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).

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. Discussions are automatically archived after remaining inactive for five days.

« Archives, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205

Implementing the consensus to set Vector 2022 to full width by default

Given the WMF has refused to do so, and given that they have ignored my comment that if they don't we will, although we would prefer they do as the solution will be cleaner, I think our only option is for us to do this ourselves.

Alexis Jazz has been kind enough to provide the CSS required for us to do this, which can be seen here.

A demonstration of this code can be seen here; note that the flash of unstyled content only appears for the demo, and putting the code in your own vector-2022.css style sheet or in MediaWiki:Vector-2022.css does not result in it.

I'm putting the code here for review by the broader community; if no one sees any issue with it then in line with the consensus at the Vector 2022 rollback RfC I will make an edit request at MediaWiki talk:Vector-2022.css. BilledMammal (talk) 20:21, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

phab:T332505 and phab:T332426 haven't been "refused" at this point, interested technical editors are welcome to contribute a patch for the first. — xaosflux ^Talk 21:09, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

The WMF has made it clear through comments at Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Rollback of Vector 2022#Proposal for next steps following the closure of the Vector 2022 RfC that they will not be implementing full width as default; I believe that we made the right choice in the introduction of the limited width and that, for readers, we are continuing to make the right choice in the decision to keep it as the default, emphasis mine.

Given this, and given their failure to reply to this comment, I don't see any reason to believe that this will change, regardless of whether the phab tickets remain technically open, and as such we need to do this ourselves. BilledMammal (talk) 21:13, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

The test would be if there was refusal to promote the patch, doing this server side would be much preferable then client-side hacks, especially for logged out users. As far as DIY, if you have a patch ready submit it and see. — xaosflux ^Talk 21:16, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

I don't have a patch, but I think a comment from the Chief Product and Technical Officer for the Wikimedia Foundation saying that they are continuing to make the right choice in the decision to keep it as the default is sufficient test; I doubt they'll suddenly reverse their opinion because a patch permitting such an option was provided.

I'm also not particularly eager to spend time learning the WikiMedia code base so that I could create such a patch, as I see no reason to believe it would be accepted - I also note Izno's comment about whether a solution for this would be better done in style sheets. BilledMammal (talk) 21:25, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

FWIW, I tested that code snippet on test2wiki, and it is not ready as-is, many pages got forced in to an even-narrower viewport that could not be recovered from. Anything like this would need very very extensive testing (think of how much went in to the client-side darkmode hack, and there are still errors reported constantly). — xaosflux ^Talk 00:40, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Can you give an idea what sort of pages those appear in? I've also found an issue with preference/contribution/etc pages; I'm working on that one. BilledMammal (talk) 01:48, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Figured out part of the reason there are issues on contribution/category/etc pages; it's disabled by default there. This does mean that there is a bug in that the toggle shows up even on those pages; I've submitted a bug report. BilledMammal (talk) 02:46, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Mostly on every Special: page. Note, it isn't just the icon being there or not, that CSS made the entire page much worse. As I noted, this would need extensive testing across all pages and actions before we would ever consider it for production. — xaosflux ^Talk 09:51, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I wasn't clear; the bug with the toggle was unrelated except for the fact that I discovered it while looking into this. The reason it fails there is because by default the width toggle is disabled on pages in namespaces 12 and -1 (with the exception of user preferences); because this wasn't accounted for it resulted in some unexpected behavior.

Alexis Jazz has produced an updated script that fixes most of those issues, although I believe there are a couple still to resolve - I'll look into it further when I have time, and in the meantime hopefully it will become unnecessary because the WMF will agree to implement it on their end. BilledMammal (talk) 22:41, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

It also seems to break the full/limited width toggle for logged out users.. is the idea to prevent unregistered users from selecting a preference? — TheresNoTime (talk • they/them) 01:50, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

My tests suggest that it does work for logged out users, although there is still some work to be done per xaosflux - see the demonstration linked above. It could be that the version I'm currently working on broke something there? I've updated the link in the original post to a static container. BilledMammal (talk) 02:31, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

@Xaosflux: I looked into creating a patch, and believe I have something that would allow TNT's patch to work; see the bottom of phab:T332505. BilledMammal (talk) 07:42, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

@BilledMammal: I just wanted to note this somewhere; my interactions with Vector 2022 and the resultant RfC/discussions/etc. have been entirely in my capacity as a volunteer (and I include the above-mentioned patch in that). I'm always more than happy to help where I can though, up to and including writing patches and trying to "prod" the right people to take a look — TheresNoTime (talk • they/them) 08:19, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, it is appreciated. BilledMammal (talk) 09:04, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

You might have to translate for us mere non-coding mortals. Would that make it the default for English Wikipedia? North8000 (talk) 21:18, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

Yes, this CSS would make full width the default on the English wikipedia if added to MediaWiki:Vector-2022.css. BilledMammal (talk) 21:25, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi everyone, thank you for bringing this up. I just wanted to mention that the discussion on next steps is still ongoing on this page and we’re still working on the best way to proceed. We have presented a few different options for how all users can clearly choose which width they prefer, and which the community is currently discussing and weighing the pros and cons of. There is also discussion of how we can respect current existing user preferences on the width. We hope to allow a few more days for discussion and provide a summary and concrete next steps by Tuesday, April 4. @SDeckelmann-WMF is out this week, but will be back next week to continue the conversation. OVasileva (WMF) (talk) 01:01, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

@OVasileva (WMF): To clarify, are you saying that things have changed since 25 March and you will now be respecting the consensus to set the default for logged-out users as full width? BilledMammal (talk) 01:05, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Alexis Jazz has produced an updated version of the CSS file, which may have fixed the issues you saw Xaosflux; so far, I'm not noticing any. It can be found here. BilledMammal (talk) 09:04, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

---

All this is so sad, and I bet most people are tired of it. So there was a well hidden RFC, where someone snuck in a second question somewhere near the bottom of the page. And some people answered what they liked better, and there were some good arguments like why any publication ever published had limited line length. Expectedly, no agreement was reached. But hey, there's consensus, and we'll make the English Wikipedia different from any other Wikipedia in the World, and we're gonna push it just so we can show who's the boss. That RFC was like me standing in the long return line at Costco the other day; guess what, everyone had to say something against Costco, 100% consensus! 300 people is by no means a majority of users. It's not even a majority of this Wikipedia's administrators. But okay, keep pushing your agenda, enjoy your 1.5 foot line lengths. 2604:CA00:16B:990E:0:0:662:4239 (talk) 18:11, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

You are implying that the majority of arguments either way where WP:ILIKEIT, which is not the case. They presented considerations that involve the implications of the changes on the experience of all users, not just the preferences of the RfC's participants. It is also strange that you are calling one of the most participated-in RfCs of all time "well hidden," and the second question was there almost from the start. small jars tc 09:18, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

well hidden the RfC was listed at WP:CENT, notified at every applicable noticeboard and talk page, even including Donald Trump’s talk page for some reason, and reached WP:300 levels for support, WP:200 for oppose, and over 150 participants in the second question alone. Aaron Liu (talk) 02:01, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

English Wikipedia was already different from the rest of the world long before a Vector 2022 was ever considered. Every wiki is unique. Not sure what you were heading at there. Tvx1 21:24, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

---

I personally would wait to see what WMF does before diving into CSS. It is WP:NOTAVOTE, it is a consensus process. Whatever we do we should take into account practical considerations, like different screen sizes and devices. Maybe set the "limited width" to only take effect as soon as the screen is extended beyond a specific screen resolution (like 1080px)? This is a good compromise between those that want some fixed width and those that want unlimited width. Then we do not have to worry about window resizing or any of that nonsense. It could be an in-between toggle. Aasim - Herrscher of Wikis ❄️ 14:30, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Then the contention would be that the width that you need to go to before fixed width takes effect is wider than the scientific optimum. small jars tc 15:41, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

We already have a consensus on the matter. A “compromise” here is unacceptable. Default width needs to be default. Toa Nidhiki05 22:03, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Please also note that a hacky workaround like this can easily break if the skin gets redesigned. Vector 2022 is still a new skin, and there will certainly be changes to make the skin stable. We should certainly give it time to evolve to meet the needs of the community and its readers. I know of many of my tools that have broken because of redesigns. Let's not make this hack be one of them. Aasim - Herrscher of Wikis ❄️ 22:32, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

It’s almost like the skin isn’t ready for prime time. But regardless, WMF can resolve this but implementing unlimited width. I hope they do so. Toa Nidhiki05 01:27, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

V22 has been in the works for years and always based on v10, a sudden redesign to the width is very unlikely. Aaron Liu (talk) 02:02, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

Maybe not right now, but when they fully deploy? This will certainly be something that will need to be considered given the skin is still a WIP. I have a feeling the Vector 2022 that you see in seven or eight months will be a different skin than the Vector 2022 you see right now. Aasim - Herrscher of Wikis ❄️ 17:02, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

I don’t think they would make such a major change to limited width, a very small (code-wise) feature, after working on this skin for so long Aaron Liu (talk) 11:22, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

While technically any workaround would be our problem, in practice the WMF will need to be careful not to break it as they have a strong interest in not breaking enwiki. BilledMammal (talk) 18:09, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

Patch rejection and further consideration of the proposed CSS change

It appears that the WMF is not willing to consider the patch I proposed, and do not appear willing to produce a patch of their own. As such, our only option appears to be the CSS. I will review the code provided by Alexis Jazz further, to identify any remaining issues, and similar efforts by other editors would be appreciated. BilledMammal (talk) 02:36, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

If you're referring to T332505, it may be worth seeing what the outcome of the meeting tomorrow is? I'm not sure the only option is changing the sitewide CSS. — TheresNoTime (talk • they/them) 12:46, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

They don't consider your patch because a logged-out invert would require changing a variable in the source code instead of a dollar-sign preference. Aaron Liu (talk) 14:42, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

@Aaron Liu: Are you referring to where we replace the class name to switch? If you are I do it that way because the WMF's existing code does it that way and I wanted to minimize changes. BilledMammal (talk) 19:26, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Nevermind, it was something else but I got confused. Aaron Liu (talk) 20:37, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Nevermind again, I was right the first time. Wouldn't the logged-out users snippet change the behavior for every wiki instead of delegating the preference to a variable? Aaron Liu (talk) 20:38, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

@BilledMammal Aaron Liu (talk) 23:31, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

@Aaron Liu: No; implementing my change wouldn't change the behavior for any wiki. TNT's patch would then change the behavior for enwiki. BilledMammal (talk) 13:38, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

What percentage of editors use VisualEditor?

I use VisualEditor for almost everything I do on Wikipedia, and I'm curious to see how many people share my editing workflow, because it seems that on most edit histories that I view, the article edit history consists mostly of regular edits, not VE edits. Where can I obtain statistics on the usage share of VisualEditor? Thanks! Félix An (talk) 12:23, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

There's probably some way to get more exact statistics, but I just checked Special:RecentChanges, with the filters "Human (not bot)" and "Page edits". Filtered for the tag "#Visual edit", the last 500 edits go back ca. 35 minutes, while with the filter "not #Visual edit", the last 500 changes only go back 5 minutes. So I'd guess that means approximately 1 in 8 human edits is done with VisualEditor. I'm not sure whether it's possible to get actual statistics "per editor" instead of "per edit", but I can imagine that it'd be a bit more than 1 in 8, because I think editors who make a lot of edits are more likely to use the source editor, but that's just my hunch. --rchard2scout (talk) 13:39, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

To improve on this method slightly, I think it's better to compare "#Visual edit" to "#wikieditor (hidden tag)" (to exclude edits made with various gadgets), and to limit the results to the main namespace (as usage in other namespaces is very different, e.g. templates and talk pages have ~0 VE edits for obvious reasons). With this method, the last 500 changes were made in ~40 minutes in visual mode [1] and ~10 minutes in wikitext mode [2]. Matma Rex talk 18:53, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

You've got me interested enough to write a proper SQL query and try to actually count the users. Here's the best I got: https://quarry.wmcloud.org/query/73006

In March 2023, excluding bots and counting only edits in the main namespace, ~18% of users used only visual mode, ~49% used only wikitext mode, and ~3% used them both for different edits. 30% of users used neither of the main two editors; I haven't tried to dig into this, but I think this mostly accounts for alternative wikitext editing experiences (e.g. the mobile site editor, AutoWikiBrowser, 2017 wikitext editor) and gadgets.

No promises that I didn't make some mistake in the query… I'm particularly surprised by the 3% figure. Perhaps someone is willing to review it, or explore different angles. Matma Rex talk 20:24, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Are you surprised by the 3% because it seems low or high? If it seems high, it is possible that your query captured editors who made just one or two edits with VE, either unintentionally or because they were testing something. In the first three months of 2023, for example, I made 11,700 edits, including one lonely edit with VE. So I would be part of the "both editors" histogram column in a three-month sample. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:38, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

It seems low. I read comments all the time from people who use wikitext except for tables, or who use visual except for templates, etc., so I expected to see more of them here. I use both editors myself as well, so maybe I'm biased (although looking at my edits in March, I guess I would be counted as a wikitext-only editor in this query). Matma Rex talk 20:52, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Did your query account for "visual edit: switched" tags? I would expect people who use an editor for only one purpose are likely to switch mid edit. small jars tc 10:23, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

It didn't, but they should have been counted with the wikitext group (as that tag is only applied when switching to wikitext). I added it to the updated query below to be sure. Matma Rex talk 17:26, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

The 2017 Wikitext Editor is pretty much the source editor and should be included in that group. Snowmanonahoe (talk) 17:00, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

You're right, although it is used by very few people, so it barely has an effect on the results. Updated query: https://quarry.wmcloud.org/query/73050. Looks like about 0.5% of editors have used 2017 WTE, either exclusively or together with VE. Matma Rex talk 17:25, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

IMO it just makes the already-easy stuff easier and makes the other things that a newish editor needs to learn harder to learn. North8000 (talk) 14:16, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

I use both visual and source, frequently even using both in the same edit. I think markup and templating is far easier with source, while wikilinking and referencing (with the exception of {{sfn}}) is far easier with visual. I used to prefer visual for writing prose, but now I prefer source. Curbon7 (talk) 14:27, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

I use a mix of both. I say that because the 2017 Wikitext Editor (see Meta:2017 wikitext editor although it is out of date) is the Wikitext editor with tools from the visual editor (my favorite is the automatic citation tool which fills out all the needed params for {{cite web}} and various other citation templates automatically). I quite enjoy using it because it makes a lot of things easier while not limiting what I'm able to do (such as editing the Wikitext directly). ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 14:35, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

User:Salix alba/Citoid is a pretty good way to get the VE citation tool in wikitext 2010. DFlhb (talk) 12:43, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Die-hard source editor here. Totally agree with North8000. I suspect that visual might help me with complex tables once in a blue moon, but that's about it. In bygone days I suppose I would have been one of those who complained about the invention of the wheel, but something in me totally rejects the idea of clicking on an icon when I know just how to do it by hand - a bit like constructing a long bash command line. I'm obviously somewhere on the scale... (I'm only happy when it rains, I only like it when it's complicated) MinorProphet (talk) 18:27, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

North8000, Curbon7, Blaze Wolf, MinorProphet: I do not think Félix An expects to derive statistics from people remarking (forum-style) on their preferences here. Félix seems to be hoping for a clearer, more immediate approximation of editor usage. — JohnFromPinckney (talk / edits) 23:44, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

This handy spreadsheet says in Column R that 9.2% of non-bot edits on English Wikipedia used visual editor (from the start of Feb 2022 to the end of Jan 2023). Other wikis are generally quite a bit higher. How it breaks down by editor tenure is an interesting question though. the wub "?!" 19:11, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

I use toolbars frequently rather than typing in, e.g., <ref>...</ref>, -- ~~~~, and VE seems to lack those. Add in its very sluggish performance and I generally strive to avoid it. What I'd really like is a snappy visual editor with all of the tools available in the regular editor. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 12:33, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Visual editor: I typically use visual editor for everything I can. I resisted this for quite a while, but visual editor evolved quite rapidly and in the right direction. One of the things that would be useful is a drive to add content to templates to make them fully compatible with the visual editor. I find it unfortunate that I cannot use visual editor for talk pages, actually. There are, of course, things that are much easier in wikitext or even impossible in visual editor, so I am a switcher on an as needed basis. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 01:34, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Your response doesn't seem to help answer the question Where can I obtain statistics on the usage share of VisualEditor?, nor are we collecting !votes here. — JohnFromPinckney (talk / edits) 03:42, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Images not displaying in the Android app

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T334827

Is anyone looking into this? Except for the first imsge in an article, captions only are displayed. Images do work in a mobile browser which iscreally annoying because like I don't already habe enough browser tabs open. 2601:1C0:CC00:45D0:A8FB:FF04:A450:D26D (talk) 07:52, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

I have the same problem but on iOS. I’m currently on the app right now, and I can only see the top image, but the rest are only captions. Hummerrocket (talk) 03:29, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

I've seen more reports and i also noticed it myself in an article now. Filed a ticket. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 09:01, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

I can confirm this for different Android Versions, Custom Roms and last App Versions installed from Play Store and F-Droid. I excluded Problems with AdBlocker DNS Filters etc. 2A01:C22:90B7:2500:78C7:C126:ACED:7045 (talk) 11:43, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

We reverted a patch that landed last week that combined with caching caused the issue. I added some details for the root cause at the ticket. For new requests things should be working fine. In case JS assets are cached on the client side images are going to be eventually fixed when client side cache expires. JGiannelos (WMF) (talk) 16:07, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

pageviews.wmcloud.org

There is no older views statistics than 2015? Eurohunter (talk) 11:22, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

The FAQ points to stats.grok.se, which is down, which points to WikiShark, which appears to be working and provide stats back to 2008. Nardog (talk) 15:04, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

@Nardog: Do you know why there are differences for year 2020 for Basshunter article between pageviews.wmcloud.org and WikiShark? Eurohunter (talk) 21:12, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

@Eurohunter Since July 2015, I assume it's exactly the same data. Before then, it used a very different metric called pagecounts. It should not be used in side-by-side comparisons with pageviews as they are fundamentally different metrics. — MusikAnimal ^talk 16:55, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Maybe they're using different criteria or timezone? WikiShark appears to be roughly equivalent to pageviews.wmcloud.org when you set the platform to "Desktop" and the agent to "User". Nardog (talk) 18:51, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Military ribbon categories

Due to the recent creation of new {{MilAward Desc}} and {{MilAward Ribbon}} templates to format military decorations in articles, there's a cluster of redlinked "Recipients of [military award]" categories that keeps turning up at Special:WantedCategories because the creator of the templates used complex module coding (see Module:MilAward) that's automatically generating them. They're typically populated by just one person, and thus can't necessarily be justified for creation yet — and while I have been able to make them go away by manually wrapping the implicated template in {{suppress categories}}, it isn't a viable long-term solution if this continues.

The most recent suspects were Category:Recipients of Order of Mendi, Category:Recipients of the Order of Merit (Chile) and Category:Recipients of the Order of Precious Tripod; at the same time, the templates' use on a personal sandbox page in the creator's own userspace also generated the nonsense Category:MilAward DescList, Category:MilAward PostNom and Category:MilAward Stack.

As of now, they've all been cleaned out with the suppress categories wrapper, but the problem is likely to recur in the future. So I wanted to ask if somebody with more experience in JavaScript coding than I've got can (a) ensure that the module only generates categories that exist, while not generating redlinks, and (b) ensure that the module suppresses all categories if the template is used on draft or userspace pages?

Gracias. Bearcat (talk) 14:52, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Have you asked the author about fixing these issues? I didn't find any discussion on Editor BoonDock's talk page nor at Template talk:MilAward Desc, Template talk:MilAward Ribbon, or Module talk:MilAward. Don't you think that the fist place to discuss this issue is with the template/module author?

—Trappist the monk (talk) 15:46, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

No. Noone has spoke to me about this. BoonDock (talk) 15:47, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Ok, so this is my suggested solution.

1. Only generate categories in mainspace

2. Check that the categories exist before adding them. Like this:

local categoryTitle = mw.title.new('Category:' .. mw.text.trim('Recipients of Order of Mendi'))
if categoryTitle.exists and not categoryTitle.isRedirect then
    -- category exists and is not a redirect
else
    -- category does not exist or is a redirect
end

BoonDock (talk) 15:55, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

This is what I have added to the module.

local namespace = mw.title.getCurrentTitle().nsText
if string.len(namespace) < 2 then
    local recipcat = data[code].RecipCat or "" -- If there is a recipient category specified, then add it to the output
    output = output .. " [[Category:MilAward Ribbon Description]]" -- Add tracking Category
    if string.len(recipcat) > 0 then
        local categoryTitle = mw.title.new('Category:' .. mw.text.trim(recipcat))
            if categoryTitle.exists and not categoryTitle.isRedirect then
                -- category exists and is not a redirect
                output = output .. " [[Category:" .. recipcat .. "]]"
            else
                -- category does not exist or is a redirect
           end
        end
end

Please see if that fixes the problem for you. BoonDock (talk) 16:12, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

As I indicated at Template talk:MilAward Desc, I believe that this template was, and still is, failing to comply with WP:TEMPLATECAT. Further discussion should probably happen there (and this thread should have started there). – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:09, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

From WP:TEMPLATECAT

“ When templates are used to populate administration categories, ensure that the code cannot generate nonsensical or non-existent categories ”

I thought that's what we were dealing with which I have now fixed. BoonDock (talk) 18:12, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

@BoonDock administration categories are categories used for the behind the scenes running of the project, things like Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as empty articles, Category:Pages translated from German Wikipedia or Category:Articles with VIAF identifiers. What you are adding are content categories, for which the appropriate part of the guidance is the bit that stats However, it is recommended that articles not be placed in ordinary content categories using templates in this way... 192.76.8.66 (talk) 20:12, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Ok. It's clear now. It's a recommendation which is why I didn't focus on it too much. How much weight should I give the recommendation? BoonDock (talk) 20:14, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

As you say it's a recommendation rather than a bright line rule, some people do have very strong feelings about automatic categorisation, but there isn't an overall community consensus to ban it. If you're going to add automatic categorisation the most important thing is to make sure that it isn't disruptive, there are a lot of editors who work on categorisation, and having special:WantedCategories flooded with nonsensical categories or a bunch of non-articles showing up in content categories due to a malfunctioning module will upset people (as you've just seen). A few ideas you might want to consider include making sure only pages in the right namespace are categorised, making sure the template doesn't add non-existent categories and having some built in way in the template to disable automatic generation of categories for cases where someone wants to categorise an article manually. Bear in mind that regardless of how well written your template documentation is at some point someone is going to put something wrong into the parameters, your template needs to be able to cope with that. It might also be worth considering using a hidden maintenance category to track pages where the module couldn't add content categories automatically - in those cases it might be that either a new category is required or one of the input parameters is wrong.

Other editors may want to weigh in here? 192.76.8.66 (talk) 20:37, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Ok, that's fair. I have been addressing the issues as they've surfaced, but let me just enumerate them here.

1. Checks for namespace and any namespace other than main, nothing is added
2. Checks for non-existent category. Does not add
3. Checks for redirect category. Does not add
4. There is only one "recipient" category possible per entry in the data table. This can only be added by adding to the correct field in the data table. There is NO way to do this from the template, whether on purpose or by accident by misconfiguring. If a category is added to the data table, it goes through the checks above, so that should prevent 99.999% of those cases you refer to. If it's a "malicious" edit to the data table, that's the same as a vandalism/disruptive edit and will get reverted asap just like any article edit.
5. A flag on the template to prevent addition of the category is definitely a good idea. I'll write that in and report back when done.
6. Two things about the maintenance cat.
   1. I've been beaten up enough about adding maint cats to want to avoid doing it at all.
   2. I cannot see the utility anyway because the module is written as I've outlined above to make checks any way. It's difficult (impossible) to prove a negative. It would be simple to create a maint category for all pages where a recipient category HAS been created, and I'll happily do that if there is consensus that that's required.

I think that covers everything.

One further thought. This isn't about an arbitrary adding of categories. The thought is that if you add in the article a display of an award then you are saying that person is a recipient of the award and thus the category. What I have not catered for is the case where the template is used on a page about the award, which would add that page to the recipient's list. That is specifically where the toggle option in point 5. above would be perfect.

I'll be interested to read other opinions/suggestions on the issue. BoonDock (talk) 20:54, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

There is now a parameter option "nocat". Calling the template {{MilAward Desc|PP|nocat=AnyGarbageYouLike}} will stop it adding the categories.

    if string.len(nocat) > 1 then -- If ANYTHING has been specified as a value for nocat, then it's true
        -- Do nothing or add to tracking category?
    else
        -- Need to exclude adding the recipient category if it is not in mainspace.
        -- for now, that means checking it's not in "Template:" or "User:" space
        local namespace = mw.title.getCurrentTitle().nsText
        if string.len(namespace) < 2 then
            local recipcat = data[code].RecipCat or "" -- If there is a recipient category specified, then add it to the output
            --output = output .. " [[Category:MilAward Ribbon Description]]" -- Add tracking Category -- Note commented out
            if string.len(recipcat) > 0 then
                local categoryTitle = mw.title.new('Category:' .. mw.text.trim(recipcat))
                if categoryTitle.exists and not categoryTitle.isRedirect then
                    -- category exists and is not a redirect
                    output = output .. " [[Category:" .. recipcat .. "]]"
                else
                    -- category does not exist or is a redirect
                    -- Add to a tracking Category ???
                end
            end
        end
    end

BoonDock (talk) 00:46, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

One further (belated) observation is that I might have predisposed people against what I'm doing during the development of the templates/modules. In my defence, I learnt to program in Lua three days ago ;-) Mea Culpa, mea maxima culpa. BoonDock (talk) 20:57, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Ghost CSD tags

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T157670

For a few days now the listing at CAT:CSD and inside {{CSD-categories}} has been counting one page in the WP:G5 category and three in the WP:G11 category, but the corresponding categories (Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as having been created by blocked or banned users and Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as spam) have no members. I have purged the main category and the subcategories as well as the template, but the issue remains. Is there like a back-end way to reset these? Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 13:20, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Given that {{PAGESINCATEGORY:Candidates for speedy deletion as having been created by blocked or banned users}}}} is returning 0 (1), I'm guessing this is an issue along the lines of T224360, T85696 and/or T221795. recountCategories.php is run monthly which should prevent most drift, but it may need running again for enwiki — this recounts all categories though, so I wouldn't feel entirely comfortable running it without getting the OK from someone "in the know" — TheresNoTime (talk • they/them) 13:57, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

In the meantime, queries like this (a specific category) or this (a depth-1 category tree) can usually find the broken page; restoring and redeleting it often fixes it. —Cryptic 02:15, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

...or at least, they can usually find it when Quarry isn't hung. The problem pages were Draft:Bucked Up (both G5 and G11 cats), Draft:Jack Carden, and Draft:SAMM - Smart Automatic Meal Maker, and the counts are good now. —Cryptic 02:29, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Adding a new barnstar to the default wikilove options

Hi! I'd like to add a barnstar to the default list wikilove uses (in my personal installation of wikilove through User:Ocaasi/WikiLoveinstallscript), how may I do so? Note, I'm not seeking to change the defaults for every user just for myself. — Ixtal ^{( T / C )} ⁂ Non nobis solum. 15:54, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

It doesn't appear that script is currently working. The documentation for adding custom WikiLove messages is at mw:Extension:WikiLove#Custom configuration. Nardog (talk) 23:39, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

(Echo) notification for email containing excerpt

I received a (formerly known as Echo) notification of an email. From what I recall in the past, the notification shown when you click on the alert icon used to just say that you got an email from another user, as seen in the image at Help:Notifications § Email received. However this time there was a brief excerpt of the start of the message. I didn't think any of the message was stored. Has the message or an brief excerpt always been stored? isaacl (talk) 01:40, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

It hasn't been stored always, but it has been apparently since February 2016: T121831#2023926. The screenshot on the help page you linked is, funnily enough, from January 2016! Matma Rex talk 01:49, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the info! I see from the Phabricator ticket that the subject line is stored, unless it's the default, in which case the first line of the email is stored. That's good to know for privacy purposes... isaacl (talk) 02:02, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Tech News: 2023-16

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

• You can now see nearby articles on a Kartographer map with the button for the new feature "Show nearby articles". Six wikis have been testing this feature since October. [3][4]
• The Special:GlobalWatchlist page now has links for "mark page as read" for each entry. This feature request was voted #161 in the 2023 Community Wishlist Survey. [5]

Problems

• At Wikimedia Commons, some thumbnails have not been getting replaced correctly after a new version of the image is uploaded. This should be fixed later this week. [6][7]
• For the last few weeks, some external tools had inconsistent problems with logging-in with OAuth. This has now been fixed. [8]

Changes later this week

• The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 18 April. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 19 April. It will be on all wikis from 20 April (calendar).

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

MediaWiki message delivery 01:52, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Graph extension disabled per immediate effect

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T334940

Because of a security problem, the Graph extension has been disabled with immediate effect. More information will follow as it becomes available. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 09:03, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Okay, that obviates my coming here to report that {{page views}} is broken everywhere. I'll subscribe here, but if you report elsewhere, please add a link here, and a {{tracked}} template, as appropriate so I can monitor. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 09:47, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

It's in phabricator as Phab:T334895, but the task is restricted. 192.76.8.66 (talk) 10:42, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Notes from T334940 — An update will go out later today, and in the meantime purging the pages cache should clear the raw wikitext — TheresNoTime (talk • they/them) 12:49, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

FYI An update will go out later today appears to mean "an announcement about the problem" and not a fix — TheresNoTime (talk • they/them) 13:13, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

An update has been posted on the wikitech-ambassadors mailing list, and it seems a MassMessage will go out tomorrow — TheresNoTime (talk • they/them) 23:41, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Problem with { { Graph:Chart } } ?

Article/section Ittoqqortoormiit#Population contains a { { Graph:Chart } } construct that does not display in the Chrome or Firefox browsers.

Notes: I don't know how to suppress WP formatting inside editing panes. A Web search and a reading of the WP manual of style did not reveal how to do this. I don't know how to submit WP bug reports, nor do I wish to know. David Spector (talk) 12:37, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

@David spector: The Graph extension has been temporarily disabled, see above. —Kusma (talk) 12:39, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Graphs disabled message

I have created {{Graphs disabled}} for use on significant documentation pages. It can just be blanked when graphs are working again but I suggest to not add it to numerous low profile pages when the problem is expected to be so brief. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:06, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Sounds good: a temporary problem that is being fixed; thank you. I hope all the uses are on "low profile pages". David Spector (talk) 13:16, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

I misread the intent of the template, but what I just did still feels like it works. See WT:WPAFC I'm not sure if this is a good solution as for those who are just browsing Wikipedia might not know what a template documentation page is and might be confused as to why the graph isn't showing. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 13:27, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

It was intended for documentation pages about graphs. I have added an option |missing for places where a graph should have been displayed. That's a lot of places and I'm not sure how many temporary notices it's worth adding. It would be more practical if any use of <graph>...</graph> automatically displayed an interface message like MediaWiki:Graphs disabled. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:56, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

That would definitely help. And I realized that its intended for documentation pages after i Had already added it because I read it too quickly. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 13:58, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

I for one oppose any need for a "Graphs disabled" message in mainspace; those in the know should just comment out graphs for the time being until this boondoggle gets fixed. (Hopefully this doesn't impugn on progress of inline SVG support.) – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 15:09, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

There is often associated content referring to the non-displayed graph. Commenting out the relevant parts may be non-trivial and it may not be uncommented quickly or at all when graphs return. The template can immediately be changed to display nothing when they return. If graphs were expected to be missing for a long time then a prettier but more work-demanding solution would be better but for a probably short term problem, I think it's good to have a simple option. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:24, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Graphs are a very important part for illustration on Wikipedia. From "Demographics" section of geographical locations to "Polling" & "Results" section of elections to articles on geological periods to articles on a specific genus. I'd suggest that MediaWiki:Sitenotice be called with the text "Due to some technical issues, most Graphs on Wikipedia are not visible. Inconvenience caused is regretted." I said, "most graphs" because some graphs also exist as svg/png on commons with should be visible, and readers should not have to face technical jargon like "extensions", etc. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 16:15, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

If consensus exists for a notice, something simple and non-obtrusive, to the effect of "Graphs are currently unavailable due to technical issues", no template boxes or red error text, or anything too flashy, would probably be best while this is sorted. It's already embarrassing enough that stuff like this happens in the current year, we shouldn't bring too much flash or attention to it while the devs work to fix it. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 16:20, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Ahead of a proper communication that WMF is coming up with, I will say that it is now possible to display a custom message in place of the graphs, it is done by replacing MediaWiki:Graph-disabled content, empty by default, with a custom notice (such as an Ambox). There is also now a tracking category "Category:Pages with disabled graphs" showing the pages that used to contain graphs. The tracking category's name and description can be changed by editing MediaWiki:Graph-disabled-category and MediaWiki:Graph-disabled-category-desc interface messages. --Base (talk) 19:50, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

How about this? —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 20:01, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

As source of inspiration, in Ukrainian Wikipedia we currently went with a standard Ambox icon and "There was supposed to be a graph or a diagram here, but its rendering is currently disabled for technical reasons. Please do not remove the code that is causing this message. Developers are already working on restoring the normal rendering of the graph or diagram." --Base (talk) 20:13, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

I find this one more precise and appropriate to be shown. Thanks for sharing. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 20:15, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

The missing graphs are probably confusing a lot of users so I have created MediaWiki:Graph-disabled with the suggested text. The text is still open for discussion but I wanted something out quickly. I guess there is no job queue to update affected pages so they have to be purged or edited to display it. See 4 Vesta#Physical characteristics for an example I purged. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:04, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

The ! in the red stop sign is quite alarming, while no action by reading user is required, not even by wikipedia editors.

Suggestion: use a 'information' sign, a white 'i' in a blue circle with the text:

"Sorry, we experience technical issues with this graph. It will reappear as soon as the developers have solved the problem." Uwappa (talk) 21:16, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

On 4 Vesta#Physical characteristics (screenshot of former display)

It looks a bit wonky for me because the notice has margins that squish it. It appears the notice has been propagated to all graphs on enwiki. SWinxy (talk) 21:21, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

I have toned it down to the default icon and no bold.[9] PrimeHunter (talk) 21:43, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. Suggested text finetuning:

"Graphs are temporarily unavailable due to technical issues."

The temporarily will indicate that a solution is on its way. Uwappa (talk) 21:55, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

I may not be editing for a couple of hours but other admins are free to make changes. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:01, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

I think this one would be better as "i" is for information pages. I actually like the unbolded text. And Uwappa's suggestion is good too. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 22:01, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

I don't think that image can be used since the file isn't protected. Galobtter (talk) 22:08, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

 Done seems reasonable. Galobtter (talk) 22:04, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

“The temporarily will indicate that a solution is on its way” lemme just do some expectation management here…. this extension is thoroughly unmaintained for over 6 years. I do not expect this to be quickly fixed. It should be noted that there were already discussions about potentially having to remove the entire extension even before the latest problem. I’m sure some ppl are looking into what is possible, but I’d be really surprised if this is fixed within a month. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 22:40, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

TheDJ, thanks for that. Expectation management is always helpful. If you have any insight into how fixing a problem like this is prioritized, that might help us at VPT understand whether we should work on implementing any workarounds in the meantime. As far as I can tell, this outage has affected at least 60,000 pages here at en.WP. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:22, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

I agree that the notice feels squished. I had tried to apply the style parameter to width:100% so that empty space on either side can be eliminated but that overflowed the notice box on the right side which is not good. I guess someone has a better idea for it. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 22:05, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Okay, this one unsquishes it: {{notice|style=width:100%;margin:0;|text=Graphs are temporarily unavailable due to technical issues.}} —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 22:07, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

I was trying just margin:0 but that didn't work. Thanks!  Done Galobtter (talk) 22:09, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

It looks good in the image frame and outside one. {{annual readership}} has been replaced with a custom notice by RedRose. SWinxy (talk) 22:18, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

The red icon is too disruptive and flashy. Text alone will do the job of explaining technical problems without calling undue attention to behind-the-scenes work. The current {{Annual readership}} notice is perfect. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 16:10, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Category:Pages with disabled graphs

There's a bunch of pages linked to Category:Pages with disabled graphs but that category has never existed and I don't know what to do with them. —Lights and freedom (talk ~ contribs) 19:40, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

The category has now been created with an explanation. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:54, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Clarification

What is this "security problem", what does security have to do with little graphs and charts and things in Wikimedia articles? I wish we heard at least a little bit more of an explanation. ɱ (talk) 00:11, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

@Ɱ Code with vulnerabilities can ostensibly be "hacked" to use to run malicious code in places it otherwise couldn't. For WP:BEANS reasons, its best to not elaborate :) CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 01:19, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

What malicious code could be put in a graph box? 'Click here for a spam site'? Is it worth pulling it rather than fixing it quietly, if there's nobody actively misusing this code? ɱ (talk) 02:26, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

I don't know the security problem but mw:Extension:Graph uses JavaScript which means it intentionally runs code in the user's browser. See JavaScript#Security for some general problems. Some people disable JavaScript completely in their browsers for security reasons. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:46, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Do graphs really need javascript? Can't graphs be just server side generated images? Is javascript only required just for mouseover effect? Will we avoid all javascript by deleting the mouseover effect? Uwappa (talk) 06:34, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Graphs used to be server-side generated images, but that was removed because that was also showing its age, and in worse ways. I like the rollovers myself, as it happens, which were not possible before; the loss of course is that graph content isn't served to users who turn their JavaScript off. Izno (talk) 06:54, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Moving away from graphs

TheDJ said it: this extension is thoroughly unmaintained for over 6 years. I do not expect this to be quickly fixed. Moving away from graphs is going to be tough, but not impossible. Some graphs are fully automated (e.g. {{annual readership}}) while others are partially automated (e.g. {{Television ratings graph}}). Would this be desired by the community? SWinxy (talk) 01:18, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

@SWinxy If by "this", you mean removing graphs altogether, no. Graphs are a fundamental aspect of conveying data, and this is an encyclopedia. Getting rid of coded in graphs would be a major headache, because they would need to be replaced by photos of graphs (photo-graphs :P), or other work arounds. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 01:46, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Yes, coded graphs! Ditching graphs altogether would be a bit of a challenge... SWinxy (talk) 01:51, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Graphs are used on Wikisource to identify those works that are being read / accessed the most. The information helps drive our choices as to what publications we will put our efforts into next. We'd need a viable alternative before the extension is discontinued. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:20, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

I think it's a bit premature to be worrying about removal/replacement. One of the suggestions on the public task is just to upgrade to a maintained version of the software package used and then do the remove/replaces necessary to fix the onwiki versions to the required standard. Izno (talk) 06:56, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

This. Don't jump the gun. This needs thorough analysis and then likely work. That can be between 3 days and 90 days or no further work at all. There really is no telling at this stage. Remember, everyone was working on their thing they are supposed to work on and now several people have been thrown into a big tumbling washing machines with work that is unscheduled and needs to happen next to other work they cannot let rest and delaying the rest, completely upending planning and scheduling. The only thing that might change anything at all, is expressing how much you appreciate and/or need graphs and how you use them. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 08:13, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

@TheDJ: well said, thank you — you should be a technical spokesperson or something..! — TheresNoTime (talk • they/them) 08:43, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Understood. I wanted to float the idea. SWinxy (talk) 16:55, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Hell no, we should be doing more inline code, with inline SVG support and whatnot, not less. In any event, I don't think anything will come of this in the long-term except hopefully more proactive maintenance. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 16:13, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

+1 —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 18:21, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Preventing future issues

Any plans by the WMF or volunteers to check all other official extensions for use of outdated libraries? Any plans to implement new processes to make sure libraries don't get out-of-date in the future? DFlhb (talk) 12:13, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

They (un-maintained extensions) are documented and supposed to be handled at phab:project/profile/3144/. WMF's CTO (Chief Technical Officer), miss Deckelmann, is supposed to handle that, but she has not done so yet. There is also a list over who handles which extension and service at mw:Developers/Maintainers. Any further questions should be answered by WMF.--Snævar (talk) 16:04, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Probably not in any systematic way. There doesn't appear to be enough software engineer time available to assign maintainers to all unmaintained software. Software gets created, then the software engineers / WMF teams move on to other projects. –Novem Linguae (talk) 19:37, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

There are some existing efforts here. libraryupgrader2.wmcloud.org is fairly prolific in updating outdated or vulnerable dependencies via gerrit change sets, see: https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/q/owner:tools.libraryupgrader%2540tools.wmflabs.org. But it has its limits and some changes must be manually reviewed. The Security Team also checks for outdated and vulnerable dependencies as part of any manual application security review request. And we are building out some SCA tooling for repos hosted at gitlab.wikimedia.org. These efforts could, of course, be expanded and accelerated. Though I would note that the way the Vega dependencies were "built" within the Graph extension was problematic, as they were not referenced within package.json and were therefore difficult to analyze, especially for an extension with no actual active maintainers. We're hoping to address this and several other issues in our current efforts to get the Graph extension reenabled on the projects. SBassett (WMF) (talk) 19:52, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Community Wishlist item for 5 years

FWIW, I'd like to remind that the Graph extension we are were using is very outdated and the community has been asking for 5 years to upgrade it to the latest build. In 2023, it was the #49 request in CWS: m:Community Wishlist Survey 2023/Multimedia and Commons/Update Vega to the latest build. I suspect that the security issue could've been resolved if it were upgraded. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 17:40, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Excellent link. This is yet another reason that I have given up on the CWS process. Regular editors, including myself, are not great at identifying which proposed improvements and projects are actually important for the continued operation of MediaWiki sites. Requests for shiny new features typically get a lot more support than boring stuff like "update the back-end software that drives a process that tens of thousands of pages depend on and for which there is no easy alternative". – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:48, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

It's outrageous how incompetent the WMF is. Everybody has known for years that the Graph extension was using outdated software and needed to be updated. This is critical software that is used in millions of pages. Nothing has been done for over 5 years! What were all the hundreds of paid developers doing in the meanwhile? Ita140188 (talk) 07:29, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

By that logic. Considering it is open source.... YOU also didn't do anything and thus you also are incompetent. There is too much code for the amount of developers, this is nothing new. Also it's not used by millions of pages. It's about 60 000 for en.wp, or just 16k articles. It's tiny compared to most extensions in use. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 08:30, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Sorry for the million hyperbole written out of frustration, it is still a lot of pages that get a lot of views every day. This problem has been known for years and reported several times, it was just waiting to happen. If doing basic maintenance of the underlying Mediawiki software also should be the editor's responsibility, it makes me wonder why are we paying millions of dollars every year to WMF developers? What exactly are they doing? Ita140188 (talk) 09:52, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

There are literally feeds of the 30000 tickets opened and closed each year and all the change sets in gerrit where you can find that out. Running a top 10 website for a couple hundred wikis each with their own configuration requires a lot of work. Also, not everyone codes, there is testing, releasing, datacenter operations, the couple thousand of software projects made by users/editors, fundraising infrastructure for dozens of countries in the world, etc etc etc. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 10:50, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Are they doing everything I want? Definitely not. Do they have the resources to do everything I want? Of course not. They have to set priorities, and disagreeing with your priorities is not evidence of incompetence.

Now, if you're in a position to fund the development you want, I'm sure that they would pay attention. Even then they would have the final say on what to do when. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 11:06, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Graph extension disabled

Yesterday the Wikimedia Foundation noted that in the interests of the security of our users, the Graph extension was disabled. This means that pages that were formerly displaying graphs will now display a small blank area. To help readers understand this situation, communities can now define a brief message that can be displayed to readers in place of each graph until this is resolved. That message can be defined on each wiki at MediaWiki:Graph-disabled. Wikimedia Foundation staff are looking at options available and expected timelines. For updates, follow the public Phabricator task for this issue: T334940

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:36, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Update on graphs: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T334940#8798354

Over the last few days engineers have been exploring an approach that will add Vega 5 support for the Graph Extension. The goal is restore as much graph rendering as possible in the shortest timeframe. This aim to address the vulnerabilities found but most importantly to restore as much of the extensions previous state. We will also be updating the D3.js library from version 3.5.17 -> 7.8.4. The Vega 1 and Vega 2 libraries will be removed from the graph extension.

In terms of expectations:

• Initially the graph extension with Vega5 may only be supported on modern browsers (approximately 2017 or newer). This is due to some issues with ES5 builds and MediaWiki in the most recent versions of Vega. It’s hoped this can be resolved with a build step to restore functionality to MediaWiki's full supported browser stack.
• A compatibility layer that maps Vega 2 community graphs to Vega aims to allow current Vega 2 syntax to work with Vega 5, but our expectation is that some <graph> syntax might need to be updated in some places.
• We are building in some more sustainable error handling code. They will load and display an error thumbnail if the graph cannot be displayed. The purpose of this is to allow us to turn some graphs on and get a better sense of which graphs need to be prioritized. When graphs fail to render they will also send an error to our client logs so we can track them and later fix them.

Security will be reviewing the updated Vega 5 and D3.js libraries and the threat model associated with this approach, and release of the update is gated on a successful security review. We want to be as confident as possible that the approach is secure and correct.

We are assembling a small group of engineers from across a number of teams to see how much additional progress we can make on Graph between now and May 5, and will be working iteratively on our approach. We will continue to share updates along the way here on Phabricator. If we hit major blockers (e.g., security or library complexities we can't quickly resolve in the order of days or a couple weeks), we will be sure to share this information whilst we establish next steps. Our hope is that we can avoid difficult tradeoffs where we would need to keep Graph disabled for a long time, but we also need to acknowledge that this is a distinct possibility.

Seddon (WMF) (talk) 14:59, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

@Seddon (WMF), maybe you missed it, but ES6 is now the minimum required version of JavaScript, plus one or two functions from ES2017ish timeframe that @TheDJ has mentioned elsewhere (Promise.finally I think was one). So not sure why ES5 is mentioned above as the source of an issue? Izno (talk) 16:19, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

@Izno The short answer is that Vega provides either a full or what they term an ES5 build. They don't do intermediate builds. Seddon (WMF) (talk) 17:40, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

lol Izno (talk) 22:25, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Software Stable Release Infobox

The Stable Release field on the SponsorBlock infobox is broken, displaying every version number instead of just the latest. I've compared the wikitext for the infobox to other software articles and it looks to be the same so I've no idea what is actually causing this. It could be Wikidata itself causing the issue but I'm afraid I just don't know enough about this to tell. Any help would be appreciated as it's been like this for a number of months now. – Mesidast (talk) 10:21, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

d:Q103887994#P348 is missing a 'preferred rank' which has been removed by a bot: d:Special:Diff/1877574242. hgzh 12:05, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

I created a section about this problem at the talk page of the template in November 2022. --Kallichore (talk) 16:16, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

As User:Jonesey95 pointed out the number of sites with this problem can be found using the search function here: currently 22 articles with this problem are found. --Kallichore (talk) 16:38, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

What's the best way to set my preferences for editing, particularly adding citations?

Besides the usual, eg a toolbar with strike, etc., I want to be able to add citations easily - ie for journals, news, books, etc by adding either details or using an url. I must have messed something up. Using the Vector 2022. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 16:14, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

@Doug Weller: Have you tried using the 2017 Wikitext Editor? While that does make use of the feature through a toolbar that sounds like what you might be looking for. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 16:23, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Sounds like you accidentally disabled refToolbar. Nardog (talk) 16:51, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

@Nardog I'm sure I have, can't figure out how to get it back. I must have something ticked that I shouldn't. So many options! Doug Weller talk 17:00, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

It's in the Gadgets tab. You can also use the new search box at the top. Nardog (talk) 17:11, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

@Nardog @Blaze WolfEnabled but I don’t get it. Can’t find the 2017 Wikitext Editor even through the nifty search box. Thanks, sorry to be a pain. Doug Weller talk 17:33, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

@Doug Weller: That's because the 2017 Wikitext Editor is currently in beta. It's under the "Beta features" tab as "New Wikitext editor". ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:36, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf That’s part of the Visual editor isn’t it? Which I don’t like. I feel pretty useless right now! :) But as I need to add a lot of sources… Doug Weller talk 17:50, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

@Doug Weller: Technically yes. However it behaves just like the source editor except it has the visual editor's toolbar. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:07, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf what I had before was the Ref toolbar. Doug Weller talk 18:27, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

@Doug Weller: Yes I realize that now, I misinterpreted what you were asking. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:29, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

AFAIK refToolbar isn't compatible with the 2017 editor. Do you at least see the toolbar buttons as in this screenshot? Nardog (talk) 17:56, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

@NardogNo, that's what I'm trying to get back. Wish I could have that with wiked but I don't think I can. I've tried to unclick most things. Did I always get a "Preview of references" and not notice it? I may have to give up tonight and comeback tomorrow with screenshots. Thanks. You've been great. Doug Weller talk 18:04, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Is "Enable the editing toolbar" on? Nardog (talk) 18:14, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

@Nardog no, should it be? Doug Weller talk 18:24, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Yes. Galobtter (talk) 18:33, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf@Nardog AGH! I've been checking it on Safari on my iPad, that's the problem. Well, I had lost it, but with help here I've got it back. I never add sources using Safari on my iPad and it just slipped my mind that I'm a Chrome user on my PC which is what I normally use to edit. iPad's just to clumsy. So I've got wikEd and Reftoolbar 2 now, life is good. Doug Weller talk 18:36, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Sounds like the same problem as the one discussed in #JavaScript above in relation to the third item in #Tech News: 2023-14. That is, MediaWiki's JavaScript support for your iPad has recently been dropped. Nardog (talk) 19:38, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

@Nardog Thanks for the explanation. Doug Weller talk 20:24, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Problem with bots today?

Reports that I use that are issued daily by HaleBot and SDZeroBot didn't get published today. Is there some system-wide problem? I scanned this page and don't see any pertinent announcement. But I find every time I post on this noticeboard, there is usually someone who knows what's up. Thanks for any clue you can bring to this situation. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:38, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Looks like there's a problem with the database. Page statistics like pageviews, date created etc. are not loading. Jeeputer ^Talk 02:52, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

The problems with HaleBot have been remedied but I assume other bots are still having issues. I noticed my own editing stats were not up-to-date earlier in the day. It's just usually when this thing happens or a ticket is filed, some technologically-minded editor posts about it here. But thanks for your observation, Jeeputer. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:28, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Over the past few months, I've observed database reports that I maintain randomly missing days and/or data. I redeploy the service each time I see this, and it works again for several weeks until it doesn't. Would not be surprised if this has something to do with wikitech:News/Toolforge Grid Engine deprecation. -FASTILY 07:37, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Still can't get edit toolbars back

@Writ Keeper: I tried the suggestion in Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 205#How to get edit toolbars back and still don't the edit toolbars, even after reboot. I do have Javascript enabled and it used to work before I added some things to my preferences. Any suggestions short of reverting to default?

And, yes, I should have kept a log of what I added, when, so that it would have been easier to back off changes :-( -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 14:38, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Chatul: Izno mentioned in that thread that the reason you no longer have the toolbar is because your browser does not support sufficient functionality in ES6. See #Tech News: 2023-14. Upgrading your browser or your OS and browser are your only recourses. Izno is very knowledgeable about such things, so I'd expect them to be right. Are you able to upgrade your browser? Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:46, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I misread the date on that and thought that it was the version I was already using. There is a version of Dooble curently in beta test for my system; I'll try that. I was somewhat surprised to see that it supports gopher but not mailto.

Thanks. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 15:04, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

No problem, I hope that works for you. (Also, to answer your question from that thread, no, you shouldn't have to log out and back in for preference changes to take effect; you'll just need to navigate away from Special:Preferences, which is always displayed in Safe Mode for security reasons.) Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 15:16, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

category

I beg your pardon. I after creating User:UBX/Marina Diamandis and adding it in my own username page, I can see her category: Marina Diamandis below my username page. also my username has been added into category: Marina Diamandis - Are you able to fix it please? I don't know how and I am not! Regarding. NameGame (talk) 16:22, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Odd. The userbox template isn't adding the category to your userpage anymore, but it's appearing in the category. Purging the cache for either page doesn't help. Not sure! it might just go away after some time. SWinxy (talk) 17:04, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

By now, there is not "category:Marina Diamandis" in my username page anymore. But unfortunately I see my username NameGame has not been removed from category:Marina Diamandis. @SWinxy Thank you for your attention, I wish it'll be disappeared soon. NameGame (talk) 17:23, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

I made a null edit of User:NameGame. This removed the user page from the category page. A purge only affects the purged page but a purge of a category page doesn't update the listed pages, only the output of the wikitext in the category page. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:29, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Good to know. If that's the case, the advice that is linked to by "This list may not reflect recent changes." should be altered: (It may help if you purge the page.) SWinxy (talk) 00:51, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

I was unclear. I meant a purge of a category page doesn't affect which pages are listed. There is no way to get an updated list without already knowing which pages need adding/removing and making a null edit on each of them. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:28, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

My username has been removed from category:Marina Diamandis & I no longer see it in there. I appreciate your help everyone. I wish happiness to you all. NameGame (talk) 08:37, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Special:CiteThisPage

Where do I go to raise an issue with the MLA output formatting generated by Special:CiteThisPage ? Nthep (talk) 16:23, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Probably MediaWiki talk:Citethispage-content? stwalkerster (talk) 17:58, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Converting links to Internet Archive links

Is it "standard practice" to convert all links in an article, all of which are working properly, to Internet Archive links, on the reasoning that doing so "prevents link rot"? Isn't it the case that by converting all the links to IA links, if IA ever goes belly-up, we lose all of the links that have been unnecessarily converted, whereas if they were left as they were, each separate source would have to go bad in order the same the same effect? Beyond My Ken (talk) 12:39, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

No, I am pretty sure it's not "standard practice" Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:43, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Adding archive-url as a parameter is fine, done by bot like IABot, replacing the original url with an archive is not fine. Indagate (talk) 12:48, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Could somebody, tell User:Rhain that (at User talk:Rhain#"Standard procedure") that, and User:CastJared (at User talk:CastJared#McSorley's Old Ale House) many of whose edits appear to be doing just that. This came in the context of the editing of these two users at McSorley's Old Ale House, which I attempted to revert. Beyond My Ken (talk) 12:50, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

No links have been replaced. For context, check this diff. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 12:55, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

As Rhain noted, no links have been replaced. They've actually made the article better by adding backup IA links. Gonnym (talk) 12:59, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

The links are no longer the actual links, they are copies of the linked material, which means that we are trusting the Internet Archive to be accurately reproducing the New York Times article, instead of just trusting the New York Times website to be accurately showing its own article. Trusting IA is fine when the original material is no longer online, since we have no choice in the matter, but why are we allowing the use of what are essentially secondary links when the primary links are still available? This makes little sense to me in terms of guaranteeing accuracy. If this is policy, I think it's a mistake (and Rhain's citations of supporting policy do not seem to be to be relevant.) Beyond My Ken (talk) 13:03, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

The title is linked to the original URL as long as |url-status=live is set. Nardog (talk) 13:07, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

The original link hasn't been changed and is still there. They've added a second link. Please actually look at the citation text before reverting. Gonnym (talk) 13:07, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

If it helps, compare this ref to this one—the only difference is the extra "Archived from the original...". The rest of the ref remains intact. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 13:09, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

OK, I stand corrected. Thanks to all for the education. Beyond My Ken (talk) 13:13, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

I asked User:HJ Mitchell the same thing a while back. Here's his viewpoint. 1AmNobody24 (talk) 13:16, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

@BMK: I see this is resolved but the point of adding the archive links now is that it is very likely that a link which works now will not work in a couple of years because websites change all the time with no thought for maintaining old information. Once a page has gone, it becomes very difficult (or impossible) to find and harder to be sure that what is found is actually what the original editor had in mind. Therefore, it is best if external links are archived now, while they are working. Johnuniq (talk) 23:03, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate the information. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:51, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

I find archiving live links to be perfectly acceptable IF there's a possibility or a suspicion of the link to go dead. Pages for a live sports competition (e.g. rio2016.com)? Sure. books.google.com? Less so. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 01:25, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

The New York Times? Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:02, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Copy options for indicator/tooltip in the Vector 2022 full/limited width toggle

Hey everyone, on the Rollback of Vector 2022 RfC talk page, there's a discussion about three copy options for indicator/tooltip. This is about some text that is to be shown next to the full/limited width toggle in the bottom right corner of the screen. It is a continuation of the discussion on our proposal for next steps following the closure of the Vector 2022 RfC. We invite you to review the copies and share which one you prefer. Thank you! SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 13:39, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Retrieve cross-wiki notifications

Today, I got pinged from a discussion in the Irish Wikipedia, something to do with User:Ritchie333/Irish Monopoly. Unfortunately I can't speak any Irish, so I cleared the notification with the idea I'd come back and run it through a translation utility to get the jist. However, the notification's now disappeared from my list, which only shows ones on the English Wikipedia. How can I get it back? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 14:32, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

You need to go to the Notifications page on the Irish Wikipedia: https://ga.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speisialta:Notifications (same as ga:Special:Notifications). Cross-wiki notifications have several annoying bugs: another one is if you use the "small screen" version of Monobook or Vector2010, you get the red number, but you can't access the notification. (I then need to rotate my phone to be able to see what the notification is). —Kusma (talk) 14:46, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

I need technical assistance with a note

Basically, I was trying to add a note like I saw in this diff. I tried to do it here and it is wigging out.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 16:30, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Fixed in this edit. The software was picking up the = in games=5.179 and treating all the text before that as a parameter name, meaning there was no parameter 1, which is why it complained about no content. Aidan9382 _(talk) 16:33, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

User:Aidan9382, Thx.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:43, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Javascript errors continously pop up

This always seems to show up every time I click on my alerts or notifications...

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T335149

Hi! Whenever I click on the alert or notification buttons, there's always this "Javascript error" that pops up, and this distracts me from clearing my notifications. Does anyone know how to fix this? I thought it was the latest script I had added to my common.js page but apparently it continued after I removed it and even prior to the addition. Tails Wx 17:49, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Not sure if this is what you're asking, but you can turn off those error popups by unchecking the relevant gadget — TheresNoTime (talk • they/them) 17:55, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Since when were those turned on? Anyway, thanks! Now I won't have to contend with the errors no more! Tails Wx 17:57, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

I'm getting these new errors as well. I've had Javascript errors turned on for a while, and those red error messages pop up very occasionally, but they are more regular now when I click on the red notification bell. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:24, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

I've also been getting these errors recently. — Qwerfjkltalk 06:15, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

This seems to trigger for me when I attempt to open the notifications menu. Looks like incorrect usage of classList.... —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 14:02, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Will be fixed in next weeks update. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 14:06, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

British heritage railways page preview error

As raised here at its talk by another editor, the Page Preview for List of British heritage and private railways does not show up properly, providing this:

wt2html: wikitextSize limit exceeded

rather than the lead, not sure why, the page has two interactive map templates at the start however. The error occurs on Chrome, Edge and Firefox for me. DankJae 22:35, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

This is phab:T286355 where Jonesey95 reported the same page. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:56, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

AIV helper bot down again

Hi all.

The HBC AIV helperbot5 is down again, it hasn't made an edit since 23:37, 20 April 2023 UTC.

Apparently the bot was down previously in earlier April, due to a scheduled outage of the Toolforge framework that it runs on.

However, this time I don't see any planned outage notices anywhere?

Just wanted to bring awareness to this. I've already notified the bot owner.

Regards, — AP 499D25 (talk) 11:04, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

You mean I have to remove entries manually after I make a block?! What is this? Les Mis? ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:10, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Unfortunately, yes. It's like manual transmission! Tails Wx 12:17, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Not sure what happened here but I've restarted it now. — JamesR (talk) 13:43, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Why not reactivate the other HBC AIV helperbots so that this does not happen again? Lightoil (talk) 13:58, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Template that supports multiple sets of parameters

Given template {{A}} which supports parameters 1-4 but I have multiple sets of parameters, I can do:

{{A|red|255|0|0}}
{{A|green|0|255|0}}
{{A|blue|0|0|255}}

I believe Wikimedia templates allow one to invoke a template once but pass it multiple sets of parameters but I have been unable to find the relevant template documentation. I found it several months ago so I'm fairly certain it is supported. So, instead of the above, I can do:
{{A| red|255|0|0 ; green|0|255|0 ; blue|0|0|255 }}

The template syntax is probably not quite correct (i.e. semi-colon set separator) to distinguish the multiple sets of data. RedWolf (talk) 20:40, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

The template would need to support unnamed parameters |5=, |6=, etc., at which point you could write:

{{A|red|255|0|0|green|0|255|0|blue|0|0|255}} and the template would work just fine. A few templates have been set up to work like this. Off the top of my head, the only one I can think of is {{Video game release}}. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:21, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

If you're asking if there is an inherent feature of template syntax so that one invocation of a template will automatically be turned into multiple invocations, no, that doesn't exist. The template in question would have to be coded to support processing multiple sets of parameters, as you describe it. To do it in a way that supports unlimited sets of parameters (within underlying resource constraints) would require the template to be implemented with a Lua module. isaacl (talk) 01:29, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

{{For loop}} with explicit values (option 2) can do something like this without having to code the wanted template for it. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:52, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Dark mode icon

I was looking at the user menu at the top right on the main page, and I noticed that the icon next to the dark mode toggle was doubled.

File:Engwikibug.png

I am using Safari v16.4 for iPadOS, if that helps.

DrowssapSMM (talk) 01:54, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

@SD0001 and Xaosflux: It looks like the workaround is no longer needed. Can you see if this patch works? Nardog (talk) 03:01, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I add several links in my personal JavaScript and they all got the dark mode icon before in Vector 2022. Now they get no icon. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:32, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Oh, it looks like we've been using portletId where it should have been portletLinkId all this time. My bad. Nardog (talk) 03:45, 22 April 2023 (UTC)