Jump to content

User talk:Pyrospirit

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from User talk:Pyrospirit (alt))
  1. /Archive 1: 6 November 2006 – 23 February 2007 (link)
  2. /Archive 2: 23 February 2007 – 13 April 2007 (link)
  3. /Archive 3: 13 April 2007 – 20 August 2007 (link)
  4. /Archive 4: 26 August 2007 – 9 November 2007 (link)
  5. /Archive 5: 9 November 2007 – 18 January 2008 (link)
  6. /Archive 6: 18 January 2008 – 12 June 2008 (link)
  7. /Archive 7: 14 June 2008 – 15 February 2009 (link)

Welcome to my user talk page. Please sign your posts using ~~~~ at the end of your message. I prefer communicating directly on Wikipedia, but if you want to talk with me privately, you can send me an e-mail.

If I tagged a page you wrote for deletion, please read why I tagged it and any related policies before asking me here. If it still seems like it shouldn't be deleted, go ahead and ask me and I'll try to explain my reasoning. Remember, I sometimes make mistakes. Please link to the page so I know what you're talking about.


Metadata script

[edit]

Just a message to say thanks a lot on the metadata script. Personally I think this script would be useful for all registered users, most of all because it avoids en.Wikipedia's pesky lack of a GA "plus" like the FA "star". Excellent work. Sillyfolkboy (talk) 03:16, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad you find it useful. I don't think it would work well if it was enabled for all users, though. There are some concerns about overemphasizing the WikiProject assessments, particularly since they're usually just informal reviews by one person. Plus, flagged revisions is much better as an indicator of articles' quality for the general public. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 21:05, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Metadata coding help once more

[edit]

Hey Pyrospirit,

I'm in love with the code you helped me with for the French Wikipedia. It's amazing! There is a wiki that I am an administrator at, and it's called Cheap Grub and I would like your help with making a metadata script from there, and if you know how, to add it to the "Gadgets" list instead of directly to the Common.js or Monobook.js. You may respond to me at your talk page or my talk page at en.wikipedia. Cheers, obentomusubi 16:45, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That shouldn't be too difficult to do, though I'm not sure how useful it would be on such a small wiki. If you want me to make a version for that wiki, I'll need the following information:
  • Types of pages that will have assessment data
  • All templates indicating an assessment that will be placed on article pages
  • All templates indicating an assessment that will be placed on talk pages
  • Text that should be displayed for each assessment
  • A color corresponding to each assessment
Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 23:25, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I was wondering since I really just like your metadata, and I think it would come in handy in the future.
  • Umm... regular namespace articles and Recipe: namespace articles.
  • {{Q}}, {{A}}, and {{Stub}}, although all that information will be available on the talk page
  • Simply the template {{metagrade}}. The parameter that displays it is the grade parameter, not the class parameter.
  • A quality article (assessment links to the page "CheapGrub:Grading system") from Cheap Grub, a wiki that anyone can edit..
  • All colors are available at the page CheapGrub:Grading system, and so are the assessments.
Cheers, obentomusubi 02:14, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm... the recipe namespace is still being developed. There will be two discussion pages for the recipe namespace, and it will be Recipe talk: and Recipe discussion:. The metagrade template should be placed on the Recipe talk: namespace. Also, for the recipes, could the message be different? Like, if it's a quality recipe, then it will say, "This is a quality recipe" instead of "This is a quality article". Thanks, obentomusubi 02:18, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'll see what I can do. I'll probably be fairly busy this week, so it might take some time. When I have a version ready, I'll let you know. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 02:41, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thank you very much! obentomusubi 02:47, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Adapted script needed for a workshop

[edit]

Hi Pyrospirit,

Could you please adapt your metadata.js script so that (1) it's invoked by clicking on a link in the lefthand column (say, Toolbox) instead of running automatically and, more difficult, (2) it colors each wikilink to an article with the article's assessment. I ask for the clickable property because I realize that the script might run slowly.

Such a script would be very helpful for some Wikipedia workshops that I might be giving to scientific societies, such as the American Society for Cell Biology. I'd like the scientists to be able to see at a glance which articles are good and which need work. I don't want to use the MathBot for several reasons. I believe such a script would have applications in other settings as well.

I realize that programming the script will take some work, but it'd be extremely helpful. Many, many thanks! Proteins (talk) 16:10, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds possible to do. I'll try to implement this as an extension to the existing script, similar to User:Pyrospirit/metadata/projectbanners.js. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 16:40, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's much appreciated; we'll put your script to good use. Proteins (talk) 03:23, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've written the script as requested. It's located at User:Pyrospirit/metadata/assesslinks.js. To use it, install it like any other script; it automatically integrates with the main metadata.js script. Here's how it works:
  • On any article page where the metadata.js script runs, this script adds a link that says "Assess links" to the toolbox. (If you want, I could easily change it so that this link appears on all pages instead of only article pages.)
  • Clicking the link starts the script, getting the assessment information for each article link on the page. The pages are requested one at a time, so it doesn't slow things down much, and you can see the progress of the script as it runs.
  • Each link assessed is colored based on the assessment and put in bold text (to make it clearer which links have been modified). Unassessed articles are bolded but remain the same color. Links to articles with no talk page are not modified at all. Redirects are not followed, so links to a redirect won't show the article's assessment.
Let me know how it works and if it does what you want. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 22:17, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pyrospirit, it works excellently, thanks! For some reason, I had to run it in Opera before it would run in Firefox or Chrome (some kind of cache-clearing, I presume), but now it works great. The idea of bolding the links as you go along was brilliant.

Two suggestion/favors. First, I think it could be useful to make the script active on all pages, not just article pages. Second, could you please adjust the behavior for the unassessed and no-discussion-page links? I think it'd be good to highlight those links to encourage editors to assess them. Could you perhaps make the background red, or outline them in a red box — you know, something like "border: 2px solid #ff0000"?

BTW, I noticed that the "[show]" link for the projectbanners.js script can collide with geotags, which are often placed in the upper right corner. Perhaps you could move the "[show]" button to the end of the assessment line, e.g., "A good article from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia [show]". That would keep the button spatially close to the assessment line and to the script's output. Just a thought, trying to be helpful.

Thanks again, and I'll keep you posted on your script's uses, Proteins (talk) 01:34, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good suggestions. The script is now active on all pages. I've also improved the behavior for unassessed pages as you suggested. Unassessed pages and pages with no talk page are marked in bold, colored with the default link color, and outlined in red. Redirects are handled differently, and are instead colored green but not bolded, with no border. I fixed the projectbanners.js link by moving the geotags element to the left 30 pixels, which prevents overlap. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 04:49, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It works great, thank you! If you'll allow another small suggestion, I'd change the color on the redirect links to something different — perhaps pure magenta (ff00ff), which is never used for class assessment? The present green is hard to discern from the B-class, and it could be difficult for inexperienced readers to distinguish the bold from the normal typeface. Picking out "pink links" might be easier. Proteins (talk) 14:06, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done, using #c0c, which is a bit less blindingly pink. I also improved the way it detects which links are mainspace links, so there should be fewer false positives now. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 15:42, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that pink is definitely better — I can see again! ;) Could I ask another feature, please? It would be great if Talk pages were colored/bolded in the same way as the main article. Your tool is great for scanning the quality of articles in Categories, but some categories such as Category:Frequently viewed mathematics articles don't categorize articles, but rather their Talk pages. Thanks again for your help, Proteins (talk) 19:32, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done. By the way, what are you planning on using this script for? Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 00:02, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 1 June 2009

[edit]

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 22:50, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

help with slideshow script?

[edit]

Hi Pyrospirit,

I'm trying to write a script that selects random links from a page and produces a "slideshow" by opening a window with the first link and transitioning to the next link after every X milliseconds. Everything is working OK, except for the setTimeout. (JavaScript has no sleep() function!) It seems like the global variables are not being passed to the timeoutRoutine() function? I'd be grateful for any suggestions. Thanks! Proteins (talk) 14:53, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look. Mind if I clean up the script a bit while I'm figuring it out? Since JavaScript has the same global scope for all scripts run on a page, it's best to minimize the number of global variables. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 00:33, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, please do. I normally don't use global variables, but I resorted to them (without success) after being stymied by setTimeout(). I'll be delighted if you can get rid of them. Thanks! Proteins (talk) 00:59, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Now that I've looked at it more closely, I can see a lot of ways the script can be improved. For example, the code that filters out certain links can be replaced with the tidier link parser used in assesslinks.js; also, by removing all invalid links before a link is randomly selected, it'll only require one try to get a valid link. I'll see what miscellaneous things like that I can do while figuring out what the problem is with setTimeout(). Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 01:12, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting vandalism

[edit]

Hi. You welcomed me on my talkpage in 2007. I was wondering if you could direct me to where users report vandalism. Please get back to me on my talk page. Thanks. Calebchiam (talk) 17:31, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 15 June 2009

[edit]

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 12:03, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 22 June 2009

[edit]

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:14, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another easy script for workshop?

[edit]

Hi Pyrospirit,

Your assesslinks script works great and I plan to use it during the workshop and introducing others to it. Please don't worry about the slideshow script for now; it was mainly for visualization, rather than being a workhorse script.

If you have time, I'd appreciate your help with another workhorse script. The motivation for the script is that newcomers who would like to improve an article significantly will often want to know who has been editing the article previously and how recently. The idea is to have a "Top Contributors" button on every article, which when clicked queries a server for its top 5 contributors, their number of edits and their most recent edit dates 

http://toolserver.org/~daniel/WikiSense/Contributors.php?wikilang=en&wikifam=.wikipedia.org&grouped=on&hidebots=on&hideanons=on&order=-edit_count&max=5&since=2008-07-16&page=Pyrospirit

and presents the results in a compact table, similar to your projectbanners.js script. It'd be a bonus if the table had a direct link to adding a new section on the Talk page of each top contributor, so that newcomers could contact them easily. Does the script seem feasible? I'd appreciate your thoughts, even if you don't have time to help in writing the script. Thanks! Proteins (talk) 11:37, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 29 June 2009

[edit]

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 02:22, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 6 July 2009

[edit]

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:20, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 27 July 2009

[edit]

Delivered by -- Tinu Cherian BOT - 12:23, 28 July 2009 (UTC) [reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 3 August 2009

[edit]

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 05:41, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 10 August 2009

[edit]

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 05:04, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 17 August 2009

[edit]

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:39, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 24 August 2009

[edit]

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:59, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 21 September 2009

[edit]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 28 September 2009

[edit]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 5 October 2009

[edit]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 12 October 2009

[edit]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 19 October 2009

[edit]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 26 October 2009

[edit]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 2 November 2009

[edit]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 9 November 2009

[edit]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 16 November 2009

[edit]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 23 November 2009

[edit]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 30 November 2009

[edit]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 7 December 2009

[edit]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 14 December 2009

[edit]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 21 December 2009

[edit]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 28 December 2009

[edit]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 1 January 2010

[edit]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 11 January 2010

[edit]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 18 January 2010

[edit]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 25 January 2010

[edit]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 1 February 2010

[edit]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 8 February 2010

[edit]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 15 February 2010

[edit]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 22 February 2010

[edit]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 1 March 2010

[edit]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 8 March 2010

[edit]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 15 March 2010

[edit]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 22 March 2010

[edit]

Design the interface for newcomers

[edit]

Hi Pirospirit. I just read your essay Design the interface for newcomers. I have concocted this. Can you tell me what you think? Anthony (talk) 00:30, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Metadata question

[edit]

Hi Pyrospirit. I am a sysop on another wiki. I am trying to determine which MediaWiki versions your metadata script works on 11:17, 4 November 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jesseissocool74 (talk • contribs)

Editor assistance list

[edit]

Hello. Since your account has been inactive for some time, it has been removed from Wikipedia:Editor assistance/list. There is an explanation at Wikipedia talk:Editor assistance/list#Problem with inactive accounts on the list. You are, of course, welcome to re-add yourself to the list if you wish to. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:58, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol survey

[edit]

New page patrol – Survey Invitation

Hello Pyrospirit! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you  have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to  know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.

  • If this invitation  also appears on other accounts you  may  have, please complete the  survey  once only. 
  • If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.

Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.

You are receiving this invitation because you  have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 12:52, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to events: bot, template, and Gadget makers wanted

[edit]

I thought you might want to know about some upcoming events where you can learn more about MediaWiki customization and development, extending functionality with JavaScript, the future of ResourceLoader and Gadgets, the new Lua templating system, how to best use the web API for bots, and various upcoming features and changes. We'd love to have power users, bot maintainers and writers, and template makers at these events so we can all learn from each other and chat about what needs doing.

Check out the Chennai event in March, the Berlin hackathon in June, the developers' days preceding Wikimania in July in Washington, DC, or any other of our events.

Best wishes! - Sumana Harihareswara, Wikimedia Foundation's Volunteer Development Coordinator. Please reply on my talk page, here or at mediawiki.org. Sumanah (talk) 15:33, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Script question

[edit]

Greetings, I noticed that you were the one who created the gadget that allows the articles assessment to be visible on the main page of an article. I wondered how hard and if it woul dbe possible too create one that would show on the talk page if the main page contained a stub template. I do a lot of article assessments and this would make it much easier to determine (within a certain degree of error anyway) if the article was a stub or not. Kumioko (talk) 17:02, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not actively maintaining that script anymore, but if someone else wants to write it, it shouldn't be that hard. The script runs on the article page and works by requesting the source code of the intro section of the talk page; just modify the code to run on the talk page and request the intro section of the article page instead, and then you'll have the framework for the script you want. Then it's just a matter of writing some regular expressions to parse it for stub tags and figuring out where to put the information on the talk page once you have it. Of course, feel free to use as much of the code from the assessment script as you want. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 18:22, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the quick reply and the suggestions. I'm not sure I am a good enough programmer to do that but I'll give it a try and see how close I can get. Kumioko (talk) 18:34, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Trout

[edit]

Template:Trout has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. C3F2k (Questions, comments, complaints?) 17:44, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Template:Wlink has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 11:07, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of Template:User Wikipedia/Autoconfirmed

[edit]

Template:User Wikipedia/Autoconfirmed, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:User Wikipedia/Autoconfirmed and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Template:User Wikipedia/Autoconfirmed during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Eyesnore (pending changes) 03:11, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

[edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:29, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Trout

[edit]

Template:Trout has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. HappyValleyEditor (talk) 05:29, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

New deal for page patrollers

[edit]

Hi Pyrospirit,

In order to better control the quality of new pages, keep out the spam, and welcome the genuine newbies, the current system we introduced in 2011 is being updated and improved. The documentation and tutorials have also been revised and given a facelift. Most importantly a new user group New Page Reviewer has been created.

Under the new rule, you may find that you are temporarily unable to mark new pages as reviewed. However, this is nothing to worry about - most current experienced patrollers are being accorded the the new right without the need to apply, and if you have significant previous experience of patrolling new pages, we strongly encourage you to apply for the new right as soon as possible - we need all the help we can get, and we are now providing a dynamic, supportive environment for your work.

Find out more about this exiting new user right now at New Page Reviewers and be sure to read the new tutorial before applying. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:29, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

  1. Adjust number of entries and days at Last unpatrolled
  2. Editor-focused central editing dashboard
  3. "Hide trusted users" checkbox option on watchlists and related/recent changes (RC) pages
  4. Real-Time Recent Changes App for Android
  5. Shortcut for patrollers to last changes list

Further, there are more than 20 proposals related to Watchlists in general that you may be interested in reviewing. (and over 260 proposals in all, across many aspects of wikis)

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Note: You received this message because you have transcluded {{User wikipedia/RC Patrol}} (user box) on your user page. Since this message is "one-time-only" there is no opt out for future mailings.

Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 01:12, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red World Contest

[edit]

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

User scripts Newsletter - Invitation

[edit]

Hi. Recently, I discovered a passion for created and understanding user scripts on wikipedia, and am planning to create a monthly newsletter about new scripts and related projects (created by anyone, not for simply promoting my own), as well as currently pending user script requests, Wikipedia-related JavaScript tips/tricks, and other related information. This message was sent to you because you are listed as a member of the user script developers category. If you would like to subscribe to this upcoming newsletter, please go to User:DannyS712/subscribe to scripts and add yourself. If you have any questions, please reach out and talk to me。 --DannyS712 (talk) 05:22, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Metadata script.png

[edit]
Notice

The file File:Metadata script.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unused Wikipedia screenshot. Out of scope.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 04:14, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Pyrospirit&oldid=1252130742"