User talk:Novem Linguae

Questions and suggestions

Hi Novem, I hope your well. Just a few things to run by you, when you have a moment. Can NovemBot do promotions of former topics? Thinking about Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Dwarf planets/archive1, in this case.

Also, two requests for the NovemBot, granted that you deem them reasonable and have a moment:

1. Could the bot possibly add something like {{Fa top}} & {{Fa bottom}} to promoted nominations? Consistency with the FA bot would be ideal—and I think the visual element makes it clearer if a conversation has ended.
2. Could the bot also put {{FC pass talk message}} on nominator talk pages? Although there's no template for GTs in this regard at the moment.

Again, these are super low-priority, so please no rush! Thank you again for all that you do here. Aza24 (talk) 02:47, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Hey buddy. Just acknowledging that I've seen this. Will circle back to it when I'm less busy with work stuff. –Novem Linguae (talk) 17:48, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Sounds good, thank you for your invaluable efforts. And again, no rush at all. Aza24 (talk) 00:08, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

@Aza24

Hard:

• Looks like NovemBot can't currently handle former/demoted FGTs. This is because I haven't programmed logic for how to handle things like Wikipedia talk:Featured topics/Dwarf planets, where it'd have to add an action4 to {{Featuredtopictalk}} and change its current status, instead of just writing a brand new page like it currently does. I would also have to add logic on how to reconcile the new set of WikiProjects with the existing WikiProjects already on the talk page.
  If you want to trick the bot into doing this anyway, blank both Wikipedia:Featured topics/Dwarf planets and Wikipedia talk:Featured topics/Dwarf planets, run the bot, then manually fix/merge the old and new content at Wikipedia talk:Featured topics/Dwarf planets.

Easy, let's knock these out, need some action on your side though:

• {{Fa top}} & {{Fa bottom}}: Can you show me a diff please? Unclear which page you want this on and where exactly the two would go.
• {{FC pass talk message}}: I think you'd need to fork this into its own template and make a few modifications, or modify the existing template to handle a "topic" parameter. Once this is ready, let me know and we can add this to the FGTC promotion work instruction and to NovemBot.

–Novem Linguae (talk) 16:19, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for all of this.

• For the FA top and bottom I'm thinking of what the FAC bot does ([1])—so this would be after pages are promoted, on the discussion page. Just seems like an archiving standard we ought to include; I imagine we'd be fine having it place {{Archive top}} and {{Archive bottom}}?
• I'm currently discussing this was Sdkb. I think a new template is probably the route; although the current supports featured topics, it doesn't for good topics, as you allude to. And using the single-star icon for featured topics is a bit strange anyways. Will report back once progress is made on this template.

Aza24 (talk) 03:10, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

@Aza24. I added the {{Archive top}}/{{Archive bottom}} feature just now. Can you run the bot on ONE regular topic (not an addition) so I can confirm the change? –Novem Linguae (talk) 09:46, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! I've now just promoted one (Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Overview of Ben&Ben/archive1) – Aza24 (talk) 03:47, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

@Aza24. Let me know when you finish forking {{FC pass talk message}}, and I can get that added to NovemBot. Also let me know the next time you need a former topic re-promoted. That will give me a nice push to work on that feature. –Novem Linguae (talk) 10:48, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Sounds good, thank you! There may be a delay with forking the template, I'm rather busy this May, but hopefully I'll get around to it early this summer. Aza24 (talk) 06:46, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi Novem, I've gotten around to forking the template, see {{GA pass talk message}}, I hope I did it right. {{FC pass talk message}} should already be available for topics. Feel free to add these to NovemBot whenever you have a chance. Thanks as always for your efforts. Best – Aza24 (talk) 05:37, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Hey @Aza24. Can you do me a favor and repost this somewhere (maybe User talk:Novem Linguae/Work instructions/FGTC) and ping me? Pings and notifications on user talk get erased really easily (MediaWiki clears them every time you visit the user talk page). Pings from remote talk pages stay in my ping box until I get around to them :) –Novem Linguae (talk) 11:23, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Am I missing something?

Draft:Sandbox???? 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 14:12, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

@Timtrent. It's just a test page. See Wikipedia:About the sandbox for more info. I'll try to remember to take it out of the queue next time to avoid confusion. –Novem Linguae (talk) 15:11, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Phew! I kind of guessed, though 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 22:25, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

RFA2024 update: phase I concluded, phase II begins

Hi there! Phase I of the Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review has concluded, with several impactful changes gaining community consensus and proceeding to various stages of implementation. Some proposals will be implemented in full outright; others will be discussed at phase II before being implemented; and still others will proceed on a trial basis before being brought to phase II. The following proposals have gained consensus:

• Proposals 2 and 9b (phase II discussion): Add a reminder of civility norms at RfA and Require links for claims of specific policy violations
• Proposal 3b (in trial): Make the first two days discussion-only
• Proposal 13 (in trial): Admin elections
• Proposal 14 (implemented): Suffrage requirements
• Proposals 16 and 16c (phase II discussion): Allow the community to initiate recall RfAs and Community recall process based on dewiki
• Proposal 17 (phase II discussion): Have named Admins/crats to monitor infractions
• Proposal 24 (phase II discussion): Provide better mentoring for becoming an admin and the RfA process
• Proposal 25 (implemented): Require nominees to be extended confirmed

See the project page for a full list of proposals and their outcomes. A huge thank-you to everyone who has participated so far :) looking forward to seeing lots of hard work become a reality in phase II. theleekycauldron (talk), via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:09, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

Tanks!!!

File:Ru 251.jpg	You get a tank!!!
	You get a tank!!! CoolMiner425 20:52, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Notification of administrators without tools

	Greetings, Novem Linguae. You are receiving this notification because you've agreed to consider endorsing prospective admin candidates identified by the process outlined at Administrators without tools. Recently, the following editor(s) received this distinction and the associated endearing title: MrLinkinPark333
Thank you for supporting this effort. Your contributions are an integral part of overall success, and an example for others to follow. To stop receiving these notifications, remove your name from the list.

TolBot (talk) 21:00, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Notification of administrators without tools

	Greetings, Novem Linguae. You are receiving this notification because you've agreed to consider endorsing prospective admin candidates identified by the process outlined at Administrators without tools. Recently, the following editor(s) received this distinction and the associated endearing title: Chlod
Thank you for supporting this effort. Your contributions are an integral part of overall success, and an example for others to follow. To stop receiving these notifications, remove your name from the list.

TolBot (talk) 21:00, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

API/MediaWiki:Gadget-morebits.js question

Hi,

I see you're involved in maintaining Twinkle, so I'm hoping you will know the answer to this; do you know if there is a way using the API/morebits to move a page and delete the page currently at the target, aside from sending a separate request to delete the page?

My understanding is that it is not but I am hoping I am wrong, as I'm trying to fix a bug with the rmCloser script where it can't overwrite pages even when the user is a pagemover. BilledMammal (talk) 01:57, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Strangely I am not very familiar with Morebits because I mostly do bug fixes and small patches so haven't had an occasion to explore it in depth yet. @SD0001 could probably answer this question easily though. –Novem Linguae (talk) 02:06, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

I don't think that's possible to do in a single request using the API. That's something only the special page allows. – SD0001 (talk) 03:29, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

@SD0001: I thought so, but I had hoped otherwise; thank you all the same.

Solving this for admins won't be an issue - it will just require an additional API call to delete the page before moving the article, but that won't work for pagemovers as they lack access to the delete API. Do you know if there is a way to delete redirects through the API without using delete? Again, my understanding is that there is not, but I'm hoping I'm wrong as alternative solutions will be messy. BilledMammal (talk) 03:56, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Double API calls aren't particularly difficult to code. Example. –Novem Linguae (talk) 04:30, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

I'm not concerned about the double API call; my issue is I don't think there is an API call for "delete-redirect". BilledMammal (talk) 04:46, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Oh. I think that's built into the move API. I think the algorithm is that any editor can move a page over a redirect if 1) the redirect only has one revision and 2) it is pointing at the current title. And any editor with `delete-redirect` (page movers and sysops) can move a page over a redirect 1) if it only has one revision. The best way to find out is probably to test it. –Novem Linguae (talk) 04:54, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I've been testing it and I don't think that it is there, unless there is a configuration option not documented at the API page. BilledMammal (talk) 05:01, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Test results

Perm	Edited via	Action	Result
Admin	Website	Move over a one revision redirect pointing back to the original page	Y
Admin	Action API via Special:ApiSandbox	Move over a one revision redirect pointing back to the original page	Y
Logged in user	Website	Move over a one revision redirect pointing back to the original page	Y
Logged in user	Action API via Special:ApiSandbox	Move over a one revision redirect pointing back to the original page	Y

Unable to reproduce. Diffs of tests. Would you like me to try any additional combinations? –Novem Linguae (talk) 06:31, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Could you try moving over a one revision redirect pointing at a different page?

With that said, I've now developed a function that uses the method at Special:MovePage to allow this - I would like to replace it with something cleaner, but it isn't an issue if it's not possible. BilledMammal (talk) 06:47, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Can you open a phab ticket requesting the ability to do this through the API? Letting page movers overwrite redirects not pointing back to the current page is a relatively recent feature, so allowing it via the API was likely just overlooked rather than intentionally left out. – SD0001 (talk) 12:43, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Done; T365325 BilledMammal (talk) 04:33, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

Perm	Edited via	Action	Result
Admin	Website	Move over a one revision redirect pointing to a different page	Y Asks you if you want to delete the page, then you have to tick the box "Yes, delete the page". This shows up both when it's a regular page and when it's a redirect. This shows up both for one revision pages and multiple revision pages.
Admin	Action API via Special:ApiSandbox	Move over a one revision redirect pointing to a different page	N tried it both with ignorewarnings=true and ignorewarnings=false
Page mover / delete-redirect	Website	Move over a one revision redirect pointing to a different page	Y Asks you if you want to delete the page, then you have to tick the box "Yes, delete the page". Only shows up for redirects. Only works for one revision redirects.
Page mover / delete-redirect	Action API via Special:ApiSandbox	Move over a one revision redirect pointing to a different page	N tried it both with ignorewarnings=true and ignorewarnings=false
Logged in user	Website	Move over a one revision redirect pointing to a different page	N
Logged in user	Action API via Special:ApiSandbox	Move over a one revision redirect pointing to a different page	N

I think I understand your question and your confusion now. The page move webpage lets admins always overwrite pages, and the page move webpage lets page movers overwrite pages under certain circumstances, whereas the move API never lets this happen unless the page is a one revision redirect pointing at the page attempting to be moved. See results above. I think you'll definitely need two API queries for all situations except the situation where there is a one revision redirect pointing at the page attempting to be moved. I hope you find these test results as interesting as I did :) –Novem Linguae (talk) 08:36, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

I did, thank you :) BilledMammal (talk) 04:33, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

Could you try a related test for me?

With the website, try moving a page to a title where the title has no article, but the talk page has a single-edit redirect to a page other than the talk page of the article you are moving. If I am correct, you will be able to overwrite the page as an admin, but you will not be able to do so as a page mover. BilledMammal (talk) 14:56, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't have time to do more testing. But I did mention our test results in phab:T365325#9847318. –Novem Linguae (talk) 11:07, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Updated draft

@Novem Linguae

Draft:Meru Gokhale is now improved. Please see link below. Blawgar (talk) 17:54, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Meru_Gokhale Blawgar (talk) 17:54, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

Semi-automation of inline tagging?

You are in absolutely no way obliged to take this on, but it seems in your realm of expertise and interest...

Would you be interested in adding inline tagging to semi-automated tools? Evidence suggests it could significantly increase new editor retention (especially if tags replace reverts). Enterprisey was interested in taking it up, in a discussion a while back. There's a related Huggle ticket, T209797 (currently also mentioned on WP:MED).

Separately, thank you for all the infrastructure work you've done. I'm sure I won't use it all directly, but I'll benefit from it indirectly, all the same. HLHJ (talk) 04:09, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

Hey. Thanks for the message. Did you have specifics in mind? Which tool, what feature to add, etc? –Novem Linguae (talk) 05:09, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the query, and sorry I've been so slow to reply.

Honestly, I don't mind which tool. The phab ticket is for Huggle, but I think the functionality is more important than how it is implemented. I'm also quite sure you'd know better than I where it would be most useful, and easiest to implement.

The simplest feature would be: when patrolling edits, IF the edit being reviewed is the addition of a single block of text, THEN have a button which adds just the point tag (not span tag) to the end of edit.

The "Basic design ideas" section in the phab ticket has a longer list (~removing the qualifications in the last sentence). These would probably be rarer use cases, tho. HLHJ (talk) 00:20, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

You could ask for a user script that does this by posting at WP:US/R. The user script could add an [add CN] link on the recent changes, watchlist, and/or diff screens when the diff meets the parameters you described. –Novem Linguae (talk) 01:44, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll look into this. HLHJ (talk) 15:00, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Report spam links on enwiki

Hi Novem Linguae, long time no see. I would like to ask where I can report spam links on enwiki. I noticed a subtle edit adding an advertisement link that went undetected for months (please see the last link in the edit). Thank you. Plantaest (talk) 19:14, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Howdy! Maybe just revert it. If it's affecting many pages, you could try the WP:SPAMBLACKLIST. –Novem Linguae (talk) 19:40, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi

Hi Novem - just wanted to say thanks for the kind statement on the arbitration request page earlier - I was getting a bit stressed and worried over the implications of some of the things being said there - especially on that page because I don't really understand what's happening but it all feels very important. Feels a bit like being summoned into an alien courtroom. It was all a bit daunting, and your message made me feel a bit better about the situation. Again, just wanted to say thanks BugGhost🪲👻 18:08, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

You're welcome. Yeah, careful of participating in places like the administrators notice board and anything with the word arbitration in it. It is easy to unintentionally get in the middle of drama in those places. –Novem Linguae (talk) 21:27, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Script kiddy

		Happy second birthday
		to the GANReviewTool. Its hard work continues to be very much appreciated.

CMD (talk) 08:16, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! Was a lot of work but had a great ROI since it's so useful to content creators. Also it's been pretty low maintenance, it doesn't break very often, which is nice. –Novem Linguae (talk) 08:52, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Notability Essays

I enjoyed reading your views on notability here on Wikipedia :) thank you for directing me to them. You have a very sobering yet gentle approach that I admire (especially in Thoughts on notability and AFD). I think that politics plays a huge part in AfD discussions. I particularly found true the words of a former admin (who has written a number of formally accepted guidelines for the project)..

"Wikipedia is utterly insane. The encyclopedia anyone can edit is the encyclopedia only logged in users can edit, and only if they're in the good graces of the arbitrary ruling clique of the day. If you don't speak their phony language of tongue-in-cheek civility and bureaucracy, they will sooner or later drive you from this project."
-Rividian

There is an element of necessary evil.. that I cannot deny. Without deletionists, the project could’ve easily tumbled into some funny junk.. albino blacksheep circus from hell. The kind that were all too familiar to us in the mindf*ck that was the 2000s. Hah :) So I try my best to remember that this project is different. It hurts sometimes, yes. Sometimes it is absolutely unwarranted. But this project is worth it at the end of the day, and that is largely in part to editors like you.

Thank you for sharing, @Novem Linguae. I truly enjoyed. 9t5 (talk) 19:59, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

@9t5. You're welcome. I wrote User:Novem Linguae/Essays/Thoughts on notability and AFD after seeing the AFD you were involved in. I've observed this pattern for a long time and decided to finally write it down. I was worried it might be a bit too harsh, so I'm glad you found the tone acceptable.

Rividian's quote there seems a bit pessimistic to me. I think Wikipedia works a lot like any social group. Each social group has norms, and it's up to newer people to learn and follow those norms and not cause friction within the group. Groups have norms for a reason. Every single norm around here is the equilibrium of 20+ years of forces trying to push it one direction or the other and arriving at a happy medium that lets us build a great encyclopedia. I think arbitrary ruling clique of the day is just these norms, and not the fiat of some small clique.

There are some norms around here I'm not thrilled about, but I believe in the "wisdom of the group". –Novem Linguae (talk) 20:19, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

@Novem Linguae

“I wrote User:Novem Linguae/Essays/Thoughts on notability and AFD after seeing the AFD you were involved in.”

I didn’t even notice! Oh brother.. I am an emotional guy. I don’t know why but that has me tearing up. The Brad Heckman article held a special place in my heart because his talks helped me through a difficult time. I felt almost scared that perhaps he saw it, and then saw it get deleted and it crushed me.

Definitely pessimistic! But I think does a good job at stripping away that tongue-in-cheek attitude. You are very clearly an editor who has achieved their level of authority through grace and truly trying to help other editors out.

And I mean that sincerely. I’m not one to kiss the a** of an admin. I’ll be the first to them them to shove it where the sun don’t shine haha… so maybe that’s why I was so drawn to Rividian’s quote.. I’m a work in progress! I like to think we all are :) 9t5 (talk) 20:29, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Side note: he definitely saw it because I reached out to him for permission to use his painting in the article. But I like to pretend he’s too busy to have noticed it get deleted. HAHA. 9t5 (talk) 20:31, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

I’m a work in progress! I like to think we all are :) Well said, my friend. If you ever have any questions or thoughts, let me know! –Novem Linguae (talk) 20:49, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diplomacy
	For your gentle approach to difficult discussion. I admire you. 9t5 (talk) 20:02, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Notification of administrators without tools

	Greetings, Novem Linguae. You are receiving this notification because you've agreed to consider endorsing prospective admin candidates identified by the process outlined at Administrators without tools. Recently, the following editor(s) received this distinction and the associated endearing title: Theroadislong KylieTastic
Thank you for supporting this effort. Your contributions are an integral part of overall success, and an example for others to follow. To stop receiving these notifications, remove your name from the list.

TolBot (talk) 21:00, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Please propose slnething

Please make a proposal as opposed to just not zero. Your conclusion on the topic is disingenuous as a number of other substantive proposals have been put forward. This is not count the votes as you see them. Please provide reasoning for the position you hold. A number of others (not just me) have done so but the not zero brigade seem to be avoiding providing their own proposals and any actual substantive reasoning. Please do so, I’ve been begging contributors to do so from the start yet no o e seems to be capable of doing so. If this is to be a discussion state what is wanted and why. The whole discussion is just lit zero and that’s it that’s not a discussion that’s a protest. PicturePerfect666 (talk) 18:24, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the message, but I am not a fan of your behavior on that talk page. I have filed WP:ANI#PicturePerfect666 bludgeoning at Talk:Eurovision Song Contest 2024. –Novem Linguae (talk) 19:37, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

IP

They're trolling, they're trying to harass Fram, see their post on the user talk page, history of block evasion too dunno of whom. – 2804:F1...BF:1C3A (talk) 06:49, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Yep, I would recommend a block of 1-yr on that 182.228.179.154 IP, given the previous block being 6-months in length and the person returning to pretty much the same behaviour of attacks towards other editors like always before. — AP 499D25 (talk) 06:52, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

I blocked 182.228.179.154 for one week, which is what I'm comfortable with for now, and pinged Yamla, the admin who did the previous blocking. Hope that works for now. –Novem Linguae (talk) 07:00, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Pending changes, level 2

Regarding your comment at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase II/Discussion-only period § "Neither proposal specified what should happen after the trial period.": as far as I understand it, pending changes levels 1 and 2 were trialed at the same time. As can be seen at Wikipedia:Flagged protection and patrolled revisions § Patrolled revisions, pending changes level 2 requires edits from all non-reviewer editors to be accepted before they can be seen by non-logged in users. Because disabling it after the trial required work to be done, it got stalled over disagreements on the best path forward ("why remove a protection level that is helpful right now?" vs "let's revert to the pre-trial state and evaluate"). Eventually its use got slimmed down to, as I recall, a handful of WMF office actions. A series of RfCs were held to establish policy for using pending changes protection, and only a policy for the use of level 1 was approved. No agreement was reached on a policy for using level 2. In spite of this, occasionally an admin would use level 2 protection if they thought it was appropriate, deliberately ignoring the lack of policy supporting its use ("there's no consensus against it"). At some point, all the instances of level 2 protection were removed, and descriptions of it were removed from the standard table describing page protection levels and other documentation. isaacl (talk) 16:14, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Good info. Thank you for sharing. I may increase my involvement in writing patches for FlaggedRevs, so having an idea of how it works is really helpful. –Novem Linguae (talk) 16:53, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Technical Barnstar
	Your scripts are SUPER useful for everyone! xq 13:18, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

One year!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:45, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

RFC tool

i've boldly/cheekily crammed in user instructions at the top of doc page as i couldn't work out how to put them lower? Tom B (talk) 10:02, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

@Tpbradbury. Thanks. I split the template in half just now to help avoid problems with this in the future. By the way, I haven't tested anrfc-lister in awhile, so please let me know if you find any bugs. –Novem Linguae (talk) 11:25, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

it wasn't obvious to me where move discussions should go, because the instructions on the closure page aren't obvious, you could put something about move going in 'other'? thank you, Tom B (talk) 12:21, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Feverfew

Hi Novem, I've created a new tool for checking links in articles and posted it here: Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) § Feverfew – A new link checker tool. I hope if you have time, you can give me feedback on it. Thank you! Plantaest (talk) 16:59, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. Will take a look. –Novem Linguae (talk) 14:42, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Model articles

Hi Novem! A recent discussion with @LunaEatsTuna reminded me of an issue I've had my eye on for a while.

One of the best ways to improve an article (and something experienced editors do all the time) is looking at GAs/FAs in the topic area to use them as models. However, my sense is that very few novice users think to do this — if they check elsewhere at all, it's typically to the most prominent article in the topic area, which won't necessarily be the highest-quality.

It would be helpful if there were a gadget that could take as input any article and return the article best-suited to use as a model for it (i.e. a GA or FA that shares similar categories/Wikidata information/text). If such a gadget worked well enough, it might someday be included as a standard talk page element.

However, I don't have any clue about how to develop such a gadget (or even if a gadget would be the optimal form for the tool). Given the technical areas in which you work, you came to mind. I'm curious, what do you think of the idea? Do you have a sense of how technically difficult it might be? And if it's feasible, would you have any interest in taking on development?

Cheers, Sdkb ^talk 03:44, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Hey @Sdkb. I think the technical approach for something like this would probably be to use a machine learning model such as mw:Lift Wing, and then access its suggestions with a user script. This is not my area of expertise. Maybe someone like Sohom Datta can provide a bit more detail. Also, WP:US/R is a good page for requesting user scripts if you want to get more eyes on something like this in the future. Hope this helps. –Novem Linguae (talk) 04:20, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Contacting admins listed as recently active

Could I request a look at the interventions of User:Maurnxiao in Talk:2024 United Kingdom general election, sections Infobox, Muslim Vote, and Workers Party.

A member of less than a week (although his very first post was challenging the status of sources as reliable, making me suspect he has been active under a different identity), entirely unaccepting of the principle of consensus, determined to see a level of coverage of one political party that is disproportionate to that given by mainstream news sources. Highly disruptive, unwilling to accept that his preference is not grounds to change the approach taken by the article. Time sensitive issue (election is in 10 days), so a quicker intervention would be desirable. Is seeking a topic ban suitable, or is some other solution more suitable.

With thanks. Kevin McE (talk) 08:34, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Hey @Kevin McE. This looks a bit too complicated for me to solve with just a couple minutes of reading. I'd recommend you copy paste this to WP:ANI to get some additional eyes on it. If you post at ANI, you will need to inform Maurnxiao of the ANI discussion on their user talk page. Hope that helps. –Novem Linguae (talk) 08:42, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks: I was just looking to see if there is a less drastic step to take before that. I will do that if he continues. Kevin McE (talk) 09:09, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Once again, he is just knocking on an open door, as this issue sss already settled before he took to tell others about me. I'd accepted the consensus against my wishes and had stopped pushing for my views. Maurnxiao (talk) 10:45, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Apologies @Novem Linguae for conducting a discussion between the two of us on your page: only doing so in the assumption that this is the last of it.

@Maurnxiao: If you have stopped, that's fine, that is why I said I would take other steps if you continued (you had not communicated your concession to consensus anywhere). You have said that you won't, so that is the end of it. Good. Kevin McE (talk) 11:12, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

note re ideas

I really like the draft charter written by User:Sj. well done indeed!! I have started a draft of sorts of my own. could you please go to this page, and let me know what you think? thanks! Sm8900 (talk) 14:01, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

War edit for List of Wonderful Pretty Cure! episodes

This is another WP:BLAR need your help Christnz1990 (talk) 04:38, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

here is the link https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wonderful_Pretty_Cure!_episodes# Christnz1990 (talk) 04:43, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

@Christnz1990. Hey there. It looks like you didn't follow all the manual AFD steps at WP:AFDHOWTO. I think I've fixed it. In the future, you may want to install WP:TWINKLE, then go to TW -> XFD -> AFD, and it will do the steps for you automatically. Hope that helps. –Novem Linguae (talk) 00:14, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Robotaxi

Hi @Novem Linguae, I saw that you recently edited the Robotaxi page and I have a request for you please.

Mobileye has announced upcoming robotaxi projects with Holo in Norway, Deutsche Bahn in Germany and Verne in Croatia that could be added to the page. Due to the scope and potential of these projects, I would suggest adding them to the timeline and creating a new section under 'Notable Commercial Ventures' for Mobileye.

Here are sources: https://www.theverge.com/2024/6/26/24185735/rimac-verne-robotaxi-croatia-mobileye-autonomous https://www.iotworldtoday.com/transportation-logistics/germany-launches-fully-autonomous-self-driving-taxi-transit-trial https://europe.autonews.com/suppliers/nio-mobileye-autonomous-driving-tech-nears-norway-debut

FYI - I'm an employee of Mobileye and have declared by COI Gideon at Mobileye (talk) 08:59, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Hey @Gideon at Mobileye. Thank you for following our COI rules. We appreciate you disclosing this and doing things by the book.

Can you please repost your request at Talk:Robotaxi? This will help crowdsource this. I'd also recommend that you draft the text you want added and post it on that talk page. Having text ready to drop in will make it easier for whoever ends up processing your COI edit request. Finally, I recommend you tag your text with the {{COI edit request}} template to draw attention to your edit request. Hope that helps. –Novem Linguae (talk) 09:34, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks @Novem Linguae. I'll put together the text and ping you once I've posted it. Gideon at Mobileye (talk) 09:48, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

User:Novem Linguae/Scripts/BlockedUserHistory.js

Hi, I was wondering if you could modify the script to show only blocked users for the entire edit history, not just the history that is displaying. Without that, it's not very useful for me. Is it hard? Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:24, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

@Bbb23. Required some work, but I think I got it working. Try it now. –Novem Linguae (talk) 09:18, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

It doesn't appear to work. If I display the most recent 50 contributions to Frédéric Arnault, it shows only the blocked users in that timeframe, even though there are blocked users from earlier, e.g., RogerNotable, who made two consecutive edits on February 10, 2024. Also, there seems to be a bug that I don't remember being there before. I can toggle on your script, but AFAIK, the only way to toggle it off is to refresh the screen. When I do that on the most recent 50, it works fine, as it did before, but when I then go back 50 contributions, it shows no one because there are no blocked users in that 50, meaning it toggles it back on. Hope my description makes sense.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:04, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Seems to be working as I expected. Page 2 is blank because none of those 50 diffs have a blocked user. If you click "older 50" again, then RogerNotable shows up on page 3. The script stays on because &onlyShowBlocked=1 is still in the URL. My assumption was that the user wouldn't want to turn it off on the same page once it was turned on. I guess I could write some code to allow turning it off. Would that help? –Novem Linguae (talk) 13:14, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

If it's working as you expected, then I guess I wasn't clear enough in my original request. I'll try again. Before I turn the script on, I display the standard 50 most recent edits. When I turn the script on, I want it to show all blocked users going back to the creation of the article (without having to scroll backwards in time).--Bbb23 (talk) 13:25, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Got it. That's doable, but would require a complete rewrite to use the mw:Action API instead of CSS element hiding like it currently does. Workaround: I could add &limit=1000 to the query to get it to display 1000 mixed revisions instead of 50, which would mean 20x the number of blocked revisions (but still not all of them). Or you could ask for someone to fork or write from scratch at WP:US/R. –Novem Linguae (talk) 13:29, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Hehe, last time I made a request on that forum at your suggestion (this script), you were the one who did it anyway. :-) Your problem is you're too nice. You need to work on that.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:43, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

I bumped it to 1000 mixed diffs per page, which should result in 20x more blocked diffs per page. See if that helps :) –Novem Linguae (talk) 22:58, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes, it does help, thanks. I'm curious. How hard is to bump it in terms of work? It certainly doesn't seem to eat up processing cycles on the Arnault article, meaning it was very quick.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:02, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

I was using the history tab of ANI as my test case. When I tried bumping it to 5000, it lagged my browser pretty good. But I also have a UserHighlighter script that probably added to that lag. But hey, you're the only user right now, so if it doesn't lag for you then it shouldn't be a problem. Want me to bump it to 5000? Very easy to do in code. –Novem Linguae (talk) 23:37, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Couldn't it be simplified like this? I don't really understand why it has to link to a different URL. Nardog (talk) 23:20, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

My reason for persisting the user script's state using the URL is that it allows the "next 50" link to be clicked and still show blocked users, rather than activating the script again. That make sense? –Novem Linguae (talk) 23:35, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Kind of, but even then I would use sessionStorage or history.pushState(). At any rate, using CSS seems far simpler if you don't care about old browsers. Nardog (talk) 00:03, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

using CSS. Wouldn't the toggle reset when one of the pagination links is clicked, which is undesirable? By the way, I have no objection to you forking this if you have some good ideas for it. I have limited time at the moment. –Novem Linguae (talk) 00:12, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

CSS was a separate point, about jQuery traversing (I avoid .show() and .hide() because they use the style attribute; even if I wanted to support browsers without :has(), I'd give class(es) to <li>). I just made my fork persist through pagination (as long as you're on the same tab). Nardog (talk) 00:16, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

CiteHighlighter

Ave Novem Linguae!

I was looking at your CiteHighlighter script. I downloaded the most recent dump (with only the current version of each article, not the revision history) and these are top 10.000 most frequently mentioned domains in URLs. I filtered out the duplicates (some lines in SourcesJSON contained subdomains so I removed those and removed the duplicates a second time). I ended up with ~8600 domains. For most domains it is pretty easy to judge how reliable they are. After a merge the script becomes much more useful because most references will be green so you only have to check those that are not. Performance impact is not too bad, on Bavaria (an randomly selected article with 64 refs and 3 notes) it ran between 600ms and 1s with the current list and between 800ms and 1.3s with the expanded list. It went from 53 refs that were not colored to only 20 (13 of which were books and one was a broken link). Comparison: https://imgur.com/a/7IsGRS5 Now its time to figure out a way how to judge the reliability of ~8600 domains. Perhaps it can be crowdsourced. Polygnotus (talk) 02:47, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Hey @Polygnotus. To be added to CiteHighlighter, I require that there have been a discussion about the source's reliability at RSN, or that it be added to some kind of curated list such as a WikiProject reliable sources page (and I assume those have their own processes that are hopefully also based on consensus discussions). I'm not sure I'd be comfortable just guessing at source ratings. Hope that makes sense. By the way, want me to change the content model of the two userspace pages you linked from wikitext to text so that word wrapping works correctly when viewing? –Novem Linguae (talk) 08:41, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

I have read User:Novem Linguae/Scripts/CiteHighlighter and I understand your approach of scraping these pages. I also saw that you've put something similar to what I've done on the todo-list User:Novem_Linguae/Scripts/CiteHighlighter#cite_note-2. Looking at this section I see that you added nrc.nl to the "yellow" section of the json based on Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_285#nrc.nl which means that the opinion of 1 or 2 random editors is enough under the current system. The domains I've proposed for inclusion have been referenced significantly more frequently across Wikipedia - ranging from 360 to 195,000 times. This extensive usage indicates a broader consensus regarding their reliability and value as sources. Of course we can curate the list to ensure things like archive.org are removed. I even thought about making a simple system where anyone could offer their opinion but I am not so sure that is necessary (e.g. an "I disagree with this rating" button with some preloaded text). I have to do a bit more research on the contentmodel thing, as far as I understand it it doesn't offer much of an advantage at the moment for plain text, but thanks for offering. It might be pretty useful for xml and json if you can collapse and expand treenodes. Polygnotus (talk) 14:57, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

It sounds like you and I have different philosophies on this. Feel free to fork (and rename) my user script then change it to point to your own source lists if you want. –Novem Linguae (talk) 16:23, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Then can you explain yours? I mean you wrote the script and you posted a very similar idea in the cite note so I don't think our philosophies are that different. I've also considered building a simple interface where people can vote on the reliability of a source. A source that is used 20.000 times is probably reliable, and we can be more sure of that than a source that 2 random people have rated as reliable on WP:RSN. Sure, we got a lot of people expressing opinions about Fox News, but for most sources no one ever debated their reliability; people have just been using them and that became the consensus (de facto, not de jure). I don't think spamming RSN with a 100 sources a day and my rating of them would be a great idea. The current script already got an installed base. Forking is a last resort. Polygnotus (talk) 16:28, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Ah. That footnote is referring to featured articles only, which I trust more than regular articles. If you can assist me with generating source counts for that subset of articles, that might be something we can collaborate on. –Novem Linguae (talk) 16:55, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

GA too or exclusively FA? Polygnotus (talk) 16:57, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Exclusively FA please –Novem Linguae (talk) 17:01, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

It is running, will take a while. What should be the cut-off point for the amount of times a source is used? Polygnotus (talk) 17:24, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

A list of the top 500 or top 1000 would be pretty useful, I think. –Novem Linguae (talk) 18:05, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

User:Polygnotus/facounts I do not believe that prnewswire.com & yahoo.com & metro.co.uk are reliable sources Polygnotus (talk) 06:44, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. I copied the top 1000ish results to User:Novem Linguae/sandbox. You can get CiteHighlighter to highlight these using window.citeHighlighterHighlightEverything = true;. For the ones not already in CiteHighlighter that had more than 200 citations, I clicked them open. If they weren't libraries, news aggregators, or dead links, I added them just now as generally reliable. –Novem Linguae (talk) 06:03, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

UserRoleIndicator script

Hi Novem - just wanted to give you a heads up that I forked your UserHighlighterSimple script to make UserRoleIndicator (my first user script!), which has a very similar purpose but slightly different execution (it puts a little div containing an emoji label next to user links, rather than altering the CSS to change the background). It uses the same logic as UserHighlighterSimple, and so relies on User:NovemBot/userlist.js as well to determine user roles. Seeing as it's forked from your user script and also borrows data from Novembot, I thought I'd give you a heads up to check if that's ok, and also to say good job on UserHighlighterSimple! The code I stole from it works like a charm. BugGhost🦗👻 15:39, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. Always good to see folks benefitting from my bot's User:NovemBot/userlist.js. You're not the first one to incorporate that into a user script. Happy coding. –Novem Linguae (talk) 22:11, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

RfA debrief

Hi Novem. I mentioned you by name in user:HouseBlaster/RfA debrief, though I only had good things to say about you (specifically, about how you acted as a de facto named monitor). Just wanted to let you know as a courtesy. Best, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:26, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Demolition Ranch has been accepted

Demolition Ranch, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

C F A 💬 04:25, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

RegExp

On your user page (in a collapsible div), there is a link that points to all uses of "the populous" in sources, via RegExp on the article search. This inspired me to try to use RegExp to find all the instances of "youre" in articles, but inwiki:/youre\./ doesn't work (note: I saw you use {insource}, so I thought inwiki would work). What code would I need to insert into the search bar to find this typo throughout all Wikipedia articles? Apollogetticax|^talk 07:42, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Hey. Glad you found it useful. Try this. Although be careful, some of those youres are Middle English or Old English, so they appear to be intentional. P.S. Just a regular search for youre with nothing fancy may also be useful here. –Novem Linguae (talk) 07:48, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! I used to program with JS and work with RegExp, but I guess either my RegExp skills are rusty or its my inexperience with coding on Wikipeda.Apollogetticax|^talk 07:57, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

If you enjoy programming and want to get back into it, the Wikimedia Movement has hundreds and hundreds of programming things to work on. It's all open source. There's user scripts, gadgets, bots, MediaWiki core, extensions, skins, Toolforge tools, etc. We programmers have an advantage because it doubles the amount of stuff we can potentially get sucked into (technical stuff + normal encyclopedia duties), which is great for variety. Of the things mentioned, user scripts (JavaScript) are probably the easiest entry point. See my userpage for examples :) –Novem Linguae (talk) 08:11, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Well, yes indeed! I'll start with WikiProject User Scripts and see what I can do there. At the same time I have to deal with counter-vandalism and my rollback and pending-changes reviewer user right requests. Hey...I could make a user script that helps with counter-vandalism! Thanks for getting me started on Wikipedia coding! Apollogetticax|^talk 08:15, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

I've never heard of WikiProject User Scripts so I am not sure how active it is. You may have better luck with WP:US/R, which is more active. Also here is my personal list of user script ideas. Something like T:CENT archiver or Please see would be a small and easy-ish project. Maybe swing by WP:US/G too. –Novem Linguae (talk) 08:20, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Well, the WikiProject is pretty active. For now I'm working on the basics. I'll check those out. Thanks! Apollogetticax|^talk 08:23, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Check your mails

Hello, Novem Linguae. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

dxneo (talk) 23:53, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks

		Project Editor Retention This editor was willing to lend a helping hand!
		Thanks for all you do to acknowledge others at the Editor of the Week Awards

Buster Seven Talk (UTC) 11:29, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Policies regarding administrator

Hi there, does English Wikipedia have a policy regarding administrator? If so, what are the policies? Thanks. Serigala Sumatera (talk) 10:36, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Hey there. WP:ADMIN has some information. Got any specific questions? –Novem Linguae (talk) 10:53, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

I mean the requirements to become a administrator. For example, minimum joins, minimum edits, etc. Serigala Sumatera (talk) 11:15, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

I think the lowest edit count I've seen succeed recently is 8,000 edits. WP:RFAADVICE has some good tips. –Novem Linguae (talk) 11:32, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

NovemBot: Update list of users who have permissions failure

NovemBot's task "Update list of users who have permissions" failed to run per the configuration specified at Wikipedia:Bot activity monitor/Configurations. Detected only 0 edits in the last 5 days, whereas at least 1 was expected. If/when the issue is fixed, please change the section title (e.g. append " - Fixed") or remove this section completely. When that is done, this notice will be reposted if the bot task is still broken or is re-broken. If your bot is behaving as expected, then you may want to modify the task configuration instead. Or to unsubscribe from bot failure notifications, remove the |notify= parameter from the {{/task}} template. Thanks! – SDZeroBot (talk) 13:20, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Create a phab task

Hi Novem, apologies, it's time to ask some really basic questions. Your suggestion of just creating a phab task feels very draw the rest of the owl, requesting an innate understanding of the weird and wonderful world of Phabricator. Why have a Feedback page for VE on meta if the feedback is actually meant to go somewhere else? But anyway, grumble grumble, I've had a phab account for awhile (only got a C icon though instead of a Pokemon outline) and have commented on some tasks. I'll make more noise for a more inclusive (and practical) author field. I can sketch an owl.

I assume a VE change is a "Create a feature or enhancement request"? Clicking through, I assume "To report a software bug, use the Bug Report form instead...If this is your first time, please read How to write a good bug report first" means I should pretend this is a bug report and read the guide even though it says in a big red box this isn't a bug report. My assumption is wrong, the bug report guide linked prominently as a read first in the form explicitly not about bug reports is very specifically about bug reports, and is not too helpful for a new user who clicked to create a feature request. Title field I can do; pre-filled text in Description field stays, summary use and benefits I can do. Tags field "Type a project name", from looking for autocompletes it seems "VisualEditor" one word with an umbrella icon is a tag, I assume from this that the Visual Editor is a "project" and that this is a tag we want? Subscribers field, blank?

If those assumptions are correct, then "Create a New Task" and let it into the wild and it will automatically appear on some project-associated kanban board somewhere? CMD (talk) 15:29, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Hey @Chipmunkdavis. Thanks for the question, and sorry if I didn't give enough initial instructions when I suggested this workflow. What's the title you're thinking of? I'll use this information to decide if this should be a bug report or feature request, and I'll give you more information after that :)

Yes, the VisualEditor tag would be good for VisualEditor stuff. And you can leave subscribers blank (you as the creator will be automatically subscribed). Subscribers are folks that will receive an email every time the Phab post receives a comment.

Speaking more broadly, the workflow is usually 1) post on a talk page somewhere -> 2) a dev creates a ticket if the talk page post is actionable -> 3) same or different dev uses the list of tickets to decide what patches to write -> 4) dev writes a patch -> 5) a different dev approves the patch, getting the patch into the code but not yet deployed to the wikis -> 6) eventually deployed to the wikis (for VE this is done about a week after the patch is merged).

Yes, my suggestion is to skip step 1 and go straight to step 2. I think that is more efficient. Also, each tag (such as VisualEditor) has a bunch of watchers who are usually the devs of that extension, and they receive an email every time a comment is made on a ticket that has that tag. If there are recent comments in that ticket, it can bring the ticket back to the dev's minds, which is helpful for getting stuff worked on. –Novem Linguae (talk) 15:57, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

To clarify, I don't think you didn't give enough initial instructions, it's more a general comment on Phab not being very accessible. (To subscribe to a ticket, ignore the "Add Action" field completely , and instead click "Submit" on a blank request. Intuitive stuff.) My concern with the ☂️VisualEdtior tag is not just checking whether the tag applies, but because that tag was explicitly removed from what I think is a related problem at Phab:T284371. On the workflow, I did step 1 in March 2023, so you can add that to your anec-data for it being inefficient.

Regarding what I propose, I lack knowledge on how much of the issue is just en.wiki, and how much is core ways VE works. I also lack project-specific vocab. Treating it as a general issue with VE based on the reply which I feel I've seen before that VE just picks up the local templates, I would propose a ticket along the lines of:

• Title: Allow the VisualEditor Citation tool to use the alias names of citation template fields
• Feature summary (what you would like to be able to do and where): When using the manual citation option within the VisualEditor Citation tool, enable/support the "Find field" search box (and equivalent in other languages) to find, display, and allow for the selection of aliases in addition to the base label/description for chosen fields.
• Use case(s) (list the steps that you performed to discover that problem, and describe the actual underlying problem which you want to solve. Do not describe only a solution): An example use case is the limitation of naming authors for the VE Citation tool on en.wiki. Currently, VE presents a form in which all added authors be added through the fields "Last name" (or "Last name X" for multiple) and "First name" (or "First name X" for multiple). This creates an immediate barrier for correctly attributing sources by authors who do not use this common European naming style.
• Benefits (why should this be implemented?): This change would have both symbolic and practical benefits. Symbolically, the current situation is blatantly uninclusive, and if applied to contributors would directly violate the Wikimedia Foundation Universal Code of Conduct "2.1 – Mutual respect: Respect the way that contributors name and describe themselves". Practically, this uninclusiveness provides a direct hinderance to the addition of sources to en.wiki, and possibly other language Wikipedias as well. An editor who is unable to correctly fill the fields as they are given may decide not to complete the edit, or will fill them incorrectly (there is no way to do it correctly!), creating future work for themselves/others and perhaps potentially creating misinformation. Sources where authors use a name in a different format are systemically disadvantaged, and thus a barrier is created for contributions from cultures and locations where such names are common. This is not an issue either in manual editing, or using the Wikitext Citation Tool, as both allow for the use of the |author alias when creating sources, an alias which intuitively leads to the inclusion of names in any textual format. The Visual Editor Citation Tool should be able to replicate this basic functionality.
• Tags: VisualEditor
• Subscribers: None

CMD (talk) 17:25, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

To subscribe to a ticket, ignore the "Add Action" field completely , and instead click "Submit" on a blank request. Intuitive stuff. There's a more intuitive subscribe link in the menu. The menu appears on desktop in the top right. It is probably folded into the hamburger menu on mobile.

My concern with the ☂️VisualEdtior tag is not just checking whether the tag applies, but because that tag was explicitly removed from what I think is a related problem at Phab:T284371. The tag was probably removed because the patch should be written for code in the Citoid repo. Citoid is an extension that interacts with VisualEditor, but is its own extension. It's OK to pick the wrong tags or too many tags; folks will help narrow them down.

Anyway, with all this said, I think this should probably be fixed in WP:TEMPLATEDATA instead of Visual Editor, so we probably don't need a ticket for this particular one. You may want to go to Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Deploying Edit Check on this wiki and Ctrl-F for "It might be controlled by the WP:TEMPLATEDATA" to read what David Lynch and I said about this. Hope this helps. –Novem Linguae (talk) 09:18, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

The line 1601 that David Lynch referred to appears to be about Citoid. The link they provide, meta:Citoid/Maps TemplateData states that "The values in the citoid object must be valid 'params' (i.e. in this case, 'foo' - aliases are not allowed)", which is what my proposed wording sought to adjust. Taking that as not true and aliases being allowed, if this isn't a phab issue, what is the suggestion here? Edit the TEMPLATEDATA array to something like:

Extended content
"author": [ [ "author", "first", "last" ], [ "author2", "first2", "last2" ],

There are probably a few ways this could be fixed, but if the decade-old VE project doesn't want to fix it I don't see where it will be. CMD (talk) 10:11, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

OK, let me restate your proposed change and you can tell me if I'm understanding you right. Are you trying to get "Author 1", "Author 2", etc. added to this screenshot in the list of fields on the left in the screenshot? If so, perhaps a good next step would be to get consensus over at Template talk:Cite. Discussion is probably needed to decide if it should be author only, first name and last name only, or both. Each has pros and cons. Gnomes that go around updating citation templates into the ideal format will probably have an opinion on what should be suggested to users through this interface. –Novem Linguae (talk) 10:21, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

I am happy with that understanding, that is what I would expect to see, but I am open to other solutions. I've posted at Template talk:Cite. My expectation is that there will be no gnome problem as the templates can already handle names just fine and template coding in the article space doesn't need to change, the issue seems to be is that VE is unable to use the template's full functionality. CMD (talk) 10:47, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Template:AfC submission/draft

Hello Novem - I read the discussion here and I'm just curious why others are rejecting this patch. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 20:17, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for asking. The reasons were mentioned onwiki somewhere, but I forget what they were and I disagree with them. I've noticed WPAFC is a bit conservative about allowing patches, rejecting small changes that would not be rejected in other tools I work on. Anyway, if you have a github account, feel free to make a comment in that ticket. –Novem Linguae (talk) 22:24, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Here? Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Archive_57 --— Saqib (talk I contribs) 22:27, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes. –Novem Linguae (talk) 09:08, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Pending

Hi, Novem there are my pending request on RfP:Autupatrolled, could you please review already it's one month. Xegma(talk) 07:13, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

Hey there. I'm pretty busy with day job stuff this month. I probably won't have time to crush any backlogs. You may have better luck posting on a talk page or noticeboard rather than asking individual admins. That way crowd sourcing kicks in. Hope this helps. –Novem Linguae (talk) 07:32, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

Z-Library

Please review my change on website of z-library. This website is base on their official account on X

Thank you Woowooa (talk) 04:54, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

also, the link https://singlelogin.re is not working Woowooa (talk) 04:55, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

https://singlelogin.re is working for me. With the amount of fraudulent copycats of Z-Library out there, I would hesitate to trust a random Twitter account or random domains. At this point I would want to see a citation to TorrentFreak or some other reliable source. –Novem Linguae (talk) 14:41, 17 August 2024 (UTC)