User talk:Qwerfjkl/Archive 12

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Archive 5 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15

Tech News: 2022-19

15:21, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #519

Administrators' newsletter – May 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2022).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:34, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Template recursion issues

Ive been looking through Category:Pages with template loops, and ive noticed pretty much all of your /scripts/ pages have popped up in them. Looking further into the issue, it seems to be originating from User:Qwerfjkl/scripts/template, which has confused me quite a bit. First of all, the onlyinclude tags dont seem to be doing much work, if any. The page displays the same no matter how i change it. Second of all, the reccursion is probably comming from the call of {{#invoke:string|match, and how you fetch its own content. Ill let you decide how you want to fix it, since it still seems to give the content back. Hope this helps. Aidan9382 (talk) 05:28, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Turns out im mistaken. The issue of template looping is originating from the call of {{SAFESUBST:<noinclude />Script installation text}} in User:Qwerfjkl/tempscript. Looking deeper, the issue seems to originate from this line (<includeonly>{{SAFESUBST:<noinclude />#if:{{SAFESUBST:<noinclude />#invoke:String|match|s={{SAFESUBST:<noinclude />:{{SAFESUBST:<noinclude />FULLPAGENAME}}}}|[[Category:Wikipedia scripts]]|plain=true|nomatch=}}||{{SAFESUBST:<noinclude />#switch:{{{categorize|{{{cat|}}}}}}|never|no=|{{SAFESUBST:<noinclude />#switch:{{SAFESUBST:<noinclude />NAMESPACENUMBER}}|2|4=[[Category:Wikipedia scripts|{{SAFESUBST:<noinclude />SUBPAGENAME}}]]}}}}}}</includeonly>) in {{Script installation text}}. I dont really know enough to understand the full extent of this line, so I'll leave it to you to decide if its posible to/worth fixing the looping. Aidan9382 (talk) 06:44, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
@Aidan9382, It transcludes the page onto itself in order to check if the page has the category. I suppose {{Find page text}} might be better. ― Qwerfjkltalk 15:21, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
I gave what you suggested a try and its worked (AFAIK) perfectly. Those were also the last pages in Category:Pages with template loops, so i can officialy consider that as (hopefully) empty now. Thanks for the suggestion. Aidan9382 (talk) 18:10, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Article created by mistake?

I believe P_talk:SARS-CoV-2 was created in mainspace by mistake when making the portal redirect. If you want to G7 it or move it where you believe it should be. WikiVirusC(talk) 23:51, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

I've nominated this for speedy deletion as you seem to have created it by accident. Mako001 (C)  (T)  🇺🇦 05:28, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Yes, Q, I'm not sure what you were going for here, with this page. Liz Read! Talk! 06:07, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
Sorry @
P:SARS-CoV-2 becomes P talk:SARS-CoV-2. This is a known bug, but I always forget to fix it (see #Speedy deletion nomination of ISO 639-6 talk:xghu). ― Qwerfjkltalk
06:29, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
Well, that makes sense. I hadn't heard of that bug before, but I'm glad I know about it now. Cheerio. Mako001 (C)  (T)  🇺🇦 06:49, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Regarding a CfD outcome

Hi Qwerfjkl, thanks for closing Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 April 9 § Category:Wikipedia requested edits. Not a big deal but I think one of the post-split categories should be Category:Wikipedia partially-block edit requests per mine and DarthFlappy's responses. Thanks! CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {CX}) 13:04, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

@CX Zoom, I read those; however, users can be partially blocked, but the block is a partial block. The edit request is not partially blocked; it is a partial block edit request.w ― Qwerfjkltalk 15:42, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
Ah, I see that. This one actually seems better. Thanks! CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {CX}) 05:06, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Relisting

First of all thanks a lot for all your work at CfD! Regarding the 3rd relisting of

WP:RELIST about that. Fwiw, personally I am even a bit more reluctant with relisting than that. I would mainly relist a second time when there has been some more discussion since the first relisting but nothing conclusive. But in case of no further discussion and if I am too uncertain about it I would usually not relist it a second time but rather leave it to an administrator to close. (In this particular case I might have closed the discussion as rename though.) Please just treat this as a minor comment, not as serious criticism. Marcocapelle (talk
) 17:34, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #520

Tech News: 2022-20

18:57, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Qwerfjkl/preservedCategories during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. * Pppery * it has begun...
03:50, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Lillup

Hello,

I see you recently reverted an edit at List of Australian Aboriginal group names that had changed 'lillup' to 'lollup'. I'm just letting you know that I'm going to delete 'lillup' as an alternative name to Alura. I'm a linguist and work with Australian languages and have been trying to find how/why this name came to be inserted as an alternative to Alura (who actually prefer to be known as Jaminjung) but it seems pretty clearly an error. There is a plant from Central Australia known as 'alura' (in the Alyawarr language) which has an alternative name of 'lilup' and I think that's how the confusion arose. Anyway, as you made a relevant edit I thought I'd let you know.

Cheers, Dougg (talk) 04:55, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Page mover

I've granted page mover per your request at

WP:PERM; guidelines for usage of the right are found at Wikipedia:Page mover. If you have any questions, or in the future decide that you do not intend to use the tool, you can contact me or any other administrator. Hog Farm Talk
20:15, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Qwerfjkl,

You tagged this category for deletion but it still has 68,291 pages in it so I'm going to remove the tag. The category has to be emptied first and I think you need help from an admin who closes CFD cases for this one. Liz Read! Talk! 03:48, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

@Liz, I also placed an edit request at Template talk:Infobox musical artist#Template-protected edit request on 18 May 2022, and tagged the template that populates the category for deletion at Template talk:Infobox musical artist/tracking. ― Qwerfjkltalk 06:05, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Noticeboard notice

Hello Qwerfjkl, there is a discussion open regarding edits made by your bot at Wikipedia:Bots/Noticeboard#Controversy_About_Report_Being_Generated_by_Bot. Please see and comment there when you have a moment. — xaosflux Talk 14:10, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter May 2022

New Page Review queue March 2022

Hello Qwerfjkl,

At the time of the last newsletter (No.26, September 2021), the backlog was 'only' just over 6,000 articles. In the past six months, the backlog has reached nearly 16,000, a staggering level not seen in several years. A very small number of users had been doing the vast majority of the reviews. Due to "burn-out", we have recently lost most of this effort. Furthermore, several reviewers have been stripped of the user right for abuse of privilege and the articles they patrolled were put back in the queue.

Several discussions on the state of the process have taken place on the talk page, but there has been no action to make any changes. The project also lacks coordination since the "position" is vacant.

In the last 30 days, only 100 reviewers have made more than 8 patrols and only 50 have averaged one review a day. There are currently 816 New Page Reviewers, but about a third have not had any activity in the past month. All 861 administrators have this permission, but only about a dozen significantly contribute to NPP.

This means we have an active pool of about 450 to address the backlog. We cannot rely on a few to do most of the work as that inevitably leads to burnout. A fairly experienced reviewer can usually do a review in a few minutes. If every active reviewer would patrol just one article per day, the backlog would very quickly disappear.

If you have noticed a user with a good understanding of Wikipedia notability and deletion, do suggest they help the effort by placing {{subst:NPR invite}} on their talk page.

If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process and its software.

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.
Sent 05:18, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #521

Feedback request: Wikipedia proposals request for comment

Your feedback is requested at

removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator

. | Sent at 16:31, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

CfD closure

I think in this discussion you accidentally moved the nominated category to the wrong target. Can you have another look please? Marcocapelle (talk) 18:40, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Tech News: 2022-21

00:19, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Sarah-Nicole Robles

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read

the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard

to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on

Sarah-Nicole Robles requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable
.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by

visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. scope_creepTalk
15:46, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Qwerfjkl,

I don't think you can find an admin who will delete a full category based on a CSD tag. All of the contents of this category need to be recategorized first to the new category, prior to this page being deleted. But you should be familiar with this process since you regularly close CFD discussions now so I'm a little bit confused by your request. Liz Read! Talk! 19:56, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi Liz, the pages can't be recategorised because it is the category page; it needs to be deleted so that the other category can be moved in its place. On second thoughts, a round-robin move might have simplified this. ― Qwerfjkltalk 20:20, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Would you mind reversing this closure? Per

WP:BADNAC, A non-admin closure is not appropriate [... when] the outcome is a close call (especially where there are several valid outcomes) or likely to be controversial. Such closes are better left to an administrator. That argument seems to apply here. * Pppery * it has begun...
15:44, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

The same applies to ‎Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 April 1#Category:Wikipedians who oppose rebranding the WMF and Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 April 1#Category:Wikipedians assessed by WikiProject Users. I don't think an unexplained no consensus really constitutes a proper closure. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:46, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
@Pppery, Not much I can do for Wikipedians who oppose rebranding the WMF, but I've reverted the rest. ― Qwerfjkltalk 15:52, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
Sorry, that was my mistake (I was only intending to challenge the no consensus closures, not the earlier relisting I conflated them with). For what it's worth I don't think the relisting there accomplished anything either, but that's water under the bridge now. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:55, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
@Pppery, the discussions have been closed as no consensus by Fayentic London. ― Qwerfjkltalk 13:03, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
I know I've disagreed with several of your decisions regarding categories in the past, but still you are doing a very good job at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion. * Pppery * it has begun... 16:08, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

"Kay eff cee" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Kay eff cee and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 May 27#Kay eff cee until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 747pilot (talk) 19:55, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

"Kay ef cee" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Kay ef cee and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 May 27#Kay ef cee until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 747pilot (talk) 21:05, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia proposals request for comment

Your feedback is requested at

removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator

. | Sent at 22:31, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 May 2022

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Category:Video games set on fictional planets. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Masem (t) 14:44, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #522

Please clarify this CFD close

Hi, please could you expand your close of Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2022_April_23#Video_games_set_in_a_fictional_location, to specify which parents you merged each deleted category to? E.g. it appears from [12] that you merged Category:Video games set on fictional islands to Category:Video games set on islands, but not also to Category:Works set on fictional islands.

IMHO it would also be appropriate for you to state your rationale for merging to only one parent, as suggested by User:Zxcvbnm, rather than to all parents, as suggested by me.

I have no objection to you processing CFDs manually, as you are leaving a clear edit summary, but feel free to list them instead at

WT:CFDW, so that an admin can then feed the donkey work to a bot. – Fayenatic London
09:55, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

@Fayenatic london, Looking at it again, if there is consensus to keep Works set on fictional X, then the categories should probably have upmerged to both. I'll fix the closing statement and upmerge to the other categories based on my contributions, though it'll take a while - some of those categories had over 400 pages.
It's mostly easier to manually process them, as with Cat-a-lot I can manage <90 pages in about 20 seconds, so it's easier, although any more than that and I have to wait another minute to avoid the rate limit. Once I remove d ~1300 pages from a category, and that took around half an hour. ― Qwerfjkltalk 11:12, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Thanks. Don't feel you have to do that just because I asked, though. There was some weight against my suggestion, and you may be able to find consensus for a single upmerge... but if so, the justification should be documented.– Fayenatic London 12:55, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
@Fayenatic london, actually, I'll wait until the DRV below finishes. ― Qwerfjkltalk 17:12, 30 May 2022 (UTC)