Wikipedia

User talk:X!/Archives/03/2009

< User talk:X!
Latest comment: 15 years ago by Bencherlite in topic SoxBot II

Technology report

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I'm not sure I'll have time to complete the technology report. It now needs to be done by Sunday night (North America time) or early Monday UTC. If you (or Jake) are interested in writing it this week, please do and it would be appreciated. Otherwise, I can try to find some time. --Aude (talk) 13:20, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Done at User:X!/Post2. Xclamation point 04:16, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

WP:ALM newsletter

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Finished and ready to go. WesleyDodds (talk) 02:51, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Sent. Xclamation point 04:15, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
18:12, 1 March 2009 (UTC) The Helpful Bot 18:12, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Question about a deletion

Latest comment: 15 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

As I'm not a Wikipedian (or whatever the proper word is for those who know what they're doing at Wikipedia), I hope I'm putting this in the right place. Would have preferred to contact you via email, but looks like that's not an option?

I was notified by a bunch of readers over the weekend that the Wiki entry for myself (Brad Friedman of The BRAD BLOG) had been removed for some reason. In trying to figure out why, I was able to figure out that any such "deletion review" should begin with contacting whoever seemed to delete it, which seems to have been you. Hope I'm right (as mentioned, not a Wikepedian!)

Anyway, as they were flummoxed, so was I. In trying to figure out why that entry was deleted, I checked other colleagues of mine, who do similar work (Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo, Mike Malloy of The Mike Malloy Show, Cenk Uyger of The Young Turks Show, for example) and find them all still listed. So not clear why the article describing me had been removed.

As mentioned, I don't know much about Wiki or Wiki editing, etc., but I do know that a number of articles which concerned me, or stories that I either broke or was personally involved in, were among those that were edited by a number of the corporations and individuals found to have been gaming the Wikipedia a year or so ago. I'll hope that had nothing to do with whatever effort was taken to remove my entry, but I don't know.

There are many articles around Wiki which still link to "my" now-deleted page, as they refer to various stories that I was either personally involved in, broke in the media (on a blog, in a magazine, on TV or radio etc.), and yet the entry is now deleted for some reason.

If you are able to either explain the reasons for that, or walk me through/towards the "deletion review" process which, as I read it, is supposed to start with you first, I'd very much appreciate it.

All easier for me via email, if you're able, at Brad@BradBlog.com. If not, I can try to come back here to see if I can make heads and/or tails of things.

Appreciate your help and/or consideration (if only so that I can answer all the email I now seem to be getting about the entry where I was listed having been deleted for whatever reason. I'm sure it's no conspiracy, I'm just not sure why or what to tell folks about it, particulary, as I said, since it seems that many of my fellow colleagues -- journalists, media folks, etc. -- remain listed.) For the record, my own personal brief "bio" and testimonials from many well known media folks and public officials, if that's useful, is at http://www.bradblog.com/bio, and should, I think, speak well enough for my credentials.

Thanks again for your help here! Brad F. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.3.209.254 (talk) 07:04, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

P.S. I don't whether its appropriate for a person who is the subject of an article, to ask about such things him/herself but, well, see above. Hope it is! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.3.209.254 (talk) 07:06, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

It was deleted per consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brad Friedman. Enough people there decided that it should be deleted. If you want to contest it, bring it to WP:DR. Xclamation point 07:10, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Okay, thanks X. The deletion review seemed to be very quick, and short on opinions. But as the deletion contest instruction said to try to work it out with the editor who deleted it first, I wanted to do due diligence there. Sounds like I should now ask at the deletion contest review area. Will do. Thanks again. - Brad--68.3.209.254 (talk) 09:20, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Deletion review for Brad Friedman

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Brad Friedman. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedy-deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. 68.3.209.254 (talk) 09:20, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

delivery

Latest comment: 15 years ago7 comments5 people in discussion

Please do. Thanks!--ragesoss (talk) 07:33, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Do you know what this is about? §hepTalk 08:40, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Also here and your talk. §hepTalk 08:47, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
and this? — JamesR ≈talk≈ 10:35, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
...And this? LittleMountain5 review! 15:34, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
O_O Something went really wrong... /me does code review. Xclamation point 18:30, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Fixed. The problem was that the bot got the page content before checking if it was a redirect. Xclamation point 18:33, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/State Class Battleship BB

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Thanks for closing this and deleting the article. The article State Class Battleship was also in the nomination (though I probably didn't format that right) and appears to have been missed? Just letting you know. ttfn, Benea (talk) 14:12, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Fixed. Xclamation point 18:29, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Drew Money

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

You've actually only deleted the redirect "Drew money". You might want to delete the actual article. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 18:34, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Done. Xclamation point 18:36, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

WP:WPTC

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

No one has welcomed you in yet, so allow me.

 

Hi, and welcome to the Tropical cyclone WikiProject! We are a group of Wikipedia editors who help to improve articles related to tropical cyclones on Wikipedia.

Looking for somewhere to start? Here are a few suggestions.

If you have any comments, suggestions, or would like to talk about the project in general, feel free to leave a message on the talk page.

→Dyl@n620 02:07, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Automated report of SoxBots

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Here is a report of the status of all SoxBots as listed on User:X!/Sox Commons:

SoxBot (talk) 00:12, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Section Title

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

???? i dont know what i was doing im sorry —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.147.200.210 (talk) 00:33, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

I've blocked SoxBot VI

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

See User_talk:X!/Sox_Commons#I.27ve_blocked_SoxBot_VI --Dweller (talk) 12:58, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Larry Hryb

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Larry Hryb gave explicit permission for us to use the publicity photo. You can ask him yourself. JAF1970 (talk) 22:51, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Since you wanted it...

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

TEST! Roxsed39 (talk) 23:09, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Ray Joseph Cormier

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

You closed the discussion on the subject AfD on February 8. It was nominated for deletion again on March 1 for the same reason. I posed some questions to the Editor who closed the 2nd discussion here:

User_talk:Stifle#Ray_Joseph_Cormier

I´m still curious to understand what happened? Can you enlighten me? Peace DoDaCanaDa (talk) 13:25, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

SoxBot III false positive

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This is a false positive. It wasn't a test edit, it was an explicit contestation of a prod. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 02:10, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

WP:NPA

Latest comment: 15 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion

Per Wikipedia policy on personal attacks against other editors I edited your comment on Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Addbot 19

"Do not make personal attacks anywhere in Wikipedia. Comment on content, not on the contributor.' Personal attacks do not help make a point; they only hurt the Wikipedia community and deter users from helping to create a good encyclopedia. Derogatory comments about another contributor may be removed by any editor."

I have bolded and italicized the relevant part of the policy in the quote above. --KP Botany (talk) 02:31, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Stating that someone has a grudge is not a personal attack. It cannot be construed as one. However, WP:CIVIL is very clear that making false claims is against the civility policy. Consider this your warning, KP Botany. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:44, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Actually another editor, the one who reverted my removal of the personal attack, disagrees with you. So, it can be and is construed as one.[1] --KP Botany (talk) 02:48, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
I've struck the comment. Sorry if I insulted you, I wasn't trying to write a personal attack. I was just saying that I've seen you around, and it didn't appear that you were exactly fond of Addbot. I probably could have worded my response better, and I apologize for not doing so (as well as bringing this whole issue up in the first place). Xclamation point 02:49, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
I accept your apology, as it is rather nice. --KP Botany (talk) 02:51, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

KP Botany Wikiquette Alert

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I have recently opened a wikiquette alert on KP Botany's comments in the recent addbot discussion. Any comments would be appreciated. —Nn123645 (talk) 07:13, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Tropical cyclones WikiProject Newsletter #24

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Number 24, March 7

The Hurricane Herald

This is the bi-monthly newsletter of WikiProject Tropical Cyclones. The Hurricane Herald aims to give a summary, both of the activities of the WikiProject and global tropical cyclone activity. If you wish to change how you receive this newsletter, or no longer wish to receive it, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list. This newsletter covers all of January 2009 and February 2009.

Please visit this page and bookmark any suggestions of interest to you. This will help improve monitoring of the WikiProject's articles.

 
Cyclone Fanele near peak intensity

Storm of the month
Cyclone Fanele was the first cyclone of tropical cyclone status to strike western Madagascar since Cyclone Fame one year prior. It formed on January 18 in the Mozambique Channel, and rapidly organized, reaching peak winds of 185 km/h (115 mph). It weakened before moving ashore in Menabe Region southwest of Morondava, and rapidly deteriorated over land. Fanele briefly re-intensified after reaching open waters, only to become an extratropical cyclone by January 23. The cyclone caused heavy damage near where it moved ashore and along its path, resulting in at least eight deaths. Fanele struck Madagascar just two days after Tropical Storm Eric brushed the northeastern portion of the country. The two storms affected over 50,000 people, of which at least 4,000 were left homeless. Fanele struck the country during a series of government protests, and consequentially relief efforts were hindered.

Other tropical cyclone activity

  • Western Pacific Ocean– The first tropical cyclone of the season was Tropical Depression Auring, as designated by PAGASA. It formed on January 3 to the east of the Philippines, producing heavy rainfall and flooding on Mindanao island. Never organizing much, the depression dissipated a few days after forming, causing one death and destroying 305 houses. The next month, Tropical Depression Bising formed near Palau and, moving westward, later passed through the Philippines as a remnant low; rainfall from the system produced mudslides, though no major damage was reported.
  • South-West Indian– Tropical Storm Dongo was the first storm of January in the basin, and it remained over open waters without affecting landmasses throughout its duration. In the middle of the month along with Cyclone Fanele, Tropical Storm Eric developed and moved near Madagascar, killing one and producing heavy rainfall in the northeastern portion of the country. Later, Cyclone Gael killed two people on Réunion while tracking for ten days east of Madagascar; at the time it was the 2nd strongest cyclone of the season. Lastly, Tropical Storm Hina persisted for about five days, nearly reaching tropical cyclone status before weakening.
  • Australia- During the previous two months their have been nine Tropical Lows with four of them becoming a Tropical Cyclone whilst the remants of Cyclone Innis briefly moved into the Australian Region from the South Pacific. Cyclones Charlotte, Dominic, Ellie, and Freddy all caused damage to Australia and or the Indonesia Islands.
  • South Pacific- During the last two months the south Pacific has come alive with six depressions forming in January and February. The most significant depression was Tropical Depression 04F which brought heavy rainfall to Fiji and caused widespread flooding and killing at least 11 people. The first two named storms, Hettie and Innis also developed, each having minor effects on land.

Member of the month

 
Cyclone barnstar

The member of the month is... HurricaneSpin HurricaneSpin is a relativly new member of the project who has helped the project out by finding photos of Tropical Cyclones and uploading them to Commons. He is still getting to grips with the project but is coming on in leaps and bounds thus we have decided to make him the Member of the Month, for January and February 2009.

New and improved articles

Main Page content

Storm article statistics

Grade Oct Nov Dec Feb
  FA 49 50 50 56
  A 19 19 19 17
  GA 190 198 202 239
B 13 21 22 14
C 119 118 122 122
Start 204 210 210 198
Stub 19 16 17 28
Total 613 631 642 669
ω 2.88 2.87 2.87 2.80
percentage
≥Less than C 		36.4 35.8 35.4 33.0
percentage
≥GA or better 		42.1 42.2 42.2 46.6

Project News
The project reached a milestone in the last two months in terms of article quality for all articles within the project. For the first time, the percentage of Good articles or better reached more than 1/3, and at the same time, the percentage of Start or Stub articles totaled less than 50%. In the previous twelve months, the overall project grew by 262 articles, of which 204, or 78%, were GA or better. Additionally, in terms of only storm articles, the project now has 46.6% of its articles as GA or better, and only 1/3 are Start or Stub. Unfortunately, much of that is due to newly-created articles easily attaining GA status. For storm articles, the total number of Start or Stub articles, currently 226, is about the same as it was a year ago. The lack of work on older articles is especially noticeable on season articles, where more than 75% of articles are still Stub or Start.

In an attempt to improve articles, there is talk of forming a collaboration between a few Wikipedians. The current project is to improve Hurricane Camille to FA status in time for its 40th anniversary this August. There is still plenty of work to be done, so if you're interested, any help would be appreciated.

Additionally, there is a recent discussion on the WPTC talk page about establishing a notability criteria. There was talk in the past of instating one, although this time the proposal is backed up by interpretations of existing Wikipedia policy. The proposal would limit articles to tropical cyclones that have at least one independent, reliable source other than any warning centers. Excluding cross-basin, off-season, or 64+ knot cyclones, the proposal would affect 26 articles, none of which affected land or lasted for an appreciable amount of time.

Jason Rees (talk) 01:47, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Counter

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Bravo on the counter. No idea how long it's been in action (I don't count edits often), but it looks pretty slick. Thanks for your hard work!!  :) //Blaxthos ( t / c ) 09:25, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Andrewmc123

Latest comment: 15 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

You're quite right, of course, but is there such a procedure as speedy non-crat RfA closures (ala WP:NAC)? If so, what is that procedure? Thanks! It Is Me Here t / c 18:58, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

User:Enigmaman/SNOW –xeno (talk) 19:02, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Cheers, done – was that done correctly? It Is Me Here t / c 19:38, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Hmm... by any chance are you stalking me, Xeno? :P Xclamation point 00:06, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

The work of deleting IP vandalism on chem element pages

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Since you're involved, I wonder if you'd like to comment on this discussion on semi-protection for element articles: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Elements Thanks! SBHarris 00:04, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost — 9 March 2009

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 10, which includes these articles:

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 00:53, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

ACC

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Apparently I've been suspended because I dropped request 24280. I've been requested to join IRC and explain my dropping of that case but no one appears to be in. Firstly, I had perfectly valid reasons (or what I thought were good reasons) for dropping that account, and secondly it's the only bad move I've made in my hundreds of account creations. Could you help find out why I was blocked immediately for this, rather than someone just initiating discussion which would seem far more rational and in proportion? —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs · email) 11:31, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

No worries now actually, I've found out who the blocking admin was so I'll ask them. Cheers anyway. —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs · email) 16:52, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

accesibility in edit counter

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Under "Namespace totals", the text inside some of the colored boxes should be set to white, otherwise it's very difficult to read. Concretely: "article", "wikipedia", "file", "file talk" and "category talk". Maybe also "user talk" and "template". --Enric Naval (talk) 21:32, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

links with slashes on the edit counter

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I looked at my edit count and clicked on the links to the pages I had edited, but the link to ANI had the "/" replaced with "%2F":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard%2FIncidents

This causes 404 errors on any page having a slash on it. --Enric Naval (talk) 21:25, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Already reported on the tracker, bug 4. — neuro(talk) 21:15, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

SoxBot killing references

Latest comment: 15 years ago8 comments5 people in discussion

I took a look at my watchlist and saw several edits by the bot that, I guess, you have some sort of control over. On (at least) two instances, the bot actually killed the reference rather than repairing it. Logan Young edit, Alabama Crimson Tide football edit. –  LATICS  talk  06:21, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, I thought I fixed the expn problem. Frankly, I'm not sure what's wrong. It's late, and I can't deal with it now. Xclamation point 06:31, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

FYI, it did it at Northwestern State University too. - ✰ALLST☆R✰ echo 15:20, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

  • Your bot keeps on breaking links - I've had to fix Keith_Law#External_links twice now. Wickethewok (talk) 16:31, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
    • My bot has not been running since last night. It broke some links due to a typo. I'm not sure what links need to be fixed anymore, and because they're all too different, I'm not able to run the bot to fix it. Xclamation point 17:27, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
      • Can't a search be done on Wikipedia for links with "expn" in them? It shouldn't be a problem to code something to replace all expns with espns. I doubt there are many legitimate things with "expn" in them. Enigmamsg 03:00, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
        • I don't think anything uses expn anymore, they use weird combinations of static and assets now. Xclamation point 03:03, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
          • [2] I just fixed it. It had like a dozen instances of expn which were inserted by SoxBot. Enigmamsg 03:11, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Finished translation

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi! I have traslated your edit counter messages for Galician (Galego) (code:gl) language, please see below:

  • Contador de edicións (versión $1)
  • Navegación
  • Ver código fonte
  • $1 non é unha wiki válida
  • Benvido ao contador de edicións de X!
  • Nome de usuario
  • Wiki
  • Ver
  • Erro de MySQL, por favor informe a X! empregando <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:X!/Bugs">o informe de bugs.</a> Estea seguro de comunicar o seguinte erro de SQL camdo informe:
    $1
  • $1 non existe.
  • Aviso: O lag é alto, cambios máis novos que $1 non se amosarán.
  • Artigo
  • Información xeral de usuario
  • Grupos de usuario
  • Primeira edición
  • Artigos únicos editados
  • Edicións medias por páxinga
  • Edicións totais (incluíndo as borradas)
  • Edicións borradas
  • Edicións actuais
  • formato_número($1)
  • Total por espazo de nomes
  • Conta por meses
  • Logs
  • Usuarios bloqueados
  • Permisos de usuario modificados
  • Contas creadas
  • Páxinas borradas
  • Páxinas vixiadas
  • Páxinas protexidas
  • Páxinas restauradas
  • Páxinas desbloqueadas
  • Páxinas desprotexidas
  • Ficheiros cargados
  • Usuarios renomeados
  • Permisos concedidos
  • Permisos revocados
  • Páxinas movidas
  • Artigos máis editados
  • Executado en $1 segundos
  • Empregado $1 megabytes de memoria para executar.
  • Ver noutras linguas:
  • (incompleto por $1 mensaxes)
  • Quere axudar coas traducións? Vexa a <a href="http://toolserver.org/~soxred93/count/translate.php">páxina de tradución</a> para máis información de como axudar.
  • Accións
  • O Contador de edicións de X! non funciona por un problema de MySQL. yarrow (o servidor de base de datos) atópase estropeado, polo que non hay maneira de conseguir resultados para a ferramenta. Este problema é común para tódalas ferramentas que acceden ao servidor de base de datos. Se quere só un número simple, pode velo na súa ventana de preferencias. Perdoen as molestias.
  • Estado de MySQL
  • s
  • d
  • h
  • m
  • s

Feel free to contact me on my talk page on gl wiki. Thanks! ----Banjo (talk) 09:07, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Admin Coaching

Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hia X!,

how are you doing was wondering if you would be able to help me prepare for a RFA Application so that i may become a sysop i have done two other previous RFA which went horribly wrong.Hope to hear from you soon take care.And /or Admin coaching in general i am very motivated about things i do and i hope to become a Sysop soon but for now i't seems i need some assistance in doing so.

Thank you for your time,

Staffwaterboy Critique Me Guestbook Hate Comments 20:26, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi, unfortunately, I'm not taking new coachees at the moment. Sorry. Xclamation point 03:06, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Np thanks anyways ,

Cheers, Staffwaterboy Critique Me Guestbook Hate Comments 16:46, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Automated report of SoxBots

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Here is a report of the status of all SoxBots as listed on User:X!/Sox Commons:

SoxBot (talk) 00:12, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Bubble tea!

File:SynergyBubble.jpg

-download | sign! has given you a bubble tea! Bubble teas promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a bubble tea, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy drinking!

Spread the bubbliness of bubble teas by adding {{subst:bubble tea}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

Exclusion compliant?

Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hi
What's the trick to get SoxBot II to stay off my user sub page User:Amalthea/test2? The page is part of a redirect loop I've set up as an example for a WP:VPR discussion.
Reverting the bot didn't bother him, putting {{nobots}} on the page wasn't enough either (despite his assertion that "this bot is exclusion compliant"). I've tried protection now, and am hoping that it doesn't have the sysop-flag set. :)
I realize that the page shows up on Special:DoubleRedirects and I'll blank the pages once the discussion is gone.
Cheers, Amalthea 18:38, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Fixed. Evidently, Chris's classes didn't have exclusion compliancy. I'll have to go port it to Pillar framework now. Xclamation point 21:04, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
Great, thanks. :) --Amalthea 21:15, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Adminstats

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
For you and SoxBot VII, for taking over updating the {{adminstats}} template ;-)

 —  Tivedshambo  (t/c) 06:27, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Breakage

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Not sure if you know about this but your tool breaks URLs when it inserts %2F instead of a /. -- Mentifisto 06:05, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it's a known bug. Xclamation point 15:27, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
17:05, 15 March 2009 (UTC) The Helpful Bot 17:05, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Aravind Vidyananthan

Hi

Winner of the '07 10th place and '08 2nd place in the Hare Krishna Temple Book Marathon

Website: www.aravindbookdistributor.spaces.live.com

SoxBot not operating correctly on double redirects to a subhead:

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi your bot did this edit to fix the double redirect: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MVRP&oldid=277620481

But this wasn't quite right:

Before:

  • MVRP redir'd -> Multiple VLAN Registration Protocol
  • Multiple VLAN Registration Protocol -> Multiple Registration Protocol#Multiple VLAN Registration Protocol (MVRP)

The SoxBot dropped the fact that it redir'd to a subhead, which is actually important. -- KelleyCook (talk) 17:39, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

An opinion required

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hey up. I was just pondering the question of whether, if I wanted to become an admin (which I do), whether it would be best to file an RfA soon (1-2 weeks) or put it off (1-2 months). As a responsible admin - and one familiar with some of the stuff I've been up to lately - I was hoping you could help. The advantage of sooner rather than later would be that I am currently very enthusiastic about the project, and I really want to make a difference in admin areas, particularly SDs, bot matters (e.g. blocking, category tidy up) and to a lesser extent AfDs and templates. The downside is that certain cruel, cruel admins won't be able to see past the numbers, which I feel are good enough, at the very least. Anyhow, if you could advise - or even stretch to a personal opinion, I would be most grateful. - Jarry1250 (t, c) 18:58, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

User:MBH2000/Florcello

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Could you pleaseItalic text explain how my article on Florcello submitted 03/16/09 is considered "blatent advertising"? How could it possibly be written in a more unbiased fashion ? I want to learn. Please take a look a the articles for Tuaca, Liquor Fogg, Sabra... If these articles are acceptable, please advise how I am offending the Wiki rules. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MBH2000 (talk • contribs) 19:05, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Main page images

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I know you're running MPUploadBot, and I've got a question: Why not protect the images at Commons? Temporary uploads wouldn't be needed, which would be easier on the servers. Shubinator (talk) 23:18, 16 March 2009 (UTC)


   — 16 March 2009

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 00:37, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Automated report of SoxBots

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Here is a report of the status of all SoxBots as listed on User:X!/Sox Commons:

SoxBot (talk) 00:12, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

SoxBot X not working

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Just in case you didn't notice my message here, SoxBot X hasn't run in over a month. Is it broken, or did you disable it? Wronkiew (talk) 06:57, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, hope you feel better soon. Wronkiew (talk) 14:24, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Adminstats (again)

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Are you intending to keep this going, or was it just a one off? Hope you can get it working again, as it's a useful tool. Thanks. —  Tivedshambo  (t/c) 22:41, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Just seen the note at the top of this page - hope you're over it soon. Don't worry too much about the stats - your health is more important ;-) —  Tivedshambo  (t/c) 22:45, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Double redirects no longer need to be fixed

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The latest version of MediaWiki finally handles them with no problem. "Fixing" some of these is undesirable in some cases, such as where the first target page is a "redirect with possibilities" — that is, where it is intended that there will be an article there in the future, and the redirect is just a placeholder until then.  –radiojon (talk) 23:35, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Technology report and Abuse Filter

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I'm not completely done with either (I may think of things to add and copyedit), but here are drafts of the technology report and a special story about the Abuse Filter. If you can think of anything to add or changes to make, please do so.

Cheers. --Aude (talk) 12:33, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Smiling back

 

bibliomaniac15 has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Not sure I know which argument you're talking about, but thanks! I always thought I was more of a gin and tonic person though...
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

delivery

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Please go ahead and deliver if you're still around. Sorry I didn't update the delivery message earlier; I had to rush out just after publication and didn't have time to do the final maintenance.--ragesoss (talk) 03:16, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 23 March 2009

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 04:37, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Abuse filter notes

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Just a reminder that auto-signatures don't work in the abuse filter notes. You'll need to write out your name normally, which is two fewer keystrokes. Stifle (talk) 09:59, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Your notice of speedy deletion

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I am not used to HTML and not sure what I did to trigger the automated response, but I believe the article is valuable and references an extensive list of sources which I believe shows it is an important discussion/topic. Smtbrady (talk) 22:50, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Old sock block, requesting unblock... was there a checkuser?

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

See User talk:Myklroventine, who was blocked as a sock of User:Donaldleegraham. Could you point me to the evidence? I assume there was a checkuser or something. I am inclined to decline, as they waited more than 6 months to request an unblock, which looks supicious. Could you at least point me to the sock evidence, however, so I have something to go on? Either a checkuser or DUCK evidence would be cool... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 00:57, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Blocked as DUCK at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Donaldleegraham. Xclamation point 01:03, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Automated report of SoxBots

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Here is a report of the status of all SoxBots as listed on User:X!/Sox Commons:

SoxBot (talk) 00:12, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Kudos on the tools!

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I just noticed your RfA voting and Automated Edits tools. Thanks muchly -- I've missed this capability since SQL's tools went away. RayTalk 22:23, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Your bot request

Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Hi X! I wanted to let you know that Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/SoxBot VII 4 is labeled as needing your comment. Please visit the above link to reply to the requests. Thanks! --BAGBotTalk 22:25, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

  • Ah, thanks for getting the admin-stats up and running. I was wondering if it might be a good idea, or possible, to also track changes to blocks and protects, which seem to be presently unrepresented admin actions. –xeno (talk) 13:19, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Seconding xeno's thanks, nice work. I took the liberty of updating the relevant pages for your bot to reflect the new task SoxBot VII does now [3] [4] [5]. Hope you don't mind. Regards SoWhy 12:29, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Tarek Khalil Atallah

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

You deleted Tarek Khalil Atallah article as a result of the AfD. Please delete also Tarek Atallah, which was a mirror page of Tarek Khalil Atallah, and currently is redirect to the deleted article. Thank you. Beagel (talk) 05:46, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:SOAPY listed at RfD

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wikipedia:SOAPY. Since you had some involvement with the Wikipedia:SOAPY redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). –Black Falcon (Talk) 19:51, 30 March 2009 (UTC) –Black Falcon (Talk) 19:51, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Filter 120

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Could you please post some explanatory notes for this filter. Why it's needed and what exactly is the aim of the filter. - Mgm|(talk) 11:40, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Delivery

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Please do. I forgot to send out the call for delivery yesterday. Thanks!--ragesoss (talk) 19:35, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Girls in computer science

Latest comment: 15 years ago8 comments3 people in discussion

You failed to give a rationale for your closure. Please add your rationale. Uncle G (talk) 19:28, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

  • Do I need to? I closed it because it appeared that it was more of a personal essay than an article, and that there were not a whole lot of keep votes (Excluding merge votes). Xclamation point 20:05, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
    • It seems to me that rationales are optional, but that's just my opinion. –Juliancolton Talk · Review 20:32, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
      • One shouldn't consider them optional. A clear closure rationale allows others to understand a closure. There are some closing administrators who regularly omit rationales, and as a direct consequence they receive no end of hassle from people asking "Why did you do that?". A clear rationale heads that off before it even starts. "{{subst:afd top}} ~~~~" is easy to type, but that's pretty much all that's good that one can say about it. A good closure adds a rationale between the substitution and the signature. It saves time and effort in the long run. Uncle G (talk) 09:57, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
    • You certainly do when you misunderstand merger to be deletion, as you've done here. ☺ Merger is a simple variant of keeping, as the Wikipedia:Guide to deletion#Recommendations and outcomes explains. Think about it: How do you expect people to perform the merger that they opine if you delete the edit history and thus make it inaccessible to them? If an action could be enacted even by an editor without an account, with the few tools that such an editor has, then it's an ordinary editorial action, that doesn't require us to exercise our administrator tools. Uncle G (talk) 09:57, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
      • If you disagree with the closure, feel free to bring it up at DRV if you want. I won't mind.
      • Also, if you go to past logs from 6-7 days ago, you'll see that almost every single AfD was closed without a rationale. Xclamation point 10:49, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
        • That doesn't make them good closures. Take a look at the talk pages of some of the administrators who regularly make rationale-free closures. Don't follow bad examples because you think that "everyone else is doing it". For starters, everyone else is not doing it. Some administrators do provide good closures, and there are a few administrators over the years whose closures are examples to learn from. Uncle G (talk) 12:31, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
          • If I feel that it's close enough, and does not warrent a relist, I will usually provide a rationale. This was an exception, and I probably should have provided a rationale. I apologize for this. I would not be offended at all if a DRV was opened. Xclamation point 12:44, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 30 March 2009

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 20:36, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The WikiCup Newsletter
 
The WikiCup Newsletter
Round I, Issue 10 - March 31, 2009

  Archive before | Archive after  

Content Leaders

As of this newsletter, the following is a list of participants with the most:

Biggest Jumps

This week, the players with the biggest difference between their points last fortnight, and their points this week are:

Rank User LF TF D
1   Durova 1713 1932 219
2   Mitchazenia 951 1167 216
3   Scorpion0422 683 788 105
4   ThinkBlue 291 386 95
5   Shoemaker's Holiday 791 873 82
6   Theleftorium 990 1060 70
7   Sasata 513 581 68
8   Rlevse 224 290 66
9   Matthewedwards 630 695 65
10   97198 314 360 46
  • LF = Last Week's score, TF = This Week's score, D = Difference between last week and this week's scores
  • A full list is located at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Jumps
From the Judges

What a brilliant finale to Round 1. With so little in it it was always going to be a tight contest, particularly in the all-important wildcard places. Congratulations to all those who have made it to Round 2, and commiserations to all who have been eliminated. I hope you continue to contribute as fully as you have been in the tournament, if not better!

As has been stated before, Round 2 begins Wednesday, April 1 2009. I hope you are all ready!

 GARDEN , iMatthew // talk, and The Helpful One

If you don't wish to receive this newsletter in the future, remove your name from this list. If you are not a participant, but would still like to receive this newsletter, feel free to add your name to the list.

WikiCup At a Glance

As of this newsletter, the WikiCup participants have collected a total of:

Pool winners

In this round of the WikiCup, the top two contestants from each pool, along with ten wildcards, will advance to the next round. As of this newsletter, the current pool leaders are:

Pool A
  1.   Gary King (1154)
  2.   Spencer (377)
Pool B
  1.   Shoemaker's Holiday (1055)
  2.   La Pianista (74)
Pool C
  1.   Scorpion0422 (944)
  2.   Candlewicke (806)
Pool D
  1.   ThinkBlue (444)
  2.   97198 (374)
Pool E
  1.   Sasata (604)
  2.   X! (216)
Pool F
  1.   Rlevse (405)
  2.   Bedford (331)
Pool G
  1.   Sunderland06 (236)
  2.   Ceranthor (190)
Pool H
  1.   Juliancolton (686)
  2.   Dendodge (220)
Pool I
  1.   Theleftorium (1107)
  2.   Durova (961)
Pool J
  1.   Mitchazenia (1180)
  2.   Matthewedwards (702)
Wildcard winners
  1.   Useight (659)
  2.   Paxse (507)
  3.   Rambo's Revenge (333)
  4.   the_ed17 (330)
  5.   J Milburn (302)
  6.   Climie.ca (265)
  7.   Catalan (256)
  8.   Ottava Rima (190)
  9.   Wrestlinglover (169)
  10.   Tinucherian (162)
  • All scores are accurate as of the end of Round 1.
21:22, 31 March 2009 (UTC)


Delivered for the WikiCup by  GARDEN  at 21:22, 31 March 2009 (UTC). Queries to my talk.

SoxBot II

Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

I noticed this account delivering lots of Signposts on my watchlist, and I wondered why it didn't have a bot flag at present when the logs show that it had one in the past. Just curious - any particular reason? Regards, BencherliteTalk 21:22, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

If it has a bot flag, the "new messages" message does not activate. I made this mistake last week, and the bar did not highlight. Xclamation point 22:16, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Ah, fair enough. --BencherliteTalk 22:21, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:X!/Archives/03/2009&oldid=1160071573"