Wikipedia talk:Dashboard

Archives

Remove "non free content review"

Deprecated, I see no reason for this link to be kept here, could someone (perhaps the bot's owner) reprogram the bot so that it won't add the link again? Lil Johnny (talk) (contribs) 05:34, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Legobot populates that page, which is then transcluded here. Deleting it from that page won't do anything, since the bot will overwrite the whole page anyway. I'm guessing you need to request that with Legobot's owner, Legoktm. I would agree this section is no longer needed. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 13:38, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bots noticeboard not working?

Wikipedia:Bots/Noticeboard has 15 threads going on. This page says it has 0. Something is borked, possibly after the move request. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 17:19, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

According to the page histories Legobot stopped updating the entries on the Bot owners noticeboard in April 2017 when the noticeboard was moved from Wikipedia:Bot owners' noticeboard to Wikipedia:Bots/Noticeboard. Since nothing is changing at the redirect, Legobot is not updating the list. If no one objects I will change the name in the appropriate dashboard grouping at Wikipedia:Dashboard/Administrative noticeboards to see if this works. It may be more complicated than this. StarryGrandma (talk) 18:58, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the Teahouse issue at the top of this page, this will not work. Any other ideas? StarryGrandma (talk) 19:09, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bot section?

I think it would be best if bots got their own dedicated section here, which would cover

Wikipedia:Bot requests
Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval (first three sections + subsections) or alternatively Wikipedia:BAG/Status
Wikipedia:Bots/Noticeboard

Opinions? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 17:25, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'd prefer a "Technical" section which could include WP:VPT and other related links as well. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 17:58, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It was one of the alternative I considered too. I've got no strong preference either way here. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 18:05, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bot owners' noticeboard (0 threads) is already on there, look like it is broken/needs retargeting. — xaosflux ^Talk 18:21, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'd fixed it myself, but I can't make any sense of how these dashboards work. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 14:19, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Board not updating anymore as well ...lets ping @Legoktm: about all this.--Moxy (talk) 19:04, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Re-@Legoktm:? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 14:08, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Something on Toolforge was borked. It should begin working regularly now. Legoktm (talk) 18:29, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Legoktm: still borked. Maybe [1] will help? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 13:33, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Legoktm: any update on this? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 16:43, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Headbomb: The solution to this issue is to rewrite the entire dashboard using Lua, thereby making it reconfigurable without waiting for a bot to be amended and preventing dozens of unnecessary bot edits per day. I've converted the "Administrative noticeboards" section as an example at Special:PermaLink/911258827. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:32, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Pppery: well, that's certainly a solution. Thanks! Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 15:48, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Legoktm: Could you have your bot stop updating Wikipedia:Dashboard subpages so that the above code can be deployed. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:44, 2 November 2019 (UTC) @Legoktm: * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:51, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Pppery: – Legoktm hasn't replied to queries for years. What should be done here is likely request for Legobot to be specifically blocked from editing this page. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 06:29, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Headbomb: It would be hypocritical of me to do that, given that I opposed the introduction of partial blocks in the first place. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 14:49, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Xaosflux: any way you can partially block the bot here? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 20:08, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If the community needs to this bot have changed, and the operator is unresponsive - please post at WP:BOTN. Bots that are operating out of control (this would include an operator not taking accountability for their edits) should be site blocked. — xaosflux ^Talk 20:15, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Xaosflux: really wouldn't want to see a nuclear option used when the scalpel is preferable. The other things aren't problematic, just this one. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 21:40, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Pppery: Let's try a {{bots|deny=Legobot}} and see how that goes. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 21:41, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Headbomb: I Tried using {{bots}} back in August, and the bot didn't care. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:58, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Let's find us an admin willing to do a targeted block then. Are your templates ready to be deployed on all Dashboard subpages /sandboxed somewhere? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 21:59, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've just converted each dashboard subpage to the Lua format. While the bot will revert me, the old revision can work as a demonstration that my code works. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 22:18, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The 'scapel' is fix the bot, and we wouldn't block the bot unless unless the discussion was at an impasse. PBlocks should not be used to manage bot tasks - and I haven't seen a proper discussion to escalate and attempt to resolve the requested change to the bot yet. — xaosflux ^Talk 22:07, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's been over two years without a response from the bot op. How much longer should we wait? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 22:27, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'll add that I also think a partial block would be the right solution here. The bot has been superseded by Pppery's module which is better than the bot in basically every way. Attempts to contact the botop has failed time and time again for years for various tasks, but I have just pinged Legoktm, posted on their talk page and sent them an email in a final attempt to contact them. If they don't respond within a week I think we should implement the least disruptive solution still on the table and give the bot a partial block and be over with it. As this ultimately is a matter for BAG I have posted a notification on WP:BOTN. Trialpears (talk) 22:21, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To follow up on my prior posting - if the bot is running without any op any more, it really should just be completely shut down. — xaosflux ^Talk 23:31, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I hate to get bogged down in bureaucracy, but this really isn't the appropriate venue for deciding whether the bot should be blocked (partially or not). I'll transclude this section to BOTN to allow for continued discussion of the update, but also allow for location-appropriate discussion of Legobot. Primefac (talk) 02:15, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A full block serves nothing. A partial block solves all current issues, without hampering what works. This is Wikipedia, not a 36 month-long commission to study a problem to propose a non-binding recommendation. Just fucking do it. It's been 3 years now. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 03:25, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I disabled Legobot's dashboard task now, thanks Trialpears for the email. I'll comment on WP:BOTN about my (in)activity. Legoktm (talk) 06:01, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And I've now converted the system to use the Lua module I wrote, and fixed both this problem and #Wikipedia:Village pump (WMF) in the process. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:42, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WP:IANB

I don't know how this system works, but someone might want to add the intadmin noticeboard. Natureium (talk) 22:14, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Natureium: It's automatically updated by a not-actively-maintained bot, so that's not feasible at the moment. See #Bot section above. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:45, 2 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Add sidebar link to the Dashboard

Please add a "Dashboard" link to the Wikipedia sidebar. -- Timeshifter (talk) 07:43, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please create a dashboard for my Wikipedia, Meta, and Commons watchlists

See also Phab:T6547. It is titled "Support crosswiki template inclusion (transclusion => interwiki templates, etc.)". See also: WP:Crosswiki watchlists.

I want my main watchlists in show/hide boxes on one page. Similar to the Dashboard look. -- Timeshifter (talk) 07:52, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Village pump (WMF)

Wikipedia:Village pump (WMF) should be added to Wikipedia:Dashboard#Village pump, if someone can figure out how. @Legoktm:? @Pppery:? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.234.210.113 (talk) 17:36, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is maintained by a bot whose operator (re-pinging Legoktm, since you failed to sign your post so your ping didn't go through) is not responding to requests to modify the bot, so this can't be done. I wrote a Lua module back in August that could replace the bot task, but the bot operator isn't even responding to requests to disable the bot task, and doesn't respect {{nobots}}, so I can't even deploy that Lua module. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:53, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Is there any way forward, or are we stuck with a zombie bot forever? 71.234.210.113 (talk) 18:01, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pppery and IP, I believe updating the dashboard is done by a cron job which runs Legobot on a schedule. Which pages to summarize are listed in the crontab file or files, not in the bot itself. I once ran into source code for the crontab somewhere while looking at the wikidata bots. RFCbot was the original updater, from 2009 to 2013. When that bot was retired Legobot took over. Harej used to run RFCbot and may know how to approach this. StarryGrandma (talk) 01:55, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@StarryGrandma: It's obvious that Legoktm could fix this, either by updating the code, or by disabling it entirely and allowing my Lua module to take over the task. The problem is that Legoktm is not responding to my request that one of those things happen (or any other queries about his bots), and his last 50 edits go back more than a year. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:23, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We have partial blocks now. Perhaps we could block the bot from editing this one page to fix this specific issue? ‑‑Trialpears (talk) 21:21, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

See #Bot section? above, the idea of a partial block has already been considered and rejected for unclear reasons. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:51, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A partial block should be implemented. There is zero reasons for it not to be. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 23:59, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring section

Currently looks weird, if someone can fix that. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:32, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Looks fine to me. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 14:54, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, whatever it was, it looks fine now. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:59, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Broken parsing of section headings with templates

I've noticed there are multiple broken entries (one of them I "fixed" by editing the heading itself) that are caused by using template(s) in section headings.

For example, currently at D/AN,

== {{User|Openshack}} personal attack and [[WP:Editwarring]] on [[Salford]] ==

is parsed and displayed as

[[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#{{User|Openshack}}_personal_attack_and_WP:Editwarring_on_Salford|Openshack (talk · contribs) personal attack and WP:Editwarring on Salford]]

where the outer wiki-link is broken and the only clickable links are from inside a template (in this case {{User}}). Could this be fixed somehow? — DVRTed (Talk) 19:37, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've fixed this, but note that using templates in headings is generally a bad idea for several reasons. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 23:20, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Wikipedia:-" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Wikipedia:- has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 5 § Wikipedia:- until a consensus is reached. Vitaium (talk) 14:35, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Need help?

hi

I need to know how can i publish my news info in wikipedia. How my information goes to public. How wikipedia works and what's it benefits for me and other people.

Thank you so much Alizy ayaza (talk) 03:20, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One place to start is Help:Contents, which links to various pages describing how to use Wikipedia. I notice, though, that you are asking for help in publishing your news into Wikipedia. Please be aware that all content in Wikipedia has to be verifiable from reliable sources. Also, our conflict of interest policy strongly discourages you from directly editing Wikipedia content with which you have a connection that can be interpreted as a conflict of interest. Donald Albury 13:29, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My account was not confirmed. I did not receive an email. Alizy ayaza (talk) 04:00, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is not an appropriate venue for asking for help. Please ask for help at either the Wikipedia:Teahouse or the Wikipedia:Help desk. Donald Albury 12:48, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussions: Web or internet

Unsure if I can edit this page directly. The link to Category:AfD debates (Web or Internet) goes instead to Category:AfD debates (Web or internet), which is intentionally empty. Recon rabbit 19:36, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

When I click on the first (the one with a capital I on Internet), I see 13 entries in the category (as of the time I looked). Why do you want to edit Category:AfD debates (Web or Internet)?. Donald Albury 21:36, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are you referring to the collapsible lists of AFD discussions by category that is just below the "Deletion discussions" header? That is from Wikipedia:Dashboard/Relisted AfD debates and yes, it looks like it has a lower case "i" when it should be uppercase. Anyone could edit it but it looks like that it may be entirely regenerated by Legobot every update, so any manual change would be blown away the next bot update and so needs to be fixed in the bot: <https://github.com/legoktm/harej-bots/blob/master/afdrelists.php>. Also pinging Legoktm to confirm. Skynxnex (talk) 21:57, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://github.com/legoktm/harej-bots/pull/16 * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:59, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the PR, I've deployed the change to the bot. Legoktm (talk) 06:43, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]