Jump to content

User talk:PokestarFan/Archive 7

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikibooks, open books for an open world
Latest comment: 7 years ago by Dan Polansky in topic Windows Command Prompt Commands
Archive 1 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7

Wikibooks:Bots

In addition to the problems of the day, please be aware of our policies in Wikibooks:Bots: Bots may be used provided they work as expected, do not interfere with or reduce people's ability to contribute meaningful content to Wikibooks, and do not perform any controversial actions or violate policies. Bots which break these basic principles may be blocked without warning.

This would be a reason to block your user account (and this too). Imagine that it had been your book where you had spent one week of your expertise, it's totally unacceptable because your bot has been refused because it had too many bugs and you have persisted to launch it with your user account. So this is my last friendly warning before blocking any account used by your buggy bot (unless it's in your user space). JackPotte (discusscontribs) 21:28, 20 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

Besides, this is not serious to welcome new users by saying possibly contact me personally without any signature. JackPotte (discusscontribs) 08:00, 24 August 2017 (UTC)Reply


18:00, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of "User:PokestarFanBot/patrol_whitelist"

User:PokestarFanBot/patrol_whitelist, a page you created, has been tagged for deletion, as it meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion; specifically, you removed all content from the page or otherwise requested its deletion.

You are welcome to contribute content that complies with our content policies and any applicable inclusion guidelines. However, please do not simply re-create the page with the same content, or remove the speedy deletion tag from the page. You can contest the deletion by clicking the "Contest this speedy deletion" button inside the speedy deletion tag. You may also wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article.

Thank you. PokestarFan • Talk • Contributions 19:40, 23 August 2017 (UTC),Reply

Speedy deletion nomination of "User:PokestarFanBot/possible_vandalisim_archivelist"

User:PokestarFanBot/possible_vandalisim_archivelist, a page you created, has been tagged for deletion, as it meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion; specifically, you removed all content from the page or otherwise requested its deletion.

You are welcome to contribute content that complies with our content policies and any applicable inclusion guidelines. However, please do not simply re-create the page with the same content, or remove the speedy deletion tag from the page. You can contest the deletion by clicking the "Contest this speedy deletion" button inside the speedy deletion tag. You may also wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article.

Thank you. PokestarFan • Talk • Contributions 19:40, 23 August 2017 (UTC),Reply

Speedy deletion nomination of "User:PokestarFanBot/possible_vandalisim/archivelist"

User:PokestarFanBot/possible_vandalisim/archivelist, a page you created, has been tagged for deletion, as it meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion; specifically, you removed all content from the page or otherwise requested its deletion.

You are welcome to contribute content that complies with our content policies and any applicable inclusion guidelines. However, please do not simply re-create the page with the same content, or remove the speedy deletion tag from the page. You can contest the deletion by clicking the "Contest this speedy deletion" button inside the speedy deletion tag. You may also wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article.

Thank you. PokestarFan • Talk • Contributions 19:48, 23 August 2017 (UTC),Reply

Speedy deletion nomination of "Template:Bot code"

Template:Bot code, a page you created, has been tagged for deletion, as it meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion; specifically, you removed all content from the page or otherwise requested its deletion.

You are welcome to contribute content that complies with our content policies and any applicable inclusion guidelines. However, please do not simply re-create the page with the same content, or remove the speedy deletion tag from the page. You can contest the deletion by clicking the "Contest this speedy deletion" button inside the speedy deletion tag. You may also wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article.

Thank you. PokestarFan • Talk • Contributions 19:49, 23 August 2017 (UTC),Reply

Sophie Cheng

Hi,

Sophie Cheng is owned by a colleague of mine. Eliarani (discusscontribs) 15:58, 24 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

Learning Quarterly: August 2017

L&E Newsletter / Volume 4 / Issue 13 / August 2017
Learning Quarterly

Stay tuned
blogs, events
& more!

Leave your mark on Meta!
Inspiring ideas and learning patterns you can contribute to.

22:09, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Nieuwsbrief 64 Wikikimedia Nederland

22:14, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 September 2017

19:15, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

15:31, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

English-Hanzi

I suddenly realized I didn't recall what had happened with the RFD on this, so I went back to investigate, and it looks as if you marked it closed, with an assertion that some pages were deleted but most were kept, and then you archived the whole thing. However, you aren't an admit and do not have the power to delete anything, furthermore I'm not convinced this was really a solid interpretation of consensus. I also see that you didn't take care of the other administrative tasks associated with closure — the book still has the RFD notice on it, and there is nothing on the book's talk page about an outcome.

So it looks to me as if you didn't have the ability to entirely implement the closure, didn't do all the things you were able to do, and made a dodgy call in "closing" it. Non-admins shouldn't be closing RFDs when the outcome is controversial, nor should they do so when the outcome involves deleting anything since they don't have the power to do that themselves (and the community hasn't designated them as someone who can make the call to do so), and RFDs shouldn't be closed without doing the associated cleanup.

That's what it looks like. I'd really like to hear your side of this.

I'm thinking it's probably not appropriate for you to close any RFD; one of your particular weaknesses is in making consistently solid judgement calls, and closing an RFD demands making very sound judgement calls. --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 05:53, 22 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Pi zero: I usually wait one or two weeks, and then decide based on the votes. PokestarFan • Talk • Contributions 18:51, 22 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
I'm going to need to agree with Pi zero here and I should have caught this earlier myself. Please do not close any additonal RFD or RFP's. --Az1568 (discusscontribs) 18:57, 22 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
Ok then. It just seems like they are never closed. PokestarFan • Talk • Contributions 18:58, 22 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

The Signpost: 25 September 2017

News, reports and features from the English Wikipedia's weekly journal about Wikipedia and Wikimedia

15:59, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Book categories

Moving book categories from the old naming scheme to the new one is a tricky operation, requiring human attention to all manner of complications that may arise. Doing those by bot is likely to create a mess that may be harder to clean up than the whole operation would have been to do without the bot. --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 03:31, 25 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Pi zero: What about semi automatically moving them, such as having the texts pop up on page? PokestarFan • Talk • Contributions 19:18, 25 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
I'm not sure what you're proposing. --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 02:31, 26 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
You can see what I did to process the ones the bot had moved (well, you can see what I did beyond the many null-edits, which don't show up as edits). --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 14:58, 28 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

Nieuwsbrief 65 Wikimedia Nederland

This Month in Education: September 2017

This Month in Education

Volume 6 | Issue 8 | September 2017

This monthly newsletter showcases the Wikipedia Education Program. It focuses on sharing: your ideas, stories, success and challenges. You can see past editions here. You can also volunteer to help publish the newsletter. Join the team! Finally, don't forget to subscribe!

In This Issue

Featured Topic "Wikipedia – Here and Now": 40 students in the Summer School "I Can – Here and Now" in Bulgaria heard more about Wikipedia

From the Community

Klexikon: the German 'childrens' Wikipedia' in Montréal

Wikipedia is now a part of Textbook in Informatics

23:25, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Book categories

I see you've moved a large number of book categories from old naming convention to new. Did you do the other things that need to be done as each one is moved? If not, moving the categories alone could cause the task of moving to the new conventions to take much longer, and more more work, than it would otherwise have done, and would also mean that all of those categories would lack the contents they should have for all the book you've moved until somebody fixes them — thus rendering all of those categories largely useless to Wikibooks users until somebody fixes them. Those being the reasons we have been moving them only a few at a time. I had already anticipated that the migration to the new naming scheme would take another six to nine months. --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 11:58, 7 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Pi zero: So what you're saying is that I should check each page in a cat is not using BookCat and/or making null edits? Like if a book page contains [[Category:BOOKNAME]] we should remove them? I can make a script to do that, if you give me some time. PokestarFan • Talk • Contributions 12:04, 7 October 2017 (UTC)Reply
I'm not altogether in favor of scripts, truthfully. For the advanced stuff (like this) it's not possible to contain in an algorithm what needs to be done, exactly because what needs to be done is to look at each individual situation, with understanding of the big picture of Wikibooks infrastructure, and see what wants doing. Often there are templates that want renaming, often in irregular ways requiring thought, and various customized structural changes to the templates' categorization and sometimes their functionality as well. Subcategories also need moving. Sometimes category structure needs to be completely rethought (not automatable at all). Each category moved needs to be checked for incoming links, and they have to be dealt with in various ways often requiring deep thought. And, well, other stuff comes up in particular cases that cannot be predicted ahead of time (and thus cannot be automated). And of course eventually an admin should make sure that there is no category redirect left behind after everything has been done — either by the admin moving each category individually without leaving a redirect (so the admin can manually check everything immediately, before moving on to the next one) or by the admin checking everything carefully before deleting the redirect left behind by a non-admin move (but if some well-meaning admin should come along and delete one of those redirects without doing the checks, we could easily end up leaving a bunch of messed up infrastructure that nobody knows is there, thus creating a vast mess that would linger about the project degrading its quality more-or-less permanently).

All of which is why we've spend the past four months doing them manually, one at a time, and expected to spend about twice that much additional time doing the remaining ones. Not everything can be automated without large-scale damage to the project. --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 12:28, 7 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

Unfortunately, the problems reported below by Efex3 are a small part of what I mean: similar problems will have occurred with all of the hundreds of categories that were moved. Even if we can keep track of them all in the mean time, it'd be next spring or summer before we could fix all the problems caused by prematurely moving all those categories. Only, it'd probably take even longer than that, because the project is no longer a simple operation; it's considerably messier, and rather than feeling like a "move these categories one-at-a-time" task it feels like a "check each one of these to clean up the mess" task, which is psychologically less attractive. That large-scale move should not have been done. I admit to some frustration because I did warn you not to do this, when you moved a bunch of them a while ago. I'm guessing you did use automation for this, despite being warned about that too. The problem with your bot isn't just the bot, it's that you, the operator, don't exercise nearly as much caution as you should before applying it. --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 12:47, 7 October 2017 (UTC)Reply
By the way, this damaging mass move cannot be undone by a non-admin moving the pages page to their old names, because the redirect left behind will trash the behavior of the automation that was put in place to allow the naming-scheme transition to be performed smoothly. The only way to reverse the damage is for an admin to go through renaming the categories back to the old names without leaving a redirect — and checking each one manually to make sure some pages didn't get left behind under the new name. --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 12:51, 7 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

Problems happened after pages moved

Could you help to fix the problems of the following pages: [37] [38] [39] [40]--Efex3 (discusscontribs) 12:31, 7 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

Problems with the requests for deletion closures

I've just noticed that Category:Requests for deletion was still containing some pages whose requests had been closed by you, eg: Wikibooks:Requests for deletion/K-Means++. So please stop closing the votes without applying them, because we can't treat them as usual in this case. JackPotte (discusscontribs) 22:41, 7 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

@JackPotte: I've stopped. PokestarFan • Talk • Contributions 20:14, 8 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

14:20, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

15:31, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 October 2017

18:18, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Structured Commons newsletter, October 25, 2017

Welcome to the newsletter for Structured Data on Wikimedia Commons! You can update your subscription to the newsletter. Do inform others who you think will want to be involved in the project!

Community updates
Things to do / input and feedback requests
Presentations / Press / Events
Audience at Structured Commons design discussion, Wikimania 2017
Team updates
The Structured Commons team at Wikimania 2017

Two new people have been hired for the Structured Data on Commons team. We are now complete! :-)

  • Ramsey Isler is the new Product Manager of the Multimedia team.
  • Pamela Drouin was hired as User Interface Designer. She works at the Multimedia team as well, and her work will focus on the Structured Commons project.
Partners and allies
  • We are still welcoming (more) staff from GLAMs (Galleries, Libraries, Archives and Museums) to become part of our long-term focus group (phabricator task T174134). You will be kept in the loop of the project, and receive regular small surveys and requests for feedback. Get in touch with Sandra if you're interested - your input in helping to shape this project is highly valued!
Research

Design research is ongoing.

  • Jonathan Morgan and Niharika Ved have held interviews with various GLAM staff about their batch upload workflows and will finish and report on these in this quarter. (phabricator task T159495)
  • At this moment, there is also an online survey for GLAM staff, Wikimedians in Residence, and GLAM volunteers who upload media collections to Wikimedia Commons. The results will be used to understand how we can improve this experience. (phabricator task T175188)
  • Upcoming: interviews with Wikimedia volunteers who curate media on Commons (including tool developers), talking about activities and workflows. (phabricator task T175185)
Development

In Autumn 2017, the Structured Commons development team works on the following major tasks (see also the quarterly goals for the team):

  • Getting Multi-Content Revisions sufficiently ready, so that the Multimedia and Search Platform teams can start using it to test and prototype things.
  • Determine metrics and metrics baseline for Commons (phabricator task T174519).
  • The multimedia team at WMF is gaining expertise in Wikibase, and unblocking further development for Structured Commons, by completing the MediaInfo extension for Wikibase.
Stay up to date!

Warmly, your community liaison, SandraF (WMF) (discuss)

Message sent by MediaWiki message delivery - 14:26, 25 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

Your half-changes of category system

Hi!

Some weeks ago, you moved Category:Swedish to Category:Book:Swedish (here), with the motivation New naming system. However, neither you, nor any other user (or bot) moved the content. Thus, the redir category now has 27 members, but the book category just has one. Moreover, you did not change the wikidata object, whence the redir category has two linked iw sisters, but the book category just has one.

(Compare this with what User:Green Giant did on May 14, namely, first moving e.g. the Category:Afrikaans to the Category:Book:Afrikaans, and then spending a few hours in moving all the content from the first category to the second, as you can see here.)

Did you also "change" other categories in this incomplete manner, or was this a one-time mistake?

Will you correct the mistake by also moving the content, or do you expect others to do that?

Where can I read more about the change of naming-system? JoergenB (discusscontribs) 14:22, 20 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

@JoergenB: See Wikibooks:Reading room/Proposals#Category infrastructure (continued). --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 15:11, 20 October 2017 (UTC)Reply
Completed that particular move. --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 15:44, 20 October 2017 (UTC)Reply
Thanks! JoergenB (discusscontribs) 16:35, 20 October 2017 (UTC)Reply
@Pi zero: However, you choose not to update the wikidata object. If you in general ignore that bit in these name changes, you might loose quite a bit of the iw linkage. In this case, when you removed the category, you also automatically deleted the English member from the wd object, here. Unhappily, as you also see from the history, when PokestarFan moved the category, there was no accompanying automatic change of that English member. I do not know why; possibly, it has something to do with leaving or not leaving a redirect.
When you moved Category:Languages of Europe to Category:Subject:Languages of Europe, you indeed also automatically changed the enbook item of the wikidata object for Category:Languages in Europe (here), and thus maintained the iw linkage. However, in that case, you moved without leaving a redir, while PokestarFan did leave a redir (which retained the same associated wikidata item).
You may have a problem here. I think that you should recommend not leaving redirs in these moves (if there still are some left to do). Alternatively, the relinking should be fixed by hand, when the temporary redir category is deleted. IMHO, the iwlinkage is potentially of great use, although it is still underdeveloped for the various wikibooks projects, and by mistake loosing what small beginnings you have thus could be decidedly negative. JoergenB (discusscontribs) 17:20, 20 October 2017 (UTC)Reply
@JoergenB: Thanks for pointing this out. Alas. I always suppress redirect when renaming these, and so was unaware of the problem; but I'm usually the only admin who does these, so the only one who does them with the option to suppress redirect. I'll have to check this with each one from now own, but there are hundreds of them that would have lost their wikidata links this way. Even though we at en.wb do not remove interwikis even after they've been added to wikidata, we don't wish to mess up wikidata. At some point I'll have to compile a list of all the category redirects deleted over the past half year or so, to be checked one-at-a-time thereafter. --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 17:30, 20 October 2017 (UTC)Reply
...if indeed leaving a redir causes the trouble, as I suspect; perhaps checking with some wizard before you compile that list would be wise. JoergenB (discusscontribs) 19:13, 20 October 2017 (UTC)Reply
Apparently those changes to Wikiata show up under my username; so I can find them all by looking through my Special:Contributions there. --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 22:40, 20 October 2017 (UTC)Reply
Turns out there were only a handful of them, for all time; mostly, a few subject categories deleted last December. --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 23:41, 20 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Pi zero: I did not change the Wikidata because I'm blocked there. PokestarFan • Talk • Contributions 23:04, 22 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I came to that conclusion myself. The change on wikidata happens automatically, though, and is supposed to ensure consistency between projects. So by blocking you there they caused their own automation to compromise their database. The root of the problem, in my engineering judgement, is the bad design decision to have fully-automated centralization at all. At any rate, I think I'll find that every category you moved that has a wikidata link is now out-of-sync on wikidata; and once I've found a few more so I'm sure of that, I'll leave a note for them over at wikidata, just so they're aware of the software flaw. (A polite note; after all, afaict this is in the wiki software, so it's really not under the control of the Wikidatans, nor are they responsible for the design error inherent in the the way their project was set up.) --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 23:31, 22 October 2017 (UTC)Reply
Btw, I have done something similar to your earlier suggestion, to null-edit {{BookCat}}. As I mentioned, I don't think that in itself would do the trick, because the software would recognize that nothing had actually changed. However, {{BookCat}} and other related templates use {{BOOKCATEGORY}} to deduce, from the name of the book, the name of its book-category. During the transition, I had wired {{BOOKCATEGORY}} to look for existing category pages in order to deduce this: if the new-name category existed, that would be the book category, otherwise if the old-name category existed, that would be the book category, otherwise use the new name. I'd always planned that after all the categories had been moved, I would change {{BOOKCATEGORY}} to just always use the new name, avoiding all that expensive logic. And since all the categories have, actually, been moved, there are no more under the old naming scheme, I have make that one-time, heavy-server-load change to {{BOOKCATEGORY}}. I think it's a heavy-server-load thing, anyway. {{BOOKCATEGORY}} is used on over 70,000 pages. Hopefully, now that I've done the update to {{BOOKCATEGORY}}, the software will (given a bit of time) update the categorization of every page that uses {{BookCat}}, and while that won't do all of what needs doing, it ought to do more than half of it. --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 14:23, 26 October 2017 (UTC)Reply
Things are going fairly smoothly, so far. The total time to complete may even be somewhat lower this way; there are a different set of advantages and disadvantages to this approach than to the one I'd envisioned, but we'll still get there. :-)  --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 16:07, 27 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

Talkheader

I record my objection to your adding Talkheader to talk pages. --Dan Polansky (discusscontribs) 16:05, 27 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

Scribus speedy nomination

In Special:Diff/3298135, you nominated Scribus for speedy deletion. That is inappropriate since Scribus survived Wikibooks:Requests_for_deletion. --Dan Polansky (discusscontribs) 19:48, 27 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

I've added {{rfd-survived}} to the book's talk page. --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 19:55, 27 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

Windows Command Prompt Commands

You have started Windows Command Prompt Commands. That seems redundant to Windows Batch Scripting. --Dan Polansky (discusscontribs) 18:42, 28 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

Windows Command Prompt Commands/mkdir seems to be a copyvio in that it contains the output of "help mkdir" unmodified. Windows Command Prompt Commands/xcopy seems to be the same story, copyvio. --Dan Polansky (discusscontribs) 18:44, 28 October 2017 (UTC)Reply