Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Thank you editors

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Thank you all, for supplying us with the sources we need to write up these articles for our beautiful project. It's greatly appreciated. Drmies (talk) 15:57, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

• Yes, indeed. Thank you to everyone — all of you have been incredibly generous and tremendously helpful. — The Most Comfortable Chair 16:00, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

SAGE journals

Does TWL provide access to this, d'you know? I haven't got it, but perhaps I just didn't apply, or there were no vacancies. ——Serial 13:24, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

It's not one of TWL partners, so I assume the answer to your question is no. I have access to SAGE through my alma mater, and I think some of the other regulars here also have access. —Bruce1ee^talk 13:35, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, Bruce1ee! ——Serial 13:58, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

No archiving?

What's up with ClueBot not having archived anything in more than three days? DanCherek (talk) 02:30, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

The bot goes to sleep sometime. Don't worry, it will start working soon. --Gazal world (talk) 04:42, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

ClueBot III does go down from time to time, but I see it is running at the moment. Hopefully it will get to RX soon. —Bruce1ee^talk 06:32, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Looks like it's working again! DanCherek (talk) 14:09, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Yes it is. Thanks to Worldbruce for the interim manual archiving. —Bruce1ee^talk 14:42, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you

I posted here the other day with a request for a particular article in Benezit. I received an email with the text, a pointer to the Wikipedia library and also two archived copies of the entry. Well done, this is a wonderful part of Wikipedia. --- Possibly ☎ 21:34, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to WP:RX! —Bruce1ee^talk 21:40, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

		The Original Barnstar
		Without this page, I'd be quite screwed with my article work - many of the sources available here aren't within a reasonable distance from me. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 18:45, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

How to volunteer to fulfill requests?

I would like to help fulfill resource requests. Can anyone tell me how I can either sign up or where I would check to see what people are requesting? (Am rather new to this.) Srrlib (talk) 22:07, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

@Srrlib: At the requests page. You can see how previous requests are addressed (the ones marked resolved are archived after a few days). Thanks for offering to help! ClaudineChionh (talk – contribs) 22:30, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

And there's no need to sign up. Have a look at Fulfilling a request at the top of the WP:RX page – that should be enough to get you going. —Bruce1ee^talk 22:43, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

Userbox

Hi! I just made a userbox about this page, in case y'all want to add it to your userpages. A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Please ping me! 11:03, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

Section headings

I notice that the instruction to add a heading is now bolded in red. I frequently miss doing this. I shouldn't do, because I am well used to adding a section heading on new posts. Speaking personally, I think the reason that this happens for me is because there is already something written in the heading text box (the instruction to write something!) plus, there are a whole bunch of other instructions that precede it. Anyway, the red shouting worked this time. We'll have to see if I keep that up. SpinningSpark 15:31, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

I was just about to come here about this issue. I've gotten the section headings fine, but I watchlist this page and a lot of its edits are people fixing their heading. I think the autofilled text is a negative. Vaticidalprophet 15:55, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

I agree. I used this page for the first time a couple of weeks ago, and I was about to hit "Publish changes" when I noticed that the edit reason said /* Please replace this subject line with a more meaningful description of the request. */ new section. I think the pre-filled heading is the problem. TompaDompa (talk) 16:08, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Fine with me. Scrolling through the history of the page it does seem to happen a lot so it could be worth a shot. Another option would be a JS form, like the one used at WP:RFPP/I, where you can require certain fields before someone submits a request. DanCherek (talk) 16:44, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

I came to the talk page to bring this up... it seems like we have consensus here—can someone who knows how to change this do so? Best – Aza24 (talk) 08:20, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

 Done and I also adjusted the wording in the editnotice [1], feel free to wordsmith further. DanCherek (talk) 08:32, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

This could cause problems. If the subject line of the new request is populated, it works fine. But if the subject line is left empty, the new request is added to the bottom of the page without a section header. See this edit. I've also tested this with a copy of the WP:RX page in my sandbox. —Bruce1ee^talk 09:25, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

It prompts you if you don't fill out the subject line and you have to click "Publish changes" a second time, right? I thought that would be enough of a reminder but I guess not. I still think a MediaWiki JS form may be a good resolution but I think we'd need the help of an interface administrator. DanCherek (talk) 14:35, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@DanCherek: You're right, it does prompt you if you leave the subject line blank. I've just tried it on the WP:RX page. I guess when this edit was saved earlier, the requester ignored the warning. I had tried it previously in my sandbox, and it didn't prompt me for a subject, which is what led me to my above conclusion. So, I'm sorry, I got it wrong. I take back what I said above. —Bruce1ee^talk 15:42, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@DanCherek: It happened again today here. It seems some editors either don't see the warning, or simply ignore it. Maybe this isn't a big deal, but I think we need watch it and see how often it happens. —Bruce1ee^talk 08:48, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, I can see how it could be easy to miss, if they think that it just didn't go through the first time they clicked for some reason and didn't look closely enough. DanCherek (talk) 08:50, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Just an update: there have since been 16 more instances of users not populating the subject line, resulting in new requests with no section headers. Here are the last three occurrences: [2], [3], [4]. In many cases the requester adds the missing section header themselves, but some don't notice it. —Bruce1ee^talk 06:52, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

Do you think we should bring the default header back? DanCherek (talk) 22:39, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

My personal feeling is yes, but there was consensus above to remove it, and it works most of the time. I think we need to hear what other regulars feel about it. —Bruce1ee^talk 23:42, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

JavaScript request form

Example

I have created a sample JavaScript form for creating a new request at User:DanCherek/Resource-Request-form.js. The image shows what the interface looks like. This would enable us to require a section heading before the form can be submitted, and it also sets the edit summary accordingly. I based the script on the one implemented at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. Thoughts? DanCherek (talk) 23:23, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

@DanCherek I like it. My knowledge of JavaScript is dangerous, so I can't comment on the code, but if it works as you describe, it will be great. I assume it will be called when the "Click here to create a new request" button is clicked. Just keep in mind that not all requesters use that button. Some simply add their request to the bottom of the RX page, although they will generally always add a new section header.

Can you put a copy of the RX page in your sandbox and link your JavaScript so we can test it? —Bruce1ee^talk 09:02, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Sure. For security reasons, auto-loading the form isn't possible until an interface administrator moves it to the MediaWiki namespace, so here are the steps for testing:

1. Make sure you are comfortably reassured that the code at User:DanCherek/Resource-Request-form.js is safe. (It should be, and is set up to run on only one particular page, but it's good to double check.)
2. Do one of the following:
   • Add {{subst:lusc|User:DanCherek/Resource-Request-form.js}} to your common.js file, then go to User:DanCherek/Resource Request and click the new request button.
   • Or, if you don't want to edit your common.js file, go to User:DanCherek/Resource Request and click the new request button. It will not load the form because it isn't in the MediaWiki namespace. Use your browser's JavaScript console to run the following: mw.loader.load('/w/index.php?title=User:DanCherek/Resource-Request-form.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript').
3. In both cases you should see the form appear. Clicking "Submit request" will add the request to User:DanCherek/Resource Request.

DanCherek (talk) 13:17, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

@DanCherek: I've played around with it a little, and it appears to be working fine. Just a couple of observations: The header must be entered first, otherwise the "Submit request" button changes to "Add heading" and no request preview shows. Can the "Add heading" button be made more prominent? Currently it looks greyed-out and it might not be clear to the user that a heading is required. Also I see there is an "edit" button next to the section header in the preview, which, if you click it, doesn't behave as expected. Can the "edit" button be removed from the preview? Otherwise it's looking good. —Bruce1ee^talk 15:22, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. I will work on those items (not sure how long it will take as I am a JS newbie!). One other thing I forgot to include was the information in {{Resource Request submission/Edit intro}}. DanCherek (talk) 15:47, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Managed to get rid of the "edit" button... DanCherek (talk) 23:59, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Bruce1ee, do you mind giving it another go when you have a chance and let me know what you think? DanCherek (talk) 02:40, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

@DanCherek: It looks fine now. I like that the submit button won't work or only appears once something is typed into the header. I haven't been able to find any issues, but perhaps some of the other RX regulars should also try it out. As I said earlier, not all requesters use the "create new request" button. They simply add their request to the bottom of the RX page. —Bruce1ee^talk 06:54, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! Yes, anyone who manually adds the request should not be affected by any of this. DanCherek (talk) 13:54, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

@DanCherek: I saw your edit summary and I"m a bit confused as to what request form you're wanting to test. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 13:56, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi Blaze Wolf, thanks for the quick response! Sorry for any confusion. We are trying to develop a new form for people to request resources on this page – it looks similar to the screenshot that I displayed above. To test it, just follow the three steps that I posted above on April 18 (I bolded the part where it says "here are the steps for testing"). Let me know if you have any additional questions! DanCherek (talk) 13:59, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

@DanCherek: It looks good, however the issue I have is that it uses the "cite journal" template by default (which is just what's already there). While sometimes that may be helpful, shouldn't it give you the option of different templates (such as "cite web")? Also, when I click the new request button, I get an error in the corner saying "Invalid withJS value Only pages from the MediaWiki namespace are allowed" even with the script installed. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 14:07, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, that's very helpful! The use of {{cite journal}} was just matching the current WP:RX default. Changing it to something else is trivial but allowing people to switch between options may be a bit more involved so I'll give it some thought. Yeah, I am seeing that little corner pop-up too – I think it will go away if/when we change the script location from my own userspace to the MediaWiki namespace DanCherek (talk) 14:12, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Ah alright sounds good. The thing that bothers me is without that I can just use my citation tool to use a template other than "cite journal", but with the script I have to use cite journal (which might not work if I'm trying to get info from a paywalled source) ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 14:14, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Oh, that's a really good point. I use the citation toolbar quite a lot when editing too, and I forgot that that's not there in the form. Hmm, that probably needs to be resolved somehow before deploying this. DanCherek (talk) 14:17, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Wikipedia talk:RR (disambiguation) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. BilledMammal (talk) 05:50, 29 May 2022 (UTC)