Userpage Talk Contribs News Sandbox RfA Wikipediholic Edit summaries Subpages  

Pull request for voteSymbols to fix that "speedy keep delete"Edit

Hi Pythoncoder, I noticed your latest change to voteSymbols.js didn't actually fix the bug you tried to fix, since the "keep deleted" part will only be matched on the next iteration of the loop. You'll need to peek at the word after and skip using continue or manually increment the counter if it's also a compound. I think this would be the easiest if merging the words and checking if the words should be merged were split into two different fuctions, i.e.

Original function left, split functions right
function mergeWords(a, b, j, k) {
  try {
    if(lowerNoPunct(j[k])==a&&lowerNoPunct(j[k+1])==b) {
      j.splice(k, 2, a+' '+b);
    return j;
  } catch(e) {
    return j;
function canMerge(j, k) {
  if (lowerNoPunct(j[k])=='speedy'
    &&lowerNoPunct(j[k+1])=='delete') {
    return true;
  } // (...) elif all the other cases
  return false;
function doMerge(j,k) {
  j.splice(k, 2, a+' '+b);

and call the functions using while instead of if:

while(canMerge(j,k)) {
} // Increments k until there are no more compounds
doMerge(j,k-1); // Then merge the last

Also, I think it's better to use the old symbols for endorse and overturn at DRV, because sometimes people want to review keep closures as well. I made several other changes to simplify the code and just to test things at a fork I made, if you're interested. Thanks for maintaining this script! Alpha3031 (tc) 10:56, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

I have reverted the script to 3.0.4. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 12:17, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 5Edit

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Thoroughbred Racing on NBC, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Justify (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

ANI discussionEdit

  There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is editing/deleting with strong POV. Jayjg (talk) 13:06, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

I presume this is because I reverted one of this guy's edits, but the point is moot because the IP has been blocked. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 20:56, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Re: Catalyst MiamiEdit

Thank you for reviewing my earlier effort.

Bearing your notes in mind, I rewrote the article in more original and neutral language. I am not connected to the organization, but I believe it is sufficiently notable to merit inclusion, as evidenced by its consistent presence in news articles, academic studies and government reports, and its long-term influence on the politics and civil society of South Florida.

Would you do me the favor of reviewing my latest draft to see if it is now ready for prime-time?

Thanks again,

Fatseal4848 (talk) 22:12, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Fatseal4848, If you believe the article passes Wikipedia's notability guidelines and is neutrally written, you can click the submit button and wait for another user to review it. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 22:22, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Signature updateEdit

Hi, just letting you know that example of your signature in section Miscellaneous is outdated. —⁠andrybak (talk) 14:02, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Fixed. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 14:04, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

H:W listed at Redirects for discussionEdit

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect H:W. Since you had some involvement with the H:W redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. UnitedStatesian (talk) 16:45, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Edit WarEdit

You reached out to me and said I was engaged in an edit war and that I had reverted something that someone else had put back, that is not the case although it may appear that way.

The same information is listed In two separate locations on one Wikipedia (Trump Organization). I have reached out to all parties involved and left full explanation on their talk pages.

Someone has copied information onto the main page, when the exact same information can already be found under the “financial disputes tab” citing the exact same source and using the exact same grammar. PatriotAmerica2019 (talk) 18:03, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 20:20, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Portal:Adele for deletionEdit


There is currently a discussion taking place as to whether Portal:Adele should be deleted at MfD.
You are being notified because you were a participant in the previous nomination discussion.
Thank you, –MJLTalk 21:03, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

A Barnstar for you!Edit

  The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
This is for your valuable efforts for countering Vandalism and protecting Wikipedia from it's threats. I appreciate your effort. You are a defender of Wikipedia. Thank you. PATH SLOPU 09:52, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
Thanks! —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 12:15, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Update about a script you useEdit

Hi Pythoncoder. I'm DannyS712 (talk), and I wanted to send you a warning about a change I am making to a script, User:DannyS712/DiscussionCloser, that you currently import. If you are an administrator, feel free to ignore this message. For non-administrators, you should be advised that I am removing the script's automatic addition of {{nac}} to your closes. If you have relied on this to mark such closes for you, please remember to add {{nac}} yourself. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk)

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 01:37, 13 June 2019 (UTC) on behalf of DannyS712 (talk)

MacKeeper page changesEdit

Hi! You reverted edits of MacKeeper page with warnings. Can I ask why do you think I want to use Wikipedia for advertising? All the small changes I made were linked to the changes company made for fixing the problems it had. I linked articles like these and these . Maybe, the features explanation - something you understood as advertising? But the new logo - can I change it? Cause the company doesn't use robot anywhere anymore. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Olehkalynyak (talkcontribs) 07:30, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

@Olehkalynyak: You can change the logo to the current one. The content added to the lede heavily favors recent developments; the lede should summarizing the whole article rather than containing content not in the rest of the article. The press release mentioned in the lede is too insignificant to include in the lede, meaning its apparent purpose is to promote recent corporate developments. While self-published sources like the official site and press releases are okay for factual information, they cannot be used as a reference for the new version having “significant user experience and design improvements”. If you have a conflict of interest, please disclose it. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 16:14, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Barnstar for youEdit

  The Userpage Barnstar
Your user page is one of the best I have seen in a while. Afootpluto (talk) 01:51, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
Thanks —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 13:24, 17 June 2019 (UTC)


FYI I copied a userbox of yours to m:User:Alexis Jazz/Userboxes/Wikimedia so I could add it to my global user page. - Alexis Jazz 23:23, 17 June 2019 (UTC)


I believe ArbCom or at least some of its members are fully aware of what transpired with Fram. If they need clues they can email me. I’ve posted about it already on their notice board. Jehochman Talk 02:13, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 21:42, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

WP:CEN is now open!Edit

To all interested parties: Now that it has a proper shortcut, the current events noticeboard has now officially opened for discussion!

WP:CEN came about as an idea I explored through a request for comment that closed last March. Recent research has re-opened the debate on Wikipedia's role in a changing faster-paced internet. Questions of WP:NOTNEWS and WP:Recentism are still floating around. That being said, there are still plenty of articles to write and hopefully this noticeboard can positively contribute to that critical process.

Thank you for your participation in the RFC, and I hope to see you at WP:CEN soon! –MJLTalk 19:10, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 19:34, 29 June 2019 (UTC) on behalf of DannyS712 (talk)

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 July 4#E._Michael_JonesEdit

I had a bad feeling this would flare up again. Best, GPL93 (talk) 20:08, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Azerbaijani Wikipedia - FollowupEdit

I thought you might be interested in doing following up on the Admin controversy at the Azerbaijani Wikipedia.

I was returning to the RFC to post more evidence of admin behavior, when I found the RFC been closed back on July 3. Closure.

An Enwiki admin (Winged Blades of Godric), myself, and an IP subsequently raised objections on the closer's talk page.

  • The closure is not remotely based on anything proposed in the RFC. (There certainly was no proposal to send someone to Azerbaycan.)
  • The closure frivolously dismisses a clear consensus as "mild support". (The global community consensus is especially overwhelming if you set aside the obvious opposes from the AzWiki admins themselves.)
  • Prior to closing, the closer was offered financial support from the Foundation to travel to Azerbaycan help the admins to behave better, which the closer clearly would not receive if the RFC were closed to desysop those admins. The closer had clear COI. The closer amazingly claims the travel benefits was not something of value, and therefore presumably would not constitute a COI. A COI, or even the appearance of COI, means they should have left the RFC to be closed by anyone else.
  • When the closer was asked is it true that do you know (m)any az-wiki admin(s), personally? If yes, were they involved in the incidents discussed over the RFC? If yes, do you see any conflict-of-interest? the closer closer respond and the last point, I have so many friends in azwiki.... The closer themselves upgraded "knowing" the abusive admins to a question&answer about the closer's "friends". The COI, or even the appearance of COI, means they should have left the RFC to be closed by anyone else.
  • When I noted that one of the problems with the admins was that they were operating as an off-wiki conspiracy club and that no consensus would ever support gathering those admins in a real-life-buddy-club as a fix, the closer says they will be conducting online meetings to address the problems. Which raises the obvious absurdity, why would we spending money to ship someone to Azerbaycan to conduct online meetings? The closer also plans to supply the abusive admins a officially-sanctioned clubhouse for conspiring. A Foundation-supplied private mailing list.
  • The closer said to Winged Blades of Godric I am not going to respond to any of your comments and what you ask means nothing to me, and they said to me Alsee, This is also my last comment for you. The closer refuses any further constructive discussion. Given a non-communicative closer, the only remaining option would be to open Meta a proposal to review and overturn the close. Although I haven't yet decided whether to take on that headache.

I don't know if you would want to make this connection, but I find it surprising (or perhaps not so surprising) that the Foundation would do something like this in the middle of the FRAMBAN mess. They offered the closer some sort of travel package, effectively to close against community consensus and prevent the community from removing admins found to be abusive based on a public examination of evidence. It's almost the same issue in reverse. Alsee (talk) 20:13, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Holy crap. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 21:16, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
Just stating for the record that WBG is not an admin at this time. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 02:18, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
Oops. Somehow I must have confused WBG with my recollection of someone else's RFA. Alsee (talk) 10:15, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

DR under developmentEdit

I think it would be worth noting that Yelyos made 22 edits since 5 July 2008, with zero edits in 2017 or 2018, then came back and requested re-sysop. Their userpage even now says they are retired. If this doesn't appear in the report, I'd probably feel compelled to make it a comment. ☆ Bri (talk) 02:54, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Invitation to project revivalEdit

Dear user, I, with Willbb234, are a attempting to revive the Wikiproject Requested Articles, of which you are a member. If you wish to be a part of our effort, feel free to add your signature in it's talk page. Best regards, Eni vak (speak) 16:33, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

MacKeeper page editsEdit

@Pythoncoder: hi! Sorry for the impression you got from these edits. I am not paid for this particular edits. However, I am working on MacKeeper. My edits are aimed to update an article with the information about the new release of MacKeeper 4.0 (as the article has information about other previous releases - MacKeeper 1,2 and 3.0). So I can't deny that I am receiving payments from the company on the regular basis, as employee.

If I am not mistaken, it's not banned by Wikipedia to make edits as a company representative. An I hope, it's ok to update product page with the new information (witout advertisement or link building) I tried to make them sound not like an advertisement (no call to install or compliments to the new version). However, if my edits should be updated to be more compliant, please, let me know.

Thank you!

Kris — Preceding unsigned comment added by Krikrikris (talkcontribs) 09:59, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

A survey to improve the community consultation outreach processEdit


The Wikimedia Foundation is seeking to improve the community consultation outreach process for Foundation policies, and we are interested in why you didn't participate in a recent consultation that followed a community discussion you’ve been part of.

Please fill out this short survey to help us improve our community consultation process for the future. It should only take about three minutes.

The privacy policy for this survey is here. This survey is a one-off request from us related to this unique topic.

Thank you for your participation, Kbrown (WMF) 10:45, 13 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)

Gadget or user scriptEdit

Hi Pythoncoder,

Hope you are doing good. I'd like to ask you to help about user script, would you like to make user script for create WD property. You can use to make and test, you will get data from the link below. I was try to make Gadget but unfortunately I couldn’t. If you need any user rights on testwd please let me know. Please help. Thank you in advance! Warm Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 08:42, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

Happy holidaysEdit

Yearly reportEdit

Your contributions have been good so far, but the Indian entry you claimed is still pending. (and if you can take some more to write, it'd be nice - damn year where collaborators seemed to vanish) igordebraga 16:54, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Bit busy at the moment but will see what I can do this weekend. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 20:44, 9 January 2020 (UTC)


Hi Pythoncoder, i've seen that you declined my submission for Hyva eng page. Can you suggest me how I can improve the quality of the page?

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by LucaColombo1990 (talkcontribs) 16:04, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

LucaColombo1990: Welcome to Wikipedia! Some of the language used in the draft (for example, "product portfolio" and "solutions") make the draft sound like an advertisement. Also, please read Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide to determine if you have a conflict of interest (COI for short). For example, if you're employed by the company you're writing an article about, you have a COI. If you determine that you do have a COI, the "Plain and simple conflict of interest guide" will tell you what steps you should take next. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 17:35, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Your input is requestedEdit

at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue/Community view before Friday.

Only 100 or so words. It should be fun and serious at the same time.

All the best,

Smallbones(smalltalk) 23:46, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Weird bug in vote symbolsEdit

At Special:Permalink/939054732#Statement by Newimpartial, there's a bold comment — (and in somea cases wasn't even an independent source, reveiwing stuff from their own company) — that appears to be setting off the voteSymbols script, attempting to GET and inserting an empty space, as there's obviously no image returned. ~ Amory (utc) 03:08, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

I've noticed this bug too with other words from time to time (it happens with the word filter). I still can’t figure out why this is happening, probably because I didn’t write most of the code. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 13:51, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
I took a quick look just now, I think I've traced it. Basically, at the bottom, it looks ip lowerNoPunct(j[k]) in the la array, then checks if the result (l) is defined. The problem is that, when using bracket notation (var l=la[lowerNoPunct(j[k])];), something like la['filter'] returns the native js code filter. Likewise for some in the example I found. Aside from rewriting the whole thing, if you change the undefined check (l!==undefined) to ensure it looks up a number (l!==undefined && typeof l === 'number'), it should work. Indeed, you could probably just do the typeof check. ~ Amory (utc) 16:12, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
  Done. Thanks for your help! —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 21:20, 4 February 2020 (UTC)