Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Index

Archives

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be auto-archived by if there are more than 4.

WikiProject Forestry

Sorry, having trouble setting up the stats for this project. Also, an editor is speedy-deleting the needed categories... I'd really appreciate it if you could set up and run the bot so we know the system is up and running. Wikipedia:WikiProject Forestry/Assessment contains the code

<div style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; margin-bottom: 0.5em; ">{{Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Forestry articles by quality statistics}}</div>

which should presumably populate Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Forestry articles by quality statistics but the file contains no data (I put a message in there to slow down the speedy deletionist).

All help gratefully received. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:27, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just ran the bot manually rather than wait for the nightly run, and it updated User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Forestry, which is where it actually updates; your "Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Forestry articles by quality statistics" page was blank, but checking the page history it needs a link to that 1.0 bot page to be useful. I've updated it for you.

Something weird is going on with the categories, though- Category:FL-Class Forestry articles is empty, but Talk:List of inventoried conifers in the United States says that it's in that category? {{WikiProject Forestry}} itself says its on 3200 pages, but only 50 are in the categories. Very strange, but unrelated to the 1.0 bot. --Pres N 13:39, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for doing that: now we at least have populated categories, and a correctly-structured table. I'm sorry to trouble you again straight away, but as you say the situation looks weird. For instance, the bot has managed to include one tree article I brought to GA, Spruce, but not some others, such as Pine, also at GA. I can't see any difference in how I configured these articles, they are similar in construction. Could the bot run have been limited to some number (50?) in some way with a default configuration parameter or something? I really don't know my way around the bot system so I'm at a bit of a disadvantage. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:29, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This has now doubled to 108 articles (out of 3200). Progress, but why not all of them? Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:44, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's not the bot, Wikipedia isn't populating the categories. The bot output matches what shows up in e.g. Category:GA-Class Forestry articles, it's just that your articles are only slowly showing up there. I think it's just slow to update; I just made a junk edit to Talk:List of inventoried conifers in the United States to see what would happen and it immediately popped up in the category. I don't know enough about how the software handles categories to tell you what to do to fix it faster (other than editing 3100 talk pages...); maybe ask at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)? --Pres N 14:42, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for investigating. It sounds as if it may slowly sort itself out. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:49, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The issue here is that the template is the thing that populates the categories, but changes made to them (like yours) don't trigger an automatic reload, so the categories are only updated (and then used by the bot) after a random amount of time or, as PresN mentioned, when there's an edit to the page it's on. Using the refresh script, I made a null edit to every page it's transcluded on, then re-ran the bot; it looks like it's still missing a few but it's not far off now! Aluxosm (talk) 11:04, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's brilliant, thank you so much! Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:16, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of all WikiProjects doing WP 1.0 assessments

Is there a list somewhere of all WikiProjects doing assessments? Category:WikiProjects participating in Wikipedia 1.0 assessments appears to contain only a small portion of these. If I can finish categorizing them, then it will be more straightforward, query-wise, to determine which projects to contact for key discussions at the WikiProject Council. Stefen 𝕋ower_{'s got the power!!1!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 19:47, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do both quality and importance assessments count? Most are using the quality assessments (especially now that PIQA is a thing), but fewer are using importance assessments. These counts should be pretty accurate as they search for templates that use Module:WikiProject banner (1,366 uses excluding sandboxes) and which specify either the |class= or |importance= parameteres:

class — 1,171 (85.7%)
importance — 1,069 (78.3%)

The inverse of these searches are almost more informative:

no class parameter — 195 (14.3%)
no importance parameter — 297 (21.7%)

With only 259 projects in that category, either way it has a way to go! It'd definitely be easier to update it with the help of a script that finds the missing ones; if you still reckon the category is actually useful, I could do it if we decide on the criteria 🤙 Aluxosm (talk) 11:36, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I was just about to suggest that it could be updated automatically by the WP banner module but it seems that it already does to some degree! I think it only tracks 1,061 templates because a few are missed due to non-matching titles (see the docs), and it currently only tracks the |class= parameter, but this might still be useful:

Category:WikiProject banners with quality assessment — 944 (89%)
Category:WikiProject banners without quality assessment — 117 (11%)

This same code could easily be adapted to categorise the WikiProjects themselves (instead of their banner templates) into Category:WikiProjects participating in Wikipedia 1.0 assessments, whether they have the |importance= parameter or not. Aluxosm (talk) 00:03, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your well-considered reply. I'm looking for any WikiProjects doing WP 1.0 assessments, where class/rating will be set for in-project subject pages. It doesn't matter as much if a project sets importance, or uses an alternative like priority, as for this exercise, I'm just interested in the overall WP 1.0 effort for inclusion in the category I referenced.

The searches you link here unfortunately won't be accurate, mainly due to the existence of WikiProject United States, which is an umbrella to a large number of projects, which themselves should count in the total.

Since I posted my request, I've been thinking about this, and have concluded the best way to handle this (so far) is to find a list of all the WP 1.0 tables that gets filled in by the WP 1.0 bot, using those to determine the WikiProject front pages, and rejecting any of those that are redirects. From this list, I would subtract out all those already included in the category, and use AWB to add the category to those remaining. If there's an easier way to do this, that would be useful, but the approach I'm outlining here already isn't particularly difficult. Stefen 𝕋ower_{'s got the power!!1!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 01:11, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like that's better for what you're going for maybe; the framework of a standalone "wikiproject" isn't always a valid one. I raise as an example User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Video game characters, which is the table for the video game characters task force (WP:VGCHAR), which isn't a "wikiproject" in that it's a task force for WP:VG, but does track its own subset of articles, so the difference between that and a wikiproject is mostly just template coding. --Pres N 04:04, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think task forces like this should be placed in Category:WikiProjects participating in Wikipedia 1.0 assessments? Or is just adding their parent project good enough? Stefen 𝕋ower_{'s got the power!!1!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 19:41, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging MSGJ to see if we could automatically populate the following categories using Module:WikiProject banner/templatepage:

Aluxosm (talk) 01:08, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We already have Category:WikiProject banners with quality assessment and Category:WikiProject banners without quality assessment. Task force categorisation could be added if needed — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:44, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is useful for banner templates but due to some banners being used across multiple projects, this probably should be seen as a separate matter from what I'm asking about. Stefen 𝕋ower_{'s got the power!!1!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 01:35, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, not as easy as I thought. To your question, I think that it'd be good to have them all in there so that active task forces with inactive parents aren't ignored when sending mass messages. Aluxosm (talk) 04:48, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are already three task forces in the category, so it makes sense to add the rest, for now. Stefen 𝕋ower_{'s got the power!!1!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 01:38, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh of course! Yeah, there are 168 WikiProjects with at least one task force that uses |TF_n_QUALITY= to provide ratings. {{WikiProject United States}} is indeed the biggest with nearly 100. Aluxosm (talk) 00:54, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Selection bug in Wikipedia 1.0 Server

I'm trying to use the PetScan feature to make a .zim for kiwix.

https://petscan.wmcloud.org/?psid=40642859

However, the Zim that is outputted by the openzim (https://wp1.openzim.org/#/selections/user) tool is weirdly small.

Just 40 pages, it seems, looking at the main page through kiwix.

Not sure if you can access the link to the Zim file but here it is (https://api.wp1.openzim.org/v1/builders/1778e6ef-6c81-494e-b044-d9014b257cc9/zim/latest). It's 430 KB. Any idea what might be going wrong?

Looking at the output of the PetScan, I seem to have all the pages I want, but it doesn't seem to translate properly to the Zim file.

the Zim downloader seems to be getting confused, downloading the pages without the Template: or Help: namespace prefix in the url (eg: instead of downloading https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Template:Barnaby_Rudge, it downloads from https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Barnaby_Rudge) SkylightPenguin (talk) 09:31, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm not the best authority on ZIM files or the ZIM format, even though I'm the developer/maintainer of the WP 1.0 website. One thing I've seen happen before is that your ZIM has all the articles, but the "index" page it generates is missing them. I believe there is separate logic for generating the index/main page of the ZIM. Try searching for articles that you expect to exist, or accessing them from links in articles you can see.

I also don't know for sure, but I think Wikipedia ZIMs usually only contain articles from the "main" (unprefixed) namespace. I don't think you can add articles from "Template:" or "Help:".

What do you think @Kelson? audiodude (talk) 17:05, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I believe to have understood the problem. This PetScan selection returns almost only pages which are not in the main namespace. Per default the scraper MWoffliner will ignore the pages which are not in the main namespace. That probably explains why most of the entries returned by PetScan are not in the ZIM file. Now, the big question is: is this a bug or a feature? I have open an issue to discuss the topic at https://github.com/openzim/mwoffliner/issues/2584 Kelson (talk) 17:50, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieve assessment log for a given article

Hi! I saw on a Wikipedia Bot 1.0 page that you can track how an article’s quality grade has changed over time, but I can’t seem to find where this info is stored. The link (https://wp1.openzim.org/#/) only shows the latest grade. Any idea where I can find the full history? Thanks! Maxou2175 (talk) 08:26, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, I don't think we track this information. The WP1 website does keep track of the article talk page revision where the rating was entered, but not a history. Your best bet is to go through the revision history of the talk page of the article. audiodude (talk) 17:06, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Australia hasn't been updated by bot today or yesterday

Hi all, can anyone work out why Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Australia articles by quality log and User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Australia haven't been updated during the past 2 days bot runs? I did a manual update last night, which worked. The-Pope (talk) 05:34, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure. The bot is definitely running and updating a large number of tables and logs. If the manual update worked, then the automatic updates should be working, because they invoke the same code. Sometimes, if there's no new information, the bot will attempt to update a page and MediaWiki will simply ignore the update because it's the same content. That leads to what looks like "gaps" in the page being updated.

My advice is to just keep an eye on it for the next couple of days and report back here if there's more problems. Thanks! audiodude (talk) 17:10, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It worked fine today. Bot must have got tired from all my changes. The-Pope (talk) 02:36, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]