MediaWiki talk:Math-tracking-category-error

Protected edit request on 29 June 2016

This category should not be displayed on the Book talk, Category talk, Draft, Draft talk, Education Program talk, File talk, Help talk, MediaWiki talk, Module talk, Portal talk, Talk, Template talk, TimedText talk, User, User talk, and Wikipedia talk namespaces, as we do with Citation Style 1 errors (see, for example, Category:Pages with citations using unsupported parameters).

Instructions for limiting the namespace have been posted at https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T49037

– Jonesey95 (talk) 14:32, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

I'm not so convinced about the need. The category Category:Pages with math errors is pretty un populated with only 110 page, this is likely to drop as the database gets refreshed. Its not too hard to find the articles from that list. The problem with this action is that it means that if you do want to get a view with all the different pages you can't actually see it. There is some utility in being able to see all the pages if you are trying to find conditions which break the math renderer. There are only a very small number of people interested in this category.--Salix alba (talk): 15:59, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

I've a bit of javascript which greys out all the non article related namespaces. This works for me as it highlights the articles but still shows all the other pages.

jQuery( document ).ready( function( $ ) {	
	if( document.title == "Category:Pages with math errors - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia") {
		$(".mw-category-group a").each(function(ind,ele) {
			var title = ele.innerHTML;
			if(title.startsWith("User:") || title.startsWith("Talk:") || title.startsWith("User talk:") 
			 || title.startsWith("Wikipedia:") || title.startsWith("Wikipedia talk:") ) {
				root = ele.parentElement;
				$(ele).css({"color":"grey"});
				console.log(ele.innerHTML);
			}
		})
	}
}

--Salix alba (talk): 16:04, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi. It's me again. The dilemma between js and wikicode can be resolved in three different ways:

1. Jonesey95's way - remove the pages from the category. They could not be found any more indeed, and this is the way you should choose if you are never going to fix these errors.
2. Salix alba's way - creates the original category and puts all the pages there, so you can see the needed namespaces only by jawascript. I don't like this way.
3. The compromise I can suggest: create 2 tracking categories, one for the namespaces needed for Jonesey95, and one for the rest. (To do this, replace ":" in the code I gave with the second name, for example: "...2600=Pages with math errors with no need to urgent fix|Pages with math errors}}") Then put both categories in one new that will include only them. So, the pages will be classified, Jonesey95 will see all he needs in one category, Salix alba will see all he needs in one supercategory. I use this way for a long time for the tracking category for included unexisting images, and it works very well. IKhitron (talk) 16:58, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

We have found with the Citation Style 1 errors that option 1 worked best, because errors in Talk pages (demonstrating the error message) and User pages (typically people messing around with code) should generally not be "fixed" (thereby breaking the broken example or changing someone's personal User-space experiment). Since they should not be fixed, they should not appear on the category page, since the purpose of the category page is to show pages that need to be fixed. Maintenance categories that are in a healthy state should show zero pages so that anything new that shows up can be fixed quickly.

If you want to find pages that have not been categorized, you may be able to search for "Failed to parse (syntax error)" in the namespace that interests you.

That's how we do it over in CS1-land, anyway. If math folks want it a different way, that's OK with me. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:22, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

OK I've created two categories Category:Pages with math errors for talk pages etc. and Category:Articles with math errors for parts of the encyclopedia. I've updated the MediaWiki message accordingly.--Salix alba (talk): 17:48, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Already done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:20, 3 July 2016 (UTC)