Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)

 Policy Technical Proposals Idea lab WMF Miscellaneous 

• Table of contents
• First discussion
• End of page
• New post

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. Questions about MediaWiki in general should be posted at the MediaWiki support desk.

« Archives, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211, 212, 213

Problem with "Official Site" if pulled from Wikidata with multiple "Official Sites"

I'm not sure if this is a problem just with Template:Official site or with the relationship with wikidata, but it appears that Official Site is having problems if there is more than one entry in Official Site on Wikidata and none in the template. See University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill#External links. It contains {{Official website}} but if that is clicked, it tries to go to the website... "http://www.unc.edu/,%20http://www.unc.edu". Any ideas?Naraht (talk) 13:39, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

The core problem: Template:Official website is coded to use the property directly rather than a Lua call. Why is Lua necessary?

1. There may be multiple official sites in different languages. The only way to access qualifiers (the way which Wikidata would indicate there is a language of interest) is via Lua.
2. There may be a preferred value by ranking.

A module on Wikipedia needs to select from among the possibly multiple values, or at least display all of them sanely.

I fixed the "intermediate problem" of this case by going to Wikidata and removing the "extra" provided website, since they were the same website. --Izno (talk) 14:04, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

I've made a start at writing Module:Official website. The Wikidata code doesn't know about qualifiers or ranking yet, though. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 15:17, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

The module is now live, and understands Wikidata ranking. I didn't think that it was worth putting in language detection in the end, although if anyone knows of an actual example on Wikidata where this distinction would be useful, I would have no problem adding it. I've made one small adjustment: previously the template used class="official website", but this is actually two classes, "official", and "website", so I changed it to class="official-website". — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 23:53, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your work on this. I assume the module behaves the same way as the template in treating locally defined values if present? Personally I think we should be more proactive in transferring data to Wikidata and removing the local values. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:54, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Yes, that's right, and I agree about the need to be proactive about moving things to Wikidata. It wouldn't be hard to switch the module to use local values only if a Wikidata value doesn't exist, or even to make it insist on using Wikidata values only. If we can come to a consensus on what to do there, then I'll be happy to make the change. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 16:22, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Bot-fix consensus

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T123093

I'm here this time as part of a bot-approval process which requires consensus that we need to fix ten thousand instances of {{Intitle}} and {{lookfrom}} on the wiki.

They are are title-oriented search links, popular in mainspace, for for use on dab pages as a bullet item in a "See also" section. They've found there way into lots of other uses, including inline usage, on similar pages where some name or topic in the title is of interest.

Currently they have the problem of messing up a printed version of their page. If you give the template a "noprint" class it leaves a stray bullet in print. The inline versions would disappear in print, and may read poorly, but there really aren't that many of them, and those 70 will be manual fixes.

Over the years they've evolved namespace parameters, labels, and alternate queries. The first part of my plan to save them is to give them a noprint bullet (in a div block), and a noprint span (for inline usage), and a print option. Since intitle is "open", I've given its sandbox version these fixes. That fixes that.

Now to remove the stray bullet from print, and to save the two templates for future use, all with no disruptions, using AWB, here is the the second part of the plan, the bot-fix. (For debating their existence in general, see the talk page at WP:NOT.) — CpiralCpiral 08:42, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Support: Bot operator seems to have a decent knowledge of regex, and the need is present for this AWB task -- samtar ^whisper 08:46, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Putting a bullet inside a div in the See also section sounds like it would have accessibility problems - see WP:LISTGAP. I think it would be a better idea to hide the extra bullet point some other way, either in MediaWiki:Print.css (if that's possible), or preferably in the MediaWiki software itself. These kinds of empty bullets were not rendered as part of the HTML output until last year, when they switched to being rendered but hidden from view. It might be that this hiding didn't work for the print view for some reason, but I would have to investigate some more to find out exactly what happened there. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 16:19, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

@Mr. Stradivarius: you're right. This should wait for the deeper solution because it certainly complicates the HTML to have div blocks in the lists. So I phabricated T123093, and the bot-fix consensus is really up to them now. My guesses are that it's a new, overlooked problem, and that CSS is impossible, and that we'll have to wait for a parser fix.

What I say there, at T123093, is that MediaWiki software correctly ignores empty bullets on screen and in print. (The second section below shows this.) It was apparently overlooked, then, that it could ever happen to become such a common idiom, that ten thousand normal bullets would ever be empty by virtue of a noprint item.

What I'll say at the bot-approval request is that it is a fine idea to run a bot to fix the print problem. But it complicates certain patches of HTML lists for an issue that is almost certainly going to be normal priority bug-fix. So any bot fix now is temporary, and should end up, after some time, needing yet another bot-fix to cleanup the complicated HTML patches. Anytime a second, cleanup run should be done after an awaited, deeper, fix of a minor problem, this should be a classical reason for denying a bot approval request. This is because the first bot-fix makes any cleanup a low priority, plus the time interval between the two related bot-runs, say, a year, can make the need for the second run much less noticeable. — CpiralCpiral 00:37, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Section

Perhaps divs are different than blank lines? It needs a test. Because none of the many screen readers I tried with Chrome and Firefox happened to work, if someone has access to one, please test these. The last three bullet items are each wrapped in there own "div class noprint bullets":

• How
• Do
• the

— CpiralCpiral 06:49, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

OK I got NVDA on FF to work. It treats them all the same saying "bullet" item, for these blank lines between bullets

• how
• do
• the

• last

• three

• sound

They all sound the same. — CpiralCpiral 08:38, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

@Cpiral: They sound very annoying to me using my primary screen reader, JAWS, like"list of 1 items, last, list end; list of 1 items, three, list end, list of 1 items, sound, list end"), and they read out similarly (but they don't sound quite as annoying) on NVDA here. Graham87 15:38, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Section

Empty bullets seem to act correctly. It's the bullets with noprint items that are the problem. For example the third bullet with no item acts correctly, in print or on screen:

---

* this bullet item is normal
* <span class=noprint>this bullet item is "span class noprint", the next one is empty:</span>
*

---

gives

---

• this bullet item is normal

---

Please see the above in a print preview (even in a print preview of an edit preview.) — CpiralCpiral 06:49, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

This proves that the bot-fix has a deeper solution, and that it will at some point be brought into alignment. — CpiralCpiral 00:37, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Google Chrome crashing while editing (especially pasting)

Is anyone else having trouble with Google Chrome crashing while adding material to Wikipedia? It's been happening to me these past two to four weeks. I haven't discerned any patterns, but it seems to often be when adding (perfectly normal, not blacklisted) citations (urls). It has gotten so frustrating that I've had to often switch to Firefox, even though I find Firefox less ideal than Chrome for wiki editing for several reasons. I'd like to know if anyone else is having these experiences on Chrome. One thing I think the incidents have in common is that the articles or drafts that crash are fairly long rather than blank pages or blank sandboxes. Softlavender (talk) 09:37, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
Edited to add: It also has happened repeatedly when I tried to add a warning template to an IP vandal's talk page. Softlavender (talk) 01:25, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

See Archive 142#Article crashing Google Chrome. --Pipetricker (talk) 10:10, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

No solutions there. I've tried clearing cache, closing Chrome completely, restarting computer -- nothing works, the crashes continue. Softlavender (talk) 10:30, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

@Softlavender: Which version of Chrome are you running? -- samtar ^whisper 10:37, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Samtar: It says: Google Chrome 47.0.2526.106 (Official Build) m (32-bit)

Revision 19b9e1a5713f4b9ae324bd59bbe16ca6eb91d0e0-refs/branch-heads/2526@{#532} OS Windows

(I think the only, or main, personal weirdness on my Chrome is that I have both versions of Flash [Chrome's built-in Flash, and normal Flash] blocked on Chrome, because Chrome keeps hanging when I am researching and have more than 20 or so windows open.) Softlavender (talk) 01:25, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

I've had fewer issues if I go into language settings and uncheck "Use spell check with this language". ViperSnake151  Talk  04:01, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Can you clarify, ViperSnake151? You mean you've had fewer crashes pasting material onto Wikipedia? Also, are you un-checking spell-check for English? (I'm asking because I don't want to do that; I rely on spell-check to help with my lousy typing.) Softlavender (talk) 04:39, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Yeah. ViperSnake151  Talk  04:41, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Just had this happen as well. Turning off spell check works, but this is obviously a crippling solution. It also seems to work if I section edit, and avoid editing the whole article. Kuru (talk) 03:49, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

And even if crippling, would have been worth it to edit Talk:Territorial evolution of the United States/rewrite, but alas I still get the error. --Golbez (talk) 06:37, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

WP Mobile App article description glitch

In looking at the WP App article on Newsmax Media, I see the description as "Ultraconservative American media organization". However the desktop version of the article does not use the term/descriptive "ultraconservative". The only term used is "conservative". How is it that "Ultraconservative" shows up on the mobile app? And how do we fix it? – S. Rich (talk) 21:19, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

I checked on my mobile, and I'm not seeing "ultra". I also checked the article history to see if it was just something that changed recently and it isn't. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 21:25, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Mobile uses Wikidata descriptions. "Wikidata item" under "Tools" in the desktop version of the article goes to wikidata:Q11991273. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:40, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Looks like IP 64.132.87.246 has fixed it at Wikidata. This old dog says 'thanks all'. – S. Rich (talk) 00:34, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Book creator toolbar

I've accidentally hidden the book creator toolbar by hitting the hide button. The book creator still works with full functionality but just without the toolbar. How do I get the toolbar back? Tom29739 (talk) 22:50, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

I managed to get it back by clearing my cookies. Tom29739 (talk) 22:50, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

False positives from recent changes at userpages

(I posted about this before but cannot find the link.)

When I search for a recreation of some username or userpage content (usually block evasion), I often get search hits for userpages that have a recent changes transclusion or such. It is a constant annoyance. I have been told to search using "intitle" or such, but this is a nuissance and extra step. Is there something that can be done like noindexing the userpages or something? Thanks. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:32, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Here is an example. Search "Smartmyer". I just blocked the user and wish to check for that term elsewhere. I get lots of matches as described above. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:34, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Did you try enclosing the search in quotation marks? This search returns good results for me. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 07:48, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

(non-admin comment) Under the Search field at the top of the page you can click "Everything" (which is what Mr. Stradivarius did, and by the way quotation marks are not needed for one-word terms); or you can click "Advanced" and select everything except userpages (and you can save/Remember that set-up for future searches if needed). I don't know if that helps. Softlavender (talk) 11:08, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, Mr. Stradivarius and Softlavender. I guess I'll have to do the extra steps. It sure would be nice to just drop the term into the searchbox and that's it. Isn't there a way to make userpage recent changes transclusions non-searchable by adding something to the userpage? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:01, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

@Anna Frodesiak: they probably meant "insource". Insource is immune to transclusion-false-positives, so there is no need for NOINDEX. (A normal search without the insource parameter searches the content as it appears on the page, regardless of whether or not it was a mere transclusion.) Insource will also find cases where a URL or username instance in wikitext (in source) renders a label (instead of itself as the name), and would be bypassed by a normal search.

{{Search link| all: insource: smartMyer}} → all: insource: smartMyer produces three results.

You can save an oft-needed search in a search link and just drop a new term into the query box on the search results page.

1. smartMyer found zero results because it searched in article space.
2. Search then tossed "Myer" and stemmed smart, reporting that it did so, and producing 51 thousand false positives.
3. When everything was searched it found seven results.

The four false positives were because of transclusions.

Substrings in camelCase are indexed as "words". The beginnings of a description of this are at mw:Help:CirrusSearch. — CpiralCpiral 23:06, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Maps

How can I create vector maps for use in Wikipedia articles? Makeandtoss (talk) 20:55, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Do you mean maps like File:Metrolink route map 31 March 2014.svg? --Redrose64 (talk) 23:21, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

@Redrose64: Like File:Jordan location map.svg. I need to create something like this File:Jerusalem_area.svg Makeandtoss (talk) 01:44, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

The first of those was created by NordNordWest (talk · contribs) (commons:NordNordWest (talk · contribs)), who is currently active (last edited on this wiki just under a week ago, last on commons today), the second by Costello (talk · contribs) (commons:Costello (talk · contribs)) who hasn't edited in almost six years. You could ask NordNordWest directly, or if you want to throw the idea on the table for anybody to pick up, try WP:GL/MAP. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:03, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

List of admins by registration date

Out of curiosity, is there any tool or list of admin accounts by date of user registration (not date of RFA)? I'm curious how many admins still active today were editors during Wikipedia's very early days (say pre-2005). Dragons flight (talk) 19:33, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Here is a quick list of admins by registration date. --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 19:44, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Is that based on a current / recent version of the user table? Dragons flight (talk) 19:51, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

On current. But the list is static. I included time (UTC) when the query was excecuted last. --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 19:57, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

So of the 1327 admins, nearly 500 registered their account before 2005. A lot higher than I would have guessed. Also saw a bunch of old names that I am surprised are still active. Of course, older accounts tend to fall back into gnoming, so maybe not that surprising. Dragons flight (talk) 20:23, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

@Dragons flight: You can get a dynamically updated version of this list through the regular interface. Also keep in mind the inaccurate date bug relating to moves over redirects (fifth paragraph down in the linked section). Graham87 15:26, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Stop using the edit filter for 30/500 protection

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

MediaWiki's group and protection systems can easily be extended to handle ArbCom's 30 day/500 edit restriction, without needing to resort to the edit filter. I'd like to submit a config change for this, but the new group would need a name, and I'm not sure what it should be called. Are there any reasons that we shouldn't do this? If not, what should the group be called? Jackmcbarn (talk) 20:46, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Well, how does your config change apply the 30/500 protection? Also, noting phab:120734 here, the general "boost up our blocking tools" task.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:54, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

I'd add a new group, set it to autopromote after 30/500, in the same way that autoconfirmed does after 4/10, then add it as a choice to the protection dialog. It's unrelated to phab:T120734. Jackmcbarn (talk) 20:55, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Oh, so it would be another user group? So autoconfirmed would set at 4/10, then [xxx]confirmed at 30/500? Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 20:57, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I have suggested many, many times that we should do it if we can, and I can't think of any reason why not to do it (noting that I have no qualification to comment on technical things). Making 30/500 a system-coded protection level was specifically what I meant when I proposed it to ArbCom, not an edit filter or 3RR exclusion. As for what it should be called, what's a word for something that's in between half and full? Threequartersprotection doesn't exactly roll off the fingers. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 20:56, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Well, I think that to create a new autoconfirm status in order to implement an English Wikipedia ArbCom sanction on a specific set of articles is a weird hack. I'd thought that one would need a much broader use-case for such a thing. The edit filter solution is very artificial but it does meet the AF use-case, sort of.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 21:03, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Agreed. If one is going to create a new restriction level in the interface (which all admins can access) then it should probably be on the assumption that it can and would be used more generally. That might well be a good idea though. Dragons flight (talk) 21:11, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

If at all such functionality should be implemented as part of phab:T16636, not as an ad hoc. There are certainly enough use cases for that and the blocked tasks.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 21:53, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

I oppose having new user classifications created ad-hoc by arbcom; so we solve this - and tomorrow they create 100ed/60day requirements? — xaosflux ^Talk 21:30, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

That being said, this is the technical pump - I think the "right" way would be to indeed create another usergroup, perhaps editor, with autopromote; and use something like editor-protected. — xaosflux ^Talk 21:30, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Well, in addition to making the protection level technically possible, the community sets its own restrictions on use. It would only currently be sanctioned for use on ARBPIA articles (per ArbCom). If an admin enabled it on some other page, they would be doing so against the protection policy. Like how PC/2 is technically available - I don't know if admins can actually select it now, but they could at one time. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 22:12, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

PC2 can still be technically applied, see list of affected pages. For the name, 'editor' seems too general and potentially confusing, maybe 'established'. Cenarium (talk) 22:23, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

PC2 is useful, and rarely is used in a WP:IAR way that usually makes sense (mostly the IAR factor is why full protection isnt quite needed). — xaosflux ^Talk 00:14, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

I don't like ArbCom making policy either, but a usergroup might actually give the community more say on the matter. Changes to the autopromotion criteria would from that point on require community consensus, as with all config changes. Cenarium (talk) 22:39, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

• An advantage of using a usergroup is that we could whitelist users who don't strictly meet the criteria (by mannually adding the usergroup). I expect that ArbCom wouldn't object to such manual promotion if the requesting user has demonstrated a pattern of constructive, collaborative editing and their contributions in this area is expected to be positive. After all, this is already the case for semi-protection, with the confirmed usergroup. In addition, it might be possible to remove the usergroup if the user has proved to edit nonconstructively, even if the criteria are technically met. See also related discussion at Wikipedia:Edit_filter_noticeboard#Two_new_disallowing_filters_as_arbitration_remedy. Cenarium (talk) 22:36, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
• I agree a new user group entirely is preferable, for reasons stated above. I thought we had already filed a phab report for this, or at least for the new form of protection? Whether WMF will do it, or the community will allow it, or whether we should be doing this 30/500 thing at all, I don't know. But I can tell you performance is not a noticeable issue with the filter implementation, and this automatic disallowing system is favourable over blindly reverting users who don't meet the 30/500 qualification -- which is what is currently being done — MusikAnimal ^talk 23:25, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

  As far as I know there is no Phabricator task for adding another level, at this time.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 23:32, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

• The exact usergroup criteria should not be considered locked-in yet. It would be worth investigating what criteria may already be in use at other Wikis for various purposes, and seek cross-wiki consensus on some arbitrary common standard. For example a German Wikipedia process requires 2 months / 200 article edits / 50 article edits in the last year. That isn't very far off from a 30/500 threshold. Alsee (talk) 20:31, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
• I've formally proposed a new usergroup and protection level at VPR: Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#New_usergroup_with_autopromotion_to_implement_arbitration_.2230-500.22_bans_as_a_page_protection. Cenarium (talk) 00:20, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

tagging wikiproject templates in other language using eng: counterpart as ref

is there such bot that does the following:

checks all members of a specific project in eng:, if versions in another language exists(for example zh)

if zh version exists tag it with corresponding template(zh)

I am planning to tag zhwp:pharmacology using this method Panintelize (talk) 04:15, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

I can give you the list of articles, that can be tagged. The tagging process itself would be up to you (or we can come up with another idea then). Moving further disscusion to your talk page. --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 09:38, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! this is very helpful -Panintelize (talk) 15:06, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Template syntax

Can somebody who understands table markup please fix the table at Gunnerus Medal? It used to be fine but when the most recent winners were added it screwed up. Thanks. BethNaught (talk) 08:12, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

 Done — JJMC89 (T·C) 08:26, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

@BethNaught: The problem didn't occur when the most recent winners were added, it occurred when you removed all uses of {{STY}} without putting something else in its place - that template was used to start a new table row, so you should have left either a plain new-row marker |- instead, or even a

|- style="background: #EFEFFF;"

to preserve the previous formatting. Did you remove {{STY}} from any other pages? Those will need fixing too. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:01, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

I know the history looks different now the template is deleted, but the cell merges and alignments looked broken anyway. (Due to the TfD template, perhaps? Too late to tell, I guess.) Anyway, that was the only page the template was used on. BethNaught (talk) 11:05, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

WTW tool

I would like a tool that can count the number of words in an article that match those listed at Wikipedia:Words to watch. Does such a tool already exist? If not, who is best to ask to create it? SpinningSpark 16:08, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Unmarking edits erroneously marked as minor

Not sure whether this issue was raised before, quick search shows it wasn't. So should we consider a way to unmark the edits erroneously marked as minor by the editor himself/herself? The proposed unmarking would remove the bolded "m" letter from page histories and user contributions and this would be restricted only to the editor who made the edit. Brandmeister^talk 22:57, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

You should make such a proposal at phabricator:. Ruslik_Zero 17:34, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

How does Module doc work?

Hello, please can you explain in short, what makes the pages in the Module namespace display the documentation from the /doc subpage? Could the same thing be applied to the TimedText namespace? Petr Matas 00:20, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

This is done in the Scribunto extension, and the mechanism is documented here. You can edit the header for modules with a /doc subpage at MediaWiki:Scribunto-doc-page-show, and for modules without a /doc subpage at MediaWiki:Scribunto-doc-page-does-not-exist. For the same thing to be done in the TimedText namespace, code would need to be added to MediaWiki somewhere (I assume to mw:Extension:TimedMediaHandler). You would need to make a request in Phabricator to do that. Note that there have been a few problems due to the different content types on module pages and on module documentation pages, though (see phab:T61194), so people may be wary of doing the same thing as Scribunto elsewhere. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 03:17, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! Petr Matas 03:49, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

I think the content type issue could be circumvented by placing the doc page in the talk namespace (TimedText talk:$1/doc). Petr Matas 04:25, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

That only works if you want to transclude the /doc in the TimedText talk namespace, though. It still won't display on the TimedText page (c.f TimedText talk header template proposal).Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:12, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

I have fixed the link to the proposal. Petr Matas 18:39, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Watchlist is not working

My Watchlist has not green markers as it usually had. Many pages have been changed and I cannot see that. Only some bullets are enlarged (my edits). --Obsuser (talk) 02:00, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Mine works. FF 43.0.4. Rehman 02:04, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Add line

I often use an {{AddNewSection}} template for some discussions and so. The trick of this template is great. It adds a line with header and another one with inserted text. And everything could be predefined. But recently I needed to add only one line with text - numbered list item in a WikiProject page. Add section template adds one line for heading even if it is not filled in. The problem is, that if there is some extra newline between two numbered list items (add section adds one), the numbering starts from beginning. Is there any possibility (e.g. using lua module or any hack), how to achieve this?

I have this:

WikiProject contributors:
# FirstUser
# MeastheseconduseR
# Third.user.wiki

And I want to add this:

# New4thUser

But template AddNewSection or InputBox allow me to add only this:

# New4thUser

because of this layout:

<!-- heading -->
<!-- content -->

So the result looks like this and the numbering is broken:

WikiProject contributors:
# FirstUser
# MeastheseconduseR
# Third.user.wiki

# New4thUser

Does anybody know any possibility? --Dvorapa (talk) 14:21, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Don't put blank lines in lists, not only does it restart the numbering, it's an accessibility issue. WP:LISTGAP. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:57, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

I don't want to put blank lines in list, but I don't know, how to do it. Because both AddNewSection template and InputBox add a blank line. Do you know any workaround to add just one line with list item without any blank lines before or after? --Dvorapa (talk) 16:56, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Surely the purpose is to add a new section, not modify an existing section? New sections always get two blank lines: one above and one below the section heading. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:07, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

You understand me correctly. I don't want to add two blank lines by creating new section. I want to add one line with list item and place it at the end of a page or an existing section and I don't know, how to achieve this using any template or module. The only two existing ways to add something at the end of a page or a section I've found so far are InputBox MW extension and AddNewSection template. And they both create a new section, which clearly aren't a good choice for lists. I wanted to create an AddNewLine template if there will be anybody who will think up some workaround or even know some workaround or lua-way or so. --Dvorapa (talk) 17:38, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

All that {{AddNewSection}} does (essentially) is create a link to a URL having the query string action=edit&section=new - it is the MediaWiki software that processes that. We can't do anything about its behaviour here, you would need to file a phab: ticket, which the devs would refuse on the grounds that it's working as designed. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:58, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

That's the latest possible option I want to avoid. And you are right that it may be unsuccessful. I zhought there is any other MW extension or any other workaround I haven't found so far. --Dvorapa (talk) 18:04, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

I've found a solution using template flowlist without closing template. Could anybody write me a message into my talk page if somebody thinked up better solution? --Dvorapa (talk) 20:11, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Why the need to double click on wikilinks?

When navigating Wikipedia on my iPad, in desktop view, I find that I have to click twice on a wikilinks to activate them. This behaviour appears to be unique to Wikipedia. It never used to be that way. The double click thing is not isolated to the same link. Clicking on link A highlights but does not activate it. With link A highlighted, clicking on link B activates link B! What causes this bizarre behaviour? It does not happen in mobile view, which I find painful on an iPad, only in desktop view. Like I said this has only been happening recently. I upgraded my iOS to the latest version but this click twice embuggerance was happening before that. Sandbh (talk) 03:24, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Just tested in Safari on my iPad 4, seems it is happening. It doesn't happen in Puffin Browser so I'd say it might just be a Safari issue. -- numbermaniac (talk) 07:33, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Can I use my common.css to make the top-right icons bigger?

What code could I add to my common.css file to make the top-right icons (like featured article, lock icons, etc) bigger? Especially with locks, I have trouble seeing their colour on my screen sometimes. -- numbermaniac (talk) 07:40, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Tried this, doesn't work. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:19, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

width and height are attributes of the img element, not CSS properties, so they can't be accessed via CSS. You could do it with JavaScript, though. With JavaScript it might also be possible to substitute a higher-resolution image; just altering the width and height attributes makes the icons look a little pixelated. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 11:19, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

An HTML object off to the side with wrap-around content

I see that in many pages here, there are infoboxes which the text wraps around - that is, it avoids the text boxes, but continues directly underneath them. How does this work in the HTML? 84.228.154.145 (talk) 12:42, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

This is probably more suited to the Reference Desk than here, but the answer is the CSS declaration float: right;. Relentlessly (talk) 12:50, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Tech News: 2016-02

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

• Wikimedia no longer uses visitor statistics from comScore. [1]
• You can make interactive graphs with the Graph extension. There is now a tutorial for how to do this. [2]

Problems

• Some pages do not turn in up in categories where they should be. This is because link tables are sometimes not populated. [3]

Changes this week

• The Nuke extension will work with Flow. This will make it easier to handle spam in Flow. [4]
• New file uploads will now be patrollable. [5]
• Internet Explorer 8 will no longer have JavaScript support. You will still be able to browse and edit Wikipedia if you use Internet Explorer 8, but will not be able to use some features. This can be solved by upgrading to a newer version or switching to a different browser. [6][7]

Meetings

• You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 12 January at 20:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

• URLs in the recent changes IRC feed will no longer be rewritten to unencrypted HTTP. This could be a breaking change for bots dependent on the IRC feed. [8]
• The edit tabs for the wikitext editor and the visual editor will be combined to one single edit tab. You will be able to choose which one you prefer. If you are not logged in, your choice will be saved as a cookie in your browser. You can test the single edit tab. [9][10]
• There is a beta feature that adds links to the subject on other Wikimedia projects. This works much like the links to for example Wikipedia articles in other languages. It will go out of beta testing and be enabled for everyone in January. Wikis that don't want this can decide to have it disabled. [11][12]
• The difference between "alerts" and "messages" notifications is unclear to some. The developers want feedback at the Phabricator task or on MediaWiki.org so they can make this better. You can give feedback in your language if you can't write in English.

Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

16:59, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Cite option not working

Not sure if it's just me but when I click on Cite Web, News, Book etc in the toolbar nothing happens ...., I've refreshed the page and still nothing happens, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 16:59, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

is there a way to auto-fill weather and climate templates?

In the course of trying to improve a city's article, I looked into adding climate information, in the standard way using one or more of the wikipedia weather templates. I've found websites describing the city's Köppen climate classification, and have found other websites with the raw numeric statistical data for temperatures etc. What has me pausing and turning to you, is that those are a lot of numbers to manually enter into a complex template, and it struck me that being that there are so many cities with wikipedia articles, maybe there was a shortcut to auto-magically fill the templates, or partially do so. —Boruch Baum (talk) 17:58, 11 January 2016 (UTC)