Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 90

• Village pump
  • Policy
  • Technical
  • Proposals (persistent)
  • Idea lab
  • WMF
  • Miscellaneous

Village pump (technical) archive  

This page contains discussions that have been archived from Village pump (technical). Please do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to revive any of these discussions, either start a new thread or use the talk page associated with that topic.

---

< Older discussions · Archives: A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, X, Y, Z, AA, AB, AC, AD, AE, AF, AG, AH, AI, AJ, AK, AL, AM, AN, AO, AP, AQ, AR, AS, AT, AU, AV, AW, AX · 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211, 212

Template:Fix title feature

Does anyone know how to fix the broken |title feature of {{Fix}}? It's used for example by {{Vague}}. Looking at the HTML, it seems to end up with a "title" parameter on a "span" tag which is correct, plus one on the "a" tag, which isn't, and dominates. Rd232 ^talk 17:13, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Do you have an example? After checking a few, I see no title attribute in the <a> tags. — Edokter (talk) — 17:28, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I asked Rd232 to help as he fixed the {{w-screen}} template for me as it wasn't working properly. Basically,

The man in the moon played upon a ladle.

should display Which man? Which moon? on mouseover which it does not. As for your code/HTML talk, this is beyond me but I have posted what the original request concerned. Thanks. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 20:22, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

If you mouse over the brackets in the vague tag above, you'll see that it displays the title. When you pipe a wikilink, the piped text also serves as the alt text in the mouseover tooltip, which overrides the <sup> tag's title. By building a full URL you can specify the title in a span around it and it will act as expected. The only difference is the slightly lighter blue of an external link (on Monobook anyway) and I don't think it usually shows up in Special:WhatLinksHere. The code is in Template:Fix/sandbox if you want to try and get it into the main template. Not sure what everyone's views are on using an external link like that though. Cheers, — Bility (talk) 21:40, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, that's great. I'll propose it at {{fix}}. Rd232 ^talk 22:54, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Edit summary dropdown of common summaries, via Javascript

Could anyone good with Javascript please comment at Wikipedia:VPR#Now_what? Thanks. Rd232 ^talk 00:53, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Contributions of an old username, request

Resolved

 – User has been renamed —DoRD (talk) 12:22, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I changed my username on svwp from Proud of Sweden7!! to the name I have now, but all my contributes (about 50) are connected to my old name. If it's possible, change Proud of Sweden7!! to Vit Platina so that the edits as Proud of Sweden7!!-contributions are connected to me, please! Vit Platina (talk) 05:45, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Rookie mistake, but instead of using a Redirect you should have just used the Move button up top. May need to officially request a move now, Wikipedia:Requested moves#Requesting_a_single_page_move, copying and using that template on the old username's Talk page, and in the rationale section explain that this is your old Userpage and you want to consolidate your contributions and you did the move incorrectly with a Redirect instead of the Move button. An admin will move the page in seven days if there are no objections. That's the only thing I can think of to do unless someone has another idea. Softlavender (talk) 06:00, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

• Proud of Sweden7!! (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Vit Platina (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

I'd like to correct a couple of things from above. Contributions by one account cannot be moved to another account with a page move as suggested. To "move" the contributions, the new account would have to be renamed to something else and the old account renamed to the new account name. I don't know all the details of how it would be carried out, but you might ask here for advice from one of the users who have the capability of performing the tasks. You may request a username change here or, for the most simple solution, just redirect the old user's talk page as you have done with the user page and be done with it. —DoRD (talk) 13:08, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

regex problem with spam-blacklist

Over a month ago, I and others invested time confirming that a November 2008 addition to the English language spam blacklist, in response to "markets.com" spam by 98.219.81.190, had unintended side-effects. After consulting with the admin who had introduced the regex for the original problem, it was confirmed that the regex needed to change.

An editor who is part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam tried repeatedly to fix the problem, with no success. With the help of http://regexpal.com/ I came up with an idea, but my suggested didn't work. There have been other suggestions as well, but no one has come up with the fix yet. I brought the problem up at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Spam_blacklist#Discussion hoping for advice I could pass along to those watching MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist#Troubleshooting_and_problems, but no one at meta bothered to comment. So I am hoping the village pump can help. Feel free to comment here or at MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist; I'll be watching both. Thank you in advance. 67.100.127.115 (talk) 07:54, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

JavaScript 1.6

Anybody know which versions of Opera and Safari which does NOT support JavaScript 1.6? --Tyw7  (☎ Contact me! • Contributions)   → I took the one less traveled by, / And that has made all the difference. 12:11, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Comparison of layout engines (ECMAScript) ;) mabdul 12:23, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

It does not say which was the earliest version that support Javascript 1.6. --Tyw7  (☎ Contact me! • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time!  13:28, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

ehm, it does. The earliest version safari and opera support 1.6 FULL doesn't exist at the moment. If you want to know since when they support partial 1.6 search for the earlies version numbering.The presto article is really good in the version numbering. WebKit is a mess... mabdul 16:28, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

No editing tool bar and no popups

I use IE8 and just in the past three or four days my toolbars have disappeared in my editing box, and so has my popup. I don't know what to make of this as I am an idiot with this stuff. I'd appreciate any help I can get. I have removed some code that I was told was wrong from my .js file and also bypassed my browser, and did refresh and also ctrl f5 but none of this has worked. Oh yea also logged out after all of the different things I did. Nothing has helped. Is this something going on with new software work or something else. Thanks, please help, I'm about to find a new hobby, CrohnieGal^Talk 10:52, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

This may be related to this. — Edokter (talk) — 11:23, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, now other things are changing so maybe the software people are working on it . (?) How long does it take to fix something like this, do you know? I did notice that the thread you point me to has users with Vista and IE8. Is there anything I should do to help this along or something? thanks again very much, CrohnieGal^Talk 11:34, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Reading the linked bug report, it seems to be related to a recent software update to Wikipedia that has some security features which IE doesn't respond too well to. The bug has high priority, so you may expect a fix in the coming days. — Edokter (talk) — 11:53, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Great to hear. I'll let the editors know at AN/I who are frustrated too. Thank you very much, CrohnieGal^Talk 12:55, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, whatever you did, everything is now working again for me. Thank you very much for your prompt attentions, --CrohnieGal^Talk 13:11, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Privacy Policy

The wiki privacy policy states that certain technical information is stored for a "limited period of time." How limited is that period of time?Smallman12q (talk) 23:07, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

On the order of several months. Prodego ^talk 23:09, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

If you edit as IP never ^^ mabdul 16:30, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

I think CU data is stored for 90 days and then automatically deleted for server/performance reasons. /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 04:29, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

I can't edit Wikipedia from 153.64.136.150

I can't edit from 153.64.136.150. Can someone please explain why? When I try to edit any page on Wikipedia from 153.64.136.150 there is no option to edit. This is the case whether I'm logged in to this account or when I try to edit without being logged in. Of course, I'm not currently using the computer on 153.64.136.150 so I can edit here like normal. Thank you, Bill Huffman (talk) 03:40, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Do you see a "View source" tab from 153.64.136.150? If so, can you edit if you click "View source"? "View source" is supposed to mean you cannot edit the page, but there has been cases where people see "View source" even though they are able to edit. The "View source" tab and "Edit" tab have the same url. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:46, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes, there is a view source tag. When I click on it then I see a message that says, it was blocked because it was thought to be an open proxy. It was set to expire at 13:49 on 10 August, 2011. What does an open proxy mean? This IP Address (153.64.136.150) worked just few hours ago or maybe yesterday? It also says this was done by Tnxman307. Should I contact Tnxman307 and ask him what is going on? Thanks for your help so far, Bill Huffman (talk) 04:30, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Open proxies. Your description sounds like Special:Contributions/153.65.16.10. Are you sure it's 153.64.136.150? Many Internet connections have a dynamic IP address. Click Special:Mycontributions when you are logged out to see your IP address. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:19, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the great tips! Yes, it says there that yesterday at 13:49 Tnxman307 set the block for open proxy. It points to the IP address that you stated. I sent Tnxman307 an email asking about it. The address 153.64.136.150 is a private IP address, not an open proxy. Thank you again, Bill Huffman (talk) 15:02, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Macrons and Google searches

Per this incipient discussion, if one googles Zuihōden (article name, with 'ō'), then the Wikipedia article is the first hit; if, however, one googles Zuihoden (redirect, with 'o'), I'm not seeing the Wikipedia article anywhere near the top of the listings. The same applies for Ōtsuka Museum of Art (article) and Otsuka Museum of Art (redirect). This is presumably of relevance to more than just WikiProject Japan. Has anyone come across this and is there anything that can be done (eg ?hidden text?)? Thanks, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 12:14, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

The redirected page is counted as "duplicate content" of the other page and thus heavily penalized by the google pageranking algorithm. Actually even though for Wikipedia it seems the redirect page is indexed, for most websites the non-canonical form probably won't even be indexed at all. Ideally we would have a list of keywords in the "destination page" that lists the redirected terms, but in reality, that is impossible due to caching considerations. It would probably best to invite a google search engine engineer to look at situations like this. They are rather tough to solve. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 13:05, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Ok, will do... Thanks, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 15:00, 11 May 2011 (UTC) (P.S. by list of keywords do you mean as per Help:Hidden text, or does that not get indexed?)

I doubt search engines consider comments; the list of keywords may be referring to the keywords attribute of HTML meta elements, although I don't think search engines use those anymore either. — Bility (talk) 15:41, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

• Be sure to rename/move articles to the most-likely search name, otherwise, Google (or Bing?) will rank the redirect names as low-ranking pages. Typically name an article for the actual English names "Zurich" not "Zuerich" or "Yucatan" (not "Yu'ca^tan`"). There is typically a simple spelling, such as for "naive". Note that this might cause a need to purposely create similar, separate articles for a specific topic, just due to "designing articles to better match searches". However, major duplication splits are fine: every athlete gets a separate article among the 1.5(?) million sports articles, so having "aluminum" as separate from "aluminium" is fine, if one is treated as the name origin of the different spelling, rather than the metal aluminum, and have each article link to the other one. Decide to rename the larger article as the most-likely search name. A similar approach has been used for the U.S. "War of Northern Aggression" as being a different article from the "American Civil War" but not properly stored as a separate article about the "Northern Aggression" to explain origin of term and historical impact, to allow a high-ranking search-match as title of another page. -Wikid77 16:24, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
  • I do not recommend following the advice "Be sure to rename/move articles to the most-likely search name". There is a well established policy on titling of articles, and it has nothing to do with search engine optimization, though is does speak to common nature of titles to be used - which often but does not always coincide with the constantly shifting "best hit" criteria. See Wikipedia:Article titles. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:29, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Not sure whether it has been noted, but this is not a wikipedia-specific problem, but rather a google problem. For instance a search in google books is also sensitive to the use of macrons/no-macrons. Since google's search is rather flexible and often finds related terms (e.g. with/without plural "s", words written together/separated by hyphen/separated), it seems a bit unnatural to me to distinguish between macron/no-macron. So I asked here. bamse (talk) 20:37, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Completely agree, and excellent, maybe I'll follow up with something similar, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 00:18, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Commons is down

OK, so right now, going to any page on commons is hanging in my browser: commons:. I'm pretty there's a server down there somewhere. Interestingly, my bot is having no trouble at all working through the API. Just a heads up! Magog the Ogre (talk) 12:31, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Just loaded fine for me. MBisanz ^talk 12:32, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

...and it's back up. What prescient timing! Magog the Ogre (talk) 12:33, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

style for individual infobox labels

I am trying to apply <span style="line-height: 1em;"></span> to a template:infobox label, this coding is ignored when i place it directly in the label.

Template:navbox has some really nice features:

Template:Navbox#Style_parameters

group_nstyle*

CSS styles to apply to a specific group, in addition to any styles specified by the groupstyle parameter. This parameter should only be used when absolutely necessary in order to maintain standardization and simplicity. Examples:

group3style = background:red;color:white;

Infobox does not have this same feature, is that correct?

What can i do instead?

Thank you. Errectstapler (talk) 07:31, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

doh. Changing it to <div style="line-height: 1em;"></div> worked. Errectstapler (talk) 07:42, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't think span tags with nothing between them does anything, while empty divs will work. /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 14:44, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

thanks! Errectstapler (talk) 21:13, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Parameter inside a parser function

I have this parser function:

{{#if:{{New York|out=found|}}|  {{New York|out=found|}} }}

How can I add a parameter like {{{1}}} into this parser function so I can put this parser function coding in a template, Template:NYtest and then call this parser function with different parameters?

For example

On the template page: Template:NYtest is this parser function: {{#if:{{{{{1}}}|out=found|}}|  {{{{{1}}}|out=found|}} }} Then on another page I post: {{NYtest|New York}} and this should be result: {{#if:{{New York|out=found|}}|  {{New York|out=found|}} }}

I attempted replacing the:

{ with {{{}}

and

| with {{!}}

...etc., but it did not work.

Thank you! Errectstapler (talk) 21:22, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

solved my problem :)

{{#if:{{ {{{1|0}}}|out=found|}}|  {{ {{{1|0}}}|out=found|}} }}

This works :) per: [1] Errectstapler (talk) 21:39, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

How can I disable the "Redirected from..." message?

I have a question. At the Dutch wikipedia we try to find a solution for the "wrong link problem" which turns out when using the 'primary topic' disambiguation system. The 'What links here' tool can not be used in such cases since there are hundreds of links.

A known 'solution' is to work with a detour. Instead of linking directly to the page one can link to a redirect page. E.g.: a link to [[Amsterdam]] would be a link to [[Amsterdam (primary)|Amsterdam]]. In this way the 'What links here' tool can be used after all (because, ideally, no pages should link to 'Amsterdam' itself, they all link to 'Amsterdam (primary)').

However, by doing so, a rather ugly redirect notice is shown .

We find some of a solution for that problem. Namely this script:

addOnloadHook ( fix_hoofdbetekenis ) ;

//fix _(hoofdbetekenis) links
function fix_hoofdbetekenis()
{
  if (typeof(disable_fix_hoofdbetekenis)!="undefined")
    return;
  var els = document.getElementsByTagName('a');
  for(var i in els)
  {
    if (els[i].className == "mw-redirect")
    {
      var oldhref = els[i].href;
      els[i].href = els[i].href.replace('_%28hoofdbetekenis%29', ''); // remove '_(hoofdbetekenis)' from URL
      els[i].href = els[i].href.replace('_(hoofdbetekenis)', ''); // remove '_(hoofdbetekenis)' from URL
      if (oldhref != els[i].href)
      {
        els[i].title = els[i].title.replace(' (hoofdbetekenis)', '');   // remove ' (hoofdbetekenis)' from tooltip
        els[i].title = els[i].title.replace('_(hoofdbetekenis)', '');   // remove ' (hoofdbetekenis)' from tooltip
        els[i].className = '';                                         // unset redirect class
      }
    }
  }
}

This script made it possible that this code: [[Amsterdam (hoofdbetekenis)|Amsterdam]] is internally transformed into a simple link to Amsterdam without that pages are included in the 'Whatlinkshere list'.

The only problem is that the script seems to be a bit to slow. When the link is already visited it took a second or so when the link turns out purple (this is because the redirect page is not really visited).

So my question is: do you know another way to make this work, eg a way to disable the "Redirected from..." message in some cases (by a code or so).

Greetings, Zuydkamp from the Dutch wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.118.104.160 (talk) 19:00, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

• I do not know a way to suppress the top message of "Redirected from...". However, on English WP, I think we no longer worry, too much, about not linking directly to a disambiguation-page title; hence, an article could say, "The new street was named 'John Smith Boulevard' " and not worry about which, particular, John Smith was the origin of that street's name. Now, a sentence can say, "The main beach road along the shoreline in Destin, Florida is known as Miracle Strip Parkway" and not worry if "Miracle Strip" is later changed into a dab-page title. Otherwise, the title should be used for the most-likely name, which I would have imagined for "Amsterdam" would be the title for the article about the large city in the Netherlands. -Wikid77 20:35, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

(ec) You can use #contentSub { display: none; } in the CSS, however, this would suppress all redirect notices all the time. At the very least you can go directly to the <a> tag within the "contentSub" <div> instead of building and iterating through an array of links. If you only want to hide the redirect notice coming from disambig pages, you could look for "(hoofdbetekenis)" in the "contentSub" div's innerHTML and hide the whole div if it's there. — Bility (talk) 20:40, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, but I don't quite understand the last suggestion (sorry, I'm a bit of a n00b when it comes to this). Where can I find the "contentSub"?

I've looked in the HTML of the page and found this:

<!-- subtitle --> <div id="contentSub">(Doorverwezen vanaf <a href="/w/index.php?title=Amsterdam_(hoofdbetekenis)&redirect=no" title="Amsterdam (hoofdbetekenis)">Amsterdam (hoofdbetekenis)</a>)</div> <!-- /subtitle -->

So do I understand correctly that it is possible to make a code which automatically suppress the redirect message if the redirect is ending on '(hoofdbetekenis)'? That would actually solve my problem ;-) .

Greetings,

Zuydkamp from the Dutch wikipedia.--81.165.211.159 (talk) 06:49, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

This might have serious implications for the Google ranking of Dutch wikipedia articles. These redirects are penalized in the Google search system, so these links might not count in the 'web' Google creates of links to pages. The Dutch Wikipedia might find that these articles will no longer show up, or show up significantly lower in the rankings. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 08:32, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

That's a good point. I think the JavaScriptsolution wont't have this disadvantage because, nevertheless [[Amsterdam (hoofdbetekenis)|Amsterdam]] is linking to 'Amsterdam (hoofdbetekenis)', he java script transforms this automatically to a simple link to 'Amsterdam'. I think Google will also count this as a link to Amsterdam instead of 'Amsterdam (hoofdbetekenis)'.

So I think it's wise to improve this solution. According to my limited knowledge I think the best way is to make the software itself automatically modify a [[Amsterdam (hoofdbetekenis)|Amsterdam]] to a simple link to 'Amsterdam' without a backlink is created.

Is this in some way possible? Zuyderkamp --81.165.211.159 (talk) 09:45, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

That would probably be better, but such a thing is not currently implemented in the software. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 11:19, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Not even in the form of a code that can be inserted in the vector.css-file?--81.165.211.159 (talk) 12:03, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

No idea about SEO, but you may only need one line of javascript:

document.getElementById('contentSub').style.display = (document.getElementById('contentSub').innerHTML.search('(hoofdbetekenis)')>-1) ? 'none' : 'block';

— Bility (talk) 13:05, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately that doesn't seem to work.--81.165.214.136 (talk) 15:16, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry, don't know what I was thinking. I modified it above. — Bility (talk) 15:54, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

I've tested it, but I still get the 'redirect from' message.--81.165.211.159 (talk) 22:49, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Quite right, this time I actually tested it, and I updated the code above again. Probably should have done that in the beginning! — Bility (talk) 23:06, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

It works! Thanks. Now we have two possible solutions to work with.--178.116.155.109 (talk) 09:29, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Page protection log

Why doesn't the page protection log move with the article when it is moved? It can be difficult to track this log if an article has been moved several times. For example, it would be useful to know who protected Iranian Azerbaijanis and why, but I am unable to find the relevant log entry. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:49, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

I agree, this is frequently a source of annoyance for me. /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 14:45, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

I have created a very simple tool that can track page protections along moves. It has currently very poor user interface. I might look at that over the weekend. User<Svick>.Talk(); 20:53, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Nice (though it could be prettier). Can we add that as an External Tool on the History tab? Rd232 ^talk 02:33, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Toolserver lag

For the past day or so, the toolserver replag has been >10 hours. This is causing issues with some bots (see User_talk:DASHBot that got it blocked) and things like WP:CATSCAN are running off old articles. I have searched around at toolserver.org, but I have no idea where else to ask the question - what is going on and when will it be fixed? The-Pope (talk) 06:55, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Can anyone help? Can anyone tell me where to go for help? It's up to 21 hours lagged now! The-Pope (talk) 00:42, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

I've got an open bug about the issue and the TS admins are aware of the situation. [2] ΔT _{^{The only constant}} 02:16, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks... good to know it's being investigated... it's very annoying. The-Pope (talk) 02:18, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Problems removing pages from my watchlist

I've noticed some pages recently not being removed from my watchlist. I click on the blue star and it turns white, but when I hover over the white star it stills offers the text "remove this page from your watchlist" as if it's not really accepted the removal. Is there a time delay in pages being removed from watchlist? Thanks. Eldumpo (talk) 08:32, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Have you tried using Special:Watchlist/edit to check and/or remove the pages? — Bility (talk) 16:44, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Semantic MediaWiki

Hi!

Why is there still no integration of Semantic MediaWiki in Wikimedia projects (e.g. Wikipedia!)? It has been proposed since years and it is quite a mature piece of software. It would make Wikipedia much better, solve the problems with the current categories, reduce necessity of boring tasks, enable alternatives to the proprietary Wolfram Alpha in the field of computational knowledge etc. So why couldn't it be “just” installed, some scripts for semi-automatic translation of categories and info-boxes written and then we would see the benefits? (inter-wiki cooperation could be implemented later) What would be needed to start a progress of integration and why isn't there any progress? --Chricho ∀ (talk) 16:26, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost offers some coverage of why we don't have it enabled here. Killiondude (talk) 17:14, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Heh, Semantic MW, lol. The devs don't trust it nearly enough. /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 21:56, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Sounds scary, they do not trust it, what is bad about the code? How could the problem be solved? Soooo many hours get wasted with that stupid manual categorization and copying of facts… And I am sure we do not want Wolfram to rule knowledge in future… --Chricho ∀ (talk) 00:01, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

There isn't anything necessarily wrong with it, the WMF just won't run any code that hasn't been written or reviewed by one of its own employees. So it needs to be reviewed for security and performance issues and to ensure that it will run on Wikimedia's complex setup. It's a huge amount of code and a huge amount of work, and there isn't very much community demand for it, so it just hasn't been done. If you're a software engineer with experience running major websites and reviewing code for security, you could offer your services to the WMF, otherwise there's not much you can do, except possibly make a targeted donation. Mr.Z-man 00:59, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

whitespace under ambox

Can someone figure out what's causing the whitespace under the {{Religious text primary}} row at the table in Wikipedia:Template messages/Cleanup/Verifiability and sources? --Waldir ^talk 20:37, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Too many hidden linebreaks. I've removed them. — Edokter (talk) — 20:47, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. --Waldir ^talk 21:21, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

group editnotice not overriding namespace editnotice

The recently-created Template:Editnotices/Namespace/Wikipedia talk is rather unsuitable for the Articles for Creation wikiproject, whose submission pages are located in the WT namespace by necessity. Following the instructions on said editnotice's talk page, I've created Template:Editnotices/Group/Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation to attempt to suppress this, but when editing submissions (example) I can still see the namespace notice. Any help would be appreciated. sonia♫ 00:35, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Firstly, you aren't an admin and shouldn't be creating edit notices. Secondly, you cannot create a blank edit notice. Prodego ^talk 01:32, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Firstly, those are the instructions in the namespace template on avoiding it appearing when it isn't helpful. Secondly, you can create a blank edit notice. I've restored it, and it has the desired effect. Of course, it may be that the editnotice can actually be put to some use, eg if there are common errors that people can be warned about. PS thanks to User:Logan for fixing the namespace template so it checked for the group notice properly - he just beat me to it :) Rd232 ^talk 01:55, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

So you can. Must have just been a cache somewhere when I tried to duplicate. Prodego ^talk 01:57, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks all! sonia♫ 02:00, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

CSD entries, many of which may be in error

The CSD list contains almost 2000 entries, most of which I believe are in error. For example, Ab-e Sefid is in the list. While the cat list includes both CSD and CSD by user, I don't see anything in the history explaining why it should be in the cat. A lot of the entries in the list are Dr. Blofeld stubs, my guess is someone managed to add the cat en masse without editing each article. Can someone check to find out whether they are legitimately in the list, or if it is a mistake?--SPhilbrickT 11:59, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

I now see Deletion_required, which is related.--SPhilbrickT 12:02, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

The CSD notice is included in {{Geographic refimprove}}. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 12:06, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

This doesn't make any sense to me, but perhaps I'm missing something. The title "Geographic refimprove" implies that the article is acceptable but could be improved with the addition of some references related to geographic information. If we mean that the article should be deleted because it fails to meet minimum standards, the template title should be improved. As evidence that there is some confusion, I still do not know whether Dr. Blofeld added the template as a way to urge improvement of geographic references, or whether he wants the article deleted. Yes, I can ask him, but I think the template could be clearer.--SPhilbrickT 12:21, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

This may shed some light. Thparkth (talk) 12:22, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Edit box stops letting me edit

When I start editing, in many cases, I am typing and don't realize that nothing is appearing in the edit box, even though I've already clicked inside the edit box. This happened just now. In many cases, the screen with the edit box also scrolls down for some reason. I have to scroll back up and click inside the edit box to start typing again.

Is this somehow related to the decision not to let the search box automatically let a search take place without the user clicking inside it first? In which case I guess nothing will change. I will say I was using Internet Explorer 8 and have just switched to Internet Explorer 9 and it's still happening.Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 15:43, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

And this only seems to happen on Wikipedia.Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 16:47, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Blocking non-descriptive file names from being uploaded

Now at MediaWiki talk:Titleblacklist. Sven Manguard Wha? 04:19, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
I just uploaded File:IMG 00225.png and File:DSC 00225.png to test my ability to do so. I am sad to say that I could. According to the most recent lists, there are 2796 other files that start with IMG or DSC. Of them there are less than half a dozen that I would view as properly named, i.e. that would not be significantly improved with a renaming. There are perhaps an additional dozen or so that are borderline. Out of 2796 that is a batting average of 0.6 percent. When I uploaded those two images, I got a nice little all text message appearing right near the name field that asked me to reconsider. To be quite blunt, that is not enough. I am asking you all to form a consensus to this effect. Files should not be allowed to be uploaded under these useless names. Like certain other naming components, images starting with IMG and DSC should be preemtively salted. I estimate doing so will save the handful of file workers (myself included) hundreds of hours of work. Propose and Support Sven Manguard Wha? 03:47, 15 May 2011 (UTC) already being done via the title blacklist. ΔT The only constant 03:49, 15 May 2011 (UTC) Apparently not, as I uploaded those two about 20 minutes ago. Sven Manguard Wha? 03:51, 15 May 2011 (UTC) take a look at MediaWiki:Titleblacklist with the section labeled " GENERIC IMAGE FILE NAMES" your upload just misses the existing filers because you added a space before the number. ΔT The only constant 04:01, 15 May 2011 (UTC) Thank you for that. I'll go get an admin that's comfortable with that page. For the record, over 80% of the ones on the IMG page use a space, so I'd like to wrap this up quickly. Sven Manguard Wha? 04:04, 15 May 2011 (UTC) Support I see no reason to allow file names that have no change of being descriptive. --Guerillero | My Talk 03:52, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Expanded Use of Article Feedback Tool

Cross-posted to wikien-l

Hello all,

This is a heads-up that tomorrow, we're planning to deploy the Article Feedback Tool, which is currently on 3,000 English Wikipedia articles, to a larger set of 100,000 articles. This initial expansion is intended to further assess both the value and the performance characteristics of the feature with an eye to a full deployment. As always, we may postpone the deployment if we run into unanticipated production issues.

Some examples of articles that currently have the tool (at the bottom of the article):

• Grassroots lobbying
• United States Constitution
• Israeli cuisine

The intent of the tool is two-fold:

• to gain aggregate quality assessments of Wikimedia content by readers and editors;
• to use it as an entry vector for other forms of engagement.

To assess its value in both categories, we've undertaken a significant amount of qualitative and quantitative research already. You can read an extensive summary of our work so far here:

http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Article_feedback

The headline summary is that based on the data we've seen so far, we do believe that user ratings can be a valuable way to predict high and low quality content in Wikimedia, and we're especially interested in engaging raters beyond the initial act of assessing an article. We've seen very good conversion rates on the calls-to-action that follow a rating which we've trialed so far, suggesting that this could be a very powerful engagement tool as well.

Beyond our own research and these engagement experiments, our goal is to make anonymized data from the tool available regularly, and to also give editors a dashboard tool that they can use to surface trends in the rating data.

Please use the talk page for comments, questions and suggestions. We'll also set up an IRC office hour soon to talk more about the tool.

All best,

--Erik Moeller (WMF) 03:05, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

• Thanks for the referral. There seems to be little response to inquiries on the page you've pointed people to. Could you look to addressing the questions and comments already posted there? --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 12:49, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Howie, Dario and I have posted additional responses on the page.--Eloquence* 01:51, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

If the WMF think this will be useful to them, then that's fine. But now that "Rate this page" thing is on 100,000+ articles, it's become a bit irritating for me, personally. I have absolutely no wish to rate any pages and I'd appreciate it if one of the tech geniuses who watch this page could give me some code to put somewhere so I can hide this (I'm on the vector skin). Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 17:16, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Try #mw-articlefeedback{ display:none; } in your Special:Mypage/vector.css file. - Jarry1250 ^{[Weasel? Discuss.]} 17:35, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Works beautifully. Thanks very much, Jenks24 (talk) 18:02, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Conclusion, the feature needs a "What is this?" link and a "turn this off" button as well as a good place to turn it on again. I suggest calling it Preferences. :D —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 13:25, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

It isn't just appearing on articles - the disambiguation page Royal London has a "Rate this page" section. Peter E. James (talk) 20:27, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

lol, that's funny :D —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 13:25, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

I think this is a very good idea. It was about time. It is first release software, and as expected has some problems. But in time this is the only way to go. Eventually reliability and assessment in Wikipedia will be semi-automated and I see this as just the beginning. In 5 years there will be many more tools and many more features. The challenge now is to get the user feedback reflected and store the data in a way that it can be suitably queried, graphed, etc. Once there is a pile of data, the luxury of restructuring the data schemata will no longer be available. A minor issue: it asked me to rate an article I had written - so that should probably not happen again. And in time, a good design for merging this with something like Wiki-Watch will lead to good results. History2007 (talk) 22:48, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

• Is there a way to prevent this thing from appearing on disambiguation pages? It's kind of ridiculous in that context. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 20:20, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

I think below here, the developers stated that they have now become aware of this and will fix it. History2007 (talk) 12:49, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

after login redirect

Is there any possibility to autoredirect someone after login (to requested or previous page)? mabdul 18:23, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

It already automatically redirects you to the last page if you click log in or log out from a Wikipedia page (adds &returnto= query parameter). If you're using a full URL for use elsewhere, such as a bookmark link or something, you can add whatever you want to it: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:UserLogin&returnto=Special:Random. — Bility (talk) 19:09, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

The reason this doesn't work automatically on Wikimedia sites is because of the Global login system, that needs to load the small images from the different wikimedia websites, to get you logged in there. To fix it would require a software change, putting onload checks on those images to make sure you are actually done with that process before redirecting you. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 09:40, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

And why wasn't this implemented with the global login last year? mabdul 11:07, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

redirected to https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Main_Page

Hi!

How come I get redirected to https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Main_Page when i access http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page in my browser (Firefox 4.0.1), i.e clicking on the link English on the welcome page?

In Internet Explorer this doesn't happen.

It's really strange...and the https connection is slower so it's a bit annoying. Is there anyway to get around this?

Viktor —Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.30.118.14 (talk) 12:06, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps you installed HTTPS Everywhere ? —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 12:11, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Are you using Tor? – Allen4names 14:48, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes, you're right about HTTPS Everywhere, I had it installed. Should have checked that before I posted. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.30.118.14 (talk) 10:58, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Code for Logo

What is the code for that Wikipedia Logo at the top left of every page? I want to disable it on my vector.css, since it's malfunctioning. All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 18:49, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Well, I suppose this will hide it entirely, though I'm not sure what you mean by "disable":

#p-logo {display:none !important;}

[stwalkerster|talk] 19:15, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Am I doing it right? The logo still appears, and that pesky brown bar across the screen. All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 19:40, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Corrected; logo should be invisible now. — Edokter (talk) — 14:11, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Making search bar for archives work

There is an archive box at the top of, for example, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pharmacology, but the search bar doesn't seem to work. How to fix it? Mikael Häggström (talk) 05:47, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

I believe I fixed it here. The root listing wasn't correct (telling it where to search). Killiondude (talk) 06:18, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Mikael Häggström (talk) 10:00, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Collapsed infobox sections in books

67.182.237.57 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) has asked a tricky question at Help:Books/Feedback - Collapsed infobox sections / Book Creator / PDF downloads. Can anyone here help out? -- John of Reading (talk) 07:38, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Webcite

Resolved

Is it technically possible (by a script, bot,...) to have web references in wikipedia automatically archived by webcite? This could help with WP:ROT. bamse (talk) 09:14, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes I believe so, some digging in our own archives will help with answering this question. Firstly note that there is no guarantee that archive sites will be around forever, I can't connect to some of the old sites. (http://www.archive.org/ waybackmachine is still going strong.) Secondly IIRC one of them suffered severe loading problems when an "auto add" solution was tried here recently (in the last year or two). Having said that it's still an excellent idea to maintain an archive, either internally or externally. Both clearly present problems, of different natures. Rich Farmbrough, 13:58, 15 May 2011 (UTC).

Thanks for the reply. I had a look at the archives, and indeed there are lots of discussions on this issue, which gives hope that it will be resolved at some point. bamse (talk) 18:02, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Odd CSD stickiness

Resolved

 – Obvious when you know the answer. Rich Farmbrough, 14:35, 15 May 2011 (UTC).

Template:Sample infobox seemed to be stuck as a CSD G2 for a long time after the actual db-g2 was removed. Some new feature I missed? Rich Farmbrough, 14:01, 15 May 2011 (UTC).

OK... it was another db-g2 in a transcluded template, later deleted. Rich Farmbrough, 14:35, 15 May 2011 (UTC).

Presenting a text table as an image or as text

Two recent Featured Article candidates presented table text as images. This isn't ideal so we're looking for help and advice from people that know about how to configure tables. Hopefully, this will allow us to achieve the goals of all the article nominator.

Please see:

• talk:Featured article candidate: Nebular Science Fiction

Regards Lightmouse (talk) 16:58, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Mystery linebreaks at the head of an article

Please help 2011 Libyan civil war has a couple of linebreaks at the top and I can't figure out how they got there. As best as I can see, the templates aren't transcluding them, but what do I know. Thanks. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:39, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

I've removed the linebreak between the protection template and the infobox, this seems to have removed the space. Peter E. James (talk) 00:19, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Strange behavior within an article

I don't know who to turn to with this issue. If I look up "Priscilla and Aquila", all is well and I get the current edit. But if I go via http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorship_of_the_Epistle_to_the_Hebrews and take the first "Priscilla" link to the aforementioned article on Priscilla and Aquila, I get a previous edit with problems in the very first sentence. Anyone have an idea about this? Not sure if it's a bad tag, corrupt database, software bug, or all in my head. Thank you! Marc W. Abel (talk) 03:19, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

The first "Priscilla" in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorship_of_the_Epistle_to_the_Hebrews links to Priscilla (Christian) which redirects (in the Wikipedia sense) to Priscilla and Aquila. However, Priscilla (Christian) has a different url (Wikipedia doesn't change the url for redirects) and an older version may be cached by your browser, or possibly by a server which hasn't updated properly. I see the same version at the two names. Try to bypass your cache on Priscilla (Christian). PrimeHunter (talk) 03:31, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Embedly support for Wikipedia & Wikimedia commons thumbnails

At my request, Embedly now returns thumbnails for images on Wikipedia:

http://api.embed.ly/embed?url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:BirdNotes-22-3.jpg

and Wikimedia Commons:

http://api.embed.ly/embed?url=http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:John-Madin.jpg

Cheers, Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 17:49, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Update: Also now for articles with images in infoboxes: http://api.embed.ly/embed?url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dark_Side_of_the_Moon Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 15:03, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

I can't find an article using the search box

Hi there! Yesterday I've created a new article, Liri Blues Festival, but I can't find it using the search box at the top right of the page. I mean, if I enter the exact words, I get the page. But it doesn't suggest the article while I'm typing "Liri Blue.....". Is there anything I/you can do to fix it? Many thanks in advance! Sardognunu (talk) 11:06, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

I was able to find the article via the search box. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 04:08, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

I would suggest this maybe takes time for the index to get updated (job queue perhaps?). Rich Farmbrough, 13:49, 15 May 2011 (UTC).

I've been noticing the Search Box issue for a few days myself, as it applies to anything relatively new. In addition, I've noticed that Talk Page article assessment changes, or initial assessments, earlier in the week took over 24 hours to show up on the assessment display on a given article's main page. Now, the Talk Page assessment changes don't seem to appear on the assessment display as having changed at all. (My "Display assessment" gadget is checked). On Sharyn McCrumb, I made an initial Talk Page assessment on May 14, which immediately showed up on the Talk Page. The article's main page still shows it as "Unassessed Article". Until the OTRS addition today, my initial assessment was the first item on the Talk Page - it should have showed up on the main page by now. Looked at the Help:Job queue, there does not seem to be a backlog there. Maile66 (talk) 16:32, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Heading issue in 'Documentation' template

There's an outstanding accessibity issue with header levels in {{Documentation}}; see Template talk:Documentation/Archive 4#Heading fix which still needs attention. Earlier discussion, with one dissenting voice, is at Template talk:Documentation/Archive 2#Heading fix.Could we get some extra eyeballs on that, please, and comments in the new section at Template talk:Documentation#Heading fix redux? Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 10:19, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Viewing all contributions from a range of IPs

Is there a way to view a list of the contributions from a range of IPs? There has been a spate of vandalism from a very wide range of IPs and I am curious to get a sense for the impact of a rangeblock. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:09, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes, use the gadget entitled "Allow /16 and /24 – /32 CIDR ranges on Special:Contributions ...". Graham87 05:12, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Some items can not be removed from watchlist

When I try to remove some items from my watchlist, I am unable to do so. I do not have this problem for all entries, but there are about a dozen or so which I can not remove. The problem occurs both when trying to do this via "View and edit watchlist" and also via "Edit raw watchlist". The dialogs tell me that the titles have been removed, but when I view the watchlist, the pages are still there. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 01:02, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

I assume you tried removing them multiple times? Have you tried bypassing your cache to see if your browser is just caching the watchlist or not? Or, try visiting the page itself and clicking on the "unwatch button on that page. Gary King (talk · scripts) 01:09, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I have tried to remove multiple times over multiple days and have also tried bypassing the cache. It seems that the titles on the watch list are not the "real" titles. When I click on the links they take me to pages that are already not watched. The reason I think they are not the "real" titles is that for all of the pages that I have this problem, the watchlist edit dialogue shows them as red links, but the "real" pages really exist. So, for example, it tells me that the title "Wikipedia:Requested moves" has been removed as a blue link, but in the dialogue, "Wikipedia:Requested moves" still appears as a red link. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 01:20, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Are edits made to those pages still appearing in your watchlist? Gary King (talk · scripts) 01:21, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

No, edits to the "real" pages do not appear in my watchlist, but the "red" titles still show in the list when I go to edit mode. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 01:42, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

All images are gone

Since last week, all images on Wikipedia are gone, including the logo.
I don't know if this may have anything to do with it, but this happened while I was looking through the Commons:Picture_of_the_Year/2010 photos. DirkvdM (talk) 05:50, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

I'd guess that you have disabled the display of images in your browser settings. This is especially easy to do by mistake in Firefox; if that's your browser, look at "Tools > Options"; "Load images automatically" should be ticked; then click the "Exceptions" button next to that checkbox, and make sure that you have not blocked "upload.wikimedia.org". If that doesn't fix it, post again here giving your browser name and version. Can you see the yellow "Powered by MediaWiki" image at the bottom right of the page? I think that gets downloaded from a different server. -- John of Reading (talk) 06:30, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Does the page "completely load quickly and display with no images" or does it try to load images and after a while give up? I've had extremely high lag-time getting images to load ("sometimes"...maybe depends on which server I hit or if the image is cached?). DMacks (talk) 06:32, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Ah, thanks John, turns out I had blocked 'upload.wikimedia.org'. Btw, I use the Linux version, where that's under edit > preferences > content. How did that happen, though? Some keyboard shortcut? DirkvdM (talk) 10:36, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

At least in the Windows version of Firefox, if you right-click on an image in Firefox, one of the options you see is to block all images from the same site. Great for spam images, not so good for Wikipedia. -- John of Reading (talk) 10:42, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Ah yes, I was copying images, for which I right-clicked and then hit 'v' for 'save image'. Instead I hit 'b' for 'block images'. Thanks. DirkvdM (talk) 06:39, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Layout Issue

Maybe one of you knows what is wring here. This is what I see when I open any page on wikipedia. Is it a website issue, a browser issue or an Internet issue. cheers. (I am currently running Opera 11.10 on a Windows XP SP 3 system) --Guerillero | My Talk 15:48, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

That looks like your cached stylesheets are broken. I'm not entirely sure how to bypass the cache with Opera, however. I'm sure its help can tell you how. — Coren ^(talk) 16:45, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Here are some instructions. Gary King (talk · scripts) 18:53, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

That seems to be working. Thank you --Guerillero | My Talk 00:16, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Email notification notification

After many requests, you can now get an email notification when your talk page is changed. [3] Turn it on and off from your preferences in the E-mail options section. Thanks ops team! the wub "?!" 11:14, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

This should really be an opt-in feature, and there should be a link in the email to describe how to turn these notifications off. I just got blasted with a bunch of emails that I didn't ask for, with no clear way of turning them off. This is bad. —SW— ^squeal 17:28, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

I absolutely agree. I actually check my watchlist much more often than I check my email, so I don't want to log into my email to suddenly see 10 messages for things I've already dealt with. E-mailing info to users should always be opt-in. Plus, as SW said, the links provided in the email don't make it clear how to turn of the email notifications (none of the links points to the preferences section)--they just direct you to your watchlist, not to your preferences. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:52, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

I would just to note that elsewhere there is considerable support for having this feature as opt-out, given that only power users would want it off, while newbies appreciate it. - Jarry1250 ^{[Weasel? Discuss.]} 18:25, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Who were the users who gave this idea considerable support? Who in their right mind would think that it would be a good idea to all of a sudden send dozens of emails to editors for no apparent reason, without them asking for the emails, and with no instructions on how to turn them off? Advertisements or not, unsolicited email is unsolicited email. The feature itself is a great idea, for those who want it (almost certainly a minority of regular users), but the implementation and decision to make it opt-out was terrible, as evidenced by the multiple threads popping up all over wikipedia from editors asking how to shut off these annoying emails. —SW— ^yak 00:43, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Surely the message is customisable? I was looking at the Email Notification extension documentation but that extension seems not installed (Special:Version), so I've no idea how. Rd232 ^talk 00:35, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

I agree that we need to correct the email's instructions on how to turn this off, because it simply doesn't say within the email, only how to take my talkpage off my watchlist. I think most people would know how to do that if they put it on in the first place. GedUK  13:59, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Cool feature, but I agree that the default should be opt-in. What I'd find more useful is the reverse: my talk page automatically notifying me that I have an email. Rivertorch (talk) 05:27, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Watchlist/edit history not styled properly, page elements conflicting

I'm using monobook on a Mac, and twenty minutes ago, my interface became like this. The logo in the left corner does not appear, the "m" for minor is not bold, the section links are not gray, and the "powered by MediaWiki" image and CC-BY-SA release appears on the side rather than the bottom. None of my scripts work either. Goodvac (talk) 22:15, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia's CSS/JavaScript did not load properly. Try bypassing your cache. Graham87 04:45, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Everything's fine now. Goodvac (talk) 21:42, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Delay in updating Search Index

The Search Index has not been updated for 5 days. These backlogs frustrate us WikiGnomes in our tidying up, and we get a huge backlog of spelling, grammar and other mistakes to correct when it is eventually updated.
Help:Searching#Delay_in_updating_the_search_index says this should be reported here. If there is a better place to report this, please let me know where/how.
Arjayay (talk) 08:17, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

We had some problems with misbehaving servers during the weekend, but now indexing is back on track and should fully update tomorrow morning. --rainman (talk) 10:42, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Arjayay (talk) 10:47, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Webcitation.org

Anyone know when webcitation.org will be working again? It's currently giving an error stating its full: "Warning: mkdir() [function.mkdir]: No space left on device in /home/webcita/public_html/filemanager.inc.php on line 102".Smallman12q (talk) 01:26, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

The Magic 8-Ball says "Ask again later". Delicious carbuncle (talk) 12:15, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

It's working for me. Perhaps it was a passing problem. If it continues, please post the URL you're using.   Will Beback  talk  20:29, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

logline-protect css class

Does anyone know where the mw-logline-protect element is defined? I'd like to customize it for myself by changing the color slightly. Thanks
— V = IR (Talk • Contribs) 01:45, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

No one knows where this element is defined? Really? I had trouble finding it myself, which is why I'm asking about it here, but... really?
— V = IR (Talk • Contribs) 20:25, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Not saying that I completely understand the question, but you might want to add these to your stylesheet: div.mw-warning-with-logexcerpt {background: #0000ff;} li.mw-logline-protect {background: #33ff33;}. The first is in MediaWiki:Common.css; the latter inherits from the former. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 21:09, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

That's what I wanted to know... I think. I was interested in finding out what other similar classes exist as well, though (similar to logline, I guess). The problem is that I can't find mw-logline-protect anywhere. When I search through MediaWiki:Common.css, that string is nowhere to be found. I don't see where the relationship between div.mw-warning-with-logexcerpt and li.mw-logline-protect is established.
— V = IR (Talk • Contribs) 21:45, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

The original styles for this element are defined in skins/common/shared.css, part of the default MediaWiki install and applied to all skins of MediaWiki. On english wikipedia it is here. But then of course it goes trough the ResourceLoader, compacting and joining it with other elements. You can override it in any of the stylesheets that are loaded AFTER this one (which are all the ones you can edit). —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 22:32, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Excellent. Thank you!
— V = IR (Talk • Contribs) 00:20, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Hang on a sec... I still don't see the mw-logline-protect class defined anywhere. I do see where it was added in 1.14 here (from the release notes, at least), but there's apparently no other documentation about it anywhere. More importantly, there appears to be a whole set of mw-logline elements, which is the sort of information that I was really after. I'm willing to document them myself, if you (or someone) can point me in the direction of the SVN file where $logtype is defined.
— V = IR (Talk • Contribs) 00:28, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Manual:$wgLogTypes?
— V = IR (Talk • Contribs) 00:31, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

trying to correctly inline format a map file with geodata

Hello I am trying to move a map, with geodata creating a dot layer, from an infobox into the article main body. However the standard thumb template is not allowing this. When I put the map syntax from the infobox into text sections, it displays correctly except the text wont wrap so it creates a ton of white space. This is a good map and this article needs it, but right now its only on the talk page because the formatting is so bad. I simply don't know the correct syntax to make it display as a normal thumbnail. Great East Japan Earthquake... 66.220.113.98 (talk) 18:54, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Resolved

 – The map has been moved -- John of Reading (talk) 07:52, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Template Help

• Template:Basketball kit
• Template:Baseball uniform

Both of those templates need tweaked so that they will not spew red-linked files when the parameters given dont have a valid file. [4] was a similar edit in order to prevent spewing errors. ΔT _{^{The only constant}} 03:13, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

• click the edit tab, copy, paste, save, done!
  — V = IR (Talk • Contribs) 04:08, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
  • Its not that simple and templates give me headaches. ΔT _{^{The only constant}} 13:58, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Google Chrome inserts an extra line break when adding a comment to a talk page

I asked about this on our Computing Reference Desk and was told this is might be a bug in our JavaScript and that I should post something here. Google Chrome inserts an extra line break when adding a comment to a talk page. For example, when I typed this,[5] I had only one blank line between my post and the previous one. By the time I submitted it, it changed into 2 blank lines which I fixed in my next edit.[6] A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 16:17, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

• Most browsers would show an extra line there, when 2 blank lines are placed above a posted reply. The way the wiki-typesetting works (MediaWiki software), by default, is to ignore 1 blank line above a colon-indented line, but treat extra blank lines as if being "<br />". The Wikipedia markup text does NOT act as a "string grammar" and so split lines an more than 1 blank-line might affect the formatted text. However even some browsers have had bugs where they re-formatted text, differently, when the HTML markup was split onto multiple lines, even though, by string-grammar rules, line-breaks should not affect the parsing (and display) of markup text. Remember: wiki-text does not follow string-grammar rules, and it is sensitive to extra blank lines, which change the meaning of the markup text. -Wikid77 17:38, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Preferences to suppress rulespam

Are there any more options in "Special:Preferences" to suppress all this extra "rulespam" which appears when someone tries to edit pages? Some of it comes from the "Page notice" blurbs, but the most verbose seems to be "View source" showing a long diatribe. I understand that new users, trying to edit a protected page, need to see the view-source rulespam, perhaps 6 or 7 times during their first week of editing, but I have seen the view-source rulespam "1,001 times" now. And, there's no "hide-this" button. Hence, I thought a preference-option could be set for "advanced user" to suppress most of the rulespam blurbs, and perhaps have "Page notice" read the "advanced-user" preference and reduce the page-notice rulespam, as well. -Wikid77 16:12, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

All those things have css classes and ID's just add the proper one to your common.css/vector.css with display:none; and it's fixed. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 08:56, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Actually the "view-source rulespam" doesn't. I requested one be added at the interface talk. — Bility (talk) 00:34, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Automatic edit summary for redirecting pages

Per Martin's suggestion I am posting here to ask whether or not it's possible to have the MediaWiki software detect redirect categorisation templates. The original edit request was here: MediaWiki talk:Autoredircomment#Edit request 2. —James ^{(Talk • Contribs)} • 10:11am • 00:11, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Everything is possible, most isn't implemented, some things are not a good idea. This seems like a lot of complexity for a small problem so I doubt anyone will implement, but bugzilla: is for feature requests. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 08:54, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Different versions of same article appearing

Hi. I am hoping you can assist me with a question from my talk page that I have been unable to answer, in particular the bolded part.

On 17 May 2011, I made five edits to the Les Misérables page under the library IP 205.189.194.208. I cannot recall whether they got through the first time (I believe they got rejected the first time or it took a while to save) but according to the page's history, they got through. On May 18th, I did three edits (as you described above) under 170.170.59.138. From what I recall, they also had problems or took a while to save, but once again according to the history, they got through. Now, if I type the URL with the accent and no underscore(Les Misérables), it shows the updated page, but when I type the title without the accent (Les_Miserables), it shows a previous version. I also type it with the accent and underscore (Les_Misérables) and it shows another earlier version. It's only when I click on "Edit" and then click on "Save Page" that the recent edits show up on all versions of the title ( a null edit). Even just clicking on "Edit" and reading the text on the edit page itself, the updated text is present. But when I delete my cache/browsing history, the "Les_Miserables" and "Les_Misérables" versions goes back to a previous page. Also on your talk page (this page), when my browsing history is clear (or cleared), the IP 170.170.59.138 on May 20 shows up in your page history, but not the question I posted. It even says at the bottom of the page "This page was last modified on 16 May 2011 at 02:17." Once again, when I click "Edit/View Source" and then click "Save Page" that the page and page history is fully updated, and the correct date and time of modification is stated. As you can see in this page's history, I did delete the question a few times. I even tried another IP (70.25.99.236) and it also gives the same problem. 170.170.59.138 (talk)

Thank you. Jevansen (talk) 05:58, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

For 'readers'/google, redirects in wikipedia are not real redirects. They are more like copies of the same content with another title. As such when one article is refreshed in the cache, not necessarily all alternative copies are updated at the same time, often leaving you with entry points where outdated content is presented to IP users. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 08:50, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Reference desk pages still broken

Hi, there are still ongoing problems with frequent stale pages (often days old) at the Reference Desk. Everything is badly broken and urgently needs looking at, IMO. These problems have been outstanding for months, with no sign of anything being done. See, for example:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Reference_desk#Still_broken

If anyone can do anything to escalate this, it would be greatly appreciated.

86.183.0.105 (talk) 11:43, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Watchlist emails

See also bugzilla:5220#c40, #Email notification notification, Wikipedia:Village_pump_(miscellaneous)#E-mails_from_Wikimedia [7], Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Question_about_Suggest_a_Bot [8], MediaWiki_talk:Watchlist-details#Talk_emails [9]

When did watchlist notification emails get enabled for enwiki? I just received one regarding my user talkpage. And how do I disable them for myself? --Cybercobra (talk) 22:02, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Turn it off in My preferences. As per a discussion above, it was recently added, but it presumed we wanted to be notified, not necessarily a great presumption.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:05, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

It only notifies you for edits to your talk page. There's more information about this in your watchlist, at the top where announcements usually go. Gary King (talk · scripts) 23:57, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

LOL, I didn't even notice the announcement until you mentioned it.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:00, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Likewise; I hadn't checked my watchlist yet and thus seen the notice. --Cybercobra (talk) 01:15, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

I received several of these annoying emails, and worked out for myself how to turn it off, well before seeing this announcement. May I state that I heartily disapprove of turning such a new feature on by default -- it creates a large amount of unwanted emails. The least-impact implementation would have been off-by-default. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 07:16, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

And I'm sure that there is a group of users who welcome finally being able to receive email notifications of their user talk pages, without having to even do anything for it. We should add a link to those emails on how you disable them btw. That is the very least we can do. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 11:22, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

bugzilla:29022. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 11:25, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

I agree that an assumption that the vast majority of users would want this was not necessarily a good one.

Furthermore, if you're going to switch something like this on, it'd be a good idea to mention in the text of the email that it's just been switched on - my first reaction to getting one of these was that my account had been hacked and someone was playing with my watchlist and preferences.

I presume that I missed all the debate and publicity before you switched it on. Debate: it's alluded above that there has been considerable support "elsewhere" for this, but no link is provided. Where was that debate? Was it properly and sensibly publicised so that many users could participate, eg at WP:CENT? And publicity: when the extensive debate concluded, I presume it was properly announced, in the Signpost etc - could you point me to the announcements?

I'll assume I missed all of these steps before someone pressed the green button. --Dweller (talk) 11:35, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't think there was any discussion for this. Per the mailing list post, it looks like it was just enabled immediately after a quick discussion among a few developers. Gary King (talk · scripts) 12:04, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

And to be honest, I don't really know why this crack team of developer-ninjas bothered -- I can't remember the last time that somebody posted something on my user talk that couldn't just as easily wait a day before being brought to my attention -- most of the time even the online alerts are simply a distraction from actual editing. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 12:30, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Sometimes i wonder why the crack team of developer-ninjas bother as well. Users seem so capable of implementing stuff themselves. They sure talk like they are capable. I propose we just hand over the project to the volunteers who see the need to complain about every little change, then they can endlessly discuss changes internally, while no one every writes any code or updates a server configuration. Seems like a much better plan. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 12:40, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia works through discussion and consensus. Implementing something like this without discussion and consensus was a bad idea, even if the idea itself was a good idea. This isn't "every little change", this was a big change - I repeat, I seriously thought my account had been hacked. --Dweller (talk) 14:11, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

MediaWiki is not Wikipedia, it is a very different community with a very different organisation, don't make the mistake of thinking they are more than loosely similar. Equally, Wikimedia is not Wikipedia, don't make the mistake of thinking that enwiki is anything more than the older brother of the 850 other Wikimedia projects. Had this change been specifically and solely on enwiki, it would be reasonable for there to be discussion here, although I am also fully in favour of reducing the inertia in this area. If it were a Wikimedia-wide change for social reasons, a WM-wide discussion on meta might have been appropriate, considering the magnitude (or otherwise) of the change. Since it was a change for purely technical reasons, it is no surprise that it followed only technical discussions. The only reason this feature was not activated when it was first added to MediaWiki many years ago were technical limitations; once those were removed, the software was set back to its default state. The default behaviour of the MediaWiki software is not defined by consensus on the English Wikipedia. Happy‑melon 15:02, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm with Dweller -- I do not consider Wikipedia suddenly and unaccountably spewing emails at me to be a "little change". My first reaction was 'how do I turn it off?' -- no answer. My second was 'why did they do this without asking me?' That something like this should be opt-in rather than opt-out should be blindingly obvious. The result was that something I neither needed nor wanted caused me a great deal of hassle. So I'm sorry, but I'm not feeling in the least bit grateful. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 14:20, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Just wanted to state that this is great news! I keep forgetting to check my talk page, and I often reply to messages 3 days late. Thanks for making this happen, guys. For those who aren't happy about this, it's just one click away. -- Luk ^talk 13:03, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

• Erm, this debate from nearly a year ago (thank you, my invisible friend) is when the idea seems to have been raised. It shows clear consensus that people liked the idea, but on an opt-in basis only. So, it's not that the developers didn't bother to gain consensus (though that would have been bad enough) - they ignored it, which is worse. Consensus has been ignored. Why? --Dweller (talk) 14:34, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Probably because the operations staff have beter things to do than go searching for such threads on all 850 wikis, most of which are in languages they don't even read. Happy‑melon 15:05, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Hmm. Were the developers not directed to that conversation when they were asked to make the change? Did someone misrepresent that conversation when asking the developers to make the change? --Dweller (talk) 15:14, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Oh for pete's sake, for those editors incapable of clicking on their preferences it might cause some inconvenience, but frankly there are far more important things to get worked up about. Oh noes! I got told that someone had left a message for me! Woe and gnashing of teeth! DuncanHill (talk) 14:42, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

I dunno, compared to some of the things Wikipedians get worked up about, it's not surprising that this procedural fiasco or glitch (depending on your POV) generates controversy. I think we should have a straw poll. :-) And returning to my favorite sore point of the last few days, clicking on My preferences isn't as easy as it was before the major response time problem.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:59, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

I know that I wasted a lot of time dealing with the slow-down, which caused all sorts of strange behaviors that I could not easily determine were on the WP end. Based on the threads here, it ppears that many of Wikipedia' most productive editors were likewise distracted trying to deal with the unannounced system problems. Who knows what the first-time users thought. Taken together, the total time wasted was probably considerable. Long ago admins were warned about deleting pages with long histories because of the impact on the databases. Let's hope the developers themselves don't loose track of that same requirement.   Will Beback  talk  09:24, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

These emails have been active on smaller wikis for a long time (e.g. commons). If I remember correctly they were disabled on enwiki for performance reasons. Apparently those have been fixed and the notifications have been re-enabled. You can turn them off in your preferences. It's not as if this is a new feature: it's an old feature that was disabled because of an old bug. — Carl (CBM · talk) 15:18, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

I think the checkmarks for boxes in Wikipedia Preferences are upside-down. Anybody else noticing that? Bus stop (talk) 15:57, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

I just noticed: the checkmarks are upside-down elsewhere as well, such as in the edit windows, such as the check-boxes for "This is a minor edit" and "Watch this page". Bus stop (talk) 16:37, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

My checkmarks are right side up - on My preferences and everywhere else. Try rotating your monitor. :-) --Bbb23 (talk) 16:44, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

This is pretty interesting: the checkmarks are upside-down when using Opera, but not when using Firefox or Safari. Thanks, Bbb23, that got me thinking! Bus stop (talk) 16:58, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

I just don't buy it. The change has been made because the developers have been asked to by enwiki (on two occasions), not because of their own agenda, Wikimedia's agenda or reinstating an old status quo. Both Bugzillas ([10]) and ([11]) clearly state the request is for default off/opt in. In the second of the bugzillas, Xeno even points out that it has been requested as default off, but is shrugged off.

So, that's the developers ignoring the consensus behind our request. Then, above, when the new feature is announced, it's wrongly stated that consensus was for it to be default on.

Even if I agreed that this is a small issue, it's been badly implemented, treading on consensus.

Moving forward, can someone who knows how to please now put some text into the emails that clarifies that this is a new feature so people receiving it for the first time are less likely to be alarmed. I'll notify the Signpost to get something in their next edition. --Dweller (talk) 16:05, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Dweller - you "just don't buy it"? Excuse me? Did you not read Tim's message and the resulting comments, are you saying he's lying, or are you just plain ignoring it? Alternatively, if he gave another reason somewhere else, I'd love for you to direct me there.

This was a Wikimedia-wide change to Mediawiki. enwiki doesn't have control over either of those things. Ale_Jrb^talk 18:15, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

I've not seen a message from Tim. Where is it? --Dweller (talk) 21:50, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

My god the pointlessness of discussions like this. Can't people go write articles or fix bugs and be productive? Input: The mails were broken, they got fixed. Output: people don't like change, no matter what it is. Get some perspective already, there are so many things to do (like make suggestions on how to improve the information inside the email notifications) yet people seem to want everything perfect in one go. More and more the English Wikipedia community is stifling development instead of fostering it. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 18:46, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Part of the problem is the often poor quality of communication between community and developers. I did try and address this with the WP:DEVMEMO approach, but it was never going to work if both developers and community didn't get behind it. Rd232 ^talk 22:19, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

@Dweller, [12]. It is also linked on everyone's Watchlist. Killiondude (talk) 21:54, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

I'd not seen it, thanks (it's not linked on my Watchlist, that I can see). I don't disagree with what Tim says - but the Bugzilla discussion does show that Xeno raised our objection to default on, and it was ignored. I have to say I'm surprised by the reaction I've had here. When a functionary even appears to ignore consensus, they're pilloried. Anyway, let's get on with it. The Signpost coverage has been and gone and I missed it four times, even when looking for it three times, so I'll concentrate on working on improving the email itself. I've already suggested making an improvement to the email notification, something that's been largely overlooked in the <shock, horror, he's criticising the developers> reaction. Where and how can I input into it? --Dweller (talk) 09:05, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

The relevant system messages are here: [13]. {{editprotected}} on the talk page is (I think) the standard way to go about getting system messages changed, though changes to something reasonably obvious like this would probably be better discussed somewhere. [stwalkerster|talk] 11:33, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

It's great that this feature is now available, I'm undecided whether I'll personally leave it on. I do wonder if it would have been possible to notify editors a bit more in advance of it being enabled, so that those who definitely didn't want it could have turned it off early? Rjwilmsi 22:59, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Not as easily as just turning it on. The software has a switch - the feature is either on (notifications possibly sent, user preference option visible), or off (notifications not sent, user preference option invisible). Some software changes would have had to have been made to allow users to enable/disable this setting before allowing mails to be sent - a software change that would add a (at the time) preference option which did absolutely nothing - leading to users getting confused that it wasn't working. Whatever happened, there would have been some suggestions for "improvements" - there's no way to win this one. [stwalkerster|talk] 11:33, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Strong +1 on TheDJ and again, thanks Tim. Dweller, discussions are linked also from bugzilla:5220#c40, and contain answers to the objection you quoted, which by the way was not ignored, see bugzilla:5220#c38. Nemo 18:41, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Comment: this (default on) is the right approach for the long tail of occasional editors. The transition was not handled well - the first email sent by the system should have been preceded by a one-off "welcome to WP email notifications" type email, and obviously each email should include details on how to turn it off (which apparently they didn't, but this is now being addressed). In sum, a good idea, with an unnecessarily rocky transition. Let it go, it's done. Rd232 ^talk 22:17, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Although I think I would have myself set the default to no and then let users set it themselves if they wanted the EMAIL its not a big deal. Worse case I can just delete it like junk mail. A couple of suggestions though:

1. A setting to not send the EMAIL unless I haven't logged on in 24 hours
2. An option to only send one EMAIL per day (or X amount of time the user prefers).
3. We should not send out EMAILS to users who are blocked or banned. (such as sockpuppets)
4. It would be great to be able to modify the EMAIL message or even make it include the message left on the talk page.

There are also a couple side effects of this that might benefit WP.

1. It may draw the attention of users who don't edit anymore and some may come back and do a few edits.
2. We may be able to use this EMAIL function for other things such as Newsletter notifications, notices of new changes to WP, etc. Some users may prefer getting newsletters via EMAIL rather than on the talk page.

So although there might be a few that find it irritating I think that there are more that may find it useful. --Kumioko (talk) 23:10, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

I disagree with a few points here (numbering same as above):

1. I've not logged on in about 20 days IIRC. A minor change to this - not made any logged action in the past 24 hours (tracking page views like this would likely be too heavy on the servers, and likely require schema changes for little benefit).
2. Only one email is actually sent until the user visits their talk page. When they've visited, it's fair game for the system to send them another email
3. Blocked users may find email notifications useful to determine that their unblock request has been dealt with for example. I don't see what the point of not sending them to sockpuppets etc is - if I was a sockpuppeteer I wouldn't bother setting an email address - too much unneeded hastle to create socks. Therefore, email notifications wouldn't be sent anyway for the simple reason of there being nowhere to send them to. Those that do set an email address are likely the master, or a user who got blocked for 3RR or something. These are however just guesses based on common sense - I have no way of knowing the actual data.
4. Modifying the message can be done through the system messages in the MediaWiki namespace.

Second set of points:

1. Users who don't edit any more probably won't get messages left on their talk page, so this will likely be only a small effect. Anyway, bringing good people back to Wikipedia can't be a bad thing, can it?
2. This is an email notification system that tells people if their talk page has been modified. It's not a system to send messages to users via email instead of on their talk page. If you want to receive newsletters via email alone (would be nice!), it needs to be done via Special:EmailUser or a mailing list.

[stwalkerster|talk] 23:23, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Proposed enhancement to email text

I'd welcome some eyes at MediaWiki_talk:Enotif_body#Proposed_amended_version, particularly as a) left out a bit of text b) I am not tech-savvy enough to be confident I've not messed anything around and c) I like working with consensus. Thank you. --Dweller (talk) 09:08, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

There's no point pfaffing around endlessly; this needs to be done, as users are already getting talk messages and hence emails. So I've gone ahead made some changes, linking to Help:Email notification which I've created. I've also removed some text which relates to email notifications for watched pages more generally; the feature is only enabled on English Wikipedia for user talk pages, so that's quite unnecessary confusion. PS Could someone ping my talk page so I can get a message and see what it looks like? Rd232 ^talk 22:34, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Question: is there any way for someone who's forgotten their password to remove email notifications? I suspect not, and whilst this won't be too common, it will be an issue sometimes. Any solutions, anyone? Rd232 ^talk 22:40, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

doh, if they've forgotten their password and still have emails coming through, they can reset their password via email. :) Rd232 ^talk 01:10, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Gray bar

The gray bar that shows up at the top of the screen previously only showed up every once in a while. Now it has expanded its reach and shows up on every single page (and why not?). What is the magic code to get rid of it? For Monobook. All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 12:46, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

You mean the centralnotice (the thing about board elections)? /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 15:26, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

No, just a random gray bar that pops up and takes time to load, every time. I know other monobook users have had it appear since those technical "improvements" were made in February. All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 22:53, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

No, it's the central notice, you have just hidden it, but the 'hidden' code doesn't seem to fully hide it on Monobook. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 08:57, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

It's not the notice. I already removed that. The gray bar is obviously part of these great technological improvements that arrive whenever Wikipedia starts working too quickly. All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 13:45, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

regex problem redux

 Reopened (Previous attempt)

Weeks ago, I and others invested time confirming that a November 2008 addition to the English language spam blacklist, in response to "markets.com" spam by 98.219.81.190, had unintended side-effects. After consulting with the admin who had introduced the regex for the original problem, it was confirmed that the regex needed to change.

An editor who is part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam tried repeatedly to fix the problem, with no success. With the help of http://regexpal.com/ I came up with an idea, but my suggested didn't work. There have been other suggestions as well, but no one has come up with the fix yet. I brought the problem up at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Spam_blacklist#Discussion hoping for advice I could pass along to those watching MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist#Troubleshooting_and_problems, but no one at meta bothered to comment. So I am hoping the village pump can help. Feel free to comment here or at MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist; I'll be watching both. Thank you in advance. 67.101.5.242 (talk) 05:52, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

There was a similar problem with "way.com" which seems to have been fixed - see meta:Talk:Spam blacklist/Archives/2010-10#way.com and meta:Spam blacklist. Peter E. James (talk) 12:59, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, your suggestion was essential in getting someone to fix the problem. For more details, see Talk:Ingles. 67.101.6.37 (talk) 21:05, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

User talk notification

Is there is a way, that I can change the colour of my user talk notification? Armbrust ^{Talk to me} _Contribs 19:59, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Try adding div.usermessage { background-color: #FFCE7B !important; } to your Special:MyPage/skin.css. User<Svick>.Talk(); 21:56, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, added. Now just need a message to my talk page to test it. :) Armbrust ^{Talk to me} _Contribs 23:33, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Added a test for you above. — Bility (talk) 00:37, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

dammit, stop that! There's a page specifically for that around here somewhere...
— V = IR (Talk • Contribs) 05:51, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Haha! I guess you could look at WP:ORANGE. — Bility (talk) 06:54, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

For consistency, I suggest setting border-color as well. Feezo (send a signal | watch the sky) 04:10, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Database error query

Just a quick query. When saving I am getting a page saying

"Database error"

as well as the following text

A database query syntax error has occurred. This may indicate a bug in the software. The last attempted database query was:

   (SQL query hidden)

from within function "GlobalUsage::insertLinks". Database returned error "1290: The MySQL server is running with the --read-only option so it cannot execute this statement (10.0.6.41)".

What is this about? My edits do appear to be saving however. Simply south...... unintentionally misspelling fr 5 years 00:03, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

I've been getting this for about 20 minutes, during which my edits weren't saving. They are now though. doomgaze (talk) 00:06, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

One of the master database servers crashes last night around this time, which of course generates a lot of trouble for all write actions. There was some fallout and ripple effects, and stuff settled down after a reboot and about 20 minutes of wait time. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 11:36, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Image caching?

Shortly after uploading, I made a change to the file Media:Schur_lattice_paths.svg. It seems this change has not been applied to the image as it appears in articles, or even on the image page and thumbnails, before actually clicking through to see the svg. It's not a browser issue, I checked on multiple computers (some only after the second image was uploaded, so no chance of browser cache interfering). Will this be fixed automatically?--Sam^Talk 05:06, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

In future, try purging the image description page on Commons. I've just done that to the above image. Graham87 07:24, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Template broken with unexpected >

Hi, there's something wrong with the {{Deleted template}} wrapper - "Expression error: Unexpected > operator". I don't know what the problem is. Anyone? Rd232 ^talk 11:39, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

It displays an error in preview because REVISIONID only exists in saved versions. Peter E. James (talk) 11:54, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Right. User:Tothwolf has come up with a fix - thanks! Rd232 ^talk 14:06, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

 Fixed I changed the logic to check if REVISIONID exists before comparing it with an #ifexpr. [14] It will now also display the notice during a page preview. It should be safe enough to assume that if someone is previewing a page, the new saved page will have a higher REVISIONID anyway. --Tothwolf (talk) 14:09, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Section editing links not appearing for some reason

Can anyone see why the section editing links are not appearing on Wikipedia:WikiProject Animal rights? SlimVirgin ^{TALK|CONTRIBS} 17:57, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

There is a __NOEDITSECTION__ a few lines above the Recognized content section header. —DoRD (talk) 18:05, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Brilliant, many thanks! SlimVirgin ^{TALK|CONTRIBS} 18:17, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Pages failing to load

Since about 6:30 am UTC, I am having severe problems getting the site to load. Pages load very slowly, usually waiting for bits.wikimedia.org, and in most cases timeout. Occasionally they load minus the skin. I'm running Win 7 (Home Premium) and Firefox just updated itself to 3.6.17 when I rebooted to see whether that would fix the problem. Other sites are loading, so it appears to be a Wikipedia problem. It's happening for me with de. as well as en. Apologies if this has been reported but I don't see it in the contents for the page and this edit screen still tells me it's reading en.wikipedia.org so I hope this posts! Yngvadottir (talk) 15:25, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm running XP Pro with Chrome and experiencing the same thing. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:58, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm using Windows 7 and not encountering any problems. IE9 Windows 7 X64 --Tyw7  (☎ Contact me! • Contributions)   → Shake 'n Bake 16:12, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

The Operations team is looking into this now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiwooster (talk • contribs) 17:12, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

• I also had timeouts for more than 3 hours, but with Firefox 3.6.13 (not 3.6.17), and used IE for slow access (with fewer timeouts). The wide impact of today's slow response can be seen by observing page-view stats for the next few days, such as for article "blanket" (but don't view that article, to avoid "epistemic feedback"): stats May-2011 (averaged 208 pageviews-per-day in April). Some other articles can be used as "litmus test" articles, which have had steady daily pageviews as immune to the typical weekday-rises of many articles, such as "Beach" (which rises ~50% from weekend 950 to weekday 1,450 pageviews). Response seems better now. -Wikid77 17:42, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

The pageview stats seem to indicate no hindrance to reader interest: whatever slow-down occurred for hours, on 10 May, did not cause many readers (world-wide) to stay away for the whole day. -Wikid77 16:24, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

• I have been having connection problems as described since at least 00:01 UTC on 10 May affecting only Wikipedia pages (i.e. not CNN/google etc). Some page configurations, such as simple diffs, load faster than others, timing out on quite a few, editing and saving are problematic; script-running is slow to a crawl too. I am Hong Kong based, have tried a public machine (IE on W7), my work (FF on NT) and home (Chrome on OSX) machines all give similar problems – not browser-related for what I can tell. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 04:05, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
• For what it's worth, I'm having consistent issues loading pages here. Something like a quarter of the time Wikipedia pages fail to load (general Internet connectivity is fine). RxS (talk) 18:30, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

• Me, too. I don't know about 25% of the time but VERY frequently. Sometimes on something as simple as clicking on My watchlist. Most annoying.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:34, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

25% might be a bit high but not by much. It lasts a couple minutes then is fine. It is annoying to say the least. Anyone have any idea what's going on? RxS (talk) 18:37, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

(smiling) I didn't say 25% was too high. Might actually be low. Annoying was a diplomatic word.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:42, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

The problem is no better today.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:47, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

• It was much improved the day after my complaint above; it has deteriorated again today – noticeably slower, but tolerable. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 17:54, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

• For me, it started on May 13 and has continued since with little change for the better or for the worse, although it comes in waves.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:38, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Bump. It does come in waves, but never goes away and is bad tonight for example. RxS (talk) 03:12, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

I would describe it as intermittent but frequent and consistent. The phrase "never goes away" is particularly apt, although I might say "never completely goes away" instead as occasional clicks work fine. Is anyone investigating this? It seems lately it's just reports from me, RxS, and Ohconfucius.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:54, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

I've had the same problem intermittently (using XP & Chrome). It seems to happen more on some specific pages, especially article history, although maybe my brain is just trying to find patterns in randomness. Hasn't happened in the last few hours. bobrayner (talk) 14:10, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

• I'm so glad this isn't just me. I've been having this problem for a week or more. I use Windows XP and Firefox 4.0.1. Is anyone trying to look into this? --Auntof6 (talk) 03:39, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

• Look at the topics ("Slow load time" and its subsection) lower down on this page.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:07, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Articles by quality statistics - broken for National Railway Museum

Resolved

Can anyone give me guidance as to why I have no importance statistics in the article assessment quality table for the National Railway Museum, shown below. Also, according to summaries at individual category pages, I have 15 articles assessment for quality and 28 assessed for importance ... but 17 articles turning up in the table. I've looked at the job queue and poked the table at the update page. That exhausts my knowledge. All help welcomed; thanks. --Tagishsimon (talk) 14:37, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

National Railway Museum-related pages by quality
Quality
	Total
Assessed	0
Total	0

Okay. So it was a lag in the toolserver database.

Performance problems and functionality quirks

I've been editing WP articles for years but in the past few months I've perceived a rise in the number of performance problems or functionality quirks I've been experiencing. I'll briefly mention the types of symptoms I've seen.

Description of performance problems and rendering quirks

The obvious performance issues are pretty self-evident: I'll make an edit, and the version I see after clicking on "save page" doesn't have my changes, or perhaps there is a delay before my changes are reflected in the article's history; in some cases, I'll do a WP:PURGE, which often seems to update the current version, but not always (as in today). Almost always I follow WP:SLOW and don't think anything more about it; if there's doubt about my changes being saved, my Special:Contributions page seems like it is always up-to-date even if article history or the current article version is out-of-date.

But in recent months I've started seeing some weird quirks in WP's page rendering and other functionality problems. They sometimes seem to be accompanied by slower-than-average performance. One common example is the illusion of page protection/semi-protection. I edit without logging in and as vandalism and page patrollers have clashed more often, I've had to get more and more used to pages being protected or semi-protected. A few months ago I clicked on "view source" anyway, and I'm finding there are a good number of cases where I am allowed to edit the article. I don't know if its just with semi-protected articles or if other kinds of protection behave that way. I can say that in all cases when "view source" is displayed, section editing is never available.

Another page rendering quirk I've seen is the occasional dynamic change in what wp:User style a page is rendered in. Obviously when you don't log in, you get the default style, but I've had multiple cases in the past few months where after I click on "save page" I get results back that are rendered in a different style than the default, or, more often, in a raw version seemingly rendered without the benefit of any style sheet at all. I should point out that this particular symptom hasn't happened in a couple of months, so it might have be a transient effect of some style tweaking that I think was going on not too long ago.

It seems plausible to me that this style rendering quirks could be attributed to performance problems; I usually use firefox, and I believe that when my local internet connection is slow, it can manifest as a delay or even a failure to apply style sheets to the current page of any website, WP included.

I am curious if others are seeing the same things in these past months. I also have a question: if I want to to get a performance status and a state of health check about WP, where's the best place to go? I known about http://status.wikimedia.org/ and http://ganglia.wikimedia.org/; I also know that WP:CHAT and certain email aliases/archives are available. But I've got to think that there must be some page in the WP: namespace that summarizes WP health and performance from the user's perspective instead of the subsystem perspective presented by those sources. I've tried WP:HEALTH, WP:STATUS, WP:PERFORMANCE, all to no avail, as well as WP:FAQ WP:FAQ/Technical, and FAQs mentioned at the village pumps. I've tried some archive searches too, and briefly resorted to googling various topics.

Thanks in advance. 67.101.7.230 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:29, 23 May 2011 (UTC).

This is probably related to this thread above on this page. A lot of people are frustrated. I'm on a semi-Wikibreak until it's fixed, it's too frustrating. (Obviously not a full break or I wouldn't be typing this.) -- Atama頭 19:43, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Google Chrome inserts line on talk pages

This issue was posted at the Reference Desk five days ago, and the poster was told to bring the issue here; I don't think they have, so I will add it. Often, when I write a post on a talk page, Chrome adds an extra line break before my indent. (Examples in the link above.)

Can you help?  ajmint  (talk•edits) 19:29, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Is this the same issue as #Google Chrome inserts an extra line break when adding a comment to a talk page, above? -- John of Reading (talk) 19:36, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, didn't see that (just searched archives).  ajmint  (talk•edits) 19:39, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Why are diffs so inappropriately "inexact"?

Hi, I've been editing Wikipedia for many years. I'm shocked that the recognition capability for diffs is so lousy -- it's so rudimentary it seems like something from the 1970s or earlier. If you move one paragraph, everything under that paragraph shows up as completely new, even though it isn't. And so on. Why is the Wikipedia diff software unable to recognize exact text below a deletion, and so forth? Why can't this be improved? It's not rocket science, as they say. Word processors mastered this decades ago. And since diffs are such a vital part of any reliable editor's monitoring work, why isn't this a priority to reform? Text recognition capability seems to be a fairly easy thing to upgrade. Softlavender (talk) 10:13, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Which word processors have mastered diff calculation? I can't even think of any that provide diffs in the first place. Microsoft Word can "track changes" because it can watch you as you type - this is not the same problem as providing the difference between two texts. Unfortunately, rocket science is a lot easier than diffs. OrangeDog (τ • ε) 11:10, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

I would repeat OrangeDog's rhetorical question - which word processors have mastered diff calculation? The "problem" with present-day diff calculation is that it is structural rather than semantic, meaning it looks at each text body as a linear batch of characters rather than as a group of hierarchically related expressions (doc, section, subsection, sentence, phrase, word). As far as I know, no commonly available application comes anywhere close to this treatment. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 13:15, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

User:Cacycle/wikEdDiff is in my opinion much better than the mediawiki default. Rjwilmsi 14:48, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes wikEdDiff is definitely better. Gary King (talk · scripts) 17:50, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Why doesn't Wikipedia use that, then? Sheesh, it's been around for over 4 years, and the current Wiki platform is dinosauric and awful. Softlavender (talk) 19:08, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Yet no one seems to volunteer to rewrite wikedDiff in C (programming language). Oh right, most of the software is volunteer work, so easy to forget. Anyone can submit patches. Have you considered trying to make the improvement yourself ? Apparently it is SO easy to do. Sheesh —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 07:54, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Good point, but MediaWiki is coded in PHP, no? —DoRD (talk) 12:21, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

wikEdDiff is a user script -- a piece of JavaScript code executed on Wikipedia pages. It executes on the user's machine (the HTTP "client" machine, vs. one of WP's "server" machines). There would be relative disadvantages to that with an implementation written in either C or php. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 15:16, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Oh (slaps forehead), I hadn't noticed that this is the tech-savvy vpt page. The talk of rewrite no doubt implicitlyv referred to updating the mediawiki diff code (no doubt written in php) to function similarly to wikEdDiff. Pls ignore the above statement of the obvious. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 15:31, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Actually, the diff code used on Wikipedia is written in C++ as a PHP extension. There is a pure PHP version, but it's too inefficient for use on such a high-traffic site. Mr.Z-man 19:53, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Wikidiff does resync in many cases. (Yes it can be better - there is a tool that marks moved stuff in blue - is that WikiEd? - but just wanted to defend the poor ol' native tool. ) Rich Farmbrough, 12:53, 1 May 2011 (UTC).

I lol'd at "dinosauric." --MZMcBride (talk) 19:28, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

I agree that the edit diff's are an area that could use major improvement. Unfortunately, this requires a coder willing to do something about it. I think improving the edit diffs ought to be considered a high priority issue. It's something that the Wikimedia Foundation should pay somebody to improve. It's probably not that tough of a coding job but would have a major positive impact for editors. Jason Quinn (talk) 00:29, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

The issue is less one of technical solution as of dotting all the i's and crossing all the t's on the deployment as it is such a central feature of Wikipedia. Whoever does this needs to have some really good code hygiene and business analysis skills. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 01:51, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

• Ultimately, a "difference-bracket" option is needed to determine how many matching lines would indicate a re-sync of the 2 texts. Currently, comparisons get out-of-sync when a blank line is introduced (which ain't rocket science to fix). The hardest texts to re-synchronize would be multiple short lists with items repeated between lists, and that is why a "difference bracket" line count is needed, to overcome confusion when thinking lines in another list are a match to a changed list (which would be viewed as an inserted list rather than changed). In a sense, a blank line is a one-line list which matches every other such list, as appearing to be the same blank line, further down. -Wikid77 16:24, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
  • One of the intrinsic problems of standard matching algorithms is their focus on the line as opposed to the matching text block. This line-centric analysis is inherently stymied by the blank-line issue as you've pointed out. Line-centric approaches are certainly suitable for typesetting situations and to situations where data is presented in short or non-wrapping lines of relatively consistent length. What we need is an evolution forward from the "difference-bracket" kludge you've proposed as a way around the line-centric behavior of most difference engines. Hopefully someone with text analytics and deep regular expression skills has time to consider this. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 03:49, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

• Setting difference-bracket line-count is typical: The consideration of the "difference-bracket" setting, as specifying a line-count bracket to re-sync the matching lines, is not a "kludge" but rather, reality of how people edit, IMHO. People edit in line-mode, splitting text into separate lines, to make editing easier, and almost all articles have multiple lines inside. An editor could treat the markup as following a "string grammar" with no split lines, as just one massive text block containing many "<br />" connected, internally, as a continuous stream of markup text; however, "everyone" splits the markup into lines. This is especially common in lists, where very few people put a list as "AA<br />BB<br />CC" but instead, editors put 3 separate lines (for "AA" then "BB" then "CC"). A continuous mass of text would be unwieldy, to most people, and that is why differencing, or markup-comparison, has been treated as a line-mode comparison for decades in other computer systems. By contrast, the WYSIWYG interfaces are severely hampered by the difficulty of showing before/after changes, without shifting the generated display window. A difference-bracket must be used in highly repetitive lines, such as tables of similar data, and the resync problem can go hundreds of lines unless a difference-bracket line-count is specified to logically resync the text. For very long paragraphs, editors could purposely split the text, with an HTML-style comment ("<--Text split for short diff-list-->"). Similarly, the category-links could be scattered across the article's markup, but putting them as separate lines, at the bottom, makes editing and additions easier (with fewer duplicates). A similar "search-bracket" could be specified for search-engine matches, with repeated search phrases, but as a "word count" because people are expecting words in most searches, rather than lines with strings of markup symbols. However, it is helpful to consider alternative schemes to see why they would be more difficult for users to control. -Wikid77 15:37, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
• I've been complaining about this for years (well, I've complained twice, I think, in four years, probably!). WP's diff generation is totally rubbish (in certain common circumstances) and full of basic schoolboy errors. Last time I mentioned it, I think I was told that the source was available, and if the errors were so "basic" I should fix it myself! He-he, very amusing! 86.183.0.105 (talk) 12:02, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
• I've invoked the WikEd Gadget via my Preferences and it does provide a very different editing and version comparison world, one that is going to take a little getting used to, but which is much richer than the current editing and diff interfaces. I think that evangelizing about the WikEd Gadget to get more people to use it (is it possible to determine how many use it now?) could lead to the desired progression of the project through emerging interested talent, including the required rewrite needed for integration into WikiMedia software. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 02:30, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

  WikEd is great, I use it myself, and it seems to be extremely popular. The only real problem with it is that it's a resource hog. Anyone using an older computer probably shouldn't use it. Even with my band new laptop, I still turn it off occasionally.
  — V = IR (Talk • Contribs) 03:06, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Section link problem from main page

The main page's "In the News" section has a link about the WTO ruling regarding Boeing and Airbus. The link is Competition between Airbus and Boeing#World Trade Organization litigation but when clicking this link, my browser (Firefox 4) sends me to the bottom of that article instead of to the relevant section. I can't see any problem with the link name itself. Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:03, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

I had the same thing happen to me. I think it started happening off and on (to me) when the ResourceLoader or something was changed on the site. Killiondude (talk) 08:58, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Editing toolbar disappeared

From one of my browsers (Firefox). It is still in Chrome. Any idea what I might've messed up? Restarting the browser is not helping, I've recently installed a new firewall but disabling it does not restore the toolbar. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:42, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Adding some other issues, it seems that for Wikipedia in Firefox, my Javascript is not working. Why could that be? PS. It doesn't work on en wiki and Commons, but it works on pl wiki and many other websites... --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:12, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Small problem with the timeline tag

Please assist I was looking at the timeline inserted into Sikhism (permanent link) using the <timeline> tag and I noticed that if you use the following scheme:

PlotData=

  width:10 textcolor:black align:left anchor:from shift:(12,-6)

  bar:Nanak from:1469 till:1539 color:1

...

It creates a timeline that includes the text "1469-1539" in the legend at the bottom, rather than the typographically correct "1469–1539" (that is, it generates a hyphen rather than an ndash, cf. WP:DASH.) Can someone amend this? Should I open a bug at Bugzilla for this? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:38, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Although this should be a noncontroversial request at bugzilla:, I'd personally wait until the current dispute over dashes/hyphens is resolved before filing a bug. /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 16:43, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

IP's contributions not showing up when using popups

Clicking on [15] which I sourced through an edit, I find the IP's contributions. Going through popups [16] I don't find any, why is this? Dougweller (talk) 04:31, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

The contribs show for me with Popups. Try hard refreshing the current page, and then the contribs page. Gary King (talk · scripts) 05:24, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, but the first url still doesn't show anything. I did shift/F5 in Chrome and also copied it to IE which I hadn't used for the url before. Dougweller (talk) 08:02, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

• The answer lies within the 'User:' in the popups' url (note it's not present in the former link). Somehow, it inserts the 'User:' whilst it ought not to. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 08:47, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

I see a contribs list on a mouseover of both links. I have had similar issues in the past, however. Killiondude (talk) 08:55, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Mouseover works for both also, but the 2nd url (not the first, sorry) still doesn't. Dougweller (talk) 09:04, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Usually when this happens, refreshing the page fixes it for me. When Popups content doesn't load, I think it's usually because it times out when trying to contact the server, since the site can be slow sometimes. Gary King (talk · scripts) 18:01, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Article Feedback tool showing up on redirects

Why Presently, users can rate Kierkegaard, even though it's simply a redirect to Søren Kierkegaard. What is the purpose of this? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:38, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

This is accidental and Eloquence has already stated here somewhere, that they will look into that this week. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 07:30, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

A fix has been implemented and should go live with the next deployment.--Eloquence* 17:46, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Arecaceae

Anyone else notice anything wrong with this page, or is it just me? Angryapathy (talk) 16:52, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Seems normal to me; could you describe what is wrong with the page as you see it (or take a screenshot)? /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 17:47, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Looks fine to me too. If you didn't specify what the problem was, I assume that something went horribly wrong at the beginning of the page, probably the infobox, since the timeline at the top can perhaps look odd in certain circumstances. Just try bypassing your cache to get the latest version of the page. Someone vandalized the infobox so it was broken for a brief moment but it's fixed now. Gary King (talk · scripts) 17:59, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

My gadgets are gone most of the time

My gadgets are gone — not all the time, but most of the time. They happen to appear on this page while I'm editing this message, but not on any other en-Wikipedia pages I have open. No popups, no clock in the upper right corner of my display, no collapsing items in the navigation menu with vector skin, no "purge" link, page and user options no longer appear in drop-down menus on the toolbar. Even worse, external links no longer open in a separate window. It's as if all my advanced user preferences are being completely ignored!

Searching the archives, I found Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 88#Did something happen to popups?, but the advice there hasn't fixed my problem with popups, in spite of me adding lines to my common.css and vector.js pages. According to that discussion, there's a problem with a resource loader that has yet to be fixed.

In the meantime, what can I do to get back my normal Wikipedia functionality? This has been going on for about 4 days now. ~Amatulić (talk) 00:10, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm going to go ahead and assume those are all gadgets (i.e. JavaScript stuff), in which case, one of your gadgets has an error in it that only triggers on some pages, breaking all the other gadgets. Do you get any errors in your browser window? What browser are you using? Regards, - Jarry1250 ^{[Weasel? Discuss.]} 19:55, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes, those are all gadgets available in the user preferences. I am using Google Chrome. The odd thing is, sometimes everything works, like this morning, and sometimes I get none of those gadgets I set, like right now.

Here are the errors I get in the Javascript console window when I look at a page.

• load.php: GET http://bits.wikimedia.org/en.wikipedia.org/load.php?… undefined (undefined)
• index.php:7611: Uncaught ReferenceError: hookEvent is not defined
• index.php:8: Uncaught TypeError: Cannot call method 'wikiUrlencode' of undefined
• index.php:198: Uncaught ReferenceError: addOnloadHook is not defined
• index.php:19: Uncaught ReferenceError: importStylesheet is not defined
• index.php:7: Uncaught ReferenceError: addOnloadHook is not defined
• index.php:5: Uncaught ReferenceError: addOnloadHook is not defined
• load.php:1: Uncaught TypeError: Cannot read property 'addPortletLink' of undefined
• load.php:1: Uncaught ReferenceError: importScript is not defined
• index.php:369: Uncaught ReferenceError: addButton is not defined
• geoiplookup.wikimedia.org: GET http://geoiplookup.wikimedia.org/ undefined (undefined)

Many of those errors appear to be related to general utility functions and unrelated to scripts I have. Particularly addOnLoadHook looks like it may be related to the resource loader. If you look at User:Amatulic/vector.js you'll see that I don't have much there. I've commented out all but what I consider most necessary, and it made no difference. What I have has worked fine until a few days ago.

If it matters, here are the gadgetrs I have set in my user preferences. None of these things are working at the moment:

Browsing gadgets:

• Navigation popups (also I added this manually to my vector.js to no avail)

Editing gadgets: None

User interface gadgets:

• Add a "Purge" tab to the top of the page
• Add a clock in the personal toolbar
• Add page and user options to drop-down menus on the toolbar.
• Allow /16 and /24-/32 CIDR ranges on Special:Contributions forms as well as wildcard prefix searches
• Display an assessment of an articl's quality as part of the page header for each article.
• Focus the cursor in the search bar on loading the Main Page
• Open external links in a new tab/window

User interface gadgets: editing:

• Add an [edit] link to the lead section of a page (this doesn't work for me now)
• Allow up to 50 more characters in edit summaries.

Library compatibility gadgets: none

~Amatulić (talk) 01:04, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

What's really bizarre about this is the unpredictability. In the same browsing session, sometimes I get my gadgets including popups, and sometimes not. Actually, most of the time not. And this started just last week. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:57, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

...And the problem is not my scripts. I have no scripts running in my vector.js page. This happens on every browser I try (Chrome, IE8, Firefox).

I do notice that the browser spends a long time waiting for bits.wikimedia.org. It appears to generate an error 503 (service unavailable) rather frequently. It happens on Commons too: the file upload wizard fails to start, apparently because of a failure with bits.wikimedia.org. Might this be the source of my problem?

Try it yourself. Click on this link, which my browser attempted to access from Commons: http://bits.wikimedia.org/commons.wikimedia.org/load.php?debug=false&lang=en&modules=ext!uploadWizard&skin=vector&version=20110510T164824Z

I pretty consistently get "Error 503 Service Unavailable" with a "Guru meditation" message below suggestive of the old Amiga computer. ~Amatulić (talk) 16:53, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Ha. Sometimes my gadgets work. And sometimes I can click on that link above. The content begins:

mediaWiki.loader.implement("ext.uploadWizard",function($,mw){(function($){function Tipsy(element,options){this.$element=$(element);this.options=options;this.enabled=true;this.displayed=false;this.fixTitle();}

which suggests my problem may indeed be the resource loader failing to load, on those far-too-frequent occasions (beginning just over a week ago) when the resource at bits.wikimedia.org generates a 503 error. ~Amatulić (talk) 23:12, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

It's been 2 or 3 weeks now since this problem started. Anyone have any idea what's going on? It does seem to be a problem with the availability of bits.wikimedia.org, as far as I can tell. ~Amatulić (talk) 18:12, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Both of your links are working for me. Have you tried using a different internet connection and seeing if that's the issue? If not, try disabling all of your gadgets and scripts, and see if you get an error from bits. —mc10 (t/c) 23:03, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

I've done that (disabled everything), except I've tried from multiple computers on the same network rather than from different networks. I don't see why bits should suddenly give problems on my network when it was working before and I have no problems with any other sites.

The problem has been difficult to repeat this week. Things seem to have improved somewhat; those links are also working for me at the moment. But I can never predict when it will happen. Sometimes I get popups on my watchlist, sometimes not. ~Amatulić (talk) 18:33, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Image update! GAH!

It's really getting on my nerves, images don't update, even if I purge really hard! Are there any admins in here who can fix this? --Beao 23:21, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm seeing the same problem. Modified images uploaded 6-12 hours earlier aren't showing up, even after clearing my browser cache and clicking on the Wikipedia clock display to force purging. This has been going on for several days now, and it doesn't matter what time of day it is. I first encountered it on 23 May 2011, while trying to upload a new version of a rather small JPEG image, and every image since then has been a pain in the ass. Somebody obviously monkeyed with the server settings; thumbnail regeneration has become nonexistent. Could it be that the purging command is no longer being executed? —Quicksilver^{T @} 16:18, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Project: Kill

Hi. I created Project: Kill as a redirect to a Leslie Nielsen film which actually has that name. However, it has placed it as a Wikipedia:Kill wrongly. The redirect is currently up for deletion at here. I need a tech guru to move Project Kill to Project: Kill as the title of the film article and evade it going to Wikipedia:kill.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:53, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

This is not possible. "Project:" is the native name of the Wikipedia namespace. It cannot be used as an article name. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 14:51, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

See also: Wikipedia:Namespace#Aliases. On Wikisource for instance, Project: redirects to the Wikisource namespace. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 15:03, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

It explicitly says there: "Project: Mersh is located at Project Mersh (Project: is an alias for the Wikipedia namespace)". עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 11:56, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Why is Wikipedia so horribly slow?

Wikipedia was never quick, but now it's slower on broadband than it was on a telephone line. I've just have seen a moderately long page (60,658 bytes) take over 3 minutes. The main culprit may be bits.wikimedia. --Philcha (talk) 18:26, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

I misread your section title as, "Why is Wikipedia so horrible now?" and was tempted to agree with you ;) ╟─TreasuryTag►person of reasonable firmness─╢ 18:28, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Changed "horrible" to "horribly" in section title. —Quicksilver^{T @} 16:33, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Please see #Slow load time above - although, it was supposed to have been fixed by now. —DoRD (talk) 19:09, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Stale article histories

For days I have been seeing seeing stale article histories. Example: Revision history of Louis XIV of France stops on May 19, even though following the "next edit" link via "Compare selected revisions" shows at least 6 more edits. Those extra edits show up in user histories, just not in the article history. This is not the only article with a stale history, just an example. I have cleared my cache many times, turned off Firefox 4.0.1 and turned off rebooted my computer. Is it me or is it Wikipedia? 71.234.215.133 (talk) 19:38, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

This seems to be only for logged out users, but yes, I've seen this too. - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 21:09, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

This should be fixed now, the same thing happened with newer versions of images. Apparently the slowness of the servers, also had another issue, sometimes purge commands would get lost, and the squids never received the latest versions of articles because of that. Both issues should be fixed now I think, but i'm not totally 100% sure. I'm not sure if the WMF is sure yet. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 22:35, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

It is still occurring. More information: if I edit an article the stale histories update; if I clear the cache after that the stale histories return. I find this frustrating, as one of the stale histories is to this project page. 71.234.215.133 (talk) 11:24, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

"Slowness of the servers" isn't a valid explanation. Somebody monkeyed with settings or software and broke something. I've seen image thumbnails not being updated for upwards of 10-12 hours, and the purge command doesn't force an update anymore, either. —Quicksilver^{T @} 16:31, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Overwriting .mid-files

Is it just me or is there something special about .mid sound files that makes it impossible to overwrite one with a new version? Yesterday I tried to upload a new version over an existing .mid file at File:Later Folia.mid. The upload log correctly registered my new version, but it's still the old version that gets played. Purging the page didn't help, and it's now almost a day. What am I doing wrong? Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:16, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

I can't answer the "What am I doing wrong" bit, but would a G6 deletion to allow upload of the new file work? Ok, it's possibly bending the rules about an admin using the tools to do something a non-admin can't, but as it's with the intention of improvement, possibly WP:IAR is involable. Mjroots (talk) 08:29, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, I don't think I would want to do that. In that case it would be better to just upload it under a new name. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:39, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

There's been a problem for the last few days in uploading modified images, too. New thumbnails aren't showing up for hours, although when one clicks on the full-size link, it is clear that the update has been accepted. I uploaded an edited image 10 hours ago, and it still isn't showing the new version thumbnail in the article. There may be a similar problem going on with all other media files. I first saw the problem with images on May 23, 2011. —Quicksilver^{T @} 16:27, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

page view is very large scale

The Wikipedia web page is such a large scale that the text is broken down to 5 or less words per line and all other features such as images are outside my view. I need to scroll over to access them.

This is the only web page that has this effect, so I don't believe it has anything to do with my settings.

My internet explorer is version 6.0.

Where can I view any responses?

Sue Haley <e-mail redacted> — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.83.133.249 (talk) 12:59, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

You probably accidentally enlarged your font size for Wikipedia. To undo it, try Ctrl + Num -, or the View menu (I think it's called something like that in IE). User<Svick>.Talk(); 18:56, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

To restore default font/zoom size in most browsers, user [Ctrl]-0 (press the "zero" key while holding the Ctrl key down). —Quicksilver^{T @} 19:07, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Making a compare from a history list - "on a new browser tab or browser page" option would be useful

• When I have called for a long edit history list display, it takes up my time and Wikipedia's server's time to make the table, if it is long. When I then call for a compare of edits, the compare display overwrites the history display, and when afterwards I click the browser's left-arrow to go back to the history display, I must wait while Wikipedia's server remakes the history display. It would be useful if I could call the compare display to come on a new browser tab or on a new browser page. (I use Firefox.) Anthony Appleyard (talk) 13:57, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Try the TabSubmit add-on. I just now installed it because your post reminded me how much I have missed the SubmitToTab add-on that was lost in an update somewhere, and it seems to work the same way (Firefox 4.0.1). - 2/0 (cont.) 14:41, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

That's a great extension for something I knew "had to be doable somehow"! Wish it worked with the javascript bullsh^Wweb-systems I have to use at work, but everywhere else seems to work fine. Thanks for finding it. DMacks (talk) 15:15, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

hello

Hello can you please take a look at my User:Penpaperpencil/modern.css page? It is saying this to me: "Code that you insert on this page could contain malicious content capable of compromising your account. If you are unsure whether code you are adding to this page is safe, you can ask at the appropriate village pump. The code will be executed when previewing this page under some skins, including Monobook." and I didn't understand it. It would be really helpful if you could help :) PenpaperpencilTalk09:06,5/26/2011

That is a standard notice whenever you are editing a css page. There's nothing harmful on your page. (Aside: your signature contravenes WP:SIG#NT) -- John of Reading (talk) 09:16, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks and I didn't know about the SIG sorry :( PenpaperpencilTalk12:38,5/26/2011

Using template parameters containing spaces in URLs

This is actually a problem from gv.wiki, but we don't have anyone there to advise. I'm hoping someone here can help; it's probably something simple I just don't know about. We are having problems with our version of {{Wikispecies}}, which is very simplified, breaking when article names or the alternative parameters contain spaces. Without encoding, the URL just links to the first word in the name and uses the rest as link text. I can't find a way to encode them properly; PAGENAMEE doesn't help when the Wikispecies name doesn't match ours (which is most of the time), and urlencode substitutes a plus for a space, which doesn't match the WS article names. Any suggestions? -- Shimmin Beg (talk) 15:01, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

m:Tech is a new forum for issues from any Wikimedia wiki.

It sounds like you either need to specify a parameter name ({{foo|bar=http://google.com/?search=bing}} instead of {{foo|http://google.com?search=bing}}) or you can try {{urlencode:}}. --MZMcBride (talk) 15:09, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your advice; I'll use m:Tech in future. Urlencode broke with spaces, but I've managed to fettle it by cribbing liberally from {{Commons}}. -- Shimmin Beg (talk) 15:37, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Purpose of the article feedback tool?

I already brought that up at the MediaWiki page about the tool, but since I didn't get a reply, I will repeat this question here.

What is the intended purpose of the article feedback tool? I think we already have well defined criteria for determining an articles quality (like neutrality of the article, number of sources etc). Also, who is supposed to analyze the collected data? And when the collected data has been analyzed, in which way will this information be used to improve the article and by whom? I know these questions may sound silly, but I just can't see the answers.

Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 15:06, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Did you read mw:Article feedback, mw:Article feedback/FAQ, and mw:Extension:ArticleFeedback? --MZMcBride (talk) 15:10, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

I didn't read the pages you linked to yet, because I didn't know they exist until now :) Thanks very much for the links. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 15:19, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Categories and redirects and links-to-redirect-to-self

After seeing the phrase "Individual Olympic Athletes" so capitalized in an article, but not a link, I looked to see if an article on Individual Olympic Athletes existed. It turns out that this title exists, but as a cross-namespace redirect leading to Category:Olympic competitors.

Fine. But what doesn't seem fine is that where it lists "Pages in category 'Olympic competitors'", one of them is Individual Olympic Athletes -- the same title whose redirect brought me to this page. If I saw that sort of thing on a normal page, I'd just edit and delink it -- but that concept doesn't apply here, since the content of a category page is generated automatically.

Presumably what's going on here is that because the page with the #REDIRECT line (necessarily) contains a link to the category page, the category processor is assuming that that page is itself in the category, and generating and entry on the category page for it. But in this case, not so!

I can't see why this would be intended behavior, so I'm assuming it's a bug and reporting it here in VP/T. If the point would be better raised elsewhere, please feel free to copy and paste this message accordingly.

(Side comment: if Individual Olympic Athletes is worth redirecting, then so is Individual Olympic Athlete. As an unregistered user -- who is going to remain that way, so don't bother replying -- I can't add that redirect, but perhaps someone else will.)

--208.76.104.133 (talk) 19:12, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

When did it become acceptable to link from article space to Category space? I thought that was a no-no. 216.93.212.245 (talk) 21:57, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Not (necessarily). A colon here is sufficient to prevent the link from also categorising the page. That's fixed that one at least :) - Jarry1250 ^{[Weasel? Discuss.]} 19:15, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

File showing as old, deleted version

File:Talesofthenewteentitans4starfire.jpg is having a problem clearing the large size display image.

An editor decided to upload a "new" version of the file - actually a different image entirely - to avoid editing an article to get their way.

This was reverted, but while the thumbs and the archive of the original upload rendered the restored image, the large display on the file page and where the image is in use didn't change. Multiple reverts haven't cleared it. Aplying "purge" hasn't cleared it. Deleting the page and restoring only the original upload hasn't cleared it. Uploading from off page hasn't cleared it. Are there any other options?

- J Greb (talk) 21:58, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Maybe delete the entire image off, and reupload them on a slightly different name? If original history need to be kept, delete all and restore only the required files (make sure each filehistory has a relevant pagehistory), and then try moving to a different name? This may be related to the server lag issues experienced at Commons (where some changes takes days to show up). Hope this helps. Regards. Rehman 06:00, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Help needed with Miszabot archiving

Resolved

 – at Talk:2011 end times prediction

At Talk:2011 end times prediction we are set up for Miszabot to archive after 10 days (at least I think we are)... but for some reason it is not shifting old talk threads to the archives. A lot of the threads have comments that are more recent... but not all. Could someone take a look at it, please? Blueboar (talk) 23:50, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Seeing old versions of pages

A lot of pages that I'm visiting are not displaying the latest revision. Definitely not a template issue than can be cleared up by purging, not a cache issue either because this happens to pages I haven't previously vistited. For instance, Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/University_of_California_Anti-Chinese_racism is showing up as still being an open AFD, even though it's been closed. Possibly related: many pages (including this one) are showing "view source" instead of "edit this page" despite not actually having any level of protection . 169.231.53.195 (talk) 05:03, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Problems with SVG images

I've noticed a number of SVG maps today that aren't displaying properly. For example, if I visit https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/File:US_states_by_total_state_tax_revenue.svg I see a generic icon that looks like a blue amoeba with two tangent lines. If I click on that and visig http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/86/US_states_by_total_state_tax_revenue.svg I see the map properly. The map does not show up in the article State tax levels in the United States properly. I tried purging but this did not seem to help. -- Beland (talk) 04:48, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

That image that you are seeing appears to be an icon that is part of the software. When I click to go to the SVG image directly to see how it renders there, my status bar in Internet Explorer 8 (which I believe has the Adobe SVG plugin installed) says "syntax error: line 10, column 2" and the image does not appear to load (or maybe it s just loading very slowly; who knows), so maybe there is a problem with the SVG image, but who knows. [|Retro00064|☎talk|✍contribs|] 06:11, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

The file is perfectly legitimate although using an unusual namespacing style; there's a bug in our code. Looks like bugzilla:27465 -- I've reopened the issue as the previous fix didn't actually solve the problem correctly. (Basic problem: SVG / XML allows many different ways of specifying that the file is SVG [XML namespacing]. The current code assumes that SVG always had a particular namespace prefix or no prefix, which is an assumption this file violates.) --brion (talk) 23:11, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

I've added this and some other files as regression test cases in our phpunit suite, and a fix is queued up for review & merging (see bug link above for full info). --brion (talk) 00:10, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Great, thanks for your work on this. -- Beland (talk) 03:29, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Edit Count at Time[x]

I found Wikipedia:WikiProject_edit_counters, but it didn't seem to have what I was looking for. I need to write queries of the form "How many edits did user [x] have at time [y]?" This can be done using the API -- but extremely inefficiently, as you can only fetch metadata for 500 user contributions at a time (and I am not even interested in that metadata, I just want a raw count). Thus, prolific users and bots require many recursive calls -- leading to a ton of network traffic and lots of time. Anyone know of a more elegant solution? Thanks, West.andrew.g (talk) 20:24, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

You could request a toolserver account and then query the database directly. User<Svick>.Talk(); 21:17, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Agreed that that would probably be the easiest way. API cap for admins and bots in 5000, btw. - Jarry1250 ^{[Weasel? Discuss.]} 13:57, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Bundling nominornewtalk with Autoconfirmed package

The 'nominornewtalk' right is no big deal, but there's no reason it shouldn't already be bundled with the autoconfirmed user rights package. I mean, I don't want to get a new messages bar because a user spell-checked their own message 10 minutes after my last response, it's stupid and I hate that bar enough already. I'm sure other users feel the same about the message bar as I do. Thoughts? —James ^{(Talk • Contribs)} • 9:00pm • 11:00, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

• Bad Idea™ ΔT _{^{The only constant}} 11:02, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
  • Would you care to elaborate? —James ^{(Talk • Contribs)} • 1:46pm • 03:46, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Indeed, a little bit longer of a comment would allow us to understand your thoughts better. :-) I for one am kind of torn on this. On one hand, it's seems a practical - on the other, it's open to abuse. I can see User:A posting an ANI notice to User:B's talk page and "accidentally" marking it as minor. This prevents User:B from actually getting the banner pop (and thus the chance to go comment at ANI), while giving User:A the chance to say "I notified him - look at this diff!". The little m would be easily overlooked at times, causing a whole new level of confusion. And this is just one example. ^Avic_ennasis @ 12:01, 27 Iyar 5771 / 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Problem with updating a video link change that existed on an older Wikipedia page

I have the xlinkbot reverting a link on the yo-yo page. I went ahead and released a video that corresponds to the yoyo wiki page into the public domain awhile back. The link worked fine without any problems. I accidently removed the clip that the video was linked to online(YouTube). I've uploaded the clip and tried re-linking it on Wikipedia and a bot keeps reverting the link to the removed status.

Yo-yo techniques[edit] SleepingFor more details on this topic, see Sleeper (yo-yo trick). Keeping a yo-yo spinning while remaining at the end of its uncoiled string is known as sleeping. Sleeping is the basis for nearly all yo-yo tricks other than looping, the player first putting the yo-yo in a "sleep" before throwing the yo-yo around using its string. Most modern yo-yos have a transaxle or ball bearing to assist this, but if it is a fixed axle yo-yo, the tension must be loose enough to allow this. The two main ways to do this are (1), allow the yo-yo to sit at the bottom of the string to unwind, or (2) perform lariat or UFO to loosen the tension (see yo-yo basics for video demonstration of throw down, sleeper, and UFO using a responsive yo-yo).

The updated link is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PjCBMrTc48.

- Luke Renner <e-mail redacted> — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.56.212.17 (talk) 13:41, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

CSD template weirdness

I just tagged an article for G4 speedy. I then attempted to edit the template parameters to add a link to the previous AFD discussion. Instead the whole text of the article was copied to the article's talk page. I suspect the recent changes to the speedy templates to include a button linking to the talk page are the culprit here, but I have no clue how to fix it. Thanks in advance. – ukexpat (talk) 15:42, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

That was weird! The article has now disappeared, of course, but I saw the history of the talk page. Can you give more details of "attempted to edit"? Which "edit" link did you use, what did you type, did you hit "preview", did you hit "save page"? At what point did you first realise that the talk page had been damaged? -- John of Reading (talk) 16:11, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

I edited the whole page (edit tab, rather than just the opening section), inserted |Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Company of Heroes: Eastern Front in the CSD template code, didn't preview, hit save. When the browser re-loaded, I was on the talk page, not the article page, with the copy of the article displaying, alerting me to the weirdness. Not sure what else I can add.  – ukexpat (talk) 16:52, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Just tried this at User:John of Reading/X2 and, of course, it behaved perfectly. Ideas, anyone? -- John of Reading (talk) 20:53, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

One thought: perhaps the problem only manifests itself in mainspace- anyone want to create a speediable article to test it? – ukexpat (talk) 01:12, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

I tried it in mainspace at an article already tagged as G12: [17]. Nothing was posted to the talk page. I imagine what you experienced is just an inexplicable, one-time glitch. Goodvac (talk) 01:32, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Infobox paramater driving me loco

Resolved

I'm probably overlooking something very simple, but I've tried every permutation that I can think of on the article infobox Harry Kalas with the signature parameter to get the image thereon and none of them are working: I tried

• | signature = File:Harry Kalas autograph.jpg|125px|Signature of sports announcer
  
• | signature = [[File:Harry Kalas autograph.jpg|125px|Signature of sports announcer]]
  
• | signature = [[File:Harry Kalas autograph.jpg|125px]]
  
• | signature = File:Harry Kalas autograph.jpg
  
• | signature = [[File:Harry Kalas autograph.jpg]]
  
• | signature = Harry Kalas autograph.jpg
  

Any suggestions on the actual formatting for this parameter? Skier Dude (talk) 23:56, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Something odd about {{Infobox sports announcer}}:

{{#if:{{{xxx<includeonly>|</includeonly>}}}|[[File:{{{signature}}}|125px|Signature of {{{name|{{PAGENAME}}}}}]]}}

Not sure why the xxx is there, but it means you have to include |xxx=1 to enable the signature. I suspect this is not the intent and it should be signature. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 00:11, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Turns out it wasn't your fault. The infobox template was broken a few months ago in this edit (notice the "xxx" when it should be "signature"). I fixed it. It's working in the article now. Gary King (talk · scripts) 00:11, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

You got there firstest. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 00:15, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Much thanks - should have looked further :( Skier Dude (talk) 04:08, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Skype problem - processesing "invisible" text

A screenshot of the Wikipedia page on Colin Fleming illustrating the problem.

In the screenshot shown here, the template {{dts|2009|September|22}} produces the hidden output 02009-09-22 followed by the visible 22 September 2009. The 02009-09-22 22 September 2009 is interpretted by the Skype extension/add-on in web browsers as a phone number and rendered as such, meaning the hidden output becomes, undesirably, shown as a phone number. It is hard to determine how many pages this affects as it depends on whether the {{dts}} sort output and displayed output combine to make a phone number, but the Skype add-on is quite common in all web-browsers. Is there some way we can alter code in dts to stop this happening or block the add-on on wikipedia pages, I cannot image we have many actual phone numbers as WP:NOTDIRECTORY. Also this problem may transcend beyond this one template. Ideas welcome. Thanks, Rambo's Revenge (talk) 12:08, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Is the Skype addon really that common? I use Skype and I don't seem to have it in either Firefox or Chrome (I haven't tried IE). - Jarry1250 ^{[Weasel? Discuss.]} 13:58, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

The Skype extension is widely accepted to be buggy, poorly implemented, and over-aggressive at replacing numbers in text boxes and other unwanted places (the trademark begin_of_the_skype_highlighting CSS class is prolific across the web). IMO this is a situation where we have to simply encourage people either not to use a badly-broken piece of software, to exert pressure on its authors to fix it, or to live with its dubious behaviour. Happy‑melon 14:51, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

See also Special:AbuseFilter/313 and Special:AbuseFilter/345 Happy‑melon 14:55, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

And the following old bugreports: bugzilla:23564 and bugzilla:26031. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 08:01, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

I've had Skype installed for years and never had the browser extension installed for me, either. Also, doing a quick search for the extension does indeed bring up lots of results that mention how buggy the extension is. This problem probably affects many other major websites besides Wikipedia. Gary King (talk · scripts) 16:46, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

I had to reinstall Skype recently and it installed the browser add-on. I quickly uninstalled the damn thing after it munged some edits. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 00:18, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Update ISO-3166

Hello, ISO-3166-2 is updatet. http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_3166-1_newsletter_vi-8_split_of_the_dutch_antilles_final-en.pdf Please update your templates and articels. --80.142.163.186 (talk) 11:30, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Pages frequently not updating and requiring purges

A large number of edits appear on pages only when I am logged in, and/or only appear in the page's history and are invisible on the edited page. I'm using the purge command a lot. Some pages seem to go unrefreshed for hours, sometimes over 24 hours, without getting updates unless I purge. Are the servers slow, or is something else wrong that's resulting in the need for so many manual purges? GreenPine (talk) 23:28, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Slow load time

Are Wikipedia pages painfully slow to load today for anyone else, or is it just me? SlimVirgin ^{TALK|CONTRIBS} 17:25, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Not just you, REALLY slow... [stwalkerster|talk] 17:29, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Working fine for me and that's speaking as someone with a broadband speed that's a tiny 223kbps. AD 17:37, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

I get time-outs partway through loading large pages (like WP:RD/S), or loading of the page but not the toolbars and frame decorations. Sometimes a quick hit "reload" resolves it...probably one hella-lagged (to use the technical term) machine in the pool. DMacks (talk) 17:44, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

It's been bad for several days now. See topic above for more complaints.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:46, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Echo the above. It's pretty awful. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 20:05, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Things are loading at a decent speed for me. No complaints at the moment; I haven't encountered any error messages yet. Gary King (talk · scripts) 20:49, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

It's been midly irritating all day, but now it's painful. Difs and pop-ups are uber-slow, and many times pages only load half-way. Other times when they do load, the font is very tiny, or the page is disjointed. --Jezebel'sPonyo^{bons mots} 00:10, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Disjointed pages are always painful. You should seek medical advice. Seriously, for me it varies from irritating (actually rarely just mildly irritating) to painful. With the new buttons on Firefox 4, I often have to click on X to stop and then on the arrow to reload, and sometimes more than once. I just wish someone would let us know what is going on, even if it's just to say "we are still looking into it".--Bbb23 (talk) 00:18, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Agreed, it goes in streaks. I'm surprised it's not more of a topic of conversation. When it fails, it's gone for several minutes...RxS (talk) 03:27, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

We must carry on and we must keep calm.

I can't get into my watchlist at all; it just hangs. Diffs are bad, history is bad, articles very slow, talk pages are sometimes only half loading. Has been like this for a couple of days for me. SlimVirgin ^{TALK|CONTRIBS} 13:18, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

I thought this was just me. It's making editing a real pain. Some kind of news that someone knows what's wrong (and that it may get better at some point) would be lovely. --Dweller (talk) 15:18, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

It has been a real hindrance to my editing as well. It's frustrating when I have to wait literally minutes and then my browser finally just shows me a blank page, or even worse, a partially-loaded page. When a page doesn't load all the way, it can be difficult to tell, especially if it's a page I've never visited before. I might just assume that's all there is to the page. Then I reload, and all of a sudden the article is twice as big.

I have a suspicion that this slow performance may coincide with the decision to turn on email notification for EVERY editor on Wikipedia at the same time. Per the discussion below talking about the new email feature, that feature was available on smaller encyclopedias for some time but avoided on en.wiki because of performance concerns. Maybe those concerns were valid? -- Atama頭 16:40, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

I highly doubt that. Sounds more like a caching server that is kaput somewhere. Other possibility is perhaps that the central notice for the board elections that is running right now ? I'm asking in the IRC channel of the system administrators for any ideas about the cause. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 18:56, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for doing that. Hopefully, they will respond and you can let us know.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:58, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

I, too, wonder if it's a caching server problem. I've been having problems with loading time at work for about a week now (which is before the email notifications were turned on, by the way), but at home everything is loading in no time and with no problems...—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); May 17, 2011; 19:04 (UTC)

Can you please explain a bit more why there would be a difference between your work and home experiences? Is there something we can do at our end to mitigate the problem?--Bbb23 (talk) 19:29, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Because the connections are routed via different providers, so there's a good chance that my work connection is hitting a defective cache server whereas my home connection does not?—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); May 17, 2011; 19:45 (UTC)

Interesting. If that's true, then it would also explain why some people are complaining, why some are saying it's okay, and why more people aren't complaining at all.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:51, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

I edit from work, and from home. From home it's a simple cable connection to a local ISP. From work, it's through a Websense proxy server that goes through who knows where, but nowhere close to here. I don't think this is a regional thing. Also, this issue is serious enough that I'm probably going to stay away from Wikipedia for awhile. This site is nearly unusable in this condition. It's like driving a car that breaks down every 5 minutes or so on the highway. -- Atama頭 00:09, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm now getting load times over at least a minute for pretty much every page. Timing a few, the shortest was 1m2s, Logic gate. It's getting ridiculous. [stwalkerster|talk] 01:16, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

I have opened a ticket bugzilla:29034. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 08:41, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Users affected, and who know how to, might consider running traceroutes on en.wikipedia.org and/or bits.wikimedia.org. Might be helpful in figuring out if it is maybe a routing issue or something ? Link to them from here, or from the ticket. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 08:54, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

 Done, but it's not as bad now as it was last night. [stwalkerster|talk] 13:12, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Not one of those who "knows how to", I did want to note that it had eased up for me this morning, but has gotten worse as the day has progressed. :/ --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:21, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Local traceroutes and from an online service show no problems with either en or bits. —DoRD (talk) 14:17, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Is everyone of you from the UK per chance ? —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 13:50, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Not here, no. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 13:53, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Nope. Texas. It's been very slow for me, but has been running more smoothly today. —DoRD (talk) 13:54, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

It's slightly better for me today, but still slow and some pages are still only half loading. SlimVirgin ^{TALK|CONTRIBS} 13:59, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm from the Southern east coast. I was on the west coast last week and had no issues there, but picked up problems as soon as I got back home. I tend to agree with Slim that it seems slightly better today. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:06, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Southwestern U.S. here. The problem continues. It may be slightly better this morning, but yesterday it got worse as the day progressed, so I'm waiting to see if it's really any better. Plus, it's still happening, so unless someone did something, why would it really be better? As for traceroutes, I'm suspicious as to their validity (with online tools). For example, I ran a traceroute from this site, and for both wikipedia and wikimedia, it showed slightly slow but not horrible timings. I then tried doing the same thing with www.cnn.com, and it timed out over and over until it aborted. Yet, when I access www.cnn.com, the response is instantaneous and complete. So, if someone can suggest an online tool that shows credible results, I'm willing to try it.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:45, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

It's already getting worse for me. I clicked on BLPN and it shows the title, says "transferring data" in the status bar, and just sits there. It's still sitting there as I type this message (it's been at least 2-3 minutes). Usually, I click on X and then refresh to push it along, but I'm curious what it will do if I don't do that. Should time out, but FF doesn't seem to care. :-) --Bbb23 (talk) 16:05, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

It's pretty quick for me at the moment, but it's been up and down all day. Usually it just hangs halfway through loading a page for a few minutes, then sometimes carries on, if I don't get impatient and refresh it. I must have left a tab open in that state for about 10 mins though, surprised Chrome didn't time it out... it's annoying though. [stwalkerster|talk] 16:15, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Western Canada on this end. Given the responses above, it definitely does not appear to be UK related. --Jezebel'sPonyo^{bons mots} 15:48, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Ohconfucius (above in earlier topic) is in Hong Kong. Don't know if he's still experiencing the problem.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:51, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

West coast of the US here and it's still irritatingly slow. Killiondude (talk) 17:20, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

I cannot discern an obvious pattern here. Can someone use Firebug or WebkitInspector to at the very least pinpoint the transaction that is on hold for so long and the server that it is trying to reach ? Also, try using "View Source" of the webpage, and look for the '<!-- Served by line in the served out html of a request that takes this long. More detailed information is needed if we want to pinpoint the problem, cause the sysadmins don't see any reason for these problems. The status.wikimedia.org is also not having any issues from any of the locations that polls for access. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 17:36, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm willing to help, but I need more specific instructions from you. I use FF 4. I just added Firebug as an add-on (never used it before). I've enabled the console. I have the console in a separate window. It appears to log entries for each time I click on something (clearing what it logged on the previous click). It seems to create maybe 25-35 entries per click with columns as to what it's doing. What do you want me to provide here to be looked at? Are there any special settings you want me to use on Firebug?--Bbb23 (talk) 17:57, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

It's back to being very slow for me. Pages barely loading. I'm having to keep several windows open, and once I press save, go to another window to open the page if I want to keep writing there. In the meantime, I can see in the first window that it hasn't finished loading yet. SlimVirgin ^{TALK|CONTRIBS} 17:58, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Me too, taken about 5 minutes to load just this edit page, after various attempts through getting Wikimedia errors - duly reported to the tech IRC channel too. Looks like they're having other issues right now though. [stwalkerster|talk] 18:28, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

It just took me nearly 15 minutes to make one edit. Couldn't get the page to open, couldn't get preview to work, then why I tried to save I kept getting error messages. It's too slow to use now, so I'm giving up for a bit. Six error messages so far trying to save this edit. SlimVirgin ^{TALK|CONTRIBS} 18:28, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Some more issues are currently playing up, possibly due to the deploy of the Google News SiteMap extension a few hours ago, or due to updated translated messages. It's not yet known if these new issues (which are much larger and seemingly affecting everyone) are in any way related to the issues that are being reported in this topic. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 18:34, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

This is a error I just got, generally it's been very slow today (same as every other day this week)...and getting this edit done was like pulling teeth. Request: GET http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical), from 208.80.152.88 via sq63.wikimedia.org (squid/2.7.STABLE7) to ()Error: ERR_CANNOT_FORWARD, errno [No Error] at Wed, 18 May 2011 18:08:47 GMT RxS (talk) 18:45, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Looks like the bugzilla bug has been closed as "INVALID". 3 mins it took me to load this edit page - and I highly doubt it's any of the issues Krinkle has suggested on the bug report, due to the number and the geographical distribution of people affected by this. [stwalkerster|talk] 19:15, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Given Krinkle's response that it may be caused "problems at your provider" and "anything on your computer", I have to doubt that this VP thread was even reviewed despite being linked to in the bug report. How frustrating for the editors who are affected. --Jezebel'sPonyo^{bons mots} 19:30, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorely tempted to reopen that bug report actually, with something snarky like "I'm pretty sure I've got a different ISP to other people whom this is affecting, given it's affecting people all over the world". So far I have restrained myself though, cos that sort of response isn't fair to them either. Seriously though, I think it should be reopened re-affirming this thread. I just don't trust myself to keep a cool head while doing it. [stwalkerster|talk] 19:37, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Aah, the old "user error" canard. It's nice to know someone cares. Fortunately, we're well-paid for all of our work here.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:41, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Don't worry, ops are working on it. Nemo 19:51, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure how you know, but I certainly hope you're right. My offer to DJ (above) to help still stands if someone explains what they need and what I should do.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:10, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes if we wish to retain and attract editors editing needs to be faster than it is now. We need to through everything we have at this problem. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:37, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

• I'm on the US South East Coast in Florida and it's been terribly slow the past couple of days and remains slow today. Pages half-load, they load slowly section-by-section, only load the header of the page then hang, happens on articles, talk pages, and even my watchlist...sometimes I'll have to refresh the browser to get the whole watchlist to load. Very irritating. Dreadstar ☥ 20:37, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

TheDJ and myself have done some poking, and we don't think it's an issue at Wikimedia, nor an issue with the users. We think the problem may lie with some server/router/rr somewhere in the middle, which we don't really have control over. I'm going to try re-routing my local traffic over an SSH link to a remote machine of mine, but I dunno what will work and what won't at the moment. [stwalkerster|talk] 20:43, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Good luck, but I must say that if it's a router, it seems odd it's not affecting other servers besides Wikipedia/Wikimedia. Network issues can be very complex to diagnose. I hope someone can pinpoint the problem.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:04, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

If it is something in the middle, it's odd that it's happening to users across a couple continents. RxS (talk) 21:16, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Could be something pretty close to Wikimedia - it'd go a way to explain the temperamental nature of the problem too, and also why it's only affecting some users. One network peering partner of many going bad, network decides to route a request through them, and suddenly a page is really slow to load. [stwalkerster|talk] 21:21, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

It's been happening Down Under too. Very frustrating. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 21:37, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

And here in southern Ontario, Canada, it reminds me of the first time I went on line about 15 years ago when the images scanned on the screen line by line. This is not a user or an ISP or a browser problem. 21:57, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes, exactly, it'll do the old-school style line-by-line scanning down the screen, building the page slowly. Sometimes hanging on a section, wait for it, then draws the next section down... Dreadstar ☥ 23:11, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

I've had a lot of trouble too here in California. Even at school where I have tons of bandwidth in both direction, uploads to Commons are proceedubg at an unusually slow rate, taking hours to upload 100 MB. Ordinary pages like this one are loading slowly and timing out too. Dcoetzee 23:57, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

You're a graduate student in computer science. Fix it! :-) --Bbb23 (talk) 00:17, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

It's really bad tonight...hard to do anything. Is there an update somewhere? I'm having a hard time believing that this worldwide issue is being caused by something near Wikipedia but not Wikipedia itself. RxS (talk) 03:55, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm in the Pacific NW. The site has been slower than usual on and off for the past few days.bllix (talk) 04:58, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Just so it's clear, the problem is still continuing for me. Tomorrow will be the first-week anniversary of this problem (for me).--Bbb23 (talk) 14:21, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

I've asked on the Foundation mailing list whether anyone is looking into it; no reply so far. SlimVirgin ^{TALK|CONTRIBS} 14:26, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Have you received any reply? The problem continues, and what is most troubling is the lack of any feedback from those responsible for fixing it except for a crappy response to the bug report. It's hard to believe anyone is investigating or working on the issue. I'd love to be proved wrong.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:48, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Erik Moeller posted a reply in the Bugzilla thread, citing a number of issues, one of which is a router problem in Tampa that can't be fixed until Tuesday at the earliest. But it looks like there's some hope coming. -- Atama頭 23:25, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the update. It's been dreadful this afternoon here.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:32, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Yet more page loading issues

For the last several hours, I've been unable to load pages either on en:wp or on Commons without logging in through the secure server: regardless of what page I try to load, it gives me a "cannot display the webpage" message similar to what I get if I go to a nonexistent website. Does anyone have an idea how to get rid of the "Do you want to view only the webpage content that was delivered securely?" message that I get from IE version 8.0.6001.19048? Or do I simply have to try a different browser? On top of that, does anyone know what's going on with the servers to make this happen? Nyttend (talk) 04:16, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

I see discussions above with people's locations being asked: I'm in Bloomington, Indiana. Nyttend (talk) 04:16, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Bugzilla:29034 for reference. :| TelCoNaSpVe :| 05:10, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Yep things are real slow now; however, refreshing once usually loads the page immediately. Gary King (talk · scripts) 14:21, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes, there is a problem. For about 3 days, intermittently. Pages don't load or load very slowly. Bus stop (talk) 14:32, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Agh, it's still happening and it's just unbearable. Dreadstar ☥ 15:59, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Last four or five days (in Australia) it as been slow but the last two it has gotten worse to the point that pages (articles, templates, talkpages ect) just don't load or half load and needs to be refreshed a few times to get them to load, whether I'm logged in or not. I've even used my Edu's computers and internet to see if my broadband ISP was the cause but still have the same issue there as well. Bidgee (talk) 03:25, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

• Ok, just now my watchlist only loaded about a quarter of the way and hung, this code was at the very end of the watchlist: "<li class="mw-line-odd watchlist-4-" Dreadstar ☥ 17:01, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

• I'm getting the same thing. My watchlist keeps loading only halfway, and often without the top part, and it's now happened a few times in preview too, where I can see only the top part of the article. SlimVirgin ^{TALK|CONTRIBS} 17:03, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

• In addition to the resource loader failure I've been experiencing for 3 weeks now (see "My gadgets no longer work" above), I am also experiencing flakey page loading for the last 3 days. My experience is the same as SlimVirgin's: The page loads part way and hangs forever. If I hit my 'reload' button the page reloads quickly and completely. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:08, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

• Seems to be worse today! Pages don't completely load but normally a few refreshes fixes allows it to full load, but today even refreshing isn't working. Getting a fully loaded page is just luck today! Bidgee (talk) 03:29, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Bump, is this ever going to be fixed? RxS (talk) 05:54, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately, because of the combination of these two sections, updates are inserted in two places. According to Atama above, there is a router problem that will hopefully be fixed next week, although the phrase "Tuesday at the earliest" is not at all concrete as to when. Then, of course, there's the issue of whether the router problem is actually the cause. One thing I can say for sure is it's been really horrible yesterday and today for me.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:15, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Just to clarify, for anyone who hasn't visited the link to Bugzilla, Erik Moeller said the following:

Erik Moeller 2011-05-20 21:27:06 UTC

According to the ops team, there are a number of separate and unrelated ops issues that have come up in the last few days:

1) Not all users are experiencing slowness, but a subset of users are. There's no definite smoking gun, but the most likely cause are ongoing issues with one of our routers in Tampa. The router will have to be taken down for maintenance to fix this issue, and order to perform this maintenance operation with minimal disruption, we need to have key ops engineers on standby to deal with any issues that may arise. My understanding is that the best available maintenance window is Tuesday next week.

2) There was a software deployment on May 18 which caused an application server overload; it was reverted the same day.

3) The mobile servers are currently intermittently overloaded, throwing internal server errors, and servers to provide additional capacity have been racked today.

4) In case you're looking at it, ganglia.wikimedia.org is not displaying correct server status information (as of yesterday); it's in the process of being fixed.

We're still in the process of setting up a new primary data center location in Ashburn, VA, which will give us higher site reliability in general, and also create the possibility of safe failover in maintenance or emergency situations.

What I gathered from that is that we wouldn't expect to see an improvement until Tuesday (tomorrow). What I quoted above was three days ago, on Friday the 20th. -- Atama頭 16:29, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't know about the rest of y'all, but today it seems much better for me. --Auntof6 (talk) 14:54, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

The techs have performed some much needed maintenance on the network today. [18] Hopefully this has resolved the problems people were having. the wub "?!" 17:07, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

No, it hasn't resolved problems. Image thumbnail updating, both on Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons, is as slow as before. I estimate it is running at approximately 1% of normal speed. Thumbnail updates after uploading a modified image now still take upwards of 24 36 48 hours, where they used to take less than 60 seconds. —Quicksilver^{T @} 20:10, 26 May 2011 (UTC) [updated 15:04 28 May 2011 UTC)]

It's improved for me as well.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:08, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

It was much better for several days, but now it's back to the same old thing. Possibly worse, I'd say a third of my attempts to load a page fail. RxS (talk) 05:58, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Slower

Because that it is slower, it is more difficult to edit pages. I have tried to edit many pages but I get an message that it could not be processed because of bandwidth. I saved all the codes they gave me. Its Chinese.

Here it goes (Please note that I replaced my IP by "--.--.--.---")

---

Request: POST http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=500_Keys&action=submit, from --.--.--.--- via sq75.wikimedia.org (squid/2.7.STABLE7) to 208.80.152.88 (208.80.152.88) Error: ERR_READ_TIMEOUT, errno [No Error] at Mon, 16 May 2011 19:01:38 GMT

---

Request: GET http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:AbuseLog/4761656, from --.--.--.--- via sq75.wikimedia.org (squid/2.7.STABLE7) to 208.80.152.48 (208.80.152.48) Error: ERR_READ_TIMEOUT, errno [No Error] at Mon, 16 May 2011 21:19:22 GMT

---

Request: GET http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:AbuseLog/4761656, from --.--.--.--- via sq66.wikimedia.org (squid/2.7.STABLE7) to 208.80.152.48 (208.80.152.48) Error: ERR_READ_TIMEOUT, errno [No Error] at Mon, 16 May 2011 21:27:57 GMT

---

Request: POST http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ebe123&action=submit, from --.--.--.--- via sq74.wikimedia.org (squid/2.7.STABLE7) to 208.80.152.85 (208.80.152.85) Error: ERR_READ_TIMEOUT, errno [No Error] at Tue, 17 May 2011 18:09:05 GMT

---

Request: POST http://fr.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Mod%C3%A8le:IP_scolaire&action=submit, from 208.80.152.50 via sq62.wikimedia.org (squid/2.7.STABLE7) to () Error: ERR_CANNOT_FORWARD, errno [No Error] at Wed, 18 May 2011 18:06:29 GMT

---

Request: GET http://fr.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Mod%C3%A8le:IP_scolaire&action=edit, from 208.80.152.74 via sq63.wikimedia.org (squid/2.7.STABLE7) to () Error: ERR_CANNOT_FORWARD, errno (11) Resource temporarily unavailable at Wed, 18 May 2011 18:07:57 GMT

---

Request: POST http://fr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mod%C3%A8le:IP_scolaire&action=submit, from 208.80.152.49 via sq61.wikimedia.org (squid/2.7.STABLE7) to () Error: ERR_CANNOT_FORWARD, errno [No Error] at Wed, 18 May 2011 18:10:06 GMT

---

Request: POST http://fr.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Cat%C3%A9gorie:Adresse_IP_scolaire&action=submit, from 208.80.152.82 via sq64.wikimedia.org (squid/2.7.STABLE7) to () Error: ERR_CANNOT_FORWARD, errno [No Error] at Wed, 18 May 2011 18:16:46 GMT

---

Request: POST http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=500_Keys&action=submit, from --.--.--.--- via sq75.wikimedia.org (squid/2.7.STABLE7) to 208.80.152.88 (208.80.152.88) Error: ERR_READ_TIMEOUT, errno [No Error] at Wed, 18 May 2011 21:21:51 GMT

---

~~EBE123~~ ^talk_Contribs 21:10, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

SVG thumbnail not regenerating

I've uploaded an image, and decided to modify it shortly after uploading it. It's part of a series of similar images, but for some reason MediaWiki isn't updating the image thumbnails (so the old image is still showing in articles and on the image description page itself). I've tried the guidance in WP:PURGE to no avail, cleared my cache, etc. and still nothing.

Any ideas? =) —Locke Cole • t • c 02:26, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps more patience on my part, as it seems to have resolved itself. =) —Locke Cole • t • c 23:19, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Chrome

Articles are displaying perfectly in IE and Firefox, but there is a problem with Google Chrome (current version 11.0.696.71). For example Water Rail has the taxobox on the left instead of right, the urls in the refs are shown as bare urls instead of being links from the title. On other pages, such as FAC, tables like the toolbox in nomination procedure are shifted to the left and above the accompanying text, and have lost the table borders. I've tried clearing the cache and restarting, but to no avail. Any thoughts, other than not using Chrome? Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:29, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

The sites look the same in both Firefox and Chrome for me. Are you perhaps using a different skin in Chrome than in other browsers? For instance, perhaps you aren't logged in? Try reinstalling Chrome perhaps? I can't even fathom how the pages could look like how you described. Could you take a screenshot to show us how it looks like? That might provide some clues. Gary King (talk · scripts) 16:48, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

The CSS isn't loading for you, for some reason, which is not (usually) a browser problem but rather an Internet connection problem. Either your ISP is experiencing high load or you're browsing on 56k dial up. :^) --Izno (talk) 16:59, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm using reasonably fast broadband, the pages are loading faster, if anything, than on IE or FF4, and the problem isn't time dependent Jimfbleak - talk to me? 17:07, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Then the last possible problem is that Wikipedia isn't serving the CSS fast enough. Another troubleshooting question: When did you download the new version? --Izno (talk) 17:13, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

It's an automatic update, I think. the release is dated Tuesday, May 24, 2011 14:17, which is about when I noticed the problem Jimfbleak - talk to me? 18:50, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Try clearing browsing data by going to "Preferences" -> "Under the Hood" and clicking "Clear Browsing Data...". According to this thread with the same problem, that was the solution. Gary King (talk · scripts) 20:54, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

I cleared the browsing data for the last four weeks, problem gone! Thanks very much to both of you, who would have thought the solution was so simple — I'd tried looking on the web before I came here, couldn't even understand the suggestions. Thanks again, Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:43, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

"Rate this page"?

What is going on with the weird "rate this page" box at the bottom of Joseph Elsner, Planet, and maybe other pages as well? This is not a template - it seems like it's coming straight from MediaWiki. Is this part of some proposed rating scheme? If so, where was that discussion? » Swpb^{τ • ¢} 04:32, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Found a relevant MediaWiki page via google, but I don't know what it means: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/86530. Wha?!... » Swpb^{τ • ¢} 04:49, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

May be related to [19] -- placing a bug on Bugzilla. » Swpb^{τ • ¢} 05:00, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Look a few sections up, in Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Expanded Use of Article Feedback Tool. Prodego ^talk 05:02, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

I see. Where was the Signpost on this?? I guess it came in after "press time". Well, Signpost ought to have something on it next week, at least: Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom/Suggestions#Expanded Use of Article Feedback Tool. » Swpb^{τ • ¢} 05:13, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2011-05-09/Technology report#In brief. You're just failing everywhere on this thread! :-) Killiondude (talk) 05:50, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

WP:DBAD, Killion. As I'm pointing out at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom/Suggestions#Expanded Use of Article Feedback Tool, that little Tech Report "In Brief" entry hardly does justice to the potential significance of this development. As one who reads News and Notes with interest but lacks the software knowledge to benefit (usually) from poring over the Tech Report, and then stumbles across this odd "Rate this page" feature, for which I was fairly certain there was no community discussion on WP, I think my response was perfectly reasonable. I think the failure here is with the people who were positioned to better inform the community of this major change. » Swpb^{τ • ¢} 15:36, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

While I support the Article Feedback Tool (at least, for research right now), I agree that it was not a very good idea to suddenly add it to 100,000 pages without telling the community in a big notice beforehand ... people will be very confused for a while. /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 04:27, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

There is also "Expanded Use of Article Feedback Tool" as a discussion above. There just needs to be a "what is this?" button on the page when it starts, then people will know. Overall,k about time it started - a good idea, and just a beginning. There will be more in 2 years I am sure. History2007 (talk) 08:12, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

What I am wondering, however, is how these ratings supposed to keep up with the edits? If we have a lousy stub which is (rightfully) rated by a dozen people as lousy, and tomorrow an editor comes in and improves it to, say, B-class, are the old lousy ratings still going to carry over? And surely over time this kind of problems will only accumulate?—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); May 12, 2011; 19:41 (UTC)

Good point. And this really means that this tool deserves more comment from the community at large, so suggestions such as yours can be included. As you stated, many of these ratings can become "stale ratings" that rate a snapshot of the article in the past and will lose validity over time, as the content changes. I will suggest a discussion the general Village Pump. History2007 (talk) 07:21, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

This is already being considered in the design of the extension. Helder 21:03, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

The "What is this" link was requested on Bug 28927 and also on MediaWiki talk:Articlefeedback-form-panel-title. Helder 19:56, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi everybody, the extension of the AFT to 100K articles (about 3% of articles on the English Wikipedia) was announced on the Wikimedia blog and on wikien and you can find an extensive discussion of the rationale on this page. Feedback from the community is very much welcome as the feature is still experimental and we'd love to hear how to improve it. For other frequently asked questions, check out this page. --DarTar (talk) 19:13, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

I like "Rate This Page". Maybe people don't have the time or inclination to provide detailed criticism. It works for me.70.125.135.72 (talk) 20:18, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

I think it is a good idea, but the more I think about it, the more convinced I become that it is but a beginning and has a long way to go. But the journey has to stop with this step. I think we need an Rfc. History2007 (talk) 23:30, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

And when are these things going to disappear from the pages they've just appeared on? Surely they're not permanent? They're way too big and ungainly. They don't look like the small ones that occasionally appeared on pages before. All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 10:24, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

I agree with All Hallow's Wraith. They are obtrusive -- way too big and ungainly. They interfere with viewing the Categories. And they make Wikipedia in general, and the article in particular, look very unprofessional. The thing has multiple problems and was very ill thought out. Please remove the things or allow us a way to remove them ourselves. Thank you. Softlavender (talk) 10:58, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Assuming you are using the vector skin, you can add #mw-articlefeedback{ display:none; } to your Special:Mypage/vector.css file, which will make them disappear (works for me anyway). Jenks24 (talk) 11:04, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Why not make the "Rate this Page" panel collapsable (and collapsed by default) like some of the navigation boxes found at the bottom of some articles? [|Retro00064|☎talk|✍contribs|] 00:47, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Right, that's a great idea. I wouldn't mind them that much if they were collapsible. There should have been wider community input about their implementation. And like I said, is there a set date for when this trial stops? All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 02:03, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't like the idea. Nonetheless, this is something which can be customizable by adding the appropriate code in personal js code. Helder 13:45, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

It just appeared magically in two redirects (here and here) I made today (in addition to the main article they were being redirected to). ¬___¬ Is there any way to remove them from those pages, they'd just be wasted sitting on a page no one ever sees (if the primary goal is to gather feedback, that is).-- Obsidi♠n^Soul 16:17, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

That's definitely a bug. We'll look into it.--Eloquence* 17:50, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Someone above also mentioned disambig pages. I assume those will also be avoided now. Right? History2007 (talk) 16:09, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

No it is still being added to random new pages. See here. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 06:35, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure it is a bad thing to be able to get feedback also for disambiguation pages: some disambiguation pages can be complete and well-organized while others are not. This information may be useful. Helder 13:45, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

The appearing of it in new pages is just a consequence of the way used to define "random page" in the js code. See mw:Thread:Talk:Article feedback/New pages/reply (3) for more details.

But I would consider a bug the presence of the extension on redirect pages, since it is only useful in the target pages. A fix for this was requested on Bug 29164.

You can try to delete the redirect page and recreate it so that its page_id changes. If you are lucky, the three last digits of the new page_id will be greater than or equal to 027 and the tool will not be displayed... :-)

Seriously, a more general (but still temporary) solution would be to add some code to MediaWiki:Common.js to hide the form in redirect pages. One option would be to query the API for info about the page and add the CSS #mw-articlefeedback{ display:none; } if it has the parameter "redirect". Such a code could probably be ported to the extension itself (or maybe this information is available to the extension by other means). Helder 13:45, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Where are the Ratings saved? How can one make changes? Bielle (talk) 18:00, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

That is a separate Pandora's box:

• Can the ratings be edited by the person who submitted them?
• Can they be edited/reverted by others if they are vandalism?
• What does it mean for a rating to be vandalism? X-standard deviations gap where X=...?
• Can ratings be edited by an admin if they are part of WP:Wikihounding of an editor by another?
• Can IPs/puppets repeatedly rate?
• Etc. etc. etc.

But these are policy rather than software issues, and they could not have possibly all been anticipated as part of a technical design. I do not have answers for them, but as any new feature/tool general suggestions by various people will eventually provide some answers. This is a new and interesting game with potential for a positive impact on Wikipedia, so we will just have to wait and see. But please do make suggestions ASAP because the sooner suggestions are fed into a software design as it undergoes testing the better. History2007 (talk) 21:34, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Here is the way the ratings logic is currently implemented:

• After a user rates an article, their rating appears pre-filled upon subsequent views of the article.
• If a user wants to change their rating, they can adjust the stars and click submit. They may also clear their ratings entirely by clicking on the trash icon next to the stars. This re-rating overrides their previous rating.

So at any point in time, an article has only one ratings set for a given registered user or IP address since subsequent ratings take the place of previous ratings. This mechanism makes it a little more difficult to game the ratings. For example, if ratings were associated by cookie, a user could easily rate an article, delete the cookie, and then rate the article again. Since the ratings are associated with IP addresses/accounts, a user would either have to find another machine with a different IP address or create another account.

Currently, there isn't a definition of ratings vandalism, and ratings cannot be edited or deleted by anyone but the rater. We should continue to monitor the ratings patterns to see if it would be useful to have this type of feature. It will be tricky since such a definition will have to be able to separate vandalism from true changes (e.g., if the article is vandalized and as a consequence receives lower reviews). Based on the limited averages we're seeing on the dashboard, it looks like the volume of well-intentioned ratings outweighs the volume of vandalism ratings, at least among the more heavily rated articles. Howief (talk) 22:44, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

By the way, I assume the ratings go into a SQL-based repository of some type. Do they? If so, what is the Wiki-protocol for editing that type of data? I have not seen an example of that in Wikipedia. Is there one? History2007 (talk) 00:38, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Finally! Finally I traced the thing here. (Happy that someone used the phrase "Rate this page" because how could I be ever guessing the "Article Feedback Tool" when there is not name of the feature on that ratebox!)

Well nice thing to rate the page and let the public be more engaged with Wikipedia content as Eric Moeller mentioned above. But the weird thing about this particular box is that this element, unlike any other in Wikipedia so far, can't be easilly traced to its origin, source code, discussion about it, or explanation of what the feature is and how it popped there. Normally when there is something new out, I look at the wikisource code and trace it back to the project which discusses its merit. I am satisfied then. Not need to ask, no need to comment a thing. Well here it suddenly poped out of nowhere. No trace of it in the page's wikicode. No link to follow, ... just uppearing on the end of weird page (lets say, it was not one of the best pages here, not one of the featured articles).

So in conclussion after rereading all written here, I completelly agree with what TheDJ mentioned above:

Conclusion, the feature needs a "What is this?" link and a "turn this off" button as well as a good place to turn it on again.

(But would there be the "what is this?" link, they could at least hunt for the more answers - on how to switch it off etc. on the description page. The "what is this?" link is quite essential)

I believe this might be yet quite interesting feature and I believe it will be good source of statistics. Just provide some common courtessy for fellow wikipedians, so they can fetch some information about it on their own and easily. In the end they will be not wasting your time, the time of the more knowledgeble by repeating the same question here and elsewhere all over again.--Reo ⁺ 18:52, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

See Bug 28927 and MediaWiki talk:Articlefeedback-form-panel-title for the "What is this" link. Helder 14:24, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

In addition to redirects mentioned above, feedback tool is now also in some disambiguation pages: ARA Veinticinco de Mayo. Also, where can I find when the feedback tool appeared on a particular page? Shouldn't that information be visible in page logs? MKFI (talk) 16:38, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Isn't a good thing to get feedback also about disambiguation pages? As said above, I think it is useful to know which disambiguation are complete and well-organized and which ones are not. It would be useful to have lists such as those created by the ReaderFeedback extension (see example on Portuguese Wikibooks)

I think there is no log for articles where it was enabled by means of a category. But if the tool is in an article created after May 10, and is not in the category, the tool is likely to be there since the article was created. For articles created before, and which were not in the list of pages where the extension was first enabled, the date is probably May 10. Helder 14:24, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

While I wholeheartedly support this initiative, for me too its sudden appearance was quite a shock... There should have been some sort of warning. Also, I question the usefulness of this tool in stub articles. What is there to evaluate in two or three-line articles? IMO the tool only makes sense for C-class and above, where there is an actual more or less complete article to evaluate. Of course, most articles are not even assessed, so this would be impossible to implement, but perhaps articles with stub notices should be excluded. Constantine ✍ 09:35, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

• This template is showing up on Pieria (Syria) (and other articles) without anything on the article to create it (or any way to remove it). The project page at http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Article_feedback/Public_Policy_Pilot/Workgroup does not seem to have anyone who watching it. This project seems abandoned and out of control, it should be controlled or shut down. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 10:54, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

I also agree that something should be done, particularly a better explanation of this tool to the community. See also this thread I started a while ago. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 14:03, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Article Rating appears immediately after creation?

I created Salt Creek (White River) and was immediately presented with the Article Rating feature, complete with the "Did you know you can edit this page?" bit. Is it intended to appear to an article's creator immediately after that editor creates the article? Moreover, is there any tracking category for articles with the feature, or any other way to find which pages have it? I can't figure out what triggers which pages have it and which ones don't. Nyttend (talk) 12:59, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Reported on Bug 29212 - Do not show ArticleFeedback tool to the author of a recently created article. Helder 21:30, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

I really wish I could point you to where the community decided to add what some of us think it a horrible feature. I can't find that discussion, or even where one should take place. Dougweller (talk) 13:44, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

It's now being randomly deployed. Which can be mildly ammusing when it ends up on a redirect page.©Geni 13:51, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

I like the feature; it's simply this implementation of it that seems rather odd. Nyttend (talk) 13:54, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict)::I found the discussion page on mediawiki, they are adding it to 100,000 enwiki articles.[20] I've chimed in there, and the helpdesk thread where I asked where this was discussed is linked there also (it didn't get an answer, of course). Dougweller (talk) 13:53, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

As I've said, I think it makes us too much like Facebook, and what do you think is going to happen on ethnic/religious etc. articles where we already have editwarring? How meaningful can it be on such articles? Dougweller (talk) 14:15, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

How the hell does an article rating feature make us look too much like Facebook ? I really dislike how people seem to claw to make anything that is just a little bit more 'out of the box' from what we currently do and label it as being 'like Facebook'. If you don't like it, please stay in your own very nice comfy box, it shouldn't hinder us from looking into the real world as a community. This feature has plenty of problems but it being 'too much like Facebook' is definetly NOT one of them. If anything, this feature is 'too little like Facebook' feature-wise to be useful as a review system. Btw. on the last topic, how about we simply find out what happens, instead of endlessly speculating ? Throw one of those into the mix. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 17:12, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

NPA and AGF anyone? Insults and patronising comments aren't helpful - and again I ask, where was the community discussion that I hope took place before this was implemented, and where on enwiki can it be discussed now? Dougweller (talk) 21:07, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

The tone may be strident, but I don't see an personal attacks or AGF failure; and he has a point about the "like Facebook" issue. I agree with you about the lack of community discussion. Rd232 ^talk 21:23, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

(e/c)As I have stated here several times over the past months, the thing holding back our software seems to be more and more the English Wikipedia and it is about time we call eachother out on that. I'm fed up with it as a volunteer contributor to the software and as a member of this community. I WANT new stuff that might help us move forward, and new stuff takes time to develop in such a way that it will satisfy the needs of the English Wikipedia community. If we can't run experiments, then software features and new ideas will never see the light of day here. Experiments are important, we should be allowed to fail, develop and improve here. People often wonder why it takes so long before they 'get' what they want software wise; well it's because this community is a freaking pain to satisfy.

If you want to take that personal, you are free to do that, but the criticism is intended to reflect on us as a community, more than you as a person. Like I said, this thing has a host of troubles, but being "like Facebook" is definitely not one of them, and I won't sit still and ignore such a blatant misrepresentation of of this experiment.

It seems you already found the relevant feedback forums, and unfortunately they are not 24/7 staffed. But such is life in a community developed project supported by a small foundation. Have a nice evening. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 21:40, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Just a thought, but what if some developer(s) contributed just a little to the Signpost on a (semi)regular basis describing some of the trials and tribulations of what they're currently developing? One of the big problems in this area is lack of communication. If the community better understood what is involved and how hard it is, that would help, I think. Plus the Signpost has a feedback section - I'm sure you'd get encouragement/praise as well. Rd232 ^talk 21:48, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

I am the current Technology lead for the Signpost and I'm all ears. :) I have tried to give the article feedback extension a few mentions, but when I can find little news per se about it, it's tricky. Regards, - Jarry1250 ^{[Weasel? Discuss.]} 19:39, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

It should at least be made smaller; it's way too large. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 21:29, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

I suggest you make your feelings known at the relevant place mw:Talk:Article_feedback. It's unlikely that anyone working on the extension is reading this. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 21:43, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Full deployment on all on en.wiki tomorrow! I've raised this at WP:ANI - not the best place and I was thinking of an RfC, but if it's going to happen in a few hours, ANI seems the best place to get the most attention. It seems pretty precipitous jumping from experiment to full implementation - where is the discussion of the trial that led to this decision? Dougweller (talk) 13:53, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

The page is in error. Sorry about the confusion; there must have been an internal misunderstanding. A full roll-out isn't planned for tomorrow. We're continuing with incremental bump-ups in usage together with small fixes/improvements in response to community comments and our own findings.

The following fixes have already been made and will be deployed soon:

• Addition of blacklist categories. If an article is in one of those categories, AFT will not be shown.
• Hiding the tool on redirects.

The following improvements are planned:

• Easy ability to hide the tool, at least for logged in users.
• A link in the tool itself to the project page and associated discussion page.

Most importantly, though, we're planning to set up a public database dump of anonymized rating data. We hope that as we make this data available, the community will be able to have a more informed discussion about whether the tool, in its current form, can usefully inform Wikipedia development or not. So, for example, using this dump, a WikiProject could create an analysis of articles within its scope to identify articles that might be suitable for featured/good article candidacy, or to seek out articles with abnormally low ratings in any one rating category. Special:ArticleFeedback is just a first demonstration of the kind of data that can be easily pulled.

This is the first time that we're experimenting with serious engagement of readers beyond the edit button. This tool already is used both to collect data from readers, and to test calls for engagement when the rating is completed (create an account, edit the page, etc.). As we learn which rating and engagement strategies are useful and effective, we can evolve and develop the tool accordingly. Please review the extensive summary and data analysis already posted to the project page and help us improve the tool. If you want to get an overview of some of the longer term possibilities that a rating tool presents, please see the document mw:Article feedback/Extended review. Thanks, --Eloquence* 21:52, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

New Twinkle deployed

After too many years I've deployed updated version of the twinkle code. It's now gadget only, and hopefully it won't destroy the pedia. _→AzaToth 21:48, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

See WT:Twinkle

I'm finding that I get an error message with 'normal rollback' and 'agf rollback' now, along the lines of, "Warning: Latest revision 431421363 doesn't equal our revision 431421363." And it won't do it. 'Vandal rollback' works fine. Any suggestions? ╟─TreasuryTag►presiding officer─╢ 22:36, 29 May 2011 (UTC) TW doesn't seem to work with FF 4 on OS X. Twinkle doesn't display at all anymore and Haza-w/Drop-down menus only shows arrows rather than "Page" and "User" as it did a short time ago. Looks ok so far on Safari 5. P.S. I'm using Vector. —DoRD (talk) 22:41, 29 May 2011 (UTC) Never mind, it has mysteriously started working for me. —DoRD (talk) 12:51, 30 May 2011 (UTC) So we can keep the discussion centralized, please post any comments, questions, statements, requests, bugs, and so on to WT:TW. Thanks, — This, that, and the other (talk) 11:30, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Cite web original view

Is there any way that Cite web can be customised so as when you first click on it within Edit you can choose which of the fields initially appear, without having to click on the 'Show/hide extra fields' tab. Or if not, is it possible for 'Date' to be globally added to the first show on Cite web, as I believe this is an important field. On Cite news the date field already shows when you first click on it. Thanks. Eldumpo (talk) 08:53, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

I suspect you are referring to Wikipedia:RefToolbar. Please determine which version you are using and discuss on the talk page. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 09:12, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for response. I have now posted at the 2.0 talk page although I note it does not seem to be that active. Eldumpo (talk) 10:01, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Stricken edit visible

I went from Šarplaninac to its source then to Template:Kosovo-note and was shown an image obviously not meant to be there. I cannot find the image in the edit history, so I am assuming it is one of the stricken edits from 28 May. Something is broken. 71.234.215.133 (talk) 13:45, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean. Template:Kosovo-note was vandalized today 28 May. The vandalism has been reverted and the template protected but it can take some time before all articles using the template are updated (see Help:Job queue). Perhaps Šarplaninac was still showing the vandalized template version when you viewed it. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:14, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Šarplaninac was showing the correct template. Visiting the template page showed a stricken edit: an edit that should be visible only to admins. 71.234.215.133 (talk) 14:49, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

OK. There has lately been many unregistered users who report seeing old versions of pages. I guess this happened to you. The template page itself should have updated right away for all users and not be a job queue issue. I don't know whether there is a server which is behind with updates or what is going on. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:03, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

I have been aware of loading problems for two weeks, and posted above about it. An IP being able to see admin-only edits is a larger problem than stale articles, however, whether they are related in cause or not, and should be dealt with immediately. 71.234.215.133 (talk) 15:19, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Community consensus for deployment of "Rate this page" / "Article Feedback Tool" on all English Wikipedia articles 31 May 2011?

I must ask; Is there a community consensus for a the planned full deployment of this on all English Wikipedia articles on 31 May 2011? I've searched for a discussion about it but can't seem to find it. I see comments scattered here and there on enwp and mediawiki, some comments are positive and some are negative. Does the community want it, or is it just the Foundation that wants it? --Bensin (talk) 20:34, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't mind. Perhaps for once we should let the foundation get on with something without opposing them tooth and nail? Otherwise this'll turn into another Pending Changes debacle for no good reason. We Wikipedians love opposing change. Fences&Windows 20:37, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

I started a discussion at WP:ANI. Change can be fine, I like pending changes for instance and would like to see it back. But implementing this without a community discussion and evidently without even evaluation of the trial isn't a good idea and sets a bad precedent. I suspect that even those who like or don't mind the concept might object to it being as obtrusive as it is, for instance. Why not have feedback from the community before it's fully implemented rather than have to deal with flack after it is? Dougweller (talk) 20:48, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

I am usually comfortable leaving these kind of things to the community to work out, but in this case I don't see the community having had its say. I want the community analyzing the impact of this thing before it is decided it should be implemented, not some dude at WMF saying he "has statistics supporting it" and then shoving "This is going to happen" down my throat. To me this goes to the very core of how the Wikimedia projects should operate and that the WMF should exist to support the community, not the other way around. Another community, LibriVox, decided against rating it's content. Perhaps we should look at how they reasoned to reach that decision? --Bensin (talk) 21:21, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

This was a misunderstanding. Please see my response at #Article Rating appears immediately after creation?. Thanks,--Eloquence* 21:53, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes, the Software deployment was just recently changed from implementation on "all en.wp" to "incremental". But the major issue here is not if it should be implemented with a "full roll-out" or with "incremental bump-ups". My question is "Does the community want it at all?" --Bensin (talk) 22:18, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Admin, move Femme Fatales (magazine) to Femme Fatales

Femme Fatales is currently a redirect, so Femme Fatales (magazine) should be moved here, as per naming conventions. --Beao 21:31, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

It's a redirect to a disambiguation page. What's special about this one? Also, VPT is not really the place to request such a move. I've seen people request it at WP:AN though, certainly. - Jarry1250 ^{[Weasel? Discuss.]} 21:34, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

The correct place to request the move is requested moves. That said, I do not think this request will go through unchallenged. --Izno (talk) 23:43, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

All right, thanks. Now I noticed the Marvel group, so the disambiguation is appearently needed. --Beao 00:26, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Ampersand making amess of an FA

Could somebody have a look at footnote number 6 on Mike Jackson, please? MediaWiki doesn't seem to be recognising A & C Black as a link (I suspect sue to the &), which is odd, because it works fine in other articles, including Tim Cross. I tried replacing the symbol with the HTML code, but it didn't make a difference. Help? Please? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:22, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Fixed. Problem was a linebreak in the link. — Edokter (talk) — 00:29, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Weird, but thanks! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:36, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

The article history of Criticism of Muhammad

I was reverting vandalism to the Criticism of Muhammad article earlier today. Now, when I look at the article's history, I don't see any edits since May 11. What's going on? 216.93.212.245 (talk) 04:37, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Hm. Now it's back to normal. 216.93.212.245 (talk) 05:26, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Firefox crashes with two column layout

I guess this should really be a Bugzilla issue or a firefox bug but here goes. The page Portal:Mathematics/Suggestions reliably causes Firefox on a Mac to crash (latest versions of both). The problem seems to have something to do with pictures in a two column layout. Safari also seems to have problems with the page placing the pictures incorrectly. Any thoughts?--Salix (talk): 21:25, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Works fine for me in Firefox 4 on a Mac. I don't understand why having pictures in a two-column layout would crash a browser. Gary King (talk · scripts) 01:46, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Just crashed for me, using Firefox 4 on a PC. 216.93.212.245 (talk) 22:33, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

So [21] doesn't crash but the latest revision does? Does this always happen or only sometimes? And does it crash in a different browser? Gary King (talk · scripts) 14:25, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

I just checked with IE8 and had no problem loading the page, though the last image took a long time to load. 216.93.212.245 (talk) 17:10, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

I think we determined on IRC last night that it's a FF4 thing. FF4 on Win7 and Ubuntu both shut down when trying to open that page. Killiondude (talk) 19:31, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Works for me on FF4 on XP. /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 15:23, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

The Portal:Mathematics/Suggestions page loads OK for me with Firefox 3.6.17 on Ubuntu 10.04. Also works OK with SeaMonkey 2.0, which is now based on Firefox 3 code. It loads with Opera 11 without crashing, but doesn't show 2-column layout at bottom. —Quicksilver^{T @} 16:50, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

 Works for me for FF4 on Win7. —mc10 (t/c) 02:30, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Page ratings

I'm creating a number of redirects, and a lot of them are getting the "rate this page" feature appear. Is there really any need for this on redirects and dab pages? Can it be turned off for these? Mjroots (talk) 08:15, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

It always helps if you list a couple of examples. And this probably requires software changes to fix, so bugzilla:. bugzilla:27252 might be related btw. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 11:30, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Examples: Erato Sartes, MV Erato Sartes, Spaarnestroom, MV Spaarnestroom, Starkenborgh, MV Starkenborgh. Mjroots (talk) 07:14, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Ditto for me. Here's one: The Long Winter (film) Lugnuts (talk) 19:40, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

There are two issues:

• Bug 29164 - ArticleFeedback shouldn't be displayed on redirect pages (should be fixed when rev:88151 goes live)
• The way the extension determines if a "random" page should or not be rateable, described in this comment.

Helder 21:13, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

I just got this myself at Tissue printer, a redirect I'd just made. I was the only one to edit the redirect and it asks me to rate it. Whatever this scheme is, it needs work. Wnt (talk) 05:43, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

See "Rate this page"? above. —mc10 (t/c) 02:32, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Most popular missing articles

Hi. I wondered if a tech guru could draw up say a list of the 1000 most searched for articles without articles on here? Its just quite a few articles I've started I've noticed got quite a few hits even before the article was created looking at the page views. It would be a good tool to build content as they are most in demand for pages.Tibetan Prayer ^᧾ 16:25, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

I would guess that most, if not all, of the 1000 most searched-for articles already are present, as not existing would drive numerous editors to create it, and others to expand it.(nevermind, didn't read above comment properly elektrikSHOOS 18:25, 30 May 2011 (UTC))

That said, that would be an interesting list to see. It would actually be neat, in general, to see WMF periodically release some general site analytics for the perusing. Anyone? elektrikSHOOS 18:24, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Yeah I don't mean the 1000 most searched for articles, I mean the 1000 most searched for articles which turn up at nothing but a red link. Looking at the page history of some articles I've created I see a few hits almost every day before it even existed. If I know which 1000 missing articles are most in demand I can make it a priority to start as many of them as I can.Tibetan Prayer ^᧾ 18:36, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

I predict we will find 1/3 which just need redirects to existing articles or parts of existing articles, 1/3 which are clearly appropriate topics we have somehow missed, and 1/3 which will be out of scope as we currently define it and will need further consideration of WP:N, WP:NT, etc. to decide whether we should be the sort of encyclopedia than people expect the encyclopedia to be, or whether we know better than the readers what they ought to look here for. DGG ( talk ) 19:01, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

I think this would be a wonderful tool. --Bensin (talk) 20:35, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

There was, or is, a list of the most linked to non-existent pages, but as I recall they are rather swamped by navbox linkages. Some about some aspect of Australian geography, I think. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 20:37, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

• It's at Wikipedia:Most missed articles, but it is three years old. Fences&Windows 20:38, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Could you update then with a new list?Tibetan Prayer ^᧾ 22:01, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Sadly the 2008 list is mostly crappy Myspace type bands and very few of them are actually notable. Ah well.Tibetan Prayer ^᧾ 12:34, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

There is another list here: Wikipedia:Most wanted articles. It is compiled not by searches, but by number of "red links" in other articles. However, in looking into of these, I suspect many don't really warrant their own article either. It looks like some of them have a large number of incoming links because they appear in different "list" articles, but apparently nobody to date has found enough information about them even to make a stub. Neutron (talk) 16:57, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

• This would be a very useful tool if someone could create it. Sure, some of the list will include the latest BLP1E flash-in-the-pans, but I am sure it would also reveal viable in-demand candidates for articles.--Milowent • ^talkblp-r 18:45, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
  • Info on how these stats were put together before:[22][23]. meta:User:Melancholie who put the last one together seems to have retired from editing in early 2010. Fences&Windows 01:36, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Strange problem

Lately I experienced a strange problem. The articles history doesn't update new edits. I can see them looking at user contributions, but the article itself doesn't update new additions to the article or its discussions. --MyMoloboaccount (talk) 22:33, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

This has been going on for about three weeks. Not only histories[24][25] but articles [26][27][28][29], images[30][31][32], toolservers[33] and watchlists[34][35] are affected; even Admin only edits can be seen[36]. (All of these links are from this Technical page and its archive.) Mostly it has been chalked up to an anonymous (ISP) editor problem. Hopefully you, as a registered editor, will get more answers. 71.234.215.133 (talk) 02:41, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Oh, look, a posting after this involving lag on an image[37]. It seems MyMoloboaccount is not the only registered user to be suffering problems. 71.234.215.133 (talk) 05:22, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Using the Purge command will usually make the new edits appear, but it would be nice if the edits appeared without needing to use that command, especially so frequently. Pine _(GreenPine) ^t 06:18, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Purge does not work on article histories. As far as I can tell the Purge command has never worked on article histories, it just comes back as an error. 71.234.215.133 (talk) 06:29, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

There were errors with purging the squid servers in Florida apparently. Seems that some element there got stuck after the network upgrade from last week. Should be fixed since a few minutes. Let's hope that finally all these issues are dealt with now. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 19:01, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Seems there is still an issue with image thumbnails bugzilla:28613. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 19:27, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Problem with new version of location map file

Hi, several days ago I uploaded a new location map version for File:Location map Uruguay Montevideo.png, waited for some some lag time to see it propagate in the article we are testing it, but I still see the old version only. Actually even if I press on the new version thumb on the above file page, the image that I see is the old map! I had lag problems before, but never anything as persistent as this. Can anyone figure out what the problem is and how to solve it? Thank you. Hoverfish Talk 03:19, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Try purging the image description page. Graham87 04:00, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Use of [R] in MOS

The link Wikipedia:Mos#Article_titles.5BR.5D works, but Wikipedia:Mos#Article_titles doesn't. This is because the section has an [R] link to its right. The [R] also - IMHO - messes up the TOC - see Wikipedia:Mos.

Could and should anything be done, to improve these IMHO unwanted & undesirable side-effects? Trafford09 (talk) 12:34, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes, don't use that MOSR link thingie that is in the header of that section. I'm not sure what this MOSR is, but it seems unfinished and I doubt it is in active maintenance. However, since this is MOS, probably better talk to them. My personal opinion on this is that people should not add links and other UI elements into the headers, it's not what they are intended for. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 18:46, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

How to attach account to the global sign-in system

It seems that the vast majority of my accounts are attached, however there’s one left — on foundationwiki — which is unattached. I have access to the account, but I couldn’t find any obvious way to do this attaching. How do I attach it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Timwi (talk • contribs) 22:55, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

All relevant information is here. However, I think that the email address and password have to be the same as your unified accounts to link it automatically. Gary King (talk · scripts) 00:37, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

It is not possible according to meta:Help:Unified login#Can I merge accounts from restricted-account-creation wikis? and wmf:Special:UserLogin. I checked a few other users with foundation accounts and they are not unified. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:38, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Finding first monday

Using the #time: parser function, is there a way to determin the date of the first Monday of a given month? — Edokter (talk) — 13:27, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure exactly what you want as input (a specified month or the current?) and output (day number or full date?). If y and m is the year and month then {{#expr:8-{{#time:N|y-m-7}}}} will produce the day number. For example, {{#expr:8-{{#time:N|2011-5-7}}}} produces 2 which means the first Monday in May 2011 is the 2nd. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:07, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

My input is "May 2011" and output should be "2 May 2011". I was hoping that "first monday of May 2011" would work, but that is not supported until PHP 5.3, and we're running 5.2. — Edokter (talk) — 14:16, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm still not sure what you want as input. Do you mean a user should give a string containing a month, space and year like your example "May 2011", or do you want the current month and year to always be used? If it's the latter then the above can be adapted to {{#expr:8-{{#time:N|{{CURRENTYEAR}}-{{CURRENTMONTH}}-7}}}} {{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{CURRENTYEAR}} which produces 1 April 2024, but it could probably be more elegant. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:37, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm trying to build an archive for Today's featured list, which only appears on mondays, so "May 2011" (or whatever month is passed) is all I have to work with from which to distill the first occurence on Monday. I think I have it working though (examples: Wikipedia:Today's featured list/May 2011 and Wikipedia:Today's featured list/June 2011 which pass the month and year to Template:TFL archive), but not at all elegant. — Edokter (talk) — 15:15, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Apparently, the PHP documentation is at fault. While I tried "first monday of may 2011", PHP barfed on "of". The following works like a charm: {{#time:j F Y|first monday {{{date|}}}}} (where date is "May 2011") produces "2 May 2011". — Edokter (talk) — 14:13, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Long Tab nanes

All of a sudden, my tabs at the top have reverted back to long names ("discussion", "edit this page", "new section"), whereas last week it was short names ("talk", "edit", "+"). I cannot remember what I used (so long ago...) to set the short names, or how to get them back - result is that all the extra tabs added are now off screen. Any suggestions. Currently on W7, with FF3.6, on monobook.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:50, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

You were using Wikipedia:Friendly to rename the tabs. The script was merged a few days ago with Wikipedia:Twinkle, so you have to enable Twinkle in Preferences -> Gadgets. Gary King (talk · scripts) 00:41, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Ah that's where it come from. I'm already using Twinkle, but it has not given me the short names. I'll post on the Twinkle page.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 18:17, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

We Need "Category:(insert word here) is up for discussion" Or Something Similar Template

I had to manually type out a message here [[38]]. I've noticed template and article message templates but not for categories, or am I wrong?Curb Chain (talk) 09:06, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

There is {{Cfd-notify}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:30, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

everything vanishes

Using my regular account, UserDGG, after I connect to a page, it reloads as a blank page. Reproducible on Safari and on Chrome. I'm using an alternate account, on Opera, and its OK there. Judging by the edit history, my account is not compromised . I assume it is something in my settings, probably cache-related, but I cannot get to that page. Any ideas what's wrong; any ideas how to fix it. ? DGG (alternate account) (talk) 17:30, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

In case something in your vector or monobook settings has started misbehaving, does http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Preferences?useskin=simple work for you? PrimeHunter (talk) 18:03, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

No. The preferences page appears, and when I try to edit it, it vanishes. The only thing I can think of, could someone here with admin privs delete my vector.js, vector.css, common.cs and twiknkleoptions.js files (I thought I had a common.js file, but I don't see it). I can reconstruct them readily enough. DGG (alternate account) (talk) 20:28, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Instead of deleting the files, I moved them to the filename without the ".", vector.css → vectorcss, for example. That should make it easier to rebuild/move the files. —DoRD (talk) 21:07, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

fixed now. And a clever idea, that move. My thanks! DGG ( talk ) 22:10, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia is formatted in Times New Roman instead of Arial font

Wikipedia is formatted in Times New Roman instead of Arial font when using Microsoft Internet Explorer 6.0.--Jax 0677 (talk) 19:25, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

AFAICT Wikipedia had no specified font. It relies on your browser to supply a (sans-serif) font. Probably here, what's happening is that your copy of IE is getting that bit wrong; perhaps because it's IE6, perhaps because its settings have been changed. - Jarry1250 ^{[Weasel? Discuss.]} 21:16, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

colwith

[39]

What does the parameter do?Curb Chain (talk) 04:36, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

See the documentation at Template:Reflist/doc. The parameter tries to arrange for the references to be displayed in multiple columns, but you may be using a browser that doesn't support it. -- John of Reading (talk) 06:46, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

The article that won't go away

Aaron Sanders is the article that won't leave the database. It was deleted on May 8. It was recreated and deleted again on May 18 as a trial. It was then recreated as a redirect on May 20, and then null edited today. It still, however shows up in any database/toolserver/bot search as an unreference BLP! See this CatScan search and Wikipedia:WikiProject Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons/uBLPs 2009 08. The toolserver page shows a "last change" time of 20110523154919. Bizarro World. Any ideas why? The-Pope (talk) 16:04, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Apparently there are still some purging issues with the squids in Florida. Ryan and Mark are now looking at it. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 18:48, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Should be fixed. You may need to purge the server cache. Prodego ^talk 19:02, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

It still doesn't seem to detect any changes to the article, except for the last change time, whether I edit it or purge the cache. [40] The-Pope (talk) 12:47, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Suppress File Redirects?

Is it possible for admins to suppress file redirects? If it is possible, is it tied to suppressing article redirects, or is it a separate bit? I'm asking because they usually aren't needed, and conceivably the bit could be tied to WP:FILEMOVER with little risk (as that is a removable right). ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 15:13, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

We normally keep file redirects unless there are outstanding circumstances. In most cases a file redirect should be left on the original page, except if it is a misleading or promotional name. from WP:File mover#How it works. When the filemover right came out, brion, a dev for Wikimedia, stated his objections against file redirects being deleted (after originals are moved). This statement was shortly after the feature was added to Wikimedia Commons. Killiondude (talk) 16:39, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Clear enough, but that's not what's happening. Most (all?) of the redirects I've created have been deleted. Granted, I'm not sure if external image hosting works when an image is moved on WP, then moved to Commons. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 16:44, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

I know User:Thehelpfulone was deleting redirects (en masse) after others had moved files and I left him a note yesterday with the same quote from the policy page as above. If you happen to notice another admin doing it, you might gently point them towards the policy page. :-) Killiondude (talk) 17:03, 2 June 2011 (UTC)