User talk:Mr.Z-man/Archive 8

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

→

Archive 15

Deleted page

Hi, i just found you deleted the page Patareni. The band is notable, it is the first grindcore band in Croatia and then Yugoslavia. The most influental Slovenian magazine wrote about noise music and you can read there about legendary noise group from Yugoslavia Patareni - [1]. There are many articles about this group and that is certainly a claim of notability. They are well-know in many countries as Croatia, Slovenia, Serbia, Bosnia, Macedonia etc. Please can you re-activate the article or nominate it again? Thank you! Patashnik (talk) 03:25, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

If you think the decision to delete it following the discussion on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Patareni (2nd nomination) was wrong, you can list it on WP:DRV. If you think you can recreate the article in a way that addresses the concerns on the AFD discussion, you may do so. Mr.Z-man 03:51, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for an explanation. Please can you move the old (deleted) article to my userspace? I will improve the article, add references and links to coverage in third-party sources. Sourcing to relaiable sources will show that the band meets WP:MUSIC. Patashnik (talk) 16:59, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Yobot

Hi. Can you check Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Yobot 3 once more. I think I answered your question. I am waiting for approval more than a month. Friendly, Magioladitis (talk) 18:13, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

{{delimitnum}} and {{val}}

Z-man, I’ve been conversing with Werdna (perma-link to discussion thread here).

There are two templates, {{delimitnum}} and {{val}}, that delimit numbers (add narrow spaces) in values like this: 6.0224438467(40)×10⁻²³ kg. Unfortunately, both these templates must rely upon math-based techniques and both suffer from unpredictable rounding errors. For instance, coding {{val|0.29872813|e=-23|u=kg}} produces 0.29872813×10⁻²³ kg (note the …29) but adding 2 to the value, {{val|2.29872813|e=-23|u=kg}} produces the correct 2.29872813×10⁻²³ kg. Note that this was extensively discussed here on WT:MOSNUM and received broad support on both there and at WT:MOS.

I had told Werdna that all we needed was a character-counting parser function  to use in these templates. Such a parser function would continually be asked the following question: “are there five or more remaining digits in the string?” If so, move over three more digits, add a space, and ask the question again. Details are at bugzilla:15677 and a detailed description of its functionality is here. He responded that the developer community discussed this request and apparently didn’t want to set a new precedent of creating new parser functions as it risked encouraging more such requests. He suggested that he might be able to write an entire magic word but had to back away from that offer, citing that too much is on his plate right now. He suggested I contact you or Mr.Z-man. I thought I would start with the first name on his short list: you.

Can you help in any way? Whereas it would be nice to see an easier-to-use template as is described in bugzilla:15677, looking at the number of articles that currently link to {{val}} and {{delimitnum}}, it would probably be better, if we were going to just make one template, to just re-write {val} with the character-counting capability. All it needs is to not choke on big numbers and not have rounding errors. The best outcome of all, would be to have both delimitnum and val. Greg L (talk) 05:14, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

• Z-man? If you don’t have the time to do this yourself, could you please suggest a developer who might be willing to? Greg L (talk) 01:44, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
  • I left a comment on the bug report. I may or may not have time to do it. Or rather, I'm sure I'll have time to do it eventually, though not necessarily soon. Your best bet is to try to find someone in the #mediawiki IRC channel, though if I have the time, I'll take a look this weekend. Mr.Z-man 03:32, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

• Thank you very much for your thoroughly-thought-out response. What about just writing a character-counting parser function? Could you do that? The two editors responsible for delimitnum and val would be happy as a clam to use such a parser function in those two templates. All the template needs to do is ask of this new parser function the following question:

“Are there five or more digits remaining to the right (or left) of the decimal marker?”

“If yes, take away three more characters and ask the question again.”

All the remaining details regarding formatting the value can be left up to the template author (who will presumably make it conform to a consensus view after a lot of debate on a talk page somewhere). In the case of delimitnum and val (en.Wikipedia) all they do is add commas to the left of the decimal marker (counting characters to the left) and add span based gaps to the right. Greg L (talk) 04:17, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

P.S. The {val} template is used extensively here on Kilogram, which recently achieved GA status. It’s just that the val template has to be used with extreme caution because of its bugs. This will be a quite popular tool if it can be fixed. Greg L (talk) 04:20, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

The Extension:StringFunctions extension has some functions that might be able to do some of that. It seems to still have some kinks that need to be worked out before its installed on Wikimedia projects. Mr.Z-man 05:21, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

• Should I run this by the guy who made {val} to see if it’s too buggy to use? Do you intend to look into this some more? Greg L (talk) 06:28, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

• If all you need is the ability to count characters in a string and split the string into substrings, that extension would work. The extension works, most of the problems on the bug report seem to be performance-related and poor coding. The request to install it was first filed in June 2006, the likelihood of it being enabled pretty soon is pretty slim. Mr.Z-man 17:22, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

• Is there a way it can be temporarily enabled for limited use with these delimiting templates to see if it works well enough? Would you be able to do that? Greg L (talk) 23:25, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

• No. It would need to be reviewed by Tim or Brion before its activated on any Wikimedia site. Mr.Z-man 02:41, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

reference toolbar

Hello, can you help me import this tool to the Tagalog Wikipedia? The discussion is here but you might prefer to talk with me in my talk page.--Lenticel ^(talk) 01:52, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

yobot 3

I do not understand why you approved a change as major as the deletion of the BD template without requiring a wide discussion of this on appropriate project message boards. The result is that its operator has done vast destrucition in biography articles, by substituting a clumpsy (though techncially correct) combination of birthdate, deathdate and defaultsort for a very neat brief and easy-to use template that is very suitable for the biographies of historical persons. If it causes problems when information is missing, then certainly its use should be banned. However the template is clearly a popular one with editors and should not have been changed in thsi cavalier way. Peterkingiron (talk) 23:40, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

The bot request was open for more than a month. In that time, not one person came forward with a reason that it should not be done, while several agreed that it was a good idea. I'm not going to decline a request when nobody gives a reason to do so. Mr.Z-man 03:33, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Hey

I know you're in the BAG, and I have a (small) question. roux asked me to write a bot for him that would get the last unpatrolled new page created. To view !patrolled edits, the account needs the "patrol" right, which you need to be autoconfirmed for. I don't want to make ten edits on my bot account without permission, so I came to ask you. (I just need to run the function to make sure it parses the last timestamp once or twice). _David^WS _(contribs) 16:03, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Sure, just do 10 edits to the bot's userpage or something like that. Mr.Z-man 20:21, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. I will tomorrow. By the way, if you have the time, check out my current BRFA and see what MaxSem said. I agree with him (the sysop has already seen the offensive username). Let me know what you think, and also if you think my "HTML comment" method is acceptable. _David^WS _(contribs) 03:24, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

OKbot

I see that you approved OKbot here. It has generated a lot of discussion on the owner's talk page here. I am especially concerned that there is discussion of a new bot that will automatically replace images over a certain size. This seems a HUGE presumption on the part of a small number of editors. Does this need to be discussed in a more public forum?--Knulclunk (talk) 20:56, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Any new bot would need BAG approval of course. I'm not quite sure what you think would need to be discussed in a more public forum or what the "presumption" is. The 500px limit? OKBot? A hypothetical new bot? Mr.Z-man 00:04, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

AFD script

Please see User_talk:MBisanz#Template:Afd-mergeto. MBisanz ^talk 16:42, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

I would sincerely appreciate a fix at your earliest convenience, as I'm manually relocating the {{afd-mergeto}} tags from talk pages to articles.
Also, would it be possible to remove the leading zero from the date (e.g. "4 December 2008" instead of "04 December 2008")? That's a very minor issue, of course.
Thank you! —David Levy 15:08, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Template:Navbox Province of Italy

plz see Template talk:Navbox Province of Italy. i've posted what needs to be changed and why. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.53.149.117 (talk) 03:45, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

afd script fix?

Hi, Mr.Z-man! I just want to say, I love your afd script and use it often. However, I've noticed that it does not follow redirects and thus if the nominator listed the article under a title that redirects to the article, hitting delete does not actually delete the article. This caused me a bunch of confusion and a very botched deletion review, so I'm wondering if you could alter the script to make it follow redirects and delete the actual article? l'aquatique || talk 01:41, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Just for you, while it lasts

[[2]]. Protonk (talk) 07:42, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

List of Forgotten Realms characters

Hello.

I'm trying to build List of Forgotten Realms characters as a proper character list. Could you please restore the edit history of Arilyn Moonblade, Galaeron Nihmedu, Kierkan Rufo, Taegan Nightwind, and Vangerdahast for me, and redirect them to the list so that we can merge the content in? Thanks! :) BOZ (talk) 04:55, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

That was fast - thanks!  :) BOZ (talk) 05:03, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

refToolbar.js for wikEd

Hey Mr.Z-man,

I have adapted your refToolbar script for wikEd, you can find the compatible version on User:Cacycle/refToolbar.js. Changes include:

• Moved refToolbar div from before textarea into toolbar div
• Correct fixed toolbar heightdefined in common.css line 12 to auto
• Removed wikEd test
• Copying wikEd rich text editing field to standard textarea before getting text (see User:Cacycle/wikEd#Making_scripts_compatible_with_wikEd)
• wikEd overrides the insertTags function in edit.js with an equivalent compatible version, so no change was needed here

I have tested it under Firefox 3.0.1 and MSIE 8beta. It would be great if you could put the compatibilized version online. Thanks, Cacycle (talk) 04:00, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Fantastic. Nja247 (talk • contribs) 07:21, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Hopefully I'll have time this weekend to look it over. Mr.Z-man 16:59, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Great. It also works under Opera 9.62. Cacycle (talk) 23:57, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Did you find the time to check the modifications? Here is a diff link comparing my adapted version against your current version: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%3ACacycle%2FrefToolbar.js&diff=251504499&oldid=213884865. Cacycle (talk) 00:36, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Can I go ahead and implement the changes? Cacycle (talk) 22:24, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I did that a few days ago. Mr.Z-man 22:30, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Template:WikiProject Television

Hi. I would like to request the protection of template be reduced to semiprotection for a short while so that I can do some work on it. I intend to overhaul it and convert it to the MetaBanner. This is preferable over a protected edit request because it may require some tweaking to make sure it is working correctly. I'm asking you because you protected it. I will request reprotection again when I'm done. Thank you. Martin 12:47, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Protection lowered. Mr.Z-man 17:57, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Is this wikibreak for real? If yes, I'll go to WP:RFPP to get the protection lifted again. Martin 20:21, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

refTool

I installed refTools in my preferences, but the next time I pressed 'edit page' the white edit box and the buttons above it (the ones that insert bold text, italic text, etc.) came up as usual, but none of the buttons were working (apart from your 'insert cite' button). I reported it here and found that when I removed your tool in preferences all the buttons worked again. Just wanted to report this error to you. :) TopGearFreak 22:34, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

AFD closing script, as mentioned on IRC

Just a few suggestions.

1. Could the script check to see if a debate has not already been closed before closing it so stuff like this doesn't happen.

2. An option to not add "oldafdfull" to the talk page if the article doesn't exist. This would be useful for closing AFDs where the article has already been deleted. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:32, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

User:Mr.Z-man/refToolbar

I've been discussing how unreferenced articles should be handled at WP:IRE. One of the ideas I had was to make User:Mr.Z-man/refToolbar a standard button that could be shut off in the preferences. But for that to work, some things need to be fixed. None of the buttons offer inclusion of archive URL links and I would like to see required fields marked with a red asteriks (*) or something. Also, the documentation seems to be somewhat lacking on the difference between a publisher and work (which for newspapers is quite confusing). And (not your fault) some templates still format dates, others don't. I think it should be uniform (preferably whatever date the MOS requires for the article. (dates like 12-12-08 or 2008-12-12 are easier to type, but tend to cause issues. Americans switch date and month around and without some blinking warning, that could happen when inserting those refs. Perhaps have separate day month and year fields and combine them in one date?

What are your thoughts? - Mgm|^(talk) 13:21, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Some red asterisks would be easy enough to add, the only potential problem is that "required fields" is pretty minimal. I believe "cite book" will work with just a title. In other cases, some fields might be dependent on others. As for documentation of fields, it would be better just to link to the template docs than reproducing it. I'm working on date formatting now, switching to separate "year" "month" "date" fields will probably be the way to go. Mr.Z-man 18:38, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

• Could you give me a quick warning if you made the changes? - Mgm|^(talk) 12:06, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

User:Fengkuangbaike

Had a direct copy of your userpage, so i've nuked it..

—Reedy 14:40, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Template:Afd-mergeto

Hi! Thanks for the reversion.
On a related note, are you able to fix your script to insert the template into the articles themselves (instead of their talk pages)? I just manually corrected another 27 transclusions.
Thanks again! —David Levy 07:07, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

I fixed it a few days ago, but it might take a few days for people's cached copies to expire. Mr.Z-man 22:23, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Ah, thank you! —David Levy 22:32, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Hiya Z-man

I read your argument at WP:VPP like this; you're saying that "editprotected" by itself doesn't provide enough of a benefit to Wikipedia to justify a new process. Assuming this point persuades a lot of people, couldn't we fix the problem by adding the ability to move pages through redirects, or possibly the ability to semi-protect a page? Those abilities wouldn't break the wiki before we had a chance to de-whatever the offender if they go crazy, and just about anyone could find some way to make themselves useful with one or all of those 3 abilities, if they want to help. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 04:54, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Creating a new group to edit protected pages would be easy. There's no userrights for moving a page over a page with a history or being able to only apply semi-protection. It would require making software changes - a lot more work. I also would oppose the semi-protection one for several reasons, page protection requires good judgment, if the process is similar to accountcreator or rollback, there's not enough evaluation. Additionally, semi-protection should be used sparingly, suddenly giving dozens more people the ability to semi-protect pages could increase unnecessary usage. Finally, when all one has is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. There are many situations where semiprotection, while effective, is not the best solution. Someone who can't block or do anything else is more likely to use semiprotection, as they have no other options directly available. Mr.Z-man 07:12, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

I was afraid of those potential problems, thanks for bringing that up. I replied by email. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 23:18, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Deleted article

I noticed your closure of the AfD on Jdimytai Damour as "delete". Based on the balance of comments in the discussion, I think the outcome should have been "keep"; aside from that, my personal knowledge of the mass attention this man's death received strongly indicates to me that the article subject is notable. I therefore ask that you recreate the article in my userspace so that I can review it and consider a DRV request. Everyking (talk) 11:07, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Rather than just counting votes, I weighed the strength of the arguments. Comments like "listed out of respect" or "martyrdom" I basically just ignored outright, as they are completely contradictory to policy. People arguing for deletion on the other hand cited several policies and good reasons to delete it. And even if we were counting votes, it breaks down as: 16 Delete, 12 Keep. I've userfied the article for you. Mr.Z-man 22:20, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that. Everyking (talk) 03:04, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

LOL

Thanks dumb mistake on my part ;-)---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 17:03, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Friendly Poke

Just a friendly FYI to get your feedback on two editprotected requests to fix some system messages you edited yesterday, MediaWiki:Revision-info and MediaWiki:Revision-info-current. Q ^{T C} 11:53, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Qui

...is a good little gadget designed by DJ that shows your online status (online, busy, offline, yadayada) See User:TheDJ/Qui. HEy, thanks for participating in the discussion- i'm happy to have my questions clarrified. 24.185.37.213 (talk) 20:58, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Can refToolbar be modified to track the changes in {{cite book}}?

Cite book recently was tweaked so that it automatically outputs "p." when |page= is used (singular) and "pp." when |pages= is used (plural). I'm not sure that page (singular) was even a parameter until recently, but it didn't matter because all the pages/page parameter did was place the page number data specified in the correct spot; it was up to the user to specify p., verses pp., verses no page prefix indicator. Now that there is a difference, it would be a good addition to add the second parameter to the cite tool. Thanks. By the way, this post arises from a discussion that started here and continued here.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 06:41, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Robert Service and Holodomor

Don't know if you're aware of this, but the problematic 14 million cited to Service has resurfaced in this article. Sincerely, Novickas (talk) 16:06, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Many thanks!

Apart from saying thanks on the WP:RFBA page, i would also like to drop both you and ThaddeusB a note for your excellent suggestions regarding Coreva-Bot. Apart from several "O yes, i got to remind that!" comments, there were also quite a few things i didn't even think about. I am pretty sure that the both of you managed to iron out several idea's for Coreva (The way to handle the user page templates, and the delay in tagging a page) a lot further then before i opened the RFBA. So again, and i can't say it often enough, Thanks! Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 22:37, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

License of refToolbar

Hello, Z-man. May I ask you which license you'll publish refToolbar? I'd like to localize and take screenshots. Which license would you like to publish? I'm appreciated if you made quick response. Thank you.--Kwj2772 (talk) 08:56, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Consider it to be GFDL. Note that its already been made into a Korean and Polish version. Mr.Z-man 20:56, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Auto-patrol script

Hey there. I was talking to User:DragonflySixtyseven and he said that you had a script for New Page Patrolling that would autopatrol all new pages by a single contributor. I was wondering if I could have a copy of that script, please, as it would be highly useful for patrolling the backlog. Thanks, NuclearWarfare _(Talk) 04:52, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Consensus Building

As a user who responded to the straw poll regarding non-free images in sports, your further input is requested with regards to the Straw poll summary and proposed guidelines on image use — BQZip01 — ^talk 00:42, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm not against you, per se, but the previous proposal is almost identical with the exception of a few additional items added on at the request of other users. What we are trying to avoid is a copyrighted picture/image. We are not simply adding pictures of text. We are adding logos of the schools (which happen to be text) and trying to standardize/provide guidance on lead images and logo use. Whether it is used for decoration or identification is irrelevant in this case because they can be used as free images. Perhaps "The preferred" is too strong of a word? Would "A preferred" help the situation in your eyes? This would give a better impression of flexibility amongst free images. — BQZip01 — ^talk 21:37, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

No, it is relevant. Its not required, but whether or not the image adds something of value to the article is most certainly relevant. We can certainly afford to be more flexible, but that doesn't mean we should just go around adding every free image that's tangentially related to the topic. Mr.Z-man 22:28, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

This was a discussion about non-free images initially, which is why what I was talking about made it irrelevant. Adding an image (any image) to an article is another matter altogether. I concur that we shouldn't just add a bazillion images and never use them. Likewise we shouldn't just add images in spades to an article simply because they are related. However, usage here seems to be a preference, would you agree? I have no problem stating (for other than team articles), that there are many options available. I was stating a preferred option simply for the sake of uniformity between articles. Are you saying that a logo adds nothing to an article? — BQZip01 — ^talk 03:20, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Your bot

Hi, I don't know if this was deliberate but your bot User:Mr.Z-bot just created a page at Mr.Z-bot/errors. I've marked it for speedy deletion, I just thought I'd let you know. -- role^player 03:51, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Deleted.. Mr.Z-man 03:57, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

User:CAT:TEMP deletion bot

FYI, WP:AN#Talk page deletion. Is the bot not capable of checking for the presence of sock tags on the userpage? The block summary isn't always going to tell the full story, and socks are often incorrectly tagged as simply {{indef}}. - auburnpilot talk 04:25, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Coincidentally, can you undelete the bots deletion of User talk:Fru23? The account is a confirmed sockpuppet, but that was only tagged on the User page (as: {{sockpuppetcheckuser|KingsOfHearts|KingsOfHearts}} instead of the sockpuppet template, which might have explained why the bot deleted it). ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 05:51, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for restoring it, any idea why the bot deleted it/will adding the {{nobots}} tag prevent future deletions for this reason? ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 06:03, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

The bot deleted it because there was nothing on it saying it should not be deleted and I just found out now that people want to keep both the user and user talk pages for these users (for reasons that are still somewhat unclear), despite the fact that the pages are generally only kept for tracking purposes (which the template on the userpage serves to do). The bot doesn't follow {{nobots}}, to prevent it from being deleted, simply remove the page from Category:Temporary Wikipedian userpages, though the bot will automatically check the userpage for sock templates as well before deleting user talk, so you shouldn't have to do that. Mr.Z-man 20:34, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I'd echo this concern with User talk:WitchieAnna, a page I had watchlisted as a sock. I can restore it myself if we're agreed that such things are to be kept, but I agree that the bot should check for the presence of sock/block templates on the user page before tagging the talk page. Jclemens (talk) 07:31, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Is there anything in that page's history worth preserving? I don't see anything off-hand. --MZMcBride (talk) 08:09, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my talk page! Iamawesome800 Talk to Me 19:48, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Deletion review for YouAreTV

An editor has asked for a deletion review of YouAreTV. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedy-deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review.  ~ Paul^T+/_C 20:19, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my userpage. Much appreciated. Useight (talk) 00:26, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Hello

Thank you for your opinion on Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Mixwell. I have decided that it's too early for it. I closed it by WP:Snow. Thanks! --Mixwell!^Talk 03:23, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Template:Articleissues

You got that from en.Wikinews, right? 70.91.178.185 (talk) 02:21, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

No, if they have something similar, they probably got it from here or developed it completely independently. Mr.Z-man 02:25, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh, funny. Yeah; I developed Wikinews' version of it. Neat that we came up with the same idea! 70.91.178.185 (talk) 20:06, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for undoing multiple incidents of vandalism on my talk page! QueenCake (talk) 22:23, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

CAT:TEMP deletion bot request

Hi Mr.Z-man. Having looked all the discussion about the bot's tasks, I cannot see anywhere that you will not be deleting talk pages of IP addresses which end up in CAT:TEMP. Can I check/request that you do not delete them. They should preferably be moved into CAT:INDEFIPs, if they are indef-blocked, though this is not always the case. Thanks. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 00:15, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Sure, I can add this. Mr.Z-man 00:26, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Hatching Pete

I have no idea where to post this sadly ._. But I noticed you were the admin that deleted it. The page Hatching Pete for an upcoming DCOM (Disney Channel Original Movie) was deleted as there was no real information, and there was no confirmation other than rumors that came from supposed cast members. However, there has been an actual preview shown on disney channel now, confirming it to be airing in April, and was wondering if/when the page should be recreated? The past page had just as much information as a normal movie does, however, it was deleted. Myzou (talk) 12:04, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

If it meets the various notability guidelines and there's enough information from reliable sources, it could be recreated. Mr.Z-man 18:19, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

User:Mr.Z-man/yet another FlaggedRevs proposal

Hi, am I ok advertising this proposal of yours to a few of the people who opposed the Wikipedia:Flagged protection proposal? I think this could be a good basis for a trial of flagged revisions as I said on that talk page so would like to get more eyes on the proposal to see if can get wider support. Davewild (talk) 18:13, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Its a very rough draft, but sure. Note that until (if) bugzilla:17157 is resolved, full-flagged protection and BLP-flagging are pretty much functionally equivalent, I don't remember if I noted that on the proposal or not. Most of the discussion on it has been on the flagged protection talk page.

A big honking OOPS

Was doing relists with the AFD closing script and this happened. Has anybody else reported anything similar? It's amazing I wasn't templated by some huggler. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:53, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Comment on my suggested FlaggedRev implementation?

If you have time, would you care to comment on my suggested Trial 13: Three month trial of all BLPs + flagged protection? Basically, would FlaggedRevs on BLPs and individually selected articles be ok? --Apoc2400 (talk) 23:07, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't particularly like the idea of rollbackers sighting revisions for BLPs, which is why its a separate user group in my proposal (that and I don't like expanding the rights of the group for more than its original purpose). For BLPs we need to do a little more than filtering out blatant vandalism if we want to make a significant impact on the BLP problem. (If we don't then there's probably better subsets of articles to test on than BLPs). If we assume that every revision is actually looked at by RC patrollers (basically equivalent to rollbackers), then they're doing a rather poor job of filtering out libel, POV, and sourcing problems based on the amount ofcomplaints we get. If we give RC patrollers the responsibility of patrolling all BLPs, I don't see how the situation will improve at all. Mr.Z-man 23:15, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

The difference is that there is someone to hold responsible to flagging a bad edit. Those who are sloppy can have their sighting right taken away before they cause too much damage. We cannot chastise an RC patrolled for not reverting a bad edit. The suggested test specifically lists vandalism, copyvios and libel as what must be checked before sighting. Since most flagged articles would be BLPs I hope sighters will not treat it as any other edits. --Apoc2400 (talk) 23:33, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

One can hope that, but experience says it won't be the case. Do you really believe that hugglers are going to get to an article and think "oh, this is a BLP, I better check the sources"? One would hope that they would, but again, experience and history says they won't. If we tie it to rollback, then not only do we take away their ability to sight articles, but we also have to take away their ability to patrol for actual vandalism, regardless of how good they were at that. That's the main reason my proposal makes a distinct separation between BLP flagging and flags everywhere else. If we have one level of flagging for everything, we give everything 1 level of review. But the level required for BLPs is too high to be practical for the 87% of articles, and the level for non-BLPs isn't really good enough for BLPs. With most articles the goal of FlaggedRevs is just to prevent vandalism from appearing to the public. With BLPs we're also more concerned with protecting the subject from false information. Mr.Z-man 03:00, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

I do not have a very strong opinion about letting rollbackers sight, it just seems like the easiest way to get some sighters. Sighter could be a separate userright, but given to all current rollbackers. I'm curious, how do you intend to find these people who are good enough to sight all the BLP edits if regular vandal fighters won't do? --Apoc2400 (talk) 11:03, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Volunteers I'd imagine. If this proposal were to go ahead, I can envisage devloping some software to help handle BLPs quickly, efficiently and (most importantly) correctly Fritzpoll (talk) 11:32, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

As I said (multiple times probably) I don't believe that the current vandal fighters are good enough. Some of them, probably, all of them, certainly not. If they were, then no one would even be considering BLPs as a special case for FlaggedRevs. If we restrict the "special BLP flagging" to poorly watched and low-profile BLPs, the number of edits won't be too large. It only becomes an issue if we include high-profile BLPs that get multiple edits per day on a daily basis. But these are already well watched, and libel sticking around for a long time isn't as much of an issue Mr.Z-man 14:43, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

:(

Were you simply scanning recent changes? What happened? I'm an administrator, and I've never been blocked before. I was quite perplexed for a second! -- Renesis (talk) 06:11, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. With that kind of title I can see how the mistake can be made. -- Renesis (talk) 06:13, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

(e/c)Your last move set off one of the pagemove watcher bots on IRC :\ I didn't realize until after I hit the button. Again, sorry! Mr.Z-man 06:14, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

User:Mr.Z-man/yet another FlaggedRevs proposal

Are you ok if I knick bit of this to put into a mainspace proposal - a functionally equivalent version, that is. Probably at a page like WP:Flagged permissions Fritzpoll (talk) 08:43, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Sure. Mr.Z-man 14:36, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

I've written a whole lot down at User:Fritzpoll/BLPFlaggedRevs but realised that my configuration is not exactly the same as yours, so I'd have to actually work out what the config should be. Would you mind having a look and seeing to what extent you agree with what I've written? Cheers, Fritzpoll (talk) 14:45, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

User:Mr.Z-man/closeAFD.js

Hey. I've addedUser:Mr.Z-man/closeAFD.js to my monobook.js, unfortunately it did not work. There appeared no tab at the log pages. Could you help me? :) Thank you. — Aitias // discussion 00:42, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

It doesn't add a tab on the log pages, you have to go to the individual AFD subpages. Mr.Z-man 01:19, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, that does not work either. :( — Aitias // discussion 01:30, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Testing with [3], closeAFD.js seemed to work correctly, adding a "close" tab to AFD subpages, hideClosedAFD.js didn't, and the Firefox error console is full of

Error: obj is null
Source File: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Aitias/User%3ASteel359%2F%5Edemon.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript
Line: 170

errors, suggesting something is wrong with User:Aitias/User:Steel359/^demon.js and casuing other scripts after it to not work. Mr.Z-man 01:44, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

(two edit conflicts) Also, if I add importScript('User:AzaToth/twinklexfd.js'); to my monobook.js, that breaks the relist tab at afd pages. :( — Aitias // discussion 01:48, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

I use both of them together as well. What browser do you use? Mr.Z-man 01:58, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

I use Mozilla Firefox 3. I just tried this and it worked perfectly. However, just removing User:Aitias/User:Steel359/^demon.js and twinklexfd did not work. — Aitias // discussion 02:07, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

I just tried removing User:Aitias/User:Steel359/^demon.js and twinklexfd another time, and everything works now. However, if I add twinklexfd neither hide closed nor relisting does work. — Aitias // discussion 02:18, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

(unindent) I just tried this and the Firefox error console displayed:

twinkleConfigExists is not defined
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:AzaToth/twinklexfd.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript
line: 26

Using this it displayed:

obj is null
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Aitias/User%3ASteel359%2F%5Edemon.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript
line: 81
obj is null
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Aitias/User%3ASteel359%2F%5Edemon.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript
line: 170

Obviously, there seem to be mistake(s) in those scripts. As I'm not good with scripts, do you know how to fix? Thank you for the help. :) — Aitias // discussion 15:23, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Just to know it: Do you plan to reply to this at some point? :) — Aitias // discussion 19:53, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

I really don't have the time (or patience) to debug other people's scripts (as in, scripts not written by me) right now. You might want to ask on WP:VPT. Mr.Z-man 20:02, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for your help anyway. :) — Aitias // discussion 20:05, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Applaudable, but done wrong

AndyzBot is not a simple sock, it is instead an unapproved bot and needs to be handled in that way. Look at a notice at/near the bottom of WP:AN. AndyBot is a similar issue.--Ipatrol (talk) 19:34, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

See my comment at AN. Mr.Z-man 19:47, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

No hard feelings?

I assume the hatchet was buried a while ago. Let's go get a drink. :) burnte (talk) 01:34, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Query on block

Hello. Just curious, but why did you block 66.123.186.82 (talk · contribs · block log)? Not only was the IP never warned past a level two warning, but it appears that the user actually listened to that warning because the he or she did not make any additional vandalism edits after receiving the {{uw-vandalism2}}. Please note that I am not complaining, as I am genuinely curious. Regardless, I follow a 0RR for the actions of my fellow admins, and defer the issue to your good judgment. Thanks, Kralizec! (talk) 18:36, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Based on the number of warnings on that page and previous blocks, I highly doubt that they had planned on stopping. They receieved a warning for this, then procedded to blank the page. Not exactly the sign of a constructive contributor. (They didn't make any edits after the warning because they were blocked). Mr.Z-man 18:45, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Bot seeing usernames as IPs

It looks like the bot is seeing usernames starting in numbers as IPs and getting confused:[4]--Terrillja _talk 03:36, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

thank you

My RFA passed today at 150/48/6. I wanted to thank you for weighing in, and I wanted to let you know I appreciated all of the comments, advice, criticism, and seriously took it all to heart this past week. I'll do my absolute best to not let any of you down with the incredible trust given me today. rootology (C)(T) 08:02, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Block Settings

So you know, it was the block settings that allowed Jarlaxle to edit own talk pages. He's running over the list of namespaces that should have been blocked by Krimpet (although Krimpet probably knows to block that by now). ~ Troy (talk) 03:49, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Feedback Required

Hi, I was wondering if you could give me some guidance please, for future reference, as to why the "Alan Harvey" article was deleted? You mentioned various WP:BLP issues but could they not have been dealt with by the usual edit and discussion, and deletion of material which did not meet the criteria? Or does 'OTRS ticket:2009011110015794' mean a legal complaint from the subject themself, in which case please could you briefly let me know how that system works so that I do not run into the same error? --Utinomen (talk) 20:11, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Based on my evaluation, the article would have needed close to an entire rewrite to bring it up to standards for NPOV and reliable sourcing for a BLP. That, combined with marginal notability and a complaint from the subject that the article contained exaggerations and incorrect statements, meant the article was doing more harm than good. From WP:BLP:

“ Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons—whether the material is negative, positive, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion. ”

In this case, that was almost the entire article. My best advice is that you do not involve yourself in editing BLPs, especially of controversial individuals without first becoming more familiar with WP:RS and WP:NPOV. Mr.Z-man 20:29, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

COUNTING EDITS

When I use Kate's Tool it says I have around 303 edits, but when I look at my contributions i have over 500 edits does kate's tool include undo's? --Chrismaster1 (talk) 21:31, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Final version

As a contributor to the discussion regarding sports team logos, I am soliciting feedback as to the latest version of that guideline. Your support/opposition/feedback would be appreciated. — BQZip01 — ^talk 21:57, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Bio cats tool

Hi Mr.Z-man! I love your refToolbar and wonder if you could be tempted to create a similar gadget that would replace the use of the {{Lifetime}} template that proponents use claiming that it is easier than having to enter in the DEFAULTSORT, year of birth, and Living people/year of death categories. Such a gadget would make entering those easier still and avoid having the defaultsort and categories hidden within the template when it is not subst'ed as usual now. Regards, DoubleBlue (talk) 21:05, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Awesome humor

Decline reason: "^{[citation needed]}". Made my day. Cheers! ←Signed:→Mr. E. Sánchez ^{Get to know me!} / _{Talk to me!}←at≈:→ 22:38, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Apology

I've posted a general apology in my withdrawal statement at the Oversight election page, but I felt that as a contributor you deserve an individual apology too.

It was not my intention to let the election begin without a statement, but an IT gremlin "ate" my first attempt at posting there some hours before the election was to begin and then unforseeable RL issues prevented me from getting back to it until too late. Thank you for your consideration and sincere regrets for wasting your time. --Dweller (talk) 10:25, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Block review (just a heads up)

Just a heads up, I'm reviewing an unblock request for a sock of Matt72in, User:Mattini. I read the whole back and forth on his talk page and the various 'articles' he has created. Nevertheless, I've offered him a {{2nd chance}} unblock request. If he takes it and makes some reasonable effort at the process I'm prepared to unblock him. Since the sockmaster was your block originally I figured I would let you know. Protonk (talk) 15:56, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Ohio meetup

I told you I'd let you know, and your interest inspired me. The page is located at Wikipedia:Meetup/Ohio 1. I'm mostly gauging interest at the moment, but please let me know what you think. Thanks, hmwithτ 01:58, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

CloseAFD question

Hi Mr.Z-man, great job on your many scripts. On your closeAFD script, does the 'relist' tab only show for administrators? The documentation page doesn't say that it's an administrator-only function, but it has never showed for me (I'm not an administrator). Thanks, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 03:08, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

It should work for everyone. Mr.Z-man 18:05, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Hm, are they any reasons why I might not be seeing it? Just to clarify, it is supposed to form a new tab, such as 'watch' or 'close', right? Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 23:22, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it should show up next to the close tab. If you're using Firefox, look in the Error console, it might be conflicting with something. Mr.Z-man 23:38, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Hm, the error console seems to be fine. However, I noticed when I commented out all of the other lines on my monobook.js the 'relist' tab appeared. Is another script on my monobook.js causing this problem? Thanks, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 17:15, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Request for adminship... 3?

Hi Mr.Z-man, it's now been over half a year since my previous request for the mop, and reviewing that RfA reveals that you were one of my opposers last time round. I was wondering if you'd like to comment on my current status in the Wikipedia community, and if you believe I would be ready to run for adminship again in future? Please respond wherever you feel it is most appropriate. Kind regards. —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs · email) 16:25, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

MILHIST popularity pages

Hi there

Thanks for doing something that I had on my "to do" list! :-)) Was just wondering if you could do a popular pages for WikiProject Military history ? Since this would be for setting priorities for editors in the first instance rather than just "what's hot?", a one-off run would be fine - and it's a big (85k) project, so you probably wouldn't want to do it regularly in any case. OTOH, it would be nice to have more than a month's worth of data - say 6 months or 12 months cumulative, just to help weed out any Slashdotting effects. But if that's a problem, one month's data is fine. Possibly looking ahead, would you be able to cope with stats on individual taskforces? TIA Le Deluge (talk) 15:00, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Happy Mr.Z-man's Day!

Mr.Z-man has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, and therefore, I've officially declared today as Mr.Z-man's day! For your great technical and administrative work, enjoy being the Star of the day, Mr.Z-man! Cheers, bibliomaniac15 01:49, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

:-D Mr.Z-man 00:16, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for tidying up the childish scribbles. I'll be glad to return the favor some day. Tim Vickers (talk) 04:52, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Template:Central America/Class

A while back, it appears that you protected Template:Central America/Class. I think it needs to be edited to allow C-class articles to be represented. Can you add the coding to allow C-class articles for Central America articles, or temporarily unprotect it to allow the coding to be added? Thanks. Rlendog (talk) 01:16, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Protection lowered. Mr.Z-man 22:46, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. It looks like I got the C-class working now, so if you want to protect it back that should be fine. Rlendog (talk) 23:02, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

User page

Thanks for the revert to the vandalism on my user page Camw (talk) 01:49, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

thoughtful idea

"What harm would occur if Wikipedia had serious articles on minor news figures?" Please, never edit a BLP, ever. For someone like that, a Wikipedia article is pretty much guaranteed to be both poorly watched, and in the top 5 google results for the person's name. Any incorrect information (it doesn't even have to be offensive libel necessarily) not only reflects poorly on Wikipedia, but can cause real-world harm to the subject. The same is true for non-BLPs as well, though the possibility for and effect of direct harm is lower. Wikimedia gets dozens of emails per month from biography subjects complaining about inaccuracies and POV in their articles, and that's with the current notability policy. Mr.Z-man 18:27, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Above is from Village Pump.

Your idea reflects thoughtfulness and caution. This is a good quality in an administrator.

I checked this out by googling two obscure names and WP entries are high up.

Should we modify WP policies on BLP? Or just informally keep this in mind and spread the word and try to stop edits that are permitted but have the potential to cause harm as you describe. Chergles (talk) 22:45, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

With your thoughtful comments, I would like to keep in contact with you. There are a limited number of very analytical and considerate people in Wikipedia. Chergles (talk) 22:46, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

The problem isn't a weak BLP policy, the problem is lack of resources to enforce it. We have 1,105,074 BLPs and only a few thousand active users so our enforcement is mainly reactionary - we don't fix the problem until after we get a complaint. I know some users are working on some tools to help with this, Wikipedia:Database reports/Biographies of living persons containing unsourced statements is a start. Note that my comment wasn't really based on thoughtfulness or reflection, but from actually working in the trenches. Mr.Z-man 19:05, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Could I help with some of the 300,000? What should I look for besides "xxxx is a jerk" in the article? Chergles (talk) 19:34, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Issue #2: You know the person that I brought up as an example, Beverly Eckert? Someone created an article on her. Chergles (talk) 20:43, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Request for copy of deleted article: Paul Maliakkal

Hello Mr. Z-man,

An article that I started was recently deleted. The reason for the deletion was cited as "A7: Article about a real person, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject." I would like to restore a copy of the article to my user talk so that I can improve the article and emphasize the importance and significance of the subject so that the article complies with wikipedia's standards.

The article is entitled [Paul Maliakkal]. If you are unable to restore the article to my [user talk page], please let me know how I can recover the contents of the article so that I can modify it to wikipedia's standards.

Thanks, Schoolbusdriver85 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Schoolbusdriver85 (talk • contribs) 21:28, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

re Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Removal of advanced permissions (proposed)#Neutral

I have created a Neutral section for those who agree with the premise but not the method, or some other aspect, which may be altered following talkpage discussion. Perhaps you would wish to review your !vote under the changed circumstances? LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:52, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

RFA thankspam

Thank you for weighing in at my RFA. I thought I was a complete policy wonk, so I was surprised to find out that I'm not. ;) Somno (talk) 06:00, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: Jumbo

By coincidence, I noticed Mr.Z-man edited Jumbo today after seeing another victorian ad card on e-bay:

Jumbo the ELEPHANT FABULOUS SET

As-is the article implies there was only one ad, while the e-bay item includes 3 others.

I'm reluctant to edit the article, but think Mr. Z-man may do it better. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vioarc (talk • contribs) 22:15, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

All I did was revert some vandalism, I'm sure you're much more familiar with the topic than me. Mr.Z-man 22:48, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi there Mr Z-Man. Just wanted to say thanks for reverting the vandalism on my user page. Cheers. Jonesy (talk) 11:06, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

IP you blocked

Recommend a longer block. If you look at the contribs, it's the same individual returning again and again after each block. I would say at least a week, probably a month would be appropriate. Thanks, Enigma^msg 00:53, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for the revert on my user page. :) LittleMountain5 15:35, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Page-move vandalism

I note that you reverted User:Spellplague's disruptive page moves. I have placed a warning on that user's talk page. Ohconfucius (talk) 02:54, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

• Don't bother. He's indeffed on sight. Page move vandalism is dealt with by blocking always. No warnings necessary. Protonk (talk) 02:58, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Sockpuppet category template

Please do not subst {{sockpuppet category}}. Thanks! --Pascal666 (talk) 20:27, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Your recent IP block

I noticed that you have blocked 70.146.242.221 for 48 hours. I recommend a longer block for this IP and disable editing own talk page, as it's heavily being used by a banned user User:Bambifan101 on top of trolling on his own talk page. See his edits. Just a suggestion. Thank you. NHRHS2010 |  Talk to me  23:25, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Looks like a dynamic IP, will probably be reassigned to someone else in a day or so. Mr.Z-man 23:28, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Joseph Armand Bombardier

Hello,

While looking for information about Joseph bombardier, I stumbled upon the Wikipedia Article only to find, for lack of a better description, it sucks. There is no information about his personal life, his childhood, his education, has no references or citations. For an artcile about Canada's most famous inventor, it is a sad page. I have started a user subpage and am trying to re-write the article. I was just wondering if there is anything else that can be done to help this page. Thanks!--Gordonrox24 (talk) 18:20, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Any ideas?--Gordonrox24 (talk) 01:00, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

AFD closure script

Just to let you know that the AFD closer is giving an error "Deletion error on Talk:PAGENAME. Error info:The page you requested doesn't exist : missingtitle" when the article talk page doesn't exist. I imagine it's got something to do with the new MediaWiki release, and it's nothing major, but just letting you know. Stifle (talk) 19:18, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

block settings

For User:68.220.177.151 should probably be adjusted so he can't edit his talk page either in light of [5]. Thanks. Beeblebrox (talk) 03:05, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

More on AFD closure script

Great job on writing User:Mr.Z-man/closeAFD.js. I noticed, though, that it doesn't remove template:rescue from articles. I suggest adding

articlepage = articlepage.replace(/\{\{\s*(r|R)escue\s*(\|.*?)?\}\}/, '');

directly after

articlepage = articlepage.replace(/<!-- Please do not remove or change this AfD message until the issue is settled -->[\S\s]*?<!-- End of AfD message, feel free to edit beyond this point -->\n/, '');

to fix this. Erik9 (talk) 03:09, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Steward elections

• Thanks for your vote, for or against, and your constructive comments. Apteva (talk) 14:46, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the vandalism revert on my page

Staffwaterboy ^{Critique Me Guestbook Hate Comments} 07:48, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

recently blocked

Can you revert User:HTTP 500 Internal Server Error's last edit at List of HTTP status codes please so I don't go WP:3RR. Thanks. OrangeDog (talk • edits) 09:30, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

The user was a vandal, looks like NawlinWiki already did it. Mr.Z-man 17:54, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/MZMcBride

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/MZMcBride/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/MZMcBride/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Tiptoety ^talk 02:19, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Reverting Mistake

Oops - that was a pretty bad mistake- sorry - Fastily (talk) 19:58, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Popular pages

Hi, I was wondering if you could do a view count page (popular pages) for Wikipedia:WikiProject Mammals like you did for Michigan? Cheers, Jack (talk) 10:57, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Pageview stats

I saw your request for comments on generating pageview stats for WikiProject Military history. Would it be possible to do the same for WikiProject Ships? I think such a list would be most beneficial there. — Bellhalla (talk) 23:38, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for creating the page. That should be a big help in helping to improve some of our more popular articles. One question, though: is it possible to include the article's WP:SHIPS importance assessment in the table as well? — Bellhalla (talk) 07:18, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my talk page. Rgoodermote  15:02, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for reverting vandalizing on my user page. Nsaa (talk) 22:51, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

		The WikiChevrons
		Thank you for generating all those lists of popular military history articles. Nick-D (talk) 07:33, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for blocking my old user name Joey Kaminski (talk · contribs). Someone got into that username and did some stuff, which was wrong of them. I should have had it delted, when I went back to my original JoeCool950 (talk · contribs), but didn't, and someone got into that username Joey Kaminski (talk · contribs). I'm glad, though that you caught it. I went ahead and had that page deleted, so that, that person can't get into that page again, so if you want to, the block can be taken off of it now--JoeCool950 (talk) 06:03, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Deleting the page doesn't remove their access to the account, you'll have to ask for the account to be renamed so you can re-register it if you want to be in control of it. Mr.Z-man 06:54, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

The account will also need a steward to remove the unification on it (which I do not doubt it possesses, so get in touch with one ASAP. -Jeremy ^{(v^_^v Cardmaker)} 07:09, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't think it's worth having two accouts, so even if the unification is removed on Joey Kaminski (talk · contribs), the best thing I guess is to keep it deleted?--JoeCool950 (talk) 02:55, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Military history popular pages

Thanks for setting up all the popular page lists for WP:MILHIST and all of our task forces! Two quick questions about the results:

1. Two task force lists (Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Medieval warfare task force/Popular pages and Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Military science task force/Popular pages) don't appear to have been generated. Is this because those two weren't in the bot list, or is there some other problem with them?
2. Am I correct in assuming that only the second, "List" section of each page is overwritten by the bot on updates? I've added categories and a navigation template to the lead section, but I'm wondering if that will persist across the updates, or if it will still be wiped out.

Thanks again! Kirill ^[pf] 12:51, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

1. Yes, these 2 were mistakes, they'll be added on the run next month.
2. Ideally yes, possibly no. Now that the script is somewhat stable, I try to avoid changing the lead section, but its possible it might change in the future.

Mr.Z-man 17:29, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

User:Momers

You blocked Momers (talk · contribs) who had moved a few pages, but the block may have been a mistake - the moves don't look like vandalism, and were explained in the edit summaries. —Snigbrook 13:54, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, this was a mistake. He almost exactly fit the pattern of Grawp (a handful of article edits followed by a few rapid pagemoves). Mr.Z-man 16:58, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

AFD closer thanks

Great script! Just to be picky, is there a way of avoiding outputting an "error" when a talk page to an AFD article doesn't exist? i.e. "Deletion error on Talk:Faheem Ahmed Nazar. Error info:The page you requested doesn't exist : missingtitle". I also get "database API" (or something like that) errors from time to time when it tries to delete some pages. yandman 10:19, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

The missingtitle error is from a bug in MediaWiki, this will go away in the next software update in the next several days or a week. The database error might be the same problem. Mr.Z-man 20:53, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Great! yandman 07:45, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Spammer talk pages

Hi. Could you program your bot to not delete old spammer pages? Spammers hop from one account or IP or another as they get warnings or blocks over many months or years. We need to be able to see what warnings they may have gotten in the past across their different talk pages; this way we can see whether we should add their domains to our spam blacklist. (Many non-Wikimedia Foundation wikis use our blacklists for their own filtering so we're reluctant to blacklist domains unless we see they've ignored multiple warnings.) We also need these pages if we subsequently get blacklist removal requests here on the English Wikipedia or at MetaWiki's global blacklist; this is also necessary when reviewing whitelist requests as well. For example, see the deletion log and restored talk page for User:Starmometer.

One way to do this is to exclude pages that contain "link", "links", "promote", "promotion" or "spam".

Beyond that, there have been broader discussions underway first at at User talk:MZMcBride/Archive 13#Spam-tracking pages, then at Wikipedia talk:User page#OLDIP and finally at Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#U4. Others have expressed concerns that other long-term vandals and POV-pushers skip accounts as well and need to be tracked via old account warnings.

Thanks, --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:56, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

As I said elsewhere, in probably multiple locations, it would be extremely helpful, not only to me, but likely to you as well, if the spam warning/blocking templates contained some sort of tracking category, or at the very least, some sort of "dummy template" like {{do not delete}} like all the sockpuppetry templates use. But as I don't have the willingness or time to argue for weeks on end about this, I might as well just quadruple the bandwidth usage and do the keyword search. Mr.Z-man 15:37, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

I've been away for several days so I'm sorry to have missed your earlier comments. Thanks for the suggestions. I have just added {{do not delete}} to our spam, advertising and coi templates. I'll tackle the categories next.

In the meantime, we have hundreds or thousands of old spam-tracking talk pages -- can you keep an eye out for them? Thanks, --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:19, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

See Category:User talk pages with spam warnings -- it has 15 subcategories based on the warning used. I did not use {{do not delete}} since, "specifically, it should only be used for templates categorizing sock puppets and puppeteers, banned users, previously legitimate users blocked following arbitration cases, and IP addresses." -- I felt unloading 100s of talk pages into that category would make it hard to find the originally targeted pages.--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:08, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

{{do not delete}} really doesn't do anything except provide a way for bots and scripts to easily determine which pages not to delete, the actual tracking is done by the templates that embed it and the actual sockpuppet categories. I'll do a search for some phrases from the warning templates on the next run to clean out all the old spam pages before the categories were added, after that I'll look at the categories. Mr.Z-man 19:39, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:49, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Ohio meetup locations

Where should the Ohio meet up take place? The best option is probably wherever the most people can attend, so you opinion counts. See Wikipedia talk:Meetup/Ohio 1#Location !vote. hmwithτ 20:51, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Toolserveraccount

Hello Mr.Z-man,
please send your real-name, your wikiname, your Freenode-nick (if you have one), your prefered login-name and the public part of your ssh-key to . We plan to create your account soon then. --DaB. 01:09, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Request

Someone asked me to point this out to you. MBisanz ^talk 07:56, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Happy Saint Patrick’s Day!

On behalf of the Wikipedia:Kindness Campaign, we just want to spread Wikipedia:WikiLove by wishing you a Happy Saint Patrick’s Day! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 16:19, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Special:AbuseFilter/15

I disabled this filter as it is broken (see abuse log). Prodego ^talk 01:15, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Request undeletion of Deathsmiles II

The article Deathsmiles II was under quick deletion for (G11: Blatant advertising), which is a false accusation on the nature of the article. The original article had previews of the game that were run by independent journalist, which could not classify it as 'Blatant advertising'. Besides, putting it in quick deletion was not even fair since there was no call for debate before it was deleted. It should be restored immediately. - Jacob Poon (talk) 21:00, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

I would suggest you bring this up with the admin who deleted it - User talk:Tone, though I would note that the speedy deletion policy doesn't require a debate. Mr.Z-man 22:02, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

BetacommandBot warnings

Hi.

There is something i would like you to help me with. You see, there is this bot that put warnings about fair use violations on images, surely you have crossed ways with one of his warnings sometime; The bot has been out of service for a while now and a lot of the thousands of warnings he put are about images that have already been erased and should be erased as well.

I asked one of the admins that participated in the block of the user that operated the bot about a way to find and/or delete these warnings, other that the manual way at least, and your name came up, so what do you think?. Could Mr. Z-bot take care of that, either erase the warnings that are no longer useful either because the image has been erased or because the proper fair use rationale has been added or just generate a list so i could do it manually.

I know is a little too much to ask but i`ll await your answer either here or in my talk page. Thanks in advance. Zidane tribal (talk) 23:27, 23 March 2009 (UTC)