Difference between revisions of "User talk:Nx"

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(S-T-O-P C-E-N-S-O-R-I-N-G M-E!!!!!!!!!: new section)
m (Reverted edits by (Talk) to last version by Rodlen)
Line 112: Line 112:
:::: ok then :-) i though the guy edited my post [[User:Waronstupidity|Waronstupidity]] ([[User talk:Waronstupidity|talk]]) 23:55, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
:::: ok then :-) i though the guy edited my post [[User:Waronstupidity|Waronstupidity]] ([[User talk:Waronstupidity|talk]]) 23:55, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
::::: If you look at the edit comment, you'll see that they edited a different section (although that can be forged, but it wasn't in this case). --&nbsp;[[User:Nx|<span style="color:teal">'''''Nx'''''</span>]]&nbsp;/&nbsp;[[User talk:Nx|''talk'']] 23:58, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
::::: If you look at the edit comment, you'll see that they edited a different section (although that can be forged, but it wasn't in this case). --&nbsp;[[User:Nx|<span style="color:teal">'''''Nx'''''</span>]]&nbsp;/&nbsp;[[User talk:Nx|''talk'']] 23:58, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
== S-T-O-P C-E-N-S-O-R-I-N-G M-E!!!!!!!!! ==
dude, i think i have one of those old aol free trial cds around, don't make me use it to tear up this site, k?

Revision as of 01:13, 18 April 2010

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15

automatic log of Mei

Hello Nx. I made a way of automating Cunning Log without using evil, which is here. It sort of works but there is a big space which makes the page look bad. I don't know where it comes from, but I'm hoping there is a simple explanation. Mei (talk) 22:21, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

I also thought I should check with you that #ifexist does not hurt the server very much. It checks 62 pages at the moment, and I will be using the Automation template once for each month. Mei (talk) 22:21, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
Ifexist is not as bad as dpl, but it's still expensive. There's a limit of 99 ifexist calls per page - you're using 31*2 = 62, plus an ifexist on every page (for the talk page link), so that means you could theoretically reach the limit, if you post more than 37 logs in a month -- Nx / talk 22:44, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
OK here is what I'm thinking.
  1. I'll get rid of the talklink #ifexist immediately. It's pretty unimportant and if it slows things down it just has to go.
  2. Nesting the #ifexists so that it doesn't check for 150410B unless it already found 150410. This is a big drop.
  3. Calling the posts manually in the monthly archives. This means that the Automation template would only be used on the 'front page', to update things automatically.
This means there is only one page that uses lots of #ifexists. It also seriously cuts down the number used - from 62 to 31. The only problem is it will still go up to 62 when I have a full month of updates on the front page. I think it would be possibly to nest the #ifexist functions so that it uses about 17 at minimum (mainly counting B updates). This would be done by starting in the middle of the month, and homing in on the latest update by progressively halving what is left. I think if I knew where the latest update was, it would seriously cut the number of #ifexists needed to trigger the rest of the posts. I only have a vague idea of how this works logically, and even less idea of how it would work in wikicode. (I'm not asking you to write this insane halving code, I'm just kind of thinking out loud). Even if I could do that, though, it would still mean 36 #ifexists on the final day of the month - five to find the latest update and 31 for the B updates.

tl;dr version - The B updates make it impossible to get the potential number of #ifexists down further than about 30, and I am probably stuck with a range of 31-62 anyway. What do you think of this with regards to the server? Mei (talk) 22:34, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
It'll probably be fine, it's not nearly as slow as some of our monster pages (WIGO:CP, Saloon bar etc.). You don't have to worry that obsessively about performance, as long as you're under 99 it's okay. The point isn't that you should spare the poor server from having to do its job, the point is that you don't want people waiting too long for the page to load, or they won't read it. You could create a sandbox to stress test it with the maximum number of updates, then see how fast it is.
For the archives, where the result is always the same, I recommend using subst. You can create a second automation template, put {{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>#ifexist:...}} in it instead of the normal ifexists (this will not work when transcluded unfortunately, that's why you need a second template - this is fixed in MW 1.16, with the introduction of safesubst), then just subst it on the archive page. That should make archiving easier (if you need help with that, look at this, just replace safesubst with subst) -- Nx / talk 07:31, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Actually, dead branches were still parsed in the version of Parserfunctions we had, so nesting ifexists had no effect. I've installed a newer version so now it should be better. -- Nx / talk 15:24, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Thanks Nx. That subst idea is very clever, but I will probably just type out the templates I want, since it would be pretty much the same amount of effort. I was afraid of nesting not working, and I'm glad it does now. :) Mei (talk) 02:30, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Block whining

So why not uncheck those buttons by default? I always do it manually, but I bet most people don't bother when blocking for 3 seconds. Fix the software rather than sending one random intercom message most people will never see or remember? ħumanUser talk:Human 14:32, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Ok. -- Nx / talk 14:37, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
Cool, thanks. I've been meaning to ask for that to be fixed for a while. ħumanUser talk:Human 14:47, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

You Goddamn fucking nazi

Christ I am sick of your fucking bullshit you fucking jesus-creeping clownshoes. You goddamn fucking Nazi. What did I fuck up? And you really think posting such condescending garbage, regardless of transgression, on my talk page gives you an ounce of creedence? Fucking moron. Acei9 08:14, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh shit I see! An "e" instead of an "o"! OH FUCK! You freak. Acei9 08:18, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
You mean other than the fact he had to go rewrite the vote tables, yet again? - π 08:31, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Cheers for fixing the broken WIGO stuff. I'm pretty ignorant of wiki stuff, but is there no way of automating the numbering? Seems it index problems are regular enough, and even a simple system is prone to error without automation. ConcernedresidentAsk me about your mother 22:47, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
There's a gadget that puts WIGO numbers into the "Wigo" section of the box below. Tell 'em,Nx. yummy Toast&  honey(or marmalade) 22:52, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
There is also a parser hook as well. When editing WIGO there is a button in the box above you can click on that will add the next poll. - π 22:56, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, I hadn't noticed those before. ConcernedresidentAsk me about your mother 23:00, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Nxbot and unsigned

While the bot is doing good work, is there a way it can operate without updating the forum "recent edit" date? It sort of messed up the box on the saloon bar by editing most of them. Kind of like how pibot doesn't give us orange boxes when it archives our talk pages? Thanks. ħumanUser talk:Human 21:36, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't think it's possible. It looks like dpl can exclude minor edits but not bot edits. I'll see if I can add that. -- Nx / talk 21:42, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Thanks! ħumanUser talk:Human 22:12, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I am adding this section without clicking the "add section" tab

I would like to say that I have changed my mind, and have decided that being a dick to users who are new here is both uncalled for and not funny. So don't do it, it does not make you appear clever or witty in any way. Also, I hope this does not edit conflict you, because incoveniencing you is the last thing I want to do.--The Emperor Kneel before Zod! 02:51, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Before everyone fights over this, I would like to say that this is not actually worth fighting over. Mei (talk) 03:22, 16 April 2010 (UTC)


Although I stand by my intial point I apologise for such vitriol. Acei9 04:36, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

What cha doing?

Are you fixing the AOTW kludge? - π 11:47, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes, but not the comments. See my reply in a minute on Talk:AOTW -- Nx / talk 11:51, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Okay. - π 11:52, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Do you often laugh at poll ids? - π 12:19, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
slider-input-slidersetaotw-slider-Moral_panic (ok this isn't a poll id, it's the id of the inputbox, but still) -- Nx / talk 12:21, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Well it doesn't roll of the tongue like wigo (or even wige) that is for sure. - π 12:24, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Vote link vs vote buttons

Please use a button for the vote link (at least) in the section of checkboxes when you are done (As of now it looks like a link buried in a bunch of other links). Not exactly urgent however. K61824ZOYG I edit like Ken! 13:31, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

what did he say ?

what did the troll say ? you deleted the revision so i cant see what he did. Waronstupidity (talk) 23:45, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Maybe one day when if you become bureaucrat you will find out. -- Nx / talk 23:50, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
dude come on it was related to me... i want to know what he said :-( Waronstupidity (talk) 23:51, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
It wasn't related to you. -- Nx / talk 23:53, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
ok then :-) i though the guy edited my post Waronstupidity (talk) 23:55, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
If you look at the edit comment, you'll see that they edited a different section (although that can be forged, but it wasn't in this case). -- Nx / talk 23:58, 17 April 2010 (UTC)