User talk:Nickj/archive01

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< User talk:Nickj

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Poccil (talk | contribs) at 05:07, 5 December 2004 (→‎Updating the offline reports). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Jump to navigation Jump to search

First entry!

Whoa!

My friend, that work on Summer Hill is possibly some of the finest work on a Sydney suburb I have ever seen! Time for a barnstar methinks :) Ta bu shi da yu 13:36, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Thank you! Also, now I know what a barnstart is! ;-) I want to address any objections raised, but one question I have is how to find "a rough location map" that is under the GFDL? Won't they all be copyrighted to the mapping company that made them? Nickj 00:22, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

  • Ney Nick! Like he said, fantastic work! A couple of questions for you, though, about that AusStats reference from the Australian Bureau of Statistics you had in there: I see that it costs $10.00 for the info-packet, but that unis, libraries etc. may be able to get it for free for research purposes. Were you able to get it free? And was it useful? What sort of info did you get out of there for Summer Hill? —Stormie 23:29, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)
    • I have a friend who goes to a Uni, and they were able to download it for free - they ('my silent collaborator') just clicked the link, and it worked straight away for them, so it must detect based on requesting IP address. The file you get is a zipped XLS file, with around 33 worksheets, breaking down the demographics of the postcode in all sorts of ways (by age, by gender, by income, by languages spoken, by country of birth, etc, etc). All you really need though is one figure from the first sheet (which gives the total population), but the ABS web site is very frustrating in that it doesn't seem to make that basic information easily available to the general public! Nickj 00:22, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Hey, was wondering how we could flesh out the lead section a bit. Perhaps we could get the most interesting info and very briefly summarise it? - Ta bu shi da yu 04:12, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

  • No problem - I've added two extra sentences to the lead-in - is that enough? If not, I'm not too sure what else to say... Nickj 05:32, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)
    • It's very good. Also, I see the first image was made bigger - excellent! Out of interest, where did you get that Satellite photograph? - Ta bu shi da yu 09:25, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)
      • The satellite photo is from here - I got the 2 meg JPEG, drew on the borders (I recognised the landmarks and roads that form the boundary of the suburb), and then resized it down to half width and half height (so that the file size wouldn't be too large). Maybe the Sydney page could include the full original satellite image somewhere on it? The current space image on that page is OK, but this one has a lot more detail on it. - Nickj 00:33, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Admin nomination

Hey mat, thanks for your support of my nomination for admin! Once you get a few more edits under your belt I reckon I'll put you forward also (assuming I get to become an admin, of course). - Ta bu shi da yu 03:06, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I like it but not sure where to leave general feedback. Perhaps we could handle disabmiguation pages better? Also, does it link to stubs? Should it? Otherwise - cool idea! - Ta bu shi da yu 07:37, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

  • Thanks for the feedback, and here's good for general feedback. At the moment it does not distinguish disambiguation pages or stub pages - basically it'll try to make most links it can of two words or more, and I'm try to add exceptions for things that it doesn't do well. It stuffs up on are commas though (so for example Parramatta Road in the Strathfield article can be linked, but it did not detect that because it had a comma after it). Also Liverpool road can be linked to Hume Highway, but they've got different names, so the link suggester won't detect that. -- Nickj 07:48, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Photos

Interested in helping me out with some picture taking? I live in the Strathfield area but have no digital camera. Needs some assistance! - Ta bu shi da yu 07:38, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

  • Sure, no problem - Do you know what you want photographed? -- Nickj 07:46, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
    • Yep. I can't do it during weekdays though as I work. I'd like to get one of Strathfield council chambers, another of Strathfield station, and there's another one I want to take of the "plaque marking the location of 'Strathfield Saye" can be found in the footpath of Strathfield Avenue, marking the approximate location of the original house." [1] Reckon your up to it? You get another barnstar if you get them, and I'll nominate you for adminship and rally the Australians to vote for you :P - Ta bu shi da yu 13:40, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

My archive

Nick, thanks for your comments on my archive, and for spotting that error. Adam 04:09, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Wiki Syntax

Have you considered moving your Wiki Syntax project to a Wikipedia:WikiProject page? - [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm|(talk)]] 08:15, Oct 28, 2004 (UTC)

Hey, i just thought id let you know that the data for the ones like Ireland: 1980-1989 has moved and is difficult to find now. i imagine you wrote the scripts to do this, nice job. the only times i have found errors was in math points such as 2 <= x < 4 is written as [2,4) which is correct and the artices on ascii chariters where they really meant to say [. Also i came up to some articles about the languages of africa where they make click noises and appeantly [ and [[ are common ways to spell the clicks (so are \ \\ and a few other symbols). In any case, well done, hope you continue after this run. Cavebear42 22:55, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

  • I guess you have point with the no wiki tags. Sorry that I know i deleted some of them from your list without adding the tags as that they were rendering correctly. When they come up again on your next scan, we can add the no wiki tags then i suppose. take care Cavebear42 16:51, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Bots

Why don't you sort these with a bot? Dunc|☺ 15:18, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Clever

Encouraging people to put a link to your needs-fixing page in the Edit summary is very clever indeed. Got me to fix one set in exchange for one fix. :-) Elf | Talk 17:27, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Unbalanced wiki-ness project

Great idea, and I've done my 5 (I may tackle more groups later--anytime realtime search is working, I mostly work on User:SirJective/tmp b). At least one of the articles I worked on also had unbalanced parens--maybe you could add those cases as well, so people editing the articles would be more likely to fix them at the same time. Niteowlneils 18:16, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Be careful with the notation [a,b) or (a,b]. While it may seem unbalaced brackets, it is valid mathematic notation. --AstroNomer 06:19, Oct 31, 2004 (UTC)

Could you please run it over Lake Burley Griffin? Someone commented that there's a bunch of things that could be wikilinked there, and I thought immediately of your tool. Ambi 05:06, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Thanks! :) Ambi 06:21, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Really cool projects you got going, Nick!

Q: On the wiki syntax correction pages, is it possible to link directly to the area in context such as the section anchors? just a thought... --Rj 21:01, Oct 30, 2004 (UTC)

bots fixing [[] []], etc

I think it should be possible to configure a script to do this automatically that gives you the section of text concerned and then asks you whether you want to fix it and how. The point is anyway to ask one of the better skilled programmers around here to see what they can do. Dunc|☺ 11:23, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Latest syntax project

Thanks for the update. I don't know if this comes up enuf to be worth coding for, nor if it's even practical/possible to code for, but Eight queens puzzle, for example, turned out to be a 'false positive' because it contains C source code. Anyways, great work--one cool side effect of this project is that articles with the problems you look for also, from what I've seen, have a fair number of other things to clean up, EG[2]. Niteowlneils 22:17, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I just wanted to throw another one out there (much like the c code error). Voulez-vous coucher avec moi contains poetry and a line has a br tag so the ) lands ona new line. Cavebear42 18:26, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Wiki Syntax

You haven't convinced me, primarily bcz although the goal is identical with that of WP:CU, the means is completely different. This difference has 2 sides to it:

  1. Putting it on C/U (admittedly only twice (or so i presume), even if you reject my reasoning):
    • further extends the overcrowded page. It already needs more maintenance than it's getting, bcz (i guess) of people wanting their entries to get more exposure by staying on the main page for longer than 4-9 days. That pushes it above 32kB, where some WPians can't fully edit it; this probably including those edit-conflicts that turn a section edit into a full-page edit; those probably (if the editors don't give up and start over, but try to resolve the section edit with the facilities provided for that) doubling or butchering the page.
    • distracts from the purpose people presumably come to C/U for, namely tackling a specific article that catches their eye.
    • does so without realizing any benefit from the format and mindset that C/U is designed for: interaction of editors in the process of deciding what kind of subject-matter background is helpful, and what kind of editing is called for.
    • muddies the waters, leaving readers less clear about what the (main) function of C/U is.
  2. Not putting it somewhere else deprives it of the wider audience of people who, for instance, just find C/U too irritating for words and never look it. Yes, its being on C/U will make those working on it more quickly think of putting a deep-fix article onto C/U after doing the shallow fix. But something i'd expect to be very effective is a 'graph about "BTW, be alert to any need for additional, non-syntactic, cleanup of the article. Many WPians regularly go to WP:CU looking for chances to do work that someone else didn't want to be distracted by, and ...."

As to not signing, i most often do sign what i add to C/U, but you may have noticed that it's one of the few (or perhaps the only) non-article page where the option of not signing is specifically mentioned. I think that is to encourage people to make quick suggestions without fearing they may be launching into an extended dialogue that they don't have time for. (And, like the specific request not to date-stamp, to save space, as i mentioned early on.) This seemed to me an especially good occasion for an anonymous suggestion, an idea per se rather than someone weighing in with their view (throwing their weight of reputation onto the scales). I put the idea out there, and would have preferred to let the idea fend for itself without my trying to be the advocate for it. Since you went to the trouble to ask, i don't resent the effort of responding to you, but my question was actually intended as a question, not a rhetorical question, and my plan was to let the process of editors answering it settle the question of whether a lot of people see C/U as i do or i'm just quirky about that, as i am with so many things.

It sounds like a great, valuable, project, and i'll be pleased if our unexpected dialogue about it turns out to further it rather than just waste your time. Thanks for your interest in my view of it. --Jerzy(t) 04:16, 2004 Nov 8 (UTC)

Not a resources-template expert, but, yeah, sure sounds like a good long-term place, and i'd be surprised if anyone finds that presumptuous in any way. But don't rule out a one-time Wikipedia:Announcements or WP:VP description. --Jerzy(t) 07:07, 2004 Nov 8 (UTC)

I meant to say, "Don't rule out doing both the template (for long term) and Announcements or VP (for immediate attention even more intensive than C/U). (But maybe that was clear anyway.) [Smile] --Jerzy(t) 15:08, 2004 Nov 8 (UTC)

Very cool. A good reminder to me that the genius of WP is the unplanned collaboration, such as the discussion with you that i tried to avoid having! And i think it's about time that i took yr IMO-very-clever "return the favor" summaries to heart, & visit your list. (Who knows what it might lead me to. [smile]) --Jerzy(t) 13:58, 2004 Nov 12 (UTC)

Finding old style taxoboxes

Do you think that the proram you wrote to find broken syntax, could also be used to find taxoboxes that don't use the template but use the much scarier table wiki code? --nixie 01:05, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

You're right about just looking for pages that link to the old taxonomy template. I'll direct the tree of life people there if they're interested in updating all the taxoboxes. Thanks--nixie 02:39, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

MacGyverMagic for adminship

I've decided to take the plunge and self-nominate for adminship to make the work I do a lot easier. Please head over to Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship#MacGyverMagic and let your voice be heard. There's no hard feelings if you oppose, just make sure you let me know how I can improve. -- [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm|(talk)]] 10:29, Nov 24, 2004 (UTC)

LinkBot

Hi Nick, LinkBot is now marked as a bot. If you change the task of the bot to do something other than what was approved at Wikipedia talk:bots, or need the bot flag removed for any other reason, please ask at m:requests for permissions. Angela. 23:57, Nov 24, 2004 (UTC)

Perhaps you should get approval at Wikipedia talk:bots before running it on a larger scale, although if there are no objections to what it is doing, I'm not sure why there would be objections to just doing more of that. You don't need to ask at m:requests for permissions again since now LinkBot has a bot flag, its edits are hidden from recent changes and running it on a larger scale makes no difference in terms of which access level is set since there is only bot level. Angela. 01:00, Nov 25, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks

for cleaning up the embarrassing remains of my cut and paste creation of brokens redirects. older≠wiser 20:03, Nov 28, 2004 (UTC)

WP:RfD

Hi, I'm going around putting notices on peoples' pages about their redirects (and deleted the ones that were created by anon's) - can you hold off adding more until I get done with this batch? Thanks... Noel (talk) 03:29, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Well, you've just increased the number of entries we deal with in a day by about a factor of 5-8! If this were going to be the steady state, we'd have to do something, I think, but if it's just for a while, until we get it all straightened out, we can probably manage it. If they were all created by anons, no problem, I'd just nuke them on sight (redirs to NX targets can be nuked), but alas they aren't all that simple. Still, if you could kind of dribble them out so it's a manageable increase in load (say 2-3 times normal) it will be no problem. Would you mind doing them over, say, a 2-week period? Or do you want to be done with them faster than that? Noel (talk) 03:56, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Sounds good. I'm making good progress with the ones you listed today, but it is taking a chunk of time, so a little slower would be good. Thanks! Noel (talk) 04:32, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)

You might also consider that some users contribute to Wikipedia on a less-than-daily basis. Redirects with missing targets may fill a purpose if covering for common misspellings or serving to avoid the creation of multiple articles on the same subject. --Johan Magnus 08:00, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Summer Hill

FYI, I've re-nominated it for featured status. Ambi 00:44, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Unification of the different Wiki fixup projects?

Might I suggest, being the nosey sod that I am, the project talk page for maximal coverage? --Phil | Talk 09:32, Dec 1, 2004 (UTC)

Have you thought about a variation on the "talk page vs list of pages" method? If you put the suggestions into a sub-page of the appropriate talk page and transclude them in, you can also transclude that sub-page into a "master page". For example, if you put the suggestions for Abraham Lincoln into talk:Abraham Lincoln/Link suggestions, you then add {{talk:Abraham Lincoln/Link suggestions}} into talk:Abraham Lincoln (under ==Link suggestions==) and into User:LinkBot/Master list (under ==Abraham Lincoln==). Then it can easily be seen how well the bot is doing, and individual page-maintainers are not overwhelmed. What do you think? --Phil | Talk 09:19, Dec 2, 2004 (UTC)

I have remodelled your entry at talk:Abraham Lincoln#Link suggestions as an example. I have introduced sub-sections for "Outward" and "Inward" links and moved most of the rubric to the top. What do you think? --Phil | Talk 09:25, Dec 3, 2004 (UTC)
Oh, and I created that Master List :-) --Phil | Talk 09:37, Dec 3, 2004 (UTC)
Unless…I just had a thought: do you want to think about linking up your link suggestions with a Wikipedia:To-do list? --Phil | Talk 09:37, Dec 3, 2004 (UTC)

Wiki Syntax BUG

It seams that there's a small bug with your software. It seams to be realated to the MATH tag:

'''<math> \sigma_p </math>'''

There were a lot of False-positives in the Modern portfolio theory article, as pointed out by user Wiml.

Thanks. -- Marianocecowski 08:44, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Found another problem. When a [[ starts in one line and ends in another.
This is common when using the [[ A | B ]] syntax, or the more complex one for images. A good (or bad) example is Bacterium, which has an image whose alternative text is a table.
-- Marianocecowski 08:44, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

That I was writing on the "don't like" page wasn't a general criticism, only about a special problem, you now have already fixed.

But I'm speculating, that a completely different approach would be of greater value and acceptance: Why don't make it a "Pull", rather than a "Push" service? I.e. someone working on article can request analysis by the Link Suggester and get the result? This would of course work best, when you can host it somewhere, so that it can repond without the delay and hassle of your manual intervention.

And in addition, when it is a requested service, it can even give more results of offline analysis, which would be considered spam if delivered without request. For example a category inheritance tree for the article, or doubled wikilinks, or dead external links, etc.

Pjacobi 10:35, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Updating the offline reports

Would you mind updating the myriad listings at Wikipedia:Offline_reports, Wikipedia:Deadend pages, and Wikipedia:Orphaned Articles? I know you have access to a dump of the Wikipedia database and I need your help on those listings. [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk, automation script)]] 05:07, Dec 5, 2004 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Nickj/archive01&oldid=8177156"