Policy Technical Proposals Idea lab WMF Miscellaneous 
The technical section of the village pump is used to discuss technical issues about Wikipedia. Bug reports and feature requests should be made in Phabricator (see how to report a bug). Bugs with security implications should be reported differently (see how to report security bugs).

Newcomers to the technical village pump are encouraged to read these guidelines prior to posting here. If you want to report a JavaScript error, please follow this guideline. Questions about MediaWiki in general should be posted at the MediaWiki support desk. Discussions are automatically archived after remaining inactive for five days.

Frequently asked questions (FAQ) (see also: Wikipedia:FAQ/Technical)
Click "[show]" next to each point to see more details.
If something looks wrong, purge the server's cache, then bypass your browser's cache.
This tends to solve most issues, including improper display of images, user-preferences not loading, and old versions of pages being shown.
No, we will not use JavaScript to set focus on the search box.
This would interfere with usability, accessibility, keyboard navigation and standard forms. See task 3864. There is an accesskey property on it (default to accesskey="f" in English). Logged-in users can enable the "Focus the cursor in the search bar on loading the Main Page" gadget in their preferences.
No, we will not add a spell-checker, or spell-checking bot.
You can use a web browser such as Firefox, which has a spell checker.
If you have problems making your fancy signature work, check Wikipedia:How to fix your signature.
If you changed to another skin and cannot change back, use this link.
Alternatively, you can press Tab until the "Save" button is highlighted, and press Enter. Using Mozilla Firefox also seems to solve the problem.
If an image thumbnail is not showing, try purging its image description page.
If the image is from Wikimedia Commons, you might have to purge there too. If it doesn't work, try again before doing anything else. Some ad blockers, proxies, or firewalls block URLs containing /ad/ or ending in common executable suffixes. This can cause some images or articles to not appear.
For server or network status, please see Wikimedia Metrics. If you cannot reach Wikipedia services see Reporting a connectivity issue
« Archives, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191, 192

dtenable testing

Hello, all. I'd like some folks to test this upcoming feature for me. Here's how it works:

  1. Click on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)?dtenable=1
  2. Scroll all the way down to this section and find the [subscribe] button for ==this section==.
  3. Click that.
  4. Post a comment here.
  5. Wait for another editor to do the same.
  6. Tell me what you think.

You should get a note via Special:Notifications (Echo) about the new comment. You shouldn't get notified if someone is just fixing a typo (same rules as trying to ping someone; notifications require a new comment/line).

I understand that on the technical side, you're actually subscribing to the timestamp of the first comment, not the section itself. Consequently, changing the section heading, moving this message to another page, etc., will not prevent you from getting notified about new comments. It doesn't matter what editing tools the other comments are posted with.

BTW, that link will give you the [reply] tool as well; if you like it, then turn it on in Beta Features. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 19:35, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

OK, leaving a comment to test. Elli (talk | contribs) 19:36, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for testing. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 19:41, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
Oh, that's pretty cool! Curious about how the timestamp thing works though - it's not uncommon for comments to share the same timestamp. Elli (talk | contribs) 19:42, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
There are some technical details in mw:Extension:DiscussionTools/How it works.
Maybe it includes the whole signature? But even then, someone could (with full-page editing) start several separate ==Sections== in the same edit, resulting in multiple identical signatures. Or we could copy it somewhere and have two copies of the same discussion. I'm not sure if it would track both, or neither, or pick one. @Matma Rex, do you have a prediction, or should we try to break it ourselves? Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 19:59, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
Subscribed and posting to test. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 21:39, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
No discernible alert - is there a delay? TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 21:41, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
No one had replied yet... now you should get a notification? Elli (talk | contribs) 21:42, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
and another persion replied —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 21:48, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
Cool - I got the notifications. I thought it would alert me when any comments were added to the subscribed thread, mine or otherwise. The only thing I would have to think about is if it will overmessage people. Is there an easy way to unsubscribe if the discussion gets too busy? TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 21:50, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
Well, the unsubscribe button is right there, too, from the same link. I'd assume if the feature was turned on generally, it would always be there. Elli (talk | contribs) 21:52, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
Ah yes - you have to click the original link to see it - gotcha. Cool. This could be interesting, particularly when new users don't know to tag people. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 21:54, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
You can also unsubscribe directly from the notification, without having to view the subscribed-to page. Click on the "..." and then "Unsubscribe". MANdARAX  XAЯAbИAM 21:52, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
I'm assuming that people don't actually want to get a notification when they post in a discussion (because you just posted your comment, so you already know that you did it, right?). But if my assumptions are wrong, please let me know when that would be useful.. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 15:47, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
Oooh, cool, you can subscribe to sections now? I did wonder what would happen or how they'd be distinguished if the same person posted multiple sections at once. And would you be auto-subscribed to any sections you create? Opabinia regalis (talk) 07:17, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
Somebody please reply to this :-) -- RoySmith (talk) 14:07, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
Never mind, I'll get one of my socks to do it. RoySmith-testing (talk) 14:13, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
Response for Roy. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 14:22, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
I am not a sock! It's that stupid testing guy. He's always stalking me and calling me a sock. He should be blocked. I'm only here to improve wikipedia. RoySmith-Mobile (talk) 14:24, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
Wow, this is major-league cool. Being able to subscribe to a thread has long been at or near the top of my wiki-wishlist. Very nice.
Somewhat orthogonal to this, it would be nice if there were a published spec for how to add buttons to a section. The "Close" link in the attached screenshot is from User:DannyS712/DiscussionCloser.js (ping DannyS712). I assume with some CSS tweaks, the visual style of both links could be harmonized, and a published standard would make that happen. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:33, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
Coolest aspect is that it lets me subscribe to a section without adding the page to my watchlist. Schazjmd (talk) 14:36, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
Cool, it worked! Does this work on mobile too? Opabinia externa (talk) 17:33, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
Hey, sock, back in the drawer! Opabinia regalis (talk) 17:35, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
I'm a dummy, I forgot to click subscribe first. Opabinia externa (talk) 17:43, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
Try this one more time, because socks aren't very smart. (The link in the OP goes to the desktop site, will this also be enabled on mobile?) Opabinia regalis (talk) 17:44, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
Success! Opabinia externa (talk) 17:45, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
Testing, attention please! - Klein Muçi (talk) 21:40, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
@RoySmith @DannyS712 You can add the CSS class mw-editsection-like to any element that should look like a section edit link, but not behave like one (e.g. not open the visual editor when clicked). It's what we used for the subscribe links too (I'm one of the developers). Matma Rex talk 12:08, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
@RoySmith Re: this, I think User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/autoCloser.js aligns properly (I use it because it works on mobile devices way better). ― Qwerfjkltalk 12:48, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
@Elli @Whatamidoing (WMF) Sections you subscribe to are identified by the username and the timestamp of the oldest comment. If two sections have identical username and timestamp (even on different pages), and you subscribe to one of them, everything behaves as if you had subscribed to both – you'll get notifications for both of them. Unsubscribing from one also unsubscribes you from all others.
It is perhaps not the ideal behavior, but it allows for sections to be moved, renamed, or archived/unarchived, without losing the subscriptions. And it's more reliable and understandable than if we were trying to detect whether two sections in different pages/revisions are the same using some heuristics. Matma Rex talk 12:05, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
I don't see any issue with this. The chance of there being two threads that have the same (username, timestamp) pair seems so small as to be safely ignored. And the fact that the subscription survives archiving is a big win.
In fact, it would be awesome if this technology could be extended to links. People often link to threads on noticeboards. Those links soon go stale when the thread gets archived. Having a way to create a link which survives archiving would be huge. -- RoySmith (talk) 12:35, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
We've been thinking about permanent links (phab:T273341), and it should be possible to extend it this way, but it would be a somewhat large project – because right now we don't actually "remember" where each topic appears, we just generate notifications when we see it anywhere. Matma Rex talk 13:39, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
Volunteer-me says that this will come up when people start complex RFCs. The simplest solution might be a social one, however: just discourage people from posting multiple comments (at the top of a ==Section==) in the same edit. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 15:51, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi, Matma Rex, re. username and the timestamp of the oldest comment: does that mean the first comment after the heading, or the actual oldest? If someone top-posts will it break things? ⁓ Pelagicmessages ) 17:24, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
The actual oldest, not the first. Top-posting should not cause trouble (in particular, we were thinking of templates like ((resolved)) and ((discussion top)) when implementing this). Matma Rex talk 17:58, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
() Clicking subscribe works even without having to post in the section as instructed. This is a Good Thing™.
Unscription becomes something of an adventure if the subscribed timestamp is edited away. I made the mistake of subscribing to Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention#User-reported, on the theory I'd see an update relatively quickly; I had to go searching back through old revisions until I found one that still had the original comment before the [ subscribe ] link turned back into [ unsubscribe ]. (I didn't notice until afterwards that there are also unsubscription buttons in the notifications themselves.) I didn't get notifications for edits made after the timestamp was removed, which I guess is probably the right thing to do for the sort of people who make reports to those kinds of sections, but it makes this feature useless for the sorts of people who monitor them. —Cryptic 22:26, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
Given that those aren't really talkpages, perhaps a special "subscribe to this particular section on this page" option would also work (maybe require an invisible keyword or template be placed on the page to prevent it from being used accidentally)? Elli (talk | contribs) 22:36, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
I don't think the distinction between talk and non-talk pages is useful. We have lots of pages in non-talk namespaces which support talk-like threaded conversations. Many (but not all) are in Wikipedia space. Tools like this should work equally well on those pages. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:40, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
I agree that it should work equally well in all namespaces. But a board like UAA (or AIV, RMT, etc) is not structured like a talk page. Therefore, I think a different subscription method for those would be reasonable to implement, instead of trying to pretend they're talkpages. Elli (talk | contribs) 22:43, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
Maybe a commented-out timestamp, or one in a display:none span. Though that'd probably confuse the poor bots. Not really the original usecase, anyway, just a missed chance for additional awesomeness. —Cryptic 22:41, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
I think it works in all namespaces, as long as there is a signature in the section. There was a brief bug that displayed the [subscribe] button on all ==Sections== (e.g., including in articles), but if there isn't a signature, you'll never get a notification.
Also, remember that it doesn't produce notifications for changes in sections. It notifies you only for new comments. This means less noise (especially if the editors you're talking to revise edit comments many times), but it wouldn't work for watching a section in an article to see if anyone changes it. You'll still need your watchlist for that. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 15:54, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
How does it handle unsigned comments that get fixed up by SineBot (who, at more than 2 million edits, is one of our most prolific contributors). -- RoySmith (talk) 16:17, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
It doesn't send a notification (it checks that the username in the signature matches the user who saves the edit). It should notify in this case (and we support comments signed that way for the [reply] links), but if we simply removed that check, it'd result in notifications being sent when someone (or a bot) is copy-paste-archiving a discussion. Resolving this might need to wait until we can "remember" each comment that has existed (same thing we'd need for the permalinks that you mentioned earlier). Matma Rex talk 16:25, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
Roy, there should many be fewer unsigned comments once the Reply tool is deployed default-on for everyone (including new editors). That won't happen here (for at least weeks, maybe months), but it will help a lot with that problem. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 19:35, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
This is a test. Please reply to me and I will let you know if I get a notif. BEEEP! Note: I'm not actually a robot Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) (Stupidity by me) 19:29, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
Using the 'reply' link to leave a comment. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:09, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
This is possibly a comment. -- Asartea Talk | Contribs 04:59, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
I told you you should have blocked that sock! Now he's back, making a pest of himself again and stalking me all over. Imma not going to sign this because I don't want to even be associated with him.

I'm late to this party. Does someone need to reply to me with the reply tool for the ping to work, or does any update to the thread prompt a notification? CMD (talk) 12:39, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Any update (I'm using CD). ― Qwerfjkltalk 12:45, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
Not sure what CD is, but I did get a notification, thanks. CMD (talk) 12:47, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
c:User:Jack who built the house/Convenient Discussions. ― Qwerfjkltalk 12:52, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
A comment here. — xaosflux Talk 13:29, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
It'll notify you regardless of what editing-method someone is using, so long as whatever edit is made looks like it's a new comment. This pretty much means "adds a new list item that ends with a signature" -- so any tool that doesn't do that is already probably being complained about for violating discussion norms. :D
There's a description of how it's working, if you're interested in more details. DLynch (WMF) (talk) 17:35, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
A comment. ― Qwerfjkltalk 19:32, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
Holy heck. That's actually rather cool. Didn't appear under my bell icon like I thought but under notices. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) (Stupidity by me) 19:36, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
WOOHOO! This is massive! Hats off to everyone who's been working on this. I can personally verify that this is a supremely technically difficult area to make progress in, and it's very, very cool that they've been able to get this far. Congratulations! Enterprisey (talk!) 05:04, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Arbitrary subsection

One disadvantage of working with signatures rather than headers appears to be that the notification does not take you to the talkpage section, although this is perhaps a minor inconvenience. CMD (talk) 13:34, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
If you visit the page with ?dtenable=1, it actually does (for example, try this). Assuming this feature is turned on generally, it'll work. Elli (talk | contribs) 13:36, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
Subsection added. — xaosflux Talk 13:38, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
For some reason that particular link doesn't work, however I tested with other links and it goes right to the comment, which is great. CMD (talk) 13:42, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
It's been working for me. I especially like the blue background highlighting. I got a notification earlier this morning for multiple comments in the thread; not only were the multiple notifications collapsed into one (nice), but each comment was individually highlighted. Very nice. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:46, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
It will also work if you have the "Discussion tools" beta feature enabled in Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-betafeatures (even though it doesn't enable topic subscriptions yet). I think we didn't consider this when testing the dtenable parameter, sorry! (I'm one of the developers) Matma Rex talk 13:43, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
Testing... --Yair rand (talk) 19:53, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
We're still subscribed, and still getting notifications.  ;-) Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 16:45, 3 September 2021 (UTC)


Just curious, what's the relationship of this to WP:Flow? They both seem to fill much the same use case. Is this a successor to Flow? Will they both continue to be developed? -- RoySmith (talk) 22:38, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Flow hasn't been actively developed since 2015. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:51, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
Flow doesn't use normal wikitext talk pages, and this does.
If Flow had been built fully, it would be far more feature-fun. Imagine a world in which AFD didn't require scripts and bots, and the nomination pages would automatically file themselves in the proper list/category when they were ready to be closed. Or that ArbCom's clerks didn't have to manually count how many Arbs had voted which way, because the software did it for them. This work is a great improvement, but it's never going to be even close to what Flow could have been. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 16:21, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
I'm of mixed-mind about Flow. I didn't particularly like the U/I, but I really don't understand why people hated on it so much. The idea of having structured data that you could reliably manipulate and navigate (as in the examples you gave) made so much sense. Tools like this are great, but trying to do automated things on any human-edited text is way more difficult and less reliable than if the structure of the conversation was rigidly enforced by software. No more conversations getting scrambled because somebody 600 lines up the page forgot a closing curly bracket. Or people using random combinations of ":" and "*" to indicate what's replying to what. But you knew that already. -- RoySmith (talk) 16:41, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
The interface that made it out was not what I had in mind. It's def. not what I designed, and the real Flow doesn't ... work like how the WMF made it work at all. Jorm (talk) 21:35, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
I see a typo in my comment above: "feature-fun" when I meant "feature-ful". But I kind of like it, so I'm not going to fix it. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 19:18, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Large number of notifications

I log in into Wikipedia today and I see 34 notifications, a number which I had never had the chance to see before in Wikipedia and which reminded me of the beginning times of Facebook notifications. Is that what we want from this function? (I'm not against per se.) Maybe we should do the same as Facebook and other social media did and start grouping some notifications together? Maybe you could have only 1 notification per specific subscription with the names of all the new commenters? Maybe you could have 1 for each commenter (not for each comment)? As I said, having a lot of notifications is not a problem for me really but I'm imagining things could get quickly out of hands in pretty dynamic discussions, especially if you haven't logged in for some hours, and there may be users complaining for this. - Klein Muçi (talk) 23:04, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

They are already grouped for me. Do you mean having the entire group display as just one new notification? CMD (talk) 01:25, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
@Chipmunkdavis, yes I suppose. And maybe not have a specific notification for each reply? I'm talking about having a general notification of this sort:
"X, Y, B and Z replied to [Specific Section]." This would remove the ability to immediately link to a specific reply and just show the discussion in general, maybe the new part of it, but maybe it would be better for some people? Or maybe we could have a preference tab for choosing between these 2 (or more) modes. - Klein Muçi (talk) 09:20, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
I wonder if you're using the no-JS interface of notifications? In the JS interface, they are grouped exactly like you're proposing – you only see one notification per section, and it says something like 34 new replies in "‪dtenable testing"., and it highlights all of the replies in the topic when clicked. But it looks like this feature (called "bundling") has never been implemented in the no-JS version. Matma Rex talk 14:28, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
@Klein Muçi, are you concerned about the number on the bell/inbox icons? Or about the number of lines shown when you click on them? Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 17:55, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
@Matma Rex, @Whatamidoing (WMF), I didn't spend too much time to look at the details when I wrote this because, as I said, it didn't concern me much personally. But after your comments now, I was examining it more carefully. I got 5 notifications (the number on the inbox icon) and when clicked, they opened as 1 notification which could be expanded in individual notifications in regard to this post. I guess this is similar to what I proposed, as you mention. My idea was to get 1 notification icon and 1 notification in total per post but I guess this can be fine as well. - Klein Muçi (talk) 19:40, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Midi files added to scores

Some articles, such as Pastime with Good Company, contain music scores written in the markup. These were temporarily removed a while back due to a security issue. They are now back, but the former option to play the score does not seem to be (by default, to my recollection). This is an accessibility issue; it's especially useful for readers who can't read music, and since the scores are .png images, this includes people who can't see well (there are formats for blind people to read music by touch).

Adding sound="1" into the <score> tag (see Help:Media (MIDI)) seems to fix. Has the default sound= parameter just changed from "1" to "0"? Should it be changed back? Should sound="1" be added automatically across the wiki(s)? It seems unlikely that people will often want a midi score visually but not want a button to click to play the generated sound file; even if you have an actual recording, having both is maybe cluttered but harmless. An alternative would presumably be reviewing all the pages including <score> tags, ideally in a semi-automated way, as there are a lot of them. Other suggestions welcome. HLHJ (talk) 20:24, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

@HLHJ: While the score extension was broken some editors found that you could get the image of the score to display if you commented out the vorbis or sound parameter, in the article you link it was this edit from January [1]. To get the scores to play again you just need to uncomment the vorbis="1" parameters. Pinging @1234qwer1234qwer4: who did the AWB run to disable them all. (talk) 21:04, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
Feel free to run a mass-rollback at [2] for now; will fix ~70 of the 503 instances. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk)
21:16, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
@ and 1234qwer1234qwer4: thank you, and thanks also to everyone else who worked on keeping the content as available as possible. I don't have rollback rights, but I've manually uncommented-out the vorbis param to the scores to which I had previously added the sound param instead. HLHJ (talk) 02:14, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
@1234qwer1234qwer4: It should be possible for someone with the technical know-how to do a reverse AWB run (looking for the "%T257066%" comment the surrounding bits). Then that will leave the few ones that were fixed manually. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 03:21, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
If anyone is doing this, might as well turn vorbis= into sound= btw.. then we're rid of the old syntax at the same time (clips are mp3 now, not vorbis) —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 08:49, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
Example edit here if anybody wants a clue what needs to be done and wants to make an AWB run. Cheers, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 00:31, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks @ProcrastinatingReader. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk)
11:52, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, everyone! There is still apparently at least one, without the quotes on the digit, that thus didn't get replaced: L'homme armé. There may be more. HLHJ (talk) 03:40, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

How we can manually change the "Page image" of an article?

Hi, articles like Android (operating system) now has "File:Pixel_4a_Android_11_Launcher.png" as its "Page image", i.e., in its "Page information" (that is, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Android_(operating_system)&action=info ) and in the "Basic information" section and "Page image" item, its value is now a screenshot.

I think this "Page image" item is added automatically (perhaps by a bot), and apparently this image is not suitable for "Page image" of such article, because for example, when we are in the disambiguation page Android, and we hover our mouse curser to the text "Android (operating system)" which is a hyperlink, then the opening window shows Android (operating system)'s page image and it is its screenshot and what is rendered to the user is a totally black image. Clearly this page image is not appropriate for this purpose. I think the "Page image" can be a more meaningful picture, for example it can be the Android's logo ("File:Android robot head.svg" or "File:Android new logo 2019.svg"), since these images obviously convey more meaningful information.

Are there any way to manually change "Page image" of an article? Thanks, Hooman Mallahzadeh (talk) 14:19, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

@Hooman Mallahzadeh: this can be quite complicated - but in general it is the first image of sufficient size used on an article. In this case, it is the image at the top of the infobox in the "screenshot" section. What do you think should be used instead? — xaosflux Talk 14:45, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
mw:Extension:PageImages has much more technical details on this, but suffice it to say - it is not done by a bot. — xaosflux Talk 14:46, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
@Xaosflux: What is rendered from existing "Page image" to a user is totally a black image, this is clearly wrong. It can be the image File:Android_robot_head.svg, for example. I think the "PageImage choosing algorithm" should be modified to avoid such problems, or wiki writers gain "PageImage changing" privilege. Do you agree? Hooman Mallahzadeh (talk) 14:58, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
@Hooman Mallahzadeh: are you seeing a pure black image, or are you just seeing a portion of File:Pixel 4a Android 11 Launcher.png - which has a lot of dark sections on it? A request to empower editors to select the page image is open at phab:T91683, where it has been open for 6 years. — xaosflux Talk 15:10, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
@Xaosflux: Yes, you are correct, the rendered picture is a portion of the screenshot that is like a "totaly black image". See it was open for 6 years without the correct action toward it, and it may be open for tens of years afterward. Would any administrators correct the algorithm, or do the "empowering editors"? I think such action is easy to implement, i.e., it requires changing/writing just a few lines of code. Hooman Mallahzadeh (talk) 15:22, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
@Hooman Mallahzadeh: AFAIK, there is nowhere that Wikipedia admins can do anything about this, it requires developers to write said new code, then for the code to be accepted for use in the WMF production systems. You may certainly volunteer to start in that capacity by submitting patches for review, mw:New Developers and mw:How_to_contribute are good landing pages for how to start on that process if you are interested. — xaosflux Talk 15:37, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
@Xaosflux: Thanks, but it is not so hard to be treated as starting a project. This simple scenario should be implemented:
  1. Go the page Information,
  2. Choose an image by a dropdown list
  3. Click the submit bottom,

It is very easy. I promise a computer bachelor student in term 3 of university can successfully do it without any problem, I mean there is no need for making a project for it. Hooman Mallahzadeh (talk) 16:01, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

@Hooman Mallahzadeh: the editors and "administrators" here on the English Wikipedia can not make these types of software changes here. We are just one of over 750 sites that WMF hosts that use the mediawiki software and extensions to the software, not to mention non-WMF sites that use the software across the world. While the UX you mentioned above sounds reasonable - this is just not the right forum to get your vision realized. You can comment at the phab task I linked above, or volunteer to help work on developing and implementing that task if you are up for it. — xaosflux Talk 16:22, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
The default configuration of the extension prefers images which are displayed at least 120px wide. I have set the logo to 120px so it's selected now.[3] PrimeHunter (talk) 18:07, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
This is Wikipedia, there are no simple scenarios. —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 20:33, 3 September 2021 (UTC)


Hi, on my Wikipedia account, I am currently only logged in on Wikipedia, and for all the other Wikimedia Projects, I need to log in manually, also when I check "Keep Me Logged in" my session will still expire, how can I fix this? I am using Firefox browser --つがる Talk to つがる:) 🍁 00:00, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Do you have Firefox's Enhanced Tracking Protection enabled? That will break SUL across Wikimedia sites. Legoktm (talk) 01:19, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
Yes, actually that is on. That probably explains it, thanks for the help! --つがる Talk to つがる:) 🍁 02:13, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Article titles

There are 10 communities named "Zion" in Ontario, Canada.

Only one of those communities, Zion, Northumberland County, Ontario, has an article.

The rest of the Zions are redirects, or have no article:

When a reader searches Wikipedia for "Zion, Ontario", the result is a link to a redirect, Otonabee–South Monaghan. (What is interesting is that a Google search for "Zion, Ontario" returns "Zion, Northumberland County, Ontario")

My question is, should the Zion which actually contains an article, Zion, Northumberland County, Ontario, be renamed "Zion, Ontario", and the redirect currently using that name be renamed? Thank you! Magnolia677 (talk) 09:54, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

This seems like a question for WT:AT or WP:VPPOL or its own move request. IznoPublic (talk) 12:06, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
Yeah. It certainly doesn't seem to be a VPT matter. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 12:36, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
I'll try there. Thanks! Magnolia677 (talk) 12:39, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
@Bearcat: If the article is so poorly sourced, just turn it back to a redirect so we can get input from the wider community. You make it seem like there was some nefarious intent asking this question, when all I wanted to do was make it easier for readers to navigate. I reached out to you for your opinion about this matter, not your churlish tone. Find a tool other than a hammer friend. Magnolia677 (talk) 16:40, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
I offered my opinion, and nothing about my tone was churlish in any way. That I didn't simply agree with you, but instead raised points that hadn't been considered, is not a failure on my part to do my job. Bearcat (talk) 17:08, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
I'd revert the article back into a re-direct & then delete all the redirects. Note: We have this article pointing to those places, in existence. GoodDay (talk) 17:29, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Installing a (top) link

Is it possible, by preference or script, to cause a (top) link to appear next to the (edit) link at every section? Perhaps even a floating (top) link is possible, as long as it doesn't interfere with editing. In my opinion, scrolling becomes excessively cumbersome as the page increases in size and this could help considerably. Thank you.--John Cline (talk) 12:22, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:User scripts/List#Site-wide shows two goToTop scripts. I haven't tried them. If you use a keyboard then there are probably Home and End keys to move to the top and bottom at any website in most or all browsers. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:33, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
Thank you PrimeHunter, I'll visit that linked script directly. I am currently editing with a mobile device while using the desktop view. Thanks again.--John Cline (talk) 12:42, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
On iOS, John, you can tap the system status bar (above Safari's address box) to jump-scroll to top. (This works in other apps like Notes, not just Safari.) But there's no equivalent for scroll-to-end. Unfortunately, I don't know enough to say whether Android has a similar feature. ⁓ Pelagicmessages ) 18:08, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Finding the most important category?

Has anybody done any work with picking the most significant category for a page? For example, I'm looking at Viviparous eelpout. If you were looking for the most concise description, you'd come up with something like, "It's a kind of fish". And indeed, the short description is "Species of fish". But trying to discover that is not easy from the category tree.

You could find the path {Viviparous fish -> Live-bearing fish -> Fish by adaptation -> Fish -> Aquatic animals -> Aquatic organisms -> Organisms by adaptation -> Organisms -> Physical objects -> Objects -> Entities}. There's two big problems there. First is that I deliberately only followed the chain of is-a relationships, but I had to apply human intuition to know which those were. Following {Live-bearing fish -> Fish reproduction -> Reproduction in animals} would have quickly got me lost in the weeds. Second, I also have to apply my human intuition to know that "Fish" was the logical place to stop.

This is a distinctly non-trivial problem, so I'm not expecting miracles. Just some pointers to previous work so I can do some reading. Specifically about navigating the Wikipedia category graph, not graph theory in general.

@Diego (WMF) and Isaac (WMF): whose research interests look like they're in this area. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:28, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

This is why Wikidata exists. It basically can't be done using categories. Izno (talk) 21:45, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Odd image

In the article on Wireless Set Number 10 there is an image of the original cavity magnetron about halfway down the page. It is oddly compressed vertically, can anyone figure out why? I believe I used the trim tool on this. Maury Markowitz (talk) 16:03, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

It looks fine here - try purging the page on your end? --Masem (t) 16:06, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Text browser renderings

Is anyone able to check rendering in text browsers? There is a discussion on this at Template talk:Morse. Better still, some help creating a Lua module to change the rendering would be appreciated. It has been suggested that de:w:Vorlage:Morse will render better in text browsers, but I have no idea if that is so. SpinningSpark 09:30, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

You should be able to download a browser like w3m yourself. Glancing through the discussion, it doesn't seem like you'll have much luck if you insist on supporting non-monospace fonts since Unicode doesn't provide a space character for use with the block-drawing characters. They intend them to be used with monospaced fonts. Lua won't help. You could try an en-space (▄ ▄) or em-space (▄ ▄) or figure space (▄ ▄), but none of those are guaranteed to be the same width as the block characters. If you insist on supporting non-monospaced fonts, your best bet may be to use a non-space block character for the spaces, something like ▅▁▅ or ▄▔▄. You could still hide the non-space block character using CSS for CSS-supporting browsers. Anomie 18:00, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, I think I have the answer now thanks to User:Izno who pointed me to the CSS white-space property which I was not aware of when I first wrote the template. The template already specifies monospace font. Whether or not text browsers respect that is a separate question. SpinningSpark 14:59, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

My watchlist looks... weird

S o c i a l d i s t a n c i n g
S o c i a l d i s t a n c i n g

Someone has implemented social distancing to the text of my watchlist. Is anyone else experiencing this? plicit 13:39, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

I'm not seeing that myself, but I wonder if it's related to IP masking :-) -- RoySmith (talk) 03:28, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
IP masking?
It suddenly occurred last night, I think after I marked all changes as seen on my watchlist (I had gone through a six-day backlog). I tested other skins out and this occurs with Vector, MonoBook, and Timeless, but not with MinervaNeue. 'Use Legacy Vector' being ticked or not makes no difference. Compared to what I was used to (File:Wikipedia watchlist.png), the (diff | hist) links switched places with timestamps. Based on the lack of responses, it seems that I'm the only one experiencing this, which is quite strange. plicit 04:15, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
Preferences → Recent changes → Advanced options → uncheck Group changes by page in recent changes and watchlist. Nardog (talk) 04:20, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
Wow, that was an easy fix. Thank you! Not sure how the box became ticked to begin with. plicit 05:45, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
Same thing happened to me, and I've never changed settings. Thank you. Yappy2bhere (talk) 17:46, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
Mine's not affected, though that might be because I don't use Vector and am still on Monobook. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Jéské Couriano 18:30, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Conference 2021 by WMRU

Greetings, wikimedians! Very soon, on September 25-26, an online Wiki-Conference of Wikimedia RU will take place (by Zoom). We are looking for speakers on topics: 1) Abstract Wikipedia 2) Wikidata Query Service 3) Wikidata Timeline. 4) About image / picture candidates in Wikimedia Commons. 5) GLAM in... I appreciate your answer! Connect to our Telegram channel: @wikiconf, welcome! — Niklitov (talk) 18:33, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Sorting issue

On Category:Pages with DEFAULTSORT conflicts, the Subcategories are all under "B" or "K", which is not correct for any of those listed. In the Pages section, most of the entries under "B" and "Y" should not be sorted under B or Y, and some of the "B" items are not properly sorted within that grouping. Yes, they all have sort conflicts, but none of the ones I checked have any sort key which would account for this. MANdARAX  XAЯAbИAM 20:47, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

The category is applied by MediaWiki:Duplicate-defaultsort, which attempts to group non-article pages by namespace under various Greek letters instead of using the usual sorting. Categories are grouped under kappa. But sometimes the code in that message winds up using variations on Special:Badtitle instead, resulting in the mix of stuff sorted under "B". Anomie 21:20, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
User:PrimeHunter/Sortkeys.js shows sort keys with an API call. It gives Sort keys which shows many "Badtitle/dummy title for API calls set in api.php", "Badtitle/Parser" and "\u039aUse [dialect] English". \u039a is Greek capital letter kappa, and so is the "Κ" in the category listing. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:31, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
Ah, thank you both. (And I see that user pages get a \u03a5, Greek capital upsilon, which accounts for the "Υ".) MANdARAX  XAЯAbИAM 21:44, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
Just now I WP:NULLEDITed Category:Use Ghanaian English and it moved from B to Κ. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:26, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
And null edits using VisualEditor change the sort key back to B. Strange, and probably worthy of a bug report. * Pppery * it has begun... 22:19, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Validating usernames?

If you had a list of strings which were ostensibly usernames, how would you use the API to discover which ones were valid in an efficient way? What I used to do is iterate over the list and get the contributions for each one, checking to see if I got a "baduser" error. That worked, but it meant 1 API call per name, which was horribly inefficient.

Per a suggestion on the cloud mailing list, I tried using API:Users to check batches of names (50 per API call with the default permissions). The problem is, API:Users is maddeningly bizarre. The results you get back are not in the same order as your input list, so you have to rely on matching keys. Except that the usernames you get back are NOT the same as the usernames you give it! They've been mapped into their canonical form, i.e. first letter forced to be uppercase, trailing (and leading?) whitespace stripped, internal "_" and "+" both mapped to spaces, hex encoding expanded, and maybe some other things I haven't discovered yet. So key matching is decidedly non-trivial.

I've been beating my head against this all day and keep discovering new unexpected behaviors. The latest discovery was the fact that order isn't preserved, which is camouflaged by the fact that python's mwclient presents the raw API output back to you as an OrderedDict. FSVO Ordered, I guess. -- RoySmith (talk) 03:47, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

I guess you could send the usernames in titles= at the same time to get what got normalized to what, though cumbersome it may be. Nardog (talk) 04:36, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
The results you get back are not in the same order as your input list[citation needed] The order is preserved I believe, except that any usernames that are technically illegal (eg. #?$) would show up at the top with "invalid": true, breaking the order. No normalisation is applied for these invalid usernames, so you can remove these from both the input and output arrays. Then, the modified input and output arrays should have the same order.
What I used to do is iterate over the list and get the contributions for each one, checking to see if I got a "baduser" error. That worked With this, there are caveats such as that usercontribs API works for IPs but not for IP ranges – but you can't even rely on this as the latter would be added at some point (phab:T177150). – SD0001 (talk) 08:03, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
I see all IPs are also technically invalid usernames. But it's easy to check if a IP is valid using regex (https://doc.wikimedia.org/mediawiki-core/master/js/source/util.html#mw-util-method-isIPAddress). – SD0001 (talk) 08:05, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
Yeah, I've got IPs covered. I try to create an IPv4Address or IPv6Address object and see if the constructor raises an exception.
I discovered yet another bizarre thing by reading the code. They match IPv4s using a brain-dead regex, which only counts digits, without actually looking at the values. So "" and "300.1.1.1" are both invalid, but "3000.1.1.1" is acceptable. The web interface gives inconsistent results for these. Special:Contributions/3000.1.1.1 says "3000.1.1.1" is not registered on this wiki.", Special:Contributions/300.1.1.1 just says there's no contributions, and Special:Contributions/ correctly adds the IP boilerplate. Sheesh.
The definition of "canonical" is supposed to be "The one true way". Yet, there seems to be four true ways, and you get to pick one depending on how rigorously canonical you want it :-)
-- RoySmith (talk) 14:29, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Changing redirects and/or pipelinks in article body, causing a mess up in the marriage section of bios' infobox.

This has happened to me a few times on bios. The latest being James II of England's intro. GoodDay (talk) 03:56, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

@GoodDay: This should be OK now, as a problem with the ((Marriage)) template has been fixed. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:37, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
Okie Dokie, thanks. GoodDay (talk) 08:41, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

What's public about sending thanks?

Recently, when sending a user thanks for an edit they had made, the system incorporated an extra step to advise me that the thanks was available to the public and give me that opportunity to abort its being sent. Can someone please elaborate on the public aspect of sending these thanks and furthermore, tell me how to review the thanks sent or received to or by a given user, if this is possible as public implies. Thank you.--John Cline (talk) 08:30, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

You can see that log here. ‑‑Volteer1 (talk) 08:33, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
Thank you Volteer1. Are mentions (Like the ping I just sent you) publicly logged as well and if so where? I didn't see them on the special page that you linked unless they're called something other than mentions or pings. Thanks again.--John Cline (talk) 08:53, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
@John Cline I don't think so. ― Qwerfjkltalk 09:04, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
technically, they are logged, because they are part of the wikitext which keep a history. As thanks are NOT part of wikitext, they are logged separately just as many other actions are (move, delete, change permissions, etc) —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 10:44, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
But without access to private logs, it's impossible in general to determine whether an edit produced a notification, even if it's assumed that the software is working and the recipient hasn't disabled notifications. Only I and TheDJ can say that he wasn't notified of this edit. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:39, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Tech News: 2021-36

15:18, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

When I look in my console at User:Trappist_the_monk/HarvErrors/testcases I see something sort of like this:
JQMIGRATE: Migrate is installed with logging active, version 3.3.2 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/load.php?lang=en&modules=jquery&skin=vector&version=8v0mf
Is that the error message mentioned above? If it is, it ain't helpful. Where is the log?
—Trappist the monk (talk) 15:50, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
That's just the message saying JQMIGRATE is active and that errors will be logged. The log is the console itself. If you don't see any other warnings containing "JQMIGRATE", then there's no issue. – SD0001 (talk) 15:54, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
Thank you.
—Trappist the monk (talk) 15:58, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia citation tool for Google Books

Wikipedia citation tool for Google Books has long been an extremely useful and efficient tool for adding books to citations in WP. Recently it started generating this server error, and the user responsible appears to have disappeared. Is there anyone who can (a) fix this, (b) perhaps make it an internal tool? --Michael Goodyear   19:27, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Here is an archived view, for reference. --Michael Goodyear   19:31, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
Here is the Github archive. App Engine was running Python 2.7 when reftag was last updated (29 Oct 2016) but dropped support for 2.7 last year [7]. Probably some library used by the app was updated and now only works with Python 3. You need a Python programmer (or maybe Daddy Warbucks [8]). Yappy2bhere (talk) 21:04, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
FWIW, the citation tool ([https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Citoid citoid?) built into VisualEditor does a good job with Google Books. Maybe you could use that instead? -- RoySmith (talk) 21:59, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Date formatting and WikidataIB

All of a sudden templates that use Module:WikidataIB have a strange date formatting, with random apostrophes added. See for example the "first light" parameter on AMiBA or birth/death dates at John Lovejoy Abbot. There have not been any edits to the module here lately. Anyone have thoughts on how to fix this? Nikkimaria (talk) 00:31, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

This seems to be caused by c:User_talk:Verdy_p#Data:DateI18n.tab (in short, a Commons template editor making insufficiently tested changes and edit warring to reinstate them when they were reverted). * Pppery * it has begun... 02:25, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
How does a page on Commons influence a module on enwiki loading data from wikidata? ST47 (talk) 05:53, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
And can we override it by creating a local page at the same name? ST47 (talk) 06:03, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
This translation data is used across dozens of wikis. Please make sure to maintain compatibility with or update other versions of the module.
That translation data is used across dozens of other wikis, and none were updated to support it.
en.wikipedia Module:DateI18n: return dFormat end local T = {} local tab = mw.ext.data.get('DateI18n.tab', lang) for _, row in pairs(tab.data) do -- convert the output into
User talk:RexxS/Archive 57#Module:DateI18n: RexxS, few weeks ago I made a big rewrite of Module:DateI18n, simplified language specific cases and moved c:Module:I18n/Date to Data namespace where one version can be accessed by all wikis. Can you update code here?--Jarekt (talk) 04:53, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
That seems like it should be pointing us in the right direction. Problem is a single point of failure with insufficient supervision. – wbm1058 (talk) 11:46, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
@Wbm1058: All Lua code has multiple single points of failure, in the sense that any one module could be vandalized (or edited in good faith but with insufficient care) in order to cause all uses to produce an error. The problem isn't a software design problem, it's a user-level problem, in that Verdy p abused his commons template editor access by [u]sing the right to edit war on a protected template and [r]epeatedly breaking protected templates (quotes from c:Commons:Template editor). I'm sure a rogue local template editor could do the same thing, and see no reason to believe that Commons has a lower standard for choosing template editors than the English Wikipedia (which has had instances of template editors edit warring with admins before) * Pppery * it has begun... 13:59, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
fwiw I've revoked their template editor rights on Commons. AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 20:47, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
@ST47: See mw:Extension:JSONConfig/Tabular#Usage. This can't be directly overridden by the creation of a new page on the English Wikipedia, although Module:DateI18n (off-topic: which really shouldn't exist anyway since the English Wikipedia is monolingual) could be modified to get its data from a different source. That said, the problematic edit to Commons has been reverted, so local action may not be necessary. * Pppery * it has begun... 13:59, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
@Pppery: mw:Extension:JSON, but mw:Extension:JsonConfig/Tabular. Go figure. I created the redirect. Both pages are only "of historic interest (or in many respects outdated)." wbm1058 (talk) 17:24, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
Oops. The proper base page is actually mw:Extension:JsonConfig, and I just screwed up the link (mw:Extension:JSON is, or more properly was, an unrelated extension that happens to have a similar name). Despite being tagged outdated, that page was the only documentation of the feature I could find, and is linked to at mw:Extension:Scribunto/Lua reference manual#mw.ext.data.get where I first looked. Actually, it's also documented at mw:Help:Tabular Data#Usage, which isn't historical? * Pppery * it has begun... 17:42, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
Dropping a ping to @RexxS:, who has worked on that module frequently. — xaosflux Talk 10:50, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
Good luck with that. wbm1058 (talk) 11:46, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
Exactly. Xaosflux, you may have forgotten, but RexxS was driven out by ProcrastinatingReader six months back. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:38, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
@Redrose64: That's basically a personal attack Redrose. Please remove or strike it. Izno (talk) 19:51, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
The evidence is here. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:35, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
I thought you were going to stop with all this? This follows months of you making vague allegations, and the sockpuppetry accusations that remain unsubstantiated. Please stop mentioning or referring to me anywhere on Wikipedia. This is harassment. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 22:01, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
@Redrose64: I would have expected a link to the final case results, but RexxS's case statement is not sufficient for yours above. Remove your comment or I will. IznoPublic (talk) 23:40, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Reference organization

I’m looking for some help with a possible solution to what I think is an inelegant footnote situation. In the article ß, there are a lot of references to “code pages” describing different systems of character encoding. Descriptions of each encoding are uniquely named and found on a different webpage, and so each has a different reference in the article. There are sets of these from certain authors, though, and I would like to reorganize them so that they are listed under each author, but remain individual references with their own clickable links to each webpage.

Graphically, the references look like this:

  1. Whistler, Ken (2015-12-02) [1999-07-27]. "ISO/IEC 8859-2:1999 to Unicode". Unicode Consortium.
  2. Whistler, Ken (2015-12-02) [1999-07-27]. "ISO/IEC 8859-3:1999 to Unicode". Unicode Consortium.
  3. Whistler, Ken (2015-12-02) [1999-07-27]. "ISO/IEC 8859-4:1998 to Unicode". Unicode Consortium.
  4. Steele, Shawn (1998-04-15). "cp1250 to Unicode table". Microsoft / Unicode Consortium.
  5. Steele, Shawn (1998-04-15). "cp1252 to Unicode table". Microsoft / Unicode Consortium.
  6. Steele, Shawn (1998-04-15). "cp1254 to Unicode table". Microsoft / Unicode Consortium.

And I'd like them to look like this:

  1. Whistler, Ken (2015-12-02). Unicode Consortium.

    a. "ISO/IEC 8859-2:1999 to Unicode".

    b. "ISO/IEC 8859-3:1999 to Unicode".

    c. "ISO/IEC 8859-4:1998 to Unicode".

  2. Steele, Shawn (1998-04-15). Microsoft/Unicode Consortium.

    a. cp1250 to Unicode table.

    b. cp1252 to Unicode table.

    c. cp1254 to Unicode table.

Is this possible, and if so, can someone help me figure out how to do it? Lexicon (talk) 01:45, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

The template ((multiref)) might suit your purpose:
|1=Whistler, Ken (2015-12-02). Unicode Consortium.
|2=a. "ISO/IEC 8859-2:1999 to Unicode".
|3=b. "ISO/IEC 8859-3:1999 to Unicode".
|4=c. "ISO/IEC 8859-4:1998 to Unicode".
|1=Steele, Shawn (1998-04-15). Microsoft/Unicode Consortium.
|2=a. cp1250 to Unicode table.
|3=b. cp1252 to Unicode table.
|4=c. cp1254 to Unicode table.

[1] [2]

—  Jts1882 | talk  07:00, 7 September 2021 (UTC)


  1. ^ Whistler, Ken (2015-12-02). Unicode Consortium.
    • a. "ISO/IEC 8859-2:1999 to Unicode".
    • b. "ISO/IEC 8859-3:1999 to Unicode".
    • c. "ISO/IEC 8859-4:1998 to Unicode".

  2. ^ Steele, Shawn (1998-04-15). Microsoft/Unicode Consortium.
    • a. cp1250 to Unicode table.
    • b. cp1252 to Unicode table.
    • c. cp1254 to Unicode table.

@Jts1882: Well, it's not exactly what I'm looking for. I'd like to keep the individual references in the article, otherwise I'd have to specify in the body which code page is being referenced for each reference. Although I suppose I could mark off each different use with a superscript letter ([1]a) and hope that the reader remembers it when clicking on the links (not that I expect much clicking on reference links in this article). Thanks. Lexicon (talk) 22:04, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
@Jts1882: I've just discovered that multiref only goes to 9, and I need 11 for one of my reference lists. Lexicon (talk) 00:54, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
@Lexicon: I see, you want each reference in the sublists to be addressable. I don't think that is possible without a Wikimedia software solution for the reference list. It is possible to group references and have separate lists (see ((Reflist#Grouped references))), but I don't know if that would help with your need.
I've increased the number of references handled by ((multiref)) to 15. It can be set higher if needed. —  Jts1882 | talk  06:36, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Welcome COI acc

I've just used this (((subst:Welcome-COI-acc))) for (probably) the first time and noticed a double-text inclusion at the bottom:-
"If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or my talk page, or click here to ask a question on your talk page. Again, welcome!".

"...or my talk page..." is extraneous and inactive, the text either side has links. I manually deleted it at the User Talk, afterwards. Thank you.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 01:51, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

@Rocknrollmancer: Should be fixed now. (talk) 04:40, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 19:52, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Will the savant of logic and technical ways please come to my aid?

The following link has ceased functioning and it would be greatly appreciated if the ones who can will help me see it revived:


The URL is pasted on an essay at Wikipedia:Administrators without tools and when launched, a list would appear that showed every user talk page ever published with ((GetMop)) transcluded or substituted on it. Feel free (if it's a trivial matter) to improve the information delivered to include more than only the name, like the date published and whether they are an admin now or not. Thank you.--John Cline (talk) 06:37, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

John Cline, I have replaced the link in the essay. It will list pages that has ((GetMop)) substed. If you want a list of transcluded pages, use this. Currently there are no userspace pages from where it is transcluded, all uses are substed. ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ (talk) 09:38, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
Thank you so very much. You guys and gals are a wonderful bunch and I really do appreciate your help. Sincerely.--John Cline (talk) 10:14, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
http://tools.wmflabs.org/betacommand-dev/cgi-bin/whatlinkshere works for me if it's just supposed to give a plain text list. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:22, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
Thank you PrimeHunter for your reply. It was a plain text list and I'm not sure why it works for you and not for me. I'm continuing with my efforts but it just isn't working for me.--John Cline (talk) 15:07, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
The tools.wmflabs.org URL is an old URL that may cease to work at some point in the in-determinant future (TBH I'm surprised it works at all). Please ensure you are using the new URL, which is https://betacommand-dev.toolforge.org/cgi-bin/whatlinkshere Izno (talk) 16:07, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
Interestingly the link https://tools.wmflabs.org/betacommand-dev/cgi-bin/whatlinkshere works fine in Firefox but not in Chrome. BrandonXLF (talk) 20:11, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Template question

I have a question pertaining to a couple of templates that are causing problems, namely ((legislationlistuk)) and/or ((legislationuk)), which both appear to exist solely as "shell" templates which further offload their actual content to modules so that any article which calls either of these templates is two-stepping the module via the shell template to actually produce the resulting infoboxes on the articles.

Leaving aside whether this is an appropriate use of modules or not — I really don't know one way or the other, not being involved in module programming — but the key problem is that the process is also somehow artificially generating categories, which are thus transcluded onto the pages through the template despite no category declarations being present on either the pages or the templates themselves. This is further having several likely unintended, but highly undesirable side effects:

  1. Redlinked categories that don't actually exist, such as Category:Lists of Acts of the Northern Ireland Assembly, and/or end up having to be created, such as Category:Lists of Acts of the National Assembly for Wales.
  2. Duplicate categories for the same thing, such as Category:Lists of Acts of the National Assembly for Wales vs. Category:Lists of Acts of Senedd Cymru — just because the National Assembly for Wales changed its official name to Senedd Cymru last year doesn't mean we should need to categorize acts of the National Assembly for Wales and acts of Senedd Cymru as two different classes of thing when it's the same body. They should all be in one category at the present name of the institution, but this is impossible to implement so long as the category generation is being automatically offloaded to a module — even categoryredirects don't work, because the bot that cleans up non-empty category redirects can't change the coding of the module in order to move the articles from one category to the other.
  3. Redundant categorization, such as every single thing in Category:Lists of Acts of the Northern Ireland Assembly also being filed directly in Category:Lists of legislation, Category:Northern Ireland law-related lists, Category:Northern Ireland Assembly and Category:United Kingdom law-related lists all at the same time. The proper handling of this would be for each article to be only in Category:Lists of Acts of the Northern Ireland Assembly itself, with membership in each of the other categories handled solely by the parent-child relationships in the category tree — but this is again unfixable, because the category generation is being sourced out to a module in lieu of direct category declarations.

Per WP:TCAT, we should not in fact be using templates (or even worse, shell templates wrapping modules) to artificially transclude mainspace content categories onto articles — this function needs to be stripped from the module entirely, with each article having its intended categories directly declared on each page itself. But because of the modular outsourcing, fixing this is completely beyond my ken, so I wanted to ask for some assistance in resolving it. Bearcat (talk) 20:21, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

I've edited Module:Legislationuk to no longer populate categories. Note that this has left several articles in no content categories at all, so you may want to go through Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Legislationuk and make sure each article is correctly categorized.

There's nothing wrong per se with "shell" templates that do nothing but call a module; in fact that's how ((cite web)) works. I don't personally like modules that "know too much" and try to produce an entire article by themselves like Module:Legislationuk, but there's no rule against it that I can find. * Pppery * it has begun... 20:44, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. I don't have a problem if using "shell" templates to call modules is acceptable in principle, but obviously for reasons like this they shouldn't be autogenerating categories themselves. Thanks again, I just started an AWB run to repopulate the categories as appropriate. Bearcat (talk) 20:58, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
As the person who created the template, I would say that the module is a work in progress and that these kinds of issues are something that can be ironed out with some discussion. However, given that the template will be used in hundreds of pages (due to the annual lists), it provides an easy way to add pages to categories and - importantly - recategorise large numbers of pages without inconsistencies arising. I do not think that removing all categories based on a handful of small issues (that are relatively straightforward to solve) is the correct approach. Theknightwho (talk) 21:01, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
We explicitly have a rule forbidding the use of templates to artificially transclude categories onto articles. A page's categories must always be declared directly on the page itself, not smuggled into the page via templates, precisely because things like this happen too easily, and are not easily fixed, if the categories are artificially transcluded by templates. Bearcat (talk) 21:08, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
Understood. I do want to ask whether there is a more appropriate way to handle large numbers of sub-pages like this in relation to categories. Is there a more efficient way to handle this going forward? I anticipate several hundred further pages being created as I work through this (though not imminently, by any stretch).Theknightwho (talk) 21:12, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
I can't really say that I see what's so complicated about simply adding one category at the bottom of a page that it needs a "more efficient" solution than the existing one. Could you clarify where you see an actual issue? Bearcat (talk) 21:32, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
It's not complex for each page, per se, but there are currently 176 pages of legislation and once this project is finished there will be well over 1,000. If we want to recategorise them (for whatever reason), then there are two issues that arise: effort and consistency. It would not be reasonable to expect an average user to manually edit all of the pages, and it is also unsatisfactory for them to do so in a piece-meal fashion. While it's possible to use bots (as you're doing), it feels as though there should be a way of both ensuring that pages are not a huge pain to recategorise, and also to prevent them from becoming "unsynced". Theknightwho (talk) 21:54, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
You could try using Cat-a-lot. ― Qwerfjkltalk 08:27, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks. Is there a way to 'lock' groups of pages in sync with each other? Theknightwho (talk) 13:09, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
@Theknightwho I doubt it. You can try asking at c:Help talk:Cat-a-lot. ― Qwerfjkltalk 20:38, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
Oops, I meant c:MediaWiki talk:Gadget-Cat-a-lot.js. ― Qwerfjkltalk 20:41, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Weird Block Message for Unblocked User

Hello! I am posting on behalf of Danese Cooper, who is being told that she is blocked from editing enwiki when she logs in. However, I see no block logs for her, and certainly no behavior that would lead to this.

I've screenshots: showing the block message and this confusing message indicating multiple blocks however she has a clear block log. It's possible that someone on another wiki put "revenge" blocks on her (that's a popular thing to do against former and current WMF employees) but I again can't see anything.

Can anyone explain what's going on here? Jorm (talk) 22:42, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

@Jorm: looks like they hit a hard IP or IP Range block. If they use a full client there will be more information available for the block message (or perhaps clicking that MORE button) - specifically an autoblock ID #. — xaosflux Talk 22:46, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
Unrelated, it looks like they are trying to edit an article that they may have a COI with. — xaosflux Talk 22:47, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
She's not. She used that for the screenshot. She was trying to show a potential new editor the process. Jorm (talk) 22:50, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
Ah OK, well unfortunately - much of the UI isn't friendly to mobile editors. — xaosflux Talk 23:16, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
More information:
  1. She was able to log in with a friend's phone and make an edit from there
    • This makes me think it's a range thing
    • I suspect that the friend's phone was on a cellular network and not the home wifi
  2. She is in Ireland, on Virgin Mobile Fiber. I don't know if that helps narrow it down. It's almost 1 am where she is. Jorm (talk) 23:56, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
It says it's a multiple block, which in my experience usually indicates a local IP block and a global IP block. A hard block for 2 years is only usually done for VPN networks and server colos. So my guess is that she was exiting from a non-Virgin range, like a proxy, cloud network, private server, or similar. -- zzuuzz (talk) 00:27, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Let's Encrypt certificates no longer to support some older clients

It seems that TLS certificates issued by Let's Encrypt are to cease being trusted at the end of this month for some users of older operating systems such as OS X El Capitan.[9][10] I understand that Mozilla Firefox has its own list of trusted root certificates and will continue to trust Let's Encrypt on these platforms. I further understand that Google Chrome is to use, from some point in the future, its own list of trusted root certificates that includes Let's Encrypt,[11][12][13] but, as far as I see, there is no timeline for this.

According to my Web browser, Wikipedia uses a Let's Encrypt certificate. Does Wikipedia (or rather Wikimedia) have plans to continue to support users on these older operating systems that will no longer trust Let's Encrypt?

2d37 (talk) 22:56, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Need a coder for an easy task

If you know what a Pull request is, please see Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment#Philosophy template. This should be easy (I think the patch will amount to "delete line #___ in the bot's code"), but I don't know how to do it. Thanks, WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:18, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

 Done ~ Shushugah (he/him • talk) 16:28, 8 September 2021 (UTC)