Wikipedia talk:Scripts++/Archive 1

Archive 1

New, improved, updated, revamped, etc scripts

Archived entries are those that were not included in any of the newsletter issues

• User:SD0001/parseTemplate.js - ok, this isn't a script, this is a JS utility function for dealing with templates in wikitext. I'm looking forward to seeing this get used in others' scripts. SD0001 (talk) 09:08, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

  @SD0001: Cool. I'll label this as a "meta-script" if that's okay with you. Can you make a doc page? --DannyS712 (talk) 09:17, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

  @SD0001: Don't know if you saw my comment - can you make a doc for this, seeing how you want it to be used as a "JS utility function"? --DannyS712 (talk) 06:41, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

  Sorry, didn't see this earlier. Usage instructions are given at the top of the js page as a comment. Still I'll try to make a dedicated /doc page whenever I get time. SD0001 (talk) 14:22, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

  FYI I've got a modified version of this at MediaWiki:Gadget-libExtraUtil.js - Evad37 [talk] 07:04, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

• User:SD0001/twinkleos.js - a proposed oversight module for Twinkle. Can be used by Twinkle users only. (Should I bother to create a /doc page, or is it ok without it?). SD0001 (talk) 09:08, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

  @SD0001: Nice. 3 things. Please do bother with a doc page, if not for me than for twinkle. Can I suggest you check that the user has oversight rights before adding the portlet, to avoid any potential errors? And, have you submitted this to twinkle/made a pull request/what's the status of getting this integrated? --DannyS712 (talk) 09:18, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

  To be clear, it's a module for requesting oversight. I've updated the Git version so that this is hidden from oversighters, but I've left this out on-wiki as it'd hinder oversighters from testing it for reviewing the PR.

  Doc created. Twinkle PR is at https://github.com/azatoth/twinkle/pull/463. SD0001 (talk) 17:18, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

  @SD0001: Thanks for the explanation. I installed it, but can't seem to find the portlet in the TW menu... --DannyS712 (talk) 19:39, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

  @SD0001: Figure out the problem. At

  Twinkle.os = function twinkleos() {

  There is an error:

  Uncaught ReferenceError: Twinkle is not defined

  --DannyS712 (talk) 21:04, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

  Oh, I updated the script yesterday but forgot to add the initialisation line! Should be fixed now. SD0001 (talk) 06:48, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

  @SD0001: It worked. Also, thanks for the "hit cancel to email yourself" thing. I'll be sure to include it, and I hope it gets added to TW --DannyS712 (talk) 07:11, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

  @SD0001: Actually, given how much is already in this issue, I'm going to hold off until its fully incorporated into twinkle, or just list it next month. Is that okay? --DannyS712 (talk) 06:13, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

  @SD0001: 2 questions - when will it be incorporated into twinkle, and any progress on the doc for parseTemplate? --DannyS712 (talk) 18:25, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Feedback

I think it would be helpful if people who submit scripts for inclusion provide a short description of what the script does. — pythoncoder  (talk | contribs) 02:52, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

@Pythoncoder: No far, I've just been finding the new scripts on my own (mostly). Why? Do you want explanations within the newsletter? --DannyS712 (talk) 03:01, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

DannyS712—Actually, I just remembered WP:US/L is on my watchlist, so if I want explanations I can go there. — pythoncoder  (talk | contribs) 03:08, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

@Pythoncoder: Yeah, that's where I've been getting a lot of them --DannyS712 (talk) 03:17, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Template

Hello, Is there a template version of this newsletter (like signpost have)? If not please consider creating it. Also it would be nice if there is a separate section for scripts for other wiki's or for xwiki work. Thanks for newsletter! ‐‐1997kB (talk) 13:52, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

@1997kB: sure, I'll make a template, but it'll just transclude the current version (in the same format and layout). As for the other wikis or xwiki scripts, I haven't had any to include yet, but when I do I'll add it. --DannyS712 (talk) 15:58, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

@1997kB: See Wikipedia:Scripts++/current --DannyS712 (talk) 16:00, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

DannyS712, Thanks I'm fine with current version. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 16:17, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

I tweaked the appearance to link to the previous issues / all past issues btw. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 07:45, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

@Headbomb: I saw - neat DannyS712 (talk) 08:10, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

December issue

Hi. Didn't have time to write an issue for December, and have some other ongoing projects right now. If someone else wants to right something in the next few days I'd appreciate it, otherwise will combine with January. Happy new year, --DannyS712 (talk) 00:17, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Update current and next via Template:Scripts++/current

@DannyS712 and Wugapodes: this change meant that two places (Wikipedia:Scripts++/current and Wikipedia:Scripts++#Next edition) would need to be updated during next publishing. I've created Template:Scripts++/current, which now controls the existing page Wikipedia:Scripts++/current and a new page Wikipedia:Scripts++/next. With these changes, one would need to update Template:Scripts++/current to publish the next issue, instead of updating Wikipedia:Scripts++/current ([1], [2], etc). —⁠andrybak (talk) 12:15, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

@Andrybak: I saw that. A few things, however. A lot of helper templates were created that I don't think are needed, and the /next page isn't really what I had in mind. I'm going to finish and send this month's issue, and then take a look DannyS712 (talk) 15:47, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

@Andrybak: I'm not sure what the point of the /next page is, since until the issue is published its not at Scripts++/Issues X DannyS712 (talk) 02:52, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

DannyS712, the purpose of /next was to automate the "Next edition" section added by Wugapodes, and later removed. —⁠andrybak (talk) 09:18, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

UX simplification for Wikipedia:Scripts++/Shell

I've tried improving UX for {{subst:Wikipedia:Scripts++/Shell}} in sandbox. With these changes instead of using {{subst:Wikipedia:Scripts++/Shell|14|14th|March 2020}}, one would use {{subst:Wikipedia:Scripts++/Shell|14|2020-03}}. Ordinal issue number is substituted using {{ordinal}}, month-year is generated using parser function {{#time:}}, and page is automatically categorized into Category:Wikipedia Scripts++ issues. Demo in my sandbox. —⁠andrybak (talk) 16:43, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Further tweaks, demo. —⁠andrybak (talk) 17:09, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

@Andrybak: I like it. Syncing the sandbox to main DannyS712 (talk) 02:53, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

DannyS712, here's another simplification: Special:Diff/954348346 (documentation update: Special:Diff/954348495). Now the /Shell template requires a single argument. —⁠andrybak (talk) 00:09, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

@Andrybak: okay. For this and the section below; I'm going to try and document the process better DannyS712 (talk) 00:14, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Even less clicking and typing with a preload link: Special:Diff/954348495/954351706. —⁠andrybak (talk) 00:14, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

DannyS712, for me personally, the Scripts++ newsletter allowed to step up my user script game on Wikipedia. Less friction in publishing of Scripts++, means more automation goodness will appear in my subscription box faster. ;-) —⁠andrybak (talk) 00:27, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

@Andrybak: Cool, worked for me! DannyS712 (talk) 03:11, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Scripts++ templates in project namespace

I wonder if it would make sense to move all pages in Category:Wikipedia Scripts++ templates, which are in project namespace to the template namespace? —⁠andrybak (talk) 00:21, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

@Andrybak: let me go through everything - some of it was created by others and isn't used DannyS712 (talk) 00:27, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

@Wugapodes: I looked through the category - Wikipedia:Scripts++/New issue and its sub template (Wikipedia:Scripts++/Content footer, Wikipedia:Scripts++/Header, etc) aren't used. Would you be willing to delete them as G7? DannyS712 (talk) 03:13, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Done. — Wug·a·po·des​ 18:51, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

@Wugapodes: Can you also delete

• Wikipedia:Scripts++/New issue
• Wikipedia:Scripts++/Misc
• Wikipedia:Scripts++/Open tasks
• Wikipedia:Scripts++/Script updates

Please? DannyS712 (talk) 20:05, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Also done. — Wug·a·po·des​ 20:10, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Massive scripts

with bugger-all description—libExtraUtil.js and the Twinkle morebits—spring to mind, highlighted as they are in the current newsletter. I'm sure they're fantastic pieces of work, if only—in one case at least—going by the reputation of its creator. But instead of / as well as linking to the source code, how about some sort of indication as to what they do and how to use 'em?

Ah, you tell me, there's already a page for that, and it's at "XYZ"? Good. Then howabout a link.

FWIW, yours is a far more useful newsletter than the Signpost, respect. ——SN54129 15:00, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

@Serial Number 54129: They both have inline documentation... otherwise no, I don't think there is help page DannyS712 (talk) 20:56, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

These are libraries of reusable components that assist in the development of user scripts (libExtraUtil contains simple and a few not-so-simple helper functions, whereas Morebits contains entire classes for GUI creation and api-based page interaction). They are hidden gadgets (you won't be able to see them in preferences or enable them) -- that can be loaded from within other scripts. That being said, a documentation page for morebits is well worth it. Someone should just boldly start Wikipedia:Morebits. SD0001 (talk) 09:31, 29 November 2019 (UTC)