User talk:Magioladitis

Welcome to my talk page, if you want to start a new topic, then click here please! Generally I will reply here, so please come back to check. If I posted something in your talk page you don't have to answer here or post a talkback template. I'll check your talk page for answer.

Archives:
Talk about images
Archive 1 8/2006 - 7/2008
Archive 2 8/2008 - 6/2009
Archive 3 7/2009 - 12/2009
Archive 4 1/2009 - 8/2010
Archive 5 9/2010 - 12/2010
Archive 6 1/2011 - 5/2011
Archive 7 6/2011 - 2/2012
Archive 8 3/2012 - 8/2012
Archive 9 9/2012 - 2/2013

Yobot and edit filters

Resolved

You might want to look at how you handle edit filters. I cleared out the data that was tripping the filter, but this is pretty silly.—Kww(talk) 01:52, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

OMG! Yobot was supposed to skip pages if there were blocked by the edit flyer than just sticking and trying for ever. I think my bot was a bit lazy yesterday. I'll have a look. Thanks! -- Magioladitis (talk) 05:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

AWB bug that now is fixed. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:29, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Untagged Biographies

Greetings Magio, I hope things are going well for you these days. I have noticed quite a few biographies lately that don't have the WikiProject Biography project on them and thought I would mention it. I'm not sure when you did the last run. Kumioko (talk) 14:00, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

I haven't run Yobot on talk pages for a long time. Mainly because KingbotK plugin doesn't behave the way I want it to. -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:15, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Oh ok no problem. Kumioko (talk) 10:50, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

KingbotK plugin improved. I might make a bot run soon. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:30, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Database dump

Resolved

Should be able to download the next dump (my) tomorrow. Saturday is going to be busy for me, so I should have the reports up no later than your Monday morning. I found a sad page that lists pages with interwiki links. *Only* 300,000 pages. Guess removing code from AWB will have to wait.

Been removing items on AWB's feature request page. Most are items that have been done or mostly likely won't be done. I'm sure I'm making some mistakes. After this, I'll sort the unsorted ones.

Να έχεις ένα υπέροχο Πάσχα με τον μπαμπά σου. Bgwhite (talk) 05:03, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! I wish you Happy Easter too. -- Magioladitis (talk) 05:08, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

I don't know if you thought removing interwikis would be easy. I didn't. We have a lot of conflicted interwikis. -- Magioladitis (talk) 05:10, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

We have a alot of conflicted editors too. I didn't think it would be easy... several of us were fixing conflicts when addboot first started up. But, I was surprised at the number... I was thinking more in the 150,000 range.

I hear that soon birth/death categories will also be redundant. I hope that none goes now to AWB's page and asks us to stop adding categories and after that to start removing them, etc. etc. -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:19, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

It's 300,000 due to templates and categories. I found many templates that their documentation wasn't right. I had to add includeonly. I suspect there are more of them out there. -- Magioladitis (talk) 20:10, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Number increased for good. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:34, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

AWB - dead links

In Main.cs on line 2575 I changed

if (deadLinks.Count > 0)

to

if (deadLinks.Count > 100)

Ahhh, no more "Dead links" showing up in the alerts window. The edit box usually goes right to the missing bracket instead of some dead link. Things go much faster and you don't pull hair out trying to find the missing bracket among 20 dead links. Bgwhite (talk) 07:19, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Cool. I thought of doing a similar trick :) -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:37, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Comment out lines 1142-1146 that begins with

foreach (KeyValuePair<int, int> kvp in deadLinks).

This causes dead links to not show up in the edit box. The above comment about changing 0 to 100 causes it to not show up in the Alerts box. Bgwhite (talk) 06:44, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Reedy started creating a table to select/deselect alerts. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:37, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Category:Infobox person using boxwidth parameter

Hi. In 2011, you created the hidden Category:Infobox person using boxwidth parameter, which is added by {{Infobox person}} (at least) when |box_width= is used. Can I ask what the purpose of this is? Are you trying to come up with a more reasonable default width, or maybe trying to see if it can be deprecated?

I end up using |box_width= often to widen the box enough to accommodate things like school names, marriages, etc. without wrapping (since the things they are part of already require multiple lines). I recognize it's not ideal, as some styles and platforms may not render correctly, but it's better than nothing. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 01:33, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Not sure if you saw this. <bump/> —[AlanM1(talk)]— 20:35, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

AlanM1, Oh. I never saw this one. I am getting older and my eyesight gets weaker. I added this parameters because usually the parameter is over-used. Box width doesn't really help in small monitors. Usually people with small monitors have to scroll vertically. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:23, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

autoFormatter

Hi there. It would be very nice if we could continue our knowledge exchange and learn from each other. Since your tool is used a lot more than my tool it's obviously more effective for me to contribute to AWB. But I need a place to start.

• To let you know, I completed the full list of all things my script does (English) and a list of the Check Wikipedia errors and what my script currently does with these errors.
• I was thinking: My script is like a subset of AWB. All I do are fully automated replacements. Could you please tell me which files are responsible for such replacements in AWB? I found WikiRegexes.cs but where is it used? I did not found the <br> regex from your list, for example.

--TMg 16:44, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello my friend. I think you may also have to take a look at Parsers.cs. I'll try to write a more detailed message in the next few days! Grusse! -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:10, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

You should look at article PerformGeneralFixes, which will lead to Parsers, MetadataSorter and Tools and WikiRegexes. -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:12, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

TMg, CHECKWIKI Error 52 (Interwiki before last category) will be obsolete soon. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:59, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm a bit confused because I don't do anything with rule 52. What does obsolete mean? In the meantime I did a code review of your Parsers.cs and WikiRegexes.cs and learned a lot. Here are some hints for the AWB developers:

Suggestions on AWB

General

1. Parser.cs is a monster. ;-) You really need to split and reorganize it. Here is a hint where to start: Move the LoadTemplateRedirects stuff into a separate class.
2. In my opinion your WikiRegexes.cs is not a good idea. It makes the code very hard to read. You constantly need to jump forth and back between two files. You should split the code based on what it does instead. For example you can create a separate file for all methods that work with reference tags. Another file for all the issues templates.
3. Some of your regular expressions start with \{\{ and some start with {{. This is not a problem but a little bit confusing. In most regular expression engines it's not required to escape curly brackets if they are not followed by a number. That's why both notations work in the .NET framework. For maximum compatibility and minimum confusion I suggest to always write \{\{.
4. Make sure that all your regular expression for templates start with \{\{\s* to catch inclusions like {{ this}} with spaces at the start. Most of your regular expressions already contain the \s but it's missing in some.
5. Did you know that {{Template   name}} is identical to {{Template name}}? I suggest to change all {{Template ?name}} to {{Template *name}} and {{Template name}} to {Template +name}} to catch all these cases.
6. Try to avoid .*? and .+? and .* if possible. It can cause lots and lots of backtracking, especially if used with the Singleline option. Try to use negative character classes like [^\n]*? instead.
7. Always bench your regular expressions. Look for bottlenecks. It happens very easily to waste time with to much backtracking.
8. I found FixUnbalancedBrackets. Wow. Just wow. This is great.

Specific

1. {{Commons|Category:…}} should become {{Commonscat|…}} in the German Wikipedia.
2. Some regular expressions are missing the Multiline option, e.g. RegexHeadingsBold and RegexHeadingColonAtEnd. Look for $" in your code and check if it should match the end of the string or the end of a line.
3. RegexHeadingWithBold is also mitting the Multiline option. A headline can not span multiple lines.
4.  Done The fragment (?:\|[^{}]*|\|) contains noneffective code. \|[^{}]* does the same.
5.  Done Avoid matching parts you don't need in the replacement. For example RegexHeadings0 and all similar expressions can be written as (== ?)(?:see also|also see)( ?==). Note that you need to use $1 and $2 instead of $1 and $3 in the replacement.
6.  Done RegexHeadings0 and all similar expressions should all start with (== *) and end with ( *==). All should contain an :? at the end. All should start with an ^ in my opinion.
7.  Done LevelOneSeeAlso is not limited to level one, it matches every level. Again I guess the ^ is missing.
8. Doesn't the EmptyBold expression remove the paragraph from '''Paragraph 1'''\r\n\r\n'''Paragraph 2'''?
9.  Done I saw <br /br> in the wild. You could try to add this to your rule.
10.  Done I saw <small><ref>…</ref></small> in the wild. The small tags should be removed. Same applies to <ref><small>…</small></ref> (ref and small switched), <sup><small>…</small></sup> and similar combinations.
11.  Done In RemoveAllWhiteSpace, are you sure it's a good idea to always remove an empty line in front of a list? What if the list is like a new paragraph and not connected to the previous line?
12.  Done Remove the .*? from the end of SyntaxRegexListRowBrTagMiddle and SyntaxRegexListRowBrTagStart. It does nothing.

--TMg 18:53, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

TMg thanks for taking the time to check our code. I'll try to implement some of your ideas. For instance, check rev 9246, rev 9247, rev 9248, rev 9249, rev 9250, rev 9251 and rev 9254 -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:00, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Conversions like these with Commonscat are enwiki and simplewiki only at the moment. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:42, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

• rev 9246: Are you sure you wanted to remove the :? from the end?
• rev 9251: Replace (?:(?:\|[^{}]*)?\|) with (?:\|[^{}]*)?\|.

--TMg 23:55, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

TMg do you have specific examples where .*? and .+? and .* could be replaced by something simpler (and faster)? -- Magioladitis (talk) 20:05, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

• rev 9264 for the last two suggestions. -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:35, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

I found 192 pages with double space after Infobox and fixed them all. -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:23, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

What I wrote about .*? was a general hint. This ungreedy stuff tends to be time-consuming because it can cause a lot of backtracking. As I said, you should profile your code to find relevant bottlenecks and focus on these. I did a lot of micro-benchmarking with my code and a few general hints are: A big regex is faster than many small. Nested stars and pluses like in (a+)* are bad. Backtracking is bad.

Here is an example from my code: I did something like \[\[[^[\]]+\]\] to fetch links. This was wrong. It matched stuff this: [[This
is not a link]] (note the line break). Better solution: \[\[[^\n[\]]+\]\]. This is also faster because it always stops at the end of the line. --TMg 22:58, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

TMg on small tags: Are there any cases that we don't remove them? Am I missing something? -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:41, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Not sure if your question is related to html5. Small tags were removed from the spec at one point, but they are now back in. Bgwhite (talk) 17:17, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

That's the HTML5 Editor's Draft, which (I believe) is now superseded by the Candidate Recommendation and the HTML 5.1 Editor's Draft. Unlike <big>, I don't think that <small> was ever deprecated, just repurposed. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:49, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Redrose64 It's also in the Living Standard. So many drafts to lists. It was actually gone at one point, but they brought it back. It no longer means small print, but small in the semantic sense, such as small print on legal agreements. FYI... The font tag is no longer in any articles. Strike tag is almost gone as I'm down to about 200 articles left. Bgwhite (talk) 18:31, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

rev 9275 Covers more cases of incorrect break tags including the one you mention. -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:37, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Your code about <small> is a bit complicated but I found it now. Marked as done above. No, this wasn't a HTML 5 question. I know it's back in the spec and I think it was a good idea to bring it back. I'm very impressed you managed to get rid of all <font> tags. How did you found them all? With the Check Wikipedia list only? --TMg 22:24, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Did a database search for <font as Check Wikipedia wouldn't have all the cases. I have multiple find & replace regexes that are used in AWB. After a bot ran over the articles, there were a few thousand left that had to be done manually. Magioladitis and I are using Check Wikipedia to keep the number of font tags at 0. Bgwhite (talk) 22:41, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

I see, thanks. Some questions to you guys:

1. Where can I see your regexes for the font tag replacements?
2. Why does AWB not replace – and a few other named character entities with the characters? The comment in the code says "look bad if changed". What does that mean?

--TMg 15:09, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Image is here of the font regexes. I bet you could turn it into one regex that is less than 30 characters long. There are cases where the color hex number is defined by a template. Most commonly found in articles about subway/rail stations. The problem with those is that the # may or may not be in the template.Bgwhite (talk) 07:20, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

If the colour template is one of those which are intended for direct use in the |col= parameter of templates like {{rail line}} or indirect use as a subtemplate to {{s-line}}, the # is never present in the colour template - this is because {{rail line}} etc. provide the # themselves. Such colour templates are mostly in Category:Rail transport color templates or its subcats. Sometimes these colour templates are used outside of the "normal" places, in constructs like <tag style="background:#{{template}};">, but those usually have more serious problems so I've been trying to track those down and fix them. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:41, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

• Bgwhite: I could try but this would require the replacement to be a function. ;-) Some of your regexes can be shortened but this doesn't change anything. There is only one thing I would change: Don't insert font-size:100%; in the articles. Remove this completely. Also I try to prefer smaller and larger over percentages if possible.
• Redrose64: Oh wow, this color stuff is strange. Using colors without the # is generally a very bad idea. It's confusing and limits everybody for no good reason. Try to avoid this if you can. Stick to the standard.
• Magioladitis: Sorry for flooding your talk page. ;-) Any hints for my – question above? --TMg 13:38, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

It doesn't breach the W3C standard - if it did, no colours would be shown at all, or at best, it would work in some browsers but not others. One set of templates yield a six-digit hexadecimal value; another set prepends these with background-color:# or something similar, so the emitted markup might be style="background-color:#496799;" which is perfectly valid in HTML 4.0 with CSS 1 - neither HTML5 nor CSS 3 change that. The system of templates was not of my devising, and is far too well established to change now: it dates back to at least February 2005, more than four years before I started. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:56, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

This was just a general hint. Templates that require color values without the # should be avoided. All this does is adding confusion. What you can do is to avoid these templates. ;-) --TMg 16:28, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

TMg some people complained that – can't be distinguished from normal minus so they are against replacements. -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:05, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

rev 9320 Remove LevelOneSeeAlso, not needed. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:03, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

RegexHeadingWithBold: True, but it is only called within FixHeadingsME, a matchevaluator that runs off WikiRegexes.Headings which is MultiLine. So no change needed. -- Magioladitis (talk) 06:13, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

June 2013 sum up

Ah, the smell of a freshly minted backup is in the air. Downloading it now. I'm going to bed, so I'll unzip and run it tomorrow. Takes more time to unzip it than to download it. Bgwhite (talk) 08:39, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

My gosh, do you have supernatural powers? I barely put all the errors up and you have one done already. At this rate, you will have them all done by the top of the hour. Bgwhite (talk) 22:08, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

I am trying to give us more time to work on special cases. The bad thing that I noticed that the number of pages with errors has increased. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:10, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

No, it really didn't go up. #61 is variable and I don't count that. The only other one to really go up is #17. #46 and #80 went down alot because we went thru those manually. I was hoping that bracketbot would make a difference, but it doesn't look like it did. Bgwhite (talk) 22:19, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Bgwhite, do we have Snotbot's code? Can you run it or we need to bug Scott once more? -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:07, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

I thought I emailed you about this. Argh, my memory. Scott hasn't returned my "calls". I think you need to bug him. Bgwhite (talk) 23:23, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

I left him a message in his talk page and sent him an email. -- Magioladitis (talk) 00:03, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

#16
Can you please generate the #16 list by searching for the 3 invisible characters in the database using the database scanner? -- Magioladitis (talk) 00:06, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Yup, what are the invisible characters?

I'm sure there on this page, but they are invisible :) Bgwhite (talk) 06:21, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Perform a regex search for \u200E|\uFEFF|\u200B -- Magioladitis (talk) 06:56, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

List is up at same place as all the others. Bgwhite (talk) 23:51, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

#6
rev 9241 more Cyrillic characters fixed. -- Magioladitis (talk) 05:53, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Speaking of not seeing why articles are still on the list. Look at the "house" articles. They are around #160 on the list. Bgwhite (talk) 06:21, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

I fixed them now. There was a hidden invisible character! The spooky thing that the character remained invisible under a unicode converter I used. -- Magioladitis (talk) 06:56, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

#14
Two of the three articles on the list were on there last month. Bgwhite (talk) 06:21, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Bgwhite these two pages are false positives. They contain a code that uses a command that looks like a source tag. -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:06, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

#28
There is no need to run a bot on #28. AWB doesn't catch any of the #28 errors. It might be possible to code one... add a |} if it is missing and a section header is the next thing after the table. Bgwhite (talk) 05:19, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

I'll let Rjwilmsi check this one. -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:11, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Snotbot
See BG19bot 8 Bgwhite (talk) 23:02, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Bgwhite, task approved. Maybe it's time to run the bot? -- Magioladitis (talk) 03:34, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

#47
I see <ref>http://www.someplace.com}}</ref> a bit. Seems like an error AWB could fix? Bgwhite (talk) 18:15, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

#18
Bgwhite maybe you could check the database for

• Regex: \[\[Category:[a-z] Case sensitive on
• Regex: \[\[category: Case sensitive on

I always do that and I always find some not detected by CHECKWIKI's code. -- Magioladitis (talk) 01:50, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Located at User:Bgwhite/Sandbox Bgwhite (talk) 20:17, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

I fixed all. It was a bit boring task to do :) -- Magioladitis (talk) 20:55, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

#32
AWB still does not fix cases where | is at the end. Examples are:

Basilan - [[Filipino language|Filipino|]]

Grigory - [[Grigory Langsdorff|Grigory Ivanovich Langsdorff|]]

John Sulston - [[Medical Research Council (United Kingdom)|Medical Research Council|]]

AWB will not issue an alert for these:

 Done 2012–13 Eintracht Frankfurt season - [[Ricardo Rodríguez (footballer)|Ricardo Rodríguez (footballer)|o.g.]]

 Done Aigrefeuille-d'Aunis - [[Saint-Georges-du-Bois, Charente-Maritime|Saint-Georges-du-Bois, Charente-Maritime|Saint-Georges-du-Bois]]

 Done Boston and Maine Corporation - [[Reading Company|Philadelphia and Reading Railway|Philadelphia & Reading Railway]]

 Done DJ Maj - [[Gotee Records|Gotee, Fistpic Music|Fistpic]]

 Done Dyson Group - [[Bairnsdale|, Victoria|Bairnsdale]]

 DoneEuroa - [[First Australian Imperial Force|Australian Imperial Force|A.I.F.]]

 Done Hiram Mier - [[Defender (association football)|Centre Defender | Right Back]]

Bgwhite (talk) 18:39, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

rev 9319 expands DoublePipeLink logic to catch more cases. Still not catching everything. -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:24, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

rev 9323 expands DoublePipeLink further. -- Magioladitis (talk) 14:05, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

#2
rev 9275 Cover more cases of incorrect break tags. -- Yobot (talk) 18:16, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Bgwhite I ran almost in all pages with </br> based on the May dump. You are welcome to perform a new database scan for invalid break tags or just wait for the new month so we have 20,000+ pages less. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:11, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Ok. I'll wait for next months dump. You can't have too much fun in just one month. Bgwhite (talk) 21:22, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Alerts
rev 9280 Now we turn on/off alerts to make searching for certain errors much faster and easier. -- Magioladitis (talk) 18:19, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

#8
rev 9318 Add missing = in some headers (external links, see also, references). -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:17, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Pinging people

Resolved

For the Record, links to users only ping/echo them on posts that include your signature. Adding a ping afterwards doesn't work. I only noticed your reply because I watch all pages I ask questions on and I monitor my watchlist. Technical 13 (talk) 13:46, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Technical 13 thanks for the advice! -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:08, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Yep, that works. :) Technical 13 (talk) 15:12, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Checkwiki on Wikimedia labs

See de:Benutzer Diskussion:Kolossos#Checkwiki Bgwhite (talk) 16:18, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

More discussion, this time with Tim Landscheidt. Bgwhite (talk) 07:17, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Technical Barnstar
	For enhancing Wikipedia through your technical work. Tito Dutta  (talk • contributions • email) 01:11, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Wow!! Thanks!!! -- Magioladitis (talk) 05:14, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Alright Tito, what are you up to? You gave me a barnstar too. Hmm, you give barnstars to two of the orneriest, ungrateful, SOBs around here. What do you want from us? Something is up. Bgwhite (talk) 05:53, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Hm... something is really weird here. -- Magioladitis (talk) 06:21, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict)What do you want from us?

— Are you sure that you can handle my want? Let's try—

I want you to not to fulfil my any want including this one.

And

Currently I want you to reply to this message here.

Here, you have two options— a) you reply b) you don't!

Now

• a) You can not reply here, because I wanted you not to fulfil my "any want" and my want was "reply here".
• b) You can not ignore this thread either, because if you don't reply here, you are actually fulfilling my that want in which I asked you not to fulfil my wants! But, ohhhhh, I wanted not to fulfil my that want too (note that "including this one")!

So?

I am giving you 10^{10101010101010101010101010101010101010101010} years time to decide whether you should reply here or not! --Tito Dutta  (talk • contributions • email) 07:38, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

My request wafted off it's feet to the great unknown...

Resolved

Hi. Thanks for re/moving my question on stubs here; where might it have gone to? Llywelyn2000 (talk) 09:17, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Llywelyn2000 I put it in Wikipedia_talk:AutoWikiBrowser/Bugs/Archive_22#stub_.2F_cats_on_cy because the bug was fixed. You need to wait for the new release or download your own version of AWB. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:31, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

My BRfA

Thank you for your support in my BRfA. You are a real brother. I am proud that I know you. --Meno25 (talk) 12:15, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Like :) -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:18, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Like I'll second what Meno has said. Bgwhite (talk) 22:14, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

And I would like to thank you both for the appreciation. Cooperating with you it's one of the great things I earned from Wikipedia. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:53, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Unusual date amendment

Hi, please see this Yobot edit which altered |date=19 May 19 2013 to |date=19 May 19, 2013 - I've fixed it. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:26, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

It was already bad. Yobot just didn't fix it. I think it's a rare but maybe Rjwilmsi may have a look? -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:36, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Yobot has removed line breaks which has destroyed the formatting

Resolved

Hi, Yobot has removed line breaks which has destroyed the formatting. I was also editing the page at the time and I lost all the edits. Paul Clarence (talk) 12:23, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

In which page? -- Magioladitis (talk) 14:02, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Paul Clarence is referring to this edit. Paul, it's not a good idea to use the <br /> tag to control vertical positioning of text and images, since it depends upon knowledge of the user's display, particularly the width. Instead, the {{clear}}, {{clear left}} and {{clear right}} templates may be used to ensure that an image or item of text is positioned below the bottom edge of a previous image on both sides, at left, or at right respectively.

Related to this, there are rather a lot of images which have little or no text to which they directly relate; also, most of the images seem excessively large. There is more on these matters at WP:NOTGALLERY, WP:MOSIM, MOS:IMAGESYNTAX and WP:IMGSIZE. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:09, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm trying to record the history and former use of the Malabar Headland, the easiest and most interesting way to do this is to include photos of the former users. I would like to restore the original formatting using the clear commands instead of line breaks but I'm not sure how to do this without undoing your edits and starting again, is this ok ? Paul Clarence (talk) 15:00, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

You can always use a sandbox version to ensure that everything is OK before submitting. Thanks for the effort! -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:04, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

If your desire is to present a collection of photographs, that's more within the scope of commons:. Commons is a separate project within the WikiMedia Foundation, but closely related to Wikipedia. At Commons, you can set up pages (known as Galleries) which consist primarily of images, see for example commons:Sydney; within a Gallery you can arrange the images into groups by theme, each with annotation. More at commons:Commons:Galleries. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:56, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your help, I've fixed the formatting Paul Clarence (talk) 12:58, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

AWB bug

Resolved

Magio, please don't work on the bug I reported about the edit summary. The bug description is wrong. (Damn I should sleep more.) I will submit a correct bug description shortly. --Meno25 (talk) 13:01, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

I corrected it. I am really sorry for wasting your time with wrong bug description. --Meno25 (talk) 13:41, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Yobot and empty section tags

Hi Magioladitis, I notice that your bot has been adding {{Empty section}} tags to articles. Would you please direct me to the WP:BRFA where this action was approved? {{Empty section}} is a fairly controversial template, and I believe that it is of very little use. It doesn't seem like it should be mass-added by a bot (if it should be added at all). If this is an unapproved task for the bot, you should stop doing it immediately as it is cluttering up a bunch of pages. Best, IronGargoyle (talk) 15:06, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi IronGargoyle. Thanks for contacting me. BRFA 13 enables me to do autotagging on selected list of pages and BRFA 16 to perform CHECKWIKI error fixes which one of them is spotting empty sections. With a quick check yobot has been adding tags for at least two years. There is something you need to know: You can take advantage of Empty section tag to completely remove an empty section when you think it's not needed. Maybe we should change the wording of the template. In my opinion the template serves multiple purposes: It helps us spot empty sections and then decide what to do with them. What is exactly your disagreement on tagging pages with it? You can also check Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2011_June_13#Template:Empty_section where a recent discussion took place. I would be happy to know your opinion on the subject. -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:37, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Huh. So basically the empty section tag was approved in a blanket approval of all the CHECKWIKI functions? I guess that's fine then (although in principle it seems an end run around the principle of bots not doing things which are controversial, as demonstrated by that TfD). I couldn't find this particular tag discussed in the WT:CHECKWIKI archives, but I'm not going to sweat it. It seems to me that the tag is something that points out the already obvious, and for the most part I do delete tagged (or untagged) empty sections when I find them. Several articles seemed better with empty sections (particularly chronological lists), but yet without the empty section tags that encourage people to add non-notable list entries. The bot kept adding the tags back after I removed them, but I really have better things to do with my time than edit-warring with a bot or getting into long discussions about random templates—and I'm sure you do too. :) Have a good day. IronGargoyle (talk) 20:25, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

IronGargoyle I didn't mean to edit war. You can always remove the tag with the empty section and the bot won't find anything to tag :) If you check the TfD in detail I proposed 3 ways to deal with empty sections: 1. Actually add something 2. Remove them 3. Convert them to a list of something else. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:16, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

J-20 page is being vandalized by indian trolls

Please lock the J-20 page, it is being vandalized again by indian trolls. I have just undid his useless changes.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.71.58.38 (talk) 00:20, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

I believe this user is concerned about Chengdu J-20. GoingBatty (talk) 00:45, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

User:Open courses tei athinas

Hello Magioladitis. Can you please check this user page? It seems to me that this is just advertising or spamming but they mention Wikimedia and I can't get a proper machine translation from their text. Regards, De728631 (talk) 14:11, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

AWB question

Resolved

Is this a broken template at James Kelley which reads Bbad|58|1991|5|14? AWB thinks the birthday is 1991 and tries to update the Persondata accordingly. I've skipped a lot of them in the 2012-2013 range; but AWB doesn't seem to be aware of the code and how to respond. It should also place the date of birth as uncertain as a result. Not sure how to proceed with this; you seemed like the best option to ask before I submit a flawed "bug report". ChrisGualtieri (talk) 00:44, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Rjwilmsi might want to take a look at this one. -- Magioladitis (talk) 03:35, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

In this one it seems it doesn't make the same mistake. I expanded the template name in case the problem is just a bad regex. -- Magioladitis (talk) 03:55, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Confirmed that the bug would not have occurred if "Birth based on age as of date" had been used. It it caught by UncertainWordings Rjwilmsi maybe UncertainWordings in Parsers.cs (line 6234) needs update or we need another regex? -- Magioladitis (talk) 04:36, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

I will update cases with the full template; it must be reading the expression incorrectly in its abbreviated form. Thanks for confirming it. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 13:25, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

I suggest adding {{bbad}} to WP:AWB/Template redirects Rjwilmsi 17:02, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Done. -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:06, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

AWB compile

Resolved

FYI... I updated the compile instructions at Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Sources. Among the things to update were the links to the new SourceForge SVN repository. GoingBatty has been going thru the same compile hell I did when trying to use .Net 4.0. So I've been trying to give him some instructions. Bgwhite (talk) 05:52, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Great! Thanks. -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:08, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Question

Resolved

Can you please explain what this edit did so that I can avoid the same mistake for the future--Yankees10 19:19, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

It removed two Left-to-right marks (U+200E) that were immediately after the last digit, as in 605333‎‎ |espn=. These often get inadvertently added when doing a copy-and-paste in certain browsers, including Chrome. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:16, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

AWB skip cosmetic option

I just want to ask about consensus and the "trivial" aspect of AWB's fixes. I want to address the issues across Wikipedia, but every time I make an edit with General Fixes or something its liable to upset someone (in this case Materialscientist). Going from the past discussion about "inconsequential edits",[1] I surmised that their is consensus for the changes and that going at least by "skip cosmetic changes" is fine. I regularly run skip whitespace and capitalizations, but I've been also trying to fix the bracket issues. I've spoken to a few readers who are legally blind (I work with one who got a special section in my company's letter) and have some idea of where things come into play and support such actions. As someone who has previously advocated for color blindness fixes on other sites; sometimes "trivial" things aren't so trivial. I think it is way past time to show consensus and reasoning for the general fixes. Once the problems are taken care of, they are gone for good. I've literally parsed large blocks of pages and skipped them hundreds of times - its become to the point that the amount of bracket errors and other issues actually grace a significant portion of Wikipedia and they must be checked by hand and corrected. Whenever I go to do this; I am made out to be causing problems despite the intention of fixing them.

And yes; I got this with the typo correction once before and other issues on IRC which basically said that fixing typos, bad punctuation and other things are "trivial", but if you cannot spell "president" correctly on an article about a national leader it just looks silly. I don't want to lose my AWB access or get blocked for such fixes; I just really need something to stand behind and state with absolute certainty what is okay to do; parse them out and fix those issues and any others that happen to exist in the process. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 04:38, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

I left an answer about Materialscientiest comments at Chris' talk page. Long story short, you are making some inconsequential edits that should be curtailed. Unfortunately, what is trivial and what isn't trivial will long be debated after we stop editing. Having a color blind person being able to read some words or a blind person having the screen reader say something correctly is not inconsequential. Fixing brackets or spelling errors are not trivial. TypoScan is made specifically for AWB to fix spelling errors. (btw... the lastest scan of the database has been done for TypoScan and waiting to be uploaded) If people complain about these, refer the person to AWB's talk page. I don't see your AWB access removed anytime soon if the problem edits are curtailed. Any long time user of AWB will have their edits come into question. It is one of the "features" of using AWB. Bgwhite (talk) 06:05, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

I have no problem with corrections of spelling errors, the cosmetic edits that shouldn't be made are things like this, which (if I am looking at it correctly) doesn't change anything in the rendered page and is basically a redirect with target replacement. This shouldn't be done (on its own), only as part of a larger edit. Since the edits didn't break anything, it's no big deal, but it becomes a problem when people make edits which don't have the potential to add any value for readers, but which break things sometimes. Fram (talk) 07:15, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm at the point where any edit even MOS-Compliant ones cause issue with "someone". Of the ones Materialscientist first pointed out some were simple referencing reorders for compliance; while not the biggest thing in the world, we have a scanner for that very issue (but I'm not using it at all). Looking at the discussion from before shows that the spacing issue on that one is part of WP:HEAD; so I don't know about everything; sometimes technical things in the vast list of MOS pages aren't clear; but their usually is reason to do so. If you notice; I also have a tendency to update the pages I alter manually; like at Bison, Bodybuilding, etc. as mentioned before. Right now; I cannot even deal with the bracket issues and other problems simply because parsing "non-cosmetic fixes" yields so many other issues that at some point what I think is "useless" might be wrong. I've tried to engage people on this matter before; but for every argument raised it seems their is a valid MOS reason for such changes. Even if I put "manual update" and avoid the semi-feature of AWB, I'll probably end up pissing people off because AWB allows me to fix issues and easily check for pages that need work.

At some point I think this "useless" edit matter is just silly; because it essentially keeps errors of all sorts in Wikipedia, purposely, on the grounds that fixing it is "trivial". I am under the impression that the relatively new skip for "only" cosmetic fixes means that their was some consensus for things that do impact the page and do impact the readouts. If there was some level of "acceptable" general fixes, I assume that would be it. I still don't see any strong arguments to NOT fix the problems; it just seems to be some emotional overreaction to the fact that an edit wasn't deemed "worthy". If these general fixes would not trigger a change on the watchlist (and only general fixes), I'd be extremely happy because we could have compliance and some conformity without upsetting the watchers. In fact; that seems to be the only reason NOT to fix the pages. Am I mistaken? I don't see a good parser for broken templates and brackets; the current one provides the mass I was fixing; but others slip in with these gen fix options. I'd like to deal with just the brackets for the time; but there is no option for that. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 11:53, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Mag, I hate to have this one your talk page if you do not want to provide input on this matter; I just thought you'd be the best one to ask given your involvement in AWB. I've been busying myself with the typos and wrapping a lot of notatypo templates and lang templates for future scans; but I hope this issue can be resolved. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 00:20, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

I am busy in real life the last few days but in general I agree with Bgwhite's comments. On the other hand it's true that some of AWB users (including myself) sometimes don't pay attention or get over-excited. As an advice, activate typo-fixing to help and reduce your edit rate. It's clear that the term "inconsequential edits" is also misused for edits that are useful and instructed by the Manual of Style. Wikipedia still can't distinguish between "useful" and "great" and according to my point of view evry little improvement is welcome. -- 04:20, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Because of the database check from labs the typo list is gleaned over already; but the scanner versus AWB's willingness to address these issues are leagues apart; but I can almost guarantee I'll get at least one upset person by the end of it. Anyways; the issue I guess can be summed up as if skip only cosmetic fixes is checked is that by itself evidence of non-trivial nature? I'm all for consistency, clarity and functionality; but Wikipedia seems to be more about conflicts than building the encyclopedia. I have half a mind to edit within AWB with some variant summary and smack the gen fixes on any page I work on in the course of my day. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 04:52, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

There will always be someone who won't be happy with your edits. Wikipedia has a lot of conflicts and also a lot of wonderful guys. I, and I believe more, appreciate your contribution. You save time of my life by doing things I would do too. Keep helping me to spend some time with my friends! -- Magioladitis (talk) 05:00, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Auto-tagger on arwiki

Resolved

Hi, Magio. Thank you for the Main Page fix. Your help is really appreciated. On an unrelated matter regarding this bug, AWB still doesn't tag pages in NS:104 on arwiki (running rev 9275). Could you, please, check this issue? I have made a list of uncategorized pages in NS:104 on arwiki for you for testing purposes. --Meno25 (talk) 05:29, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Ping! Any progress here? --Meno25 (talk) 19:46, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Let's see what Rjwilmsi can do about this. -- Magioladitis (talk) 20:59, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

rev 9314 enables genfixes on ar-wiki namespace 104. This will make the tagger run. -- Magioladitis (talk) 14:18, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Trivial edit

In this edit the only things done were the removal of an end of line (so invisible) space and changing one valid for of the BR tag to another, i.e. two inconsequential changes that made no difference to the page appearance and that AWB should skip.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 11:03, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

According to Bgwhite " </br> is not HTML5 compliant" -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:09, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

True; <br> and <br /> are valid in HTML5, but </br> is not. I posted somewhere very recently on this exact matter, with links to technical docs. Can't find the post, otherwise I'd link to it. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:21, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

</br> is never valid. Used in isolation, it's not even well-formed. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:22, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Strictly speaking, it is valid in certain circumstances: XHTML permits <br></br> but only as a balanced (and empty) pair; but the documentation specifically cautions against its use. Wikipedia has not served XHTML since 17 September 2012, when we switched to HTML5. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:00, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

I've just found the bit of the HTML5 spec that shows that the slash in <br /> is optional: it's 8.1.2.1 Start tags, item 6. If you follow the first link there, br is listed as one of the void elements. It also states "Void elements only have a start tag; end tags must not be specified for void elements". --Redrose64 (talk) 13:43, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Ah, so it's my broken HTML. This and another similar change done by Yobot on my changelist were to line breaks almost certainly added by me, and though they worked it seems more by luck than anything else. You learn something new every day, I guess. I'd not seen the {{tag}} template before either, which looks very useful for such discussions. One thing that would help though would be if there some note of what changes were being made, or the tasks being done. Not necessarily in the edit summary but in a page somewhere which it linked to. I had a look at the page linked, WP:AWB, and it's talk page but could not see anything, while the edit summary gives no indication.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 15:52, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

JohnBlackburne there is User:Magioladitis/AWB and CHECKWIKI. It's a bit painful to write descriptions for all these errors but I may start at some point. Thanks for the feedback! -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:58, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Bad HTML only partially fixed

Hi, see this edit, the block beginning at "Line 56". Yobot correctly altered two </br> to <br>; I've removed both, because they were superfluous, since they occurred after the last text content of a table cell. But two lines below, the one beginning

{{rail line |previous={{stnlnk|Bicester Town}}

Yobot has ignored some bad markup: two <small> without closing </small>. Not visible in this diff are more unfixed problems on the line immediately after that: one is

<small>''towards {{stnlnk|London Marylebone}}''

another unclosed <small> but soon after is the misclosed and misnested

<small>''towards {{stnlnk|Milton Keynes Central}}<br><small>''

I've fixed up all of these, but tidying unclosed <small> is definitely one that I think Yobot could do. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:19, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Magiolidits has a big honking list of articles without closing small tags. All cases cannot be fixed as AWB wouldn't know where to place some closing tags. Majority of the cases without </small> happen in tables. This could be fixed by just placing a </small> just before the |.

Small tags aren't the only problem. There are a ton of <center> and <span> without closing tags. Bgwhite (talk) 21:48, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

superfluous section headers

Resolved

Not all subpages of a talk page need a section head, such as here. —Ruud 14:27, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I have noticed when I edited. I just kept it to report as a bug in our page. Then I forgot to revert. -- Magioladitis (talk) 14:28, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Translations with AWB

Hi,

I would like to know if you'd seen this question: [2]. If you've have an answer, it would be great.

Thanks by advance,

Regards, Automatik (talk) 12:47, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Automatik, you can help if you write me down how is in French and Esperanto:

• "removed" (for F&R)
• "replaced" (for F&R)
• clean up // using // AWB
• tag(s)
• "removed" (for tags)
• "added" (for tags)

And the proper names for the following tags

• orphan
• dead end
• underlinked/wikify
• uncategorised
• uncategorised stub
• stub

-- 15:08, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Automatik I forgot to sign. -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:09, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Ok, this is a stub:

• "English name" → French name
•  Done"removed" (for F&R) → Retrait
•  Done"replaced" (for F&R) → Remplacement
•  Done clean up // using // AWB → maintenance // avec // AWB
•  Donetag(s) → balise(s)
•  Done"removed" (for tags) → Retrait
•  Done"added" (for tags) → Ajout

And the proper names for the following tags

• orphan → page orpheline
• dead end → page en impasse (or Pages en impasse)
• underlinked/wikify → à wikifier
• uncategorised → (*)
• uncategorised stub → (*)
• stub → ébauche

I'm not sure for the "proper names" of the tags: what are tags (template like here, or tag like <pre> <br> etc.)?

(*) Not sure that you want, like said above (maybe just à wikifier in French Wikipedia would be sufficient)

Note if possible that French typography prefers space before the sign ':'

I used capital letters sometimes, it's useful when the edit summary begins with the concerned word; otherwise it's not useful.

Thank for your work. Automatik (talk) 16:47, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

With tags I mean templates. -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:43, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

rev 9294 and rev 9295 for starts. -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:47, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Just in case, with tag(s) → balise(s) I would say tags like <nowiki> <pre>, etc. For "template", it's "modèle" in French. I come back with others translations. But, how use these translations (I ever updated the softawre)? Thanks by advance. Automatik (talk) 19:11, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Translations are built-in. They will be available in the next release. You can test them by yourself if you download a debug version of AWB. We provide instructions of how to do it at Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Sources. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:14, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

An interesting AWB edit

Howdy. Why did you make this edit? Was it to make that portion of the page a bit easier to edit? It isn't a big deal, I just saw the edit while looking at my watchlist. :) --Rockfang (talk) 17:25, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Rockfang I pressed Save by accident. I use shortcuts to save time. I wanted to skip instead. My apologies. -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:27, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

No worries. Thank you for responding. :) --Rockfang (talk) 17:29, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

AutoWikiBrowser

Hi. Does AutoWikiBrowser works in domains other than en.wikipedia.org? Whould it work in pt.wikibooks.org? Tuliouel (talk) 12:49, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Of course. While in AWB go to Options -> Preferences -> Site and select pt and books. -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:51, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

PROTEST

On this Wikipedia hard to offend some people and their national languages​​, ignoring the facts and international documents. The fact that the Serbian and Croatian two different standard languages, here it does not matter how big the difference is, it deals with linguistics. Why did you lie about that?

What are these languages: http://hr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pomo%C4%87:Sadr%C5%BEaj http://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9F%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%BE%D1%9B:%D0%A1%D0%B0%D0%B4%D1%80%D0%B6%D0%B0%D1%98

See official international documents:

1. https://www.ethnologue.com/subgroups/indo-european
2. http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/php/code_changes.php
3. http://euobserver.com/news/31343
4. http://hrv.nsk.hr/dokumenti/Sluzbeno-prihvacanje-izmjena-ISO-639-2-Registration-Authority.pdf
5. http://www.danshort.com/ie/iesatem.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.227.18.219 (talk) 16:50, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Stuff

Does an alert go out somehow that a new version of AWB was released?

I'm not going to finish all checkwiki errors this month. I'm still working on #46. Bgwhite (talk) 16:20, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Editors who use release versions and not compile their own, get alerts within AWB. -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:26, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Hmmm - although you can see the release version on the WP:AWB page, changing the release version doesn't trigger a change to my watchlist, since it's changed within Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/CurrentVersion and Template:Latest stable software release/AutoWikiBrowser. I have been watching Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/History, which shows when a new version has been released and what has changed. Thank you for releasing more often! GoingBatty (talk) 16:55, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Your contribution to the "theft of fire" page on Prometheus

Greetings from the "theft of fire" page and Prometheus page and thank for your contribution from last year.

On behalf of the humble and old classicists and editors of this page, there seems to be an interWiki link problem which is getting worse and causing disambiguation problems across three wiki pages. Last year a film version came out with the name Prometheus which is causing interWiki disambiguation problems. The co-authors of the film Prometheus page are apparently maintaining a 24/7 vigil for their self-appointed oversight of their page for which they have received a barnstar (good for individual wiki page). However, they are now blocking interwiki links to the related wiki pages for the titan Prometheus and the "theft of fire" pages (bad for larger wiki community) and referring to the titan Prometheus page grammar as "atrocious." Could you glance at this interWiki issue which appears unhelpful to the larger interwiki community. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.168.46.153 (talk) 20:14, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Can you please explain me, with links, to which pages you are referring and please be more specific? -- Magioladitis (talk) 20:18, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Maybe Prometheus (2012 film), which this IP also edited? GoingBatty (talk) 03:02, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Greetings from the Prometheus page

Thank you for your quick comment above. The information was collected over night so that you would have it all in one place.

The 3 Relevant wiki pages experiencing interwiki link difficulties are: titan Prometheus (over 11 yrs old), theft of fire (one year old), and Prometheus (2012 film) (8 months old).

The 3 pages should be interlinked to avoid disambiguation problems, however, the film Prometheus page co-authors have been refusing to allow any attempt to create an interwiki link with the theft of fire page. They are both employed on a 24/7 watch and are manually deleting all our attempts to address the disambiguation problems and provide wiki users with a simple and useful link to the theft of fire page. The wording they prefer is the unrecognizable phrase "to gift fire", allowing no options, and to block the use of the preferred phrase theft of fire at all costs. The two co-authors (co-editors) have indicated that they will even ignore normal "three revert rule" wiki policy by manually removing any and all attempts to insert a link to the established theft of fire page. The co-authors employing this 24/7 revert policy are user=darkwarriorblake and user=MisterShiney. During the last two months they have skirted the "three revert rule" repeatedly in order to block interwiki links to the theft of fire page.

The disambiguation problem edit is located in the first sentence of the Theme section of the film Prometheus (2012 film) page using the unrecognizable phrase "gifting of fire" for undisclosed reasons, and blocking all attempts to avoid disambiguation problems by inserting a link to the theft of fire page. (text abridged)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.107.55.2 (talk) 16:38, 26 June 2013 (UTC) 

(talk page stalker) - It appears that you want to update Prometheus (2012 film) to include a wikilink to the Wikipedia article theft of fire. (Interwiki links are links to sister projects such as Wikisource, Wiktionary, and Wikipedia in other languages.) I see that you have attempted to address this issue on Talk:Prometheus (2012 film), which is good. After reading WP:BTW, you may want to respond on Talk:Prometheus (2012 film) by stating something like "I think it would be beneficial to readers of this article to add a link to theft of fire because ___________." Good luck! GoingBatty (talk) 01:43, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Yes, agreed, the friendly way is to be preferred. As you can see in the "Edit History Comments" of Prometheus (2012 film) this was attempted with the phrase "Good for the wiki community!" If you try to add this 3 word wikilink you can see first hand the reaction. The premise being applied here is that relevent wikilinks help to address disambiguation problems especially when two or three wiki pages are using the exact same name and title. My recommendation to all editors involved from titan Prometheus page was not to violate the 3RR rule in wiki policy, even though user=Darkwarriorblake has done this repeatedly and serially. Once last week and another time during last month.

Could user=Magioladitis indicate if the 3RR wiki policy of allowing new edits to stand for one day be applied here. This would normally allow the general Wiki community to see the wikilink and help everyone to make an informed decision. 66.99.3.244 (talk) 18:09, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

infobox

check this out: [3]. so much to do. Frietjes (talk) 15:30, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Frietjes FFS. -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:37, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Trivial edit

Sorry to keep reporting these but then I keep seeing them clogging up my watchlist and the rules for automated/AWB edits are supposed to prevent this. In this edit: [4] all that's been done is remove invisible trailing whitespace, with no effect on appearance.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 14:37, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

JohnBlackburne thanks for the reports. I am sorry if I sometimes do these. Someone fixed the unbalanced bracket before me and I thought I did it. Reports make me better so I encourage you to keep reporting. -- Magioladitis (talk) 14:53, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Checking my last edits, I'll see if bots can remove whitespace while fixing section headings. -- Magioladitis (talk) 14:57, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

I screwed up and had this happen and AWB will not fix the whitespace header before the first content lines. Is there an issue why AWB's general fixes do not do this? It is not a cosmetic fix because in my case the whitespace is apparently visible to editors like Koavf. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 14:59, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

ChrisGualtieri what is the problem exactly? -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:01, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Made useless whitespace with an extra carriage return which appears. AWB's general fix doesn't catch it on parsing through. [5] Seems to not catch other peoples errors either at iPed to. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 15:07, 27 June 2013 (UTC)