Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 10:57, 20 June 2010

Archives
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5

Another DAB Challenge Leaderboard Issue

I'm sure you're already aware of this, but you know what assume does.

The Leaderboard section is reporting the following error:

Database connection error: User 'jason' has exceeded the 'max_user_connections' resource (current value: 15)

Ulric1313 (talk) 05:47, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, they upgraded PHP to a version that doesn't support the pattern matching used in my scripts. I hope to have it fixed by tonight. --JaGa 10:20, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Just checking to be sure you know this: although the database connection error is gone, the Leaderboard still isn't updating (and hasn't since about March 7). I wanna know whether Woohookitty is over 5000 edits yet!  :-) R'n'B (call me Russ) 22:13, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Musicals - primary topic

Thanks for raising the issue at WP:MUSICALS. In the cases where there is a consensus, would you kindly go ahead and make the moves? Thanks! -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:36, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Oh, sorry, I totally overlooked this message! It looks like others have taken care of it. My apologies for the negligence. --JaGa 09:41, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Untagged Deadend Pages broken

As of right now, Untagged Deadend Pages has a total of 4 items, even after a refresh. As much as I'd love to believe that's true... :)--Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:31, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi Fabrictramp. Updates on the Toolserver have broken my scripts. I'm going to have to rewrite it to get it working again - but I will get it working again! Don't give up on me, this is just a very busy time for me right now. :) --JaGa 12:15, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

I can relate. :) Thanks in advance for whatever you can do.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 14:59, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Done at last! deadend pages is up and running again. --JaGa 12:17, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Toolserver Pages

All seem to be saying the following:

Unknown database 'u_jason' Database connection error: Unknown database 'u_jason' Ulric1313 (talk) 17:25, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Ergh, Toolserver is killin' me. The error that is causing the dab challenge to fail is causing my database connections to pile up. I checked - the tables are still there, so my schema hasn't been deleted, despite what the error implies. I'll try to get to this, but we just moved to a new apartment (no broadband yet) and I can't access the Toolserver from work. But I'll do what I can. --JaGa 09:39, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

OK, should be sorted. Let me know if you see any new problems. --JaGa 12:12, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi

Yes, it's been a while. Never enough time to work on all of the projects that you're interested in. J04n(talk page) 21:19, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Wild Horses

Don't you think that making the Rolling Stones song the primary topic shows bias? If it stays at (Rolling Stones song) I'll be more than happy to fix the links. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • 19:32, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

<<shrug>> I'd say that is the most famous "version", making it primary. The question boils down to popularity; if most people, when searching for Wild Horses (song), have the Stones' version in mind, the link should go there, with a hatnote for the other versions. Just the other day, someone wanted to point Balzac to a disambig because there's other stuff called Balzac. But since a large number of searches and links are with the intention of finding the author, the author gets primary status - proper bias, I suppose. Now, Wild Horses is much more debatable, and if the status quo stays I won't be upset. Mostly, I hope to see those who boldly move articles clean up after themselves. (I'm not at all worried about you, btw; I've seen you around and know you to be responsible; I only needed to make sure you were aware of the need of cleanup.) --JaGa 22:29, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Toolserver questions

Two questions for you...

1. I've noticed a small bug in recent weeks when working with the uncategorized articles toolserver; what happens is that a vandal blanks all or part of an article, resulting in category removal, and another user or bot reverts — but then, even though the categories are back on the article, it remains listed as uncategorized until another subsequent edit is made to the article after the revert. I have no idea how many articles it ultimately affects, but I've seen it at least four or five times in the past week alone — just as an example, this happened to Aretha Franklin on Saturday, and then Cluebot reverted it, but even after that it remained on the uncategorized articles list until I did a no-change save on the article several hours later. Is that something you're able to fix on the toolserver end, or is it an unavoidable server glitch?
2. I'm also wondering, is there a way to scan or search the uncategorized articles list for titles which have a specific word in them? For example, as a user who lives in Toronto, I'd sometimes like to be able to scan the list for all titles which have the word "Toronto" (or "Ontario", or "Canada", and on and so forth) in them, so that I can knock off a batch job in AWB whenever possible, instead of having to manually eyeball a list of about 15,000 articles one title at a time. Is there, or could there be in the future, a way to do that?

Thanks. Bearcat (talk) 22:47, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Another example of #1: design was blanked and reverted almost two days ago, and I just force-saved it off the list now. Bearcat (talk) 23:12, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

And Alex Ríos. I promise I'll stop now; you get the idea :-) Bearcat (talk) 00:30, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Ah yes, that bug has been an annoyance to me for a long time. I duly reported it some time ago, and it's been duly ignored. Would you be interested in updating the bug with your findings? You'll have to create an account on the MediaWiki site to get at the bug. Here's the bug report, which you'll see, is exactly what you described; the last update is one of those somewhat condescending "I can't reproduce it so obviously there's no problem" comments. Perhaps a word from you, a different user verifying its continued existence, could get it moving? It would be a service to the wiki, if we could only get the right person to look into it; this doesn't only affect the uncat reports. (BTW, sorry to say, I wouldn't know how to address your request #2). --JaGa 20:28, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Update: I was about to update the bug myself, but I can't seem to find a reliable way to reproduce the bug (Not that I'm blanking pages; I'm just finding pages that were blanked and then reverted, and they all have their links intact.) Any thoughts? --JaGa 20:12, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

is it possible

is it possible to delete an article "from all visibility"? brad olesen here

back in January you AfD'd an article - rightfully so. not contributed by me i had no idea it was up and I want any record of it deleted

and, can you delete this conversation as well??

brad olesen - article name deleted bcolesen my username

Bcolesen (talk) 23:49, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Is the page showing up on sites that scrape content from Misplaced Pages? If so you'll have to wait for them to refresh their content. I would bring the question up at Misplaced Pages:Help desk; I'm not an administrator and wouldn't have the power to do what you ask, if it's possible. I'll delete this conversation in the next few days if I don't hear from you. --JaGa 09:01, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Arno Elias

Hello JaGa. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Arno Elias, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you. Tikiwont (talk) 20:15, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned images

What happened to http://toolserver.org/~jason/orphaned_images.php ? Did you give up on it or has it been replaced by something else? It is still listed at: Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Images and Media/Great Copyvio Purge. Thanks. ww2censor (talk) 09:45, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Huh, I didn't even know about that page. A change to the Toolserver some time ago broke most of my tools. I've rehabilitated the majority of them, but haven't worked on the Orphaned Images tools because I thought no one was using them. I'll fix it, but it'll be a few weeks before I can get to it - very busy at work right now. --JaGa 09:51, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Sounds good. Please drop me a talkback when you get it done. Thanks ww2censor (talk) 11:14, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

I would like to second this request - I too found it very useful!! Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:36, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

 Done --JaGa 21:29, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Great, thanks! Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:23, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

User Results

What is the criteria used to recognize a disambiguation link fix at your toolserver page? I am curious, because I cleaned up about 500 links to Washington last week, but the disambiguation link fix page shows none. -- JPMcGrath (talk) 19:08, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi JP, it's great to see you contributing to the project! The link fix page only shows fixes done to pages in the monthly list, which is a list of the 500 most-linked disambig pages as of the beginning of each month. Washington was converted into a disambig on May 4, so it wasn't available when the list was generated. Hence no one got credit for those fixes. I wish the list weren't so limited, but I have to do it that way for Toolserver performance reasons. --JaGa 19:20, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

That explains it, I think. I came across a list of top DAB pages with links here, which did contain the Washington page, but the monthly list does not. Is there a reason that the monthly list can't be updated from the other list? — JPMcGrath (talk) 03:58, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

It is updated from the other list, but only on the first of every month. This is the preferred way, as we can set a goal and pursue it through the course of a month. It would feel chaotic if that goal changed daily. --JaGa 08:12, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Doesn't really sound like a performance issue then. — JPMcGrath (talk) 01:15, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

There are also performance issues, but even if there weren't, I don't think people would want the change. --JaGa 08:05, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Toolserver suggestion

An article that has stub categories on it, but isn't in any articlespace categories, is actually considered to be uncategorized for the purposes of Misplaced Pages categorization. For example, China Stock Index Futures has the stub template on it, with the result that it has a category link on it for Category:China stubs, but since it isn't in any true topic categories it is still considered to be uncategorized.

So, is there a way that we can exclude such articles from the "Categorized articles" toolserver list, and include them in the "Uncategorized articles" list instead? Bearcat (talk) 00:22, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

There should be a way - aren't stub templates normally categorized as such? If so I could key off that. I'll check it out. --JaGa 08:06, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

 Done - and the uncat count has jumped to about 40,000. --JaGa 18:26, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Toolserver Issues

Getting the following:

Database connection error. Please try again later. User 'jason' has exceeded the 'max_user_connections' resource (current value: 15)

Ulric1313 (talk) 07:29, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Resolved. Thanks for the heads up - I wouldn't have noticed so quickly without it. --JaGa 18:39, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Misplaced Pages:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 17:29, 15 June 2010 (UTC)