User talk:MDP23/NPWatcher/Archive1

Multiple tags
Please check Special:Undelete/Bikni, apparently NPWatcher put multiple tags in the article (or BostonMA just put a lot of them there). Maybe you should check if the article has a deletion tag already before adding it? Just a thought. Cheers! -- ReyBrujo 20:15, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Urgh! I will do that - it's improtant not to repeatedly click the buttons (!) M a rtinp23 20:23, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry. --BostonMA talk  20:24, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * What happened is this. When I hit the button for Delete-non-notable, it seems to refresh the page, and show the template.  When I hit the button for Delete-no-reason, it did not seem to refresh the page.  So, foolishly I tried several times.  Again, sorry.  --BostonMA talk  20:26, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Ahah - it's not a problem at all! The reason I say ahah! is because that's my fault, and I probably need to put a refresh thingy on that method (I think..).  I'll do it in a minute :) M a rtinp23 20:28, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I've done a new release - please download it :) M a rtinp23 20:41, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Wow, that was quick. So that was the problem?  --BostonMA talk  20:43, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * :) although I can't remeber that far back, I think that was the problem! I'm finding that my version of the tool isn't refreshing (or at least not quickly).  Is anyone else having this problem?  At some point I'll try to put a progress bar for the web-browser in.  Thanks M a rtinp23 15:26, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

image not entirely free
Please be careful with the Free screenshot tag; even having the partial Mozilla and AIM tags in your screenshot could have caused trouble, not to mention the Windows stuff at the bottom of the page... I cropped and uploaded a tighter copy of what you had, but feel free to replace with something else if you can. -- nae'blis 23:18, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for doing that :D M a rtinp23 15:19, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Appropriate criteria?
I just came across a couple of articles with "speedy delete" templates added by editors using this tool. Today is my first exposure to this tool, so I'm not quite sure yet as to what parts are automated and which parts are user-controlled, but it seems that a few odd "speedy" tags were added using this tool. For example, it seems fond of using CSD A7 as the SD criterion, even when it's not a bio/band/club/etc (i.e. Paarl rock, for which CSD A1 would have been much more appropriate. Another example is double-tagging: ie. Dead Man's Chest (novel) was nommed under CSD A1, but this tool was used to add a second template (again, CSD A7, which doesn't seem appropriate for a book). If these templates are user-generated (using the tool), then as Emily Litella would say, "never mind". Agent 86 00:02, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * The user clicks a button to add the appropriate tag to the article - of course, this can be prone to error, or misjudgement. Very little of the tool is automated, apart from the editing, which is all user directed.  Thanks M a rtinp23 00:08, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I am a guilty party in this matter. I am relatively new, and sometimes make the wrong choice.  I will try to be more careful regarding the category of speedy delete.  Sincerely, --BostonMA talk  00:13, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Don't worry - things often fall under multiple criteria, and choosing which to pick can be difficult. They all go into the same category (some go into others in addition), so as long as the tag's there, and admin will see it. M a rtinp23 15:20, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Launching NPW
Hi, last night I was able to use NPW without difficulty. This morning, it will not launch after the login window. I notice that you have a new authorized version .7.7. However, the download version is still .7.6 I will sit tight in case you are in the middle of reorganizing things. However, I thought I should let you know in case something is wrong. Sincerely, --BostonMA talk 15:10, 2 December 2006 (UTC)


 * download from where? Download box still downloads old version.  --BostonMA talk  17:49, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * There was something strange going on when I was doing all of the releases last weekend - it seems that even though I'd uploaded a more recent version, the old one was still being downloaded (perhaps it had been cached or something). If you try the same download link, but with NPWatcher1.zip as the file name, you may get a better version. Thanks M a rtinp23 15:22, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Feature Suggestion
I think that all the popups should have a cancel button, in case you click on the wrong button accidentally. Also, a revert feature for non-admins (just editing the prior version of the page) would be nice..

Thanks for the wonderful app!

 T  yson Moore   es   00:22, 15 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree that it is a wonderful app. Also with the cancel button.  Sometimes one is faced with the choice of a) leaving an incorrect tag and needing to manually fix it or b) killing NPWatcher completely.  A cancel button on all popups would be nice for such situations.  --BostonMA talk  09:00, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm working on it right now :) M a rtinp23 13:00, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Some image orphanding issues
The automatic image orphanding is a great boon, however it's not quite there yet, a few issues I've noticed: Otherwise a usefull little thing for processing speedy image deletions, even if it's not what it was originaly made for. --Sherool (talk) 17:07, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) When orphanding an image that is used inside tags it just removes the image name, leaving the caption (if any) in the article.
 * 2) If the image name does not match 'exactly it's not orphanded, for example if the first letter is not capitalised of it underscores are used instead of spaces, this is quite common so I still have to manualy remove quite a few images.
 * 3) Then there is the issue of infobox usage. I realise this is tricky but the most common practice is to simply use, so simply removing instances of the image name sans the Image: prefix (if nothing else is found) should probably catch most of them.
 * OK - I'll work on this. Thanks for pointing it out, M a rtinp23 12:40, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I tihnk it already catches the infobox ones just by removing the image name, leaving "image =" in the wikitext. I'm going to sort out a better way to handle this sort of thing M a rtinp23 14:29, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * As of version 0.8.4.2. it no longer seems to delink any images, not even the most basic [[Image:Some image.jpg|caption]] style images are removed (yes "orphan image" is checked (even tried unchecking it in case a true/false check had been inverted somewhere, but no luck))... --Sherool (talk) 23:49, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Fixed in 0.8.4.3, 0.8.4.2 and all previous have been disabled so we can start from a new slate for bugfixes :) Mart inp23 23:07, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Inappropriate or Buggy use
User:Pilotguy edits (talk) is using the tool for image deletion, not for New Page watching, as the project page clearly states:, , and numerous others involving the same image. Further, the user made many deletions of an image with the edit summary "corrupt/empty", which clearly was not the case. There is a problem either in the usage or the tool. Hu 00:20, 27 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Don't see anything wrong with using it for image deletion. That's what I use it for myself (mostly because of the automatic delinking of deleted images). Though it is naturaly the responsibility of the user to pick an apropriate delete reason when doing so. --Sherool (talk) 07:46, 27 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Ah, I see what the problem is. He deleted a blank description page for a commons image (falls under the "blank" category). However he failed to take into acount that the program would automaticaly remove the image from the article. Maybe add a checkbox for "delink image yes/no" for cases like this where removing the "deleted" image is not apropriate. --Sherool (talk) 07:53, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I think the problem was with the tag which had been placed on the image by another user, labelling it as an empty/corrupt image, when in fact it should have been tagged as "on commons under the same name, bit for bit copy". Now, for commons images, the program doesn't delink them (now - I've just fixed it), but for all others it does.  I'll add the checkbox at some stage though, as there will probably be times that it's desired that the links remain. M a rtinp23 12:57, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh - I can see the confusion over the purpose of the tool - for admins, the tool has an interface for image deletion as well as for prodclearing and CAT:CSD emptying. M a rtinp23 14:19, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for looking into this, fixing or extending the features, and adding the admin note in the intro on the project page. Hu 21:49, 30 December 2006 (UTC)