User talk:Tawker/Mar06

RfA thanks

Thank you for voting on my RfA, it passed with a final tally of 68/0/0 so I'm now an administrator. If there's anything I can do to help, you feel I've done something wrong, or there's just something you want to tell, don't hesitate to use my talk page. Thanks. - Bobet 10:29, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Editing talk archives

Hi Tawker. I would appreciate it if you would not edit comments left by others on my talk page archives (or anywhere else in my userspace for that matter). Using a bot to make uninvited edits to edits by third-parties on fourth-parties talk page archives is little more than needs to be done. Thanks. -Splash^talk 17:55, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Time based bot

I have a solution worked out. Come and talk to me on IRC joshbuddy^talk

Sorry

Sorry for reverting you on User talk:Ajblakeney. I guess you fixed the blanking right before I tried to. :) --Krashlandon (e) 02:23, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

By the way, I like the practical joke on your userpage. That's a good idea for April Fool's Day. *wink* ...Even though it's hard to fool someone who uses popups. --Krashlandon (e) 02:27, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

User page vandalism

Thanks for saving my user page! -- Jjjsixsix ^(talk)/_(contribs) @ 08:26, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

IP talk pages

See also Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#IP talk pages Femto 12:59, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Speedy deletion tagging by Tawkerbot

It appears that your bot is tagging talk pages for deletion which are under 90 days old, but from the looks of User:Tawkerbot#Stale_IP_talk_pages it should only be going after pages which have been inactive for 6 months. Can this be remedied? Best regards, Hall Monitor 19:19, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm changing it back to 180 days, what happened was we were having an IRC discussion on the length of the timeline for "stale" status, I think we had decided on 30 days there but you're right, 180 days is probally better.

We've had a discussion on blanking vs deleting the old pages, seeing that doing just the 1.2 to 128. IP's we've had 2500 pages, it might be easier just to blank the pages as its going to be a fair bit of work for an admin to delete each one. See Wikipedia_talk:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#IP_talk_pages for the discussion.

On another note, do you mind if I request temporary unblocks / blocks on the IP 207.216.137.194 - It's a BC education system shared IP and I sometimes have some spare time and being able to edit from it would be an asset. Tawker 19:37, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Not at all (with regards to the unblocks), but for the record, I show no contributions nor do I show any record of a block [1] for the IP address you're referring to.  :) Best regards, Hall Monitor 19:41, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Nominated for adminship

joshbuddy^talk 22:51, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I voted. Sigh, but it looks like some people are opposing you with the reason "too soon". :( We'll see how this RfA turns out though... --Khoikhoi 01:22, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Oh yes, of course I understand this. You're right. --Khoikhoi 01:26, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

No problem. What do you mean "you've pulled the page"? --Khoikhoi 02:16, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

I have little doubt that once you've poked around a bit more, your RfA will make for a fun week. I was made an admin at almost exactly the 'golden' 3 month point; just about the inside of what is really possible. And yet, after about a month, I thought I had read and understood all the main policies and things and was not going to make no-brainer mistakes or walk around offending people. And I wouldn't have, if I'd been handed an admin bit. But I would, I realise now, have execute those new abilities with less finesse than I did when I was made an admin, and even then I executed them with less finesse than I can now (when I put my mind to it). There's just a 'community' feel since, despite what some people say, the community does matter and the project would likely have fallen before the first of its many hurdles if there were no community and we all edited anonymously. As to the user talk edits, well, they're a useful part of your history. Noone can say you don't know how to handle RC patrol, for starters, or that you're not probably familiar with the recent history of the to-be determined vandals. Looking at your first 50 edits, they were all editorial contributions to articles. That must be why you acquired this new hobby...try getting back to it from time to time. I still find it far the most personally fulfilling part of the hours I spend editing Wikipedia, and working in article space really does teach me quite a lot, in unexpected ways, about what Wiki really is. -Splash^talk 03:26, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Mahmud of Ghazni

Why have you reverted my revert of Haiduc ? Mahmud of Ghazni is considered a hero in Pakistan. The allegation of his homosexual affair is just false rumor spread by his enemies. He lived around 1006 AD so it is a 1000 year old history. I have read about Mahmud of Ghazni in my school books and have never heard of these malicious rumors. What proof do you have that he had homosexual affair with Ayaz ? Please provide your sources. I have never seen you contributing to this page. I know the history of Mahmud, names of his grandfather, father, brother, etc. This blind revert has no merit !!!

Siddiqui 02:17, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Image:Motorola PEBL.jpg

Help required, I don't want to revert a third time, even though this seems to be vandalism now.... Could you continue warning the user?

Prodego ^talk 02:20, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

At at first, before the user inserted the "NAKED..." comment, I thought that he might just not understand why he shouldn't do what he was doing. In which case I didnt want to revert again. But it was vandalism so....

Prodego ^talk 12:37, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

User:Moe Epsilon/haha

lol, you fell for it twice? :-D Moe ε 03:14, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, I'm just glad some users can fall for it and smile. :-) Moe ε 03:19, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

To darn addicted to leave Wikipedia. That's why I changed to semi-wikibreak. On another note, I was just thinking about if you were an admin or not. Then I looked through your contributions and saw you were just nominated and denied. Don't worry about it, just be thankful you didn't fail 4 times like I did. :-D Moe ε 03:24, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

OP scanner

Ah, yes, thanks, I would like that! And I laughed out loud when I realized that Freakbot was legit. I think we've all been waiting to pounce on the next SQUIDWARD as soon as it appears. Good work on the bot! Antandrus (talk) 06:25, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Excellent work: thank you. It's quick, and I'm getting interesting results, both on previously blocked proxies and some I find listed on internet sites. This is much better than my previous method.  :-) Antandrus (talk) 17:15, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for your support in my request for adminship. I'm delighted that the RfA succeeded with a final consensus of 52/17/7, and receiving comments including having 'excellent potential to become a great moderator', and I am now an administrator. It did however only just pass, and I shall do my very best to rectify any of my errors, including the general belief that I should do more article work. If you have any concerns, or if you ever feel that I may be able to help you, please feel free to leave a message on my talk page. Again, thank you!

Ian13/talk 19:31, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Talk Page Dispute (mediation reply section)

Hi

• First this returns to when I was new on wikipedia and he despite of being an old wikipedian several times attacked me with most bad words. Second he has continued it even till this time which if necessary I can provide links to all of them in five minutes. Third, Those Iranians who due to political and economical reasons have more access to internet when a wikipedian from Kurdish minority comes to wikipedia imidiately disagree with him, call him in every talk page separatist... and mispresent him to all other Iranians in a bad way. For example his links refereing that I am from CIA.!!! and I do not do it anymore despite really everyday we are suffering bad words by them. Thank you very much.Diyako Talk + 00:22, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I had forgotten it untill tonight he rewrote it to you. also i have several times told them that we are not enemies, I'm not from CIA, we are all wikipedians but they act systematically against us (few Kurdish wikipedians). I also do not reply them so much, look at my talk page there are many threats, many boggus warnings by them for no good reason but I do not reply.Diyako Talk + 00:52, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

You were the one who first initiated the attacks on me. You had quite some number of posts by then,,,you werent new (even if we are to accept that as your pretext). And you still use the word "Farsees" against me, even though me, ShervinK, and others have asked you to stop using this term as it insults many. (Im not a Persian, if that's what you mean. I'm an ethnic Azeri).--Zereshk 00:38, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Dear Zereshk, Farsis is the name of yiour ethnicity in your own language Persian for 1400 years but unfortunately persian users do not agree to use it on english wikipedia in the article persian people and this is also another action tthat is against wiki policies persian users revert it in the name of vandalism!.Diyako Talk + 00:55, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

"In my own language"? In case you didnt know, this is English WP. And in English, it's "Persian". You disregard this fact intentionally to irritate many users.--Zereshk 10:05, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

About Best iStory

Ok, I understand, and removed it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jazzer2 (talk • contribs)

Iranian Kurdistan

May I suggest that you contact User:Shervink for this? She/he is much more involved and capable than I am. She/he has been centrally involved in the debates. I only served corroborational purposes in backing him/her up. Thanx again.--Zereshk 00:40, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

It was a lower case k in User:Shervink. Sorry :)

As for that obnoxious user, my strategy is to avoid him in discourse altogether. He will eventually get an ArbCom verdict if he continues creating such massive scale tension on the Iranian pages. I will let the others take care of him as they are currently doing.[2]

Such people are not worthy of my correspondence. I have better contributions to make. I fully acknowledge your message, and will abide by it. Over and out :) --Zereshk 00:52, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

My POV is that they are afraid of Kurdish wikipedians and want to mispresent and hence block us. and this is my last comment in this talk page. sorry and thanks.Diyako Talk + 01:01, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Re: When you remove copyrighted text

And your comment "{copyvio|site} could you use that template with the source of the text please?", naturally I recognise that I was in the wrong and have added the {copyvio|site} template to the article in question. I hope I haven't made a hash of things by doing the correct action in two edits, and all I can do is strongly apologise if I have! Commiserations on the admin thing, you'd have earnt my vote today if you hadn't already withdrawn. - ThomasHarte 01:29, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Further to this, User:Nok32uk has twice removed the {{copyvio}} tag on the basis that "The copyright issue has been resolved" whereas in my reading of Wikipedia:Copyright problems the statement "Pages should stay listed for a minimum of 7 days before a decision is made." is entirely unqualified so once an article listed there as Daz Simpson is, Nok32uk doesn't have the right to do that. Nevertheless I don't want to start an edit war, and if you could weigh in on Talk:Daz Sampson with an opinion either way it might help avoid a dispute. - ThomasHarte 17:06, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Anon Iranian

Please see here! removes link to Britannica and adds his POV. then in the talk page bolds the word "jerk" to me. This is their bahavior. Is not it a systematically action by them?Diyako Talk + 02:38, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Actually, the user has to sign in to be more credible; however, at the risk of being personally attacked by you again Diyako, I looked at that revert, and with all due respect, I have to say, I looked at that link, and Encyclopedia Britannica [and] Columbia Encyclopedia both do actually say; the Kurds are of “....an ethnic group of unknown origins” 1. I don`t see how that user is violating any rules, moreover, it seems that he or she has valid refrences, so you need to work it out in the discussion page first, until you both agree. In the mean time, please do not remove the banner, and that statement. His or her refrences are authoritative, for now. I will revert back to his version if you keep editing it, so again, please come to a consensus first. Also, I`m just curious, how do you the anon user is Iranian, or Turkish or something? Please assume good faith. ThanksZmmz 04:07, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Because I know him. you can read archieves on those articles. You be attacked by me???Diyako Talk + 04:10, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

How can you know an anon user with an IP address? Does he ever mention he is Iranian, Iraqi or Turkish or something? Furthermore, why did you revert and removed the banner, if the user has an authoritative source, and did not resort to the discussion page first?Zmmz 04:15, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

He removed the Britannica link and added his POV. Diyako Talk + 04:16, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Second Opinion

Mind giving me a second opinion on 134.161.241.176 's contribs? Serlin 06:45, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

They seem to have been disagreeable for a while, I'll leave them alone and let someone watching those articles to deal with it if they feel the need. Thanks Serlin 06:50, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Seattle University Athletics

Hi, with regards to the article in question, I don't see any claim of notability. I may be wrong as I don't know how prestigious national level university teams are, but just the fact that they are university team (not independent sports clubs) makes me feel that they might not be notable for their atheletics. Again, I may be wrong, but I am having this gut feeling. I leave the decision up to you. -Ambuj Saxena (talk) 08:15, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

In this case I would feel that a list of NCAA teams be put up (as against SU Teams) with this as a subpage (but this requires that NCAA article should be detailed enough). -Ambuj Saxena (talk) 08:26, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Fake msg vandal

I'll keep an eye out for his return. They never get bored this quick. -- Longhair 10:30, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

AfC

Damn it, I've seen that joke before and still fell for it!

I've only been doing AfC for about a month, but the convention (and the current instructions) when fulfilling an AfC request seems to be to leave the submission where it is and give a short reply. I can think of a few reasons it's a good idea to not delete the requests, but none of them are really very compelling. It might help them find the new article, especially when you haven't used their title; a message on the IP's talk page may or may-not reach them. If nothing else, leaving them there with a thumbs-up or thumbs-down added might give other submitters examples of what does and what does not get in. It's not big deal. Cheers. ×Meegs 12:46, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

It's crazy: I've created articles a week after they were submitted, not written to the IP's talk page, and still had the submitter discover and start editing the article within hours. Anons don't have watchlists, so they're either-punching in the article's title, looking for a reply below their submission, or looking at the "Recently created articles" list at the top of WP:AFC (that not everyone adds to). They're monitoring one of the three, and some of them really seem to put their lives on hold waiting for a response. That's part of why I like working there. ×Meegs 13:03, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Hunter Ellis

I've put this article up for deletion review, after re-writing a stub focused much more on his non-Survivor notability as a TV host, which was then speedy deleted as a recreation of deleted content. Since you commented on the initial AFD, I thought you might want to participate in the discussion here as well. -Colin Kimbrell 17:25, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

GAA

In reply too your comments i am removing the line x is a prominent GAA club in County Kildare, significant in Kildare GAA history as it pov and cant be true for every club in kildare and removing the clubs links and adding them to category gaa clubs in kildare (Gnevin 19:49, 5 March 2006 (UTC)) Will do even if it will make a big task even bigger , nearly finished now anyway. (Gnevin 19:59, 5 March 2006 (UTC))

Edit summaries - fresheneesz

Hey, I got your message just now, but i was wondering when you saw an edit of mine that isn't summaried. I try hard to remember to put those things, and I think I usually do, unless its a minor edit or a talk page. Fresheneesz 21:06, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Template

Template was given go ahead for deletion, see the history of the articles talk page. Cordially SirIsaacBrock 23:44, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for putting up the speedy delete template, with no edit summary and blanking it really did look like vandalism. You might want to use edit summaries in the future though, they really help out RC patrollers :) -- Tawker 23:52, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I will let you delete this time ...Cordially SirIsaacBrock 23:55, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

I already told you read above, read the history of the talk page. You are not the admin so stop monkeying around with the article. SirIsaacBrock 00:07, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Actually, one of the main features of a Wiki is that anyone can monkey around with an article. Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia, SirIsaacBrock! :)

— User:Adrian/zap2.js 00:31, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

(To whoever it may concern) I've recently delisted the TALK page of Template talk:Mil-antarctica from CSD, as a talk page for an existing template, possibly potions of a deletion discussion. This in no way endoreses that the Template itself should or should not be included in the encyclopedia. The template is currently in use in articles, and it's deletion could be disrubtive at this time. I don't see that this template has ever gone through a deletion review, but anyone is free to list it on TFD at anytime they have a good faith reason for it's nomination. The template itself does not seem to qualify for speedy deletion either, and I would delist it as well in it's current state. Thanks, xaosflux ^Talk/_CVU 01:49, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

As for my "blank it if you wish" comment, although not popular, archive to history is an allowed talk page archiving protocol. xaosflux ^Talk/_CVU 01:51, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

My aplogies

The bot just hit a bug there, I was just about to fix it but you beat me to it -- Tawker 02:05, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, Tawker. I'm lost. What happened ? What did I fix ? -- PFHLai 02:08, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

You mean at Current events ? Okay ! I thought it was just an edit conflict ..... Don't worry about it. -- PFHLai 02:12, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Accident

Regarding your warning on my talk page, it was an accident. I was about to revert the article myself before some super-fast Wikipedian (who, sadly, probably dedicates his whole life to reverting so called "vandalism") reverted it before I could even get a chance, just in time to accuse me of being a vandal. --69.232.218.27 04:38, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

Heh, just FYI, the person that disrupted the Mohammed cartoons page (202.83.174.28) is from Pakistan. Haizum 06:17, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi.

;-) Jude(talk,contribs) 08:00, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

:-D Jude(talk,contribs) 08:03, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

You're evil. Jude(talk,contribs) 08:10, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Marriage license

I'm wondering...why did you revert the reversion of blatant POV material at Marriage license? I'd revert it again myself, but I don't want to start an edit war. -- Calion | Talk 21:39, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

You didn't have any edit summary to go along with the large removal, it was tagged by the vandalbots and seeing a lot of blanking with what looks to be on topic without an edit summary usually gets reverted. Feel free to remove the content, look at it I think your POV concerns are valid, it was the lack of an edit summary that caused the revert -- Tawker 21:41, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Ah. It wasn't my edit without a summary that you reverted, it was some anonymous intelligent person's. And thanks for the clarification. -- Calion | Talk 21:48, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Fair use

It is an image. The article does not specificaly comment on that image thus there is not even a ghost of a fair use claim.Geni 21:50, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Reporting more vandalism

You reverted edits by Special:Contributions/205.155.32.128 on Bill Gates the "bitch suck my cock" incident. Same user IP put HAIL SATAN GO ANTON LAVEY!!!!!!!!!!!!! on Anton LaVey is that considered vandalism or... Just a passing note + I didn't do it! Should I fix it or will you. I've edited articles before but heavn't encountered this kind of stuff before. Death2 23:12, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Reply reply

Yeah I saw what 205.155.32.128 also did. He or She is crazy but shure made my night brighter, I know it's vandalism but for some it's also fun. Just keep an open mind, always. I do articles but I'll take an eye on occasional rampaging. HEHE. Death2 23:21, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Neopets

I think we need an administrator to protect from anons and new users. In the Neopets site there is a board regarding the vandalism. [3] Joelito 00:35, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I was trying to find someone to protect it. I was not about to spend all night reverting. Joelito 00:40, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

The link above was the one for the board. I have an account so I did not notice I needed a username and password. Joelito 01:02, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Just wanted to say

Good job. You helped me out when I needed it, and I've seen you do so much it's amazing. Keep up the good work! Oh, and your Tawkerbots are friggin' awesome. :)

That would help, I suppose. And I forgot to sign this again, didn't I? *Sigh* --69.145.122.209 02:04, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

TawkerBot2

...kicks ass. It's beat me on about a dozen reverts since it started. Good stuff! TKE 02:16, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I was just about to say the same thing. Nice work. Yeah! Antandrus (talk) 03:37, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Guinness, and message

That would be a great upgrade! So far I'm quite impressed.

By the way, I blocked 63.19.128.0/17 to shut down the Guinness vandal for 15 minutes (it's a good way to verify if my suspicions are right as to who it is) -- it seems to be working. There's two good users I know at that range so I keep the blocks short for that kid. Antandrus (talk) 03:51, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I think the message is good. (The harsher messages have a way of enraging vandals; bored vandals leave more quickly.) Cheers!  :-) Antandrus (talk) 03:56, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Tawkerbot2 mistakes vandalism reverts for vandalism

I noticed that Tawkerbot2 seems to detect removals of large portions of text as vandalism. Several minutes ago, someone started an article with very little content, and an anonymous IP added many profanities to it. Another editor and I reverted the IP's edits, but Tawkerbot2 saw both of those reverts as vandalism. This could affect legit editors who remove copyright violations. I thought that I should let you know.

Other than that, Tawkerbot2 seems to be doing fine. --Ixfd64 04:31, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

• The page was almighty LOL, but it has been deleted. Would you like me to temporarily restore its history? --Ixfd64 04:41, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Jeffrey Vernon Merkey Page Archive

I am archivng that page, its over 84K. Thanks. Waya sahoni 05:03, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Please just make a note archiving or something like that in the edit summary, without it we take it as blanking and revert. Thanks -- Tawker 05:05, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

You were faster than me. I was in process of doing that when you reverted. I will be more concise in the future. Waya sahoni 05:07, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

I took the liberty of copying the current topic forward to the empty Talk:Jeffrey_Vernon_Merkey from Archive 5 as it is relevant to the latest additions on the Jeffrey_Vernon_Merkey page itself. talks_to_birds 06:49, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Why delete?

Effection: Hellraiser does exist. But the IMDb havn´t a programm of this film! It´s a PRESENT film. The film is not completed, but he will be completed, this year! -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Julian Thome (talk • contribs)

See reply on your talk page

flattbush problem

I have re-edited it again...you are the man...Well, what they (current flattbush members) are attempting to do is to essentially silence everyone that disagrees with their politics. Now that they have been blocked, I presume that they will just move to some other locale. You can see why they need to lie? We quit because they basically stole the band from us and changed the image to Communists, when Ray and Eric are just normal musicians. So, I guess, in short Flattbush hasn't been about the music since 2002. Thanks again, Tawker! Stabinator 09:24, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Flattbush as of 12:37 am PST

Flattbush has again been vandalized after being blocked. Maybe it takes a few minutes. Stabinator 09:24, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

thx

ok, I hope they can keep it cool. Stabinator 09:24, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

vandalism

Hi, sorry for all that stuff. I was frustrated with PFHLai as he came off as condesending when he was questioning me about using the attribution tag. I was confused on how to tag this photo as a copyrighted image and didnt know about the image policies until later. My regards. S0berage 23:48, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Tawkerbot blanking

Is there a place where the behavior of the tawkerbot was decided upon? The fact that it blanks anon user talk pages is often very inconvenient, as it removes useful information such as shared ip templates. A lot of editors have spent a lot of time putting useful informative templates on these user talk pages, and we really need to consider whether or not its worth blanking/deleting them. --DDG 17:27, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Well as you can see in the example I linked, it may ignore templates, but it doesn't ignore the "subst"'d content, which many editors have been told to do repeatedly. Can you turn off the tawkerbot for now until we can establish what it should be doing with these kind of pages? Is there a more permanent discussion for these features? --DDG 18:55, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Maybe on Wikipedia_talk:Bots? I'm not really sure where the best place for discussion is either, as unfortunately I am not able to participate in IRC chat that often. In either case I fear that a lot of editors don't use the templates in question directly, but rather use the subst: template commands, as is the policy suggested at Wikipedia:Template substitution. I'm not sure what your bot can do to recognize these subst'd infoboxes. --DDG 19:08, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Tawkerbot2 damage (Tawker's note: the bot didn't touch the page

While I appreciate the service of Tawkerbot removing vandalism, Tawkerbot also caused more than a little damage over at the [4] wikipage today, with damage to the 1)Talk 2)Origin and 3) Drafting sections BruceHallman 22:32, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't see the bot having any edits on the article, I see a couple by myself which might be in error but I don't see any bot edits, could you provide a diff to the bots edit? -- Tawker 23:03, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

You're right, I did have an edit history version with godmodelight where it reverted to the vadalised version which I promptly fixed, I still don't see how my bot was involved in this. -- Tawker 23:07, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Tawker Bot incorrect (Tawker's note: not really, see message)

Hello- I noted that Tawkerbot flagged me as vandalizing a page Rambler (automobile). What is going on is that I did an incorrect move from Rambler (car) to Rambler (automobile). This was borught to my attention by an admin and I am (first time ever moving an article here) attempting to get the problem reverted so a proper move can be done. In total, the blanking (which I know is not the way to do it) lasted about three minutes and has been reverted. Stude62 00:18, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

See reply on your talk page, the bot really wasn't incorrect it was an error in procedure that triggered the bot, no worries, it happens. -- Tawker 00:28, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Sieve of Atkin

Can you read my question on the talk page and try to address the issue? --mets501 02:01, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I'm fine

I reverted that page like any other vandalism regardless of whether it was by a bot or not. (copyvio contents) Cheers! – WB 02:15, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Hey Tawker

I was looking through my contribs lately, and you seem to have reverted my vote? Can you explain this. I don't want to start any trouble or anything, so I'll just ask you here, and then you can re-post that vote once you've realized the mistake. Thanks. --Rob from NY 02:19, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

It was the AaronS RfA, as I recall. --Rob from NY 02:39, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Oh, heres what happened, you accidentally removed some questions (see this dif) [5] - feel free to re-add your vote :) -- Tawker 02:41, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Anon

D'oh, I may have fed them. I just reported it to WP:AIV. -- Samir ∙ T C 05:26, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Artbox

C'mon, this page is ridiculous. This band barely existed in real life except as a mouthpiece. They shouldn't even be included in Wikipedia.216.231.46.147 06:12, 9 March 2006 (UTC) I didn't blank it, I removed all the stuff that's either blatantly untrue, extreme POV or just pointless (they got in a fight outside a bar? This wouldn't belong in an encyclopedia article about the Beatles, let alone a nothing indie group. Is there evidence they actually ever played this bar?). I left the basic facts intact -- membership, releases. I don't know how to do a AfD or db. Sorry, new around here. I've contributed on a page or two where I have some knowledge. This is one of them.216.231.46.147 01:45, 10 March 2006 (UTC) OK, I'm gettin' the hang of it. Registered, AfD'd it. Sorry for stumbling around. Fnarf999 02:22, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

wow

Wow, you're my hero. Thanks for making and running the bot!!!! ⇒ SWATJester ^Ready Aim _Fire! 14:48, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Tawkerbot2

I'm very curious to know what algorithm you are using to perform those reversions, but probably it is best to keep it a secret so the vandals reading this page don't find out how to beat it :-) Anyway, I think the bot is a nice idea. I came by to say that I've semiprotected the bot's user page, especially since it will be reverting quite a bit of vandalism. Let me know what you think? See you around! --HappyCamper 15:04, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Fabulous bot. Bravo! Maustrauser 08:40, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Tawkerbot2's autowarnings

Hi, I just thought you'd like to know that I'm looking at a progressive autowarn system for Tawkerbot2 right now and hopefully it'll will be up and running soon -- Tawker 16:17, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, that sounds like it will be a big improvement! Could you make it give progressive warnings and flag repeat offenders (within a certain timeframe, eg 10 vandalized edits in the last 24hrs) for an admin to look at? (maybe even post to WP:AIV) _└ ^UkPaolo/_talk^┐ 16:22, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Gabriel Gervais page

Your bot just vandalized the page after I added a career table and accused me of vandalism. Since when is adding a career stats table to a soccer player's article vandalism? Kingjeff 20:36, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Don't worry. It looks like somethings wrong with the system for bots. It was 2 isolated inncidents that I haven't seen till the past week. Kingjeff 22:00, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

My RfA

Hey Tawker/Mar06, how is it going? Thank you for supporting my Request for adminship! It passed with a final vote of 73/1/1, which means that I have been granted adminship! I look forward to using these tools to enhance and maintain this wonderful site. I will continue regular article/project contributions, but I will also allocate a sizable portion of my wikischedule toward administrative duties :) Thanks again, and if you have any questions/comments/tips, please let me know! — Deckiller 04:59, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Tawkerbot2

Hi, I just learned of your wonderful tawkerbot2. Is it already active on the dutch wiki? Would it be appreciated if I would want to use it on the Dutch wiki? Does it require additional development before it can be used cross-wiki? Great work! Zanaq 12:14, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Just wanted to echo Zanaq's comments. Thank you for this bot. —Viriditas | Talk 13:47, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

• I'll add a me-three here - Nice one! :) - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 20:48, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

in the interest of keeping a discussion together I copied this answer from my user page. Zanaq 10:56, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
Yes, it's cross wiki compatible, it just needs a little more tweaking (the warning system needs work and the reporting is half effective) and sure, I'll either run it or give you the code whatever works best -- Tawker 02:40, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

If you'll give me the code I can do some tweaking myself and report the results back to you. I wil validate my e-mail so you may e-mail me if you still wish the code to be a secret, which I hereby vow to uphold. Zanaq 10:56, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Response

Hi there - just trying to get back to you since the last message you left on my talk page. Sure, that sounds great! I guess I'll wait for you to respond in an e-mail and such then. See you around! --HappyCamper 12:20, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Beans in noses

The edit summary is vague to disguise what exactly the filters are, I'm not totally sure how BEANS applies but some people claim it does. We did put in the reasons before but then we had some requests via email to remove the summaries as it was probally going to spark a cat and mouse to try and outsmart the bot. -- Tawker 10:26, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Ohhh... I see. Should the bot be handling malicious vandalism anyway? I thought its target was mostly anon tests, blankings and "X is gay" comments, etc. Those types of vandals won't even know what a bot is, let alone why they should try to thwart it. I think it would save us editors some time if the bot said things like "reverting total page blanking", so we don't have to look at the diff. — Omegatron 15:10, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Tawkerbot - blanking of talk pages

I'm not sure where to post this comment, so here it is :-) : I disagree with the blanking of old IP talk pages; besides other reasons, it does send the "new messages" banner to the users. We've already gotten several complaints about the "new messages" banner when a message is removed or substituted. Anyways, just my 2 cents; I don't think that the bot should continue doing this. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 17:14, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply - I'll comment there. Flcelloguy (A note?) 17:30, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Tawkerbot2 on Ethanol

The bot hasn't touched the page, I'm not sure where you are getting the history from. The bot will revert to the last version that doesn't trigger its filters, it should go to the "clean" version 99.9% of the time -- Tawker 09:42, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

The bot reverted Ethanol fuel at 08:30, 9 March 2006. I guess your filter is pretty conservative, and earlier vandalism was too subtle to trigger the filter. Or does your algorithm look for successive vandalisms? In the end, bots are just helpers, not almighty, so it is better not to touch the article than fixing the sublte vandalisms, I suppose. Lifetime 03:16, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Tawkerbot2 vandalism warning?

Hello! I have been closing down AfD discussions and redirected Intoonfada to Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy. You can see the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2006_March_8#Intoonfada. Why then did the bot accuse me of vandalism? Can you explain it to me, please? I am acting in the role of Admin, so I am suprised to receive a warning such as this. Regards,  (aeropagitica)  13:56, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

False positive by Tawkerbot2

Per your wish to be notified: Tawkerbot2 has just reverted my revert. See ya! Misza13 ^{T C} 17:16, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Tawkerbot2 on John Ratzenberger

No problem, I just wanted to make sure I hadn't missed some piece of vandalism I had inadvertantly reverted back to. Staxringold 18:23, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Analysis of data

I was just thinking that perhaps the edit counter results for your bot, Tawkerbot2, could possibly be used to extract data about when Wikipedia is vandalized the most. Human editors often sleep, and are not on for 24 hours, or at least most of them. However, with your bot chugging away all day, everyday, the graph below can be used to isolate times of heavy vandalism. What do you think? --Jay(Reply) 21:04, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting vandalism in my userspace. CanadianCaesar The Republic Restored 06:45, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

St. Louis

Some of the sub-categories still need doing, (Category:Saint Louis University shouldn't change.) Rich Farmbrough 07:28 12 March 2006 (UTC).

Effection: Hellraiser

User:Julian Thome is continuing to remove the AfD template from this page. Can you please report this to an admin? - adnghiem501 (talk) 07:42, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

An IP user (User:84.173.35.98), possibly Julian Thome, has removed the AfD template. Report this user to the IRC. - adnghiem501 (talk) 08:04, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

My Talk page

Someone used your bot to revert my own talk page (appears to be Werdna648). Is there any way to stop this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcyu (talk • contribs)

I reverted a blanking on your talk page, my bot wasn't involved -- Tawker 08:39, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Then stop reverting my talk page. I don't want comments. I want it left blank. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcyu (talk • contribs)

Removing warnings is considered vandalism, hence the revert -- Tawker 09:02, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

If you have an issue with my talk page, please post it on the admin board instead of reverting my talk page. Thanks. Policeman of the Control Freak Wikipedia Editors 09:06, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

GFDL and AfC

Hi Tawker. It's usually pretty easy to find the author of an AFC submission from the history. Just search for the section heading – or, it it's not there, the heading of the proceeding submission – and then look at the diff to make sure you've got the right one. It's annoying, but it's really really important. I added the IP to City Centre Mall, by the way. ×Meegs 09:26, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

My RfA

WikiThanks

Thanks for supporting my RFA. I really appreciated the show of support and all the kind words from so many great Wikipedians. I hope I live up to them! -- Vary | Talk 17:26, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

---

---

**** → See WP:AN (Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Tawkerbot2_bug_fix) for what I'm fairly certain is the explanation of the glitch with Tawkerbot2. -- Curps 16:02, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

---

---

Archives (by month) @ User talk:Tawker/Archives

Hmm

You should have been caught by the adminlist feature, I've manually added you in for now until I can figure out whats going on. -- Tawker 22:33, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Heh, I am no admin. :P --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 22:35, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Archive

You may want to model my archive style as your talk page seems to be very active. :) --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 22:35, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm, that might be a good idea, 5 archives in 2 months, its nuts :) -- Tawker 22:37, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Very well. See User talk:Cool Cat/Archive

• My archives are sorted by month. All posts on march are stored on one page. I do not add all posts at once, but I add gradualy.
• Notice the + next to archive link on top of my userpage. By clicking that I add to my archive.

The structure may look a bit complicated but it is really simple to use. I can import that structure here if you like. You would have two archives instead of 5 for two months. They would not directly apear on your talk page so as not to clutter. (over time some people have a page of archives listed on their talk page)

--Cool Cat^Talk|@ 22:44, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

I redid my archive system similar but not a copyvio of yours :) - its a lot cleaner now, one per month so 12 a year. So much cleaner -- Tawker 07:30, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

I have asked you to steal my style if you like. No copyright infrigments are involved. :P --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 11:40, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

My RFA

Thanks for participating in my RfA. It passed with a final tally of 98/13/10, just two short of making WP:100. If you need my help with anything, don't hesitate to ask.

Naconkantari e|t||c|m 23:25, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Your bandwidth costs

Just out of curiosity what were your bandwidth costs monthly to run the bot, I've had a grand total of under 100MB used by anything Wikipedia related including my anti vandal bot and my two IRC bots, keeping the bot up has been basically one cron process that does it for me, I would have thought writing the bot takes more work. Feel free to ignore this if you want but you have me curious, how bad is bandwidth in your area! -- Tawker 02:54, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

I'll gladly answer. I used to have a 256Kbits/sec line, I had to upgrade to 512Kbits/sec in order to have my bot run efficently as my bot used to disconnect because of the lack of bandwith. I am currently paying 87.83YTL a month ^[6]. The current exchange rate is 1$ ~ 1.347YTL (Local curency) ^[7]. Hence I pay roughly $65.21/month.

--Cool Cat^Talk|@ 03:08, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

The bot I wrote had numerous bugs, I eventualy perfected it to its current form. For example a MSSQL server will use roughly 28 megs of ram just for the database (600+ lines) no matter how simple it is, God knows how much more for MySQL. My bots entier memory usage is 17megs. It takes constant effort to code such a thing. The original bot was no more than 10-20 lines. Its currently a 1000 line mirc script which if you ask anyone is a decent amout of code for mirc. The bot is also highly modular its not static 1000 lines.

It takes constant fixing to satisfy the needs of the masses. My bot does not just run on en. People often complain about simple stuff such as a missing colon. Or they ask for a new function. Fr.wikipedians asked for the tiny page function.

Also rarely the bot fails to ping timeout. I am not certain why this happens but I blame my pathetic ISP

--Cool Cat^Talk|@ 03:29, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Wow, thats a fair bit bigger than I thought it was. Bandwidth sure is a bit of a rip off, I pay $70 for a 10mbit fiber feed here. How many wiki's are you running bot services for! As for the bot pinging out, I'm doing it too and this is direct to a tier 1 backbone so I think its an network core issue. -- Tawker 04:34, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Yea but it takes my bot several hours to realise its not connected. Well it used to happen. My bot runs for 14 wikis, I intend to make it more. One thing I hate about the country I am in is the bandwidth and its costs... I kinda miss my 10mb line at MSU. --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 11:46, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Bot

Check the history of Neu!... there's been some strange problem with the wikisoftware i think, I have no idea what your bot was doing there however --LimoWreck 14:21, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Tawkerbot2 false alarm

Hi there - Tawkerbot2 accidentally reverted my deletion of copyvio material from Donald Simpson Bell [8]. Thought you might like to know - it's not a major problem, though I'm a little peeved that it automatically labels me a vandal in the edit summary - surely it can say something a little less judgemental like "blanking" or "removal of material" instead? Qwghlm 14:26, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

And another

Your Tawkerbot just gave me a vandalism warning. I dont know what for as I made several minor edits recently and the message doesn't give any info. I suggest your bot needs further refinement yet - a link to the disputed edit would be good. Thanks, ::Supergolden:: 14:28, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Unwarranted reversion

Hello. I've noticed Tawkerbot2 has reverted my recent edits on Grand Theft Auto III [9] and notified me of my "vandalism" in my talk page [10]. It also seems that it has been doing the same with certain other legitimate edits (some of which could be copyedited). I hope that this can be looked into. Thanks. ╫ ２５ ^{◀RingADing▶} 14:34, 13 March 2006 (UTC) ╫

WARNING

Software errors (database related) are causing new posts to this page to sometimes blank old ones. After posting here, please check you've not blanked the page too. Talker: there are more edits in the history: getting them back when the system is like this is too difficult. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 14:43, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Bot making errors

Just prior to the DB problems the bot made this revert. The edit by 131.107.0.86 was valid. I have reverted the bot and the warning it left on the users talk page. If the bot is making this sort of error it should only run while being monitored. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 16:04, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

---

---

**** → See WP:AN (Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Tawkerbot2_bug_fix) for what I'm fairly certain is the explanation of the glitch with Tawkerbot2. -- Curps 16:02, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

---

---

Re: your message. I actually noticed long after other people did (and so didn't get to press the button, which is a pomo work of art by the way), but thanks for stopping by with an update. 9 blocks in 19 minutes has got to be some kind of record, huh? The database freakiness caused all sorts of problems, including what look like some permanent holes in the database. For example, I was watching recent changes at about 14:30 and noticed that this produced this. How weird is that? Under those circumstances, I think any bot would have gone haywire. Chick Bowen 21:47, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

I've been looking through its contribs--it's very impressive. Quote me as being on board if there's any more to-do about it. Chick Bowen 22:13, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

because of the bug already submitted by email:

Hi,

it seems there is some bug in wikipedia, because some of the already existing topics show blank - e.g. there is default template for empty page (non-existing article) shown. When you check the history and/or edit the article, you can see, there is plenty of content/text etc... When you save it, nothing shows. Then, when edited/all text is cut (deleted) + put into clipboard and then submitted and then again edit and insert the text from clipboard, thens save.

finally, the article is properly displayed

See Thomas Jefferson (english wiki) for example - see edits/reverts.

-- Best regards, —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.119.105.208 (talk • contribs) .

Again, this record according to the database which should not be believed by the bug. I just triple checked the history and I don't see your edit as being legit bug or not. -- Tawker 23:26, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Roxanne Harman

Thanks for taking another look at that. Your proposal sounds very reasonable to me. I've decided to not do anything more unless and until she responds to my question about changing her story. I can understand why the community is responding so apathetically on this one. It's hard to want to stick your neck out even a little bit on something like this. -LambaJan 02:18, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm fine with not being able to save the account. Given my previous posts you can imagine what I think about her only option being hiding and lying, but given the current climate with these sorts of things I guess it would be best for me to bow out of that aspect of it also. The admins generally do good work and I shouldn't condemn them for not always being the embodiments of my idealism. Thanks again for your consideration. If you ever want a hand with anything don't hesitate to visit my talkpage. -LambaJan 01:48, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Tawkerbot2 error

When I was reverting vandalism by 202.74.165.162 on Wikipedia, Tawkerbot2 reverted my change and gave me a vandalism message on my talk page. -- King of Hearts | (talk) 05:46, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

See reply on your talk page, sry about that -- Tawker 05:49, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Reply

More likely what happened is the first edit happened when the bot was offline, hence it didn't touch the original tiny edit. The bot is pretty good so far, multiple user vandalism is always tricker to catch, its not really a false positive as the version it reverted to was a lot cleaner than the super vandalized version. I know the bot is just a bot and that kind of thing is always checked by a human (or is flagged to be at least) but bot is better than no bot. -- Tawker 03:30, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Just to make sure, I am not criticizing the bot. I was reporting the case so that you might be able to improve the bot by looking at it. I appreciate what you are doing. Thank you. Lifetime 06:08, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

No worries, I just try to provide a reason for what goes wrong, it tends to make people happy :) -- Tawker 06:10, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

a bit of a shock

Hello, I think I got jumped on unnecessarily. I am attempting to merge two articles, after responsible discussion, and when I deleted some text, including the NPOV tag, I got your bot message, which accuses me of vandalism. This is the first time I have tried to merge anything, so your help would be appreciated. The articles are English as a second language and English as an additional language. THank you for any help. BrainyBabe 11:59, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Oh dear, maybe I should have posted this here, instead of as a response to your comments on my talk page. Whicih is more appropriate? Anyway:

Thanks for your response. I used the quotation marks because I was following the instructions on Wikipedia:Merging and moving pages under "performing the merger". I have never done this before (we all have to start somewhere) so perhaps I followed them too literally. If you know how to change that page, so that it says "without the quotation marks", that would help. Also, I found the bot message harsh and unhelpful, to be accused of vandalism when I thought I was following all the proper procedures (discussion to merge, waiting for comments, etc.). It put me off my lunch till I figured out it was an auto-thing and not a person reverting me. So perhaps you could consider changing the message. I am sure your bot exists for a good reason; I just hope you can see that it can come across the wrong way. I hope these comments are constructive for you. THanks BrainyBabe 17:16, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

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

Ok, I've bolded the automated bot text in the message, I've been yo-yo'ing between the messages, essentially its a copy paste of a stock message with the automated bot portion and link if you think the bots in error. If you have any suggestions on how to make the message both friendly enough and stern at the same time, it would be very much appreciated. I've also changed the help page to note "without the quotation marks", let me know if it looks more helpful. I hope I didn't ruin your lunch, it really is entirely automated, I only saw the message in the morning when I woke up -- Tawker 17:29, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, but...

...no thanks. That's the third time now. The bot should spot when it gets reverted, or it should leave peoples' archives alone. -Splash^talk 15:39, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

It's just done it again, dammit. I will not semiprotect my talk page since I'm an admin and new users are common-enough recipients of my admin buttons that they need to be able to talk to me. I'm starting to get majorly PO'd, now. -Splash^talk 17:36, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

And yes, I am having to go through this with multiple bot operators. I am leaning rapidly towards writing up a page that says "don't use bots to do things that peolpe don't want done" and seeing if that helps. -Splash^talk 17:38, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. I snapped at Drini for essentially the same thing yesterday, and he mentioned essentially the same solution (eventually). I'm not the only one who's being irritated by it, btw. -Splash^talk 17:55, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

See reply, I'm working on a "checkuser" page which would prevent the bot from editing requested pages / users / subsets (archives etc) of users -- Tawker 18:09, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

OP

Dnsstuff.com showed it was in Poland, and Google showed it on numerous blacklists; since the vandal/POV-pusher was obviously in the US, and switching IPs every five minutes, it passed the duck test. I don't honestly know why it wouldn't show on the scan. Thanks! Antandrus (talk) 03:16, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Well...

I think you're asking the wrong junkie! Mindspillage (spill yours?) 08:16, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Nazi Vandalism

I have just created a new template for Nazi vandals {{Nazi vandal}}Myrtone (the strict Australian wikipedian)

TawkerBot

Thanks for the quick reply, bon voyage! - Tangotango 13:28, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Buzz

[11]. — Mar. 15, '06 [13:38] <freakofnur_xture|talk>

an edit was cancelled?

hi there, i was directed to you from the sicily discussion page. We had discussed an edit of the main page removing an unnecessary list of 'sicilian-americans' and the bizzare 'part sicilian' lists from the page. as has already been outlined in discussion these lists have their own seperate page and have no merit on an encylopaedia article on the island of sicily itself.

I will re-edit the page taking them off once again. Please can you leave it be this time.

Thank you

Best wishes--Eus2 17:11, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Nolan Ryan ?

What vandalism are you accusing me of? I was correcting vandalism by users inserting weird stuff like "Jack was here" or whatever. Wahkeenah 18:08, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Reply

-----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
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==
=rWOF
-----END PGP MESSAGE-----

--Cyde Weys 19:43, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

need your bot to do something

Recently we've had vandals vandalising high profile pages with statements of Jimbo Wales, rape, and small children, as well as images of penises and children, I assume you have seen it, things like this - overt vandalism like this is fairly easy to detect, so can we have your bot automatically roll this back upon detection please? Thanks. Every second counts, and your bot is pretty effiicent, so. ;-) Elle _{vécut heureuse} ^{à jamais} (Be eudaimonic!) 02:24, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Ah, I meant it didn't revert the pages before it was blocked. I just meant autoreverting. Also, is it possible to autorevert stuff like this? It's a product of a long running dispute with Singapore since December for hanging an Australian drug dealer, it's not vandalism per se, but it has been constant insertion of that section by anonymous IP's who won't discuss, and everyone else has reverted on sight. Of course, as long as they don't catch on and realise there's an algorithm searching for that exact text, which I think their ignorance of community process kind of makes it likely that they won't. It's the only solution besides semi-protection. Thanks! Elle _{vécut heureuse} ^{à jamais} (Be eudaimonic!) 06:46, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, it could check specific pages, and if it saw that page was changed in a certain range of bytes (as its nearly always the same text change), it would check the "hanging" article to see if it matched the text. For one, if the changes are around 570-590 bytes in length (as the specific change so far is 578), then it should check. I'm giving that range right now, but if the article is changed we of course need to update the byte number. Elle _{vécut heureuse} ^{à jamais} (Be eudaimonic!) 06:55, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Good job!

The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar For your awesome bot. M o P 03:33, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

I just wanted to award you this barnstar for both yourself and your bot's (Tawkerbot2) contributions fighting vandalism. I've run into the bot a number of times the past few days, and it is working almost flawlessly; I just hope that we don't have a Terminator-type incident where the bots elbow the real people out of Wikipedia :P. Anyway, here's to a job well done! -M ^o P 03:33, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, from what I've seen, it's kinda like an old Western; you know, the intimidating sheriff swaggers through those nifty swinging doors and everyone is quiet. Well, the bot is like that as in it seems to discourage most vandals. M ^o P 03:56, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Bots' noticeboard

It was an evidently unsuccessful attempt at humour. I had hoped that the remainder of my post gave that away. It's Friday and I didn't drink anything yet is my excuse. I'm funnier when I'm drunk, honest. -Splash^talk 23:59, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

....see you under the table, then. :) -Splash^talk 00:11, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Bot

Yea no problem, Sorry for any inconvience. I just do not like being accused a vandal. Tutmosis 00:39, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Zombies and squids and proxies, oh my

Thanks for the message. Yes, I'll be happy to do that. Joyous | Talk 18:52, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

A question: are we considering all of the squidward vandals to be using zombies? Joyous | Talk 18:56, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Tawkerbot error

See User talk:Tawkerbot2#Huh? -- SCZenz 20:12, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Something I noticed about Tawkerbot2

I noticed in the last few days that when I give a vandal a bv or test2 warning, Tawkerbot2 will then revert a later vandalization by the vandal, and post a test1 on the talk page.

Is there a way to tell Tawkerbot2 to take into account previous warning levels and when they were left? This sometimes causes the next vandal fighter to warn the vandal with a test2, bv, or test3, when they should really be getting a test4 or being blocked. Thanks. tv316 20:42, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

It will escalate a test1 to a test4 within a specific amount of time (I don't have the code in front of me, sry), it looks for test1 only at the moment, I'll add bv to the list -- Tawker 20:51, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Removed a warning

I removed the warning left here. It was based on this edit. User:Edward Hunter is new and was trying to create a redirect. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 00:50, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Blanking and Tawkerbot

I noticed twice today that Tawkerbot reverted a page blanking and warned users when I think they were really just trying to request the page be deleted (WP:CSD General 7). Is there a way for Tawkerbot to recognize the recent and first author of an article is blanking and not warn them in this case? Possibly even leave a note on the user's page on how to request speedy deletion? Thanks, --TeaDrinker 08:50, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. You are doing fantastic work--keep it up! Cheers, --TeaDrinker 09:24, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Requirements

Hi and thanks for the information. I can easily exceed the hardware requirements, but unfortunately my bandwidth is only ~1.5Mb upload and ~256K download. Do you think this would be a problem if I was running the bot from 11pm - 3am in the Hawaii-Aleutian Standard Time Zone? I've noticed that there isn't much traffic on recent changes at this time. Let me know. —Viriditas | Talk 09:06, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Adminship

Hey there,

I took a look at your userpage there and I think you would almost certainly pass an RfA. What say you? Werdna648^T/_C\^@ 09:11, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, at this point in time (being exactly 16 days from another nomination) I'd have to say no mostly due to the fact that the community usually frowns upon RfA's so close together. Maybe in a few weeks yes, but at this point I think I'd be shunned for too soon. -- Tawker 09:27, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Heh, obviously I didn't do my research. I'll keep my eye on you though, and feel free to increment that counter on your userpage of users who thought you were an administrator. Werdna648^T/_C\^@ 09:30, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Lol, that thing is soo out of date, its up to about 150 now :) -- Tawker 09:31, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi

I am certain this [12] is not one of yours but just in case let me know.--Dakota ~ ° 20:47, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Tawkerbot warning wrong people, and leaving slightly odd edit summaries

Title says it all. Rich Farmbrough 23:40 19 March 2006 (UTC).

See reply on your talk page or the bots page -- Tawker 23:42, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

No problem at alal, just htought you ought to know. Rich Farmbrough 23:44 19 March 2006 (UTC).

Whatever you're trying to fix with Tawkerbot2, it's not working. Twice you've falsely accused me of vandalism, when the vandalism actually occurred in the user after my last edit, and you reverted to some previous edit. Kindly cease and desist until you can get it right. Wahkeenah 23:50, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. Squidward's slimy tentacles must be gumming up the works. Wahkeenah 00:46, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Your bot tawkerbot2 causing vandalism

Tawkerbot2 has recently vandalised Railways Act 1921. I recently reverted this page due to vandalism; the bot has returned a vandalised version and slandered me in the comment. Please check this behaviour. Kierant 00:35, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Please see reply on your talk page, it was an issue with the IRC feed returning incorrect data and it threw the bot off, sorry about that, not much I could have done about it -- Tawker 00:48, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for rapidly replying on my talk page. I would point out that by going back too far, and missing a recent change, the bot does indeed make the page better than the vandalised version but perhaps less "obviously broken", and therefore less likely to be fixed properly by a human. An attractive and elegant upgrade to your bot would be to measure the editing activity on pages and leave alone those which are regularly edited or patrolled. Kierant 00:51, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

I'll look into it though half of the advantage of the bot is that it is so rapid that vandals have no chance of keeping any vandalism on Wikipedia for any amount of time. That particular attack was a mass vandalbot which is a pain in the butt to selectively revert and another check on the page would add a lot of overhead to the bots revert cycle, its a good idea but technically its a fair bit of strain to implement -- Tawker 06:37, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

I hop that I'll not get any false warnings again. User_talk:Spasage#Shamsur_Rahman --Spasage 07:45, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Not sure how this one is a false warning -- Tawker 07:49, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

No, you're misunderstanding me. You / someone claiming to be you removed all of the text from an article page and did not leave an edit summary. My bot flagged this as page blanking and reverted and gave you an auto warning. If you take a second to look at the page here you'll see that your version of the page had no content on it. I'm sure its an accident but the bot is functioning perfectly. -- Tawker 07:49, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

I understand that there may be some problem with your bot, but please dont remove any thing from my talk page User_talk:Spasage. --Spasage 08:05, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Again, its not a bot problem but I don't know how many other ways I can explain it. I just removed the bots warning nothing more nothing less because I figured it was obviously a good faith mistake ommiting the redirect that lead to the warning message and no point in keeping such "black marks" on talk pages -- Tawker 08:10, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed by an automated bot. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. If you feel you have received this notice in error, please contact the bot owner // Tawkerbot2 19:33, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Nothing against the bot (I actually find it quite useful) but given the recent rash of false positives and mis-laid blame, I find the above quite humorous. :) - TexasAndroid 19:38, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

ROFL. Looks like you really need to fix this. -Splash^talk 19:39, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Pwnt. --Rory096 19:43, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Last time when this happened, I could resist. Not this time:

"Ha ha!" :-) Femto 19:54, 20 March 2006 (UTC)