Welcome!
Hello, Pppery, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- Introduction
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- Contributing to Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- How to write a great article
- Simplified Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ~~~~, which will automatically produce your name and the date.
If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or . Again, welcome!
– Fayenatic London 20:32, 14 July 2016 (UTC)Archives | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||||
Contents
- 1 Templates
- 2 Request Fully Protect Article
- 3 Dependencies: none
- 4 Doing safesubst invoke
- 5 Move disruption
- 6 TemplateStyle experiments
- 7 moving templatestyle pages
- 8 Expensive parser call in Template:Template parameter value
- 9 Renaming Unknown parameter subcategories
- 10 "Usage of Wikidata is not allowed in article text"
- 11 Module cleanup
- 12 Demon-controlled orcs in Warcraft III
- 13 ArbCom 2018 election voter message
- 14 Visual glitch at WP:VPP
- 15 Template
- 16 Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year
- 17 Tfd
- 18 Wood Street station (PAAC)
- 19 Your recent edit in the article "Template:C11–17 year in topic"
- 20 Speedy deletion nomination of Template:IPA\Transwiki
- 21 Tfd tags
- 22 A barnstar for you!
- 23 User:Pppery/noinclude list
- 24 Batch protection (originally "Under-protected modules")
- 25 Question
- 26 Coxeter–Dynkin diagram
- 27 Template issues
- 28 Infobox settlement wrappers
- 29 Infobox RM
- 30 Enough
- 31 Coxeter–Dynkin diagram
- 32 Templates with similar code
- 33 Nomination for deletion of Module:Storm name
- 34 Template-protected edit requests
- 35 XfD notice
- 36 confused
- 37 Fold into intro?
- 38 NaNs due to deletion of Decimals template
- 39 Help requests from sock puppet
- 40 Pages with graphs
- 41 Well, that was efficient.
- 42 A barnstar for you!
- 43 Previous account
Templates
Your account has been granted the "templateeditor" user permission, allowing you to edit templates and modules that have been protected with template protection. It also allows you to bypass the title blacklist, giving you the ability to create and edit editnotices. Before you use this user right, please read Wikipedia:Template editor and make sure you understand its contents. In particular, you should read the section on wise template editing and the criteria for revocation.
You can use this user right to perform maintenance, answer edit requests, and make any other simple and generally uncontroversial edits to templates, modules, and edinotices. You can also use it to enact more complex or controversial edits, after those edits are first made to a test sandbox, and their technical reliability as well as their consensus among other informed editors has been established. If you are willing to process edit requests on templates and modules, keep in mind that you are taking responsibility to ensure the edits have consensus and are technically sound.
This user right gives you access to some of Wikipedia's most important templates and modules; it is critical that you edit them wisely and that you only make edits that are backed up by consensus. It is also very important that no one else be allowed to access your account, so you should consider taking a few moments to secure your password.
If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.
If you were granted the permission on a temporary basis you will need to re-apply for the permission a few days before it expires including in your request a permalink to the discussion where it was granted and a {{ping}} for the administrator who granted the permission. You can find the permalink in your rights log.
- Useful links
- All template-protected pages
- User:AnomieBOT/TPERTable – outstanding template-protected edit requests (bot-generated)
- Request fully-protected templates or modules be downgraded to template protection
Happy template editing! CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 04:58, 16 May 2018 (UTC) CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 04:58, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
Request Fully Protect Article
@Pppery (talk) Can you please protect the article of edit fully-protected[[1]] from being deleted in future reference? If you can do so thank you in advance and have a nice day as being semi retired. =) Wiki Informant X (talk) 17:07, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
- Wiki Informant X, pppery is unable to do this as they are not an admin. To request page protection please go to WP:RFPP. Primefac (talk) 17:25, 10 June 2018 (UTC) (talk page stalker)
- Wiki Informant X I'd add, more importantly, that your article is not going to be protected from deletion; that is not a thing that we do Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:36, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
I have no interest in deciding the direct fate of article, only in insuring they aren't incorrectly speedied. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 17:47, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
Dependencies: none
If you explicitly state that a function has "Dependencies: none" then you are differentiating between the case where a function has no dependencies and that where a function may or may not have dependencies, but it has not been documented. That's an important distinction for any third party looking at the code who may wish to reuse it. Best practice is to make that distinction clear. --RexxS (talk) 23:20, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
Doing safesubst invoke
As this set of experiments will indicate, I'm obviously missing something. Help:Substitution does not cover substitution of #invoke
. The goal in this case is for the template to work as-is, and also to substitute cleanly if it is substituted (i.e. to produce [[French language|French]]
from {{subst:ISO 639 name link/sandbox|fr}}
. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 06:09, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
- I don't know why that was failing, but modules should be safesubstable like everything else. (example: {{MultiReplace}} is substable by passing safesubst to a module) {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 13:47, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
- It seems that doing
safesubst:<nowiki />
will not work butsafesubst:<noinclude />
will. Mysterious but noted. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 14:33, 22 July 2018 (UTC)- Probably the order in which stuff is evaluated. My guess is that the
<nowiki />
tag is extracted early, before the template is evaluated but the<noinclude />
tag is not extracted because it is directly related to template evaluation. The content of<nowiki />
tags is reinserted after template evaluation. What is not clear to me is why it is necessary to insert anything betweensafesubst:
and#invoke
or a template name. - —Trappist the monk (talk) 16:18, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
- Because otherwise the safesubst gets parsed during PST of the edit being saved. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 16:20, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
- Explain please. I don't know what the initialism PST is.
- —Trappist the monk (talk) 16:30, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
- Pre-save transform. I mean that, just like if one types "{{subst:foo}}" and gets the result of substing Template:foo, the same thing happens with safesubst. {{3x|p}}ery (talk)
- Because otherwise the safesubst gets parsed during PST of the edit being saved. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 16:20, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
- Probably the order in which stuff is evaluated. My guess is that the
- It seems that doing
Move disruption
Please stop moving those template styles pages and please revert those already moved. It is disruptive. If you think they should be named differently, please come chat at WT:TemplateStyles.
Thanks. --Izno (talk) 01:54, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
- No. For all other uses of subpages, the "/sandbox" goes at the end (ex. Template:Db-multiple/item/sandbox is not called Template:db-multiple/sandbox/item. TemplateStyles should not be special in this regard, and I am not going to endorse this deviant behavior by reverting myself. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 02:01, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
TemplateStyle experiments
Hello, regarding Template:Template sandbox/styles.css, is there any alternative to test templateStyle without creating a subpage of the template sandbox? Thank you, and sorry for the inconvenience. --Ita140188 (talk) 02:10, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
- Not that I'm aware of. A CSS sandbox probably is a good idea, however the solution to that problem is to discuss it at WT:TemplateStyles or WT:About the Sandbox, not to create pages that meet G2. (Also: this is the second time I had to G2 such a page, which explains the announcement to all edit summary). {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 02:13, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for the help. This has now been solved at WT:TemplateStyles#TemplateStyles in Modules. --Ita140188 (talk) 07:19, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
moving templatestyle pages
hi.
so you moved "Template:Chess from pgn/template style.css" to "Template:Chess from pgn/styles.css" with summary "Naming convention" (wish i knew how to link to specific move log item). this is fine, but i think that when doing so, it should be your responsibility to see that the template that includes this style using "templatestyle" tag, is modified to use the moved page.
we can argue whose responsibility it is, but twisi, something was working, you made a change, for "naming convention", to a state that was not technically wrong, or in violation of any policy (as a side, please note that even Wikipedia:TemplateStyles does not stipulate specific name, at least not consistently: there is at least one example using a different name), and after your change, things were borked: the template referenced non-existing page, and did not get the style it needed.
i do not mind it that much, as a one-off thing - i fixed it shortly after, and the specific template is not currently used in article space, so the impact was very limited. however, if you regularly move style pages this way, i think you should not leave broken stuff behind, and when you rename a page, you should fix the places it's referenced, so the reference is made to the new name. if you can't or don't want to do this, i think you should refrain from moving those pages, even when their name violates the convention: better violate naming convention, than violate a working template.
peace - קיפודנחש (aka kipod) (talk) 15:18, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
- (not a talk page stalker, just happened to be reading) קיפודנחש, you can link to [Special:Log?logid=92283440 a single log entry] using User:Enterprisey/links-in-logs.js - just visit a Special:Logs page (like the move log for the second page) and the timestamps will now be links. Enterprisey (talk!) 06:16, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
Expensive parser call in Template:Template parameter value
In the deletion discussion you mention The fact that it uses an expensive parser function means it is by definition not "extremely efficient".
Which parser function is that? (please ping with reply) Cheers, · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 11:36, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
- Follow , click show preview, scroll to the bottom of the page and click Parser profiling data, midway down is 'Expensive parser function count'. If there are any expensive calls in
{{template parameter value}}
they will be tallied there. The only function in module:template parameter value that can be expensive ismw.title.new()
but only when called with an id number (see its documentation). It appears that the template expects article titles as text strings so the occasion of id will be rather rare. It is possible that whatever is handled byframe:preprocess()
might be expensive (I don't know what that is because the author couldn't be bothered to document the code – shame on them) but such expensive calls are not caused by{{template parameter value}}
. - —Trappist the monk (talk) 13:08, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Pbsouthwood: It looks like I was just wrong when I said that. The piece of code I was thinking was expensive was calling
getContent
on a title object, but that doesn't seem to be true. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 14:17, 15 September 2018 (UTC)- Thanks Trappist the monk and Pppery, Cheers, · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 14:28, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Pbsouthwood: It looks like I was just wrong when I said that. The piece of code I was thinking was expensive was calling
Renaming Unknown parameter subcategories
Following up on this discussion, and the related WP:CFDS comments, I'd like to invite you to open an RfC/CfD to reach a standard for naming these categories. -DePiep (talk) 11:47, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
"Usage of Wikidata is not allowed in article text"
Hi Pppery. Can you please tell me which WP policy doesn't allow links to Wikidata in article text? Thanks. -- P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:06, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Wikidata#Appropriate usage in articles, which I guess isn't technically a policy. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 19:08, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks. Yeah, since it is not really a policy, it looks like it is not enforced. Regards, -- P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:17, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
- It may not be enforced very well, but it should be, so I enforced it when I stumbled across that set of articles in an unrelated task. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 19:18, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks. Yeah, since it is not really a policy, it looks like it is not enforced. Regards, -- P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:17, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
Module cleanup
I know you've been working on cleaning up the module space recently, does this seem useful to you? For me, I would think typing {{=}} would be simpler. Primefac (talk) 13:56, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
- It could theoretically be useful. For example, if {{URL}} were implemented in Wikitext, using this module would be useful if it were rewritten to use parent arguments. Personally, I probably wouldn't nominate it, but wouldn't !vote keep if someone else did. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 18:55, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
Demon-controlled orcs in Warcraft III
Actually, the orcs belong to Blackrock Clan which has resumed demon worship as revealed in the second mission of the human campaign, Blackrock & Roll. That said, it's not really relevant to the plot as whole, so your removal still makes sense, Regards SoWhy 08:15, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
Visual glitch at WP:VPP
Hi Pppery. Thanks for fixing the visual glitch at WP:VPP. I noticed the glitch but couldn't work out what was causing it. Regards. DH85868993 (talk) 00:15, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
Template
Hi, If you click here, Scroll up one to Ser's greeting - Click edit next to that header .... It takes you to the template .... Thanks, –Davey2010 Merry Christmas / Happy New Year 21:36, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
- You just fixed it as I wrote this :), Unfortunately it's still taking me to , Thanks for your help, –Davey2010 Merry Christmas / Happy New Year 21:38, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
- I've configured things so the problem should fix itself by a bot in 20 or so minutes. In theory, I could code up a more short-term fix, but it's not worth it in my opinion. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 21:42, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
- You're a legend!!, Thanks so much your help is very much appreciated :), Merry Christmas and I hope you and yours have a Happy and Healthy New Year, Thanks again. –Davey2010 Merry Christmas / Happy New Year 22:26, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year
Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year
| |
Hi Pppery, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas |
Tfd
I'm looking at nominating Module:Rail with T3 speedy for duplication, does that seem like the right one for this situation? Cards84664 (talk) 00:02, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
- I personally see no reason that Module:Rail can't be kept as a redirect, as the name seems plausible to me. Given that I boldly redirected Module:Rail, it does not meet T3 as it is a redirect. I would recommend starting a RfD, if you think the redirect as it remains is implausible or should otherwise be deleted. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 00:05, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
- I don't think it's a good idea to keep the redirects. Knowing Ythlev's editing behavior, they're just gonna restore it in a day and keep injecting sandbox code into Template:Infobox station, as they did recently. Now the problem is that I'm not experienced with RFDs, could you make the nomination for me? Cards84664 (talk) 00:12, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
- RfD created at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 February 2. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 00:30, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
- I don't think it's a good idea to keep the redirects. Knowing Ythlev's editing behavior, they're just gonna restore it in a day and keep injecting sandbox code into Template:Infobox station, as they did recently. Now the problem is that I'm not experienced with RFDs, could you make the nomination for me? Cards84664 (talk) 00:12, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
Wood Street station (PAAC)
Take a look at Wood Street station (PAAC) as an example, Adjacent stations is pulling "toward to" instead of "toward". Can you fix that? Cards84664 (talk) 05:11, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Cards84664: Yes. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 12:34, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
Your recent edit in the article "Template:C11–17 year in topic"
Your recent edit deletes the code <noinclude
> and </noinclude
> from the template "Year in various calendar" used in the article "Template:C11–17 year in topic". However, you should remain "year=1250" in the template "Year in various calendar", which used in the article "Template:C11–17 year in topic". 123.150.182.177 10:57, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
- ... the template already produces so many errors on its own page that it's not worth worrying about this specific case. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 12:48, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Template:IPA\Transwiki
A tag has been placed on Template:IPA\Transwiki requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:
Unused redirect with awkward backslash leftover from a rename
Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 19:55, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
Tfd tags
Thank you for adding them! 77.183.150.15 (talk) 22:30, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
Thanks so much for doing all the tricky template work at Template:Tfm and Template:Tfm/dated, I appreciate you stepping in where I came up short. More impressively, I might add, is that you not only came back and back to fix things up, but took care of various other things as well. Truly a tireless contributor! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 02:12, 18 February 2019 (UTC) |
User:Pppery/noinclude list
Question for ya. What is the purpose of User:Pppery/noinclude list??? I keep seeing that page show up in TFDs as the only page transcluding a template that is about to be deleted. Just curious what that is for. Thanks! --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 01:52, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Zackmann08: You're the third user to ask. It's a tracking category of sorts, which lists all templates at TfD that are missing TfD tags or have the TfD tags noincluded when they shouldn't be. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 02:14, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
- Gotcha. Not a huge deal, but any way to have it list the template by name rather than using a transclusion? Just makes it easier to know when a template is good to be nuked based on having 0 transclusions. If its a pain to do then no worries, but would appreciate it! :-) --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 02:16, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Zackmann08: It does list the template name, but in order to check whether the a page has a TfD tag, Module:Sandbox/pppery/noinclude tfd has to call
title:getContent()
on every page at TfD, which records a transclusion. Also, it should only transclude pages with open TfDs, so it shouldn't interfere with the process of deleting templates: close the TfD and the transclusion should go away. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 02:19, 22 February 2019 (UTC)- Ah gotcha. Good to know. When I'm closing a TFD I check the transclusions to see if it is ready to be deleted or needs to be orphaned. That's why. All good! Thanks for the info. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 02:22, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Zackmann08: It does list the template name, but in order to check whether the a page has a TfD tag, Module:Sandbox/pppery/noinclude tfd has to call
- Gotcha. Not a huge deal, but any way to have it list the template by name rather than using a transclusion? Just makes it easier to know when a template is good to be nuked based on having 0 transclusions. If its a pain to do then no worries, but would appreciate it! :-) --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 02:16, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
Batch protection (originally "Under-protected modules")
Initial discussion
I saw this and figured that this list and this script might come in handy. Pinging @MusikAnimal who asked for a list. --DannyS712 (talk) 04:19, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
- This will need some manual processing to determine which page has the right level, so its not super useful. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 04:23, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
- Yeah, if we wanted to protect all of them with the same level you could do so directly on the category page with Twinkle. I understand that is not the case, and it looks like your RFPP requests are being handled already. The mass-protection concept is just something to think about for next time. Thanks for bringing these templates to our attention. — MusikAnimal talk 04:59, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
- @MusikAnimal: Don't worry, I have far more pages in my queue to request protection for, and I even made multiple edit requests to the infrastructure behind protection. In any case, real life is getting in the way, so I won't be able to do more work on this for many hours. Pppery, the protection wizard 05:08, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
- @MusikAnimal: I've now done the requisite processing and created User:Pppery/pages to semi-protect, a list of pages that should be semi-protected (modules or CSS pages that aren't protected but are used in semi-protected templates). Pppery, the protection wizard 23:10, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
- Done I spot-checked about half of them and indeed the associated template was semi'd. The rest I'm taking your word for :) — MusikAnimal talk 23:18, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
- Yeah, if we wanted to protect all of them with the same level you could do so directly on the category page with Twinkle. I understand that is not the case, and it looks like your RFPP requests are being handled already. The mass-protection concept is just something to think about for next time. Thanks for bringing these templates to our attention. — MusikAnimal talk 04:59, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
System messages
@MusikAnimal: OK, I'm back at the protection-management task again. Please fully-protect all pages in Category:Pages used in system messages needing protection, an auto-generated category I just created that categorizes all pages tagged as {{Used in system}} that aren't already fully-protected. Pppery, the protection wizard 21:22, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
- Done Thank you! — MusikAnimal talk 22:08, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
- Also, if you think it's a good idea, we could have User:MusikBot II/TemplateProtector automatically protect anything in this category. — MusikAnimal talk 22:12, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
- @MusikAnimal: That's too prone to vandalism: what if someone adds {{Used in system}} to a random template they want protected. This would be a good idea, however, if the bot actually checked that the page was used in a system message, and removed or nocatted the template if not. Pppery, the protection wizard 22:14, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
- Yes I was thinking the same. It would need to verify {{used in system}} is accurate. I like the idea about having it remove the template if it is incorrect, too. I'm going to be making some new proposals for this bot at WP:AN soon, I'll be sure to mention these ideas. Cheers — MusikAnimal talk 22:16, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
- @MusikAnimal: Removing the template is going to be a difficult bot task, as pages can be used in system messages in extremely obscure ways. See Module:Jf-JSON for an example. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 04:48, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
- Interesting. I don't even see how MediaWiki:Group-sysop.js is using it, but okay. I guess that bot task is a no go! — MusikAnimal talk 18:17, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
- @MusikAnimal: Removing the template is going to be a difficult bot task, as pages can be used in system messages in extremely obscure ways. See Module:Jf-JSON for an example. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 04:48, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
- Yes I was thinking the same. It would need to verify {{used in system}} is accurate. I like the idea about having it remove the template if it is incorrect, too. I'm going to be making some new proposals for this bot at WP:AN soon, I'll be sure to mention these ideas. Cheers — MusikAnimal talk 22:16, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
- @MusikAnimal: That's too prone to vandalism: what if someone adds {{Used in system}} to a random template they want protected. This would be a good idea, however, if the bot actually checked that the page was used in a system message, and removed or nocatted the template if not. Pppery, the protection wizard 22:14, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
- Also, if you think it's a good idea, we could have User:MusikBot II/TemplateProtector automatically protect anything in this category. — MusikAnimal talk 22:12, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Template protection
@MusikAnimal: One final set of pages to template-protect as modules/stylesheets of protected templates is available at User:Pppery/pages to protect. I'm reusing User:Pppery/pages to protect for a different task {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 03:10, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
Of the pages that will still be left in the bad protection level categories after this:
- 3 pages need full protection, which is requested normally at WP:RFPP
- Template:Infobox book is a false positive: the code isn't designed to handle a template that sometimes calls a module.
- The "XXX as random slideshow" templates, Template:Stack begin, and Template:Smallcaps2 are false positives: code isn't designed to handle CSS pages used by multiple templates.
- Someone needs to decide on the right protection level for Template:Flex columns: the module, template, and CSS pages all have different levels and I'm not sure which is right.
- Template:Pp-office and Template:Pp-reset are a special case: neither template-protecting nor fully-protecting the entire line of modules they use feels correct to me. Pppery, the protection wizard 01:00, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
- I'm going to have to stop here. I think we need broader input. Semi and system messages are one thing, but template-protection for Module:Search for instance I don't think is really needed. Yes, {{search}} uses it, but I'm not sure why that's template-protected either. ECP at most, in my opinion. I think the solution is to start using cascading protection, if we really wish to have all transcluded templates have the same level of protection. — MusikAnimal talk 01:12, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
- @MusikAnimal: Cascading non-full protection isn't allowed by the software because it would allow non-admins to protect pages. Pppery, the protection wizard 01:13, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
- Ah, that makes sense. I'm still a bit unsure about some of these. Template:Chess diagram I think used to have a lot more transclusions. Today I don't see template protection as necessary. Maybe these could use a more thorough look over? — MusikAnimal talk 01:28, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
Question
How is Template:!Cite/doc not a subpage of a deleted page? Template:!Cite is a redirect to Template:Full citation needed. Am I missing something? --Gonnym (talk) 22:28, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) @Gonnym: Template:!Cite exists, so subpages of it doesn't meet G8. In my opinion, G8 doesn't apply to subpages of redirects, and in this case there is nothing wrong with a redirect to the doc page of the target. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 22:30, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
- Oh come on, G8 is used for these routinely. There is also absolutely nothing to gain from a redirect from a /doc template with no incoming links. Please revert your revert as this is really pointless. --Gonnym (talk) 22:34, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Gonnym: No. CSDs are intended only for uncontroversial actions. The fact that something is done routinely does not make it right. If you really wish for these templates to be deleted, please take it to RfD. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 22:40, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
- Oh come on, G8 is used for these routinely. There is also absolutely nothing to gain from a redirect from a /doc template with no incoming links. Please revert your revert as this is really pointless. --Gonnym (talk) 22:34, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
Coxeter–Dynkin diagram
Hi Pppery, I moved the template and module per Requested move; but you need to fix documentation text manually in the Module. Regards, Xain36 (talk) 03:36, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
- Done. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 03:45, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
Template issues
Can you clarify what you meant by template limit issues? Asking because of your revert on Module:TfdLinks. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 18:17, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Zackmann08: It was part of a (mostly unsuccessful) attempt to get Wikipedia:Templates for discussion out of Category:Pages where template include size is exceeded, see Wikipedia:Template limits. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 20:03, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
- Ok well I don't see any issue with the page being a larger size. If it actually prevents proper functionality that is different. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 21:06, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Zackmann08: It is preventing proper functionality: it's causing the bottom part of the page to not transclude properly. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 21:07, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
- I have looked at the page and see no issues... What are you referring to? How does adding another link prevent the page from transcluding? --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 21:10, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Zackmann08: Then you haven't looked closely enough: Look at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#Old discussions and see that all of the log pages before the 22nd are linked instead of the content showing up like they should. My edits are trying to fix that issue. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 21:13, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
- Ah ok now I'm seeing it. Thanks for clarifying. Not sure what we can do there. Removing the link from the module won't help. It is still transcluding the same number of templates. As we continue with this large cleanup of unused templates I think we are just going to have to deal with the old discussions not transcluding onto the main page. If you want to look at the old discussions, click the link and look at them there. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 21:18, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Zackmann08: The actual way the limit I'm trying fix is calculated is not "number of templates transcluded", but roughly "amount of Wikitext transcluded by templates" (see Wikipedia:Template limits#Post-expand include size for a better definition), so removing the link from the module does help, as do my recent "hack to reduce post-expand include size" edits. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 21:21, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
- Ah ok now I'm seeing it. Thanks for clarifying. Not sure what we can do there. Removing the link from the module won't help. It is still transcluding the same number of templates. As we continue with this large cleanup of unused templates I think we are just going to have to deal with the old discussions not transcluding onto the main page. If you want to look at the old discussions, click the link and look at them there. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 21:18, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Zackmann08: Then you haven't looked closely enough: Look at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion#Old discussions and see that all of the log pages before the 22nd are linked instead of the content showing up like they should. My edits are trying to fix that issue. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 21:13, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
- I have looked at the page and see no issues... What are you referring to? How does adding another link prevent the page from transcluding? --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 21:10, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Zackmann08: It is preventing proper functionality: it's causing the bottom part of the page to not transclude properly. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 21:07, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
- Ok well I don't see any issue with the page being a larger size. If it actually prevents proper functionality that is different. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 21:06, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
Infobox settlement wrappers
You have been involved in previous similar discussions. A new batch of wrappers has been proposed for replacement: Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 February 28#Infobox settlement wrappers 89.12.133.115 (talk) 05:35, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
Infobox RM
RMs usually turn into !voting and zero discussion which was why I didn't open it as one. From the two comments already there, this will probably be the case here. --Gonnym (talk) 16:18, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
Enough
Your appalling rudeness in moving pages such as Module talk:WikidataIB/testing that I've invested so much time into, yet you have never contributed to, without any discussion or a notification to me is unacceptable. This is not the first time you've fiddled with work that I've spent so much time on - the documentation at Module:WikidataIB is a classic example of you deciding that you know best about what should be included in a module and stripping out the documentation of whatever you didn't like. If I don't get assurances from you that this is the last time I have to complain about such actions on your part, I'll be taking steps to see you topic banned from the area of modules. --RexxS (talk) 00:04, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker)@RexxS: you don't WP:OWN ANYTHING on Wikipedia so threatening another user with topic ban because of their work is frankly laughable. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 01:38, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
- Exactly! Especially when the entire substance of the complaint is a months-old content dispute and then me making a bold move. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 01:41, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
Coxeter–Dynkin diagram
You seem to have broken Point group. J G Campbell (talk) 00:32, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
- @J G Campbel: A null edit seems to have fixed the problem. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 00:34, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
Templates with similar code
Based on your Module:String crusade, I thought you might have some insights on this. See all the templates at Template:Yes documentation. They all (or mostly all) seem to have the same exact code, with the only difference in the class and color values. Seems to me that a module doing that work with the templates only supplying the variables would make for much better maintaining of current templates, and for the creation of newer ones (as I'm pretty sure that some of the editors just copy/paste without actually understanding the code). Thoughts? --Gonnym (talk) 14:04, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Module:Storm name
Module:Storm name has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the module's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Johnuniq (talk) 02:41, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
Template-protected edit requests
Hi. Do you think you could take a look at some of the <6 pending requests> I have open?
- Template talk:Single-purpose account#Template-protected edit request on 26 February 2019
- Template talk:Infobox SCOTUS case#Template-protected edit request on 7 March 2019
- Template talk:JSfile#Template-protected edit request on 7 March 2019
- Template talk:Policy-guideline-editnotice#Template-protected edit request on 7 March 2019
- Module talk:AFC submission catcheck#Template-protected edit request on 7 March 2019
- Template talk:BLP Spec Admin#Template-protected edit request on 7 March 2019
Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 08:38, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
XfD notice
Regarding your XfD notice on User talk:AnomieBOT, due to this edit by bot operator, please do not add any XfD notice on this page, thanks Hhkohh (talk) 03:25, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
- What happened there is someone notified to bot of an RfD because it created the redirect. That's nothing like what I did, which is notify of a TfD of a template that the bot does care about. You're massively overgeneralizing. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 03:28, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
- Pppery, Ahhh, I think User:Anomie will remove this as pointless. See WP:CANVASS. Hhkohh (talk) 03:32, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
- That is, of course, his right to do. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 03:34, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
- Pppery, Ahhh, I think User:Anomie will remove this as pointless. See WP:CANVASS. Hhkohh (talk) 03:32, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
confused
I evidently misunderstood what was happening with Module:Text_count. Would you mind helping with the actual conversion? Its been sitting in the holding cell for almost a month. Thanks! --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 20:38, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
- @Zackmann08: I've been waiting for the merge of Module:PatternCount and Module:Text count into Module:String to happen first; doesn't make sense to me to convert uses of one template in the holding cell to another template also in the holding cell. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 20:40, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
- Sounds good! Thanks. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 20:41, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
Fold into intro?
Feel free to fold my comments on Wikipedia_talk:Template_namespace#RfC_on_templates_storing_data into the intro to the whole discussion. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 23:38, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
NaNs due to deletion of Decimals template
Hello, this morning I noticed a problem on some articles where NaNs kept appearing in inflation-adjusted currency amounts. For an example, see Macy's, Inc. I couldn't pinpoint the problem so I asked the Village Pump, and the problem was traced back to this edit. The cause is that the output of {{Inflation}}
is often piped to {{Formatprice}}
, and {{Formatprice}}
doesn't like numbers in human readable scientific notation (like ×1023). 6.022{{Decimals}}
used to output in computer readable scientific notation (like 6.022E+23), but {{Rnd}}
does not. Do you have any objection to reverting your edit until a solution can be found that prevents these errors? Thanks. —BorgHunter (talk) 14:26, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
- @BorgHunter: No, go ahead. Also, pinging the users involved in the merge: @Zackmann08, DannyS712, and Kadane:. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 19:00, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
- Is this something we want to fix by changing articles, or should we update the template to recognize human readable scientific notation? Kadane (talk) 00:08, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
- @Kadane: I'm not actually sure what do do right nowm, but it's not changing articles. My best idea is to modify Template:Rnd (actually Module:Math in some way as to support the computer-readable output. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 00:12, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
- Is this something we want to fix by changing articles, or should we update the template to recognize human readable scientific notation? Kadane (talk) 00:08, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
- @BorgHunter: No, go ahead. Also, pinging the users involved in the merge: @Zackmann08, DannyS712, and Kadane:. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 19:00, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
Help requests from sock puppet
Hi Pppery, just fyi, you fulfilled an edit request in Rising Sun Flag, which was actually made by indefinitely-blocked user:Shingling334. He often places the "{{Help}}" template on protected article talk pages, asking for changes. He sometimes edits via VPNs, or sometimes just directly from his ISP, "Talk Talk Essex". Typical subjects are related to Northern Cyprus, Turkey, Macedonia, Azerbaijan, any "de facto" states, politicians, and so on. The section in question has in the meantime been removed for unrelated reasons, so it's a moot point, but you might want to double-check before answering similar "help" requests in the future, thanks. --IamNotU (talk) 01:14, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
Pages with graphs
Hi Pppery
I closed Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2019_March_17#Category:Pages_with_graphs as rename, but can't figure how the modules are populkating the categories.
Please can you help? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:09, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
- @BrownHairedGirl: The category isn't populated by a template at all; it's populated by the software directly. To implement my rename proposal, you need to edit MediaWiki:Graph-tracking-category and MediaWiki:Kartographer-tracking-category. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 18:59, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks. Done!
- Now just waiting thousands of pages to be purged. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:42, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
- @BrownHairedGirl: The category isn't populated by a template at all; it's populated by the software directly. To implement my rename proposal, you need to edit MediaWiki:Graph-tracking-category and MediaWiki:Kartographer-tracking-category. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 18:59, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
Well, that was efficient.
I was still trying to get things to play nice with the flatlist and you cut the grass below my foot! You quite surprised me, but hey, I won't complain, it seems to work fantastically. I'll test it some more, but it looks good. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 22:24, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- Doesn't seem to work for the last three parameters here (draft). Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 22:26, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Headbomb: You actually discovered a bug in Template:Template parameter value. Fixed. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 22:33, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- Look at that, I'm the Magellan of bugs today it seems! Could you deploy this to the live template? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 22:36, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Headbomb: Done. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 22:42, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- Now it's the first two parameters that don't work right. Possibly a thing to do with their names (Has-title/Has-blurb). And the handling of empty parameters. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 22:43, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Headbomb: No, it was just me making a careless error, which I've fixed. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 22:45, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- Well, the testcases and WP:NEWSROOM. still look busted to me. Even after purging the cache. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 22:47, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Headbomb: Looks like it's yet another bug in Template:Template parameter value (that took me forever to track down), requiring another easy fix (which I did). {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 23:13, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- Well, the testcases and WP:NEWSROOM. still look busted to me. Even after purging the cache. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 22:47, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Headbomb: No, it was just me making a careless error, which I've fixed. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 22:45, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- Look at that, I'm the Magellan of bugs today it seems! Could you deploy this to the live template? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 22:36, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Headbomb: You actually discovered a bug in Template:Template parameter value. Fixed. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 22:33, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
Seems to work a lot better now. There's an issue with an empty |Notes=
though. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 23:20, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Headbomb: Fixed. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 23:25, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Newsroom#Arbitration_report looks a bit messed up. Could you take a look? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 21:28, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Technical Barnstar | |
For this and the associated voodoo magic that came with it. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 23:30, 2 April 2019 (UTC) |
- Um, Headbomb, the actual Lua code was written by Alex 21, not me (I actually tried to get it deleted at one point). {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 23:31, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- Well, you fixed several bugs, so there's been magic involved somewhere. Plus you used #invoke' s. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 23:35, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- Cheers for the fixes. There's still one big bug I need to work out as well, and that's if the parameter content includes any piped links. It cuts off at the first pipe it sees. -- /Alex/21 02:18, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Previous account
Please acknowledge your previous use of the banned Technical 13 account, to save me the tedium of an SPI. I was prepared to ignore this obvious socking, and have done so until now, because your new account seemed to have good intentions, until you started being a dickhead at Rexx's RfA. You're not going to squirm out of this, so just admitting it seems most prudent. -- Begoon 14:00, 6 April 2019 (UTC)