The dashboard link is not working. It gives a 403: User account expired error. I sent an e-mail to the contact e-mail a couple of weeks ago but there's been no response. I'm assuming this link is totally dead. Jason Quinn ( talk) 16:16, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
@
23W: This template is used on the GA nomination page. For example, XXXX/GA1 where XXXX is the page name. When this template uses {{SUBPAGENAME}}
instead of {{BASEPAGENAME}}
, the tools will actually show the results for GA1 or GA2 and so forth (for example, like
[1]. It is not like the peer reviews, where the article is the subpage name. If there is anything I went wrong with, please tell me. I am not a master at templates. Thanks,
TheQ Editor
(Talk)
02:03, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
Have updated the links for disambig and external links checker, following Dispenser's update at template:Featured article tools/sandbox. If interested, please check and correct any possible errors. Just a note for clarity: I don't care, why those tools are currently not available on the new server or who is to blame for which failure. My only interest is in having actual working tools for our contributors. If similar WMFlab-tools are verified or finished in the future, they can simply be replaced again. GermanJoe ( talk) 17:06, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
The automated tips link is currently broken, leading to this page. Anyone know if an alternative location is available? Or shall we go ahead and remove the link? ~ Super Hamster Talk Contribs 22:09, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
At present the "peer reviewer" tool is suggesting placing a non-breaking space between numeric values and units, even to the extent of giving an example of using between 3000 and metres. This is contrary to the
Manual of Style which requires a non-breaking space only between numeric values and unit symbols: "Except as shown in the "Specific units" table below, a space appears between a numeric value and a unit name or symbol. In the case of unit symbols,
Until this is fixed, I'll disable the peer reviewer tool from this template. --
RexxS (
talk)
01:44, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
, {{
nbsp}}
, or {{
nowrap}}
should be used to prevent linebreak."
I doubt that the Peer review tool is going to be fixed. Many of these third-party tools are not open-source, so a simple amendment to the text generated will not be so simple. I really don't want to re-invent the wheel by creating a corrected version from scratch, so I'm considering intercepting the link from Template:Good article tools to Dispenser's server and inserting a warning notice before passing on the BASEPAGE link to the Peer review tool. I can't see an easy way of doing that using wiki-text, so it would have to be a php page on an external server.
Prhartcom quite rightly makes the point that most of the tool works, and there's no point in further inconveniencing GA reviewers, if that isn't going to put pressure on to get the tool fixed. For the moment, as a work-around, I've restored the Peer reviewer tool link in this template and added a " Peer review erratum" link. Would that be an agreeable compromise until a better solution is found? -- RexxS ( talk) 05:33, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
if(/<li>match dab list item/.exec(html)) issue('code', 'Rule description', RegExp'$&'/*example*/, '[[WP:MOSDABRL]]');
. Probably too simple for non-disambiguation. I'd look for a DOM+JQuery (#contents > p
, table.wikitable td
type system for this. Read up on the
known problems. —
Dispenser
22:26, 13 March 2016 (UTC)noXHR_PR=true
which disabled image licensing checks and
misspellings. —
Dispenser
22:26, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
Three months later and when I look at
http://dispenser.homenet.org/~dispenser/view/Peer_reviewer#page:Decompression_sickness for example, I still see "Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), there should be a non-breaking space - between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 1 litre, use 1 litre, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 1 litre.
", which is simply wrong according to
MOS:NUM #Unit names and symbols as has been explained above. I tried a compromise, while waiting for the text to be amended, by adding an erratum link, but it seems that has now been removed without explanation. I've removed the Peer Reviewer as it is better to give no advice than wrong advice. --
RexxS (
talk)
18:38, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change the domain from toolserver to dispenser.info.tm. Dat Guy Talk Contribs 16:33, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
I see this discussion isn't going to go anywhere anytime soon, so I'll just close it as not done. Dat Guy Talk Contribs 13:44, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please replace with the current sandbox version ( Special:PermanentLink/886717301). This splits the link to the review templates into a different subsection, and more importantly adds links to the review criteria and instructions. Thanks, -- DannyS712 ( talk) 01:57, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please replace with the sandbox ( diff). It changes legacy tools.wmflabs.org links wrapped in {{ plain link}} to toolforge: interwiki links. I know the links to Dispenser's tools are dead but according to this that may be changing soon so I haven't removed those. Thanks, – Majavah talk · edits 16:38, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
This tool doesn't work properly if the article contains special characters. For example,
{{Good article tools|Lord & Taylor Building}}
creates
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
If you follow the Copyvio detector link, you'll find it's searching for "Lord" instead of the full name.
The solution is to encode the URL twice, like an onion (pardon my dumb analogy). The first layer is removed by following the link; the second layer is removed by the tool itself. An annoying bug, however, is that this double encoding can produce a string like %2526 (that's the double encoding of &), which is rejected by MediaWiki in certain cases. More specifically, a link of the form [[toolforge:copyvios/?title=%2526]]
produces [[toolforge:copyvios/?title=%2526]]. I think this is a bug in MediaWiki. I'm not sure how to get around this, besides linking directly like [https://copyvios.toolforge.org/?title=%2526 Copyvio detector]
which becomes
Copyvio detector.
How should we fix this? Sincerely, Ovinus ( talk) 12:19, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
I recently wrote a tool, WP:LINKDISP that checks the availiability of URLs being used as references. (It is intended to be a stripped down replacement for User:Dispenser/Checklinks). Would it be possible to add that to the list of tools ?
I also see that the copyvio tool (which definitely works and is online) is commented out, maybe that should also be restored ? Sohom ( talk) 09:44, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Per the conversation above, please replace the content of the page with Template:Good article tools/sandbox. Regards. Sohom ( talk) 13:49, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
urlencode:
calls (
Template:Good article tools/sandbox should be the corrected version)
Sohom (
talk)
18:59, 26 April 2024 (UTC)The dashboard link is not working. It gives a 403: User account expired error. I sent an e-mail to the contact e-mail a couple of weeks ago but there's been no response. I'm assuming this link is totally dead. Jason Quinn ( talk) 16:16, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
@
23W: This template is used on the GA nomination page. For example, XXXX/GA1 where XXXX is the page name. When this template uses {{SUBPAGENAME}}
instead of {{BASEPAGENAME}}
, the tools will actually show the results for GA1 or GA2 and so forth (for example, like
[1]. It is not like the peer reviews, where the article is the subpage name. If there is anything I went wrong with, please tell me. I am not a master at templates. Thanks,
TheQ Editor
(Talk)
02:03, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
Have updated the links for disambig and external links checker, following Dispenser's update at template:Featured article tools/sandbox. If interested, please check and correct any possible errors. Just a note for clarity: I don't care, why those tools are currently not available on the new server or who is to blame for which failure. My only interest is in having actual working tools for our contributors. If similar WMFlab-tools are verified or finished in the future, they can simply be replaced again. GermanJoe ( talk) 17:06, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
The automated tips link is currently broken, leading to this page. Anyone know if an alternative location is available? Or shall we go ahead and remove the link? ~ Super Hamster Talk Contribs 22:09, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
At present the "peer reviewer" tool is suggesting placing a non-breaking space between numeric values and units, even to the extent of giving an example of using between 3000 and metres. This is contrary to the
Manual of Style which requires a non-breaking space only between numeric values and unit symbols: "Except as shown in the "Specific units" table below, a space appears between a numeric value and a unit name or symbol. In the case of unit symbols,
Until this is fixed, I'll disable the peer reviewer tool from this template. --
RexxS (
talk)
01:44, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
, {{
nbsp}}
, or {{
nowrap}}
should be used to prevent linebreak."
I doubt that the Peer review tool is going to be fixed. Many of these third-party tools are not open-source, so a simple amendment to the text generated will not be so simple. I really don't want to re-invent the wheel by creating a corrected version from scratch, so I'm considering intercepting the link from Template:Good article tools to Dispenser's server and inserting a warning notice before passing on the BASEPAGE link to the Peer review tool. I can't see an easy way of doing that using wiki-text, so it would have to be a php page on an external server.
Prhartcom quite rightly makes the point that most of the tool works, and there's no point in further inconveniencing GA reviewers, if that isn't going to put pressure on to get the tool fixed. For the moment, as a work-around, I've restored the Peer reviewer tool link in this template and added a " Peer review erratum" link. Would that be an agreeable compromise until a better solution is found? -- RexxS ( talk) 05:33, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
if(/<li>match dab list item/.exec(html)) issue('code', 'Rule description', RegExp'$&'/*example*/, '[[WP:MOSDABRL]]');
. Probably too simple for non-disambiguation. I'd look for a DOM+JQuery (#contents > p
, table.wikitable td
type system for this. Read up on the
known problems. —
Dispenser
22:26, 13 March 2016 (UTC)noXHR_PR=true
which disabled image licensing checks and
misspellings. —
Dispenser
22:26, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
Three months later and when I look at
http://dispenser.homenet.org/~dispenser/view/Peer_reviewer#page:Decompression_sickness for example, I still see "Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), there should be a non-breaking space - between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 1 litre, use 1 litre, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 1 litre.
", which is simply wrong according to
MOS:NUM #Unit names and symbols as has been explained above. I tried a compromise, while waiting for the text to be amended, by adding an erratum link, but it seems that has now been removed without explanation. I've removed the Peer Reviewer as it is better to give no advice than wrong advice. --
RexxS (
talk)
18:38, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change the domain from toolserver to dispenser.info.tm. Dat Guy Talk Contribs 16:33, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
I see this discussion isn't going to go anywhere anytime soon, so I'll just close it as not done. Dat Guy Talk Contribs 13:44, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please replace with the current sandbox version ( Special:PermanentLink/886717301). This splits the link to the review templates into a different subsection, and more importantly adds links to the review criteria and instructions. Thanks, -- DannyS712 ( talk) 01:57, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please replace with the sandbox ( diff). It changes legacy tools.wmflabs.org links wrapped in {{ plain link}} to toolforge: interwiki links. I know the links to Dispenser's tools are dead but according to this that may be changing soon so I haven't removed those. Thanks, – Majavah talk · edits 16:38, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
This tool doesn't work properly if the article contains special characters. For example,
{{Good article tools|Lord & Taylor Building}}
creates
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
If you follow the Copyvio detector link, you'll find it's searching for "Lord" instead of the full name.
The solution is to encode the URL twice, like an onion (pardon my dumb analogy). The first layer is removed by following the link; the second layer is removed by the tool itself. An annoying bug, however, is that this double encoding can produce a string like %2526 (that's the double encoding of &), which is rejected by MediaWiki in certain cases. More specifically, a link of the form [[toolforge:copyvios/?title=%2526]]
produces [[toolforge:copyvios/?title=%2526]]. I think this is a bug in MediaWiki. I'm not sure how to get around this, besides linking directly like [https://copyvios.toolforge.org/?title=%2526 Copyvio detector]
which becomes
Copyvio detector.
How should we fix this? Sincerely, Ovinus ( talk) 12:19, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
I recently wrote a tool, WP:LINKDISP that checks the availiability of URLs being used as references. (It is intended to be a stripped down replacement for User:Dispenser/Checklinks). Would it be possible to add that to the list of tools ?
I also see that the copyvio tool (which definitely works and is online) is commented out, maybe that should also be restored ? Sohom ( talk) 09:44, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Per the conversation above, please replace the content of the page with Template:Good article tools/sandbox. Regards. Sohom ( talk) 13:49, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
urlencode:
calls (
Template:Good article tools/sandbox should be the corrected version)
Sohom (
talk)
18:59, 26 April 2024 (UTC)