The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | |
For your lightning fast anti vandalism work! Krillzyx (talk) 19:38, 9 October 2021 (UTC) |
Hi Rlink2
Please can you not do edits like this [1], where a bare URL tweet ref was replaced with the generic title "Twitter".
https://twitter.com/itselliotknight/status/1134319123217784832
{{cite web| url = https://twitter.com/itselliotknight/status/1134319123217784832| title = Twitter}}
... which renders as:
Your edit leaves the ref less informative than the bare URL. A cite template using a generic value for |title=
is almost never than the bare URL.
I fear that your tools may have created many of the >940 such refs I mentioned at User_talk:TheSandDoctor#Tweet_using_cite_web_with_generic_titles.
If a tweet ref is left bare, then TweetCiteBot can fill it properly, using {{ Cite tweet}}. Please can you revert any such changes you made? BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 18:22, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 07:32, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
I'm trying to confirm and have changed John Godina's Olympic Medal Status. I know him from army family life decades and decades. His Silver Medal was changed to Gold because the gold medalist failed drug tests. John deserves historical recognition. PjinLauderdale ( talk) 13:26, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
Great work on refs. Didn't even notice that while I was scouring for grammatical and spelling errors. 99.106.93.88 ( talk) 20:58, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
Thank you for doing a yeoman's job fixing the bare URLs on so many articles. Magnolia677 ( talk) 23:05, 9 January 2022 (UTC) |
Hello, I was wondering if you could modify your Converting bare URLs task.
For example in
this change the text "The Star" should not be part of the title but should go in the |work=
or one of its alias fields.
It would also be good if the |achive-date=
field followed the appropiate article style, day or month first when specified, rather than always using ISO style.
Keith D (
talk)
00:02, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
|publisher=
field, as would other organisations such as council names.
Keith D (
talk)
00:26, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
The Copyeditor's Barnstar | |
You fix bare URLs and References so quick! Have a barnstar. Severe storm 28 04:28, 11 January 2022 (UTC) |
This edit. I guess I'm not persuaded that 'News story' is much of an improvement over 'Archived copy'. In fact, mass replacement of known bad titles with generic non-titles means that we will lose track of those citations so they may never get proper titles. Yeah, I understand that what you are attempting is difficult and I understand that success is dependant to a fairly great extent upon the quality of the source's metadata – which is why I don't like auto-filling by WP:RefToolbar or VE (too much junk and too many editors accepting what the tool suggests because the-tool-can't-be-wrong-or-it-wouldn't-do-what-it-does, right?). At least with 'Archived copy' it's obvious to both editors and readers that there is a title missing; 'News story' might actually be a title for something.
cs1|2 knows about 'Archive title' and tracks templates with that title so that (someday) the citation might be repaired. I would like cs1|2 to start shifting articles from Category:CS1 maint: archived copy as title into a error category because this is a problem that, I think, requires humans to fix.
In this case, the title is 'Australia's Hamilton Island Yacht Club confirmed as Challenger of Record' in <h1>...</h1>
which more-or-less matches the url.
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 00:53, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
@ Rlink2: Hello user you edit very quick can you say me which tool you use for editing and helping the articles with archive link so that I can also use. २ तकर पेप्सी ( talk) 20:41, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
|lay-url=
is not supported by |archive-url=
as you attempted in
this edit. Also, |lay-date=
, |lay-format=
, |lay-source=
, and |lay-url=
will become actively deprecated at the next cs1|2 update.
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 00:36, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
You seem to misunderstand what a "bare" url is, as at Apollo. You should be aware of WP:CITEVAR, and follow it. Johnbod ( talk) 04:33, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
It's good to fill in bare URLs, but the results in markup don't look like the example at {{ Cite web}} and differ the rest of most pages. Almost no human editor or bot uses such a quirky format; I call it ugly. The space belongs before the pipe, with no space after. No space belongs before or after the "=".
For example, you recently replaced this:
<ref name="tech.ebu.ch">[http://tech.ebu.ch/docs/techreview/trev_265-kozamernik.pdf Digital Audio Broadcasting (EBU Technical Review article)]</ref>
with this:
<ref name="tech.ebu.ch">{{cite web| url = http://tech.ebu.ch/docs/techreview/trev_265-kozamernik.pdf| title = Digital Audio Broadcasting (EBU Technical Review article)}}</ref>
which is helpful, but it really should look like this:
<ref name="tech.ebu.ch">{{cite web |url=http://tech.ebu.ch/docs/techreview/trev_265-kozamernik.pdf |title=Digital Audio Broadcasting (EBU Technical Review article)}}</ref>
Are you using an outdated version of AutoWikiBrowser or custom settings related to these edits? If so, then could you please update and/or change the settings? If not, then my objection is with AutoWikiBrowser making a coding mistake that is continually multiplied by hundreds and hundreds of edits, and one or both of us should complain there. - A876 ( talk) 07:42, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
Continuing the example above, you could have visited the URL, to see whether it works and whether it redirects. (In this case it redirects to https.) That would add a little more value.
Further, you could have checked this article's title, split the title from the publication name, removed the word "article", completed the article's title, and added the missing issue number, publisher, and date, yielding this:
<ref name="tech.ebu.ch">{{cite journal |title=Digital Audio Broadcasting – radio now and for the future |work=EBU Technical Review |issue=265 |publisher=[[European Broadcasting Union]] |date=Autumn 1995 |pages=2–27 |url=https://tech.ebu.ch/docs/techreview/trev_265-kozamernik.pdf}}</ref>
That's all for now. - A876 ( talk) 07:42, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
|title=
and |author=
. --
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (
talk)
14:07, 14 January 2022 (UTC)<ref>https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/418490</ref>to
ref>{{cite web |url=https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/418490 |title = Redefine \or form within a nested if statement? - TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange}}</ref>. As with
|author=
, it would be best if you used separate |title=
and |work=
parameters, e.g., <ref>{{cite web |url=https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/418490 |title = Redefine \or form within a nested if statement? |work = TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange}}</ref>. Note that the documentation for various tools warns that the results are not perfect and that editors should manually adjust them as necessary before committing the results. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul ( talk) 16:03, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Please do not change optional citation styles. For example, where an article used manual citations, do not add template formatting. That is not "completing a bare ref", as you are not adding any new information, you are simply changing the citation style. Again, please read WP:CITEVAR. -- Ssilvers ( talk) 14:12, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
mass edit world, I have been there for a while, but only recently have I been using it to fix citations, which in honesty I don't know too much about compared to the rest of the people commenting here, that's why I rely on the editors to clear up any misunderstandings. Rlink2 ( talk) 01:03, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
If you upgrade a sloppy citation like that to a convenient style,, I failed to explain that by 'upgrade' I meant adding author, date, ISBN, DOI, SSN etc, actually providing the missing metadata. -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 01:05, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
Living in Houston and trying to figure out the EZ TAG system right now - thank you for clarifying that it's different from EZ Pass. Dkennell ( talk) 21:02, 15 January 2022 (UTC) |
Hello again, spotted a problem with
this edit. The |date=
field has a leading zero added which causes a cite date error.
Keith D (
talk)
00:21, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
I do not know what happened here, but it is clearly not fixing links. Since Anglo-Indian people still exists and is identical to your version, I reverted the edit back to the redirect. Please feel free to fix if you wanted to do smth else.-- Ymblanter ( talk) 08:40, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
If you're going to fill out bare refs, you should add the parameters for the name of the author "last=Smith |first=John" and the date of the publication of the source "date=". Also, instead to throwing the website name in after the title of the source, you should use the "website=" parameter. All the best, -- Ssilvers ( talk) 13:53, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
The problem is that you don't understand about referencing.hence why I leave the rest up to citation bot. Citation bot is good at adding the website, author, field, publisher, ISBN, etc. like Maynard said. It has databases that I do not have access to. I think there was consensus that filling in a bare ref with a usable title is always better than having a bare ref. Editors said
it is horribly bureaucratic to be pushed to debate every step of incremental progress against those who who prefer no progress to an incomplete improvement.and Friedman followed up saying he agrees with that editor analysis.
I don't get it. Why do an incomplete job, when you could actually fill out the refs with all the information. Fine. Everybody likes it. Happy editing. -- Ssilvers ( talk) 03:26, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Perhaps you should post at Village Pump the specific list of issues you want to resolve and get community consensus to operate in a semi-automated manner to fix those issues. Otherwise, you are going to be dealing with lengthy inquiries to your talk page indefinitely. Slywriter ( talk) 15:11, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
I'm intrigued to know how you so nearly got this one right? In the second of your two edits to Weedon Bec, you turned
into
with this edit. That is not a bad result at all, it is certainly intelligible. My finished version is very little different, just replaced the splitting pipe with a |publisher=
There are no clues on the website that would give you that for free - did your process really get that close unaided or did you have to give it a mid-course correction? -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 22:31, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
|trans-title=English translation
. --
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (
talk)
13:08, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
<title>Bus Stops & Shelters | Weedon Bec Parish Council</title>
. Rlink2's tools use that data.BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 16:54, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Hello @Rlink2, please can you have a look on this: /info/en/?search=Romani_people#Turkish_and_Tatar_Y-DNA_genes_of_the_Muslim_Roma699
the source behind them, says nothing about turkish or tatar Y-DNA, the source says also nothing that muslim romani woman got children from turks or tatars etc., the source is about Genetic impact of the Ottoman occupiers on the Balkan-Roma population and central eastern population, but not especially in muslim roma.
That's why I wanted to fix it but I can't. I'am blocked from editing the Article. But If you read the source, you can understand what I mean. Thanky
-- Nalanidil ( talk) 16:03, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Ok i understand, maybe another User who is active in the page romani people can be changend it.
Nalanidil ( talk) 00:01, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Izno ( talk) 23:23, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar | |
For doing great work on filling bare URLs, and remaining cool and engaged under the outrageous pressure of an ANI pile-on based on unevidenced allegations. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 02:16, 20 January 2022 (UTC) |
I'm not fully convinced presumably mechanical edits like this are net improvements. The URL was a bit malformed and remained so - not an improvement. A title was added, which is clearly an improvement, but there is a lot of extra junk included with the new title detracting from the improvement. I have improved your improvement here but, ideally, this work should not require two passes by two editors. ~ Kvng ( talk) 15:48, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
ideally.
<title>
element by stuffing it with redundant verbosity:
http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/leaky+bucket+counter has <title>Leaky bucket counter | Article about leaky bucket counter by The Free Dictionary</title>
, and Rlink2's edit has reproduced that faithfully.http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/leaky+bucket+counter.
{{cite web |url=http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/leaky+bucket+counter. |title = Leaky bucket counter. {{!}} Article about leaky bucket counter. by The Free Dictionary}}
→
"Leaky bucket counter. | Article about leaky bucket counter. by The Free Dictionary".. {{!}} Article about leaky bucket counter. by
and replace it with |website=
. That was a lot easier than having to add the cite template and visit the webpage to find the title.not the best way to make these improvements. It is very likely that with a lot more resources, much more sophisticated tools could be developed.
I assume when adding titles, we want to use the title that someone visiting the web page will identify as the title, not what's shown in the browser tab. They often don't match as is the case here. ~ Kvng ( talk) 16:03, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
< title >
html tags gives a reasonable first cut for the large majority of them. And if it prompts a page watcher to do it properly, so much the better. Hard cases make bad law: just because one web page has a useless html title is not a reason to do nothing for the thousand others that do. --
John Maynard Friedman (
talk)
16:21, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reasonable first cut, and in this case that is what Rlink2 did. I also agree that
hard cases make bad law: it would be absurd to use a very low percentage of problems as a reason to omit the 99% of edits which improve.
useless html title. It has a stupidly verbose and repetitive title, but that verbose repetition is a lot more useful than no title. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 16:31, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
Making automated edits that are not improvements (I'm still undecided whether that's actually the case here). However, at 16:26 you write above
these are easier to fix manually after the automated changes. So what's your problem? BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 16:46, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
a stupidly verbose and repetitive titleor plainly wrong title is better for readers than a bare link. ~ Kvng ( talk) 17:11, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
How much harm we're willing to tolerateis yet more specious nonsense. It is a straw man, because you not have identified any way in which Rlink2's edit have caused any harm at all to any article or to Wikipedia as a whole.
|title=Archived copy
which is certainly not a good title but it is recognizable as not-a-good-title so cs1|2 templates can (and do) recognize that title and add the article to
Category:CS1 maint: archived copy as title. An editor can go look, discover the correct title, and then make a proper repair. Most titles added by the various tools become just another string of blue-linked words in a sea of blue-lined words; cs1|2 can do nothing to help locate these marginally 'fixed' templates. Were it up to me, because reliably fetching titles from online sources is so hit and miss, all tools that cleanup bare urls should not attempt to create |title=
except for sources that have been fully vetted to provide clean and correct metadata. Not on that list, citation gets a generic, trackable title so that cs1|2 can categorize those articles for human repair. This comment is more-or-less an expansion of what I wrote at
User talk:Rlink2 § News story above.become a general purpose placeholder for any missing title. Have I missed something? BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 21:11, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
<ref>http://example.com/foo</ref>
and replacing it with <ref>{{cite web |url=http://example.com/foo |title=Unknown cite title - please help}}</ref>
... or possibly as <ref>{{cite web |url=http://example.com/foo |title=Unknown cite title - please help |website=example.com/foo |access-date=20 January 2022}}</ref>. (If I have misunderstood your idea, please correct me).Hi Rlink2
I am sorry that you have had to go through the unpleasant and unjustified ANI drama, and I hope that it is coming to an end. So it is time to focus on getting approval for a bot task through which you can continue your good work of filling WP:Bare URLs.
I have been reviewing WP:BRFA/Rlink2 Bot 2, and it seems to me that it has run into the sands because it was initially drawn with too big a scope. That led to a lot of discussion in which you responded well to the feedback: you narrowed the scope and tidied up a few glitches. However, there is a lot of verbiage for any BAG member to wade through.
So I suggest that the best way forward is to withdraw that BRFA, and open a new one which explicitly builds on what emerged from that BRFA: the bot should have a narrowed scope, clearly specified. I suggest that for now you drop any idea of archiving in this bot task, and drop the user request feature. Just make this a very simple task: fill bare URLs, using list which you create by a variety of methods: database dumps, other editors list-making, and pages tagged with {{ Bare URL inline}} and/or {{ Cleanup bare URLs}}. Give the bot a unique name (as I suggested in the current BRFA), to emphasise that tight focus.
I recommend that you don't assume that those reviewing the BRFA have any prior knowledge of filling bare URLs, let alone the extensive experience that you have. So be explicit that the bot is just to do a first-pass improvement, and that in nearly every case the ref should be expanded further. By converting a bare URL to a cite template and adding a rough title, you are both making the ref more helpful to readers, and assisting editors who want to fill the ref more thoroughly ( because they don't have to format the ref as a cite template).
Stress also that other tool have limitations, such as Reflinks's bot's inability to even connect to thousands of websites, and that BHG's work of systematically feeding all bare URL to @ Citation bot means that your work is a sort-of second line repair: you are picking up on what the others can't do.
I think that if you do this, concisely, it will be much easier to get the bot to a trial stage. If you would like any assistance in drafting that new BRFA, I would be happy to help. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 18:55, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
Just make this a very simple task: fill bare URLsand that is exactly what the bot will do.
I recommend that you don't assume that those reviewing the BRFA have any prior knowledge of filling bare URLsis good advice so everyone is on the same page. All good ideas. Regarding archiving, I will leave any dead or "cloudflared" links alone in the bot for now (which is in contrast to my existing filling, which used/uses web.archive.org exclusively to retrieve the dead or "cloudflared" link). This way we can avoid any more unnecessary archive drama. I think I got the handle of rewriting the BRFA, but if I need help I'll ask you ;) Rlink2 ( talk) 20:46, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | ||
Hello Rlink2! Just wanted to tell you to stay strong and keep up the good work on here. In my opinion, any user that makes a single productive edit on this platform is doing a good service for future generations. Do not let negativity uproot your desire to contribute. My advice is to take positive note from those that offer it and shape your operation in a way that makes you satisfied with your work. Red Director ( talk) 22:48, 21 January 2022 (UTC) |
The Anti-Flame Barnstar | ||
For keeping your cool and not responding in kind. John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 16:33, 22 January 2022 (UTC) |
I've a request my friend. If possible, can you plz archive the references in a particular article— List of foreign football players in India? Lots of them are rotten there. Thanks in advance!!
Thanks buddy!! Keep up great work :) Billjones94 ( talk) 05:50, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
|url-status=
it defaults to rendered dead ie. the archive URL is displayed first. --
Green
C
21:16, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
Hi Rlink2, have you considered using the {{
webarchive}}
it has a few advantages. For example instead of this (from
Steve Ballmer):
Archived at [https://ghostarchive.org/varchive/youtube/20211205/qFe0S3F389w Ghostarchive]{{cbignore}} and the [https://web.archive.org/web/20161107061621/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFe0S3F389w&gl=US&hl=en Wayback Machine]{{cbignore}}: {{cite web| url = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFe0S3F389w| title = Microsoft's Former CEO Says Disagreement With Gates on Smartphones Drove Them Apart | website=[[YouTube]]}}{{cbignore}}
It would be:
{{cite web |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFe0S3F389w |title=Microsoft's Former CEO Says Disagreement With Gates on Smartphones Drove Them Apart |work=Bloomberg |via=[[YouTube]] |author= |date= |access-date=January 24, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161107061621/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFe0S3F389w&gl=US&hl=en |archive-date=2016-11-07 |url-status=live}} {{webarchive |format=addlarchives |url=https://ghostarchive.org/varchive/youtube/20211205/qFe0S3F389w |date=2021-12-05 |title=Ghostarchive}}
It's cleaner, and no need to use {{
cbignore}}
. The webarchive template can accept up to 10 archive providers in case you want to use WayBack, Ghost and Archive.today for the same cite. You could put both archives in the webarchive template instead of one in the cite web. The title field is free form so could say whatever you like. --
Green
C
19:34, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
|format=addlarchives
option. By free-form |title=
is meant in the webarchive template. -
Green
C
20:03, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
{{
webarchive}}
because it is designed for this situation. --
Green
C
20:33, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
|format=addlarchives
is a special use case of {{
webarchive}}
that follows a CS1|2 template when there are additional (> 1) archives. The diff you link is correct. In that case, there are no additional archives only 1 archive thus webarchive can be merged into the CS1|2 template. --
Green
C
20:46, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
adding multiple archive URLs into wikitext just compounds the problems, then why have you been suggesting that Rlink2 do just that by using {{ Webarchive}}? BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 20:35, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
My views on the bigger scale are we should not be doing multiple archivesand
On the smaller scale if someone wants to do an occasional one due to special conditions it should be allowable via special tools like webarchive.Yes. Rlink2 ( talk) 01:28, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
Hello Rlink2. This is a courtesy note to let you know that I have closed the ANI thread about you. As part of the closure, I have interpreted the community to have warned you that the rate of your editing with AWB has been too fast and that you should slow down to avoid problems in the future. If you have any questions, please feel free to let me know. All the best, Mz7 ( talk) 09:13, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
Some of your edits are causing duplicate parameter errors. This edit added archive-url and archive-date parameters to a citation template, but those parameters were already present. This causes articles to be placed in Category:Pages using duplicate arguments in template calls. Please review and fix any of your edits that caused this error. One way to fix it is like this, removing the empty duplicate parameters and leaving the populated ones. – Jonesey95 ( talk) 07:40, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
I noticed this happened again yesterday on a page on my watchlist, in this case adding a duplicate archive date parameter: [6]. This particular instance of the error has already been fixed. Trainsandotherthings ( talk) 17:34, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for fixing dead links
like this, but could you please add Wayback Machine links as https://web.archive.org/...
? (see
Village Pump archive for why). Cheers. --
bender235 (
talk)
22:42, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
Սան Ոչանսան 45.146.38.66 ( talk) 15:03, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
Please issue a talk discussion first, before reverting it, it was provided what the cite had, no vandalism was made. Have you checked those sources? 223.182.98.230 ( talk) 17:13, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Diligence | |
I have seen your anti-vandalism and bare reference fixing work. Today I re scrutinized your contributions and am really happy with it. Continue your work like this and I hope you bring a change to this place. Itcouldbepossible Talk 03:53, 7 February 2022 (UTC) |
Hi Rlink2
As promised [7] at the BRFA, here are some URLs which returned a HTTP status 410:
They should all have been tagged as {{ Dead link}}, so you will need to set up a test page to check your code's handling of them.
Hope this helps. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 11:19, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
This edit adds recent archive links. Shouldn't we be striving to present archives more coincident with the stated |access-date=
? ~
Kvng (
talk)
15:14, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
Re your edit to add an archive link in Burton Agnes drum: what does {{ cbignore}} do? Why should this ref be ignored by the bot in future? Thanks for any explanation. Pam D 06:42, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created, Template:Dead YouTube links, was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. – Jonesey95 ( talk) 14:43, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
Punta Reyes or Punta de Reyes will be the correct Spanish translation of Point Reyes. Thanks for your article it is very informative and helpful. Just trying to help here. Kagdilla ( talk) 04:27, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
Can you repair and archive the following urls: https://ghostarchive.org/varchive/FyEkrzQOUmo and https://ghostarchive.org/varchive/ihmLlmemQQM. I tried to archive them but the process says, "There was an issue trying to archive your webpage or video. Usually, webpages that are bigger than 50 megabytes, or videos longer than 15 minutes, may fail to archive." Chompy Ace 22:44, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
videos longer than 15 minutes may fail to archivethen you have the reason for why that may be the case. I can't even access the first video ("Video not avaliable in your country" is the error YT gives me), and Wayback does not have it either.
Hi Rlink2
Just a quick note to say that @ Primefac has authorised a second trial for BareRefBot: see Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/BareRefBot#Trial_2.
Primefac didn't ping you, so I just wanted to be sure that you hadn't missed it. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 00:28, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
Hi @ Rlink2: is it time for Trial 3? --- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 16:17, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
When the bot is fully authorised, would you be OK with taking the lists out of the the history of my log page?This is also fine.
If that's OK with you, I can just post msgs for you like this...Please do, this is also easier for me as well. Rlink2 ( talk) 23:45, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
filled 3 of 5 bare URL refs; tagged 1 as {{Bare URL PDF}}
[[User:BareRefBot/Batch005|Batch005]]: filled 3 of 4 [[WP:Bare URLs|bare URL]](s); tagged 2 {{[[Template:Bare URL PDF|Bare URL PDF]]}} refs
, which renders as
Batch005: filled 3 of 4
bare URL(s); tagged 2 {{
Bare URL PDF}} refsI know I have been a bit of a pain pushing for BareRefBot improvements, so I am sorry to add another one.No worries. The goal of Wikipedia is to build a high quality encylopedia, after all, so edit summaries add to that. If I can't do something, I'll let you know. But so far all of your sugesstions have been resonable.
Whaddaya think?Yes, these edit summaries and pages are a good idea. I will implement them. So you give me the list, I make another page with the list, and the bot will link to that page in the edit summary.
Batch 0005: Found 7 bare URLs: Filled 3; Tagged 2 as {{Dead link}}; Tagged 1 as {{Bare URL PDF}}
BrownHairedGirl
(talk) • (
contribs)
00:01, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
@
Rlink2: After nearly a week, there has been no response to the request for a third trial of BareRefBot. May I suggest that you try using {{
BAGAssistanceNeeded}} and/or leaving a msg on Primefac's talk? --
BrownHairedGirl
(talk) • (
contribs)
00:08, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
Have you done some tests runs of the latest BareRefBot in sandboxes to check that it is all polished, and that edit summaries are neat?Not yet, but I ought to. I will do this.
Great to hear that you are at work on the deadlink bare URLs. There be a feck of a lot of them, and any serious dent in the necropolis will be big boost to the verifiability of the 'pedia.Yes, thank you for that. On a semirelated note, I have recently found many of the Youtube links I preempt archived in December are now dead, including some of my personal favorite Youtube videos. Google apperently does a yearly, if not quarterly purge, of videos, and it seems like these were part of it. If it weren't for my preempt archive efforts, they would have been dead forever.
My first step was done in two rounds in February, when I tagged dead links on about 60K (yes, sixty thou) articles. I tagged only those which returned HTTP 404 or 410. That made a big dent in the total number of ABURs, cutting it from ~215K to ~155K.Yes, I am aware, hence why I am clearing the log.
To verify that these are not transient outages, I left the list aside until mid-March, and then tested the whole set again ten times,Intresting, nice to see you are putting in alot of effort into this. On Wikipedia, Competence is required, and you have shown yourself to be very competent.
Then I hope that BareRefBot can get the tally well below 100K.Me too.
Tagging them as dead would raise some "but it worked for me" complaints from those who hit it lucky, so that seems like a path to drama.It is always been my personal opinion that we should have links that work. We should do what works for most readers. If the website can't be bothered to fix their config then its a "dead link" in a way.
This evening it occurred to me that your work might provide a solution. Would it be possible for you to archive these refs without first tagging them as dead?Yes, do you have a list of the "ghost" sites and/or a list of the articles with the "ghost sites" you'd like me to look? Or do you just want me to look out and archive dead bare refs in general (Both of which I can do) Rlink2 ( talk) 04:25, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
I will put together some lists and start a new section to explain it all. I will give you a list or websites and a list of articles, but I don't want to just give you the lists; I want to give you the tools to verify them.Sounds good.
Do you have Perl installed?I should (isn't it one of the things that come with every computer?) but if not I can easily install and set it up. Rlink2 ( talk) 22:28, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
Why are you adding archive-url values when url-status is set to 'live', as in part of this edit? At Category:CS1 maint: url-status, the intro says that "cs1|2 templates that have |url-status= but not |archive-url= should be repaired", but ... "if the value is live, remove |url-status=" (emphasis is mine). The archive-url is only to be added if url-status is not 'live'. — ADavidB 06:19, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
"If url-status is not 'live'The whole category consists of articles with URL-status=live, I think you meant to say "if the URL is not live".
Including so many 'just in case'is a perfectly acceptable thing to do (see Wikipedia:Citing_sources/Further_considerations#Pre-emptive_archiving, that's why "url-status" exists so the existing citation continues to go to the original URL even with the addition of archived links.
subscription-based sources.an archive link is also fine but url-status=live is still set for those, as the purpose of the archive link is to not necessarily bypass paywalls. Rlink2 ( talk) 18:13, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
When the page contains javascript? Given this URL: https://www.centreforcities.org/city/milton-keynes/
No doubt there are counter examples, of course. -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 20:17, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
Wanted to let you know I responded to your GA review. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 23:51, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
Wikiwings | ||
For your valuable additions of archived links for references on aircraft articles. - Ahunt ( talk) 13:10, 20 February 2022 (UTC) |
Template:Codeberg has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym ( talk) 09:00, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
Template:Sourcehut has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. WikiCleanerMan ( talk) 23:04, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created, Template:Dead Facebook links, was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. SɱαɾƚყPαɳƚʂ22 ( Ⓣⓐⓛⓚ) 11:41, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for helping with the prep sets! It would be nice to see in an edit summary that you promoted a hook to prep (minimum), and I have seen others (tlc especially) also saying which prep, and if the hook was modified saying so with a ping to the nominator (luxury). -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:57, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
I like your first set!Anyways thank you. I like the prep work so I think I'll be doing that stuff from now on. It's nice getting to do new things, now that the bare ref fixing is delegated to a bot, and I'm almost done with preemptive archiving Facebook and Instagram citations.
I don’t know how to update wiki but can I email picture I just took of the sign in Kiowa Kansas. It would be nice to have on page since this is where Carry began her campaign. Redgrashoper ( talk) 17:34, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
Note that this sort of replies are passive and are not encouraged, what you want to is, communicate as if it were a real life interaction, passive responses such as the one you gave sounds a little bit like an automated response. Please keep this in mind moving forward. Celestina007 ( talk) 21:44, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
I took this pic in 2009. It was on the German MP yesterday, with this song from 1885, in English Prayer for Ukraine. - Thank you for your appreciation. I nominated it for English DYK before the German, but faced incredible reservations against "taking side in a conflict". - "waiting until the conflict is over" was mentioned. Sadly, I don't expect that during my lifetime. - The nom needs a review, and then someone to move it to prep, - perhaps the latter is more for you ;) -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 22:39, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
that the chamber choir Oreya (pictured) chose the spiritual anthem Prayer for Ukraine, published in 1885, a" and is not necessarily biased towards any one side, but others may disagree. I would give it an OK but nominating isn't really part of my balliwack (done that a few times before moving stuff over to prep, maybe I'll start doing both). I'll be happy to move it to prep if its approved and no one does it before me. Rlink2 ( talk) 00:33, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
Update: IABot now supports Ghostarchive.org - {{cbignore}}
is no longer needed, and existing {{cbignore}}
should be removed. Is this something you want to do or should we find someone? The problem now is we don't know who added the cbignore - yourself or someone else - since |bot=
was not used in the template to identify who added it so we risk removing legitimate cases addd by other users, but I don't think they will be very many if we quickly get this done sooner than later. --
Green
C
19:35, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20210728022510/https://www.instagram.com/p/BMUccRPg4Ow/
redirects to
https://ghostarchive.org/iarchive/instagram/georgemofficial/1374848874216391600
.
https://ghostarchive.org/iarchive/s/instagram/Bi-NSa4l5NS/
.
https://ghostarchive.org/archive/2020/https://en.wikipedia.org
and short form links like
https://ghostarchive.org/archive/wOPfV
. In this case, the short form is hiding the resulting webpage, while the long form URL still has information about it.https://ghostarchive.org/iarchive/instagram/georgemofficial/1374848874216391600
into https://www.instagram.com/p/BMUccRPg4Ow/
. The bots need to convert the source URL both to and from archive URLs. And need date of archive. This probably can be solved with a /longform/ API only need to ask the Ghost admin if it can be done. There are currently about 1,700 with iarchive/facebook and about 2,000 with iarchive/instagram --
Green
C
16:17, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
@ Rlink2: This appears to be resolved [9]. -- Green C 01:29, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
See cite #13 and #27 fixed
here. Presuming there are a bunch which will make removal of the {{cbignore}}
more complex. We'll need a bot to fix these first I think. --
Green
C
19:48, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
See cite #30 - missing title generates red error. -- Green C 19:58, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
The Current Events Barnstar | ||
Awarded for efforts in expanding and verifying articles related to the 2021–2022 Russo-Ukrainian crisis and 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. Awarded by Cdjp1 (talk) 7 March 2022 (UTC) |
The Original Barnstar | ||
Awarded for being the top contributor to an article related to the 2021–2022 Russo-Ukrainian crisis and 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. Awarded by Cdjp1 (talk) 16:02, 8 February 2022 (UTC) |
Thank you for support in the related RfC for DYK! Listening to the charity concert mentioned here. I created the articles of the composer and the soprano. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 19:47, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
The Prayer is on the Main page, finally + new flowers, and btw: the TFA is tlc's first -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 21:34, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for building preps. I'm just letting you know that bio hooks shouldn't be right by each other. Otherwise, everything is phenomenal. SL93 ( talk) 00:44, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
Hi, I saw that you've recently gone about adding archives to some Bolivia-related pages. I ask that you don't do so for references that site the websites atlaselectoral.oep.org.bo and gacetaoficialdebolivia.gob.bo as archives for those cites simply don't work. Examples:
Thanks! Krisgabwoosh ( talk) 02:19, 13 March 2022 (UTC) Krisgabwoosh ( talk) 02:19, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
References
Hello and I have seen some archive efforts of yours. I want to join in to learn and help in some tasks. I humbly ask the process in which you use to archive YT vids of different kinds, including YT URLs not included here in Wikipedia. As you may know, Ghostarchive implemented an HCaptcha for every entry which is time-consuming and pain-stakingly problematic for me. Do you use a bot for easy archival? I have a lot of URLs bookmarked to be archived, and to be used in Wikipedia soon. I would be glad if you can help me in this demeanor of mine. Thank you :) -- Likhasik ( talk) 10:35, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
Hello and I have seen some archive efforts of yours. I want to join in to learn and help in some tasks.Thank you, it is always nice to see people appreciate my work. I use a tool called AutoWikiBrowser to add archived links to articles.
As you may know, Ghostarchive implemented an HCaptcha for every entry which is time-consuming and pain-stakingly problematic for me.Usually the captcha is temporary, it comes when there is alot of submissions I think. It should go away soon.
javascript:void(window.open('https://ghostarchive.org/save/'+location.href))
) If you add it to your browser, you can archive any youtube video just by clicking on the bookmark at the top of your browser, saving you time. As of right now, saving Youtube videos through the bookmarklet does not have a captcha.I would be glad if you can help me in this demeanor of mine.I would be happy to, please let me know if you have any questions. Rlink2 ( talk) 14:03, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
unfortunately I can't codeI only have an extremely basic understanding of coding (enough for WP purposes, haven't done anything outside of that), but computer science is intresting to me.
This saved my time and Hcaptcha problem.I'm glad it helped.
BTW, do you have a group or Wikiproject for overall archiving?I am not aware of any. There was an attempt to get a Wikiproject off the ground but I don't think it got anywhere.
Also, do you have some sort of automation for archive.today?The owner does not want mass submissions, see https://blog.archive.today/post/678411898279067648/hello-i-am-developing-an-application-that#notes , hence the captcha. There is a bookmarklet on Wikipedia:Citing_sources/Further_considerations#Archive.today, but you will still have to complete the captcha.
automatically crawls whole websitesArchive.org crawls entire sites, as they are the biggest archive with the most resources. If you have a huge chunk of links, you can also use the archive.org bookmarklet, or put all the links in a Google Sheet and upload them to archive.org (see https://archive.org/services/wayback-gsheets/).
Hi Rlink. I wanted to know how I could remove country and language linking in television infoboxes using AWB. Is there such a maintenance category? Like there was a maintenance category for articles having infobox television and an unnecessary name paramter. Itcouldbepossible Talk 04:03, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
hey! sorry to bother- looks like C. J. Cregg got promoted into the April Fools' Day set, but it's for Women's History Month? theleekycauldron ( talk • contribs) (she/ they) 22:21, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
thx for hard vork Spacegoat1 ( talk) 13:48, 23 March 2022 (UTC) |
Editor of the Week | ||
Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected as Editor of the Week in recognition of your great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project) |
User:Magnolia677 submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:
You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week:
{{User:UBX/EoTWBox}}
Thanks again for your efforts! ― Buster7 ☎ 17:01, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
Feels like the article was rushed promoted into GA without clean ups and additional content/update yet to the article. 2001:4455:364:A800:4DE3:6D2:F33:BC8D ( talk) 00:28, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
without clean upsI suggested multiple improvements and cleanups to the article, and the reviewer integrated those into the article.
additional content/update yet to the article.What else does the article need? It seems to meet all the Good Article requirements and is consistent with other articles.
Well written(if it is not as well written as it could be, suggesttions like the ones I made are done),
Verifiable with no original research(which it was),
Broad in its coverage(which it was), and
Neutral, Stable, and Illustratedwhich it was.
I was wondering if you could promote Template:Did you know nominations/Eyes That Kiss in the Corners since I can't as the nominator and theleekycauldron can't as the reviewer. SL93 ( talk) 00:39, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Hello. It's me again. I would like to request an auto-archive on the page Ex Battalion. It has a lot of YT links and I cant grab them one-by-one. A lot of them are in danger of being removed since the group has a lot of beef with other producers and etc. BTW, do you have a tool that does this task automatically for Wikipedia pages? Thank you -- Likhasik ( talk) 09:54, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
Those lists of bare URLs I promised, sent on Thursday. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 02:43, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
I'm trying to make a talk discussion about actually including genres to their page. people finally agreed to that for evanescence so wy not cradle of filth. are you able to talk about it and other people can too? i tried to start a discussion a few years ago and nobody responded on the talk page. Statik N ( talk) 17:02, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
The Wikipedia community encourages users to be bold when updating the encyclopedia. Wikis like ours develop faster when everybody helps to fix problems, correct grammar, add facts, make sure wording is accurate, etc. We would like everyone to be bold and help make Wikipedia a better encyclopedia.Rlink2 ( talk) 01:57, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
You're invited! NYC Earth Day 2022 Edit-a-thon! April 22nd! | |
---|---|
Sure We Can and the Environment of New York City Task Force invite you to join us for:
This Edit-a-Thon is part of a larger Earth Day celebration, hosted by Brooklyn based recycling and community center Sure We Can, that runs from 1PM-7PM and is open to the public! See this flyer for more information: https://www.instagram.com/p/CcGr4FyuqEa/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link |
-- Environment of New York City Task Force
Hi there! quick thing: looks like the nompage wasn't closed; i made that mistake before, and a hook got on the mainpage twice! t'was quite weird. theleekycauldron ( talk • contribs) (she/ they) 22:38, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | |
For your lightning fast anti vandalism work! Krillzyx (talk) 19:38, 9 October 2021 (UTC) |
Hi Rlink2
Please can you not do edits like this [1], where a bare URL tweet ref was replaced with the generic title "Twitter".
https://twitter.com/itselliotknight/status/1134319123217784832
{{cite web| url = https://twitter.com/itselliotknight/status/1134319123217784832| title = Twitter}}
... which renders as:
Your edit leaves the ref less informative than the bare URL. A cite template using a generic value for |title=
is almost never than the bare URL.
I fear that your tools may have created many of the >940 such refs I mentioned at User_talk:TheSandDoctor#Tweet_using_cite_web_with_generic_titles.
If a tweet ref is left bare, then TweetCiteBot can fill it properly, using {{ Cite tweet}}. Please can you revert any such changes you made? BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 18:22, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 07:32, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
I'm trying to confirm and have changed John Godina's Olympic Medal Status. I know him from army family life decades and decades. His Silver Medal was changed to Gold because the gold medalist failed drug tests. John deserves historical recognition. PjinLauderdale ( talk) 13:26, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
Great work on refs. Didn't even notice that while I was scouring for grammatical and spelling errors. 99.106.93.88 ( talk) 20:58, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
Thank you for doing a yeoman's job fixing the bare URLs on so many articles. Magnolia677 ( talk) 23:05, 9 January 2022 (UTC) |
Hello, I was wondering if you could modify your Converting bare URLs task.
For example in
this change the text "The Star" should not be part of the title but should go in the |work=
or one of its alias fields.
It would also be good if the |achive-date=
field followed the appropiate article style, day or month first when specified, rather than always using ISO style.
Keith D (
talk)
00:02, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
|publisher=
field, as would other organisations such as council names.
Keith D (
talk)
00:26, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
The Copyeditor's Barnstar | |
You fix bare URLs and References so quick! Have a barnstar. Severe storm 28 04:28, 11 January 2022 (UTC) |
This edit. I guess I'm not persuaded that 'News story' is much of an improvement over 'Archived copy'. In fact, mass replacement of known bad titles with generic non-titles means that we will lose track of those citations so they may never get proper titles. Yeah, I understand that what you are attempting is difficult and I understand that success is dependant to a fairly great extent upon the quality of the source's metadata – which is why I don't like auto-filling by WP:RefToolbar or VE (too much junk and too many editors accepting what the tool suggests because the-tool-can't-be-wrong-or-it-wouldn't-do-what-it-does, right?). At least with 'Archived copy' it's obvious to both editors and readers that there is a title missing; 'News story' might actually be a title for something.
cs1|2 knows about 'Archive title' and tracks templates with that title so that (someday) the citation might be repaired. I would like cs1|2 to start shifting articles from Category:CS1 maint: archived copy as title into a error category because this is a problem that, I think, requires humans to fix.
In this case, the title is 'Australia's Hamilton Island Yacht Club confirmed as Challenger of Record' in <h1>...</h1>
which more-or-less matches the url.
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 00:53, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
@ Rlink2: Hello user you edit very quick can you say me which tool you use for editing and helping the articles with archive link so that I can also use. २ तकर पेप्सी ( talk) 20:41, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
|lay-url=
is not supported by |archive-url=
as you attempted in
this edit. Also, |lay-date=
, |lay-format=
, |lay-source=
, and |lay-url=
will become actively deprecated at the next cs1|2 update.
— Trappist the monk ( talk) 00:36, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
You seem to misunderstand what a "bare" url is, as at Apollo. You should be aware of WP:CITEVAR, and follow it. Johnbod ( talk) 04:33, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
It's good to fill in bare URLs, but the results in markup don't look like the example at {{ Cite web}} and differ the rest of most pages. Almost no human editor or bot uses such a quirky format; I call it ugly. The space belongs before the pipe, with no space after. No space belongs before or after the "=".
For example, you recently replaced this:
<ref name="tech.ebu.ch">[http://tech.ebu.ch/docs/techreview/trev_265-kozamernik.pdf Digital Audio Broadcasting (EBU Technical Review article)]</ref>
with this:
<ref name="tech.ebu.ch">{{cite web| url = http://tech.ebu.ch/docs/techreview/trev_265-kozamernik.pdf| title = Digital Audio Broadcasting (EBU Technical Review article)}}</ref>
which is helpful, but it really should look like this:
<ref name="tech.ebu.ch">{{cite web |url=http://tech.ebu.ch/docs/techreview/trev_265-kozamernik.pdf |title=Digital Audio Broadcasting (EBU Technical Review article)}}</ref>
Are you using an outdated version of AutoWikiBrowser or custom settings related to these edits? If so, then could you please update and/or change the settings? If not, then my objection is with AutoWikiBrowser making a coding mistake that is continually multiplied by hundreds and hundreds of edits, and one or both of us should complain there. - A876 ( talk) 07:42, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
Continuing the example above, you could have visited the URL, to see whether it works and whether it redirects. (In this case it redirects to https.) That would add a little more value.
Further, you could have checked this article's title, split the title from the publication name, removed the word "article", completed the article's title, and added the missing issue number, publisher, and date, yielding this:
<ref name="tech.ebu.ch">{{cite journal |title=Digital Audio Broadcasting – radio now and for the future |work=EBU Technical Review |issue=265 |publisher=[[European Broadcasting Union]] |date=Autumn 1995 |pages=2–27 |url=https://tech.ebu.ch/docs/techreview/trev_265-kozamernik.pdf}}</ref>
That's all for now. - A876 ( talk) 07:42, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
|title=
and |author=
. --
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (
talk)
14:07, 14 January 2022 (UTC)<ref>https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/418490</ref>to
ref>{{cite web |url=https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/418490 |title = Redefine \or form within a nested if statement? - TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange}}</ref>. As with
|author=
, it would be best if you used separate |title=
and |work=
parameters, e.g., <ref>{{cite web |url=https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/418490 |title = Redefine \or form within a nested if statement? |work = TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange}}</ref>. Note that the documentation for various tools warns that the results are not perfect and that editors should manually adjust them as necessary before committing the results. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul ( talk) 16:03, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Please do not change optional citation styles. For example, where an article used manual citations, do not add template formatting. That is not "completing a bare ref", as you are not adding any new information, you are simply changing the citation style. Again, please read WP:CITEVAR. -- Ssilvers ( talk) 14:12, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
mass edit world, I have been there for a while, but only recently have I been using it to fix citations, which in honesty I don't know too much about compared to the rest of the people commenting here, that's why I rely on the editors to clear up any misunderstandings. Rlink2 ( talk) 01:03, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
If you upgrade a sloppy citation like that to a convenient style,, I failed to explain that by 'upgrade' I meant adding author, date, ISBN, DOI, SSN etc, actually providing the missing metadata. -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 01:05, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
Living in Houston and trying to figure out the EZ TAG system right now - thank you for clarifying that it's different from EZ Pass. Dkennell ( talk) 21:02, 15 January 2022 (UTC) |
Hello again, spotted a problem with
this edit. The |date=
field has a leading zero added which causes a cite date error.
Keith D (
talk)
00:21, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
I do not know what happened here, but it is clearly not fixing links. Since Anglo-Indian people still exists and is identical to your version, I reverted the edit back to the redirect. Please feel free to fix if you wanted to do smth else.-- Ymblanter ( talk) 08:40, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
If you're going to fill out bare refs, you should add the parameters for the name of the author "last=Smith |first=John" and the date of the publication of the source "date=". Also, instead to throwing the website name in after the title of the source, you should use the "website=" parameter. All the best, -- Ssilvers ( talk) 13:53, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
The problem is that you don't understand about referencing.hence why I leave the rest up to citation bot. Citation bot is good at adding the website, author, field, publisher, ISBN, etc. like Maynard said. It has databases that I do not have access to. I think there was consensus that filling in a bare ref with a usable title is always better than having a bare ref. Editors said
it is horribly bureaucratic to be pushed to debate every step of incremental progress against those who who prefer no progress to an incomplete improvement.and Friedman followed up saying he agrees with that editor analysis.
I don't get it. Why do an incomplete job, when you could actually fill out the refs with all the information. Fine. Everybody likes it. Happy editing. -- Ssilvers ( talk) 03:26, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Perhaps you should post at Village Pump the specific list of issues you want to resolve and get community consensus to operate in a semi-automated manner to fix those issues. Otherwise, you are going to be dealing with lengthy inquiries to your talk page indefinitely. Slywriter ( talk) 15:11, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
I'm intrigued to know how you so nearly got this one right? In the second of your two edits to Weedon Bec, you turned
into
with this edit. That is not a bad result at all, it is certainly intelligible. My finished version is very little different, just replaced the splitting pipe with a |publisher=
There are no clues on the website that would give you that for free - did your process really get that close unaided or did you have to give it a mid-course correction? -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 22:31, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
|trans-title=English translation
. --
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (
talk)
13:08, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
<title>Bus Stops & Shelters | Weedon Bec Parish Council</title>
. Rlink2's tools use that data.BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 16:54, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Hello @Rlink2, please can you have a look on this: /info/en/?search=Romani_people#Turkish_and_Tatar_Y-DNA_genes_of_the_Muslim_Roma699
the source behind them, says nothing about turkish or tatar Y-DNA, the source says also nothing that muslim romani woman got children from turks or tatars etc., the source is about Genetic impact of the Ottoman occupiers on the Balkan-Roma population and central eastern population, but not especially in muslim roma.
That's why I wanted to fix it but I can't. I'am blocked from editing the Article. But If you read the source, you can understand what I mean. Thanky
-- Nalanidil ( talk) 16:03, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Ok i understand, maybe another User who is active in the page romani people can be changend it.
Nalanidil ( talk) 00:01, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Izno ( talk) 23:23, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar | |
For doing great work on filling bare URLs, and remaining cool and engaged under the outrageous pressure of an ANI pile-on based on unevidenced allegations. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 02:16, 20 January 2022 (UTC) |
I'm not fully convinced presumably mechanical edits like this are net improvements. The URL was a bit malformed and remained so - not an improvement. A title was added, which is clearly an improvement, but there is a lot of extra junk included with the new title detracting from the improvement. I have improved your improvement here but, ideally, this work should not require two passes by two editors. ~ Kvng ( talk) 15:48, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
ideally.
<title>
element by stuffing it with redundant verbosity:
http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/leaky+bucket+counter has <title>Leaky bucket counter | Article about leaky bucket counter by The Free Dictionary</title>
, and Rlink2's edit has reproduced that faithfully.http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/leaky+bucket+counter.
{{cite web |url=http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/leaky+bucket+counter. |title = Leaky bucket counter. {{!}} Article about leaky bucket counter. by The Free Dictionary}}
→
"Leaky bucket counter. | Article about leaky bucket counter. by The Free Dictionary".. {{!}} Article about leaky bucket counter. by
and replace it with |website=
. That was a lot easier than having to add the cite template and visit the webpage to find the title.not the best way to make these improvements. It is very likely that with a lot more resources, much more sophisticated tools could be developed.
I assume when adding titles, we want to use the title that someone visiting the web page will identify as the title, not what's shown in the browser tab. They often don't match as is the case here. ~ Kvng ( talk) 16:03, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
< title >
html tags gives a reasonable first cut for the large majority of them. And if it prompts a page watcher to do it properly, so much the better. Hard cases make bad law: just because one web page has a useless html title is not a reason to do nothing for the thousand others that do. --
John Maynard Friedman (
talk)
16:21, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
reasonable first cut, and in this case that is what Rlink2 did. I also agree that
hard cases make bad law: it would be absurd to use a very low percentage of problems as a reason to omit the 99% of edits which improve.
useless html title. It has a stupidly verbose and repetitive title, but that verbose repetition is a lot more useful than no title. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 16:31, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
Making automated edits that are not improvements (I'm still undecided whether that's actually the case here). However, at 16:26 you write above
these are easier to fix manually after the automated changes. So what's your problem? BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 16:46, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
a stupidly verbose and repetitive titleor plainly wrong title is better for readers than a bare link. ~ Kvng ( talk) 17:11, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
How much harm we're willing to tolerateis yet more specious nonsense. It is a straw man, because you not have identified any way in which Rlink2's edit have caused any harm at all to any article or to Wikipedia as a whole.
|title=Archived copy
which is certainly not a good title but it is recognizable as not-a-good-title so cs1|2 templates can (and do) recognize that title and add the article to
Category:CS1 maint: archived copy as title. An editor can go look, discover the correct title, and then make a proper repair. Most titles added by the various tools become just another string of blue-linked words in a sea of blue-lined words; cs1|2 can do nothing to help locate these marginally 'fixed' templates. Were it up to me, because reliably fetching titles from online sources is so hit and miss, all tools that cleanup bare urls should not attempt to create |title=
except for sources that have been fully vetted to provide clean and correct metadata. Not on that list, citation gets a generic, trackable title so that cs1|2 can categorize those articles for human repair. This comment is more-or-less an expansion of what I wrote at
User talk:Rlink2 § News story above.become a general purpose placeholder for any missing title. Have I missed something? BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 21:11, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
<ref>http://example.com/foo</ref>
and replacing it with <ref>{{cite web |url=http://example.com/foo |title=Unknown cite title - please help}}</ref>
... or possibly as <ref>{{cite web |url=http://example.com/foo |title=Unknown cite title - please help |website=example.com/foo |access-date=20 January 2022}}</ref>. (If I have misunderstood your idea, please correct me).Hi Rlink2
I am sorry that you have had to go through the unpleasant and unjustified ANI drama, and I hope that it is coming to an end. So it is time to focus on getting approval for a bot task through which you can continue your good work of filling WP:Bare URLs.
I have been reviewing WP:BRFA/Rlink2 Bot 2, and it seems to me that it has run into the sands because it was initially drawn with too big a scope. That led to a lot of discussion in which you responded well to the feedback: you narrowed the scope and tidied up a few glitches. However, there is a lot of verbiage for any BAG member to wade through.
So I suggest that the best way forward is to withdraw that BRFA, and open a new one which explicitly builds on what emerged from that BRFA: the bot should have a narrowed scope, clearly specified. I suggest that for now you drop any idea of archiving in this bot task, and drop the user request feature. Just make this a very simple task: fill bare URLs, using list which you create by a variety of methods: database dumps, other editors list-making, and pages tagged with {{ Bare URL inline}} and/or {{ Cleanup bare URLs}}. Give the bot a unique name (as I suggested in the current BRFA), to emphasise that tight focus.
I recommend that you don't assume that those reviewing the BRFA have any prior knowledge of filling bare URLs, let alone the extensive experience that you have. So be explicit that the bot is just to do a first-pass improvement, and that in nearly every case the ref should be expanded further. By converting a bare URL to a cite template and adding a rough title, you are both making the ref more helpful to readers, and assisting editors who want to fill the ref more thoroughly ( because they don't have to format the ref as a cite template).
Stress also that other tool have limitations, such as Reflinks's bot's inability to even connect to thousands of websites, and that BHG's work of systematically feeding all bare URL to @ Citation bot means that your work is a sort-of second line repair: you are picking up on what the others can't do.
I think that if you do this, concisely, it will be much easier to get the bot to a trial stage. If you would like any assistance in drafting that new BRFA, I would be happy to help. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 18:55, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
Just make this a very simple task: fill bare URLsand that is exactly what the bot will do.
I recommend that you don't assume that those reviewing the BRFA have any prior knowledge of filling bare URLsis good advice so everyone is on the same page. All good ideas. Regarding archiving, I will leave any dead or "cloudflared" links alone in the bot for now (which is in contrast to my existing filling, which used/uses web.archive.org exclusively to retrieve the dead or "cloudflared" link). This way we can avoid any more unnecessary archive drama. I think I got the handle of rewriting the BRFA, but if I need help I'll ask you ;) Rlink2 ( talk) 20:46, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | ||
Hello Rlink2! Just wanted to tell you to stay strong and keep up the good work on here. In my opinion, any user that makes a single productive edit on this platform is doing a good service for future generations. Do not let negativity uproot your desire to contribute. My advice is to take positive note from those that offer it and shape your operation in a way that makes you satisfied with your work. Red Director ( talk) 22:48, 21 January 2022 (UTC) |
The Anti-Flame Barnstar | ||
For keeping your cool and not responding in kind. John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 16:33, 22 January 2022 (UTC) |
I've a request my friend. If possible, can you plz archive the references in a particular article— List of foreign football players in India? Lots of them are rotten there. Thanks in advance!!
Thanks buddy!! Keep up great work :) Billjones94 ( talk) 05:50, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
|url-status=
it defaults to rendered dead ie. the archive URL is displayed first. --
Green
C
21:16, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
Hi Rlink2, have you considered using the {{
webarchive}}
it has a few advantages. For example instead of this (from
Steve Ballmer):
Archived at [https://ghostarchive.org/varchive/youtube/20211205/qFe0S3F389w Ghostarchive]{{cbignore}} and the [https://web.archive.org/web/20161107061621/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFe0S3F389w&gl=US&hl=en Wayback Machine]{{cbignore}}: {{cite web| url = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFe0S3F389w| title = Microsoft's Former CEO Says Disagreement With Gates on Smartphones Drove Them Apart | website=[[YouTube]]}}{{cbignore}}
It would be:
{{cite web |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFe0S3F389w |title=Microsoft's Former CEO Says Disagreement With Gates on Smartphones Drove Them Apart |work=Bloomberg |via=[[YouTube]] |author= |date= |access-date=January 24, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161107061621/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFe0S3F389w&gl=US&hl=en |archive-date=2016-11-07 |url-status=live}} {{webarchive |format=addlarchives |url=https://ghostarchive.org/varchive/youtube/20211205/qFe0S3F389w |date=2021-12-05 |title=Ghostarchive}}
It's cleaner, and no need to use {{
cbignore}}
. The webarchive template can accept up to 10 archive providers in case you want to use WayBack, Ghost and Archive.today for the same cite. You could put both archives in the webarchive template instead of one in the cite web. The title field is free form so could say whatever you like. --
Green
C
19:34, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
|format=addlarchives
option. By free-form |title=
is meant in the webarchive template. -
Green
C
20:03, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
{{
webarchive}}
because it is designed for this situation. --
Green
C
20:33, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
|format=addlarchives
is a special use case of {{
webarchive}}
that follows a CS1|2 template when there are additional (> 1) archives. The diff you link is correct. In that case, there are no additional archives only 1 archive thus webarchive can be merged into the CS1|2 template. --
Green
C
20:46, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
adding multiple archive URLs into wikitext just compounds the problems, then why have you been suggesting that Rlink2 do just that by using {{ Webarchive}}? BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 20:35, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
My views on the bigger scale are we should not be doing multiple archivesand
On the smaller scale if someone wants to do an occasional one due to special conditions it should be allowable via special tools like webarchive.Yes. Rlink2 ( talk) 01:28, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
Hello Rlink2. This is a courtesy note to let you know that I have closed the ANI thread about you. As part of the closure, I have interpreted the community to have warned you that the rate of your editing with AWB has been too fast and that you should slow down to avoid problems in the future. If you have any questions, please feel free to let me know. All the best, Mz7 ( talk) 09:13, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
Some of your edits are causing duplicate parameter errors. This edit added archive-url and archive-date parameters to a citation template, but those parameters were already present. This causes articles to be placed in Category:Pages using duplicate arguments in template calls. Please review and fix any of your edits that caused this error. One way to fix it is like this, removing the empty duplicate parameters and leaving the populated ones. – Jonesey95 ( talk) 07:40, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
I noticed this happened again yesterday on a page on my watchlist, in this case adding a duplicate archive date parameter: [6]. This particular instance of the error has already been fixed. Trainsandotherthings ( talk) 17:34, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for fixing dead links
like this, but could you please add Wayback Machine links as https://web.archive.org/...
? (see
Village Pump archive for why). Cheers. --
bender235 (
talk)
22:42, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
Սան Ոչանսան 45.146.38.66 ( talk) 15:03, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
Please issue a talk discussion first, before reverting it, it was provided what the cite had, no vandalism was made. Have you checked those sources? 223.182.98.230 ( talk) 17:13, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Diligence | |
I have seen your anti-vandalism and bare reference fixing work. Today I re scrutinized your contributions and am really happy with it. Continue your work like this and I hope you bring a change to this place. Itcouldbepossible Talk 03:53, 7 February 2022 (UTC) |
Hi Rlink2
As promised [7] at the BRFA, here are some URLs which returned a HTTP status 410:
They should all have been tagged as {{ Dead link}}, so you will need to set up a test page to check your code's handling of them.
Hope this helps. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 11:19, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
This edit adds recent archive links. Shouldn't we be striving to present archives more coincident with the stated |access-date=
? ~
Kvng (
talk)
15:14, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
Re your edit to add an archive link in Burton Agnes drum: what does {{ cbignore}} do? Why should this ref be ignored by the bot in future? Thanks for any explanation. Pam D 06:42, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created, Template:Dead YouTube links, was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. – Jonesey95 ( talk) 14:43, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
Punta Reyes or Punta de Reyes will be the correct Spanish translation of Point Reyes. Thanks for your article it is very informative and helpful. Just trying to help here. Kagdilla ( talk) 04:27, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
Can you repair and archive the following urls: https://ghostarchive.org/varchive/FyEkrzQOUmo and https://ghostarchive.org/varchive/ihmLlmemQQM. I tried to archive them but the process says, "There was an issue trying to archive your webpage or video. Usually, webpages that are bigger than 50 megabytes, or videos longer than 15 minutes, may fail to archive." Chompy Ace 22:44, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
videos longer than 15 minutes may fail to archivethen you have the reason for why that may be the case. I can't even access the first video ("Video not avaliable in your country" is the error YT gives me), and Wayback does not have it either.
Hi Rlink2
Just a quick note to say that @ Primefac has authorised a second trial for BareRefBot: see Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/BareRefBot#Trial_2.
Primefac didn't ping you, so I just wanted to be sure that you hadn't missed it. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 00:28, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
Hi @ Rlink2: is it time for Trial 3? --- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 16:17, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
When the bot is fully authorised, would you be OK with taking the lists out of the the history of my log page?This is also fine.
If that's OK with you, I can just post msgs for you like this...Please do, this is also easier for me as well. Rlink2 ( talk) 23:45, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
filled 3 of 5 bare URL refs; tagged 1 as {{Bare URL PDF}}
[[User:BareRefBot/Batch005|Batch005]]: filled 3 of 4 [[WP:Bare URLs|bare URL]](s); tagged 2 {{[[Template:Bare URL PDF|Bare URL PDF]]}} refs
, which renders as
Batch005: filled 3 of 4
bare URL(s); tagged 2 {{
Bare URL PDF}} refsI know I have been a bit of a pain pushing for BareRefBot improvements, so I am sorry to add another one.No worries. The goal of Wikipedia is to build a high quality encylopedia, after all, so edit summaries add to that. If I can't do something, I'll let you know. But so far all of your sugesstions have been resonable.
Whaddaya think?Yes, these edit summaries and pages are a good idea. I will implement them. So you give me the list, I make another page with the list, and the bot will link to that page in the edit summary.
Batch 0005: Found 7 bare URLs: Filled 3; Tagged 2 as {{Dead link}}; Tagged 1 as {{Bare URL PDF}}
BrownHairedGirl
(talk) • (
contribs)
00:01, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
@
Rlink2: After nearly a week, there has been no response to the request for a third trial of BareRefBot. May I suggest that you try using {{
BAGAssistanceNeeded}} and/or leaving a msg on Primefac's talk? --
BrownHairedGirl
(talk) • (
contribs)
00:08, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
Have you done some tests runs of the latest BareRefBot in sandboxes to check that it is all polished, and that edit summaries are neat?Not yet, but I ought to. I will do this.
Great to hear that you are at work on the deadlink bare URLs. There be a feck of a lot of them, and any serious dent in the necropolis will be big boost to the verifiability of the 'pedia.Yes, thank you for that. On a semirelated note, I have recently found many of the Youtube links I preempt archived in December are now dead, including some of my personal favorite Youtube videos. Google apperently does a yearly, if not quarterly purge, of videos, and it seems like these were part of it. If it weren't for my preempt archive efforts, they would have been dead forever.
My first step was done in two rounds in February, when I tagged dead links on about 60K (yes, sixty thou) articles. I tagged only those which returned HTTP 404 or 410. That made a big dent in the total number of ABURs, cutting it from ~215K to ~155K.Yes, I am aware, hence why I am clearing the log.
To verify that these are not transient outages, I left the list aside until mid-March, and then tested the whole set again ten times,Intresting, nice to see you are putting in alot of effort into this. On Wikipedia, Competence is required, and you have shown yourself to be very competent.
Then I hope that BareRefBot can get the tally well below 100K.Me too.
Tagging them as dead would raise some "but it worked for me" complaints from those who hit it lucky, so that seems like a path to drama.It is always been my personal opinion that we should have links that work. We should do what works for most readers. If the website can't be bothered to fix their config then its a "dead link" in a way.
This evening it occurred to me that your work might provide a solution. Would it be possible for you to archive these refs without first tagging them as dead?Yes, do you have a list of the "ghost" sites and/or a list of the articles with the "ghost sites" you'd like me to look? Or do you just want me to look out and archive dead bare refs in general (Both of which I can do) Rlink2 ( talk) 04:25, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
I will put together some lists and start a new section to explain it all. I will give you a list or websites and a list of articles, but I don't want to just give you the lists; I want to give you the tools to verify them.Sounds good.
Do you have Perl installed?I should (isn't it one of the things that come with every computer?) but if not I can easily install and set it up. Rlink2 ( talk) 22:28, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
Why are you adding archive-url values when url-status is set to 'live', as in part of this edit? At Category:CS1 maint: url-status, the intro says that "cs1|2 templates that have |url-status= but not |archive-url= should be repaired", but ... "if the value is live, remove |url-status=" (emphasis is mine). The archive-url is only to be added if url-status is not 'live'. — ADavidB 06:19, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
"If url-status is not 'live'The whole category consists of articles with URL-status=live, I think you meant to say "if the URL is not live".
Including so many 'just in case'is a perfectly acceptable thing to do (see Wikipedia:Citing_sources/Further_considerations#Pre-emptive_archiving, that's why "url-status" exists so the existing citation continues to go to the original URL even with the addition of archived links.
subscription-based sources.an archive link is also fine but url-status=live is still set for those, as the purpose of the archive link is to not necessarily bypass paywalls. Rlink2 ( talk) 18:13, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
When the page contains javascript? Given this URL: https://www.centreforcities.org/city/milton-keynes/
No doubt there are counter examples, of course. -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 20:17, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
Wanted to let you know I responded to your GA review. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 23:51, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
Wikiwings | ||
For your valuable additions of archived links for references on aircraft articles. - Ahunt ( talk) 13:10, 20 February 2022 (UTC) |
Template:Codeberg has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym ( talk) 09:00, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
Template:Sourcehut has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. WikiCleanerMan ( talk) 23:04, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created, Template:Dead Facebook links, was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. SɱαɾƚყPαɳƚʂ22 ( Ⓣⓐⓛⓚ) 11:41, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for helping with the prep sets! It would be nice to see in an edit summary that you promoted a hook to prep (minimum), and I have seen others (tlc especially) also saying which prep, and if the hook was modified saying so with a ping to the nominator (luxury). -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:57, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
I like your first set!Anyways thank you. I like the prep work so I think I'll be doing that stuff from now on. It's nice getting to do new things, now that the bare ref fixing is delegated to a bot, and I'm almost done with preemptive archiving Facebook and Instagram citations.
I don’t know how to update wiki but can I email picture I just took of the sign in Kiowa Kansas. It would be nice to have on page since this is where Carry began her campaign. Redgrashoper ( talk) 17:34, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
Note that this sort of replies are passive and are not encouraged, what you want to is, communicate as if it were a real life interaction, passive responses such as the one you gave sounds a little bit like an automated response. Please keep this in mind moving forward. Celestina007 ( talk) 21:44, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
I took this pic in 2009. It was on the German MP yesterday, with this song from 1885, in English Prayer for Ukraine. - Thank you for your appreciation. I nominated it for English DYK before the German, but faced incredible reservations against "taking side in a conflict". - "waiting until the conflict is over" was mentioned. Sadly, I don't expect that during my lifetime. - The nom needs a review, and then someone to move it to prep, - perhaps the latter is more for you ;) -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 22:39, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
that the chamber choir Oreya (pictured) chose the spiritual anthem Prayer for Ukraine, published in 1885, a" and is not necessarily biased towards any one side, but others may disagree. I would give it an OK but nominating isn't really part of my balliwack (done that a few times before moving stuff over to prep, maybe I'll start doing both). I'll be happy to move it to prep if its approved and no one does it before me. Rlink2 ( talk) 00:33, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
Update: IABot now supports Ghostarchive.org - {{cbignore}}
is no longer needed, and existing {{cbignore}}
should be removed. Is this something you want to do or should we find someone? The problem now is we don't know who added the cbignore - yourself or someone else - since |bot=
was not used in the template to identify who added it so we risk removing legitimate cases addd by other users, but I don't think they will be very many if we quickly get this done sooner than later. --
Green
C
19:35, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20210728022510/https://www.instagram.com/p/BMUccRPg4Ow/
redirects to
https://ghostarchive.org/iarchive/instagram/georgemofficial/1374848874216391600
.
https://ghostarchive.org/iarchive/s/instagram/Bi-NSa4l5NS/
.
https://ghostarchive.org/archive/2020/https://en.wikipedia.org
and short form links like
https://ghostarchive.org/archive/wOPfV
. In this case, the short form is hiding the resulting webpage, while the long form URL still has information about it.https://ghostarchive.org/iarchive/instagram/georgemofficial/1374848874216391600
into https://www.instagram.com/p/BMUccRPg4Ow/
. The bots need to convert the source URL both to and from archive URLs. And need date of archive. This probably can be solved with a /longform/ API only need to ask the Ghost admin if it can be done. There are currently about 1,700 with iarchive/facebook and about 2,000 with iarchive/instagram --
Green
C
16:17, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
@ Rlink2: This appears to be resolved [9]. -- Green C 01:29, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
See cite #13 and #27 fixed
here. Presuming there are a bunch which will make removal of the {{cbignore}}
more complex. We'll need a bot to fix these first I think. --
Green
C
19:48, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
See cite #30 - missing title generates red error. -- Green C 19:58, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
The Current Events Barnstar | ||
Awarded for efforts in expanding and verifying articles related to the 2021–2022 Russo-Ukrainian crisis and 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. Awarded by Cdjp1 (talk) 7 March 2022 (UTC) |
The Original Barnstar | ||
Awarded for being the top contributor to an article related to the 2021–2022 Russo-Ukrainian crisis and 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. Awarded by Cdjp1 (talk) 16:02, 8 February 2022 (UTC) |
Thank you for support in the related RfC for DYK! Listening to the charity concert mentioned here. I created the articles of the composer and the soprano. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 19:47, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
The Prayer is on the Main page, finally + new flowers, and btw: the TFA is tlc's first -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 21:34, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for building preps. I'm just letting you know that bio hooks shouldn't be right by each other. Otherwise, everything is phenomenal. SL93 ( talk) 00:44, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
Hi, I saw that you've recently gone about adding archives to some Bolivia-related pages. I ask that you don't do so for references that site the websites atlaselectoral.oep.org.bo and gacetaoficialdebolivia.gob.bo as archives for those cites simply don't work. Examples:
Thanks! Krisgabwoosh ( talk) 02:19, 13 March 2022 (UTC) Krisgabwoosh ( talk) 02:19, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
References
Hello and I have seen some archive efforts of yours. I want to join in to learn and help in some tasks. I humbly ask the process in which you use to archive YT vids of different kinds, including YT URLs not included here in Wikipedia. As you may know, Ghostarchive implemented an HCaptcha for every entry which is time-consuming and pain-stakingly problematic for me. Do you use a bot for easy archival? I have a lot of URLs bookmarked to be archived, and to be used in Wikipedia soon. I would be glad if you can help me in this demeanor of mine. Thank you :) -- Likhasik ( talk) 10:35, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
Hello and I have seen some archive efforts of yours. I want to join in to learn and help in some tasks.Thank you, it is always nice to see people appreciate my work. I use a tool called AutoWikiBrowser to add archived links to articles.
As you may know, Ghostarchive implemented an HCaptcha for every entry which is time-consuming and pain-stakingly problematic for me.Usually the captcha is temporary, it comes when there is alot of submissions I think. It should go away soon.
javascript:void(window.open('https://ghostarchive.org/save/'+location.href))
) If you add it to your browser, you can archive any youtube video just by clicking on the bookmark at the top of your browser, saving you time. As of right now, saving Youtube videos through the bookmarklet does not have a captcha.I would be glad if you can help me in this demeanor of mine.I would be happy to, please let me know if you have any questions. Rlink2 ( talk) 14:03, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
unfortunately I can't codeI only have an extremely basic understanding of coding (enough for WP purposes, haven't done anything outside of that), but computer science is intresting to me.
This saved my time and Hcaptcha problem.I'm glad it helped.
BTW, do you have a group or Wikiproject for overall archiving?I am not aware of any. There was an attempt to get a Wikiproject off the ground but I don't think it got anywhere.
Also, do you have some sort of automation for archive.today?The owner does not want mass submissions, see https://blog.archive.today/post/678411898279067648/hello-i-am-developing-an-application-that#notes , hence the captcha. There is a bookmarklet on Wikipedia:Citing_sources/Further_considerations#Archive.today, but you will still have to complete the captcha.
automatically crawls whole websitesArchive.org crawls entire sites, as they are the biggest archive with the most resources. If you have a huge chunk of links, you can also use the archive.org bookmarklet, or put all the links in a Google Sheet and upload them to archive.org (see https://archive.org/services/wayback-gsheets/).
Hi Rlink. I wanted to know how I could remove country and language linking in television infoboxes using AWB. Is there such a maintenance category? Like there was a maintenance category for articles having infobox television and an unnecessary name paramter. Itcouldbepossible Talk 04:03, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
hey! sorry to bother- looks like C. J. Cregg got promoted into the April Fools' Day set, but it's for Women's History Month? theleekycauldron ( talk • contribs) (she/ they) 22:21, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
thx for hard vork Spacegoat1 ( talk) 13:48, 23 March 2022 (UTC) |
Editor of the Week | ||
Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected as Editor of the Week in recognition of your great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project) |
User:Magnolia677 submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:
You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week:
{{User:UBX/EoTWBox}}
Thanks again for your efforts! ― Buster7 ☎ 17:01, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
Feels like the article was rushed promoted into GA without clean ups and additional content/update yet to the article. 2001:4455:364:A800:4DE3:6D2:F33:BC8D ( talk) 00:28, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
without clean upsI suggested multiple improvements and cleanups to the article, and the reviewer integrated those into the article.
additional content/update yet to the article.What else does the article need? It seems to meet all the Good Article requirements and is consistent with other articles.
Well written(if it is not as well written as it could be, suggesttions like the ones I made are done),
Verifiable with no original research(which it was),
Broad in its coverage(which it was), and
Neutral, Stable, and Illustratedwhich it was.
I was wondering if you could promote Template:Did you know nominations/Eyes That Kiss in the Corners since I can't as the nominator and theleekycauldron can't as the reviewer. SL93 ( talk) 00:39, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Hello. It's me again. I would like to request an auto-archive on the page Ex Battalion. It has a lot of YT links and I cant grab them one-by-one. A lot of them are in danger of being removed since the group has a lot of beef with other producers and etc. BTW, do you have a tool that does this task automatically for Wikipedia pages? Thank you -- Likhasik ( talk) 09:54, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
Those lists of bare URLs I promised, sent on Thursday. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 02:43, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
I'm trying to make a talk discussion about actually including genres to their page. people finally agreed to that for evanescence so wy not cradle of filth. are you able to talk about it and other people can too? i tried to start a discussion a few years ago and nobody responded on the talk page. Statik N ( talk) 17:02, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
The Wikipedia community encourages users to be bold when updating the encyclopedia. Wikis like ours develop faster when everybody helps to fix problems, correct grammar, add facts, make sure wording is accurate, etc. We would like everyone to be bold and help make Wikipedia a better encyclopedia.Rlink2 ( talk) 01:57, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
You're invited! NYC Earth Day 2022 Edit-a-thon! April 22nd! | |
---|---|
Sure We Can and the Environment of New York City Task Force invite you to join us for:
This Edit-a-Thon is part of a larger Earth Day celebration, hosted by Brooklyn based recycling and community center Sure We Can, that runs from 1PM-7PM and is open to the public! See this flyer for more information: https://www.instagram.com/p/CcGr4FyuqEa/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link |
-- Environment of New York City Task Force
Hi there! quick thing: looks like the nompage wasn't closed; i made that mistake before, and a hook got on the mainpage twice! t'was quite weird. theleekycauldron ( talk • contribs) (she/ they) 22:38, 12 April 2022 (UTC)