User talk:The Earwig/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

Spam in Snapz Pro X

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Snapz Pro X, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Snapz Pro X is blatant advertising for a company, product, group, service or person that would require a substantial rewrite in order to become an encyclopedia article.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Snapz Pro X, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 17:41, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Problem resolved, sentence repaired, no longer requested for deletion. Formerly Codename Colorado | The Earwig ^{(User | Talk | Contributions)} 18:05, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Daxter.png)

Thanks for uploading File:Daxter.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:22, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

It seems that image was unnecessary because the article "Daxter" was deleted (that is, Daxter the character, not Daxter the game) and it couldn't sensibly be put anywhere else. See the below discussion. The Earwig ^{(User | Talk | Contributions)} 13:26, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Daxter

I noticed your message on Daxter's talk page. I agree with your proposal - why don't you go ahead and do it? Or I could, if you like. — Levi van Tine (t – c) 13:33, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, that was the original idea. However, it's now obsolete, as Daxter (Jak and Daxter), the article about the character, no longer exists (it's a redirect). Apparently, it failed at WP:NOTE. I could've added some notability into the article, but frankly I'm lazy, and above that, extremely busy. If you want to, go ahead, but it's not necessary without an article about the character. Formerly Codename Colorado | The Earwig ^{(User | Talk | Contributions)} 03:44, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough, I'll leave it as-is. — Levi van Tine (t – c) 07:42, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Sophia Lamar

Hi. Please WP:DONTBITE the newcomers: it looks to me like the article was posted in good faith. Thanks, MuffledThud (talk) 22:52, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that is true— I guess I got a little ahead of myself there. I still can't find proof that the topic exists; he's adding links that don't prove his topic. Maybe I'm just horribly wrong. Formerly Codename Colorado | The Earwig ^{(User | Talk | Contributions)} 22:54, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Emoticons

I was not vandalizing, I just think that those examples are bad and are not the correct meaning of the emoticons. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.106.1.3 (talk) 21:46, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Understood, I see how you feel. However, I think that the matter should first be discussed on the article's talk page before such drastic changes are made. It is important that we respect WP:3RR, so I will not revert any more of your edits, and you should not revert any more of mine. Again, I see what you mean, but this should be discussed on the article's talk page. Thanks. The Earwig ^{(User | Talk | Contributions)} 21:51, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

hi

following your much appreciated welcome you left on my Ip talk page just there, I've decided to make an account and try to make a few edits to the wiki, regards now. Routerone (talk) 23:00, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your response to my advice, and welcome to our encyclopedia. The Earwig ^{(User | Talk | Contributions)} 23:05, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

165.155.208.81

Here's the IP I was talking about. Please rollback the latest edit. Thanks. 165.155.208.81 (talk) 18:57, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Done. The Earwig ^{(User | Talk | Contributions)} 20:03, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Prairie Golden-Aster

Hey! Just your adoptee here! I am nurturing a new series of articles on the golden asters. Check out my user page! By Earwig :-D Babylonian Armor (talk) 02:31, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

That's pretty cool! I see that you have figured out how to create subpages and subpages-of-subpages, and have used them to implement a article-creation scheme much like my own. Good luck with your articles! The Earwig ^{(User | Talk | Contributions)} 02:35, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank-you. I currently am in need of your assistance, as I have seemingly FORGOTTEN how to cite a book reference (correctly that is). HELP! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Babylonian Armor (talk • contribs) 02:50, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I noticed that. Did you forget to include the <ref> tags at the beginning and end of the reference? The Earwig ^{(User | Talk | Contributions)} 02:52, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

That's what I'm missing. Okay - I'll take care of that in the morning. GOOD NIGHT WIKIPEDIA Babylonian Armor (talk) 02:55, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

That's fine by me. The Earwig ^{(User | Talk | Contributions)} 02:57, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 13 April 2009

• License update: Licensing vote begins
• News and notes: WMF petitions Obama, longer AFDs, UK meeting, and more
• Dispatches: Let's get serious about plagiarism
• WikiProject report: WikiProject Color
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 17:01, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Uruguay talk

Oh c'mon!! How dumb was that initial posting?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.219.255.133 (talk) 14:03, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

You may think it was dumb, but that's no reason to go off and attack one of our contributors. Please respect No Personal Attacks. The user made an argument that may have been related to vandalism, and is a legitimate point. He wasn't talking about how the word and the phrase are connected: he was talking about why the word and the phrase are connected. The Earwig ^{(User | Talk | Contributions)} 14:11, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Ok, fair call. I apologize. Sometimes I get the better of myself, if you know what I mean! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.219.255.133 (talk) 14:21, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Babylonian Armor

I would like to speak with you over skype in regard to some help I may need on various issues Babylonian Armor (talk) 15:30, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Sarun Mata Temple

Is there really anything in this article that you need to fix it? It's so bad I can hardly resist deleting it. If you want to make a new article on the subject, that's fine, but I can't imagine why we need to have this up in the mean time. --Ryan Delaney ^talk 00:46, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

I beg your pardon? I'm afraid I do not quite understand what you are referring to. I did not create the article, nor do I support the author's resentment of speedy deletion. I am the one who tagged the article with speedy per A1, and as such, think that the article should be deleted. Feel free to go ahead and speedy delete it: that seems like the proper course of action (per WP:FIELD), but I might be mistaken. The article offers little context: I have no clude what the article is about, but please tell me if the A1 tag was incorrect, and another tag should be used. Thanks. The Earwig ^{(User | Talk | Contributions)} 01:22, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Ahh, I asked because [1] this edit made it look like you had placed a {{hangon}} template on the article. I'll go ahead and delete it. --Ryan Delaney ^talk 01:40, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I was just rearranging the template. The author put {{hangon}} above {{db-a1}}, and the {{db-a1}} template says that hangons should be placed below the speedy templates. The Earwig ^{(User | Talk | Contributions)} 01:44, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Nice work

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		For meeting a challenge with great precision, and for being an asset to the Wikipedia community. Keep up the good work! —Eustress talk 02:23, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for participating in the challenge! You did great work, and I know it's not easy. If you have time to do another 15, I'll be happy to offer the second barnstar of the challenge. Best regards —Eustress ^talk 02:23, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Yay: my first "true" barnstar! The Earwig ^{(User | Talk | Contributions)} 02:25, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For tireless work in fulfillment of a challenge. Cheers! —Eustress talk 16:11, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Wow...15 more! My only critique is to remember that Wikipedia cannot cite itself as a source, nor is Wikia a reliable source. Best regards —Eustress ^talk 16:11, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I might go back in the near future to see if I can find a better source for that one; yes, I do know what you're talking about. Thanks again! The Earwig ^{(User | Talk | Contributions)} 16:14, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Toronto Dragons RFC

You declined the article based on copyright and notoriety. The article expands on two stubs:

• Toronto Welsh RFC
• Ontario Rugby Union

I agree that there was copyright issues that I would like to correct, however I am new to Wiki and am not sure how to introduce the formatting and titling seen with most articles. If you could help me produce an article on the subject that conforms with wikipedia standards I would appreciate it.

Thanks,

GW. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gnatwest (talk • contribs) 19:02, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your interest in Wikipedia. I have done some research and have concluded, based on the already-existant articles Toronto Welsh RFC and Ontario Rugby Union, that the article meets Wikipedia's notability guideline. If you want help writing your article, I would be happy to— I have a good deal of experience with Wikipedia's formatting and their Manual of Style.

If you want to make this a good article, it is important that we find reliable, third party sources. I can not stress this enough: we need proof that Toronto Dragons RFC has some importance. This is not difficult: essentially we need a reference to Toronto Dragons RFC in a publication unrelated to them, indicating some form of signifigance. They can be web sources, but they can also be books. While the club's website is a great source for information, we need others, and most importantly— you must write it in your own words. This was the main reason why I denied your request.

If you want me to help you write the article, respond to this below by saying that you do, and try to write the main content on your userpage. Do it just like you did here, except don't put {{AFC submission}} on it, and don't violate coyright. If you need help, just ask. Good luck! The Earwig ^{(User | Talk | Contributions)} 22:59, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Ok I will try to update the content and post it to my page. I dont know how the tags really work Gnatwest (talk) 14:48, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Tags? Are you referring to something like this: {{AFC submission}}, or are you referring to categories? The Earwig ^{(User | Talk | Contributions)} 21:25, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Query about your DYK nom

Please see my comments at Template talk:Did you know. I hope you can respond! --Orlady (talk) 22:39, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

I responded on T:TDYK. Thanks! The Earwig ^{(User | Talk | Contributions)} 03:35, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Article for deletion (Kohl's Plaza)

Please see comments at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Kohl%27s_Plaza_(Colonie,_New_York) . As I have noted there, if well-researched articles are going to become candidates for deletion (when there are a multitude of articles all over Wikipedia that have zero sources), then I guess I have better things to do with my time than waste it making contributions here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yx7791 (talk • contribs) 04:14, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Note for the archives, as well as anyone who is curious The AfD (link) was closed. See that page for comments, as well as Yx7791's talk. Thanks, The Earwig ^{(User | Talk | Contributions)} 04:38, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks very much for your decision! I appreciate it. My interest in articles like these is only in history and providing a reference point as to where something has come from. We can learn a lot from the past and most importantly, avoid making mistakes that have already been made. Yx7791 (talk) 04:42, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 27 April 2009

• Book reviews: Reviews of Lazy Virtues: Teaching Writing in the Age of Wikipedia
• News and notes: Usability study, Wiki Loves Art, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia Art dispute, and brief headlines
• WikiProject report: Interview on WikiProject Final Fantasy
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot II (talk) at 04:56, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Interval Monday

The reason the articles discuss Ava is because of Interval Monday (the name of the jazz jam session). Nevertheless, I don't understand how Interval Monday isn't notable... we're talking about world renowned musicians here. The musicians are notable according to the musicians criteria, so wouldn't the fact that these musicians are coming together to play music at Interval Monday be notable? If Bruce Springstein showed up just about every Monday to a rock and roll jam session that was referred to as 'rock with Bruce,' and played music for free, wouldn't that be notable? Maybe I'm missing something.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.163.247.20 (talk) 08:42, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Here's what I meant when I denied your request: it's not that Interval Monday isn't notable— it most likely is— it's just that you need to prove it. On Wikipedia, the definition of notability is this: "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article." If you don't fully understand that, you can read further here. Sadly, it doesn't matter if an article's subject was cited a million newspaper articles— it matters that you can prove that it was cited a million newspaper articles. You do this, obviously, by using sources. The problem, though, is that only the third out of all four sources talks about Interval Monday specifically, the rest talk about Ava Lounge in general. I will accept the article— in truth, you need only one source for an article, but I made a proposal on the submission's talk page, if you did not read it, please do so. Why not make an article about Ava Lounge, which appears to have more sources, and have Interval Monday as a section in it? I await your response. Regards, The Earwig ^{(Talk | Contributions)} 13:31, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Account creation confirmation

This is to prove that I requested an account on English Wikipedia Internal Account Creation Interface. The Earwig ^{(Talk | Contributions)} 20:52, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for applying to access the account creation tool. I have approved your request. You may now access the tool here. Before you do so, please read the tool's guide to familiarize yourself with the process. You may also want to join #wikipedia-en-accounts on irc and the mailing list. Keep in mind that the ACC tool is a powerful program, and misuse may result in your access being suspended by a tool administrator. Don't hesitate to get in touch with me if you have any questions. Thank you for participating in the account creation process. FunPika 23:08, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Review

Thank You, and yeah, I'll use the preview button from now on, and also , I was messing with those templates on my page, which I now realize is wrong.Also , I have a lot of trouble remembering polices, do you have any ideas that would help me there? I was thinking about creating a subpage and putting the important facts of the policies down , but I want to do it the best way.Again, thanks for the review!Þέŗṃέłḥìμŝ ^Life_Death 14:11, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Forgetting policies is by no means uncommon, so I see why you would want to create a subpage with important facts. How about putting the content from {{Welcomeg}} or {{WelcomeMenu}} on it? These are two standard templates that some users give to newly registered users, and they both contain a good deal of information. Wikipedia's simple ruleset page contains a lot of useful information about standard rules in an easy-to-browse format. The five pillars contains five core principals of Wikipedia, while the list of policies and the list of guidelines pages contains every major policy and a selection of guidelines in a summarized format. Finally, there's the glossary, which is pretty self-explanatory, and {{Wikipedia policies and guidelines}}, which is a template that is also pretty self-explanatory. I hope that helps, The Earwig ^{(Talk | Contributions)} 22:03, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Cool, Thanks.-Þέŗṃέłḥìμŝ ^Life_Death 11:22, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Archidermapteron martynovi

On April 27, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Archidermapteron martynovi, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 08:18, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Cool! The Earwig ^{(Talk | Contributions)} 02:27, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Fairview, California Cool (aesthetic) Santa Fe Indian School Military of Paraguay WCWM Revolutionary Organization 17 November Naruto Lauryn Hill Democritus Mikołaj Rej Athens Polytechnic uprising Pauly Shore Is Dead Antonis Samaras Cox's Bazar Mount Pleasant High School (San Jose, California) Perris Union High School District Ashland High School (Ohio) Sierramont Middle School Oklahoma School for the Blind

Cleanup AOL Bret Harte Middle School (San Jose, California) 1986 NBA Draft Merge Acne vulgaris List of major freeway systems History of US and Canadian license plates Add Sources Graffiti Bridge (album) Stacey King Spanish nouns Wikify Vanessa Anne Hudgens Sphynx (cat) California School for the Deaf, Fremont Expand York Community High School Thunderstorm List of seawatching locations by country

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 17:50, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

I definitely requested that, and it turned up some interesting responses! The Earwig ^{(Talk | Contributions)} 02:28, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Bot

I like the bot. I thought it would have been natural though to post a message on WT:WPAFC to inform the project about the proposal. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 23:09, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

I forgot to notify WikiProject Articles for Creation... wow. That's really weird. I actually thought for a moment that I had. Oh well, I guess I'll do that now, and thanks for your support. It's my first true bot (EarwigBot I has no BRFAs yet, so I appreciate the fact that it's working as I had programmed it to do. The Earwig ^{(Talk | Contributions)} 23:15, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Response to WP:IFU request comment

{{Talkback|DestinyofZorro}} DestinyofZorro (talk) 17:34, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

The image has been uploaded. Thanks! The Earwig ^{(Talk | Contributions)} 21:15, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

RFA

I have answered your question. I hope it is the answer you are looking for. Gaia Octavia Agrippa ^Talk | _Sign 20:40, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your support

The Earwig, Gaia Octavia Agrippa has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing! Gaia Octavia Agrippa ^Talk | _Sign 21:06, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thanks! The Earwig ^{(Talk | Contributions)} 21:11, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

adopt

Sure you can adopt me that would be great! P-Real DA deal 23:52, 8 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by P-Real DA deal (talk • contribs)

OK, it's done. The Earwig ^{(Talk | Contributions)} 00:40, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

vandal

I noticed on a talk page for a article on my watch list about a album there was links to download it because it was leaked i removed it i think it go's against the leak rules wiki has but i am not sure your thoughts would be great!--P-Real DA deal 04:35, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Good work! I've responded in more detail on your talk page. The Earwig ^{(Talk | Contributions)} 13:27, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

My page

I noticed my user page is blank and boring and yours is really cool i was wondering if you could help spruce mine up i probably don't need to but was just wondering--P-Real DA deal 05:01, 9 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by P-Real DA deal (talk • contribs)

See the userpage guidelines and the userpage design center. More information on your talk page. The Earwig ^{(Talk | Contributions)} 13:27, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

I am having a little trouble i am not so good with codes and stuff in fact not good at all and i wanted to make my page have the drop down box's like yours has and don't know how to put the box's and things on there a little help would be nice :)--P-Real DA deal 19:22, 9 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by P-Real DA deal (talk • contribs)

award

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		thanks for helping out a newbie i really think its nice of you P-Real DA deal 19:28, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! It's very much appreciated! The Earwig ^{(Talk | Contributions)} 19:29, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

status

I added a status thing to my page the same one you have and it says i am lost but i am not lol how do i change it to what i want?--P-Real DA deal 20:16, 9 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by P-Real DA deal (talk • contribs) I did it but i still wont work what do i do?--P-Real DA deal 20:30, 9 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by P-Real DA deal (talk • contribs) Ok i did the cache thing and then i tried clicking on one of the links and it takes me to a page i can edit but doesn't change my status--P-Real DA deal 20:38, 9 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by P-Real DA deal (talk • contribs)

edit

So how do i go about getting things changed on locked articles? the one i want to make a change to is locked i put it up on the discussion board. is that the way to settle it when its locked?--P-Real DA deal 20:58, 9 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by P-Real DA deal (talk • contribs)

I'm assuming that, by locked, you mean protected. As a new user (no offense, really) you are unable to edit semi-protected pages, but after being on Wikipedia for four days and having made ten edits, (you've already done the second one, now you just have to wait for the first) you'll be able to edit them. For the time being, you can request a change to be made by entering the text {{editsemiprotected}} at the top of the discussion page, and writing the requested change, in detail, below it. Don't worry, you won't have to do this once you have been here for four days (this is called being autoconfirmed). The Earwig ^{(Talk | Contributions)} 21:06, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

One more thing: our protection policy has details on why a page would be protected. The Earwig ^{(Talk | Contributions)} 21:14, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

wiki

I have a question before i created my account every-once and a while me and my freinds would vandalize pages (please don't be angry i have changed) and was wondering if that would ever affect my standing here on wiki--P-Real DA deal 21:27, 9 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by P-Real DA deal (talk • contribs)

No problem, I'm not angry. As you can see on my userpage, I encourage the peaceful correction of vandals. The question you've asked is rather complex, so while I can answer it, I'm afraid that you might be a little confused. If you want something explained in more detail, just ask.

Assuming that you did the vandalism before you created an account, it will not hurt you at all, unless you get into some serious trouble in your new account (which is unlikely). When a user is not registered and they edit Wikipedia, they are not editing under a username, but rather under an IP address. An IP address is basically a bunch of numbers with dots in between them, like this: 192.64.3.114. A user's IP address contains information such as where they live and who their internet service provider is, and when you create an account, for privacy, that information becomes hidden. As long as you never reveal your IP address to anyone, no one will know anything about the vandalism you have made.

Of course, if you make vandalism under your account, that's a different story. Chances are that it will not affect you, unless you do something that puts you under heavy scrutiny, such as running for adminship or requesting permissions. Now, the only way your IP address can be discovered is if you get under serious trouble under your current account, such as sock puppetry (making other accounts to influence discussion, and pretending that they are someone else). Someone with CheckUser abilities (a heavily-trusted member of Wikipedia who is over eighteen) may be able to trace your IP, but I'm getting ahead of myself. The simplest answer is no: you will not get in trouble. The Earwig ^{(Talk | Contributions)} 21:41, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Reward Board

How do I accept your offer? Please reply on my talk page. --Abce2|Howdy! 22:00, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh, ok. Thanks for telling me! Just a quick question, but why does the editor status indicator thing say that your offline? --Abce2|Howdy! 22:09, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, because I was about to log off, and then you asked me a question, so I had to answer it! You kind of held me up a little bit, but no harm done. The Earwig ^{(Talk | Contributions)} 22:11, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm working on it, but I don't know how long it will take. Is there some kind of time limit of something? --Abce2|Howdy! 23:54, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

2nd Award

		The Adopt-a-User Barnstar
		For be the coolest and most helpful adopter out there! P-Real DA deal 00:40, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, again! The Earwig ^{(Talk | Contributions)} 01:48, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

More Help!

I have been making my user page but i cant make the boxes show up under each-other like yours do can you help me because i have no clue how to do it its the boxes that say wiki stuff and about me--P-Real DA deal 02:05, 10 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by P-Real DA deal (talk • contribs) and one more question when i sign my name how come it doesnt put a link to my page and talk page like yours does? how do i do that and i always says its unsigned —Preceding unsigned comment added by P-Real DA deal (talk • contribs) 02:10, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Question 1: Why don't you look at my userpage and try to figure it out? What you need to do is add this text above both of the boxes:

{{Userboxtop|toptext=[[WP:USERBOX|Userboxes]]}}
{|align="right" width="160px" style="background-color: transparent;"
|-
|<div>

and then this text below both of the boxes:

</div>
|}
{{Userboxbottom}}

Question 2: You're signing your name with four ~'s, right? The problem is probably in your preferences. Go to Special:Preferences, and under "signature", make sure that "raw signature" is unchecked, and delete all of the contents in the signature box. I hope that helps! The Earwig ^{(Talk | Contributions)} 02:15, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

I got 1 more thing i have been going around the talk pages i patrol and removing urls to leaked music and pictures and put url removed like you siad but i also put that it was removed by me it looks like this (url removed by P-Real DA deal (talk) 02:23, 10 May 2009 (UTC)) should i do that? P-Real DA deal (talk) 02:23, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

That's a good idea, but it would be even better if you put <small> before and </small> after the notice that you removed the URL. That will make it look smaller, like this: (url removed by P-Real DA deal (talk). Just remember not to do that on article pages! The Earwig ^{(Talk | Contributions)} 02:29, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Article

i want to make a article on a video game and was wondering what your thoughts or ideas are or if i should get familiar with wiki more first P-Real DA deal (talk) 02:50, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Go ahead! Actually, one thing you can do is make the article on your userpage in a new section. That way, you can develop it first without worrying about it getting deleted if you put it as an actual article. When you're done, you can simply copy it to a new article. Does that sound like a good idea? The Earwig ^{(Talk | Contributions)} 02:53, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Sounds great i will find a game and get started!--70.176.63.140 (talk) 03:20, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

I have been having trouble finding a game to write a article about most have already been written have any ideas? P-Real DA deal (talk) 19:13, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

If the article is short, expand it instead of creating it. Otherwise, pick a different topic to write about. What else are you interested in? The Earwig ^{(Talk | Contributions)} 19:15, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

I really like history that is my favorite class anything about that i could write i also like animals my favorite is the elephant but i am sure wiki has a large article about those but i am up for anything if you have any ideas of needed articlesP-Real DA deal (talk) 19:19, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Check out Wikipedia's requested articles. I'm sure you'll find something. The Earwig ^{(Talk | Contributions)} 19:23, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Vandal

One of my favorite cars lamborghini has been having its article vandalized 3 times in the last 30 min so im on the look out!P-Real DA deal (talk) 04:08, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

What's the article? If the vandalism continues, check out this page to request that the article be protected from editing. The Earwig ^{(Talk | Contributions)} 04:13, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

The main lamborghini article and the 350gt and the 350gtv article some guy kept putting that it ran on cheese and coke and pieP-Real DA deal (talk) 04:14, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

I have been looking at the recent changes article and am finding it fun to revert vandalism and uncostructive edits should i keep this up?P-Real DA deal (talk) 04:33, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Of course you should keep this up! This is wonderful; reverting vandalism is an excellent skill for any user to have. I strongly suggest reading WP:TWINKLE— that could help you a lot when reverting bad edits. The Earwig ^{(Talk | Contributions)} 04:35, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Twinkle

I installed the right script but i don't see anything i don't think its workingP-Real DA deal (talk) 19:27, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Did you remember to refresh your browser's cache? The Earwig ^{(Talk | Contributions)} 19:29, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

NICE! that was it now i got all my tools thanks!P-Real DA deal (talk) 19:34, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

User page

I think here is something wrong with the script on my user page but i cant figure it out the boxes don't work what do you think it is?P-Real DA deal (talk) 19:43, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 11 May 2009

• News and notes: Wikimania 2010, usability project, link rot, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Quote hoax replicated in traditional media, and more
• Dispatches: WikiProject Birds reaches an FA milestone
• WikiProject report: WikiProject Michael Jackson
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 22:30, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Guestbook

hey i have a guestbook i would like you to be the 2 signer only if you want too!P-Real DA deal (talk) 20:56, 12 May 2009 (UTC)here's the link

WikiProject User Rehab

Would you be interested in joining this project? We need more editors who share a burden for rescuing promising editors who have gotten into serious trouble because of behavioral issues. IF (a fundamental condition!) they are interested in reforming and adapting to our standards of conduct, and are also willing to abide by our policies and guidelines, rather than constantly subverting them, we can offer to help them return to Wikipedia as constructive editors. Right now many if not most users who have been banned are still active here, but they are here as socks or anonymous IPs who may or may not be constructive. We should offer them a proper way to return. If you think this is a good idea, please join us. --Abce2|AccessDenied 02:36, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

This looks like an interesting WikiProject. Sure I'll join! The Earwig ^{(Talk | Contributions)} 00:41, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 18 May 2009

• From the editor: Writers needed
• Special report: WikiChemists and Chemical Abstracts announce collaboration
• Special report: Embassies sponsor article-writing contests in three languages
• News and notes: Wiki Loves Arts winners, Wikimania Conference Japan, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Arbitrator blogs, French government edits, brief headlines
• WikiProject report: WikiProject Opera
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 13:39, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

EarwigBotII

I noticed that your bot was identifying copyright vios on AFC pages. I was wondering if there was some sort of special way to run it on an article to look for copyright, or if it goes through automatically. Thanks, MacMed^{talk to me!}_{what have i done?} 01:04, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

EarwigBot II is run from my computer, and automatically starts itself every fifteen minutes by checking all pages in Category:Pending Afc requests for copyright violations. Even if I'm not at home, the bot will still activate. In that sense, the bot is automatic, and it would also be outside of the bot's approved task to check pages outside of that category. If you were wondering about a copyright violation-checking bot that could be run manually, see the only other active copyvio bot on Wikipedia: User:CorenSearchBot. While this bot's main purpose is to check new pages for copyvios automatically in a format similar to EarwigBot II, it can also be asked to check a specific page by listing it here. I hope that answers your question! The Earwig ^{(Talk | Editor review)} 02:12, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Yep, thats perfect :) Thanks! MacMed^{talk to me!}_{what have i done?} 02:37, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Bot

Thanks for the note. Won't the log page always be at User:EarwigBot II/Logs. If so, why do you need to pass that as a parameter to the template? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:06, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

 Fixed. Thanks. That simplifies the code a little. The Earwig ^{(Talk | Contributions)} 20:07, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Looking good. I'm wondering how to avoid this - note they just copied |ts=TIMESTAMP|u=USERNAME|ns=5 ! Probably not worth worrying about as it won't happen often. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:48, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, the user fixed that soon after, so I doubt that it could be a problem. I don't see any way, via parser functions or magic words, to make the editintro automatically have the data in it, unfortunately. It's not that big of a loss, though. I think that after almost ten revisions to the code and many more to the template, the bot's pretty well integrated into AfC now. Because of the blacklist, the bot can now run on it's own without making me worry about it screwing up. I still need to write a python script to remove logs from the report page, but this is of lower priority. The Earwig ^{(Talk | Contributions)} 21:00, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. And good work! — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:28, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

		The Articles for Creation Barnstar
		Congratulations for testing your bot so thoroughly and for getting WPAFC a great new tool. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:46, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Well now for the next job? :) I've populated Category:Undated AfC submissions with all the submissions without a timestamp. (Most of these were from before the timestamp existed, but some will be there because the reviewer removed it by mistake.) Would it be feasible to run a bot (once only) and add the creation date to each, in the form ts=YYYYMMDDHHMMSS? Of course, the ideal solution would be a magic word like CREATEDATE but this doesn't exist yet. Let me know what you think. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:57, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar! I'll start working on the next bot task after I finish a few things involving the current bots I have running. I still have to configure the time script for EarwigBot II, making it automatically start every thirty minutes. (I was unable to do this yesterday when the bot was approved because I was quite busy). I'd also like to finish up EarwigBot I's third task, which has about 1,000 checks remaining on its counter.

Now for the bot idea you've suggested. It definitely seems doable with the conditions you described, but the only problem is probably the creation date. Making it get the time of the last revision would require so much less code than getting the time of the first revision (magic word {{REVISIONTIMESTAMP}}), but I suppose that getting the creation date is feasible. I'll have to look at the code for this in depth a little more to make a decision.

Regardless, I definitely think that this is a good idea. One more question: are you sure this should be a one-time thing? Of course the 2,000+ pages in the category right now will be done in one session, but would it be a good idea to have the bot run a check of the category, maybe, every week, and do more timestamp-adding if there are pages in the category? Having it run once might not fix the problem if more reviewers/submitters mess up the timestamp. The reason I want to know this is because I need to decide whether to have the task run as EarwigBot I Task 4, or EarwigBot III. What do you think? The Earwig ^{(Talk | Contributions)} 20:35, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

I was thinking that after that category is cleared out, we can display a big red angry warning if the timestamp is omitted, and hopefully people will get the message and we don't have many. Then it should be easy to clear out the category manually. So no, I'm not sure if it's worth running continuously. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:15, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Makes sense. I guess I'll do it that way. The Earwig ^{(Talk | Contributions)} 21:17, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

An update: EarwigBot II is finally ready to be used without me worrying about it! The bot no longer makes duplicate logs like this, which was its only major problem. Also, EarwigBot I's third task has about 500 edits remaining in the queue, down from over 1,000. At this rate, this bot should be ready by the weekend. The Earwig ^{(Talk | Contributions)} 21:11, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Little suggestion. Could you wikilink "report" in the edit summary of the bot? Thanks, — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:06, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

 Done a few days ago. Thanks! The Earwig ^{(Talk | Editor review)} 20:58, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Your bots

Hi Earwig, I was just wondering-does your copyright bot run on your computer or somewhere else? Cheers! dottydotdot (talk) 11:35, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, as I mentioned in the above entry, it runs from my computer. I automatically activate the code every 30 minutes (previously 15 minutes) using an AppleScript whose source can be viewed here. An annoying side-effect of this is that I have to keep my computer on most of the time, but at least it is fully automated. The only way I could avoid this in the future is by having access to the Toolserver, but the current applications are at a standstill right now. So yes, the bot runs from my computer. The Earwig ^{(Talk | Editor review)} 15:31, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Cool, thanks for the info! dottydotdot (talk) 22:42, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 25 May 2009

• License update: Licensing vote results announced, resolution passed
• News and notes: New board member, flagged revisions, Eurovision interviews
• Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia: threat or menace?
• WikiProject report: WikiProject LGBT studies
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 04:16, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Bot 1, Task 4

Hi, Earwigbot 1 appears to be causing problems with timestamps on AfC requests, e. g. here. Didn't want to stop the bot in case this has already been fixed or is caused by something else. Alexrexpvt (talk) 23:30, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for telling me about this. The bot is already done with this task, for now. The problem was caused because the closer of that submission subst'd {{AFC submission}} when they weren't supposed to. It's not the bot's fault. I will fix this; are there any other cases where this happened? Thanks, The Earwig ^{(Talk | Editor review)} 23:37, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Happened here and here, but I've fixed both of those (I think). Alexrexpvt (talk) 23:41, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Yep, those are fixed now. Apparently, it was a small error that could've been prevented if I had known that {{AFC submission/declined}} was in use, even though it's not supposed to be. It's so minor though (3 submissions out of a total of 2,000 untimestamped submissions). The Earwig ^{(Talk | Editor review)} 23:46, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 1 June 2009

• From the editor: Browsing the archives
• Book review: Review of The Future of the Internet
• Scientology: End of Scientology arbitration brings blocks, media coverage
• News and notes: Picture of the Year, Wikipedia's first logo, Board elections, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Tamil Wikipedia, Internet Watch Foundation, and more
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 23:07, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

I need your mentorship

Hi,

I need help from an experienced Wikipedian, and I saw your name over at WP:ADOPT.

I need your advice concerning WP:WPOOK, which I've been coordinating. The set of pages the project concerns is listed at Portal:Contents/Outline of knowledge and Wikipedia:WikiProject Outline of knowledge#Projected outline, and has grown to about 500 articles in the encyclopedia.

The goals of the WikiProject are:

1. Increase awareness of readers of the existence of the outlines on Wikipedia
2. Complete the existing outlines
3. Create an outline for every subject that is extensive enough to benefit from having an outline (core subjects and major or extensive fields). There are thousands of these.
4. Recruit as many editors to work on these as possible (we need thousands of editors working on these)
5. Surpass portals in number by the end of the summer, and leave them in the dust by the end of the year
6. Get the major outline subject areas displayed on the Main Page (in place of or in addition to the portal links at the top of the page)
7. Increase the OOK to higher quality than Britannica's Outline of Knowledge (published in its Propaedia volume).

I was hoping you could comment on how to achieve the goals above.

Also I'm interested in every possible way of reaching readers and editors of Wikipedia. How can I get the most eyes and typing fingers on Wikipedia's outlines? Contacting editors directly without a reason relevant to them is spam, which I'd like to avoid. There are 75,000 regular editors on Wikipedia, and I want to contact all of them. So how do I do it? Directly or indirectly, I don't care which, piecemeal or all-at-once, all methods are fine with me. But I've got to find ways. I need your help.

I would also like to know how to find or attract editors to create new outlines. And I need advice on finding editors to help write the new outline article mentioned above (it needs to be fleshed out, completely referenced, and brought to featured article status).

Please recommend anyone you know who might be interested in sinking their teeth into a project like this. Or ways to reach groups of editors. Or ways to reach all editors. I welcome any and all recommendations and advice you might have.

And any thoughts on attaining the WikiProject goals above.

I look forward to your reply on my talk page.

The Transhumanist 03:38, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page. Thanks, The Earwig ^{(Talk | Editor review)} 20:19, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Copyvio bot

I followed the link from Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Leadership Initiatives to the bot's report, but the page was empty. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 06:56, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Interesting. This happened because the submission's writer removed the copyvio, but did not reset the template afterwards. Naturally, the bot removed the report from the log page, but there is nothing in its programming to check if the submission's template itself was reset. This would be an interesting feature to implement. Thanks, The Earwig ^{(Talk | Editor review)} 09:56, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Oh, so it keeps checking? I thought it would just check once when the article is submitted. I think that's fine then. Maybe just a note on the log page, that if the report is missing then the copyvio has been removed. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:59, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, if the bot didn't check more than once, it wouldn't be able to update the log page, would it? I added a note to the log page, hopefully that should make it clearer. The Earwig ^{(Talk | Editor review)} 10:09, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Oh no! That picture on your userpage is horrible ;) By the way, I've added you to Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Active participants so that people can ask you for help if necessary. If this is not okay, please revert. Cheers, — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:01, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I have no problem with the addition there, thanks! Oh, and about the image: well, it is an earwig, after all. The Earwig ^{(Talk | Editor review)} 17:05, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I wasn't suggesting you take it away. It's great ... just gross ;) — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:10, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I understand... OK, I'm keeping it! The Earwig ^{(Talk | Editor review)} 18:16, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

wiki

Sorry i have not been on i was busy with finals but now i shall go back to editing--P-Real DA deal (talk) 19:15, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

No problem. Welcome back! The Earwig ^{(Talk | Editor review)} 19:37, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Category:Undated AfC submissions warning from EarwigBot I, Task 2

The Earwig, Category:Undated AfC submissions is not empty, and contains submissions! In order to clean it up, per the task I was approved for, I strongly consider running EarwigBot I, Task 4 using this local command: file:///Users/ben/Desktop/Benjamin/Wikipedia/Bots/EarwigBot_I/Task_4/Launch.app. Thanks, EarwigBot I ^{(Owner | Talk)} 19:22, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

 Done. Yay, it works! The cat's been cleaned up. The Earwig ^{(Talk | Editor review)} 19:28, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Lol, your bot is talking to you? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:32, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Yep :) It's a fun way to get reports/warnings, anyway, to make the bot seem like a real person. The Earwig ^{(Talk | Editor review)} 15:04, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Now you are edit-warring with your bot, see [2]. Does the bot not recognise if its decision has been overruled by a human? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:55, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

 Fixed, even though that's not edit-warring. My first edit to that page was to correct a template error that had nothing to do with the bot. Next, the bot tagged the article with a copyvio tag (unrelated to the preious edits). I overruled the edit, because there was no longer a report involving the page, but I was not refuting the copyvio, whose report I had not seen. Later, the report reappeared, so the bot re-added the template. Although I later refuted this, it's not because the bot was doing something odd. Anyway, I've fixed so that the bot won't edit a page more than once. I'm surprised I didn't implement this earlier. Ah well, The Earwig ^{(Talk | Editor review)} 21:24, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

{{talkback|Wikipedia:Bot requests|Press multi adder}} Smallman12q (talk) 00:21, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. Replied there, The Earwig ^{(Talk | Editor review)} 04:14, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Category:Undated AfC submissions warning from EarwigBot I, Task 2

The Earwig, Category:Undated AfC submissions is not empty, and contains submissions! In order to clean it up, per the task I was approved for, I strongly consider running EarwigBot I, Task 4 using this local command: file:///Users/ben/Desktop/Benjamin/Wikipedia/Bots/EarwigBot_I/Task_4/Launch.app. Thanks, EarwigBot I ^{(Owner | Talk)} 03:05, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

 Done. The Earwig ^{(Talk | Editor review)} 03:10, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Of course, if there is already a timestamp in one of the templates then it doesn't need another (see [3]). Not a big deal though. Why can't the bot launch himself? Maybe he could wait till there were 10 undated submissions and then stat. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:24, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

I disagree. If the bot didn't tag both of the templates, the submission would stay in the undated submissions category. You can confirm that yourself if you don't believe me. As for automatically running itself: I guarantee you that it will take quite a while before there are ten submissions in the category. Now, I suppose the bot can run itself, but I wanted to do it this way because I should confirm the bot's actions before it makes them. Sometimes, the category contains pages that aren't really submissions. Examples include WP:AFC/R, as seen here. It's still a good idea, though. The Earwig ^{(Talk | Editor review)} 20:52, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Sure, both templates need the timestamp, but the second one already had a timestamp! That's what I meant. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:52, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

The information contained in article (Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Tionne Williams)

the information contained in this article was written by myself (Brandon Williams) and my artist Tionne Williams collectively and is not a violation of copyright. I, we are authorizing you to proceed with posting the article. the information that appeared to be a violation was placed on the websites by us.

thank youWilandSto (talk) 05:27, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi. The reason the robot thought that this was a copyright violation was because it is a duplicate of content at [4], [5], [6], and [7]. If you and your artist did indeed write the content, you must be aware that you are releasing the content into the GNU Free Documentation License, which means that other people may shamelessly edit it, remove parts of it, or all around change it to something you may not want. I am mostly worried that there may be a conflict of interest involved, which is a severe problem. A confict of interest is when you are writing something for Wikipedia that is directly related to yourself, which can result in the article not having a neutral point of view, or being written more like an advertisement. In this case, I am concerned mostly about the second one. Do you think you could rewrite it without language such as, "[…] talented young man […]", and, "In addition to providing mesmerizing entertainment, the goal of this charming actor turned […]," which seems a little more like an advertisement than an encyclopedia entry. In short, I'm concerned that this may not be appropriate for Wikipedia, do to the way it reads, and the fact that it was written with a confict of interest. I have put it on hold pending the fix of the problems outlined above. Regards, The Earwig ^{(Talk | Editor review)} 10:28, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

I have made the changes per your request. I to clearify, i wrote the article information myself but obtained some of the pertinent info as far as Tionne's childhood from him to write the story. that's what i meant about collectively composing the bio. please let me know if there is any additional info that may require editing. Thank youWilandSto (talk) 19:04, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Overall I must say that the submission has been improved, but there are still some outstanding issues that I would like to be corrected before the article is created. Besides some minor formatting things, which can be fixed very easily (I made some changes to it, hopefully it looks cleaner now), I am concerned that the article just isn't notable. We don't have a copyright violation anymore, which is good, but this is a major issue that should be addressed. Please, read this page carefully, which discusses Wikipedia's notability guidelines for musical artists. You need to confirm that the subject is somehow notable. I made an attempt to do so myself, but Google only returns about 23,500 results that are mostly affiliated with the person, not independent, reliable sources as is required. As you obviously know them better than I do, could you check to see if Tionne has appeared in any newspapers, music charts, TV shows (shows about him, not with him as an actor), et cetera. It would be very helpful if you could do this. If this is not possible, the article may simply not be suitable for Wikipedia at the time. Thanks! The Earwig ^{(Talk | Editor review)} 21:06, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

United Methodist Hymnal

I tweaked the hook. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 13:29, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. It looks much better now! The Earwig ^{(Talk | Editor review)} 22:22, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Regarding the article on Good-Feel

I am a user at project Mario Wiki. Some of the information that was posted at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Good-Feel is from http://www.mariowiki.com/Good-Feel, and some of it is from me! How can it be an infringement? It's information from an other Wiki that has never been copyrighted. Plus, I do not have an account on Wikipedia, so I lack the ability to fix the minor things that need to be edited (like the logos and pictures to the company). Your bot made a mistake.74.97.61.169 (talk) 21:55, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

I apologize for this error. I am assuming that you are User:Grandy02 on MarioWiki, correct? This was a unique situation because you wrote the content; often similar situations occur when a user who did not write the content steals it from a website such as MarioWiki, so even though MarioWiki is released under the GDFL, we have to be careful that all possible copyright violations are caught. You can continue working on your article without interruption. Thanks, The Earwig ^{(Talk | Editor review)} 22:19, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Robot

Could your robot help me with a task I've been putting off for a while? --William S. Saturn (talk) 21:01, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Sure! What is the task? The Earwig ^{(Talk | Editor review)} 21:03, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

At Wikipedia:WikiProject United States presidential elections there is a long list of articles within the sphere of the wikiproject but I have no idea which ones have been tagged and which ones have not been tagged. Is it possible for your bot to tag the talk page of the articles that have not been tagged yet. --William S. Saturn (talk) 21:11, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

This should be a very easy task. I'm assuming that you mean just the articles in the "Articles in our scope" section, not the "To-do list," "Articles to create," or "2008 election-related articles that are GA or FA" sections, right? Or do you want all of the pages linked from that one tagged? The Earwig ^{(Talk | Editor review)} 21:18, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm referring to the "articles in our scope" section. --William S. Saturn (talk) 21:22, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Could you hold off on this for a little bit? I need to clarify what the project covers.--William S. Saturn (talk) 19:06, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

OK, no rush. Yesterday, I did a preliminary run without edits, and had the bot return the status of the talk page of every article listed at that section. Results can be found here. The Earwig ^{(Talk | Editor review)} 21:55, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Category:Undated AfC submissions warning from EarwigBot I, Task 2

The Earwig, Category:Undated AfC submissions is not empty, and contains submissions! In order to clean it up, per the task I was approved for, I strongly consider running EarwigBot I, Task 4 using this local command: file:///Users/ben/Desktop/Benjamin/Wikipedia/Bots/EarwigBot_I/Task_4/Launch.app. Thanks, EarwigBot I ^{(Owner | Talk)} 19:52, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

 Done. This was a collection of four submssions, 1 2 3 4, that were untimestamped because User:Chzz didn't realize that the ts= field had to be left intact. No big deal, really. The Earwig ^{(Talk | Editor review)} 21:45, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Reply re. AFC parameters

{{User:chzz/tb|Note about reviewing Articles for Creation submissions}}  Chzz  ►  21:57, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

I replied there. Wow, what a cute Talkback template! The Earwig ^{(Talk | Editor review)} 22:41, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Dear Mentor,

Thank you for your advice. We're putting it to good use.

I've run into a situation, and need your valuable insight.

One thing I've tried to do with respect to the outlines is place a hatnote on subject articles leading to that subject's corresponding outline.

Two people complained, and form the basis of consensus not to do it.

The main concern was quality: a hatnote shouldn't be placed unless the outline is of at least the same or higher quality than the article the hatnote is being placed on. That sets up a catch-22, since we need the best linking we can to attract readers and editors in the first place. The more traffic, the more feedback and changes.

So quality is the focus.

Please have a look at the outlines.

What are the biggest quality issues? What do the outlines need done to them in order to improve their quality?

I look forward to your reply on my talk page.

The Transhumanist 22:37, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Pending

Hi there.

I thought I'd try to explain something else that I feel is confusing at AFC.

If I understand it correctly, Category:Pending AfC submissions is "everything that has been submitted but not accepted or declined yet".

And within that category, there are these letter codes - H and P being the main ones. But that means there are some entries called 'pending' within the pending category...that's what I find confusing.

For example, if I go to http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Pending_AfC_submissions&from=P at the moment, it says, "Pages in category "Pending AfC submissions": The following 16 pages are in this category, out of 33 total" - and the box says, "31 pending submissions".

So, there are really 33 total submissions (ie not processed), and actually only 16 of them are awaiting a review (ie truly pending).

Hope that makes sense; it's confusing, and thus hard to state clearly. If you have any ideas about how this could be made clearer, let me know. We kind-of need to decide what we mean by 'pending' - maybe it should be Category:Queue of AfC submissions or something.

Cheers,  Chzz  ►  13:39, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

I think I get what you're trying to say. You're wondering why Category:Pending AfC submissions doesn't only contain "pending" submissions, but also submissions that are on hold, et cetera, and that this makes things like {{AFC status}} slightly confusing. In the past, we actually had the submissions separated into different categories, Category:Queued Afc requests, Category:Pending Afc requests, and Category:Held Afc requests, but were then merged into Category:Pending Afc requests, now known as Category:Pending AfC submissions, for easy viewing. I support your idea here, and agree that our organization is a little hard to understand. I have brought up a proposal at WT:AFC for other users to comment on. Thanks, The Earwig ^{(Talk | Editor review)} 15:39, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that; I'll look in on the discussion and contribute if I can.

I've had great fun today, trying to clear down the backlog. It's taken me all day, but I've actually got the pending down to zero :-) Hopefully I'm doing things the right way; I feel a bit guilty when I decline things, but if I feel they have potential I do all that I can to try and help the users to fix them up. Anyway - I'll start looking at some of the stuff on hold now. Cheers!  Chzz  ►  02:06, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Wow, thanks for the help! Likewise, I've been spending the day working on a bot for the project, that generates a chart of the active submissions (view an example here). I thought that there was some bug— because nothing was showing up as pending— but realized that you had reviewed all of them! Just look at how many times your username appears in the Last edited by section. And yes, I share your guilty feeling when declining submissions. It is, in a way, the equivalent of deleting an article, and as an inclusionist, I'm not much of a fan of that. Thanks again, The Earwig ^{(Talk | Editor review)} 02:18, 14 June 2009 (UTC)