Archives

2009–2012 · 2013 · 2014 · 2015 · 2016 · 2017 · 2018 · 2019 · 2020 · 2021 · 2022 · 2023

Not sure how it being an adjective changes things, it's still a compound modifier with 'then' modifying 'boyfriend' and the combination modifying the name. I don't see anything at MOS:HYPHEN that suggests it would not be hyphenated. I would hyphenate future in that case too. –CWenger (^ • @) 00:16, 15 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nobody would write "the future-president Jane Smith" (for "Jane Smith, who would in the future become president") or "her Italian-boyfriend John Brown" (for "John Brown, her boyfriend, who is Italian"). The word "then" works the same way in this context. It is confusing because "then" is usually an adverb, so our brains get stuck in the wrong frame. I linked to two mainstream style guides in my edit summaries at Rachel Bilson. Feel free to bring it up at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style and ping me; I don't see a detailed discussion about it in the archives, but it is a difficult topic to search for. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:09, 15 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I would not hyphenate "her Italian-boyfriend John Brown" because 'Italian' could just as easily modify 'John Brown' as 'boyfriend', But like I said I would probably hyphenate "the future-president Jane Smith", although I admit there is no potential ambiguity so that's probably why it is usually omitted. You could very well be correct, I'm just trying to understand how one would formulate a rule for this case. It's not the adjective-noun compound modifier case that doesn't require a hyphen because we have short-story writer in the MoS. –CWenger (^ • @) 01:44, 15 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

When in doubt, consult style guides. Some style guides are hundreds of pages; MOS tries to be concise. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:06, 15 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just a heads-up, I am planning to restore the hyphen. It seems like many reputable sources use it according to the comment at the MoS talk page, and we have only found a single style guide that says to omit it. –CWenger (^ • @) 14:46, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the note. I do not follow MOS talk pages because they make me crazy. I have posted a follow-up note there. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:03, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

remember to use preview! Colorado and Alabama had duplicate args introduced. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 01:44, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yum, trout! Thanks for fixing my errors. That template's documentation was a disaster. The editor who did the merge did not tidy it up very well. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:50, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happens to us all... Thanks for taking it with the good humor I intended. Stay well! -- Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 20:18, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Template:KFCBOX and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 25 § Template:KFCBOX until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. — Navajcmer (🔔 • 📝) 04:02, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

[moved to Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Inline long quote.]
Hi Jonesey, note [1]; the previous edits changed the appearance of many old Signpost articles that were designed to have background shading. It also led to multi-para quotes being broken up. It just didn't look right, and given the potentially large number of articles involved, going back many years, this seems like the easiest solution. Best, --Andreas JN466 15:24, 26 January 2023 (UTC) [moved to Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Inline long quote.]Reply[reply]

Template:ASEA License Built Rolling Stock has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. This is because it now duplicates Template:ASEA Export Electric Locomotives. XAM2175 ^(T) 12:32, 30 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery 00:03, 31 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

		The Minor Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to Jonesey95 for copy edits totaling between 1 and 3,999 words (including bonus and rollover words) during the GOCE January 2023 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Miniapolis 20:28, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks! This drive marked the tenth anniversary of my first drive. So far, I've lived a charmed life and have not missed a drive or blitz since January 2013. Here's to ten more years. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:38, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, I see you added an end div tag on User:Trödel/box the other day. Its placement, while clear on that page, is throwing a missing div on this talk page Any issues with swapping the div and noinclude end tags, or is that order intended? Thanks, Zinnober9 (talk) 23:41, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, the order is intended. This template requires the person inserting it to provide their own closing div tag, which apparently was not done, or perhaps the div tag was later removed (I don't care to dig through the page's history, since the problem was easily fixable). – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:59, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Good to know. Hadn't run across this before, and since you had been the last one to edit the box, thought I should ask instead of adjusting. Thanks. Zinnober9 (talk) 00:29, 6 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Guild of Copy Editors 2022 Annual Report Our 2022 Annual Report is now ready for review. Highlights: Overview of Backlog-reduction progress Summary of Drives, Blitzes, and the Requests page Membership news and results of elections Closing words – Your Guild coordinators: Baffle gab1978, Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Zippybonzo To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

Sent by Baffle gab1978 using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 6 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for your help with the report; much appreciated. :) Cheers, Baffle☿gab 01:36, 6 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I just wanted to express my frustration at your reversion of my edit, which somehow I missed in my watchlist. Since you were an active participant in the VPT discussion, you should have been well aware that the problem was not fixed, so you should either have not reverted my edit, or should have undone your edit as soon as you realized it. When the Phabricator ticket was resolved this morning, I went back to check the page and only then noticed your reversion. I guess I'm not sure what to say – would you please be more advertent in the future? Thank you. jhawkinson (talk) 16:07, 8 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Would you please get a bot to fix linter errors on very old pages. Please do not do WP:BOTLIKE editing from a non-bot account. SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:53, 16 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There are multiple bots fixing Linter errors, but they are not able to fix all kinds of errors. If I find a page that has only errors that are being fixed by currently approved bots, I usually leave it alone. I review every one of my edits before saving; some of them take many minutes to perform and verify. If you see a consistent pattern in my editing that a bot should be able to fix without errors or false positives, please let me know. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:00, 16 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Here's a typical recent edit of an old page; I fixed a half-dozen errors that a bot would be unlikely to be able to fix, leaving the obsolete font tags for the two or three bots that are currently working on them. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:08, 16 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You should not be doing this edits with a non bot account. These pages are important records. They are barely ever viewed, and so your assertion "Fix Linter errors. More needed" is dubious. By fixing them, you are adding noise of random non-bot accounts fiddling with important records. This fiddling needs reviewing. Already, that page had three MalnadachBot edits, three being a problem that has been called out and is being addressed. Your non-bot edits are much worse. When I look at individual edits, such as your adding </del> to unclosed <del> tags, I do not agree that these would be unlikely to be fixable by a bot.

To the extent that old pages have defined problems that need fixing, please have a bot approved to do it, so that you do not pollute Special:RecentChanges or other's watchlists, or violate WP:BOTLIKE. If you do use a non bot account for repeatedly fixing common problems, you establish a precedent that any editor may do this, and any editor may do it poorly. SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:14, 17 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Human editors have fixed Linter errors on hundreds of thousands of pages since 2018. There is a half-decade of precedent for these edits, and there has been plenty of time for bots to be developed to fix bot-fixable errors. To my knowledge, there have been four or five bots deployed to fix errors. During the development of these bots, repeated discussions have narrowed their focus because some proposed edits were subject to WP:CONTEXTBOT. If you have some foolproof code that would be able to determine how to fix misnested tags without false positives, please post a note about it at Wikipedia talk:Linter. If the code is viable, someone will probably be able to use it to deploy a bot, saving me and other human editors a lot of trouble. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:16, 17 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In this example, a bot cannot determine that striking was supposed to be from line 27 to 40. This page was giving Special:LintErrors/html5-misnesting, a category of error where most things that can be fixed by bots have already been fixed. There was about 130k total errors, which bots had reduced to 25k. There are still 20k left (1.4k in project space), which human editors are slowly working through. ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ (talk) 04:47, 17 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I noticed that you tried to ping another user in an edit summary. As noted at Help:Notifications, mention templates don't work in edit summaries. You have to use a normal wikilink in an edit summary, e.g. [[User:xyz]]. Schwede66 02:23, 18 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So many things to learn, even after ten years of daily editing! Thanks for letting me know. I may or may not remember. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:31, 18 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

		The Minor Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to Jonesey95 for copy edits totaling between 1 and 1,999 words (including rollover words) during the GOCE February 2023 Copy Editing Blitz. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Miniapolis 15:05, 22 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Jonesey. This page is helpful for me. Do you intend to continue to update it? It's been a couple weeks.[3] --DB1729^talk 17:20, 27 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Updated. Thanks for the reminder. I've been working on other stuff recently. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:30, 27 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, I see you nowiki'd the end div here on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States regions/temp the other day. That box is called on Template talk:Regions of the United States and is claiming a missing end tag div error over there. I'm commenting here as I'm not seeing a div error with the WikiProject code prior to your addition of the nowiki, (I tested it both in my sandbox and the Wikipedia sandbox and both were clean) and I'm not sure I should just add an end div to the Template Talk page after the call, or if the nowiki isn't actually needed. Was this one of those bizarre ghost issues that only exists in some namespaces but doesn't appear when tested elsewhere, or was it causing issues in other places where the box was called? No complaints of the nowiki'ing, just trying to understand the reason for it, and how I should proceed for the Temp talk issue. Cheers, Zinnober9 (talk) 22:17, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This version of the page had a missing </div> tag, which is why I added one. The div at the top of the page was not closed. Each page that transcludes the "/temp" page, like Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States regions/1, will also need a closing div tag added at the end of the page. The reason that I put the closing tag inside <noinclude>...</noinclude> (not nowiki) tags is that if I had not, the green box would not have wrapped the entire page content in the transcluding pages. If this all sounds like gibberish, there are literally millions of easier errors to work on. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:27, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ah, so the green wrapping is wanted. Ok. I've seen so many unclosed divs from happy holiday mass mailings where the background color spilled to everything after that I hadn't considered it was wanted thing. Good to know. I'll add the end tag to the bottom of the Template Talk page with a note and be done with it. Thank you for the insight, Zinnober9 (talk) 00:23, 2 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That normally happens when somebody copypastes from the template source instead of WP:SUBSTing the template. Every Christmas/new year I clean up a bunch of missing </div> or missing |}. I think that they are assuming that they only need to copy down to the line above the <noinclude> without appreciating that stuff on the same line might also be important. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:40, 2 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, and sometimes the template itself was broken, resulting in every proper substitution having Linter errors. Back in the early days of Linter cleanup in 2018, I tidied up hundreds of subst-only and transcluded templates and userboxes. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:22, 2 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The most widespread proliferation of Lint errors from proper substitution is 71 and 72 in User:MalnadachBot/Task 12/51-100. They were in 330k+ AFD pages each of which was transcluded in a daily AFD log page, totaling 660k+ errors. This and a lot of other broken massmessages makes me think that subst should be used as little as possible. ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ (talk) 15:08, 2 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks very much for your attention to detail and helpful contributions at Ian Gibbons (biochemist). Since he was British, should we use that date convention of Day Month Year? Princessa Unicorn (talk) 17:34, 6 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

See Wikipedia:Overview of date formatting guidelines. I do not have an opinion one way or another; I looked for the dominant format and made it consistent. The dominant format prior to my edit may not be the right format per the guideline. Discuss on the article's talk page if it is not obvious which of the two formats to use. Once a decision is made, all dates in the article prose should be changed to match the chosen format. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:37, 6 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I agree with you that it should be standardized throughout the article. I also don't really care too much either way. I'll start a discussion on the talk page about it, happy to have your feedback there if you wish! Princessa Unicorn (talk) 18:21, 7 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Regarding my edit of this article that you reverted: [4] As someone unfamiliar with Linter, I don't know what you mean by your edit summary, "Caused Linter image option error." I assume that it was flagged by Wikipedia:Linter but the message does not suggest to me how I might fix it. I think my edit was consistent with the guidance of Template:As of. If so, I wonder if that guidance might be improved, or if a bug report is warranted? I note that in 2017, cscott posted "Parsing of captions for media is fragile" in Linter.[5] That raises the possibility that my edit was fine, it is Linter that is broken. Best wishes, Walter Siegmund (talk) 17:09, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(talk page watcher) @Wsiegmund: The problem is indeed the ((asof)) but not both of them. It can't be used in |alt=, because alt text must be unformatted plain text (see WP:ALT#Basics), and the ((asof|2016)) template adds some HTML markup, specifically

<sup class="plainlinks noexcerpt noprint asof-tag update" style="display:none;"><a class="external text" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Usage_of_electronic_cigarettes&amp;action=edit">[update]</a></sup>

plus a category, the first of which breaks the HTML for the alt text. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:46, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you, Redrose65 for the cogent explanation. I added Asof to caption but not to |alt=. --Walter Siegmund (talk) 00:37, 13 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Guild of Copy Editors March 2023 Newsletter Hello and welcome to the March 2023 newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since December and our Annual Report for 2022. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below. We extend a warm welcome to all of our new members, including those who have signed up for our current March Backlog Elimination Drive. We wish you all happy copy-editing. Election results: In our December 2022 coordinator election, Reidgreg and Tenryuu stepped down as coordinators; we thank them for their service. Incumbents Baffle gab1978, Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Zippybonzo were returned as coordinators until 1 July. For the second time, no lead coordinator was chosen. Nominations for our mid-year Election of Coordinators open on 1 June (UTC). Drive: 21 editors signed up for our January Backlog Elimination Drive, 14 of whom claimed at least one copy-edit. Between them, they copy-edited 170 articles totaling 389,737 words. Barnstars awarded are here. Blitz: Our February Copy Editing Blitz focused on October and November 2022 requests, and the March and April 2022 backlogs. Of the 14 editors who signed up, nine claimed at least one copy-edit; and between them, they copy-edited 39,150 words in 22 articles. Barnstars awarded are here. Drive: Sign up now for our month-long March Backlog Elimination Drive. Barnstars awarded will be posted here after the drive closes. Progress report: As of 12:08, 19 March 2023 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have processed 73 requests since 1 January 2023, all but five of them from 2022, and the backlog stands at 1,872 articles. Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Baffle gab1978, Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Zippybonzo. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

I forgot to add a sig beneath the nl. Sorry. Baffle☿gab 13:12, 19 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Jonesey95, in working on T170874 now that the linter table has a discrete linter_template field. I can create a special page that displays lint errors due to template error or template usage error. The caveat I have run into is that the query time to run the report is many second to produce a top 10, and more for the top 50 templates involved in a lint error. Because the report takes a long time to run on the database, I know the DBA's will not like it, and require some rate limiting on page refresh at a minimum, and more likely as Daniel Kinsler recommended, require me to have the report run off a background job and have the page contents be cached somehow on a timer or with TTL on demand. This later solution would lead to some delay in the updating of the totals and pages affected error counts in the report. But since this is such a specialized report, probably with just a handful of editors like yourself finding it useful, would a cached, maybe hourly report be okay.

separate question I have is beyond making the template name a clickable link to its page, would a clickable link to the first wikipage usage of it also be useful. How the special page works and its features being evaluated.

Thanks Shannon SBailey (WMF) (talk) 22:21, 22 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A report with hourly updates would be great. Such a report would need to account for Linter errors generated in transclusions of any kind of page, not just pages in Template space, since User and Project and other kinds of pages are often transcluded. As for the separate question, a link to an example page with an error would be helpful. If you want to mock something up, even if it's just a top 50 report based on cached data, I'll be happy to provide feedback. I appreciate you working on this; the major transclusion-related errors are mostly cleared up on en.WP, but I do find Template-space edge cases occasionally, and there are many hundreds of User and Project pages with 3 to 5 transclusions that have not yet been fixed. Commons and other WPs still have a ton of pages where errors are caused by transclusions.

One thing to keep in mind is that there are multiple kinds of transclusion-related Linter errors. One kind is where there is a fundamental error in the transcluded page itself, like <div>'''bold text with no closing tag</div>, where the transcluded page will cause the error in every transclusion. Another kind is where there is something like '''(({parameter|))}''', where a Linter error is caused only when the parameter is missing or contains ' markup at the beginning or end. Yet another kind is where mismatched tags are caused by the results of conditional statements like #if. It's a nest of snakes. A demonstration report will determine whether your proposed code finds useful links for us gnomes. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:51, 23 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

For reference, there is an old report of pages containing Linter errors that are transcluded 5 or more times here: User:Jonesey95/linter transclusions. Many of the pages listed on the report have been fixed, but hundreds of them are still causing Linter errors when they are transcluded. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:03, 23 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just looking at the report link, I am curious how you captured this data, do you have access to Quarry to run SQL against enwiki? SBailey (WMF) (talk) 16:58, 23 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've been lazy about getting access to Quarry/SQL and learning it. It would probably be useful to me. The report came from this request. A refined version of that report showing the number of transclusions along with the number of Linter errors on the identified page would be useful, and it might be the best that we can do in this line of inquiry (see below). – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:10, 23 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Glad this type of report is desirable and even if constrained to hourly or longer refresh updates is still adequate. So far I have created a test patch that provides some info just as a hack and this latest SQL query produces this result for test2wiki:

linter_template pages_using_template total_errors

Template:Stub 160 160

Template:Dokumentation 78 148

Template:Documentation 79 103

Template:Orphan 61 61

Template:QS-Medizin. 32 32

Template:High-risk 25 27

Template:Peter_Bowman/odm-czas-hiszp 2 26

Template:Tld. 4 26

Template:Infobox_Country 21 21

Template:Header 8 20

Showing 1 to 10 of 10 entries

In this report you can see whether a template has a one to one relationship with how many pages are transcluding it, or whether a few pages have multiple errors using the same template. This ratio probably hints at whether the template itself has an error versus the pages transcluding it are causing the error, though this ratio is not definitive in helping narrow down the source of the error. The link I will be adding to first page in error will use the source range info provided by Parsoid, which should be mostly accurate in a variety of scenarios. Unfortunately, this report will not cover errors that currently report as multi-part-template-block. I need to look further into how that should be reported separately.

The next iteration of the preliminary patch will get the page titles from the linter_page ID and prepend that column as a clickable edit link that highlights to range Parsoid determined, but that requires accessing the page table, making the query even slower, though probably not by much.

Thank you for your comments and desire to be part of this new report ensuring it is most valuable and effective. SBailey (WMF) (talk) 16:53, 23 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't know how test2wiki maps to en.WP, but I suspect, if I may speak frankly, that the above report does not (yet?) contain useful information. The current Linter error pages try to say if an error occurs in a transcluded page, but since we have fixed most of the template pages that contained actual errors, that data is not reliable for finding transclusion-related errors. I suspect that all of the errors within Template:Documentation in the above report, for example, are errors in the wikitext used inside parameters of a Documentation template on a specific page, not errors in Template:Documentation itself. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:10, 23 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

My efforts are to satisfy the description in https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T170874

"Sometimes, a small number of templates are responsible for a large number of individual linter issues that are reported by Linter. In order to enable editors to not get overwhelmed by the counts, it might be useful to provide additional summary statistics:

How many linter issues in a category come from templates, and from top-level page itself? This statistic gives a quick scale of the effort involved.

For those pages with template-generated linter issues, some sort of ordered listing of templates by most # of issues so that editors can address those first."

The new Linter search UI I recently deployed now allows for searching only pages which contain template related errors, and if a single page title is used with the "Filter by template state" selector set to [With Templates] will provide all the linter errors on that page where a template is involved. But the number of pages in error versus the total number of errors associated with a specific template is not available through Special Pages: Linter Errors and would be provided by a new subpage I would be adding.

If most errors currently in enwiki are due to a page misusing a correct template, and not an error in the template itself, then the ratio of total_errors to page_using_template not being 1:1 is indicative of the few pages misusing the template.

If there is little value in this information, even with clickable links to the first page with the error and the template page as well, along with the two error statistics, then either additional info would make it useful, or it doesn't need to be created anymore due to other recently released search features being adequate.

I am glad to get feedback on the utility of a proposed feature and adjust it. If Parsoid needs to produce other info that it currently isn't generating about template related errors so that a more valuable report can be generated, that would be helpful.

Best, Shannon SBailey (WMF) (talk) 14:54, 24 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you are able to generate a report similar to the one you posted above, but for en.WP, I will be able to tell you whether it is useful or not. The report should look for transcluded pages from all namespaces, not just template space. For example, if a userbox living in User space contains a Linter error and it is transcluded in 8 pages, the report could show the name of the transcluded page, the number of pages transcluding it, the number of Linter errors on the transcluded page, and a link to an example page, like this:

If that report does not work, an enhanced version of the quarry query that I linked to, turned into a regular report, would probably satisfy the feature request. Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:38, 24 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Jonesey, yes I think I can gather this information from the existing linter table. There is no reason I cannot gather template info from all namespaces at the same time so that is not a limitation. I will get back to you with a better sample report from enwiki of top 50 errors by total linter errors formatted as your example defines.

To make sure that I understand your example, is the [number of linter errors] column the amount of errors that the example transcluding page has for all linter errors, or just for errors generated due to the transcluded template page?

Your input has been very enlightening, thanks SBailey (WMF) (talk) 14:27, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

My intent was that "Number of Linter errors" would refer to the number of errors in the page named in the left column. If you click that link, you will see that User:Sahara4u/Navbar has 29 errors (until one of my talk page stalkers fixes it). – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:02, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Excellent, ok, got it, developing query and measuring performance, getting input from DBA on their concerns and how I should approach making this type of report production friendly. SBailey (WMF) (talk) 19:34, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

After some exploration, the ability to have a template page lint error count and a number of times it has been transcluded in the report I am working on is proving a bit difficult. The number of lint errors the template page possess cannot be determined easily as the linter table does not (yet) mark linter records for templates as a template itself, so my query cannot (easily) determine that some linter records are in template page versus a normal page. I was exploring using the templatelinks table which has a from page ID, a from page namespace ID and target (template) link page ID, which I might use to match against the linter_page ID value in a join to see that page is being transcluded, but that table may not be reliably updated as the wiki is updated, pages moved, deleted etc. SBailey (WMF) (talk) 21:46, 7 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Maybe Cryptic would be willing to give you some pointers. They were able to whip up quarry:query/65736 pretty quickly. Also, quarry:query/31876 shows how to get the Linter error count on a page. So in the table above, you should be able to use a version of query 65736 to get the first two columns, then code from query 31876 to get the number of Linter errors on the page. The fourth column is just math. I don't know how to get the fifth column, but you seemed relatively confident above that you could generate it; it is purely optional. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:22, 8 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can You create a page for Rex (Toy Story) instead of a draft.. Ethan169 (talk) 19:55, 28 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I M will be happy. Ethan169 (talk) 19:56, 28 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Draft:Rex (Toy Story) already exists, so a new page should not be created in article space. See Help:Your first article for information about how to develop that draft page into a well-sourced article. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:34, 28 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey. Please move The Glory of Walküre to Valkyrie no Eikō or The Glory of Valkyrie [6] to follow the same spelling convention used by the other articles in this franchise. The only game that was officially released in English uses the "Valkyrie" spelling: [7]. -- 𠔻 (talk) 16:32, 30 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The only source in the article, and the screen shot shown in that source, supports the name given in the article. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:41, 30 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Would you be able to move Category:WWF/WWE King Crown's Champions/King of the Ring winners to Category:WWF/WWE King's Crown Champions/King of the Ring winners. I am unable to find the move button and can't do it myself. Davidgoodheart (talk) 17:01, 30 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I do not have that user right. See this page for instructions. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:10, 30 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

		The Minor Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to Jonesey95 for copy edits totaling between 1 and 3,999 words (including bonus and rollover words) during the GOCE March 2023 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Dhtwiki (talk) 00:55, 5 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Jonesey, I've mentioned you in a discussion at REQ Talk about recent rapid-fire copy-editing; your input would be welcomed. Cheers Baffle☿gab 06:13, 7 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Responded there. – Jonesey95 (talk) 11:52, 7 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Precious

Five years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:20, 11 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]