User talk:Cote d'Azur/Archive 5

Search formatting script for working with links

Since you work on lists a lot, I thought you might be interested in a script I wrote to make the finding and copying of links easier. It reformats Wikipedia search results...

It strips out everything from search results except the links, which it formats to be ready to copy and paste into lists. It even strips out the annoying redirect results. It is most useful when you use "intitle:" in the search, and set the number of results to 5000 (to do that, you must change it in the URL input box of the browser - after the initial search, click on 50, and then add two zeros to the 50 in the URL).

If you would like to try it out, insert this into your Vector.js page:

importScript("User:The Transhumanist/StripSearchInWikicode.js");

I've only tested it on Firefox, and it only works with the Vector skin.

If you try it, please let me know if it works.

Good luck. The Transhumanist 22:28, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

P.S.: Suggestions are welcome.

I have Firefox and will have a look, thanks for letting me know. —Cote d'Azur (talk) 03:58, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

You are welcome. The Transhumanist 08:18, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Outlines/Drafts

Would it be possible for you to email me, please? Thank you, Cote d'Azur (talk) 09:37, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

You don't do the email thing and I don't write on talk pages, so how can we communicate? —Cote d'Azur (talk) 10:31, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

We've been communicating on talk pages. Concerning email, I believe that development of WP should be transparent, with issues presented out in the open (on talk pages) so that others can see what's going on and join in on what's being discussed. It's the wiki way, and the basis for collaboration and consensus building on WP. Also, I wish my postings to be included under WP's licenses, which they wouldn't be if they were in email. The Transhumanist 11:03, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

I see. In this case I cannot help because I really do not write on talk pages, I apologise. —Cote d'Azur (talk) 11:09, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

I don't see how that benefits the encyclopedia. On the bright side, standards for outlines are in place. As long as we follow those, not much communication is needed. The Transhumanist 12:44, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Where can one see them, please?

Wikipedia:Outlines covers the basics. The formatting standards for country outlines reside in the set itself - that is, most of them match, for ease of comparison between countries. Changing all country outlines to a new configuration or presentation order would pose a problem, only if someone objected. Then a new consensus would be needed.

Individual creativity on outlines is great to have -- it is a driving force of the wiki, and it is fun to watch the outlines evolve in unexpected ways. For example, I noticed you changed the way headings are used in the Outline of Italy. That is fine. We can't learn the benefits of new ways of doing things if we don't try them. Indented bullets signify hierarchical level equally well. The important thing is that outline levels remain parsable, meaning that a reader or computer program will be able to tell what level an item is, and be able to discern the parent-offspring relationships between the items based on their placement in the outline's tree structure. It is the essence of an outline. Many editors come along who don't get it. But you obviously do.

By the way, a major difference between the items in an outline (such as headings) and those in a regular article, is that we retain the whole topic in the item. For example, "Geography of France", instead of just "Geography". There are a couple of reasons for this. One is that a branch of an outline is also an outline, indicating what subject the reader is looking at (in accordance to the Principle of least astonishment). If all the reader sees is "Geography", he may have forgotten what topic he was browsing. The other reason is that if the reader is comparing between outlines, it may not be immediately obvious which outline he is looking at. It's most useful to think of each node in an outline as the title for its branch -- a node's name conveys parent-offspring relationship information. Outlines are taxonomic classification systems. Semantic accuracy is important. "Geography" is not an offspring of Argentina, but "Geography of Argentina" is.

Being outlines in their own right, outline sections often have redirects pointing directly to them. Please be careful about breaking redirects.

Standard headings are also very helpful when using tabs. You can make a list of links specifying outline sections, and then open them all up in tabs. For example, 20 tabs all displaying "Transportation of" sections of 20 different country outlines.

One of the big problems the outlines face is the tendency for editors to morph them into regular articles, like with the insertion of section lead paragraphs -- prose format is the opposite of list format (outlines are structured lists). If you come across any of that, please convert those outlines back to outline list format.

What the outline project needs most of all is new blood. I hope you adopt the outlines as your project of choice.

I hope my ramblings help. If you have any questions, feel free to fire away. The Transhumanist 21:33, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

I don't do the email thing

I'm just a guy who works on outlines (even before they were called outlines).

And scripts for working on outlines.

I'd like to figure out a way to build 1,000 city outlines without taking 10 years to do it. The first 600 outlines were produced at a rate of about 100 per year, and it has slowed down since then. Ten a day would be nice, which will take a lot of programming. I spotted you working on navigation for Italian topics, and figured that would be a good place to start experimenting with new building methods on the city outlines.

If you have any questions, comments, or ideas, feel free. The Transhumanist 09:56, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Ok, thank you. —Cote d'Azur (talk) 10:41, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Please help me understand

Above, you wrote:

I see. In this case I cannot help because I really do not write on talk pages, I apologise. —Cote d'Azur (talk) 11:09, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Why do you not write on article talk pages? The Transhumanist 21:46, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Here, the reason must remain secret, but I would tell you in private. —Cote d'Azur (talk) 05:48, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

In general, why do you not write on article talk pages? The Transhumanist 12:35, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

I already answered this question. —Cote d'Azur (talk) 14:04, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

You're answer was specific to this situation. You have not explained why you have a policy of not posting on article talk pages in general. Concerning that, I still do not understand. The Transhumanist 21:29, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Outline drafts

Outline drafts appear in two locations.

Most of them are in the Wikipedia:WikiProject Outlines draftspace. We learned by trial and error that this is the safest place for them.

There are some in the Draft namespace, but it is best not to create any more there. There's a bot that checks them for the date of the last edit. When that reaches six months, they are automatically posted for review at AFC on whether to delete them or not. So, someone has to go over them regularly making edits to make sure they don't trigger that process. Some of the reviewers are unfamiliar with outlines and confuse them with disallowed content forks.

Drafts are listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Outlines. The Transhumanist 00:04, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Outline news

See Wikipedia:Community portal#Projects seeking help. Outlines have a permanent section there. The Transhumanist 22:40, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Future of outlines

I'm working on scripts for viewing outlines and for outline development.

So far, there is:

• User:The Transhumanist/OutlineViewAnnotationToggler.js – this one provides a menu item to turn annotations on/off, so you can view lists bare when you want to (without annotations). When done, it will work on (the embedded lists of) all pages, not just outlines. Currently it is limited to outlines only, for testing purposes. It will support hotkey activation/deactivation of annotations, but that feature currently lacks an accurate viewport location reset for retaining the location on screen that the user was looking at. It also needs an indicator that tells the user it is still on. Otherwise, you might wonder why a bare list has annotations in edit mode, when you go in to add some. :)
• User talk:The Transhumanist/RedlinksRemover.js – strips out entries in outlines that are nothing but a redlink. It removes them right out of the tree structure. But only end nodes. It delinks redlinks that have non-redlink offspring, or that have or are embedded in an annotation. It does not yet recognize entries that lack a bullet (it treats those as embedded).

It is my objective to build a set of scripts that fully automate the process of creating outlines. This end goal is a long way off (AI-complete?). In the meantime, I hope to increase productivity as much as I can. Fifty percent automation would double an editor's productivity. I think I could reach 80% automation (a five-fold increase in productivity) within a couple years.

Script and script feature requests are welcome. The Transhumanist 22:22, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

edit summaries, multiple consecutive edits

Hello, and thanks for your contributions. Just wanted to remind you that edit summaries make it easier for your colleagues here to understand the intention of your edit. Plus, it will be easier for you and your co-editors to collaborate on articles if, instead of making multiple consecutive edits in rapid succession on an article, you use the "Show preview" button to view your changes incrementally before finally saving the page once you're satisfied with your edits. This keeps the page history of the article less cluttered. Thanks in advance for considering these suggestions. Also, re your recent edit to Gardon, I'd suggest a summary such as "changed picture" instead of "ce", as it was more than a copyedit. Eric ^talk 21:20, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Ok, thank you. Cote d'Azur (talk) 06:21, 16 November 2017 (UTC)