you for taking the time to run the gauntlet, and I hope you choose to run again in the future. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 00:32, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Sorry to see this, Wug. I'm glad you ran and I wish the community had chosen to crat you. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 01:11, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for closing, Nihonjoe. I've been reviewing comments as they came in, and yes there's a lot of helpful feedback in the opposition that I'll keep in mind. I appreciate the note as well. I wouldn't call the process fun, but I did enjoy reading the discussion of the points I raised. With enough time passed and personal interest, I wouldn't mind going through the process again. — Wug·a·po·des 01:15, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for running, Wug :) looking forward to when the support sticks – should be much easier when you're no longer an Arb. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 01:19, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) I'm sorry too. I hope that this will not affect your enjoyment of Wikipedia too much. Please take comfort in the fact that the wide majority of editors offered praise for your judgment at the discussion. Mz7 (talk) 01:20, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Mz7 Oh it won't affect my enjoyment, don't worry. It's disappointing, sure, but I've been told no plenty of times before. I've got enough other stuff to do that the crat bit won't be missed. I appreciate the concern though. — Wug·a·po·des 01:39, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- 78% is a ridiculously high level of agreement about anything and I hope you are proud of that, even if the cut-off is (ridiculously) higher. Levivich 02:02, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- I'm very happy with the support I received and appreciate so many people taking the time to give feedback. 78% is an achievement in itself, and I was only 4 supports shy of tying for most-supported unsuccessful RfB. I enjoyed thinking about, researching, and answering the questions. There were productive discussions about project governance and how to improve various parts of the encyclopedia. There are plenty of things to take pride in, and it helps to view the process itself as valuable. Lots of things went well, and the encouragement from editors in support and opposition is one aspect that made it worthwhile regardless of the outcome. — Wug·a·po·des 02:37, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- 78% is a ridiculously high level of agreement about anything and I hope you are proud of that, even if the cut-off is (ridiculously) higher. Levivich 02:02, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Mz7 Oh it won't affect my enjoyment, don't worry. It's disappointing, sure, but I've been told no plenty of times before. I've got enough other stuff to do that the crat bit won't be missed. I appreciate the concern though. — Wug·a·po·des 01:39, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
Template:cent/core
Thanks for this. I thought I had tried all of the combinations, but somehow my brain couldn't find the right div tag placement to satisfy all of the if statements. I can usually get it, but my brain was tired today. Sorry for having to undo your addition of the meta code; I have no objection to it, only to unbalanced tag errors. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:12, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- No problem, the structure was confusing so it also took me a while once you alerted me to it. It turns out the code duplication was the real cause of this bug. Thanks for trying to fix it and for letting me know I messed up. — Wug·a·po·des 21:19, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
Question
Hey, Wugs - the little "restrictions" bar at the top of my user page (don't remember how it got there) but it failed to note the removal of a t-ban. I don't have the link where the appeal was granted. Can you please correct/update this or get a clerk to do so? Thanks in advance - Atsme 💬 📧 21:35, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hi @Atsme, I checked the enforcement logs and MJL updated it with the successful appeal. I can't seem to find the "restrictions bar" you're talking about. Is this maybe a user script or gadget you have enabled? If so it might be using an old list of restrictions and needs updated. If not, I might need more direction on what I'm looking for since it's not jumping out at me. — Wug·a·po·des 22:27, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thx for providing that diff, Wugs.
The other reference is the Arbitration enforcement log - to make sure it no longer shows as an active restriction.I meant to ask for the diff to the actual close of the appeal. (I don't know how I got that neat menu bar but it shows up on any User page I land on.) Atsme 💬 📧 22:33, 18 June 2022 (UTC)- Oh, the diff of the close is this one. It sounds like the restrictions bar comes from a user script. Looked through your common.js and it seems to be provided by User:Bradv/Scripts/Superlinks. So I'd suggest talking to Bradv about how to get that updated. Hope that helps! — Wug·a·po·des 22:58, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thx for providing that diff, Wugs.
Tech News: 2022-25
20:17, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
June songs
Thank you for improving articles in June! My song collection is especially rich, look, and the hall where I first heard DFD, Pierre Boulez and Murray Perahia. Do you find the baby deer in the meadow (last row)? - Cosima Wagner, - I quoted one of your closes there, but some of the participants seem not have read it. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:16, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:PBS on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:30, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
New Page Patrol newsletter June 2022
Hello Wugapodes,
- Backlog status
At the time of the last newsletter (No.27, May 2022), the backlog was approaching 16,000, having shot up rapidly from 6,000 over the prior two months. The attention the newsletter brought to the backlog sparked a flurry of activity. There was new discussion on process improvements, efforts to invite new editors to participate in NPP increased and more editors requested the NPP user right so they could help, and most importantly, the number of reviews picked up and the backlog decreased, dipping below 14,000[a] at the end of May.
Since then, the news has not been so good. The backlog is basically flat, hovering around 14,200. I wish I could report the number of reviews done and the number of new articles added to the queue. But the available statistics we have are woefully inadequate. The only real number we have is the net queue size.[b]
In the last 30 days, the top 100 reviewers have all made more than 16 patrols (up from 8 last month), and about 70 have averaged one review a day (up from 50 last month).
While there are more people doing more reviews, many of the ~730 with the NPP right are doing little. Most of the reviews are being done by the top 50 or 100 reviewers. They need your help. We appreciate every review done, but please aim to do one a day (on average, or 30 a month).
- Backlog drive
A backlog reduction drive, coordinated by buidhe and Zippybonzo, will be held from July 1 to July 31. Sign up here. Barnstars will be awarded.
- TIP – New school articles
Many new articles on schools are being created by new users in developing and/or non-English-speaking countries. The authors are probably not even aware of Wikipedia's projects and policy pages. WP:WPSCH/AG has some excellent advice and resources specifically written for these users. Reviewers could consider providing such first-time article creators with a link to it while also mentioning that not all schools pass the GNG and that elementary schools are almost certainly not notable.
- Misc
There is a new template available, {{NPP backlog}}
, to show the current backlog. You can place it on your user or talk page as a reminder:
>NPP backlog: 13175 as of 19:30, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
There has been significant discussion at WP:VPP recently on NPP-related matters (Draftification, Deletion, Notability, Verifiability, Burden). Proposals that would somewhat ease the burden on NPP aren't gaining much traction, although there are suggestions that the role of NPP be fundamentally changed to focus only on major CSD-type issues.
- Reminders
- Consider staying informed on project issues by putting the project discussion page on your watchlist.
- If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, suggest they help the effort by placing
{{subst:NPR invite}}
on their talk page. - If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.
- To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.
- Notes
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:02, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
Question from Chanu mia (18:39, 24 June 2022)
hello :) --Chanu mia (talk) 18:39, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
The Signpost: 26 June 2022
- News and notes: WMF inks new rules on government-ordered takedowns, blasts Russian feds' censor demands, spends big bucks
- In the media: Editor given three-year sentence, big RfA makes news, Guy Standing takes it sitting down
- Special report: "Wikipedia's independence" or "Wikimedia's pile of dosh"?
- Discussion report: MoS rules on CCP name mulled, XRV axe plea nulled, mass drafting bid pulled
- Featured content: Articles on Scots' clash, Yank's tux, Austrian's action flick deemed brilliant prose
- Recent research: Wikipedia versus academia (again), tables' "immortality" probed
- Serendipity: Was she really a Swiss lesbian automobile racer?
- News from the WMF: Wikimedia Enterprise signs first deals
- Gallery: Celebration of summer, winter