Jump to content

User talk:Rjwilmsi/Archives/2010/May

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Bot - authorlink?

Would it be possible for the bot to include an authorlink in the citation template when we have an article on the author? DuncanHill (talk) 14:00, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Possible, but not sure it would be easy. How would it know which author to use if the author name goes to a disambiguation page? Rjwilmsi 14:45, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Good point! DuncanHill (talk) 14:47, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

AWB

I just wanted to inform you that this edit was a mistake, but it didn't break anything so I won't tell you to be careful next time as no major harm was done. I even wonder how that much of a change is possible anyways. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 18:12, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

And this one, this one, and finally this one. Sorry to be a pain, but I guess AWB isn't a cure all. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 18:29, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
These all look to be incorrectly substituted templates. What are the correct underlying templates then? Don't worry, it was a one off cleanup exercise, AWB doesn't do that automatically. Rjwilmsi 21:17, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
Well looking at the tower one, it was a homemade template. The others were likely a change in the current events template. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 23:54, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Ref ordering

Can you comment on User_talk:Magioladitis#AWB and reference reordering? Which function reorders the refs? -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:10, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

RTFM. Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/General_fixes#ReorderReferences_.28ReorderReferences.29. Rjwilmsi 16:12, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Dates conversion

I was just wondering what list you were working off for your date conversions? I note you seem to be working solely to convert ISO dates at the moment...

Some time ago, Tom created for me this list of articles with mixed dmy/mdy date formats, and was wondering, as you have a script and automation, whether you might be interested in helping me with (a)updating the list, and (b)do some date alignments, please? Ohconfucius ¡digame! 07:35, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm working on articles transcluding {{use dmy dates}} and updating date fields within citation templates only. The dates can be ISO or American format, though turn out to be mostly ISO ones. I can certainly able help with date alignments but only under limited conditions: dates within citation templates, and where the article transcludes {{use dmy dates}} or {{use mdy dates}}. If you can arrange for articles in your list to be tagged with one of those templates (if not already) based on the categories/some other criteria then I can update the dates. In fact I think a bot run could be approved for my part of the work. Rjwilmsi 10:30, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
There are only about two or three thousand articles so templated, so you'll be out of work soon! As I don't have automation, I was trying to think of a short-cut to add markers for some of the articles. Would you be able to work on articles where the talk page (and talk page only) has a given category, say – one such as Category:Articles using dmy dates? Ohconfucius ¡digame! 14:51, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Yes, though if we add the {{use dmy dates}} or {{use mdy dates}} it allows more simple updating later. For me the real task is to get those templates on the pages, updating the cite dates after is much easier. Rjwilmsi 16:19, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
That was what I had in mind when I thought up those templates - that they would be for semi-automated or automated maintenance. It is a bit of a recursive short-cut I dreamt up, because I don't myself have automation. I have been working these articles for a while, systematically tagging them as I go along. I know which should go dmy and which mdy, but it's very fastidious. Because date formats are fundamentally WP:ENGVAR driven, in suggesting the above, I was thinking of, for example, using articles tagged with {{British English}}, and eventually other categories. your AWB script, instead of detecting the {{use dmy dates}} or {{dmy}} tags, could use {{British English}} or whatever narrow category to to the work, whilst at the same time adding the 'use' templates, and doing the date conversions at the same time, or in a two-step process step. What do you think about that? Ohconfucius ¡digame! 02:17, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
I'd certainly like the dmy/ymd tagging and date conversion as separate functions, though they could be performed in the same edit. I could easily configure a script to dmy/ymd tag based on article category, but somebody would have to provide the list of categories. Rjwilmsi 12:40, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

To minimise the political risk to you, I can suggest you start with:

Ohconfucius ¡digame! 04:22, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

A small bug on multi issues

User_talk:Magioladitis#Caps_problem_with_converting_tags_into_Multiple_Issues_tag. I could probably do alone but the latest solutions don't load on SharpDev. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:31, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

rev 6499. Done Rjwilmsi 12:48, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Help needed!

I would like to create a procedure called MergeDABlinks in MetaDataSorter after the MoveDABlinks. I created some rules in Wikipedia_talk:AutoWikiBrowser/Feature_requests#Merge_DABlinks. If you could create one of them for me, I think I would be able to do the rest.

I don't know how to sufficiently use the GetTemplateParameter etc. Did you create a manual somewhere from them? Thanks in advance. -- Magioladitis (talk) 06:59, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

All the new tools functions have descriptions of what they do and their parameters in the code. However, they're not designed for use with unnamed parameters. This FR is of course doable but I doubt it will be trivial. Rjwilmsi 09:34, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
As a start we can allow {{About}} to move about {{for}}. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:37, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

The da Vinci Barnstar

The da Vinci Barnstar
For implementing my AWB feature requests which keep coming and coming :) -- Magioladitis (talk) 10:26, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Cite web

Could you probably help me with User_talk:Magioladitis#Improper_line_feeds.2C_date_revisions? -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:48, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Date format

Please point me to where in the Manual of Style this date format is recommended? It should be "1 February 2008" surely? --Redrose64 (talk) 21:27, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I didn't add the date. The scope of that task is limited to removing trailing periods in citation dates. Rjwilmsi 21:31, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Question on the date stuff

Some of your date formatting changes seem to be against standard handling of dates (eg you're forcing to the dmy format through the article though this may not always seem right; overridding the original date format of the initial article author, etc.). Because of the numbers of edits you're doing it would be helpful to know what criteria you're using to judge the switch or if you've discussed this at MOSNUM or a Village pump or the like before engaging, as again, some of the changes are very questionable. --MASEM (t) 20:28, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm changing |date= and |accessdate= within citation templates to use the date format specified by the {{use dmy dates}} or {{use mdy dates}} template on the article. This is all in accordance with the WP:DATE rules. Rjwilmsi 20:31, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
However, citation dates can be different from in-body dates. It is not clear if this template is meant to apply to in-citation dates as well as body dates. --MASEM (t) 21:14, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
  • Yes, MOSNUM only requires consistent date formats within the body and reference sections, taken separately. However, I have found that only a small percentage of articles have consistent date formats within the reference section. I'm glad RJ is doing this, even if the occasional article has its dates 'wrongly converted' as this is a really shitty job – and I should know, I've done enough of them by hand. Ohconfucius ¡digame! 01:19, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Care is needed with the date= parameter. If it is in the YYYY-MM-DD format, it may be in the Gregorian calendar, even though the Julian calendar was in use at the time and place of publication. Jc3s5h (talk) 22:08, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
Yes yes, this has come up occasionally at WT:MOS. I must say, I am convinced by the argument that most English-speaking non-technical readers are flummoxed by the all-numerical format, which is the opposite of the ways we express dates orally. I'd say many readers just glaze over at the gobbledy numbers. Tony (talk) 05:17, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
I also think that with changing ISO dates, the incorrect (e.g. 2009-9-9 and 09-09-2009 etc) and ambiguous date formats (e.g. 8/8/09) used will become more apparent. Ohconfucius ¡digame! 05:27, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

I notice your bot fixing refs on many of the articles I work on regularly. Thanks. PrBeacon (talk) 21:15, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Your bot

Hello Rjwilmsi. Your RjwilmsiBot screwed up a list in this edit (scroll down a bit). You may want to turn the bot off and fix it. Cheers, theFace 14:33, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I see. Error in grabbing the USA Today page title. I've now fixed it. Thanks Rjwilmsi 21:01, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi, RJ-- thank you for adding the MC [Southwest/Volaris codeshare] link to the OAK article. I recall using that same one for either the Southwest page (Volaris section) or Volaris' own page, and like that article alot. If I end up making that section of the OAK article too long, because of added service continuing, I will likely consolidate it all into a smaller reading; just added California Pacific Airlines earlier today. If I do though, I will keep your added link in. I was the one who wrote that whole "added service" section (f.k.a. upcoming service) months back, to counter with that previous section about service dropping at OAK in '07-'08. Although it may seem somewhat redundant, with the table following, I have kept it there because of some of the detail added that cannot fit in the table. Anyway, happy reading, thanks again, and feel welcome to provide any other feedback: here, or via the discussion page for the OAK article. Min1Phoeb2 (talk) 19:51, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

You deserve a Barnstar

I see your name several times a day in my watchlist - and thousands of other editors must see the same. You totally deserve this:


The Cleanup Barnstar
For all the things I miss and you see. Philcha (talk) 15:09, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

BAG

Have you ever thought of joining BAG? I was thinking of nominating you. MBisanz talk 03:34, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Poke MBisanz talk 19:56, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
That sounds like an increased involvement in WP bureaucracy, which is not appealing to me. Thanks for the interest though. Rjwilmsi 22:17, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
Okey, thanks for thinking about it. MBisanz talk 05:07, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

request to do the PDF thingy in refs on USS Indiana (BB-1)

Hey, I saw you added a pdf tag to the New York times references on USS Maine (ACR-1) and USS Iowa (BB-4) with AWB. If this is can be done automated, would you be so kind to do the same to the 20 orso refs on USS Indiana (BB-1)? If it is not automated than please just say so and I will fix it myself. Many thanks Yoenit (talk) 21:03, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Done. Rjwilmsi 21:07, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

There is one last merge dablinks request in the FR page. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 09:43, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Reg Ex Question

Thanks again for this fix here, and I understand why my attempt at a negative look-behind didn't work either (was looking for the /etc, not the /etc.) but I've had a lot of trouble getting the negative look-ahead (?!) pattern to work as a general rule. The example I'm thinking of is this (find="(?!/etc)(E|e)(tc\b([^\.\w])|ct\b\.?)" Replace="$1tc.$3") which was still making changes to examples like "foo /etc/foo foo". Is it a question of the / character complicating things? Shadowjams (talk) 00:00, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

I often find lookarounds difficult. This lookahead "(?!etc/)\b(E|e)(tc\b([^\.\w])|ct\b\.?)" will match "/etc/foo" but not "/etc" so the lookbehind works better than the lookahead in this case. Rjwilmsi 07:26, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
Strange. Look arounds knock up the complexity considerably, especially when there are nested groups within them too! Thanks for the help. Shadowjams (talk) 10:35, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

6603

rev 6603 What happened to Highlight dead links, etc.? Are they still working? I noticed a change in line 3471. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:36, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Have you actually tried it? Rjwilmsi 08:45, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Rjwilmsi/Archives/2010/May&oldid=1138927400"