User talk:Harej/Archive08

Schmear

I couldn't resist and opened up your redirect from 2006... Source of blame: User_talk:Doc_glasgow#Bagels.3F Lawrence § t/e 15:54, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Questions

Answers. --Kim Bruning (talk) 18:44, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

GA contest

Hi, if you are still doing this, I would like the money to go to this. Cheers. miranda 13:55, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

WP:Lectures

Today (Apr 20th), around 15:00 UTC! Possibly on Skype, but certainly on IRC (#wikipedia-en-lectures on freenode)! I don't actually know about the Skype details... Message me on Skype (xavexgoem) about that, if you have it (no harm in getting it, either), and then maybe by that time I'll have a clue :-p Xavexgoem (talk) 14:28, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I see that you'd be interested in speaking! What topic would you like to talk about? --Kim Bruning (talk) 14:23, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

You're no longer interested in speaking? :-( How come? --Kim Bruning (talk) 00:09, 24 April 2008 (UTC) If you have no time, I understand. If you have some reason to disagree with me on certain positions, you might actually want to speak anyway, as it would be useful to have people learn multiple views of the system.

Lack of time; nothing political. MessedRocker (talk) 00:13, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

I understand, I also wish I had more time. :-) --Kim Bruning (talk) 00:19, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

RfC Question

I can't figure out why this one isn't working. Dlabtot (talk) 05:09, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Is the bot AWOL?

Or does it just take a while? I added Talk:Documentary_hypothesis#RfC:_Vatican_reference manually in the meantime. Feel free to remove if the bot adds it instead. Faith (talk) 14:20, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Hello!

Hiya MR! How are you doing?

Nice to see you active a bit again... I'm writing about the unreferenced BLPs, which I still use to find articles to work on sources for. Any chance of getting an updated version anytime? Cheers, -- phoebe / (talk) 22:33, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Awesome! back to BLP eradication BLP referencing... :) -- phoebe / (talk) 00:07, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

NYC Meetup: June 1, 2008

New York City Meetup Next: Sunday June 1st, Columbia University area Last: 3/16/2008

In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, elect a board of directors, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the last meeting's minutes).

We'll also review our recent Wikipedia Takes Manhattan event, and make preparations for our exciting successor Wiki Week bonanza, being planned with Columbia University students for September or October.

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and (weather permitting) hold a late-night astronomy event at Columbia's telescopes.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

Also, check out our regional US Wikimedia chapters blog Wiki Northeast (and we're open to guest posts).
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:10, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

RfC not appearing on list

Did I do something wrong? Is it [1] too long? This is the first time I've ever used it and I'm sure I messed it up somehow... Sugarbat (talk) 18:51, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Update: OK I see it now; it just took a few minutes. Please disregard the above. :) Sugarbat (talk) 19:08, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

RFC bot

Would it be possible to modify the RFC templates, such as Template:RFCstyle list, to include a switch to hide the listing instructions? I ask this because I've recently noticed that translcuding the RFC lists works quite nicely in many situations, but often don't require the instructions also being mentioned. Something simple like {{#ifeq:{{{hide_instructions}}}|yes| |{{RFC tagging instructions|RFCstyle}} }} would work, I believe. {{RFCstyle list|hide_instructions=yes}} would then only list the actual discussion descriptions. -- Ned Scott 06:32, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

The bot changed it back. -- Ned Scott 04:11, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

RFC bot messed up Chiropractic entry in RFCsci list

Could you please take a look at Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment #RFC bot messed up Chiropractic entry in RFCsci list? I understand you're an expert on that bot, which appears to have a bug. Thanks. Eubulides (talk) 22:39, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Template:RFCsoc list

Hasn't been updated in 3 days in the bot ok? Gnevin (talk) 07:52, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

RFC Bot

RFC Bot just closed all the RfC's and removed them from the list. Is it broken? —BradV 13:07, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Also RFC Bot

It keeps rejecting this:
== Trivia and unnecessary repetition ==
{{RFCbio | section=Trivia and unnecessary repetition !! Repetition in recent edits !! time=18:08, 30 May 2008 (UTC) }}

Is there something wrong with that? Or with the bot? RedSpruce (talk) 20:09, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. I checked for errors like the one you found about 10 times over, and still managed to miss it. RedSpruce (talk) 02:16, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Error message

You gave an error message. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image_talk%3ARespiratory_system_complete_en.svg&diff=218237326&oldid=218236201. I tried to correct the issue. Could you please keep an eye on this? --CyclePat (talk) 23:17, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

David Lynch

I saw your list on the Wikipedia e-mail, you say, "Once an article has sources for all the statements made, or once it is deleted, remove it from this list." I think it would be hard to find a single article on Wikipedia longer than 2 sentences that has "sources for all the statements made," meanwhile there are many entirely unsourced articles, and [[David Lynch]] is sourced. Is this what the list is, a list of BLPs for which you want every statement sourced, or is that even the requirement for BLPs? --Blechnic (talk) 03:14, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Then how about I just generally confirm that most of the article is attached to sources and remove your notice? Of course I'll make certain all controversial or remarkable statements are strictly sourced. He's controversial enough, but easily sourcable. There are so many unsourced and badly sourced BLPs that it seems a shame to worry about well-sourced, if not perfectly sourced ones. Would this work for clearing the article from your list of badly sourced/unsourced BLPs? --Blechnic (talk) 18:05, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't understand what you mean by attributed to sources that are cited in the article? Do you mean, well I don't know what you mean? --Blechnic (talk) 00:13, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

No worry if you're thinking I will cite sources without naming them, which kinda appears to be what you're saying, but isn't possible--if I don't name them, I haven't sourced the statement, that's what sourcing means: attributing to a source. I do know how to cite sources, how to use reputable sources, and how to write them up as references. I'm a bit confused though that you seem to be saying something else, maybe I'll just leave these articles alone. --Blechnic (talk) 00:19, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Steve Jobs

I'll take it. And I must say, this is the first time I've wished that I was on IRC - those logs aren't available anywhere, are they? 68.151.101.48 (talk) 00:15, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Er, me, obviously. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 00:17, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

RFCbot question

Suppose I make a typo in the RFC description contained in the RFC template... if I go back later and fix it on the RFC'd article's talk page (in the template), does the bot update the RFC list with the corrected statement? If not, can I edit the RFC list directly to do so, or will I be undone? /Blaxthos ( t / c ) 21:32, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

How to manually close an RfC?

Hi, people unaware of the bot's counter keep a done RfC alive by adding to the text, with the result that the 30 days are never reached.[2] Parties involved in the RfC agree to close it, but we can't figure out how. Could you help us out? Guido den Broeder (talk) 20:18, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

I second that question. I just (idiotically) asked on an RfC talk page if we could close the RfC, as consensus was reached a few weeks ago. Now I realize that reset a counter. Can we kill a request manually somehow? Livitup (talk) 19:53, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the info! Livitup (talk) 20:05, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Yorkshirian

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Yorkshirian/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Yorkshirian/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 19:14, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

User:Orangemarlin RFAR

Per ruling of the arbcom here: Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbitration/Orangemarlin#Arbitrator_views_and_discussion an RFAR on Orangemarlin has been opend here: Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#User:Orangemarlin. You are invited to submit your evidence and statements.. — Rlevse • Talk • 16:53, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

OpenStreetMap.org

Is this the mapping project that you couldn't remember? I can't seem to comment on Wales' page. - Bytes breaking to bits (talk) 04:13, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Re. Redaction

I have restored my comment, since you find it useful. Thank you. Regards, Húsönd 03:23, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Geogre-William M. Connolley

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Geogre-William M. Connolley/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Geogre-William M. Connolley/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Daniel (talk) 02:10, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

unblock request

User talk:Eu nao fiz nada Someone you tagged in January 2007 is requesting an unblock. He claims to be a good boy now. Your thoughts? --Jayron32.talk.contribs 00:44, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

RFC bot

Special:Contributions/RFC bot shows no updates in some time. --Pascal666 (talk) 12:12, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Your bot is out of control -- it keeps removing a brand new RfC at Talk:George Soros. Please restrain it. --Marvin Diode (talk) 06:05, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Hello? The RfC process seems to be dysfunctional as long as your bot has apparently gone rogue. --Marvin Diode (talk) 15:01, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Hey, thanks, Messed. Bots will be bots, I guess. --Marvin Diode (talk) 21:03, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Removal of my comment from a talk page

I have reverted your edit here [3] as it removed without explanation my existing comment on the talk page. DuncanHill (talk) 21:17, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

OK thanks, actually now you say it, I have had similar problems before - for some reason, if two people edit at the same time on a previously non-existent page, the one who hits "save page" second wipes out what was written by the one who hit first. Anyway, you may want to re-add your comment. Best wishes, DuncanHill (talk) 22:01, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Bot stuff

What's wrong with the bot at modifying Talk:Montenegrin language here? --✉ Hello World! 17:49, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Please stop RFCBot from deleting the tag on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Arbitration Committee, this RfC was agreed to last three months, not the normal one month. --Barberio (talk) 20:07, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

RfB Thank You spam

Thank you for participating in my RfB! I am very grateful for the confidence of the community shown at my RfB, which passed by a count of 154/7/2 (95.65%). I have read every word of the RfB and taken it all to heart. I truly appreciate everyone's input: supports, opposes, neutrals, and comments. Of course, I plan to conduct my cratship in service of the community. If you have any advice, questions, concerns, or need help, please let me know. Again, Thanks! — Rlevse • Talk • 08:48, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

You took my "user's name begins with 'R'." comment to heart? Tool. --harej 19:42, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

That's pretty funny, actually. Enigma ^message 02:18, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Reminds me of when people vote "per all of the above" and some of the above is outright lies. Oopsie. :D Enigma ^message 02:18, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thank you for participating in my RfA, which did not succeed with 30 in support, 28 in opposition and 6 neutral votes. Thanks again for the support!

—CycloneNimrod^Talk? 15:35, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry I was only capable of spiting your opposition instead of slaying them. :) --harej 18:49, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

How long does it take for RfC to be recognized?

So about 10 minutes ago, I added this RfC: Talk:Melissa_Farley#RfC:_NPOV_and_BLP_issues.3F, including the template. However I have yet to see it added to the RfCbio list. Does it just take a while or did I do something wrong? Iamcuriousblue (talk) 23:34, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

OK, never mind, it showed up on the list. Looks like it just takes a little bit of time. Iamcuriousblue (talk) 00:06, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I added a tag to Template talk:Nobel icon almost 24 hours ago and it has not been added yet. Did I do something wrong? Thanks, --Clubjuggle ^T/C 15:16, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

mboverload is back. From outerspace

I am sending this message to people who wished me well after I said I was leaving for awhile. It's been about 2 years now but I am back. I have come back to my role as a developer of RETF and I have founded a new WikiProject, WP:TSN. I am looking for people to work on that too! Thank you and please let me know how you are doing, --mboverload@ 05:36, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Bajrang_Dal#RfC

Hi, I am trying to file a RfC in this page, but repeatedly an error is occurring. The RfC bot is saying RfC error. I tried to fix it several times, but all times is is displaying error in syntax. It is my first rfc, I am not well-versed with this. Could you please fix the problem. Thanks. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 14:02, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Note

Welcome back to the admin corps. You need a new admin t-shirt. Enigma ^message 21:50, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

How come he gets a new white shirt again while I still have to wear my crap-covered one? *whine* Anyway, welcome back! bibliomaniac15 22:50, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

banned?

banned? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sneaky Oviraptor18 (talk • contribs) 18:28, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Prospect Park picnic

FYI: http://www.nycgovparks.org/sub_permits_and_applications/images_and_pdfs/Permit_SpecialEvents.pdf

Of particular interest might be: "Excerpts from Parks Rules (as codified in Title 56 of the Rules of the City of New York) § 1-02 Definitions. Special Event. “Special Event” means a group activity including, but not limited to, a performance, meeting, assembly, contest, exhibit, ceremony, parade, athletic competition, reading, or picnic involving more than 20 people or a group activity involving less than 20 people for which specific space is requested to be reserved. Special Event shall not include casual park use by visitors or tourists."Shoreranger (talk) 20:42, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I finished making the brownies just a little while ago (I'm still waiting for them to fully cool, since they're still too fragile to be cut and moved around), and I bought the frisbee on Thursday. Thanks for the reminder anyway. Nightscream (talk) 03:24, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Surely "adjacent to" the Picnic House, not "within" it. Within costs big bux. -- Zsero (talk) 03:56, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Join me?

Do you want to join me in being a charter member of the Provisional Editorial Council? I say provisional because if there is ever action on the Editorial Council, we could either step down or ask to join. You and me, to start out, would try to help form an editorial consensus.

My qualifications is that in real life, I am quite good at being polite and bringing people together.

I would like to get a 3rd or 4th person. 903M (talk) 05:51, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

We are the 2 members of the Provisional Editorial Council. If I may, I would like to be the unofficial coordinator during these infant days (eventually there will be no coordinator once this gets started). I propose that we step down when or if the editorial council is established. In the mean time, I hope we can be of service. We will exercise extreme politeness and caution and try to help Wikipedia. If we are successful in solving just one dispute before there is a decision on the editorial council, we could conceivable say "look, we've tried and we've done some good so that's why there should be an editorial council...community, you may take over." How's that? There is a possibility that we could join the editorial council or that they may join us but that is too far off for now. 903M (talk) 04:38, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

I've looked for our first case but I will resume looking in a few hours. I did find a professor who has been blocked for some dispute over the $20 bill but I suspect admins won't unblock him so there's no dispute, at least not that one user can talk about (he's muzzled). I do know of a dispute involving the Battle of Jenin and articles related geographically but I think this would be too big a case to do as a first case. Furthermore, having only two of us for such a big case spells disaster. 903M (talk) 05:17, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Problem identified

I am very much for an Editorial Council. However, I've already identified one problem. I am an expert in several fields and know a lot about many other fields. However, I am not completely versed in the issues of Northern Ireland. User_talk:Setanta747 is involved in this issue. I would find it difficult to judge as a council member or one that would take extensive research before I could be an effective council member. Therefore, I would find that 7 members are inadequate. Some topics would escape the knowledge of a significant number of these members. 903M (talk) 05:40, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Why did you lock Scotland

Why did you lock Scotland? Constituent country is far more descriptive and accurate to what Scotland is, it is not a country in the typical sense. Scotland is also listed as a constituent country in the Constituent country page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.158.31.74 (talk) 18:50, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Except for the cleft chin

I saw this picture and, frankly, it looked a bit familiar to me, so I checked, and, sure enough there is a certain resemblance, and I don't recall ever seeing the two of you in the same place together (or was he at the meetup as well?). But don't worry, I'll keep the secret. -- Noroton (talk) 03:45, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

RFC

Hi! RFC bot doesn't list my RFC :( I've checked it for exclamation points etc and it seems ok. Could you please do something about it? Best regards. Alæxis_¿question? 11:51, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which succeeded with 71 support, 14 oppose, and 5 neutral. Thanks for your participation. I hope I serve you well!

--Smashville^BONK! 23:35, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

RFC bot malfunctioning

RFC bot is malfunctioning, delisting all RfCs. I have reverted the bot, but this is a serious malfunction. Vassyana (talk) 04:33, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

I have blocked the bot, as this is becoming very disruptive. Xclamation point 04:41, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Editorial Committee

I have refactored your comments "Regarding Orderinchaos's oppose" that appeared on Wikipedia:Editorial Council/Poll by moving them to Wikipedia talk:Editorial Council. My idea is to put "votes" on the former page and more detailed "comments" on the latter.

By the way, where is the quote from the top of your talk page from? Is it a true story? Bwrs (talk) 09:15, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

RFC template

Even though it was unused, should Template:RFCpolicy have been deleted? MBisanz ^talk 15:41, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

The template wasn't unused. It was deleted by a single editor that didn't like the bot-based RFC system personally. I think we should centralize the discussion at the WT:RFC page, and perhaps find an uninvolved admin to undelete the pages, since the deleter is pretending that a lack of fierce opposition to his personal preference is the same thing as consensus to screw up the existing system. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:05, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Customer support question

Hi, I asked this over at WT:RFC but I didn't get an answer. I filed an RFC on civility restrictions 5 days ago and the bot hasn't listed it. I'm not sure what I've done wrong in copying the template and filling in the fields, but if the fault is mine could you tell me how to fix it? Also, it would be good if the bot output some sort of error for malformed templates (like {{WPBannerMeta}} does for banners not in talk space with regard to passing a category), but I wouldn't know the first place to start in doing that. Thanks for any help you can give. Protonk (talk) 19:32, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

• Hmm. Back again. Someone said at the RFC talk page that the problem might be that the bot stopped listing RFC's outside of talk space, so I moved the RFC to Wikipedia talk:Editing restrictions/Civility restrictions and replaced the RFC bot template (see the last revision before the bot for what it contained). Still got the error. Protonk (talk) 14:08, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Another RFC bot bug?

Please see this page history: [4]. The bot made one correct edit [5], then apparently tried to list another but linked to the RFC template page instead of the correct target talk page [6] (also removed the older listing from just a day earlier, don't know if that was intentional); since then it's been switching from "no listings" to "1 listing" twice daily, but without ever actually listing anything. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:12, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

RFC Bot

It seems like the bot is throwing an insane number of errors Special:Contributions/RFC_bot. MBisanz ^talk 12:05, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

And a lot of users seem to be having trouble with it in general...see the RFC talk page. Maybe the instructions need to be tweaked or something? Ncmvocalist (talk) 15:34, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

RFCBot: The future is now

The bot seems to be ahead of its time, and our time, and everyone's time. [7] Can you fix it, please? --GRuban (talk) 16:53, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Those are actually expiration dates, so naturally the newer ones will have future timestamps. --harej 19:11, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Er ... I can't see anything about expiration dates in Wikipedia:Requests for comment. And you'll notice entries marked August and even February, so clearly they haven't "expired". If there is such a thing as an Rfc expiration date, can you write as much in the instructions? --GRuban (talk) 20:21, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

RFC Bot Malfunctions

RFC bot assigned the wrong date October 11 instead of September 11 to the discussion on WP:MEDRS. It also gave it a summary I did not give it. I think it developed a HAL personality. Please haul it in for maintainance. Thank you Paul Gene (talk) 11:22, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

What about it giving idiotic summary instead of the one I wrote?! Paul Gene (talk) 09:50, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

I figured that out. When you have two RFC's on the same page the bot takes the summary from the first one. I wonder if this bug can be fixed? Or at least mentioned on the bot page? Thank you Paul Gene (talk) 11:06, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

	Happy Adminship	from the Birthday Committee
	Wishing Harej/Archive08 a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! -- Chamal Talk ± 13:20, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Two years of administratorship! Well, not really. --harej 14:38, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but... more gripes about the Bot

After trying a couple of times to put the RFCmedia tag on a talk page, and getting a "syntax" error, another user got it to work by moving the tag to within the section. I had put it at the top of the page, which seemed to make sense because the tag includes a pointer to the section name, so it didn't look like it belonged within the section. The instructions just say to put it on the talk page; they don't say where. I strongly suggest you change the instruction pages, and also change the bot so it doesn't claim this error is a "syntax error" (because the exact same syntax worked later), or better still, change it so it can handle the tag regardless of where it's placed. Getting a vague error with no clue as to where to go next, aside from a suggestion to check the syntax and try again, is not user friendly. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 16:06, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Bot deleting archives

Hi, I just came from an archive deleted by the bot: [8]. NJGW (talk) 04:44, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

error

Explain this erroneous deletion: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk%3AManual_of_Style&diff=240063370&oldid=240062335

--Gerry Ashton (talk) 19:43, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikis Take Manhattan

Wikis Take Manhattan Next: Saturday September 27

WHAT Wikis Take Manhattan is a scavenger hunt and free content photography contest aimed at illustrating Wikipedia and StreetsWiki articles covering sites and street features in Manhattan and across the five boroughs of New York City. The event is based on last year's Wikipedia Takes Manhattan, and has evolved to include StreetsWiki this year as well.

LAST YEAR'S EVENT

• Wikipedia:Wikipedia Takes Manhattan/Spring 2008 (a description of the results, and the uploading party)
• Commons:Wikipedia Takes Manhattan/Gallery (our cool gallery)

WINNINGS? Prizes include a dinner for three with Wikipedia creator Jimmy Wales at Pure Food & Wine, gift certificates to Bicycle Habitiat and the LimeWire Store, and more!

WHEN The hunt will take place Saturday, September 27th from 1:00pm to 6:30pm, followed by prizes and celebration.

WHO All Wikipedians and non-Wikipedians are invited to participate in team of up to three (no special knowledge is required at all, just a digital camera and a love of the city). Bring a friend (or two)!

REGISTER The proper place to register your team is here. It's also perfectly possible to register on the day of when you get there, but it will be slightly easier for us if you register beforehand.

WHERE Participants can begin the hunt from either of two locations: one at Columbia University (at the sundial on college walk) and one at The Open Planning Project's West Village office. Everyone will end at The Open Planning Project:

• Wikis Take Manhattan page at The Open Planning Project

349 W. 12th St. #3

Between Greenwich & Washington Streets

By the 14th St./8th Ave. ACE/L stop

FOR UPDATES

Check out:

• Wikis Take Manhattan main website

This will have a posting if the event is delayed due to weather or other exigency.

Thanks,

Pharos

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:19, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikis Take Manhattan rescheduled for October 4

Wikis Take Manhattan has been rescheduled for next Saturday, October 4, due to the rain predicted for this weekend.. I hope you can make it to the new time, and bring a friend (or two)!--Pharos (talk) 23:22, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

RFC bot stopped

I just wanted to check but the RFC bot hasn't made an edit in a few days. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 06:42, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Ditto (still waiting for it to transclude this). Is it taking a well-earned wikibreak? Sipping piña coladas on a beach in Second Life? Don't let the bug reports grind it down! chocolateboy (talk) 09:59, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Huh?

Hi Messed, what was the purpose of this edit? Cbrown said it was on your advice. Thanks.--Pharos (talk) 19:04, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I was wondering where the old names went :)--Pharos (talk) 23:02, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

RFC bot

On the RFC pages you added the option to hide instructions with {{#ifeq:{{{hide_instructions}}}|yes| |{{RFC tagging instructions|RFCmedia}} }}. Since the tagging instructions are now {{RFC list footer}} and contain manual entries this unfortunately hides those manual entires as well. I've modified {{RFC list footer}} to fix this, and just need the line in the RFC pages changed to {{RFC list footer|RFCmedia|hide_instructions={{{hide_instructions}}} }} (with RFCmedia replaced with whatever value is appropriate for that RFC). Thanks! -- Ned Scott 02:45, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Natalee Holloway#RfC: Proper naming for article

I cannot figure out why the bot isn't picking this one up. It doesn't show up on the list of malformed requests, either.—Kww(talk) 22:11, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Got it now. Just took much longer than the hour stated.—Kww(talk) 22:43, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Spoke too soon. It added it, and then took it right back out.—Kww(talk) 22:50, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

In again, out again.—Kww(talk) 23:10, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Finally staying in. I think that this is related: there were two consecutive spaces in the section header.—Kww(talk) 00:44, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

NYC Meetup: You are invited!

New York City Meetup Next: Sunday November 16th, Columbia University area Last: 6/01/2008

In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, finalize and approve bylaws, interact with representatives from the Software Freedom Law Center, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the June meeting's minutes and the September meeting's minutes).

We'll also review our recent Wikis Take Manhattan event, and make preparations for our exciting successor Wikipedia Loves Art! bonanza, being planned with the Brooklyn Museum for February.

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and (weather permitting) hold a late-night astronomy event at Columbia's telescopes.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our mailing list.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:31, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

BLP RfC entry fix

I manually edited the entry made by your bot: (1) Wikilink to the relevant section of the Talk page instead of the Talk page, (2) Link to the relevant diff as originally given by me instead of link to Wikipedia main page.--Goodmorningworld (talk) 21:53, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Your bot changed the link to the diff again. Is this a glitch?--Goodmorningworld (talk) 22:13, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

"No"? When you write "you have to fix the link on the talk page" I do not understand. The link that I put into the RfC Template at Talk:Denial of the Armenian Genocide is fine already. And when I try to fix the link on the RfC page your bot changes it right back.--Goodmorningworld (talk) 22:27, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

"Incidentally, there is an issue with linking to diffs. I found a way around it which should suffice." Well if you can find the time to also implement your workaround, it would be just terrific. Thank you for all the hard work you do.--Goodmorningworld (talk) 22:44, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Bug in RFC bot

In this diff [9] the bot left a completely broken link. I think you have assumed that the wiki name of a section is the same as the HTML anchor for the section. That isn't true; the HTML anchors are munged in various ways. I don't think the munging algorithm is documented anywhere. When I had to deal with it I just looked up the code in the mediawiki source to see how to make the anchors. — Carl (CBM · talk) 15:46, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Missed link?

I can't seem to get the bot to notice the template here. Any reason? --Falcorian ^(talk) 09:02, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

RfC bot bug

For some reason, RfC bot didn't copy the entire RfC at Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Politics. I subsequently fixed it manually, but the bot keeps restoring the old broken version. Is there a way to override this behavior? siℓℓy rabbit (talk) 13:17, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

I found a similar problem; here's the bot update, and here's the fixed version. Note that the portion of the edit (that -> the Unity crisis) was not a problem - I changed that for clarity. Mindmatrix 16:45, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Aside: the bot is also counting incorrectly, at least in the edit summaries. Mindmatrix 16:45, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:British_Royal_Family_reduced.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:British_Royal_Family_reduced.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 06:48, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

RFC Template

I've copied the template format verbatim from other pages. Could you please explain what is wrong with the format I'm providing? EagleScout18 (talk) 05:32, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Scientology

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Scientology/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Scientology/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Daniel (talk) 04:22, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

RFC bot bug

Take a look at what happened in Talk:The China Study here. Copy-pasting the entire talk page twice isn't exactly removing an old RFC...--Boffob (talk) 01:47, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

its an error with the recent update of mediawiki. Cydebot had the same issue. β^_command 02:17, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

RFC Bot is down

Hasn't updated RFC pages for days. Cool Hand Luke 20:47, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

The bot appears to still be down.  :/ No changes since December 20. --Elonka 06:37, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Working again, yay!  :) --Elonka 20:05, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

DYK bot

Hi there MessedRocker. I notice what looked like an apparent offer to effect repairs on the DYK bot at Ameliorate!'s talk page. If you are interested in taking a look, the bot failed to pass out the user credits in the last cycle and we can't figure out why. Gatoclass (talk) 12:43, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Downwards user

I see you too are having problems with this guy. What can I say? He seems out of control. He is on a daily basis deleting and reverting pages specifically only the sourced and cited material and then says "removed all for no sources", even almost totally blanking some pages. If it is added back he again reverts or deletes it. And he REFUSES to allow any info on a page even if it is sourced if it does not fit some imaginary belief he personally has. Like cited info he will just delete it and say "not easy enough to verify or prove", even when the source is GIVEN right there. What in the hell is with this guy? Something needs to be done about him. Wiki Greek Basketball (talk) 16:36, 30 December 2008 (UTC)