User talk:Novem Linguae/Scripts/CiteHighlighter

Make colours lighter

Hi, I really like this script, it's really helpful! I have a minor concern about the colours. They are currently a little bit to dark and make the references hard to read, and have a few accesibility concerns. Have you considered making them lighter? If you don't want to, would you mind if I forked the script to change the colours?​ — Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 16:47, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Berrely. Hey there. Thanks for the feedback. I don't think forking this would be a good idea. I don't have the source list set up as a separate file, so it would quickly get out of date. I went ahead and added a way to trigger lighter colors. Add window.citeHighlighterLighterColors = true; to the top of your common.js file. If you want me to tweak any of the colors, let me know. You can use Google's color picker to let me know what shade you want (the "hex" number is what I need). Hope that helps. –Novem Linguae (talk) 02:15, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Lulu.com

This is a self-publishing site, probably needs to be highlighted as generally unreliable. —valereee (talk) 14:36, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Valereee. Added. Thanks for the tip. Feel free to post tips anytime. –Novem Linguae (talk) 00:01, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

P.S. Looks like lulu.com was already included in CiteHighlighter, since it is in WP:NPPSG, and the highlighter grabs data from there. But still, keep em coming :) –Novem Linguae (talk) 00:05, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Dammit, this is the second time I've wasted someone else's time today lol... —valereee (talk) 00:27, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

issuu.com

isssuu is a publishing platform, so each publication that uses it should be considered by itself, rather than as a group. Vexations (talk) 19:57, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

@Vexations.  Fixed. Thanks. –Novem Linguae (talk) 01:07, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

feature request

maybe this could support the citation style used in articles such as Ike for President (advertisement) and C. J. Cregg? (also, I greatly appreciate the needle/haystack variable :D clever clever) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 04:26, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

@Theleekycauldron. Thanks, I'm glad you like the code. Good feature suggestion. I'm a bit busy with work this week but I'll try to circle back to this. Feel free to remind me in a week or two. Thanks! –Novem Linguae (talk) 05:40, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

gotcha! no worries, I'll remind ya :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 07:26, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

@Theleekycauldron.  Done. Thanks for suggesting. Unfortunately CiteHighlighter doesn't highlight most books, but this feature will be useful for things like C. J. Cregg#Articles and tweets –Novem Linguae (talk) 15:04, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

What is the best way to add for example Swedish sites? Javascript questions. All scientific journals.

Let's say we want to add the references in this Swedish list and many other Swedish sources to this list, what is the best way? I guess you don't want us to fork the script to our own copy?

Another question: Would it be possible to make this nice script visible outside of the main name space (in non-articles)? For testing and demonstration purposes.

A third question: Many scientific journals have Danish Bibliometric Research Indicator level (P1240) journal rank (score 1, 2 or 3 based on journal impact factor/citation analysis) at Wikidata on my initiative. For example Nature (Q180445) has score 3 out of three. I suggest that all three scores should be dark green - not only medical journals. In non-medicin fields, secondary/meta studies are typically not required. Many of the scientific publications also have other types of scores in review score (P444) that may be useful.SHould the list of scores be imported manually into this list, or should it be imported automatically from Wikidata? Tomastvivlaren (talk) 21:07, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

@Tomastvivlaren. Hey there. Good questions.

1) I would love to use WP:RSPs from other Wikipedias as a dictionary for CiteHighlighter. The best way to help with this is to create a page on wiki somewhere (such as in your userspace) in the same format as WP:NPPSG, that is, with ;Reliable or ;No consensus or ;Unreliable on a line to indicate the reliability, then * [1] on a line below it to indicate the website. Then let me know and I can import it into CiteHighlighter using an offline tool I made.

2) Yes, you can have CiteHighlighter highlight more aggressively by adding window.citeHighlighterHighlightEverything = true; to the top of your common.js. May increase lag on some pages though.

3) CiteHighlighter currently analyzes journals (and everything) solely based on domain name (e.g. nature.com). It doesn't look at journal name, ISSN, etc. I do like this line of thinking though. If you can find a way to generate a list of high quality journal's domain names, I am happy to add it to CiteHighlighter. For pulling stuff from Wikidata, https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:ApiSandbox or https://query.wikidata.org/ would probably be the way to go. –Novem Linguae (talk) 15:17, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

KXRR bug

Hi again! Thanks for tackling my previous thing :) The program seems to be throwing a red flag for worldradiohistory.com over at KXRR, despite the source not being listed in the program – what's going on there? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 22:24, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

@Theleekycauldron. Hey there. Unable to reproduce. Perhaps a different user highlighter is highlighting that one, such as unreliable or CiteUnseen? Screenshot. –Novem Linguae (talk) 23:22, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

@Novem Linguae: I don't have either of those – strangely, it doesn't show in the "references" section for me, but it does show up in the tooltips... theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 23:28, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

Unable to reproduce with your common.js loaded. Screenshot. Any other hints? –Novem Linguae (talk) 23:40, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

@Novem Linguae: If that's the case, it's probably something client-side – thanks for digging into it anyway! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 01:04, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

Interface-protected page edit request

Line 60 contains an error; colors should be this.colors. See GH#135. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 03:31, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

PR accepted and deployed. Thanks for reporting and for writing a patch. No need to use interface administrator edit request in the future for user scripts with active maintainers, I'll just edit it :) –Novem Linguae (talk) 04:28, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

The script is highlighting

Tracked in github.com
Issue #146

I was looking at draft:Creepy Nuts and I think the script highlights one of the headers in the contents. Image example link: https://imgur.com/a/W6BXZYq BhamBoi (talk) 18:02, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

 Fixed –Novem Linguae (talk) 12:46, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Tracked in github.com
Issue #147

Another weird problem, at w:Draft:Me_vs._Myself#References, there is a highlighted link within a differently-highlighted ref... Example image: https://imgur.com/a/Y4S1eCV BhamBoi (talk) 19:11, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Probably  Fixed by patch above –Novem Linguae (talk) 12:46, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Script seems to highlight random things sometimes

Tracked in github.com
Issue #148

When viewing this for some reason the script will highlight the following things: the Draft assessment icon, the pagieviews link, the full page statistics link, the links to view the current and prior revision, the edit button on both revisions, the undo button, my talk page and the IPs talk page, the rollback button, the previous edit button, and the changes since my last edit button (as well as the "welcome" button from Twinkle).On the draft the script will also highlight the center of the image (presumably where the link would be if it weren't displaying the image). All of these are highlighted in orange. This doesn't happen on every article either. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 21:00, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

It also appears to highlight the "improve it" link in the maintenance template as well as the "talk page" link in the same template. I dunno what the hell is going on here, but I"ve noticed that the script really seems to enjoy highlighting whatever the hell it feels like. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 21:02, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Happening to me too when I click on your link. Maybe related to my previous report one talk section above. BhamBoi (talk) 04:30, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

 Fixed –Novem Linguae (talk) 12:54, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

McClatchy

Should all of McClatchy's newspapers be added as RS? Every time it's mentioned briefly on RSN, its saying it's not unreliable, but maybe a little bit more consensus should be reached and/or only the News Agency and not their subsidiary papers should be added? BhamBoi (talk) 04:36, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

The standard used at WP:NPPSG, where CiteHighlighter gets a lot of our sources from, is RSN discussions with at least 2 participants. Are there any RSN discussions with at least 2 participants stating something like "all McClatchy newspapers" are reliable? At first glance, looks like a pretty standard WP:NEWSORG so is probably reliable, but would like to see it at WP:RSN to make it official. –Novem Linguae (talk) 13:02, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Distinction between GU and Depreciated/Blacklisted?

I feel as though it's an important distinction between the quality, same as the light green/dark green distinction. DecafPotato (talk) 05:56, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

Unreliable, deprecated, and blacklisted have a lot in common though. They shouldn't normally be used, they don't pass WP:GNG, etc. –Novem Linguae (talk) 09:33, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Digital Trends

Digital Trends is currently highlighted in Orange (see Draft:The Crew Motorfest) however WP:VG/S shows that it's reliable based on 2 discussions. This should be changed to be highlighted in green. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:50, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf. Howdy! That one is getting highlighted orange because it has the spammy keyword "announce" in the URL. Orange highlights can override the other colors, and it means a spammy keyword was found in a particular URL. I think if you check some other Digital Trends cites, you'll find they are highlighted normally. Do you think "announce" has enough false positives that I should remove it? –Novem Linguae (talk) 06:57, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Probably. Especially regarding video games since usually "announce" is referring to a new video game. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 12:00, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

The Philadelphia Inquirer

inquirer.com should be treated as generally reliable, I assume? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 22:09, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

@Theleekycauldron. Howdy! I try to only add sources to CiteHighlighter after they've had a discussion at RSN, or they show up on a semi-vetted list of sources such as WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG, or a WikiProject source list. While inquirer.com looks pretty reliable and WP:NEWSORG-ish at first glance, do you know if it meets the criteria I just mentioned? If it does I'll be happy to add it. –Novem Linguae (talk) 07:00, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

it doesn't, but The Philadelphia Inquirer is basically a run-of-the-mill major U.S. newspaper, and the paper of record in its area (including parts of South Jersey). I don't think it was something that ever really needed discussion, it's just treated like an RS. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 18:49, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Sounds good. Will add in the next update. Thanks. –Novem Linguae (talk) 17:47, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

More sources to add

@Novem Linguae I listed some unreliable sources at add to this script at User:137a/sandbox/sources. 137a (talk • edits) 16:09, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Hey @137a. Thanks for making this list. Looks good. I don't have much time right now. If you want you can do the following, and after you make the changes, I will run a script that updates CiteHighlighter:

• Add any of the sources on your list with an RSN consensus of at least 2 people to WP:NPPSG, copying the format there (include the domain, ref to the RSN discussion, put in correct country/topic section, put in correct reliable/no consensus/unreliable subsection, etc.)
• Add any of the sources on your list without an RSN consensus to User:Novem Linguae/Scripts/CiteHighlighter/AllSourcesExceptNPPSG, copying the format there (include the domain, put in correct reliable/no consensus/unreliable subsection, etc.)
  • Maybe make your own heading called "== 137a's Miscellaneous ==" at the very bottom. You can include your "overrides" of existing colors there, along with redice.tv, vk.net, gamepedia.com, etc.
  • You can use "; Reliable" "; No consensus" "; Unreliable" "; News aggregator" followed by a series of bullets to set their reliability level.
  • Feel free to leave comments for all your entries. * [https://abc.com/] comment goes here

Good idea on "essay". I will add that to CiteHighlighter's code.

Note to self: Update the code so that if there are duplicate entries, only the last entry is actually added to the dictionary. That should get 137a's overrides working without having to hard-code a bunch of stuff.

Maybe ping me when you're done with that and I will run the update script. How's that sound? –Novem Linguae (talk) 17:46, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

@Novem Linguae

I added a few sources to your subpage (one was blacklisted), and some to NPPSG. I might have more.

[2] 137a (talk • edits) 17:30, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Would you mind moving any that have an RSN consensus with at least 2 participants to NPPSG? That's a better spot for them. –Novem Linguae (talk) 22:36, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

science.org

As you probably know, Science is a top-tier academic journal and is likely okay to be listed here considering is it on WP:NPPSG. But the link added to the highlighter is sciencemag.org, which is the outdated URL and now a redirect to science.org. Please add the new URL. Thanks! BhamBoi (talk) 04:03, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

 Fixed by editing Wikipedia:New page patrol source guide. Diff. Feel free to fix URLs on this page yourself if you see any other broken ones. –Novem Linguae (talk) 21:12, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Also, what about the URL for Wired UK? BhamBoi (talk) 18:47, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

 Fixed by adding the URL to NPPSG in this diff. Again, feel free to add URLs yourself if you catch any more. –Novem Linguae (talk) 21:16, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

thoughtco

thoughtco should be yellow, not green. it falls under dotdash (about.com). lettherebedarklight晚安 08:00, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

@Lettherebedarklight. Thanks. Feel free to update its entry at WP:NPPSG, which is where CiteHighlighter is getting this rating from. –Novem Linguae (talk) 09:03, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

add user-review as suspicious word

Some otherwise-reliable websites let users post reviews about video games and movies, stuff life that. Here is an example. 137a (talk • edits) 16:11, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

 Done. Thank for the idea. –Novem Linguae (talk) 09:19, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

also add "viewtopic" since it is used in some forum URLs. 137a (talk • edits) 17:15, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

 Done –Novem Linguae (talk) 18:26, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

Source lists

Hey Novem, have you added the links from here? Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources#Topic-specific pages BhamBoi (talk) 17:25, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Hello! I think I have most of those either in CiteHighlighter or on my todo list, but I see at least one there that I haven't found before. So thank you for pointing this out. Also, I can only use lists with reliability ratings. –Novem Linguae (talk) 19:19, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Does this work in other language versions of wiki?

Hey, I edit in French Wikipedia as well, this would be a useful tool there, does the script work on other language versions of wiki? Oaktree b (talk) 01:27, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Oaktree b. I checked just now and it works on testwiki. Looks like I added this feature on some point. Try adding importScript('en:User:Novem Linguae/Scripts/CiteHighlgihter.js'); to your common.js. –Novem Linguae (talk) 14:02, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

cool, thanks! Oaktree b (talk) 14:38, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Press releases on AP site

The AP's site is generally highlighted green, however press releases (under the pattern apnews.com/press-release/pr-newswire/), such as [3], should probably note be. LittlePuppers (talk) 01:48, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

 Fixed. Although this will increase the false positive rate for orange highlighting. I may roll it back if I get complaints. Thanks for the idea. –Novem Linguae (talk) 05:14, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

I got complaints, so I rolled it back. –Novem Linguae (talk) 04:54, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

Kirkus Reviews marked red

Hello, I noticed that Kirkus Reviews has been marked red on articles despite WP:KIRKUS suggesting that it is generally reliable. Thank you for this great tool! ⇒ Lucie Person (talk|contribs) 01:55, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Looks like it's mostly green, but has some paid reviews that are considered red. I'll average it out to yellow in the next release. Thanks for reporting. –Novem Linguae (talk) 02:07, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

the guardian marked yellow

hi, the guardian is marked yellow despite rsp and nppsg saying it is reliable. ltbdl (talk) 02:21, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

At RSP, there's a "Guardian Blogs" right below the Guardian that is marked yellow. That's the reason for The Guardian being yellow. I think they both use the same domain name. –Novem Linguae (talk) 10:56, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

is it possible to switch it to green? ltbdl (talk) 06:32, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Bug report

Hi! I'm not sure why, but Politico is not highlighted by CH. It has an entry at WP:RSPSS. I noticed this on this article. Other sources are still appropriately highlighted. Actualcpscm (talk) 15:52, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Sources to Highlight

Hello Novem Linguae, thank you for writing this script 🙏, as an AfC reviewer (and formerly NPR) and an editor who works heavily on music, I noticed the script does not recognize roughly 98% of the sources listed under WP:RSMUSIC (it highlights Billboard and maybe few others), and also marks Rolling Stone as marginally reliable or no census.
Could you please adjust the script to recognize the reliable sources and of course unreliable source listed under RSMUSIC, thank you. dxneo (talk) 13:23, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

Hey Dxneo. Looks like I already have WP:RSMUSIC in CiteHighlighter, but I did it a year or two ago so it got out of date. RSMUSIC looks like it has the websites in a format that will be easy to add. I'll try to do an update after lunch :) –Novem Linguae (talk) 21:34, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you Novem Linguae, if you can, please notify me when it is done. Can't wait. dxneo (talk) 21:51, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Dxneo. Updated. Give it a try now. –Novem Linguae (talk) 07:25, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Perfection Thank you. dxneo (talk) 19:31, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Novem Linguae, sorry to disturb but I think as much as Billboard is a "chart site", news publishing site, and green source, maybe The Official South African Charts (launched by RiSA) should also be highlighted as they release news and is also a "chart site" and sources listed here. dxneo (talk) 00:39, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

TimesLIVE and IOL

Hello NL, I've just noticed that the above mentioned domains are now highlighted yellow (from green), is there something I'm missing? dxneo (talk) 05:47, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

@Dxneo. Looks like TimesLIVE and IOL are yellow over at Wikipedia:Reliable South African Sources, but green at WP:NPPSG. NPPSG cites Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 418#South African sources.

Thoughts on how to reconcile? Do you want to try boldly editing Wikipedia:Reliable South African Sources and moving those sources from no consensus to reliable, linking to Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 418#South African sources? Or maybe start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Reliable South African Sources and ping the list's maintainer, TapticInfo? Up to you.

As long as those sources are on two lists, CiteHighlighter will pick the lowest reliability as a precaution. –Novem Linguae (talk) 03:36, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Novem Linguae, I think running it through TapticInfo is the better option. However, I think consensus reached by various editors is better than that decided by one person as I see no discussions on the project's talk page. dxneo (talk) 00:46, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Billboard and other sources

Moved from User talk:Novem Linguae § Billboard and other sources

 – –Novem Linguae (talk) 20:57, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi Novem Linguae, I took a deeper look at Billboard sites that were added to your script and found Brazil is owned by Penske (same as US) so is under the same editorial board ("While Billboard takes on editorial claims...") but the others are brand licensing agreements with different ownership: Japan (see bottom right), Argentina, Arabia. Looking at WP:CHARTS, Billboard Japan, Brazil and Argentina are listed but not Arabia. Just an FYI, Forbes is another one that has licensing agreements to use their name. It appears the script only lists Forbes.com but something to be aware of.

As for the ones from WP:WikiProject Africa/Africa Sources List, I noticed this discussion back in 2021 where a couple editors urged caution because it was not clear they had gone through any discussion. Looking at now, it appears to be a mixed bag. S0091 (talk) 15:07, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

I formally request you remove any changes/additions to your script you implemented that were directly made by now CU blocked I'm tla. S0091 (talk) 19:51, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

 Done. Too much work to check them all, so best to just remove them. –Novem Linguae (talk) 21:09, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Pakistani sources

Hello - The Express Tribune tribune.com.pk is marked in orange, but it’s actually a RS. It's the Pakistani partner of the NYT. Can it be switched to green, please? Thank you! — Saqib (talk) 13:32, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Also The Friday Times thefridaytimes.com is also a reputable RS. --Saqib (talk) 13:35, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Hey @Saqib. CiteHighlighter gets its ratings from various reliable sources lists onwiki, which are usually the summary of consensuses somewhere such as WP:RSN or WikiProject talk pages. In the case of tribune.com.pk, that comes from Wikipedia:New page patrol source guide#Pakistan, which itself comes from Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 423#The Express Tribune. I don't see thefridaytimes.com in CiteHighlighter at all.

Anyway, long story short, to get a source changed in CiteHighlighter, it should be done with a discussion downstream, that then results in one of the lists CiteHighlighter uses getting updated. Hope that makes sense. –Novem Linguae (talk) 17:17, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Novem Linguae, Noted. But if that is the case, tribune.com.pk should be marked yellow, not orange because [no consensus] and bolnews.com should be marked in red, but it is not. —  Saqib (talk | contribs) 21:37, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

#1 is correctly showing as yellow for me. Any regular citation can turn orange if that particular url has a suspicious word in it such as blog. #2 is correctly showing as no color for me, which is the default. –Novem Linguae (talk) 22:04, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Novem Linguae, But don't you think #2 should show as red. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 22:09, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Has there been a discussion about its reliability somewhere? –Novem Linguae (talk) 22:13, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Novem Linguae, Bol News at Wikipedia:New page patrol source guide#Pakistan. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 22:14, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Please add dark mode support ?

Hi @Novem Linguae! Dark mode support is rolling out shortly! Could you modify this script to work with it? I think the quickest way to do this is by adding the notheme class whenever you add the classes cite-highlighter-red, cite-highlighter-yellow etc.. Let me know if I can help in any way! Jon (WMF) (talk) 22:30, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

 Done. Adding notheme changed the foreground text color from white to black, which seems like an improvement. –Novem Linguae (talk) 10:07, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

www.panarmenian.net

Hi! I've come here from Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#panarmenian.net. As far as I can see there has been no community consensus to declare this source unreliable. Unless I'm missing something, could you remove this source from the script's list of unreliable sources? Alaexis_¿question? 22:02, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

https://panarmenian.net is currently highlighted as yellow for "no consensus". The source for this is WP:NPPSG, which analyzed 2 RSN discussions about it. Please see Wikipedia:New page patrol source guide#Armenia, citations 57 and 58. With that in mind, do you still think I need to take action here? –Novem Linguae (talk) 06:33, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Marking WP:RFD as a "slow page"

Hi Novem - firstly, apologies for being in your notifications so much recently! I just wanted to ask if Redirects for Discussion could be added to the list of marked "slow pages" in the isSlowPage() method of this script. From my testing it looks like because of the behemoth size of the RFD main page the script is running for about 4 seconds which is causing a bit of a slowdown, and most of the time there aren't many source links for this script to check on there anyway (and when there are, we're often just checking for term usage rather than traditional reliability). Thanks! BugGhost🦗👻 13:44, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

 Done. Easy to code so that was nice. Hope it helps! –Novem Linguae (talk) 20:49, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

Nice, feels much faster now - thanks Novem! BugGhost🦗👻 22:35, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

music.apple.com

Should definitely not be green, for the same reasons spotify.com is red (see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums/Archive 64 § Spotify as primary source for release date and labels. I would say the best way to resolve this inconsistency is to remove apple.com from the JSON altogether– note also that discussions.apple.com is unreliable as user generated Mach61 04:29, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Apple Music is considered reliable when referencing set lists, release dates, and credits and personnel as it is way more detailed compared Spotify. Apple Music staff (Zane Lowe) interviews artists. Maybe that's why it is green and honestly I think it's better that way. (only my opinion). dxneo (talk) 05:24, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

@Dxneo Even if we believe that music.apple.com is vetting all it's artists (which I find a bit dubious due to the existence of DistroKid), it is still a listing of the song and nothing more, so it's usability to prove notability is dubious. I would support making it yellow (instead of green). I assume the greenness is due to apple.com's usage in multiple FAs as a primary source for details about their products. Sohom (talk) 16:06, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

DistroKid is a distributor, literally everyone is distributing their music via their "DistroKid alternatives." I don't quite understand the meaning behind mentioning the distributor. However, for apple.com, marking it as unreliable (red) is really not the way to go. dxneo (talk) 17:33, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

@Dxneo The statement that Apple Music vets and interviews all it's artists is at odds with existence of distributors like DistroKid which put up music on platforms like Apple Music and Spotify simultaneously without any active involvement of the artist with the said platforms. Surely, for the majority of the songs uploaded to apple Music, the strict verification is not done? Sohom (talk) 19:16, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Apple.com is green because it's used in a lot of FAs. Some of the greens on the list are harvested from sources very common in FAs and not on any other lists. You can take a look at these by visiting User:Novem Linguae/Scripts/CiteHighlighter/AllSourcesExceptNPPSG and searching for "Featured article sources". –Novem Linguae (talk) 19:26, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

@Novem Linguae I wonder if we can do a strict comparison for apple.com, i.e. only make apple.com green but not it's subdomains like music.apple.com and/or discussions.apple.com ? Sohom (talk) 00:37, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

The script doesn't currently support subdomains having a different rating than domains. If this comes up a lot, I guess we could think about patching it. But I'm not sure it comes up that much –Novem Linguae (talk) 04:23, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Bug with .us domain

Regarding Kodansha USA which the domain contains is kodansha.us. Which is automatically tagged with orange. Also I hope you add the sources at Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and manga/Online reliable sources. This is a useful tool btw, great work. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 12:29, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

@Miminity. The only orange URL for me on that page is http://www.crunchyroll.com/anime-news/2014/10/12-1/vertical-announces-attack-on-titan-harsh-mistress-of-the-city-light-novel. Is this the URL you're talking about?

Orange means that a spammy word was detected somewhere in the URL. Orange can override every other color. So for example if the URL contains /blog/, it will turn orange, even if that domain is normally green.

Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and manga/Online reliable sources is already included, although the snapshot I'm using may be a year old. –Novem Linguae (talk) 19:48, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

@Novem Linguae: not the page itself but the url, I notice it while editing As a Reincarnated Aristocrat, I'll Use My Appraisal Skill to Rise in the World. the kodansha US source which is the source 1 is orange. Also regarding WP:A&M/RS, Anime News Network is not labeled at all. Also, I would like for you to add WP:TAMBAY/RS as well. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 01:09, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

https://kodansha.us/2022/03/23/april-fall-2022-licensing-announcements/ is orange because it contains "announcement", a spammy word.

I went ahead and fixed animenewsnetwork.com just now, which was yellow before but should be green.

Wikipedia:Tambayan Philippines/Sources looked promising at first, but I am concerned that it just labels every source as no consensus / additional considerations apply (yellow). This suggests to me that maybe someone just made a big list of sources but didn't know their classifications. –Novem Linguae (talk) 05:37, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Ahh Okay, Thanks Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 08:36, 29 October 2024 (UTC)