User talk:Saris Milley

This is Saris Milley's talk page, where you can send them 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. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Your submission at Articles for creation: Syngastes twynami has been accepted

Syngastes twynami, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

–Novem Linguae (talk) 05:19, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Couple things for future drafts. 1) Don't forget to hit the "Submit" button to get it in the AFC queue. I happened to stumble across this one a different way and decide it was ready, but normally you will not get a review if it is not submitted. 2) Please look into inline citations. Every paragraph should ideally have an inline citation. You can place these using <ref></ref> tags. WP:ILC. Hope that helps. Happy editing. –Novem Linguae (talk) 05:24, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! :) I just wasn't quite done editing it (there is an issue with the infobox Genus template that I need to fix), and I was just about to put in the citations! I'll do that stuff right away!! Saris Milley (talk) 07:01, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think I fixed the infobox issue by creating Template:Taxonomy/Syngastes. You can click edit source on that page to see the wikicode I used. If you end up creating a lot of those in the future, I have a user script that can help with this. –Novem Linguae (talk) 13:15, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have a favor to ask. Can you add an inline citation to every paragraph when you get a chance? On reflection, I probably shouldn't have approved the draft without citations, since we usually draftify those for violating WP:V. If we can get citations added, it should solve the issue. –Novem Linguae (talk) 03:47, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!

I was just about to message you!!

I was trying to put in the inline citations yesterday but they were overwriting the citations that you put into the infobox (and I couldn't figure out what was happening with the code). Should I just remove the citations that you put in and put them inline in the main text? (I have a couple more to add as well).

Also, on a personal note, I looked through a bunch of the work you've done with your scripts and what not, and I want to say thank you for everything that you do here. I just want you to know that you are appreciated.

Hope you're having a good day! :)

Cheers,

Saris Saris Milley (talk) 00:45, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A little more info - I thought about just adding the inline citations anyways since it has to be done, but wasn't sure if you wanted to see the problem I mentioned above (I imagined you would probably have to delete the inline citations to reproduce it, if you're not already aware of it). Saris Milley (talk) 00:48, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just want you to know that you are appreciated. Thank you very much for the kind words.

The references in the infobox are in a different part of the article than the unreferenced paragraphs. It should be possible to just leave those infobox references alone in both the wikitext editor or the visual editor, and they won't get deleted.

In both editors, if you want to copy those citations, you can click on them and ctrl-c to copy, then ctrl-v to the spot you want to paste.

If you want to add new citations, in the wikitext editor, just add <ref>https://test.com/</ref> references. In the visual editor, click on the "Cite" button in the toolbar., then the first tab, paste a URL, click generate, then finish inserting.

Hope that helps. Thanks. –Novem Linguae (talk) 03:20, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I should've been more clear but was trying to be brief - I've learned more about the 'bug' that I was seeing, I'm wondering if it's something you might actually be able to work on!

I'm capable with adding and editing citations in both visual and source and have added quite a few to other articles (I have a PhD from a good school and have done a ton of coding so I'm pretty comfortable with that stuff).

The problem was the following:

-You had inserted two citations in the infobox, and their corresponding references showed up in the References list;

-I would add an inline citation (or I would try to copy and paste one of the two that you inserted into the main text);

-That action would clear the references in the References list and only list that one reference that was inline in the main text of the article (I'm not sure what you call that - the 'edit space'? - the editing page preview before clicking Publish). As you said, those citations are in a different 'part' of the article and don't appear in the 'preview';

-I just learned that clicking Publish would update the References list so that all three would show up, but it was not automatic in the 'edit space', like they usually are.

To reiterate, the point is that the typical behaviour of references when adding citations to the main text is that they update in real time in the References list after they are inserted, and before the page is published - but this was not the behaviour of the page with the citations in the infobox (which is what I expected, so I didn't know what to do!).

I didn't want to publish the page and screw up the citations that you had put in and trigger some kind of automatic revert or something (I am still relatively new to Wikipedia but learning fast).

Is there a way that you can have the main Wiki code update (refresh/purge/whatever) ALL the references on the page to the References list immediately after any citation has been added, but before the page is published? (just like when citations are added to the main text?).

Hopefully this is understandable, maybe it's even a well-known bug/behaviour. Please feel free to ask any questions (I also haven't looked into posting this into any sort of bug report, but I could also do that). It's a subtle one, but it was enough to throw me off!

Thanks again Novem! Saris Milley (talk) 04:37, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It should be easy to fix because it should just copy the same behaviour as when the 'Publish' button is pushed, so the function with the correct code is already in the source code there somewhere. Saris Milley (talk) 04:41, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there. Yeah, Visual Editor is a powerful WYSIWYG editor, but it has bugs. Looks like you found some. Just now and based on your report and my testing, I filed phab:T405155 and phab:T405156 in our bug tracker. T405155 probably already exists in the bug tracker somewhere since I've noticed that before, but I couldn't find it when I searched. Someone with more knowledge of that repo will come along and merge it into the correct task. You can log into Phab with your Wikipedia account and "subscribe" to those two tickets if you'd like emails when people comment on them.

But yeah. Just work around it by adding your references anyway. Even though they're getting "deleted" in the preview, they're being kept when you submit. It's the "references" section preview that is malfunctioning -- the citation code is being left alone and is undamaged/not deleted. Hope that helps. –Novem Linguae (talk) 05:15, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for filing the bug reports, I checked them out! I just played with it for an hour and it wasn't working well at all.

I added the inline citations to every paragraph, but I ended up just deleting the ones from the infobox, they were colliding with the main text ones - they weren't numbering properly, they wouldn't show up in 'Re-use', and I couldn't figure out how to reuse them with copy and paste or any other way without causing errors or having them show up twice in the References list.

I hope you're ok with me deleting them! The name and synonyms are discussed and cited in the main text so I'm sure it's alright.

I think it's fully cited so I also removed the maintenance template, I hope that's ok too! Can you please just take a look and make sure everything is all good.

Thanks again, you're awesome! Hope we get a chance to work on something together again.

Enjoy the rest of the weekend!! :) Saris Milley (talk) 06:03, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In the future, you can do duplicate citations, and a WP:GNOME will be along at some point to clean them up. There's some syntax for reusing citations in the wikicode editor. But I think your solution of deleting them is fine in this case. I just mention the other way to give you more options for next time.

Yeap, removing the maintenance template is correct. I was also going to remove it after you edits.

I'm kind of glad I messed up by approving your draft too early since we got to work together. You seem like you'll be a great addition to Wikipedia if you stick around. Welcome.

I'll be around. Ping me or drop a message on my user talk if you ever need anything. Have a great weekend. –Novem Linguae (talk) 06:39, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's funny how that type of serendipity happens, thank you for the welcome! I'm really happy we connected too.

I'm sure a lot of people come into Wikipedia with good intentions and don't stick around - I have a list of at least twenty articles I'd like to write (some of them pretty high impact), and I've dedicated myself to spending an hour or two a day here over at least the next year, working on all of it and learning as much as I can (my work is also super busy but it gives me flexibility, and I'm good at getting stuff done). I'm really interested, so hopefully I'll develop some good habits and be around for awhile past that.

Again, I have a ton of respect for all the work you've done here, it's really impressive. I'll be able to help out with NPP and what not at some point when I'm ready - I'm already reading through the NPP School material and I can probably work on counter-vandalism (I have ~200 edits and am comfortable finding my way around). I also like to develop automated tools so I'll probably be able to help write scripts. I think Wikipedia is one of the greatest resources in the world, so I'm excited to have opportunities to contribute.

I'm sure you're busy too, if you're interested in a mentorship role I'd be happy to chat about that (I saw the 'adopt' program and what not, it can even just be informal and casual like what we have going, you've already been really welcoming and helpful). Let me know what your thoughts are on that (feel free to email too), and no worries if you've already got too much happening! Either way I'll be in touch if I see things come up that might interest you.

Cheers,

S. Saris Milley (talk) 00:55, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I'm happy to mentor you. Ask me questions anytime.

The open source movement is really cool, and Wikipedia is part of it. Everything is so transparent, so you can learn a lot just by reading, and also jump right into helping.

Wikipedia in particular is really exciting to a nerd like me because it has both the encyclopedia side and the programming side. I certainly never get bored around here (or I should say, when I do get mildly bored, it's effortless to switch the type of activity I focus on since there's so much breadth).

What programming languages are you familiar with? We use a lot of LAMP stack around here (PHP, JavaScript, HTML, CSS, SQL), and that happens to be what I made websites in when I was a teenager, so Wikipedia technical stuff has been a really great fit for me. User scripts (WP:US/G) are a great place to start when you get to that phase (although I imagine you'll focus on article writing for awhile before you dive into that rabbit hole). Hehe.

Also, it's really cool to hear you have a Ph.D. Subject matter experts are great. Wikipedia kind of has a layered defense against poor quality edits, and the inner layer is subject matter experts who have key pages in their subject on their WP:WATCHLIST.

P.S. Do anti-vandalism before NPP. NPP is kind of hard because you have to master notability. Anti-vandalism is pretty easy and is a good entry level task. You can apply for rollbacker at some point once you get some basic anti-vandalism experience, which will unlock the good anti-vandalism tools such as WP:HUGGLE.

P.P.S. Consider joining WP:DISCORD if you ever want a more informal chatting environment than onwiki. –Novem Linguae (talk) 01:36, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!

Hope you're awesome!! :)

I finished another article and just moved it to mainspace: Syngastes

It's the genus of the last one so it was pretty straightforward.

Can you please review it quick if you have a minute!

I haven't used Discord, I was hoping to set that up so we could chat more - the last month has been super busy! I will definitely try to do that soon so we can connect more informally.

Enjoy the rest of the weekend!

S. Saris Milley (talk) 05:51, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not as good at genus articles as species articles. But on a quick spot check, looks fine. Now we can let crowd sourcing kick in, and I'm sure some random editors will swing by the article to add categories, add maintenance tags, make copy edits, etc. Nice work! –Novem Linguae (talk) 06:57, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]