User talk:George Orwell III/Archives/2016

Please do not post any new comments on this page. This is a discussion archive first created in 2016, although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date. See current discussion or the archives index.

Template include size.

Bearing in mind the comment on your latest edit to {{scrollpane}}, were you maintaining Index:The Works of Francis Bacon (1884) Volume 1.djvu in a state of technical sin as a reference case? In which case please undo my edit there. Apologies if it turns out we were at cross-purposes. AuFCL (talk) 02:04, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Oops; my mistake. - I recall now the issue with that one particular Index: is with the transcribed/transcluded content itself and not really the fact it's also being wrapped in the template on the Index: page. You can revert me [or leave it be?] however you think best (or if I broke something somehow elsewhere). -- George Orwell III (talk) 07:13, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

It seems in our different ways we were on the same page. I have no objections to your change to the template, and at the same time the contents are far too large to consider putting on that Index: page no matter where anybody stands on the "aesthetics." I suggest leaving things as they are and see if anybody cares? AuFCL (talk) 07:18, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

┌──────┘
Another day, another instance. Don't we have the sense not to keep worrying at the same old bones time and again?

I have a question regarding this edit. I frankly fail to comprehend how nesting an <includeonly> pair inside an <onlyinclude> pair ever generates an outcome not entirely equivalent to the <includeonly> directives themselves being entirely dropped. Have I missed some subtlety somewhere along the line? If I have I welcome it being pointed out. AuFCL (talk) 07:37, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Ah I overlooked that little fact since the template output rendered normally when I was [re]viewing it's doc page. Reverted. Thanks. Commented back in scripto; I noted you beat me to the punch about the same sh!t - different stink point-of-view too :) -- George Orwell III (talk) 07:45, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Movepage-moved

Please pardon my interference but MediaWiki:Movepage-moved "looks" wrong to me (and has been so dating back to Pathoschild's edits) depending upon the expansion of fullurl: if the form //en.wikisource.org/wiki/Special:MovePage… is generated, then the syntax ought to read as

[{{fullurl:Special:MovePage?wpOldTitle=$4&wpNewTitle=$3&wpReason=revert&wpMovetalk=1}} revert]

—i.e. note the leading "?" before wpOldTitle. On the other hand the coding is correct if fullurl: expands in the alternate form //en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Special:MovePage…. I believe it expands the first way but you may know better? AuFCL (talk) 02:10, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Already reached the same conclusion; the fact it has always lacked the question mark was the only reason it took so long to verify. Thanks. -- George Orwell III (talk) 02:15, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Template:PermissionOTRS is top presenting

Would you please add to future work list, a review of Template:PermissionOTRS as it seems to be top presenting on Rabbit: A Compiler for Scheme, and inline it is at the bottom of the page. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 03:38, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: All our M-box, A-box, T-box and similar "box" based banners are based on Wikipedia's implementation and are suppose to "group" together when one or more of the family of box templates are present. Since they are not content, they should not appear in the content area -- as is the case even on Wikipedia article talk pages. So they can all appear before the namespace header at the top or before the category "bar" on the bottom when it comes to Wikisource's "implementation" of this particular Wikipedia scheme.

That said, I can attempt to convert the current OTRS banner from its current "box" based format to a license based one -- which I think we can both agree should have been the appropriate foundation for something "license related" to begin with -- to resolve the positioning issue you raised if that is agreeable(?) to you. Let me know either way. Please note: I'm almost at the point of declaring a wikibreak since my free time is nearly nonexistent nowadays. -- George Orwell III (talk) 22:28, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

MediaWiki:PageNumbers.js and erroneous linkage to Main Page

I hope you might be able to fill in the gaps in my own faulty memory.

For some reason I recall being very interested in cases when PageNumbers.js generated page links which did not "point" back into the Page: name space but instead resolved to $wgArticlePath; and to my frustration not being able to find a suitable example to complete investigations due to (some random idiot) "fixing" the then-issue and killing further investigation cold.

Now, to my intense annoyance I have found such an example: Mexico,_as_it_was_and_as_it_is#x yet cannot recall the purpose for which it was so essential to follow up (it was perhaps somehow related to the issue you and I mutually resolved upon reflecting red-links through to the offset-left page numbering?) Apologies for this rave: if it makes sense please treat me like the idiot I clearly am and kindly or otherwise set me straight. However if it does not make sense then dismiss me for a fool. AuFCL (talk) 03:50, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

It all has something to do with the near-random case of a page-boundary occurring such that mediawiki maps the "marker" to a <tr> as occurs in the above example:

<tr class="pagenum ws-pagenum" id="x" data-page-number="x"></tr>

—as opposed to the "normal" case where a <span>² (isn't that pathological enough all of itself?) is produced (e.g. just above the prior error):

<span><span class="pagenum ws-pagenum" id="ix" data-page-number="ix" title="Page:Mexico_as_it_was_and_as_it_is.djvu/22"></span></span>

—and (presumably) PageNumbers.js gets confused and generates the default page link instead of a proper one. AuFCL (talk) 04:22, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Aha! No title for

		$.data(
			page_span,
			"link_str",
			'<a href= "' + page_url + action_str + '"' +
				class_str +
				' title= "' + mw.html.escape( page_title ) + '">' +
				mw.html.escape( name ) +
			'</a>'
		);

—to work upon! So PageNumbers.js is the victim not the perpetrator. The real issue is (oh ${Gods}!) further upstream. This is going to need a larger hammer than even I can persuade you to wield… AuFCL (talk) 04:30, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

O.K. lost in a world of Gerrit but currently suspect is:

	/**
	 * Returns titles of a page namespace page from name of scan and page number
	 * If the title with an internationalized number doesn't exist and a page with
	 * arabic number exists, the title for the arabic number is returned
	 * @param $scan string scan name
	 * @param $number int page number
	 * @return Title|null
	 */
	protected static function getPageTitle( $scan, $number ) {
		global $wgContLang;

		$i18nNumber = $wgContLang->formatNum( $number, true );
		$title = Title::makeTitleSafe( self::getPageNamespaceId(), $scan . '/' . $i18nNumber );
		if ( $i18nNumber != $number && !$title->exists() ) {
			$arabicTitle = Title::makeTitleSafe( self::getPageNamespaceId(), $scan . '/' . $number );
			if ( $arabicTitle->exists() ) {
				return $arabicTitle;
			}
		}
		return $title;
	}

—out of ProofreadPage.body.php, or whatsoever its derivative may have become. Giving up for now (my failure). AuFCL (talk) 04:57, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

(Also (entirely unrelated because the process clearly does not work™): MediaWiki talk:Gadget-Easy LST.js AuFCL (talk) 05:42, 16 January 2016 (UTC))

Further down in ProofreadPage.body.php (in rather large function renderPages()) it appears the selected page is passed through MediaWiki:Proofreadpage pagenum template. Possibility for a debugging check/breakpoint (obviously on Test2! Not here!)? AuFCL (talk) 09:12, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

@AuFCL: Just dropping you a note that I stopped by and am now aware of your post but will need some time to absorb and then look into this further. -- George Orwell III (talk) 22:34, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

I see one of your fav. toys has "returned"

..so I'll lay off and let your fun continue. AuFCL (talk) 09:18, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

A floating image caption problem

Hi. I ran into a problem of a three line caption for {{FIS}} floating image HERE, which I tried to display properly but couldn't. Could you please look at it? Sorry to have forgotten. — Ineuw talk 01:22, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

I somewhat brutally simplified things. Hope that was O.K. AuFCL (talk) 01:48, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Nothing brutal about it, thanks.  — Ineuw talk 05:39, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Dear ${MONEY} why‥

‥(that got your attention!)‥are you persisting with this? Didn't you get the memo to the effect #wikiEditor-section-characters is so much closer to the hierarchy you seek? AuFCL (talk) 07:12, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

I understand that; I'm pondering options that go beyond altering just the character set(s) is all. -- George Orwell III (talk) 07:44, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Of course I was teasing. As it stands I am but guessing what you are really trying to achieve. AuFCL (talk) 08:37, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

valign/valignb usage associated with TOCs pretty useless

I noted your experiment and reversal here. It is stating to grate that the so-called CSS maintainers seem to lack motivation or ability to come up with useful cases so here comes trouble! If this is too dumb to contemplate then kindly restore your cerebral content from a recent backup as appropriate. You do take back-ups frequently don't you?

To be serious, a table representing a TOC rarely is a useful target for "traditional" classes "valign" or "valignb" and related. The most common case for three-or-more columns is for the first column cells to be top-aligned; and the third, fourth etc. to be bottom-aligned. By stretching a point I'd suggest applying hanging indentation to the second column alone, and whitespace:nowrap to the others. To save bloating your talk-page please see User:AuFCL/SandBox if interested. I am sure you will think of improvements. AuFCL (talk) 05:34, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

I'm of the same mind and spent a bit of yesterday separating .table-c75vtop into .tablev75 and .valign, etc. just for that reason & so I can eventually "bot out" the .valign and .valignb classes altogether (less than 250 uses I [believe]) to something-better-that-is-yet-to-be-defined.

And I'm also already thinking the same re: typical 1st, 2nd and 3rd cell usage as well but not convinced its worth it because of the table spanning more than one Page; transclusion thing. FuaxTables based on divs [apparently] eliminates all of that (proof-of-concept done test2.wikipedia.org btw).

So I was going to do something like you have in your sandbox now but only establishing the 1st and last cells with pseudo classes like :first-child / :last-child / :first-of-type / :last-of-type / etc. at first but now I'll play with your example next instead. -- George Orwell III (talk) 05:55, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Light the blue touch-paper and stand well clear. Thought this might stir up a reaction. AuFCL (talk) 06:24, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Need help in Bengali Wikisource

I have just import MediaWiki:Common.js to our MediaWiki:Common.js. Our main issue at mainspace page (NS:0) where trancluted page link shown as garbage. Please check at s:bn:চাঁদের পাহাড়/দ্বিতীয় পরিচ্ছেদ, you could see it. The MediaWiki:PageNumbers.js is also load from enws. ButMediaWiki:PageNumbers.js when I MediaWiki:PageNumbers.js load from old wikisource, the pagenumber shown properly instead of garbage. But then dynamic page layout with pagelayout option not working. So could you please check MediaWiki:PageNumbers.js to fix the issue in for Bengali Wikipedia. OR we can load MediaWiki:PageNumbers.js from local bnws with necessary change to fix this issue. Jayantanth (talk) 17:08, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

The bottom line is that the English variant, as "ugly garbage" the embedded links back to the Page: namespace may appear, still WORKS when you click on it. This and the fact the Display Options also work means there is nothing really 'broken' here on the English side. The major reason "we" moved away from importing oldwikisource variants was that only bits and pieces of the advertised options actually worked. You should try copying their mul:MediaWiki:Base.js and mul:MediaWiki:Proofreadpage pagenum template to see if that helps anything.

Either way, the root of the problem "seems" to be a language based one -- specifically the Arabic numbers (integers 1, 2, 3, etc.) are not being recognized and converted to their Bengali counterparts when using our script(s) causing the conversion to hex or whatever that is. I'm to sorry to say I have no idea how to fix something like that. You should try asking mul:User:Tpt or mul:User:Phe instead. -- George Orwell III (talk) 18:47, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you George Orwell III for prompt reply. As of now I have just copy paste the code mul:MediaWiki:Proofreadpage pagenum template to s:bn:MediaWiki:Proofreadpage pagenum template. Now garbage has gone. Previously that was copypaste from ENWS. But Now another issue comes, "Page links displayed/hidden" and "Page links beside text/within text" vanish from side menu. Only "Display option" exits. Any idea how to recover side menu options as ENWS? Jayantanth (talk) 19:54, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Fixed the issues after some trial and error. change the code s:bn:MediaWiki:Proofreadpage pagenum template. The same code of ENWS, just without of <includeonly></includeonly>. Now work perfect.Jayantanth (talk) 20:50, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

how to download from google books?

This book's upload, did you download it from Google? And if so, could you please post an image of the webpage? The reason for asking an image to see if I can access the same page from a Canadian IP. Have not been able to download any books directly from Google, and don't know why. Thanks. — Ineuw talk 23:15, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

@Ineuw: Have you tried toollabs:bub/ ? — billinghurst sDrewth 01:08, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. Didn't know about this. Will try it later tonight. — Ineuw talk 03:03, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

@Ineuw: - What is so "wrong" this file that you can't collect your senses and go to the sources parameter of the book template for the link I used from Google Books? -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:09, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Now now GOIII, you are jumping to conclusions, just like I do. Perhaps it's because we are related? After all, my mother and your mother are both mothers. :-) — Ineuw talk 00:50, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

By that reasoning so am I: mothers of sons of b…es? AuFCL (talk) 00:59, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

A different note on mediawiki:PageNumbers.js (& mea culpa)

You might cast your memory back to my influencing you to make this change? Well this proves there is a bug of minor consequence remaining—to which I currently have not the slightest inkling of a solution. In other words I realise now I mislead you at the time!

It appears if the very first item on a transcluded page happens to be a red-link itself, the page_span.parentNode.nextSibling logic as it stands homes in to the wrong DOM node with this result. I am undecided as to whether this issue is unique to the first page in the transclusion set; or perhaps the parser hierarchy has subtly changed since PageNumbers.js traversal logic was established. Either way, two heads aware of matter better than one?

This is far from being a priority matter; just a note you might find of interest. AuFCL (talk) 21:10, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

I am a bit lost - mostly because I do not "see" anything wrong (redlinked) at the example DNB page you linked. Can you elaborate? -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:17, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Well this is whats yuz gets when yuz is slow on the scene observing transient conditions. When I wrote the note on the 10th February, the first content element on that page happened to be a red-link to Author:Francis Henry Salvin—an item which Billinghurst added on 11th February. Now looking at the page on (well my time anyway) 13th Feb. the condition has "gone away."

If you recall I stated it was not a high-priority issue so don't bother further except to note somewhere in the background the code isn't perfect (as if you did not already know that!) AuFCL (talk) 00:45, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

@AuFCL:, as always -- I appreciate your interest & collaboration in such matters and apologize for my unavoidable "slowness" of late as well. It's this lack of free time that has forced me to reassess my "approach" and focus more on coming up with a replacement to the current nonsense on test2.wikipedia.org rather than trying to prune and pray with every incremental fix on the current bits here. I'd welcome your participation there as well if agreeable. -- George Orwell III (talk) 23:39, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Joking aside I am not holding said "slowness" as a mark against you. On the contrary thank you for the invitation and the expression of trust.

I have been (extremely casually) watching over there but to this point feel I am so far behind the eight-ball as to be unable to offer anything useful. Test2 is a good choice but no doubt suffers from a different set of eager "fixers"? (The last fully tongue-in-cheek: one person's prized sample fault for further analysis is another one's challenge to plaster over and obscure as quickly as possible. Sound familiar?) AuFCL (talk) 23:49, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Not when it comes to the ProofRead Page extension and related - nobody has cared what I do with it so far. Only the PR extension is active by default there - all the "supporting" scripts and bits are up to local (User:) activation; plus any MediWiki: template can be moved as a redirect from the Template: namespace (if not already). -- George Orwell III (talk) 00:22, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

You cunning sod. I am all admiration but wait: isn't that just a back-handed way of creating a #REDIRECT out of MediaWiki:-space into Template:? Or is there some special loophole-for-testing going on over there? Remember (and this is not a hint or request) I am not a sysop there. AuFCL (talk) 00:33, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Nothing special - it can be done anywhere including here except for the "rule" frowning upon no cross-namespace redirects in the first place (told you nobody says boo over there). I did it there on test2 for no other reason other than letting non-admins edit/revert stuff "normally" unavailable to them when normal residing in the MediaWiki namespace. Its also further evidence that the MediaWiki namespace is not meant for what amounts to a Template: to begin with. (e.g. the edit protection argument is moot). -- George Orwell III (talk) 01:11, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

I am proud to consider myself a technician rather than a politician in these matters. I am far more interested in the capabilities than the legalities at this point in the investigation. I cannot at this point in time recall where I read this but I believe the MediaWiki: name space is internally sub-classified three ways (umm. I think (java)scripting and CSS was one; $-substitution was another and the third might have been template-like? As you might tell my recollection is hazy. If I come across the reference again I'll shove it your way if you are interested.) [I think you politely side-stepped excreta bovinus, No?] AuFCL (talk) 01:48, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

I don't doubt that is stated somewhere as you say - all I'm saying is things like MediaWiki:Proofreadpage pagenum template are hacks or they'd be listed along with the rest of the PR message group but its not so it can't be thought of as legitimate usage of the MW namespace. Its just a manually made up template occupying the MW namespace for no good reason (other than to keep it "hidden" initially). -- George Orwell III (talk) 06:14, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

I am in total agreement on that point. I have not found the "mystery documentation" but in looking around note the third paragraph of meta:Help:System_message#Protection. Your ultimate let-out clause, should you ever want to use it, henceforth should be: "If an administrator wishes to allow general editing of a system message, a template call can be placed in the MediaWiki page, with the template containing the message itself." (Hey, it was in the official documentation, been there unchanged since a helpful IP editor introduced it in February, 2006. Wasn't me: U.S. based.) AuFCL (talk) 07:04, 14 February 2016 (UTC)