User talk:Dr pda

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive
Archives


Contents

[edit] James Planché

Great work on this article, Doc. Well done!--Eva bd 21:53, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Dr pda 05:37, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] editrefs

I take it this isn't quite done? I get a blank screen. Gimmetrow 03:20, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

It wasn't quite done when you tried it; I suspect the blank screen was from trying it on an article with no references. I've added handling for this case, plus a couple of other bug fixes, and created documentation at User talk:Dr pda/editrefs.js. Let me know if it still doesn't work. Dr pda 05:37, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
Nope, still blank, tried on a few articles. Cleared cache/reloaded too. Gimmetrow 12:27, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
Strange. Do you get any error messages, eg on the javascript error console in Mozilla, or the yellow triangle in the status bar in IE? It works for me in Mozilla 2.0.0.7 (and even 1.0.7) and IE6 under Windows XP. Maybe there's some conflict with another script you're using. Dr pda 20:38, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Yes, the error from editrefs is "dummy has no properties" (Firefox 1.5.0.10). Also, I plan to automate the heraldry portal soon. I'm going to split past selected articles into individual pages, then have code to select one in the selected article slot. I'm thinking it will go for a week. If some article warrants preempting the sequence, it can be hard-coded and left for a month. I'm not sure how to do it yet, but I was going to try to identify which selected articles are flags and COAs, so those can be rotated randomly or daily. Gimmetrow 14:23, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
That error seems to be because it can't find the <div> with id of toolbar, which I use to work out where to insert the textboxes into the page. I wonder if it has anything to do with the fact that in the source of the page the id is only single-quoted, i.e. id='toolbar' and not id="toolbar". Anyway I've changed the script to insert things before the main edit box rather than after the toolbar (which is physically the same place). Hopefully it will work for you now. Automation of the portal sounds like a good idea. Maybe at some point WP:HV could have an article improvement drive to get some more articles at GA or above. Dr pda 21:08, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Hey, there, sorry to take so long in getting back to you, been in a Wikifunk. I tested it at Sociological and cultural aspects of Tourette syndrome. It did one weird thing which I didn't save, probably can't replicate, but will try to describe. I was basically linking the dates in the ref formatting.[1] When I hit the preview button when I was done, the final ref was repeated at the top of the article, and the first sentence of the article up to the first ref was missing. In other words, somehow the last ref replaced the first part of the text, although the last ref was also still at the bottom of the article. To fix it, I edited the article in another window, grabbed the missing text, and replaced it. Sorry I can't explain better :-) Keep up the excellent effort ! I see now that I should have saved a copy of that to a sandbox so you could see what it did. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:17, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi Sandy, thanks for your message. I was able to replicate the problem :) When updating the references the script looks through the text for the old reference, chops it out and adds in the new one, however the starting point for this search was off by one character. Most of the time this wouldn't matter, but if there are two consecutive references the script couldn't find where to put the second one, so it got confused and put it at the start. I think I've fixed this now; you'll need to reload your monobook.js to pick up the changes. Dr pda 20:36, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Possible change to peer review and bot implications

Dr pda, as you may know, there's a discussion going on at Wikipedia talk:Content review/workshop about reinvigorating Peer Review. I can point you at details if you are interested, but essentially the current situation is that the group on that page would like to suggest re-engineering the PR page to sort articles by category and only show a link for each article, rather than the whole review. Allen3, who (I gather) does most or all of the PR archiving work, commented that this would not work without a bot; and a bot has been suggested as necessary for other aspects of the change. Here's a mock-up of how the peer review page might look: Wikipedia talk:Content review/workshop/Peer Review mockup.

We're proposing to put a request on WP:BOTREQ to see if someone is interested in working on this idea, but SandyGeorgia pointed out that you, Gimmetrow and Rick Block are three users who have the necessary background and might be interested in doing the work. If you are interested in finding out more about what the bot would do, and possibly implementing it, please drop a note on the workshop talk page. In any case we'd be interested in your opinion about the proposals, because of your knowledge of the system.

I'm posting this note to Gimmetrow and Rick Block, too. Thanks -- Mike Christie (talk) 04:00, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Coronation

In answer to your two points at FAR:

  • Yes, Rose specifically states "supertunica and mantle".
  • If we remove "wearing the anointing gown", it sounds as if she's naked!

I still don't believe Heads of State attend: the guest list of 1953 doesn't include any. (And yes, I know Salote of Tonga and the Arab sheikhs went, but they were all subordinate monarchs of British Protectorates). DrKiernan 09:21, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Admin?

Hi there, SandyGeorgia recommended you as somebody who might make a good admin. If you would be interested in being nominated, please drop me a note on my talk page. Tim Vickers 04:45, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New script?

I saw an edit summary that mentioned a new script? a fan of your scripts, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:42, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

You've already seen it, it's the one which I used to do the statistics for FA's, I just hadn't linked it from my user page yet :) I've also just modified it and redone the FA stats by prose size, as well. Dr pda (talk) 01:47, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Great! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:52, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Can you add to the list of the ten longest to show all above 50KB readable prose? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:57, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ahoy there - sizing up furry critter articles

Dear Dr PDA, Sandy pointed me in your direction as I was keen for a bot to do Wikipedia:WikiProject Mammals/mammal articles by size much in the same was as I got Betacommand to do Wikipedia:WikiProject Birds/bird articles by size and Wikipedia:WikiProject Fungi/fungus articles by size, but Bc is pretty busy.

It would consist of everything in Category:Mammals but excluding Category:Fictional mammals and derivatives. If you had time to set this up I'd be very appreciative :) cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:50, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Strike that. Bc has just offered and I can see you're offline for a bit. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:52, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Glad you were able to find someone else to do it. I haven't been around much because of holidays, moving house, starting a new job, and lack of internet connection at home!. Dr pda (talk) 23:17, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] (Belated) Happy New Year! spam

Here's hoping the new year brings you nothing but the best ;) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 18:11, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
The design of this almost completely impersonal (yet hopefully uplifting) message was ripped from Riana (talk · contribs).
Please feel free to archive it whenever you like.


[edit] A recognition of your excellence from the best Korean in the world

(moved to userpage)

Thanks! Dr pda (talk) 23:17, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Great saves (from Marskell)

  • We've got some issues brewing with COA images. I recall once a discussion of images from [2] but I can't find it. It may have been on commons. Do you recall this, and in any event, what can we do? Gimmetrow 00:50, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Roman Catholic Church

Hi Dr pda, SandyGeorgia directed me to your user page to obtain the readable prose template. After reading the instructions I believe that installation is beyond my technical abilities to do by myself. I am taking the chance that maybe you are possibly willing to install this on the Roman Catholic Church page so other editors and myself can keep an eye on article size which was an issue at a recent FAC failure. Thank you. NancyHeise (talk) 14:10, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

It's not installed on an article; it's installed on your monobook, which only you can edit. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:35, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Article history script

Is it possible to be able to access the script from the edit screen? It would make it easier to be able to access the data directly from the edit screen, rather than having to have it open in a separate one. Harryboyles 14:24, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I've modified the script so you can now do this. The reason you couldn't before was I had copied and pasted from another script, where it didn't make sense to use it on an edit page. Dr pda (talk) 23:17, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello. The edit references script seems not to recognize refs which contain comments, which is an issue since a bot adds a comment when it auto-generates titles. The edit refs script didn't catch a bunch of references in this version. Gimmetrow 22:56, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi Gimmetrow, the reason for this was the regexp I was using, namely using [^>] to match everything between the <ref> and </ref> tags, since using .* just matches everything to the end of the article. I can't find any clever way to modify the regexp to allow for nested comments, so I've added a hack which converts the closing --> to something else, finds the refs, then restores the closing tag. This appears to work on the article you mentioned. Dr pda (talk) 04:46, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Page Size

How do I get my page size working? I have tried ctrl-shift-R.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 20:54, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I do not see a page size link.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 21:53, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
Might my preferences be interfering. The clock has caused my peer reveiw link to disappear.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 21:54, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
Did you load the script into your monobook and refresh? Did you look in the toolbox, under the search, on the left-hand side of your screen? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:56, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Another barnstar

(moved to userpage)

[edit] Prose Size script error

When I use the script, I get "There was a problem retrieving the XML data: Forbidden". Can you fix this please? Gary King (talk) 22:42, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Dr pda. You have new messages at Gary King's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} template.

It's working fine here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:35, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] many problems with footnotes; javascript to the rescue?

  • can this & this be done? Ling.Nut (talk) 00:59, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm not entirely sure what you're wanting. Would this be for citation templates which occur in a references section, so that they could be referred to from within notes? Wouldn't that then require you to change the notes as well? In which case couldn't you just use citation plus harvnb? Or if this was for large numbers of articles maybe tweaking the cite X templates would be the way to go, as others have suggested. But in any case I don't really feel up to taking on a big scripting project at the moment. My wiki time is currently quite limited at the moment, and there's a few articles I've been meaning to work on for ages which I want to get back to. Sorry I can't be of more help. Dr pda (talk) 11:39, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Article history script

Could you please add "delist", "delisted", "delisting", etc to the list of phrases that the article script uses to detect key edits? Harryboyles 08:27, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Done. Dr pda (talk) 11:39, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Prosesize feature

Could you have this display the exact byte count rather than divide by 1024. At least for articles up to 10k, this would be helpful for WP:DYK evaluation. Gimmetrow 05:14, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Done, fields will now display in bytes if under 10kB, except for 'Wiki text' where I take the string straight from the search output. I wonder if 10kB is too high a threshold? I'll leave it there for the moment and see what experience suggests. Dr pda (talk) 10:42, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
Is there any way of having an option to display the full character count, or how about just displaying both? Oakwillow (talk) 02:17, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
(I presume this is related to the discussion at WP:SIZE) For most applications the size in kB is sufficiently precise. It would take a bit of work to have an option to show the byte count as well, and I am reluctant to just add it in addition to the kB value as it would clutter up the results (the prose size line already shows size in kB as well as word count). Plus the wiki markup size is coming from the Wikipedia search results at the moment, so is always in kB anyway, and I'd have to modify the script to take the size from somewhere else to have it in bytes. Dr pda (talk) 06:10, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
It's fine just showing kB (over 10k). I only needed the actual number for the stats, which you have thankfully provided. Oakwillow (talk) 18:07, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

At DYK, new articles must be at least 1500 characters, and old articles expanded about 5x or more (often 4x is sufficient), both based on prose including spaces between words. Since I've seen stubs in the 1500-2000 character range, I suggested 10k for precision with 5x expansions.

Also, do you have any comments on WT:HV#Animals_in_heraldry? Gimmetrow 01:55, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] User:Dr pda/Featured article statistics

I am having trouble figuring out which version of the article was used for User:Dr pda/Featured article statistics. For example, it says 27 November 2007, and you posted it at 02:02 (UTC), so it had to be from before then, but I'm having a lot of trouble with that. For example, for Chess[3] (40 kB) I get about 49 kB, and I get about 52 kB for Charles Darwin[4] (45 kB). Any suggestions? Oakwillow (talk) 02:17, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

The stats were based on the "prose size" result from the script, not the "file size" entry. The script has also changed since then and will produce slightly different values. [5] reads 43k of prose right now. Chess brings up another issue, though: div tags (apparently unclosed) as anchors interfere with the current script. Gimmetrow 02:29, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
I'm not entirely sure what they're doing with those <div> tags over at Chess, I might ask on the talk page. Dr pda (talk) 06:10, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. Well there are a hundred more to try. The version before that one for Chess was vandalized down to about 20 kB, the article was completely replaced with another article. In fact I got that version the first time I looked. 43 and 45 are not far apart from each other. I'm using a text editor and not stripping out the [num] references, so that accounts for some difference, but a 7-9 kB difference seemed excessive (200 times 5 characters = 1,000). I wasn't using file size. I don't think I took out the image captions, so that accounts for a few more bytes. I haven't been able to get much cooperation filling out the table at Wikipedia talk:Article size#Table so I have gone off in search of some articles for which I do have the character count, but as you can see I'm not having much confidence in what I'm seeing. What I am doing is sampling five articles each that have 75/70/65/60/55/50/45/40/35/30/25/20/15/10 kB characters. Oakwillow (talk) 03:21, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
The old version of the script does indeed give 40kB and 45kB. The difference with Chess probably comes from the bulleted lists, which the script skips. I'm not sure where the difference is with Darwin, as I can't see any non-prose which the script has not highlighted. I've filled out the table at Wikipedia_talk:Article_size#Table for you though. Dr pda (talk) 06:10, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Like a Rolling Stone ArticleHistory

I used the {{Template:ArticleHistory}} for Like a Rolling Stone, but it won't work. The links don't work, and the result won't show up. I'd appreciate some help. Thanks. Cheers, Kodster (heLLo) (Me did that) 18:06, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

I fixed some of the errors,[6] and left a note for Gimmetrow. I think there's been some recent fiddling for this new GA method. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:25, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Never mind; I found the remaining error, and it's all fixed now. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:33, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks Sandy! Dr pda (talk) 21:19, 10 June 2008 (UTC)