User talk:MusikAnimal

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search


Afrikaans | العربية | অসমীয়া | asturianu | azərbaycanca | Boarisch | беларуская | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | བོད་ཡིག | bosanski | català | کوردی | corsu | čeština | Cymraeg | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | ދިވެހިބަސް | Ελληνικά | emiliàn e rumagnòl | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | Nordfriisk | Frysk | galego | Alemannisch | ગુજરાતી | עברית | हिन्दी | Fiji Hindi | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | interlingua | Bahasa Indonesia | Ido | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | ភាសាខ្មែរ | 한국어 | kar | kurdî | Limburgs | lietuvių | Baso Minangkabau | македонски | മലയാളം | молдовеняскэ | Bahasa Melayu | မြန်မာဘာသာ | مازِرونی | Napulitano | नेपाली | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | occitan | Kapampangan | polski | português | پښتو | Runa Simi | română | русский | sicilianu | سنڌي | සිංහල | slovenčina | slovenščina | Soomaaliga | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | ślůnski | தமிழ் | тоҷикӣ | ไทย | Türkmençe | Tagalog | Türkçe | татарча/tatarça | ⵜⴰⵎⴰⵣⵉⵖⵜ  | українська | اردو | oʻzbekcha/ўзбекча | Tiếng Việt | 吴语 | 粵語 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/-

Welcome to Meta![edit]

Hello MusikAnimal, and welcome to the Wikimedia Meta-Wiki! This website is for coordinating and discussing all Wikimedia projects. You may find it useful to read our policy page. If you are interested in doing translations, visit Meta:Babylon. You can also leave a note on Meta:Babel or Wikimedia Forum (please read the instructions at the top of the page before posting there). Happy editing!

-- 04:38, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Letter petitioning WMF to reverse recent decitions[edit]

The Wikimedia Foundation recently created a new feature, "superprotect" status. The purpose is to prevent pages from being edited by elected administrators -- but permitting WMF staff to edit them. It has been put to use in only one case: to protect the deployment of the Media Viewer software on German Wikipedia, in defiance of a clear decision of that community to disable the feature by default, unless users decide to enable it.

If you oppose these actions, please add your name to this letter. If you know non-Wikimedians who support our vision for the free sharing of knowledge, and would like to add their names to the list, please ask them to sign an identical version of the letter on change.org.

I'm notifying you because you participated in one of several relevant discussions. -Pete F (talk) 22:15, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Usage of edit summary on Wikipedia[edit]

Hello, today I found by chance this page of "mine", which has some history on prefilled edit summaries. Given your question on the mobile site, I thought it could interest you. Maybe document in this page what you discover about that feature. --Nemo 13:09, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Global renamer[edit]

Hi, your request for global renamer was succesful, and I have now granted you the related rights. Congratulations! You may have read the policy already, but you can check it again and also it's useful to join our mailing list here. I have added you to the Global renamers list, please check that it's correct. If you're active on IRC you might want to join in #wikimedia-renameconnect. Regards, --Stryn (talk) 05:02, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Congratulations! —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 11:21, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
Congrats!--Star प्रमुख.pngBiplab Anand (Talk) 16:23, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
Thank you! — MusikAnimal talk 20:04, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Re https://github.com/MusikAnimal/pageviews/issues/11[edit]

GitHub commenting fails so I'm pasting here: Note that such a tool (by @hay) already exists, though it needs to be tweaked to use the new pageviews API: https://tools.wmflabs.org/hay/langviews/ --Nemo 08:30, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

@Nemo bis: Cool! Thanks for letting me know. I probably will want to adopt a similar design. I think comparing multiple pages across all projects isn't going to be API-friendly. Fortunately though the new pageviews API is significantly faster than stats.grok.se, so we have that much going for us — MusikAnimal talk 17:10, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Quick note about Tech News and style[edit]

Hi!

I see you exchanged "wrong" for "inaccurate" in the current issue of Tech News. That is indeed a better way to phrase it. The reason I like and kept "wrong" is that Tech News is distributed in English to a lot of non-English wikis, where editors aren't native speakers. It's a constant battle between precision and simplicity, but "wrong" is much more likely to be understood by en-1 or en-2 speakers. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 17:19, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

@Johan (WMF): Got it! Thank you for the clarification, keeping it simple is certainly ideal if we want to get around language barriers :) — MusikAnimal talk 17:21, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, I mean, your edit made all the sense in the world – it's far better English. :) Just that we need to take more factors into account when it's to be distributed widely. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 17:25, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Technical barnstar

I hear that you fixed the pageview stats graphs. --Pine 07:47, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

I worked on it with Community Tech, yes! Thank you for the praise :) — MusikAnimal talk 15:57, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

No renaming between November 20 and November 27[edit]

Hi,

You’re getting this because you’re a steward or global renamer. The Community Tech team are working on cross-wiki watchlists. We need to add a couple of fields to the localuser table in centralauth database. In order to be able to do this, we’d need to run a script that will get in the way of renaming users. Our apologies – we realize this is getting in the way of your work.

We ask that you do not rename anyone between 00:00 November 20 (UTC) and 00:00 November 27 (UTC).

(UTC means that if you live in the Americas, it will be on the evening or afternoon of November 19 when the script starts running, and if you live in Oceania or eastern Asia, it can be closer midday on November 27 before we can be sure the script is no longer running.)

Phabricator task.

If there are any problems related to this, or you have any questions, please write me on my talk page. /Johan (WMF) (talk) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:42, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

I want to be renamed[edit]

I heard that you are a global renamer. I would like to be renamed to miles527. If someone has already taken that username, you can change me to miles.527 or miles_527. Either is fine with me. Thanks. Miles.mu (talk) 21:59, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Tech News[edit]

Hey, the newsletter has been frozen and translators told that this is it and that they can ignore it for the rest of the week if they're done, so I've moved the item to Tech/News/2017/38 instead. I'll copy edit as necessary, or ping you if I've got any questions. (: /Johan (WMF) (talk) 23:37, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

@Johan (WMF): No problem. This is better anyway because as I said, I'm not 110% sure it will go out on the next train :) Though I guess if it doesn't, we have to roll back all of MediaWiki. Fingers crossed! It's also a bit of a "silent" change, where only users of the IP range gadget would even notice the new feature is there, so no biggie.
For future reference, when do we typically freeze the Tech News for translating? — MusikAnimal talk 23:41, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Tech/News/For contributors#The deadlines! As it says, typically a few hours later than stated there, but that's when you should be able to rely on it never being too late. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 23:47, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Also, Tech/News/Next should lead you to the right issue to add things to – I typically edit that to point to the next one just as I freeze the issue. (: /Johan (WMF) (talk) 00:01, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Tech/News/2017/38 has been edited now. Looks OK? I tried to simplify "backfilled" because that can be a pretty difficult word for en-1 and en-2 speakers. Will that still be relevant on Monday, or do you expect to be finished by then? /Johan (WMF) (talk) 23:18, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
@Johan (WMF): Looks great! :) I was also brainstorming a better way to explain "backfilled". We hopefully will have all data backfilled by Monday, but there's no guarantee. I would leave that bit in there before you freeze the newsletter, just in case. Thanks! — MusikAnimal talk 15:12, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
OK, good. Thanks. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 15:14, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

No edit sections[edit]

Re: Special:Diff/17264136. This must have been because you were looking at either a diff or an oldid permalink. You have actually removed several comments with your edit, please be careful ^_^ --Base (talk) 00:07, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

That was it! I failed to notice I was given a permalink. Sorry! I'm not a newbie I swear =P — MusikAnimal talk 00:12, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
@Base: Yeah... in reply to your edit summary, it wasn't the new wikitext editor itself that messed up, rather it wasn't very verbose in saying I was editing an older version (tiny little popup at the top-right, that is not shown in red as it should be). So still kind of it's fault. I'm going to create a bug! — MusikAnimal talk 00:15, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

AbuseFilter es.wikiquote[edit]

Hi. I wonder if you could have a look at the current list of filters of es.wikiquote and suggest improvements to them? It does not have to be now, but I noticed some filters that maybe could use some improvements. I've just activated the AbuseFilterProfile feature to identify the expensive filters. Regards. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 14:23, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

@MarcoAurelio: Indeed those filters all could use some work! Fortunately it doesn't look like you have very many, and the overall condition limit (1,000) isn't getting hit. Nonetheless, it's probably good to combine a lot of those OR conditions into one where possible, and take advantage of available functions so you can shorten and simplify your regex. For instance, with filter #1 you have the code texto rlike '\bs+o+i+s+\s+u+n+o+s\b', which could be shortened to rmwhitespace(rmdoubles(textto)) rlike '\bsoisunos\b'. Taking it a step further, you could group all of those individual "rlike" clauses into one big regex string. That cuts down on condition count big time. Another example, with filter 2 I see ("chan chan" in texto) | (":bull.jpg" in texto) | (":pig.jpg" in texto) | ..., when you could combine all of those into one condition with contains_any(textto, "chan chan", ":bull.jpg", ":pig.jpg", ...). If you or someone wants to give me temporary edit rights I'll be happy to clean them up, but like I said you're not actually hitting the condition count, and there aren't enough filters that I'd be worried about them significantly slowing down editing — MusikAnimal talk 03:39, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Global lock notes[edit]

See here for details: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_locks . To sum them up global locks remove a user's ability to log into their account and that is it. Hope this helps you out. --Sau226 (talk) 16:45, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

@Sau226: Right, and in this scenario we do not want them to be able to use CopyPatrol. However I guess if they can't login, they can't use OAuth. Perhaps I don't need to worry about it, then. It might be possible to be already logged into CopyPatrol, and then your account gets locked, but seems like an edge case. Not going to worry about. Thanks! — MusikAnimal talk 16:53, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Name Mention[edit]

Hello MusikAnimal. A huge fan of yours. Sometime i look at your "Awards page" and think if i had those. :) .. By the way, You mentioned .. The DJ as the only Proposer for "that proposal". Actually I was the first Proposer . It would be much appreciate if you also mention my name (as a fellow member of wikimedia bangladesh chapter).Thanks in advance. -- Ahm masum (talk) 14:55, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Hey, first off thank you for the kind words! I didn't know I had fans :) I have made mention of your 2016 proposal in the "More comments" field. The "Proposer" field is for the current survey. Rest assured we're not trying to take credit for your idea :) I see you haven't made any proposals this year. Would you like to takeover? I only adopted it because TheDJ had already made three proposals, which is the limit. — MusikAnimal talk 18:56, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
Smile2.svg
Gladly. -- Ahm masum (talk) 20:34, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
Sounds good. I've removed my signature from the "Proposer" line, so just add yours and you're all set. Best — MusikAnimal talk 20:53, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Authorship info[edit]

I just wanted to thank you for your work on this at T176912, first, and then to ask about how a given page's results should be interpreted. The page in question is articleinfo-authorship for Tulsi Gabbard.

  • The #3 user has contributed 6,548 bytes, and the #18 user has contributed 826 bytes.
  • "Top edits" for user #3 shows a net negative contribution of -21,891 bytes and, for user #18, a net positive contribution of 359 bytes.

I'm wondering why there is this apparent discrepancy between the numbers shown on the articleinfo-authorship page and those on individual "Top Edits" pages. Which is accurate? Are they measuring different things? I appreciate your time... there's something I'm missing here. SashiRolls (talk) 17:03, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

@SashiRolls: The difference is the number of bytes added (Top Edits) versus the number of characters retained (authorship, with some caveats which I will explain). Top Edits counts the bytes added/removed over time, taking into account surrounding reverts (more at phab:T179996). This is merely a running total of what you see in the revision history (+ or - bytes), not the amount retained after other editors have made copy edits, partial reverts, etc.

In order to determine the amount of content that was retained, you need to measure what's called content persistence, which is a complex problem. Fortunately the kind people at WikiWho have figured this out for us, and we're using their API. Their research and thorough testing shows the algorithm to be around 95% accurate, so I think you can take the authorship stats to heart. The other thing to note is we're showing authorship stats by character count, not bytes as Top Edits does, but for English this shouldn't make much of a difference.

I'm glad you brought this up, because I was wondering if people were confused by the variety of statistics shown in XTools. Maybe we should show the above explanation within the interface. In fact, we're actually showing the authorship stats slightly different than what WikiWho intended. Perhaps I could get your input on this... allow me to explain: The WikiWho stats are measured by tokens, which is basically a word ("foo", "bar") or part of wikitext code (opening of a template, such as {{, or pipe characters |, etc.). So say I put the word "Gooogle Search" in an article. I am now credited with 2 tokens. Someone else comes along and corrects my typo to "Google", and now they are credited with the entire token, and now I'm only credited with 1 token from the word "Search". The same thing happens with wikitext syntax. I thought this was too complicated to explain, so I instead am measuring the character count of each "token". This means the actual numbers may vary from WikiWho slightly, but overall you're still looking at an extremely accurate representation of authorship stats. Does that makes sense? Should I be showing the statistics by "token", as WikiWho intended, or is that too complicated for people to understand?

Hopefully I've answered your question, and any further feedback is greatly appreciated! Regards — MusikAnimal talk 17:39, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

That's really interesting. There are are two very different measures, both of which (actually) have their utility. I think I'll pick some simpler examples and look at it more carefully. (Aesthetically, you have space on the page if you want to give more info, but I do think you made the right choice converting to characters and keeping it simple). Thanks again, I'll play with it some more. Looking at some pages I know pretty well, this tool really does give a much better vision of authorship for article space pages than what was available before. SashiRolls (talk) 22:25, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
I've really been impressed with the remarkably clear vision this tool gives. Someone I was discussing it with suggested I ask if it could be made available for the policy & guideline (Wikipedia:) namespace. Unfortunately, today it's down in mainspace. (It looks like it's just an expired certificate: "cURL error 60: SSL certificate problem: certificate has expired", though maybe that's actually a big deal, I don't know.) I assume the normal procedure would be to bump the phabricator thread. I've made an account, but as I know you're interested in this, I thought I'd leave you a message and ask about the Wikipedia namespace. The old system shows negative values for the top contributors to WP:! , for example ^^. Your help on this "authority" question has been much appreciated. SashiRolls (talk) 16:41, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
@SashiRolls: Glad you're enjoying it! I'm not sure what you mean by the certificate problem. Were you trying to hit the WikiWho API directly? They only support the mainspace, so unfortunately that's all we have right now :/ The negative values you speak of here is most certainly a bug, and I will get to fixing that very soon. I hope it's clear that these are two very different systems, and are not comparable. They measure different things, and can offer different insight into a page's history. The top editors by "added text" can tell you who worked the hardest on the page (for example), while the "authorship" shows whose work was retained. Unfortunately over time, a prolific contributors' work may be erased, and this helps illustrate that. — MusikAnimal talk 20:16, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
@MusikAnimal: yes, I understand how the old system shows very different things from the new system (which bears no traces of conflict). Someone must have fixed the certificate (it started working again yesterday). Even templates are in a separate namespace, I notice. When I've made indexes for books I've been lucky to have friendly authors who thanked me in their acknowledgements section: it's true that not every cross-linker in history gets such mention. Is the plan eventually to roll out authorship for policies and templates? Regards, SashiRolls (talk) 21:08, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
@SashiRolls: I would not expect the Wikipedia and Template namespaces to be supported anytime soon. WikiWho has to store every revision to every page in their database (which costs money), so I think that's partly why they have only supported the mainspace, as that's what most people are interested in. I think right now they are more focused on supporting more Wikipedias. I will let them know people have asked about non-article namespaces, though.

Also, I looked into the bug with Top Edits on w:en:WP:NOT, and it turns out the issue is how revisions were stored way back in the early days of MediaWiki. For instance, if you look at the first seven revisions, which where from 2001, you can see the added/removed bytes don't add up. The edit by The Cunctator is said to have removed 47,919 bytes, but if you look at the actual edit it appears to have removed some 20-30 bytes at most. This is throwing off all the calculations, and unfortunately I don't think we can do anything about it. It's just bad data :( So instead, when viewing a really old page, XTools now shows the notice "This page is very old. Some data may be inaccurate due to how revisions were stored in the early days of MediaWiki.". Hopefully that disclaimer will suffice, for now. Regards — MusikAnimal talk 22:24, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your reply and your work on this question. I hadn't been back to meta since I left my message, so I'm just seeing this now; but I *did* just see the banner on another page whose old history doesn't add up (Haiti) using the old system. From the beginning, I've been worried about asking for something that involves disproportionate energy expenditure. In that spirit, there's no need to go digging up the reasons for the clash between the numbers on the Haiti article! (The state of NOT back in 2001 -- with the redlink to Larry Sanger's "Is Wikipedia an Experiment in Anarchy?" -- is certainly fun. Thanks for posting it. I found the article in its new home on meta; it's a pretty good read, as was the state of NOT in 2001!) SashiRolls (talk) 04:45, 21 February 2018 (UTC)