Welcome!

Hello, Pppery, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ~~~~, which will automatically produce your name and the date.

If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or click here to ask a question on your talk page. Again, welcome!

Fayenatic London 20:32, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Well, that was efficient.Edit

I was still trying to get things to play nice with the flatlist and you cut the grass below my foot! You quite surprised me, but hey, I won't complain, it seems to work fantastically. I'll test it some more, but it looks good. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 22:24, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Doesn't seem to work for the last three parameters here (draft). Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 22:26, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
@Headbomb: You actually discovered a bug in Template:Template parameter value.   Fixed. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 22:33, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
Look at that, I'm the Magellan of bugs today it seems! Could you deploy this to the live template? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 22:36, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
@Headbomb:   Done. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 22:42, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
Now it's the first two parameters that don't work right. Possibly a thing to do with their names (Has-title/Has-blurb). And the handling of empty parameters. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 22:43, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
@Headbomb: No, it was just me making a careless error, which I've fixed. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 22:45, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
Well, the testcases and WP:NEWSROOM. still look busted to me. Even after purging the cache. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 22:47, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
@Headbomb: Looks like it's yet another bug in Template:Template parameter value (that took me forever to track down), requiring another easy fix (which I did). {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 23:13, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Seems to work a lot better now. There's an issue with an empty |Notes= though. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 23:20, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

@Headbomb: Fixed. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 23:25, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
Seems to work now. And I've fixed the preload template to make use of the correct parameters. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 22:03, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Technical Barnstar
For this and the associated voodoo magic that came with it. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 23:30, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
Um, Headbomb, the actual Lua code was written by Alex 21, not me (I actually tried to get it deleted at one point). {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 23:31, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
Well, you fixed several bugs, so there's been magic involved somewhere. Plus you used #invoke' s. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 23:35, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
Cheers for the fixes. There's still one big bug I need to work out as well, and that's if the parameter content includes any piped links. It cuts off at the first pipe it sees. -- /Alex/21 02:18, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Previous accountEdit

Please acknowledge your previous use of the banned Technical 13 account, to save me the tedium of an SPI. I was prepared to ignore this obvious socking, and have done so until now, because your new account seemed to have good intentions, until you started being a dickhead at Rexx's RfA. You're not going to squirm out of this, so just admitting it seems most prudent. There might be ways to avoid having you indefinitely blocked if you co-operate. -- Begoon 15:17, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

No, I am not Technical 13. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 20:38, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
Heh. We'll see. I don't have much time right now, but rest assured I'll get back to this soon, unless you retreat once again to 'good edits' without fuckwwittery, which is why I've taken no action regarding your blatant socking so far. Second chances have limits. 'Happy editing' anyways. -- Begoon 13:40, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
(talk page watcher) A full confession at the RfA may help, perhaps. ——SerialNumber54129 13:43, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

  Centralizing/redirecting discussion to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Technical_13#08_April_2019. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:21, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

For the record, the SPI closed as unlikely. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 16:01, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

April Fool'sEdit

Thanks for catching that mistake. I thought I was marking the page pertaining to featured articles, but I was actually marking the page for all April Fool's items. As best as I can tell, "Did You Know" is still (semi-)active with respect to April Fool's day items, but all other categories (featured article, in the news) are defunct. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 00:31, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

SPIEdit

I just wanted to let you know that the SPI that was opened against you has been closed due to lack of evidence. I've also archived the report just a bit ago. Reading the discussion on the talk page of RexxS' crat chat, some users are debating whether or not someone should message you and apologize for any hardship, frustration, stress, or disheartened feelings that the accusations, the SPI, and other related discussions have caused upon you. I personally believe that if such an apology even becomes a debate in a related discussion, one should be given - even if the goal is to try and end things on a positive note so that everyone can move on.

I obviously can't speak on behalf of other editors directly; I think that those who actually made the accusations and/or caused any stress or frustration upon you should be the ones apologizing - not someone such as myself and in an attempt to speak on behalf of others. However, I will express my sincere feelings of sympathy and compassion to you regarding the situation, and encourage you to not take the accusations personally, and to move on from this as positively as you can. My talk page is always open to you, and you're welcome to message me there any time you need any input, advice, assistance, encouragement, mentoring, or if you just want to talk... please don't hesitate to reach out to me. I'll be more than happy to help you with anything you need. Keep your head up, move forward from this, and everything will be okay. :-) As you already know: How you act and behave following such hardship will be what the community will see and judge in the future - significantly moreso than the accusations themselves.

I hope you have a great day, and I wish you happy editing. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 13:35, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

  • I just wanted to offer some sympathetic support regarding the recent SPI you were involved in. I've never been in that particular situation, so I can't know exactly how you feel, but I did get blocked once, when I was a brand-new editor, when an admin mistakenly thought I was vandalizing when I had, in fact, merely tagged a vandal's article for speedy deletion. That both stressed me out and bummed me out. I imagine you felt similarly. Everyone makes mistakes and I would like to apologize for any mistake anyone made that caused you any undue distress. Useight's Public Sock (talk) 15:28, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
    • Agggghhh, try not to take it too personally. I've actually been blocked twice as a sock due to total vindictiveness. Sock accusations are terms of endearment around here. Lynn (SLW) (talk) 00:17, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
      • "terms of endearment!" No, no, no, , no no no no ... . * Pppery * fades away 00:49, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Special Barnstar
The Special Barnstar is awarded to a user as a gesture of appreciation when there is no other barnstar which would be appropriate. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:46, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Um, ToBeFree, what is this barnstar supposed to thank me for? * Pppery * survives 21:09, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
I believe that a general gesture of appreciation, especially as Wikipedia offers such a beautifully colored star for special circumstances, is appropriate.   ~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:13, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Purple Barnstar
I'm surprised there are only three apologies on this page. Thank you for all of your contributions. You are valuable to the Wikipedia community, and I hope the recent events don't discourage you from staying with us. — Newslinger talk 06:55, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

You will appreciate the ironyEdit

Sorry to have seen the "inquisition" you faced at the recent RfA SPI, which was unfair in my view [1]. There was another editor User talk:Woshiyiweizhongguoren, who had been only 14 days in WP and entered the RfA, asked a full RfA question [2], and logged their RfA !vote [3], without any SPI concern. However, they have only now been revealed as an SPI and blocked. I thought you would appreciate the irony and it might give you a laugh. All the best. Britishfinance (talk) 22:31, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Indeed. The thing is, though, Woshiyiweizhongguoren's fate is irrelevant now that the RfA has passed and the arbitration committee seems uninterested in the matter. * Pppery * fades away 22:41, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
Life goes on. Most of the non-content / non-platform development part of WP is not very meaningful in the long-run. I am not sure it brings anybody much satisfaction. Not by accident so many crats are uncontactable/fade-away. This article is an amazing read on long-term satisfaction in WP User:Antandrus/observations on Wikipedia behavior. Britishfinance (talk) 22:54, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

PilgrimEdit

Just FYI: I'm not new here. I was going to redirect Pilgrim (song) myself-—after fixing the incoming links, so it wouldn't set off the WP:DPL bot. Maybe chill while another editor is still working. --ShelfSkewed Talk 22:21, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Module:Ancient GreekEdit

Sorry about this. It wasn't intentional; I was viewing an old revision and mistakenly edited it instead of the current one. — Eru·tuon 21:53, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Lua helpEdit

  Moved to Wikipedia talk:Lua: * Pppery * has returned 12:15, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Merging templatesEdit

Hi Pppery. You know it's sort of a new development that folks are also tagging the template to merge into. Our instructions at TfD don't really say to do it. That being said, I don't mind, but wanted to call your attention to that. Maybe it's something that ought to be changed? --Bsherr (talk) 12:48, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Not new to me; I've been tagging both templates since I became active in my "add tfd tags" task in September 2016. * Pppery * has returned 18:58, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

TNT docsEdit

heh, I agree - i wish there was a better shared docs system :(. So far we have translate wiki (great from translation perspective, but absolutely horrible for actually creating content itself -- all those special comments keep breaking, section tagging get mismatched, and very few people actually understand how to use that tagging system. I hope the TNT-based alternative is better -- adding a {{#invoke:TNT|table|message}} is fairly readable for any person who uses mediawiki templating language, and easy to trace who uses what. Thx for editing. --Yurik (talk) 02:05, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

In truth, my position has not changes since I nominated Module:TNT for deletion back in 2017. The fact that I wasn't able to make as simple a change as that proves I was right. * Pppery * has returned 02:16, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
Which change? The fact that you tried to add a link to a plain-text-only field proves that a module that allows all wikis to share content should be deleted??? Strange reasoning tbh. All small wikis have been dying to get this functionality, but it will only work if larger wikis support them, because we are the ones who have the vast amount of human resources to make these templates/modules. --Yurik (talk) 03:04, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
What I was trying to say is that the fact that the module forces that field to be plaintext means it is inhibiting functionality and thus should be deleted. It looks like, in any case, I was misunderstanding what the module was supposed to do; it produces TemplateData, not the wikitext content I typically associate with doc pages, and that limitation is part of the software, not the module. * Pppery * has returned 03:26, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

The edit you thanked me aboutEdit

There is a discussion about the merits of the article you thanked me about on Talk:Criticism of the Catholic Church, so if you want to weigh in, be my guest.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 03:18, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

That, if I recall correctly, was a technical "thank", thanking you for not using <onlyinclude>...</onlyinclude> (which I've been on-and-off crusading against sicne July 2016), and unrelated to the content of the article. I've never been interested in actual article content, instead focusing on the technical side ... * Pppery * has returned 03:27, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Infobox settlement - naming topic - Infobox placeEdit

RE Template talk:Infobox settlement#Requested move 28 February 2019:

What do you think about "Infobox place", matching Wikipedia:List of infoboxes/Geography and place#Place

Furthermore, it

  • is short (length brought up as anti-move reason)
  • only uses one word (multiple words brought up as anti-move reason)
  • catches all use cases, no misnomer anymore

78.55.183.64 (talk) 13:04, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

  • Could work, but the only way to find out is a requested move. * Pppery * has returned 18:55, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Module:Section sizesEdit

Hi, there's no problem with moving the name of this, it's just the first move made the module non-functional and I had to revert it. I thought I had made that clear in the summary. Hope this helps. Onetwothreeip (talk) 22:19, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

How could you?Edit

Thief! —⁠烏⁠Γ (kaw)  00:22, 08 May 2019 (UTC)

The content of your userpage is, like all other text on Wikipedia, licensed under CC-BY-SA; I'm allowed to use it as long as I credit you. * Pppery * survives 00:23, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
I hoped that'd be clear as a joke. I'm happy to see other people doing the same work. —⁠烏⁠Γ (kaw)  00:28, 08 May 2019 (UTC)

Portal:No Escape listed at Redirects for discussionEdit

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Portal:No Escape. Since you had some involvement with the Portal:No Escape redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. UnitedStatesian (talk) 12:30, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Css in Graph templateEdit

I re-instated the code that calls the sub-page with some style.css stuff in it. It is needed to make the graph templates work on the mobile version of any page - otherwise it comes out as a blank space. There was quite a one-sided discussion by me at the mediawiki page and the solution finally emerged via phabT216431. RobinLeicester (talk) 18:54, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

@RobinLeicester: No need to tell me about this on my talk page; my removal of the CSS was unintentional. * Pppery * survives 18:55, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
The code at the mediawiki page is supposed to be a master version, so changes to the en:wikimedia one will always risk being overwritten - which is what presumably happened before.RobinLeicester (talk) 19:04, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:GAREdit

I don't believe this was a problem; it would have been removed in the parsing process. But this definitely was. Another error by me; I could have done the simple step of creating a sandbox and testcases when updating commonly used templates; that is my takeaway here. But perhaps I should just take a break.

This is one thing I generally appreciate about coding: it exposes one to the undeniable truth of human fallibility (or at least my own fallibility). Retro (talk | contribs) 02:24, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

@Retro: The edit that you pointed out wasn't a problem didn't only remove a newline, it added a necessary datestamp to the template. * Pppery * it has begun... 02:27, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
You are accurate (the weird part is I can remember adding the timestamp). But regardless: apparently I did not take enough care in updating the template, and I suspect there still may be errors, based on the testcases page. I will probably fix them, but you are welcome to take a crack at them if you want (I would not blame you if you've lost confidence in my ability to competently code templates). Retro (talk | contribs) 02:37, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
Well, no, I wouldn't say I've lost confidence yet. After all, I broke a template used on thousands of pages a few months ago. * Pppery * it has begun... 02:49, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
I appreciate your kind words. I know the feeling of breaking a widely-transcluded template; I recall more than a year ago, before my 11-month break, edit requesting on a template-protected page and through the fault of either I or the implementing editor, (I remember it being the implementing editor, but memory deceives) watching in horror as the template became broken because an extra newline was inserted. Unlike your five minute fix, it remained broken for an hour until I finally posted about the error to WP:AN. I should have posted to AN immediately, but I was less experienced then. Retro (talk | contribs) 03:05, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Template:CalendarEdit

Just wondering, since I know you know how to develop Lua modules: Do you know he likelihood that {{Calendar}} can get "Lua-ized" via a module at Module:Calendar? Asking since ... something I'm trying to do ran across issues. Steel1943 (talk) 22:39, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Fair enough on undoing the unanswerableEdit

Just as long as we're all aware that comprehension is futile. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:37, July 15, 2019 (UTC)

FRS commentsEdit

Please don't alter my additions to WP:FRS, as you did here. They might not be necessary to you, but they are to me, to help me manage what I've signed up for. As I'm sure you've noticed, when in preview mode, the list is long enough that you have no idea what sign-up element section you are looking at, when you search for yourself. I will be adding these back again; please leave them. Thanks. Mathglot (talk) 21:59, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Possibly a better solution: add a duplicate section header as a hidden comment every twenty-five vertical lines or so. Then I can take out my comments, and everybody else gets to benefit from knowing where they are, as well. (Yes, the line-distance between them will get messed up over time with new edits; doesn't matter.) Mathglot (talk) 22:16, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Precious anniversaryEdit

Precious
 
Three years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:07, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Book RfC closeEdit

Hi, you said that you thought me reverting my closure was inappropriate and I'm wondering how you think I should have reacted, apart from the obvious don't close it in the first place. I believed the comment could be considered grounds to revert a closure based on the WP:DRV criteria "significant new information has come to light since a deletion that would justify recreating the deleted page" since there are ways to read and create books, even though it require external tools. --Trialpears (talk) 05:50, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

I didn't interpret Steelpillow's comment as providing some significant piece of new information, but instead as disagreeing with Moxy and others that the pre-existing functionality of the namespace was sufficient to warrant it not being hidden. Given that interpretation, I believe the close should have stood as-is. * Pppery * it has begun... 20:49, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Template redirectsEdit

Thanks for the template modification you made for me last week ({{Infobox_animanga}}). There you stated that the redirects don't have to be followed. Can you explain how that works? Other admins have not raised any question about this when I've made similar requests. Colonies Chris (talk) 13:42, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Your removal proposals of what I uploadedEdit

I have already exposed my disagreement on each removal proposal. But I would like to add the following:

All these modules I uploaded are designed primarily to completely renew Module:Chart (a column diagram). Surely finished in two weeks. This diagram will be much better than the Module:Graph column diagram. A preview can be viewed here: ca:Plantilla:Diagrama de columnes.

In order to facilitate translation in other languages, after consulting with other wikipedians, I opted for the TNT system that allows easy translation and multilingual parameter names (in my case in English and Catalan).

Jmarchn (talk) 22:37, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Module:BrewerColorsEdit

You have nothing better to do?.

With your changes it does not work properly. In Function Legends the color list appears in a single column instead of two columns. You can see it in Spanish or Catalan Wikipedia.

Please, revert your edits. --Jmarchn (talk) 21:06, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Please stop trying to overturn the consensus at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 October 27#Module:Multicol. * Pppery * it has begun... 21:11, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Question about Module XfDsEdit

Hi Pppery,

Remember that Module:Quid that you nominated and which I closed yesterday (albeit slightly prematurely, which I've learned now includes relistings)? Well, there was a "/doc" subpage, which administrator Fastily has since deleted. It's probably not a big deal as I don't imagine there was much there more than a placeholder the creating editor couldn't copy+paste from his or her original one, but was just wondering, so I understand the process, when TfDs get closed as "move," is it practice to move the subpages or to delete them?

Thanks in advance, and thanks for everything that you do with respect to cleaning up the lesser-used namespaces. : )

Cheers,
--Doug Mehus T·C 21:00, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

Dmehus, any template or module that is moved should have its subpages moved as well, unless there's a reason given in the discussion why they shouldn't be moved. Looking at this page, though, I would say this is one of the few exceptions, because the /doc only contained the TFD nomination and there's not much point in keeping it. Primefac (talk) 21:03, 17 November 2019 (UTC) (talk page stalker)
Primefac, Oh okay, that was what I was thinking. So it was probably just an oversight. Is it worth you undeleting Module:Quid/doc and moving it to the module sandbox? Doug Mehus T·C 21:05, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
Disregard my reply. We replied at the same time. Thanks! Doug Mehus T·C 21:06, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

As Primefac said, I created the doc page myself when I nominated the module for deletion, so saw no need to move it along with the rest of the subpages. * Pppery * it has begun... 21:21, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

Pppery, Ah, that makes sense. Thanks for clarifying! I just wanted to make sure I understood the process correctly (which I did) and, as Primefac noted, this seems to be one of those exceptions. Doug Mehus T·C 21:22, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter messageEdit

 Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:20, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!Edit

Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

How ironic ... * Pppery * it has begun... 22:26, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Module renamedEdit

Please tell me, based on which rule did you rename the moduleCarn !? 05:58, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

"Newsweek Media Group" listed at Redirects for discussionEdit

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Newsweek Media Group. Since you had some involvement with the Newsweek Media Group redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. –MJLTalk 01:07, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Be well at ChristmasEdit

  Have a WikiChristmas and a PediaNewYear

Be well. Keep well. Have a lovely Christmas. SilkTork (talk) 15:45, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia BooksEdit

Since you participated in the discussion on Wikipedia Books I herewith inform you that a decision has been taken.

See Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)/Archive_176#Suppress_rendering_of_Template:Wikipedia_books Dirk Hünniger (talk) 20:34, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

You do realize I worked toward implementing that close already ... * Pppery * it has begun... 22:41, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

Module:IPAc2-mhEdit

You should be aware that Module:IPAc2-mh (formerly at Module:mh-pronunc) is actually a mirrored version of wiktionary:Module:mh-pronunc, and the code is primarily maintained there. When updates are refined there, they are copied here. It is a very complex module with some complex algorithms that are still actively being refined, and since they are part of an active project connecting efforts at both Wikipedia and Wiktionary (discussed at Talk:Marshallese language here at Wikipedia and at wiktionary:User talk:Erutuon on the technical side), it is still currently important for these efforts to remain combined. If you want to participate in refining the module or its code structure, I request that you participate in the effort at Wiktionary. - Gilgamesh (talk) 07:51, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Now, reviewing your own recent edits, the local versions of functions were cached intentionally for performance reasons, as part of an overall effort to improve the module's speed, which especially in the past could be extremely slow to the point where this was considered a potential concern for articles here on Wikipedia like Kwajalein Atoll. The performance hit can be felt most acutely in the debug table at wiktionary:Module:mh-pronunc, which has to be able to refresh as quickly as possible between changes, and at one point this took several times longer to refresh than it does now. As the debug table increases in size, there's also concern that the module could time out before completing, as actually did happen recently at Wikipedia's Talk:Marshallese language such that I had write a demo table there with cached results instead, and looked into getting that talk page bot-archived.

Now, when I started mirroring the module here at Wikipedia, I left a comment at the top:

-- This module is primarily maintained at:
-- https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Module:mh-pronunc

The intent was for all queries into the module's maintenance to be centered there. Until now, there have only been two editors: Myself and wikt:User:Erutuon (also here as User:Erutuon). A helpful third hand would be appreciated, but the technical challenges need to be understood and respected as they represent real technical restraints on the module's development and debugging at Wiktionary. - Gilgamesh (talk) 08:00, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

As an added note on the linguistics of the topic... Marshallese is a phonologically complex language. User:Austronesier has been assisting me with peer review and feedback in trying to improve the article Marshallese language as well as the linguistic principles informing the refining of the phonetic algorithm the module is designed to calculate. It's a vertical vowel system, with extremely complex rules for consonant and vowel reflexes, which has necessitated the module to grow to the size that it has. Austronesier, a specialist in Austronesian languages, commented that of all the languages in that family he has studied, none has proven phonologically more complicated than Marshallese. This effort has had to combine both multiple sources of linguistic data and no small amount of programming expertise into a working algorithm to convert the language's phonemic model to its phonetic output, which for this language is far from a trivial task. And that's just for one model of phonetic reflexes. If it comes to the point where we have to cover common variant reflexes (like /wetˠemʲtʲetʲ/ to [wotˠemʲ(e)zʲetʲ] for the common reflex and spelling otemjej instead of [wɤtˠɤmʲ(e)zʲetʲ] for the same word's primary reflex and dictionary spelling wōtōmjej), then those words have to run the entire gauntlet of the toPhoneticRemainder function for additional iterations with conditionally tweaked reflex algorithms, which since it's our most expensive function can greatly balloon overall module execution time, because one phonetic change ripples into other changes (with sandhi considerations) and they all have to be taken into consideration. So please...be patient with this technical effort. - Gilgamesh (talk) 08:23, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

@Gilgamesh~enwiki: I think that the local variables for various functions in global libraries don't noticeably improve performance, so they could be dispensed with. I previewed the table in wikt:Module:mh-pronunc/documentation with two different versions of the module, with and without the local variables in question, and there wasn't a significant difference in Lua time usage in the parser profiling data. The time varied a bit, but there was not the significant difference that there was for some of the other changes you made, like replacing IPA with X-SAMPA-like ASCII code and using string rather than mw.ustring functions. Apparently the two or three table lookups required to use the global variables don't take that long. However, I second the request for patience. — Eru·tuon 09:17, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
@Erutuon: That's good to know. Thank you. - Gilgamesh (talk) 09:56, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

I've uncached the library functions in line with Erutuon's performance analysis, and I've also expanded the comments at the top of the script to clarify that technical queries and contributions need to be directed at Wiktionary, and that the version at Wikipedia is a mirror. If I knew it were feasible, I would instead maintain one copy of this module at Wikimedia Commons, but then the module's primary debug table is over at Wiktionary as it collects existing Wiktionary entries that use the module. Can Lua modules be hosted primarily at Commons? And how practical would it be to divide debug efforts between multiple wikis? - Gilgamesh (talk) 10:16, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Apparently not... I tested a few Wikipedia Commons module names to see if they load at Wikipedia, but no dice. I think we're just going to have to maintain more than one copy across wikis. - Gilgamesh (talk) 10:49, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

@Pppery: With all due respect, you have already three times made a point of editing this module, and Erutuon and I have left comments here with concern to it. I want to avoid conflicts in the future and ensure that, if you have additional concerns, you address them as a contributor to the multi-wiki project (centered at wiktionary:Module:mh-pronunc) rather than as an incidental editor of its mirror on Wikipedia. Again, if I could host the module in just one shared location at Wikimedia Commons, that might be more ideal, but that doesn't seem possible at the moment. So, do you have anything to say? - Gilgamesh (talk) 02:26, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

I hadn't responded earlier because I had felt that the situation had resolved itself with Erutuon's post above while I was asleep. In generalities, most of my edits to templates and modules are content-blind enforcement of standards across, and I have no actual interest in the Marshallese language. This is not the right place for a broader discussion about the merits of shared modules (WT:Lua, perhaps?), so I won't comment any further on that front. * Pppery * it has begun... 02:33, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
All right. Thank you for making your concerns clear. - Gilgamesh (talk) 03:03, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
Well, for the time being, the kind of edit conflict this module received earlier is not sustainable. Especially while its codebase is still in development, in the basic interests of software compatibility, the copies here and at Wiktionary need to remain identical to ensure they can accept the same input and always generate the same output. In the future, if you have concerns about the standards enforcement of this particular module's code, could you please raise them over at Wiktionary? I can't stress this enough. That way, whatever is updated there will be mirrored here, satisfying standards here in the process. - Gilgamesh (talk) 03:30, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) I added an edit notice and soft redirected the talk page. That should hopefully be enough to keep things centralized. ‑‑Trialpears (talk) 08:08, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
Thank you. - Gilgamesh (talk) 08:29, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Module:For nowikiEdit

  Moved to Template talk:For nowiki: * Pppery * it has begun... 20:07, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Transcluding Special PagesEdit

@Pppery:

You would know if this is possible, or how to do it, but months ago, an editor (possibly yourself) suggested that I could transclude the special page listing subpages of a certain page with the prefixes stripped, so I wouldn't have to update my user talk archive index manually at User talk:Dmehus/Archives. However, when I try to transclude it with {{:Special:PrefixIndex?prefix=Dmehus/&namespace=3&hideredirects=1&stripprefix=1}} or {{Special:PrefixIndex?prefix=Dmehus/&namespace=3&hideredirects=1&stripprefix=1}}, I assume that's because it's looking for a template namespace template? Is there a different way to transclude in a special page?

Cheers,
--Doug Mehus T·C 20:27, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

(Special page transclusion formats oddly when indented, so I'm breaching talk page protocol and replying unindented) * Pppery * it has begun... 21:12, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

Pppery Ah, thanks! Looks what I was doing wrong was not converting the question mark to a backslash and then not replacing the ampersand with a pipe. Unusual formatting I would not have expected. Do you know, off hand, where that's described, either in the Wikipedia or MediaWiki help manual?

By the way, was it you that suggested using this method previously? --Doug Mehus T·C 21:27, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

I don't know where that idiosyncracy is described, but it was originally me that suggested the special page transclusion. * Pppery * it has begun... 21:29, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
Pppery, Interesting. It was a good idea! Doug Mehus T·C 21:43, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

UnusedEdit

While Template:SHORTDESC is currently "unused", it may become used at any point by someone typing {{SHORTDESC|…}} instead of {{SHORTDESC:…}}. The sole purpose of the template is to prevent such uses from marring the articles they occur on. By not 'noincluding' the TFD notice, you are guaranteeing that any transclusions of the template will marr their articles with large, irrelevant warning boxes (unless/until the editor notices and fixes the problem). I don't see the benefit of not using 'noinclude' since, by your logic, using it has no effect, while not using it could have a specific detrimental effect. - dcljr (talk) 02:12, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

My logic was essentially "since it's unused, there's no justification for deviating from the instructions". (Note that <noinclude> is only mentioned for substituted templates, which {{SHORTDESC}} isn't). As for the rest of your argument, I don't see large warning boxes (which is a misstatement anyway; the actual text transcluded would not be a box) marring an article that uses a template nominated for deletion as the clearly bad thing you are potraying it as. * Pppery * it has begun... 02:38, 13 February 2020 (UTC)