User talk:Zackmann08


User	Talk	Awards	Contacts	Notes	Templates/Tools	Bookmarks	My Sandbox	v t e

This is Zackmann08's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15: 7 days

Template:Infobox mapframe

I notice you added parameter checking to {{Infobox mapframe}}, but it is now objecting to the documented argument "zoom" with the preview message 'Preview warning: Page using Template:Infobox mapframe with unknown parameter "zoom"'. I would expect that "zoom" would be included in "mapframe_args=y", which you specified, so it is likely that the issue comes from some higher level rather than your action. However, you may be better placed to sort this out than I am. To duplicate: click edit on any article containing a zoom article to Infobox mapframe (I encountered this at Raumati Beach), then press preview. The error appears just below the location map in the infobox. I see that Category:Pages using infobox mapframe with unknown parameters has 58,000 entries, which this might be a contributing factor to.-Gadfium (talk) 01:41, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Gadfium: hmmm. not sure what's going on and i'm not in a place to dive into it at the moment... Obviously there is a problem with what I did though so I have reverted my edit until I can do a proper investigation. Thank you for bringing this to my attention! Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 01:50, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.-Gadfium (talk) 01:53, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think the issue is that {{infobox mapframe}} itself uses parameters that are different from the |mapframe-xxx= parameters. See the examples for parameters that are valid in {{Infobox mapframe}}. Note that the parent infobox template, e.g. Infobox hospital, is using the documented mapframe-xxx parameter names, probably to prevent parameter namespace conflicts. I have a feeling that the TemplateData section for {{infobox mapframe}} is not accurate. I am not a Lua programmer, but it appears that the "mapframe-" prefix on the parameters is optional, and that the trimArgs function strips it before reading the parameter names. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:33, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jonesey95: that is EXACTLY what I was thinking as well. Haven't rolled up my sleeves and dived in yet, but that what my first cursory glance revealed as well. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 17:42, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think I may have fixed it. I possibly missed a few parameters, and the deprecated parameters may want special processing. I'll leave that to you. There is some odd stuff happening at Great Slave Lake and similar pages. It's something to do with processing of the coordinates, I think. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:54, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The TemplateData report is a good place to look for obvious problems that you could fix with an AWB run, like the 128 articles using |tyep= instead of |type=. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:57, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yea that EXACTLY how I do these.. Problem is, per the 2 diffs in my sandbox that I just tagged you in, the report is wrong.

Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 17:58, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The linked TD parameter usage report can't be "wrong". It just reports what is happening in articles, and it pulls the "Valid" column values from the TemplateData section, which can definitely be wrong. If you mean that the TemplateData itself is wrong, that would not surprise me. It may be that that "mapframe-" prefixes need to be removed. As I said, I don't program in Lua, so I don't know what that trimArgs function is doing, exactly. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:03, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, clarify... I think the TemplateData is wrong, and in turn is causing the report to be inaccurate in column 2 "Valid name?". You are correct that the use of params in the report cannot be "wrong".

|tyep= obviously should be |type= but my point is that the current version of the report marks BOTH as being invalid parameters for the template. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 18:07, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The TemplateData section of the documentation is poorly designed in many ways. It gives the impression that it is authoritative about what parameters the template supports or doesn't support, and which parameters are required, but there is no required correspondence between what the TD section says and how the template actually works. A TD section can say a parameter is required, even when the template itself makes no attempt to require that parameter. A TD section can say that a parameter is supported, leading to a false "Y" value in the parameter usage report, even when that parameter is not supported. And vice versa, a supported parameter can be omitted from TD, leading to a false "N" value in the report. The "Valid" column in the report should be trusted minimally. The main function of TD is to present a list of parameters to editors inserting templates using the Visual Editor, but unfortunately, people have tied various reports and functionality to the TD sections on the assumption that its contents are accurate. It's a mess and always has been. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:09, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh for sure... So I've been doing a LOT of cleanups of CAT:UNKNOWN and I always take the param reports with a grain of salt. If you glance at my userpage, I have a "Check in November" section. Those are for Templates where I have personally checked and updated the TemplateData in preparation for the Nov 1st run of the TemplateParams report. Those are the ONLY ones that I take as anything close to "gospel" and even then I'm cautious because there could always have been changes between my update to the TD and the run of the report. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 18:14, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've found another couple of parameters in use for Infobox mapframe, which are not documented in the template but are used in the module: 'plain=' and 'frame-align='. They're in use in the article Motions Creek. I don't see any obvious change made by the frame-align, but that may be because it's embedded in an infobox. Removing the plain= makes the river bolder. At [1] I see plain has been used 221 times in the last month, and frame-align 155 times. These params are used in several examples at Template talk:Infobox mapframe/Archive 1. Should we add these params into the allowed list?-Gadfium (talk) 04:11, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Gadfium: so you might be onto something... However per this test I don't see those 2 parameters doing anything... Are you seeing something I'm not? The fact that a parameter is widely used in the param report doesn't necessarily mean it is a valid param. Remember that the report means that on October 1st those parameters were in use X number of times. It does NOT mean it was added recently... It could be those parameters were once supported and were removed months or years ago. That happens all the time... I just finished removing hundred of instances of |casus= from {{Infobox military conflict}}. That parameter was removed in like 2016 if I remember my late night research correctly. Until the unknown parameters check is added, no one notices these unused/nonworking parameters...

That being said, I'm not in a position to speak authoritatively on this code... So let's both investigate further. Take a look at my sandbox code I linked to. Jonesey95 any thoughts? Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 04:49, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Gadfium: as a follow up, look at Module:Infobox mapframe Line 211 & 214. It looks like these two values are hardcoded so passing them to the template causes them to just be overridden. Thus, they are indeed invalid parameters. I don't really feel the need to trace the module history, but if you feel like checking the diffs, I bet you a tray of cookies that it used to be you could pass that value, but it was hard coded ages ago. Again I might be missing something, but is how things appear to me. Let me know if you interpret something different. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 05:18, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I was comparing the output by flipping back and forth between two tabs. Yours is a much better test. I can't see a difference there. I also tried making frame-align-left and plain=no, which also made no difference. I now agree that these parameters do nothing, and I'll remove them from pages where I encounter them (usually when I'm doing new page patrol). Thanks for your help. [just saw your additional comment. I had seen that in the module but I'm not fluent in lua and thought there might be an override somewhere]-Gadfium (talk) 05:21, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciate you bringing it up! I wasn't sure until I dove into it so def worth the question. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 05:34, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Those two parameters do nothing because they are hard-coded into the module" was also my conclusion when I looked at the code. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:42, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Odd use of parameter 1=

If you're on the hunt for unsupported parameters, here's an odd batch of 300+ pages. I don't know what that value in parameter |1= was supposed to do, but it doesn't appear to be doing anything now. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:08, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good find. It looks like an attempt to use |coordinates= that went awry. Surprised there are so many of them with the exact same error tho. I'm going to wait to tackle {{Infobox mapframe}} until after I have the new ParamReport this weekend as it just works better with my workflow to have that as a guide. I generate a big list of regexes that expedites the process... Replacing |tyep= with |type= for example. But I will def keep an eye out for these pages and get them fixed. Thanks! Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 21:14, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jonesey95: those 300+ pages are all resolved.

Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 23:48, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that earlier today. Nice work. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:02, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

I apologise for causing those cite errors, however the article did have cite errors before. I do use preview, however I missed those errors on this occasion. Your response to my reply was inappropriate, however I thoroughly dislike confrontation. It puts me off wanting to edit entirely. As you believe I am not a regular, how you responded technically comes under WP:BITE. Please be aware of this in future. I wish to leave things on a good note, so I will thank you for fixing the errors and wish you well with your Wikipedia endeavours. Take care. 11WB (talk) 06:34, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@11WB: I was in the midst of leaving a comment on your talk page, but since you came here, I will respond here instead. I came to you in good faith to POLITELY notify you about a problem. You decided to take offense to that notification. WP:DTTR#AGF specifically says Recipients should also put themselves in the shoes of the user of the template. How were they to know you are a regular? Were you acting like an experienced user?

Nothing in your editing or on your talk page led me to believe that you were an "experienced user" so I had no reason to hesitate giving you a very polite message that said, in essence "hey, you made a tiny mistake here. Here is a link to why it is a mistake and how to prevent it in the future." Rather than taking it in good faith, you completely ignored the message as it was a template, complained that I had "templated a regular" and asked me to do the work of proving to you the exact diff where you made a mistake.

For the record I have more than EIGHTY TIMES the number of edits you do and have been editing more than twice as long. The ONLY reason I bring that up is that I am MUCH more a regular than you. Yet I have never and will never object to someone templating me. How can I expect them to know how long I have been here or that I am a regular?! What's more, and the much more important point here, if I make a mistake, I want and need someone to tell me. Let me be clear, I make mistakes ALL THE TIME. Feel free to browse my talk page for the many recent ones. It is immensely helpful when someone points out my mistake as it prevents me from making it in the future.

If my tone or my actions offended you, I genuinely am sorry. That was NOT my intention. Let me also say, adding a duplicate parameter is far from a big deal... It causes a tiny error and gets cleaned up, but it does have unintended consequences. That is why Template:uw-dupargs was created and is used regularly. I will continue to be careful about WP:BITE (something I sometimes fail to do when I get frustrated) and I would encourage you to work on AGF. If you continue to edit on wikipedia (which I sincerely hope that you do), I flat out guarantee you will get tempalted again. Instead of taking offense that someone used a template, I would encourage you to think of it this way:

This user took the time to trace down who had caused this error and then took the time to notify me of my mistake. They have other things they are working on and so rather than taking yet MORE time to write me a custom response, they used a template to concisely and consistently convey the necessary information to me about my mistake. I am going to use this as a learning point and thank this user for bringing it to my attention.

Again, we all make mistakes. This was far from a major one (I've made Template errors that broke literally tens of thousands of pages with one click of the mouse, see WP:TROUT for my reward). I hope that you will learn from this. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 06:44, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We operate on different parts of the project Zackmann. I am new, you are right. All I requested from you, and I didn't know you were leaving another comment, I'll put that down to me not being psychic (this a self-jab by the way, not directed at you) - was a diff. I've had a few interactions with editors before that have left me feeling quite stung, and I wonder... how could I have done that differently? I can imagine, being on that part of the project, you run into many, many cite errors and probably get sick of the sight of them. I am the same with unreliable sources at NPP, trust me, it gets old fast.

I have a preference for leaving a message detailing exactly what the issue is, rather than a template, which in many instances can be more vague. We prefer different ways of doing things, and I respect that.

I think our tenure on Wikipedia is, for the most part, irrelevant. We're both just people who are trying to make the best digital encyclopaedia possible. In this case, I messed up. I've had little sleep recently as life has been quite busy. Whilst I am a bit more rested now, I am annoyed with myself that I continue to keep making silly mistakes like this. As you saw, my talk page had become a bit of a posting ground over last 48 hours. I allowed myself to get momentarily annoyed and I directed it at you, when the fault was with me. I am genuinely sorry for doing that.

The quote from the bottom of your reply actually resonates quite strongly with me. That is a very fair statement to make, and I will absolutely keep this in mind in the future. I was genuinely preparing myself for a rinsing from your reply, but I am glad we have been able to resolve this.... as best as possible. I have no hatred toward you or anything, I don't function that way. This is a slap in the face for me to genuinely focus more when editing and not keep making silly mistakes like the ones I have recently. 11WB (talk) 06:56, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As I have said to many editors of late, we live and we learn. You are doing great work. Keep it up. This is a tiny bump in the road. Thank you for hearing what I had to saying and for understanding the spirit in which I said it. Moving forward... Feel free to reach out if you ever need help on anything. I tend to focus most of my efforts on the technical side of things... Spending a lot of time on Infoboxes and related modules, but don't hesitate to post here if you have question, need guidance, or come across a funny joke.

Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 07:00, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Most of my jokes are rather unfunny, or as they more commonly known as, dad jokes. I think I have actually seen you around the project by name before. I hope you didn't take offence to my immediate archiving of my user talk page. In that precise moment I had a vision of our conversation genuinely going super sour. I never intentionally cut off conversations, I felt it was best to deal with the cite error and then try and resolve our initial interaction after the fact. To quickly comment on your user count, I don't think I will likely ever reach over 300K edits in my entire lifetime. Your commitment to the project is an incredible achievement, so I can only congratulate you on that. Thank you for the first part of your reply by the way, I definitely needed to hear that, October has been a challenging month both onwiki and off. My knowledge of code, as you've probably realised now, is.... non-existent. I don't actually use the visual editor, I prefer the older text based one. I will make sure to make use of preview in future, as it is something I often forget to do or just don't do in favour of just hitting publish!

I will keep you in mind if I run into issues with anything code related in the future. I'm also familiar with @Novem Linguae, who is one of the maintainers over at the new pages patrol. I have the deepest of respect for the work coders do to make the lives of editors easier. It is a true gift. 11WB (talk) 07:15, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We all do our part. Keep chugging away! Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 07:16, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	For constantly cleaning up all the errors the rest of us leave behind :) GreenLipstickLesbian 💌🦋 05:31, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@GreenLipstickLesbian: Thanks yo! Keep up your great work! Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 05:32, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your wish is my command! (This was filed during your inactivity, so hopefully this isn't the first you're hearing of it - but anyways, I figured it had been open long enough :0) ) GreenLipstickLesbian 💌🦋 22:45, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@GreenLipstickLesbian: Honestly, had no idea it happened... I was awol for a few years... Do I need to do anything about this or was I cleared of all charges? Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 22:50, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, nothing for you to worry about now - just be a little more careful with close paraphrasing going forward, and everything's good. GreenLipstickLesbian 💌🦋 22:59, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like it dates back to my days of creating firefighting articles. That was a different life...

Appreciate your message! Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 23:07, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Wildfire

Hello, and thank you for your cleanup edits I greatly appreciate. You created WikiProject Wildfire, but there are several editors who are no longer active or do not participate in the project anymore. Would you be interested in helping improve more wildfire articles? There are several recent wildfires that are certainly notable enough to have articles but have had little mention in the project due to lack of editor interest, and I have noticed your contributions to wildfire related articles. If you are interested in re-joining, we would be adding another valuable editor back to the project. If this message has bothered you, please feel free to ignore it. Have a good day, Hurricane Wind and Fire (talk) 04:19, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the message. My interest have really moved on to other areas at this point. If there are specific things I can help with, feel free to reach out but for the most part, I'm doing more technical stuff these days. Cheers! Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 06:22, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2025-45

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Updates for editors

Administrators will now find that Special:MergeHistory is now significantly more flexible about what it can merge. It can now merge sections taken from the middle of the history of the source (rather than only the start) and insert revisions anywhere in the history of the destination page (rather than only the start). [2]
For users with "Automatically subscribe to topics" enabled in their preferences, starting a new topic or adding a reply to an existing topic will now subscribe them to replies to that topic. Previously, this would only happen if the DiscussionTools "Add topic" or "Reply" widgets were used. When DiscussionTools was originally launched existing accounts were not opted in to automatic topic subscriptions, so this change should primarily affect newer accounts and users who have deliberately changed their preferences since that time. [3]
Scribunto modules can now be used to generate SVG images. This can be used to build charts, graphics and other visualizations dynamically through Lua, reducing the need to compose them externally and upload them as files. [4]
Wikimedia sites now provide all anonymous users with the option to enable a dark mode color scheme, featuring light-colored text on a dark background. This enhancement aims to deliver a more enjoyable reading experience, especially in dimly lit environments. [5]
Users with large watchlists have long faced timeouts when editing Special:EditWatchlist. The page now loads entries in smaller sections instead of all at once due to a paging update, allowing everyone to edit their watchlists smoothly. As part of the database update, sorting by expiry has been removed because it was over 100× slower than sorting by title. A community wish has been created to explore alternative ways to restore sort-by-expiry. If this feature is important to you, please support the wish! [6]
View all 31 community-submitted tasks that were resolved last week. For example, the fixing of the persisting highlighting when using VisualEditor find and replace during a query. [7]

Updates for technical contributors

Since 2019 the Wikimedia URL Shortener at https://w.wiki is available for all Wikimedia wikis to create short links to articles, permalinks, diffs, etc. It is available in the sidebar as "Get shortened URL". There are 30 wikis that also install an older "ShortUrl" extension. The old extension will soon be removed. This means /s/ URLs will not be advertised under article titles via HTML class="title-shortlink". The /s/ URLs will keep working. [8]
On Thursday, October 30, the MediaWiki Interfaces and SRE Service Operations teams began rerouting Action API traffic through a common API gateway. Individual wikis will be updated based on the standard release groups, with total traffic increased over time. This change is expected to be non-breaking and non-disruptive. If any issues are observed, please file a Phabricator ticket to the Service Ops team board.
MediaWiki Train deployments will pause for the final two weeks of 2025: 22 December and 29 December. Backport windows will also pause between Monday, 22 December 2025 and Thursday, 2 January 2026. A backport window is a scheduled time to add things like bug fixes and configuration changes. There are seven deployment trains remaining for 2025. [9]
Detailed code updates later this week: MediaWiki

In depth

In 2025, the Wikimedia Foundation reported that AI systems and search engines increasingly use Wikipedia content without driving users to the site, contributing to an 8% drop in human pageviews compared to 2024. After detecting bots disguised as humans, Wikimedia updated its traffic data to reflect this shift. Read more about current user trends on Wikipedia in a Diff blog post.

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

MediaWiki message delivery 19:30, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

help

Can you help me with something? 197.60.208.215 (talk) 01:25, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure? What's up? Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 01:59, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Be bold

Hello. You can not use Wikipedia:Be bold as an argument as a wp:template editor - see the section WP:TPEBOLD. Christian75 (talk) 05:48, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Christian75: learn something new every day! Thanks for the link. I'll be better with my edit summaries moving forward. - Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 05:51, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

replacement of map = infobox mapframe with just mapframe

One thing that worries me somewhat about edits like [10] is that we have to make sure that all the fundamental parameters still match. For a long while, this old formatting made sure that the shape was rendered, which wasn't necessarily the case within the main infobox syntax. Now the behaviors do seem to match (river lines are shown by default), but after your edits it's also implicit and I'm not sure if it's going to stay that way because I don't know why they now match :)

Should there be an explicit mapframe-shape = yes somewhere in there, whether in the callers or in Infobox river? --Joy (talk) 08:20, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Joy: I've been pretty carefully comparing the results. If you compare the old revision to the current revision you will see the only thing that has changed is the mapframe marker. This is because in {{Infobox river}} you have |mapframe-marker=water. This is for consistency sake across all river infoboxes. If you find any of these edits that have problems, please absolutely ping me, but thus far I've been checking them pretty carefully and fixing issues as they come. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 08:25, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No argument there. I'm just thinking how to preserve the intent of the callers best.

Maybe my real question is how did the behavior of properly embedded mapframes change compared to the behavior of the manually embedded ones. I distinctly remember it being different. I've been searching through the diffs, but can't seem to find it now. I was thinking it was maybe something inside [11] for example, but it looks fine. --Joy (talk) 08:31, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]