Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Backlog elimination drives/September 2019

404 error
Hi, is anyone else running into 404 errors on attempting to save edits? Any suggestions about what I might be doing wrong? Logophile59 (talk) 19:46, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Wow, that's odd. I've run into many a 404 when clicking on sources (Firefox's old Resurrect Pages add-on was very helpful; the new FF RP isn't as good), but never when saving edits. What I have gotten after a long editing session is the loss-of-session-data error message, but just clicking "save" again fixes that. Have you changed anything recently? FWIW, WP was wonky last night and may be acting up again. All the best,  Mini  apolis  23:36, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
 * , thanks. I found out by trial and error that editing and saving one section at a time worked, but each time I tried to save a larger chunk it failed. I wasn't editing for particularly long stretches of time. It's been erratic (problems on some pages but not others). I guess I can hope it goes away by itself... Logophile59 (talk) 00:05, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
 * There was a DDOS attack earlier today; that might be the cause. Wikimedia statement Media article Bobbychan193 (talk) 01:22, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks, maybe that's the explanation! Logophile59 (talk) 11:59, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
 * My 404 errors are back: I can't save changes to Economy of Kenya even when I try adding a single space (in visual edit) and then saving. I can save if I edit in source, so the problem seems to be visual editing. SUPER frustrating. The other symptom is that if I try to switch from visual to source editing I get "Error loading data from server: apierror-visualeditor-docserver-http." Any suggestions about someone to contact about this? Many thanks. Logophile59 (talk) 12:55, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I've been getting those errors as well since yesterday. I've discovered a temporary workaround: reopen the article you're editing in a new tab, make the same edits, then save. It worked for me yesterday at least. Bobbychan193 (talk) 16:52, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's what I was doing, but it failed multiple times this morning. However I just tried again and this time it worked.  I seem to have fewer problems if I edit one section at a time, but I'm not sure that that's real. Anyway -- fingers crossed that it's gone again. Thanks! Logophile59 (talk) 02:18, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Half of an article complete
Hi there. I copyedited half of an article, but ran into problems and asked a more experienced copyeditor to take over. Will I still be credited with the words? If so, then how can I count them - the pagesize counter only counts total words. Regards, Willbb234Talk (please &#123;&#123;ping&#125;&#125; me in replies) 16:50, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Copy and paste the text that you copy-edited into a text editor, and use that program's word count function to get a word count. Don't worry about getting the number exactly right. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:56, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Real-life superhero
The page size won't count. I've tried literally everything. Please help. Willbb234Talk (please &#123;&#123;ping&#125;&#125; me in replies) 10:27, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Have you installed the word-count script? I get a word count (apart from the long lists) of 498. The indenting (which you'll probably want to remove, since a section shouldn't be indented) messes up the list by country, and the word-count script doesn't do bullet lists; for both, you need to copypasta to a word processor and use its word count (plus the 498). All the best,  Mini  apolis  13:35, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
 * My "Page size" script counts 2658 words in the version of the article just before you started working, after I removed table, bulleting, and indenting markup that causes the script to ignore text thus marked. Dhtwiki (talk) 16:59, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot and . I guess I'll just use the 2658 you said. To be honest, that sounds about right. Thanks once again, Willbb234Talk (please &#123;&#123;ping&#125;&#125; me in replies) 17:06, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

Nadipinayakanahalli
I have admitted defeat on the infobox on this page, which will not properly display the entries for "Established title" and "Established date" whatever I do. If someone would like to take a look and advise, that would be lovely. Logophile59 (talk) 00:42, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Looks like got it for you with this edit. It looks like established_title determines the bold text in the left column of the infobox, which could be something like Founded or Established or Created. Without a valid established_title, it might not properly display established_date or other parameters in the group. If you can't figure out how to use a template from the template documentation, you may find it useful to click on  from the template page and look for clues in how the infobox is implemented in other articles.  Hope that helps. Please let us know if you run into other problems like this. – Reidgreg (talk) 15:34, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Ohhh... it never occurred to me that the original author had misunderstood what "established title" was for. Not the title of the village but the word to be used to introduce the established date. Duh and facepalm. Thanks to both you and, and yes I'll read the manual next time. Logophile59 (talk) 20:29, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I think we've all run into situations like that at one point or another. Template editors try to keep the parameter names short, which sometimes unavoidably makes their purpose unclear. – Reidgreg (talk) 20:37, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Murray D. Levy
I did a major copyedit/expansion of the article early this morning; it started at 130 words and ended at 359 words. The reason I'm writing here is that the previous edits showing the initial length may end up being hidden: the majority of the article as it had been was lifted from a non-free source all the way back in 2009, and I've just written Diannaa, who I always consult in copyvio matters, to take a look to see whether it's serious enough that the offending edit and all those in the ten years since need to be hidden. If you wanted to check the copyedit for size and that sort of thing, it'll need to be done soon. Otherwise, I think the fact that the article doubled in bytes is an indication that I did do some work on the article... BlueMoonset (talk) 19:34, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
 * If you're asking if you can take credit for the article, I see no reason why not. Thanks for your help and all the best,  Mini  apolis  21:58, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Oh, I was sure that credit was okay—it was an actual copyedit—just that some of the completed copyedits are checked to be sure they are up to standards, and there wouldn't be any way to check if the revdels were done (which they now have been) unless one of the checkers is an admin. BlueMoonset (talk) 08:19, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
 * We trust you . TBH, I don't have time to undelete revsions just to check; I'm trying to finish Conservation refugee—quite a polemic, so it's not a copyedit—and have a ways to go before tomorrow night. All the best,  Mini  apolis  13:46, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Debatable copyedit
Hi there. Please take a look at the copyedit from the user at the bottom of the drive list (Funny gamer). Copyedit doesn't seem to be in depth and look at the later comment from a user in the revision history of the article. Thanks, Willbb234Talk (please &#123;&#123;ping&#125;&#125; me in replies) 16:46, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
 * pinging a coordinator just in case it fell through. Willbb234Talk (please &#123;&#123;ping&#125;&#125; me in replies) 18:08, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Here's a link to the diff. Some mistakes were made by, and the article still needs to be copy edited, but the article was improved overall. I wonder why changes from British English to American English spellings were made, possibly in violation of MOS:ENGVAR. Comments by the copy editor are welcome. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:00, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I have completed a copy edit of Dragutin Keserović, the article in question. The initial copy edit was inadequate. Here's a diff of my edits, FWIW. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:48, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

thanks for the copyedit. The user in question has copyedited another article, but I don't think it was in depth either. There were a few comma additions but the other two changes were from British English to American English. Regards, Willbb234Talk (please &#123;&#123;ping&#125;&#125; me in replies) 06:26, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you
I'd like to thank, , , and  for your work in hosting this drive. It is my first drive and I really enjoyed it. Thanks, Willbb234Talk (please &#123;&#123;ping&#125;&#125; me in replies) 20:59, 30 September 2019 (UTC)


 * And thank you and the other participants for your contributions and helping to make the drive such a success. August requests were completed and the article backlog is now in the low-500s. Twofingered Typist (talk) 21:11, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
 * It's our pleasure, and thanks for your help. I find article improvement much easier in a structured setting like this. Have fun and all the best,  Mini  apolis  02:17, 1 October 2019 (UTC)