Wikipedia talk:reFill

TAPINTO: A local New Jersey USA news source I frequently use doesn't seem to get "converted" any more by Refill toolforge?

hi - A news publication in NJ USA called TapInto has a number of city-based news pages by different journalists. When I put a bare URL recently using the Refill Tool forge tool, it no longer seems to fill it? Wondering why and if there is a fix? I also opened a discussion awhile back on TapInto' talk page. Thanks in advance

UTF-8 Character Issues

After noticing odd character combinations appearing in references from time to time, such as ’ appearing in place of ', I found that the errors were known as Mojibake, a character conversion error (common examples listed here). After determining how the errors were introduced into articles, I found that they occurred in edits that used Reflinks and ReFill. Is this something that could be fixed? CoolieCoolster (talk) 01:28, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

@CoolieCoolster: Please could you provide some example Wikipedia articles where this has happened, ideally as diffs? Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 09:17, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

Here, here, here, here, and here are examples. Each of those edits updated a reference title using ’ in place of '. CoolieCoolster (talk) 09:46, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

Outage

== reFill is down at the moment (16 April) ==

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T362613

Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 08:58, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Eurosport

Hi! I was wondering if you can help me. Any ideas why refill doesn't handle Eurosport.com/Eurosport.co.uk web addresses? I swear it used to work. Example page is 2024 World Snooker Championship Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:12, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

@Lee Vilenski: hmm, interesting. I created User:Curb Safe Charmer/sandbox to test this. I see what you mean. No, I don't know why it doesn't work. Nothing obvious. Would require some debugging. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 15:49, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Interesting. I was worried I'd done something wrong. Any ideas who might be able to help me with that? Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:02, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Pending again

Just a heads up, refill has been down for almost an hour. Says "pending: waiting for an available worker". Thanks, This is Paul (talk) 14:52, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Yes, refill is still down and the same pending message is appearing.Skilgis1900 (talk) 15:17, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

The tool is still not working today. The note at the top of the page states "If the tool is stuck displaying "waiting for an available worker", and you have a Phabricator login, then you can use this link to raise a report to get it restarted". That is fine, but I do not have a Phabricator login. Can anyone help us with this, please ? Thanks. - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 09:46, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi, I just did that, see: T366588

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T366588

. Best regards, Redalert2fan (talk) 12:18, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 12:21, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

I've seen the Phabricator report now, thanks, and have tried the obvious things. Hoping @TheresNoTime will take a look. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 13:07, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks from me as well. This is Paul (talk) 14:41, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

@This is Paul, Skilgis1900, Derek R Bullamore, and Redalert2fan: it is working again now - can't say why! Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 17:13, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Hate to report bad news. I used it once an hour ago and it worked perfectly. Then I went to use it again moments ago and it is now back to "pending: waiting for an available worker" status.Skilgis1900 (talk) 21:00, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

I used it last at 20:47 UTC, then tried to do something else at 21:00 and it was kaput. Hopefully it rights itself again. This is Paul (talk) 21:08, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

I just used it again and it's working fine now. This is Paul (talk) 22:14, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

deadurl parameter

Why is this tool still using the deadurl parameter instead of url-status? I can see that it was changed in the GitHub repository last year, but it still creating the deprecated parameter. What needs to be done to get the code rolled out to the tool? —Ost (talk) 19:49, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

@Ost316: The project needs volunteer developers, with skills in the tech stack. If you fit the bill, please volunteer! Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 07:18, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Did we finish merging githubs and merging git branches? I think it might be a bit hard to deploy and do open source collaboration until those two housekeeping tasks are done. I have PRs open for those tasks if someone wants to review them: 261, 262, 263. –Novem Linguae (talk) 08:12, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

@Novem Linguae: That is still outstanding. I'm not comfortable doing it - needs someone who knows what they're doing! @TheresNoTime:? Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 08:22, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

@Curb Safe Charmer and Novem Linguae: I am willing to volunteer to help with support for this, but unfortunately I need to learn more about how to do that. I created a Toolsforge account years ago with the intention of learning how to maintain or develop tools, but I never got far in the process. Even looking those linked tasks got me confused about the branches; I'm unclear which one(s) are being hosted or used for the gadgets. In my Tools menu, I have "reFill 2 New!" and "reFill" which appear to have different URLS, but they both take me to the same "ng" URL when I use them. I also have "(o)", which opens an interface similar to the old options, and which also runs in the "ng" URL. I think I would need a tutorial or diagram to explain the branches, application structure, and support model. —Ost (talk) 19:37, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

I have some patches that, once merged, will put everything in one branch and one repo. There will be a couple folders in the root directory of the repo. One will be the old version, one will be the rewritten version (NG), and one will be some config stuff. Both versions appear to be deployed (the old version at https://refill.toolforge.org/ and the new version at https://refill.toolforge.org/ng). Once that's done, it will be much easier to reason about this software. I don't think we're too concerned about the user scripts. I think we're mainly concerned with the web tool itself (front end, back end, API). Sounds like the stack is PHP for the old version, and JavaScript Vue & Python for the new version.

Some open questions...

• When were the last deploys? And how out of sync are they with the GitHub repos? In what direction are they out of sync? (e.g. are there changes that never made it into git deployed on Toolforge?)
• Having two ReFills doesn't make sense in the long run. Double the maintenance, double the patches. Which version is in better shape?

–Novem Linguae (talk) 04:18, 6 June 2024 (UTC)