From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For information about the script (including introduction, installation, features, etc.), please see User:AndyZ/peerreviewer.

Contents 1 Basics 2 Usage 2.1 Options 3 Discussion 3.1 Problems? 3.2 Doesn't work for protected pages 3.3 editprotected 3.4 Use the full names of Wikipedia policy articles rather than the shortcut names 3.5 APR script 3.6 Logged out by script

[edit] Basics

If you receive a message on your peer review that states Please see automated peer review suggestions here, the link leads to a certain section in Wikipedia:Peer review/Automated/December 2006. The suggestions there were generated semi-automatically by JavaScript, and generally focus on formatting and stylistic (as well as others) issues that tend to appear (based on my experiences) on WP:PR, WP:FAC, and WP:FARC; many of the suggestions are based on WP:MOS, WP:GTL, several other Wikipedia pages, and also from my suggestions page. Though most of the tips are generally accurate, some will not be applicable for the article in question.

The suggestions provided don't have to be acted upon, but the general idea is to improve the quality of Wikipedia's articles. See User:AndyZ/peerreviewer#Introduction for more information.

[edit] Usage

More detailed instructions can be found here

You don't need an account to use this, but it would be best to have one (If you don't, please make one). For IP users, see here. Otherwise, to use the script, add {{subst:js|User:AndyZ/peerreviewer.js}} to your monobook.js (or other relevant file depending upon your skin). Then clear your browser's cache.

While editing an article, there should be a "peer review" link right next to your "log out" link. On clicking, it presents suggestions for the article generated by the code. For a longer list of features, see here.

[edit] Options

To change a configurable option, add a line to your monobook.js:

option = value;

, replacing option with the name of the variable from below, and value with one of the possible values listed below.

[edit] Discussion

Haven't got round to using the results yet - but looks really useful one note - in the intro for a review 'may or may not be accurate' has one may too many suggest 'may be accurate' or 'may not be accurate' either would suffice Leevanjackson 18:10, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

• Hmm... dunno which sounds better. Any suggestions? AZ _t 17:50, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

• 'may not be accurate' - since it seems to be accurate than not, but I suggest something like 'and may not be entirely applicable' Leevanjackson 12:27, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

• I like "applicable"; I was looking more for a word like that but just couldn't think of it at the time. AZ _t 23:02, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

• Just one more minor tweak 'so might not be applicable...' sounds a bit more 'solid' Leevanjackson 02:04, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Problems?

This script worked fine on 'Old Dan Tucker", but the Mac wait icon just keeps chugging along when I run it on minstrel show. Does it take a long time on longer articles or something? — BrianSmithson 05:46, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

I just tried it by copying all the code like the instructions says to User:Horus Kol/monobook.js, but the javascript doesn't run in my browser and I get an Invalid Quantifier { error when I use a console to debug it. Horus Kol 13:06, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Doesn't work for protected pages

The script doesn't work for protected pages (ones where you have to click view source. I know you can just copy the source into a different page but still... --WikiSlasher 15:43, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

• I've never had this problem, being an admin. Thanks for bringing this to my attention, I'll fix it. AZ _t 00:25, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] editprotected

document.theForm.theResponse.value+="\n*You may wish to convert your form of references to the cite.php footnote system that WP:WIAFA 2(c) highly recommends."

is wrong. 1(2) deals with refs, 2(c) deals with the ToC. 68.39.174.238 20:19, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

• Good point, WP:WIAFA changed, so I'll have to make quite a few changes. Thanks, AZ _t 00:22, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

...did this page get protected with nothing showing in the protection log? 68.39.174.238 20:20, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

• I think the monobooks of users are protected so that a vandal can't just install a malicious script on the page (but then again, I'm not sure) AZ _t 00:25, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Use the full names of Wikipedia policy articles rather than the shortcut names

Thanks for creating this tool, it has proven to be quite helpful, despite the occasional disgruntled comments I've seen on peer review requests.

One request I have is addressing one of my pet peeves about making wikipedia more inclusive to new editors who don't know all the shortcuts and jargon, is that when referring to elements of Wikipedia policy or the manual of style, the automated suggestions refer to the shortcuts names of the articles, rather than the full name. For example, one of the lines I received was:

Per WP:CONTEXT and WP:MOSDATE, months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.

The first time I saw this, I was thinking to myself, "huh? MOSDATE?" It would be clearer and easier to understand if the script would include the full name of the article, "Manual of Style (dates and numbers)" rather than "MOSDATE". When I'm manually typing comments to people, I frequently get lazy and use the shortcut name rather than the full name, especially if I feel like the reader I'm writing to would know what MOSDATE means, but with an automated script, it shouldn't be too difficult to put the full name and would reduce the amount of deciphering required. Neil916 (Talk) 00:44, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

• Good suggestion, I guess I'm really lazy ;). I'll start fixing them. AZ _t 02:55, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
  • I've gone through and fixed all of the non-obvious ones (leaving shortcuts like WP:FOOTNOTE where they were obvious). AZ _t 14:24, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Thanks, and no, I wasn't calling you lazy! :) Nice work. Neil916 (Talk) 06:22, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] APR script

This script rawks. I love the new auto-fix tabs, they are great. One of the things I noticed is that it doesn't nbsp measurements when the measure is cm. See Climate_of_Minnesota for an example. Also do you think the spell checker could be it's own little tab thing? I was trying to use it, and I think it fires off when you hit "peer review" but it didn't seem to do anything. Thanks and keep up the great work. -Ravedave ^{(help name my baby)} 01:27, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Also my tabs, except send to wp:pr seem to have dissapeared since your last edit... -Ravedave ^{(help name my baby)} 01:34, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

The tabs are from User:Bobblewik's scripts, you'll have to contact him about the nbsp thing. The spell-checker is literally nothing compared to others (like MS Word's); it works by finding comon mispelings based upon the torough list (but far from complete…) at Wikipedia:Lists of common misspellings/For machines. It is similar to the spellchecker provided in User:Lupin's anti-vandal tool. Thanks for the feedback! AZ _t 22:55, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Logged out by script

I installed this script and tried it out on one page and found it helpful, but then found the following problem, which led me to uninstall it: Almost every time I open something that requires me to be logged in, such as Special:Watchlist in a new tab, it thinks that I'm logged out even though I'm still logged in in the other tab. Similarly, when I'm in a page (article, talk page, etc) and go to edit, history, watch, etc., it suddenly decides that I'm not logged in and I have to log in, go back to the page, then go back to the action again. That's a real pain when reverting vandalism, etc.! --Athol Mullen 07:59, 15 December 2006 (UTC)