Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5

This user doesn't subscribe to mass messages. Instead they prefer to read them off other users' talk pages!

Wikimedia Code Review - Gerrit[edit]

Hello SD! Some time ago you helped me learn the basis of contributing in Gerrit for Wikimedia and solving a localization problem I had with the special pages in my community. The commit was merged some days ago and now I'm waiting for deployment. Motivated by that, I was wondering if there were other possibilities I could get involved more, reviewing other changes and basically helping around there. Do you have any advice on "how to start" or maybe some easy tasks to review or small details where I can help around? I understand if my request might feel rather odd so don't worry much about the answer. :) - Klein Muçi (talk) 02:00, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For testing or working on most changes, you would need a local MW dev instance. In my experience, setting that up is the biggest barrier to getting started. You can take a look at mw:How to become a MediaWiki hacker#Set up your development environment. You can pick up some PHP (it's easy) and use an IDE (I hear Visual Studio Code is good) – that makes it easy to identify syntax issues before submitting patches. – SD0001 (talk) 03:33, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot! Would the pages below be the starting point for what you described?

• [1];
• [2];

- Klein Muçi (talk) 08:36, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but they're not without issue. For instance, the 2nd link includes a unix command that won't work on Windows. What OS do you have? If windows, I believe using WSL2 is recommended nowadays, though I think mediawiki can be slow if the files are on a windows partition (and if you put them on the linux partition, then the code editor would become slow instead) – not sure though as it's been a while since I used windows. If you're not using windows, you're more in luck. – SD0001 (talk) 04:09, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have both actually, 2 laptops. You think is better if I start the whole procedure in Linux? - Klein Muçi (talk) 08:13, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes Linux is much preferable for working with mediawiki. – SD0001 (talk) 09:21, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay then. I'll try setting up my developing environment in Linux soon. If i get stuck somewhere, I'll come here, maybe you can help me. Thank you! :) - Klein Muçi (talk) 09:31, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

After some errors I was able to install docker and docker-compose and I verified they're working properly by checking their versions and downloading some images and playing a bit around. (This is the first time I ever deal with docker though.)

Now I'm stuck at the next step: Prepare .env file.

It says create a .env file in the root of the MediaWiki core repository but I'm not really sure what that means. What should the name be (what is its exact purpose) and where exactly should it be located (what command do I use to get there)?

Also, should this line be kept unchanged: MEDIAWIKI_USER=Admin?

And finally, unrelated specifically to this but, when using sudo add-apt-repository "deb [arch=amd64] https://download.docker.com/linux/ubuntu bionic stable", I get this error. I only started getting this after I had to delete something after some errors in the first time. Any idea what I've done wrong and how to correct it? - Klein Muçi (talk) 03:30, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You'd need to figure out things like that via google and stackoverflow and so on – searching for .env files brings up https://docs.docker.com/compose/env-file/ as the 3rd result.
Are you using linux mint? I couldn't see any relevant search results but you'd probably get something useful with a specific search like "add-apt-repository on linux mint gives additional-repositories.list not found error" – SD0001 (talk) 04:02, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, so it is a literal ".env" file. I thought I hade to create it with a name like: Something.env

The only question now is where do I create that? What does root of the MediaWiki core repository mean in a more simple language? In the Mediawiki directory? Or somewhere here somehow? - Klein Muçi (talk) 11:15, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The directory to which you cloned mediawiki – the one which contains the docker-compose.yml file. This directory should be named "mediawiki", (not "core"), so that you can later install extensions under mediawiki/extensions/. (core/extensions/* would also work in theory but just sounds awkward). – SD0001 (talk) 13:47, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@SD0001, thank you! I prepared the .env file and then created a docker-compose.override.yml file in the mediawiki directory. But, when I wanted to start the containers, I got an error. I gave the command while being in the mediawiki directory and got this error. What am I doing wrong? - Klein Muçi (talk) 21:51, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I was able to fix that error. (Had downloaded an older version.) Things went smoothly after that (got MediaWiki on localhost8080) and I also downloaded Visual Studio Code. A bit of a silly question but what would be the next step after this?

How does one identify problems and usually goes on about solving one? I mean, I understand the whole Phabricator/Gerrit thing theoretically but I've never dealt with a situation like that before (beside the one you helped me) and any kind of practical advice would be helpful. As I said in the beginning, I do understand if this sounds odd as a question and that you might not really have an answer for it. - Klein Muçi (talk) 02:59, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pick your favourite extensions and look at their phab workboards to see if there's anything you find interesting. Extensions work primarily via hooks – so the first place to look for understanding the code of any extension would be the file in includes/ directory having "Hooks" in the name. These are usually self-explanatory, eg. onPageSaveComplete hook allows an extension to execute code every time any page is saved. MW core itself does not use hooks, though, so its code can be generally harder to modify.

(Also make sure your code editor is set up so that it allows you to navigate to class/function definition by clicking on where its used, provides autocomplete suggestions, etc.) – SD0001 (talk) 14:18, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot! I think I'll give it a try with a task from here. If I manage to solve anything maybe I add you as a reviewer in Gerrit. I'm supposing you'll have the same name. Thank you one more time! Really grateful. :) - Klein Muçi (talk) 00:50, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm experimenting around with the various Mediawiki files and folders and I was trying the PHP update script. Every time I use it, I get this. Is that supposed to be normal? What are those 8 listed entries? - Klein Muçi (talk) 03:57, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It clearly says mediawiki can't access its database. The 8 lines are the stack trace. – SD0001 (talk) 05:03, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Uhm, so no update is really happening? Why could that be happening? Something wrong by my side? - Klein Muçi (talk) 10:59, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

update.php mainly just runs the db schema upgrades - which of course can't happen if it can't connect to db. Do you have the wgDb* credentials in LocalSettings correctly configured. Are there any db errors while viewing pages? The folks in MediaWiki discord (https://discord.gg/ZrV2Ex9) may be better positioned to help with this. – SD0001 (talk) 11:14, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't touched the file beside adding the WikiLove extension just to test out how "things" (extensions/skins) can be added. I have this.- Klein Muçi (talk) 11:48, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If it still isn't working, consider using a MySQL/MariaDB database. You can set one up using docker, and specify its credentials in LocalSettings. – SD0001 (talk) 11:42, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I tried using docker-compose exec mediawiki php maintenance/update.php following the instructions here and I get this. It seems to be working fine, no?

Is that the same thing as running the Update PHP script? Does that tell us anything about why that doesn't work? - Klein Muçi (talk) 12:25, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes that's working fine. So you were running it earlier without using docker?

Running any maintenance script directly in a linux terminal will not work. Your sqlite database is inside the docker container and can't be accessed from outside (unless ...). You need to do it inside the container – docker-compose exec mediawiki bash gets you a shell inside the container – and then you can do php maintenance/update.php (The command you mention is the shortcut for this.)

Some commands like composer install and composer test may work when run outside – but if your local php version is different from what's there inside docker, it could result in subtle bugs. – SD0001 (talk) 13:34, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ah... Yes, you're totally right. Thank you one more time! - Klein Muçi (talk) 14:18, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello back! I was working with some good first tasks at Phab and I started noticing that I started encountering conflicts. This is normal but do you have any advice on how to act in regard to that? Like, for example, in this small change, what would I need to do, if anything, in regard to the current conflicts that are listed there? Do I follow the links and solve them manually somehow? Or is that considered rude and bad manners? As usually, I'm just starting so any kind of information would be appreciated. - Klein Muçi (talk) 13:27, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You don't have to do anything. Depending on which patch gets merged first – the conflicts will have to be fixed in the other. Also don't +1 your own patches. – SD0001 (talk) 14:43, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see. I don't do that but I saw that it came with an automatic comment in the lines of "it looks good to me, maybe someone else can check it" and given that it was just a simple change of characters, not code per se, I thought it would be a good and acceptable occasion to do that. Apparently it almost never is. :P Thank you! :) - Klein Muçi (talk) 15:28, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and also, what about the "topic" content? What are some examples for good topics? I ask because I thought that would be the first line of the commit message but apparently it gets put aside and the description, which is optional, is what becomes the commit message. The topic in my task above seems strange now.

I'm referring to the web interface usage. Klein Muçi (talk) 15:39, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's usually just the phab ticket id or the branch name. Doesn't really matter what you put in there. – SD0001 (talk) 18:15, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Help![edit]

Hi, I was working on categorising templates, I stumbled upon a redirect that is printworthy, and happens to be a colloquial name too. But I'm not able to make out exactly what to put within the r cat shell. You happen to be the most recent editor of {{R from colloquial name}} Can you please help me out? Thanks! ---CX Zoom(^he/_him) (^{let's talk}|_contribs) 18:50, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@CX Zoom I'm not sure about this – I only made a maintenance edit to that template. You may want to ask at WT:WikiProject Redirect. – SD0001 (talk) 05:05, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, thank you very much for linking the discussion spot! ---CX Zoom(^he/_him) (^{let's talk}|_contribs) 05:23, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bots Newsletter, January 2022[edit]

Bots Newsletter, January 2022

BRFA activity by month Welcome to the ninth issue of the English Wikipedia's Bots Newsletter, your source for all things bot. Vicious bot-on-bot edit warring... superseded tasks... policy proposals... these stories, and more, are brought to you by Wikipedia's most distinguished newsletter about bots. After a long hiatus between August 2019 and December 2021, there's quite a bit of ground to cover. Due to the vastness, I decided in December to split the coverage up into a few installments that covered six months each. Some people thought this was a good idea, since covering an entire year in a single issue would make it unmanageably large. Others thought this was stupid, since they were getting talk page messages about crap from almost three years ago. Ultimately, the question of whether each issue covers six months or a year is only relevant for a couple more of them, and then the problem will be behind us forever. Of course, you can also look on the bright side – we are making progress, and this issue will only be about crap from almost two years ago. Today we will pick up where we left off in December, and go through the first half of 2020. Overall In the first half of 2020, there were 71 BRFAs. Of these, Y 59 were approved, and 12 were unsuccessful (with N2 8 denied, ? 2 withdrawn, and 2 expired). January 2020 Yeah, you're not gonna be able to get away with this anymore. Y ST47Bot, Seppi333Bot, Qbugbot 4 · N2 PkbwcgsBot 25, PkbwcgsBot 26 A new Pywikibot release dropped support for Python 3.4, and it was expected that support for Python 2.7 would be removed in coming updates. Toolforge itself planned to drop Python 2 support in 2022. Two new bots dropped in January 2020: ST47Bot, the successor to STBot, and Seppi333Bot, whose task was to perform a weekly update of four "massive" wikitables for WikiProject Molecular Biology. Cydebot, an adminbot operated by Cyde since 2006, was blocked after going berserk on categories that hadn't yet been CfD'd. February 2020 Speaking of WikiProject Molecular Biology, Listeria went wild in February Y AnomieBOT 78, Cewbot 2, DannyS712 bot 67, DannyS712 bot III 63, PearBOT 6, DemonDays64 Bot 2 · N2 PearBOT On February 1, some concerns were raised about ListeriaBot performing "nonsense" edits. Semi-active operator Magnus Manske (who originally coded the Phase II software|precursor of MediaWiki) was pinged. Meanwhile, the bot was temporarily blocked for several hours until the issue was diagnosed and resolved. On February 18, ST47Bot got into a tussle with Amalthea (bot), and had to be partially-blocked from Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Cases/Overview. March 2020 Y MajavahBot, SDZeroBot, TheSandBot 6, TheSandBot 7, Bitbotje, FACBot 6, TheSandBot 8, Qbugbot 5, Cewbot 3, SDZeroBot 2, PrimeBOT 31, WikiCleanerBot 12 · AntiCompositeBot In March, a long discussion was started at Wikipedia talk:Bot policy by Skdb about the troubling trend of bots "expiring" without explanation after their owners became inactive. This can happen for a variety of reasons -- API changes break code, hosting providers' software updates break code, hosting accounts lapse, software changes make bots' edits unnecessary, and policy changes make bots' edits unwanted. The most promising solution seemed to be Toolforge hosting (although it has some problems of its own, like the occasional necessity of refactoring code). Some of the twelve bot tasks approved this month were TheSandBot 6 (removing blocked users from Category:Wikipedia usernames with possible policy issues), and TheSandBot 7 (removing unblocked users from Category:Wikipedians who are indefinitely blocked for promotional user names). SDZeroBot 2 was approved to refine geographic stub tags. New bots approved this month were MajavahBot (to patrol WP:EFFPR), SDZeroBot (to merge stub tags), and Bitbotje (fixing DISPLAYTITLE modifications, DEFAULTSORT errors and broken behavior switches in draftspace). April 2020 Listeria being examined Y TheSandBot 9, BHGbot 5, DannyS712 bot 69, SDZeroBot 3, ST47ProxyBot, WugBot 4, SDZeroBot 4, DatBot 10, WikiCleanerBot 11, WikiCleanerBot 13, WikiCleanerBot 14, AntiCompositeBot 2, Cewbot 4 · N2 DaedanBot 1 · Creffbot A discussion on the bot noticeboard, "Re-examination of ListeriaBot", was started by Barkeep49, who pointed out repeated operation outside the scope of its BRFA (i.e. editing pages in mainspace, and adding non-free images to others). Some said it was doing good work, and others said it was operating beyond its remit. It was blocked on April 10; the next day it was unblocked, reblocked from article space, reblocked "for specified non-editing actions", unblocked, and indeffed. The next week, several safeguards were implemented in its code by Magnus; the bot was allowed to roam free once more on April 18. ST47ProxyBot joined the stable in April, after a BRFA started in December was finally completed. As an adminbot, it was authorized to block IP addresses belonging to open proxies, public VPN services, and web hosts. New tasks approved for existing bots included BHGbot 5 (diffusing categories), TheSandBot 9 (taking over some tasks from the inactive RonBot), and WugBot 4 (updating data at {{Interactive COVID-19 maps}}). Also, DatBot 10 was approved to scale down non-free SVGs — I didn't even know that was a thing. A discussion at Wikipedia talk:Bot policy was started by Thryduulf about whether WP:BOTCOMM should explicitly specify that bot operators must be responsive to concerns raised on English Wikipedia specifically (as opposed to Phabricator, SourceForge, Toolforge, et cetera). Eventually, the policy was amended to its current form: Issues and enquiries are typically expected to be handled on the English Wikipedia. Pages reachable via unified login, like a talk page at Commons or at Italian Wikipedia could also be acceptable [...] External sites like Phabricator or GitHub (which require separate registration or do not allow for IP comments) and email (which can compromise anonymity) can supplement on-wiki communication, but do not replace it. May 2020 We heard you like bots, so we made a bot that reports the status of your bots, so now you can use bots while you use bots Y MajavahBot 3, DannyS712 bot 70, CitationCleanerBot 5, Dreamy Jazz Bot 4, QEDKbot, William Avery Bot 2, DannyS712 bot 68, PrimeBOT 32, TheSandBot 10, Bot1058 7, BHGbot 6, EaglesBot 2, Cewbot 5, WikiCleanerBot 17 · N2 MDanielsBot, PhuzBot 3, Gedimon · ? PearBOT 7 MajavahBot 3, an impressively meta bot task, was approved this month for maintaining a list of bots running on the English Wikipedia. The page, located at User:MajavahBot/Bot status report, is updated every 24 hours; it contains a list of all accounts with the bot flag, as well as their operator, edit count, last activity date, last edit date, last logged action date, user groups and block status. Other approvals for this month were William Avery Bot 2 (processing redirects in {{R from scientific name}}), DannyS712 bot 68 (allowing users to schedule bot reminders for themselves), TheSandBot 10 (removing blocked/locked users from Category:User talk pages with conflict of interest notices), Bot1058 7 (updating Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests/Permalink), Dreamy Jazz Bot 4 (adding {{WikiProject Biography|living=no}} to talk pages where their associated article is in a year of death category), and QEDKbot (deleting and nominating empty categories). General syntax fixing tasks were approved for DannyS712 bot 70, CitationCleanerBot 5, PrimeBOT 32, BHGbot 6, Cewbot 5, and EaglesBot 2, as well as WikiCleanerBot 15, 16, and 17. Seven bots who fell below activity requirements (with neither the bots nor their operators having any edits or logged actions in two years) had their bot flags removed. They were NekoBot, Robert SkyBot, DASHBotAV, VoxelBot, JackieBot, ReferenceBot, and CensusBot. On May 12, EmausBot was blocked. June 2020 A partial block averted at the eleventh hour for the robot that makes Legos Y QEDKbot 2, AnomieBOT 79, WOSlinkerBot 6, Yapperbot 2, Yapperbot, AnomieBOT 80, Dreamy Jazz Bot 5, WikiCleanerBot 18, HasteurBot 15, MusikBot II 4, NoSandboxesHere · N2 RedWarn · ? Seppi333Bot 2 In July 2017, Headbomb made a proposal that a section of the Wikipedia:Dashboard be devoted to bots and technical issues. In November 2019, Lua code was written superseding Legobot's tasks on that page, and operator Legoktm was asked to stop them so that the new code could be deployed. After no response to pings, a partial-block of Legobot for the dashboard was proposed. Some months later, on June 16, Headbomb said: "A full block serves nothing. A partial block solves all current issues [...] Just fucking do it. It's been 3 years now." The next day, however, Legoktm disabled the task, and the dashboard was successfully refactored. On June 7, RexxS blocked Citation bot for disruptive editing, saying it was "still removing links after request to stop". A couple weeks later, a discussion on the bots noticeboard was opened, saying "it is a widely-used and useful bot, but it has one of the longest block logs for any recently-operating bot on Wikipedia". While its last BRFA approval was in 2011, its code and functionality had changed dramatically since then, and AntiCompositeNumber requested that BAG require a new BRFA. Maintainer AManWithNoPlan responded that most blocks were from years ago (when it lacked a proper test suite), and problems since then had mostly been one-off errors (like a June 2019 incident in which a LTA had "weaponized" the bot to harass editors). David Tornheim opened a discussion about whether bots based on closed-source code should be permitted, and proposed that they not. He cited a recent case in which a maintainer had said "I can only suppose that the code that is available on GitHub is not the actual code that was running on [the bot]". Some disagreed: Naypta said that "I like free software as much as the next person, and I strongly believe that bot operators should make their bot code public, but I don't think it should be that they must do so". Two new bots had their first BRFAs approved: Yapperbot, to replace Legobot for handling the Feedback Request Service, and NoSandboxesHere, to remove {{user sandbox}} from articles in draftspace using Category:Non-userspace pages using User sandbox. Conclusion What's next for our intrepid band of coders, maintainers and approvers? Will Citation bot ever be set free to roam the project? What's the deal with all those book links that InternetArchiveBot is adding to articles? Should we keep using Gerrit for MediaWiki? What if we had a day for bots to make cosmetic edits? These questions will be answered — and new questions raised — by the February 2022 Bots Newsletter. Tune in, or miss out! Signing off... jp×g 23:22, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply] (You can subscribe or unsubscribe from future newsletters by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Edit Request Wizard[edit]

Hi! As a followup to Special:Diff/1068844162, would you be OK with me listing you as a mentor on the project? As I said, the time commitment would be light (or whatever you want). Enterprisey (talk!) 07:02, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Enterprisey Sure - kinda forgot about this. I can help with the MediaWiki/PHP porting if that's ever taken up. – SD0001 (talk) 03:26, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A brownie for you! (Parser tag for loading gadgets)[edit]

For your patch for T241524 - thank you! Enterprisey (talk!) 23:04, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AFC Helper News[edit]

Hello! I wanted to drop a quick note for all of our AFC participants; nothing huge and fancy like a newsletter, but a few points of interest.

• AFCH will now show live previews of the comment to be left on a decline.
• The template {{db-afc-move}} has been created - this template is similar to {{db-move}} when there is a redirect in the way of an acceptance, but specifically tells the patrolling admin to let you (the draft reviewer) take care of the actual move.

Short and sweet, but there's always more to discuss at WT:AFC. Stop on by, maybe review a draft on the way? Whether you're one of our top reviewers, or haven't reviewed in a while, I want to thank you for helping out in the past and in the future. Cheers, Primefac, via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:00, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Draft articles on media has been nominated for merging[edit]

Category:Draft articles on media has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. ★Trekker (talk) 15:57, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User:SDZeroBot/G13 soon[edit]

Hello, again, SD0001,

It's been a while since I visited your talk page which, I guess, is a good thing because there have been no problems with SDZeroBot! But I thought I'd check in with you because we have another calendar jump with the G13 soon report as we go from the February 28 report to the March 1 report. We can handle the extra three days of expiring drafts okay (for August 29-31) but we really can't have SDZeroBot skip ahead three days of G13 reports and miss reports for drafts expiring in early September. Both DGG (on the part of the AFC) and I review the G13 soon reports prior to the time of deletion and having 3 missing reports would negatively affect this process.

I should say that with simple 1 day mismatches (like when months are only 30 days long) seem to be handled by SDZeroBot with few problems these days so maybe you have fixed this glitch which has more to do with the calendar irregularities than with how your bot functions. Thanks again for all of the work that both you and your bot do for the project! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:31, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Liz – this was fixed quite some time back (User talk:SDZeroBot#SDZeroBot glitches). I think bot would create 3 reports on one day to account for the calendar jump – you can check that in the page history. – SD0001 (talk) 15:24, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, SD0001,

I thought that calendar problem was fixed but, you know, I look at these pages every day and so I try to anticipate problems that might occur. But I will just assume from now on that this problem won't reoccur. Today's G13 soon report is for drafts that would expire February 29, 2022 but we'll just take care of them on February 28, 2022.

But you know when I said above I hadn't posted here lately so there must be no problems? LOL! Well, I spoke too soon. The G13 soon reports have been a little short lately which wasn't a surprise because the AFC did a huge July 2021 Backlog Drive so six months ago there were thousands of drafts that were reviewed in July (so they would expire in January) as AFC reviewers caught up with the draft backlog so we were expecting February would be much lighter. Today's report had just 150 expiring drafts (there are typically about 200-225) which was just fine but then, on User:SDZeroBot/G13 eligible, which is usually empty, it listed 45 drafts that were G13 eligible today but didn't show up on the G13 soon report! That's unusual...it's happened before but it doesn't occur very often as you can see in the page history. Usually the only time drafts appear on G13 eligible page is because they were missed by myself, Explicit or one of the editors who helps out with G13s. Any idea what might have happened with SDZeroBot? It's not a big deal unless it starts happening more frequently. And even then, it's not urgent, it's just that we like to delete expiring drafts over the course of the day & night rather than all at once. But it's curious. Thanks! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:55, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz
I see pages on today's eligible report had last edits on 22 August. If we look at the soon report for 22 August, the entries are there but unfortunately there was a formatting problem, phew! The raw wikitext of the links are all inside the Excerpt field of User:Rockpromo/sandbox. This happened because the generated excerpt for the sandbox page had an unclosed <nowiki> tag.

I made a change some time back to keep out unclosed <ref> tags from excerpts (which too can affect the formatting of the rest of the page) because they were more common. Will take a look whether nowikis too could be handled the same way. – SD0001 (talk) 04:00, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You always know what to do, thanks so much! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:46, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Everything worked out perfectly, SDZeroBot issued 4 G13 soon reports today so we won't miss a day of reports. Thanks! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:31, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A more direct ping[edit]

Recognising that you're a busy individual, just wanted to note that you've either missed or forgotten about a few pings at this BRFA, so whenever is convenient for you please respond. Primefac (talk) 14:18, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Did you know/Create new nomination[edit]

Hi! I'm sure you're busy; is there a way to include a checkbox in the QPQ section of the form, for users exempt from the QPQ requirement? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 00:04, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]