User talk:WereSpielChequers/Archive 22

Home

Bling

Content

Userboxen

Editcount

Talk

Guestbook

Email

This is my archive for threads from 2014 that don't belong in my themed archives.

Happy New Year WereSpielChequers!

	Happy New Year!
	Hello WereSpielChequers: Thanks for all of your contributions to improve the encyclopedia for Wikipedia's readers, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, Northamerica1000(talk) 05:49, 1 January 2014 (UTC) Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2014}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Mangers ?!

Thank you for correcting this error of mine. I enjoyed all the hay references ! Neonblak ^talk - 18:01, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

You're very welcome. This has been my most fertile hunting ground since I started reducing the amount of staring in Bollywood. It is also my second secularisation of the pedia, the first being an assortment of calvary regiments, charges, horses and troops. ϢereSpielChequers 19:05, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Beatrix Potter now out of copyright

Can we do a mass move of the large number of images in Category:Out_of_copyright_in_2014 to Commons? Johnbod (talk) 15:04, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

I make that 126 images so yes its great that they can be moved but probably most efficient to use whatever the normal tool is for wiki 2 commons. Is there a bot that does that? ϢereSpielChequers 19:56, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

All caps edit summary

You posted to User talk:Dougweller/reversion about this - I never seem to notice changes on that page, sorry (although others get there thinking it's my talk page, ignore everything else on the page and post). I've removed that on your advice. Dougweller (talk) 10:53, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Doug, it would be really good if someone could write a mixcasing routine. My suspicion is that the rise of the mobile phone is going to force us to reappraise our attitude to All caps edits. There is already an obvious pattern in that they are predominately from African and India. This could become a global south issue, as well as about being open to newbies. ϢereSpielChequers 05:42, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

I hadn't thought of that, although it's obvious once you mention it. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 16:19, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia Weekly

Hi WSC, we're recording an episode of the podcast tomorrow (Thursday) evening East coast US time of 8pm, which I know is pretty tough for someone in Europe. If this time doesn't work, we're still trying to find at least one episode we can record earlier to get folks like you involved. Thanks. -- Fuzheado | Talk 21:59, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks but not practical tonight, I've emailed you. That would be midnight in the UK and 1 am in Europe, not ideal especially on a Thursday as Friday is a working day. Have you considered Sunday? Quite a long time when people are potentially available 3pm East coast might work for all but the Aussies. ϢereSpielChequers 05:51, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Mixcase

I think I could write some module to help with your mixcase problem ... except, I have absolutely no idea what you meant. Looking at the all caps heading above maybe I have a guess now, but if you want, let me know (or post to WP:Lua requests if you want) what you're looking for in particular. I'm afraid I'm not thrilled by the idea of trying to use the internet over a phone keyboard, so be very basic about the explanation. :) (Incidentally, do you know if typing "{" and "|" is possible for phone users? Because that could severely reduce the options) Wnt (talk) 21:51, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi Wnt, thanks for picking up on that. I'm not thrilled about editing by mobile either, my couple of experiments have been disastrous - its even worse than using microsoft which is the malware I'm having to use this fortnight. But there is a revolution going on in the world with dramatic growth of smartphone based internet use. The mobile internet is largely a broadcast medium for Wikipedia hence our editorship stabilising whilst our readership is rapidly growing, but occasionally these people will try and edit. If they succeed they sometimes do so in all caps either because that is the culture of txting and phone use, or even because they haven't mastered the use of lower case letters on a mobile. So sometimes I come across articles with A SENTENCE IN CAPITALS. EVEN A WHOLE PARAGRAPH ABOUT SOME TEMPLE. What I'd like to do is highlight the affected bit and have almost all the uppercase letters replaced with lower case ones. Exceptions being the first letter after a semicolon or full stop, and ideally the O and first letter after the apostrophe in O'Connor and similar Irish style names, and the M and the letter after the Mc or Mac in Scottish style names such as MacDonald and McRae. That would still need a bit of tarting up as there are bound to be names within it, but it would save me and I believe others a lot of time if we could highlight a section such as A SENTENCE IN CAPITALS. EVEN A WHOLE PARAGRAPH ABOUT SOME TEMPLE. and get a sentence in capitals. Even a whole paragraph about some temple. I suspect that an edit summary of No SHOUTING plz would deter anyone who simply does this for emphasis, and if my theory is wrong and the people who are doing this are doing so deliberately then mixcasing it sends them a useful message. I don't know whether all mobile phone users have access to all the symbols you need for wiki markup, I suspect it depends on operating system. ϢereSpielChequers 05:54, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Personally, I think the stigmatization of all-caps text is excessive, but definitely we need articles to be better written. The problem I have with making a template is that someone who can't be bothered to figure out lower case on a phone is supposed to type something like {{subst:lct| ... }} around every edit, which seems ... optimistic. I can write something but I don't expect they'll ever hear about it, let alone use it. Even if they or someone else do use it, there's the problem that the subst: isn't done until they save, which means that two edits are needed if the template isn't absolutely correct on every letter.

Another option would be a bot to look for all-caps sentences, but that's something of a different matter - all it should be permitted to do is look, because there are instances where any automated approach would lead to trouble.

Thinking about it, what you're describing is more a user script to call from Common.js that would allow you to find-and-fix all caps sentences. I do know Javascript, but I haven't used it much in the context of Wikipedia yet. I should fool around with this but it's harder for me to make promises. Wnt (talk) 16:35, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Oh I'm under no illusions that the mobile phone users would use this themselves, though I'm hoping that some would notice the fixes on their watchlists and learn, I'm pretty sure that has happened with some of the easily confused words that I fix. I'm more thinking of something that I could use to fix ones that I come across. However a script based thing that let people search for all caps things and assist with fixing them would be great. But I expect it would need some hefty safe phrase and safe page functionality. Otherwise it would get bogged down in NATO, ICBMs and so forth. ϢereSpielChequers 17:11, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

As for not wanting to stigmatise contributors who use ALL CAPS, I'd like to have this tool so that more of their contributions get mixcased and accepted rather than simply rejected. ϢereSpielChequers 10:13, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Reliability

I think you and I are pretty much pointed in the same direction on that issue. Have I convinced you that our medical FAs should be fact-checked by experts and locked between reviews? --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 18:00, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Yes, or at least a very similar direction. Though you sometimes seem focusesd on the end point and I on the next steps in what I believe is the right direction. Re the matter in hand I think there are four interrelated elements here:

1. As someone else asserted on Jimmy's talkpage not every WikiProject Medicine article actually contains the sort of material that would lead to people incorrectly self diagnosing. Assuming that's correct, and Anti-tobacco movement in Nazi Germany is one of the 58 FAs in question, then I think that any special protection for medical articles needs to be narrowly rather than broadly construed. The community would be much warmer to a proposal that was clearly targetted at articles that people might be consulting when they self diagnose.
2. Fact checking by experts is great, but mixing paid and unpaid work is contentious for many reasons and may even be counter-productive as once you start paying some editors it may be difficult to get others to work for free. I'd suggest that we go much further down the path of encouraging this sort of thing before giving up on the voluntary model.
3. Locking articles is contentious, not only do you lock out damage you also lock out improvements. I think that instead we could build on our existing models of pending changes.
4. Empowering subject experts is also tricky - people will hark back to a former competitor of our who put a homeopath in charge of "the healing arts". My view is that first we need to establish a group of trusted credentialled experts, and then we can persuade the community to give them some extra status. Wiki Project Medicine may actually be at the early stages of this with its widely accepted tighter rules about medical sourcing.

If you want the vision thing, where I'd like to see us wind up is with the academic community seeing wikiwork as part of its duty and method of evaluating academic effort. So just as currently a degree or masters degree would be awarded for someone demonstrating mastery of their subject by writing an essays or thesis, so in the future I would like to see degrees awarded for people who review a text against the latest research and updating and indeed correcting it. So an ever improving Wikipedia would be in part a byproduct of the academic process. If we get to that point, and I fail to see why grad students or their assessors would prefer to continue with the current method where few little PhD work has any substantial audience, then I think I can see the day when certain WikiProjects do get to "own" topics where only their designated editors can approve edits; When the higher the quality rating an article has the better the quality is; But hopefully there will still be roles in the project for people like me. ϢereSpielChequers 10:08, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

1. Yep. We only need to fret over content that contains safety, efficacy, epidemiology, biological mechanism, etc. assertions.
2. Sorry, too long. We need something big and structural involving deep commitment from the learned societies and the relevant charities. Editors and reviewers are different beasts. I'm not saying we involve paid editors. I think that if we offer stringent peer-review and locking between reviews, we'll have no shortage of experts contributing - every expert I've tried to recruit as an editor (or reviewer) has commented on the futility of investing time in something that could be messed up by Randy.
3. It all depends who's doing the reviewing. If you could recruit the topic's most learned and revered scholars to patrol an article, then I guess that would work. But that would be very expensive using my paid reviewer model, and I think we have to pay them to get the best. (I had in mind paying them for 4 reviews a year on the average article.) - It's essentially the same thing, but with my model editors have to wait a bit longer for a reviewer to OK their edit.
4. We don't need to give anyone extra status. I'm talking about articles written as today by mostly anonymous editors. The fact-checking being done by named expert reviewers is a new, adjunct not elevated, role. The article remains on Wikipedia open to live editing if it fails expert review - it just doesn't get locked with the "reliable" stamp (or the Quality mark).

Personally, I think the "anyone can edit" ethos is the engine of this place, and can't imagine that changing. But I can imagine experts becoming so involved with editing here that there will just be no real need for you and me to be editing topics in which we have no expertise. Are you interested in taking this on? --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 13:58, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi Anthony, firstly I'm already a part time WMUK employee, so I won't personally go for the Cancer Research role, but I'm indirectly involved via the UK chapter.

Honing in on our areas of difference, you seem to think my route is "too long" which I take it implies that you think this would involve a slower rate of quality improvement than your route. I suspect we'll just have to disagree on that one. I'd rather say it was a viable and uncontentious next step, and an essential precursor if we were to ultimately go down your route. Going for some sort of expert approver status is a radical change to the nature of the community, one that would require some pilot projects, a lot of discussion and would be the sort of dispute that I as a WMUK employee would try to stay out of, especially if there was any chance that the WMF would impose this against the community's wishes.

Re: "every expert I've tried to recruit as an editor (or reviewer) has commented on the futility of investing time in something that could be messed up". There is a common fear out there, personally I think it exaggerated, in my experience cited quality material tends to stick on all but the most contentious topics. When I've talked to experts who have edited on subjects that they know about and had bad experiences the most common problem is not bothering to cite their edits. I've also met a number of experts who are curators and so forth in various museums and who haven't had problems in their editing. I'll concede that medical experts challenging the quacks probably have more of a problem than the sort of people I mainly meet, hence my suggestions about edit warring and a BLP rule on dubiously sourced info.

I think we are talking at cross purposes re extra status or a specialist reviewer right. One can try and argue that such a right is not an extra status, I have no problem describing it as a specialist right, but I'd predict that some will object to it as an extra status.

As for non-experts like myself making changes to medical articles, I have no problem with the idea that my edits on that topic should need review, but I would anticipate that I will still be correcting preform to perform forth ribs to fourth ribs for as long as I'm an editor here. ϢereSpielChequers 09:22, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Ah. I didn't realise you are on staff. You're right about me staring at the goal and you at the road there. More later. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 05:02, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	Your comment at User talk:Jimbo Wales: "I celebrated Xmas by trawling through a subset of our articles that contained the word manger and secularising over a hundred of them.". This is the first time I have ever laughed out loud at Wikipedia - keep it up! :) Acather96 (click here to contact me) 21:09, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Ta muchly. I do rather enjoy the way that particular typos seem to be associated with particular topics. The calvary cavalry confusions were kind of predictable as was my role in the abolition of the Olympic sport of synchronsised ventriloquism. But posses has brought me to a startling number of edits in horror and manga articles, staring has given me enough Bollywood edits for an honorary membership of that Wikiproject, as for preform, I'm beginning to suspect that there is a new meaning to the word Preform - the singing of a rock or pop song in a sports stadium. As for sports contracts I rather worry I may have misconstrued the process, perhaps some sportsmen nowadays are indeed singed to new clubs in some sort of branding process. ϢereSpielChequers 10:31, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

A well-earned barnstar

		The Barnstar of Integrity
		For being amongst our most reasonable editors and administrators. I have always observed fairness, stellar judgment and great work from you. Thank you. Acalamari 14:33, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much, I'm deeply honoured. ϢereSpielChequers 19:30, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gohna Lake dam-burst, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Garhwal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Value of guestbook barnstars

Thank you for explaining to me about the value of barnstars (albeit in an edit summary). I guess I shouldn't give them out to people just because they signed my guestbook—it probably has to be a bigger accomplishment. Anyway, many thanks for signing my guestbook. Epicgenius (talk) 16:19, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	NIce to arrive at this page and see that some users do in fact have a sense of humour and are not afraid to use it. When will we be seeing you on Live at the Apollo ? Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:36, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

This Barnstar is for you!

	The Barnstar of WereReviewers
	For a mild mannered Wiki gnome, who turns into a mighty spell checker at the sight of poor grammar. Thank you for the increase in WikiRights. Geraldshields11 (talk) 23:07, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, though to be honest my grammar is crap, my specialism is in typos. ϢereSpielChequers 21:51, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Move like this

Move Like This
by 28bytes

I liked your "reassuring", - one link goes to "awesomely weird", --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:28, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, twas a surreal episode. Hope 28bytes comes back some time. ϢereSpielChequers 21:49, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

More surreal: his blue duck attacks the German Main page right now, - had to happen on the 28th ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:58, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the welcome cookies!

Hi there, Thanks for the nice welcome message! I'm a total wiki newbie and I've created an article as you know. I did a lot of research on my topic and spent hours on here trying to get everything right. I am stuck now on a couple of issues and would really appreciate some help if you would be so kind. It says that my article has an unclear citation style and my reference section has some problems. All the reference links are good, again thoroughly researched and supporting of the facts within the article but I'm clearly missing something as to how it's supposed to be formatted or which of the many templates to use. I'm sure I can figure it out eventually, if I had a lot more time but I have two small children and a million other things going on always. I really want this article to be good and to learn how to be a good Wikipedian! Any help would be much appreciated! Thank you! mrssmith 18:23, 29 January 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Treeannsmith (talk • contribs)

FYI

A proposal has been made to create a Live Feed to enhance the processing of Articles for Creation and Drafts. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/RfC to create a 'Special:NewDraftsFeed' system. Your comments are welcome. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:59, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

I believe you are overdue a kitten. Thank you for your continued activity, it is always appreciated. Cheers,

_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:30, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Why thanks Piotrus, much appreciated. ϢereSpielChequers 13:33, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Giovanni Carmazzi

It was seldom edited before semi-protection. In two years, it has been infrequently edited. Lower to PC then? --George Ho (talk) 19:26, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

OK done. ϢereSpielChequers 19:30, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Frank R. Parker

I tried to insert a photo of the subject on the "Frank R. Parker" page, but it has not appeared. It was a photo taken by his widow and given to me to be used with permission. I'm not sure if I just didn't insert it properly or if there was a problem with the copyright. JamesParker5413 (talk) 21:50, 18 February 2014 (UTC)JamesParker5413

Hi James, fixed that. There was a bit of extra code in there, you only need a gallery if you want to display several images together, and if you are using a gallery you don't need some of the other options. There may also be a problem with copyright - you probably need to email our copyright team if you were not the photographer, I will get back to you on that in the next day or so. ϢereSpielChequers 00:11, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

British Museum

Hi Jonathan, just wondering if you had a moment to share your thoughts at Wikipedia_talk:GLAM#Contacting_a_museum_to_get_permission_to_use_their_photos_-_British_Museum.

Regards, Oncenawhile (talk) 19:55, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Precious again

native tongue as tool
Thank you for using the tool of your native tongue, for the wisdom to ignore "your" articles after you finished them, and for not ignoring people, as one of the adiminz: you support others to be one in "fair and consistent" voting and make efforts to reform the process, and you trust editors to rights such as roll back, - repeating: you are an awesome Wikipedian (3 May 2009, 14 October 2009)!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:35, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

A year ago, you were the 432nd recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:31, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Gerda, much appreciated. ϢereSpielChequers 20:45, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

John Magnum disambiguation page

I love your user name. Your change to the John Magnum disambiguation page didn't follow Wiki format (the name you put in quotes is the man's actual name) so I reverted it. --Aichik (talk) 04:45, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Aichik, glad you like my name. I'm not sure why you removed the {{hndis}} at the same time as changing the link, may I suggest that in future when you only disagree with part of someone's edit you just change the bit you disagree with rather than simply rejecting the whole of an edit by hitting undo? As for whether the link should go to the actual name or the name of the article, in a disambiguation page it is important that we link to the actual page in question without piping it, otherwise you could have half a dozen John Smith's rather than [John Smith (politician)]], [John Smith (actor)]] etc. If you think that the article John Mangum should be moved to his full name then I suggest you do that or at least propose a move - the important thing about disambiguation pages is that they guide people to the articles that we have. So if John Mangum was moved to John Wayne Mangum then the disambiguation page should reflect the new name. Though unless there are more than two notable John Mangum's I doubt if that disambiguation page will last long. ϢereSpielChequers 20:44, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Merchandise Giveaway

Hey WereSpielChequers, I just wanted to stop and thank you for nominating me for my free Wikipedia shirt! Although I haven't done so in the last month, I still try and stop by the "dead on other wikis" page whenever I get a chance... and whenever the bot is working! Canadian Paul 20:11, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Paul, you're very welcome. I think the bot has been running fairly regularly of late, though last I heard the Ukrainians had been waiting several months to get their version started. I assume it is just one of those toolserver to labs migration problems. ϢereSpielChequers 05:30, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Tall Jawa archaeological site Jordan

Jonathan. I have had the session with Andrew, and we have made good progress on the article -Tall Jawa. Nteli78 (talk) 15:34, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

• Yes, after a faltering start, Google Hangout worked quite well and I was able to talk Athena through the process of starting the article. She has been shown the basics of communicating on Wikipedia too and leaving you this message was the test. I'll work up this and similar experiences of remote training into a talk for Wikimania when I get a moment - tomorrow perhaps. Andrew (talk) 16:07, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks both of you, I made a few tweaks to Tall Jawa, I really enjoy reading about that sort of thing. ϢereSpielChequers 16:10, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Poop patrol

Thanks for the message about poop patrol. I had a look at it and been thinking, but I've not had a chance to do any work on it yet. Sorry for not contacting you sooner. I'll try and find some time to have another look. Edward (talk)

Thanks Edward, much appreciated. ϢereSpielChequers 19:27, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

I've had a go at implementing my own version of poop patrol. My prototype is available here: https://edwardbetts.com/page_patrol

It is built using the Wikipedia search API, so all the results are live. It has support for safe phrases and safe articles. Right now there isn't an interface for adding safe phrases. Edward (talk) 22:16, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Edward, that is really useful, I have already fixed a hundred or more typos with it. ϢereSpielChequers 14:33, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

a few issues with the prototype:

• Some pages don't become safe articles despite multiple clicks, it is almost as if the mark as safe article button is disabled for pages such as shoegazing, or possibly if it is a safe page for stared it can't also be so for staring.
• The fifty exceptions limit seems to be on fifty examples of the word being found rather than fifty examples after screening out safe pages and safe phrases. This makes it a bit of a faff going through a report such as staring which has over 20 screens. not subdividing it might be the best solution here.
• Sometimes the same exception keeps recurring, almost as if the next batch of fifty is calculated on a sometimes differing index.
• @Edward: An odd one. When I clicked on Who's That Boy? I wound up at the article that Who's That Boy redirects to, as if the questionmark had been displayed but ignored.
• Would it be possible to import the existing lists of safe pages into the new system? I noticed with causalities that many of the examples are on the existing safe page list. This is particularly helpful for ones like pubic where it can take a bit of research to add each example to the safe page list. ϢereSpielChequers 08:16, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
• Currently there are two numbers, one on the list before you select a report and one in the report. For example Strecher appears as Strecher (8) with a result that says 7 results. I think the 8 comes from the first time it was run with your software and 7 is the number of examples screened out by safe words and safe phrases. Both are interesting, though it would help if the 7 was subdivided into safe pages and safe phrases. But more important is the number of articles still to check, if as in the case of strecher this is zero then there is no need for me to check that report.
• Smelly and Poop can come off the list, I started the thing with poop and cleared up lots of old vandalism, but I think one of the edit filters is stopping the new stuff. However there are a number of others worth adding. Idealy the current list would be as per User:DeltaQuadBot/Job requests, though I suppose I should move that. ϢereSpielChequers 06:01, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

I've dome some work on Page patrol. The latest prototype is in the same place: https://edwardbetts.com/page_patrol

There are now pages that list the safe phrases and safe articles for each term. It is possible to add new safe phrases.

The fifty examples after screening problem is due to the way that the mediawiki search works. I can only get up to 50 results at a time. I get 50 results, then filter them and display them. The solution is to use more Javascript. I should show the first set of filtered results, then in the background request more results from the search engine, filter and add them to the current patrol page.

I have a look at adding the existing lists of safe pages and at adding the terms from User:DeltaQuadBot/Job requests.

The numbers are all off, maybe of the hit counts are returned from the search engine before filtering. To fix this I need to download all the search results, filter and safe to the database. This would take more time, I didn't make it a priority.

I'll take a look at the question mark problem. I need to URL encode the article titles when generating links to Wikipedia.

Edward (talk) 13:43, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

I've been working on fixing some of these problems. The new plan is to cache search queries in the database instead of trying to use the live search engine.

The article titles from the search results are saved to the database with safe articles filtered. The search engine is used to find articles that contain safe phrases and filtered them as well.

The API will be used to download and save the full text of each article. Snippets showing patrol terms within article text will be generated and stored so the patrol pages can be rendered quickly. The patrol pages will include a pager that works correctly, showing a fixed number of articles per page.

A user can either identify an article as safe by clicking the 'safe article' button, or follow the link to the article and fix the vandalism. When the user clicks 'safe article' it will trigger Javascript add to the list of safe articles in the database. The user will see the article removed from the list without needing to reload the page.

There will also be a 'vandalism fixed' button. This will trigger the article text to be downloaded again and checked to ensure the problem has been fixed. The article will be removed from the patrol page using Javascript without a reload.

Using this technique means the search result numbers on the index page and patrol pages will be correct. Edward (talk) 08:52, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Edward, I think what is happening is that the search includes the safe phrases, but the fifty are then filtered against the safe pages. So searches with a lot of safe phrases work well but ones with lots of safe pages can involve quite a few tedious trawls through empty batches before you find anything. Also there seems to only be one safe page list for all queries, and the system errors if you need to put the same page as safe in more than one query. ϢereSpielChequers 09:17, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

I had to take "Salle à Manger" out of the safe phrase list for manger as it caused crashes. ϢereSpielChequers 21:59, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Edward, I noticed you were back editing today. Hope you can switch your server back on soon. BTW any chance of tweaking this so that it looks at draftspace as well as mainspace? ϢereSpielChequers 07:41, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

@WereSpielChequers: Server is back. Let me know if there are any problems. I'll investigate adding draftspace. Edward (talk) 22:06, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Edward, much appreciated. I have been doing more work in draftspace of late, and I am very conscious of a lack of collaborative editing there. ϢereSpielChequers 18:40, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Advice plz

Hi Were - I am markdask but can't login. My comp crashed recently and I had to fully reinstall. No biggie - except I was soo long logged into Wiki I forgot the password. So I simply requested a reset and anticipated the auto-email. It aint arrived - on two seperate occasions. If you can access my acc it should list my registered email as markdask@msn.com. So why aint I receiving wikimail? I can access my user page so can read any messages, though you might choose to refer me to a collegue.

Any assistance much appreciated

81.157.42.130 (talk) 14:35, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Oh sugar. Have you had any other email accounts you might have used for a password reset? Alternatively might you have set that email on other projects such as commons? Admins don't get to see people's email addresses except like anyone else if they receive an email. ϢereSpielChequers 14:45, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Were - it looks like my email acc is messed up. I created the wiki-acc markdask1 and can receive email from that so it aint wikimail. No probs will sort it Markdask1 (talk) 23:56, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

OER inquiry

Hi WereSpielChequers, I'm sending you this message because you're one of about 300 users who have recently edited an article in the umbrella category of open educational resources (OER) (or open education). In evaluating several projects we've been working on (e.g. the WIKISOO course and WikiProject Open), my colleague Pete Forsyth and I have wondered who chooses to edit OER-related articles and why. Regardless of whether you've taken the WIKISOO course yourself - and/or never even heard the term OER before - we'd be extremely grateful for your participation in this brief, anonymous survey before 27 April. No personal data is being collected. If you have any ideas or questions, please get in touch. My talk page awaits. Thanks for your support! - Sara FB (talk) 20:50, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Live Art, Feminism and Archives 25 April 2014

See this: User:Leutha2/LADA1. Leutha2 (talk) 16:30, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

And in this corner...

I hope you don't think I'm beating up your idea. I actually find it quite interesting with great potential, it just raises a lot of questions of how to manage since it is so different than anything we have done before. I'm peppering you with a lot of questions, but others will be asking the same in time anyway. I'm curious as to if the Foundation would interfere and say no to such an idea for some reason, ie: "it is against the open nature". Anyway, it is very thought provoking and I just wanted to make sure you knew the questions were because it intrigued me, not because I was against it. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 15:19, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

RFC

I'm starting to draft an RFC User:WereSpielChequers/Private Space RFC, comments and collaboration from observers would be welcome. ϢereSpielChequers 10:40, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank for helping me with my first edit!

Hey! Thanks for helping me out today. Herahussain (talk) 16:50, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Editor retention

Any watchers interested in looking at User:WereSpielChequers/2010-2014 Editor retention test? ϢereSpielChequers 17:03, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Article count ranking

This also seems to have stopped working. BTW, happy to do that review you suggested. Philafrenzy (talk) 01:14, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Philafrenzy, I'm not personally interested in that list, but it looks like it stopped at the same time and probably for the same reason. I'd suggest you start a thread at User_talk:MZMcBride - I think he is only migrating stuff to Labs if people request it. As for the review, we got enough reviewers for that one but I would welcome your input on the next one. ϢereSpielChequers 22:07, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Philafrenzy (talk) 23:02, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

GGTF

Hi WereSpielChequers, thanks for your offer on the GGTF re: admin nominations.

I was about to archive that section because it contains personal attacks, so I'm thinking of creating a new section with your comment, assuming you don't mind. If you do, please let me know, or feel free to revert. Best, SlimVirgin ^(talk) 15:43, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Sure go ahead, that thread is near the top of the page anyway so it would make sense to restart. ϢereSpielChequers 15:57, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! SlimVirgin ^(talk) 15:57, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) Media Viewer RfC

You are being notified because you have participated in previous discussions on the same topic. Alsee (talk) 20:13, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the cookies

Thanks for the cookiesUclzhwa (talk) 14:52, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

んｓｌ Dear Johnathan, Thank you for the cookies! Best, Naoko

Your email

I will reply later. Should we discuss it here? --Greenmaven (talk) 09:46, 4 December 2014 (UTC) I have sent you an email. Unless you object, it might be easier to communicate here. Greenmaven (talk) 17:49, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, I have started a page on the UK Wiki for suggestions re the U3A event.

Any advice gratefully received, there or on email. There will be thirty to forty people, on average one per Borough, but with no AV aids. I hope to have a handout ready by Friday. Jonathan Cardy (WMUK) (talk) 11:13, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings

		Happy holidays.
		Best wishes for joy and happiness to you and all your loved ones from ```Buster Seven Talk 21:48, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Jason Stewart (actor)

Lower to pending changes? --George Ho (talk) 09:59, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

OK, done. ϢereSpielChequers 13:45, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks!

And happy holidays to you as well! --j⚛e decker^talk 01:17, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Hey

How the heck are you? Just dropping by to say ... Happy Holidays. — Ched :  ?  12:22, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi Ched, Happy New Year. I'm very good thanks, how are you? ϢereSpielChequers 15:32, 31 December 2014 (UTC)