User talk:DatGuy/Archives/2017/July
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:DatGuy. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent changes
- There was a problem with maps on Wikimedia wikis that used <mapframe> when you clicked on the link to another map service. Open Street Map or Google Maps are examples of other map services. If you had marked a place on the map the marker would not be in the same place on the other map service. It was in the middle of the map. This has now been fixed. [1]
Changes this week
- Very old and inactive unpublished translations in the Content Translation database will be removed. This is because of technical maintenance. If you have not worked on a translation after 1 January 2016 you will lose it after 6 July. If you want to keep the unfinished translation you need to open it before 6 July with the Content Translation tool. You can continue working on it later. Translations that were started or have been worked on after 1 January 2016 will not be affected.
- There is no new Mediawiki version this week.
EventStreams is a new way to show activity on Wikimedia wikis. It works with the recent changes feed. It will do more things later. It will replace RCStream. Tools that use RCStream should move to EventStreams before 7 July. Tech News wrote about this in the 2017/07 issue. [2]
Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
15:32, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
RonBot
Bot has been approved Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/RonBot, thanks for your help Ronhjones (Talk) 22:46, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
Can the resize function be delayed?
As most of what DatBot seems to be doing with regards to image resizes as tagged by @Ronhjones:, who is tagged automagically through AWB at a rapid pace, can it be possible to make sure DatBot doesn't resize until at least a week from tagging passes? While 95% of what Ronhjones tags do meet the informal 0.1 megapixle image size guides (which is not a requirement), there are images that are exceed 0.1MP that are getting caught up in this tagging that have rationals to explain why they are larger and thus should not be reduced. As I understand from previous discussions with Ronhjones, if the non-free reduce tag is removed by an editor after they place it, they won't retag it, but right not I see DatBot operating under a day once the tag is placed, which is not enough time to contest that. We need to give editors more time (more than a day) to remove that tagging. Basically as once DatBot operates on adding the reduced image (and thus tagging for image cleanup to remove the original size), undoing the action requires admin interventions. Editors should have more time to contest the non-free reduce tag addition, hence why adding a delay of 7 days before doing it makes sense, to be consistent with other "contested" issues. --MASEM (t) 03:57, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
- Sounds like there is a parameter that has rationale as to why they should not be reduced? If that is true, the bot can look for the parameter. If that is not true, perhaps there should be a parameter the bot looks for? Do you have any other ideas? Kees08 (Talk) 05:37, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
- There's no parameter - for one we do not require NFC to use any template for the rational, as long as it addresses the 10 points. And even in within the template versions of the rational, it's not one single field. Basically, at the present time, this is something that can't be automated, hence just asking for more time on the human review side after the tag had been placed. --MASEM (t) 12:37, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
- @Masem: It would complicate things, but yes, it would be possible. However, Ronhjones (who has already been pinged) might like to skip the page if it has "text" anywhere in it? Just a suggestion. If not, I'll code Masem's idea. --Dat GuyTalkContribs 12:08, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
- Rationale are text, and justification for a larger size is expected to be part of that rational (if this is the case), so it's going to be easy to miss, and doesn't making the "skip" idea feasible (at least at the rate that AWB can do things). --MASEM (t) 12:37, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
- @Masem: We still have the 7 days post reduction, where both old and new versions are still visible (and if necessary can be quickly reverted by anyone back to the larger size), and rarely makes a great deal of effect on the article (as the thumb pic is often smaller than the reduced). If I see they are reverted, then I tag them for no more reduction with either {{non-free no reduce}} or {{non-free manual reduce}} - depending on if I think there is some room for some reduction. If we must have longer, then surely it would make more sense to extend the period post reduction - and change it to 14 days, that would also be a much easier thing to implement. When Theo's bot was working properly then it would also reduce the files within a few hours of tagging, so this is nothing new. For some images, one needs to actually see the reduced version before making a decision as to the suitability of the reduction. Ronhjones (Talk) 19:21, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
- P.S. The current "revert rate" is in the order of 0.2%. 99.8% of the tagged files are not reverted. Ronhjones (Talk) 19:24, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
- While anyone can revert the image change, that's still leaving an extra non-free image floating around that another bot (not DatBot) will eventually remove the unused images. Ideally, I'd rather see the delay before DatBot and eliminate the delay on deleting the non-free duplicate it creates, only because in that period before DatBot acts, all changes can be reversed by any editor; once DatBot acts, there's a cleanup job created by some admin or bot to undo or sweep up after whether the reduction is kept or not. It's not to question that your tagging, you're right very few are contested, but we should follow similar processes that we have in other places where we are talking about a contestable change, giving editors more time to undo before a point a no return is made (even if it is just uploading a reduced image as DatBot is doing). --MASEM (t) 21:10, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
- @Masem: OK,but we really need to have that as a policy, as anyone can do a reduction as soon as the {{non-free reduce}} tag is added (and I've seen quite a few editors do that) - Also I can see that happening more, because Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests will fill up if waiting 7 days. Maybe you should start a proposal at the Village Pump? Ideally we need the {{non-free reduce}} to show a date when reduction can be done. Ronhjones (Talk) 21:40, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
- Also with the contest rate so low, does it make a lot of difference if one or two extra files a day have to be revision deleted - the bot has removed the bulk of the revision deletes from admins. Ronhjones (Talk) 21:47, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
- We would definitely need to have a consensus to allow (for example) DatBot to also delete the images that it resized after uploading. The thing with editors doing the reduction earlier is that they are then taken on the responsibility of saying "Yes, this reduction makes sense, and unlikely to be opposed, I will do it". Having the 7 day period between your tagging and the reduction upload where no one contests it and then having a bot do it is the same type of confidence that the action won't upset anyone. But definitely the immediate rescaling and deletion by a bot is a novel aspect of policy and needs consensus. In the meantime, I'd not see a problem with having DatBot wait 7 days, and knowing that deletion won't have until 7 days later by current accepted practice; that's still only 7 days that excess non-free is used, whereas most of the image reductions you're tagging are to help better meet fair use allowances but are not always strictly required by NFC. --MASEM (t)
- Also with the contest rate so low, does it make a lot of difference if one or two extra files a day have to be revision deleted - the bot has removed the bulk of the revision deletes from admins. Ronhjones (Talk) 21:47, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
- @Masem: OK,but we really need to have that as a policy, as anyone can do a reduction as soon as the {{non-free reduce}} tag is added (and I've seen quite a few editors do that) - Also I can see that happening more, because Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests will fill up if waiting 7 days. Maybe you should start a proposal at the Village Pump? Ideally we need the {{non-free reduce}} to show a date when reduction can be done. Ronhjones (Talk) 21:40, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
- While anyone can revert the image change, that's still leaving an extra non-free image floating around that another bot (not DatBot) will eventually remove the unused images. Ideally, I'd rather see the delay before DatBot and eliminate the delay on deleting the non-free duplicate it creates, only because in that period before DatBot acts, all changes can be reversed by any editor; once DatBot acts, there's a cleanup job created by some admin or bot to undo or sweep up after whether the reduction is kept or not. It's not to question that your tagging, you're right very few are contested, but we should follow similar processes that we have in other places where we are talking about a contestable change, giving editors more time to undo before a point a no return is made (even if it is just uploading a reduced image as DatBot is doing). --MASEM (t) 21:10, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
- P.S. The current "revert rate" is in the order of 0.2%. 99.8% of the tagged files are not reverted. Ronhjones (Talk) 19:24, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
- @Masem: We still have the 7 days post reduction, where both old and new versions are still visible (and if necessary can be quickly reverted by anyone back to the larger size), and rarely makes a great deal of effect on the article (as the thumb pic is often smaller than the reduced). If I see they are reverted, then I tag them for no more reduction with either {{non-free no reduce}} or {{non-free manual reduce}} - depending on if I think there is some room for some reduction. If we must have longer, then surely it would make more sense to extend the period post reduction - and change it to 14 days, that would also be a much easier thing to implement. When Theo's bot was working properly then it would also reduce the files within a few hours of tagging, so this is nothing new. For some images, one needs to actually see the reduced version before making a decision as to the suitability of the reduction. Ronhjones (Talk) 19:21, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
- Rationale are text, and justification for a larger size is expected to be part of that rational (if this is the case), so it's going to be easy to miss, and doesn't making the "skip" idea feasible (at least at the rate that AWB can do things). --MASEM (t) 12:37, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
So, reading the discussion, is there 'consensus' for me to ad it to the bot? Dat GuyTalkContribs 11:42, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q2 2017
The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter
Volume 10, No. 1 — 2nd Quarter, 2017
Previous issue | Index | Next issue 
Project At a Glance
As of Q2 2017, the project has:
|
Content
|
|
(Delivered 14:32, 9 July 2017 (UTC))
Bot?
Hi, how can I stop your bot destroying an image of non-free text, please? This has happened twice now to the same image. Vashti (talk) 19:43, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
- @Vashti: Sorry for the late reply. You could change {{non-free reduce}} to {{non-free manual reduce|type=screen}}. Dat GuyTalkContribs 17:16, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
- Hm. I've currently tagged it with {{non-free no reduce}}, as it seems like any reduction at all will make the file[[3]] illegible? Is that wrong? Vashti (talk) 09:02, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent changes
- There are sometimes links to pages about the same thing on other Wikimedia projects. A Wikipedia article about Berlin can link to the Wikivoyage guide or Wiktionary entry about Berlin. You can now see when that page has a badge. A badge could be the star that shows that an article is a featured article. [4]
Changes this week
The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 11 July. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 12 July. It will be on all wikis from 13 July (calendar).
![[3]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Discworld_mud_drum.PNG){kind=link}
Meetings
- You can join the next meeting with the Editing team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 11 July at 19:00 (UTC). See how to join.
Future changes
- Mobile users will be able to edit Wikipedia without JavaScript. This will make it possible to edit the wikis from older mobile phones. This will probably happen on 18 July for most wikis. [5]
- We will not use Tidy on Wikimedia wikis in the future. It will be replaced by June 2018. It could be earlier. Editors will need to fix pages that could break. You can read the simplified instructions for editors.
Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
15:07, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
New Page Reviewer Newsletter
Backlog update:
- The new page backlog is currently at 18,511 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a a day.
- Some editors are committing to work specifically on patrolling new pages on 15 July. If you have not reviewed new pages in a while, this might be a good time to be involved. Please remember that quality of patrolling is more important than quantity, that the speedy deletion criteria should be followed strictly, and that ovetagging for minor issues should be avoided.
Technology update:
- Several requests have been put into Phabractor to increase usability of the New Pages Feed and the Page Curation toolbar. For more details or to suggest improvements go to Wikipedia:Page Curation/Suggested improvements
- The tutorial has been updated to include links to the following useful userscripts. If you were not aware of them, they could be useful in your efforts reviewing new pages:
- User:Lourdes/PageCuration.js adds a link to the new pages feed and page curation toolbar to your top toolbar on Wikipedia
- User:The Earwig/copyvios.js adds a link in your side toolbox that will run the current page through
General project update:
- Following discussion at Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers, Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Noticeboard has been marked as historical. Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers is currently the most active central discussion forum for the New Page Patrol project. To keep up to date on the most recent discussions you can add it to your watchlist or visit it periodically.
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:48, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}}
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent changes
- "Wikimedia Labs" is now called "Cloud VPS". "Wikimedia Tool Labs" is now called "Wikimedia Toolforge". This is to help clarify the purpose of these services. [6]
Problems
- On some pages, the Table of Contents is not being shown. It will normally appear if you edit the page again. Investigation is currently ongoing. [7]
Changes this week
- The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 18 July. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 19 July. It will be on all wikis from 20 July (calendar).
Meetings
- You can join the next meeting with the Editing team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 18 July at 19:00 (UTC). See how to join.
- You can join the next meeting with the Architecture committee. The topic this week is: Migrate to HTML5 section ids. [8] The meeting will be on 19 July at 21:00 (UTC). See how to join.
Future changes
- Page Previews, currently a Beta Feature, will be enabled for logged-out users for all remaining Wikipedias (with the exception of English and German) the week of 24 July. An A/B test will be run on English Wikipedia to collect data before approaching the community for further discussion. [9]
Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
23:00, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
Bots Newsletter, July 2017
{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}}
| Bots Newsletter, July 2017 | |
|---|---|
 Greetings! Here is the 4th issue of the Bots Newsletter (formerly the BAG Newletter). You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future newsletters by adding/removing your name from this list. Highlights for this newsletter include:
BU Rob13 and Cyberpower678 are now members of the BAG (see RfBAG/BU Rob13 and RfBAG/Cyberpower678 3). BU Rob13 and Cyberpower678 are both administrators; the former operates BU RoBOT which does a plethora of tasks, while the latter operates Cyberbot I (which replaces old bots), Cyberbot II (which does many different things), and InternetArchiveBot which combats link rot. Welcome to the BAG!
We currently have 12 open bot requests at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval, and could use your help processing!
Wikimania 2017 is happening in Montreal, during 9–13 August. If you plan to attend, or give a talk, let us know! Thank you! edited by: Headbomb 17:12, 19 July 2017 (UTC) (You can subscribe or unsubscribe from future newsletters by adding or removing your name from this list.) | |
Pending changes count
After over six months of tireless service, the bot has stopped updating the pending changes backlog (Task #4). Could this be restarted please? I see there are now over 70 transclusions of {{Pending Changes backlog}} and its variants, which rely on the data: Noyster (talk), 22:41, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
- @Noyster: Restarted. Dat GuyTalkContribs 08:50, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
- It stopped again. Seems like the file was deleted? No idea why. Dat GuyTalkContribs 15:58, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
- Noyster FYI: I found the reason for the delay. See T169774#3409484. Dat GuyTalkContribs 17:14, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for info DatGuy. The phabricator thread doesn't mean much to me, but I hope the bot can soon be back to updating PC backlog every 15 mins as before: Noyster (talk), 20:10, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
- It's still only firing sporadically and looking at the history since 4 July, I suspect the same problem that occurred once before, where it only picks up counts of 10 or less: Noyster (talk), 06:23, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
- I think DatGuy's having a well-earned break, but I hope he can attend to this on his return: Noyster (talk), 06:45, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
- @Noyster: I forgot what I did earlier, but I tried something now as well as cleaning some of the code. We'll see soon if it works. Dat GuyTalkContribs 18:31, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
- I think DatGuy's having a well-earned break, but I hope he can attend to this on his return: Noyster (talk), 06:45, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
- It's still only firing sporadically and looking at the history since 4 July, I suspect the same problem that occurred once before, where it only picks up counts of 10 or less: Noyster (talk), 06:23, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for info DatGuy. The phabricator thread doesn't mean much to me, but I hope the bot can soon be back to updating PC backlog every 15 mins as before: Noyster (talk), 20:10, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
- Noyster FYI: I found the reason for the delay. See T169774#3409484. Dat GuyTalkContribs 17:14, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
- It stopped again. Seems like the file was deleted? No idea why. Dat GuyTalkContribs 15:58, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
Noyster Looks good? Dat GuyTalkContribs 22:05, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
- Looking good now and thank you for fixing it!: Noyster (talk), 08:11, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Brunei at the 2016 Summer Olympics
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Brunei at the 2016 Summer Olympics you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. 
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of QatarStarsLeague -- QatarStarsLeague (talk) 01:01, 21 July 2017 (UTC)