RationalWiki:Technical support/Archive5

This is an archive page, last updated 17 July 2012. Please do not make edits to this page.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <6>, <7>, <8>, <9>, <10>, <11>, <12>, <13>, <14>, <15>, <16>, <17>, <18>, <19>, < List>, <20>, <21>, <22>, <23>, <24>, <25>, <26>, <27>

, (new)(back)

Statistics question #2

And how about editcount per a namespace? Do the view/edit stats match up, or are they very different? I'd guess, edits are mainly site members, views would include many visitors from search engines, etc. So these two groups probably have rather different interests... (((Zack Martin)))^™ 23:49, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Main still wins. Better luck next time. -- Nx / talk 00:06, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

namespace	%
Main	21.7665
User talk	15.1751
Conservapedia talk	14.8476
RationalWiki	10.7128
Talk	7.8411
File	5.6596
User	5.2155
Conservapedia	4.7314
RationalWiki talk	2.7826
Template	1.8895
Fun	1.8189
Essay talk	1.0873
Debate	1.0727
Forum	0.8106
Fun talk	0.7585
Essay	0.6438
File talk	0.6343
Template talk	0.5720
Thread	0.4847
Category	0.3375
Help	0.2531
MediaWiki	0.2128
Debate talk	0.1744
Category talk	0.1649
MediaWiki talk	0.0709
Recipe	0.0682
Help talk	0.0617
Recipe talk	0.0385
Forum talk	0.0234
Summary	0.0057
Summary talk	0.0007

But we see that Main is 49% of views, but only 21% of edits. There are two groups of people here: RW regulars (most of which have accounts, a few might stick with IPs) and occasional visitors. The difference between 21% and 49% is probably accounted for, at least in part, by the differences between these two groups. (((Zack Martin)))^™ 00:10, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Gee, you think? You mean casual visitors aren't reading user talk pages? To me, these numbers suggest that RW has a healthy community (as indicated by the many talk comments), which is producing content that appeals to a lot of people who aren't regulars and gets a lot of hits. Are you willing to share the corresponding statistics about the Maratreanism wiki? --Benod (talk) 00:43, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Since it's Wikia, I don't have server access, so I can't give you any stats that you can't get yourself. Look at the stats pages linked to from here. However, I'll say straight up, that there are no serious editors besides me, and I don't know what the pageviews are like, but I'd suggest not very high. (((Zack Martin)))^™ 00:51, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Voting

The extension used for voting for board/mods/etc, how hard would it be to configure it so some votes could be non-secret ballots? Then we could use it for preferential voting for policy questions, like AD's talk page options. (((Zack Martin)))^™ 01:32, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Can we stop non-mods from reversing mod blocks or user rights changes?

This discussion was moved here from RationalWiki:Chicken coop.

Nx, can you make it so non-mods can't undo mod blocks and mod desysopping?--User:Brxbrx/sig 00:34, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Good idea, was raised previously, but technically not very straightforward, if I remember the discussion from last time. (((Zack Martin)))^™ 00:37, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

No, it's technically unfeasible (and I believe the policy of making everyone who breathes a sysop is stupid). -- Nx / talk 00:39, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Well, can you "lock" certain users' rights?--User:Brxbrx/sig 00:43, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Hm. I could make a user group that revokes all sysop rights... then make it so only mods can add and remove the group. So even if the user is a sysop, being a member of the other group means they lose all the rights. -- Nx / talk 00:51, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

That's a good idea Nx. Another idea I had, is that maybe locking a user's page could substitute for locking their rights? Or create a special user subpage called /rights, and locking that functions as locking their rights? (((Zack Martin)))^™ 00:55, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

I thought of the user page locking to prevent unblocking. That's not the problem. The problem is there's no way to actually intercept the unblock in an extension. -- Nx / talk 00:58, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Mods don't need special blocks that can't be undone or special powers to desysop, I don't think.--^talk 01:10, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

is there a way to unblock someone other than from the block log page ? is it possible to change the visibility of a block log entry to only mods or above ? Hamster (talk) 01:26, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

You could hide a block log entry to only mods, but I don't know if that will prevent you from unblocking the user by simply typing in their name in the unblock form. Or just blocking them for 0 seconds. Probably not. -- Nx / talk 01:28, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Can we force people to e-mail us in order to open an account?

Since people want to make this place as boring as possible? B♭maj7 “We are moving too fast for any label to stick.”-CLRJ 01:07, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Oh FFS. It's just one attention whore creating accounts thinking he's funny. He'll go away soon. -- Nx / talk 01:08, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

{ec}I think user name conventions would be a terrific idea. Also, making the place boring for trolls seems like a good idea.--User:Brxbrx/sig 01:09, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

You wouldn't know what to do with a troll free enviro, Brx. Most of your interaction on this site is with and about trolls. and that's not a complaint. it's just a reality. people who came here to bash CP enjoy that side of it, and that breeds trolls cause some of you are and were trolls on CP. if it all stopped, you would not be here, you'd find somewhere else to go.En attendant Godot 01:27, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

O rly? There seems to be quite a bit of interaction without being trolling each other here.--User:Brxbrx/sig 01:55, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Can we implement a "real first name and last initial" naming policy?

In order to stop all of these accounts poking fun at NX and Sprocket? B♭maj7 “We are moving too fast for any label to stick.”-CLRJ 01:10, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

That's not necessary. Instead we can make it so account names can't be unwieldy, and so accounts can't be named for the sake of bugging people--User:Brxbrx/sig 01:11, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

In real life, my middle initial is not "J." Think about that for a few seconds. Sprocket J Cogswell (talk) 01:13, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

He was still kidding, Brx. This is not a rampant problem we need new rules for - having conventions won't make it any faster to block these obviously ridiculous accounts.--^talk 01:14, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

I know he was kidding. I was shutting him down by being obtuse.--User:Brxbrx/sig 01:17, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Something we discussed before, some reduction in maximum possible account length could be a good idea. But Nx mentioned the technical problem, if your account is too long to create, MW won't let you log in as that account either. To do this, we'd need to find a way to change the code to grandfather existing users who had too long names, while preventing new ones which are too long. 30 chars should be enough for most people, maybe 40... (((Zack Martin)))^™ 01:17, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Fuck right off. Stop worrying about creating more goddam rules to solve non-existent problems. B♭maj7 “We are moving too fast for any label to stick.”-CLRJ 01:19, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

There's nothing wrong with some rules and some order. (((Zack Martin)))^™ 01:20, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

B♭maj7, you only see these problems as non-existant because you're one of the ones causing them and you don't want anybody to stop you.--User:Brxbrx/sig 01:22, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

No, he's right. There's definitely such a thing as swinging too far in the other direction. Some playful anarchy and incivility is a big part of RW. Just because SR is being an enormous douche is no reason to throw that away.--^talk 01:24, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Amen, amen, amen. (oh, wait, we're rational) - evolve, evolve, evolve. there is something to be said for ignoring things you don't like. not all the time, but sometimes.En attendant Godot 01:26, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Can we start asking for writing plans?

To ensure that there's more order around here? B♭maj7 “We are moving too fast for any label to stick.”-CLRJ 01:23, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

snark... you mean people actually compose and edit articles? seriously?En attendant Godot 01:24, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Here's a thought: How about I disable editing for everything except mainspace? -- Nx / talk 01:25, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

I got your writing plan right here. Sprocket J Cogswell (talk) 01:26, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Wait, people edit here? I thought they just ran around telling on each other at the coop and ATIM and making new rules. sterile^talk 01:48, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes, sterile, even I have made a few articles. --User:Brxbrx/sig 01:53, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Could we provide a way to lock a user's page so only they can edit it?

This would be useful to reduce vandalism. In normal circumstances, only a user should be editing their own user page. I'd suggest Tech and Mods still be able to edit the user's own page though, in case of inappropriate/defamatory/etc. content. We could either do it across the board, or make it opt-in. (Opt-in is good for user subpages, maybe some of them user wants only themselves to edit, others they want to make editable by others.) Of course, this would not apply to User talk namespace. (((Zack Martin)))^™ 00:58, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes, that's possible, although it's not opt-in and it protects all subpages. It's also useless for user talk, unless LQT is used, so the header can be protected. -- Nx / talk 01:01, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Hmm... I'm thinking, I wonder how hard it would be to make that extension be an opt-in thing... I used to work full-time as a PHP programmer, but it's been a few years in Java-land, and my PHP is getting rusty... (((Zack Martin)))^™ 01:10, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

The problem is making it integrate nicely into MediaWiki. -- Nx / talk 01:12, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Well, after a couple hours of tinkering, I think I managed to hack the extension to make it opt-in. It's using the existing protection system to introduce a new level, "owner", to make it opt-in. Unfortunately it does something that should never ever be done and there are probably ways to break it (oh yeah and it doesn't disable cascading, so a malicious user could protect any other page so that no-one can edit it...). Back to the drawing board I guess. -- Nx / talk 10:41, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Can we install nite moad?

Since people want to lock things up tighter than mosquito pussy? B♭maj7 “We are moving too fast for any label to stick.”-CLRJ 01:04, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

That's not at all comparable.--User:Brxbrx/sig 01:05, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

yeah, but nite mode US style, or UK style, or Aussi style?En attendant Godot 01:06, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

All of the above, shut the whole thing down except for one 10-minute window a day for a cocoa edit. B♭maj7 “We are moving too fast for any label to stick.”-CLRJ 01:07, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

It's night mowed, you idiot. sterile^talk 02:21, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Night moat, surely? --PsyGremlinTal! 10:59, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

NSFW filter doesn't work for categories

See e.g. Category:NSFW. Now, maybe you'll say, what do you expect if you go to a category called "NSFW". But, the point is, the same problem occurs in other categories, if people add NSFW images to them, which they have been doing. (((Zack Martin)))^™ 23:34, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Well, if you're at work, you should be working, not clicking around category pages at some joke site like RW. Serves you right for wasting your employer's time, money and resources. B♭maj7 “We are moving too fast for any label to stick.”-CLRJ 23:41, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I know it doesn't. It's because it uses a hook that's called only when [[File:Someimage.jpg|thumb|whatever]] is parsed. It also doesn't work on galleries. The reason for this is that I can't be bothered. It's a simple and crude extension meant to stop Ace pooping arse.jpg on your talk page. Feel free to improve it -- Nx / talk 03:39, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Do you have an SVN or Git or something you keep this in? As I said, I have hardly touched PHP for a few years, but maybe inspiration will hit me and I'll fix it up for you... (((Zack Martin)))^™ 10:52, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

mediawikiwiki:Extension:ImageFilter. Remember that it has to be a pure extension, no hacks to mediawiki core. -- Nx / talk 17:35, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Tell me - do you also bitch non-stop to the Facebook people, and Google people, because their sites don't suit you 100%? Here's a newsflash boy - this is a COMMUNITY, and as with any community, there are going to be things you don't like. Stop bitching like a red-haired step-child, grow a pair of balls, stop trying to impose your will on this wiki. If you're really that unhappy here, then take your little Magic Roundabout religion and fuck off. That's your choice - grow up or fuck off. But we're not pandering to you anymore. --PsyGremlinSiarad! 11:03, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

I really don't understand your problem with proposing to help Nx improve his code. (((Zack Martin)))^™ 11:07, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Oh sure, it's all about you wanting to improve the code. Why don't I believe you, given your history of "Wah! There's pictures I don't want to see." --PsyGremlinTal! 11:18, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

I used to be a professional PHP programmer... I've even worked on the MediaWiki source code before (never published any of it, but I used to maintain a custom fork of MediaWiki for use of a previous employer, but that was five years ago and I forget...) It would be interesting to have a go at it again, if I find the time and motivation. I may personally be interested in not looking at certain images some people are intent on shoving in my face, but hey, every programmer programs for some reason, be it personal interest or promise of remuneration... (((Zack Martin)))^™ 11:23, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Capturebot again

Is borked. Or shacked up with pibot again. --PsyGremlin講話 15:39, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, it probably chocked on a page that was too large. Someone needs to kick it in the butt restart it. -- Nx / talk 17:55, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Looks like it's back. -- Nx / talk 18:26, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! --PsyGremlinPraat! 18:51, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

I did nothing. -- Nx / talk 18:56, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

div in R.C. / Holydaze

Any idea why "</div>" is appearing below the Holydaze template in Recent Changes? I've checked the two templates currently in place & there's no div in either of them. Wėąṣėḷőįď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 22:24, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

One of them has an unclosed tag, not necessarily an unclosed div. -- Nx / talk 07:17, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Ah, someone fixed it. -- Nx / talk 08:07, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

image filter

Can't find the option under the appearances tab (or the misc tab, where it was erroneously listed before I changed it). Would it be because I'm on a public computer? Does the preference vary from computer to computer or is it stored server-side? In that case, the toggle should be far more evident. thx--User:Brxbrx/sig 01:34, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

It's under thumbnail size in the Files section of appearance. -- Nx / talk 06:09, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

% in title

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/User:Nx/sand%25box gives a bad request error. -- Nx / talk 07:20, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Would probably be a good idea to change the whole rewriting to rewrite to w/index.php/Whatever instead of w/index.php?title=Whatever. E.g. http://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php/User:Nx/sandbox%25 works -- Nx / talk 16:24, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

User can't unblock himself notification

Would it be possible to have a big red thing show up every time you try blocking someone that can't unblock themselves, asking you to confirm? I know Ace would confirm without hesitation, but at least he wouldn't be able to pull that excuse out of his ass. Also, once or twice I've been blocked by someone unaware that I don't have my rights--User:Brxbrx/sig 14:47, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

So what you want is a special bit of code that basically only applies to you. When was the last time that someone other than you who couldn't unblock themselves was blocked and it created an issue? Perhaps, while we're at it, you'd like us to change the name of the site to Camilleapedia or something similar? B♭maj7 (talk) Anachronistically anachronistic 15:17, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

The same thing would apply to users that have been promoted and newbies. --★uːʤɱ anti-communist 15:23, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

And when was the last time that a block like that created an issue? B♭maj7 (talk) Anachronistically anachronistic 15:24, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

You know why my rights were originally removed, right?--User:Brxbrx/sig 15:31, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Because you fucked up blocking people? And so after that we created the "Bricks" group which had a population of "one," namely you. So we need a piece of code that only applies to you, we need a group that only you fit into. Do you see a pattern here, pinhead? Is it maybe starting to get through to you that the problem might not be user groups, or a lack of warnings about who shouldn't be blocked? Are you starting to see that maybe, just maybe, the problem might be you? B♭maj7 (talk) Anachronistically anachronistic 15:34, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

While this would clearly be written with Brx's situation in mind, it certainly has implications beyond just him. It isn't the worst idea in the world. Can someone in the know at least say if it's impossible and/or prohibitively difficult? If so we can close this down and move on. DickTurpis (talk) 15:55, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Nah, it's probably quite simple. -- Nx / talk 16:05, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

In principle, I see where Dick is coming from. That said, Imma also point out that the "sysoprevoke" group was created for Ace when he was being punished in regards to a situation that Brx was at the center of. For those of us keeping score, that's 2 user groups and one bit of code that came out of Brx-oriented situations. It's a good thing Nx likes this guy, 'cause he certainly needs to do a lot of coding to make the wiki a place that can accommodate his particular needs. Hopefully Brx is a thoughtful kind of troll and will send Nx a nice bottle of cognac for Christmas. B♭maj7 (talk) Anachronistically anachronistic 16:10, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

A lot of coding? Not really. -- Nx / talk 16:31, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm going to give Brx a pass on the sysoprevoke thing as well. It's not his fault promotion of various users doesn't tend to stick. It was one of the predictable results of giving any old sysop power to demote. DickTurpis (talk) 16:40, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Just jesus fuck why is Brxbrx permitted to take this much control and get this much attention for days on end? Why does it happen so often? This cycle has been going on for 6 fucking months with just him along, barring all the few other assholes who create conflict to whore for attention, and it's making this site's culture intolerable. Here's what: we ask Trent if he wants to code more special shit so Brxbrx can continue refusing to accept the responsibility of being a sysop and hand him RW's official blessing to continue exactly this kind of behavior by bitching and moaning whenever he's treated exactly as he so earnestly begs to be treated. Sounds great to me. 17:40, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

We permit him to take such control because we generally permit people to do as they please. No one's forced to respond to his inquiries, though some seem to go out of his way to do so at times. If Brx wants this code written and someone wants to write it, they should feel free to. We have people who do that, and I guess they kind of like it. If no one wants to bother then that's fine. I actually wouldn't mind having something informing me if someone I'm blocking can't unblock themselves. Sort of like the "you are not logged in" warning that's kept me from inadvertently revealing my ip on countless occasions. It's harmless, and could actually do some good (like shutting Brx up for a little while). DickTurpis (talk) 18:13, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Hm, well after I thought about it for a bit I decided it wouldn't be very useful, since it would only be relevant in a minority of cases. But if you think it would be useful, I can write a script that puts a warning next to the block button or something. It should be pretty easy. -- Nx / talk 18:22, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

The cycle has been going on for six months and it's all brxbrx's fault. I mean, really, people. It's brx's fault he leaves red exclamation marks everywhere. It's his fault people keep blocking him even though he can't unblock himself. It's brx's fault people vandalize his user page. It's brx's fault everybody hates Maratrean. It's brx's fault Nutty Roux hates Ty. It's brx's fault that Human and Psygremlin are feuding. It's brx's fault that Human promoted Blue unilaterally. Brxbrx is a bane on RationalWiki and must be taken out and shot because he doesn't even make for a good jester (he has the nerve to complain when we throw food at him). You are so full of shit, Nutty, it's coming out of your ears--User:Brxbrx/sig 18:13, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Hey everybody look at Brx's utterly artless attempt at deflection. He goes from stuff he won't admit is his fault to stuff that's either not true, nobody ever said, or nobody would blame him for. And, as usual, he ends up such an unsympathetic victim. Brx, I'm not the source of your problems on RW. You are.You're just sore because you're not winning the pissing match you started with me, Ace, and whoever else you're plaguing, which is boring but whatever, but Jesus fuck stop with the absurd hyperbole, lies, and nonsense already. Take your tantrum elsewhere while the adults discuss how to deal with your technical support request. 19:38, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

You might also ask Ty whether he thinks I hate him. I don't. But once again you've shown you're not above slinging shit as far as you can to distract. 19:41, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

How on earth is sysoprevoke brx's fault? Correct me if I'm wrong, but how is it brx's fault that our very own local angry mob found something to piss Maratrean off, pissed him off, got some of themselves cooped and desysoped and then without community consent sysoprevoke was installed? Sure brx was one of those who reverted the "let's troll the living shit out of Mara" but many others, including me and Nx, were too. Does brx whisper in Trents ears? Oh, no! Even better! All this time brx was actually Trent and made this place up solely to troll it later! Seriously people you are either just making stuff up to make him look bad and flat out lying, or completely delusional. --★uːʤɱ structuralist 18:56, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

WYou may be confused by the theme of this section being that Brx was the center of or very near controversies that resulted in two new user rights groups. Glad I could help. Your hyperbole is great though. 19:38, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Wasn't that created because people hate seeing red exclamation marks? --★uːʤɱ netlabelist 20:37, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Sysoprevoke was created on the fly by Trent to remove the threat of people wheel warring Ace's userrights while we decided what to do after he went on a tear wandalizing Maratrean and Brxbrx's userpages. Nx made the Brick group on his own motion to deal with people complaining about Brx leaving red exclamation marks after he lost his sysop bit. Is sysoprevoke the that you're referring to? Not sure it this is 100% correct history because I've been drunk and having an unusually hard time deciding between opiates or amphetamines for the last few months but I think it's more or less right. 22:09, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, that that was that that, that I meant. I think you are right with the history, but for me that's like blaming the guy who had heart attack that you triped over his body an hour later. --★uːʤɱ secularist 22:24, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

I don't see what you mean about blaming him for anything but just email me if you care about any perspective I might offer. 22:33, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

I fucked up the comment. Now it should be clear what I'm comparing it to (I'm sorry, it's late). --★uːʤɱ socialist 23:47, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Before this discussion goes downhill any further, let's just call it closed and say that if someone wants to write the script in question they should feel free to, but no one is compelling them. I don't think anyone is going to say anything further that will do anything but make matters worse. DickTurpis (talk) 20:18, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

I think someone should create an entirely new brx wiki. Ace^ace 20:23, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Language options

On WP there is an option to format dates dependent on the editor's preferences - if they are formatted via a template. Could one of our boffins conjure up something similar for US/UK spellings? Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 12:09, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Use the dateformat/formatdate parser function. 2011-11-12 -- Nx / talk 12:36, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Er, I was thinking along the lines of skeptic/sceptic rather than actual dates. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 15:40, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Ah, I see. It's possible to use the {{int:}} parser function and wrap it into an if. For example {{int:Delete}} is "Vaporize" for en and "Vaporise" for en-gb. But that depends on those two not changing. It would also be possible to compare the result of {{int:Delete}} to {{MediaWiki:Delete/en-gb}}, and if the two match, that means the user's interface language is set to en-gb. This is more robust, but still depends on MediaWiki:Delete/en-gb being different from MediaWiki:Delete. -- Nx / talk 18:07, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Also, it's possible to use a different message of course, but it looks like you can't add a new one. As long as the en and en-gb versions differ, the second method should work. And it should be short. -- Nx / talk 18:25, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Named references with pages

Is there any way to use a named reference, but with a field for page numbers? I.e. I want to cite a book, but with different page numbers in different spots? Is this possible?--^talk 03:53, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Template:Rp Ponder Stibbons ^talk 22:13, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Do I just copy that to here?--^talk 22:35, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Did it for you. Ponder Stibbons ^talk 22:43, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!--^talk 22:46, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

More ref stuff

I'm rewriting the ICR article to include a million-and-one examples of their lunacy, along with a few odd refutations and SPOV comments thrown in. Point is, there are now nearly a hundred entries under 'Footnotes' at this moment in time, and there is also the potential that the casual reader may mistaking assume the bountiful supply of little numbers in boxes to mean that their claims have merit, or something (it's unlikely, but bear with me).

I've seen other pages (none of which I can currently remember the names of) which divide up "references" and "footnotes." Should I do this, and, if so, how should I do it? Peter ^{talk, or type, or whatever...} 07:22, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

This might help.--^talk 07:41, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Not really, in this case - as I am not really reusing pages that would just double the length of the stuff at the bottom. I was thinking more like some kind of ^[ref-n] and ^[note-n] thing. Peter ^{talk, or type, or whatever...} 07:50, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Ah this was what I actually meant to link. May be more helpful.--^talk 08:06, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

That looks like what I was thinking of, thank you. Is it ok if I use the fancy Roman numerals thing to differentiate them? Peter ^{talk, or type, or whatever...} 08:10, 5 November 2011 (UTC) ED: The Roman numeral stuff wont work. Oh, well... Peter ^{talk, or type, or whatever...} 08:38, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Limits on block lengths

What are they and was our Mediawiki modified to permit changing them wiki side vs server side? 13:34, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Uh, what? -- Nx / talk 13:39, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

What is the maximum block length permitted? Is it set by a variable in the Mediawiki code, as is usual, or in some other place? If some other place, where? 13:46, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

AFAIK the only maximum is a technical one, i.e. what php can interpret as a date. -- Nx / talk 14:00, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Try blocking me for infinite or indefinite. 14:16, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

It worked. -- Nx / talk 17:40, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Is "indefinite" treated as an actual date (circa 2037, IIRC?) by the software, or does it create a special case that will never expire naturally? Blue (is useful) 17:55, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

tl;dr: No, it's a special case, and no, we're not affected by Y2K38.

From mediawikiwiki:Manual:Ipblocks table:

| ipb_expiry           | varbinary(14)    | NO   | MUL |                |                |

ipb_expiry

Expiry time set by the administrator at the time of the block. A standard timestamp or the string 'infinity'

The expiry is stored in the mediawiki timestamp format (YYYYMMDDHHMMSS). Special:Block uses strtotime, which is affected by the Y2K38 bug on 32 bit systems, and the server in Trent's bedroom was 32 bit, but we're on a 64 bit system now. Strtotime probably returned false for dates > 2038 so blocks like that probably didn't work, but they should work now. -- Nx / talk 18:25, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

I apologize for bringing this up. Turns out I could have figured it out on my own. The confusing part was that this morning I tried infinitely blocking Ace, Sterile, and Pi (circlejerkers) on my phone but got an error. Maybe it was sticking in special characters in the "other" field. Thanks for clarifying. 18:41, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

What error did you get? -- Nx / talk 18:50, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Expiry time invalid and I just replicated it. 18:52, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

What did you type? Are you sure you didn't make a typo? -- Nx / talk 18:56, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

No typo I can see. Perhaps someone else can replicate it on an iPhone. 19:10, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

It needs to be lowercase. only "infinity", "infinite" and "indefinite" are recognized. -- Nx / talk 19:12, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Technology is a bitch. :) --★uːʤɱ constructivist 19:34, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Special:Whatlinkshere not updating

It's nothing critical, but for some reason Special:Whatlinkshere has, for the past several days, been reporting over 900 links to my old userpage (User:Radioactive afikomen). When I checked the pages listed, I found almost all of them have a link to my current userpage (User:Stabby the Misanthrope), but not a link to RA. What gives? Are Special pages set to not update to keep the server from chugging? Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 00:44, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

It is probably just caching, especially given the number of things that need doing it has probably been added to the job queue. Give the poor thing sometime. Having the wiki viewable and editable is more important that you vainly looking at how many pages link to your userpage. - π 00:51, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Hahah, caught :) And that's what I figured. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 00:52, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

You probably need to purge those pages, or at least visit them for whatlinkshere to update. -- Nx / talk 18:05, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Actually, neither of those work. You have to edit the page and click save - not a dummy edit, i.e. you don't have to insert a space or anything, just click save without changing anything. This won't create a new revision, but it will update whatlinkshere. I've seen this bug before, though that was with a template transcluding a template, here it's probably happening because those pages have User:Radioactive afikomen/sig, and that's a redirect. -- Nx / talk 18:11, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Oops

There's a spare </div> in the recent changes header. Scream!! (talk) 18:15, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Fixed -- Nx / talk 18:23, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Please overhaul the site for me

My mouse's scroll wheel is broken. Please redesign the entire wiki so I no longer have to scroll up and down pages. Kthnx Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 21:39, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

You could try your keyboard. Also, how broken is your mouse wheel? Can you still click it? That would enable you to scroll- click it and all you'll have to do is move your mouse up or down to scroll.--User:Brxbrx/sig 21:59, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

And, with that, the joke was ruined. Forever. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 22:00, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Joke? -- Nx / talk 22:01, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

You could also try resetting the resolution on your monitor or your browser so that ever page fitted on a single screen. I do accept that this could potentially generate some readability issues.--Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 22:05, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

I was going to suggest what Bob said. Or you could print all the pages you want to read. Ace^{Vote Ace for Mod!} 22:10, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Hm. Printing it out would work. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 22:41, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Human used to do that. Ace^{Vote Ace for Mod!} 22:41, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

I thought he wrote everything out by hand first? Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 22:50, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Na, he used punch cards. Ace^{Vote Ace for Mod!} 22:52, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Help with references

This is the second time I've tried to get a reference inside of the cquote template to work, and failed. This hasn't been an issue before, as far as I can remember, but now I just can't get the ref to work. What am I doing wrong? Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 01:36, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Put the nav temp on the line above, with cqoute on the line below fixed it once. Now^what? 01:40, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

That works. Peter ^{talk, or type, or whatever...} 01:42, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

That's fine for now, but I prefer cquote to always be on top—otherwise the quote is squished between the margin and the navbar, rather than properly centered. I'd also like to know why putting the cquote up top breaks the ref it contains. Either something in our navbars breaks refs, or WikiMedia in general has issues handling refs in templates. One of those possibilities is immediately fixable, the other doesn't inspire much confidence. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 01:47, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

DPL resets the parser. Now^what? 01:51, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, Captain Technobabble. In English, please? Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 01:52, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Techy thing for random article listing messy with reffies. Now^what? 01:55, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. Is this one of those problems with DPL I occasionally hear about? I can never understand much of what Nx says about it, beyond "it's a pile of shit." Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 01:59, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Yes. I'm not a MW dev, but I'd imagine so. Now^what? 02:01, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Archiving

Seeing as the botserver seems to be bust, I've archived the Saloon and TWIGOCP. However, neither new archive shows up in the archive list. Somebody with more wiki-fu than I needs to tweak a template or something. --PsyGremlin말하십시오 12:31, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

No, they're both showing up. Wēāŝēīōīď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 13:26, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

You sure? The last entry on the Barchives on my machine is 134, but I've just created 135. --PsyGremlinParlez! 13:29, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

I can see 135 in Chrome, 134 in IE. Guess it's a browser issue rather than a template thing. There might be a delay? Check again later & it'll probably be visible. ₩€₳$€£ΘĪÐ^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 13:34, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

NB. 134 was also a manual archive rather than a bot one, so I don't think it's anything special the bot does. Щєазєюіδ^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 13:35, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

oh goody, so I didn't break the wiki then. Carry on, nothing to see here. --PsyGremlinSpeak! 13:46, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Purge the page, clear your cache. -- Nx / talk 15:12, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

do we have a list of unsupported html stuff?

So I can know if I'm doing something wrong or if I'm doing pointless. Thanks.--User:Brxbrx/sig 20:23, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Haven't seen anything here about videos. Where does the template {{ev3}} come from?--User:Brxbrx/sig 20:27, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Not everything is standard Mediawiki, much functionality comes from extensions which are not documented at WP, you would need to check up on the MW site for standard extensions. Susan used to document a lot of this stuff, we do miss her. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 20:41, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Commons

Shared repository seems to be down too. File:Essay.svg for example isn't displaying. ^{d hominem} 02:44, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I thought that that was just me. Evidently not. Peter ^{Urist for Mod!}(MW) 02:46, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

should be fixed keep me updated on other issues. Tmtoulouse (talk) 06:30, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

See Forum:Wikimedia Commons. There's discussion about disabling use of Commons images permanently (if such a thing can be arranged). ωεαşεζøίɗ^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 11:22, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

This page was tweaked well badly

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Natural_horsemanship ^{— Unsigned, by: Techmichelle / talk / contribs}

What do you mean? Peter^{Quasniki 2012!} 02:59, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

It was tweaked well badly. How much more obvious could she be? Blue (pester) 03:36, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Red exclamations

I'm not seeing the red marks for unpatrolled edits. Are they still working? Steven Kavanagh (talk) 22:42, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

They're working for me. Do you have "Hide patrolled edits" enabled? duhhh im a dumb (ʞlɐʇ) ɹǝɯɯɐHʍoƆ 22:44, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Works for me as well, there were a few issues last week but I think that was too many rather than too few. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 23:20, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Fossil record slowness

Is there like a massive script in the fossil record of most pages? It's always sooooo slow to load and then let you do something, but then when you disable JavaScript, it works much faster. sterile^talk 05:56, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

Search

The search function isn't working, other than for exact title matches. ωεαşεζøίɗ^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 22:21, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Search is still broken. This is kind of a big deal. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 08:01, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Bump. Wèàšèìòìď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 21:05, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

You should send Trent an email. -- Nx / talk 21:07, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

I didn't get round to it, but this seems to have been fixed now anyway. Thanks to whoever did it for whatever you did. Wēāŝēīōīď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 00:43, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

It's broken again. Peter ^{Monomorium antarcticum} 23:37, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

/div

There's a spare </div> below the Holydaze in RC. It doesn't seem to be from the CNY template. Ŵêâŝêîôîď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 07:39, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Evowiki interwiki links

Links in the style [[evowiki:Jurassic]] aren't working properly. They link to evowiki.org alright (try: evowiki:Jurassic), but they end up being redirected to the main page of the wiki at evolutionwiki.org. Can that be fixed? Peter^{Quasniki 2012!} 23:27, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Bump. It would be helpful if this worked. Peter ^{Monomorium antarcticum} 06:27, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

should be fixed. Tmtoulouse (talk) 06:57, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Seems to be - thank you for that. Peter ^{Monomorium antarcticum} 07:18, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

External links

Where did those little pointy arrows go? Is this a deliberate change? Wěǎšěǐǒǐď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 19:23, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I would like to know that too.--ZooGuard (talk) 19:45, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Fixed. Tmtoulouse (talk) 05:06, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

User rights

http://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=rights&user=&page=User%3AIpatrol&year=&month=-1&tagfilter= says I'm a sysop and http://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3AActiveUsers&limit=1&username=Ipatrol says I have no rights at all, but my prefs list Autoconfirmed users, Eligible users, Users. Can someone fix this problem?--Ipatrol (talk) 16:14, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

i gave you auto and sys back. not sure what happened to em--il'Dictator Mikal 16:34, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Everyone was de-sysoped serverside in the May HCM I believe - it doesn't show up in the logs. Peter ^{Monomorium antarcticum} 18:36, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Page histories

So I was going through page histories, and I noticed that some of my edits are attributed to "Tyrannis for now", which AD briefly renamed me. Not so much a problem as just moderately irritating and confusing. Thanks. Тy^YAUA 02:57, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

And what would you like done about it? Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 09:54, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Server voodoo, presumably. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 10:00, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

I don't know what could be done server-side to fix that. Then again, I'm not the techincal wizard here. The Symphony of Punk ^{Can't sleep, clowns will eat me!} 10:20, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks anyway though :} Тy^No 13:43, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Bible generator template

I can never remember the code, so I was trying to make a template to do it for me, with the code:

<bible book="{{{1|Genesis}}}" chapter={{{2|1}}} verse1={{{3|1}}} verse2={{{4|}}}/>

But when I hit either 'Save page' or 'Show preview' it just sends me to a blank page. Is it even possible to make a template for this? Peter ^{Monomorium antarcticum} 03:34, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Spammers

Is there a way we could implement better spam filters around this place? I gotta say that the spambots have gotten out of control around here lately. The Symphony of Punk ^{Can't sleep, clowns will eat me!} 13:18, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Edit conflicts

Has anyone else noticed weird edit conflict failures on talk pages where one person's changes are being overwritten when another updates? Such as [1] and [2]? -- Seth Peck (talk) 18:30, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes, happens fairly often. Тy^YAUA 18:31, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

I've only noticed it today where it doesn't prompt me to resolve the conflict. -- Seth Peck (talk) 19:36, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Bot flag

Can somebody with the superpowers please give this account a bot flag? I've gotten fed up with forgetting to de-bot myself when making a comment. Thanks! Pizzabot (talk) 07:35, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Abuse filter: images

Pleas add a rule banning BoNs from adding images with certain words in the name (e.g. "anus"). Another possibility is to prevent adding the image tag with sizes larger than, let's say, 400.--ZooGuard (talk) 16:43, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Trent apparently did something after I posted that, but I can't see if it's related.--ZooGuard (talk) 16:57, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes, something to this effect has been implemented. Blue (is useful) 20:55, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Certain things aren't appearing in recent changes

Like, user creation logs. Also, a BoN edited my talk page but that didn't show up on recent changes until I replied to him. I assume this is part of some sort of anti-vandal/troll measure?--"Shut up, Brx." 17:35, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Never mind, please ignore that, I'm just dumb--"Shut up, Brx." 17:38, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Incompetent idiots

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Special:AbuseLog?title=Special%3AAbuseLog&wpSearchFilter=16 217.112.128.247 (talk) 16:57, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Mmmh hmm. ArchieGoodwin (talk) 17:00, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Filter #16

Is catching quite a few legit edits by BoNs. Тy^Yarrr 14:53, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Is now disabled. Blue (pester) 18:57, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

I look forward to the goatse. P-Foster Talk "The existing superstructure has handed out crumbs. We don’t want crumbs; we want the whole loaf now.” --Ras Frank I 18:59, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Can be reenabled in seconds if needed. Tmtoulouse (talk) 19:01, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Provided there's someone around to do it, yes. Тy^Yes? 19:15, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Another special thing to remove from watchlist (and recent changes?)

Is there a way to add "hide the block log" from WL/RC? Just to see what is actually happening to pages on the wiki once one has enjoyed whoever the fuck is using block comments to have a conversation? ħuman 00:30, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Used Enhanced Recent Changes. And I agree that joke blocks are rather annoying, making discussions difficult to follow, among other things.--"Shut up, Brx." 02:57, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

I want to modify my watchlist. I rarely use RC, as I find it repetitive. Thanks for trying, though. ħuman 03:56, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

I tried the other day to make a js thing to screen out the block log from the watchlist, but it didn't work. You may have to resort to going through it namespace by namespace, or you could just not watch people's talk pages. Peter ^{tanquam ex ungue leonem} 03:59, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

The namespace idea is a moderately good one, I suppose. I see the block log bits because their talk pages are on my watchlist? Interesting. Thanks for trying to help, I appreciate it. ħuman 02:22, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Renaming and contributions

I was renamed, but now none of my edits are listed in Special:Contributions under my current name. They're still listed under the old one, for some reason. Could you fix this please? Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 07:29, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

The same thing has happened to TOP now too. It's the third renaming that seems to do it. Peter ^{tanquam ex ungue leonem} 02:09, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

I just lost ~3000, meh. Nav popups display the correct number. Тy^eh? 02:24, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for fixing, Trent! Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 23:14, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Ahem. please? Тy^rannis 13:18, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Which account were edits stuck on for you Ty? Tmtoulouse (talk) 14:49, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Tyrannis for now. Тy^Talk 14:54, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Whiny little bastards! Did yo' mamma say "go pick a new name?" NO! But now it's "I want to by Ty" this, and "Stabby is my better name" that. :-) Godot Tout s'acheve par commencer un autre voyage 15:06, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Trent! Тy^{Serious Business Guy} 17:13, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Nice work, Trent. ħuman 02:13, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Carrying on conversations in block comments

I'll use the Nutty Roux persona's predilection for being an asshole as a cover for expressing my own genuine curiosity why the use of block comments to carry on chit chatty conversations nobody but the conversants give a fuck about is so rampant. It's gotten to the level of sometimes making it hard to look at recent changes for the sheer volume of mindless shit getting spammed by a few of you and it's nearly always something I wish could be hidden. It would be fine if it was limited to cheeky comments here and there but some of you all just go on and on and on with stuff you should just be IMing each other. It's the RW equivalent of talking loudly on your cellphone while on line at the market. I can only imagine what a stranger coming to visit might think. Trent, can you make it so that all blocks get marked as bot edits unless a box gets checked indicating they're "real"? Is that even possible? 03:48, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

If you want i can cut it down, I'm just to lazy usually to go to the talk pages. Plus with liquid thread it isn't like there's much of a difference--il'Dictator Mikal 03:50, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

You could just remove the block log from the page, like human wanted to - I worked out how to do that finally. Peter ^{tanquam ex ungue leonem} 03:53, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

How?!?!?! If I want to see the block log, I'll um, go look at the block log... ħuman 02:25, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Looks like the last function here. Тy^{communications wire} 02:30, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Ty is correct. I finally got the js code working - the following code in your vector/monobook.js should scour the block log from your watchlist (and can be easily modified for RC):

Code

function blocklog(){ if (wgCanonicalSpecialPageName == "Watchlist"){ var wlist = getElementsByClassName(document.getElementById('bodyContent'),"ul","special"); var x; for (x=0;x<wlist.length;++x){ var parent = wlist[x]; var list = parent.getElementsByTagName("li"); var i; for (i=list.length-1;i>=0;i=i-1) { var bads=list[i].getElementsByTagName("a"); var j=0; for (j=0;j<bads.length;++j) { if (bads[j].getAttribute("href")=="/wiki/Special:Log/block" && bads[j].childNodes.length > 0) { parent.removeChild(list[i]); } } } } } } addOnloadHook(blocklog);

It also has the side affect of removing all entries where the person has included the link in their edit comment, but I don't think that will be a major problem. Anyway, if it's a problem for everyone I'll stop talking to Mikal so much using blocks, though as has been mentioned LQT is just as bad (though you can filter that out with the namespace thing). Peter ^{tanquam ex ungue leonem} 02:53, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! What's the syntax to add comments to the monobook.js file? ħuman 03:59, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Single line javascript comments are of the form "<code> // <comment>". Multiline comments are like "/* ... */". Peter ^{tanquam ex ungue leonem} 04:25, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you again. ħuman 04:33, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

The problem with that is then you have to go out of your way to see the block log for real blocks.--il'Dictator Mikal 03:55, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

What real ones? These? Peter ^{tanquam ex ungue leonem} 03:57, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Nutty Roux, I have an idea for what you personally can do to reduce the lackadaisical overuse of blocking: cease contributing to it yourself. ListenerX^TalkerX 03:58, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

^I saw others doing it which is why I started doing it actually. ^^Whatever it is Nutty thinks is real i would assume. --il'Dictator Mikal 03:59, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

ListenerX, I have an idea for what you personally can do when you feel the urge to say something as ridiculous as this solely for the sake of being a contrarian, as usual: don't. I issue a few bullying and harassing blocks a week tops. 04:02, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

(EC) Frivolous block wars are a long-standing RationalWiki tradition; a reaction to the banhammer being wielded so ruthlessly at Conservapedia.

I issue a few bullying and harassing blocks... Which, many would say, are more of a problem than frivolous block wars. ListenerX^TalkerX 04:06, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

They very well might. What's that got to do with recent changes clogged up with conversations? Block wars are so markedly different than chit chatting in block messages that I wonder if you're being serious. Anyhow, if people are going to get defensive and make me a target I'll just use my watchlist. Wutevs. 04:09, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Because the harassing blocks do clog up Recent Changes at times, especially when those making them wheel-war over them. Furthermore, the messages attached to those blocks tend to have even less content in them than these frivolous IM-style exchanges (half of them are variations on "User X is a tw**"). ListenerX^TalkerX 04:30, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Sigh. What are you doing? There's no honest way to compare the volume of blocks in what you call "wheel wars" with the chit chat. I'm acutely sensitive to being a buzz kill here.You al obviously don't need permission from some dick on the Internet to do whatever you want. Like I said, I'll just use my watch list when RC gets clogged. If anyone else cares to actually add something to this discussion rather than make a silly attempt to flip it, that's great. If not, I'll still just use my watchlist when RC gets clogged. CoopMe 04:52, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

LX, shut up, you are being a less than useless contrarian. Slutty, the WL doesn't help much, hence my above request. Ideally, people would just slow down and stop using "block this user" to carry on a "conversation". In this less than ideal world, it would be nice to be able to ignore them. Your idea of marking blocks as bot edits by default might be a very good solution. ħuman 02:29, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

As long as if Maratrean returns, we (or, uh, I mean the "critters") can have another Maratrean "religion" menagerie block war. (and PS, I do understand Nutty's frustration). sterile^{evolutionist story telling} 02:41, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

LX, shut up, you are being a less than useless contrarian. Pardon me for suggesting that someone should cease making harassing blocks (which breach the Community Standards) before whining about non-harassing joke blocks (which do not). ListenerX^TalkerX 22:00, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Lol, the "standards" and "harassing blocks". This is about people using the block log to carry on conversations, which I would mostly prefer to ignore. ħuman 02:25, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Add this to your monobook.js and you won't have to ignore anything. It changed my life. 02:48, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Stray div in holydaze template

There's a stray </div> in the holydaze displayed on the watchlist. I tried tracing through the horrors of the holydaze templates and went "what the shit" and gave up. Anyone feeling sufficiently intrepid to fix the breakage? - David Gerard (talk) 19:25, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Maybe if you explain what intrepid means ;) --"Shut up, Brx." 19:28, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Bizarre side-effect of it stacking two on top of each other by the looks of it. I'll see if there's anything that can be done to remedy it. ^theist 19:34, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

No, it was an unclosed <font> tag in the St George's Day one. Fixed now. Wėąṣėḷőįď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 20:26, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

I found the old technical support page on it. Gorram unclosed tags. ^theist 20:28, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Holydaze is one of our crowning achievements. Thanks for fixing it! ħuman 02:27, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Search default

Before this goes into the archive at the Saloon Bar, is there any one who can address this issue? sterile^{evolutionist story telling} 05:11, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

It's gone. What was the issue? ħuman 02:27, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

This issue larron^{sicut fur in nocte} 05:25, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

button to edit only section 0

where to find it in the default template? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 15:25, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Go to prefereneces → Gadgets → Editing gadgets → 'Add an [edit] link for the lead section of a page' and that should do it for you. Peter ^{tanquam ex ungue leonem} 21:34, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

apparently I tried that and the Vector Skin doesn't have it (only MonoBook and Modern has such a button). Should that be a problem? [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 19:31, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

I use vector and it works fine. Тyrannis^{An iron, but caring, fist} 20:19, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

I resetted the settings and tried to do that again and it still doesn't work. Lemme know what other info do I need to provide. [[User:K61824|]][[User_talk:K61824|]] 17:46, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

De-LQTing my talkpage

So here's an interesting situation: I love LQT, but since it's no longer being supported by this Wiki (as a result of Nx's getting the boot from the server), I think a good course of action would be to drop it. The problem is that I have no idea how to do so without losing a ton fo shit from my talkpage. Any ideas on how to de-LQT my talkpage would be welcome. The Symphony of Punk ^{Can't sleep, clowns will eat me!} 11:06, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

This and then this is the easiest way—removing the tag doesn't delete the pages, they're still there somwewhere. You can also simply move your talkpage off to a subpage and make a new one, although that splits the history. Peter ^{with added ‼Science‼} 19:54, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Once upon a time I was working on a script to export LiquidThreads to wikicode... I may need to do that, I'm in a similar situation. If I do it for me, feel free to ask me to do it for you or anyone else. Blue (is useful) 20:33, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

What do we gain from scrapping it? Is it actually causing or likely to cause problems with site maintenance? Wëäŝëïöïď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 20:36, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Well, if we end up mothballing it, then we'd basically lose a ton of talk if we didn't convert the format for archives. Blue (pester) 03:20, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

You should definitely finish your LQT-to-Wikitext script; without something like that we are essentially locked in to the LQT extension. ListenerX^TalkerX 03:35, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

What is this bullshit? LQT may have been abandoned, but it still works, and it's used by many wikimedia sites, including mediawiki.org, so it's still going to be maintained. I'd be more worried about all the extensions I wrote for RW. And at least LQT doesn't have a huge security hole like another extension that's been abandoned by its original developers, yet you love to use so much. Here, try it:

Click me

EmbedVideo received the bad id "stuff"><script lang="text/javascript">document.getElementById("ohai").onclick=function(){ alert("O hai"); }</script><span style="display:none;">" for the service "youtube".

Lx, why don't you go tell all the forums out there that they're locked in and should switch to storing all their comments in a flat text blob too. Obviously, that's the best way to do it. 91.137.155.2 (talk) 06:12, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

This is all just FUD, I haven't seen anyone back up their claims of LQT being unmaintained or a risk, yet here's EmbedVideo, an extension that wasn't even compatible with MW 1.16 when we upgraded, and contains a massive security hole; and then there's DPL, a huge, unmaintainable mess that can lock up the database and kill the wiki. LQT is the least of your problems. 91.137.155.2 (talk) 06:43, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

If by some chance Goonie is wrong about your not being around to support LQT, maybe the idea needs reconsideration. ListenerX^TalkerX 07:01, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Did you just completely ignore what he said? Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 08:03, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I ignored what he said, seeing as how I do not endorse the presence of either of the other extensions. ListenerX^TalkerX 04:07, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

1. You seem to have missed the point about LQT being installed on several wikimedia wikis, and therefore receiving some basic support (hell, they even reviewed and committed my patches, finally).
2. I don't see anyone complaining, or, heavens forbid, doing something about DPL, for example. 91.137.155.2 (talk) 22:33, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Well, a while back, we were removing this "dpl" from the category navigation templates (although I think it was at yours and Armondikov's behest). Also, I don't suppose you've found a way to not have dpl but at the same time have customized bullet points (such as tiny crucifixes for the Christianity template). And what does dpl mean, anyways? I figure the dp is double penetration, but what's the l doing there?--"Shut up, Brx." 01:07, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Dynamic page link. - π 01:45, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

It's still there on those templates, just hidden. Peter ^{with added ‼Science‼} 01:48, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Dynamic page list. It allows you to create a list of pages that is dynamic, because it automatically updates when pages that meet the selection criteria are added or removed. It's been abstracted away into {{Randomarticles}} so it can be replaced easily, but there's no replacement. Custom bullet points are not possible with inline css, because mediawiki strips away css url references (otherwise anyone could use them to display any image on the internet to you, which is a security risk), but they can be added to one of the css files. 91.137.155.2 (talk) 04:55, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Meh, having thought this over once I sobered up, I've decided to keep LQT on my talkpage after all. The fact that so many people here bitch about how much they hate it makes it all the more appealing to me. The Symphony of Punk ^{Can't sleep, clowns will eat me!} 12:37, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

edit break

What are the problems LQT is currently causing or may cause, exactly? I think we should lay these out for all to see.--"Shut up, Brx." 18:51, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Our version of LQT has "forked" from the main release, in general the issue is too many custom extensions or no longer supported extensions that prevent us from easily updating mediawiki. LQT isn't the main culprit. Tmtoulouse (talk) 18:55, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

So there aren't currently any problems?--"Shut up, Brx." 18:56, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Not really, other than the bellyachers and whiners who are resistant to any change of the wiki unless they proposed/endorsed/implemented it. - π 01:13, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

It's not a fork, it's a couple patches, and some of them have since been committed upstream. 91.137.155.2 (talk) 22:33, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Why is this such a big deal? --Revolverman (talk) 05:09, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

See Pi's post above--"Shut up, Brx." 05:21, 20 May 2012 (UTC)