Open main menu
Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Leszek Manicki (WMDE)!

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 08:17, 26 June 2015 (UTC)


Code issues in User:Leszek Manicki (WMDE)/common.jsEdit

Hi Leszek Manicki (WMDE), I am a bored bot (this is kind of a computer program) that is watching the recent changes and tapping buttons like I did now.

Curious about the reason? Possibly not but I will tell you anyway:

  1. You edited User:Leszek Manicki (WMDE)/common.js. Glad to see you coding in javascript! Have you ever considered becoming a MediaWiki hacker?
  2. Though, that change appears to introduce 3 new jshint issues — the page's status is now having warnings. Note that invalid or ambiguous code often has unwanted side effects like breaking other tools for you. If you cannot find out how to fix it, I suggest blanking the page for now.
  3. To help you understanding where the issues are, I have aggregated a report here and now. If you have questions, don't hesitate to ask users experienced in javascript writing for help. But do not ask the bot's operators (chronically overwrought) unless you suspect an error of mine. If you prefer not getting spammed by me, you can opt-out reports by adding {{ValidationOptOut|type=all}} to your user page. Good luck at Wikimedia Commons and happy hacking!
  1. ISSUE: line 31 character 18: Expected a 'break' statement before 'default'. - Evidence: case 'en':
  2. ISSUE: line 91 character 12: Missing semicolon. - Evidence: } )
  3. ISSUE: line 103 character 23: Bad assignment. - Evidence: arguments = [arguments];
  4. ISSUE: line 103 character 25: Expected an operator and instead saw '['. - Evidence: arguments = [arguments];
  5. ISSUE: line 103 character 26: Missing semicolon. - Evidence: arguments = [arguments];
  6. ISSUE: line 103 character 35: Missing semicolon. - Evidence: arguments = [arguments];
  7. ISSUE: line 103 character 35: Expected an identifier and instead saw ']'. - Evidence: arguments = [arguments];
  8. ISSUE: line 112 character 37: ['status'] is better written in dot notation. - Evidence: } else if ( ajaxResponse['status'] == 'OK' ) {
  9. ISSUE: line 121 character 71: Missing semicolon. - Evidence: newSearchTerms = computeResponses( responses, newSearchTerms )
  10. ISSUE: line 132 character 54: ['userparam'] is better written in dot notation. - Evidence: userParameters = JSON.parse( responses[i]['userparam'] );
  11. ISSUE: line 135 character 32: ['negativeSearch'] is better written in dot notation. - Evidence: if ( userParameters['negativeSearch'] ) {
  12. ISSUE: line 138 character 67: ['result'] is better written in dot notation. - Evidence: newSearchTermString += 'incategory:id:' + responses[i]['result'].join( '|id:' );
  13. ISSUE: line 140 character 42: ['searchTermNum'] is better written in dot notation. - Evidence: newSearchTerms[userParameters['searchTermNum']] = newSearchTermString;
  14. ISSUE: line 151 character 51: ['userparam'] is better written in dot notation. - Evidence: userParameters = JSON.parse( errors[i]['userparam'] );
  15. ISSUE: line 170 character 42: ['searchTermNum'] is better written in dot notation. - Evidence: newSearchTerms[userParameters['searchTermNum']] = '';
  16. ISSUE: line 186 character 41: ['statusMessage'] is better written in dot notation. - Evidence: mw.log( "statusMessage: " + data['statusMessage'] );
  17. ISSUE: line 191 character 41: ['statusMessage'] is better written in dot notation. - Evidence: mw.log( "statusMessage: " + data['statusMessage'] );

Your CommonsMaintenanceBot (talk) at 09:53, 1 July 2015 (UTC).


Code issues in User:Leszek Manicki (WMDE)/common.jsEdit

Hi Leszek Manicki (WMDE), I am a bored bot (this is kind of a computer program) that is watching the recent changes and tapping buttons like I did now.

Curious about the reason? Possibly not but I will tell you anyway:

  1. You edited User:Leszek Manicki (WMDE)/common.js. Glad to see you coding in javascript! Have you ever considered becoming a MediaWiki hacker?
  2. Though, that change appears to introduce 2 new jshint issues — the page's status is now having warnings. Note that invalid or ambiguous code often has unwanted side effects like breaking other tools for you. If you cannot find out how to fix it, I suggest blanking the page for now.
  3. To help you understanding where the issues are, I have aggregated a report here and now. If you have questions, don't hesitate to ask users experienced in javascript writing for help. But do not ask the bot's operators (chronically overwrought) unless you suspect an error of mine. If you prefer not getting spammed by me, you can opt-out reports by adding {{ValidationOptOut|type=all}} to your user page. Good luck at Wikimedia Commons and happy hacking!
  1. ISSUE: line 171 character 12: Missing semicolon. - Evidence: } )
  2. ISSUE: line 186 character 23: Bad assignment. - Evidence: arguments = [arguments];
  3. ISSUE: line 186 character 25: Expected an operator and instead saw '['. - Evidence: arguments = [arguments];
  4. ISSUE: line 186 character 26: Missing semicolon. - Evidence: arguments = [arguments];
  5. ISSUE: line 186 character 35: Missing semicolon. - Evidence: arguments = [arguments];
  6. ISSUE: line 186 character 35: Expected an identifier and instead saw ']'. - Evidence: arguments = [arguments];
  7. ISSUE: line 195 character 37: ['status'] is better written in dot notation. - Evidence: } else if ( ajaxResponse['status'] == 'OK' ) {
  8. ISSUE: line 218 character 54: ['userparam'] is better written in dot notation. - Evidence: userParameters = JSON.parse( responses[i]['userparam'] );
  9. ISSUE: line 221 character 31: ['result'] is better written in dot notation. - Evidence: if ( !responses[i]['result'] || responses[i]['result'].length == 0) {
  10. ISSUE: line 221 character 57: ['result'] is better written in dot notation. - Evidence: if ( !responses[i]['result'] || responses[i]['result'].length == 0) {
  11. ISSUE: line 221 character 75: Use '===' to compare with '0'. - Evidence: if ( !responses[i]['result'] || responses[i]['result'].length == 0) {
  12. ISSUE: line 224 character 46: ['searchTermNum'] is better written in dot notation. - Evidence: newSearchTerms[userParameters['searchTermNum']] = '';
  13. ISSUE: line 227 character 32: ['negativeSearch'] is better written in dot notation. - Evidence: if ( userParameters['negativeSearch'] ) {
  14. ISSUE: line 230 character 67: ['result'] is better written in dot notation. - Evidence: newSearchTermString += 'incategory:id:' + responses[i]['result'].join( '|id:' );
  15. ISSUE: line 232 character 42: ['searchTermNum'] is better written in dot notation. - Evidence: newSearchTerms[userParameters['searchTermNum']] = newSearchTermString;
  16. ISSUE: line 248 character 51: ['userparam'] is better written in dot notation. - Evidence: userParameters = JSON.parse( errors[i]['userparam'] );
  17. ISSUE: line 271 character 42: ['searchTermNum'] is better written in dot notation. - Evidence: newSearchTerms[userParameters['searchTermNum']] = '';
  18. ISSUE: line 287 character 41: ['statusMessage'] is better written in dot notation. - Evidence: mw.log( 'statusMessage: ' + data['statusMessage'] );
  19. ISSUE: line 292 character 41: ['statusMessage'] is better written in dot notation. - Evidence: mw.log( 'statusMessage: ' + data['statusMessage'] );

Your CommonsMaintenanceBot (talk) at 10:01, 15 July 2015 (UTC).


Code issues in User:Leszek Manicki (WMDE)/common.cssEdit

Hi Leszek Manicki (WMDE), I am a bored bot (this is kind of a computer program) that is watching the recent changes and tapping buttons like I did now.

Curious about the reason? Possibly not but I will tell you anyway:

  1. You edited User:Leszek Manicki (WMDE)/common.css. Glad to see you coding in css! Have you ever considered becoming a MediaWiki hacker?
  2. Though, that change appears to introduce 2 new prettyCss issues — the page's status is now having warnings. Note that invalid or ambiguous code often has unwanted side effects like breaking other tools for you. If you cannot find out how to fix it, I suggest blanking the page for now.
  3. To help you understanding where the issues are, I have aggregated a report here and now. If you have questions, don't hesitate to ask users experienced in css writing for help. But do not ask the bot's operators (chronically overwrought) unless you suspect an error of mine. If you prefer not getting spammed by me, you can opt-out reports by adding {{ValidationOptOut|type=all}} to your user page. Good luck at Wikimedia Commons and happy hacking!
  1. WARNING: suggest-relative-unit:px: line 14 char number 22 - Evidence: 24px
  2. WARNING: suggest-relative-unit:px: line 19 char number 13 - Evidence: 1px
  3. WARNING: suggest-relative-unit:px: line 20 char number 16 - Evidence: 13px

Your CommonsMaintenanceBot (talk) at 10:02, 15 July 2015 (UTC).

Return to the user page of "Leszek Manicki (WMDE)".