Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion/Working

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Contents

[edit] What happens when category is deleted?

Category:Environmental science timelines was deleted and I would have thought that you would have upmerged all the pages in it to Category:Science timelines but instead the category was just deleted. Now there are a bunch of timelines with no timelines cat and I have no way of finding them. Is this what is supposed to happen? Do I need to make a special request during the discussion if I think the categories should be upmerged instead of deleted? --JeffW 19:33, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes, and yes. According to the nomination, there were only 4. Unfortunately, the actual deletions were done by Cydebot (talk • contribs), and the new administrator Cyde (talk • contribs) was careless and the edit summaries don't indicate the category that was removed. So, hunting will be hard. Good luck!
--William Allen Simpson 05:02, 7 May 2006 (UTC)


JeffW - if you still need help with this, I can use some bandwidth and download a database dump. I might be able to recover those timelines. Syrthiss 12:37, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ** Category:ALGOL dialects to Category:ABCL programming language family

This change was a mistake that unfortunately wasn't caught in the discussion because of the huge number of categories listed. They should have been changed to Category:Algol programming language family can it be corrected? --JeffW 03:47, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Of course, I'll add it to the queue. My apologies. Syrthiss 12:42, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
It was my cut-n-paste error so it should be (and is) my apologies. If there's away for it to be double checked that would be good, but I think it's fixed. SMALL was the only one left in Category:ABCL programming language family that should have been in Category:Algol programming language family instead. The other three in Category:ABCL programming language family are all ABCL languages. It looks like the rest had already caught by Cyde and others. Sorry! -- JLaTondre 12:47, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
Ah, ok. Thanks for following up on it then. Syrthiss 12:55, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Full automation

Just so you guys know, I've programmed up a little something special for Cydebot that lets him tackle everything on this page with a single command. So if stuff is ever lagging behind just send me a ping and I can have Cydebot do it all in a jiffy ... there's no reason to waste time setting up a bot manually to handle each different move, especially when there's lots of them to work on. --Cyde↔Weys 13:52, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy moves

Xaosflux (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves) removed this section as redundant. Admittedly, the format is the same as the "Move/Merge and delete" section, but traditionally this has been kept separate. I can only speculate as to the original reasons, but the practical aspects are:

  1. There isn't a "per-day page that has the discussion on it."
  2. Busy folks (both editors and administrators) can quickly list the final results from WP:CFDS here, and rely on others (and bots) to finish the work.
  3. It may help these non-controversial moves be SPEEDY (or speedier)....

What thinkest anybody else?

--William Allen Simpson 23:59, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
(from my Talk)

What do you see as the differance between items that should go in WP:CFDS and items that should go in Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Working#Speedy_Moves? — xaosflux Talk 04:36, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Huh? Requests go in /Speedy, then the results go in /Working. Same items.
--William Allen Simpson 11:17, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

The speedy move section should be kept ... it is different than the "regular move" section. If nothing else, it does require a different edit summary format for the bot, and thus the bot needs to know how to differentiate between normal and speedy moves ... putting them into two separate sections on the page is the easiest way to do this. --Cyde↔Weys 16:07, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

It sounds like Xaosflux isn't saying that the speedy move section of the working page is redundant with the regular move section of the working page. Instead I think he's saying that an administrator (or bot) can work off the speedy move section of the main page so there is no need to move it to the working page. I think the answer to that is that it gives an admin a shot at weeding out those entries that don't meet the speedy criteria before a bot does the dirty work. --JeffW 17:11, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
There may be some use, but this at least seems confusing for other editors wanting a speedy move/rename for a category, should it go in: Speedy Moves or WP:CFDS. I work WP:CFDS fairly regulary, but almost never look at Speedy Moves. The most common template, {{cfr-speedy}}, references CFDS. — xaosflux Talk 01:06, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
Of course {{cfr-speedy}} references WP:CFDS! All nominations go in WP:CFDS. Nominations NEVER go in /Working.
Are you saying that having /Working display at the bottom of the CfD page is confusing? In that case, we should stop transcluding it, and just link to it instead. That's OK with me.
--William Allen Simpson 03:46, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
Or is he saying that admins who want to speedy delete some categories don't know that they're supposed to go to the list on the /working page instead of the main list. --JeffW 04:07, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
For the possible editor confusion, I've made a proposal for a simpler linear organization of the listing over at Wikipedia talk:Categories for deletion#Working transclusion. They'll only see WP:CFDS on the main page.
For the possible administrator confusion, we'll need cleaner/simpler documentation....
--William Allen Simpson 05:05, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
Even I'm getting lost now! On WP:CFD anyone coming to list something sees the /Speedy transclusion (which I think is JUST FINE) and the /Working transclusion as well (which I also think is just fine). The part that I'm seing as redundant is that to anyone viewing WP:CFD there is a speedy category section inside of /Working that is diferant then the /Speedy transclusion. — xaosflux Talk 02:15, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
As of right now these are seciotns 4(Speedy renaming) and 6.3.1 (Speedy moves) on the TOC. As renaming and moving are the same thing with regard to a category, why have 2? — xaosflux Talk 02:17, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
We have two because:
  1. one is a primary (level 2) section with a "Add requests for speedy renaming here" as a level 3 under it,
  2. the other is a level 4 under "To be emptied or moved",
  3. they have somewhat different names so that any links to the CfD page will link to the correct section, a requirement of the current Mediawiki software....
--William Allen Simpson 06:03, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Does this imply that the correct process is to put a nomination in /Speedy, wait 2 days, move it to /Working, work it, then remove it? If so all that process seems to be taking the speedy part out of the process. Personally I work nominations to completion right out of /Speedy all the time, and haven't gotten any complaints yet. — xaosflux Talk 12:23, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that used to be the process (long before I split off the /Working page version of "Cleanup overhead"). In fact, each item in the "Speedy Move" section would have an annotation "approved by ...", so that the decision was recorded in the history. For example,
However, I'm sure that occasionally working them right out of /Speedy is not a problem, as long as each decision is clearly documented in the edit history with appropriate summaries. Really, the /Working version would be most useful for bots doing cleanup, as noted by Cyde above.
--William Allen Simpson 17:04, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the elaboration. My bot Fluxbot has begun working WP:CFDS items, but is only running under AWB, after I manually review the entries. Happy categorizing! — xaosflux Talk 00:46, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] are we stalled out for a reason?

It seems very few discussions are getting closed. Is there a reason for this?--Mike Selinker 07:50, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Both CfD and TfD are way behind, so I'm assuming the regular administrators have gone on break.
--William Allen Simpson 11:14, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
I'm personally still on break for a bit until work settles down. Syrthiss 12:30, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
No problem. I was just wondering if there was a technical reason or debate among admins or something.--Mike Selinker 15:14, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
Well, I've worked on the 6 weeks behind TfD, and with Pagrashtak (talk • contribs), we've gotten it almost caught up! I'll try to do more here soon.
--William Allen Simpson 02:32, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm not doing CFDW anymore until the user categories are split out into a separate process and not listed on this page. --Cyde Weys 01:52, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

That's a shame. It'll just take longer to do without your help. --Kbdank71 02:12, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

There's something big in the joblist (470k items when I looked last) so some of the user category moves are taking longer while the templates sort out. The smaller categories I was going and touching the articles by hand, but I'm not going to do something that labor intensive for 100+ userpages. :) I still managed to knock out most of the 21st's queue today while working. Syrthiss 19:24, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Where do you find the joblist? --Kbdank71 13:38, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Special:Statistics tells you how many items are in the job queue (currently 0). Syrthiss 13:44, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Reason is that all the standard bots for handling this choke at categoruies created out of templates (which are most Wikipedians... categories). The problem is that one needs to track every single tempalte including the category and manually remove them, and some categories are cinluded by up to 10 different userboxes, not helpful. -- Drini 17:28, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

seconds this. Syrthiss 22:49, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I have created a tool that averts this situation. I will be uploading to my website with source and ,exe it iw written in VC++. The program was used today to help find the remianing UBX in the september 2 User Cats for deletion. (was working with Sagaciousuk and his bot User:Sagabot, on IRC. The results given from the program allowed easy cleanup after the bot made initial passes) —— Eagle (ask me for help) 17:24, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ARGHHHHH

There was this line:

**[[:category:Fictional characters with spiritual awareness]] - unchanged

on the /Working page under Moves and Deletes. whoever what pasted it, please don't!!. It confuses bots. And if there was nothign to do, why list it at all? -- Drini 15:06, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Just keeping you on your toes. Or an oversight on my part. --Kbdank71 16:43, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
While I'm here, what are you doing with the discussions you closed on the 24th? I don't see anything happening with them, nor are they listed on cfd/w. --Kbdank71 16:43, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
I got interrupted while I was doing them. I?m resuming the working, and wil lcontinue clearing logs along the day. 23 and 24 have some really huge categories, I?ve been doing superheroe stuff for the past 2 hours. -- Drini 17:25, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
Also, for cases that noone will really dispute since they're clear cut, I usually clear them before closing. Only the ones I?m about to clear and not clear-cut, I?ll close first (so noone closes witha different option in the middle of my run). I do this precisely to minimize the state of closed CFDs whose category has not been processed. -- Drini 17:28, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
Gotcha. No problem, I was just curious. I noticed the clear cut ones that were deleted but not closed yet. I just went ahead and closed them. --Kbdank71 18:28, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
Backlog cleared sir! Almost 5000 pages done. -- Drini 22:45, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
Thanks much for the help. It's very appreciated. --Kbdank71 02:11, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
I think that some of the discussions from Sept-24 may still have some pending actions, such as Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 September 24#Category:Fictional participants of a love triangle which was closed delete, but not yet deleted. In general is it OK for me to list these on cfd/w or would you prefer that only admins put things on that page when they close the discussions? --After Midnight 0001 12:39, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
If some categories still need to be processed (like Fictional love triangle) for all means, DO relist them again on the /working page, it's easier for us to spot them there. -- Drini 00:06, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
OK, thanks. It's good to know that I am allowed to do this when needed. I've added a couple from the 24th onto the page. --After Midnight 0001 02:34, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fictional cats

Speaking of superheroes... is it just me or are there just way too many of these "fictional" categories? In the last few weeks, I have nom'ed a couple of these and I've seen alot of activity on many others. Do we have a glut, or are we comfortable with the current state? --After Midnight 0001 03:13, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category:America Online to Category:AOL

I ain't being funny or anything, but why can't bots complete this move? --Sagaciousuk (talk) 20:04, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

I didn't want the cat redirect to get moved to aol. If it won't, then have at it.  :) --Kbdank71 20:29, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Waxy Yellow Buildup

I've been cleaning up some of the old entries in Category:CfD 2006-10 ... It seems that when a bot renames a category, sometimes it makes a mistake and copies the cfr tag into the new category. Look at the history of Category:Harvard Medical School alumni for an example. The subst headers are considerably more difficult to parse.

I've gotten several warnings from AntiVandalBot, it gets annoyed by people removing cfr/cfd/cfm tags. I don't blame it, it's working as designed, we want it to consider removing these tags as vandalism. However, I've taken to putting the discussion link as a comment to the change, so that someone looking over it later can tell what was going on.

However, it's often quite difficult to find the discussion, since often there's no indication of even what day to look at. And then of course the discussion is often listed under the old name, and not the new one, or it could be part of an umbrella nomination.

I've had a few thoughts about this ... it seems to me that when a new category gets created as the result of a discussion on the cfd page, we ought to add a link to the relevent discussion on the new page. Otherwise it can be difficult to find, later.

I've created a few of these, see Category talk:Solar System, although it seems strange to see a cfdend with an outcome of rename.

I'm hoping the bot bug can be fixed soon. If they could be made to add some kind of discussion link that would help a great deal too. -- ProveIt (talk) 15:55, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Can you run your bot to ignore everything between "BEGIN CFD TEMPLATE" and "END CFD TEMPLATE" when creating the new category? As for finding the discussion, it should be fairly simple. It's linked to in the CFD template "this category's entry". And even if by mistake, the CFD stuff gets moved to the new category, the link will still point to the correct discussion. And if, for whatever reason, it's not linked right (which it should be), "What links here" will get you to the discussion. --Kbdank71 16:43, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] deletion of CFDU empty categories

There's another big backlog of categories that have been emptied on Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Working/User. Can someone delete all of them, please?--Mike Selinker 16:12, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Done. the wub "?!" 00:30, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Much obliged!--Mike Selinker 00:51, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

I just dropped another large collection of categories to be deleted in there, so if someone wants to take those out, I'd appreciate it. Also, Category:Members of the SpongeBob SquarePants Wikiproject contains a banned user whose page has been locked, so someone please fix that (or delete it).--Mike Selinker 06:00, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm on it :-) the wub "?!" 21:35, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] need a bot or two on UCFD

Over on Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Working/User, there are some categories that really need bots to handle them. AMong them are the conversion of Category:User languages to Category:Wikipedians by language, the conversion of Category:User writing systems to Category: Wikipedians by writing system, and the deletion of Category:Friendly Wikipedians and Category:Angel Wikipedians. If anyone has a bot can that can go to the working pages and take those necessary steps, I'd appreciate it.--Mike Selinker 08:06, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Is it possible to get a list of ALL category members on a single page??

My query is that when I visit a category page that contains links to hundreds of articles, such as Category:Cleanup_from_December_2006, the initial page presented only presents a subset of the total articles, with links to the "next 200" etc. This is obviously a useful feature to stop a user's browser having to try and print 10,000 articles if you are viewing a huge category. However, is it possible to override this behaviour and get a list of all articles in a category on a single page, no matter how many there are? (perhaps by sending an argument in the URL such as "&showall=true") The reason I ask is that I have a bot that needs to fetch a list of all articles in a category and it would obviously be a lot easier if it could do this from a single page. Many thanks - PocklingtonDan 17:00, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

You can use the query API to fetch a list of category members, but this is limited to the first 500. AutoWikiBrowser seems to manage with fetching larger categories though, you might want to ask on the talk page how it does it. the wub "?!" 22:58, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../c/a/t/Wikipedia_talk%7ECategories_for_discussion_Working_c918.html"