![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Hi Lightmouse, The Lightbot is going through ship info boxes and changing
Did you intend this? Regards, Acad Ronin ( talk) 00:41, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
No worries. Thanks. Lightmouse ( talk) 07:49, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
For all your amazing contributions. Enjoy! Pinkstrawberry02 ( talk) 11:32, 18 September 2011 (UTC) |
I noticed your bot recently converted "1.2 billion gallons (453,600 m³)" to "1.2 billion US gallons (4,500,000 m3)". As the location is clearly in the US, adding US to the gallon measure is redundant and is inconsistent with the normal method of describing volume in the US. Is there any way to remove that without removing the template entirely? Monty 845 14:56, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
Direct quotes should not be altered. Your bot has disregarded this rule today at Boston Molasses Disaster. Hertz1888 ( talk) 15:25, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
Regarding your implementation of {{ MoS-guide}} in place of {{ guidelines}}, I'm concerned that it's no longer obvious that the manuals of style are guidelines. Was there a discussion somewhere about this presentation? I do think it looks better, but it seems strange for the pages to lack a distinct policy/guideline/essay type label. Erik ( talk | contribs) 11:10, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. Feel free to bring this up again in the future. It's not a big deal for me. Lightmouse ( talk) 11:55, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
I did propose modification to headers, see the links to prior discussions at the top of the page (albeit for other MOS headers). User:DePiep predicted "alas, ... it will bog down somewhere somehow". He was correct, it got bogged down with discussions about everything except the issue. Believe me, I would have preferred to the simpler method you suggest. There are 58 target pages, 55 have the new template. Three have the old one: users at two pages objected to my template changes; one page was overlooked. Lightmouse ( talk) 09:41, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
small=yes
, a well-worn system which took years to develop and deploy consistently, rather than hand-rolled HTML;small=yes
parameter; see its test cases page.
Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) -
talk
10:09, 20 September 2011 (UTC)Yes, there's link between consensus and change but I don't believe consensus was an issue in the discussions or in the response to the new template. The aim was to improve the signal to noise ratio by reducing space taken up by low-added-value template space/content. That has been achieved in MOS pages and MOS-talk pages. Your update looks like what we needed all along. I welcome your help and your conditions seem reasonable. I don't mind at all if it involves tfd and undo. Thank you very much. Lightmouse ( talk) 10:51, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
|small=yes
to the syntax.
Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) -
talk
10:54, 20 September 2011 (UTC)Great. My watchlist will let me know when you've done the roll back. When I see that, I'll go and add |small=yes
. Thanks again for your help.
Lightmouse (
talk)
10:58, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
Just to let you know you bot is adding conversions within quotes such as this edit, which is not appropriate. - Ahunt ( talk) 17:12, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
Wanted to let you know that in this recent edit, the bot appears to have switched inappropriately from the noun form of the unit to the adjective form. Perhaps it was confused by the hyphen in the old text? Loop202 ( talk) 00:07, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
It would be a good idea to check this category after your bot runs. I started to fix Ethanol fuel in the United States, Fredericksburg, Texas, Lake Manitoba, Morris (town), New York, Northridge, Los Angeles, and Spratt's Complex, but gave up and just reverted the edits. The more disturbing improper edits were the ones that did not result in parserfunction errors, like missing numeric spans, missing usage of adj, and others. Frietjes ( talk) 15:38, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. Each edit recently has been examined by human eye, it's the human that keeps missing these. I'll have to find a way to make code to take the burden. Lightmouse ( talk) 21:32, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
This is to let you know that I reversed changes made by you and your bot in several ethanol related articles. Please go to the talk page here to participate in the discussion.-- Mariordo ( talk) 23:42, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
Please see Talk:Bailout bottle#Invalid metric conversions. -- 180.251.9.172 ( talk) 01:10, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
I noticed your bot recently converted "1.2 billion gallons (453,600 m³)" to "1.2 billion US gallons (4,500,000 m3)". As the location is clearly in the US, adding US to the gallon measure is redundant and is inconsistent with the normal method of describing volume in the US. Is there any way to remove that without removing the template entirely? Monty 845 14:56, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay in response. I've only just spotted these comments.
Thanks. Lightmouse ( talk) 18:01, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
Regarding this edit at Modiin Energy, the bot corrupted article titles and quotes within citation templates. Please modify its algorithm so it only modifies prose inside the article proper.— Biosketch ( talk) 12:37, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
Small problem here, with an easy fix. There's an erroneous space in <!-- cubic what?-- > that blanks everything beyond this point. -- WikHead ( talk) 20:49, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi, re
this edit - as you noticed, putting a category name between two pairs of square brackets doesn't create a link, but places the page into that category. If you do wish to make a regular link to a category, there are two ways of doing this. One is to use the {{
cl}}
template without the word "Category:" - that is, {{
cl|Occupations by type}}
produces ‹The
template
Category link is being
considered for merging.›
Category:Occupations by type. The other way is to use the normal double square bracket syntax, but insert a colon before the word "Category:" as well as after it - that is, [[:Category:Occupations by type]]
produces
Category:Occupations by type. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
17:13, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
Hello. Noticed this conversion which replaced "the 26.2-mile London Marathon" with "the {{convert|42.195|km|mi|adj=on}} London Marathon", which produces "the 42.195-kilometre (26.219 mi) London Marathon". Not only changing from imperial-first to metric-first, but also adding an additional 2 decimal places. It did a similar thing here with the phrase starting "At 13.1 miles"... cheers, Struway2 ( talk) 18:03, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
If it's a metric race, then that system should be first. If you want to approximate the distance, the same applies. Putting the wrong system first and approximating it leads to a cascade of conversion errors. Metric values are normal in races, as is mixing systems according to which system is the official one. Lightmouse ( talk) 09:00, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
You might like to check out the history on usoi dam Lightbot just made an edit (I've not reverted it yet)
1) the comment is in error - it said it 'delinked common unit' there was no link (I think not anyway)
2) in converted a (US) unit 'acre feet' into 'acre.ft'
I'm not familiar with the US unit acre foot - but I think that the lightbot has not made the page easier to understand. So I'd suggest either getting it to ignore acre feet - or telling it to change acre feet to acre-ft (rather than acre(dot)ft).
3) being from the UK (where we used to have the imperial system) I think 'acre foot' is really archaic and odd - so personally I'd actually want it linked (as something interesting rather than delinked as something common) - I imagine the same goes for all of europe (and probably much of the rest of the world) as they never had the imperial system of measures. Sure imperial measurements are common - miles, feet, acres even , but acre feet seem obscure compared to cubic feet.
Cheers EdwardLane ( talk) 17:20, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. Lightmouse ( talk) 08:34, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
In reviewing Lightbot's recent edits to Souris River, I noticed that it linked acre foot in every use of Template:convert in which it appears. My question is this: since a dutiful editor would follow the guidelines at WP:REPEATLINK and not link every appearance of the term in such a short section, I was wondering if the bot could be changed to only link the first appearance of an obscure measurement in an article—or a section, if you think that would be more prudent. What are your thoughts? Would it be difficult to do something like that? — LinkTiger ( talk) 19:23, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
Just letting you know I reverted the bot at Opium: [1]. -- Tryptofish ( talk) 20:30, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Hi Lightmouse, The Lightbot is going through ship info boxes and changing
Did you intend this? Regards, Acad Ronin ( talk) 00:41, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
No worries. Thanks. Lightmouse ( talk) 07:49, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
For all your amazing contributions. Enjoy! Pinkstrawberry02 ( talk) 11:32, 18 September 2011 (UTC) |
I noticed your bot recently converted "1.2 billion gallons (453,600 m³)" to "1.2 billion US gallons (4,500,000 m3)". As the location is clearly in the US, adding US to the gallon measure is redundant and is inconsistent with the normal method of describing volume in the US. Is there any way to remove that without removing the template entirely? Monty 845 14:56, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
Direct quotes should not be altered. Your bot has disregarded this rule today at Boston Molasses Disaster. Hertz1888 ( talk) 15:25, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
Regarding your implementation of {{ MoS-guide}} in place of {{ guidelines}}, I'm concerned that it's no longer obvious that the manuals of style are guidelines. Was there a discussion somewhere about this presentation? I do think it looks better, but it seems strange for the pages to lack a distinct policy/guideline/essay type label. Erik ( talk | contribs) 11:10, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. Feel free to bring this up again in the future. It's not a big deal for me. Lightmouse ( talk) 11:55, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
I did propose modification to headers, see the links to prior discussions at the top of the page (albeit for other MOS headers). User:DePiep predicted "alas, ... it will bog down somewhere somehow". He was correct, it got bogged down with discussions about everything except the issue. Believe me, I would have preferred to the simpler method you suggest. There are 58 target pages, 55 have the new template. Three have the old one: users at two pages objected to my template changes; one page was overlooked. Lightmouse ( talk) 09:41, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
small=yes
, a well-worn system which took years to develop and deploy consistently, rather than hand-rolled HTML;small=yes
parameter; see its test cases page.
Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) -
talk
10:09, 20 September 2011 (UTC)Yes, there's link between consensus and change but I don't believe consensus was an issue in the discussions or in the response to the new template. The aim was to improve the signal to noise ratio by reducing space taken up by low-added-value template space/content. That has been achieved in MOS pages and MOS-talk pages. Your update looks like what we needed all along. I welcome your help and your conditions seem reasonable. I don't mind at all if it involves tfd and undo. Thank you very much. Lightmouse ( talk) 10:51, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
|small=yes
to the syntax.
Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) -
talk
10:54, 20 September 2011 (UTC)Great. My watchlist will let me know when you've done the roll back. When I see that, I'll go and add |small=yes
. Thanks again for your help.
Lightmouse (
talk)
10:58, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
Just to let you know you bot is adding conversions within quotes such as this edit, which is not appropriate. - Ahunt ( talk) 17:12, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
Wanted to let you know that in this recent edit, the bot appears to have switched inappropriately from the noun form of the unit to the adjective form. Perhaps it was confused by the hyphen in the old text? Loop202 ( talk) 00:07, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
It would be a good idea to check this category after your bot runs. I started to fix Ethanol fuel in the United States, Fredericksburg, Texas, Lake Manitoba, Morris (town), New York, Northridge, Los Angeles, and Spratt's Complex, but gave up and just reverted the edits. The more disturbing improper edits were the ones that did not result in parserfunction errors, like missing numeric spans, missing usage of adj, and others. Frietjes ( talk) 15:38, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. Each edit recently has been examined by human eye, it's the human that keeps missing these. I'll have to find a way to make code to take the burden. Lightmouse ( talk) 21:32, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
This is to let you know that I reversed changes made by you and your bot in several ethanol related articles. Please go to the talk page here to participate in the discussion.-- Mariordo ( talk) 23:42, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
Please see Talk:Bailout bottle#Invalid metric conversions. -- 180.251.9.172 ( talk) 01:10, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
I noticed your bot recently converted "1.2 billion gallons (453,600 m³)" to "1.2 billion US gallons (4,500,000 m3)". As the location is clearly in the US, adding US to the gallon measure is redundant and is inconsistent with the normal method of describing volume in the US. Is there any way to remove that without removing the template entirely? Monty 845 14:56, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay in response. I've only just spotted these comments.
Thanks. Lightmouse ( talk) 18:01, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
Regarding this edit at Modiin Energy, the bot corrupted article titles and quotes within citation templates. Please modify its algorithm so it only modifies prose inside the article proper.— Biosketch ( talk) 12:37, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
Small problem here, with an easy fix. There's an erroneous space in <!-- cubic what?-- > that blanks everything beyond this point. -- WikHead ( talk) 20:49, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi, re
this edit - as you noticed, putting a category name between two pairs of square brackets doesn't create a link, but places the page into that category. If you do wish to make a regular link to a category, there are two ways of doing this. One is to use the {{
cl}}
template without the word "Category:" - that is, {{
cl|Occupations by type}}
produces ‹The
template
Category link is being
considered for merging.›
Category:Occupations by type. The other way is to use the normal double square bracket syntax, but insert a colon before the word "Category:" as well as after it - that is, [[:Category:Occupations by type]]
produces
Category:Occupations by type. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
17:13, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
Hello. Noticed this conversion which replaced "the 26.2-mile London Marathon" with "the {{convert|42.195|km|mi|adj=on}} London Marathon", which produces "the 42.195-kilometre (26.219 mi) London Marathon". Not only changing from imperial-first to metric-first, but also adding an additional 2 decimal places. It did a similar thing here with the phrase starting "At 13.1 miles"... cheers, Struway2 ( talk) 18:03, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
If it's a metric race, then that system should be first. If you want to approximate the distance, the same applies. Putting the wrong system first and approximating it leads to a cascade of conversion errors. Metric values are normal in races, as is mixing systems according to which system is the official one. Lightmouse ( talk) 09:00, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
You might like to check out the history on usoi dam Lightbot just made an edit (I've not reverted it yet)
1) the comment is in error - it said it 'delinked common unit' there was no link (I think not anyway)
2) in converted a (US) unit 'acre feet' into 'acre.ft'
I'm not familiar with the US unit acre foot - but I think that the lightbot has not made the page easier to understand. So I'd suggest either getting it to ignore acre feet - or telling it to change acre feet to acre-ft (rather than acre(dot)ft).
3) being from the UK (where we used to have the imperial system) I think 'acre foot' is really archaic and odd - so personally I'd actually want it linked (as something interesting rather than delinked as something common) - I imagine the same goes for all of europe (and probably much of the rest of the world) as they never had the imperial system of measures. Sure imperial measurements are common - miles, feet, acres even , but acre feet seem obscure compared to cubic feet.
Cheers EdwardLane ( talk) 17:20, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. Lightmouse ( talk) 08:34, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
In reviewing Lightbot's recent edits to Souris River, I noticed that it linked acre foot in every use of Template:convert in which it appears. My question is this: since a dutiful editor would follow the guidelines at WP:REPEATLINK and not link every appearance of the term in such a short section, I was wondering if the bot could be changed to only link the first appearance of an obscure measurement in an article—or a section, if you think that would be more prudent. What are your thoughts? Would it be difficult to do something like that? — LinkTiger ( talk) 19:23, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
Just letting you know I reverted the bot at Opium: [1]. -- Tryptofish ( talk) 20:30, 28 September 2011 (UTC)