User talk:AWeenieMan/furme/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Archive 1 Archive 2 →

Contents

Article auto-fill

* The "Article" field is automatically populated if there is only one field listed in the "File links" section of the page.

This isn't working for me. I seem to recall it did on my very first use, before I switched to album fur. Maybe my memory is playing tricks on me. It certainly doesn't now. :( 19:01, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Is it not populating the article field on any images? Or is there one/a couple that it didn't work on? I quickly checked several images that you have added fair use rationales to using FURME and the article field is populating for me (using album cover fur). What browser are you using? - AWeenieMan (talk) 20:36, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Not a sausage. I'm using Firefox/2.0.0.11 on WinXP. I'll try restarting Firefox. Wwwhatsup (talk) 22:57, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Ah yes. The restart fixed it!  :) Now, if you can get it to chop out the 'disputed' tag & cat, I'll be buying the beers. Wwwhatsup (talk) 23:02, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Glad to see the article field problem resolved itself. I now have it set to remove {{Di-no source}}, {{Di-disputed fair use rationale}}, {{Di-no fair use rationale}}, and their redirects. If you come across any more templates it should remove, let me know. - AWeenieMan (talk) 03:27, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

That's great. I still have to manually remove the cat, e.g. \,[[Category:Disputed non-free images as of 2 January 2008 3]]. How about that? Wwwhatsup (talk) 13:38, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about that, I didn't realize BetacommandBot went through and manually added categories to those images (usually the category is added as part of the template). Anyhow, it should now remove categories like the one you described. Let me know if it misses any. - AWeenieMan (talk) 19:02, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
Is there anyway of getting the script to check a page for an infobox etc after entering an article name in the field? I mean, if an image is used on more than one article, then I could add a FUR for one of these by either selecting it in a dropdown box or by typing it in - the script would then have a look at that page to get any fields it can for the rest of the FUR. (If you see what I mean..) Nanonic (talk) 08:12, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Interesting idea. This may in fact be possible, but will take a little work. Consider it on the todo list. - AWeenieMan (talk) 06:24, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Y Done Just type an article name in the box and hit the refresh icon and it should pull up info from that article. Let me know if this is not working as expected. - AWeenieMan (talk) 00:25, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
That works great thanks! And as the bot's doing another run, great timing! Nanonic (talk) 06:48, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

2008-01-22: Update

I made a fairly major update to the code. It now attempts to fill in more information if the image is only used in one article.

Please note that I tested this quite a bit on logos, but a lot less on album covers. Please let me know if you find any bugs or have any suggestions. - AWeenieMan (talk) 01:59, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

The infobox check/artist insertion is wonderful. Thanks for that! Wwwhatsup (talk) 01:11, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you!

I'm installing this right now -- I run across too many situations where I could use it. :-)--uɐɔlnʌɟoʞǝɹɐs 19:47, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Awesome tool

Great tool, but are there ay other auto-situations, other than logo and albums that can be templated? MBisanz talk 00:42, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

For instance Template:Historic fur? Wwwhatsup (talk) 01:10, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Basically this Category:Non-free use rationale templates whole list of top level FUR templates. MBisanz talk 03:24, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

I added {{Historic fur}}. The reason it wasn't added originally is that it didn't support named template parameters, it is not widely used, and it kind of looks...unfinished? For example, it only has two parameters (article and source) implemented, with no way to overwrite any of the other fields. I edited the template so that it supports named parameters, which means I could very easily add it into FurMe. So, now you have that as an option.

What I want to add is {{Book cover fur}}, but it says it is in development. Maybe I will leave wikidemo a message and see what is up.

I will take a look at Category:Non-free use rationale templates to see what else works. - AWeenieMan (talk) 03:30, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Just an FYI that some licenses like Template:Non-free_symbol include external links in the template text, so there would need to be some sort of screener to not include those as potential source sites. MBisanz talk 03:37, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Good point. I added a fix to ignore external links inside the "imageLicense" div. I believe that most (all?) license tags should be built that way. If not, it will still count the links. So, if you notice such a license template, let me know and I will take a look. - AWeenieMan (talk) 04:12, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Scroller

Can we have a bit more documentation? It says it's an 'add-on' - it's not clear that it's included and can be activated by just adding the option parameter (assuming that's the case). Plus a couple more lines about how it works. I've installed it and am waiting to see it kick in. Wwwhatsup (talk) 01:28, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I got lazy and didn't actually describe it in any detail. Basically, it's an 'add-on' because it is useless by itself (as in if you only included it in your monobook.js file, it wouldn't really do much, because it is integrated with the FurMe script.
It needs to be installed separately (I could have done this differently, but given that most people will not use it, it seemed silly to roll it into the basic FurMe script). To install it, you need to add this line to your your monobook.js file:
importScript('User:AWeenieMan/furmeScroller.js');
In a nutshell, all it does is allow you to go through large lists of images fairly quickly. The lists are at User:AWeenieMan/furme#Image_lists_for_FurMeScroller. Really, the only thing special about these lists are the fact that they have a special span with an id that the script replaces with a link to start up the scroller (this seemed better than placing another tab or something, because it really is only useful on a properly formatted list). By default, the scroller will choose 10 images (at random) from the list and show you the first one (and open the fur window). You do what you normally do (enter in info, etc, etc) and hit the submit query button. When you save the changes, the scroller moves you to the next image automatically. The scroller script will also add a new button into the fur window so that you can skip an image and just move on.
Now, this isn't the most useful for everyone. But, take for example album covers. The majority of album covers that are used on only one page are used in infoboxes. So, if you use that list, and run FurMe scroller and just want to knock off all the "easy ones" (i.e. album covers used in the infobox about the album), you can go through pretty darn fast and just skip over the ones that might need further review.
Here's the downside (right now). I have to manually run the lists (I have a script that does it, but it takes several minutes to run). I am going to put in a request to get toolserver access, then I can rig something so that the lists can be updated not only quicker, but also immediately at anyone's request (like at the click of a button).
On a technical note, the script sets two cookies that expire when your browser is closed (and are overwritten if you restart the scroller).
Some known bugs/quirks:
  • The scroller commandeers the image namespace. Until you finish scrolling (i.e. go through the number of images you set it for), you cannot visit anything in the image namespace without the scroller taking over (article namespace is completely unaffected). Basically, I just need to put in code to invalidate the cookie upon request. In the meantime, you can 1) finish scrolling, 2) clear the cookie, or 3) close the browser. I will have this fixed in short order.
  • The scroller is only as good as the lists are accurate/updated. So, I'll have to see about making them auto-updated.
  • It is not smart enough yet to say, for example, that you started on the album lists, so check off album cover by default. I am working on that also.
I hope that sheds some light on its purpose. If not, let me know. And as always, let me know if you find any bugs or have any suggestions. - AWeenieMan (talk) 02:26, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. I'll give it a shot. It would be helpful if furme would always check album cover if the image is so defined. Wwwhatsup (talk) 03:08, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
  • My furme is set to 'preview'. I'd like the option to preview in the scroller. Maybe a second button? Or would that break the script?
  • A couple of times it seemed to drop the article name. Can't repeat the error.
  • Edits don't show up on my watchlist so I can't go back and check them easily.
  • Brought up one I'd already done. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wwwhatsup (talk • contribs) 04:20, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Wwwhatsup (talk) 03:42, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

A few comments and questions:

  • My furme is set to 'preview'.
Stupid mistake on my part. Was it just going to the next image every time it should have been previewing? If so, that problem should be fixed. FurMeScroller should be using the same settings as FurMe does for that part (if you are curious, the reason the preview wasn't working was because it didn't know the difference between preview and view mode).
  • A couple of times it seemed to drop the article name
This is more than likely a regex problem. If you can find a page it is repeatable on, I can probably narrow down exactly what is up with it.
  • Edits don't show up on my watchlist
FurMe doesn't have an option to have things show up on your watchlist after editing them (I can add that option if you would like).
Option added (it was easy to do). - AWeenieMan (talk) 05:29, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Brought up one I'd already done.
Did it do this during one run? Or did you run the scroller, then run it again? If the former, it's a bug I need to track down in the random unique choice algorithm. If it's the latter, it's a problem that cannot readily be fixed (without some giant cookies) and is why the list needs to be updated often (because you might also get some that other people have already done to). So let me know if this happened during one run or what.
On a subsequent run. Surely it could check for an existing fair use template? Also how about tagging the images that one skips? Wwwhatsup (talk) 07:13, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Well, I am not convinced about checking for a fair use template (as I often come across images that have a template but still are up for deletion, so they still need to be fixed), but checking for a deletion template might work. I am not entirely sure I can reliably check for all deletion templates (keep in mind that at the stage I need to check for a template, I am looking at html, and not a template declaration). Anyhow, I have implemented such a check that seems effective. I will roll it out in the next update (which will be fairly major code change, so I haven't updated the wiki code yet, stay tuned). What do you mean about tagging images that you skipped? - AWeenieMan (talk) 23:24, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. - AWeenieMan (talk) 04:33, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! Wwwhatsup (talk) 07:13, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Non-qualifiers

I understand that the purpose of furme is to clear through trivial examples at speed, but it would be nice to have some functionality to deal with images that appear not to qualify, perhaps with a choice of suitable tags including Ifd. For example Image:Tbc.jpg where the album reference appears to be totally spurious, or when covers are used in (the now non-kosher) galleries, Wwwhatsup (talk) 07:48, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

I am not completely understanding what you want here. What I normally do when I run across an image like Image:Tbc.jpg is I open the article and delete the image. You then have the option of tagging it as orphaned (or letting a bot do it for you). There would be some debate on whether removing the existing deletion tag is appropriate, because both problems would need to be fixed for the image to remain. However, by orphaning the image, on the next run through when I update the lists, that image will only appear on the list of all album covers (regardless of whether or not you put an orphaned tag on it), and not any of the usage lists (which are much better to go through anyway, in my opinion). And there doesn't seem to be any delay in deleting orphaned images, just disputed fair use ones.
As for the galleries, I find it best to wipe those out manually and orphan those images too. I know, this makes me look bad sometimes, but otherwise what happens is a bot goes though and removes images from discography galleries so the discography is no longer complete (often times when I get to such a gallery, I find several images have already been deleted).
Now, if you want deletion tag functionality, that is built into TWINKLE already. Here are the two relevant scripts. The first one does pseudo-speedy deletion image tagging (such as orphaned fair use image) and the latter does anything for deletion tagging (such as ifd).
importScript('User:AzaToth/twinkleimage.js');
importScript('User:AzaToth/twinklexfd.js');
Hope that makes sense. If there is anything specific that you would like to see added, let me know, as I am not sure I completely understood your request. - AWeenieMan (talk) 19:18, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
So you are saying - delete the image from the article, hit skip in furme, and let nature take it's course. In the particular case of Image:Tbc.jpg where the image is seemingly improperly tagged I'd want the option to hit a button that would edit the bad tag out of the image description and also add a <tag needed> template (I've seen that around but can't find it offhand). Maybe just a 'none' option in the top choices that would open the preview for editing could do it. I have to familiarize myself more with Twinkle image capabilities. It would be good to be able to switch on an option that, in album cover scenario, automatically opens the article if no infobox is found. Wwwhatsup (talk) 01:50, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
More or less, yes. Though I might be taking back what I said about letting a bot do the orphan tagging for you. There are a handful of bots approved to do this (User:Roomba, User:Fritzbot, User:BJBot, and possibly more), but I see none actively doing it. So, it might be better to manually do it. As for image tagging, the TWINKLE "di" menu has the tag I think you would be looking for {{di-no license}} (it also has the {{di-orphaned fair use}} template too). Unfortunately, the behavior of TWINKLE is to just apply the tag (not show you a preview or give you a chance to do something more). So, in the scenario we are talking about, you would be stuck doing two edits (one to remove the license, and one to tag it). I will have to think about the best way to solve this, because adding a 'none' option might not be best (you can accomplish the same thing by just hitting the edit tab). I am thinking it might be best to add different functionality to the fur tab in the edit mode (could simply be things like remove the current license, add a disputed fair use tag, etc).
As for opening an article when the image is only used in one article but not in the infobox, I added that functionality in the latest update. Let me know how it works for you. - AWeenieMan (talk) 05:57, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

2008-01-31: Update

I made some fairly major changes to the code. This was necessary in order to get FurMe to default to the correct FUR (i.e. album cover, logo, etc). Basically, a synchronous http request had to be put into the code to get all the initial values (album name, artist, etc) before FurMe really loads its window (this might not have been necessary, but it was easier than taring apart the morebits.js library to find a better way). Anyhow, I have tested this fairly extensively and everything seems to be working. If not, let me know.

Changes made in this (and the previous minor updates):

  • FurMe
    • Knows to default to album cover when the album cover license is used
    • Knows to default to logo when the logo license is used
    • Option to watch all the pages you edit
    • Option to open an article page when image used in only one article, but not in the infobox
    • Support for {{Historic fur}}
    • Ignores external links in license tags when looking for the source
    • Will remove anything in <small></small> tags in the label name (for album cover fur)
    • Will replace <br /> with " / " in the label name (for album cover fur)
  • FurMeScroller
    • Button to stop scrolling
    • Option to skip images that have no deletion tag

Let me know of any bugs. - AWeenieMan (talk) 05:37, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Seems to work well. Love the article page opening! Now what's needed is a widget to remove non-infobox images - say, replace them with <!--unacceptably used non-free image removed -->, and enter non-free Discography/Gallery images removed per WP:NFC#Images_2 in the edit summary, and then bang through to preview/diff.. Wwwhatsup (talk) 06:25, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Well, on second thoughts, maybe we only want to remove the image we're actually dealing with - let's not make any assumption about the rest. Wwwhatsup (talk) 06:42, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
This poses some challenges. For example, a lot of discographies are image galleries (using captions for titles and years, etc). When bots go and remove these images, the captions go also, leaving an incomplete discography. That is one of the drawbacks of having bots remove deleted images. So, I would not want to write a script that did the same thing. To get around this, I could replace the image with Image:Pixel.gif. Of course then you have a pile of embedded pixels that don't really need to be there (although visually it won't matter). I also believe in removing the entire discography, personally. Otherwise, we're are going to end up having to revisit the same article every time Betacommandbot tags another load. So, I think it's easier in the long run to fix them all at once.
So, given the various ways people use the images and the inevitable refactoring of information necessary to convert a gallery discography into a list or table, etc, I am not sure this is something I could get working well as a userscript. - AWeenieMan (talk) 00:39, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
I wasn't suggesting it be automatic, but if, say, when the article auto-opens a new script could be invoked which would give the opportunity delete unacceptably used image? that would be great, one could add options to replace with comment or image and even make a few unacceptably used non-free image type svg's including album covers etc that could be chosen. There already exists one for infoboxes I believe. Wwwhatsup (talk) 12:37, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Okay, I put together a little something. I could not find any good unacceptably used non-free image images accept for one that is catered towards userspace (Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg). Although, I am not sure putting a pile of placeholders that should never be filled is a great idea anyway (if one was to do that, I would think Image:Pixel.gif would be the best to use). Anyhow, there are a few configuration options, and it would be trivial to replace with any other image you want (just let me know). I did some testing, but I wouldn't be surprised if something funny happens on an odd article setup, so let me know. Any suggestions are welcome. - AWeenieMan (talk) 05:36, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm snowed under with video-editing. I'll try to take it out for a run in the next day or two. Sorry about your football team btw. Wwwhatsup (talk) 05:41, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I like the shortened edit summary. However the FUR link goes to a freshly deleted page. Wwwhatsup (talk) 07:52, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
I've contacted the deleting admin, it looks like it violated our rule against the mainspace redirecting to a non-mainspace. Hopefully an exception can be made in this case and AWM can reprogram FURME to point directly to the helpspace in the future. MBisanz talk 08:37, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
I've an idea WP:FURG might suffice. Wwwhatsup (talk) 09:43, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm having no joy with replacing the unacceptable image with the svg - when I click it thru it just leaves the pic there. I find the the easiest solution is to just reformat the entire gallery into a bulleted list.. Wwwhatsup (talk) 09:47, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Firstly, I have changed the link t point to WP:FURG. Hopefully that will avoid any future deletion issues. Also, I did find a bug in my code where images using underscores and not spaces were not replaced and another one having to do with the wiki escaping some characters when I didn't think it would, perhaps that was your issue? Although I agree that making a bulleted list is probably best, if you can give me any sample articles where it is not working, I can work out the bugs. - AWeenieMan (talk) 00:33, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Web sources

Is it possible for FURME to pick up URLs that aren't hyperlinked, ie. those that are in the form www.website.com instead of http://www.website.com ? MBisanz talk 05:57, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Y Done I put in a few fallbacks for the url finder. First it looks for external links. If it doesn't find one of those, then it looks for www.example.(com|gov|edu|cc|org|net|co.uk|eu|cn|tv|fm). If it doesn't find one of those, then it looks for example.(com|gov|edu|cc|org|net|co.uk|eu|cn|tv|fm). I can make the TLD list whatever you want, but I think that will cover most of them. I am not 100% sure the regular expressions to detect the links are perfect (it's hard because it is going through the html source of the page, not what the uploader typed). So, give it a go, and if you find any pages that it doesn't detect correctly, let me know. - AWeenieMan (talk) 02:36, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Minor incompatibility

Great thanks for this tool. I would like to point out however, it does not work when wikEd is enabled in Preferences. -- RoninBK T C 03:54, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I have added compatibility for wikEd into my development version. Because adding such support affects the manner in which FurMe is loaded, I won't be making those changes live until I am confident it is not going to produce any adverse effects on those not using wikEd. Thanks for letting me know of the issue. - AWeenieMan (talk) 01:31, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Y Done - AWeenieMan (talk) 01:39, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Too many tabs?

I have had Twinkle enabled in my preferences, and Friendly and FurMe installed and working well. Now I am an admin with a bunch of shiny new tabs and the Fur tab is gone. If I remove Friendly, the Fur tab reappears. Any ideas? --— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 13:41, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Interesting. I have Friendly and Twinkle installed (and so do many other users) and don't seem to have any problems (although I am not an admin), so I don't think it is a compatibility issue (but who knows). A couple questions:
  1. Could you check the error console to see if there are any javascript errors
  2. Could you try installing FurMeScroller and then see if it still works (when the fur tab does not display). This way I know FurMe works, and it is just a tab problem.
  3. Does it look like there isn't enough room for another tab on your monitor?
The next version (do out shortly) will provide you with the option to move the FurMe link (it can be as a tab, in your toolbox, in your personal links, or in the file table of contents), which may solve your problem. But I would still like to eliminate the possibility of a bug. Congrats on the adminship. - AWeenieMan (talk) 16:25, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Looking at Image:Zeit.png with Twinkle and FurMe; I get:

Image, Discussion, Edit this page, History, Delete, Protect, Unwatch, CSD, Last, Pp, Xfd, Di, Unlink, Deli, P-batch, Fur. At P-batch, it starts going off of the WP screen, past the right edge of the [edit] links.

And now I reinstall Friendly and purge and I get the same thing. The darn thing is working now. Go figure. --— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 16:56, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, the order of the tabs in large part depends on the order in which each script loads (it is possible to specify, but that is not done in either FurMe or Twinkle, as far as I know). So, for example, you have your Twinkle tabs first and I have them last (probably because you have Twinkle installed as a gadget and I have it in my monobook.js file). Anyhow, glad to see things are working now. If you run into any more trouble, let me know. - AWeenieMan (talk) 17:13, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Hmmm... I had Friendly installed in my monobook.js, but then I enabled it as a gadget. --— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 17:24, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

2008-03-11: Update

Please note that I made a few fairly major additions to the code. If you experience any problems, please let me know I will revert to an older version while things are figured out.

Change notes:

  • Should work with wikEd now
  • Cleans amazon.com URLs of extraneous parameters (configurable)
  • Window height configuration
  • FurMe link location configuration (in case you dislike the tab)
  • Some regex tweaks to make it work in Opera

Let me know of any bugs or issues. - AWeenieMan (talk) 01:36, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

I tried FURme scroller today for the first time. Here's some stuff I've got to say:
  • Bug: A couple of times, when the next image loaded, the FURme interface was present, but the buttons "skip image" and "stop FURme scroller" buttons were missing.
  • Feature request: I'd love to be able to add {{non-free reduce}} by checking a check box, below the "tag for renaming", and "Scanned by uploader"
  • Feature request: If the image is used in one article, that article is opened in a new tab/window. But with images used in two or more articles, the articles don't open in a new tab/window/whatever. This would actually be very useful, can we get it as a configuratible option?
  • Feature request This one isn't just for the scroller, it's for FURme in general. Could we get the fill in form to be moveable? It's hard to word it clearly here's another attempt: Twinkle's blueish window can be moved around your browser window so you can look at the stuff that would otherwise be obstructed with it. This would be an awesome feature.
Overall, I love it! With the Wikimedia dead-line for non-free images approaching, I'm really glad to have this tool so I can help. Puchiko (Talk-email) 20:56, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Response:

  1. That certainly is a bug. Can you let me know your browser and operating system so I can try and reproduce it.
  2. That will be trivial to do. I will add it when I have a chance. Y Done in development version
  3. So, you want an option to open all articles that the image is used in? Just to make sure I am understanding you. Y Done in development version
  4. FurMe uses the same popup generating code that Twinkle does, and can be moved around by clicking on the title bar and moving (just like Twinkle). If it doesn't do this for you, I can try to pinpoint why, but it is possible that it is a bug in morebits, which is out of my hands.

Thanks for the feedback. - AWeenieMan (talk) 23:05, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Regarding #4: I see that as well. I run FireFox 2 and have my screen at 1024 x 768. The FurMe screen will not move and the close [X] is above the top of the window; the only way to close it is to close the tab or submit. If I reduce my window site, then the submit button is inaccessible. If you start adding options that make the FurMe popup longer, then submit will be totally off. You can't move it because the title bar is off. If you are running a larger screen, then you may not see the issue. --— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 01:29, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Yes, that is a known quirk and there is not much that I can do about it (people keep asking me to add things). As a workaround, I implemented a configuration option to set the window height. See here. Note that the largest FurMe window is the generic {{non-free use rationale}}. So, you might not even notice any downside to shrinking the window height a little depending on what option you select. - AWeenieMan (talk) 03:01, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
I set my window height a bit smaller. Not only can I move the window around, but bug 1 disappeared. The buttons must have been there all along, I just couldn't see them. I still don't get why they sometimes displayed and sometimes not, but oh well.
Thanks for adding the {{non-free reduce}} thingy, I'll use that a lot when it's introduced into the live script.
Regarding no.3, yeah. I'd like it to open all the articles that the image is used in. Puchiko (Talk-email) 15:10, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Ditto. Changing windowHeight to 560 brings the title bar down to were I can move or close it. --— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 17:06, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Glad to see that worked for you folks. - AWeenieMan (talk) 03:44, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

2008-03-26: Update

This update rolls in some of the feature requests received since the last update.

  • Checkbox to add {{non-free reduce}} to image
  • Option to open all articles (max 10) in which the image is used (only works with certain openArticleMode parameters)
  • New openArticleMode option to allow the browser to handle the opening a new window however it wants
  • New option to add an extra tab/link to remove non-free use templates from free logos and replace them with {{Trademark}} and {{PD-textlogo}}
  • Bug fix: cleaning Amazon URLs should work now

As always, let me know if you have any issues. - AWeenieMan (talk) 21:48, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the update, works great. I was stupid not to see this sooner. But when replacing the non-free use template with {{PD-textlogo}}, it should include another trademark tag (didn't know it existed) and look like this in the edit window.
{{Trademark}}
{{PD-textlogo}}

Really sweet script! MBisanz talk 22:10, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Y Done - AWeenieMan (talk) 23:23, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, this is really an awesome script. MBisanz talk 03:07, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Template moved

I moved:

Warning Be advised that you take full responsibility for any action performed using FurMe. You must understand Wikipedia policies and use this tool within these policies, or risk being blocked.

...to talk. I understand that you worry that people will screw up furme, and this is your own user space, but aren't you discouraging suggestions, updates, and improvements with such a nasty template? I just wanted you to consider this before you return this template to the main page. Keep in mind, as you know is very easy to revert peoples mistakes and edits, as you will probably do. Trav (talk) 01:04, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

This is a fairly standard warning, use on similar tools. I don't see it as "nasty" or deriding, just a warning that you can really screw things up by using this tool. --— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 01:18, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
The warning is simply there because FurMe is a fairly powerful tool. It allows you to quickly add fair use rationales to a large number of pages (and using it inappropriately basically renders the image bots useless in finding images that do not meet policy). The warning has nothing to do with people screwing up the script, but with people using the script without knowing the relevant policies. Perhaps the language is a bit strong, if you want to propose some toned down language, I am all ears. Gadget850 is right, however, in that the template was borrowed directly from TWINKLE (also appears on FRIENDLY).
As for suggestions and updates, I think if you look through this talk page and my own talk page, you will find that I am very open to suggestions. Actually, the whole script came at the suggestion of another user. - AWeenieMan (talk) 00:47, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
I agree with this, and since it appears Travb misinterpreted the use of the warning, I have restored it to the page. It is important to warn people not to misuse such powerful scripts. the wub "?!" 21:49, 15 April 2008 (UTC)