Template talk:Featured article tools

Toolbox
	Alt text; Citation Bot; Disambig links; Edit count; External links; Peer review; Redirects; Ref Links;

Toolbox
	edit count; disambig links; external links; alt text; redirects;

This template was considered for deletion on 23 September 2023. The result of the discussion was "keep".

Edit request

{{editprotected}} Some files were moved tonight at the toolserver, breaking several links in this template, which is used on all Featured article candidate pages. Please replace the existing code with the following:

<noinclude>{{pp-template|small=yes}}</noinclude>
{| class="infobox"
! Toolbox <small>({{edit|Wikipedia:Featured article tools|+/-}})</small>
|-
|
*[{{fullurl:tools:~dispenser/cgi-bin/dabfinder.py/{{{1|{{SUBPAGENAMEE}}}}} }} disambig links]
*[{{fullurl:tools:~daniel/WikiSense/Contributors.php|wikilang=en&wikifam=.wikipedia.org&grouped=on&order=-edit_count&page={{urlencode:{{{1|{{SUBPAGENAMEE}}}}}}} }} edit count]
{{#ifeq:Featured_article_candidates|{{PAGENAMEE}}|<!-- do not display -->|
*[{{fullurl:tools:~dispenser/cgi-bin/webchecklinks.py/{{{1|{{SUBPAGENAMEE}}}}}#view0}} external links]
*[{{fullurl:tools:~dispenser/cgi-bin/readability1.4.py/{{{1|{{SUBPAGENAMEE}}}}} }} readability]
}}
|}

There are no substantive changes in this code; only fixes to ensure that the links still reach the same targets as before. Thank you. Maralia (talk) 05:31, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Funny, I don't remember moving any files around without properly redirecting them. — Dispenser 08:04, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Readability

I've used the readability tool about three times in the last three days, and about three times last week. I did find it useful. DrKiernan (talk) 12:59, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, it's back, but be aware it's not entirely accurate. Gimmetrow 14:04, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would prefer if you removed it as I don't like advertising a tool that isn't working right. User talk:Dispenser#Dispatch Gimmetrow notes how the syllable counter is screwed up (it actually drops certain words) and at User talk:Ragib#Email/Script describes the plans of getting it working correctly. Also, please using ./readability.py (without the numbers) as that will always redirect to the correct version. — Dispenser 08:04, 27 November 2008 (UTC) Can you also get ride of the edit link now since the template is protected? — Dispenser 08:29, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{editprotected}}
Update the code for the readability link to [[tools:~dispenser/cgi-bin/readability.py/{{{1|{{SUBPAGENAMEE}}}}}|readability est.]] or remove it entirely (author's preference). — Dispenser 01:30, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the edit link and updated the readability script link—I'm leaving the latter in for now as I don't know exactly how widespread its use is. {{Nihiltres|talk|log}} 16:12, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{editprotected}}
Remove the readability link, numbers are inaccurate and people don't understand that everything on that page is approximation. I do not have the time or interest to fix the algorithums. — Dispenser 15:26, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Martin^msgj 16:56, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Use outside of FA candidacies

Is there anything in this template that makes it unsuitable for use outside of an FAC candidacy? I don't see, for example, any categories or any such thing as that… — Bellhalla (talk) 18:42, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I second Bellhalla's question. -- Hoary (talk) 02:40, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe there would be any problem. It's already in use on a couple dozen article talk pages, presumably for monitoring introduced dabs, expiring external links, etc. We don't use 'what links here' for any behind-the-scenes tracking. Maralia (talk) 03:24, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I'll add it to the talk pages of one or two not-even-candidates-to-be-"Candidates" in the next couple of days. -- Hoary (talk) 03:42, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fix this template in IE7

{{editprotected}}

This, along with its sister page Wikipedia:Featured list tools, has a problem in Internet Explorer 7 (and perhaps other versions too). Take a look at this screenshot. The problem lies with #mw-prefixindex-list-table adding width: 98% to the <table> that surrounds the archived candidates. The CSS code for that is in the shared.css file, which I assume is not accessible via MediaWiki. The ultimate fix to this problem is to change the width to either auto (preferable) or 100%. To do this, the easiest way would be to add a custom class in MediaWiki:Common.css for these templates specifically, or another option would be to change the width in the class itself, which is less desirable. Gary King (talk) 16:23, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What exactly needs to be changed here? (Also, something seems to have cut off a div tag: [1]?) Gimmetrow 14:33, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We could add #tools #mw-prefixindex-list-table { width: auto !important;} to the CSS, and then wrap the tools in <div id="tools"> so that we have better control over them. Gary King (talk) 21:27, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deactivating this for the moment. It seems that you are not quite sure what needs to be done. The reason that this is still sitting here is that no one else knows either. Please try discussing this with someone who knows about these things, or bring it up at WP:VPT maybe. Until we know exactly what needs to be done to which page, we can't act. Thanks, Martin^msgj 16:54, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What I suggested does the fix. I just seem unsure because it's only one of several solutions to this problem, but it's the best one as it gives us direct control to the CSS that controls the list. Gary King (talk) 16:58, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I'm still unsure as to what you want. Are you requesting a change to MediaWiki:Common.css? If so would you mind putting a proposal on that talk page because it probably needs some discussion/consensus. If on the other hand you are asking for a change to this page, please could you make a sandbox copy. Forgive me if I'm being a bit thick. Martin^msgj 20:14, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay done. Hopefully that page isn't as dead as this one. Gary King (talk) 20:41, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merging this template with the other?

Considering we've got two templates that perform the exact same thing (this one and Wikipedia:Featured list tools), just with different URLs, we could just merge the base components of the two so that we only have one template to tweak when we need to. The downside is that they will both have the exact same tools, which isn't really that big of a problem if we don't change them that much. Thoughts? Gary King (talk) 20:42, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Updates

{{editprotected}} First add the alt text viewer to the list of other tools, while it isn't polished yet I think it'll still be useful to some FAC reviewer.

* [[tools:/~dispenser/cgi-bin/altviewer.py/{{{1|}}}|alt text]]

Second, {{SUBPAGENAMEE}} can be removed since it no longer works, with the new "archive#" naming scheme. Third, dabfinder.py has been renamed to dablinks.py. Finally, the #switch stuff around Checklinks link can be removed. — Dispenser 02:44, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for writing that tool. I assume the first "/" shouldn't be there. That it, it should be:

* [[tools:~dispenser/cgi-bin/altviewer.py/{{{1|}}}|alt text]]

Eubulides (talk) 19:59, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops, overlooked that. It should be without the first slash, although it technically works either way. — Dispenser 21:07, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done everything but {{SUBPAGENAMEE}}, because i don't really understand how it's (/was) used. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 10:04, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I tried after I thought I figured out what this SUBPAGENAMEE part was for, but it was causing havoc for the list functionality for some reason. So the SUBPAGENAMEE part is

Not done. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 10:51, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd assume that the problem was </noinclude> being on the wrong line. Anyway, that part of it just a house cleaning chore, and might not have been such a good idea because users are putting this on talk pages (It should really be {{PAGENAME}} not {{SUBPAGENAME}}). Originally we had pages at /PAGENAME and moved them when completing requests to /PAGENAME/archive1, now we've switched to using starting them with the archive1 subpage. — Dispenser 20:23, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a reason for this not being in template namespace?

I noticed this when I tried to add {{tl|Wikipedia:Featured article tools}} to my notes, only to get {{Wikipedia:Featured article tools}}. Regards, Paradoctor (talk) 20:57, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Problem solved Gary King (talk) 01:40, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sheesh, now that I see it, it is obvious. Thanks! Paradoctor (talk) 02:08, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your suppose to link it like {{[[Wikipedia:Featured article tools]]}} since your already including the namespace. — Dispenser 06:35, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info. Question: How am I "supposed" to? Nothing in H:T, and it's the first time that I've seen this construction. Paradoctor (talk) 07:16, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The page doesn't mention {{:Main Page}}, so I guess it only covers stuff exclusive to the template namespace. — Dispenser 15:01, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

{{editprotected}} That there is a workaround still does not explain what a general-use template is doing in projectspace. Please move this to template:Featured article tools. Thanks. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 12:50, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense.

Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:17, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Because its not a general use template, it's a template only for the Featured article candidates and they keep everything (with the exception of Template:FAC-instructions) in the project: namespace. — Dispenser 18:04, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. I don't see that as an argument for contuining to do so. Might be worth investigating a mass-moved of such templates out of projectspace. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 21:53, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dashboard link

Doesn't seem to work unless the spaces in the article name are replaced by an underscore. DrKiernan (talk) 21:09, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

{{editprotected}}

Yeah; this is busted in all FAC/FLCs that have spaces in their name. Either remove it or use a string replace template (which is expensive, though). Another option could be to send the user to another page that can create the correct link. Gary King (talk) 21:18, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what edits - if any you want? As it stands I don't see a problem - pages like Talk:Celine Dion, and Talk:James Joyce seem OK to me (am I missing something?) - Talk:Music of Canada looks bad, but then someone has added {{Wikipedia:Featured article tools|1=Music of Canada}} rather than {{Wikipedia:Featured article tools}} - which would cure the problem of seeing "of Canada dashboard" as the first link in the toolbox. Ronhjones ^(Talk) 00:02, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just fixed this without noticing this thread. Ucucha 00:04, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please remove the extra E off SUBPAGENAME. It's double encoding, see Talk:Tiësto. — Dispenser 00:36, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gimmetrow did this. I am not entirely sure what is going wrong, but this leaves the link at Talk:Tiësto broken. Ucucha 00:44, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The problem was in the Tiesto page itself: [2]. I hope that fixes all problems. Ucucha 01:39, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Name

We've traditionally labeled the links by function name rather than product name. Why not call it "edit timeline" instead of "dashboard" since the product name is actually "WikiDashboard". — Dispenser 02:23, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fine with me, but I'll wait a bit too if there are more comments. Ucucha 02:26, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Purpose

I gather this new tool measures the timeline of edits, but I am interested in a obtaining a quick summary of its intended usage so I can answer questions for the milhist ACR people when they ask what this new tool does. Can anyone provide that please? TomStar81 (Talk) 12:37, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It generates a more thorough and detailed report than the existing editcount tool, which just gives numbers of edits. This tool shows when a given user contributed to a page and is thus more informative in determining primary contributors. Ucucha 14:55, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is it intended to replace the edit count tool? TomStar81 (Talk) 15:55, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rather supplement it, for now, I think. We might delete it as redundant later, but for now it seems better to me to keep it for people who're used to it or otherwise find it more convenient. Ucucha 15:58, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Thanks for the info. TomStar81 (Talk) 18:54, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain why at this A-class review the dashboard tool ran its report on the mainpage instead of the page in question? TomStar81 (Talk) 19:55, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The link there works fine for me. Ucucha 20:56, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmph, silly tools are out to make me look folish :) Thanks for looking anyway, I appreciate it. TomStar81 (Talk) 21:54, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed the preload which was using the -E variant. This cause the title to be precent encode (%xx) which makes the parser function fail (we could use this as a test). I, also, fixed the instance on Lê Văn Duyệt. — Dispenser 07:02, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Prefix index feature broken at Wikipedia:Featured article review/Australia/archive1

Over at Wikipedia:Featured article review/Australia/archive1, this template is producing a list of links to unrelated FACs, such as Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Australian Magpie/archive1. It might be necessary to change the prefix index search from "Australia" to "Australia/", and then manually hardcode in the missing cases. Hesperian 00:10, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect check

{{editprotected}} While were updating this may I suggest that we add * [[tools:~dispenser/cgi-bin/rdcheck.py/{{{1|{{SUBPAGENAMEE}}}}}|Redirects]] code for the rdcheck tool? — Dispenser 19:55, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Since there have been no objections, I have added an edit protection request. This tool lists redirects grouped by the targeted section and checks to make sure the section hasn't been renamed. — Dispenser 19:31, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done -- WOSlinker (talk) 22:30, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FA Criteria

I would quite like a link to the FA criteria on this template, any thoughts? Fasach Nua (talk) 15:50, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Update

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Could you replace

Code removed for clarity — Martin (MSGJ · talk)

This will update the toolbox to include several other useful tools.

Before

After

In addition, the whole thing should be between <includeonly></includeonly>. Thanks. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 05:18, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done
Please consider using the template sandbox next time.
Why do some have the external link icon and others do not?
I do not see any benefit from using includeonly.

— Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:47, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The template is shown in the documentation. There's no reason why it should appear twice and move the documentation down. As for the ext. link icons, some are wikilinked to the toolserver, others use fullurl. Placing them in <span class="plainlinks"> should fix that I think (I find those icons annoying so I disabled them for me). Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 23:22, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please remove "Ref links"

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The Reflink tool is gone. Could someone who can edit this template, please remove it. Thanks. Lentower (talk) 03:01, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have updated the template to reflect the disappearance of several tools and the relocation of a few others. — This, that and the other (talk) 04:10, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please add "Ref links" etc. back

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

All but one of the tools that were removed from this template recently are back at
https://tools.wmflabs.org/dispenser/
The link to Relinks from en.WP pages are working for me. — Lentower (talk) 18:53, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Already done Thanks. — This, that and the other (talk) 04:01, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rcats needed – 4 July 2014

This edit request to Wikipedia:Featured article tools has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

A protected redirect, Wikipedia:Featured article tools, needs redirect category (rcat) templates added. Please modify it as follows:

from this...

#REDIRECT [[Template:Featured article tools]]

to this...

#REDIRECT [[Template:Featured article tools]]

{{Redr|from move|to template namespace|fully protected}}

WHEN YOU COPY & PASTE, PLEASE LEAVE THE MIDDLE LINE BLANK FOR READABILITY.

Template Redr is an alias for the {{This is a redirect}} template, which is used to sort redirects into one or more categories. Thank you in advance! – Paine Ellsworth ^CLIMAX! 19:52, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Redrose64 (talk) 21:50, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Redrose64! – Paine 08:34, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 10 October 2014

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Remove tools that are dead replace with working tools:

David Condrey (talk) 10:41, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can you be clearer about what should be removed and what should be added? (I can't see any link that says "review tips".) Or better still, make the changes to Template:Featured article tools/sandbox. Thanks — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:10, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@MSGJ:David was referring to two tools under different labels. I have made the requested changes in the sandbox (please double-check my syntax). Note, that i have left the current default of SUBPAGENAMEE as alternate parameter (there may be cases, where this default is handy) and also included a recent "nomobile" change. On a sidenote, the protection of this template is clearly against WP:protection policy as convenience protection, but that's a different issue. Hope, the change is correct and helps. GermanJoe (talk) 14:38, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It would be great, if a template editor could replace the current dead links with active links (see sandbox for active links). This toolbox is in use by reviewers and very useful, currently almost all links are dead due to the ongoing server dispute. GermanJoe (talk) 11:31, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Request has been answered, thanks DrKiernan. 2 tools (reflinks, peer review) still have problems, but I have reported both cases. GermanJoe (talk) 18:44, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Edit count tool

Does anyone know how to edit the template so the Edit Count tool no longer takes you through a redirect? The tool is now at https://tools.wmflabs.org/xtools-articleinfo/. --Laser brain (talk) 21:33, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to be fixed now. DrKiernan (talk) 21:45, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done in sub-template (/without list) too, thanks for the link. GermanJoe (talk) 07:15, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]