User talk:Rich Farmbrough/Archive/2007 March

Previous · Next

Sorrows of Satan

Hey Rich, I've tried to add sourcing on a topic "The Sorrows of Satan" which your smackbot said was missing attribution on a fact. That's an impressive bot by the way - how did you programme it to look for missing attributions?! I'm not sure I've added the footnote correctly. (It's not appeared at the bottom of the page of the article). If you could give me a tip on how to put it right, and if the attribution is acceptable to you, I'd be grateful. Coricus 04:58, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Sadly I have not invented AI. SmackBot merely dates the tags, such as "fact" "cleanup" etc (and does a few other tasks). Someone has fixed up the footnotes, but merely adding <references /> in the appropriate place is what is required. The smaller typeface I can take or leave, generally I leave it. Rich Farmbrough, 14:45 23 February 2007 (GMT). 14:45, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Is it okay with you then if I remove the does not cite sources tag now that I've added a reference? (Or is that not possible because I'm a regular user rather than admin?) Coricus 17:52, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Fact tags (again)

Hi Rich. I turned the bot off for the moment, with a note. The issue of the fact tags and the category involving articles which contain one or more fact tags is currently under DRV at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2007_February_20. It appears there are broader implications involved, some of which I've brought up in the DRV, that will require participation by interested members of the larger community. Look's like it'll take another week to ten days to sort this through. That said, very nice work with the bot, in general. I've appreciated seeing it attend to "unreferenced" and cleanup templates and other such matters. ... Kenosis 17:07, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

List of United States Presidents by military rank

Hello, in this edit, User:Smackbot removed the wikilinks of the section headings as part of its other cleanup duties. I will add those back, as they are useful in that article, but just wanted to drop a note. Thx. — MrDolomite • Talk 17:09, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

SmackBot Kevinkor2

To: Rich Farmbrough, Kenosis

Cc: Template talk:Fact

From: Kevinkor2

Currently, Rich, your bot is expanding {{fact}} by adding the current month, resulting in {{Fact|date=February 2007}}.

Kenosis, whenever you see this on the Truth, Pragmatism, and a few other articles, you revert it. As you noted at User talk:Rich Farmbrough#Automated fact-tag tagging, it would be useful to have fact dating/nondating under control of an article's editors.

I suggest we adopt one of three possible compromises:

1. Manually change {{fact}} to {{fact|date=}} for facts where we do not know an accurate date.
2. Add {{nobots}} to the top of the article.
3. Research the page history for the first appearance of the {{fact}} tag to give it the correct date.

I recommmend the first alternative. --Kevinkor2 17:43, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Altering capitalization in templates

I notice you have edited many templates (states) and changed the capitalization in the category/subject heading, i.e., Largest Towns, you've changed to Largest towns. On what basis are you making these changes? Is there a Wiki guideline addressing this that you know of? If so please point me to it, and if not I would and do argue against you making these wholesale changes. As an example, the main category/subject header of many of these templates is: State of Someplace, and you leave state capitalized (which it should be), but then in the sub-categories where the important element, for instance, Town, is modified by a limiter, Largest, you de-emphasize the element being delineated by removing the capitalization of that important word. These are not sentences, and should not follow sentence capitalization rules. They are instead to be considered headers or even titles, and the rules for that typically allow, even instruct, that important words should be capitalized while unimportant articles and prepositions should not be, UNLESS those articles or prepositions appear at the start of the title/phrase, so State of Someplace, and Largest Towns, would both be correct, but State Of Someplace, and largest Towns, would not be correct. To repeat what I am objecting to in your edits of these templates, the word Largest is capitalized since it begins the phrase, but the word Towns should also remain capitalized as that word IS the name of the category and certainly the important word in the title/phrase. JackME 20:41, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi, As you say, these work the same as headings: the MoS states for headings 'In a heading, capitalize only the first letter of the first word and the first letter of any proper nouns, and leave all of the other letters in lowercase. Example: "Rules and regulations", not "Rules and Regulations".' Rgds, Rich Farmbrough, 10:20 24 February 2007 (GMT).

Noumenon

RE YOUR COMMENT ON MY TALK:All the tags where you've removed "February" as wrong were added in February. The one by "causal loop" where you've left the date of February was added on the 26th of January. Rgds, Rich Farmbrough, 00:15 24 February 2007 (GMT).

Hi Rich. Yes I noticed the more recent ones too. As I mentioned, the whole issue of whether this dating thing should be automatic from this period of time forward is a legitimate one that appears to need broader discussion about the various issues that are involved. Among them are standardization vs. editorial discretion by local WP:CONSENSUS, administrative actions vs. broader community actions, and a few other issues. Thanks also for calling to my attention the {{Nobots}} template. Many approaches have been proposed thus far that I hadn't heard before, and that particular discussion, as it relates to Category:Articles with unsourced statements, appears like it'll probably play out over the next week to ten days or so. My point of view you already know to some degree. Thanks. ... Kenosis 00:42, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Odd bot edit

What's with this diff? It apparently caused the editor to mistakenly message me. --Gwern (contribs) 08:25 24 February 2007 (GMT)

How to get a site on semi-protect status or mediation?

An editor is pulling a category from Health effects of September 11, 2001 attacks. He is doing this on a daily basis, so it doesn't break three revert rule. How do I get semi-protect status or mediation? Thanks. Dogru144 01:03, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

4AM Miracle

I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article 4AM Miracle, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Yavoh 04:56, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Next time go for the 3RR

		The Surreal Barnstar
		For editwarring with your own bot on Vyacheslav Sychev (sorry but I had to delete the article). Gave me a good laugh. Too much of this? CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 10:54, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Race and intelligence (explanations)

Why did you delete "Other Factors" ? futurebird 18:11, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I didn't. Rich Farmbrough, 18:13 25 February 2007 (GMT).

Okay. My bad. futurebird 18:15, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Question about your edit to Demographic estimates of the German exodus from Eastern Europe

Rich, how did you add the "date=February 2007" attribute to the requests for citation in the Demographic estimates of the German exodus from Eastern Europe ? I thought the article was protected from editing. --Lysy^talk 18:58, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I was wondering whether putting timestamps within a protected article is not a bit "risky". Say if the article remains locked for a longer time and then, when it's unprotected someone decided that the citation requests timed out ? Just a suggestion that it might lead to accidental removal of the information. --Lysy^talk 19:07, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

OK, thanks for looking into it. --Lysy^talk 19:13, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

re: "Fact" tags

Thanks for the info. --Rrburke^(talk) 21:31, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for the positive feedback - slowly working my way backwards through the alphabet to assess all those unrated biographies. Going to take me ages to get all the way back through X, however.

Smackbot fixed a minor error I left when I added a message to Wellesley College. Thanks for writing/running it! --Scouttle 00:56, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for February 26th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 9	26 February 2007	About the Signpost

Three users temporarily desysopped after wheel war	Peppers article stays deleted
Pro golfer sues over libelous statements	Report from the Norwegian (Bokmål) Wikipedia
WikiWorld comic: "Pet skunk"	News and notes: New arbitrators appointed, milestones
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:32, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

User:Rklawton

Thanks for the note regarding WP:SUBST. I've checked, and it's been weeks (at least) since I last made that mistake. Have I missed something? Rklawton 16:24, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

CHICOTW

	Chicago Collaboration of the Week
Last week your bot helped edit the Chicago COTW. Thank you for designing a useful bot! I hope your bot keeps an eye on our future projects. You may also want to help us out. This week Chicago Theatre has been chosen. Please help improve it towards the quality level of a Wikipedia featured article. See the To Do List to suggest a change or to see an open tasks list.
	Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago

TonyTheTiger 02:57, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Ware Polacks bearing gifts!

Well, not really! I was inspired by your note here, which I unfortunately read in diff, so missed 'Fact-now' until this moment. (and apparently got the wrong sense entirely as well, as what I THOUGHT I'd read you suggesting, isn't, quite as complicated as what you meant.) Sigh! Alas, I have since developed Template:DATE(edit talk links history), {after some initial testing in {{X4}} and {{X5}} about three hours ago) which has lot in common with Template:Tlx(edit talk links history), but has one virtue... it's extensible to all the other administrative templates which like to see the stray 'date=' definition. Unlike fact now, DATE will yell (shout!) at the user for not substituting it.
  See: date=May 2009 <BSEG>!
OTOH, it also works (finally), albeit, there may be a more elegant way than it's sub-template. {{fact-now}} seems like it might add problems if not substituted... there's a split in the what links here list, at the least. In any event, I bequeath to you {{DATE}} (and it's loyal sidekick Template:DATE2(edit talk links history)) which can be used in merge and copyedit and all that stuff that uses the parameter 'date=', iirc.
  I'm imagining the consternation that will occur in mainspace when that big text error message blasts off a preview screen where someone has forgot to substitute it... might want to take Template:Error:not substituted(edit talk links history), copy it to {{error:not substituted2}}, and downsize that font selection. Best regards // FrankB 11:16, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

re:Your Challenge

• Don't tell me, let me guess. You spell Polack: "S-U-C-K-E-R", right? <g>

My that's an interesting concoction of densely coded esoterica! Ahem. Well, Give a Speedy-D to this... if I experienced that right, it may be okay, but I suspect it was supposed to be tacked onto a days afd pages, N'est pas? No matter at the moment. Need more to go on with what was 'broken' now that I have a feel for the general code, and I definitely do not want to nominate The Beatles for deletion--wwoods would be after my scalp, and I'd hand it to him! <g>. I suspect, I found one logic nesting problem right up top. I've commented that in {{smartafd}}, and there are at least two probable nesting errors in {{Testafd}}, as I scanned it.

That's a for-certain on only the one... Text search for 'XX', and read the comments about it. Unless I'm way off, the preceding triple '{{{' is just a double, and the 'XX' is thus 'garbage text' needing deleted. I'm not quite sure about the two in test that involves the calls to {{!}}... looks to me even if the subst's work, the code just adds an empty 'else' to the #if: block... so just exits having done nothing. Otoh, your logic was using the old if statements, and that's not something I've experience with. So be advised I also changed those to the new parserfunctions. The use of switch as it is employed seems a bit strange as well. And then there is the overall flow and braces nesting, which needs a bit more analysis coupled with understanding of what is happening when.

I'm also fairly sure the self-referential definition of the parameter category to a parameter of the same name is pretty shakey ground. At the least, CBD counseled me against using such in the older depreciated interwikitmp-grp templates (Say {{interwikitmp-grp3}} feeding such params to the common template {{interwikitmp-grp}}... which is why that scheme is loading everything into the one, and will be deleting the numbered suffixed ones.)

Bottom line, this is something maybe CBDunkerson, Ligelum, Omegetron, Azatoth or others should be looking at-- at least someone with more than my six months of playing template coder brings to the table. I'm primarily a hardware guy, not that I don't still occasionally code for imbedded systems, but this is a very funky language and I'm still very much on a steeper part of the learning curve than I like. If you can give me a better appreciation for the expected behavior, I'm pretty fair at testing code and finding erroneous behavior--and you can plan on doing some speedies of dummy articles so we can test it for certain. I'm up a little late to be going into this more now and today, so if what I've stretched out along with my comments doesn't inspire you with great insights... I'll take another look again tomarrow or the day after. While I'm able to stay awake, I need to get back to WP:TSP matters so I can officially launch it someday.

Oh, btw. You wouldn't want to subst it with the expanded comments as I added, but they code should function the same, save for the 'XX' add in testafd. Now that I've done that, you may well be able to see something I don't yet since (I hope) you know what behavior you were aiming for! Cheers! // FrankB 14:27, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

re: Thanks, interesting analysis. I may have another go at it in a few days. I had asked Azatoth some time back, but I think he was busy. Rich Farmbrough, 19:16 28 February 2007 (GMT).

I asked Ligulem to take a peek at it last night and opined he could probably spot the error at least eight times faster than I... which is particularly true when I've had little sleep in three days(!) I asked him to let me know if he was disinclined to take it on. (Unfortunately he said: "Per the afd: sorry, not interested." Sigh!) Have you asked CBD? He's usually supportive of admin stuff overall, and God knows he's helped me spot more than a few nesting errors. My problem with this is that it seems to want to make self-modifying code with that includeonly subst technique with the {{!}} calls. Not knowing how that {{if}} template behaves is a sticky point when that is taken into accout. My approach would be to disable the 'subst' test logic, put the big message boilerplate aside in a text file off line, then play with it's logic until I could see where things weren't behaving as expected. Best I can do for you now. I've destabalized my windows system and have a bunch of browsers with edits that I need to finish so I can reboot. ttfn // FrankB 19:46, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup templates

Just to let you know that most cleanup templates, like "unreferenced", "fact", "cleanup" etc., are best not "subst"ed. See WP:SUBST for more details. Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 19:19 27 February 2007 (GMT).

can not understand what you wanted to say. Khalidkhoso 19:22, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Things like this. Rich Farmbrough, 19:29 27 February 2007 (GMT).

I know what you mean but which one did I do it on? Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 22:07, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Well it took some sleuthing, but it was this one! Best wishes, Rich Farmbrough, 16:57 28 February 2007 (GMT).

And the wrong template as well. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 17:50, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Smackbot html entity removal

Smackbot removed html entity &#133; (ellipses: "&#133;") from Veganism. Not quite sure why, didn't see any mention of it on Smackbot's pages. Kellen ^T 12:49, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I think that was an incorrect replacement, I will investigate further. I was going to suggest […] to show that the omission is editorial, but I have put the elided passaged into the text, it seems relevant. Rich Farmbrough, 13:39 2 March 2007 (GMT).

Cheers, thanks. Kellen ^T 14:39, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Why I Turned Off Your Bot

I shut off Smack Bot and I figured I should tell you why. It tagged the articles Torrasque and Hunter Killer (StarCraft) as being unsourced. Technically, they were sourced. However, they have sources. They are only primary sources. Because you said on the bot userpage to shut it off if it looks like something may have gone wrong, I shut it off. Sorry if that was what it was supposed to do that. I just figured I'd do it just in case. Captain panda In vino veritas 13:20, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

No probs. It actually dates existing tags, does not (generally) add new ones. I would actually argue that in these two articles,"primary sources" are fine and dandy, and are all that is needed. Statements such as "The Zerg are the most horrifying creature in the video game" would require an external source, of course, but factual statements that are easily verified by playing the game or reading the manual seem fine to me. Rich Farmbrough, 13:50 2 March 2007 (GMT).

Thank you for taking care of that. I just figured I should let you know about that. Captain panda In vino veritas 13:52, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Your bot

Hi, your bot has been tagging {{fact}} with "date=February 2007" as early as this morning (March 2).. you may wish to update that, since February only has 28 days, and my belief is that it's got a bug. -- KirinX 15:17, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

note of thanks left. Problem fixed. Rich Farmbrough, 21:19 2 March 2007 (GMT).

I don't grok your date and place edits

In reference to the William A. Spinks article (at least): you or one of your bots, with an edit summary that mentioned "Ced Date fragments" (a phase unfamiliar to me), de-wikilined a large number of dates, and then also make rather inexplicable location wikilink changes that introduced gross redundancies, e.g. Los Angeles, California ⇒ Los Angeles, California, where "California" as a link an sich has no in-context value whatsoever. I'd like to know what value you perceive such edits as having, on both counts. — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 18:32, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

It was me. All bot edits are under SmackBot. "Ced" means "copyedit", I'll try and spell it out in futrue, and refers to changes that are very minor. Most year dates are not valuable in context. Geographically, I agree that both "Los Angeles" and "Calfornia", may be of limited value links in context, and certainly Los Angeles, California might be considered better in this example. I think, though, that if someone clicks on "California" they should go there not "Los Angeles". "Thou art God" Rich Farmbrough, 22:01 2 March 2007 (GMT).

Ah! "CEd" might get the point across. I think I would have gotten that. I totally agree that most contextless year wikilinks are kind of useless, but they seem endemic, almost to the point of being de facto "required". I got my head about bitten off when I reverted a few of them once. If you can cite a guideline against them, I would frankly be overjoyed and have a field day with AWB...: "Removing pointless year wikilinks per WP:POLICYHERE". </lust> I didn't revert that change because I thought the links were useful, just because I thought their removal went against long-standing consensus. Please tell me there's a consensus argument in the other direction! Didn't get the "god" point. If you mean that I was coming off as a know-it-all, I apologize; was certainly not the intent. Not sure I get the point about Cali. If I point at Los Angeles, California my browser tells me what link that will go to; I can see that it isn't California, and since the L.A. article already wikilinks to California, I'm not sure I understand a reason to break the state link out (I used to do Manila, Philippines and the like, and have an endless stream of reverts from people combine them into Manila, Philippines and so on, with virtual no counter-reverts, so it seems to be a trend). Similarly, someone recently changed my calcium carbonate wikilinking to calcium carbonate, and I'm in concurrence with the change - better to link to the specific than the general, and let people manually dig deeper if they want generalities. And I've felt strongly for a while (from a usabilty point of view) that one should studiously avoid, if ever possible, putting two wikilinks completely side-by-side (because calcium carbonate and Los Angeles, California are, respectively, entirely or virtually indistinguishable from calcium carbonate and Los Angeles, California unless/until one hovers over them. Kind of the counterpoint to the "if I click on 'California'..." point. To me, if a user sees a blue contiguous string of text (e.g. Los Angeles, California) it should be one link, to something that addresses the entire blue string, unless and only unless it would result in truly tortured wording to separate the two (or more) contiguous wikilinks ("carbonate of calcium"). I can't cite WP:MOS on this (that I know of); just advancing it as a wikiusability theory. :-) — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 02:44, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

PS: Re-reading my original message, it sounded more cranky than intended. Sorry! I was in a hurry, and wasn't thinking at all of how my tone might come across. D'oh. — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 02:46, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

1. "Thou art God" - the greeting used in Stranger in a Strange Land.
2. Dates - there is near consensus about delinking years, however one or two of those that were anti, were vociferously so, mainly User:Rebecca, who has blocked users and done "admin rollback" on their edits, to the disgust of many other admins. WP:MOSNUM points out that context is key, it's as far as we could get with unanimity, with mere consensus we could have maybe gone a little further. I have certainly de-linked many hundreds of years with two complaints (both from "antis" in the long long debates) and a handful of queries. You can certainly point to WP:MOSNUM to say that default lining is not policy.
3. Combination links - I certainly agree with calcium carbonate, I suspect the place names depend partly on display style. I us pop-ups, so I see the link, but the browser hint is too far away for me. If you see underlines then that and the comma probably make the two links clearly seperate, if not the comma can appear (psychologically) blue. Also in the article you cite, since California is already linked to, the argument for leaving it unlinked grows stronger. I did think there was some guidance on this, but haven't been able to find it recently. Rich Farmbrough, 12:46 3 March 2007 (GMT).

smackbot's tagging of the header of Flora Purim

I don't understand. I thought header areas should be simple statements. The whole article was substantially unreferenced and brief - I expanded it and referenced it carefully but largely left the header section seemed legit (it been changed since then but I still see no particular problem) but smackbot tagged it as needing references. There doesn't seem to be an controversy in the header to me and references might be distracting and largely depend on the substance of the article anyway. Please explain. I'm also not sure if this should be here or at smackbot's talk page but since you are who would explain....--Smkolins 23:00, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

"smackbot tagged it as needing references" .... No it didn't it merely dated the existing tag. Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 23:28 2 March 2007 (GMT).

I stand corrected. Apologies of course. It seems *you* tagged the header section. Can you explain please? What is it you want fixed?--Smkolins 23:34, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

No, no, my apologies. It seems I was editing the lead, and thought it was the whole article. tag removed. Rich Farmbrough, 23:42 2 March 2007 (GMT).

Ah, well then, that is better. Thanks!--Smkolins 01:25, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Your message

Thanks for the clarification; I'll edit in line with that in future. (I don't like to turn "bots" off in my Watchlist because occasionally they do things that I need to tidy up.) --Mel Etitis (Talk) 17:05, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Survey Invitation

Hi there, I am a research student from the National University of Singapore and I wish to invite you to do an online survey about Wikipedia. To compensate you for your time, I am offering a reward of USD$10, either to you or as a donation to the Wikimedia Foundation. For more information, please go to the research home page. Thank you. --WikiInquirer 22:15, 3 March 2007 (UTC)^{talk to me}

RE: David robertson

Definitely not notable. Links only to a single other article, another wrestler in the 'KWA', a "short lived wrestling promotion" - it is not notable. Not to mention the incorrect name/conflict with an existing article named David Robertson. Jammy Simpson | Talk | 11:32, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, maybe not notable, but does assert notability. Therefore use {{nn}} for non-notable, {{unref}}, {{cleanup}}, {{orphan}} for the other problems, {{prod}} or {{Afd}} for deletion, and move to a disambiguated name to solve the naming issue/. Rich Farmbrough, 11:40 4 March 2007 (GMT).

ISSN issues

I am trying to work on items at Category:ISSN_needed.

• Can you do something such that the likes of Talk, Template and Wikipedia pages do not get flagged here?
• I'd also like to hear your suggestions for how to deal with the ISSN issues for Sega Pro and Mega Power. I am rather convinced that the journals exist but do not have ISSNs. (See a bit of discussion here.)

Keesiewonder ^talk 13:31, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

• Ok ... thank you, I think ... Maybe a better solution would have been to move the template for the 5 articles that really do have ISSN issues to their respective talk pages. Keesiewonder ^talk 19:36, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

• Flop - I tried reverting the changes you made that I asked for, after moving the template to the talk pages of articles that do have issues ... and it didn't work as I expected. Maybe you can put the template back the way it was, or point me to instructions on how to begin understanding template programming. Thanks for your help ... Keesiewonder ^talk 02:03, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi Rich and Keesie,

Try it now.

I have reversed the condition of the test. --Kevinkor2 06:27, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Not dating maintenance templates

Hello, I see your bot at work daily fixing tags and such--good job! I was just wondering if it's OK that lately I've taken to not adding the date to tags, knowing that shortly your bot will come along and fix it. Does saving my energy as a wikiresource somehow get canceled out by wasting your bot's energy/server space/whatever? Keep up the good work. Katr67 17:26, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I believe it is a good thing to leave the dating to the bot, less typos for a start! Rich Farmbrough, 19:06 4 March 2007 (GMT).

Excellent! I'll take any excuse to be lazy. Katr67 20:46, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

SmackBot

Smackbot recently edited Radiation hormesis and changed "fact" to "Fact." in all but one instance (where it added a date). Is it really necessary to change "fact" to "Fact?" would it have made an edit if this was the only change? Pdbailey 20:58, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

No, but it's neater, no it would be unlikely to edit an article without an undated template, although if the template was dated by a third party between being identified and edited, this could happen in theory. Rich Farmbrough, 10:12 5 March 2007 (GMT).

Merge tags for List of basic topics in classical studies

Hi Rich,

I don't know how else to change the link to point to the correct discussion page - it's not in the standard autogenerated location. The Transhumanist (AWB) 16:21, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Parameter 2 with {{mergefrom}} - see Classics#0. Rich Farmbrough, 18:23 5 March 2007 (GMT).

Signpost updated for March 5th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 10	5 March 2007	About the Signpost

New Yorker correction dogs arbitrator into departure	WikiWorld comic: "The Rutles"
News and notes: Picture of the Year, milestones	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.

Ralbot 06:37, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

WP:WBE

Can you give me step by step instructions for how to update WP:WBE, please? I am absolutely happy to maintain it, I simply do not know how. I just looked at the download dumping place and was utterly bewildered by which one I needed, and what to do with it. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 16:28, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm nominating "Satsuma (disambig)" for deletion

Please note: I am nominating Satsuma (disambig) for deletion.
You are shown in the history as having edited this page.
If you wish to object, check the details by clicking the link above.

Regards, JohnI 18:32, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

CHICOTW

	Chicago Collaboration of the Week
Last week you helped edit the Chicago COTW, but did not vote. Thank you for your help! Your input in future selections would also be appreciated. This week Union Stock Yards has been chosen. Please help improve it towards the quality level of a Wikipedia featured article. See the To Do List to suggest a change or to see an open tasks list.
	Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago

TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 18:52, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

SmackBot and merge tags

Sometimes the date parameter is added to merge tags without "date=" and SmackBot then adds the date parameter again to the merge tag but with "date=". This causes the Discuss link to redirect to the Month/Year page of the date, as here: [1] Can this be fixed? Squids'and'Chips 01:34, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi Rich,

When I look at the template code for {{mergefrom}}, I see that the Discuss link would redirect to Month/Year page of the date whether or not your bot made its change. I suggest that if Smackbot finds an unnamed parameter that has Month/Year form, that it add "date=" in front of the parameter.

--Kevinkor2 06:46, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes this can be done and is done for some templates. I will have a look. The risk is if someone wants to merge (say) "Attacks of Septmber 11, 2001" with "September 2001"; fairly unlikely. Rich Farmbrough, 08:49 8 March 2007 (GMT).

Done for "mergefrom", I may do a major re-write which would include all fixing up all "date=" or not "date=". Rich Farmbrough, 10:04 8 March 2007 (GMT).

SmackBot and capitalization of the fact tag

Hi! Is there a reason why SmackBot changes {{fact|Date=March 2007}} to {{Fact|date=March 2007}}?[2] I keep an eye on some articles by watching my user contributions page, if they're not high-priority enough to be on my watchlist, and having SmackBot change such minor things as in-tag capitalization means that those articles are no longer listed as "top" on my user contributions. LastChanceToBe 21:31, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

HI. Yes, "Date=" will not work, it needs to be "date=". Rgds, Rich Farmbrough, 21:38 8 March 2007 (GMT).

Thanks for your prompt answer! LastChanceToBe 21:40, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:Paperdolls.jpg

An image that you uploaded from stock.xchng or altered, Image:Paperdolls.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images#SXC_images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page for more information if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sherool (talk) 01:23, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Scientific racism by an editor

I thought that you might be interested in a racially disturbing pattern of edits by an editor that has erased article sections pertaining to the common human heritage in Africa. User:Dbachmann is the editor in question. Please see his edits under African people. Dogru144 13:10, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I looked at 11 edits summed here. I understand you oppose the removal of the image, which you could take up on the talk page, but this doesn't seem like "a racially disturbing pattern of edits". Rich Farmbrough, 13:19 11 March 2007 (GMT).

The particularly disturbing edits in particular

Hi Rich, Thank you for quickly getting back to me. The particular edits that disturbed me were the following:

• (1) Removal of a section regarding common human heritage. It is scientific consensus that human heritage derives from Africa.

However, Dbachmann removed the following without reinserting (elsewhere in the article) the comment of common human heritage from Africa. (This was the first of several edits on 9 March 2007 on African people.

The removed material follows immediately:

The term African people encompasses several kinds of people; it is most commonly used to describe people who can trace their ancestry to the indigenous inhabitants of the continent of Africa (in fact, scientific evidence points to the fact that all humans originated in Africa), but it is also sometimes used to describe all people who live in Africa, regardless of ancestry.

• (2) Removal of large pieces of Turkestan history before the 8th Century CE.

He gave the justification for this in the edit box, "BC history is anachronistic. Substantively, his removal of certain history represents a diminuition of certain groups at the expense of others. The region of Turkestan has a rich history prior to the 8th Century CE. This is amply documented in books, standard encyclopedia articles, and major museum artistic displays. The removed material follows:

Turkestan has a rich history, dating back to the second and third millenia BC. Many artifacts were produced in that period, and much trade was conducted. The region was a focal point for cultural diffusion, as the Silk Road traversed it.

The removed material immediately follows:

Successive external powers have held the region. Greeks, under Alexander the Great, held the area fom 327 BCE to 150 BC. </ref> Huns conquered the area after they conquered Kashgaria in the early 2nd century BCE. With the dissolution of the Huns' empire, Chinese rulers took over Eastern Turkestan. [Arab]] forces captured it in the 8th Century. The Persian Samanid dynasty subsequently conquered it and the area experienced economic success. Dogru144 13:41, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

666Satan

hey, idk if your still in2 666Satan much anymore, but i designed a userbox if your interested in using it

{{Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and manga/Userbox/User 666Satan}}

above is what it looks like, and the template link for it,

peace,

-Ancientanubis 21:28, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm not really, and have never been "into" 666Satan. Thanks, Rich Farmbrough, 21:59 11 March 2007 (GMT).

ya i only added it cuz you made an edit on the page and i basically just went through the history and clicked on people who've made edits to the page and send them this message___Ancientanubis 22:15, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Pilsudski

Thank you for copyeditng this article. Could you look over Soviet invasion of Poland (1939) - I am trying to improve this to GA and reviewer asked for a further copyedit with dates and such (I am not a native English speaker, and I primarily create content, not polish it). Thanks, -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  21:35, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

JAK

I don't quite agree with you and the "tag" about "notability" of the Jayne Ann Krentz article. I'm not the creator of that one. I just translated it into Spanish. Would you please read the discussion in that page in order to see if there was a mistake of the bot or anything?. Thank you.--Joanenglish 02:15, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

You need to talk to someone else, probably User talk:Cornellrockey. Rich Farmbrough, 09:30 10 March 2007 (GMT).

Than you for your messenge. I'm sorry I though it was you. I apologize.--Joanenglish 15:19, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

bar code & issn connection

Is there one? Someone just uploaded an image of a magazine for which I have not been able to locate an ISSN ... you can see the bar code digits on the image ... ? ... Thanks for your help! --Keesiewonder ^talk 12:13, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes it will be 0964-264 with whatever checksum is correct. Rich Farmbrough, 18:32 12 March 2007 (GMT).

Excellent! Thanks! I trust it'll always be in that location in the bar code then ... Keesiewonder ^talk 00:16, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Sprinkling an external link

Hi Rich. Question about someone's having sprinkled several articles, including Homelessness with external links to a specific orgranisation, intelligentgiving.com, and if it looks okay to you. See the user's (User:Jtuulian) contributions Special:Contributions/Jtuulian and have a look. Something feels uneasy about it. But perhaps it's just me. I'd really like to ask for your thoughts on the matter. Thanks and Best Wishes. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 14:48, 12 March 2007 (UTC) (talk)

Thanks, Rich, that was my feeling. Not egregious, but a bit fiddly. What is your recommended disposition on the matter ? Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 13:52, 13 March 2007 (UTC) (talk)

Signpost updated for March 12th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 11	12 March 2007	About the Signpost

Report of diploma mill offering pay for edits	Essay tries to clarify misconceptions about Wikipedia
Blog aggregator launched for Wikimedia-related posts	WikiWorld comic: "Cartoon Physics"
News and notes: Wikimania 2007, milestones	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:42, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Template:Disambig-cleanup

As I was cruising Wikipedia I had an idea for a task a bot could do that's not very complicated, and I recalled your bot doing similar things already so I thought I'd pitch the idea to you. If a page has both the {{disambig}} and {{cleanup}} it could replace them with {{Disambig-cleanup}}. Vicarious 06:45, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm having a quick look at this. There's some 76,000 disambig articles, so a one-tme sweep will take a couple of days, more if the changes are done manually. Rich Farmbrough, 15:09 2 March 2007 (GMT).

If your plate is full I understand, I can always pitch the idea at Wikipedia:Bot requests, or who knows, maybe someday I'll finally finish the bot I started making. Vicarious 20:04, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I've put an approval request in. Rich Farmbrough, 21:20 2 March 2007 (GMT).

I did this manual-assisted, since there weren't many. Rich Farmbrough, 13:30 11 March 2007 (GMT).

Thanks! Vicarious 22:44, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

CHICOTW

	Chicago Collaboration of the Week
Last week your bot helped edit the Chicago COTW. Thank you for designing a useful bot! I hope your bot keeps an eye on our future projects. You may also want to help us out. This week Burnham Park (Chicago) has been chosen. Please help improve it towards the quality level of a Wikipedia featured article. See the To Do List to suggest a change or to see an open tasks list.
	Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago

TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 00:37, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

date delink

Hi Rich. Why did you delink the dates on Mpemba effect? Is there a wiki policy somewhere I should know about?

Best wishes, Robinh 14:20, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Article for Deletion

Hi Rich,

Thanks for looking at my articles. The article for the Biomolecular Object Network DataBANK was an assignment for a university class; however, my partner accidentally started the article entitled DataBASE so we we're hoping that article could be deleted. The content of the 2 articles is the same, but the DataBASE article is incorrectly titled. The goal of the article was to provide an overview of a current bioinformatics resource.

Daniellebourque 22:43, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Daniellebourque"

History of Poland (1945-1989)

First, thanks for the copyedit of the Soviet invasion - the article is now a GA. Second, if in som espare time you could look over History of Poland (1945-1989) - some users commented that this FA (now on FARC) needs a copyedit - it would be much appreciated.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  18:03, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup templates

Thanks for letting me know. I was not aware of that. Corvus cornix 18:21, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Orphan Tags

I am trying to gather a consensus on whether Orphan tags are necessary on wikipedia.

Please go to the page Template talk:Orphan and fill in you opinion under the heading Please give you opinion on the Orphan tag below area of the page. Thanks Dreamweaverjack 22:36, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment - I'm a bit surprised at the style of this user - a glance at his contributions page will show you what I mean. He's putting this note on a LOT of people's pages. Since I started the discussion with him [3] on this topic, I suppose it's my business to care what he does with it. Do you have any advice? --Alvestrand 22:55, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

He was blocked after an hour for WP:CANVASS, so I now know what Wikipedia policy is relevant. Case closed. --Alvestrand 06:35, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

SmackBot: dated templates inside references

Apparently there is a problem with SmackBot's "Date/fix maintenance tags" process, in which an undated {{fact}} tag is replaced with a dated one. Based on an 8 February 2007 bot-edit done to Satellite of Love (MST3K) ([4]), such a tag inside an HTML <ref> element does not get properly processed, leaving template parameters unsubstituted and the template usage itself mangled. (I've manually fixed the problem for that article.) I'm not sure how common this problem is, so I felt uncomfortable stopping the bot by leaving a note on its talk page. Please review this situation to see how it might be avoided. Thank you. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 03:58, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it's a known mediawiki problem. Therefore I now replace the (date=)"subst:CURRENTMONTH" "subst:CURRENTYEAR" parameters before making the save. Unfortunately this means that "March 2007" is hardcoded into the regular expressions, albeit only in one place. I believe there are not many if any unfixed. Rich Farmbrough, 12:14 16 March 2007 (GMT).

copyedit of Jewish Cuisine

Hi... I anticipate you're going to leave me a well-deserved message telling me merge templates shouldn't be substed, so I'm here to save you the trouble. Mea culpa. Next time, forty lashes with a wet noodle. I'll look and see if I've made the same mistake elsewhere. Cheers. --Rrburke^(talk) 11:28, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Well done! Rich Farmbrough, 12:09 16 March 2007 (GMT).

Spam blacklist

Do you agree with and/or understand why the following are blacklisted?

"isbn-check\.com, books-by-isbn\.com, isbn-check\.de"

I had the first one on my user page, and received warning about it upon trying to save unrelated edits to my page. I used 'nowiki' ... for now.

Keesiewonder ^talk 02:49, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

User:Naconkantari got a request to add these links to the spam blacklist, which he did on 12 March. I left him a message here hoping to get this reversed. The complaint was that the owner of isbn-check.com makes revenue by referring people to Amazon. Personally I think that a small amount of affiliate revenue is deserved in return for the service that his site provides in checking ISBNs. I'm copying the dialog below (from the spam complaint at meta.wikimedia.org) to help publicize the issue slightly. EdJohnston 20:43, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Here is the original complaint that User:81.211.181.164 sent to Naconkantari:

isbn-check.com + books-by-isbn.com + isbn-check.de

these 3 websites are present in many wikis, mainly in the 'Wikipedia:Book sources' special pages (just removed from it.wiki ). If you search a book, the websites are always redirecting to Amazon (pay-per-link system). The same system is adopted by isbndb.com (Amazon and others). Probably the special pages related to Special:Booksources are full of this kind of spam in every wiki. --81.211.181.164 00:05, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Please provide diff links to the spam. Thanks, Naconkantari 05:32, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

the 3 websites on the topic title belong to the same author: he is making money with the "referral profiteering" system (when you get a book description then the links are pointing to amazon). Links are mainly in the "Wikipedia:Book sources" pages on several wikis, for example: en, fr, es, fi, it, de. It is allowed to make money in this way? --81.211.176.241 00:21, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Done, thanks Naconkantari 19:21, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Follow-up: There is now a removal request in place at [5] on the Talk page of the Spam Blacklist at meta.wikimedia.org, but it may be a hard sell. (The request has already been turned down once, though the first attempt may not have given enough reasons). Any ideas for what to do next would be welcome. EdJohnston 02:09, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

CAT:INVALID has disappeared (due to emptiness, perhaps)

Hello Rich. See [6] for this issue and on another matter see [7] for the scary possibility that links from WP articles to Amazon would be disallowed. EdJohnston 03:37, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Replaced.Rich Farmbrough, 09:51 19 March 2007 (GMT).

SmackBot sources

Hi,

I operate a similar bot in HuWiki for timestamping maintenance tags. It currently has a lot of hardwired things and I'm in the process of generalizing it, so that its easier to support new templates and timestamp all tags by just one look at the page history.

Could you share the source for your bot? I believe it would help me a lot when working on my code.

Thanks, nyenyec ☎ 16:20, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

SmackBot edits on 8 February 2007 - Commanders of World War II

SmackBot seems to be removing wikilinks from subtitles. This may be mandated by WP:MOS, although I do not know if this can be automated. A more serious issue is, that the bot is also remowing images from subtitles. This led to awful results in this edit, that still have not been corrected. In short, - Germany - was replaced with - 22px Germany -. -- Petri Krohn 21:24, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

P.S. Using the template {{flagicon}} in subtitles (as used in some of them) does not solve the problem, as {{flagicon|Germany}} produces a very different flag: -- Petri Krohn 21:43, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Page fixed up. Rich Farmbrough, 13:17 20 March 2007 (GMT).

Irrelevant Cat?

I have a question. You made a small change (I think) to one of my user boxes, which didn't appear (at least to me) to do anything. In fact, and maybe it's because I havn't had coffee yet, I can't even detect what you changed, lol. If it's not too much trouble, could you teach me, in a sentence or two, what you did and why? Thanx Sue Rangell 18:20, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Templates can be used in four ways (that I can think of!)

1. "transcluded" {{my-template}} puts the text of the template in the rendered page without any "noinclude" sections
2. "substituted" {{subst:my-template}} puts the text of the template in the source page without any "noinclude" sections
3. "referred" [[template:my-template|my-template]] or {{tl|my-template}} merely creates a link
4. "pasted" the text of my template puts the text of the template in the source page including any "noinclude" sections.

This last is what I think you did with a userbox. Therefore the category that should have only applied to the userbox was applied to your page as well. You are not the only person to do this, by a long way! Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 12:40 20 March 2007 (GMT).

references for 9.6_year_cycle_of_lynx_abundance

Inn the page 9.6_year_cycle_of_lynx_abundance you have posted that the references are inadequate. Please put your reasons on the talk page of that article. They look fine to me. Ray Tomes 05:25, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

SB doesn't add tags, just dates them. Rich Farmbrough, 13:48 20 March 2007 (GMT).

FRANCE WEAPONS MASS DESTRUCTION

Citation is already given in article quoted at end of paragraph - see FWMD discussion for details - SmackBot is getting over-enthusiastic.

SB doesn't add tags, just dates them. Rich Farmbrough, 13:48 20 March 2007 (GMT).

Homelessness article

Hi Rich. Do you think the "Homeless Hero" YouTube reference in the Homelessness article is appropriate for WP ? Your thoughts appreciated. Best. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 00:49, 20 March 2007 (UTC) (talk)

Thanks, Rich, for your help on this one as ever. Cheers. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 16:19, 21 March 2007 (UTC) (talk)

SmackBot

Don't see why this [8] article's bottom needed smacking.--Shtove 19:18, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

SB doesn't add tags, just dates them. Rich Farmbrough, 11:59 21 March 2007 (GMT).

CHICOTW

	Chicago Collaboration of the Week
Last week your bot helped edit the Chicago COTW. Thank you for designing a useful bot! I hope your bot keeps an eye on our future projects. You may also want to help us out. This week Beaches in Chicago has been chosen. Please help improve it towards the quality level of a Wikipedia featured article. See the To Do List to suggest a change or to see an open tasks list.
	Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago

TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 00:26, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 20th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 12	20 March 2007	About the Signpost

WikiWorld comic: "Wilhelm Scream"	News and notes: Bad sin, milestones
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:27, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup tags

Hi, re the message you left me, I'm not sure what you're referring to? Jdorney 12:07, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry should have been left for User:Shtove re Battle of Affane. Rich Farmbrough, 12:16 21 March 2007 (GMT).

Help populate novel list?

I'm soliciting assistance in populating the page List of novels by point of view. Would you consider pitching in? Thank you! --TheEditrix2 15:44, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Toolserveraccount

Hello Rich Farmbrough,
please send your real-name, your prefered login-name and the public part of your ssh-key to . We plan to create your account soon then. --DaB.

Must check if this happened. Rich Farmbrough, 23:32 24 March 2007 (GMT).

Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can

Left by pockcleanbot. Rich Farmbrough, 23:33 24 March 2007 (GMT).

citations you were looking for

Hi Rich/SmackBot,

thanks for your help on the Glen E. Friedman article. i have found the citations you requested but don't know how to properly format them. (sorry i'm a bit of a newbie) do you mind doing them for the article?

the first one requested was for the line:

"A consummate artist and political activist, he shuns intoxicants, and follows a strict vegan diet"

Can be seen in many places. The 1st two sources i have are:

Herbivore magazine, fall 2003 which is archived at http://www.southern.com/BURNINGFLAGS/press/herbivore.php

and also on

the PETA2 web pages in an interview http://www.peta2.com/outthere/o-glenfried.asp

the second one requested:

"His photos are said to reflect the spirit of progression and angst that defined an era" this came from SkateBoarder magazine, May 1997, PhotoEnergy by Michele Lockwood the original is archived at http://www.southern.net/BURNINGFLAGS/press/skateboarder.html

the third one requested :

"Friedman has helped define the moment and movements he was caught up in" this came from DAZED& CONFUSED magazine, issue#11 1995 p.46 and has been used many places since in other articles. The original is archived on http://www.southern.com/BURNINGFLAGS/press/dazed.html

the fourth one requested :

"His process was much more incendiary than it was documentary" this came from "HUH magazine, November 1994 and has been used many places since in other articles. The original is archived at http://www.southern.net/BURNINGFLAGS/press/huh.html

and further spots where i saw a citation was asked for:

on the time line:

1990 citation - this came from WARP magazine, Feb 1995, "Glen E. Friedman - Photos from the Edge" by Ian Christie The original is archived at: http://www.southern.com/BURNINGFLAGS/press/warp.html

1994 citation - this came from Glen E. Friedman bio on the burningflags.com webpages at http://www.southern.net/BURNINGFLAGS/bio

1997 citation - this came from the main page of the burning flags.com website that is dedicated to the work and information on this artist. the URL for all the shows listed is at : http://www.southern.com/BURNINGFLAGS/main.php and on that page there are also URL's for each of the city shows mentioned individually.

on Published Quotes of Interest about Friedman:

Los Angeles Times - 21 November 2002

ART section

It's all about attitude, Rebels keep finding their way into Glen E. Friedman's viewfinder.

By Keith Hamm

Washington Post - 21 may 2000

Here and Now - Art

By Pete L. Zanko

THANK YOU again.

My pleasure, Rich Farmbrough, 23:31 24 March 2007 (GMT).

Adam and Satan=

Hi Rich: I came across the Satan and Adam entry this afternoon and saw that you were the most recent contributor. I'm delighted to know somebody's taken the trouble to write us up, but it's definitely undersourced. I'm not a Wikipedia person and have no idea how to add sourcing, but I did manage, from memory and with the help of some googling, to find some basic sourcing material, which I'll paste below. I'm sure that some of it doesn't meet the reliability criterion. Maybe you could get back to me with some word of whether this stuff helps. Thanks. Adam Gussow (agussow@olemiss.edu)216.119.179.229 22:34, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Satan and Adam – some sources I think I can point you towards

For general information on Satan and Adam, esp “Gussow left New York several times….”: My own book, Mister Satan’s Apprentice: A Blues Memoir (New York: Pantheon, 1998)

Entries in All Music Guide to the Blues (not sure of the editor; Rich Skelley’s quote is from this, I believe) and Big Book of Blues, ed. Bob Santelli.

Paul Winley and the Harlem Underground; “Get in My Arms Little Girl”; “Freedom For My People” from Rattle & Hum – can google this

Satan and Adam cover story in Living Blues: http://www.livingblues.com/product_information.php?product=96&productlink=yes&search=&page=2&title=Issue_129

“After a long silence…..Boca Ciega….”: http://indangerousrhythm.blogspot.com/2006/03/adam-gussow-mister-satans-apprentice.html

Some published information on Sterling Magee’s recent career and “Five Fingers Magee”: http://www.sptimes.com/2005/11/27/Neighborhoodtimes/Musician_rekindling_a.shtml

Details added to articles talk page, for now. Rich Farmbrough, 23:31 24 March 2007 (GMT).

SmackBot algorithm needs some tweaks

It seems like one of SmackBot's functions is to remove markup for links that refer to the current article. However, mediawiki seems to render the first occurrence of the subject text as bold whether it is marked up with triple quotes or double square braces. Some articles have utilised this mediawiki 'feature', and in those cases SmackBot seems to remove the link markup instead of replacing it with bold markup. For an example of this see Uranium Glass (01:24 20-Mar-2007) Mister Farkas 17:53, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes this is a general AWB fix, as is bolding the first mention of the article. The two should balance out except on the day-of-year articles where there is special anti robot code in place. I'll raise with AWB team. Rich Farmbrough, 17:24 24 March 2007 (GMT).

SmackBot punctation weirdness

Hello Rich. I noticed that SmackBot added date to a "Wikify" tag. But it also changed the punctation in the whole page. It doesn't seem to make sense. See the diff. Is it supposed to do this? Thanks in advance. --Ysangkok 16:48, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it moves superscripted refs to after the punctuation. This article used them in a different way, as if they were in line text, which didn't work. Fixed up now I believe. Rich Farmbrough, 23:35 24 March 2007 (GMT).

mergeto boiler

The bot cleaned-up a page "Eric's Extension" that I had added a mergeto boiler to. It added a date to the tag. What is weird is that the boiler wouldn't appear on the bot's cleaned-up page. I reedited the page, just by adding a space and return to top of the page before the boiler and now the boiler appears. No real changes were made. (This isn't a caching issue I checked that.) In the history though the bot-edited page shows the mergeto tag. I don't know what's going on here. You might want to manually check some of the bot-edited pages to see if the boilers aren't displaying after the bot cleans things up. Jason Quinn 22:47, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi Rich and Jason,

For sake of investigation, I undid Jason's last change to Eric's Extension.

The boiler still appeared after my change.

--Kevinkor2 16:52, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Looks O.K. in all history to me. Rich Farmbrough, 16:31 24 March 2007 (GMT).

Smackbot

On this edit - why did the bot move the location of the {{ref}} tags in the table? Also it seems to be having trouble with comments. Gimmetrow 16:01, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

The first is due to a known WP:AWB feature, I have requested a change. The second is very odd I will investigate further.Rich Farmbrough, 17:34 24 March 2007 (GMT).

The second part is a fixed AWB bug. I guess we should scan for it. Rich Farmbrough, 17:34 24 March 2007 (GMT).

I have a similar question about this edit. In the top Infobox, it moved all of the references down a line, which isn't as easy to read for an editor. Why did it do this? --MattWright (talk) 16:58, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Not sure why, I think this is part of AWB general fixes as well. Bug reported. Rich Farmbrough, 17:34 24 March 2007 (GMT).

Thanks for the followup. --MattWright (talk) 18:54, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Dave, Shelly, and Chainsaw

Hey there.

You recently made the following statement at the Dave, Shelly, and Chainsaw talk page reasoning why it has the Articles with unsourced statements tag:

Because of this statement

"The J-K Conspiracy is a movie produced by Dave, Shelly, and Chainsaw, directed by Chainsaw, and released in 2005. It stars the entire show, plus a number of celebrities (such as Bob Costas, Doug Flutie, Don Rickles, and Laura Schlessinger) and several notable listeners (including Listener Lex, Commander Butch, and Quiet-Talking James)"

I am wondering which part must be sourced. On the iMDB, it lists everyone listed as actors in the movie. This way we can fix the problem and have the tag removed. --Raderick 03:08, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't know, ask the person who added the tag. Rich Farmbrough, 16:41 24 March 2007 (GMT).

Perhaps a ref to iMDB? Rich Farmbrough, 16:42 24 March 2007 (GMT).

US vs. U.S.

Hi Rich, I put a couple of hours in changing The Office (US TV series) to The Office (U.S. TV series) only be have it moved backed to its original title for what strikes me as a quite nonsensical policy of "US" being the abbreviation of choice in article titles. I've never waded into the arena of Wikipedia style policy before but, as silly as this may sound, this bugged me enough that I'd like to change it. I notced the discussion over at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (abbreviations) is dated from November so I was curious if there had been a change in policy or what the next step is.

Thanks for your help and time, Jarfingle 09:13, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

SmackBot is not logged in

I think SmackBot is editing while not logged in. Please see 172.146.36.39 (talk · contribs). The IP has been blocked for 24 hours. J Milburn 18:30, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Not SmackBot. I don't believe AWB can edit unless it is logged in - as an approved user. Also the edits are too slow, and include definitely manual edits. Rich Farmbrough, 20:02 24 March 2007 (GMT).

Thanks

Thanks for your cooperation regarding SmackBot. --Ysangkok 11:10, 25 March 2007 (UTC)