Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Alex 21 (talk | contribs) at 00:19, 21 November 2018 (→A Discovery Of Witches: Replying to Valeriaorl77 (reply-link)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archives

no archives yet (create)

Tracking categories

Hey Alex,

I was actually thinking of Category:Pages using infobox television episode with incorrectly formatted episode list yesterday as I fixed some Goodies infoboxes. Do you think this is something a bot request could do or would it cause more problems?

I was thinking of maybe something like this:

1. Get list of articles from category.
2. Get the series name from the |series= param.
3. Next step has two options
   1. If |series= param does not have a value, skip article.
   2. If |series= param had a value, check if an article exists at "List of <series> episodes".
4. Next step has two options
   1. If list article does not exist, skip article.
   2. If list article exist, add it to the episode_list value.

What do you think? (unrelated to this, but related to tracking categories, is it ok to categories userspace? I've worked on finding all the television tracking categories this past month and put them all in Category:Television articles needing attention, but did not know about your userspace one. --Gonnym (talk) 08:17, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

That's a good idea, but it might not clear out as many articles we want, due to any possible differences in disambiguation between the parent article title and the episode list title. I actually filed a bot to fix this about this time last year (Misplaced Pages:Bots/Requests for approval/NihlusBOT 3), but it seems to have expanded since. The same procedure should be doable. -- Alex 03:12, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Sheffield spoons

The observation about spoons is accurate and, I think important. I did a Google search and found several sources. Didn't feel i Should include them all. What do you believe is needed? HiLo48 (talk) 23:59, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

HiLo48, this belongs at Talk:The Woman Who Fell to Earth. Cheers. -- Alex 00:37, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Definition of recurring

Hi. I've been having some issues regarding the definition of "recurring" on List of How to Get Away with Murder characters as you can see here: , , . As I stated, a character should only be introduced to the recurring table after 3+ appearances within a season, otherwise they're guest stars; I've been following other shows' characters list, where this is assumed. Is there any rule on Misplaced Pages I can use to prove my point? Cheers. - Chairhandlers 13:12, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Unfortunately not, as it's one of the Television Project's "standard practices" that we don't have formally written down. You could, however, link them to the discussions at the project talk page that reside within its archives. (It's been a job of mine to write down all of these standard practices we have into some FAQ...) -- Alex 03:02, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Demons of the Punjab

Hi. I was just wondering if it's okay to edit the above draft? I have some production info about the episode from the latest Doctor Who Magazine that would be beneficial, but I don't want to tread on anyone's toes. - JuneGloom07 Talk 17:56, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

JuneGloom07, it isn't my draft or anyone else's, if you have more info for it, go for it! -- Alex 00:43, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. I wasn't too sure how those drafts worked. I usually create drafts in my userspace and hate it when others edit them without asking first. - JuneGloom07 Talk 02:36, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

No problems. We're deliberately creating these drafts in the Draft space so that everyone can edit them, and then we move them to the article space once the episode is airing in the UK. -- Alex 03:01, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Apology

I'm sorry for the mix up on The Ghost Monument. I've been chewed out by other users for not spotting copyright violations in 3 new articles and 1 draft (in all 4 cases OTHER users, more experienced and some with NPR rights ALSO missed said copyright violations- yet they don't get in trouble for it and I did). I thought that unreviewed articles don't show up in off wiki searches but I forgot websites might come to Misplaced Pages and copy the stuff from articles, even unreviewed ones (I guess Doctor Who is high traffic article). so I'm sorry. JC7V-talk 08:06, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

JC7V7DC5768, no problems! (I know all about copping the flac because of something I have/haven't done and other editors getting away with the exact same thing. It's annoying, buy we prevail.) Just thought it was odd when it came up on my watchlist, as I've monitored the progress of the article since its creation. Anything Doctor Who is definitely high traffic at the moment, due to the popularity the series is getting at the moment with its major change-ups and its currently-airing status. All the best. -- Alex 08:12, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Accusations of bad faith towards other editors

Could I ask you why you thought it was acceptable for you to say my edit here to be in extremely bad faith (as said here) when you called this edit an actual personal attack (as you said in this edit summary)? TedEdwards 14:43, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

November 2018

JOIN THE DISCUSSION ON THE TALK PAGE BEFORE REVERTING, WE HAVE TO TRY TO REACH A CONSENSUS!

Sebastian James (talk) 12:54, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

@Sebastian James: Yes, we should try to reach a consensus, but it is fairly standard practice to revert to the status quo in a dispute, hence Alex's and my reverts. And while Alex is very welcome to join in on the discussion, he doesn't have to. And I believe you've made several more reverts than he has. TedEdwards 13:43, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

@Sebastian James: Your recent WP:BOLD edit has been reverted. Per WP:BRD, after a bold edit is reverted, the WP:STATUSQUO should remain while a discussion is started instead of edit-warring per WP:EW, and it should be resolved before reinstating the edit, after a needed WP:CONSENSUS is formed to keep it. -- Alex 18:47, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

CSI Miami season 4 driven

I hope You saw this Episode so Acording To Director or Writer, wat Posible Comon Sense Reason Y didn’t Dumb Delko ask Hayden if He can describe the Thief’s Dam Face to Sketch Artist?(2601:204:D97F:E584:2D96:1655:41D4:B8F0 (talk) 21:22, 11 November 2018 (UTC)).

Never seen it, sorry. -- Alex 23:19, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Ur name was on Revision History season 4 of Csi Miami?(107.77.214.185 (talk) 23:42, 11 November 2018 (UTC)).

Yes, an automated edit that was made across a multitude of articles; I've never actually visited the article itself, nor watched the series. -- Alex 00:41, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Date validation for Template:Infobox television episode

Hey Alex, I'm trying to do a correct date format check for Template:Infobox television episode like you did Module:Episode list, but I'm having problem making a correct validation check. I'm not sure if the {{Start date}} template itself is causing the data to be formatted before I can check it, or if it's something else. Do you have any idea how to make this work? --Gonnym (talk) 23:28, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Just to get this right, you're trying to make sure that {{Infobox television episode}} is using {{Start date}}, and checking for articles that don't? -- Alex 23:32, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Yes. I've tried doing something with the code below, but it doesn't work. Since this isn't module code, I can't use your exact code, but maybe you might know how to do it.

{{#if: {{str sub find|1={{start date|1993|02|24}}|2={{start date|}} }} | Substring is found | Substring is not found }} --Gonnym (talk) 11:52, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Gonnym, I'll take a look into it for you, but that won't work - templates are executed from the inside out. This means that in your example, {{start date}} will execute first, returning the formatted date it's meant to. Then {{str sub find}} will execute, but it won't find "{{start date", because there is no "{{start date", there is only the formatted date. -- Alex 12:01, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining that, as I had a feeling that might be the issue but couldn't verify if that is how it worked. Another option is maybe creating a module that takes that value and expands the template and checks it. Think that might work? --Gonnym (talk) 12:04, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Gonnym, no module required. Instead of using "{{start date" as the search term, use "dtstart", as this is a string specific to {{start date}} that is generated by the output of the template. Try the following:

• {{#ifexpr: {{str find0| {{start date|1993|02|24}} | dtstart }} != -1 | Substring is found | Substring is not found }}

It returns "Expression error: Unrecognized punctuation character "

That's great! I've found that this does not catch these cases. Are they issues?

• Text before template: {{#if: {{str find0| prefix {{start date|1993|02|24}} | dtstart }} != -1 | Substring is found | Substring is not found }} -> Substring is found
• Text after template: {{#if: {{str find0| {{start date|1993|02|24}} suffix | dtstart }} != -1 | Substring is found | Substring is not found }} -> Substring is found --Gonnym (talk) 12:28, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

  Gonnym, what cases are there to catch? Both of those use {{start date}}, which is what we want in the parameter. Was the goal not to make sure that {{Infobox television episode}} is using {{Start date}}, and only categorizing articles that don't (i.e. ones that just use "February 24, 1993")? -- Alex 12:32, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Well, that is the main goal yes, but an entry might be considered malformed if it was "|date = {{Start date}} 20:00 local time" or "|date = first broadcast: {{Start date}}". It might also not be, which is why I asked your opinion if these are issues or not. --Gonnym (talk) 12:35, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Gonnym, I wouldn't say that they are. I very highly doubt many articles include such content at all, and if they did, it would vary article to article, series to series, so it would require a lot more than a template check to track any such cases. -- Alex 12:37, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

If they aren't an issue that's great. Tracking them really isn't a problem though, it just might require a bit module work and not template. The reason I asked is because while fixing The Goodies (TV series) infoboxes, almost all of them did not have {{Start date}} and also had the time it aired (Tower of London (The Goodies)). --Gonnym (talk) 12:41, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Gonnym, so it's less about tracking unformatted dates and more about tracking dates with abnormal additions. Someone could do an AWB run without editing any articles, and find any articles that don't match the pattern of using just {{start date}} or an unformatted date, hence finding something that's not meant to be in the parameter. -- Alex 12:48, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Again, it's both. The infobox requires the use of {{start date}}, so any date not using that should be found. Second issue is the abnormal additions (which may or may not be an issue). So the first could be tracked by the code you've supplied. The second if needed can be found by an AWB run you say, which is better than nothing but not optimal as an automatic process. --Gonnym (talk) 12:55, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Gonnym, I see. AWB is automatic when pre-parser mode is on. Effectively, it just goes through the articles, finds any matches, and puts them all in a list then ends its pre-parser mode run. No editing through the program, just: article, check, find, next article, check, find, next article. -- Alex 12:59, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

But do you need to routinely ask someone to do it, or once created, does it recheck every day/week? It also does not place the articles in categories which then can be emptied, but a list which needs editing. But overall they serve the same function. --Gonnym (talk) 13:26, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Notice of No Original Research Noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:No original research/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

It doesn't look like you were notified. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 11:57, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Ratings for Dr Who - Demons of the Punjab

I accurately added the correct final viewing figures for Demons of the Punjab. You removed the accurate final viewing figures and replaced them with an incorrect figure. Please don't edit articles to introduce incorrect, unsourced figures. The source I gave is 100% accurate. It is here: https://www.barb.co.uk/viewing-data/four-screen-dashboard/. Please don't reverse my accurate edits to replace them with incorrect, unsourced data again.27.131.36.174 (talk) 15:03, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Are you talking about the typo of 84 instead of 48? We all make mistakes. Don't be mad. Perhaps you should have added it correctly in the first place, then I wouldn't have needed to fix it. -- Alex 22:55, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Same with you, Sebastian James. -- Alex 22:59, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

I did add the correct figures with the correct reference. You undid it and made it incorrect. You didn't make a typo. You deliberately undid a correct edit and made it incorrect. Whether it was a typo or not, you undid a correct edit to an article and thus made the article incorrect. Misplaced Pages is supposed to be accurate with accurate sources. You inserted an incorrect figure with no supporting citation and in doing so, removed accurate, cited information. Your attitude is unhelpful. If you wish to attack editors who make correct editors with sarcasm simply to justify the mistakes you make, then good luck to you and your alter-ego Sebastian James. 27.131.36.174 (talk) 02:51, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

I made a typo. Get with the program. I'll be watching your edits in case you ever make a mistake, before I jump onto you about it. We'll see what you think then. Your attitude is unhelpful. If you wish to attack editors who make correct editors with sarcasm simply to justify the mistakes you make, then good luck to you. You're clearly not here to edit the site. Bye bye! -- Alex 02:55, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, AlexTheWhovian. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, AlexTheWhovian. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Richard Bott (clergy) and Richard Bott (skeleton racer)

Thank you for initiating a title swap in order to make Richard Bott (clergy) the main Richard Bott. Although "Richard Bott" now directs to the article about Richard Bott the clergy man (yay), the article is incorrectly titled Richard Bott (skeleton racer). Likewise, the article about the skeleton racer is now titled Richard Bott (clergy). I do not have the skill set to swap titles, so could I ask you to? Thanks you. Guinness323 (talk) 06:20, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Additionally, the article about the clergyman needn't have the parenthetical disambiguator as it is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, as noted in the accepted request. Thanks, 142.160.89.97 (talk) 06:58, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

 Done -- Alex 11:07, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Thank you!! Guinness323 (talk) 20:39, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

A Discovery Of Witches

Hi! I saw you edited the page for ADOW and since I wanted to add something and create a page for some of the actors of the series someone sudgested me to contact one of the editors and here I am. I tried to do it by myself but I am new and it seems very complicated, plus my native language isn't english so I was wondering if you could do it. Daniel Ezra as Nathaniel Wilson and Freddie Thorpe as Matthieu Beny are listed but do not have a Misplaced Pages article plus Julian Kostov as Timur, Rorie Stokton as Timothy and Leo Ashizawa as Osamu aren't listed and do not have a page. i hope you can help, sorry if I bothered you. --Valeriaorl77 (talk) 23:45, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't create articles for actors. Best of luck. -- Alex 00:19, 21 November 2018 (UTC)