Please sign your messages on
talk pages with four
tildes (~~~~). This will automatically insert your "
signature" (your username and a date stamp). The or button, on the tool bar above Wikipedia's text editing window, also does this.
If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills without changing the
mainspace, the Sandbox is for you.
Please do (notify me). I'd very much be interested in seeing updates to that page. By the way, I was hoping it was in JavaScript. (Sigh.) Here are some more questions for you:
@
The Transhumanist: I'm native russian speaker and I'm the user of Russian Wikipedia, I'm mostly inactive there. This script was written for ruwiki as well, I just decided to launch it for enwiki to test it on bigger wikis and it fails, statistics is incomplete (probably because of lack of apihighlimits right). I can't say I know any program languages, but I know basic syntax of many of them and can google the rest of needed functions, JS included. Why do you asking? I have no plans to write something for enwiki, I just can occasionally port some of my ruwiki bots.
Facenapalm (
talk)
21:32, 2 March 2018 (UTC)reply
@
The Transhumanist: I have bad news for you: I've figured out why statistics are incomplete, but I have no idea how to fix it. The problem is that CirrusSearch can't find more than 10,000 articles, while there are currently
28,035 userpages with importScript in English Wikipedia. So the statistics you might see isn't a list of most used scripts – it's a list of most used scripts in the sample of 10k (most popular?) userpages. If you're interested, I can once prepare the statistics manually, but I surely will not update it with bot or script.<bt>Possible solution is to get this list from
Quarry, but I don't want to write such a complicated script. There are only 1,500 userpages with importScript in ruwiki, so the problem will not be occured for a long time.
Facenapalm (
talk)
00:10, 22 March 2018 (UTC)reply
CirrusSearch does find more than 10K, as can be seen by the number at the top right of the screen. "28,035" userpages found having importScript in them. On English Wikipedia, you can look at 5,000 results at a time; so you look at them in 6 parts, and you've seen them all. And if you can look at them all, so can a script. There's your solution for making a list of all the pages with importScript in them. Then, I assume you scrape each page for the names of the scripts each one imports, tallying them as you go. Is that how you do it? — The Transhumanist04:52, 22 March 2018 (UTC)reply
I tried it, using &limit=5000. You're right, won't go past the second batch. Damn. Well, there is the database scanner in
AWB. But it won't give you the most up-to-date results. And it cuts you off at 30,000 matches. A workaround with the scanner is multiple searches using regex, splitting up the alphabet. I've been doing that to find uncategorized sectional redirects. — The Transhumanist11:28, 22 March 2018 (UTC)reply
AWB scanner definetely can't calculate anything, I'm pretty sure it even can't get the list of "importScript" functions, only the list of pages with it. I can write a special dump scanner for this, but I don't want to. I think scanning dumps is the only valid way to get statistics in enwiki, because it can take several hours to analyze thousands of userpages with bot, so you anyway shouldn't launch it more often than twice a mouth, otherwise it will be kind of DDoS for server. :D You can try to implement it by yourself. The general algorithm is: get the list of userscripts with ^[^/]+/(common|vector|cologneblue|minerva|modern|monobook|timeless)\.js$ title and at least one importScript inside (I use search, you may use Quarry or dumps); get its texts; delete //.+|/\*(?:.|\n)*?\*/ from texts; find importScript *\( *([\"'])([^\"'\n]*?)\1(?: *, *[\"']en[\"'])? *\) inside; unify the results you got (delete "user:" prefix, replace spaces with underscores, delete leading/ending underscores, etc); count unique results.
Facenapalm (
talk)
12:00, 22 March 2018 (UTC)reply
By the authority vested in me by myself it gives me great pleasure to present you with this barnstar in recognition of your creation of the informative and well researched article,
Nuclear Gandhi. Thank you.
Gog the Mild (
talk)
00:05, 11 January 2021 (UTC)reply
On
27 January 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Nuclear Gandhi, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that one of the most recognizable
video-game glitches, a bug that forced
Mahatma Gandhi in Civilization to use
nuclear weapons heavily, never actually existed? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at
Template:Did you know nominations/Nuclear Gandhi. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (
here's how,
Nuclear Gandhi), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to
the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the
Did you know talk page.
@
Reconrabbit, @
OnlyNano, hi. I started
the deletion review back in January. Thing is, this list was deleted back in 2019, when such list wasn't presented in any reliable sources, and that has changed. I found at least 3 reliable and 1 situational source maintaining similiar list, and bunch of extra sources. I thought that's enough reason to re-consider the notability of a standalone list. The admin who initially deleted the list considered my arguments "pretty uncontroversial" and restored this exact draft that I eventually improved and submitted. Perhaps I appended for the wrong page in the first place. What's the standard procedure for undeleting articles in English Wikipedia?
A particle for world to form (
talk)
20:21, 24 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Even if it is well sourced, and the list is much improved compared to its previous form, there is still the issue that it is a repository of information that (barring the list) could be represented on the
Epic Games Store page itself, and the list of prices (even if they are all $0) is contrary to the cited policy.
Reconrabbit20:29, 24 June 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Reconrabbit, I understood your opinion regarding list notability, but I still don't undrestand English Wikipedia procedures, can you please fill me in?In Russian Wikipedia, there's a
ru:Википедия:К восстановлению page (basically "restore requests"). If the article was deleted, but the situation has changed and somebody wants to re-consider whether the article can exist, they can apply to this page and an admin would decide whether the article can or can not be undeleted. If admin decides it can be undeleted, it automatically dismisses previous deletion discussions' outcomes.I thought
Wikipedia:Deletion review is designed for exactly the same purpose, so I applied there. The article was undeleted to the draft, and I personally considered it as a greenlight to continue the work, but apparently it can still be declined. Is there a place I can estimate previously deleted article's chances of survival? Or are all deletions considered indisputable and permanent even if there are new arguments for the discussion?I'm okay with both restoring and deleting this article, but I'd like to avoid getting false confidence in the future.
A particle for world to form (
talk)
21:18, 24 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I wasn't sure, and it was unusual for the article to be restored because it was deleted from
Articles for Deletion and not as an expired draft or "soft delete" (nominated for deletion without discussion). But you had a good reason to restore the deleted article, the end result was completely different, and I was not certain if it should be declined as I did not completely review the sources, only the premise of the article. I left it to someone else to decide what to do, which was OnlyNano in this case.
Reconrabbit00:47, 25 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Your recent article submission has been rejected and cannot be resubmitted. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use
Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by OnlyNano was: This submission is
contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: I'm sorry that I had to decline this, as it looks like a good piece of content with lots of sources, but I am going to agree with the XFD discussion before,
WP:NOTCATALOGUE is relevant here. Wikipedia is not the place to have never-ending logs of a sale of a game storefront. Steam doesn't even have one.
OnlyNanotalk20:09, 24 June 2024 (UTC)reply
@
OnlyNano, I'm not fluent in English Wikipedia ruleset, so please correct me if I'm wrong.
WP:NOTCATALOGUE links to
WP:LISTCRITERIA that insists that the selection criteria must be supported by reliable sources. There are three reliable sources (
[1][2][3]) that are or were maitaining the list with the same selection criteria, and one situational source (
[4]) that maintains somewhat simliiar list. The difference between EGS and Steam is that Steam does not have such sources. Why is NOTCATALOGUE still applicable here?
A particle for world to form (
talk)
20:36, 24 June 2024 (UTC)reply
After further research into your opinion, I see your side, and agree. You do have some reliable sources backing the information, which does discredit the
WP:NOTCATALOGUE policy. I see no problems anymore, and I've accepted your article into the mainspace. Congrats! If you could resubmit, I can accept your submission and we can get it moved over. OnlyNanotalk20:52, 24 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as B-Class, which is recorded on its
talk page. This is a fantastic rating for a new article, and places it among the top 3% of accepted submissions — major kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the
grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now
create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to
Articles for creation if you prefer.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to
create articles yourself without posting a request to
Articles for creation.