Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation/Helper script/Archive 2: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
ClueBot III (talk | contribs) m Archiving 1 discussion from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation/Helper script. (BOT) |
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12) |
||
| (6 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
Line 44:
== Bug? ==
I started using AFCH a few days ago, without adding myself to the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Participants|participants list]]. Then today a message appeared in the top right corner saying that I couldn't use the tool because I wasn't on the list. I've joined now, but is this a bug letting non-participants use AFCH? --[[User:AmaryllisGardener|<
:The whitelist feature was only turned on in the last few days. Before then, anyone could use the tool without adding themselves to the participants list. [[User:davidwr|davidwr]]/<small><small>([[User_talk:davidwr|talk]])/([[Special:Contributions/Davidwr|contribs]])</small></small> 20:56, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
== Review tab on userpages and other pages not pending submission ==
Recently, I've been seeing the review tab on user pages and other pages outside of the article namespace that are not pending AfC submission, or are eligible for G13 deletion. What's going on? [[User:HMSSolent|<
== "Accept" is not working ==
Line 103:
== Point at which script decides to add tags, and whitespace issues ==
When accepting an article I've had an issue a couple of times when the script executes its cleanup edit. The script seems to be fond of leaving large gaps at the top of accepted articles and removing blank lines ''before'' a section header, but insisting on inserting a blank line ''after'' a section header. If anything, it should surely be the opposite? See [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vikas_Joshi&diff=prev&oldid=612769405] also the script added a linkrot tag based on the presence of a single bare URL ref. Can this be watered-down so that it only adds tags to articles with multiple bare URLs -- at least two perhaps? [[User:Bellerophon|<span style="font:small-caps 1.0em Alexandria,serif;color=#00008B;">'''Bellerophon'''
* {{U|Theopolisme}}, the space below instead of above the header thing has been an annoyance to me as well. That should certainly be reversed. The large gaps at the top of the article, I'm assuming, has to do with incomplete cleaning of the submission template space (yet another reason this stuff should be moved to the separate /editnotice page and included via a guided tour (JavaScript)), which I'm sure is usually caused by malformed submission templates, comments, or some other intervening factor which would be very difficult for the script's cleanup code to detect and fix. I personally like the adding of linkrot tags even if only one bare URL exists, although I wouldn't be opposed if it ran the citation expander and reflinks in seperate tabs to try and fix the issues before doing so, if that is possible. I'd think it is, although it would slow processing down some, not sure if that is worth the trade-off. Perhaps there needs to be a community discussion about whether or not this should be done? Actually, if it adds the tags and then runs those tools in separate tabs, those tools should remove the tags if it fixes the issue I think, so it wouldn't slow anything down... Hrmmm.. Sorry about the thinking out loud... — <span class="nowrap">{{U|[[User:Technical 13|Technical 13]]}} <sup>([[Special:EmailUser/Technical 13|e]] • [[User talk:Technical 13|t]] • [[Special:Contribs/Technical 13|c]])</sup></span> 14:50, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
== URLs to wikilinks not working properly ==
Line 208:
== Notification ==
I keep getting the notification that AFCH can't be loaded...I don't find it in my subpages. <span style="background:silver;font-family:Kristen ITC;">[[User:CTF83!|<
== [0.9] Feedback about Chrome ==
Line 249:
== WikiProjects ==
I'm not entirely sure where to go with this, and it might not be a helperscript function, but sometimes it won't let me add a valid WikiProject. For instance, I want to add [[WP:WikiProject Classical music]], which I know to be a valid Project, but helperscript is not recognizing it. Not a big deal, I can add it manually later, but I am curious as to where the disconnect is. Thanks! [[User:78.26|<span style="border:1px solid black;color:red; padding:1px;background:1h5h1h"><
:Just came here to post the exact same thing about [[WP:WikiProject Military history]]; I run across articles that need this all the time, but it doesn't pop up into the box. [[User:MatthewVanitas|MatthewVanitas]] ([[User talk:MatthewVanitas|talk]]) 22:24, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
Line 622:
I noticed in [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Kris_Kidd&diff=next&oldid=796595420 this edit] that my comments edit clobbered some recent (2 to 5 minutes earlier) edits by the submitter. This doesn't seem right. Can the addition of comments or a review be made more atomic (or if not atomic, at least confined to a few seconds)? Or am I doing something wrong? [[User:jmcgnh|<b><span style="color:#248F7D">— jmcgnh</span></b>]]<sup><small><b>[[User_talk:jmcgnh|<span style="color:#58D582">(talk)</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/jmcgnh|<span style="color:#8F7D24">(contribs)</span>]]</b></small></sup> 04:40, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
::Bear in mind the script takes the version of the page you last loaded as current. Example, you load the page wait 10 minutes and fire up the script, which is working on how the page was 10 minutes ago, if you spend 5 minutes writing your comment, that comment will be inserted on the version from 15 minutes ago. A workaround is too refresh the page before commenting (after reading it) and to spend a limited amount of time actually writing your comments. I hope this makes sense, I would test it further but I don't have access right now. --- <
:::A recent change I made to the script might stop this behavior, because I figured it was causing more confusion than it was worth. [[User:Enterprisey|Enterprisey]] ([[User talk:Enterprisey|talk!]]) 03:02, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
== Small mistake in link for random afc submission ==
Line 634:
:My guess would be either ST closed the page before the script was done editing, or there was a script error client-side, because I see nothing strange as far as the code on the page goes. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 15:15, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
::OK, '' —'' [[User:Ammarpad|Ammarpad]] ([[User talk:Ammarpad|talk]]) 05:03, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
== script complaining im not listed ==
the script keeps saying that im not listed at participants (which I am, i checked.), and won't run. -- [[user:aunva6|Aunva6]]<sup>[[user talk:aunva6|talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Aunva6|contribs]]</sup> 17:39, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
:Another capitalization issue. {{ping|Primefac}} just need to change the capitalization to Aunva6 not aunva6. [[User:Galobtter|Galobtter]] ([[User talk:Galobtter|pingó mió]]) 17:55, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
::{{u|Aunva6}}, I take it that you're interested in becoming active again? [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 18:23, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
:::yes. i actually tracked down the bit of code that's causing it, as the script is case sensitive. probably easier to use an editnotice or hat to tell adding admins to ensure capitalization is correct. -- [[user:aunva6|Aunva6]]<sup>[[user talk:aunva6|talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Aunva6|contribs]]</sup> 18:31, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
::::Since that's "me", I will make a note (and I've already fixed a few others on the list). [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 18:32, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
== Categories ==
Apparently, the "Add categories" box now only lists categories that are already listed in the draft. For example, for [[Draft:Avant Festival]], only 4 categories are allowed in the categories box and any other category name will just display "No results match Foo" regardless of whether the categories actually exist or not. Is there a recent change somewhere in the code that causes this to occur? Is this intentional, or is this a bug that should be reverted? [[User:PrimeHunter|PrimeHunter]] suggested at [[WP:VPT#Categories in AFC script]] that I should post the problem here instead of there. [[User:GeoffreyT2000|GeoffreyT2000]] ([[User talk:GeoffreyT2000|talk]]) 19:32, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
:This doesn't sound like a script issue, but a lookup issue (I don't think AFCH has even been updated in the last day or so). {{u|Enterprisey}}? [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 13:47, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
:Similar for me too.. [[User:Galobtter|Galobtter]] ([[User talk:Galobtter|pingó mió]]) 18:06, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
:Reproduced and investigating. I'm not sure what's causing this right now, but I should have it figured out soonish. [[User:Enterprisey|Enterprisey]] ([[User talk:Enterprisey|talk!]]) 21:51, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
::Alright, should be fixed. Let me know if there are further issues. [[User:Enterprisey|Enterprisey]] ([[User talk:Enterprisey|talk!]]) 23:04, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
== Option for reviewer note upon acceptance? ==
There's been a few times where there's a passable draft but there are some next steps I'd like to provide the author to improve the article further. This can be done by the talk page, but it would be super cool if there was a "reviewer note" field to easily provide article feedback before pressing "accept & publish". – by [[user talk:Anne drew Andrew and Drew|<span class="nobreak">AdA&D</span>]] at 02:17, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
:Where would the feedback go? I guess the article talk page, and the talk page of the creator? [[User:Enterprisey|Enterprisey]] ([[User talk:Enterprisey|talk!]]) 03:20, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
::I would think on the Talk page. There have been a couple of instances myself where I've been on the fence, and wanted to leave further notes on the talk page (usually saying "I'm okay with AFD for this one"). Obviously there are those will find it useful, but it also becomes a question of effort-to-return; is it easier for the devs to implement this extra suggestion, or easier for the reviewer to just go to the talk page? As I'm not one of them I cannot say which holds more sway. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 14:18, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
::::I'd also find it reasonably useful; yeah to say when I'm 50-50 on something or something like that. [[User:Galobtter|Galobtter]] ([[User talk:Galobtter|pingó mió]]) 03:13, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
:::::A talk page note would be pretty easy. I'm busy right now getting stuff together for Wikipedia Day, but after that I should be free to get this done. [[User:Enterprisey|Enterprisey]] ([[User talk:Enterprisey|talk!]]) 23:21, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
::::::Thanks! [[User:Galobtter|Galobtter]] ([[User talk:Galobtter|pingó mió]]) 05:07, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
== Addition of CSD ==
Similar to the 'cv - Submission is a copyright violation' dropdown selection, where there is a checkbox for 'Nominate the submission for speedy deletion', could there be the same checkbox for 'adv - submission reads like an advertisement'. I've lost count the number of times I've has to also nominate the submission for deletion. Thank you [[User:David.moreno72|<span style="font-family:verdana;color:#ffff00;background:#0040ff">David.<span style="background: #0033cc">moreno<span style="background:#002080">72</span></span></span>]] 06:02, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
:Completely Support. It would be a very valuable addition. [[User:KJP1|KJP1]] ([[User talk:KJP1|talk]]) 16:00, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
::Just for clarity - this would be a nomination as G11, yes? [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 17:07, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
:::Yes, a G11 nomination. [[User:David.moreno72|<span style="font-family:verdana;color:#ffff00;background:#0040ff">David.<span style="background: #0033cc">moreno<span style="background:#002080">72</span></span></span>]] 01:34, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
== Talk page headers ==
Would it be possible for the script to automatically add the <nowiki>{{talk header}}</nowiki> when a draft is accepted?[[User:SeraphWiki|SeraphWiki]] ([[User talk:SeraphWiki|talk]]) 08:55, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
== Teahouse invitation wording ==
The Teahouse invitation that the tool adds begins "Hello! User, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing." That looks odd – and a bit sarcastic – when it comes from the same person who declined the article. Could we change that to something like "Hello User! I know that having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing."? [[User:Mortee|Mortee]] ([[User talk:Mortee|talk]]) 02:47, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
:Definitely better.. [[User:Galobtter|Galobtter]] ([[User talk:Galobtter|pingó mió]]) 05:22, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
::{{done}}. I removed the "I know that" part, since it also sounds a bit condescending. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 14:08, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
:::Very good point. Thank you for making the change. [[User:Mortee|Mortee]] ([[User talk:Mortee|talk]]) 16:58, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
== Checkbox to clear not appearing ==
Reporting [[Draft:Katharine von Bora]] as a copyvio ([https://tools.wmflabs.org/copyvios/?lang=en&project=wikipedia&oldid=821459748&action=compare&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.geni.com%2Fpeople%2FKatharina-von-Bora%2F6000000002561935125 Earwig report]), I see [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Reviewing_instructions#Step_1:_Quick-fail_criteria the instructions] say "ensure you select the checkbox to blank the submission using {{tl|afc cleared}}", but I don't see that as a checkbox (Chrome, v. 63.0.3239.84, Windows 7). I did check the CSD checkbox that appeared. I've since deleted the contents of the page and added that template manually. Would the checkbox have done anything else that I should do manually?
The instructions for negative unsourced BLPs mentions a similar checkbox that I also don't see if I try selecting that option. [[User:Mortee|Mortee]] ([[User talk:Mortee|talk]]) 00:17, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
:Actually in this case I think Earwig may be confused; it strips off the "Draft:" and compares the existing Wikipedia page, which I hadn't yet seen, to Geni.com, which is presumably mirroring us. I'll sort out the mess I made, but I'd still like to understand what I should do about the hidden checkboxes. [[User:Mortee|Mortee]] ([[User talk:Mortee|talk]]) 00:23, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
:: Good grief. No, just my pure idiocy. The existing article is [[Katharina von Bora]], not [[Katharine von Bora]], and they're about different things. Backing away from the whole topic before I break anything else. [[User:Mortee|Mortee]] ([[User talk:Mortee|talk]]) 00:30, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
:::I'm... glad you sorted that out? To answer your original question, the reason why the check box does not appear for copyvios any more is by my request - if you blank a copyvio draft then I (or any other admins addressing the G12 issue) have to go and find the older version of the page to run the copyvios report and I got tired of doing that. I'll update the instructions accordingly. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 13:21, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
== Blank Submission ==
One of the reasons that a reviewer can check for a decline is that the submission is blank. We need that. However, the text that is provided then isn't really appropriate to the cases where we get blank submissions. The text says that we do not accept blank submissions, and that the user should go to [[WP:RA|Requested Articles]]. That seems to be oriented to a case where the editor has provided a title, but nothing else, such as [[James Z. Smith]]. I don't see that at AFC (a title and a blank page). What I do sometimes see is a completely blank page, in the sandbox, with no title, but that has been submitted. In this case, I don't think that the editor is requesting an article. I think that the editor is trying to do something, and we don't know what the editor is trying to do, or may just be playing. I have said that the submission has no content, and that if they are trying to create a draft, they may want to ask for help at [[WP:THQ|the Teahouse]]. However, I don't see the situation where a blank submission has a title, and so can be viewed as an article request. Thoughts? [[User:Robert McClenon|Robert McClenon]] ([[User talk:Robert McClenon|talk]]) 16:27, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
:For reference, the text of the |blank| decline is:
:{{talk quote|We're sorry, but we cannot accept blank submissions. Please consider submitting to [[Wikipedia:Requested articles]] instead. If in fact you did include text within the article, but it isn't showing, please make sure that any extra text above your entry is removed, as it may be causing it to hide and not be shown to the reviewer. }}
:I agree that the language could be changed. Will have a think. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 16:33, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
==WikiProject Military History is not an available option on AFCH?==
Longstanding issue that I'm finally bringing up: it appears that WPMILHIST is not an automatic option in the WikiProject field of AFCH. Tried to find it under a number of renderings and it's just not there. MILHIST is a huge and very active project, so tagging articles properly with it is actually really productive and practically guarantees an assessment visit by a project member. Am I missing something, or is this an oversight that can be corrected? Thanks! [[User:MatthewVanitas|MatthewVanitas]] ([[User talk:MatthewVanitas|talk]]) 01:16, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
:Yeah, neither is Pop Culture (and a few others that I discovered yesterday). {{u|Enterprisey}} will know more - I thought it had something to do with how the projects were searched/filed, but I'm not really sure. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 01:45, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
::I have had the same complaint about military history. Can something be done? [[User:Robert McClenon|Robert McClenon]] ([[User talk:Robert McClenon|talk]]) 02:29, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
:::A short-term fix for this is an admin going to [[User:Theo's Little Bot/afchwikiproject.js]] and adding the line <tt>"Military History": "Wikiproject Military history",</tt> (don't forget the comma on the end!) in the alphabetically appropriate ___location. [[User:Enterprisey|Enterprisey]] ([[User talk:Enterprisey|talk!]]) 03:36, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
::::{{done}}. Also added pop culture while I was at it. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 04:33, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
:::::{{ping|Primefac}} thanks! [[User:MatthewVanitas|MatthewVanitas]] ([[User talk:MatthewVanitas|talk]]) 03:08, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
{{deindent}}
{{ping|Primefac}} not to be ungrateful, but I'm still not seeing MILHIST pop up in the WikiProjects field when I type in "military". Am I doing something wrong, or has it not processed yet? [[User:MatthewVanitas|MatthewVanitas]] ([[User talk:MatthewVanitas|talk]]) 23:12, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
:{{bcc|Enterprisey}}No idea; I was just following directions. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 01:08, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
::Weird. Debugging now. [[User:Enterprisey|Enterprisey]] ([[User talk:Enterprisey|talk!]]) 20:43, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
:::Should be fixed. [[User:Enterprisey|Enterprisey]] ([[User talk:Enterprisey|talk!]]) 20:50, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
::::And I should probably document what I did, for posterity. The script caches the list of WikiProjects very aggressively, only updating it when the AFCH version is bumped. To do this, we generate a key (variable name: <tt>lsKey</tt>, near the top of <tt>showAcceptOptions</tt> in <tt>src/modules/submissions.js</tt>) that is tied to the local cache. Whenever you change the list and want to trigger an update to everyone's caches, change the number on the end. This is a bit of a hack, and I'll see if I can get a "last time of modification"-based approach going eventually. [[User:Enterprisey|Enterprisey]] ([[User talk:Enterprisey|talk!]]) 21:10, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
:::::Thanks all! Working fine now. [[User:MatthewVanitas|MatthewVanitas]] ([[User talk:MatthewVanitas|talk]]) 04:46, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
| |||