User talk:Anomie: Difference between revisions
ClueBot III (talk | contribs) m Archiving 2 discussions to User talk:Anomie/Archives/2022. (BOT) |
Wtmitchell (talk | contribs) →Barnstar: fix my typos in the substed text. |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 63: | Line 63: | ||
[[User:SietsL|SietsL]] ([[User talk:SietsL|talk]]) 13:48, 26 June 2022 (UTC) |
[[User:SietsL|SietsL]] ([[User talk:SietsL|talk]]) 13:48, 26 June 2022 (UTC) |
||
:{{tps}} {{ping|SietsL}} The bot seems to be rescuing the citations because its still being referenced. If you leave the referencing to them (E.g. <code><nowiki><ref name=DNP-EBookN/></nowiki></code>) without defining them in any place, it creates an error . If the references arent needed, remove them. Otherwise, dont just leave it as an undefined named reference, or this creates an error. [[User:Aidan9382|Aidan9382]] <sub>([[User talk:Aidan9382|talk]])</sub> 14:03, 26 June 2022 (UTC) |
:{{tps}} {{ping|SietsL}} The bot seems to be rescuing the citations because its still being referenced. If you leave the referencing to them (E.g. <code><nowiki><ref name=DNP-EBookN/></nowiki></code>) without defining them in any place, it creates an error . If the references arent needed, remove them. Otherwise, dont just leave it as an undefined named reference, or this creates an error. [[User:Aidan9382|Aidan9382]] <sub>([[User talk:Aidan9382|talk]])</sub> 14:03, 26 June 2022 (UTC) |
||
== Barnstar == |
|||
{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;" |
|||
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align:middle;" | [[File:Vitruvian Barnstar Hires.png|100px]] |
|||
|rowspan="2" | |
|||
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The da Vinci Barnstar''' |
|||
|- |
|||
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | I very much appreciate [[User:AnomieBOT|AnomieBOT]]. I just spent some time figuring out what went wrong with a cite orphaned by [https://refill.toolforge.org/ Refill] only to find that AnomieBOT had beaten me to figuring this out and fixing it. I've had similar previous experiences, and have appreciated every one of them. Thanks and Kudos. [[User:Wtmitchell|Wtmitchell]] [[User talk:Wtmitchell|(talk)]] <small>(earlier ''Boracay Bill'')</small> 17:26, 21 July 2022 (UTC) |
|||
|} |
|||
Revision as of 17:27, 21 July 2022
| Anomie is still around, mostly to maintain AnomieBOT. But after the WMF proved that office politics are more important to them than seemingly anything else, and otherwise generally seem more concerned with their own image than substance, Anomie is not engaging in technical work on MediaWiki. |
 | Despite T360488 asking them not to, Toolforge admins have gone ahead and broken AnomieBOT's scripts. Keeping things running properly will likely require manual intervention until they fix that or give me a usable workaround. |
 | If you want AnomieBOT to do something, please ask at User talk:AnomieBOT. Thanks. |
Spam Blacklist Phab
Hi Anomie! It's been awhile since we've said "hello" to one another! I hope you're doing well and that you're having a great weekend. :-) I was looking through the spam blacklist extension documentation, and it mentioned T36928. I looked through the phab ticket, and saw that the implementation of the patch is currently stalled because you gave the changes a '-2' a few years back, and due to concerns about some users having the right and others not. Many users have responded since you added the comment stating that the patch doesn't assign the rights to anyone, but simply makes the user right available. It looks like users have added you back as a subscriber to the ticket numerous times attempting to ask you about it, and you subsequently removed yourself without responding. I was just curious as to what was going on exactly. Do you still think that the changes shouldn't move forward, even though others believe that they've addressed your stated issue? Are you not responding on purpose? What's going on? Again, I'm just curious and wanted to ask you about it. :-) Thanks - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 23:23, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
- I literally can't change that -2 now even if I wanted to, thanks to certain terrible WMF managers doing some terrible management and me not having any motivation to find out what hoops they might have wanted jumped through to regain the access I had back in 2012 before I was hired. As for the ticket, I can't say that any of the arguments people have made convince me (the moment the right gets added but not assigned to anyone, people will start requesting it be added on various wikis) but it's not my job anymore anyway. Anomie⚔ 23:31, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
Happy First Edit Day!
|
Happy First Edit Day, Anomie, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 13:29, 18 May 2022 (UTC) |
Deprecated tag fixing
Hey! Do you think you could edit or request an edit to your User talk:Anomie/Archives/2009 page? The page currently uses deprecated source tags. Replacing these tags with <syntaxhighlight> tags will fix any issues with it. The page is fully protected, and I've been advised to inform the archive owner of this instead of requesting an edit myself. Don't worry - the page will have no visible effect, this is just a maintenance thing. Thanks! Aidan9382 (talk) 16:28, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Up and down
Those arrows are stationary at the bottom of the page. One simply clicks to get to the top and clicks to get the bottom - why did you remove them? Having to scroll that page is a far bigger problem than the feature I added. I've got too many other things to do than spend time scrolling. Please put it back. Atsme 💬 📧 18:19, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- Having to scroll the page is a non-issue, IMO, while having large floating boxes obscuring part of the content can easily get annoying. If you're not on a phone you can use the Home and End keys on your keyboard. If you are on mobile, and flick-scrolling doesn't work well enough for you, you'd be better served by a user script that put the arrows on every page. Anomie⚔ 20:39, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
"Huh, weird"
I mean, the bot's edit makes total sense, given that I gave two different keywords in the same sentence. Didn't realise it would check through the whole phrase and not just the first template of a line. The more you know! Primefac (talk) 12:12, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- More specifically, it was complaining because the close was Category:Expired Wikipedia bot requests for approval but {{BotDenied}} was also transcluded in the page. That's not the weird part to me, my "Huh, weird" was about the bot setting the status field to {{BRFA}} to include the "Inconsistent categories/tags!" bit which breaks that template. I just pushed a fix for the bot so it won't do that anymore. Anomie⚔ 12:19, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- Sounds good! Primefac (talk) 11:29, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
Rescuing orphaned refs is not always a good idea
As of February 15, 2022 all 156 national parks mentioned in "List of national parks of Thailand" have links to DNP webpages and RTGG resources.
So this references in "List of Protected Areas Regional Offices of Thailand" are no longer necessary, can be ommitted.
Rescuing DNP-EBook web pages in this list seems to me unneccessary.
SietsL (talk) 13:48, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) @SietsL: The bot seems to be rescuing the citations because its still being referenced. If you leave the referencing to them (E.g.
<ref name=DNP-EBookN/>) without defining them in any place, it creates an error . If the references arent needed, remove them. Otherwise, dont just leave it as an undefined named reference, or this creates an error. Aidan9382 (talk) 14:03, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
Barnstar
|
The da Vinci Barnstar | |
| I very much appreciate AnomieBOT. I just spent some time figuring out what went wrong with a cite orphaned by Refill only to find that AnomieBOT had beaten me to figuring this out and fixing it. I've had similar previous experiences, and have appreciated every one of them. Thanks and Kudos. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 17:26, 21 July 2022 (UTC) |