User talk:Polygnotus

Eine Treppe

double boom for WikiTextExpander!!

[edit]

holy heck I swear I had a dream about a script like this once. it's great! A feature request and an ask, though:

  1. Could you make it so WTE expands the entire editor if no text is selected and the shortcut is clicked twice "soon" (probably by setting a timer to revert a boolean "doublePress" to false in 4.8 seconds)?
  2. You may want to display a warning when both Alt and Shift are checked as this is the basis for WP:Access keys.

Aaron Liu (talk) 22:43, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Aaron Liu Hmmm. Gotta think about that for a second. I also have to scrape basically everything that transcludes {{shortcut}}. Polygnotus (talk) 16:51, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I did namedrop you over at User talk:Polygnotus/Scripts/WikiTextExpander.js. ;-) Polygnotus (talk) 17:18, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I didn't see that lol. Thanks! Aaron Liu (talk) 17:08, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
User:Polygnotus/shortcuts is a first step. Polygnotus (talk) 16:46, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Random acronym generator when? Polygnotus (talk) 21:39, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2025-17

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 20:57, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2025-18

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 19:29, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 1 May 2025

[edit]

Have at it.

[edit]

I'm posting here, per WP:TPG, as I'm not making any specific suggestions for improving the article. But regarding your comment here, I encourage you to go for it - make those improvements to the article. I've made many in the past, when the article was truly rife with WP:PROMO and WP:NOT content, and I'm happy to see other editors take a shot. JoJo Anthrax (talk) 14:14, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@JoJo Anthrax Last time it didn't go so well. I didn't want to be perceived to be "taking advantage" by working on the article during the block but I was probably too kind. Oh well. Polygnotus (talk) 08:48, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah. But as I wrote, have at it! Own and all that. JoJo Anthrax (talk) 16:02, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reporting DetectPromo false-positive

[edit]

Thomas_A._Cellucci "entrepreneur" in phrase "American entrepreneur" is not promotional Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 00:13, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

[edit]

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Luis_Elizondo&diff=1288650174&oldid=1288648755

You know that template isn't needed. That page is already now drier than a dysentery victim's butt who died a thousand years ago. -- Very Polite Person (talk) 00:58, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Very Polite Person Greg Atoms is clearly not a reliable source. In BLPs we should almost exclusively use reliable sources. The location of his birth is probably not disputed and not unduly self-serving (or the opposite) so we can just use an WP:ABOUTSELF source. I assume you own his book? Polygnotus (talk) 08:57, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This says Elizondo was born in Miami, Florida. Polygnotus (talk) 09:47, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This says: Luis grew up in South Florida.
So it may be a good idea to check "Imminent". Polygnotus (talk) 09:47, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also according to this he was born in 1972. The same year is mentioned here. Polygnotus (talk) 10:19, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Warring

[edit]

Please quit edit warring with me as you did on the Terrence Howard page. Funkykittycat (talk) 23:26, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Funkykittycat aka Gillysuitedbookworm aka Politicalscaffolder Please stop vandalising as you did at that same page. Also maybe stop socking. Polygnotus (talk) 23:27, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reporting DetectPromo false-positive

[edit]

Parasitic_ant "drastically" in phrase "vary drastically" is not promotional Sophisticatedevening🍷(talk) 16:28, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2025-19

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 00:12, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reporting DetectPromo false-positive

[edit]

Abraham_Van_Neste "revolutionary" in phrase "American revolutionary war" is not promotional Sophisticatedevening🍷(talk) 13:17, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Contentious topics notification

[edit]

Information icon You have recently made edits related to the Arab–Israeli conflict. This is a standard message to inform you that the Arab–Israeli conflict is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. Additionally, editors must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days, and are not allowed to make more than 1 revert on the same page within 24 hours for pages within this topic. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. Jclemens (talk) 00:22, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Polygnotus (talk) 00:30, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2025-20

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 22:35, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 14 May 2025

[edit]

Team leader

[edit]

I was made redundant after I told the companies owner that his idiocy made my position pointless. So "unruly"? yes, "pay raise"? no. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested «@» °∆t° 21:55, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Polygnotus (talk) 21:55, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Knock it off. You're being disruptive. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:57, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@ScottishFinnishRadish Bit of a history to that, see here and there and that and various other places. But yeah such debates are pointless. Polygnotus (talk) 22:07, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's much easier to block someone for bludgeoning when there aren't others doing the same thing. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:10, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@ScottishFinnishRadish Good point, agreed. Polygnotus (talk) 22:14, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ww → www replacement

[edit]

Hi Polygnotus. Just letting you know that I've mass-rollbacked your 12 AWB edits changing ww to www. In the first three I looked at (Mike Tyson, Rami Malek, Sweden), your edit changed a previously working URL to a broken one. If there's any cases where your change was an improvement, please feel free to restore, but please do try to be more careful using AWB. Thanks. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe|🤷) 04:47, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Tamzin I am a genius. I confused the browser window with the working URLs with the browser window with the broken URLs. D'oh! My bad, thanks for spotting it. Polygnotus (talk) 05:26, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Heh, earlier this week I had my monthly case of thinking "holy shit these sockpuppets' edits are, like, identical" before realizing that I'd opened the same tab twice. Fortunately I did catch that before I blocked, and they were socks anyways. But I have seen at least one case where someone got blocked based on a CU comparing a set of results to itself. 😬 The perils of tabs... -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe|🤷) 05:52, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2025-21

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 23:10, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reporting DetectPromo false-positive

[edit]

Zo_nationalism "revolutionary" in phrase "zomi revolutionary army" is not promotional Flyingphoenixchips (talk) 02:22, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2025-22

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 20:02, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata weekly summary #681

[edit]

DuplicateReferences question

[edit]

Hi Polygnotus, is it possible to override the automatic edit summary when using your script? I was thinking of using something like: Tagged duplicate citations using DuplicateReferences Nobody (talk) 12:37, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@1AmNobody24: Sure, see here. Polygnotus (talk) 12:46, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Nobody (talk) 12:48, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure if you have a bugtracker, but it just did this. Nobody (talk) 13:29, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hm, I should look into the morebits template insertion logic, one sec. Polygnotus (talk) 13:39, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@1AmNobody24 I am now using the Wikipedia:Morebits template insertion logic, which should work now. Polygnotus (talk) 13:47, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the quick fix. Nobody (talk) 13:48, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah it was already on the todolist but I hadn't gotten around to it yet. Polygnotus (talk) 13:50, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Continued at MediaWiki_talk:Gadget-morebits.js#Morebits_and_MOS:ORDER. Polygnotus (talk) 21:50, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Helping Hand Barnstar
Thanks so much for going through those article issues with me on my talk page! As a new Wikipedian, it really helped to receive such good constructive criticism on these articles and make the fixes that I had to. Keep up the good work! Reverosie (talk) 19:45, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you @Reverosie! I always learn a lot from typofixing and discover all kinds of interesting articles. Polygnotus (talk) 20:09, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Barnstar of Good Humor
Please stop. From kitty litter, to just refusing to let someone retire, to toilet paper orientation (for the record, it's over. And yes that's WP:NPOV because WP:FACTS). You have no right to make my day that much. Cheers, GoldRomean (talk) 00:12, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and on a completely unrelated note, I now have to know whether you're named after the painter, crater, or disambiguation page. Or something else. GoldRomean (talk) 00:15, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! The 'over' method is superior because it doubles as a cat toy. I now have to know whether you're named after the painter, crater, or disambiguation page. I am named after the Wikipedia user of that name. Polygnotus (talk) 03:09, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Of course! Now I'm wondering, @Polygnotus, since this user's claims to be named after you, what are you named after? Just kidding. You don't have to answer. Happy editing, and see you around! GoldRomean (talk) 04:23, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Filemover

[edit]

Hello Polygnotus. Your account has been granted the "filemover" user right, either following a request for it or due to a clear need for the ability to move files. Please take a moment to review Wikipedia:File mover for more information on this user right and under what circumstances it is okay to move files. When you move a file please remember to update any links to the new name as well! If you do not want the file mover right anymore, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Thank you, and happy editing! PresN 17:12, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Polygnotus (talk) 18:54, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
Really appreciate your help with the user lists. Excellent job! Have a great weekend! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 06:39, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Dr. Blofeld Thanks! Let me know if you need new lists/filtering. Destubbing the entire world is certainly an admirable goal! Polygnotus (talk) 14:32, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Do you want to filter out blocked users? Or people below x contribs? If so, what should x be? Polygnotus (talk) 14:56, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If there is a concern about messaging too many people, perhaps we could keep it to a list of maybe 1000 of the most active editors. I don't mean by edit count, I mean editors who really write a lot of content. One thing I noticed in browsing is that a lot of people signed up at wikiprojects are inactive. If you could find a way of finding the most active writers of sciences, tech, engineering, medicine, maths, business, geography, places and architecture first that would be most useful, as there is $1340 going into those in total. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:27, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Dr. Blofeld Sadly the API is not that advanced (yet). The API can't tell you "this user added a lot of content" (without getting all their contribs) or "this user mostly worked on this topic". It is possible to get that information, but currently not without a lot of hassle and API requests. I'll filter out blocked users and we can then filter out users with less than x edits if you want. Roughly 50% of users in a Wikiproject are inactive/blocked. Polygnotus (talk) 15:31, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Good idea, see what you can come up with. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:13, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata weekly summary #682

[edit]

Tech News: 2025-23

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 23:52, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Foundation Bulletin 2025 Issue 10

[edit]


MediaWiki message delivery 21:56, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On VPT

[edit]

Can I ask you take a step back and consider not WP:BADGERING Olga  ? Also consider toning down on asking rhetorical questions or by default assuming that consensus will be overridden by surveys in this discussion (like you did with respect to MMiller).

Note that these folks are real people with real jobs that typically include a large number of disparate projects, they are typically not single threading on a specific thing (and thus are not required to answer every single pointy question thrown at them by the community and neither should you try to get them to do it). Sohom (talk) 13:38, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Sohom Datta Please read the page you linked to. I do not think it is polite to falsely accuse someone. You can disagree with me, that is fine. But pretending that I am doing things I am clearly not doing, just because you have a different position in a discussion is weak sauce.
Note that I am also a real person, and your approach of not engaging in discussion but falsely accusing me of something I did not annoys me. Please stay off my talkpage if you have nothing to offer but negativity. Thank you. Unlike you I am actually working towards a solution and helping the WMF. Polygnotus (talk) 13:44, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Sohom Datta: You claim to be an expert JavaScript programmer on your userpage. If you want to contribute something meaningful and constructive, I have this but I am not sure what the best way is to have it occupy the side of the screen. Normally that wouldn't be difficult but for some stupid reason the different themes Wikipedia uses mess things up. Claude couldn't figure it out and I am currently too sick for debugging. The idea is to use it to prove to the Wikipedia community that not all AI is bad. You can look at User:Polygnotus/Scripts/Claude3.js. I use Vector 2010 but I tried to get it to work in modern Vector. Figuring out what to do is not hard: 1) WMF should acknowledge the problems and show that it understands 2) Someone should show the community that not all AI is bad. You can help me with both. Polygnotus (talk) 13:51, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
So, I realize my initial message was a bit hasty and poorly worded. I wanted to dissuade you from making comments like Probably a bad idea to respond only to 1 comment, the only comment that is not critical but asks about the underlying stuff. We are kinda waiting for a response to the other stuff. since it makes people feel like you are demanding that folks answer the hard questions, even if you don't want it to sound that way. I can however, understand that this is a fairly emotionally charged situation and both of us worded our responses poorly.
Regarding the rest, User:Sohom Datta/claude.js should contain a fixed version of the script that you showed me. For my part, while I might seem relatively inactive onwiki, I've been doing my part as a member of the PTAC, I've raised this internally (on the PTAC slack) and pointed out that the English Wikipedia is perceives large-language model generated text negatively. I've also asked WMF folks to reconsider it's internal guidelines for what can/should be A/B tested without community approval (since I see this as being the main reason/loophole why this made it to a enwiki deployment). I also plan on doing some ground work trying to understand how/why the WMF made the decision of proposing this feature and see if I can provide feedback about the workstream. Sohom (talk) 00:13, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Sohom Datta Thank you! One of the problems here is that, if you try to push a discussion in a direction, people link to WP:BADGER which is written for bad people with bad intentions, and not people who are, let's say, perhaps a bit overly enthusiastic. Saying "Oi, slow down" works better. Badgering is demanding that people restate their position, refusing to accept the consensus, IDHT behaviour. I didn't do any of that, and I very much agree with the consensus.
I know I can convince the community that we shouldn't throw out the baby with the bathwater. I want to continue using AI, and I want the WMF to continue experimenting, while also being very very clear that some things go against our values.
I've been thinking about voluntarily tagging my own AI-assisted edits with a special (hash)tag so that people can see that the fear of AI (in a supporting role, while the human makes the decisions and holds the responsibility) is overblown. I don't use the generated text on Wikipedia, I just have it generate instructions that I can follow (like "fix this typo").
Stuff like this is a major setback because the community loses confidence that the WMF respects the community and understands its own role. Creating a simple script like the one I showed you and posting some screenshots on a public place is a quick win. I want to show the WMF what acceptable and responsible AI use looks like and show the community that they have nothing to fear from responsible AI use. We can't just shout "bad dog" at the WMF and expect them to do better next time. Anthropic's Sonnet 4 and Opus 4 work really well in my experience. It may be a good idea to also make a ChatGPT-version. In the future, maybe we can have a script like this with a model hosted by the WMF.
I do think that calling out manipulative tricks is very important. There is probably a better term for this I am unaware of, but let's call it "politician-speak". I think the WMF uses politician-speak to protect itself and does not realize that it is hurting instead of helping. We need to be able to criticize undesirable behaviour without wrapping it in compliments. Way too often people hide behind the trick "oh, you criticized something I said, then you must be a one-dimensional villain/troll who is just plain evil and has nothing of value to add" instead of realizing that their behaviour is not who they are as a person and that they can't grow if no one points out when they mess up. It may have something to do with the world getting more polarized/people being less relaxed but I am no expert in that field. I am on the other end of the spectrum in the sense that I rarely agree with myself, and can write books about the flaws in my own reasoning.
I may want to get community consensus for my AI-assisted typo fix tool at some point, and people will object to it if they think all AI is evil and wrong.
Thanks for your help. I think we need to turn this debacle into something positive, somehow. If you need help with PTAC stuff or other stuff, you know where to find me. Polygnotus (talk) 01:31, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Todo

[edit]

Stuff that should probably happen:

  • use OOUI buttons (but they use too much space, because they are fullwidth)
  • think about accessibility
  • make OpenAI version(?)
  • add warning about AI imperfections
  • preserve scroll position when navigating to new page
  • currently it opens on top of the page, and when you drag the left border the article width changes. It should never be on top, and always next to article content
  • make button to delete API key from localStorage() instead of pointless "clear results" button
  • key should probably be in sessionStorage not localStorage
  • improve prompt to not include summary at the end The article is generally well-written
  • improve prompt to ensure it focuses on areas in which it gives good advice, and ignores areas about which it gives bad advice. Should probably run it on ~100 pages and check what is the worst advice and tune the prompt based on that. Special:NewPages >10k b?
  • horribly ugly in light mode
  • ability to minimize and restore?
  • it is relatively pointless on pages with very little text/pages that consist mostly on tables with scores. Perhaps have a way to detect that it shouldn't even bother trying?
  • how to deal with very very long pages? I got Quarry 91712 and Quarry 91714. Test on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_chiropterans
  • test with other themes
  • when its working on the next article it could hide the output from the previous one
  • probably possible to get how much money is left on the API key
  • improve error handling
  • strip ref and exlink sections (and infobox?) before sending wikicode
  • in system prompt, explain that things get repeated in the lead and that that is nothing to worry about
  • i18n

Administrators' newsletter – June 2025

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2025).

Administrator changes

removed

Interface administrator changes

added 0xDeadbeef

CheckUser changes

readded L235

Oversight changes

readded L235

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC is open to determine whether the English Wikipedia community should adopt a position on AI development by the WMF and its affiliates.

Technical news

Arbitration

  • An arbitration case named Indian military history has been opened. Evidence submissions for this case close on 8 June.

Miscellaneous


Hey

[edit]

Hey, why are you nominating my article for deletion? I spent so much time and effort creating that article and I put many Sources and References in my Article which took many hours. Please donʼt delete my article. AyaanJaved (talk) 13:43, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@AyaanJaved Hi! I don't think Trollface Edits is suitable for Wikipedia because the topic does not meet WP:GNG or WP:NWEB. You could try the urban dictionary or perhaps wikis like https://rage-comic.fandom.com/wiki/Trollface or similar. Polygnotus (talk) 15:28, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Polygnotus, thanks for your feedback! I understand Wikipedia's notability guidelines, but I believe 'Trollface Edits' meets the criteria. The trend is not just limited to YouTube Shorts, it has spread across TikTok and Instagram, showing significant cultural impact. Additionally, I found a reliable source discussing the phenomenon: https://galaxy.ai/youtube-summarizer/the-dumbass-epidemic-ruining-youtube-shorts-KoA371iBdzQ
Would you be open to reconsidering its inclusion, or could you suggest how I can strengthen the article further? Thanks! AyaanJaved (talk) 18:05, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You can add all sources you believe can help establish notability to the article or to Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Trollface_Edits and the community will decide. The procedure is explained over at WP:AFD and WP:DELETE. Have a nice day, Polygnotus (talk) 23:25, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Re: withdrawal

[edit]

Fair enough that you didn't feel like going through with the nom. I do think it might be worth bringing the topic back to AfD in a few months to get a clearer consensus on notability either way once the dust has hopefully settled. Eddie891 Talk Work 20:07, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Eddie891 Yeah, kinda hoping someone smarter than myself will do that at some point. Polygnotus (talk) 20:09, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Another idea would be to only consider sources that are actually in the article at the moment the AfD is closed. This would require editors to actually use the sources they claim establish notability instead of simply pointing to them in the discussion. While judging an article on what it is instead of what it could be may a bad idea when an article about a notable topic just needs a rewrite, when notability is the problem it may be a good idea. Polygnotus (talk) 20:43, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I’m not sure that I follow. The first and second clauses of your final sentence seem, to me, contradictory. Surely the crux of the issue in most afds is that the article needs to be rewritten to make notability clear (or deleted)? If it wasn’t, the article probably wouldn’t be nominated in the first place. Eddie891 Talk Work 20:53, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Eddie891 I mean that when a subject is certainly notable but the article is terrible we do not delete because the article being terrible is fixable (so we judge it not on what it is but on what it could be). But when the notability of a topic is in doubt then I think we should judge notability based on the sources that are in the article at the end of the AfD so that those who want to keep the article must put the sources in the article (and simply mentioning them in the AfD is not enough). Polygnotus (talk) 21:25, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Eddie891: forgot to ping. Polygnotus (talk) 20:43, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A free Gemini version of your Claude6.js proofreader

[edit]

Greetings Polygnotus! I'm a huge fan of your work on User:Polygnotus/Scripts/Claude6.js. Anthropic has to charge a lot of money but Google offers their slightly better (at text in LMArena, anyway) gemini-2.5-flash-preview-05-20 model for free, so I asked it to convert your code to User:Cramulator/GeminiProofreader.js which I have tested and seems to work. There is a hyperlink to Google's API key generation page in the key entry dialog box which anyone logged in to Google even without a Google Cloud account can use to generate a free tier key. The only technical change I had to make was to increase maxOutputTokens well above the default for when it had to say a lot, because unlike Claude, Gemini returns no completion at MAX_TOKENS instead of truncating, nor does it prioritize generation to fit inside the limit in the first place. I also made it prepend the article title to the LLM results since the output persists (which I think is a good thing, while you work on an initial article; but this probably could have been a prompt change.)

I also enabled Gemini's googleSearch and urlContext tools, so presumably it should be using its "grounding" capability to search for facts and sources, and actually examine linked sources (including PDFs etc.) when prudent, but I haven't tested either of those yet because I'm not sure how I could set up conclusive tests -- maybe you can think of something?

...Maybe we should put something in the Gemini prompt to use web search to check important facts and figures, and browse sources to confirm important or conflicting statements? Cramulator (talk) 06:15, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Cramulator Check out User:Phlsph7/SourceVerificationAIAssistant.js and T360489. More detailed response follows. Polygnotus (talk) 07:54, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Cramulator Ooh that is excellent work, thank you! We may need to combine them at some point and add OpenAI. AI bashing is pretty popular round these parts, but Wikipedians should be able to deal with unreliable sources. I'll have to make something to compare them so we can judge who is best. I prefer Claude for coding tasks at the moment, but being free is a very important advantage of course! When I have more time I'll try to make some minor improvements. Thanks again! Polygnotus (talk) 00:21, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You're very welcome! I did very little compared to your 6 revisions. I agree the Claudes version 4 are better for code than competitors (when the much smaller context window doesn't get in the way), but Anthropic clearly didn't optimize them for prose over previous versions, while Gemini Flash 2.5 has three other advantages that I believe the Claude API lacks:
  1. Web search: Gemini will try to use Google Search with its "grounding" approach which I believe looks at low confidence token output behind the scenes and gets more aggressive with searching when it thinks it might be hallucinating. Claude 4 via the API won't search the web without "extended thinking" which is slow, expensive, and possibly overkill for proofreading.
  2. PDF browsing: Claude can read PDF files, but by default it refuses to. For example https://s24.q4cdn.com/216390268/files/doc_downloads/test.pdf which Claude says is forbidden by robots.txt, but there is no robots.txt or exclusionary headers for it, so.... I suggest many if not most of the PDF sources we link to in articlespace lack affirmative permissions from a robots.txt file. Also, when you turn on Gemini's urlContext tool as I did, I have confirmed it tries to load in as many links as it can, and keeps them when they fit in its million token window.
  3. Cost: Gemini Flash has a very generous free tier, while Anthropic and OpenAI have less of a slush fund to dangle "$0" in front of potential APIs users, so I expect Google will continue to try to bludgeon them this way. We definitely want to prioritize this for editors, not just to reduce adoption friction and keep them from having to open their wallets, but also while I know very little about userscripts and gadgets, I know security issues are not unheard of, and I would hate to see editors getting defrauded somehow. Gemini free tier API keys just rate limit, without incurring payments.
If I were going to offer just one point of constructive criticism, I suggest the three vertical buttons could be improved to be horizontal when width allows. Cramulator (talk) 02:58, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. Please feel free to fork User:Cramulator/GeminiProofreader.js back into your /scripts/ in which case I will make it a redirect to your version, or just edit it in my userspace as you see fit. Cramulator (talk) 03:07, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2025-24

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 01:14, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata weekly summary #683

[edit]

You might want to see this

[edit]

[21] Doug Weller talk 06:22, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller Yeah it is depressing. Thanks. Polygnotus (talk) 06:24, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Veery. I'd hate to be a teacher now. Doug Weller talk 07:04, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Doug Weller I read a quote somewhere along the lines of: every generation has complained about the youth, and they were all correct. Polygnotus (talk) 07:47, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Very true. Doug Weller talk 08:18, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I was just looking at one of his scripts... what happened? Ah mercy, a blast from the past. – SJ + 20:37, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Sj For the full story you gotta ask User:Moneytrees but the short version is that Cramulator got blocked by a WP:checkuser. Polygnotus (talk) 20:42, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback requests from the Feedback Request Service

[edit]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Canada, Talk:Main Page and Talk:UserBenchmark on "All RFCs" request for comments. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 13:42, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reporting DetectPromo false-positive

[edit]

François-Edmond_Fortier "more than" in phrase "more than" is not promotional Munfarid1 (talk) 19:14, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata weekly summary #684

[edit]

Tech News: 2025-25

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 23:36, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List

[edit]

Hi, can you use this list of quality editors, Wikipedia:WikiProject Quality Article Improvement/Precious, extract the names and create a list purely with their user talk pages, one per line, nothing else?.


User talk:xxxxx

User talk:xxxxx ♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:40, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear, it's too late now to send out more invites but I want to compile a more filtered list of good editors next time to message so it would help me if you could. Hope I haven't upset you and you don't feel like you can respond. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:15, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Dr. Blofeld No, I checked the notification when I wasn't near a computer and then I didn't get a reminder because I had clicked it already. Polygnotus (talk) 07:17, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ah. I thought you're likely busy, but hoped you and people weren't annoyed at me for sending out a lot of invites. As per my talk page I will come up with a good A-Z list for next time but will take a lot of time to filter manually. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:40, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Dr. Blofeld I don't mind you sending a lot of invites, but I know others do. I think you need something like User:Polygnotus/Data/Blo but then you need to filter out blocked, vanished and inactive users. If you are not in a hurry I'll do it some time this week. Also didn't that one person have a good idea about Quarry? What was the link again? Polygnotus (talk) 07:56, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Dr. Blofeld Also we should probably have a tool that can take a list of users and output those who are active and not blocked because it seems like that is a recurring task for every mailing. Polygnotus (talk) 08:05, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that, but just simply not good enough that you weren't able to predict the future block of Thomas tut tut hehe! :-) ♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:38, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Dr. Blofeld I vaguely remember being disappointed by Minority Report because they could've done so much more with the concept. Polygnotus (talk) 16:29, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Foundation Bulletin 2025 Issue 11

[edit]


MediaWiki message delivery 19:39, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reporting DetectPromo false-positive

[edit]

2009_UK_&_Ireland_Greyhound_Racing_Year "significant" in phrase "significant changes" is not promotional CreatorTheWikipedian2009 (talk) 17:06, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

[edit]

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Air India Flight 171 on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:30, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]