User talk:Headbomb/unreliable
 | If you're curious about why a source is highlighted, first check common cleanup and non-problematic cases and limitations, which should answer most questions. Feel free to make requests for various tweaks or more sources to be covered below and I'll address things as best I can. − Headbomb {t · c · p · b} |
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Dark mode is coming[edit]
Some of the CSS in dark mode "scans" for inline CSS and then makes certain assumptions about colors. Those assumptions were not friendly to this script. (I made a bad report on Phab as a result, see phab:T361785.)
I think it should be pretty easy to adjust this script so that instead of adding the CSS for each element directly, each element gets a class for each CSS and that CSS gets pulled into a "full" CSS declaration earlier in the script that always loads the entirety. I think that's modifying 143 and 157 to use $.addClass(), changing the related "css" in the JSON to "class" with class names, and then using addCSS() to get the actual CSS onto the page.
Is that reasonable? Izno (talk) 03:14, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Possibly. But that's beyond my paygrade. @GeneralNotability, Jorm, and SD0001: might know though. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 22:15, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Ok, this works like I thought it would. I'm not sure of the best way to support custom rules. I think it would make more sense to do it like this in that case also. Assign some CSS to a known variable in unreliable-rules (
var unreliablerulecss = ...), load that by name in the core script, and then make similar changes to load cssclass instead of the CSS for each of the additional rules. We have about 15 pages of legacy to move over unless you want to support that for whatever reason.... some of those might even be simplified because they could choose to use the standard class names without resorting to custom color definition. Izno (talk) 23:54, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Ok, this works like I thought it would. I'm not sure of the best way to support custom rules. I think it would make more sense to do it like this in that case also. Assign some CSS to a known variable in unreliable-rules (
Configure a script for me to treat sources differently than the defaults[edit]
Can I configure a script for me to treat sources differently than the defaults? For example, I would like to have MDPI journals displayed as normal sources, rather then "borderline" if an article in a journal by MDPI group has PMID and PMC. Another example is that I want Semantic Scholar ID attribute to also be displayed as normal rahter than "borderline".
As an example of configurable script, see User:Maxim_Masiutin/common.js where there is a custom hook 'refrenamer.rename' to assign default names for me differently than by default, naming references to articles with PMID citation attribute as "pmid1234567" (where 1234567 is an example PMID).
Can I do the same for the "unreliable" script? I viewed the code and it seems that I cannot do that other than making a fork (copy the whole script to my user area and change appropriate lines of code). Maxim Masiutin (talk) 11:09, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
The Moscow Times[edit]
Hi, any idea why the Moscow Times is shown as blacklisted here? Alaexis¿question? 07:56, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- It's not? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 01:39, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
- No, please see WP:RSP. Alaexis¿question? 20:37, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
- What I mean is that the Moscow Times is not blacklisted and the script doesn't touch it. So I'm not sure what you're talking about. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 20:17, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- Got it, thanks. Now that I look at it again, I think that that paragraph is highlighted because it has the string "Lenta.ru" even though it's not a hyperlink. Alaexis¿question? 20:40, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- What I mean is that the Moscow Times is not blacklisted and the script doesn't touch it. So I'm not sure what you're talking about. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 20:17, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- @Headbomb, I've also noticed that Middle East Monitor is shown as unreliable even though it's not in the WP:RSP list. Alaexis¿question? 08:59, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- See Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_343#Middle_East_Monitor, Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_360#Middle_East_Monitor, Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_265, etc... It not being listed at WP:RSP is likely an oversight more than anything else. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 20:22, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- No, please see WP:RSP. Alaexis¿question? 20:37, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
Xinhua sister site[edit]
Can we add Xinhuanet.com so it is flagged the same as news.cn? Both are Xinhua News Agency sites. Thanks! - Amigao (talk) 22:15, 1 May 2024 (UTC)