Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
  Policy   Technical   Proposals   Idea lab   Miscellaneous  
The technical section of the village pump is used to discuss technical issues about Wikipedia. Bug reports and feature requests should be made in Phabricator (see how to report a bug). Bugs with security implications should be reported differently (see how to report security bugs).

Newcomers to the technical village pump are encouraged to read these guidelines prior to posting here. If you want to report a JavaScript error, please follow this guideline. Questions about MediaWiki in general should be posted at the MediaWiki support desk.

Frequently asked questions (FAQ) (see also: Wikipedia:FAQ/Technical)
Click "[show]" next to each point to see more details.
If something looks wrong, purge the server's cache, then bypass your browser's cache.
This tends to solve most issues, including improper display of images, user-preferences not loading, and old versions of pages being shown.
Font size changed unexpectedly?
You may have accidentally changed the font size on your browser for a particular website by pressing a shortcut key or scrollwheel without realising it. Try resetting the zoom with Ctrl+0 (typing the digit zero while holding down the control key) or adjusting the zoom with Ctrl++ or Ctrl+-. Alternatively, look for the View option on your browser's menu and reset it to 100%.
No, we will not use JavaScript to set focus on the search box.
This would interfere with usability, accessibility, keyboard navigation and standard forms. See bug 1864. There is an accesskey property on it (default to accesskey="f" in English), and for logged in users there is a gadget available in your preferences.
No, we will not add a spell-checker, or spell-checking bot.
You can use a web browser such as Firefox, which has a spell checker.
If you have problems making your fancy signature work, check Wikipedia:How to fix your signature.
If you changed to another skin and cannot change back, use this link.
Alternatively, you can press Tab until the "Save" button is highlighted, and press Enter. Using Mozilla Firefox also seems to solve the problem.
If an image thumbnail is not showing, try purging its image description page.
If the image is from Wikimedia Commons, you might have to purge there too. If it doesn't work, try again before doing anything else. Some ad blockers, proxies, or firewalls block URLs containing /ad/ or ending in common executable suffixes. This can cause some images or articles to not appear.
Numbers listed in parentheses in the "Recent changes" section, on history pages and in your watchlist are the number of added or removed bytes.
For server or network status, please see Wikimedia Metrics.
« Archives, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174


Watchlist not being marked read

So sometime over last night my watchlist behavior changed, and the nodes on the side won't change from green to grey after I visit the diffs like they usually do. The marked pages as read seems to work, though. I do have some custom CSS which I know might be an issue, and am using Monobook, but it is extremely useful to know if I missed anything when I go through my list. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 12:38, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Not caused by your custom CSS, being looked at in phab:T218511. – Ammarpad (talk) 14:35, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
I hope it's sorted soon. Today I saw a page on my watchlist with new edits not marked as new. It's the first time I've noticed this; it's generally been the problem described above. This behaviour's described on the phabricator page as well. BlackcurrantTea (talk) 04:05, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
I've been having this and related problems on and off since mid-March. See here for past discussion. I hope this all gets done with soon. —Granger (talk · contribs) 11:46, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
Yes, I'm seeing it again too now, with the added benefit of changed, unseen pages showing up without bold. It's kinda insane this is STILL an issue six weeks later! —Joeyconnick (talk) 03:42, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Sigh. And now bolded and non-bolded entries are entirely random. GMGtalk 12:18, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
Melodia, I'm getting pages showing I've visited since the last change when it's not true. --valereee (talk) 18:09, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
I get this too. – Tea2min (talk) 06:40, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
My watchlist is buggered too, exactly as described above, but that Phabricator report is weeks old, and my issue only started a couple of days ago.Roxy, the dog. wooF 14:27, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
It seems that it was related to whatever update included a time stamp on the "view new changes" button. Or maybe that's just a coincidence. At any rate, it's a problem across all projects, and not just the English Wikipedia. GMGtalk 14:46, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
The issue with Firefox certification made teh Internetz unusable for me yesterday. Mozilla script kiddies fixed that quite quickly. Could WMF poach some of the Mozilla nerds to help? Roxy, the dog. wooF 14:52, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
As noted above, the issue has been affecting some users (including me) since March, so something else must be involved with the problem. isaacl (talk) 17:26, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
Started happening for me a few days ago too - David Gerard (talk) 17:36, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
Seems to have stopped happening for me now - David Gerard (talk) 19:35, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
Just started again for me. —Joeyconnick (talk) 05:23, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
I have these two gadgets enabled: "Display green collapsible arrows and green bullets for changed pages in your Watchlist, History and Recent changes (unavailable with the improved Watchlist user interface)"; "Display pages on your watchlist that have changed since your last visit in bold (see customizing watchlists for more options)". Both have been misbehaving for several weeks now. But interestingly, there was an occasion a day or two back when the Wikimedia servers were slow, and not all of the JavaScript and CSS was being sent back to me. During that period, the Watchlist was behaving as it should: unread posts were boldfaced with a green bullet; read posts were normal weight with a blue-grey bullet. Once the servers were back to speed, the misbehaviour resumed. I conclude that for each of the gadgets, there are two different scripts that have different effects that conflict with one another. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 16:21, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
Perhaps we'll find out later this week. According to the Phabricator page this week's MediaWiki release fixes it. In the meantime I'm thinking of my watchlist as one of those irritating online shops where they keep suggesting the same items, whether or not you've seen them ('Other editors who read Village pump (technical) were interested in...'). BlackcurrantTea (talk) 16:59, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
Still not fixed. Someone's posted about it on Phabricator; the task is still marked as resolved, and I can't tell if anyone's opened a new one. BlackcurrantTea (talk) 18:06, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
Yes, it's still broken. Read items still marked as unread. I don't know what the "Closed, Resolved" status means: either it's fixed in the code but not deployed on the servers yet, or it's already deployed, but then it means the fix does not fix it, and therefore the bug should be reopened.—J. M. (talk) 21:06, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

How is this still happening? More than two months and this problem is still showing up. This morning most of the pages on my watchlist aren't getting marked as read, and those that are get marked as unread again a few minutes later. —Granger (talk · contribs) 23:35, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

@Aaron Schulz: It looks like it was you who marked this as resolved on Phabricator, so I'm pinging you to let you know that the problem is still happening. —Granger (talk · contribs) 23:38, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Is there a way to reset the entire watchlist? Geordie (talk) 23:49, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
Yes, there's a "Mark all changes as seen" button, if that's what you mean. —Granger (talk · contribs) 00:16, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
Where is this button to be found? Geordie (talk) 00:32, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

From the plebs to the devs

script execution order

One would expect imported scripts to execute in a linear fashion (or at least I did), but this does not appear to be so. How does one force the execution order of scripts imported into common.js (or other)? For reference, this is basically what I'm doing in my common.js:

   importScript("A");
   importScript("B");
   importScript("C");

Regards, Guywan (talk) 13:19, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

So, you could do this by using the ResourceLoader function of Mediawiki--which incidentally you should switch to anyway, because importScript is deprecated. mw.loader.getScript provides a means to load a script, and also provides a callback for when loading is done; you'd basically daisy-chain the callbacks. Like this:
mw.loader.getScript('/w/index.php?title=User:Foo/bar.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript').then( function () 
{
  mw.loader.getScript('/w/index.php?title=User:Foo/shoosh.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript').then(function ()
  {
    mw.loader.getScript('/w/index.php?title=User:Foo/pap.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript');
  });
});
If I may ask, though; why do you want them to run sequentially? Writ Keeper  13:27, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
I don't, really. I was importing two scripts that added links to the Tools section of the sidebar, and sometimes the links would be in a different order. So, I was wondering if there was a way to prevent this. Thanks for the help! Guywan (talk) 17:57, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
@Writ Keeper: forgotten ping. Guywan (talk) 18:01, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

new lines

Also, completely unrelated: Is there a character code for inserting newlines into wiki pages? Regards, Guywan (talk) 13:19, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

@Guywan: it really depends on what you are trying to do, can you show an example of where you need a newline? The direct html code <br /> could be used in some cases, however we mostly try to avoid it in articles. — xaosflux Talk 14:34, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, Pong ball in flight.svg Xaosflux:. Hopefully this might clear it up.

Hello, World!

Hello,

Wikipedia!

In the second example, what invisible character did the parser read that told it to insert a line-break, and how can I insert it programmatically? Regards, Guywan (talk) 17:57, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Programmatically in what context? A JS user script? You can put a new line through the standard \n character within a string. For example: the call new mw.Api().newSection("User:Writ Keeper/sandbox","test","test\n\ntest"); led to this edit, newlines included. Does that help? Writ Keeper  18:13, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
The parser wraps double \n\n characters as paragraphs. Single \n characters are included in the same paragraph tag. The "Magic" character is a \n.--Jorm (talk) 18:20, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Thank you, @Writ Keeper and Jorm:. This helps very much. The problem was I only used a single \n, and not seeing what I wanted, assumed \n was stripped. Guywan (talk) 16:37, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

Can someone generate a new list for Wikipedia:Templates with red links

Wikipedia:Templates with red links lists all templates containing red links, but has not been updated in eight years. Can someone generate a new list? The existing subpages (Wikipedia:Templates with red links/001 through Wikipedia:Templates with red links/150) can be overwritten. Cheers! bd2412 T 23:09, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

  • @Pppery: can do a database dump probably? -qedk (t c) 20:56, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
    @QEDK: What do I have do do with this? * Pppery * survives 20:57, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
    @Pppery: I saw you do a query over at Quarry, so I thought you could help BD2412 with fetching this. That was quick! --qedk (t c) 20:59, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Infobox song contest entry

Template:Infobox song contest entry has double bold in parameter "Name" in embded version. Template is protected and only template editors and administrators can edit it. Eurohunter (talk) 08:35, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Template:Infobox song contest entry has no Name or name parameter. Click the "View source" tab to submit an edit request to a protected page. Clearly state which change you want. If you are thinking of the song parameter then the double bolding may be deliberate to indicate that the below headings are subheadings for song and not for the parent infobox. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:53, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

A "special" page is taking a very long time to load

I just visited my bookmarked site to check contributions by new users, but it is way too slow to respond for some reason; I reloaded the page a couple of times, even with a different ISP, but it didn't help.

The page is Special:Contributions; it responds instantly, but if I add these two parameters: contribs=newbie&target=newbies, it takes roughly 40 seconds to load, which is absurd.

If you'd like to help, please let me know if you can reproduce the issue: link with the said parameters added. Thanks. —RainFall 11:30, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

  • @RainFall:  Confirmed I got this error: PHP fatal error: entire web request took longer than 60 seconds and timed out. Must be quite an intensive request. Guywan (talk) 12:12, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
  • There's phab:T137478; filtering recent changes by new users is much faster ([1]). Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:25, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
The Special:Contributions&contribs=newbie&target=newbies worked fine until about 10 days ago when I started getting the same problem as User:RainFall. The phab task to remove this option as I see it is not a good idea despite the ability to get pretty much the same information via Special:RecentChanges. Nthep (talk) 17:51, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
Nthep, ok. so you have a patch to make the thing magically faster ? —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 21:27, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
I wish. Although the same link on Commons continues to be rapid. I accept that the load here is greater but something must have been changed to make the performance degrade so badly. Nthep (talk) 21:34, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

New user contributions slow

For the past week or so, whenever I try to look at new user contributions ("Show contributions for new users only"), the query takes VERY long (sometimes so long that the Wikimedia server gives up and throws up an error page). Has anyone else experienced this? Anyone looking into it? WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 00:31, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

See #A "special" page is taking a very long time to load. PrimeHunter (talk) 08:47, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Newbie edits function not working

Hi all,

In recent weeks, the new editors' contribs feature has not been loading. When it (rarely) does, it is very, very slow. I've also been getting Wikimedia errors ("Our servers are currently under maintenance or experiencing a technical problem.") Would appreciate any help resolving this.

Thanks,

GABgab 08:26, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

See #New user contributions slow and #A "special" page is taking a very long time to load sections above. – Ammarpad (talk) 09:13, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Talk pages consultation: Phase 2

All my contributions today say "Tag: PHP7"

It's annoying. Is there a fix?— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:19, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

@Vchimpanzee: Go to the beta features page in Special:Preferences and verify that a) "enable all new beta features by default" is turned off and b) "use php7" is turned off. That aside, using PHP7 is not a bad thing, and there isn't really a reason for you to be annoyed. --Izno (talk) 21:25, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
Izno, the beta mode has just been removed, and now gradually more and more people will be switched over. —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 21:26, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
:O --Izno (talk) 21:27, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
Vchimpanzee, everyone is slowly being moved over to PHP7. This tag will be in place until everyone is moved over to php7. So this means you are in the group of the lucky few who have already moved over. Nothing to worry about. —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 21:25, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
As long as the tag stops appearing eventually.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:39, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

What is "php7"? DuncanHill (talk) 23:01, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

See PHP. -- WOSlinker (talk) 23:06, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
I did and it seems to be written for people who already know what the article is telling them, rather than for people who don't. DuncanHill (talk) 23:08, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
mw:Beta Features/PHP7#I am a non-technical user. What does this mean?: "Hopefully nothing. This is about changing the software used to run the wiki's code. Ideally, you should notice no real difference." PrimeHunter (talk) 23:44, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
MediaWiki, the software that runs Wikipedia, is written in a language called PHP. For a while, there were two ways for servers to run the PHP code: the default engine called Zend and an alternate method called HHVM. Wikimedia used HHVM because it was faster. A few years ago, HHVM decided that it would only support a specific style of PHP after PHP version 5. MediaWiki is not written in that style, so the developers decided to switch back to Zend. Zend had also become faster than HHVM. This change was first made as a beta feature to make sure nothing broke, but is now being rolled out on a larger scale to test it with more users. TL;DR: What PrimeHunter said. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 23:55, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, that's the sort of explanation I was looking for. DuncanHill (talk) 23:58, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
@Vchimpanzee and DuncanHill: If you look at the history of many pages (such as this one), the contribs of some users like Vchimpanzee (talk · contribs), your warchlist or indeed this diff, you'll see that "(Tag: PHP7)" has two links. Click the second one. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:39, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

Tag: PHP7

Why are edit contributions being marked with Tag: PHP7? GoodDay (talk) 01:13, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

GoodDay, See this thread a bit up the page. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 01:17, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Talk pages consultation 2019 – phase 2

The Wikimedia Foundation has invited the various Wikimedia communities, including the English Wikipedia, to participate in a consultation on improving communication methods within the Wikimedia projects.

Phase 2 of the consultation has now begun; as such, a request for comment has been created at Wikipedia:Talk pages consultation 2019/Phase 2. All users are invited to express their views. Individual WikiProjects, user groups and other communities may also consider creating their own requests for comment; instructions are at mw:Talk pages consultation 2019/Participant group sign-up. (To keep discussion in one place, please don't reply to this comment.) Jc86035 (talk) 14:48, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

Caps lock

About a week ago, my computer started locking on all-capital letters when I capitalize a letter, but only when I'm typing in an English Wikipedia edit box--not in the edit summary box, and not in French Wikipedia or Wiktionary or non-Wiki sites. How do I turn off the automatic caps lock? (I'm using an iPad.) Loraof (talk) 15:41, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

This is a known issue, of which the cause has not been fully tracked yet. —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 16:25, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Oops

Resolved

I managed to mess up the AFD that I started here Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of tragedy films and TV programs. If someone can fix my error it will be most appreciated. MarnetteD|Talk 17:56, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

What's wrong with it? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:29, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
Nothing now. Thanks to QEDK for fixing it. MarnetteD|Talk 18:33, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
@MarnetteD: It was just an external link that you wikilinked accidentally, which broke the substitution, all fixed now! --qedk (t c) 18:47, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
D'oh! Thanks for letting me know QEDK. MarnetteD|Talk 18:51, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
That would just display brackets around the link: [this note]. The problem was mismatched brackets in [[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_tragedy_films_and_TV_programs&diff=next&oldid=895915235 this note]. When source code is displayed in the rendered page, always look for something mismatched. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:12, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

watchlist too short again

In order to see my watchlist for a date range of about a week or two, I had to edit the number of items to 10,000, which I did in the watchlist URL by editing "limit=1000" to "limit=10000". Apparently, this has been disabled, with efforts to set the limit to 10,000 or 5,000 causing a redirect to 1,000, resulting in my seeing only about 50 items. What it shows me should be 30 days, and I've tried 29.9 and 14, but no matter, it's showing only May 14-18. The earliest on May varies, but sometimes it's an item from 7:37a. The first time it was around 7:37, then it was later in the day, and now it's 7:37a. I tried editing "days=30" in the URL to 40, but that auto-redirected to 30, with the earliest item now being 16:43p on May 14.

Removing VP(T), which has a lot of edits, from my watchlist did not solve the date range problem.

I'm not bothered by the closing off of one kludge, but we need something, so what solution or kludge can I try now?

Nick Levinson (talk) 19:46, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

The max is 1000, AFAIK, per the Prefs->Watchlist screen. When I go away for a week, I have to go through my Watchlist namespace by namespace. It's yet another way of making life a little more difficult for WP power users. T10681 is related, in that it also makes it harder to catch up after multiple days away. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:30, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
What would be nice is if the watchlist URL accepted a parameter like &offset=20190512223000 in its query string, the same way that user contribs and page histories do; even better if it also allowed &dir=prev. That way, when you have finished going through your watchlist, you would note the date and time time of the most recent edit that you have examined, and on return from hols, set the offset to the date and time that you had reached, and work forward from that point. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:48, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
Support all of the above. At the very least let's get rid of the limit for extended confirmed users or for the non-Javascript watchlist. I'm fairly sure I used to be able to see more than 1,000 pages before the new watchlist was rolled out. DaßWölf 04:12, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
@Daß Wölf: No, the "improved version of the Watchlist" moved from an opt-in beta feature to an opt-out live feature in July 2018; the 1000-change limit was introduced in August 2017. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:52, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

please fix Category treatment in watchlist (kludge is to exclude that)

I found a kludge, not my favorite and with some possibilities not tested: Leaving settings at 1,000 items and 30 days and with no active filters, open the Namespaces menu and select to exclude Category. You don't even have to exclude Category Talk.

If filtering is to include Category only, I get May 15-18, but if I want articles and Category only, then I get May 14-18, but if I want articles only, I get April 18 to May 18. That means that including Category alters the date range for one or more other namespaces. Most of my tests produced April 20-May 18. The difference between April 18 and April 20 may be the 1,000-item limit, so that's probably not a fault.

But Category should not be truncating my watchlist. If it must, then please add an explanation to the page so we'll know to select namespaces accordingly.

Nick Levinson (talk) 00:12, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

I reported this as a bug to Wikimedia's Phabricator. Perhaps the other suggestions in this topic should be reported there, too; I'll leave that to other people at their discretion. Nick Levinson (talk) 01:09, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
Are you seeing edits like this "(diff | hist ) . . Category:Heist films‎; 17:51 ‎Gjs238 ( talk | contribs‎ ) (Category:Japanese heist films added to category)"? When I'm watching a category and someone adds/removes multiple pages from it, they all show up in the watchlist, not just the most recent change (regardless of whether I'm watching the pages which were added/removed from the category), so when someone makes a real flurry of edits like that it can swamp the watchlist. Perhaps you've watchlisted some very active categories and those changes are not showing up but still counting towards the 1,000 limit somehow. DaßWölf 04:33, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Lead section paragraphs out of order again

At Surtsey on mobile, the second paragraph has been put above the infobox instead of the first one, resulting in an incorrect reading order. This isn't the first time this has happened. Hairy Dude (talk) 02:52, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Hairy Dude, next time you should post at the actual village pump Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) instead of this talkpage as people rarely reply to posts here. – Ammarpad (talk) 12:32, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Wikimedia Foundation Error

Resolved

I've been getting this error intermittently for the last hour or two. It seems to happen on some pages a lot more than others. For instance, I got it once on VP(T) while leaving a reply in the section above, but after getting my last edit saved I can't access Virtual reality sickness at all anymore. Oddly this only seems to be a problem in one browser, despite the page showing a 503 code (server error). (I wasn't logged in on the other browser I tried.) Anyone else seeing this? DaßWölf 04:21, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

  • Not just you. --qedk (t c) 08:04, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
  • It has been happening for days, on and off. - Sitush (talk) 08:06, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
    • I've seen it frequently in the last half hour, here and at Wikidata. The explanation on the error page about complicated templates doesn't fit the current error. If the revision history of this page loads several times without an error, and it hasn't changed, it shouldn't start producing error messages. Yet it did. BlackcurrantTea (talk) 08:29, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Can confirm, happened to me in id.wikipedia as well. Vulphere 10:00, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
  • The issue is closed as resolved, if the issue persists (after the timestamp of the resolving comment only!), reopen the Phab ticket. --qedk (t c) 13:37, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Magic word

Hello everyone, I'm from ckbwiki. I added this mediawiki page, but it doesn't work properly! Now what should i do to create {{SHORTDESC:description}} (The magic word) on our Wikipedia? Thanks! --ئارام بکر (talk) 17:26, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

@ئارام بکر: see phab:T184000 and related tasks. ckbwiki does not appear to have the shotdesc parser hook enabled (w:ckb:تایبەت:وەشان). — xaosflux Talk 17:36, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
@Xaosflux: but why? English wikipedia how did that? Why other wikipedias can't? I want to add the magic word in same way that enwiki did that. Any way? --ئارام بکر (talk) 19:04, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
@ئارام بکر: Using and changing the appropriate letter-code descriptions on Wikidata will do the same thing. Your wiki probably does not need the short description magic word. --Izno (talk) 19:46, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
@Izno: I know, but that gadget is more useful and easy than we go from ckbwiki project to wikidata and repeat again and again always. --ئارام بکر (talk) 23:04, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
Unless I'm missing something, that gadget makes a LOCAL description, it doesn't update the normally used wikidata entry. — xaosflux Talk 23:42, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
@ئارام بکر: I'll look into making the gadget work on other wikis (so you can edit the wikidata description without going to wikidata) while working on User talk:Galobtter/Shortdesc helper#Export to wikidata?; should be easy enough. Galobtter (pingó mió) 16:17, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Page download speed

The code for Wikipedia:Database reports/Indefinitely blocked IPs has a size of 1,784,147 bytes, and as it's basically a big chart with lots of text, I expect that the complete page size isn't significantly larger than that. (It has no images at all, except the little up-and-down arrows, and images present on all pages, like File:Wiki.png and File:Wikimedia-button-for-homepage.png.) Conversely, http://proceedings.esri.com/library/userconf/fed16/papers/fed_86.pdf has a size of 27,717,239 bytes. Can anyone guess why the first page takes a lot longer to load than the second page? I just discovered the second page a few minutes ago; it's not as if I had it cached. And while Esri is an important player in its field (software for Web-mounted GIS), I suspect that their servers' speed and capacity are significantly less than Wikipedia's, with Alexa rankings of #7,072 and #5 respectively. And it's not just my computer; go to Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 158 and look for "Indefinitely blocked IPs" to see Galobtter's comment. Nyttend (talk) 21:06, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

PS, please note that Esri's self-hosted GIS sites tend to be mounted on arcgis.com, so I don't think the nature of the site would require them to have significantly faster servers. Nyttend (talk) 21:16, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

@Nyttend: Does the page still take a long time to load while you are logged-out? --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 01:28, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Interesting: it loads a lot faster, even though I have no scripts installed except one to hide a link in a certain infobox and another to give me the traditional "You have new messages" bar. Could it be the skin? I use Monobook. Nyttend (talk) 01:39, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Nyttend, when you are logged in, you get a fully dynamically generated page, when you are logged out, you get a partially cached pre-rendered page which is slightly faster, but still not as fast as a fully pregenerated thing like a PDF. —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 10:53, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Nyttend, they don't really compare. One is a website, the other a pdf. One is generated on the fly based on wikicode, the other is pre generated. —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 10:38, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Hm, okay; I didn't realize that there was a difference from the server's perspective. I figured it sent me a bunch of 1s and 0s (about 14¼ million for the webpage and 221.7 million for the PDF), and once they'd all downloaded, the page was ready. Nyttend (talk) 11:03, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Nyttend, yeah it's not like that. By that definition buying a factory printed book in the store vs having the store employee type over a book using a typewriter and handing you that copy would take the same time ;) —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 09:43, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Both of them took negligible time for me, which means, it's a problem with your internet connection, browser, intermittent server-side problems, OS, or a combination of them (not an exhaustive list). --qedk (t c) 18:09, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-21

13:03, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Major schema changes coming to database replicas

On June 3 the _user and _user_text fields of revision, logging and a few other tables on the Toolforge replicas will be dropped, as part of the actor migration that has been going on for over a year. The full list of changes can be found at phab:T223406. At simplest, you'll need to JOIN on actor to get user names and/or the value for the *_actor foreign key in revision, etc. Pinging maintainers of bots and tools that I'm fairly sure are affected: @Enterprisey, Σ, SQL, and MZMcBride. The time to update your tools is now. If you're not already, you should subscribe to the Cloud-announce mailing list to get notified of such changes with more advanced notice. Best, MusikAnimal talk 00:10, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

MusikAnimal, I've updated SQLBot's AIV task. I'll try to hunt it down in all my remaining tools when time permits. SQLQuery me! 06:13, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Oh, yikes. Thank you for the ping! This change is almost certainly going to break some scripts that I'm foolishly still maintaining. --MZMcBride (talk) 07:11, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

This template editnotice doesn't work

Resolved

Template:Parenthetical referencing editnotice is supposed to place an editnotice that is only visible when someone opens up the editing window on an article but instead it places a BIG BRIGHT notice onto the article itself when it is in the Read-only mode. (See this lovely example at Hyde Park Picture House.)
If this editnotice worked the way it says it's supposed to work, it should only be visible to editors when they are editing a Harvard-cite'd article that the template has previously been placed upon. Someone, please fix it...I don't know how and have just discovered this editnotice and it would be really really REALLY useful to (hopefully) forestall editors not following an established Harv-cite referencing style on an article. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 05:40, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

@Shearonink: Edit notices are created in a pseudo-namespace at Template:Editnotices/Page/___. I've created Template:Editnotices/Page/Hyde Park Picture House for you --DannyS712 (talk) 05:46, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Thank you...but that sort of doesn't answer my question... There then needs to be additional documentation/instructions on the actual Template page to tell editors how to implement this template. And, does that mean that for every time I want to use this Template that I have to create a pseudo-namespace for it? Can't it be transcluded or something? On almost every single article that uses Harvard cites that I come across there is a continuing problem of editors adding the more-common straight inline citations and then that subsequently creates a funfunfun mess to clean up afterwards. Shearonink (talk) 05:58, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
@Shearonink: If you want to post a list at my talk page, I'd be happy to create edit notices for you --DannyS712 (talk) 06:00, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Heh, you have no idea how long that list can get...I mean, now that I understand what to do I can do it myself but seriously...this is the only way to do it? Also, just to make sure I understand how to implement it... When the pseudo-namespace thingy is created it then will just appear on the article whenever the article is edited, it doesn't have to be added to the article itself as another bit of code? Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 06:09, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
@Shearonink: Correct --DannyS712 (talk) 06:25, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Ah...ok, thanks. Since you understand how editnotices work would it be possible for you to add some instructions on the template itself? Editors not understanding how editnotices work seems to be a longstanding issue from the Template's talkpage... Thanks again, Shearonink (talk) 06:39, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Shearonink, you may be thinking of {{Use Harvard referencing}}, which is meant to be placed at the top of articles. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:43, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
I might have been but I wasn't. I had already found that Template, used it and found it wanting for my purposes. I wanted and want an edit notice to boldly appear when the editing window is opened. In my opinion the "Use Harvard referencing" is a little too demure for most editors to really see it... Shearonink (talk) 07:22, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Shearonink, well.. the template does say: "To create a new editnotice, please follow the instructions at WP:Editnotice" and that should explain everything right ? —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 09:40, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Does it? I don't see that line of text anywhere on Template:Parenthetical referencing editnotice so I obviously missed that part when I tried to use the template and that's why I asked here. And if someone who is somewhat-experienced around WP misses it so might others. So far as I can tell the template at present reads as follows:
  • To display this message when an editor edits an article, create an editnotice for the article containing {{Parenthetical referencing editnotice}}. This template is not for use in articles. Editnotices are separate pages that display as message boxes shown about the edit window when a user edits a page.
Btw the present instructions at the How-to guide WP:Editnotice?... Well, DannyS712's explanation above was very clear, very concise, and I understood it right away. The "official" how-to guide instructions?...well, I had to ask here didn't I. Shearonink (talk) 17:00, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
@Shearonink: The methods for adding editnotices to specific pages differ according to whether or not you have the templateeditor user right or not.
If you do not have this right, you need to make an editnotice request by following the directions at WP:Editnotice#How to request an editnotice.
If you do have this right, you will find when editing any page (or section of a page) that one or two links are displayed at upper right, titled "Group notice" and "Page notice", which may each be red or blue. The "Group notice" one may be absent; but regardless, the one to click and edit is "Page notice". For example, when editing Actuary, there is only a "Page notice" link, which is blue, and goes to Template:Editnotices/Page/Actuary. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:41, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
@Redrose64 and Shearonink: also, User:DannyS712/Edit notice.js adds a link to a page's edit notice, without needing to edit the page --DannyS712 (talk) 20:05, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Labs is down, or partially down

I am having issues accessing https://tools.wmflabs.org/copypatrol/en, getting an error "HTTP error 500" message. Some of the other pages on Labs are not working, for example these ones are not working:

  • https://tools.wmflabs.org/admin/tools
  • https://tools.wmflabs.org/xtools/rangecontribs/index.php?
  • https://tools.wmflabs.org/rangecontrib/
  • https://tools.wmflabs.org/xtools/autoblock/index.php

Any assistance in getting this fixed would be appreciated. Thank you, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:41, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Update: Some of these are now working, including CopyPatrol, but others are not. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:24, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

CopyPatrol has been fixed. The outage was due to phab:T223992. I assume it was the same issue that affected toolforge:admin/tools. @Diannaa: You should not be using any of those legacy XTools links. Range contributions is now part of core, just enter the IP range at Special:Contributions. I don't know anything about toolforge:rangecontrib but I assume it did the same thing. Autoblocks are viewable at Special:AutoBlockList. If you need to search by autoblock ID, currently you need to do this at Special:BlockList, putting #123 as the "IP address or username", where 123 is the autoblock ID. MusikAnimal talk 14:29, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Thank you, I will remove the old tools from my collection. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:34, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Illegible talk page

All of my talk page below the edits of February 18, 2018 (15 months ago) were rendered illegible by this edit by Wikiacc. Why? How can it be fixed? Michael Hardy (talk) 19:45, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

... and now it appears I've fixed the problem, except that the thing that appeared to be causing it has been there for a long time, so it's a mystery why it suddenly happened now. Michael Hardy (talk) 19:57, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
An edit in February last year added a <math> tag without the balancing closing tag. Wikiacc's edit added three (balanced) pairs of <math>...</math>, the first of which was taken as the closing tag for the one added in February. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:16, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

A gadget seggestion

Hello everyone, I'm from ckbwiki. I thought enwiki add this (and a sipmle) gadget like ckbwiki and arwiki also. If this community accept the gadget, please an interface editor create the gadget by following these instructions:

Create Mediawiki:Gadget-RedirectLinks with the following:

Display links to [[Help:Redirect|redirect]] pages in near-green cola

Then, create Mediawiki:Gadget-RedirectLinks.css with the following

/**
 * Display links to redirect pages in near-green cola
 * @revision 1.0 (2019-05-21)
 * @author ئارام بکر
 */
a.mw-redirect { color: #4e6f1c; }

Then, at MediaWiki:Gadgets-definition in appearance section add the following:

* RedirectLinks[ResourceLoader]|RedirectLinks.css

Finally, check the gadget and enjoy!

Goal: See all redirect page links with the different color ("near-green cola" for now).

Thanks:) --ئارام بکر (talk) 23:07, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

@ئارام بکر: I suggest you start by listing this at Wikipedia:User scripts/List and see if people start using it first. — xaosflux Talk 01:25, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
There is also User:BrandonXLF/GreenRedirects, which does something similar --DannyS712 (talk) 02:18, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
@Xaosflux: and @DannyS712: I do apology to User:BrandonXLF. I didn't know that this gadget (or script) is available already. However, thank you both! --ئارام بکر (talk) 15:41, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

What's

Resolved

the obnoxious weird box being visible over pages that have a red linked category? See this image. WBGconverse 12:14, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

See Template_talk:Sockpuppet#Sockpuppet_categories. According to the documentation, it's garish. -- zzuuzz (talk) 12:28, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
For the technical side, the image is from User:PedroLucas151204 with source {{sock|João Victor23567|confirmed}}. It uses {{Sockpuppet/categorise}} which uses mw:Help:Extension:ParserFunctions##ifexist to test whether the corresponding category exists. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:37, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
The helper script is creating new cats and I don't see any reason for the message to exist. Inclined to revert. WBGconverse 12:41, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
Just someone's way of throwing errors, it's not that garish imo, either way, Fixed. --qedk (t c) 12:41, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
@Winged Blades of Godric: Please don't upload Wikipedia screenshots to imgur. My browser takes several minutes to display anything, and then it's the cookie information box which I am obliged to "accept" before I can see anything useful. Even when I have exited the website, my computer slows to a crawl necessitating at the very least close and restart the browser. In the past, my antivirus software has warned me about imgur and I don't want to reboot every time.
Instead, we have guidance at WP:WPSHOT. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 13:20, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
If something appears when you log out and it doesn't look like a browser issue (layout often is) then you can usually just link the page and describe it. If it's text then quote a sample. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:30, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Same with me, but it eventually opens and doesn't affect my system. Idk if this is helpful, but I upload stuff to imgBB (which downsizes it) and generally distribute the hotlink to the static image page. --qedk (t c) 13:43, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
I don't personally care as much about imgur screenshots as I do about un-search-friendly, unhelpful section headings like "What's", made out of the first word of the comment. But that's probably just me... -- Begoon 13:39, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
Begoon, Apologies. I ought to keep that in mind. WBGconverse 15:44, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
Don't lose any sleep over it - just a peculiar niggle of mine. People in help forums I frequent do it a lot and it inexplicably irritates me whereas I don't usually care about small stuff like that. Illogical, but true... -- Begoon 15:53, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

Why was I not signed in?

I'm certain I checked the box when for some reason I wasn't signed in earlier this week. I turned off the computer on Monday and turned it on this morning.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 15:13, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

Your browser probably just cleared your cookies. Happens occasionally. --qedk (t c) 17:47, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
I have noticed a lack of purple links. But the last time I restarted the computer because of updates was Sunday.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 18:38, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
That's a definite sign your browser is clearing your history. Updates sometimes have something to do with it and sometimes don't. Cookies are set to expire after a while and while the Wikipedia "Remember me" cookie is indeed set for 365 days, it probably won't last that long anyway. --qedk (t c) 18:58, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

Weird new user account

Resolved: Nothing was technically wrong here, but there is a suspect compromised account being dealt with and cleaned up after. See also Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Probable_compromised_admin_account. — xaosflux Talk 20:17, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

Sorry if this is off base, but I just came across User:NVPA8200. They have no contributions anywhere, and were created 16 hours ago. However, they are in the following user groups: edit filter manager, edit filter helper, account creator, autopatrolled, confirmed, event coordinator, extended confirmed, page mover, file mover, IP block exempt, mass message senders, new page reviewers, pending changes reviewers, rollbackers, and template editors. That being said, I can't find any log of the account being created or given these rights (see enwiki log and meta log). Any ideas? --DannyS712 (talk) 19:00, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

The logs are redacted. Galobtter (pingó mió) 19:08, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
@Galobtter: Oh, never mind then --DannyS712 (talk) 19:09, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
Yeah, it's not the first time, I think. Some people prefer CLEANSTARTs like this (not assuming anything about this account). --qedk (t c) 19:13, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
These logs probably shouldn't be revdel'ed, per Wikipedia:Revision_deletion#Log_redaction. I'm not sure if I can say who RD'ed it (erring on the side of caution). SQLQuery me! 19:21, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Per WP:ADMINACCT I'd like to know the reasoning behind this and why it's not visible with a reasoning for it. Clean starts don't mean you get logs redacted and all the perms...Praxidicae (talk) 19:24, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  • What Praxidicae said. Clean starts mean you create a fresh account and restart from scratch, they don't mean you get to keep those parts of your previous history you feel like keeping while jettisoning those parts you consider inconvenient. ‑ Iridescent 19:27, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
This also brings up a potentially much larger issue but I'll wait for the answer to the "why" before I get into it...also how can we apply WP:ADMINACCT to something like this where such an action is not visible to the larger community? I would think that any type of RD or even OS of this nature would warrant an explanation that would make it obvious to at least someone with a mop that there was good reasoning? Praxidicae (talk) 19:29, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Agree with Iridescent. I think the number of rights is primarily why they did not want a blanket new account — gaining this many rights takes a significant amount of limbs into each field, and that's a lot of time and effort. Although, and I am playing the devil's advocate here, what's the point of the EFM+EFH combination? --qedk (t c) 19:35, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  • @QEDK, the EFM+EFH combination is because they've literally granted the new account every single bit that it's technically possible for an admin to grant unilaterally. ‑ Iridescent 19:37, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
@Iridescent: The EFM bit worries me but I explained a little more below.
  • I think I've put 2 + 2 together here so forgive me if I'm wrong and as I'm not a mop holder and have no ability to review the logs, this is merely based on what is obvious but I think an explanation is warranted given the admin appears to have created a second account, given it all the perms that aren't crat given and then redacted the logs. I apologize if this isn't allowed but they also don't have email enabled so I can't even ask privately. Would pinging the user here be any violation? I'm quite concerned given the recent compromises and the fact that there's no email but they've given themselves EFM access on a redacted account. Praxidicae (talk) 19:40, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
    It's kind of stupid to redact one log and leave the other one as-is. --qedk (t c) 19:44, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
    @QEDK: I think they were just unredacted by TonyBallioni --DannyS712 (talk) 19:47, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
    @DannyS712: There was a 2:00 Special:Log/rights log by Nv8200pa which was not redacted, immediately followed by a 2:09 redacted (now unredacted by Tony) log — that's why I called it stupid, since they redacted only one of them. --qedk (t c) 19:53, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
    @QEDK: One of them was for the hidden account, and one was for themselves, but I see what you mean --DannyS712 (talk) 19:54, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  • User:Nv8200pa is an admin, who has been around since at least 2003. This admin is currently active, so this is not them, but it's an interesting coincidence. — Maile (talk) 19:47, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
    @Maile66: Not a coincidence - the logs were unhidden. Nv8200pa created the account and added the rights --DannyS712 (talk) 19:48, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Since it's been unhidden, I'll do it here: @Nv8200pa:. Can you explain this mess and also your unblock of this with the explanation of: (Incorrect ISP Identification; No longer owned Webhost; Residential IP Pool.), which is easily identified as a webhost. Followed by your assignment of IP block exempt to yourself via a UTRS ticket: Nv8200pa talk contribs changed group membership for Nv8200pa from administrator to IP block exempt (temporary, until 02:00, 22 May 2020) and administrator (Requested via UTRS #223560 - Trusted user across multiple projects)) (thank)? And can another administrator with UTRS access verify that it is indeed a ticket from the person in question? Praxidicae (talk) 19:49, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
    • 223560 isn't even a valid UTRS#, UTRS is only in the tens of thousands right now, not the 200 thousands. — xaosflux Talk 20:09, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
I'd also suggest a block of both accounts until this is sorted out as it appears to either be compromised or an egregious abuse of tools (or possibly incompetency) and none of these things are good. Praxidicae (talk) 19:51, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
Qedk Not at all. In one of the last spates of compromised admin accounts, they created alt accounts after editing innocuously and gave them perms too. If this was indeed a compromise, the EFM alone could do a TON of damage. Praxidicae (talk) 20:06, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
@QEDK: ^^^ --DannyS712 (talk) 20:07, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
This one tops that too is what I'm trying to say. Giving alts perms is one thing but erasing your tracks so meticulously is new to me. --qedk (t c) 20:09, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
QEDK, wasn't meticulous enough, DannyS712 caught it! SQLQuery me! 20:10, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  • @SQL: Yeah, before the logs were unhidden here is what I pieced together (I sent it to Praxidicae becauce I thought they were an admin and could check, but here it is verbatim):
Here is what I've managed to piece together:



From the user table in the database,

"user_id"       "       user_name"      "       user_registration"

36574779        "       NVPA8200"       "       20190522020807"



NVPA9800 was created on 05/22/2019 at 02:08:07



Log event (revision deleted) at 02:08, 22 May 2019 (likely creation of the account):

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&logid=99346409



Log event (revision deleted) at 02:09, 22 May 2019 by Nv8200pa (likely adding the user rights):

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&logid=99346427



New users (account creation) log item hidden at 02:11, 22 May 2019 by Nv8200pa:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&logid=99346469



User rights log item hidden at  02:10, 22 May 2019 by Nv8200pa:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&logid=99346460



I'm all for assuming good faith, and I could be completely off base since I can't see the log entries myself, but to me it appears that Nv8200pa created NVPA8200, gave them rights, and then hid it. You may want to check those log entries.
If you know what you are looking for, its not hard to piece together --DannyS712 (talk) 20:14, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
@DannyS712: Yeah but how'd you find NVPA8200? --qedk (t c) 20:19, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
@QEDK: I was bored DannyS712 (talk) 20:21, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
718smiley.svg --qedk (t c) 20:24, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
@QEDK: In all seriousness, in the context of exploring @SQL: (the language) I ran a database query that I've recreated at Quarry:query/36356, ordering template editors by time of account creation. I ran similar queries with a few other rights, and thought I would investigate why an account created earlier today had all of these rights. I posted here, and then went on to figure the rest out, before Tony undeleted the lock entries so I could confirm my suspicions (the text above was sent when it was still hidden) --DannyS712 (talk) 20:28, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
Ahhh, so we got lucky afterall. But it's a good thing that we did. Let me make some progress regarding this over at ANI. --qedk (t c) 20:32, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Hi all, I ran a check after unrevdeling the log entries. There were several oddities in the edits that to me suggested the likelihood of account compromise. The account moved from editing on a static IP with one operating system for all previous edits within the CU period to a proxy with an entirely different device for the log entries in question. I have blocked locally, notified ArbCom, and requested a steward lock the account. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:12, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
    That was quick, @TonyBallioni:! --qedk (t c) 20:13, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

Thumbnails in mobile search

Is there a way to tag an image in an article so that it won't be used as a thumbnail in mobile search? GoldenRing (talk) 16:03, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

It's called the page image and is used for several things. mw:Extension:PageImages#Can I exclude certain page images? says: "There is a blacklist on every wiki that administrators can edit, at MediaWiki:Pageimages-blacklist (example). Any images that appear here will not be page images for any article." I guess we shouldn't make a long MediaWiki:Pageimages-blacklist for efficiency reasons. Moving the image out of the lead would also work. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:49, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Wikiscan down?

Hi. This morning in the UK I noticed that I was unable to access en.wikiscan, and that's still the situation this evening. I can access the site http://wikiscan.org/, but not http://en.wikiscan.org/ For the latter, I either get "The connection has timed out" error in Firefox or simply "Sorry, the website en.wikiscan.org cannot be found" via by ISP. Everything seemed OK yesterday. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 18:01, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

In the US the same thing is occurring as well. OkayKenG (talk) 21:33, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
Appears to be working now. Thanks to whoever helped behind the scenes. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 13:34, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Request/proposal for ability to suppress certain redirects from searches

At this Redirects for Discussion entry, concern was expressed over them cluttering the search results, as a justification for deletion. This seems like a kludge that does not address the underlying problem.

I'm writing here to open a discussion about the desirability/feasibility of marking redirects with, for example, Category:Unsearchworthy redirects, and having them be removed from the search dropdown, and from search results unless they're specifically requested to be included. That would allow the redirects to be retained to preserve inbound links if desired, without getting in the way. (It would make them WP:CHEAPer, I suppose.)

Thank you for considering this! —{{u|Goldenshimmer}} (they/their)|😹|✝️|John 15:12|☮️|🍂|T/C 18:16, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Isn't this already a feature of some templates, like {{R unprintworthy}}? Perhaps Paine Ellsworth (talk · contribs) knows. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:15, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
Oh, that would be cool if so! —{{u|Goldenshimmer}} (they/their)|😹|✝️|John 15:12|☮️|🍂|T/C 22:55, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
If so that is news to me (and that would be great)! {{R from subpage}} and {{R from camelcase}} both should have this feature, if it exists. Some of the RfD guidelines would also probably need to be updated if this feature exists. - PaulT+/C 03:09, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
I agree that this sounds very much like editors with an R#DELETE #1 agenda testing the meaning of "unreasonable" as it applies to search-field-dropdown-menu hogs, and I also agree that R#KEEP #4 far outweighs. I know of no redirect category for such hogs. And I wonder if anyone in that RfD has actually tested "The Simpsons" in their search field? It yields very different results than "The Simpsons/" with the backslash. Printability is an altogether different issue, yet there is likely some overlap. For the millions of mainspace redirects, one thing that unprintworthy redirects would have in common with unsearchworthy redirects is that this is not a choice that should be given to a bot, since it would often be difficult to assess the "unworthiness" of a redirect. This will remain an issue that should be decided at RfD. Paine Ellsworth, ed.  put'r there  08:49, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
That all makes sense. There are definitely some tricky edge cases with this feature that require human judgement. Do you agree that this is a feature that makes sense? Where is the best place to request it? WP:PHAB? Or does there need to be more discussion first, perhaps at WT:SEARCH? - PaulT+/C 12:24, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Timelines?

Idk if this has been asked before, i first questioned this on the Teahouse and they redirected me to this page, i went to a band's page and it shows that they have a timeline but there is nothing on it so i tried editing to fix it, on the preview it is shown but on the real thing nothing (I use a phone to edit btw, so it's probably because of that). --FromFrankTalk♬ 14:35, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

See phab:T216318. You have to use desktop view to actually see the timeline, at least for now. – Ammarpad (talk) 14:46, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Blocked user able to upload

Has anyone ever seen an editor who's able to upload while blocked? If so, please visit Commons:COM:VP/T and offer an opinion. Commons:User:Drbaseball95 was indefinitely blocked in 2012 and hasn't been unblocked, but as you can see from Commons:Special:Contributions/Drbaseball95 (temporarily, until I delete them) or Commons:Special:Log/Drbaseball95, the account uploaded dozens of images in 2019. Nyttend (talk) 00:52, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

@Nyttend: The files were uploaded to this wiki and then imported to commons by User:Magog the Ogre. * Pppery * survives 01:13, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for helping me understand. I was under the impression that a little marker (like <at en:wp>) was added to an uploader's username when an import occurred in the last few months, so I rejected the idea of an import when it came to mind. Nyttend (talk) 01:26, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Toolbar highlight duplicate links

I've had User:Ucucha/duplinks in my common.js for a very long time. It used to highlight duplicate links pretty well. Now, the only way I can tell what it's highlighted, if anything, is by enlarging my screen and using a magnifying glass. And how it highlights is one link is a a teeny-weeny very thin red line around one duplication, and a very faded dotted box around the other instance. For one thing, red is not easy to see for some visions that have no problem with other colors. And what is the use of making the other link so subtle that it can hardly be seen? Is there a better tool than this to highlight the duplicate links? This is just not workable as it. I've tried it on Firefox and Chrome, so the issue is not browser specific. — Maile (talk) 01:05, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

@Maile66: User:Ucucha/duplinks.js was merged with User:Evad37/duplinks-alt.js on 24 January 2019. Have you asked Evad37 (talk · contribs) about it? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 12:47, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
Redrose64 (talk · contribs) Thanks. I switched the script with Evad37's script. Same thing. Perhaps that's the editor who changed the visuals. I'll contact him. — Maile (talk) 12:57, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Offensive Captcha

Wikimedia received an email from someone attempting to create a new username. ticket:2019052510000337 They were prompted to enter a Captcha with the phrase "nazisgood". They were understandably surprised as were some other agents, who thought this would be excluded by a blacklist.

I thought that there may be editors here who might be able to said some light on the issue.--S Philbrick(Talk) 14:34, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

I assume it is because "nazis" isn't in the bad word list (which does appear to exist per phab:T163148). Galobtter (pingó mió) 16:33, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
Galobtter, That sounds plausible. S Philbrick(Talk) 18:17, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
Was there a picture of the catpcha attached? Reedy (talk) 18:37, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
Reedy, there is now. S Philbrick(Talk) 21:38, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Global locking? Or blocking?

Color me confused.

A new editor user:Jflemmingjr wrote to Wikimedia, ticket:2019052510003218 saying they could not login. Their account is two days old with zero contributions. I didn't see any sign they were blocked, so I asked them to try again. It didn't work and they provided a screenshot.

Then I remembered I had run into a similar situation, and I was told to check to see if it was a global block.

I checked here, and see no sign of a block.

According to Wikipedia:Blocking_policy#Global_blocks:

Registered users cannot be globally blocked. The analogous action is global locking, which prevents anyone from logging into the account.

However, the screenshot clearly states that they are "blocked globally".

What am I missing?--S Philbrick(Talk) 16:13, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

The account Jflemmingjr is not globally locked and the only global blocks that exist are IP global blocks. Ruslik_Zero 20:39, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
Ruslik0, Thanks. I thought a message notifying an individual that they are subject to a global lock would identify the IP address. I saw a sample somewhere recently but can't seem to track it down at the moment, but the message this person received identify their username not their IP address so I'm still unclear on what happened. I've asked them to share their IP address so I can check the global lock list. I won't be terribly surprised if they failed to tell me their IP address. I know I wouldn't share mine if someone simply asked. S Philbrick(Talk) 21:51, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  • I was blocked without being blocked thanks to an IP block. See threads on my talk page about it. It was highly distressing. DuncanHill (talk) 21:53, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
Pinging @Swarm: who helped me. DuncanHill (talk) 21:57, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)&oldid=898782069"
This content was retrieved from Wikipedia : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)
This page is based on the copyrighted Wikipedia article "Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)"; it is used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA). You may redistribute it, verbatim or modified, providing that you comply with the terms of the CC-BY-SA