Wikipedia talk:Scripts++

Archives

Archive 1

Scripts++/Issue 1 Scripts++/Issue 10 Scripts++/Issue 11 Scripts++/Issue 12 Scripts++/Issue 14 Scripts++/Issue 15 Scripts++/Issue 16 Scripts++/Issue 17 Scripts++/Issue 19 Scripts++/Issue 2 Scripts++/Issue 20 Scripts++/Issue 21 Scripts++/Issue 22 Scripts++/Issue 23 Scripts++/Issue 24 Scripts++/Issue 3 Scripts++/Issue 4 Scripts++/Issue 5 Scripts++/Issue 6 Scripts++/Issue 7 Scripts++/Issue 8 Scripts++/Issue 9

This is probably dumb and wouldn't work, but I bet it'd be possible to write something in Quarry that found new userscripts that were large enough to do something, like:

SELECT page_title, page_len, page_latest FROM page WHERE page_title LIKE '%.js' AND page_title NOT like '%/common.js' AND page_is_redirect = 0 AND page_len > 500 AND page_namespace = 2 ORDER BY page_latest;

You'd need to JOIN it with revision and do some stuff like this to get the first revision timestamp for each page and then sort by that. I dunno if this would give us anything good, but maybe there'd be a bunch of good stuff, and then we could go to people's talk pages and say "this script looks cool, can we put it in the newsletter?" jp×g 01:34, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

JPxG, interesting idea, though we should keep in mind that many scripts weren't written for any wider audience, they could be things that only work well for the author. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 13:58, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, my estimate is that probably 80% of these will be someone copy-pasting an existing script into a fork, 15% goofy things that someone wrote for their own extremely narrow use case (like User:JPxG/Monthcounter.js, which... counts the occurrences of each month name in the edit box... and then outputs them as a tab-separated list to the edit summary box). But maybe there will be a few bangers, in which case it'd still require going to their talk page to ask first (I certainly don't want my most dogshit code being shown to the world without my knowledge lol). jp×g 00:54, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Where do we currently get our scripts from? WP:US/L and watchers of this talk page? –Novem Linguae (talk) 17:05, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedia scripts? ― Qwerfjkltalk 17:07, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Qwerfjkl, {{Infobox Wikipedia user script}} (which not even every script has) doesn't categorize so that'll probably miss a lot. At least my scripts aren't in there atm. I made the infobox categorize so now my scripts (and another 200+ scripts that have the infobox but lacked the category) are in there. For example User:Enterprisey/set-js-prefs, User:Ahecht/Scripts/ReadingMode, Wikipedia:Shortdesc helper, User:Awesome Aasim/customsearch, User:Awesome Aasim/savedraft and Wikipedia:WikidataLinker. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 17:50, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging @Nardog who reverted me doing this here. ― Qwerfjkltalk 20:19, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yeah, I don't like it. I certainly didn't intend my scripts end up in that category. Make it optional, or at the very least provide an opt-out. If you want to know which pages use the infobox, why can't you just search with hastemplate:? Nardog (talk) 00:51, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nardog, opt-out added. Just out of curiosity, any particular reason you don't want your scripts categorized? If they're just for personal use or a specific task only you perform I'd imagine you wouldn't use the infobox to begin with. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 06:27, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm realizing I didn't want my scripts in that category precisely because it was voluntary and scarcely populated. It seemed pointless. Now that it's automatic I don't really mind it, admittedly. Nardog (talk) 16:56, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, would it be worth listing entries like
* {{userscript | code= User:Example/example.js |name= example |doc= User:Example/example |noref=yes}} – Description.
producing

• example (source) – Description.

or something along those lines. ― Qwerfjkltalk 09:47, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Late by a lot, but I don't think so. I think users should be reviewing scripts in a bit more detail before installing them, unlike the approach at US/L. Aaron Liu (talk) 15:27, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I remember there being a list somewhere of all the scripts that have been featured. Any idea where? Aaron Liu (talk) 21:49, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aaron Liu, list of featured scripts is at Wikipedia talk:Scripts++/Archive. —⁠andrybak (talk) 23:09, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]