User talk:Trappist the monk/Archive 19

URLs[edit]

hi! Question re: this edit. Are URLs no longer preferred for scholarly cites? Just trying to keep up with current preferences since I know cite tool doesn't always reflect that. Thanks! Star Mississippi 16:01, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think (this is me talking; no doubt, no doubt, others have a different opinion) that when |url= links to the same place as a persistent identifier (even when the identifier link first lands on an intermediary page), then |url= should go away because the value assigned to |url= is much more likely to suffer from link rot than the matching persistent identifier (which, of course, can also rot but doesn't rot so often). So, when I encounter a url that derives from a persistent identifier, I remove the url in favor of the identifier.

I got to that page because |doi=10.1.1.115.772 is not a correctly formed doi but is, instead, a 'digital object identifier' specific to CiteseerX. That then lead me to notice that 'Northrop Grumman Mission Systems / Defense Personnel Security Research Center' is not a journal so I rewrote the template to reflect the actual source.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 16:44, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! That's helpful. I don't cite scholarly sources all that often so DOIs are new to me and I didn't realize they weren't all the same. In prior edits where you've come through after (Thanks!) there's usually a citation error that I don't know how to fix, but I don't recall this one throwing an error. Will remember that so you have less clean up going forward. Star Mississippi 13:50, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Junk citations[edit]

Hi, I previewed the links the tool added which you reverted here. Which were junk? Cheers. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 13:06, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, was it just the archive date? The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 13:08, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It was the missing |archive-date= that caught my eye but there is more. For example, the tool changed this:

[https://web.archive.org/web/20080629235755/http://www.salford.gov.uk/leisure/parks/parksinsalford/countryparks/thecliff.htm ]

to this:

{{Cite web|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080629235755/http://www.salford.gov.uk/leisure/parks/parksinsalford/countryparks/thecliff.htm|title=The Cliff / Kersal Dale - Salford City Council|date=29 June 2008|website=web.archive.org}}

"The Cliff / Kersal Dale - Salford City Council". web.archive.org. 29 June 2008.

That citation doesn't show any errors but is still junk:

|url= should not hold the url of the archived snapshot but should hold the url of the original source

|website= should be: Salford City Council not web.archive.org because the web page is not a publication of archive.org

|title= should be: The Cliff / Kersal Dale; The text 'Salford City Council' is not part of the page title

|date= should not hold the archive-snapshot date unless the source has the same date; in this case, since all we have is the snapshot url, the correct date is 6 August 2007

A correctly formed citation should look something like this:

{{Cite web |url=http://www.salford.gov.uk/leisure/parks/parksinsalford/countryparks/thecliff.htm |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080629235755/http://www.salford.gov.uk/leisure/parks/parksinsalford/countryparks/thecliff.htm |archive-date=2008-06-29 |title=The Cliff / Kersal Dale |website=Salford City Council |date=6 August 2007}}

"The Cliff / Kersal Dale". Salford City Council. 6 August 2007. Archived from the original on 2008-06-29.

Do not trust the tool. Closely inspect each citation that it creates and fix the problems or abandon the edit. I, for one have grown weary of fixing problems that this tool and its users have created. Remember, you are responsible for every edit that you make using the tool. Complain at the tools talk page. If more users would complain about the poor quality of its suggested edits, perhaps the tool can be improved.

And now you've reverted me and restored all of the badly formed citations which does not fix the problem. Sigh.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 13:58, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh well, the time you spent berating me could have been better spent (a) fixing the issues and (b) notifying the reFill people that their script needs updating. Right now we have a meatbot-esque user smashing out inline tags on 20 articles per minute, some of us are trying to fix some of these but it's just overwhelming, and reverting based on one or two errors (which aren't linkrot related) is not helpful either. So I will. Also. Sigh. Sigh. Sigh. Not helpful. But no worries, I won't be transgressing with this widely used tool again, I'd hate to be summarily reverted by you again. And for what it's worth, your complaints above have limited validity when it comes to solving "linkrot" which the mass addition of tags currently ongoing at 20 articles per minute is tagging. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 16:49, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, aye, I could have (a) fixed the tool's edit but then you would just keep-on-keepin'-on which just makes more work for me and for other editors. As I said, I have grown weary of cleaning up after editors who use this tool. Enough of that.

I have also grown weary of (b) complaining at the tool's talk page; when I have done so, my complaints have gone unheeded. You, and the other users of that tool, should be the ones complaining (loudly and often) because you are the ones who are responsible for the tool's edits. Perhaps the massed voices of a discordant tool-user choir will cause change where my solo voice could not. The group of you should grab the maintainers by the collar and put their noses on the grindstone until they fix the bare-urls-with-adjacent-{{bare URL inline}}-templates problem (and other problems). The meatbot-esque actions of Editor BrownHairedGirl is not a problem that needs solving and does not justify a rush to clear Category:All articles with bare URLs for citations by the creation of malformed citation templates – that merely replaces one problem with another (more obscure and insidious) problem. There is no hurry.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 17:46, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

From my perspective, I have 10,000 pages on my watchlist and I've just see around 20 to 30 tagged in the last few hours by this user. The tags are inline and are incredibly unhelpful, and apparently being added to pages at a rate of 20 per minute. The sole purpose (per the "explanation"/edit summary) is to reduce linkrot. Now, reFill is doing a fair stab at that, even in its current guise, and is better than nothing. If you're looking for perfectly formed citations (and I note you have been making edits to "correct" citations where you change things like "accessdate" to "access-date"....) then I agree, reFill isn't the thing. But to prevent linkrot, it certainly makes a better attempt at it than just simply reverting its changes back to bare URLs. I agree there's no hurry but you'd be better off following your own advice rather than reverting good faith edits to solve the issues being "highlighted" by the meat-bot edits going on in their tens of thousands. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 17:56, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@The Rambling Man and Trappist the monk: I have sympathy with both views here.

I am glad that TRM and some other editors find the tags useful in identifying articles that need fixing. Personally, I use these tags in conjunction with Petscan to cleanup sets of articles.

As to reFIll, I find that its output varies:

occasionally formattng a ref that needs no tweaking
mostly formatting a ref that needs some tweaking
in a significant minority of cases, it formats a ref so badly that its better to just bypass reFill and proceed manually.

Personally, I am unsure whether the approach of just saving whatever reFill generates is actually an improvement. In most cases, I find that produces results that are unacceptable to me, so I don't save poor reFill output. Whether they are acceptable to others is a difft matter. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:58, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In most cases, reFill works fine for "linkrot" purposes which is what the aforementioned user appears to be mass-tagging. If the aforementioned user wishes for further improvements or for their other improvements which are summarily undone to allow scripts to fix the issues they are trying to raise to not be removed, they should work harder with the community rather than just go on an unapproved tagging spree. I look forward to a time when these mad AWB edits are just verboten because they achieve literally nothing, and have no consensus. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 19:03, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh. Yet again, TRM goes straight for the pejorative terminology of "spree", ",mad" etc. That sort of trolling is why I kicked TRM off my talk.

There are issues to be resolved here, and consensus to be built, but this sort of aggression makes that much harder. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:05, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

SIGH* there goes this mass-editing user "banning" me from its talkpage but yet chasing my edits around Wikipedia trolling me everywhere else. Give it a break. Quit the unhelpful mass edits, get a consensus before edit sprees, and there's no issue. There's no aggression, just abject disappointment in the user with the second-most edits just missing the point. I'm glad you've desisted in creating more work for the rest of us. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 20:23, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Stop posting attacks on me in so many places, and I'll stop replying.

I do hope you don't really believe that repeatedly calling someone "mad is not aggression, or that calling a carefully-planned series of edits a "spree" is not hostile.

I haven't created more work for anyone. I have merely identified work that needs to be done whenever anyone has the time and/or inclination. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:33, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You already know that there are plenty of alternatives to your approach, one which I might add has no consensus for 20 edits per minute. That is all. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 20:37, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If you had bothered to discuss instead of just being hostile and insulting, we could have discussed alternative approaches. For the record, I have tried lots of other approaches to this. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:40, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Whatever. I started to discuss your behaviour but you closed it down with a fake ABF call. Making thousands of unhelpful and counter-community edits per day is not the approach anyone wants. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 20:46, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No, I closed it down with a genuine ABF call, after you declined a request to retract. You insults and aggressive hostility are not the approach anyone wants. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:50, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I don't follow you at all. You were the one telling me you could smash out 20 pages per minute. At that time I couldn't care less other than you'd littered my watchlist with edits I had to undo to fix. Your pre-emptive bad faith speaks volumes. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 20:54, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No, TRM, I responded to your bad faith by closing the discussion. There was no pre-emption.

And no, I didn't say "smash out". That's just another of your attempts to raise the temperature, this time by putting words in my mouth. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:00, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You made a mistake. And that happens. No stress. I didn't "quote" you, I paraphrased you. Frankly, by now you should realise your edits are unwelcome by everyone. I have no axe to grind but your bot-like edits are against community consensus and against guidelines so I'm glad you stopped. I hope you think twice before trying it again. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 21:03, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
TRM, you have been grinding an axe all day.

No, you didnt paraphrase me. You used hyperbole to misrepresent me.

And no, my edits are not unwelcome by everyone.. I have had a steady flow of thanks for them, as I had for my similar run in May.

No, I didn't make a mistake ... except, perhaps, in feeding your trolling. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:38, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You aren't working with the community, and you aren't actually improving things. It's clear. But thanks for your thousands of automated edits. The rest of us will actually deal with the improvements. And no, when I've had the chance, I've created yet another WP:GAN. For the improvement of Wikipedia and its readers. And you? Where's the community consensus for your meatbot edits? The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 22:48, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
TRM, I am working with the community. You are trolling again. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:49, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not one single person is in support of your behaviour. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 22:56, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Question[edit]

Hey Ttm, I've come across Template:Sclass/core on a couple of USN ship articles in just the past few day ([1] & [2]). Is this a template people should be using? Or should we be sticking with Template:sclass? Thanks - wolf 00:40, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely not. Editors should be using {{sclass}} and {{sclass2}} There are two redirects, {{sclass-}} and {{sclass2-}} that may be used but the actual templates are preferred.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 00:58, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Course of action[edit]

I am not sure what do with the Module:Nihongo kerning discussion, as it seems to have stalled with a weak consensus against the implemented change (weak because there has only been 4 editors involved). I made several attempts to expand the discussion at WT:JAPAN and VPT to no avail. I am not sure the procedural path is here (maybe a reversal for your part, and then the opening of a wider thread in a more central venue? an RfC? I'm really not sure). I think all parties are interested in seeing more participation and a wider discussion of the problem.

I have pinged the two other involved editors here to discuss the procedural path forward. — Goszei (talk) 21:52, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why does your intended conversation have to take place here? What benefit derives from discussion here that can't be derived from discussion at a more public venue? If you want to have an RFC, have an RFC – but do it someplace other than my talk page.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 23:16, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You are right, that was ill-advised (the original message concerned only you, but then I changed it before I posted). I have copied my post to the relevant talk page. — Goszei (talk) 23:21, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Broken citation[edit]

This makes much more sense (irt. Broken Genius: The Rise and Fall of William Shockley, Creator of the Electronic Age), apologies and thank you! - TheresNoTime ^😺 18:03, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:CS1 maint: ref duplicates default[edit]

Would you mind unleashing MonkBot on that category? It seems a perfect candidate for bot cleanup. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 15:20, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is no monkbot task to do that. And, such a task is essentially another set of cosmetic edits; readers will not see any difference in the rendered articles. I'm not interested in having the oh-my-god-the-sky-is-falling drama-board crowd getting their knickers all in a twist yet again.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 16:17, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Albanian Wikipedia[edit]

Hello Trappist! How have you been? Always a pleasure to be back at your talk page.

So, I did take some time off Wikipedia because I burned myself out working with Smallem's script those days. To be honest, I'm still bitter I couldn't make it work in a consistent manner (the auto-update feature) and there are still ongoing discussions on some MediaWiki talkpages about that but at the moment Smallem works only by manually updating it (which it's been a while without doing it as well because I just returned to Wikipedia these days).

When I do return, usually the first thing I do is to check for updates at the CS1 module (and I will do that soon and most likely the conversation here will cover some help requests in regard to it eventually) but this time I have something else a bit more complex to discuss before that.

Take a look at this phab request. This was done by some members of my community. As Izno did, you'll understand fast what it is all about. I contacted them personally to explain what was going on but they see the whole thing from a different perspective. If you remember, I've set up a whole infrastructure in regard to the language parameter in citations. (The graphs, the quest for correct sources in Albanian, etc.) This whole thing was praised by our community (by the same people creating the request) but they didn't think much about the implications that it would have. Now time has passed and the sea turned red. There are 11k citations needing "the extra" language parameter and they've started to notice that. The expression that gets thrown around is "this article had no mistakes, now it shows a lot, what's happening??? How do I fix them?!?!". Red is associated with everything bad in the WikiWorld and people are terrified of it. I've tried telling them what they see is actually fine, they don't really need to do anything about it if they don't want, someone else can fix it. We also made a video tutorial explaining "how to fix that" but another problem started: Around 90% of the new articles on SqWiki come from CTT (Content Translation Tool). It has become the norm for new articles. You search for that article on EnWiki, you start CTT and just fix some words and you publish it. It's become so prevalent that that's what we're even teaching new users to do on workshops. This on itself isn't a problem, the "problem" is that apparently on EnWiki no one bothers to set up the language parameter (LOL) on citations and when they translate them with CTT, they get a sea of red on citations which wasn't there on the original article. This causes utter confusion in new users, who, as you can understand from what I wrote above, have no technical knowledge whatsoever on citations or even on Wiki markup (they all use VE) and thinking they have done something wrong, they go on their tutors who eventually grew tired of this experience and started treating it as a bug, hence the ticket.

Now, the original, ideal plan, was to be able to make Smallem smart enough to fix some of those problems by separating them in batches in regard to specific details and set the specific language parameter en masse to all that batch. This whole thing was postponed indefinitely in the future after my fail to do something even easier with Smallem (the autoupdate process). On the other hand, the concern has, apparently, escalated enough to make room for requests in the Phabricator so... I'm looking a bit for your advice on the subject.

The ideal outcome, at least according to our community, would be that EnWiki started adding that parameter so new users at us didn't get errors when dealing with CTT. I can, of course, just remove everything but, understandably, I wouldn't like to do that. Maybe another grey area solution could be found? Maybe I should press on keeping it as a feature no matter the small turmoil? Maybe we can really talk about implementing it on EnWiki as a feature (and subsequently, like it usually happens, make it a standard for other wikis as well)? You are more experienced with "anti-red uprisings" and the whole thing altogether and I'd really like to have your opinion on this. - Klein Muçi (talk) 10:20, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Izno: MAYBE you have interest on the subject as well. I believe you would be lacking some historic information in regard to what's being discussed but I'm happy to divulge more if you wish to be informed. For the moment, I just mentioned you because I mentioned your name above. :) - Klein Muçi (talk) 10:33, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

From the screen cap at T285763, what I want to know is: Why are the ISBN numbers red? sq:Special:BookSources and sq:q:Special:BookSources exist so the ISBNs should not be red.

Do not, do not, hold your breath for en.wiki to start adding |language=en to old cs1|2 templates. I think that editors who use the abomination that is ve, unwittingly add |language= parameters in their new citations so those editors are doing what you want. For those who eschew ve, likely they won't be adding |language= unless the source is non-English. The concept that en.wiki articles with English language sources are translated to other-language wikis just doesn't occur to our editors.

Editors here don't want to know that their precious templates have errors so turning on new error messages is sometimes an exercise in frustration which then leads to hidden error messages that only serve those who deliberately enable error message display which means that clearing the errors takes much longer than it should.

I suck at dealing with the politics here so am likely not going to be able to help with the politics there.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 14:54, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, exactly. To be honest, judging by how many other details CS1 looks after for, I'd think that implementing these extra functions would be following the same path. I believe you remember the graphs you've helped me create in the past. I really think that could be interesting to have in EnWiki considering the amount of data you could get from those and the extrapolations you could make, judging by the vast number of samples you'd have. And one can easily ask himself why stop at the languages... I believe there may also be other quantities that you can use for data deductions.

Having said all that, if you don't think my approach is wrong in any way, would you care to make me a favor and comment in the aforementioned task, using your expertise in explaining what's happening and why that may be a good thing? As I said, I talked with them personally yesterday and mentioned that I would discuss it with you, so you commenting there would come naturally.

As for your question... I don't know. I've never got to use the ISBN feature too much myself and, as I said above, it's been a while without revisiting the module. Maybe I'll have a better answer for you after I start dealing with the update. - Klein Muçi (talk) 17:38, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have posted at T285763 mostly I identified the discussion that we had here regarding the missing or empty |language= parameter error message. I also asked about the red ISBN numbers.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 22:05, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot! If there are no new news from that topic, I'm keeping everything as it currently is and in the following days (hours?) I may start annoying you with help requests in regard to the module. I'll start checking what's new soon. :) - Klein Muçi (talk) 09:11, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Module update[edit]

So, I started the updating process. I started from "the end" given that the main page and Config. one are the ones that require most of the changes during l10n. This is the first time we're using the sandbox pages so I hope everything will be smoother this time. Small questions:

In COinS, I see an error message. MATH RENDER ERROR I believe I should translate that. If so, can you explain to me a bit more what the error is for?
In Whitelist, this is the only value set in false: ['transcripturl'] = false. Just curious, why is that? Are you doing changes in regard to it in articles and you'll remove it altogether when the changes are complete? - Klein Muçi (talk) 08:59, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This simple citation:

{{cite book |title=<math>pi</math>}}

$pi$ .

produces this for the rendered citation's title:

<span class="mwe-math-element"><span class="mwe-math-mathml-inline mwe-math-mathml-a11y" style="display: none;"><math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"  alttext="{\displaystyle pi}">
  <semantics>
    <mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD">
      <mstyle displaystyle="true" scriptlevel="0">
        <mi>p</mi>
        <mi>i</mi>
      </mstyle>
    </mrow>
    <annotation encoding="application/x-tex">{\displaystyle pi}</annotation>
  </semantics>
</math></span><img src="https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/ba86bd277bdfbcb0caadce80317f52d34f168178" class="mwe-math-fallback-image-inline" aria-hidden="true" style="vertical-align: -0.671ex; margin-left: -0.089ex; width:2.061ex; height:2.509ex;" alt="pi"/></span>

All of that produces an image (right click on the templates rendering to see that it is an image).

When Module:Citation/CS1 finally gets the template's parameters and values, all of that html is hidden inside a math stripmarker:

'"`UNIQ--templatestyles-0000000F-QINU`"'<cite class="citation book cs1">'''"`UNIQ--math-0000000E-QINU`"'''.</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Abook&rft.genre=book&rft.btitle=MATH+RENDER+ERROR&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fen.wikipedia.org%3AUser+talk%3ATrappist+the+monk%2FArchive+19" class="Z3988"></span>

Module:Citation/CS1/COinS attempts to extract the contents of the math stripmarker and in this example, hunts for the image's alt= attribute ('pi') and returns that as the value to be used in the citation metadata. But, MediaWiki took away the ability for modules to get the content of math stripmarkers so we are unable to provide any meaningful title-text for the math-image in the metadata. So we insert 'MATH RENDER ERROR' until such time (if ever) we can regain access to the math stripmarker content.

The only people who will ever see that text are those who consume cs1|2 citations using reference management software so I wouldn't bother translating it.

|transcripturl= is deprecated and can be removed.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 12:57, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the detailed explanation. I translated it just to keep the same standard with everything else given that each error message is translated. But now I got curious about something else: Maybe I've already asked you before about this but, if Whitelist only has parameters with true values... Do we really need a module subpage Whitelist from a technical point of view? - Klein Muçi (talk) 23:53, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Whitelist is needed if we want to know which parameters are allowed. Without a list of 'authorized' parameter names, we don't know that |author-middle-name= is not allowed. The assignment to true makes it easy in the code to ask if |author= is allowed because we just write if whitelist.basic_arguments['author'] then block end. Because |author= is allowed, whitelist.basic_arguments['author'] returns true so the block inside the if ... then block end gets executed. On the other hand, when we ask ask: if whitelist.basic_arguments['author-middle-name'] then block end, whitelist.basic_arguments['author-middle-name'] returns nil and the block inside the if ... then block end is skipped.

We could write the whitelist without assignments but then to find out that |author-middle-name= is not supported, we would have to read the entire table:

for i, argument in ipairs (whitelist.basic_arguments) do
    if argument == 'author-middle-name' then return true end
end

and that is a huge waste of time that would end up biting us on very large articles with many, many cs1|2 templates.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 00:51, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see. So basically it just provides easier support if expressed like that. Thanks for the explanations! :)) - Klein Muçi (talk) 08:43, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Getting closer to the hard zone now. I updated the main page of the module (leaving config. the end). Can you implement this change

local Language = A['Language']; if not utilities.is_set (Language) then -- when |language= is missing or empty table.insert( z.message_tail, { utilities.set_message( 'err_language_missing', {}, true )}); -- emit an error message and add to category end

without losing the overall structure of the module (comments, etc.) in here? I'll copy it once and I'll be able to do it myself the next time. It's just that you've changed that part these days and I don't wanna ruin the comments. - Klein Muçi (talk) 09:06, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the change! I have some questions: First of all, is the "sandbox part" related to "debugging" or I understood it wrong? Secondly, I started dealing with the configuration page. Can you give me a practical example of this message rendered somewhere: ['mismatch'] = '|$1= / |$2= mismatch' Or just make up one yourself. I just need it for extra context on translation.

Also, In local special_case_translation, why is all this section removed:

['authors'] = 'authors', ['contributors'] = 'contributors', ['editors'] = 'editors', ['interviewers'] = 'interviewers', ['translators'] = 'translators',

Is it accompanied with any change in category pages?

I must warn you that I'm yet to go more down the page. I'm asking as I work. - Klein Muçi (talk) 00:04, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't remember why those translations were removed but it looks like they were removed because they weren't being used.

{{cite book |title=Title |date=2020 |year=2021}}

Title. 2020. {{cite book}}: Check date values in: |year= / |date= mismatch (help)

—Trappist the monk (talk) 00:31, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Found it: Help_talk:Citation_Style_1/Archive_75#Bug_in_cfg.special_case_translation_[list_name]

—Trappist the monk (talk) 00:39, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Finished updating half of the config. page (basically most of the translations and now I need to deal with the categories). I have a kind of suggestion though: MAYBE it would be nicer that like the mismatch case above, the messages came with some kind of examples beside the explanation in the comment? For context I mean. I'm not sure how that could be implemented without overcrowding comments but a) that's how TranslateWiki does it, where most of the phrases to be translated have examples beside them and b) I've had a lot of cases where I had translated something "blindly" and only months later happened to see it "in action" and understood what it actually meant and how my translation was basically wrong. It's not a big deal really but just as a quality of life update, if we are to use game designing jargon. - Klein Muçi (talk) 08:53, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That already exists (sort of). Most error messages are displayed and explained at Help:CS1 errors. The module links to that page by adding the url fragment that is defined in the error message table. For the example above, the error message table is:

err_bad_date = {
	message = 'Check date values in: $1',									-- $1 is a parameter name list
	anchor = 'bad_date',
	category = 'CS1 errors: dates',
	hidden = false
	},

the module uses the value assigned to anchor to create: [[Help:CS1 errors#bad_date]].

—Trappist the monk (talk) 10:25, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I understand but I was talking about something "more for the common man". When communities deal with CS1, most of them, unfortunately, just translate the local messages because they see Translation table written above and call it a day. So maybe some examples for that table for some more context. The error messages and category names are for "the intermediate man" and accessing the help page anchors' is for "the advanced man", if we are to keep the figure of speech going. :P

One such case for example is with ['event'] which many people just translate as event, like a kind of celebration or so. It took me a bit to understand that it was related to videos and the context was a totally different one.

Speaking of that... What does sepc mean in ['agency'] = '$1 $2' -- $1 is sepc, $2 is agency? I was never sure of that abbreviation, assuming it is an abbreviation. - Klein Muçi (talk) 06:17, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Is your accusation that communities ... just translate the local messages because they see Translation table written above and call it a day supported by evidence? That's a bit harsh isn't it?

sepc is a variable used in the module suite. The name is a shortening of 'separator character'. For cs1 sepc holds a period character; for cs2, sepc holds a comma character.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 11:56, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm reaching the end of the update. Currently dealing with maintenance categories. Normally I don't work with category pages until I've finished working with the module but I went to check the category page of maint_discouraged to know what it is about so I knew how to name it in Albanian and there I see that the category is being discussed to be deleted. Is that so? Maybe I should skip it from the module altogether? - Klein Muçi (talk) 10:41, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

—Trappist the monk (talk) 11:56, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, for starters I can say that that was exactly what happened to our community (SqWiki) for years. The user who had imported the module had translated only that part and that was the state of it for more than 10 years (+ not updated technically) until I started dealing with it. I can't say with certainty but I think I've noticed that when working in Wikidata, connecting the categories, many other wikis, usually small ones, have not translated the category names and my guess is that they haven't bothered to translate the error messages as well. Generally, English is accepted as a lingua franca for tech-terms in the wikiworld. Especially for small wikis. In that context, my assumption isn't really an accusation per se because leaving those parts untranslated isn't seen as "morally wrong".

Oh... I've followed parts of that discussion about hyphenation and standardization. Can't we have both? Can't we choose 1 form and let a robot forever fix everything into the chosen form? I understand the idea behind the category now. Any idea about its fate though? Or too soon to talk? The reason I ask, beside personal interest in standardization, is that our community, for example, doesn't have any special interests in details like this so if the change was decided here, we'd just go all in, deprecate everything that doesn't follow the standard and let Smallem make the needed changes. So the gray area of "discouraged parameters" wouldn't make much sense to us. Of course, EnWiki's categories aren't supposed to suffice to SqWiki's (or other communities') wishes, I understand that. - Klein Muçi (talk) 12:32, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cosmetic bot edits at sq.wiki may be acceptable but here at en.wiki, for a few vocal editors, cosmetic edits are not acceptable. So after making some 1.47 million edits (of which only 158 had been reverted), the bot that 'fixed everything' was stopped and those six parameters will be with us forever. Category:CS1 maint: discouraged parameter is no-longer being populated and is going to be deleted.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 12:57, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I followed through the discussion links some more. I have only 1 question, more out of curiosity now: Why was the process of deprecation for other parameters allowed and for these stopped? - Klein Muçi (talk) 13:27, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I was able to complete the updating process in the sandboxes. Now, before I get everything live, I have a question: How stable is your sandboxes' code? When is the next planned update? The reason why I'm asking is understandable I believe. After this I'll go and deal with the categories and then with Smallem so my questions may start to be related to those concepts (I assume there won't be many, judging by what I've been dealing with in the module.) - Klein Muçi (talk) 08:24, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The sandboxen here are as stable as they ever are; which is to say, they are sandboxen so are subject to change at any moment for any reason or for no reason. No current plans to update.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 16:21, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see. I'm not updating them yet them then but can I ask you a favor to ping me whenever that happens in the future? Secondly, working with categories now: Why was Category:CS1 maint: ASIN uses ISBN removed? I was a bit surprised by that. - Klein Muçi (talk) 07:27, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ping you whenever the sandboxen are updated? Nope, not going to do that.

Help talk:Citation Style 1/Archive 75 § asin & isbn

—Trappist the monk (talk) 11:58, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, don't be silly. I meant when you decide to update the live module pages the next time, whenever that is. I usually do the update the same time as you do it but this time I didn't follow trends, that's why I said that. "To catch up with the rhythm." - Klein Muçi (talk) 12:26, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Categories done. Now onto the last a-bit-hard-to-swallow questions, mostly related to Smallem: Given that I removed the corresponding part in the config. page, am I supposed to remove this part even from the main page "< D I S C O U R A G E D _ P A R A M E T E R >"? Secondly, regarding the same thing, keeping in mind that, as you said above, cosmetic changes are acceptable in SqWiki, "should" I get Smallem to change those 5-6 parameters into the corresponding hyphenated forms? Basically, what I mean with that question is to ask if those really are the only parameters non-following the standard and if a change like that would bring difficulties in any way in localization in the future. If they are and you think I wouldn't make it harder for myself or you in any way in localizing future updates for CS1, I would prefer to make them follow suit with the other parameters. I don't think it makes any difference for us from our point of view. And lastly, given your latest request about Monkbot and ref duplicates default... Would that be a thing that could be solved by Smallem (find and replace regexes)? Keeping in line with all I said above, we'd be more than glad to have that in action, if it is possible. Maybe for you could be a good way to experiment and get results, even though I doubt changes on SqWiki would be much impactful on EnWiki's decision making. - Klein Muçi (talk) 22:46, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you are going to discourage the use of nonhyphenated parameter names, you should restore the maint category stuff to ~/Configuration/Livadhi and in ~/Whitelist/Livadhi mark those parameter names as discouraged: ['accessdate'] = discouraged, etc. At the next en.wiki upgrade, you will have to remember to preserve the discouraged parameter code which will be rather a pain for you. If you are not going to discourage the use of nonhyphenated parameter names, it is still probably best to restore the maint category stuff to ~/Configuration/Livadhi and make sure that there are no parameter names in ~/Whitelist/Livadhi that are marked as discouraged because all of that will go away at the next en.wiki upgrade. Should you discourage those parameters? Only you can answer that question. Because en.wiki is prevented from deprecating and removing the last few nonhyphenated parameters, if you remove support for those parameters, citations that contain those nonhyphenated parameters and are copied from en.wiki to sq.wiki, will be broken.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 00:52, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

But... I'm a bit confused. My plan was to make Smallem do the needed changes, for example: accessdate -> access-date, whenever it saw them on citations, whenever it gets its monthly auto-activation. Why would I need a tracking category for that? Smallem is programmed to scan every possible article during its run. And why would I need to discourage them when I can immediately jump that step and just make the change? Judging from what you describe, it seems to me that the whole category thing would do nothing more than just add extra steps to the update process. Follow up question: What has happened with other deprecated non-hyphenated parameters? Do articles with them appear in another specific category? Would it be wise to give Smallem a full table of regexes in regard to this with all the parameters and advise it to change them to their hyphenated forms? (Basically what I described above but for every parameter.) - Klein Muçi (talk) 06:20, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I understood you to be asking about the function discouraged_parameter(). I think that you should keep it intact (restore that bit that you removed from ~/Configuration/Livadhi) until the whole gets removed by the next update to the en.wiki module suite. If you choose to have smallem replace nonhyphenated parameter names with their hyphenated counterparts, that has nothing to do with the module suite.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 12:59, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay then, 2 straightforward questions:

If I re-add the category part in Config., I believe I also have to create the category, no?
I'm understanding that Smallem replacing nonhyphenated parameters with their hyphenated forms will have no effects in regard to anything related to the module suite and its categories. This is good. Should I only create regexes for the parameters you mentioned above or for all the parameters that exist? Said differently, assuming I created a list of regexes for "fixing" every parameter ever, would that be helpful in any way? Or would it be totally unnecessary because another mechanism is in place that deals with that. As I said above, I'm not sure what happens if you use parameters in deprecated forms. I'm guessing you get an error message with a suggestion, no? If that's the case, the said list of regexes could be helpful. - Klein Muçi (talk) 15:28, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Answers:

You don't need to create the category if you never change |accessdate=, |archivedate=, |archiveurl=, |airdate=, |authorlink= (and enumerated forms), and |origyear= in ~/Whitelist/Livadhi from true to discouraged.
If a cs1|2 template has a parameter that isn't in the Whitelist, or has a parameter that isn't supported by that particular template, cs1|2 emits an error message. The number of possible things that can be wrong with a parameter range from the just plain wrong to simple typos like character transposition and fumble-fingers. Trying to make smallem deal with all of those possible errors for 300+ parameters seems like a waste of time; humans are pretty good at seeing how the parameter name is wrong and applying a fix; machines, not so much. Articles with unknown parameter names are categorized in sq:Kategoria:Gabime CS1: Parametra të palejuar.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 16:44, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see what you mean. The idea was that Albanian editors are likely to get articles from EnWiki and if those parameters are not deprecated here, we will keep getting the same errors there and, if not for all the parameters, maybe Smallem could be on the lookout for these particular ones given this specific situation. That was my thinking. I don't know how right or wrong that is, looking forward to your insight. As for the discouraged category, wouldn't it be better if I changed only the whitelist (removing the changes at the main and config. pages) and deprecated those parameters fully instead of leaving them on a limbo state and creating a special category for that? The "discouraged" concept doesn't make much sense to us (what I explained earlier). - Klein Muçi (talk) 17:03, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As long as you are going to be copying the en.wiki module suite, if you decide to deprecate that handful of parameters, you (or smallem) will be forever fixing all of your deprecated parameters as they are imported from en.wiki (or hand entered by sq editors). At each module-suite update you will have to remember to make sure that your deprecated parameters are all marked as deprecated (false) in the Whitelist (they will be set to true in the en.wiki version that you import). Is all of that work really necessary?

—Trappist the monk (talk) 17:46, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Now we're finally walking the same street. :P That's a good question but... I mean, the deprecation, although not accepted here, was either your idea or at least, something you were pro doing, no? Or maybe the benefits on that were only present on EnWiki in regard to internationalisation and in other wikis it may bring more harm than good. I don't really know. :/ The plan was to let Smallem deal with the fixing aspect and the only thing I would have to worry about is in removing some parameters from Whitelist in every update. I guess I could do that. Or I could follow EnWiki's way. I believe it's fine either way (at least it doesn't look like too much work now). If you think that method is "more right", I would be willing to follow that path. If you think it's not worth it... It looks sort of the same to me at the moment but you're the expert on the subject. - Klein Muçi (talk) 18:50, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, I am in favor of limiting the variety of parameter names when there is no semantic difference among the names. But, alas, my preference is not supported by the community. Were I you, I guess that I would make my life easy and follow en.wiki. But I am not you so the decision is yours.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 13:17, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Right... Okay then... I'll follow the EnWiki way. Thanks for the insight. I believe this will be all there is to discuss if something strange doesn't happen with Smallem's source code's update, which is nearly done and nothing seems wrong. Thank you! :) - Klein Muçi (talk) 15:39, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yet another Smallem discussion[edit]

Hey Trappist!

So, you are aware of my long-standing attempts to make Smallem autoupdate. Some times ago you helped me finetune its module and that helped make the end result lists more consistent but still didn't fully clear the inconsistencies between its final list and the manual final list. Its final list is usually lacking ~1000 results. Now having some free time from CS1, I retried fixing it and was trying to compare lists in small batches. Tried 10 lang-codes with Smallem and the same 10 lang-codes manually. The lists were the same. Then tried the next 10 lang-codes in both ways. The lists were the same again. Then tried all those codes together. The first 20 codes. Smallem's list was lacking 2 results from the manual one. Retried it. It wasn't lacking any results anymore. Retried it one more time, it was lacking one. Inconsistencies like these are common and I'm not gonna lie, I'm really intrigued to know what makes the results change so fast in the background even though the inputs are all the same and the tests are done with not much time in-between. I don't expect you to help me on that much because we've already tackled that aspect in the past to no avail. I wanted to ask about something else though that may help me on that quest.

This is the result that Smallem lacked the third time and one of the 2 results it lacked on the first time. (Keep in mind there was also 1 time when it lacked nothing.)

(r"(\{\{\s*cit[aeio][^\}]*\|\s*language\s*=\s*)atikamekw(\s*[\|\}])", r"\1atj\2"),

Notice anything "strange" on it? :/ I just want something where "I can grapple" to investigate further. All this was with only the 20 first codes. Things like these contribute in the 1k lines missing in the end, a number which also fluctuates with its test, like the case above. - Klein Muçi (talk) 13:30, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I just looked at sq:Përdoruesi:Trappist the monk/Livadhi personal which is using two codes en and it. There I see this for atj:

(r"(\{\{\s*cit[aeio][^\}]*\|\s*language\s*=\s*)Atikamekw(\s*[\|\}])", r"\1atj\2"),

The only difference between mine and yours is first letter uppercase v. lowercase. The native form apparently falls back to the English form:

Atikamekw ← {{#language:atj}}

Atikamekw ← {{#language:atj|en}}

so one of your codes is mapped to a name with different capitalization. That should not make any difference to sq:Moduli:Smallem which should include both in its output.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 14:00, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm... Not really sure what to deduct after this but... Thanks for trying! I'll keep experimenting and if I find any other pattern whatsoever, I'll write here. Most likely there won't be a lot of requests after this though. Thanks again! :) - Klein Muçi (talk) 16:57, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Headings[edit]

I noticed your edit summary in this edit. I've never been able to find anything to back up this preference although I've run across other folks who have this preference. It's not in MOS:HEADINGS. Where did you get that from? Toddst1 (talk) 20:54, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Templates in section headings break links from page history and from watchlists. Prove that to yourself by going to the WT:SHIPS history page. Click on your 00:02 (→New template: {{tlx|USV}}: vessels) link. Doesn't work; takes you to the top of WT:SHIPS but not to the correct section. Then click on my 00:24 (→‎New template: {{USV}}: no templates in headers;) link. Works; takes you to the bottom of WT:SHIPS.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 21:43, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. I'm not following. I tried both links: [3] and [4] and both take me to the top of the page with that edit's content. Are these the links you're referring to or am I missing it? Toddst1 (talk) 23:31, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No. On the history page the text '→New template: {{tlx|USV}}' and '→‎New template: {{USV}}' are the section links. Basically, the text from (and including) the → until the last character before the colon is the link. Click those links: yours is the one associated with the edit summary: 'vessels' and mine with the edit summary: 'no templates in headers;'.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 00:58, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

New template: `{{USV}}`[edit]

I realized this morning that the example above doesn't show what I wanted to show because the section links link to the current page which doesn't have a heading with template so I've created one here using your original heading from WT:SHIPS. When I save this edit, an entry will appear in this talk page's history with a broken section link.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 10:52, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The section link at the 10:52 19 July 2021 section entry in this talk page's history does not work.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 10:58, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

New template: {{USV}}[edit]

Here is a new heading without the template. When I save this edit, an entry will appear in this talk page's history with a working section link.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 10:58, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The section link at the 10:58 19 July 2021 entry in this talk page's history does work.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 11:01, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you[edit]

In reference to the discussion at Help talk:Citation Style 1/Archive 77#Invalid Cite web aliases in TemplateData: Thank you, Trappist the monk, for helping me to resolve the invalid parameter alias errors at Template:Cite web#TemplateData, for pointing me to the Manage TemplateData button, and making life just a little easier. — CJDOS, Sheridan, OR (talk) 20:51, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Harvard citation script[edit]

Can I just thank you for the harvard citation checker script you developed? It has already found an issue in my article Sylvia Rose Ashby. Very useful! - Aussie Article Writer (talk) 21:45, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Iranian calendars[edit]

saw you edited page about iranian calendar. did not found how iranians call years before first year (analogous to "before christ"). would be nice if you add this info if you have knowledge. thank you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.140.119.251 (talk) 09:20, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That was my only edit to that article and was a semiautomated edit to fix a particular citation template error. You should make this request at the article's talk page so that interested editors can address it. I am not one of those editors.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 12:11, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Help with modules[edit]

Hello! Some months ago me and another guy started dealing a bit with the overall helping infrastructure related to the module CS1. With that I mean creating the navigation box, the sandbox pages and all. We have still a long way to go but it seems like we're sort of reaching our limits. In here (EnWiki) the pages of module CS1 appear under a bluish background, in EnWiki that thing doesn't happen. We've tried updating the documentation module many times but it still remains the same. Do you have any ideas how we can deal with that problem? Also, sandbox pages here have a template on top of them which doesn't appear at SqWiki even though we did get the template for it. We're not sure what we're lacking and where. These are the main things that we can see with "bare eyes" but there are other things lacking as well, for example test cases (which I honestly have no idea what they're supposed to be, I only learned about sandboxes lately, have yet to start to deal with those), some other subpages, etc. If you have the nerves to help us a bit here, we'd be grateful. I can even provide all the needed permissions/privileges (what's under my possibilities as an admin) if you think it'd be easier for you to work on your own than with "third parties". If you don't, I can totally understand why so don't worry much. - Klein Muçi (talk) 15:26, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You are thinking about the colored background that appears on, for example, sq:Stampa:Cite book, and are wondering why that same background isn't available at sq:Moduli:Citation/CS1. Fine question. I don't know the answer. I speculate that there is some site-wide setting somewhere that tells MediaWiki to use {{documentation}} to style the documentation section of Scribuntu pages when they are rendered. If you view the page source for Module:Citation/CS1 you can find these this:

<div class="documentation">
<div class="documentation-startbox">
<span class="documentation-heading">...
<div role="note"...

These also appear in the page source of Stampa:Cite book (has {{documentation}} but not in the page source of sq:Stampa:NgjyraShteti/Franca (does not have {{documentation}}).

Because a module at en.wiki that does not have documentation, still shows the boilerplate and styling (Module:Sandbox/trappist the monk/random sort), and because there is no place in a module's code for a {{documentation}} template, I suspect that some site-wide setting somewhere automatically transcludes {{documentation}} on module pages. Where that is, I don't know. Someone at WP:VPT will likely know.

I suspect that the sandbox notice at the top of en.wiki module sandboxen is also provided by the automatic transclusion of {{documentation}}.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 16:50, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, thanks for deciding to help! Secondly, yes. You're correct on everything you say. Maybe the site wide MediaWiki js and css pages need to be updated. Before I dealt with them some months ago, they had been without any kind of changes for around 15 years straight if I remember right. I'll take a look on them these days and see if anything changes. - Klein Muçi (talk) 14:43, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there! :) I updated the Mediawiki common js and css pages but unfortunately nothing changed. :/ Can you rephrase my question for me in a short way so I can ask it in the Tech Pump someday in the future? - Klein Muçi (talk) 13:50, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Is this what you want to ask?

At en.wiki, module documentation is rendered over a colored background; see for example, Module:Documentation. At sq.wiki, module documentation is rendered over an uncolored background; see for example, sq:Moduli:Documentation. What needs to be done at sq.wiki to render module documentation over a colored background in the same way that template documentation is rendered over a colored background; for example sq:Stampa:Dokumentacioni?

—Trappist the monk (talk) 14:14, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I tried my luck there. If I'm able to get past this part, maybe I'll be back here with other minor interface changes that might be needed to Sq-CS1 for it to be able to resemble En-CS1. - Klein Muçi (talk) 15:17, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there! After Izno's help in Tech:Pump I was able to fix the background problem. Maybe you've seen it yourself. Now I wanted to fix the missing sandbox notice part in the modules' sandboxes' subpages. For that I imported a lot of template pages related to sandboxes and I believe that normally that should be enough but the problem is that the system can't find our sandboxes because we call them "Livadhi" and not "Sandbox". Given that the importation of said pages I mentioned earlier was done in a blind manner (just copy-paste and hope for the best, translation left for a future time) I don't know what exactly to change so that it starts finding our modules. (Supposedly, the sandbox notices should appear in all namespaces when applicable but they appear nowhere currently.) Whenever you have some free time, do you mind checking my last contributions (everything done today, August 2nd 2021) and maybe tell me what I should change in which page to make the above request possible? I suppose it must be only one word in each page, something like what you did earlier in our CS1 module page. Or, if you can edit those yourself, I'd be grateful as well. Anyway I'm here to help in anything you might need should you have some time to deal with that. :) - Klein Muçi (talk) 14:25, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Change line 200:

cfg['sandbox-subpage'] = 'sandbox' → cfg['sandbox-subpage'] = 'Livadhi'

that will get you the template. The words in the template appear to be controlled by sandboxNotice(). To translate those words find the appropriate keyword from the function in ~/config. For example 'sandbox-notice-diff-blurb' is at line 61. Translate that. Wash, rinse, repeat.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 15:07, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Biggest WikiLove that could be given. Now that appearance is finished, let's talk a bit about subpages. First of all, a bit of a silly question: What do you think we should do with Moduli diskutim:Citation/CS1/Feature requests? We've never gotten specific requests in regard to our citations except for the basic cry "make the evil red error go away". All these years we've relied solely on EnWiki for any kind of change and basically accept as Word of God any new update that has been made. Should that subpage be removed altogether in SqWiki? What do you think? - Klein Muçi (talk) 16:21, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Additional questions: What should I do with Moduli diskutim:Citation/CS1/COinS? What does that serve for and would a blind importation (copy-paste) help with it? How does Moduli:Cs1 documentation support exactly help? Any specific example? And lastly, when I try to create Moduli:Citation/CS1/doc/Category list by blindly importing from EnWiki, I get an error at line 1. Any idea what might be wrong? Maybe the link at SqWiki I'm following for its creation is set up wrong? - Klein Muçi (talk) 16:30, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Extra additional question: When I changed the documentation module from sandbox to Livadhi I expected it to make the notice appear in every sandbox possible. It worked perfectly on the module namespace so my job with it it's done, as to say, but I tried out the user personal sandbox (mine) out of curiosity and the notice we get on EnWiki isn't there on SqWiki. I can't try other namespaces (for example templates' sandboxes) but my guess is that those aren't covered too. How correct am I? Can that be fixed in a fast way? My interest was on fixing the CS1 interface but given that I'm working on it, might as well go all in. - Klein Muçi (talk) 16:36, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

sq:Moduli diskutim:Citation/CS1/Feature requests – you probably don't need it

sq:Moduli diskutim:Citation/CS1/COinS – here that page is a documentation collection page that I started to collect information about the metadata standard that we use. I doubt that it will be any use to you; but keep it if you want ...

sq:Moduli:Cs1 documentation support – at some point you created sq:Stampa:Citation Style documentation/language/doc; the lists rendered in that page come from module:Cs1 documentation support. We use that module here for a number of things that make it easier to maintain our documentation. For example, in Help:CS1 errors we use the module to automatically create replicas of the error messages associated with each section and to create links to the associated category (all from data in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration). The error message occurs because you have an older version of Template:Div col. The new version uses TemplateStyles css that the module uses when rendering those lists.

sq:Moduli:Citation/CS1/doc/Category list – You have to change the 'Page content model' setting to 'wikitext' (from the Tools > Page information menu at left – your words will be different)

The {{User sandbox}} in your sandbox is an automatic insertion. It has been so long that I don't remember that notice in my sandbox. To find out, I deleted my sandbox so that I got a redlink and then clicked the redlink. That gave me a blank page with the {{User sandbox}} template. If its important, WP:VPT is that way →.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 17:27, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for the replies. I didn't know you could manually change the content model of a page. I fixed everything you mentioned. Some other questions: Why is Moduli:Citation/CS1/doc/Category list indented 1 space more than the other first 2 entries? Curiosity. Why do I get so many missing categories here? What have I done wrong during the update? I don't believe those categories really to be missing. Talking about the prop-cats. And most importantly, what are test cases? How are they used? - Klein Muçi (talk) 22:34, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why is Moduli:Citation/CS1/doc/Category list indented 1 space more than the other first 2 entries? sq:Moduli:Citation/CS1/doc/Category list looks correct to me. What other two entries?

Two problems:

sq:Kombëtarja japoneze e futbollit, for example, is creating a redlinked category sq:Kategoria:Vetitë CS1: Vlera në japonisht(ja) when the correct category title is sq:Kategoria:Vetitë CS1: Vlera në japonisht (ja) which exists but is unpopulated. Fix this line.
The Moduli:Citation/CS1/doc/Category list is turning up redlinked, English-language named categories because the category names don't exist in the ~/Configuration modules. The names and links to those categories are created on the fly by Moduli:Cs1 documentation support script_cat_lister(). Translation needed.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 23:18, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I mean here: Other documentation:. You get three entries not indented and Module:Citation/CS1/doc/Category list is indented with 1 space. Is that because it is considered a subentry of Module:Cs1 documentation support?
I fixed it.
I made this change. Results changed a bit but language names still persist on English. Anything that can be done? - Klein Muçi (talk) 23:43, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Indented because sq:Moduli:Cs1 documentation support creates sq:Moduli:Citation/CS1/doc/Category list

Change line 683 from 'en' to 'sq'.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 00:30, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Works like a charm! What do I do with Ottoman Turkish (ota) which doesn't follow format. Should I remap it somehow? - Klein Muçi (talk) 01:04, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Categories for languages' scripts with ISO codes (bo) and (dz) are currently missing at EnWiki. Can you create them so I do the Wikidata connections? I'm afraid I might forget to do it later. :P - Klein Muçi (talk) 01:24, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You will have to add ota to lang_code_remap{} and lang_name_remap{} or not bother until there is something in that category. I have created Category:CS1 uses Tibetan-language script (bo) but not created the others because there is nothing in them. When it comes time to update the module suite again, I may decide to delete dz and ota – no point in supporting something that isn't bein used.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 13:02, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay then. I'm not making any changes because I don't want to create and then redelete the same category for nothing. Now, can you tell me a bit about test cases? How are they used on Wikipedia? How do they differ from Sandbox pages? CS1 has 4 test cases. Should we import those? They also come equipped with a "Run" link. What should we do with that? I have no information whatsoever in regard to test cases and that's the only thing I am left to deal with. - Klein Muçi (talk) 14:40, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The testcases automatically compare the output of the sandbox module-suite against the live module-suite. It is a way for us to know if we've broken something when making changes in the sandbox. You can see that there are a lot of 'broken' tests. The key is to know what is broken because we expect it to be broken versus something that is broken that should not be broken; many of those broken tests are expected to be broken because the new output is intended to be different from the old output. Were I you, I would not worry about our testcases.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 15:05, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm... Interesting... I removed that functionality from us then. As a last question, now that I finished everything (I only need to worry about some minor translations in the docs of CS1's subpages) can you maybe help me understand why our colors and box outlines render differently than the ones here? Check the 3 templates at the top here and here. It's really strange because we have the same exact templates. - Klein Muçi (talk) 15:49, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is a bot here that gets template and module page transclusion-counts and writes them to a data module (Module:Transclusion_count/data/C for the cs1 modules). When there is a data module available and the template or module is listed in the appropriate data page, {{high-use}} will use that value. The content and border of the rendered message box is determined by the count greater than 100,000; your count, were the bot operating at sq.wiki is about 18,000. See Template:High-use § Technical details.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 16:22, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oooh! So it is working as intended. Yes, I learned about that bot just yesterday but I didn't know about the differences in the template. I'm holding a conversation with its operator right now. Take a quick look if you want. Thank you for everything then! I believe this is all I had to ask. To end it, is there any planned update for CS1 that I should look out for? I mean, any set up date anytime soon? I got reminded when you said that you'd remove those categories in the next update. - Klein Muçi (talk) 16:55, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I'm sorry to ask again but I'm confused: Can you please check our full suite of CS1, sandboxes included, and tell me why am I getting a golden padlock template in most of them, not to say all of them while that's not happening in here? I've dealt with so many templates and modules today that "I've lost track" of basic things like these. Sorry... - Klein Muçi (talk) 17:14, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that I know what you mean. Are you talking about the table 'Modulet CS1 | CS2'? or something else? None of your sandboxen are protected. The left-most column of the table, 'Versionet aktuale' show the fully-protected lock for the live templates (you might want to change that column to be rowspan="9" and remove [[File:Semi-protection-shackle.svg|20px|alt=Silver padlock|link=|auto confirmed]] || from the last row.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 17:24, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good observation! I did that, thank you! I mean the big template you get at the top of the page though. This module is subject to page protection. It is a highly visible module in use by a very large number of pages, or is substituted very frequently. Because vandalism or mistakes would affect many pages, and even trivial editing might cause substantial load on the servers, it is protected from editing. This template with the aforementioned text is also on sandbox pages which aren't protected. You don't have it and neither should we (for the same reason). - Klein Muçi (talk) 20:40, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

sq:Stampa:Sandbox other expects to see sq:Moduli:Citation/CS1/sandbox, but instead sees sq:Moduli:Citation/CS1/Livadhi so presumes that Moduli:Citation/CS1/Livadhi is not a sandbox.

Shouldn't sq:Moduli:Citation/CS1/Livadhi/doc redirect to sq:Moduli:Citation/CS1/doc?

—Trappist the monk (talk) 21:47, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, apparently it should. :P

Interesting... Can you pinpoint what should I change in that template to let it know how to say sandbox in Albanian? :P - Klein Muçi (talk) 21:50, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

sandbox → Livadhi (2×)?

—Trappist the monk (talk) 21:55, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Way easier than expected. :P Well, I think I managed to fix everything. Thank you a lot for your help! :)) - Klein Muçi (talk) 22:04, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Question out of curiosity: "Shouldn't" the css subpage be in the end of the table, after the suggestions subpage? Given that it is the only page that has a format different from the other subpages? (Childish me dislikes the fact that you have no nav-table there and if you go there, you're "stuck".) What's the logic behind the overall order? - Klein Muçi (talk) 22:10, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Until someone abuses the privilege, the live ~/Suggestions page is editable by most everyone whereas the stylesheet is not so all of the fully protected modules are grouped together.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 22:25, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ah! Yes. Forgot about that detail. Well, in that case, I believe I can switch the order in SqWiki and it wouldn't bring any problems. Thanks for letting me know! :) - Klein Muçi (talk) 22:46, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[Persecution of pagans in late Roman Empire][edit]

I am trying to learn how to do these Harvard citations so as not to use for additional pages from one reference, and I thought I had it figured out - until you came along and changed it. Can you help me understand? I need to learn this and I am clearly not getting it. There was no red when I was done and no red when you are done and how can that be? Can you help? Jenhawk777 (talk) 04:07, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In the current version of the article, I see six errors that were present before my edit. Those references are:

29
30
56
137
142
143

References 29, 30, and 137 use R. Malcolm Errington's whole name and omit the year. The (apparently) matching {{sfnref}} template has 'R. Malcom Errington'. Names must match exactly.

Reference 56 identifies a work by Brown published in 1997 for which there is no matching citation.

References 142 and 143 correctly identify Bayliss' 2004 work but the matching citation uses {{sfnref|Bayliss}}.

Further, this, while not an error per se, is just ugly.

In general, simple is best so let the cs1|2 citation templates create the anchor identifiers (using |ref={{sfnref|...}} overrides that). Use only surnames in {{sfn}} and always include a year unless there isn't a year. These steps are usually sufficient to disambiguate an author for whom there are multiple works being referenced (Errington and Brown in this case).

I noticed this which is the citation with the misspelled {{sfnref}}:

{{cite journal |last1=Errington |first1=R. Malcolm |title=Constantine and the Pagans |journal=Errington, R. Malcolm. "Constantine and the Pagans." Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies |date=1988 |volume=29 |issue=3 |pages=309–318|ref={{sfnref|R. Malcom Errington}}}}

I presume that you really meant to write:

{{cite journal |last1=Errington |first1=R. Malcolm |title=Constantine and the Pagans |journal=Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies |date=1988 |volume=29 |issue=3 |pages=309–318}}

the {{sfn}} templates for this (29, 30, and 137) would look like:

{{sfn|Errington|1988|pp=309–310}}

{{sfn|Errington|1988|p=312}}

{{sfn|Errington|1988|p=317}}

There are tools that can help you see these errors. See Category:Harv and Sfn template errors.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 11:42, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User page[edit]

Hi. I was wondering if you could create your user page even if it is blank, because some editors like myself check edits of editors with no user page, thinking they might be new and may or may not be making a legitimate edit. I have seen you around for some time now and I know you are an established editor, but from time to time I inadvertently check your edits because you have a red linked user page. Have a nice one. Thinker78 (talk) 17:19, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I'm not going to do that. I actually want editors to check my work; if a red-linked user page gets editors to check my work then, all the better.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 17:24, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

war crimes[edit]

Why do you not talk about the war crimes of the croats and ustase when taking over and burning all the serbian homes that the serbs lived in in whats now, but shouldnt be croatia, bosnia, kosovo??!

You shouldnt bed the truth and be biased — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.132.222.101 (talk) 21:57, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Don't know what you're talking about. If you believe that a Wikipedia article needs to be improved, the best place to discuss is at that article's talk page. Be sure to provide reliable sources to support your position.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 22:27, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 Help Page - Meta[edit]

Hey there! Lately some users from our community have started translating A LOT of things from TranslateWiki and Meta Wiki in regard to SqWiki. I felt bad thinking that for years our help page of CS1 has been only partly translated (less than 25%, I believe) because it's only me who occasionally works on it. To be honest, I got further demotivated in working with it when I saw that you continuously updated its content (rightly so), even retroactively and since then, it's been a while since I've contributed anything new to it. Now I was thinking that maybe if it was part of one of the 2 wikis mentioned above some of the said users could also help with it and the more I thought about it, the more it seemed like a good idea. Do you think that having the said help page as part of Meta could benefit the global community more? I mean, the translation infrastructure is certainly easier there. And basically we'd be "notified" for every change/update that it gets. Is there any way you'd be interested in somehow transporting the said information from here to there? Are there any cons I'm not thinking of in this? I mean, sure, the templates would be lacking a bit I suppose but nothing that can't be fixed, right? I've almost never worked in Meta (apart from casual translation) so I don't know for sure. :/ - Klein Muçi (talk) 23:20, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Which documentation page would that be? There are several.

What I know about translatewiki can be put into a thimble so I have no opinion about putting the cs1|2 documentation there.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 11:43, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I was talking about this, given that it's the first page most of the users are bound to meet while editing but any page really. - Klein Muçi (talk) 02:51, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Fix your script"[edit]

What exactly is the error that you claim I created in these two edits by you:[5], [6]?

Both those page were edited by me of a single-purpose short AWB run to fix the 12 pages (these 12 edits) in Category:CS1 errors: unsupported parameter which used the outdated parameter |deadurl=y. That was clearly set out in the edit summaries: "replace outdated CS1 parameter, replaced: |deadurl=y → |url-status=dead"

So what exactly do you believe was done wrong? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:08, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

These:

Hassan Rouhani: |deadurl=y → |url-status=dead es

Four-funnel liner: |deadurl=y → |url-status=dead es

and, I've just noticed, meaningless text 'foo' at the bottom of both pages.

Please fix your script.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 12:17, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I hadn't spotted that those two used "yes". I hadn't encountered that before, because nearly all of these probs are caused by reFill2, which uses "|deadurl=y".

Dunno what caused the foo thing, but I am annoyed with myself to have missed that. I will go clean it up. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:24, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"foo" removed, in these 11 edits. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:37, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Postscript parameter[edit]

Can you explain to me a bit better how this category works? How wrong is asking you for help in creating a find and replace regex to remove |postscript=.? :P - Klein Muçi (talk) 23:29, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

cs1 templates ({{cite book}}, {{cite web}}, etc) end with a terminal dot:

{{cite book |title=Title}}

Title. ← ends with a dot

cs2 templates ({{citation}}) do not end with any punctuation:

{{citation |title=Title}}

Title ← no ending punctuation

|mode=cs2 in a cs1 template removes the terminal dot:

{{cite book |title=Title |mode=cs2}}

Title ← cs1 but no terminal dot

and |mode=cs1 in a cs2 template ends with a terminal dot:

{{citation |title=Title |mode=cs1}}

Title. ← cs2 but ends with a dot

Sometimes, editors add |postscript=none to cs1 templates with |mode=cs2, or they add |postscript=none to cs2 templates. Neither of those make any sense so the citation gets the maintenance message:

{{cite book |title=Title |mode=cs2 |postscript=none}}

Title{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: postscript (link) ← maintenance message

{{citation |title=Title |postscript=none}}

Title{{citation}}: CS1 maint: postscript (link) ← maintenance message

Similarly, editors sometimes add |postscript=. to cs2 templates with |mode=cs1, or they add |postscript=. to cs1 templates. Again, neither of those make any sense so the citation gets the maintenance message:

{{citation |title=Title |mode=cs1 |postscript=.}}

Title.{{citation}}: CS1 maint: postscript (link) ← maintenance message

{{cite book |title=Title |postscript=.}}

Title.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: postscript (link) ← maintenance message

|postscript= is not a dumping ground for any text that editors want to put there. |postscript= controls the citation's terminal punctuation so the content of |punctuation= is limited to one character (the special keyword none of course excepted):

{{cite book |title=Title |postscript=!!}}

Title!!{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: postscript (link) ← maintenance message

Does that answer your question?

—Trappist the monk (talk) 00:38, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sort of. I mean, it's the first time in all these years that I'm made aware of having different kinds of templates that use different styles. To make me gain more trust in working through that category can you also show me some common fixes for the problems there? As I said, the whole information is very new to me. - Klein Muçi (talk) 08:01, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

From sq:Attack on Titan:

{{Cito web|last=「進撃の巨人」製作委員会|script-title=ja:放送情報|trans-title=Broadcast Information|url=http://www.shingeki.tv/onair|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130330061739/http://www.shingeki.tv/onair|archive-date=March 30, 2013|access-date=January 14, 2016|website=shingeki.tv|language=ja|postscript=. "{{Nihongo2|ＭＢＳ 4月6日より 毎週土曜25時58分～ ※4月13日は26時10分～}}" See rest of article for other broadcasting times.}}

→

{{Cite web |last=「進撃の巨人」製作委員会 |script-title=ja:放送情報 |trans-title=Broadcast Information |url=http://www.shingeki.tv/onair |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130330061739/http://www.shingeki.tv/onair |archive-date=March 30, 2013 |access-date=January 14, 2016 |website=shingeki.tv |language=ja}} "{{Nihongo2 |ＭＢＳ 4月6日より 毎週土曜25時58分～ ※4月13日は26時10分～}}" See rest of article for other broadcasting times.

→

「進撃の巨人」製作委員会. 放送情報 [Broadcast Information]. shingeki.tv (in Japanese). Archived from the original on March 30, 2013. Retrieved January 14, 2016. "ＭＢＳ 4月6日より毎週土曜25時58分～ ※4月13日は26時10分～" See rest of article for other broadcasting times.

from sq:Carol W. Greider

{{Cite journal|doi=10.1016/0092-8674(85)90170-9 |last=Greider |first=C. W. |last2=Blackburn |first2=E. H. |lastauthoramp=yes |year=1985 |title=Identification of a specific telomere terminal transferase activity in Tetrahymena extracts |journal=Cell |volume=43 |issue=2 Pt. 1 |pages=405–413 |url= |issn= |pmid=3907856 |postscript=. }}

→

{{Cite journal |doi=10.1016/0092-8674(85)90170-9 |last=Greider |first=C. W. |last2=Blackburn |first2=E. H. |name-list-style=amp |year=1985 |title=Identification of a specific telomere terminal transferase activity in Tetrahymena extracts |journal=Cell |volume=43 |issue=2 Pt. 1 |pages=405–413 |pmid=3907856}}

→

Greider, C. W. & Blackburn, E. H. (1985). "Identification of a specific telomere terminal transferase activity in Tetrahymena extracts". Cell. 43 (2 Pt. 1): 405–413. doi:10.1016/0092-8674(85)90170-9. PMID 3907856.

from sq:Geoffrey Chaucer

{{Cite journal|title=Chaucer|last=Ward|first=Adolphus W.|year=1907|publisher=R. & R. Clark, Ltd|location=Edinburgh|postscript={{inconsistent citations}}}}

→

{{Cite book |title=Chaucer |last=Ward |first=Adolphus W. |year=1907 |publisher=R. & R. Clark, Ltd |location=Edinburgh}} →

Ward, Adolphus W. (1907). Chaucer. Edinburgh: R. & R. Clark, Ltd.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 13:17, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! That will surely help me deal with the articles there. :) - Klein Muçi (talk) 18:20, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Quick question so I don't start a new discussion: Is |url-status=(y)es/no equivalent to |url-status=live/dead? - Klein Muçi (talk) 00:49, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

|url-status=yes / |url-status=y may mean |url-status=dead (in which case the whole parameter may be deleted)

|url-status=no / |url-status=n may mean |url-status=live

When there is no |archive-url=, |url-status= serves no purpose so the whole parameter may be deleted.

Only way to know for sure what these bogus parameter values really mean, is to test the value in |url=.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 01:05, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sad. I was trying to evade testing and do a mass editing towards articles in regard to that. No easy way to success. Another question: This is perfect for fixing those invisible characters. Found it in the category suggestions. Any chance we may have something similar implemented in-wiki in the near future? By "something similar" I mean anything that helps a bit more than what we currently have (which is still a lot). Maybe the module itself being able to underline the exact character, maybe Mediawiki showcasing some of these symbols in a certain way when used in specific situations or maybe even a replica in-wiki tool/gadget of the one above. - Klein Muçi (talk) 02:09, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That tool is a great tool, its free, it does the job well, why reinvent the wheel?

—Trappist the monk (talk) 12:46, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It would allow for a smoother overall infrastructure I believe but okay, let's keep the wheel that we have for the moment. :) - Klein Muçi (talk) 18:42, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In regard to |url-status=no/|url-status=yes, turns out, what you described was exactly what had happened and the culprit was I. I was using AWB to do exactly that fix for some articles some hours ago and that had led to this situations. Thanks for your help! Was able to fix it fast. - Klein Muçi (talk) 02:21, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Empty unknown parameters[edit]

How am I supposed to fix the error here in the second citation? (Not the language one.) I have a lot of biology related articles with the same error but that parameter just isn't there. I thought they were getting it from a template but... :/ - Klein Muçi (talk) 21:58, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you could edit sq:Stampa:IUCN and change |last-author-amp= to |name-list-style=. Or, if you are feeling adventurous, you can do as we did and replace all instances of Stampa:IUCN, sq:Stampa:IUCN2006, sq:Stampa:IUCN2008 with sq:Stampa:cite iucn and then delete those templates. Before you do that, I would recommend an update from sq:Moduli:iucn to Module:Cite iucn because yours is a wee bit out of date. I have an awb c# module that might be helpful (or not – it was just a hack to do what needed doing here so might not work so well there; but you can try it).

—Trappist the monk (talk) 22:36, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I imported the module and the corresponding template. Let's try our luck with AWB now. - Klein Muçi (talk) 23:08, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

sq:Përdoruesi:Trappist_the_monk/iucn_awb_module. When you're done with it, please delete it.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 23:30, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also, what is the new equivalent parameter to |coauthors=? We've got a dozen of articles with that unknown parameter. - Klein Muçi (talk) 23:21, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Individual |author<n>= parameters or individual |last<n>= / |first<n>= parameters-pairs or a single |vauthors= parameter.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 23:30, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot! Do you mind re-telling me how to set up the module to AWB? I've only worked once with it in the past when you gave me one. Usually I just work with individual regexes. - Klein Muçi (talk) 23:38, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think I was able to get past that. Make module, copy-paste, compile, close. That's it, no? Now the only problem is how to generate a list of all articles using those templates. Do I have to get a full database dump for that? :'( - Klein Muçi (talk) 23:42, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So glad AWB had the option to compile lists from transclusions. Fixed everything! Thanks a lot for the help! :)) - Klein Muçi (talk) 00:42, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good. If you're done with it, delete sq:Përdoruesi:Trappist the monk/iucn awb module please.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 00:43, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted since the last reply was written. - Klein Muçi (talk) 01:09, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Equivalent of |cid=? - Klein Muçi (talk) 08:12, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In what context?

—Trappist the monk (talk) 11:01, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The citation errors here. (Already "fixed" them though. All the parameters were empty so I just removed them.) - Klein Muçi (talk) 15:40, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Likely an imported citation from it.wiki where |cid= is the same as en.wiki |ref=. See it:Modulo:Citazione/Configurazione.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 15:53, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unsupported parameters[edit]

Can you help me empty this category? I don't know what to do with the remaining articles there. Even checked the errors' help page but... - Klein Muçi (talk) 00:18, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

from sq:Dielli:

|=[[Astronomy and Astrophysics]] – needs a parameter name: |journal=

from sq:Elektriciteti gjeotermik:

|conference=IPCC Scoping Meeting on Renewable Energy Sources – |conference= only works with {{cite conference}} (to retain the same style, add |mode=cs2)

from sq:Fedora:

| mailing-list=Fedora Project announce – |mailing-list= only works with {{cite mailing list}}

from sq:Hafezi:

|encyclopedia=Encyclopædia Iranica – |encyclopedia= only works with {{cite encyclopedia}} and {{citation}}

You see the pattern. Most of the unique parameters are listed, oddly enough, in Moduli:Citation/CS1/Whitelist at line 429 et seq.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 01:00, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot really! What about here? Am I supposed to really change the template from the one for books to the one for conferences? I checked the English version here for guidance and funny enough, it has the same error unfortunately. :P - Klein Muçi (talk) 07:43, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

La Chanson de Roland is not a conference proceeding so {{cite book}} is correct, |title= → |section= or |chapter=; |book-title= → |title=.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 11:14, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I'm very inexperienced when it comes to fixing individual citations. Can you also tell me what I should do with the last article here? Also, I'm thinking of putting the whole table here (or maybe parts of it) as find and replace regexes for Smallem to look after for. I don't think that's a thing that could become problematic, isn't it? - Klein Muçi (talk) 22:22, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete empty parameters; delete extraneous white space; change |monte= to |title=; change |lrchive-url= to |archive-url=; change |url-status=dead to |url-status=live. |auth=2003 doesn't make much sense; according to the article's page at the journal's website – click the 'How to cite' link – the date should be 2011 (but not if you choose MLA from the drop-down: 2006; what?) so I would change |auth=2003 to |date=2011 and add |doi=10.12681/makedonika.8.

You could give that table to smallem. Article with cs1|2 templates using those parameters will show up in sq:Kategoria:Gabime CS1: Parametra të palejuar so constrain smallem to that category and not run it across every single article at sq.wiki.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 23:36, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Date problem[edit]

Hello Trappist, there appears to be a problem with the date replacement in this change. Regards Keith D (talk) 17:45, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the report; I'm going to revert you so that I can test against that article.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 17:50, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed, I think.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 18:05, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, looks OK on that article. Keith D (talk) 19:52, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AWB[edit]

Many of your recent edits do not seem to meet be in accordance with WP:AWBRULES, in particular making mass changes without demonstrated consensus and making cosmetic changes. As a reminder, could you please limit your changes to those that do meet that standard? Nikkimaria (talk) 01:53, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You know, you and I have never agreed on anything. Ever. But maybe there is hope. The two silent reverts you made immediately before posting here is evidence that you agree with the purpose of my edits – to remove {{date}} from cs1|2 templates in accordance with Template:Date § Description which says, in part:

This template should only be used internally in other templates. emphasis in original

But, unlike my edits, you ignored the {{Use dmy dates}} (List of Airbus A380 orders and deliveries) and {{Use mdy dates}} (Maple Leaf Forever Park) templates so there is still some way to go before we find full agreement. Someday someone driving User:Ohconfucius/script/MOSNUM dates.js will com along and fix those for you. Yesterday's reverts contrast to your reverts of others of my edits in which nothing was retained:

Arnold Bax
Isabella Beeton
Burke and Hare murders
Senghenydd colliery disaster
Tottenham Outrage – this one sort of different in that you more-or-less retained the <br> → <br /> from my edit except that you removed the space characters (<br/>) but discarded all of the rest of the edit.

Still, we may someday agree on something...

If I were to take your writing above at face value, it would never be possible to make any cosmetic-like changes using AWB. That is just not true. It is perfectly acceptable to make cosmetic-like edits in conjunction with non-cosmetic-like edits which in this case is the removal of {{date}} from cs1|2 templates.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 13:50, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Could you explain why you believe that particular change is non-cosmetic? I see no visible difference between this version and this one, for example. Has there been any discussion about {{date}} not being permissible within citation templates? Adding cosmetic edits to truly non-cosmetic ones can be permissible when there is consensus to make that sort of mass change. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:22, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Because Template:Date § Description says:

This template should only be used internally in other templates.

Of course you see no visible difference. That is due to the interaction of {{use mdy dates}} and {{cite web}}.

The history of {{date}} template doc:

11 November 2008 – This template is probably best used as an way of standardize all the date parameters in other templates like {{cite web}}, see {{cite web3}} for an working example.
apparently originally named {{DATEtoMOS}} moved with history merge to {{date}} 21 November 2008 so {{cite web3}} (since deleted) uses {{DATEtoMOS}} (4×):
- | ({{DATEtoMOS|{{{date}}}|{{{dateformat|}}} }}) (2×)
- | Archived from [{{{url}}} the original] on {{DATEtoMOS|{{{archivedate}}}|{{{dateformat|}}} }}.
- | Retrieved on {{DATEtoMOS|{{{accessdate}}}|{{{dateformat|}}} }}{{#if: {{{accessyear|}}} | , {{{accessyear}}} }}.
18 December 2008 – This template is probably best used as an way of standardize the appearance of all dates in an article, including those in citation templates and infoboxes.
18 September 2009 – This template is probably best used as a way of standardizing the appearance of all dates in an article, including those in citation templates and infoboxes.
30 December 2009 – This template is probably best used internally in other templates.
21 April 2014 – This template should only be used internally in other templates.
3 June 2014 – This template should only be used internally in other templates.

There was this discussion: Template talk:Date § Only use in other templates? If you are looking for some sort of an RfC, who knows, maybe there was an RfC, maybe there wasn't; those things can occur anywhere and result in changes in a multitude of places where the deciding RfC isn't mentioned in edit summaries or other discussions. Since the community can't be bothered to catalog RfCs (despite their avowed importance), I'm not going to go looking for one and so leave that search to you. When (if) you find one that definitively says that the template documentation is wrong, let me know.

If the (apparent) main author of the template saw fit to provide an example of how the {{DATEtoMOS}} template (now {{date}}) should be used and the documentation over all of these thirteen years has (except for the one-year period 18 December 2008 – 30 December 2009) not contradicted that example, then {{date}} template invocations do not belong in cs1|2 template invocations.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 14:59, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the template documentation is wrong, but your interpretation of it appears to contradict the discussion linked - that it can be used within templates in any namespace. That would, in the absence of any explicit indication otherwise, include cs1|2 invocations. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:36, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, we do not agree. That discussion died without having made any determination at all so does not contradict my interpretation of the template doc. One of the participating editors wrote: I don't know why there would be a problem with putting something like {date|December 3, 2009|DMY} within article prose, although it seems like overkill that should be substed – substing does not work inside <ref>...</ref> tags where most cs1|2 templates are used (see Help:Substitution § Limitation). You should not believe what that help section says about a workaround. I tried it. The example there:

{{safesubst:#tag:ref|...Title=ExampleTitle|archivedate={{subst:TODAY}}|Edition=Hardcover...}}

substs to this:

<ref archivedate="22 August 2021" Edition="Hardcover...">...Title=ExampleTitle</ref>

Maybe that's just broken documentation, but the workaround isn't simple.

So, some other mechanism must be used to 'subst' {{date}} templates in cs1|2 templates – and, of course, substing won't ever return a result where the subst'd date format complies with {{use xxx dates}} when the {{date}} template's format parameter specifies some other format. My script does that for {{date}} templates in cs1|2 templates; it does not touch {{date}} templates in article prose because those can be subst'd.

Another editor in that discussion, whose post attempts to answer the OP's question, describes an example use-case that is the same as the {{cite web3}} use-case example from the earliest documentation; which, in a sense, supports my interpretation of the template doc.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 14:35, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"does not contradict my interpretation of the template doc" != "consensus in favour of my interpretation of the template doc". So again, while you may feel there are good reasons for these changes, they do appear to be mass cosmetic changes without demonstrable consensus. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:09, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Module:Section sizes[edit]

Is it possible to make Module:Section sizes show readable prose size and not (just) raw non-readable prose count (which includes complex wikitext markup, ref tags, etc.)? I get that Lua doesn't have a "return readable content" function, but perhaps a lot of stuff could be filtered out using string replacements (eg remove the ref tags). ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 16:19, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Probably. I have enough on my plate right now so the doing of it will likely not be by me.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 17:00, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]