Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation/Helper script/Rewrite
This page is for feedback about the rewritten Articles for creation helper script. See the rewrite page for more information.
[0.3] Feedback about article review
Review this submission should not appear if(mw.config.get('wgPageContentModel') !== 'wikitext'). There is no reason for the script to appear on userjscss pages... — {{U|Technical 13}} (t • e • c) 02:15, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Done, thanks :) Theopolisme (talk) 04:49, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Parsing
If all you care about is template names and their parameters, you could have avoided using Parsoid and use rvgeneratexml instead. See mw:User:Kephir/XML parse tree for the parse tree format. Keφr 06:22, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks for the heads up, Keφr! I'm actually not just getting template names/parameters but also various other pieces of data about the page (more in the future). Yeah, I probably *could* use the API combined with some other query parameters but Parsoid is fast enough already for our needs (especially via parsoid-prod.wmflabs), plus the JSON is very simple to manipulate as well as grab new information from. Theopolisme (talk) 06:52, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
- Okay, then. I skimmed through the source code and Parsoid was mentioned only in one place, and seemingly only to extract that information. Quite a waste of bandwidth right now, as a Parsoid-parsed page contains human-readable data entangled with with machine-readable data (never mind more HTTP round trips). Not sure how the former might become useful later, but I guess you know what you are doing. Keφr 08:17, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'm definitely not completely sure about ditching the API of course. I'll being doing some more detailed speed comparisons and such in the future -- thanks for brining this to my attention. Theopolisme (talk) 17:25, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
- Okay, then. I skimmed through the source code and Parsoid was mentioned only in one place, and seemingly only to extract that information. Quite a waste of bandwidth right now, as a Parsoid-parsed page contains human-readable data entangled with with machine-readable data (never mind more HTTP round trips). Not sure how the former might become useful later, but I guess you know what you are doing. Keφr 08:17, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Kephir Spent my afternoon doing some serious speed tests. It looks like even with the additional requests in the future (metadata, categories, etc.), using the api itself rather than Parsoid is still faster. So... I've implemented it! Your guide was extremely helpful, and the script is significantly sped up as a result. Just goes to show that shiny new features aren't always better. (The funny thing is, I was working on Special:ExpandTemplates in MediaWiki itself recently...implemented the HTML preview functionality... and still didn't remember that you could get the XML parse tree...*sigh*). Again, thank you. :) Theopolisme (talk) 01:25, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
More notes.
Accept button returns no action with "NS_ERROR_DOM_QUOTA_REACHED: Persistent storage maximum size reached" as an error message in the console. Decline and Comment do work, but visually need a bottom border as the letters are too hard to read with the bottom of them bleeding into the white space below. — {{U|Technical 13}} (t • e • c) 12:51, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
- This is due to your browser reaching its localStorage limit (we use localStorage to cache persistent data like the WikiProject list). I've added a try/catch block so the script will still continue if unable to cache the data (a message will be logged to the console for debugging purposes). Also reduced the font size of the header text which should help with readability issues. This will be on-wiki soon, keep the feedback coming :) Theopolisme (talk) 17:19, 14 March 2014 (UTC).
- Hrmm. Not sure why my system would be reaching the localStorage limit... Where do I find the default limit that my browser is set at... I'd like to try and find out how much of a difference there is. If there is a huge difference, maybe what is stored there should be trimmed? — {{U|Technical 13}} (t • e • c) 17:37, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
- Web storage#Storage_size might be useful. It's still not entirely clear though, and different browsers vary in how they handle storage. You can look at the
window.localStorageobject to see what is currently stored. Theopolisme (talk) 20:36, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
- Web storage#Storage_size might be useful. It's still not entirely clear though, and different browsers vary in how they handle storage. You can look at the
- I see... wikEd seems to be filling most of mine... Disabling wikEd clicking the icon on the page doesn't help. I wonder if there is a way we can clear the wikEd data... Cacycle, is there a way that you could have wikEd not store "wikEdFindHistory", "wikEdReplaceHistory", and "wikEdSummaryHistory" if &action !== edit|submit or if "wikEdDisabled" === 1? — {{U|Technical 13}} (t • e • c) 21:16, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
- You can manually remove specific items as well if you'd like,
localStorage.removeItem( 'key' ). Theopolisme (talk) 21:49, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
- You can delete wikEd's history fields by clicking the
button on its control button bar on the right. But the amount of stored data is extremely small and cannot be the cause of reaching the storage quota, especially comparing to the amount of data stored in MediaWikiModuleStore:enwiki. Cacycle (talk) 12:44, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
- You can delete wikEd's history fields by clicking the
- You can manually remove specific items as well if you'd like,
- I went to my about:config and searched for "dom.storage.default_quota" and doubled the value from "5120" to "10240" for now. This is just a hack solution however, but I have some ideas for a better one. — {{U|Technical 13}} (t • e • c) 12:56, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
Decline hangs
Declining hangs with "Use of mediawiki.api callback params is deprecated. Use the Promise instead." It does say that it "Saved Draft:" and "Saved User talk:" which are confirmed in [1] and [2] respectively. — {{U|Technical 13}} (t • e • c) 12:57, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
- Technical 13: Huh, interesting. The mw.api callback warnings aren't related to the rewrite script, unless something really funky is going on (I'm not getting them), so they must be from some other script you're running that calls the API using the old method
var api = new mw.Api();
// the old way to do it, deprecated
api.get( { action: 'query' }, function ( data ) { console.log( data ) } );
// as opposed to the new way using a $.Promise
api.get( { action: 'query' }.done( function ( data ) { console.log( data ) } );
- I'm also not able to replicate the hang, although it may be because you're on a slower browser or something. Could you paste in your user agent? Theopolisme (talk) 16:41, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
alert(navigator.userAgent);returnsMozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; rv:27.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/27.0- I'm unable to recreate the hanging at this time too... I'm not getting the mw.api callback warning anymore either, so I'm guessing it was an API fluke or something at this point.
- Technical 13, just let me know if the problem crops up again and we can reinvestigate. Theopolisme (talk) 17:26, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Notice on user talk page has no header
Declining posted the template on the user's talk page, but did not give it a header. — {{U|Technical 13}} (t • e • c) 13:32, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
- Done, thanks :) All of the recent fixes in response to your issues are now live too. Theopolisme (talk) 17:21, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Review submission showing up on inappropriate pages
I am posting this feedback from Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:TheShadowCrow/sandbox/Youri Raffi Djorkaeff and I'm entirely unsure of how the script is running on this page (I can't see it in the coding). — {{U|Technical 13}} (t • e • c) 12:48, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
- Gotcha, thanks. Fixed and pushed :) Theopolisme (talk) 19:31, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
Not patrolling submissions
The rewrite is not patrolling pages and I'm having to go back and do it manually. This is annoying and wasting time that I could be spending reviewing... — {{U|Technical 13}} (t • e • c) 18:52, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
Add WikiProjects
I'm approving Roger's template submission for WP:WikiProject Disability and when I try to enter the WikiProject in the WikiProject line, it rejects it since it is not on the list. There has to be a better way to do this. It should be able to pass whatever is in the input line through as if it was on the list even if it isn't. The "list" should only be for assisting people in finding a specific project or if there is questionable case or spelling. There should also be a log page of all WikiProjects entered on that line that are not on the current list which would allow for addition of those projects to the list if they are used enough. — {{U|Technical 13}} (t • e • c) 14:14, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
- A log page is quite a bit of work... but, as I've become pretty adept at hacking this jquery.chosen plugin (dynamic categories, oh yeah!), I just coded "custom WikiProject" functionality. Please try it out and let me know your thoughts! :) Theopolisme (talk) 23:30, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
Adding an odd category to all approved submissions.
See this accepted disambig for details. — {{U|Technical 13}} (t • e • c) 20:38, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
- More examples
- Kamaljit Singh Garewal
- Chesya Burke
- Template:WP Disability Invite (kind of confusing chain of events with this one, but still shows the [[Category:]] issue)
- — {{U|Technical 13}} (t • e • c) 21:20, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
- Should be fixed, thanks Technical 13 :) Theopolisme (talk) 23:40, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
- Should be
0.5 released
Version 0.5 has been released. It includes G13 functionality, custom WikiProject tagging, and a number of other improvements, tweaks, and fixes. Give it a whirl if you're so inclined! :) Theopolisme (talk) 03:04, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
[0.5] Feedback about article review
Hello - trying out the new AFCH interface. It might be nice to have the script do a check, and if the name of the article is "sandbox", not send a message counting how many times that article name has been deleted. —Anne Delong (talk) 22:15, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
[0.5] Feedback about article review
My take on the visual interface: The old helper script had a very compact and easy-on-the eyes design. Screen space is at a premium, so I'm hoping that the new giant words, white lettering on black background, and hidden options on the right which I use a lot are temporary while important functional aspects are worked on. I liked the left-justified options in the old interface because they were always in the same ___location for selection by mouse pointer. —Anne Delong (talk) 22:28, 22 March 2014 (UTC)