1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11 · 12 · 13 · 14 · 15 · 16 · 17 |
GA subpage moves
Hello!
I just wanted to remind you, that when moving pages with pageswap such as Talk:Anglo–Zanzibar War/GA1, the redirects need to be updated so they don't redirect to themselves. Not sure if you just missed some or what, but I'll fix the 17 that were left. Thanks! :) ~ Eejit43 (talk) 05:21, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for fixing those -- I had a look and I see those pages ended up as redirects to themselves. Hadn't thought about that but I will take care of those the next time I do page swaps of GA subpages. Thanks. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 09:43, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi Mike, just wanted to check if your various bots are still doing subpage moves? 1999, 2002, and 2007 Scottish Challenge Cup final were recently moved without their subpages and I'm just checking if we are meant to handle this manually going forward. Best, CMD (talk) 01:20, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- I don't currently have a way to detect or fix that -- to be honest I hadn't even thought about stopping the problem going forward; I've been focused on cleaning up the past. As it happens I have the database about as clean as I can get it (I'm in the middle of composing a post to WT:GAN which you'll see shortly) so I have a breathing space to think about how to find those. I don't think I have any way to fix them automatically, though. The best I could come up with is probably going to be a report posted somewhere periodically that would require either Qwerfjkl's bot or manual fixes. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:32, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- I've tried to seek solutions to the problem going forward before to no avail. However, manual reporting is a massive step up on what we had before. If you can't think of anything more, that is already great. In the meantime, makes sense to keep whack-a-moling manually I guess! Looking forward to your database post. (Lots of quirks around, I have my own little question going on with the number of current GA articles for example. Scraping the lists and counting them, I get a different number to that generated by Template:GA number. Not sure why yet.) CMD (talk) 02:02, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- CMD, I've put together a draft report to catch these, but I can't tell if it's not working or if there are simply no un-fixed moves from the last few days. The next time you spot one of these can you let me know before fixing it so I can test it? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:49, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- Fear not Mike, we have Talk:2012 Scottish Cup final. Furthermore, you could move 2000 UEFA Cup Final riots to 2000 UEFA Cup final riots without moving subpages and control the entire process. (The move is entirely valid and bound to happen as soon as someone notices it.) CMD (talk) 11:54, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- Take a look at User talk:ChristieBot/Incompletely moved pages. A couple of false positives there; not sure why yet. That run goes back to 26 February. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:18, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- Actually I don't think they are false positives; they are reverted improper moves. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:21, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- I see it caught the Scottish Challenge Cup Final articles. Will it automatically clear them since they have been fixed? CMD (talk) 13:04, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- No, I need to think about it a bit more. Looking at the code I just wrote, I think it's just finding candidate errors, not actual errors -- I need to have it look to see if the GAN pages were moved on-wiki, instead of checking status in the bot's database, because the database may not have been updated at the time this query runs. I'm sure I can set it up to run a daily query that will append a listing to the page, but making it clear old errors is going to be harder, because there are a ton of moves every day and I don't want to have the bot scan tens of thousands of old moves over and over again to see if they've been fixed. I'll see if I can think of a way around that. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:24, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- I see it caught the Scottish Challenge Cup Final articles. Will it automatically clear them since they have been fixed? CMD (talk) 13:04, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- Actually I don't think they are false positives; they are reverted improper moves. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:21, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- Take a look at User talk:ChristieBot/Incompletely moved pages. A couple of false positives there; not sure why yet. That run goes back to 26 February. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:18, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- Fear not Mike, we have Talk:2012 Scottish Cup final. Furthermore, you could move 2000 UEFA Cup Final riots to 2000 UEFA Cup final riots without moving subpages and control the entire process. (The move is entirely valid and bound to happen as soon as someone notices it.) CMD (talk) 11:54, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- CMD, I've put together a draft report to catch these, but I can't tell if it's not working or if there are simply no un-fixed moves from the last few days. The next time you spot one of these can you let me know before fixing it so I can test it? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:49, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- I've tried to seek solutions to the problem going forward before to no avail. However, manual reporting is a massive step up on what we had before. If you can't think of anything more, that is already great. In the meantime, makes sense to keep whack-a-moling manually I guess! Looking forward to your database post. (Lots of quirks around, I have my own little question going on with the number of current GA articles for example. Scraping the lists and counting them, I get a different number to that generated by Template:GA number. Not sure why yet.) CMD (talk) 02:02, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
CMD, take another look -- I think this format is good for telling you what the status is -- red and blue links, and green links if you have the redirect colouring enabled. For now I don't see how to solve the clearing issue, but these could be manually deleted by whoever does the cleanup. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 15:12, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- Not seeing green, but working for me really well. Manual clearing is the time-tested method, we can just use that. What's up with Kingston upon Hull? How is this updating, is it looking at new ones each day, or doing a more general search? CMD (talk) 01:47, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Kingston upon Hull was moved and then moved back as an improper move. The code looks for a move where the source of the GA subpage is not a redirect; here that's technically true but since the article was moved back it doesn't matter. It should be possible to filter those out. The green must be coming from css I have somewhere but I can't see where it is; it's very handy -- it highlights a redirect as green text and a redirect that is to the same page as the one you're on has a green background. The job runs once a day, just after midnight UTC, and looks at the prior 24 hours, so it shouldn't ever repeat an alert. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 03:21, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks. I have it on watchlist now. Do you think it's ready to be gnomable? I have a slight concern that we are gaining a proliferation of reports, with Christiebot, Wugbot, and GreenC bot all doing things. Not sure how to pull them together, outside of maybe transcluding all onto a new container page. CMD (talk) 04:05, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, I think it's ready. I agree re multiple reports. I could probably combine this one with User:ChristieBot/GAN errors by sectioning, so the problematic moves are listed after the GAN errors. Transcluding is a good idea for gnoming but wouldn't help with watchlisting; you'd still have to watchlist the constituent pages. What is it that GreenC bot does?
- Currently the bot decides what to list as an incomplete move by checking each move to see if the source title of the GA subpage is a redirect, and adding it to the complaints list if not. I could eliminate anything where the source title of the parent page is not a redirect, which would remove Kingston upon Hull from the list, but that would also remove any page swaps, or chained moves (e.g. B -> C and A -> B where B would not list because it would not be a redirect). It might be better to leave those there for a week or two and see how many false positives show up. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 08:53, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- GreenC bot does Wikipedia:Good articles/mismatches, which Bryan and I have finally got fully cleared again. False positives are probably not a problem. CMD (talk) 09:08, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- OK, I'll leave it as is unless you tell me you need it changed. I'll add another note about this at WT:GAN since the "probably drive-by" report PMC is asking for would be yet another report page; we probably need a central consensus on where everything should be. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 09:27, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- GreenC bot does Wikipedia:Good articles/mismatches, which Bryan and I have finally got fully cleared again. False positives are probably not a problem. CMD (talk) 09:08, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks. I have it on watchlist now. Do you think it's ready to be gnomable? I have a slight concern that we are gaining a proliferation of reports, with Christiebot, Wugbot, and GreenC bot all doing things. Not sure how to pull them together, outside of maybe transcluding all onto a new container page. CMD (talk) 04:05, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Kingston upon Hull was moved and then moved back as an improper move. The code looks for a move where the source of the GA subpage is not a redirect; here that's technically true but since the article was moved back it doesn't matter. It should be possible to filter those out. The green must be coming from css I have somewhere but I can't see where it is; it's very handy -- it highlights a redirect as green text and a redirect that is to the same page as the one you're on has a green background. The job runs once a day, just after midnight UTC, and looks at the prior 24 hours, so it shouldn't ever repeat an alert. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 03:21, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
Thanks
Just a quick note of thanks for your support of Ignace Tonené at GA and now at FA. Your care in the source analysis is noted and respected. I hope I've addressed the point and hope that someone else will endorse that and that you will be willing to reassess.
I also noted your ethics of doing several reviews for each one of your own, something I hope to pay back in future, when I've learned more about how to get articles to FA status. CT55555(talk) 22:37, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- I really appreciate that. I dislike opposing and in this case it's clear you've put a lot of work and care about getting it right, which makes it a real disappointment. I'm in no doubt that the article can pass FAC, either this time, or next time round. If it does fail this time, I'd be happy to work with you on it before you renominate, if you want. Thanks for the note. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:44, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Fingers crossed my edits satisfy reviewers. If it were to fail, I would renominate. I feel like the history books didn't give Chief Tonené enough attention and I hope that getting this to FA might help tilt the scales a little.
- This is my first FA, so it's been a bit of a learning curve...all good lessons for steps I could have taken earlier on this article and others. CT55555(talk) 22:57, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Science Fiction Monthly scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the Science Fiction Monthly article has been scheduled as today's featured article for April 11, 2023. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page blurb, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/April 11, 2023, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so. If you wish to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article, you can do so at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/April 2023.
I suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Feel free to change the image Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:08, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks, Jim. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 19:30, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
Books & Bytes – Issue 55
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 55, January – February 2023
- New bundle partners:
- Newspapers.com
- Fold3
- 1Lib1Ref January report
- Spotlight: EDS SmartText Searching
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --12:45, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
FA review for Li Rui
Hello! I nominated Li Rui for FA status, but the review is now at risk of being archived because there have not been many comments. Would you be willing to jump in and share your thoughts on the article? You previously were a reviewer for one of my other two FAs (Mary Jane Richardson Jones), which I really appreciated. Thank you! —Ganesha811 (talk) 14:11, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
- I can't promise anything but I might be able to look at it later today. I just took a look at zh:李锐_(1917年) and it seems a little longer; are there sources there that you could use? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 14:15, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you, totally understand. Yes, there's definitely some information in the Chinese article not in the English one, for a few reasons. Some of it is just unsourced, so that can't be carried over. There's some information from Chinese-language sources I'm not really able to assess the reliability of (such as the Yueyang City Information Network, a few blogs), and finally some information from his memoirs, which regrettably I'm not able to read and are not available in English. I don't like to rely on Google Translate when reasonable, secondary, reliable English-language sources are adequate instead. —Ganesha811 (talk) 14:24, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
- Fair enough. I'm going to try to finish up a long GA review today and will see if I can get to it after that. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 14:34, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you, totally understand. Yes, there's definitely some information in the Chinese article not in the English one, for a few reasons. Some of it is just unsourced, so that can't be carried over. There's some information from Chinese-language sources I'm not really able to assess the reliability of (such as the Yueyang City Information Network, a few blogs), and finally some information from his memoirs, which regrettably I'm not able to read and are not available in English. I don't like to rely on Google Translate when reasonable, secondary, reliable English-language sources are adequate instead. —Ganesha811 (talk) 14:24, 24 March 2023 (UTC)