User talk:Bender235/2015 archive

Happy New Year!

Dear Bender235,
HAPPY NEW YEAR Hoping 2015 will be a great year for you! Thank you for your contributions!
From a fellow editor,
FWiW Bzuk (talk) 21:36, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

This message promotes WikiLove. Originally created by Nahnah4 (see "invisible note").

Thank you very much. Happy new year to you, too. --bender235 (talk) 07:58, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Olivia de Havilland

Just curious but I am sure it was an accident. This edit [1] back in July 2014, gave the actress a date of death in the Persondata template. I have removed it and only waving it at you for your info. Periglio (talk) 10:27, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

It must've been an accident. AWB usually fills in this data from the infobox template, but it didn't seem to have been there, either. I don't know what went wrong. You are right to remove it. --bender235 (talk) 10:58, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Ah yes, AWB is picking up the death date of her son which was added with the Death date template. Thanks Periglio (talk) 12:07, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Robert Koch, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Wollstein. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Infobox NFL player: current parameters

Bender, I saw that you're adding hidden versions of the infobox template to college player bios in preparation for the 2015 NFL Draft. I note that you are still using deprecated versions of several filed/parameter names, specifically:

• "currentpositionplain" and "currentposition" should no longer be used, and should be replaced with "position" in all instances;
• "currentnumber" should no longer be used, and should be replaced with "number" in all instances.

Having consolidated these redundant parameters, we would not like to perpetuate the deprecated paraameter/filed names by incorporating them into the the new 2015 players bios. Thanks. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 14:06, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Alright, thanks for the info. --bender235 (talk) 14:10, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

I'billin

I see that you have changed the Palmer, 1881, archive.org address in I'billin to a https-adress. Please don´t do that. I added that link once (as I have added most of the links to archive.org on Palestinian places), and I am occasionally on my old computer which simply cannot read the https://www.archive.org -links, And it is not only me; you are making it impossible for any person with an older computer to follow these links; that is not very fair, is it? Huldra (talk) 20:43, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

You must have a really old computer then, but okay (seriously, what kind of machine are we talking about here?). Luckily, Wikipedia has something called protocol-relative URLs in its toolbox. I converted the links. --bender235 (talk) 08:01, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Huldra FYI... Wikipedia only supports IE version 8+ and the current releases of Chrome and Firefox. At the end of 2015, Wikipedia will only support IE 11+. At the moment, the code for IE 8 and below is depreciate, but will be removed by the end of the year. Currently only 10% of requests come from IE and 6% of requests from IE 11. Wikipedia will not support any browsers that are no longer maintained. Bgwhite (talk) 08:39, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Bgwhite: I assume that by IE you mean internet explorer? I have used Macs now for nearly 25 years, and always Safari (sometimes Opera). And my reserve computer is from when I started editing Wikipedia, back in 2005. But even on my brand new Mac, looking up https://www.archive.org -links takes a quite a bit longer than looking up http://www.archive.org -links (especially if you use them as much as I do). And Bender235: using that Wikipedia:Protocol-relative URL for I'billin does´t really work, either: I`m sent https://www.archive.org -links. If you look at the total of http://www.archive.org-links in Arab localities in Israel, List of Arab towns and villages depopulated during the 1948 Palestinian exodus and [[Category:Villages in the West Bank]], then I think you will see that I have added most of them. I still have a few to add. But having to deal with them being turned into https://www.archive.org-links seriously puts me off Wikipedia -editing, Please stop. At least stay out of the localities in the areas I mentioned. Huldra (talk) 12:30, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

And I cannot even undo the edit on I'billin, because I would break 1RR. <facepalm> Huldra (talk) 12:34, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

"[...] using that Wikipedia:Protocol-relative URL for I'billin does´t really work, either: I`m sent https://www.archive.org -links."

Is it because you're accessing Wikipedia via https://en.wikipedia.org? Only then protocol-relative URLs should return an HTTPS link (hence the name). I really wonder what kind of ancient machine you're having, please tell me. --bender235 (talk) 12:40, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

I am running on a brand new Mac, bought last August, Safari 7.1.2. It is only my back-up which is ancient. (But when my Mac broke down last summer, it took one month before I could get it replaced, that whole time I was on my old 2005 computer, and really had problems with the Https). Yes, I´m logged in as https, and I hate it, but I have found no way in my preferences to change it. Is it possible to be logged in as Http? Huldra (talk) 13:13, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

It is possible to switch this in your user preferences. But anyhow, is it that difficult to just update your machine? I don't find it reasonable to mold Wikipedia articles because fringe cases like yours. --bender235 (talk) 19:04, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

So please tell me then: where the heck can I switch it of?? I have looked for ages, and not found any method! And there are lots and lots of people with ancient computers out there, they are just not contributing to Wikipedia as they are put off by lots of nerdy geeks who have the very newest computers and expect everyone else to have it, too. And people wonder why Wikipedia is loosing editors! FYI: in my area (partly listed above) I`m hardly a "fringe case"; Huldra (talk) 20:44, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Bgwhite: By "requests" above, what do you mean, people editing Wikipedia, or people reading wikipedia? Huldra (talk) 20:44, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Turn off https: Goto Preferences at the top-right. Uncheck the box that says, "Always use a secure connection when logged in".

By "requests" above: I mean any request to the Wikipedia web servers.

A slow computer really doesn't affect performance of https via plain web browsing. If on an older browser (pre 2010), not all browsers would cache https content. This would result in a huge slowdown. Network connection speed does cause problems for the initial connection to a site as it takes more round trips to make the initial connection. Any connections after, the secure connection should be cached, so no more extra round trips. But, the cache is only there for around 10 minutes. Bgwhite (talk) 08:05, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Bgwhite: thank you very much for your tip on how to turn https off, I have done so now. (As you perhaps understand: I'm not that technically advanced!) Anyway, I have checked the I'billin article again, and now it works, i.e., I stay on http, also for archive.org. I use archive.org a lot, typically several links for every article I edit. I am not based in the Middle-East, but I know the area, and in my estimate, if people have computers, then most would have pre-2010-models. And connections are generally slow. Please don´t make Wikipedia a place for only those with the newest computer-models or fast connections.

Thank you for your explanation about https, I still prefer http, though I can see that at times https would be useful (say, dealing with sensitive material, in certain countries) Cheers, Huldra (talk) 20:02, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

@Huldra:, please tell me, what "ancient machine" (your words) are you running? I'm really curious why it can't be updated at all. I have a 13-yr old Windows XP on a virtual machine on my computer, and it processes HTTPS links just fine, because it can be (and has been) updated with Mozilla Firefox 35. So please tell me, what kind of system are we talking about in your case. Maybe there's an easy fix for you. And it doesn't have to be Firefox; Chrome, Opera, or any other modern browser will suffice. Please don't think of this as "geeky stuff", because keeping your machine updated is actually highly relevant for its security and integrity. --bender235 (talk) 11:50, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

I am writing this on my old Mac, (ibook G4, Safari 4.1.3). It was brand new when I first stared editing Wikipedia 10 years ago, I only has it as a reserve these days. But I had to use it for nearly a month last summer, as the screen on my 3 year old Mac flunked out, and it took some time for the shop to get the model of Mac Air that I wanted. When it tries to access https-pages, it just freeze. Anyway, with the info from Bgwhite: it works out fine. Huldra (talk) 22:09, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Alright. I suspect the trouble you're having is caused by an outdated version of your browser. Is it possible for you to update it? --bender235 (talk) 23:08, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Nope, that is the newest I can have with that hard-ware. I´m writing this on my new Mac, though, (Safari 7.1.2). As I said above though, when I learned how to not log into a https-account: things work fine. Huldra (talk) 23:47, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Alright then. --bender235 (talk) 23:48, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

You are correct Bender, it is caused by outdated version of the browser and possibility the hardware too. Safari 4.x series came out in 2009. Huldra would be running OS X 10.4, which had its support end in 2010. One cannot expect anything that old to work on today's web. Huldra's "new" system is not that new and is using an older version of Safari. Latest version is 8.x. Huldra I would recommend using Chrome or Firefox. Chrome or Firefox supports SPDY. One of the advantages of SPDY is instead of multiple round trips to establish an https connection, it can be done in one, like non-https browsing. A web site has to support SPDY. Archive.org and Wikipedia currently don't support it. Wikipedia is currently testing it. Google, Facebook, Twitter, Yahoo all use it. Bgwhite (talk) 20:47, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

@Bgwhite:, Thank you for taking time to explain this. The Safari 8 was released in October 2014; Wikipedia really cannot rely on users having computers less than 6 months old. I have had Macs now for about 25 years, so I´m pretty much at home with Safari. As I said above, though: outside the high-tech environments people often have ancient computers, because they see no need to upgrade when their present computer do everything they wants it do: a bit of surfing, (typically news) and some email. I think it would be a loss for Wikipedia, if these people were not also given a chance to edit Wikipedia. Huldra (talk) 20:13, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Huldra Wikipedia supports Safari 7. I was just giving an example where a new version would be more helpful. YouTube just made a change to HTML5 video by default. This is only supported in Safari 8. HTML5 is a smaller download, thus videos would load faster. Again, an example where a newer version of a browser would be more helpful. Nobody supports an unsupported browser. This is a common practice because of security and manpower. It would be irresponsible to support an unsecure platform. It also costs more to keep unsupported version going and nobody is going to waste manpower for that. Currently a Mac OS version is only supported for ~4 years. 10.6 was last to have support dropped. Sorry, but it is not remotely reasonable for anyone to support 10.6 now. You choose a Mac, you knew you will pay more for a Mac and have shorter support times. At the end of the year, Microsoft is dropping support for all browsers except for IE 11 and above. At that point, sites will start yanking out code supporting anything earlier than 2013 browsers. This is just the way of computer life. Bgwhite (talk) 20:51, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Curious about editing

Bender235: You apparently were the user who edited my wikipedia biography (Timothy J. Bartik) to say that my birth date was October 1, 1952. This is incorrect. My birthdate is March 26, 1954. This has since been partly corrected (a part of my wikipedia bio says March 26, 1954, the other part says February something, 1954, for reasons unclear to me. )

However, google now seems to have picked up Wikipedia, and Google now lists my birthday as October 1, 1952.

I am very curious as to why on earth you would think my birthday is October 1, 1952? And how on earth are such errors to be corrected, when I am not supposed to edit my own Wikipedia page, for obvious reasons.

I do note that there is at least one online source that gives my correct birthdate, in a bio of my mother. http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/~history/Biographies/Bartik.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tim Bartik (talk • contribs) 19:00, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

The wrong date of birth was in there ever since the article was created in 2011 by User:Rwyrwa. If it was incorrect, I'm sorry. Google will pick up the correct DOB shortly, don't worry. Good thing that you fixed it. --bender235 (talk) 00:49, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Guten Tag,

ich bin Journalist und würde mich mit Ihnen gerne über Ihre Arbeit als "Contributor" unterhalten. Vielleicht kontaktieren Sie mich einfach unter der Mail "ad.lobe@googlemail.com". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.241.65.6 (talk) 21:01, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Und weshalb, wenn ich fragen darf? --bender235 (talk) 22:39, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Dennis Shaw

The article Dennis Shaw has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsourced BLP

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. JBH (talk) 22:04, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Ratcliff Thomas

The article Ratcliff Thomas has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsourced BLP

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Wgolf (talk) 22:16, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

About your (non)participation in the January 2012 SOPA vote

Hi Bender235. I am Piotr Konieczny (User:Piotrus), you may know me as an active content creator (see my userpage), but I am also a professional researcher of Wikipedia. Recently I published a paper (downloadable here) on reasons editors participated in Wikipedia's biggest vote to date (January 2012 WP:SOPA). I am now developing a supplementary paper, which analyzes why many editors did not take part in that vote. Which is where you come in :) You are a highly active Wikipedian (47th to be exact), and you were active back during the January 2012 discussion/voting for the SOPA, yet you did not chose to participate in said vote. I'd appreciate it if you could tell me why was that so? For your convenience, I prepared a short survey at meta, which should not take more than a minute of your time. I would dearly appreciate you taking this minute; not only as a Wikipedia researcher but as a fellow content creator and concerned member of the community (I believe your answers may help us eventually improve our policies and thus, the project's governance). PS. If you chose to reply here (on your userpage), please WP:ECHO me. Thank you! --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 16:57, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

@Piotrus:. My memory's a bit hazy, but I think I did vote for the SOPA blackout. I actually see my vote here. Are we talking of different things?

Recalling events, I was in favor of the blackout right from the beginning, because I recognized the threat SOPA would pose to Wikipedia. --bender235 (talk) 18:17, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you - you are right, I somehow missed your vote there. Once again, thank you for taking time to answer! --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 18:24, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Discussion about HTTPS at Village Pump (Proposals)

There is a proposal to enable HTTPS by default for all readers on Wikipedia at the Village Pump. You are being notified because you have previously expressed interest in matters related to this subject. Your input in the discussion would be welcome. Thank you, Tony Tan⁹⁸ · talk 19:41, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. --bender235 (talk) 22:02, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Tony Tan 98 I saw your message here and then looked at the discussion on the pump.... egads. Well, that turned worse than I thought and my thoughts were very, very low to begin with. I don't think there is a chance until Wikipedia moves to HTTP/2. At that point, one can say https is faster than http. Enabling SPDY was on the Wikimedia technical team's agenda for last quarter, but never got looked at. Most of last quarter's agenda wasn't looked at or finished. SPDY and/or HTTP/2 is not currently on any agenda that I know of. Bgwhite (talk) 09:52, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

@Bgwhite: Yeah, the discussion at the pump is not looking very good. My hopes were up when Jimbo made a comment that I thought was mostly positive, but then there were many opposes. Now I will just have to see how the discussion goes. I don't really understand why some users are so against this; many issues that they mentioned (performance, server load, actual security, censorship, etc.) were addressed by replies from me and others. Anyways, I would like the opinions of as many people as possible so you are also welcome to comment there. Best, Tony Tan⁹⁸ · talk 15:51, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, well, Wikipedia seemingly can always only move as fast as the weakest link in the chain. Since there are apparently still people with IE6, or dial-up connections, we can't switch to modern and secure techniques. (see above) --bender235 (talk) 16:47, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

@Tony Tan: and Bender. I just installed the HTTP2/SPDY detector plugin for chrome. It gives a little symbol if either one is installed. According to the plugin, Wikipedia is running SPDY v 3.1. I hadn't seen anything that SPDY was enabled on Wikipedia. There is also a firefox plugin.

The Chrome plugin will tell if QUIC is installed. It doesn't show up in the icon, but does if you click for more info. More on QUIC can be found here. Bgwhite (talk) 22:57, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

@Bgwhite: That's interesting. After a little digging I just realized that SPDY has been enabled since March, and that I had actually "subscribed" to the tracking bug a bit before, but forgot about it. According to this, WMF servers are now technically capable of serving HTTPS-by-default; they are just waiting for enough data to be gathered to make a decision. Tony Tan · talk 00:41, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the update Tony Tan. Looking at the phabricator reports, they are still in the process of optimizing SPDY via other changes. Nginx hasn't released a version that supports HTTP2 yet. Bgwhite (talk) 05:05, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

@Tony Tan and Magioladitis: They are turning on HTTPS by default. The Village pump post and they following sections are full derp. Blog post. They have also been making improvements to speed up things for https. I know they getting rid of bits.wikimedia.org because of https, see T95448. Bgwhite (talk) 08:31, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I welcome this move. --bender235 (talk) 08:39, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

This is great. Thanks for letting me know! Tony Tan · talk 20:15, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 14 March

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Sylvia Likens page, your edit caused a URL error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:26, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

automated substitution of http in URLs outside of the URL's protocol

Hi, Re special:diff/651836097, sometimes changes like this may be warranted but IMO they shouldn't be done automatically. Changing the protocol of a URL is one thing, changing an "http://" that occurs within a URL path is a different matter. --Jeremyb (talk) 22:26, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

You're right. That edit was a lapse. I'm sorry. --bender235 (talk) 22:29, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

your edit on Germanwings Flight 9525

fyi i found your edit on Germanwings Flight 9525 rather unconstructive to say the least.

TYour edit summary this is how you link between different language versions could be called merely arrogant, if it was based on knowledge.

Since it produced this garbage {{Interlanguage link multi|Joseph-König-Gymnasium|de|3=Joseph-König-Gymnasium Haltern am See}}, I call it incompetent. It seems

Lastly, you seem to not to have the faintest idea how to interact with fellow editors. --Wuerzele (talk) 22:32, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, you may want to check that again. Also, have a look at {{link-interwiki}}. Have a nice day. --bender235 (talk) 22:38, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Please can you check all refs at these pages 1) Lupton family 2) Potternewton 3) Martineau family 4) Headingley 5) Oswald Birley

Thanks so much - I struggle a bit with it all Mike — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.214.63.12 (talk) 06:57, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Check them for what in particular? --bender235 (talk) 13:27, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 2 April

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Averroes page, your edit caused a duplicate page number error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:37, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Albert Crewe, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chesterton. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

GBooks template

I've seen you doing stuff like this recently and I don't understand it most of the time. What on earth is the point of using it when the info is already "parameterised" in a cite books template, for example? It looks like yet more daft template changes just for the sake of it. Has there been some sort of discussion about this somewhere? - Sitush (talk) 16:49, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

I implemented {{Google books}} because it automatically enables protocol-relative URLs, which are recommended following this policy discussion. Also, my edits remove spurious tracking parameters as recommended here. I'm sorry for not following the existing style, though. Sometimes it is hard to tell whether an article has an "established style" if there are all kinds of different references, including bare links. --bender235 (talk) 18:00, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

The whole thing seems like a load of bollocks. We really do have to stop fussing because I guarantee you it is driving a lot of established contributors away. And since we're not doing well filling their ranks that is pretty disastrous. I do wish the tech folks would keep everyone properly in the loop and that they would stop fiddling around with citation styles and formats. I'd love to hear what Eric Corbett thinks of this. We're increasing our number of (usually crap) articles exponentially and we're fighting silly fires like this. - Sitush (talk) 18:18, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Additionally, you didn't even need to use that template to create hte prurl if it is that important to you. Just do the // thing, surely? - Sitush (talk) 18:22, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

What's the big deal anyways? Sure, {{Google books}} creates a rather ugly ad hoc style, but if incorporated in {{cite book}} as |url={{Google books |plainurl=yes ... }} it does not disrupt any citation style. It's just a little technical tweak that makes sure you leave Wikipedia on a secure connection if you entered it the same way.

P.S.: yes, // would do the same trick. However, it is less flexible if, in the near future, Google abandons unsecure HTTP entirely. If they do, then for us it's just a minor change in a widely deployed template, rather than having to fix a million links. --bender235 (talk) 18:24, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

@Sitush. I think it's just another step in the attempt to drive all editors away. Eric Corbett 18:27, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Nobody is supposed to be “driven away.” This is just minor technical stuff that (content) contributors don't even have to worry about. --bender235 (talk) 18:34, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Really? Eric Corbett 18:40, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

It might be technical but it is not minor. Stop fiddling around, please - you are making things more complex even for those of us who supposedly know what we are doing and we poor content contributors do have to worry about it: you're stuffed without us. If you must change all instances relating to GBooks because of WP:PRURL then surely it would be better to run a bot or AWB: search for "http://books.google.*" and strip out the necessary; ditto for "https://books.google.* - Sitush (talk) 18:55, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Providing properly formatted citations is difficult enough as it is, without introducing this monster. Eric Corbett 19:02, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

It certainly could be done like that. But that would fix only one problem. What I also like to do is remove bare URLs. That's why I do it manually. --bender235 (talk) 18:59, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Does your template support the cs2 citation style for instance Bender? It doesn't seem that it does. Eric Corbett 18:58, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes, it's the same story. Just |url={{Google books |plainurl=yes ... }} inside of {{citation}}. Done. --bender235 (talk) 19:00, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) But you were not just removing bare urls in the example I gave, nor in others that I have seen. And what you should have done was stick with whatever template seemed most appropriate of those that were already in use, not introduce yet another variant. - Sitush (talk) 19:02, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

In most cases, I do this. --bender235 (talk) 19:04, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Well, at least do me one favour if you must persist with this bizarre style. Before applying it to an article, first check whether I have contributed and if I have then don't bother. Fix the barelinks, by all means; strip the http etc, sure; but don't add that template - perhaps you don't realise how many problems we already have without adding another layer of broken brackets, malformed arguments and different cite styles into the mix. Just leave it well alone if I've been there before you. Please. Gnoming is easy; really keeping tabs on stuff takes more effort. - Sitush (talk) 19:22, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but nobody owns an article, or has a veto right about what may be edited. --bender235 (talk) 19:26, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

You are not sorry at all. However, you are correct. Which is why I will most likely revert you on every occasion. I'm not being bullied by you or anyone else. For starters, you may have forgotten about WP:CITEVAR. - Sitush (talk) 23:50, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

• This template is not even half-baked, and I suggest that it be deleted forthwith. Eric Corbett 19:48, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Feel free to run a TfD. --bender235 (talk) 19:50, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

I will. Eric Corbett 19:55, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

@Eric Corbett: Personally, I'd prefer this template would turn into one of those bot-enhanced citation templates, like {{cite doi}}, that produce a nice CS1 citation just from entering {{Google books |id=7rB8dq6r7lEC }}. Only the {{Google books |plainurl=yes |id=7rB8dq6r7lEC }} cases should remain untouched. --bender235 (talk) 14:26, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

You can paste google book urls into here. I agree with Sitush and Eric, it's important to display all info in citations and references. I don't think it's a good idea relying on templates like this, this isn't a solution. If you want to draw up refs quicker as I say, use the tool I linked.♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:15, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

I totally agree with you. Heck, I spent most of my time on Wikipedia fulling out incomplete references. I never meant for {{Google books}} to replace {{cite books}}, but rather to complement it. I never replaced a {{cite books}} with a {{Google books}}. If anything, I replaced a bare URL with {{Google books}} (which, I know, is only a temporary solution, but better than nothing). --bender235 (talk) 16:02, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Citation format

On the article Statistical model you changed the citation format. I much prefer the previous version: it makes the list of References a source of useful information, and does not have duplicates. Hence, I reverted your changes. The format that I like best is the one used in Akaike information criterion. There, the Notes section has links to the References. SolidPhase (talk) 13:52, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

I don't really agree with your decision, but ok. --bender235 (talk) 15:52, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. Each note now links to the appropriate item in References. SolidPhase (talk) 16:36, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Andrew George MP. Wonder why you edited out the section MP's Expenses? This information is verifiable and was in the National Press. As a Public figure and elected member of the British Parliament it is essential that people are aware of such matters concerning elected members? Removing the said article is hiding the undeniable facts.

Template:Google books

I oppose the addition of this template to medical articles. IMO the last thing we need is more complicated templates that work in no other language of Wikipedia. Will start a discussion at WT:MED Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:24, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

To be honest, I'd prefer a |googlebooks= parameter in our CS1 templates, like {{cite book}}, any time. So that the Google books link would be automatically created from that information and the |page= info. --bender235 (talk) 18:09, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes that would be better. We need to convince the WMF to create a list of templates that are supported across all languages. Maybe with Lila's new tech initiative we can get tech support time. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 14:40, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Everett Peter Greenberg

Thank you very much for general improvements to the page (Everett Peter Greenberg). Zenqueue (talk) 07:24, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

You're welcome. --bender235 (talk) 10:55, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Spaces in headings

FYI, removing the spaces next to == in headings is pointless. The MOS:HEADINGS says either is fine, and it makes no difference at all to how the article is rendered and presented to the user. Tayste (edits) 21:43, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Persondata

Hi Bender235, I noticed you added Persondata to one of the articles which I created. I wanted to let you know that Wikipedia:Persondata has apparantly been deprecated. See the link for more info. I also did not know until someone pointed it out to me. Crispulop (talk) 18:19, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

I saw that myself earlier today. That whole debate went past me. --bender235 (talk) 18:20, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Refspace

Looking at your edits here, some of them (adding spaces before ref tags) seem opposite to edits others are making, citing WP:REFSPACE. You may want to reconsider using a tool to make those edits, and maybe discuss with other tool users/developers as appropriate. I'm not rolling back your changes, but if you think some of them should be rolled back in light of the policy, feel free to do so. Thanks for your contributions! --ProtectorServant (talk) 02:16, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

I don't think any of my edits added spaces in front of Ref-tags. Have a look at that diff you linked. There is no such change. --bender235 (talk) 06:27, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Misrepresenting village pump consensus

Hi! In response to this and other related edits: I don't have a problem with converting http:// links into https, but the edit summary you're using implies that this is condoned by the village pump discussion, which is not true — the VP discussion recommends protocol-relative URLs for websites supporting both. Please change the edit summary for these edits. This was already pointed out to you by me and another user at User talk:Bender235/2014 archive#http or https. -- intgr [talk] 15:51, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

You're right. I'll fix that. Anyhow, protocol-relative URLs no longer make sense since Wikipedia is HTTPS-only. --bender235 (talk) 16:11, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

This edit replaced some http entries with https. The last village pump discussion (from January 2014) recommended protocol-relative links for sites supporting both http and https. If you think that the 2014 consensus has been superseded by a later discussion, I'd appreciate being pointed to it. Your comments here suggest that you feel free to ignore the previous consensus because some ignorance was involved. Using AWB to make edits that go against consensus might be questioned, since AWB is granted to trusted users. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 16:12, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Again, protocol-relative links do not make sense anymore since all Wikimedia projects are HTTPS for everyone. --bender235 (talk) 17:04, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Have you found anyone who agrees with you on that? The fact that Wikipedia content is now served by default as HTTPS doesn't say anything about how we should code external links within our articles. If this is so obvious, you should be able to link to a consensus discussion. EdJohnston (talk) 21:45, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Your user page actually refers to the discussion that concluded don't do what you are doing! Why are you doing it? Why are you still doing it? Shenme (talk) 06:24, 17 June 2015 (UTC) [2]

I really didn't expect this to be so hard to understand. Let me re-phrase it in simple English. The feature of protocol-relative URL is that the protocol for the link is chosen based on how you entered Wikipedia. For example, [//archive.org Internet Archive] would be [http://archive.org Internet Archive] if you entered Wikipedia on HTTP, and [https://archive.org Internet Archive] if you used HTTPS. This made sense as long as there were two different protocols supported by Wikipedia. But since June 12, entering Wikipedia on HTTP is no longer an option (try for yourself: click http://en.wikipedia.org). Thus, all protocol-relative URLs will be HTTPS links from now on. That's why I wrote “protocol-relative links do not make sense anymore.” I hope that was clear enough. --bender235 (talk) 07:36, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

The answer is very simple -- reading Wikipedia content on Wikipedia is only one way to read it. We use licenses that encourage others to republish our work. Other sites do not use HTTPS (and may have good reason not to) -- there is no need to force all users toward HTTPS rather than HTTP. There is no downside I'm aware of to using the "[//..." format. (It also has the -- tiny -- virtue of being using a few less characters.) -Pete (talk) 15:44, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

That is true. Haven't thought about that. --bender235 (talk) 16:26, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

• If there is consensus for this, wouldn't it be best done by a bot? And the way you're going about it would make it more difficult to return to protocol-relative links in case WP ever re-allows http or creates an insecurewikipedia.org as some have commented about. Perhaps you should seek a fresh consensus if you want to press forward with this AWB task outside a BRFA. –xeno^talk 10:39, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

It could be done by a bot, I guess. In some cases, however, I also manually remove link-clutter. Not sure if our bots can do that. Anyhow, I don't think this issue requires a lenghty "consensus-seeking" discussion. Wikimedia's HSTS move is not going to be reversed. --bender235 (talk) 13:05, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

June 2015

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Ballot may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• called a "'''ballot paper'''".<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.learnersdictionary.com/search/ballot[1|title=Ballot|publisher=Merriam-Webster Learner’s Dictionary |accessdate=2012-11-07}}</ref> The

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 09:57, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Convert disp=s

Re your edit at Sławomir Rawicz, disp=s has been deprecated for {{convert}}. It is now equivalent to disp=or. This is just FYI, no action needed. I'm letting you know because using a deprecated option puts the article in an error tracking category which I clean up. Johnuniq (talk) 03:00, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Hmm, I didn't know that. Thanks. --bender235 (talk) 06:05, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Changes to the Battle of Waterloo

With his edit you have broken the text for text-readers. This was discussed in depth see Talk:Battle of Waterloo/Archive 11#Pseudo-headings after the headings were changed into section heading justified with:

• "Do not make pseudo-headings using bold or semicolon markup." - Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Accessibility#Headings

They were altered again to '''text''' to remove text-reader problem. So please revert you changes to the bold lines which were changed form '''text''' to ;text -- PBS (talk) 13:57, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't know that the semicolon formating is deprecated. Is that new? --bender235 (talk) 14:08, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

I didn't until that debate and I had used the ";" for years. So I guess it has been pressed more in the last year or so. From what I have seen on other sites if you place a colon after the bold then the HTML that results is ok. But I have not discussed that and quite frankly it is not worth the effort when ordinary boding usually works just as well. -- PBS (talk) 17:30, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

• What a load of crap. "That sort of defective html causes annoyance for screen readers who are led to expect a definition, "

This is not "defective" (or even not valid HTML) see http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/lists.html#h-10.3

For the HTML standard, any combination of <DT> and <DD> within a <DL> is valid (except for the empty list <DL>...</DL>). If a screen reader has a problem with such valid HTML, the screen reader is broken. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:54, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

To Create

How To Create Pages Mister J. Ocampo (talk) 15:09, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Is that a question? --bender235 (talk) 13:38, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

https

Would you please leave changes such as http->https to bots? You're spamming my watchlist at a rate of 10+ edits per minute, which is too fast for AWB use anyway. If you were a bot, I could filter you out, otherwise I miss vandalism. See also points 3-4 here. Materialscientist (talk) 13:39, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

I thought about this, too. Maybe I should ask for setting up a bot. --bender235 (talk) 13:41, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Yes, please stop, for the same reasons. Fgnievinski (talk) 02:39, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

I initiated a bot request. Feel free to comment. --bender235 (talk) 05:50, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Sacagawea statue

Hi Bender, I am so sorry if I am not doing this right. I was just wondering if you could add my bronze Sacagawea statue in Cascade Locks, Oregon to the list of statues on the Sacagawea Wikipedia page? My name is Heather Soderberg and my website is www.heathersoderberg.com Thank you so much! Heather Hsoderberg13 (talk) 04:44, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure what I am supposed to do about this. --bender235 (talk) 06:43, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

https

I hate complaining, but can't help it - your https edits do mask vandalism. Materialscientist (talk) 10:08, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

I know what you mean, but this of course is a possibility which each of our edits, semi-automatic or not. I'll do my best to catch nonsense where ever I find it. --bender235 (talk) 11:24, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

@Materialscientist: we both know my edits are not a violation of AWB rules. But I understand your concern with the technicalities. What would be a compromise you could live with? Me creating a bot-account and running those routines over there? --bender235 (talk) 09:43, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

@Materialscientist: Hello? --bender235 (talk) 15:25, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Google books

With regards to this edit. It is not a good idea to change from a specific nationality to com in Google books. Sometimes the pages are only visible for certain nationalities. If for example you change google.co.uk to google.com, google usually defaults that to the nationality of the IP address making the request and that may make the pages inaccessible to some uses when it would be visible if the choose to look at it with google.co.uk (as an example).

I never heard of that and I highly doubt this is true. Do you have a source confirming this sort of regional discrimination of Google Books? What is true is that Google Books usually re-directs a visitor of books.google.com to say books.google.fr if she's located in France. Also, it switches the language from English to French (in this case). Rather than having this switch "predetermined", it is better to offer our "general audience" readers the "general link" which is books.google.com. --bender235 (talk) 16:55, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

If you look at my edit history you will see it is very large and I do not have an example to hand. But I can assure you that it is true in some cases. I often test a page that is not available within the UK (uk) against Canada (ca) and New Zealand (nz) and while it is not always true that the book is accessible through those domains it is not uncommon either. This is not access for the whole book (which is quite frequently available in the states but not in the other domains) but for sections of a book. -- PBS (talk) 13:57, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I'm really not convinced of this story, because I find it implausible. Even if Google restricts access to some books because of some stupid copyright law (which definitely could be the case), the domain on which you enter Google Books should be totally irrelevant. Geo-blocking depends on your IP (hence your location), not the domain you're trying to access. So unless you can provide at least one example, I'm not buying it. --bender235 (talk) 14:02, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

As a secondary issue I am not at all sure that just because one accesses Wikipedia via https it is necessary to access links external to Wikipedia as https rather than http. What is your thinking about that and do you check if the external site is running an https server before you make a change? -- PBS (talk) 14:36, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I certainly do that. Google has long been offering (and encouraging!) the use of HTTPS of all of its services. As has the Internet Archive, another of the URLs I am converting. --bender235 (talk) 16:55, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

AWB

Kindly note that you have been removed from Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage, see here. --Human3015 knock knock • 08:59, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

I am stunned that you have done this has been done under false pretense. I do realize that the Wikimedia Foundation's decision to make Wikipedia and all related projects HTTPS by default has been somewhat controversial of late, but accusing me of breaching AWB rules is just ridiculous. --bender235 (talk) 09:07, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

I have not done it, I'm not admin, I was just informing you. admin Materialscientist removed you, you can give your explanation on his talk page. Human3015 knock knock • 09:21, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't realize it wasn't you. My apologies. --bender235 (talk) 09:27, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Alan Sharp

Hello bender, I'd love to know what you changed on Alan Sharps (my grandfather) Wikipedia page, thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.61.42.22 (talk) 23:39, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Well, as you can see I converted some external links from HTTP to HTTPS. It's a mere technicality that increases privacy for our readers. --bender235 (talk) 05:34, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

https for archive.org

Your edit at Andrea Dworkin was acceptable but not for the reason in your edit summary, unless something has changed again. Wikimedia generally prefers HTTPS over HTTP, but the link you edited was for <archive.org>, not a Wikimedia property, and, because of restrictions in some nations, Wikimedia does not always require HTTPS, so external links to Wikimedia should begin with the double slash that comes after the opening protocol and colon, as in //example.com. In the archive.org Dowrkin case, both protocols work. Nick Levinson (talk) 20:16, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Wikimedia does not "prefer", it has set it as default recently. Wikipedia in HTTP is no longer available. Thus, protocol-relative links are pointless. --bender235 (talk) 21:02, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for telling me that, I learned something, but that doesn't apply to non-Wikimedia sites (and I'm not clear if all non-English Wikimedia sites are in that exclusive mode yet). On Saturday, I tested a site of my own that I set up for HTTP by trying the HTTPS protocol and got a browser message about the connection being untrusted (I don't have that kind of certificate) and, according to the browser, possibly a target of site impersonation. My site is minor but later the same day I tried a *.gov site that worked with HTTP but failed with HTTPS (www.cdc.gov). So, unless you're testing every non-Wikimedia link or at least every non-Wikimedia subdomain, I wouldn't convert their protocols to HTTPS. I assume protocol relativity works only for Wikimedia URLs (and perhaps some others but that's only a speculation), so I'll continue to link to the URLs that I actually used. Nick Levinson (talk) 00:27, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

You will notice that changing Internet Archive links to https does not affect external links to www.cdc.gov or any other site. In fact, I only changed those links for websites that definitely support HTTPS and encourage its use, such as YouTube, Google Books (basically any Google service), and finally the Internet Archive. That's it. --bender235 (talk) 06:22, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Durbin–Watson statistic, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page SAS. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Since when?

Since when do we do http to https link changing? MSJapan (talk) 09:13, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Since there's no grand agreement on things I can't say what “we” do, but I certainly found it useful. A lot of websites that Wikipedia articles rely on as sources offer HTTPS without any downsides, so it seemed only plausible to me to do this. A lot of users thanked me so far and apparently agreed. In general, using HTTPS is not sufficient, but certainly a necessary step to ensure readers' privacy. HTTPS prevents entities to scan traffic at internet hubs. --bender235 (talk) 09:20, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Should've read your talk page. This seems to be related to an earlier discussion, and seems to be your personal judgment. This needs wider discussion. MSJapan (talk) 09:14, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

@MSJapan: Wider discussion? How about WP:VPP? Wikipedia and all its Wikimedia sister projects already moved to HTTPS permanently. For what reason should external links not? --bender235 (talk) 09:26, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

That VPP discussion closed no consensus due to technical issues (as clearly stated), and WMF does not decide what services external servers should run. That's why not. MSJapan (talk) 09:32, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

MSJapan FYI... The VPP you mention is moot. It was closed as something the Mediawiki people should decide. They decided and Wikipedia is now https only. The only reason not to move to https is where countries (ie China & Russia) are blocking websites. https makes it harder to go around the blocks. Reasons not to switch, such as https is slower, are no longer the case. https is now faster. Another FYI... the new HTTP/2 protocol technically handles both http and https, but the browser companies are only going to support https. Note, I have no position on what Bender is doing. Bgwhite (talk)

@Bgwhite: fyi, it is this edit we're talking about.

• Bender... I don't think what you are doing is wrong... but you are going about it in the wrong way. Making mass changes to lots of articles in a short period of time is almost seen as disruptive (it is seen as crusading, and people react negatively to any form of crusading). You need to go slower... remember that most editors don't know about the WMF decision to favor https, or why they favor it. They will instinctively react negatively to mass changes (especially to changes to citations). This reaction may be a "knee-jerk" reaction, but it is a natural, instinctive reaction never the less. You need to anticipate this reaction, and take the time to educate other editors as to why you are making the changes you wish to make. I realize that you left edit summaries explaining what you were doing, but a simple edit summary is often not enough.

What I would suggest is that you craft a short paragraph, outlining the situation with http and https... something you can cut and paste onto the talk pages of articles. Post this paragraph, wait a day or two... then return and (if there are no objections) update the links to https. If there are objections, take the time to respond to them. At a minimum, this will let others know that you are acting in good faith. Blueboar (talk) 14:20, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

I see your point, but do you honestly believe this is practical given almost five million articles on Wikipedia? Am I supposed to post on five million talk pages about this issue? It doesn't seem practical to me.

In my opinion, this subtle URL switch from HTTP to HTTPS for (some!) websites is no different from other low-level copy-editing types of changes that I have made for years. For instance, I replaced some words---some words with some words—some words, or 4x winner with 4× winner on thousands of articles without anyone complaining. The HTTPS switch is of the same kind, only that it is less esthetic and more practical. It harms no one. Honestly I have no clue why anyone would oppose this other than pure “nobody's touching my article without asking me” kind of knee-jerk reactions. --bender235 (talk) 15:51, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Bender, if the VPP was moot, you should not have cited it as support for your position. You have been questioned by at least three different editors on this talk page and have yet to give an answer that boils down to anything other than "because I want to." The fact that WMF is https does not force external sites to do so. I went back to VPP, and if a site does not use https, the reference breaks, period. Therefore, there appears to be no pressing reasons to change external citations, especially when you have no idea if those sites are running https services. So do you want to "protect users' privacy" or only make them think their privacy is secure? The sites that are being visited still use cookies, https or no. So I don't see a pressing need or an appropriate rationale for mass editing like this. MSJapan (talk) 17:08, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the elaborate answer, and giving me the chance to clear some obvious misunderstandings. The point "if a site does not use https, the reference breaks" is, of course, true. That's why I do not convert each and every link, but only those who offer and encourage the use of HTTPS. One example is the Internet Archive, who reached out to the New York Times for their announcement of switching to HTTPS. I repeat, they encourage readers to use their HTTPS service for sake of their own privacy. Same goes for Google who, being a tech-savvy corporation, have been early to the game and both enabled and encouraged the use of HTTPS for their services since 2009. Google Books, Google News, and of course Archive.org are among the most linked-to references on Wikipedia. Both encourage HTTPS use. And if I change those links from HTTP to HTTPS, no reference will break. None.

As for "why is this important since there are cookies and all...": a HTTPS connection to Google or Internet Archive obviously does not protect your privacy from Google or Internet Archive. But from everybody else. Who could that be? Well, the list of adversaries is long. And I'm not tin-foiling about government agencies here, although that is a practical concern for everyone currently not in a western democracy. Instead I am talking about any entity that could manipulate plain HTTP traffic between you and a Google or IA server. People that slide-in malware or worse into your traffic if it is unencrypted. I don't want to expand this to a 101 lecture on internet security, but I hope I could clear some misconceptions. To summarize, the reason to read Google Books or Internet Archive via HTTPS is no different from the one for Wikipedia: "to ensure the security and integrity of data you transmit." --bender235 (talk) 18:05, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Well, HTTPS isn't perfect either. Also, I'm not going to dig everything out, but there are problematic edits. I will point out this, where you've changed not only HTTP to HTTPS, but also changed a template. So you're doing more than just conversion, and not disclosing that - fact to cn is totally different. You also tagged a 1068 byte removal as a "minor edit", as well as a 658 byte change, both of which appear in contribs in the dark red "major change" category. Lastly, why are we at Wikipedia beholden to an external site's policy? MSJapan (talk) 18:40, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

MSJapan I don't see how a template changed from the diff you gave. Everything stayed the same except for the https change. The two "minor edits" you gave were indeed minor (depending on one's view of the https change). How many bytes were changed isn't the definition of minor. Combining refs into one named ref or cleaning the cruft from a Google link are minor. Bgwhite (talk) 22:41, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Once again sorry to correct your misunderstandings. FREAK is an attack on a particular low-security export-graded level of encryption that is deprecated for decades. The disclosure of the attack led to many fixes in SSL/TLS software. As for the "problematic edits": this changes a template to its original name (AWB auto feature), and this removes a reference duplicate by adding a name tag. Both are perfectly inline with Wikipedia guidelines and policies. I'm unsure where this discussion is going. I get the sense that your opposition is unreasonable, hence a "knee-jerk" move. --bender235 (talk) 20:40, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

In the end, majority of links will go the https route. Things will really start rolling when HTTP/2 gets installed on web sites. It might be better to wait until this happens. Say when Google finally goes https for unlogged in users, then change the links and use a bot to do it. Would save time and grief. Bgwhite (talk) 22:41, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes, HTTP/2 will be a game changer, but I don't see it widely deployed until the 2020s. --bender235 (talk) 05:54, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

@MSJapan and Bgwhite: here's a wider discussion. Please weigh in. Also, now there's an RfC ongoing. --bender235 (talk) 19:26, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 14 August

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Dominion Theology page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:25, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Template:Marriage

Per consensus at Template talk:Marriage#Who is widowed - topic or topic's spouse?, please do not use "widowed" when the spouse has died. It should only be used when the article topic has died and their spouse survived. Thanks. DrKiernan (talk) 21:14, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

I see. Thanks for letting me know. --bender235 (talk) 05:53, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Convert disp=s

Re this edit at Douglas DC-3: The "slash" options like disp=s were deprecated in {{convert}} quite a while ago. They now show "or" instead of a slash, and they also put the page in a tracking category for cleanup. The following shows a tiny asterisk after each convert, and holding the mouse over that shows a warning. Pretty obscure, I agree.

Its cruise speed ({{convert|207|mph|abbr=on|disp=s}}) and range ({{convert|1500|mi|abbr=on|disp=s}}) →

Its cruise speed (207 mph (333 km/h)) and range (1,500 mi (2,400 km))

Anyway, I will replace disp=s with disp=or in that article in due course, but you might like to bear this in mind for the future. Johnuniq (talk) 04:45, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Alright, thank you. I'll keep it in mind. --bender235 (talk) 14:55, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Mohammed Aman (disambiguation)

The article Mohammed Aman (disambiguation) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unnecessary disambiguation per WP:TWODABS

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -- Tavix ^(talk) 23:20, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

No objection. --bender235 (talk) 23:37, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

September 2015

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Efraín Ríos Montt may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "<>"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:53, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Martez Ivey, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Halfback. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:43, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, fixed. --bender235 (talk) 19:28, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Just wanted to say thanks

For tirelessly getting links rewritten to their stronger HTTPS forms. I've read a number of comment threads reacting to your changes, and people seem to keep interpreting it as blind activism that will break links, rather than thoughtful selection of institutions which have made public and clear declarations of HTTPS support and enforcement. I appreciate your detailed responses to each one, and I hope you continue working on rewriting them. Keep a cool head and stay polite, no matter how many people don't seem to read your full rationale, and you'll make a stronger Wikipedia. Konklone (talk) 18:18, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

I appreciate the pep talk. But this has come to a point where there is not much left I can do. Changing literally millions of links by hand is too tedious. Using AWB for this, as I used to, is no longer allowed. AWB authorities, in particular Materialscientist who revoked my AWB editing rights twice now, made it clear that they consider a switch to a secure URL protocol as insignificant and secondary as fixing wrongly piped Wikilinks like [[Airplane|Airplanes]] to [[Airplane]]s. A bot request, to have this task done fully automated, was run down by people who do not understand the issue.

So what's next? Since people on Wikipedia keep telling me how not to do this, I asked on WP:VPT which way is left. So far, none. In the end, this is a masterpiece of Wikibureaucracy. People who understand the issue agree that it is important to protect readers' privacy, but no one can come up with a way to do it that doesn't violate some petty rule from years ago. --bender235 (talk) 19:42, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

@Konklone: feel free to leave a comment here. --bender235 (talk) 00:46, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

Ah, looks I'm too late (I don't get notifications of Wikipedia pings, as a not-super-active community member). The discussion was archived or removed. Feel free to email me at eric@konklone.com if I can ever be helpful. Konklone (talk) 21:07, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

@Konklone: It was indeed moved (and extended) to a Request for Comments on the issue. Please leave a comment if you have time. --bender235 (talk) 21:09, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Laabs

If you find time for it, please take a look at the article about Gustav Laabs. Any help is appreciated and I will of course add you to the DYK nom for the article.--BabbaQ (talk) 22:32, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure how I could help. --bender235 (talk) 22:40, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

A cupcake for you!

Thank you for your edits to Wikipedia more specifically Giancarlo Gandolfo. They are great! :)  ' Olowe2011 Talk 23:40, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

You're welcome. --bender235 (talk) 13:04, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Economic results of migration, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Foreign exchange. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:26, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, correction, a request

Hi, thanks for your edits to my page.

A correction - this links to the wrong footnote: "published by Hard News, in India.[1]" - it goes to " http://www.chowk.com/writers/Beena-Sarwar Jump up ^" - I was a featured contributor at Chowk.com

The Hardnews link is: http://www.hardnewsmedia.com/column/personal-political

I've added some info to the page but I'm not sure about the format.

Also - I would love to see a page about someone - is this a conflict of interest: my mother Zakia Sarwar, a teacher, teacher trainer pioneer and pioneer in large classes teaching in Pakistan whose work is acknowledged worldwide. She started the Society of Pakistan English Language Teachers (SPELT - http://spelt.org.pk/) over 30 years ago. Here are a couple of links about her and her work: http://lasig.iatefl.org/uploads/1/1/8/3/11836487/seitenaus44.pdf http://e.thenews.com.pk/newsmag/mag/detail_article.asp?id=2043&magId=1

Thank you Beenasarwar (talk) 04:45, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

I have a question

Hey..I'm completely new here on Wiki and just made this account to ask you a question but I'd like to ask you this question in private..so how can I do that? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Curiousmind2015 (talk • contribs) 13:17, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

There's an "email this user" button on the left side of your screen that will, obviously, send an email to me. --bender235 (talk) 16:25, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Bad link

You've just made a large number of edits, each with a red-linked "this RfC" in the edit summary. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:59, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Shot. Didn't realize that the shortcut WP:VPR does not work for the archive. But I was referring to this RfC) --bender235 (talk) 17:04, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation; I've now made it work, for that particular archive page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:47, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

archive.org / HTTPS / PRURL

Hi, re this, I wasn't aware of that RfC while it was open. Are you (and others) also changing existing protocol-relative links to archive.org? If so, why? ―Mandruss ☎ 19:26, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

No, so far I don't. Since Wikipedia is HTTPS-only, all protocol-relative links will be HTTPS anyways, so what would be the point of changing, right? --bender235 (talk) 13:10, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Right, thank you. I'll continue to use PRURL for archive.org, then. In fact, one might go so far as to say that we should be changing HTTP to PRURL, not to HTTPS. ―Mandruss ☎ 03:03, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Why would you say so? It's not like Wikimedia is going to switch back to HTTP. Ever. --bender235 (talk) 04:04, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

My thinking was that HTTPS and PRURL have exactly the same effect for archive.org, so why spend six characters unnecessarily? Upon further reflection, it does require some editor effort to remove those six characters from new URLs that have been copied from the browser's address bar. And it makes sense to do them all the same way, thus simplifying the environment a bit. So maybe I'll start using HTTPS instead of PRURL, and changing both HTTP and PRURL to HTTPS when I see them. ―Mandruss ☎ 06:09, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

I liked the idea of protocol-relative URL when Wikimedia still gave the option between HTTP or HTTPS access. But now it seems more like an obsolete feature. --bender235 (talk) 12:53, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi Bender235 and Mandruss! Sorry for this late comment. I only noticed this RfC after it was closed. I think that since WP has switched to https by default, it would be much better to use WP:PRURLs (where applicable). Dropping six characters after a copy-paste from an address bar is not such a hard task, isn't it? Using Protocol-relative URLs takes less space, as it was already spotted. Moreover, it could be usefull, some day, to let user-agents opt-out of the https redirection (e.g. with a cookie or an http header). I know that this sounds crazy. Everyone, including myself, prefers https. But, as we all know, using PR links instead of https links won't change anything for https users and won't block anyone in some countries where people might be affraid of complaining when WP gets blocked through https. Besides, the more we force Big Brother to increase its decryption power, the faster BB will get money for spying even more. BTW, the RfC could not be seen by readers living in countries that block https, so the concensus was reached among https-only readers. Sorry if I missed something. Ekkt0r (talk) 19:47, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

I don't buy that logic. There is basically no downside to traffic encryption, and even if this gives reason to ‘Big Brother’ to find ways to decrypt, the race will continue. TLS 1.3 is in the making. --bender235 (talk) 22:09, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

I do agree that there is no downside to traffic encryption. But this is not the point. Since:

• a) using WP:PRURLs will not disable https for anyone reading WP with https, and
• b) everyone is redirected to https when entering WP via http,

protocol-relative URLs for archive.org, books.google.com and any other site accepting both http and https (even if http gets instantly redirected to https by those sites) will continue to be rendered as https. So encryption will continue to be used for everyone.

On the other side, imagine that for some reason some user is forced to read WP through http. Should WP force this user to copy the https absolute link he/she wishes to follow, paste it in the address bar of a new tab, remove the s and, only then, clic "Go" or press return, and repeat all these steps for every link he/she wants to follow? If those users who might, some day, have no choice but access WP through http decide to go through the difficult task of first convincing WP to allow for an opt-out feature, and then opt-out to be able to visit WP with http, then they will be very upset everytime they see an absolute https link where a PR link would have been fine for everyone. These users will get bored of converting https to http and will wonder why PR links were not used.

If my suggestion of using protocol-relative URLs insteat of absolute https would have meant disabling https for anyone already using https, then I would not be writing all this. But this is not the case. Hardcoding https will only result in more trouble the day WP finds out that some countries are blocking https for selected users. Do you think these targeted users would be able to protest if they represent only a tiny percentage of the population in their countries? No, they will be ignored. Targeted blocks are probably already being used in some countries. Should WP disappoint those targetted users by adding an avoidable hassle (removing the s in some external links)? I don't think so. Creating potential problems for users that are targeted by their governments will not help these users fight their govs.

What I am proposing is absolutely neutral for everyone already using https. Using absolute https will only disapoint users, should an opt-out feature be adopted some day. I'm not suggesting to revert the decision of making https the default for WP. I'm suggesting that we keep articles as protocol-neutral as possible. I admit that having no https opt-out can drive some users in some countries to protest against blocks, but there will always be some users who won't be able to fight against blocks nor find workarounds. I just wish that these users be able to get an opt-out feature from WP if they can't fight against blocks by their govs. I agree that these users should fight against blocks, but I also think they know better than us whether such fights are worth or not. WP should not treat them badly just because they decide not to fight. WP should be, imho, as user-friendly as possible to all its users, even to those who don't want to fight. Some people might think that this is a bad idea and that WP should do politics. I would answer that WP can still do politics by refusing opt-outs or by accepting opt-outs only for carefully selected countries and for a limited time, until diplomacy gets rid of gov-driven blocs.

A tiny change to your AWB edit rule to make it convert http to PR links (instead of absolute https) would be so great! Don't you agree? Ekkt0r (talk) 06:14, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Another advantage of using protocol-relative URLs for archive.org and books.google.com is that if/when WP becomes available with an .onion address (as Deku-shrub suggested in this RfC, see Wikipedia_talk:External links/Archive 35#.onion linking and clearnet gateways and Wikipedia_talk:External links/Archive 35#.onion linking proposed standard for the archived discussions) then, in case archive.org and/or books.google.com also become available through a .onion address, a small number of changes (in the way PRs are handled) would probably be enough to have these links rendered as onion addresses. Ekkt0r (talk) 07:26, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

That would require both Wikipedia and Google (Books/News/etc.) to become available as .onion at the same time. Highly unlikely. --bender235 (talk) 15:42, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Well, I don't think it would require to add .onion availability for WP at the same time as archive.org and/or Google (Books/News/etc.) become available through .onion addresses. If WP becomes available through a .onion address, then whenever a WP:PRURL pointing to archive.org needs to be rendered for someone accessing WP through its .onion address, WP would use https if archive.org has not yet become available through a .onion address, or the clearnet onion gateway address of archive.org if it has already become available. The implementation of the PRURL renderer would first use a hash table to find whether or not the address in a given protocol-relative external link points to a website that is known by WP to be available through an associated .onion address and then, if the answer is yes, it would output the right .onion address. As you see, there is no need for any synchronisation. All we need is some changes in the renderer (to make it aware that it is working for WP's .onion address) and a small table of websites for which WP accepts to use their associated .onion address in PRURLs.

We also don't even need to update the hash table immediatly after a new website becomes available through a .onion address. This update just needs to be done if (and when) WP decides to start rendering PRURLs for that website using that site's official .onion gateway address.

I'm not an expert of Tor, but I think/hope that what I wrote makes sense. Ekkt0r (talk) 17:53, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure how that would work. If WP was available through an .onion address, all PRURL would link to .onion, too. Unless we add domain-specific filters to the Wiki software, which I don't see yet. --bender235 (talk) 18:47, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Yep, I also think that there would have to be some sort of filter. But if I'm not mistaken, nothing forbids a .onion website to have an external link to a normal site (i.e. without a .onion address). Of course, links from .onion to .onion would be prefered because in such situations no traffic needs to go through an exit node. Coming back to PRURLs, I would imagine that any attempt to make WP available through a .onion address should, during some beta phase, only try to convert PRURLs to .onion addresses. It would, later, also examine https and http. But I need to learn more about Tor... Ekkt0r (talk) 23:26, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

References

A bunch of your edits appeared in my watchlist. Most make sense, but I'm wondering why you reordered some references, like you did here. I'm not upset, just curious.--BrianCUA (talk) 17:57, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

The shuffling is done automatically by AWB, and it is to make sure that references appear in descending numeric order. In other words, A[1][2][3] rather than A[3][1][2]. --bender235 (talk) 19:38, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

I see. Sometimes when I put them in with the best first, so that even if they are not in numeric order my order is deliberate. It's really not a big deal, but I'm wondering if there is a policy on this or if it is just a style choice. --BrianCUA (talk) 13:10, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure, either. Like I said, AWB does it automatically, and they usually don't implement stuff that is not backed by atleast our WP:MOS. --bender235 (talk) 13:14, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Phil Prince at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 01:54, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Bender235. Please note that articles must be at least 1500 characters long to qualify for DYK. Please be encouraged to type more into the wikiarticle on Phil Prince. Thanks. --PFHLai (talk) 04:41, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

http/https

Thanks for putting them right but what's the difference? Regards Keith-264 (talk) 20:39, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

HTTPS is the encrypted version of HTTP. It basically prevents anyone between you and the webserver you accessed to read or interfere with the data you requested. There's also a nice website by the Federal Chief Information Officer on the issue. --bender235 (talk) 20:43, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Aah, thanks, I know it must be technical. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 22:30, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

You're welcome. --bender235 (talk) 23:02, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

October 2015

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to World War I casualties may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:04, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Oba Chandler

Hi, could anything be done with the four deadlinks at the Oba Chandler article detected today? :) If so any help is appreciated.--BabbaQ (talk) 23:35, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

I counted four. I fixed them now. But for future reference, doing this is pretty easy: have a look at WP:WBM. --bender235 (talk) 00:05, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Aristotle

Hi, why did you lock the aristotle page?? I discovered some interesting things that i would like to add. I understand you not wanting it to be vandalised but i would please like it if you cpuld un lock it. Thnx

,Amy White — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amy white1009 (talk • contribs) 16:10, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

I did not lock any page, since I am not an administrator. --bender235 (talk) 17:16, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Phil Prince

Hello! Your submission of Phil Prince at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 17:59, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Debate on Bernard Shaw's nationality.

Was he "Irish" or "British" or do we need to define his nationality in some other way? A debate on the subject, to reconsider a long-standing consensus that he was Irish, has started at talk:George Bernard Shaw. Just in case you're interested. Current comments are at "Nationality", at the foot of the page - although an earlier thread at "Irish"? may also be relevant. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 05:58, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Virginia Tech Project Invite

As a current or past contributor to a related article, I thought I'd let you know about WikiProject Virginia Tech, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Virginia Tech. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks and related articles. Thanks!

Go Hokies (talk) 04:16, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Nissan leaf

I don't see any mention of 2500+ Nissan leafs in Sri Lanka. Husny Mohamed (talk) 15:44, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

No sure what to make of this comment. Is there anything you want me to do? --bender235 (talk) 17:07, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Serneholt

If you want to, please help by improving this weeks TAFI article Marie Serneholt. Any help is appreciated.--BabbaQ (talk) 21:47, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

archive.org

I thought we agreed that we should use //archive.org/stream/etc, when referring to archive-links? See I'billin, Huldra (talk) 21:50, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

No, see this RfC. --bender235 (talk) 21:51, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Do you call that a good practice: you opened the RfC...then you closed it ...with the conclusion you wanted? Should you not have had the decency to let someone else close the RfC? I see some strong objections there, which you have ignored. Oh well, I guess a RfC about your conduct is next? Huldra (talk) 21:56, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

I did not close it. I merely added the archive templates on the top and bottom. And added a summary. Of course this is irrelevant, because what matters is others' opinions during the RfC. You can read it. So stop the ad personam.

But anyhow, if you think I somehow manufactured consensus in that RfC, feel free to open another one. Of course, no one will agree that we should use protocol-relative links for any website anymore, since Wikipedia is HTTPS-only now and forever. --bender235 (talk) 22:01, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

I see "In conclusion, there is near-unanimous support for converting the mentioned links to a secure HTTPS connection." signed by you...if you did not close it, who did? Huldra (talk) 22:02, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Looked up the version history for you. And again, what does it matter? The consensus is clear and obvious. --bender235 (talk) 22:05, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. Just to get this clear: it was archived by a bot, then you added "the conclusion"? Huldra (talk) 22:09, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Open an ANI and have an admin of your choice reword it, if it makes you feel better. Serious, this is ridiculous. The consensus in this RfC was crystal clear. --bender235 (talk) 22:11, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Fine, I will, Huldra (talk) 22:13, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

So you honestly accuse me of writing an RfC summary that is factually wrong? --bender235 (talk) 22:25, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. ..I think we need more eyes, Huldra (talk) 22:31, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Citation bot

I put in a bug report so that the citation bot will stop converting google books to http. AManWithNoPlan (talk) 03:01, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Where exactly? --bender235 (talk) 04:18, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Citation_bot#Google_https Citation Bot does the exact opposite of what you are doing, so I asked them to stop it. AManWithNoPlan (talk) 04:34, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I hope this gets fixed. --bender235 (talk) 16:27, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Benny Nelson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Halfback. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:57, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 20 November

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Taylor Creek, Ohio page, your edit caused a URL error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:24, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

History of Baden-Württemberg

Hello, Bender235 -- I just undid most of what had been done in an edit to History of Baden-Württemberg. I had to do that manually since a bot had added another edit. I didn't see the need for a "Needs a copy-edit" tag when I had just completed a thorough copy-edit of the article. Also, the editor had re-worded the first sentence so that it no longer made sense. Since I had forgotten to put the GOCE template on the article's talk page, I did that. However, I noticed that the size of an image in the article had also been changed. I didn't know whether to change that or not. I thought I'd ask you to check it. Corinne (talk) 01:09, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Ramon Llull

Hello, Bender.

On the Llull article, under his picture, the date of his beatification is 1847.

In the preliminary text, just before "Early Life..." the beatification date cited is 1857.

Thank you for your hard work!

Elaine Ginman97.34.1.37 (talk) 19:09, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Not sure what you're asking me to do. --bender235 (talk) 19:57, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:48, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Florida-Tennessee

Hi, Bender. I had to revert a bunch of re-spacing edits on the Florida–Tennessee football rivalry article, going back to mid-October. Your https edits were mixed in the middle; please feel free to re-run your https script on this article again, and I will not revert. Thanks, and sorry about the bother. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 02:14, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

No problem. I'll do it by hand. --bender235 (talk) 18:27, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

http->https in tools

Just noticed that my edit to Canada you fixed I used citation tool for Google Books for this.... has there been any conversation about fixing the tools (like RefScript and refill) to comply with the latest RfC on the matter? If so i would love to comment and help-- Moxy (talk) 23:13, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

If there was any, I'm not aware. --bender235 (talk) 00:34, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jordan Wynn, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dave Schramm. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:11, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

Fixed. --bender235 (talk) 16:32, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

Burbank high school notable alumni

Lana Maria Parrilla ("Regina," on Once Upon A Time) Sabrina Soto (HGTV)

Source - we went to school together

Stacie stacie.m.kidwell@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.153.155.130 (talk) 06:17, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

So? --bender235 (talk) 15:49, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Minor barnstar
	For spending so much time working on the http->https conversions for archives.org, Google Books and Newspapers.com. Our researching readers deserve optimal security when clicking on our references :) Astinson (WMF) (talk) 21:16, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Or there is another way of looking at this. My watchlist is turning massive in the "active" sense because of the number of India-related articles that are being processed. Specifically, that causes problems for one of Wikipedia's well-known hotbeds, ie: caste stuff. Seriouusly damaging edits are likely to be missed because of the sheer number of gnome-ish edits going on. Win some, lose some. - Sitush (talk) 00:17, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

December 2015

{{subst:User:BracketBot/inform|diff=695283912|page=Aram Khachaturian|by= by modifying 1 "[]"s|debug=(0, 1, 0, 0)|list=yes|remaining=*{{quotation|We will consider that if these comrades <nowiki>[Shostakovich, Prokofiev, Myaskovsky, Khachaturian, Kabalevsky and [[</nowiki> |lines=1}}

Sargan test

I would appreciate if you can revert the title of the "Sargan-Hansen test" to the original title "Sargan test". This will be more fair and accurate. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shakunneed (talk • contribs) 15:08, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Why? We also have Gauss–Markov theorem and Durbin–Wu–Hausman test, despite several decades between the authors. --bender235 (talk) 15:28, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

File:Xmas Ornament.jpg

To You and Yours!

FWiW Bzuk (talk) 16:08, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

i am eric davis the third

my father was a great man he was the innovative of the world wide internet as we know it today i cannot share our real names because his own identity must not be discoverd he was the fifth element which is the open source project for all of the internet without his suffering pain and work they would be no internet today tommorow or in the future 1035ericdavis (talk) 05:48, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

I have no idea what you're talking about. --bender235 (talk) 05:50, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi

Please take a look at the refs on Clara Henry. Much appreciated.--BabbaQ (talk) 23:11, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

attack on you

Se Talk:Atlantis. 2 new editors suddenly arriving. Doug Weller talk 16:50, 30 December 2015 (UTC)