User talk:Ohconfucius/archive38

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

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Your scripts[edit]

Can I clarify - what sort of testing are you doing on your scripts? In particular, User:Ohconfucius/script/Sources? They seem to be causing issues - see this edit and this edit, which broke the references and had to be rolled back. Of course, when the broken references were reverted, it reverted all the other changes - changes you were asked some time ago to split out into different edits. - Chris.sherlock (talk) 13:17, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • There are two scripts: a test version and a production version. I run the test script almost exclusively, and Tony is my co-beta tester. New features are first tested before being ported to the production script after a suitable period; errors in the production script are corrected with a much reduced delay. Although the script are split by functionality, I personally run them together for productivity reasons, otherwise there is the risk of making inconsequential edits (which are frowned upon). Tony does likewise.--Ohconfucius (on the move) (talk) 21:22, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • What sort of inconsequential edits are you referring to? It would be best to split up the functionality into seperate commits. That way it can be reverted more easily when necessary. It does sound like you need a sandbox with test input. - Chris.sherlock (talk) 23:38, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • An inconsequential edit can occur for example when I the MOSNUM script finds no changes except for updating the maintenance date parameter of the {{use dmy dates}} template.

        The scripts have been extensively tested for the most part because I wrote them several years ago; others have helped me refine them, and I am usually swift in acting on error reports. I run the scripts as a composite as there are generally very low error rates with the MOSNUM, formatting and Common Terms scripts; there is the occasional issue with the ENGVAR script because of the widespread and increasing use of terms like "color" within templates (and I always run it separately for a number of reasons); the Sources script is perhaps the most complex (but there's always something for it to fix) and I keep a close eye on the output. I assume that Tony has the same level of awareness of the issues involved. --Ohconfucius (on the move) (talk) 09:14, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

        • I don't think you are as careful as you think you are. In fact, I'm fairly certain that at some point in the past you have been told about replacing aliases. What I am suggesting is twofold - firstly, separate out trickier scripts into seperate edits for your more reasonable and solid scripts. And second, find the times where your script does fail and put it onto a test script sandbox, then when you release a new script you run it on this. I'd be happy to do this myself if you would like, I would only need to know when you have made a major change. I have no idea what Tony knows about - he certainly runs your script and doesn't appear to check the output as he was messaged recently as he hadn't noticed the problems his changes caused. - Chris.sherlock (talk) 13:07, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I will fix the errors as soon as I can get back to my computer. --Ohconfucius (on the move) (talk) 21:25, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Hong Kong RM[edit]

Hi, I had saw your write an oppose, so i wanted drop by and leave a note in response to the RM. That title was that because of an RM, but was renamed in contrast by the other guy. I wrote it because I just felt that it was appropriate. Starzoner (talk) 00:40, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thank you. I am unsure why you placed an "oppose" vote that you subsequently withdrew. Perhaps you could withdraw the move request? --Ohconfucius (on the move) (talk) 14:20, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • not sure if it was appropriate for me to oppose it. I myself am ambivalent about it but I don’t think I ca withdraw the move request. Starzoner (talk) 15:10, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Could you deal with this script stuff please?[edit]

I want nothing to do with the person who posted this. Thanks. Tony (talk) 04:08, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Tony, I'm sorry that an error in my script has caused you all this stress. I think I've now fixed the problem. Hope it goes smoothly henceforth. -- Ohc ¡digame! 15:17, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Special:WantedTemplates[edit]

Hi! Could you (and Walter Görlitz) do me a favor? Could you add //<syntaxhighlight lang=javascript> to the top of any pages you own in this list? This doesn't change how the javascript functions, but prevents the link from appearing in Special:WantedTemplates when it is regenerated. You will be able to tell if it worked by checking this list after the cache has regenerated. The Special:WantedTemplates won't regenerate until the 20th of next month. You can see an example of this hack in the top line of Wikipedia:AutoEd/htmltowikitext.js. If you do this, we can clear about 250 entries from the list! Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:32, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Plastikspork and Walter Görlitz I think you need a // </syntaxhighlight> at the bottom of the page as well (based on my own tests in my own scripts). this is why it didn't remove the pages from the list you mentioned. Frietjes (talk) 20:55, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'll give it a try, but I'd be happy to delete it if the problem I saw in Ohconfucius older template is fixed now. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:32, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks to all three of you. It looks like it worked! By the way, I believe <nowiki>...</nowiki> and <pre>...</pre> also work in disabling WhatLinksHere. I don't know if there is any particular advantage to using one over the other. But, in any event, the next database report will have 250 fewer entries, which is great! Thank you again! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:52, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Something to ponder[edit]

Hello, you may have already considered this, but after using your "products" since last summer, I have come to realize that it might be a natural move if you took GregU's (now retired) dash tool and converted it for use either in a stand-alone module or integrated right into the AWB toolset. From what I understand, it looks to be difficult to capture all the variations where the endash is preferred over a hyphen and. In the last six months or so, the developers of AWB have finally integrated the handling of that issue into the "typo fixing" aspect of AWB, but it falls short of GregU's efforts. Take, for example, how one particular article's dashes came out after using both tools:

Greg really did a knock-out job with his tool. This isn't a request really, as I'm sure it's crossed your mind, but if it did happen, I'd be first in line to take it for a spin. Thanks for all you've done. Dawnseeker2000 18:50, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Scripting and Infobox Chinese[edit]

You had forgotten to remove intermediate piping at One Country, Two Systems, please be more careful dealing with Infobox Chinese syntax. CaradhrasAiguo (leave language) 01:14, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Kewal Dheer[edit]

Hello Ohconfucius. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Kewal Dheer, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambiguously promotional. Thank you. GedUK  12:24, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

reFill[edit]

Hi, I don't know if you are aware, but there are a number of problems with reFill. (About 50% of the daily additions to Category:Pages with citations using unsupported parameters are due to reFill). The tool hasn't been updated since |dead-url= was dropped in favour |url-status= so any references using an archive-url that are filled cause an error. Additionally, it fails to add |archive-date= when the archive-url is from archive.today. Both of these problems are evident here. Regards. --John B123 (talk) 22:03, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

COVID-19 pandemic in India[edit]

Hi, just letting you know that your script assisted edit[1] at the said article, converted the "-"(minus) within expression into "-"(hyphen) at Line 61. I had to change it back. - Timbaaa -> ping me 04:15, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Didier Raoult[edit]

Hello,

I am not a Didier Raoult fan, but when I just read the current article for the first time, and it is SO against him that I had to check.

Your Modification here is definitely NOT NEUTRAL. He DID find the Giant Viruses, and the cure of the Q Fever, thiat's why it is complex to apprehend him and his suspicious treatment.

Then there are other really suspicious modifications (Like here) where you remove all the start-ups he created with a comment Who care ?, but in the mean time, you add the mention that he was a bad student when he was a child. Are you serious ?? It might be true, but of course creating a start-up and/or a company is important for futur conflict of interest...

I will undo all of your modifications in the near futur if you don't give me an explanation.

--Roniee (talk) 08:55, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Roniee:What you said is mostly true, but there's a huge problem of compliance with policies about content that I offered a quick fix to. You're welcome to include material but I hope you will help ensure the article is adequately sourced. Regards, -- Ohc ¡digame! 09:12, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


    • @Ohconfucius:, thank you for your reply.
    • The current status of the article is so bad, with so many biaised references, that your modification didn't help at all.
    • I am sorry if it will upset you, but I will undo this specific modification where you have deleted 30k data just like that. I have checked the sources : some might be unsual, but his big works are reference by Science' and Journal of Virology'.
    • --Roniee (talk) 11:40, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • @Roniee: I wasn't so much upset by your comment as by your referring to my removal as "an act of vandalism". You certainly pointed out some shortcomings, but I often find articles like this which I have to remove huge chunks from. You should bear in mind that WP is not a scientific journal, and when referring to his major works, you need to ensure that they are properly sourced and presented with due weight in relation to his biography. The article in fr.wp is just as problematic and isnt a good model – all the citations from number 58 to 101 are authored wholly or partially by Raoult. Instead of attempting to prune the article down from its assembled unsatisfactory content (i.e. reinstate my deletion and then try editing it), I suggest that you rebuit the article from the ground up. It may be an idea to look for personal profiles such as the one that appeared in the NYT or Paris Match. -- Ohc ¡digame! 13:42, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Revdels on the Falun Gong talk page[edit]

Can you explain why you made a series of revision deletions at Talk:Falun Gong? I want to know what to avoid in the future. Binksternet (talk) 21:26, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DOT dates script fails now[edit]

I just dusted off your script to work on Roman Catholic Diocese of Nova Friburgo and it fails, silently, no action taken. I have disabled "New Wikitext Editor" in Beta Features. Elizium23 (talk) 17:09, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Image[edit]

It would seem as though someone saw fit to revert Xi’s profile pic from this morning. I cannot find it anywhere on the Internet, either. Can a copy be found (not a screenshot)? George3569 (talk) 19:22, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! George3569 (talk) 08:58, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Emma González Page[edit]

hi i saw that you recently edited the emma gonzález page-they now use they/them pronouns instead of she/her so i was wondering if we could somehow include that? thanks Vdanahy05 (talk) 17:04, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:Ohconfucius/script/Common_Terms.js[edit]

Just letting you know something's fishy with this script. Sometimes it removes the display text in favour of the link, like this. --Kailash29792 (talk) 12:21, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Join the RfC to define trust levels for WikiLoop DoubleCheck[edit]

Hi Ohconfucius/archive38,
you are receiving this message because you are an active user of WikiLoop DoubleCheck. We are currently holding a Request for Comments to define trust levels for users of this tool. If you can spare a few minutes, please consider leaving your feedback on the RfC page.
Thank you in advance for sharing your thoughts. Your opinion matters greatly!
María Cruz

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:59, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If you would like to modify your subscription to these messages you can do so here.

Orphaned non-free image File:{{{1}}}[edit]

⚠
⚠
Thanks for uploading [[:File:{{{1}}}]]. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:41, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your Dash Script[edit]

Hello, I came upon your dash script & think this could be fairly useful, but there is are two "issues" I'm seeing with it. First is the cleanup of date ranges. Per MOS:DATERANGE, it should be using {{snd}} or &nbsp;&ndash; for separation of the first date from the second date in a date range. Second "issue" is that I feel it be more beneficial to use &ndash; & &mdash; for the dashes conversions instead of the rendered dash. This makes it easier when editing in the code editor (or in my case most of the time, using Notepad++) to identifying when dash is actually being used instead of having to hunt it down in the preview. Thanks. ThePersecuted (talk) 18:04, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Script opinion request[edit]

Would you mind offering an opinion about whether scripts for date formats would be possible per this discussion? And if the changes couldn't be automated to revise all the articles needing them, could a tag and link to the script be added to talk pages so that regular editors could run it? Thanks. --Light show (talk) 05:04, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Technically, the script can be and is used to perform such tasks – flipping formats is just what it's written for. But you need to obtain consensus to change the date formats of articles governed by long-standing convention. US military articles are case in point. --Ohconfucius (on the move) (talk) 23:08, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

General formatting script[edit]

Hi, General formatting script changes crore/lakhs to million, but about Indian articles, it's not preferable. I derived a script from this see User:Empire AS/General formatting.js. However, I wanted to remove the changing of crores into millions. I've tried to do it manually, but I know nothing about developing scripts. Can you tell me what to remove or add to just remove this units changing? Thank you. Waiting for your reply. --Empire AS Talk! 02:13, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Empire AS, I'm not the script author but try either deleting or commenting out the sections labeled "remove Crores and Lakhs in templates converting to USD" and "remove Crores and Lakhs not in templates" and see if that works. Ionmars10 (talk) 14:31, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ionmars10, Ionmars10, I tried that already. But a problem arouse that it didn't 'de-capitalize' the words of a third heading. For example ===Background History And Release===. It stopped decapitalizing it to <owiki>===Background history and release===</nowiki>. Thank you. You may see here User:Empire AS/sandbox 1, that a heading is capitalized, but it isn't de capitalized after using both script. Did it happen with real script too or just with my derivative. You may test or verify. Thank you. Empire AS Talk! 14:44, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Empire AS, this is because only certain common section names, e.g. "See Also", "External Links", and "Personal Life", are changed, according to my testing using the original script. This is similar to what AWB general fixes does, presumably due to the frequency of false positives (i.e. words that are actually part of proper names). So it doesn't appear to be caused by your modifications in any way. Ionmars10 (talk) 15:02, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ionmars10, now, I understood. I think that it caused due to my modification but in reality the original script also does the same, so the method was fine. Thank you. Empire AS Talk! 01:45, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please remember that en.WP articles are for all readers—not just those in India. Tony (talk) 10:09, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for merging of Template:EngvarB[edit]

Template:EngvarB has been nominated for merging with Template:Use British English. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 15:15, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sources script[edit]

Hi! I use your fantastic userscripts all the time. For whatever reason, the sources script no longer appears on my edit window (I used it yesterday). I tried uninstalling/reinstalling but no dice. Just letting you know in case it is on your end, or if you had a quick fix.

Keep up the great work! Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:41, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • thanks for your message. I have not made any changes to the sources master script nor to the underlying scripts since July/August. I would point out that other script-loading failure has been flagged for which I, once again, have no explanation nor time to address for now. I suspect that it may be due to conflict with one or more other scripts. Known conflicts are known to have existed with AutoEd, which may be at fault, or it may be another that I'm not aware of. I would suggest that you scrubbed your vector.js file and reloaded the scripts one by one or in small batches to isolate the one causing the problem. Best, -- Ohc ¡digame! 05:01, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. I should add that I hadn't removed/added any scripts before this happened and your other scripts work correctly. I'll spend some time looking to get a fix, but thanks for your response. :). Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 10:00, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Cantonese opera singers[edit]

A tag has been placed on Category:Cantonese opera singers requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz Read! Talk! 13:28, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of humor in EngvarB script[edit]

Hi Ohconfucius, there seems to be a bug in your EngvarB script. I tried to run it on the article Joxantonio Ormazabal. It doesn't convert the word "humor/humour" in the "Career" section. Someone changed it to "humour" and I tried to apply "American" spelling but it only added the "use" template and didn't change it to "humor". After changing it back manually, as a test I tried converting it to "humour" but none of the three variants converts it. Not sure what's going on there, or if I'm doing something wrong... --IamNotU (talk) 21:26, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for the error report. The bug should now have been fixed. Regards, -- Ohc ¡digame! 09:23, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • He says without humor. --Izno (talk) 13:28, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your scripts are removing non-breaking spaces[edit]

Evidently, User:Ohconfucius/AWB modules/dmy and User:Ohconfucius/script/MOSNUM dates.js remove non-breaking spaces in places where they should be retained (e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Celebration_Day_%28film%29&type=revision&diff=985506798&oldid=973123876). Why is this? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:31, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New, simpler RfC to define trust levels for WikiLoop DoubleCheck[edit]

HI Ohconfucius/archive38,
I'm writing to let you know we have simplified the RfC on trust levels for the tool WikiLoop DoubleCheck. Please join and share your thoughts about this feature! We made this change after hearing users' comments on the first RfC being too complicated. I hope that you can participate this time around, giving your feedback on this new feature for WikiLoop DoubleCheck users.
Thanks and see you around online,
María Cruz
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:05, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If you would like to update your settings to change the wiki where you receive these messages, please do so here.

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:28, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Badiucao-hong-kong-extradition-poster.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Badiucao-hong-kong-extradition-poster.jpg, which you've attributed to Badiucao. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

  • make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
  • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Wikiacc () 02:03, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Hong Kong Basic Law Article 22[edit]

Hello, Ohconfucius. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Hong Kong Basic Law Article 22".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 14:41, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Script errors[edit]

Hi,

I'm posting this here in case you didn't get my tag on the script talk page.

I made this edit and, as you can see the script has changed magazine dates to exact dates. I did check the script and I thought something had maybe changed and we're only allowing one date now but then I've been contacted off-Wiki by another editor who confirmed that this wasn't the case. I opened up a discussion on the script talk page and Jonesey95 confirmed that the date ranges are valid per MOS and accepted by the citation template code. Therefore the script shouldn't change them. I fully reverted my edit, because I'd ran two scripts at once, I ran the other script individually here and you'll see that hasn't attempted to do anything to the date ranges. However, when I still try to run your script and select "DATES to dmy" it still tries to change magazine dates to exact dates. Is there a fix for this?-- 5 albert square (talk) 17:25, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That is indeed weird. I'm a quite heavy user of the scripts, so I'll probably need to stop until this is addressed. I can guess (I'm no tech-head) that it's a new-template problem. Thanks for bringing it to our attention. Tony (talk) 11:05, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Tony1 it definitely is very weird! For the example I've used above, "DATES to dmy" is definitely correct as this is an Australian article. Just to point out though I selected "DATES to mdy" on the same article though and got the same result. I did wonder if some changes had been made to a template somewhere and maybe the script needed updating?-- 5 albert square (talk) 16:44, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
OK, Ohconfucius is really busy in real life at the moment. He'll check in within a few days, probably. Tony (talk) 07:34, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ohconfucius is there any update on this yet? I've just tried the edit again and it's doing the same.-- 5 albert square (talk) 22:35, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Happy new year, 5 albert square! Thanks for using my scripts. I'm very sorry, but I'm really snowed under even during these holidays and have not had time to run through the labyrinth of script to find the problematic regex that "corrects" magazine dates. All I have time for right now is to check in from time to time and make a small edit here and there when I check in. The horizon remains busy so I cannot promise when it will be fixed. All I can say is I'll try to do it in the near future. Best regards, -- Ohc ¡digame! 13:33, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
5 albert square: I think the problem has been isolated and the regex modified. Let me know how you get on. Regards, -- Ohc ¡digame! 19:37, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, seems to be! Thanks!-- 5 albert square (talk) 20:02, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary[edit]

Precious
Six years!
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:34, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Season's Greetings[edit]

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2021!

Hello Ohconfucius, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2021.
Happy editing,
Starzoner (talk) 00:04, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

I wish you a Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays!Starzoner (talk) 00:04, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hkf logo1.png listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Hkf logo1.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Matthew hk (talk) 17:49, 29 December 2020 (UTC) Matthew hk (talk) 17:49, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year![edit]

Happy New Year!
Hello Ohconfucius:


Did you know ... that back in 1885, Wikipedia editors wrote Good Articles with axes, hammers and chisels?

Thank you for your contributions to this encyclopedia using 21st century technology. I hope you don't get any unnecessary blisters.

Starzoner (talk) 15:19, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Happy New Year elves}} to send this message

I wish you a prosperous 2021! Starzoner (talk) 15:19, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lighthouses and military[edit]

Hi hello you and other Wikipedians in Hong Kong or Macau may be interested to take part in the discussions at Talk:Lighthouses in Hong Kong, Talk:Military of Hong Kong and Talk:List of lighthouses in Macau. 219.76.24.203 (talk) 10:26, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Totem Acoustic for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Totem Acoustic is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Totem Acoustic until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Cupper52 (talk) 17:31, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Changing dates[edit]

Hey,

Just to let you know I've had a message left on my talk page about your scripts. They're changing titles of works, URLs, and established date formats. Example here. I have tagged you in the thread on my talk page but thought I'd also post it here in case anyone else can rectify your script.-- 5 albert square (talk) 01:39, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OhC, I was glad to see your answer about what's at the bottom of this. For a moment there I was worried you might be slipping. EEng 08:07, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You nearly had me there. You'd probably understand why it wasn't merged into the main script. the function is deliberately very light because it's occasionally very useful. I've now made it more foolproof, because that's progress . -- Ohc ¡digame! 18:33, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
foolproof – Like the wise man said, the difference between a fool and a criminal who attacks your system is that the fool attacks unpredictably and on a wider front. EEng 18:18, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That's soooo true! -- Ohc ¡digame! 21:59, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Special:WantedTemplates part 2[edit]

Hi, I have been helping with an effort to clear up false-positives in Special:WantedTemplates and found that 7 of the entries can be traced back to User:Ohconfucius/script/formatgeneral.js and User:Ohconfucius/test/formatgeneral.js/core.js. For example, if you check Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:(?:end, you will see that the server is reporting that User:Ohconfucius/script/formatgeneral.js and User:Ohconfucius/test/formatgeneral.js/core.js are transcluding that template. Clearly this is a quirk in how the backend software parses javascript pages, but it makes it harder to find the real problem pages. It would be great if you could put 

// <syntaxhighlight lang=javascript>

at the top of the script page and 

// </syntaxhighlight>

at the bottom of the script page. Since these are commented out, it won't break the javascript, but it will prevent the backend software from parsing the {{(?:end as a template transclusion. Thanks again for your help with this! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:34, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Interface-protected edit request on 6 February 2021[edit]

Add a ? to line 137: protect_string(/(?:ar|de[mv]|enterpr|parad|prec|prom|rev|surpr|treat|telev)(?:ise?[drs]?|ing)/gi);

The script is inaccurately changing "arising" to "arizing" when converting an article to American English. GorillaWarfare (talk) 16:54, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Many thanks! I don't use this US English button as much as I ought to to be able to find all the bugs. -- Ohc ¡digame! 22:25, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

One to cultivate[edit]

He did a little maintenance on my script page. Tony (talk) 07:08, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Totemlogo.jpg[edit]

⚠
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Totemlogo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:06, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for merging of Template:Use English English[edit]

Template:Use English English has been nominated for merging with Template:Use British English. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Joseph2302 (talk) 22:07, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Engvar script[edit]

Hi! I'm trying to load your Engvar conversion script. Where should I be seeing the buttons you refer to? Thanks for any help you can give. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:35, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • The sidebar is on the left side, and the script buttons should appear right at the bottom, below "Languages". There may be an additional heading marked "Script", with "EngvarB" directly below it. Let meknow if it's not there for any reason. -- Ohc ¡digame! 09:28, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I found that another script I had loaded (BrandonXLF/FloatSide.js, which floats the left-hand column separate from the main part of the page), was interfering with your script. Once I disabled it, yours loads fine. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:14, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cleaning up Special:WantedTemplates[edit]

Hi, due to quirks in the way that Wikipedia parses javascript pages, curly braces are parsed as templates, unless they are inside of <nowiki>...</nowiki>, <pre>...</pre>, <syntaxhighlight>...</syntaxhighlight> ... As a result of this, two of your script pages, User:Ohconfucius/script/EngvarB.js and User:Ohconfucius/test/EngvarB.js, are generating links in Special:WantedTemplates (in particular links to Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:)((?:NYT and Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:\w*\scolor\). Recently, an interface editor attempted to fix this by adding <nowiki> at the top and </nowiki> at the bottom of your script pages. This didn't work because you already have <nowiki>...</nowiki> on those pages. It would be great if you could add <syntaxhighlight>...</syntaxhighlight> tags (you don't have these) at the top and bottom of your pages like this which will prevent your page from generating links in Special:WantedTemplates. Thanks for your help! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 14:37, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WikiLoop 2020 Year in Review[edit]

Wikipedia mini globe handheld
Wikipedia mini globe handheld

Dear editors, developers and friends:

Thank you for supporting Project WikiLoop! The year 2020 was an unprecedented one. It was unusual for almost everyone. In spite of this, Project WikiLoop continued the hard work and made some progress that we are proud to share with you. We also wanted to extend a big thank you for your support, advice, contributions and love that make all this possible.

Head over to our project page on Meta Wikimedia to read a brief 2020 Year in Review for WikiLoop.

Thank you for taking the time to review Wikipedia using WikiLoop DoubleCheck. Your work is important and it matters to everyone. We look forward to continuing our collaboration through 2021!

María Cruz
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:35, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Scripts removing text[edit]

Hi,

I was trying to edit an article to change it from dmy to mdy as it's an American article. When I did this though it's trying to remove text from the article. Any idea why?-- 5 albert square (talk) 02:27, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • If we're looking at the same diff, the problem is caused by a malformed reference where the citation is broken. Observe how the {{cite web}} template isn't closed in the article (missing double curly brackets I've put in bold): <ref>{{cite web|author=Helen Branswell|url=https://www.statnews.com/2021/02/02/comparing-the-covid-19-vaccines-developed-by-pfizer-moderna-and-johnson-johnson/#:~:text=The%20Pfizer%20and%20Moderna%20vaccines%20have%20shown%20astonishing%20%E2%80%94%20and%20essentially,Covid%20infection%20after%20two%20doses.|date=2 February 2021}}</ref>. So it's primarily not my fault but I can amend the script to avoid this happening again, which I could do in a few days' time. -- Ohc ¡digame! 10:05, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • BTW, there is a sort of consistency as most of articles in the COVID-19 series are in dmy. So if such an article already has a {{use dmy dates}} template, I would tend to leave it and not change the format. -- Ohc ¡digame! 10:09, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • That article does look as though it should be mdy. Tony (talk) 12:32, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • That's what I thought Tony1. I can only think it may be going by WP:DATEOVER. Ohconfucius thanks for taking a look at that. I completely missed that! I've fixed the broken reference, maybe the script could flag a broken reference instead of remove the text?-- 5 albert square (talk) 13:21, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        • Yeah, I've learned to live with dmy/mdy differences in clutches of sibling articles. Tony (talk) 00:47, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Inappropriate hyphen insertion[edit]

Hello, I'm not sure if this was actually the script's fault, but this edit added an inappropriate hyphen before the word "second". I've gone and cklarified the sentence to avoid the issue altogether. Graham87 15:55, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for the input. It was indeed the script at work. Ordinarily it would insert a hyphen between a number and a singular noun, and this is indeed a false positive. Your change is great as it removed the root cause. Regards, -- Ohc ¡digame! 07:18, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:JBL Paragon.jpg listed for discussion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:JBL Paragon.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. MGA73 (talk) 19:39, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:फ़िलप्रो/script/EN-IN.js[edit]

Could you please merge this script with this? Because each script nullifies the other, and फ़िलप्रो is no longer active. Kailash29792 (talk) 11:09, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

COVID-19 pandemic in Montenegro[edit]

Good afternoon, I'm sorry I removed your script-assisted fixes on COVID-19 pandemic in Montenegro, but I got into an edit conflict and didn't want to lose my changes. Can you please do the fixes again? Thank you. Moson81 (talk) 15:46, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another discussion re links in song infoboxes ...[edit]

We weren't notified (I only found out about it through contribs-traipsing), but see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Music#Can somebody take interest in the infobox for Melanie's "Lay Down"?. And lol at your "It's My Party" edit ... Graham87 17:14, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your date style scripts[edit]

Hello. It appears that some of your scripts change dates in articles to different styles. And whilst they do that with body text, they also appear to change the access dates in manually formatted references (they may well do this in cite templates as well, not sure). I've been told that apparently this is something I need to take up with you rather than an editor using them. I'd have thought the problem might lie with the editor using them to do their due diligence and check, but you know how it is...

Anyway, any chance of getting the scripts to ignore dates inside references? Or adding a switch so that they can be configured by the user to do that? I've absolutely no idea if that's possible or not. It may well not be.

Sorry to bother you etc... I'll only watch here for a week and you probably get a tonne of traffic, so a ping might be helpful if you need to tell me anything. Ta. Blue Square Thing (talk) 22:32, 14 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Blue Square Thing: WP:MOSNUM requires that dates be uniform across an article. The raison d'être of the script is to work through all dates in any given article, correcting any errors and unifying the format to either dmy or mdy. The script should not bypass references because it potentially leaves the job partly done for reasons that will become apparent further below.
Please note that there is indeed a "switch" that allows citation dates and access dates to be rendered as yyyy-mm-dd when in read mode. That switch is not user configurable, but is for editors, so the article dates appear the same for everybody according to the choice of the editor. Several display options exist for dates within citation templates which can be achieved by adding the parameter |cs1-dates= to the {{use dmy dates}} or {{use mdy dates}} templates you will see on many articles that inform the autoformatting. It will override whatever format is seen within the citation template (when in edit mode) and will render output in the format according to the parameter chosen. However, this switch cannot guarantee that all dates are uniform, because there is no universal requirement to use citation templates, and there are often formats errors when dates are inserted. I trust this answers your question. Regards, -- Ohc revolution of our times 15:36, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reply. I appreciate the complexity of what your scripts do and that I'm asking for another level of complexity on top of that. As you're aware, of course, special rules apply to citations under WP: MOSNUM. The issue is that, despite your documentation urging users of your scripts to check what they're actually changing, I'm getting a handful of examples where there are no issues whatsoever with the dates in the article body, but what might be semi-automated editing processes are insisting on updating the use dmy date template at the top of the article (I have no idea why it's a big deal to update that) and are then changing perfectly valid citation date styles. Which sort of isn't a big deal, but it part of a push for absolute uniformity that I think is probably quite a big deal to some people.
Anyway, thanks for the reply. I think the problem is probably with the use of the scripts rather than the scripts itself - but if there is a way of getting them to not touch anything inside of ref tags then that would probably be a good thing. But I appreciate how much work that is so it's not a massive deal. Perhaps strengthening the documentation to stress that users need to be responsible for ensuring that they look at citation style dates might be helpful?? Thanks. Blue Square Thing (talk) 18:26, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Blue Square Thing: The {{use dmy dates}} or {{use mdy dates}} templates have a double function. The first one is for editors who specialise in date audits using the script. The template is updated automatically by the script (the date is changed to the current month) as it works through an article. This categorises articles by date, marking the date when it was last visited, allowing more efficient and targeted maintenance where desired. The common misconception is that the date on the template is immutable and mustn't be changed once it has been placed.
The second function is one which we have discussed: one of autoformatting. The Mediawiki software reads the template and then interprets all dates within citation templates so that they are rendered per the parameter |cs1-dates= in display mode. The default is the format used in the template, and you will have noticed that certain articles have a hodge podge of dates in the reference section where there is no template on the article. You refer to discussions which I have long ceased being contacted about, but feel free to ping me if you feel my comments would help in any such discussion.
Personally, I would have preferred that the community agreed in a single date format throughout an article, or one date format for the body and yyyy-mm-dd for the reference section (and not a choice). but instead, have a Frankenstein format that can be subject to edit wars. That's what poses challenges for the date auditor. -- Ohc revolution of our times 10:22, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for explaining some of the inner workings of this. Appreciate your time and expertise. As I say, I (partly) came here because someone told me to do so rather than engage with them, so thanks for helping me out in that regard. I understand the dilemma - and the frustration which comes with the hotch potch. An actual consensus I could accept; it's the procedural push towards a forced outcome from people who don't seem to appreciate the different options in play that I find more concerning. Thanks again - I know more than I did. Blue Square Thing (talk) 12:55, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unlinking of elections and similar occurrences[edit]

Hi, could you explain this edit? 2011 Peruvian general election is linked only in the navbox (so never on mobile). It is also a reasonable link per WP:YEARLINK, which is in one of the guidelines you link to. Similarly, in this edit by Tony1, I don't understand why 1960 Summer Olympics and the various Stanley Cups are being unlinked. I hope this is a bug: mass edits shouldn't be made that remove links that are compliant with the MOS. —Kusma (talk) 18:20, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In this edit mentioned above, why is |work=Reuters changed to |agency=Reuters when |url= has a reuters.com url? When |url= has a reuters url, the source is Reuters so the citation should be {{cite news}} with |work=Reuters. |agency= applies when another 'source' (a newspaper, magazine, broadcaster, etc) is distributing work produced by Reuters (or AFP, UPI, AP, etc).
Why is |publisher=Reuters changed to |agency=Reuters when |url= has a reuters.com url? In this case |publisher=Reuters is wrong and should have been changed to |work=Reuters not to |agency=Reuters.
Similarly, why was |website=[[France 24]] in a {{cite web}} with |url=https://www.france24.com... changed to |publisher=[[France 24]]. The website is France 24 so it was correct before your script changed it. And, in a {{cite web}} with |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/..., the script changed |via=www.bbc.com (clearly incorrect) to |publisher=BBC when it should have changed to |work=BBC News.
This is important because |agency= is not made part of the citation's metadata (the standard has no support for the concept of 'agency') so the information that you have moved into |agency= is lost to those who consume our citations via the metadata. Please fix your script so that those data are not lost.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 19:03, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
While I have disabled those conversions, I protest in the strongest possible terms. There is no consensus on the italicisation of websites. I fundamentally disagree with the forced italicisation of same in reference sections because one of the objectives of the script is to achieve a consistent formatting style across WP. In addition, I fail to see the reason for changing |via=www.bbc.com to |work=BBC News instead of |publisher=BBC. It's another matter if it wer news.bbc.com, but the script already does that. -- Ohc revolution of our times 11:38, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
|via= exists mostly as a mechanism to prevent reader astonishment. For example, when clicking a link to article from a newspaper, the reader expects to land at the newspaper's website but may be surprised when they land at some other, apparently unrelated, deliverer's website. To minimize that astonishment, cs1|2 provides |via=<Deliverer>. Like |agency=, the underlying metadata standard has no support for the concept of 'via' so the value assigned to |via=, when it should have been assigned to |work=, is also lost to those who consume our citations by way of the metadata.
British Broadcasting Corporation has several divisions, one of which is BBC News. The collection of articles produced by BBC News (the division) is published on its eponymous website BBC News (the work). This is really no different from a collection of articles produced by a newspaper company and published in their eponymously named newspaper. So, changing |via=www.bbc.com to |work=BBC News is correct because the work of BBC News (the division) is not the work of, and not published by, BBC (the umbrella corporation). The script can know that a particular article is produced by BBC News (the division) because it's right there in |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/... (same with BBC Sport: |url=https://www.bbc.com/sport/...).
Did you mean something other than WP:ITALICTITLE? That page appears to be about the titles applied to en.wiki articles.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 15:06, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have an issue with BBC News as such, and I agree that having |via=www.bbc.com is not appropriate. My issue is with how |via=www.bbc.com can default to |work=BBC News, when there is little "natural" or automatic about it. This is impossible to determine in the absence of subdomains within the field to be moved/converted. "BBC", as the overarching organisation. I understand that the parameter |publisher= is an integral part of the metadata, so how can that be incorrect? Of course, if we already have |work=BBC News, then |publisher=BBC is redundant.
WP:ITALICTITLE is designed to be the guiding principle for the script actions. Titles for which there is consensus to italicise are put into the italicised field |work=. The instructions in Help:Citation_Style_1#Work_and_publisher stipulate that one should strip the .com appelation where this is not an integral part of the name, but having |work=Reuters.com would violate that principle while using |work=Reuters could conflate the source with the organisation. This doesn't appear to be resolved, so it is potentially confusing for editors like me who work to clean these up. So which way do we go? -- Ohc revolution of our times 07:06, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you[edit]

... for what you said on User talk:SlimVirgin - missing pictured on my talk, with music full of hope and reformation --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:34, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Regal logo.jpg[edit]

⚠
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Regal logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you.   JaJaWa |hello  20:48, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ohconfucius/archive38&oldid=1031224758"