Fritzbot

Sev Images

The images you tagged for deletion are used on Sev Wide Web. Admiral Memo 02:28, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Exosquad game image

• Image:Exosquad Game Title.png

This image is actually used in the article about Exosquad (game). There was a slight error in the image inline syntax, so it hasn't appeared to be included in the article. I've fixed it now and removed the tag (following the instructions it contained). I apologize for the inconvenience. --Koveras 12:20, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Image:Kim Delaney.jpg

Tagged as orphan due to being removed from article Kim Delaney. That's all correct work by the bot, however, its removal from the article is being questioned. It has been replaced in the article by Image:Kim Delaney1.jpg which is a much better image, but seems to be a copyright violation; it is tagged as promophoto, but the source does not seem to be Delaney's official site, so I don't see how it can be. In short, I suspect we may end up restoring the mugshot, so please don't delete it until this is settled. AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 13:51, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Tinacousinsmastermind.jpg

I tried to use the image here: Mastermind (album), but it doesn't seem to have worked, could you please help?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by -Anthony- (talk • contribs) .

What the...?

This bot has deleted the image Naggtr.JPG as being unused. Take a look at the following pages, both of which used it:

British National Party

Mark Collett

So, that's at least five erroneous deletions.

Having deleted the image, can YOU get it back? Emeraude 21:37, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

The image is still online (Image:Naggtr.JPG), and as far as I can see was never deleted. Also, the bot can't delete images. It tags unused images to be deleted, which then are deleted by an admin after seven days if they are still unused. And I don't really understand what you mean by "So, that's at least five erroneous deletions." If you're refering to the comments on the bot's talk page, you sould note that all those were about image that really were unused at the time the bot tagged them (so no error by the bot there) and that none of the images were deleted. --Fritz Saalfeld (Talk) 09:56, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

The image is still online? Where? It doesn't show in either of the articles I quoted, and going to its own page shows no image. So its page still exits, but the image doesn't, at least not in any way that I can find it. Regarding 'five erroneous deletions': OK, I misunderstood what people were saying above by reading too quickly, but it certainly seems that two images were wrongly tagged as unused, three including Naggtr.JPG, which I have just looked for again and still can't locate. Emeraude 10:10, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Update: An inspection of the image page shows that the picture was deleted by User:Shweeny666 who has a history of vandalism and is currently blocked from editing. Emeraude 10:15, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

I know about the red - that's why I edited it out. Sorry, I'm not with it tody. Of course User:Shweeny666 uploaded the picture. However, I still can't see it on its page or in the two articles and haven't been able since I first noticed it yesterday. Cache cleared (I think) but still can't see pictures. There is something strange happening. Emeraude 11:10, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Um... maybe the image was re-uploaded, in which case this comment won't apply, but i still see image:Naggtr.JPG. Just my 2 cents... --Storkk 14:02, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Unusual Question

Hi, this is more of a theoretical question. I uploaded a fair use image to replace the previous promo image, on the Kevin Crawford page. Unfortunately, Kevin is far better known for playing flutes than for playing the bodhrán. Do you think that the promo image could still legitimately be used in an expanded article (where 2 images might fit), since I wasn't able to get a good (i.e. non-grainy/smoky) picture of him playing the flute? If so, would the better course of action be to: delete it now, and re-upload it when the article is expanded enough to warrant a new picture; or un-tag it for deletion in anticipation of a larger article. Many thanks for your thoughts. Cheers! --Storkk 13:59, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

I just looked again, and I see that Fritzbot failed to notify the uploader (with "{{subst:Orphaned|Image:Kevin crawford.jpg}} ~~~~"). I've done it now, but maybe this is a behavior you might like to correct. Cheers! --Storkk 15:51, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

This is a automated to all bot operators

Please take a few moments and fill in the data for your bot on Wikipedia:Bots/Status Thank you Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 19:04, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Automated message to bot owners

As a result of discussion on the village pump and mailing list, bots are now allowed to edit up to 15 times per minute. The following is the new text regarding bot edit rates from Wikipedia:Bot Policy:

Until new bots are accepted they should wait 30-60 seconds between edits, so as to not clog the recent changes list and user watchlists. After being accepted and a bureaucrat has marked them as a bot, they can edit at a much faster pace. Bots doing non-urgent tasks should edit approximately once every ten seconds, while bots who would benefit from faster editing may edit approximately once every every four seconds.

Also, to eliminate the need to spam the bot talk pages, please add Wikipedia:Bot owners' noticeboard to your watchlist. Future messages which affect bot owners will be posted there. Thank you. --Mets501 02:48, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I would like to know why you felt the need to delete my images of the collapse of the St. Francis Dam? I don't appreciate your disputing my creation of these images and artwork. I own any and all copyrights to those images, and would not have put them up otherwise. I am considered, by scholars of that event, to be an expert on the subject.

The images of the collapse itself (the CGI artwork) were created by me in 1998 as part of the artwork I created for my docudrama video, "A TEST OF INTEGRITY" under my own name and my company, Gravity Arch Media.

If you have any doubts as to the originality of the image, check out my website at www.geocities.com/zeebya Look under A Test of Integrity, and you'll find it and many other such images there. You can also check with Dr. J. David Rogers at the University of Missouri, Rolla, and with Catherine Mulholland, granddaughter of William Mulholland, and also Professor Abraham Hoffman, author of VISION OR VILLAINY, which is a book about the history of the L.A. DWP. They all know me well, and can verify my claims. Same with the colorized images of the St. Francis Dam Wikipedia used from the Santa Clarita Valley Historical Society. Those images were created by me for Dr. Rogers, which he uses in his lecture series.

If you have any further questions, please email me at zeebya@hotmail.com

Pony R. Horton —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Zeebya (talk • contribs).

AWB

Hi, I noticed that this bot hasn't used AWB for a considerable amount of time. If you still have plans to use it, please let us know so that we could remove unneeded bots from the check page. Cheers, MaxSem^{(Han shot first!)} 18:17, 28 April 2008 (UTC)