User:Magioladitis/Notes

Wikipedia or Editors vs Wikipedia for Viewers is the Wikipedia's biggest war nowadays. Some wikipedians see Wikipedia as a product that we have to forward and spread. I see it as a place for creation, participation and communication. We want more editors and we have to invite them. Nobody likes participating in something that seems already complete. And Wikipedia is far from complete as Human Knowledge is far from knowing everything.

I have one of the Credo accounts. I need to start checking History references.

Small shiny things
Janitorial work I have done and enjoyed:
 * Mass categorization of Political parties by year of establishment
 * Mass categorization of TV stations by year of establishment
 * Moved hundreds of living people from "Year of birth missing" to "Year to birth missing (living people)"
 * Added WPSchool and LocateMe tags in many schools / Updated hundreds of unassessed tags
 * Tagged for speedy deletion more than 500 redirects caused by implausible typos in 4 days. They were all successfully deleted.
 * Assessed hundreds of articles for WikiProject Greece and other projects.
 * Fixed all biographical pages that needed persondata, zeroing backlog
 * Removed duplicated extension from more than 500 files
 * Removed invisible unicode character from pagetitles in interwikis by moving the page (worked in more than 4 wikis to achieve that)
 * Deleted more than 500 redirects from talk pages of dab pages to talk pages of non-dab pages
 * Replaced links to freenode with the appropriate template
 * Sent dozens of unused templates for deletion

Reverted vandalism after 2 years.

Copyedits that I enjoyed:

,,, , , ,

Cleanup ideas

 * Stubs with date parameter
 * br tags with mixed casing i.e. ,
 * Automatically generated comments such as
 * <ref name=<ref name

"Do all in one run" project
It takes two or more runs:
 * mixed tags
 * first remove tag and then realises there is a header same with the pagename
 * first moves defaultsort and then fixes uneven brackets
 * Same ref different name and refs with same name!
 * Triple brackets!
 * Added refnames and then reordered.
 * More whitespace.
 * Triple small tags!
 * Closed bracket and then bypassed redirect
 * Closes bracket then fixes whitespace inside category.

Crazy little things
Unbalanced brackets Unbalanced tags Other
 * remove parenthesis inside year field
 * unbalanced italics inside work
 * italics inside reference, hhtp instead of http

Template standardisation

 * WikiProject banners: All banners renamed to "WikiProject PROJECTNAME", many bots bypass redirects to mainname. See WP:STANDARDIZE.
 * DABlinks: Move all on the top, merge multiple, use standard names
 * Infoboxes: Aim to have all templates support the same fields for birth/death name/date/place. See User:WOSlinker/Infoboxes.

To-do
An old to-do list:
 * Create an essay for Redirects with quotes.
 * Replace image with image1 in Infobox character
 * Infobox football biography to supercede older similar templates
 * Find a way to convert single issue articleissues to the original template
 * Move nofootnotes to the references section (consensus changed)
 * Handle the BD templates
 * Remove old "amg_id", "imdb_id" parameters from Infobox film Category:Film articles using deprecated parameters
 * Remove imdb_id from Template:Infobox adult female
 * Move stub untagging before cat check. Case: 1 cat generated by a stub tag, article not a stub
 * Replace all quotes with straight quotes? Check WP:PUNCT.

Random notes
To catch templates:

\{\{[Tt]emplatename\s*\|[^|]*?\}\}
 * To remove a template articletext = Tools.NestedTemplateRegex("foo").Replace(articletext, "");

Orphan tagging in other languages

 * We add for ruwiki,  for ukwiki
 * Wikipedia-connectivity