Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Red Link Recovery/Archive 5

Broken section links
Although they are not red, WP has many links to non-existent sections in actual articles, e.g. Dan Quayle. Would it make sense to list these in future checks of the database dump? There is a short discussion at WP:Village pump (proposals) (archived) and I have mentioned the idea at WP:Bot owners' noticeboard (archived). Certes (talk) 00:43, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
 * This sounds like fertile ground for finding fixbale red links, yup. I'll look into it. - TB (talk) 19:04, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Ironically all three of my section links above are broken now that the discussions have been archived! Certes (talk) 20:28, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I've not forgotten about this one. However, when I started looking at the underlying structures used to represent section links, I found, well ... not niceness.  I'm hoping that one or two messages I've left asking for more information might clarify the situation to the point where I can report these.  Until/unless this happens, this idea is on hold though .. sorry. - TB (talk) 20:28, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem; it's just a suggestion made without knowing any detail of the structures. Let's get it done if it's easy but concentrate on more productive areas if it's too difficult. Certes (talk) 20:40, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Bots/Requests for approval/FrescoBot 3 may be able to help. I've left it a link to here. Certes (talk) 14:03, 28 February 2010 (UTC)


 * You'll love Category:Pages containing links with bad anchors, populated with broken #section links found in New Page Patrol by User:WildBot. Josh Parris 14:26, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes I do, it's exactly what I've been looking for. Thank you!  I'm working through the list, templates first, and hope other Red Link Recoverers will join in.  By the way, WildBot marks bad links in an effective but unusual way: the talk page has a template which WildBot itself removes once you fix the links (or amends if you fix only part of the problem).  A question for the project: should this type of link have a project subpage, even if it's just a link to the Category? Certes (talk) 00:35, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Userbox graphic
As suggested(see three rows from bottom), I've produced File:Redlinkrecoveryteam.svg as a vector alternative for the image in the userbox. I've left a message for the original artist but I don't think he's as active as he was. Do we want to use the new image, and if so what's a polite way to go about doing so? Any other comments are also welcome: for example the red/blue gradient can easily run diagonally if preferred. Certes (talk) 17:23, 5 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Good job - I've been bold and updated the author's page.  It'll take him seconds to undo the change if he dislikes it.   Nitpicks and suggestions - the old graphic had a white background (which I've had to expressly add to the userbox template to make it look right), and a slightly bolder font which showed up better when shrunk to the 45px size needed for a normal box. - TB (talk) 20:46, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the constructive comments. All were easy to fix. Certes (talk) 14:07, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Red Link Recovery/Initialisation
This section: WikiProject Red Link Recovery/Initialisation is currently finished and all the items remaining need to be put to the exceptions list. I am not sure if that is done automatically or what, but yeah, just thought I would indicate it as such. Cheers.Calaka (talk) 07:35, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Repeated Letters vs. Repeated letters
We seem to have two sections for the same thing, HERE and HERE (Repeated letters vs Repeated Letters). These are the same list right? EmanWilm (talk) 01:05, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
 * It seems that way to me. I don't know enough about how these are generated though. --Open2universe (talk) 12:57, 7 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Well spotted. Yup - my bad, I've fixed the problem, deeming the upper-case-L version to be the definitive one (it has less history, but I prefer the capitalisation).  The offline copy of MediaWiki I generate the reports on is slightly differently configured to the English-language wikipedia it seems;  the problem doesn't show up there.  Most odd.  Apologies for the mishap. - TB (talk) 08:37, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Diacritics
I notice that the Diacritics list is having trouble with displaying some diacritics, that's causing spurious red links in the parts of the list that are supposed to be blue. For instance: which is meant to be:
 * FC_CFR_Timisoara links to Uros_Milosavljevic, try Uroš_Milošavljevic
 * FC_CFR_Timişoara links to Uros_Milosavljević, try Uroš_Milošavljević

Letters I've noticed this with include: Č, č, Ď, ě, š, ć, ó, ź, ř, ą, ş, Ł, ł, ő, ď


 * I'm aware of this - it's a longstanding problem ultimately arising from the fact that the reports are generated on a server running Solaris but uploaded to Wikipedia on a PC running Microsoft Vista; the two systems disagree somewhat in their handling of UTF-8.  I did have the problem fixed, but then (like a fool) moved to a newer more powerful database server running a slightly-different-still set of softwares.  I'll see if I can't get it sorted for the next RLR regeneration. - TB (talk) 16:29, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

And, not quite the same problem, but I also noticed this: (should be Hồng_Hoá) —Paul A (talk) 06:23, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Cha_Lo_Border_Gate_Economic_Zone links to H?ng_Hóa, try H?ng_Hoá


 * Is Ł vs L being compared at all? for example WikiProject Red Link Recovery/Diacritics/8 item 3813 "Podlehnik links to Ložina, try Lozina" doesn't suggest Łozina.  (In this case it would not be a helpful suggestion as they're different towns; I'm just asking about the principle.) Certes (talk) 22:23, 28 September 2009 (UTC)


 * The current list of diacritic-letter-equivalences is here. The list is my no means exhaustive - from memory it has the common Roman- and Danish- root diacritics, but not the Turkic-, Hebrew- and Slavic- ones.  No good reason for this other than my own limited knowledge and the fact that the script finds plenty of matches as is.  By all means add any more letter combinations that might work. - TB (talk) 16:29, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I've added Ł and Č to WikiProject_Red_Link_Recovery/Link_matching_script/Diacritics. Please check that I've not broken anything!  There are plenty of other possibilities like ģ but I doubt they're common enough to bother with.  Đ transliterates to D; would TH be better? What does the final entry z. do: should it read ż? Certes (talk) 18:24, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Hey TB
I, along with another member *completed* Repeated letters 1 - 499 minus a few things. I'm still waiting for an expert from WP:TRAINS to tell me if two trains are the same thing (Marked as expert needed). Also, I marked one as admin edit required. This is part of a protected template, and I cannot edit it. Thanks  TheWeak Willed   (T * G) 16:16, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I believe Ts4 and Tss4 are different. German WP has separate articles on Württembergische Tss 4 and Württembergische Ts 4.  The tops of the German infoboxes quote subclasses as 99.62 and 99.17 respectively, as in Class 99.  (The extra s probably stands for Schmalspur = narrow gauge).  I have marked these entries as an exception.
 * For Londonderry, I have edited a parameter to the ancestor table. (I did not need to edit the template itself, even though it is only semi-protected.)  However, the corrected link was to a disambiguation page and we clearly need the second creation of the title, so I copied the redlink from the dab page.  I have assumed, based on comment above and Google counts, that Randal is the correct spelling.  I have removed this entry as done.
 * I think that completes the page - well done! Certes (talk) 22:19, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Good work guys. - TB (talk) 16:11, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Unlikely/images and Unlikely/?? are complete
Someone has kindly completed WikiProject Red Link Recovery/Unlikely/images and WikiProject Red Link Recovery/Unlikely/??, making Unlikely complete except for the long links. Certes (talk) 23:19, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Red links as a reason for banning users
has built a bunch of UW warning templates to tell-off editors who include redlinks into their edits, see the TfD discussion where they are being considered for deletion. Templates for discussion/Log/2009 November 27

76.66.197.250 (talk) 07:46, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Mr Beals appears to have missed the point of redlinks somewhat. A brief check shows me that more than enough people are involved in trying to set him back on the right path; here's hoping he makes it and becomes a useful wikipedia editor. - TB (talk) 08:38, 28 November 2009 (UTC)