I’d replace // // with // // , which is
what I add to all my user scripts. The use case is preventing things like
userSignature = “” from being rendered as the developer’s hard-coded
signature on page save.
Sincerely,
Novem Linguae
___
On Fri, Jun 9, 2023 at 9:13 AM Thiemo Kreuz
wrote:
> Both pages start with , which is a deprecated alias for
> . Replacing it with e.g. will remove the
> pages from the category.
>
Or just get rid of it. Adding a formatting tag was useful back in 2011 when
that page was created, because
As said there is no bug. The pages need to be updated.
___
Wikitech-l mailing list -- wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an email to wikitech-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
okay, thank you, with this I'll open a bug report. Do you know the
extension or software, that categorizes the mentioned pages?
Am Fr., 9. Juni 2023 um 10:46 Uhr schrieb Thiemo Kreuz <
thiemo.kr...@wikimedia.de>:
> Yea, that's really confusing. For consumers that read the page as
> JavaScript
Yea, that's really confusing. For consumers that read the page as
JavaScript the is in a comment, true. But the wikitext parser
doesn't know what JavaScript comments are. It ignores the // at the
start of the line. You can test this when you copy-paste the source
code from the .js page into a
Hi Thiemo,
it helps a little.
The most interesting thing is, that within the mentioned .js pages
is commented out. So it should not be read as deprecated alias, should it?
Thanks
Martin ...
Am Fr., 9. Juni 2023 um 09:13 Uhr schrieb Thiemo Kreuz <
thiemo.kr...@wikimedia.de>:
> Both pages
Both pages start with , which is a deprecated alias for
. Replacing it with e.g. will remove the
pages from the category.
Wait, you ask. We are talking about .js pages, don't we? There is not
wikitext. Still, for historical reasons, even .js pages are parsed by
the wikitext parser to populate
