This page uses content from Wikipedia and is licensed under CC BY-SA.

Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)

 Policy Technical Proposals Idea lab 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.

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.
Font size changed unexpectedly?
You may have accidentally changed the font size on your browser for a particular website by pressing a shortcut key or scrollwheel without realising it. Try resetting the zoom with Ctrl+0 (typing the digit zero while holding down the control key) or adjusting the zoom with Ctrl++ or Ctrl+-. Alternatively, look for the View option on your browser's menu and reset it to 100%.
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 bug 1864. There is an accesskey property on it (default to accesskey="f" in English), and for logged in users there is a gadget available in your 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.
Numbers listed in parentheses in the "Recent changes" section, on history pages and in your watchlist are the number of added or removed bytes.
For server or network status, please see Wikimedia Metrics.
« Archives, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172


Should this edit have happened?

I'm unsure why this edit was possible. The article should have been fully protected. Is it server synchronisation lag, or a bug? Interference with PC1?

Samsara 11:16, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

You fully protected and your next edit was to change that to pending changes. Doesn't that "overwrite" the full protection? CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 11:49, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
@CambridgeBayWeather: Both forms of protection were configured in one step, I did not enter the menu twice. In my experience up to this point, PC can run concurrently with hard protections, it simply has no effect and kicks in again eventually if its duration is longer than that of the hard protection. This is also the only way to avoid having this other bug (untriaged for a year now!) Samsara 18:43, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
I think this is a bug, Pending Changes should not affect page protection, which allows it to be used to extend protection, or a page with PC to have its protection level increased temporarily. Danski454 (talk) 17:02, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Is it a bug, really? Pending changes should only be configured on an article that is allowing edits by editors below the level of administrator, and if PC is being configured, then it would logically drop the full protection. There is no value to PC if the article is fully protected. Perhaps the bigger question is why anyone would enable PC when fully protecting an article. Risker (talk) 18:51, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Using pending changes and another level of protection (usually semi-protection) allows having some level of protection after the full/semi protection expires, as it basically allows setting multiple protections of different durations. Galobtter (pingó mió) 18:54, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
In any case, the full protection was immediately lifted within the same minute after application, and dropped to Extended Confirmed protection; the user who made the edit is at the EC level, and edited several minutes after the EC protection was applied. The article was fully protected for less than a minute, and there is an edit summary when dropping to EC that indicates it was an intentional decision. Nothing here indicates that there's a bug. Risker (talk) 18:58, 9 March 2019 (UTC) Sorry, I misread the protection log and saw 11:40 as 11:04. Mea culpa. Risker (talk) 19:27, 9 March 2019 (UTC)


  • A page with both FP and PC1 should not be editable (see Wikipedia:Sandbox2 for an example) - but it could be buggy under just the wrong timing or conditions - does not appear to be happening now, and this is hard to replicate. — xaosflux Talk 19:03, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Timeline:
  • 110431 - Edit Protection Set to admin
  • 110431 - Pending changes set to autoconfirmed
  • 110809 - The suspect edit took place, appears to violoate the edit protection
@Risker: I'm not seeing the "full protection was immediately lifted within the same minute" - what am I missing? — xaosflux Talk 19:03, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Mea culpa, I misread the protection log. The change from full protection to EC protection was at 11:40, not 11:04. Risker (talk) 19:27, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

So the answer seems to be, nobody really knows, it just occasionally happens, is not reproducible, and will in all likelihood never get fixed. Samsara 00:04, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

@Samsara: Well, issues that are not reproducible are not easy to fix. It'll get fixed eventually when it's more fully understood, possibly when investigating other issues, as currently the details are hazy and the issue relatively harmless. I can see this old issue from phab T4737 where something like that was reported but couldn't be reproduced, so had to be closed as invalid. If this is reported (as is), it's similar scenario that would play out. FWIW, when you first posted this message I visited the page and it was quite fully protected and so it was in ?action=info. – Ammarpad (talk) 06:39, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

It just happened again: Googol. Unprotection is in the log, but not taking effect. IP reporting to not be able to edit, action=info also reports it as protected. I'm not going to fix it now so that people can poke at it in its current state if they wish. I'm starting to think that this is a recent bug and probably reproducible. Specifically, I suspect that simultaneous configuration of pending changes and page protection no longer works reliably. When pending changes is changed, any changes to page protection done at the same time seem to generate a log entry and do nothing else.

Reporting this and will add link here shortly. Samsara 10:45, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Fabricator link: [phabricator.wikimedia.org]

Samsara 10:49, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Secondary ToC template

How do I create a secondary Template:Toc in the article Betty Boop? I'm trying to place this template in the "Filmography" section. I want the years to appear within this secondary Toc, but not appear in the primary Toc shown at the top of the page. Mitchumch (talk) 22:53, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Please ignore request. I've split the article. Mitchumch (talk) 04:26, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Fixing an edit in mobile

I have a question about the mobile view because some things just seem so strange ... The scenario could hardly be more basic: I check my watchlist, I notice that somebody has made an edit (or left a comment) and I want to fix a mistake in that edit (or respond to the comment). Perhaps I'm missing something but as best as I can tell there's no way to do that without doing a separate search for the page. Current workflow:

  1. Click on the edit. This gets me to the diff view. So far, so good: [en.m.wikipedia.org]
  2. There's no link to jump in and edit directly. But now it gets tricky. If I click on the title of the page that was edited, this doesn't take me to the page. Instead, it leads me to the current version (?oldid=...). E.g., in my example, to [en.m.wikipedia.org].
  3. This oldid view has an edit button (i.e., that pen icon), and all of the sections have edit buttons (unlike in desktop view). So I thought I'd give these a try.
  4. However, if you click on any of these icons, you just get to the source view, prompting you to leave the edit interface again.
  5. You're now back to the ?oldid=... view. But there's simply no link anywhere that lets you navigate to a live version of the page where you could edit.

How are you supposed to edit the page without having to manually search for it? Am I missing something? Best, — Pajz (talk) 23:39, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Pajz, I have been able to reproduce the issue and I agree that it is problematic. If you'd like, you can create a task on Phabricator by following the instructions at mw:How to report a bug. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 01:46, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
It's complicated and not logical but after step 1 and 2 you can click "Previous revision" and then "Latest revision". PrimeHunter (talk) 02:15, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the pointer to the Phabricator tasks, and thanks for the helpul work-around, PrimeHunter, I'll do that (if, for whatever reason, I feel a desire to make further edits using the mobile interface ...). — Pajz (talk) 19:53, 15 March 2019 (UTC) (Not sure what the process is on this page but as far as I'm concerned this thread can be archived.)

Ephemeral spurious CAPTCHA on Alice Eagly

Hi, just want to report that when I edited Alice Eagly diff here the article was in some kind of ephemeral state where any edit, no matter how trivial, would cause the "You have added external links" CAPTCHA to come up. The CAPTCHA would come up even if I edited the whole article and not just a section. Another piece of information which may be significant is that I often block Javascript. After making that edit, the problem disappeared. 192.118.27.253 (talk) 08:01, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

If on base page template?

Howdy all. So I have a template that is being called in multiple template's documnetations. I would like to use it to add the parent template to a tracking category. So for example if I add the template to {{foo/doc}} it would place {{foo}} in the category but NOT {{foo/doc}}. I'm looking for a function/template that does this. Isn't there some sort of "if on base page" function? Any help is greatly appreciated! Please {{ping|zackmann08}}. --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 22:10, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

@Zackmann08: Please see WP:Magic. You can use {{BASEPAGENAME}} to get the result you would like. 2405:204:130C:AF29:C8F:A00F:42DA:D56B (talk) 22:35, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
No that isn't what I'm looking for... I don't need the base page's name... I need to know whether or not I am on the basepage... --Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 22:38, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
{{Sandbox other}} or maybe {{When on basepage}}.--Gonnym (talk) 22:46, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
Have a look at a template /doc page that was created recently by using the [create] link upper right of the green doc box. For example, the last one that I created is Template:WikiProject Sanitation/doc which includes:
<includeonly>{{sandbox other||
<!-- Categories below this line, please; interwikis at Wikidata -->

}}</includeonly>
This came from Template:Documentation/preload. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:45, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
Redrose64 & Gonnym thanks!!!

Green watchlist bullets do not turn blue

Today is Thursday. And now when I visit a link from my watchlist, and then go back to the watchlist, the green bullet stays green instead of turning blue. This problem occurs even for deleted redlinked pages. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 23:36, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Wow, you just beat me here by like 3 minutes. I've noticed this a couple times today, but in both cases, my watchlist had green bullets for articles in which I had made the most recent edit. If I actually go back to the article, the bullet will go back to blue. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 23:40, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
(Well, now that I say that, a couple of them are now insisting on staying green, even though some have gone back to blue, so I dunno). –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 23:46, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
They change to greyish cyan (specifically,      #638c9c) for me. But then I use MonoBook skin. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:56, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
I've been having this problem on other wikis too, including en.wiktionary and en.wikivoyage. —Granger (talk · contribs) 00:54, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
They look OK to me in monobook and in vector. Do you have "Use non-JavaScript interface" set in your prefs? — xaosflux Talk 01:24, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
(e/c) GeoffreyT2000, there have been some changes in the watchlist logic this week. Can it be that they work, but are not updated as quickly as you are used to ? —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 13:48, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

I'm a monobook user and have "unseen changes" set as a filter and "expand watchlist to show all changes" set in preferences. Until recently, if I viewed a change and returned to the watchlist, that change would no longer be showing. Now the item remains stuck in the watchlist. This would seem to be the same problem as above. I think they might clear on browser restart, but I'm not sure on that point – I'll try that in a moment and report.SpinningSpark 13:13, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

I'm finding that on all the WMF wikis where I'm active, pages are only inconsistently marked as read after I look at the changes. I'm pretty sure this problem started less than 48 hours ago. It's really frustrating and makes my watchlist hard to use. —Granger (talk · contribs) 14:22, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

@TheDJ: If this is a timing issue, then it is persistent for an extraordinarily long time. Yesterday, I had items in my watchlist that hadn't cleared after several hours. I eventually dealt with it by "mark all pages visited" nuclear option. There does seem to be some inconsistency - I was looking at the possibility that it was connected with the number of unseen edits on an individual page or whether one viewed the page or the diff, but for the last couple of hours it been somewhat better behaved and I didn't get anywhere with that. SpinningSpark 14:41, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

I now think the way it works is this: if there are multiple unseen edits on a page and the one you look at is not the first one made, then that edit will get stuck on your watchlist, even if you then go back and view the first one, which will also stay stuck. Those who don't have their watchlist expanded to show all edits don't have a choice; they are going to view the last edit and it will stick on the watchlist unless it was the only one made. If you actually make an edit to the page it's taken off the watchlist. SpinningSpark 19:13, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
To me it seems much more random and inconsistent than that. Sometimes editing the page doesn't even solve the problem—I just edited wikivoyage:Wikivoyage:Travellers' pub, and my own edit (along with the other recent edits to the page) is still displaying on my watchlist as if I haven't yet visited it. —Granger (talk · contribs) 00:04, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
I'm seeing my own edits that I've just made show up on my watchlist too, whereas previously they hadn't. I often can't clear those pages from the watchlist, even if I visit the current incarnation of the page or view the last diff. Has been happening since 10am Pacific for me. —Joeyconnick (talk) 03:26, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Can anything be done about this? Who can I contact to fix this problem? It is still extremely frustrating. —Granger (talk · contribs) 14:10, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
    @Mx. Granger: see mw:How_to_report_a_bug. Please share the bug number here for other's benefit after creating. — xaosflux Talk 14:14, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

I suspect this might be fixed with this change. It is a followup change that is part of phab:T188801. Hopefully it can be deployed asap. —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 14:36, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

I'm having the same problem. If I visit a page any way other than by clicking on it on my watchlist, it's not marked as read. TheDJ, Neither of those links are working for me. Is that broken too? Natureium (talk) 18:59, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

There's an issue at the moment with, among other things, phabricator. ~ Amory (utc) 19:09, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Also an issue: if there's a long list of unseen changes, and I compare the oldest unseen and the subsequent, say, 3 changes (but there are more than 3 changes unseen after that), then return to the article History, it lists all revisions as seen. Definitely not what should be happening, because I haven't seen those other revisions. —Joeyconnick (talk) 02:41, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

I've noticed this issue too. It doesn't interfere with my workflow, so I haven't brought it up, but I can imagine it might bother other editors. —Granger (talk · contribs) 13:53, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

It seems they overfixed this, as I now have the opposite: a page which is marked as "visited" now stays marked as "visited" even after new edits have been made to it (I don't use the green and blue, I use the blue circle / filled blue circle version, FWIW). Fram (talk) 14:58, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Looking at this further, it seems as if a page stays "read" until a new section is posted, while in the past it changed to unread as soon as anything was posted. I don't know if this change was deliberate or not, but I prefered the old way, certainly since there is no per section watchlisting. Fram (talk) 16:21, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Failed page move

Talk:African-American civil rights movement (disambiguation) was not moved when article title changed to Talk:Civil rights movement (disambiguation). Mitchumch (talk) 09:14, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Done. {{db-move}} can be used to request moves where the target can only be overwritten by an administrator. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:11, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Spaces changed to NBSPs are breaking templates

What happened here? Some spaces seem to be replaced by spaces of a different kind. After this edit, the items type and fatalities are no longer displayed in the infobox. --FredTC (talk) 07:54, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Those were "raw" (meaning not text-encoded like &nbsp;) non-breaking spaces (NBSP), and those don't work as separators like regular spaces do in template parameter assignments, hence the disappearing items – same thing happens if you replace a space with &nbsp;. --Pipetricker (talk) 10:22, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
But how did such spaces get there? I have no way to detect that they are there. When I edit the version I mentioned, and select/copy (ctrl-C) the code for the infobox, then paste it to a notepad.exe file, I cannot see a difference. Can I produce it by accident? How? --FredTC (talk) 11:13, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
Per the tag of the edit you linked to, in this case the culprit was the official Wikipedia iOS app.
If you want to report this as a bug in the iOS app, go to mw:Wikimedia Apps/Team/Bug reporting.
Some text editors (for example LibreOffice Writer) can highlight NBSPs. There are feature requests for MediaWiki:
Phabricator: T96666: Make non-breaking spaces (nbsp) visible in VisualEditor
Phabricator: T181677: Implement syntax highlight for U+00A0 (no-break space, nbsp)
--Pipetricker (talk) 15:10, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
I put a note at the misc village pump directing further technical discussion to here. --Pipetricker (talk) 15:33, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

New template: WikiProject link

Hi all! I have created a new template that you can use to link to WikiProject pages at {{WikiProject link}} (or {{proj}} for short), analogous to {{User link}}. For example, to link to WikiProject Biography, you can type {{proj|Biography}}, which produces WikiProject Biography. Please use this template and leave feedback on the template talk page. Also, feel free to modify or extend the template as long as you keep the basic interface the same. Thanks! Cross-posted to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council. Qzekrom 💬 theythem 03:34, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

I have commented at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council#New template that we already have {{wplink}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:38, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Purge cache

How do I purge the cache for the small portal links that appear in the Template:Portal or Template:Portal bar? Mitchumch (talk) 07:26, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean. If a page transcludes a template and something changes in the template then the whole page will automatically be rendered again but it can take time before the job queue gets to it. You can purge a specific page with immediate effect but you still have to purge the whole page. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:12, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
PrimeHunter This does not appear to be the case for article pages that used to be linked to File:AmericaAfrica.svg (see here for full list). The image was part of the small portal links for Portal:African American. Article pages with those small links don't seem to purge the old image file. I was using null edits, but I should not have to do that. The article page Jenn Shaw is one example of this problem. Mitchumch (talk) 23:10, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
I examined Jenn Shaw and 20 other pages at your link. They had all been updated to display File:Kleed- Stichting Nationaal Museum van Wereldculturen - RV-5899-18 (cropped).jpg. It can take much longer to update link tables than to render the articles. A purge of an article will update the article page but not the link tables associated with the article. The latter requires a null edit to do right away. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:24, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
That "much longer" can be months, sometimes forever. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 23:28, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the information. I'll null edit the remaining articles. Mitchumch (talk) 00:29, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
I see no reason to use server resources on that. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:49, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Tool

Do we have a tool that helps to easily import pages? (Aside from special:import)--▸ ‎épine talk 14:04, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

piped links in templates?

Could somebody look at the {{distinguish}} hatnote on Draft:Hernan Larrain Matte. It's rendering badly. I suspect it has to do with the piped link in the template arguments, but my template-fu isn't strong enough to fix it myself. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:50, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

@RoySmith:  fixed --DannyS712 (talk) 22:54, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Infobox map tooltips

I noticed something in the infobox on the England, Wales, Northern Ireland, and Scotland articles (tho it might be on more). When you hover hover the the biggest "zoomed in" part of the map, the tooltips have some css in them (eg, Scotland's is Location of  .mw-parser-output .nobold{font-weight:normal}Scotland  (dark green) – in Europe  (green & dark grey) – in the United Kingdom  (green)). I tried poking around the wikitext used in the templates, but I can't seem to find the cause (might be due to how templatestyles injects Template:Nobold/styles.css, but that would probably require a phab ticket). --Terra (talk) 06:57, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

It's due to the usage of {{nobold}} in {{Infobox_country_UK}}. I'm not a fan of adding templatestyles to inline and 'style only' templates like that. It makes no sense, because the CSS belongs with the template USING nobold, and the nobold template should be removed from a template that is using it really. —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 07:35, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
I agree that in another template it makes sense for the surrounding template to take the entirety of the styling. That said, no one seems to have been interested when I tried to discuss how we should deal with CSS for metatemplates. So... --Izno (talk) 01:11, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

File:Lee Dixon.jpg

There's something strange happening with this image that might be related to a file name change on Commonswikidata/meta data or something. When you click on this file, you're basically seeing the Commons image c:File:Lee Dixon 2015-02-10 1.jpg which was recently moved from c:File:Lee Dixon.jpg. It appears that the Commons file was moved becoming it was being shadowed by the local non-free file of the same name. However, something strange happened as a result of the move and it's almost if the non-free file has been overwritten by the Commons file. The local non-free file is "File:Lee Dixon.jpg" and should be infobox image used in Lee Dixon (actor) I'm not sure why this is happening, but it needs to be sorted out before the non-free file get mistakenly deleted per WP:F5 or WP:NFCC#1. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:12, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Perhaps one better asks this on Commons (links back to here) Klaas `Z4␟` V 22:08, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
This appears to be a bug, I'm opening a phab ticket. In the meantime, I've broken the redirect at commons and it appears to have restored our local behavior. — xaosflux Talk 00:24, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
@Marchjuly and KlaasZ4usV: this appears to be phab:T30299, opened about 5 years ago and noone is working on. — xaosflux Talk 00:27, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
Thanks KlaasZ4usV and Xaosflux for taking a look at this. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:43, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
Any time, Marchjuly, you're more than welcome Face-smile.svg Klaas `Z4␟` V 11:05, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Poorly interacting templates

It seems like a few articles are suddenly (without any changes to the articles themselves) showing a lot of "$NaN" where {{Inflation}} is piped in to {{Formatprice}}. Check out e.g. Macy's, Inc. ("2010 retail sales revenue of $25 billion (equivalent to $NaN in 2019)."). Even one of the examples on the documentation for {{Inflation}} is broken. I don't see any changes to the templates themselves either. I suspect something changed to make {{Inflation}} start outputting scientific notation like "2.032×109" instead of "2.032E+9" and {{Formatprice}} can't handle that, but I don't know what that change could be. —BorgHunter (talk) 13:03, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

The format change in {{Inflation}} happens for numbers above 109. It was caused by [1] where Pppery changed {{Decimals}} from Module:Decimals to {{Rnd}} due to Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2018 December 14#Template:Rnd. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:59, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
Oh, isn't always annoying when you implement a template merge and some unexpected issue crops up. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 19:16, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

WikiProject Yorkshire clean up list

Hello all, sorry about this but I am a complete novice when it comes to this stuff, hence why I am asking for help..... The clean-up list for WP Yorkshire has been going to a blank page with 502 Bad Gateway error for about five days now; anybody any ideas how to resolve this? Is it as simple as repointing the link? Help! *Clean up list is here. Thank you and regards. The joy of all things (talk) 19:33, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

This has been sorted. Thanks anyway. Regards. The joy of all things (talk) 06:29, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-12

19:43, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Blue Publish Button on Upper Right

I noticed there is a slightly different interface when I go to publish. There's a blue Publish button on the upper right and on clicking it you have the option of comparing against previous version, preview, resume editing, or publishing. Is this a new interface that was rolled out for everyone or am I seeing it because I checked all the Beta options in preferences, including Wikitext mode? Thanks. Lore E. Mariano (talk) 13:16, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

LoreMariano, "I checked all the Beta options in preferences, including Wikitext mode" <-- this —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 15:51, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
Thank you! TheDJ (talkcontribs Lore E. Mariano (talk) 14:40, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

List of pages using multiple infoboxes

Is there any list of pages using multiple infoboxes? What does the Wikipedia policy say about that? Capankajsmilyo(Talk | Infobox assistance) 15:33, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

@Capankajsmilyo: I don't know of such a list. Normal wikitext searches won't work for this because most child infoboxes also have names beginning with "infobox".
I don't think there are any policies that would directly affect infoboxes in this way. Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Infoboxes does not have any guidance on this, and the language implies (but does not explicitly say) that one infobox is the default. Regardless, as you've probably noticed, in practice there are a number of pages which include more than one infobox, often to describe multiple topics or entities covered in the same article (e.g. Great Belt Fixed Link), or to separate information into groups (e.g. Georgetown University). Jc86035 (talk) 14:35, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
This search which times out (for probably obvious reasons) is a short list of some multi-infobox pages. --Izno (talk) 01:16, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Internet Archive link

The Internet Achive link at Martin Luther#External links returns 18 271 results. Adding |birth=1483|death=1546|sopt=t only reduces them to 18 265. Is there a way to reduce the results returned?

A direct link to the IA page with relevant filters  didn't work, maybe because the brackets in the link messed it up:

Jonund (talk) 16:22, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

(I fixed the broken link by copying the URL (and link label) from Martin Luther#External links. --Pipetricker 18:40, 19 March (UTC))
Why do you want fewer results? --Pipetricker (talk) 19:09, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
I wanted to exclude results like Martin Luther King, but now, as I scroll down the results, these do not apppear to turn up. Books in foreign languages do, however, turn up, and I think they should be excluded. Jonund (talk) 15:48, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
@Jonund: As indicated in the sidebar, it is possible to filter the results by language. Jc86035 (talk) 15:55, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

@Jonund:, cases like this are difficult because it is a common 2-word name who is popular. About the only way is to build a custom search that filters other known Martin Luthers. Because Internet Archive now uses an infinite scroll it's impractical to scroll to the end to see what might be there. The site Internet Archive Classic Search allows paged viewing to get deeper into the results. Looks like filtering out "luther king" helps a lot: 6,012. BTW I don't think we should filter English language because end-users can easily do that through the side bar. I've added this custom search to the template. -- GreenC 16:49, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Template merger discussion notice

There is a discussion about merging {{Yesno}}, {{If declined}}, and {{If affirmed}}. As this template group affects a very large number of pages, additional input is requested. Please join in the conversation at the TFD. Thank you. Primefac (talk) 19:49, 19 March 2019 (UTC) (please ping on reply)

Template:Sec link/secure url

anyone know what is generating transclusions in Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Sec link/secure url? it would be helpful to clear this from the database report if possible. thank you. Frietjes (talk) 23:43, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Whoa, something really weird was going on there that I don't exactly understand myself. I think I've fixed the problem, though. {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 00:20, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Ref toolbar

Since yesterday, the autofill function in the Help:Referencing_for_beginners#Using_refToolbar doesn't work for me at all. You know, the little magnifying glass. Any help? I use Chrome on a laptop. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:30, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Also reported at Wikipedia talk:RefToolbar#Autofill of citations with pings to maintainers. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:54, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
Thank you! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:28, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

CSD categories

Hi! Can anyone explain (or even fix?) this: {{CSD-categories}} shows 7 candidates for speedy deletion as "Abandoned drafts/AfC submissions"; Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as abandoned drafts or AfC submissions is empty. It's been this way for several days at least. Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:56, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

phab:T200402, phab:T202833, phab:T18036 - take your pick @Justlettersandnumbers: - category counts aren't reliable. — xaosflux Talk 19:14, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Is there a way to have a vertical 'no wrap'

If you have something like

  • Header1
    • Item 1
    • Item 2
    • Item 3
    • Item 4
    • Item 5
  • Header 2
    • Item 1
    • Item 2
  • Header 3
    • Item 1
    • Item 2
    • Item 3

and you zoom at different levels, you will often have lists broken up over multiple columns. Is there a way to have everything on Header 1/Header 2/Header 3 kept together, much like {{nowrap}} prevents things from spilling over multiple lines, so you have something like

  • Header1
    • Item 1
    • Item 2
    • Item 3
    • Item 4
    • Item 5
  • Header 2
    • Item 1
    • Item 2
  • Header 3
    • Item 1
    • Item 2
    • Item 3

or

  • Header1
    • Item 1
    • Item 2
    • Item 3
    • Item 4
    • Item 5
  • Header 2
    • Item 1
    • Item 2
  • Header 3
    • Item 1
    • Item 2
    • Item 3

depending on your zoom level. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 14:26, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

I think using Template:No col break should do it. Galobtter (pingó mió) 14:36, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
Doesn't seem to work. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 14:52, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
Actually, it works in Chrome, but has some issues in Firefox. Does the nocolbreak class need tweaking in MediaWiki:Common.css? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 15:01, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Request for testing and feedback: Automated article section recommendations

The Wikimedia Research team is developing a new method for automatically recommending sections to add to stub articles. This method uses machine learning to suggest sections that could be added to an article, based on the sections that exist in other articles on similar topics.

We think this method could be useful for helping new editors find useful onboarding tasks to do. But before we build anything, we need to test the quality of the recommendations.

We are looking for experienced editors to evaluate these recommendations and provide feedback to help us improve them. We have built a testing tool that makes it easy to provide quick, survey-style feedback on the quality of the recommendations, and we are also interested in more detailed feedback on the project feedback talkpage.

If you are interested in giving us feedback, please get started by reading the instructions here and then start rating articles!

If you have questions about the project or more general feedback, you can reach us here.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Morgan & Diego Saez-Trumper, Wikimedia Foundation Research

Jmorgan (WMF) (talk) 15:05, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

BRFA for Xinbenlv_bot

Dear Technical Wikipedians

FYI

|I would like to ask for your opinion on a BRFA I am applying for m::Xinbenlv_bot.

(by the way, should I use {{rfc}} instead?)

Xinbenlv (talk) 22:46, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Behavior of settlement infobox

I noticed that the Template:Infobox settlement has two population fields: population_total, and population_density_km2. A person asked a related question at the help desk and when trying to answer the question, I noticed that these aren't text fields, and so you can't put a year in parenthesis ex: (2019) after the values, in case they are from different years. I tried to add citations after the numbers, and population_total allows it, but if I try to put a citation after population_density_km2, the field disappears. Is this the intended behavior? The article I tested this with is Jeju City if you want to see if you can duplicate this. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 00:34, 22 March 2019 (UTC)