User talk:Hesperian/V

when you get a chance, could you please kick the script to regenerate. thx billinghurst (talk) 13:34, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Okay. Probably tomorrow. Hesperian 14:09, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Only just remembered. It is running now. Probably no results until tomorrow morning. Hesperian 05:21, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. 'Tis okay, being blond on the inside I just keep revisiting pages that I have already actioned. billinghurst (talk) 06:24, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Um, it only just occurred to me... should I have adjusted the code to exclude pages in your "Not to transclude" category? Hesperian 06:34, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Umm, that sounds like a really good idea. Is this a case of the boys at the intellectually gifted school pushing on the door labelled PULL? billinghurst (talk) 11:04, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

That sounds familiar.... Actually I was busy and stressed out today, and the effort I gave this was limited to finding the right script and running it. I think tomorrow should offer an opportunity to engage more fully with it. At this stage I plan to post the current crappy output as soon as possible tomorrow, then fix the script and set it running again. Hesperian 11:43, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Understand, had a full-on day, with another tomorrow :-/ FWIW when I say when you get a chance is not a push or urgency, it just means at some time, and anytime in the next week, month, ... is okay. I am thankful enough that someone can just do it. billinghurst (talk) 11:57, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Understood.[1] Hesperian 12:58, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Noice.billinghurst (talk) 01:23, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Done. "Not to transclude" pages are excluded. Hesperian 04:17, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Also to exclude

• if transcluded to the Index: namespace (only IF that is easy)
  • So you don't want to know about pages transcluded into their index page, even if they are not transcluded into the mainspace? Yes, that is easy... but I'm on holidays and won't have access to the computer upon which sits my one and only copy of the code, so I can neither tweak it nor re-run it for the next six weeks. Hesperian 05:51, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Nice, hang on! NOT. :-(

If they are transcluded to the Index: space and not to main namespace, that is a decision made by the editor as a conscious decision, and not one that I wish to override. They are not missed pages. I am wanting to get works that have been overlooked and get them transcluded (and tidied so it has worked out. Too consci). billinghurst (talk) 06:03, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I intended to grab a copy, but I intended a lot of things, and only some of them got done. :-( Hesperian 12:35, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Sorrow and/or apogolies not required. I will probably find one or two other things to keep me busy. billinghurst (talk) 13:07, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

If the opportunity arises for me to drop in and grab it, I will do so. Else, meh. Hesperian 13:24, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Got it. The next challenge is to keep my currently crappy internet connection up long enough to run it. I might try it overnight tonight. Hesperian 05:29, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

In case you haven't noticed, I've updated. Rather than checking for transclusion in the main or index space, it now simply checks for transclusion; so it will also ignore pages that are transcluded into a user subspace sandbox.

Since the two changes required were trivial, I didn't test it; I just fixed it and ran it. So speak up if the output stinks. Hesperian 04:17, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Transcluded pages appearing

Something quirky, as these Celtic Fairy Tales-related pages are already transcluded, and also think that it may have been the case for a couple of others. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:40, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

We'll have to have a talk to Thomas about this. Have a look at Special:WhatLinksHere/Page:Celtic_Fairy_Tales.djvu/19. Celtic Fairy Tales is listed but not as a transclusion. That is, according to the links table, this page has no mainspace transclusions. I blame the <pages> tag. It is populating the links table with links instead of transclusions. Hesperian 14:41, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

I think that it may be more related to the fact that it is transcluded more than once, as it is also seen here [[2]], and it is also where the SOURCE page tab does not show which I have already dispelled as being related to transclusion. Tests done and presented elsewhere. — billinghurst sDrewth 15:54, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

As a workaround. I am now checking for links as well as transclusions. This will (potentially) result in omission errors rather than commission errors, which is preferrable. I'm rerunning it now.... Hesperian 01:14, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

When you have sometime, would you be able to run an update? We have some page moves and stuff so it would be useful. Not screamingly urgent. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:28, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

I'll do it on Monday. It would help if you remind me then. The bug seems to be fixed, so it should be safe for me to roll back the workaround. Hesperian 11:54, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

I remembered, albeit belatedly. Running now. Results probably not until tomorrow morning. Hesperian 05:17, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

You win. — billinghurst sDrewth 07:33, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Done. Hesperian 00:44, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Poke me

When you have an opportunity, would you mind giving the script a nudge. I have done a wad, and am now trying to work out which I have and haven't visited and fixed. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 16:43, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Done. Hesperian 05:33, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

P.S. you are welcome to delete and/or annotate entries as you go. Or not. Whatever. :-) Hesperian 05:38, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Yep, it just was a big table, and I so just had to pay attention so it didn't get f'up'd. Woohoo, at least it is a smaller list this time. — billinghurst sDrewth 06:17, 31 May 2010 (UTC)