User talk:Jmcgnh/Archives/2018/10

A barnstar for you!

		The Original Barnstar
		Thank you for helping out with my defcon template! PorkchopGMX 15:48, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	You are really good, and thank you for the update on Lakshmi Ramaswamy content. I still require your help. Will you be able to provide me with that. Paul2018Jackson (talk) 05:26, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your help with GI Hub

I appreciate your help last time with the GI Hub draft Draft:Global_Infrastructure_Hub i have tried to address all the concerns, would you mind having another look and letting me know if there is anything else required for this submission. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcodounis (talk • contribs) 05:35, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

@Marcodounis: I'm afraid I agree with the comments you recently received at the Teahouse. The concerns raised by the earlier reviewers seem to still be applicable and I'd be surprised if a reviewer accepted it in its current state. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:58, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

A cheeseburger for you!

I appreciate your contribution very much. Cheers! Spurb (talk) 12:02, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

New South Wales stations with suffix

@Jmcgnh: Thank you for your recent help with Template:NSW TrainLink intercity stations where we had problems with Artarmon railway station A separate issue was then raised about other similar templates and getting them to a more similar state and you added a default function to the template mentioned earlier. I have now changed that template again deleting all stations which can make use of the default option again bringing it line with other templates. I have so far identified about 6 templates of the this nature. I have now created another template which includes all stations which contain a default Template:New South Wales railway stations with suffix. I would like to change all templates so that they include this new template so that only one needs to be changed when another stations needs to be added or changed. But I am not having any luck with that. I am trying this with template Template:Closed_Lines_stations (the simplest one) where I would like to replace | Cochrane= [[Cochrane railway station, Sydney|Cochrane]] | St Marys= [[St Marys railway station, Sydney|St Marys]] | #default= {{#ifexist:{{{station}}} railway station|[[{{{station}}} railway station|{{{station}}}]]|[[{{{station}}} railway station, Sydney|{{{station}}}]]}} }} with a link to the new template but no matter what I have tried including leaving the default in the original template and not having it in the new one, I can not get it to work. Is there any was you can help? Could it have something to do where the default is placed? I would be happy to provide any further information.Fleet Lists (talk) 04:51, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

@Fleet Lists: on first glance it looks like you're doing it a bit backwards.

There are a few exceptions, but nearly every station that we've had under consideration could be handled by the following default:

| #default= {{#ifexist:{{{station}}} railway station, New South Wales|[[{{{station}}} railway station, New South Wales|{{{station}}}]] |{{#ifexist:{{{station}}} railway station, Sydney|[[{{{station}}} railway station, Sydney|{{{station}}}]]| |[[{{{station}}} railway station|{{{station}}}]]}} }}

This searches for a NSW suffix first, then a Sydney suffix, then goes without any suffix (which could result in a red link). I hope I've counted out the right number (and placement) of curly braces. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:33, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

In a perfect world, I believe this would be OK but unfortunately over the years a large number of stations had incorrect links created because people did not understand the templates and to overcome this redirects from those invalid addresses where created to the valid addresses. See my Sandbox [[1]] where I have started to document 158 of such invalid redirects where in most cases New South Wales should be Sydney and vice versa with some wrong Victorian ones thrown in, which currently do not link to anything because we force the bypassing of these. Perhaps I should give some priority to completing that list and try to arrange to have those redirects deleted so that we can work in a cleaner environment. Thanks for your thoughts which do tend to confirm some of the things I have been thinking. If we opened them up again now, links would be created to some of those again, making it more difficult to have them deleted as they would show links.PS In the case of country NSW stations there is an additional option where the link goes to a locality name and not a station name but I will further investigate that later. Fleet Lists (talk) 10:11, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

I may not be understanding you right Fleet Lists. Are you thinking that the existence of these extra redirects is some sort of error that needs to be corrected? Redirects are sometimes there to assist users, so this list of redirects to Bondi Junction railway station contains one capitalization correction and two region designators. The region designators are not required to be "correct" in any sense other than that a reader might think those are suitable qualifiers. It might be possible to exclude redirects with suffixes if they redirect to the simple default case, but it starts to be a lot of code for not much gain. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 10:34, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

See WP:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 October 13#Newcastle railway station, SydneyFleet Lists (talk) 01:51, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

I have expanded your default to cover the country station conditions I mentioned and also not put in a link if a no found condition exists (red link) which is what has been asked for, so as to read: {{#switch:{{{station}}} | #default={{#ifexist:{{{station}}} railway station, New South Wales|[[{{{station}}} railway station, New South Wales|{{{station}}}]] | #default={{#ifexist:{{{station}}} railway station, Sydney|[[{{{station}}} railway station, Sydney|{{{station}}}]] |{{#ifexist:{{{station}}} railway station|[[{{{station}}} railway station|{{{station}}}]] |{{#ifexist:{{{station}}}, New South Wales|[[{{{station}}}, New South Wales|{{{station}}}]] |{{{station}}} }}}} }} and put it in a template I am working with Template:New South Wales railway stations with suffix I then tried to edit Template:Sydney Trains stations replacing the default statement with{{Template:New South Wales railway stations with suffix|{{{station}}} }} but when I do a preview on Caringbah railway station nothing is shown for the previous and next station so I am doing something wrong. If I can get this to work, I could possibly use this one default statement in all other templates as well. What am I doing wrong? Thanks in advance.Fleet Lists (talk) 05:43, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

@Fleet Lists: You only get to have one #default option. If I'm understanding you right, someone has expressed a preference for a black text result if the station is not found? That doesn't sound like a good policy to me; if, say, the station is misspelled, I would like to see a red link. Nevertheless, to do existence tests on all the default options and fall through to a black text result, I think your code would look like this:

| #default= 
    {{#ifexist:{{{station}}} railway station, New South Wales   |[[{{{station}}} railway station, New South Wales|{{{station}}}]]
   |{{#ifexist:{{{station}}} railway station, Sydney            |[[{{{station}}} railway station, Sydney         |{{{station}}}]]
   |{{#ifexist:{{{station}}} railway station                    |[[{{{station}}} railway station                 |{{{station}}}]]
   |{{{station}}}}}}}}}

(again, no promises that I have all the curly braces in the right places; I also can't guarantee that stray spaces won't appear in the output, but until we have to deal with that problem, let's use spaces to make the code readable!). — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:25, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.14 21 October 2018

Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months.

Hello Jmcgnh/Archives/2018, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

Backlog

As of 21 October 2018, there are 3650 unreviewed articles and the backlog now stretches back 51 days.

Community Wishlist Proposal

• There is currently an ongoing discussion regarding the drafting of a Community Wishlist Proposal for the purpose of requesting bug fixes and missing/useful features to be added to the New Page Feed and Curation Toolbar.
• Please join the conversation as we only have until 29 October to draft this proposal!

Project updates

• ORES predictions are now built-in to the feed. These automatically predict the class of an article as well as whether it may be spam, vandalism, or an attack page, and can be filtered by these criteria now allowing reviewers to better target articles that they prefer to review.
• There are now tools being tested to automatically detect copyright violations in the feed. This detector may not be accurate all the time, though, so it shouldn't be relied on 100% and will only start working on new revisions to pages, not older pages in the backlog.

New scripts

• User:Enterprisey/cv-revdel.js^(info) — A new script created for quickly placing {{copyvio-revdel}} on a page.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 20:49, 21 October 2018 (UTC)