![]() | This 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. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 |
You wrote:
At what point should a draft outline be moved to mainspace? It seems that there are people opposed to incomplete outlines so I would prefer to avoid an attack of knee-jerk deletionism by getting Draft:Outline of underwater diving to an easily defensible condition before making the move. On the other hand, I do not want to delay unnecessarily, as the outline will be useful to WP:SCUBA and anyone interested in underwater diving.
I am making use of the recently created experimental short descriptions as annotations on WP:SCUBA articles, so will have annotations for most if not all of the links already in the list, however there are hundreds more article which will go into other sections, many of which do not yet have a short description. Cheers, · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 09:55, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
I wrote a script in perl to do this several years ago in conjunction with WP:AWB's external script calling feature, lifting the first 2 sentences from each article's lead to insert as annotations, but ran into numerous problems, the main one being that it wasn't scalable, as it required thorough proofreading/copyediting because many of the leads included redundant phrases. For example, "is a species of shark" showing up again and again in a list of shark species, or "is a branch of" showing up in a "Branches of" section. There were also problems with redirects and disambiguation page links, resulting in gaps the script couldn't fill, requiring a human editor. I expect these challenges will still need to be overcome even with the short descriptions. Though those look like they'll make better annotations than the lead sentences.
By the way, what's the function of the magic word? The Transhumanist 15:00, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
I just realized that I didn't answer your initial question above. The answer is: when it is less likely to be deleted. A new outline might be nominated for deletion if it is full of red links, has mostly empty sections, or it is an exact duplication of a navigation footer (not that that is a valid reason for deletion, it isn't -- see WP:CLN). More than likely, though, a new page not ready for article space will simply be moved back to draft space. To avoid negative attention, it is helpful to develop it past those limitations. Annotations definitely help, as they are a feature not supported by navigation templates.
By they way, where are the "recently created experimental short descriptions" you mentioned in your initial post? The Transhumanist 10:58, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
I've created a user script, called StripSearchSorted.js, which has a switch (menu item in the side bar), so you can turn it on/off.
What it does is strips out all the extraneous descriptive stuff on the search results page, sorts the results, and adds link formatting for easy copy paste. It also removes those annoying redirected and category results, and includes a work around for the intitle bug. If you include intitle:"search term" (with your search term between the quotes), as your search string, the script will remove all titles that do not match. (WP's search engine fails to do that when the intitle search term includes common words like "the", "in", "of", etc.).
So, the script strips your search results to a bare list of links that are ready to be copied into a wiki editor.
And it remembers its on/off state between pages. It will stay on for all your searches until you turn it off.
I hope you find it useful. The Transhumanist 11:24, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
importScript("User:The Transhumanist/StripSearchSorted.js");
intitle:"in Rome"
SR sort (turn on)
&limit=5000
to the url in your browser's address field. I do that anyways, because that is the maximum, and is way more than the usual maximum of 500 allowed by clicking the view number on screen.In that movie, there are these glasses, and if you wear them, you see things way differently, including aliens from another dimension walking amongst us, and subliminal messages everywhere.
Well, I'm working on a system for list and outline developers that will let them see Wikipedia differently than everyone else...
It will display all list items, wherever they appear, in list/outline wikiformat, ready to copy/paste, like the results in the search script above (with some further enhancements). Eventually, most it will be handled in a single script, with an on/off switch (menu item). But, while I'm developing it, I'm working on it page type by page type, in separate scripts, with no off switches.
So far, I've completed conversions for AllPagesWithPrefix, Books, and Category pages, with some other types partially working. These save time converting the links from those pages to wikilink format, because they are already in wikilink format!
I have them activated now on my account, and have gotten quite used to the view. I find this view very useful for gathering links. The one for nav boxes forces them all to the show state, which, combined with list formatting, is a mind blower.
Let me know if you are interested. The Transhumanist 12:24, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
importScript("User:The Transhumanist/ViewAsOutline-Book.js");
to your vector.js page (if you don't use the vector skin, switch your skin to it in
Preferences#Appearance)The Transhumanist, How does one handle articles which could logically fit in more than one place in the tree? · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 08:47, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
The code for en dash is &ndash ending in a semi-colon; which looks like this: –
You could type out the first one, and then copy/paste it in wherever else you need it.
Or, you could copy/paste an en dash from the screen and copy/paste that in wherever you need it.
Or you could use search/replace. Are you ready for a ride? Hold on to your chair...
Search/replace is available in 3 major places:
Text editors, like Notepad++ (this one is very powerful yet easy to use). Cut and paste the article into there, and then do the search/replace, and cut/paste it back to WP. The things I like about Notepad++ the most are, that it supports regex, it can have many documents open at the same time, and it remembers your documents even if you didn't save them. They'll be in there the next time you use the program. An almost identical program for Linux is Notepadqq.
Or you could use a better text editor on Wikipedia. WP:WikEd replaces WP's standard wiki-editor. It's a gadget you can activate in preferences. It has a very good search replace feature, that even supports regex (there's a check box to activate it near the search box). Regex (regular expressions) is a powerful little language for representing searches and replaces. It was my stepping stone into programming in perl and JavaScript. Those weren't as alien to me after learning regex. Regex is especially useful, because you can include ↵ Enter (\n) into your searches for multi-line search/replaces, which is incredibly convenient for working on list items.
The nicest thing about WikEd's search feature, in my opinion, is that it can do search/replaces in text that you have selected, rather than for the whole page. It can do the whole page too, of course.
The killer apps for search/replace are WP:AWB and WP:JWB. These are semi-automatic editors / automatic page loaders, that will process a list of as many pages as you feed into them, and do all the search/replaces that you specify to those pages, including in regex. Instead of a mere search box, these programs can accept as many search/places as you want before you start the processing. The search/replaces are kept in a list that you can modify as needed.
These editors are semi-automatic, because you have to personally review the changes for each page and then press the save button yourself, after which they load the next page in the list automatically. Without you, they would be bots, which would make some errors because search/replacing doesn't catch all exceptions. So a human must remain in the loop. When you want to make changes to a batch of 20 or 20,000 pages, these two babies can get the job done.
Both AWB and JWB are capable of making lists of pages. After all, who can make lists of pages to process better than a program? Many options to choose from. AWB's make list feature is quite extensive.
The difference between WP:AWB and WP:JWB is that AWB has more bells and whistles but can only be installed on Windows, while JWB has fewer features but is a user script, and so it works across almost all platforms.
You'd use AWB or JWB if you wanted to look over or process all of the pages relevant to the underwater diving WikiProject, in one batch, for example.
AWB has a feature to make common fixes, while both AWB and JWB have a feature to fix standard typos (based on a list of many thousands of these). So you might want to run the diving pages through one of these just for that.
Another possible use is to feed them a list of all the talk pages for all the diving articles, and have them check those for the WikiProject's banner, placing it in there if it is missing. I use AWB's append feature to post notices to the talk pages of all outlines. I also contacted (posted messages to the talk pages of) all JavaScript programmers I could identify (by their user boxes), to tell them about the JavaScript WikiProject. But next time, I'll hone that list down to accounts with recent activity (some of the users hadn't logged in for years, but this will take use of a totally different tool).
You can also process the categories for each page, to replace a category, add a category, or remove a category.
And now for some more power tools...
AWB has another search feature that goes way over the top, but the power of which would be hard to beat. It is the database scanner feature. You download the Wikipedia database, and use this to do searches straight from that, offline. I generally download both the articles-only version, and the full-blown version that include all namespaces. AWB can handle either. The search parameters for the database scanner are much more powerful than WP's search feature, and it also supports regex so you can fine-tune your searches to the nth-degree to find things not possible with other methods. You can search just titles, or just contents, or both. Both AWB and its database scanner have a filter as well, so you can modify results further after they are done searching. Searches with the database scanner take 20 minutes or more, so you would use this for important look ups, and have it running in the background while you work on something else in another window.
Another nice feature of AWB is its list compare tool. Find out which items are on only one list, or the other, or in both.
If AWB can't process the pages the way you want, you can use its external processing feature to have it call a script or program you've written, feed the pages from your list to it one by one, and show the results to you as a diff for your approval or rejection on each page before moving onto the next.
There's more, but that's all I can think of off the top of my head.
I hope you've found the above info interesting, if not helpful.
Of course, if you have any questions, feel free to ask.
Cheers, The Transhumanist 10:41, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
\n
]]\n* [[
^
beginning-of-string anchor character, and then modify the first regex with a second regex and strip out the unwanted "Outline of"'s. And then I forgot how to do it later, and had to figure it out all over again. What a pain in the ass.Check out this month's issue of the WikiProject X newsletter, with plans to renew work with a followup grant proposal to support finalising the deployment of CollaborationKit!
-— Isarra ༆ 21:26, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi! Rather than add a new template to all of the bazillion disambig pages in existence, I think it should instead be added to Template:Disambiguation directly, so all articles transparently gain the description. Have you considered that? -- intgr [talk] 14:20, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
Here's a new outline I thought you'd be interested in looking at. Notice the use of images to support the list sections. The Transhumanist 20:02, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Outline of underwater diving, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cylinder valve ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:19, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2018).
contains_all
that edit filter managers may use to check if one or more strings are all contained in another given string.The helium balloon gas is supplied as 80 helium, and up to 15% air. [1] Although this can kill you, the small amount of air will cause the hypercapnic response, which is why Humphry says it won't work. Ratel ( talk) 12:39, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
That's an impressive job you've done on building and annotating the Outline of underwater diving.
Kudos.
It's now one of the best outlines.
As you know, lists (including outlines) have two main formats: bare and annotated.
Each has its advantages.
Bare is easier on the eyes, and is arguably more convenient to browse when you already know what the terms mean.
Annotated is highly useful when you need descriptions to help you decide what to click on, or to read the outline as a general overview to increase familiarity with the subject.
So, I've been developing a script to deliver the advantages of both, enabling the user to switch between the two modes at will.
That way, a user can browse the bare list, and when they come to a term they are unfamiliar with, press ⇧ Shift+Alt+a to see the descriptions. Then, after reading the desired description, press it again to continue browsing the bare list.
It's still under development, and doesn't reposition exactly the way it should, but it is developed enough to be useful, and as proof of concept.
I thought you might want to give it a test drive.
It is ViewAnnotationToggler.
The menu item is in the same tab menu as Move, in case you need to use that instead of the hot key.
If you give it a run, please let me know what you think of it, and point out any problems it may cause, ways to improve it, etc.
Sincerely, The Transhumanist 17:11, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
P.S.: It works across all pages, and it is easy to forget when annotations are hidden, which may surprise you when you go into edit mode to add annotations, and discover that there are some already there. If you start to wonder why there are so few annotations around Wikipedia, it might be that you have them turned off.
The Transhumanist, I had a problem that I tracked down to the annotation toggler script. It appears to disable the move page function, in that the page opens normally from the tab, but the dropdown menu for namespaces greys out and does not activate the menu when clicked. Removing the script and purging gets move page working again. I tried this twice and effects seem repeatable. I have had a few other anomalies on both my browsers on both my machines, so going to check if this might not have some other effects by leaving it off for a while. Cheers, · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 11:26, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
I've tried to understand Wikidata several times, but I still don't get it. All the help pages I've read so far seem to describe it in roundabout terms. Wikidata:Introduction doesn't give me any idea what it is for.
What, in essence, is it?
A database? Of what? That can do what?
What can it be used for now?
What will it be able to be used for in the future?
Frustratedly, — The Transhumanist 10:06, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2018).
I've now found the following:
Those are better, I think. -- RexxS ( talk) 19:39, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
User:Amorymeltzer/sandbox/npp/note ~ Amory ( u • t • c) 19:20, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This 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. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 |
You wrote:
At what point should a draft outline be moved to mainspace? It seems that there are people opposed to incomplete outlines so I would prefer to avoid an attack of knee-jerk deletionism by getting Draft:Outline of underwater diving to an easily defensible condition before making the move. On the other hand, I do not want to delay unnecessarily, as the outline will be useful to WP:SCUBA and anyone interested in underwater diving.
I am making use of the recently created experimental short descriptions as annotations on WP:SCUBA articles, so will have annotations for most if not all of the links already in the list, however there are hundreds more article which will go into other sections, many of which do not yet have a short description. Cheers, · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 09:55, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
I wrote a script in perl to do this several years ago in conjunction with WP:AWB's external script calling feature, lifting the first 2 sentences from each article's lead to insert as annotations, but ran into numerous problems, the main one being that it wasn't scalable, as it required thorough proofreading/copyediting because many of the leads included redundant phrases. For example, "is a species of shark" showing up again and again in a list of shark species, or "is a branch of" showing up in a "Branches of" section. There were also problems with redirects and disambiguation page links, resulting in gaps the script couldn't fill, requiring a human editor. I expect these challenges will still need to be overcome even with the short descriptions. Though those look like they'll make better annotations than the lead sentences.
By the way, what's the function of the magic word? The Transhumanist 15:00, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
I just realized that I didn't answer your initial question above. The answer is: when it is less likely to be deleted. A new outline might be nominated for deletion if it is full of red links, has mostly empty sections, or it is an exact duplication of a navigation footer (not that that is a valid reason for deletion, it isn't -- see WP:CLN). More than likely, though, a new page not ready for article space will simply be moved back to draft space. To avoid negative attention, it is helpful to develop it past those limitations. Annotations definitely help, as they are a feature not supported by navigation templates.
By they way, where are the "recently created experimental short descriptions" you mentioned in your initial post? The Transhumanist 10:58, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
I've created a user script, called StripSearchSorted.js, which has a switch (menu item in the side bar), so you can turn it on/off.
What it does is strips out all the extraneous descriptive stuff on the search results page, sorts the results, and adds link formatting for easy copy paste. It also removes those annoying redirected and category results, and includes a work around for the intitle bug. If you include intitle:"search term" (with your search term between the quotes), as your search string, the script will remove all titles that do not match. (WP's search engine fails to do that when the intitle search term includes common words like "the", "in", "of", etc.).
So, the script strips your search results to a bare list of links that are ready to be copied into a wiki editor.
And it remembers its on/off state between pages. It will stay on for all your searches until you turn it off.
I hope you find it useful. The Transhumanist 11:24, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
importScript("User:The Transhumanist/StripSearchSorted.js");
intitle:"in Rome"
SR sort (turn on)
&limit=5000
to the url in your browser's address field. I do that anyways, because that is the maximum, and is way more than the usual maximum of 500 allowed by clicking the view number on screen.In that movie, there are these glasses, and if you wear them, you see things way differently, including aliens from another dimension walking amongst us, and subliminal messages everywhere.
Well, I'm working on a system for list and outline developers that will let them see Wikipedia differently than everyone else...
It will display all list items, wherever they appear, in list/outline wikiformat, ready to copy/paste, like the results in the search script above (with some further enhancements). Eventually, most it will be handled in a single script, with an on/off switch (menu item). But, while I'm developing it, I'm working on it page type by page type, in separate scripts, with no off switches.
So far, I've completed conversions for AllPagesWithPrefix, Books, and Category pages, with some other types partially working. These save time converting the links from those pages to wikilink format, because they are already in wikilink format!
I have them activated now on my account, and have gotten quite used to the view. I find this view very useful for gathering links. The one for nav boxes forces them all to the show state, which, combined with list formatting, is a mind blower.
Let me know if you are interested. The Transhumanist 12:24, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
importScript("User:The Transhumanist/ViewAsOutline-Book.js");
to your vector.js page (if you don't use the vector skin, switch your skin to it in
Preferences#Appearance)The Transhumanist, How does one handle articles which could logically fit in more than one place in the tree? · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 08:47, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
The code for en dash is &ndash ending in a semi-colon; which looks like this: –
You could type out the first one, and then copy/paste it in wherever else you need it.
Or, you could copy/paste an en dash from the screen and copy/paste that in wherever you need it.
Or you could use search/replace. Are you ready for a ride? Hold on to your chair...
Search/replace is available in 3 major places:
Text editors, like Notepad++ (this one is very powerful yet easy to use). Cut and paste the article into there, and then do the search/replace, and cut/paste it back to WP. The things I like about Notepad++ the most are, that it supports regex, it can have many documents open at the same time, and it remembers your documents even if you didn't save them. They'll be in there the next time you use the program. An almost identical program for Linux is Notepadqq.
Or you could use a better text editor on Wikipedia. WP:WikEd replaces WP's standard wiki-editor. It's a gadget you can activate in preferences. It has a very good search replace feature, that even supports regex (there's a check box to activate it near the search box). Regex (regular expressions) is a powerful little language for representing searches and replaces. It was my stepping stone into programming in perl and JavaScript. Those weren't as alien to me after learning regex. Regex is especially useful, because you can include ↵ Enter (\n) into your searches for multi-line search/replaces, which is incredibly convenient for working on list items.
The nicest thing about WikEd's search feature, in my opinion, is that it can do search/replaces in text that you have selected, rather than for the whole page. It can do the whole page too, of course.
The killer apps for search/replace are WP:AWB and WP:JWB. These are semi-automatic editors / automatic page loaders, that will process a list of as many pages as you feed into them, and do all the search/replaces that you specify to those pages, including in regex. Instead of a mere search box, these programs can accept as many search/places as you want before you start the processing. The search/replaces are kept in a list that you can modify as needed.
These editors are semi-automatic, because you have to personally review the changes for each page and then press the save button yourself, after which they load the next page in the list automatically. Without you, they would be bots, which would make some errors because search/replacing doesn't catch all exceptions. So a human must remain in the loop. When you want to make changes to a batch of 20 or 20,000 pages, these two babies can get the job done.
Both AWB and JWB are capable of making lists of pages. After all, who can make lists of pages to process better than a program? Many options to choose from. AWB's make list feature is quite extensive.
The difference between WP:AWB and WP:JWB is that AWB has more bells and whistles but can only be installed on Windows, while JWB has fewer features but is a user script, and so it works across almost all platforms.
You'd use AWB or JWB if you wanted to look over or process all of the pages relevant to the underwater diving WikiProject, in one batch, for example.
AWB has a feature to make common fixes, while both AWB and JWB have a feature to fix standard typos (based on a list of many thousands of these). So you might want to run the diving pages through one of these just for that.
Another possible use is to feed them a list of all the talk pages for all the diving articles, and have them check those for the WikiProject's banner, placing it in there if it is missing. I use AWB's append feature to post notices to the talk pages of all outlines. I also contacted (posted messages to the talk pages of) all JavaScript programmers I could identify (by their user boxes), to tell them about the JavaScript WikiProject. But next time, I'll hone that list down to accounts with recent activity (some of the users hadn't logged in for years, but this will take use of a totally different tool).
You can also process the categories for each page, to replace a category, add a category, or remove a category.
And now for some more power tools...
AWB has another search feature that goes way over the top, but the power of which would be hard to beat. It is the database scanner feature. You download the Wikipedia database, and use this to do searches straight from that, offline. I generally download both the articles-only version, and the full-blown version that include all namespaces. AWB can handle either. The search parameters for the database scanner are much more powerful than WP's search feature, and it also supports regex so you can fine-tune your searches to the nth-degree to find things not possible with other methods. You can search just titles, or just contents, or both. Both AWB and its database scanner have a filter as well, so you can modify results further after they are done searching. Searches with the database scanner take 20 minutes or more, so you would use this for important look ups, and have it running in the background while you work on something else in another window.
Another nice feature of AWB is its list compare tool. Find out which items are on only one list, or the other, or in both.
If AWB can't process the pages the way you want, you can use its external processing feature to have it call a script or program you've written, feed the pages from your list to it one by one, and show the results to you as a diff for your approval or rejection on each page before moving onto the next.
There's more, but that's all I can think of off the top of my head.
I hope you've found the above info interesting, if not helpful.
Of course, if you have any questions, feel free to ask.
Cheers, The Transhumanist 10:41, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
\n
]]\n* [[
^
beginning-of-string anchor character, and then modify the first regex with a second regex and strip out the unwanted "Outline of"'s. And then I forgot how to do it later, and had to figure it out all over again. What a pain in the ass.Check out this month's issue of the WikiProject X newsletter, with plans to renew work with a followup grant proposal to support finalising the deployment of CollaborationKit!
-— Isarra ༆ 21:26, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi! Rather than add a new template to all of the bazillion disambig pages in existence, I think it should instead be added to Template:Disambiguation directly, so all articles transparently gain the description. Have you considered that? -- intgr [talk] 14:20, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
Here's a new outline I thought you'd be interested in looking at. Notice the use of images to support the list sections. The Transhumanist 20:02, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Outline of underwater diving, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cylinder valve ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:19, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2018).
contains_all
that edit filter managers may use to check if one or more strings are all contained in another given string.The helium balloon gas is supplied as 80 helium, and up to 15% air. [1] Although this can kill you, the small amount of air will cause the hypercapnic response, which is why Humphry says it won't work. Ratel ( talk) 12:39, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
That's an impressive job you've done on building and annotating the Outline of underwater diving.
Kudos.
It's now one of the best outlines.
As you know, lists (including outlines) have two main formats: bare and annotated.
Each has its advantages.
Bare is easier on the eyes, and is arguably more convenient to browse when you already know what the terms mean.
Annotated is highly useful when you need descriptions to help you decide what to click on, or to read the outline as a general overview to increase familiarity with the subject.
So, I've been developing a script to deliver the advantages of both, enabling the user to switch between the two modes at will.
That way, a user can browse the bare list, and when they come to a term they are unfamiliar with, press ⇧ Shift+Alt+a to see the descriptions. Then, after reading the desired description, press it again to continue browsing the bare list.
It's still under development, and doesn't reposition exactly the way it should, but it is developed enough to be useful, and as proof of concept.
I thought you might want to give it a test drive.
It is ViewAnnotationToggler.
The menu item is in the same tab menu as Move, in case you need to use that instead of the hot key.
If you give it a run, please let me know what you think of it, and point out any problems it may cause, ways to improve it, etc.
Sincerely, The Transhumanist 17:11, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
P.S.: It works across all pages, and it is easy to forget when annotations are hidden, which may surprise you when you go into edit mode to add annotations, and discover that there are some already there. If you start to wonder why there are so few annotations around Wikipedia, it might be that you have them turned off.
The Transhumanist, I had a problem that I tracked down to the annotation toggler script. It appears to disable the move page function, in that the page opens normally from the tab, but the dropdown menu for namespaces greys out and does not activate the menu when clicked. Removing the script and purging gets move page working again. I tried this twice and effects seem repeatable. I have had a few other anomalies on both my browsers on both my machines, so going to check if this might not have some other effects by leaving it off for a while. Cheers, · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 11:26, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
I've tried to understand Wikidata several times, but I still don't get it. All the help pages I've read so far seem to describe it in roundabout terms. Wikidata:Introduction doesn't give me any idea what it is for.
What, in essence, is it?
A database? Of what? That can do what?
What can it be used for now?
What will it be able to be used for in the future?
Frustratedly, — The Transhumanist 10:06, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2018).
I've now found the following:
Those are better, I think. -- RexxS ( talk) 19:39, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
User:Amorymeltzer/sandbox/npp/note ~ Amory ( u • t • c) 19:20, 10 April 2018 (UTC)