User talk:Xeno/Archive 22

Archive 15

←

Archive 20

Archive 21

Archive 22

Archive 23

Archive 24

Archive 25

De and others

I just closed this. Could you take care of the necessary deprecation? Let me know if you need any help. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:02, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Deprecation will take ages. A new admin backlog - glorious! –xeno^talk 00:04, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Well, what do you know, a rough consensus close, I don't see those enough.
What makes this job very difficult is that it's been used twenty different ways in the past (which of course is part of the reason behind deprecation). In large parts it can probably be AWBed when it's enough to remove the template from the references section and make note of the source in the edit summary instead. Maybe that's always enough and it only requires more cleanup if the template is used inside ref tags or whatever? I'm sure that hard-working xenocidic (talk · contribs) guy can help with that. And it's not a pure admin backlog, everybody can start un-transcluding them. :)
Amalthea 12:14, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Ah, right, and probably place {{Translated page}} on the talk page, for good measure, and maybe even place {{Expand language}} on the article, which will be a judgement call (e.g. if no other "references" are left). Hmm. Amalthea 12:19, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

What do you think, should we mark them all as deprecated, like I've just done with {{Polish2}}? Currently they still have the TfD notice in it.
Will depend on how long it takes to remove the translusions I guess. Amalthea 12:34, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

AWB would probably require a custom module to modify the edit summary on-the-fly based on the wikitext. My main concern is that the attribution if we just do it this way then comes months or years later after the initial translation - which is why I thought importing was the ideal solution... We should perhaps engage Moonriddengirl to see what she thinks is the best way to go about it. –xeno^talk 12:36, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

That's actually covered in WP:Copying within Wikipedia#Repairing insufficient attribution.
I tested out Special:Import on an article a couple of days ago, but couldn't figure out how to import only a specific range of revisions. Do you know if that that's possible? Seemed like I could only import the latest revision or all. Amalthea 12:56, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Yup, this kind of belated attribution happens all the time, really, even with OTRS materials when the issue is not noted and permission not verified until long after the content has found its home with us. :) Edit summary annotation and talk page template are probably the best ways to go, if importing is not done. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:01, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! –xeno^talk 13:17, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Graham87 should probably be able to lend some insight. I believe he has been importing the revisions to the Mediawiki namespace, deleting those not required, and moving the rest in place with the article. –xeno^talk 13:17, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Yep, that's what I've been doing, except with the MediaWiki talk namespace. :-) It would take a loooooong time to import all the necessary revisions by hand. Maybe a suitably programmed admin bot could do it; there won't be as many snags when importing from other language Wikipedias as there are for the Nostalgia Wikipedia. Graham87 13:23, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

We'd also need to make sure that any new usernames that come with the imported edits either already exist, or can't be created do to SUL, for WP:BEANS reasons. There's no way to change a username of an imported edit, so there may be related attribution issues, but they shouldn't be a big deal. Graham87 13:31, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

I was thinking some kind of 'importation-for-dummies' page could be created (*nudge*) to help with this rather substantial deprecation campaign. –xeno^talk 13:32, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

As a start, I've rewritten the guidelines for admins at Wikipedia:Requests for page importation. IMO they now cover the major situations people would encounter when importing from other language Wikipedias, but they probably need some clarification. Graham87 14:07, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Hmm. Seeing that importation from an active project will always leave garbage revisions in MediaWiki talk, albeit deleted, this suddenly seems like a quite unattractive solution to me.
Since even belated edit-summary attribution is OK per CC-by-SA/GFDL, and the {{translated page}} talk page template can take revision ids of source and target wiki if one wants to go to the trouble to figuring them out, I'd actually not import anything, and stick to edit summary/talk page template. Amalthea 14:18, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Are you some kind of neatfreak? ;p What about a bugzilla to allow selective import? –xeno^talk 14:20, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Almost every long-term editor here shows some OCPD symptoms, I'm afraid. :) Bugzilla certainly sounds good, should be rather simple change, but probably still more of a long-term solution. Amalthea 16:25, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

No argument there, I'm afraid (re OCPD). Shall you file or I? –xeno^talk 16:27, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Deprecated templates

I note that following a TFD you marked Template:Frenchtrans and Template:De as depreciated. However, Category:Deprecated templates indicates that If a deprecated template is still in use on other pages, add <noinclude>...</noinclude> tags around the {{Tdeprecated}} template. Is that no longer the practice? I just found, and replaced, a Frenchtrans template at the Ange Leccia article, and noted that the template was still in use on over 500 pages, as is the German one. --Bejnar (talk) 15:18, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm not entirely sure, but note that these are using {{tdeprecated-inline}} which is designed to filter through to the articles. I think it is supposed to clue people into the fact that the template is deprecated and should be replaced with something more appropriate. See above at #De and others for some background on this. –xeno^talk 15:20, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Just changed them to the non-transcluded notices: Turns out that with the glaring in-article deprecation notice it was just as likely that editors remove the template not quite how it was intended (i.e. by replacing it with iw-ref). By the way, why the heck wasn't {{iw-ref}} part of the TfD? :) Amalthea 16:27, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Because iw-ref is still used for the articles that can't have their histories imported and my main argument was that history-import should take its place. Now that we know that attribution-long-after-the-fact is ok, we could probably initiate another TFD on the smaller languages and iw-ref itself. Or just rouge out and claim precedent. (On replacing inline with the regular template - good point, and no worries) –xeno^talk 16:28, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Could use an admin's help at WP:ANI#user:Zlykinskyja's conduct at AFD page

The thread has gone on forever. From a brief examination, it appears that Zlykinskyja's account is compromised. The rest of the argument seems to be much less cut and dry (Zlykinskyja isn't usually vandalizing, just completely incapable of achieving consensus for edits, poor at citing sources for their edits, and entirely too inclined to assume bad faith and overreact). The recent vandalism edit appears to indicate a compromised account though, which (I would think) makes the decision much easier. I'm contacting you directly only because you're the first active admin I noticed, and this thread needs to be resolved one way or another. —ShadowRanger ^(talk|stalk) 17:13, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

I usually try to pass the buck on these things, but I'll take a look and see if anything jumps out at me. –xeno^talk 17:14, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

I read over the whole thing, and like I said, most of it seems like a case of an immature editor, but not a vandal. The very end of the whole thread (where I came in) has a diff to a clear case of vandalism by said editor, but the editor denies having done it, which means a compromised account. The fact that the account appears to be compromised makes the decision easier, because you can ignore the big complicated argument and focus on the clear policy guidelines. —ShadowRanger ^(talk|stalk) 17:21, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Too complicated for me to untangle right now. This [1] could be chalked up to a bad connection rather than compromised account. Maybe a nice cup of tea would help? Or a talk page stalker... –xeno^talk 17:22, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Yeah. Bad connection is possible, but damn, that would have to be a hell of a bad connection to break TCP's checksumming that many times. Either way, I think any resolution is better than none, and having no horse in this race, your close seems as good as any. Thanks for the help. —ShadowRanger ^(talk|stalk) 17:44, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

I've seen worse. =) –xeno^talk 18:03, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

And despite multiple attempts to explain that our hands are tied in the case of a compromised account, they insisted that it could not be a connection issue and forced you to block them. While sad, I can't help but admire their devotion to WP:PLAXICO (though it appears that that particular policy page was deleted; maybe this was a tribute, a memorial if you will?). —ShadowRanger ^(talk|stalk) 19:56, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Truly boggles the mind... On your side note, I might have had something to do with the redlinking of that... heh! –xeno^talk 20:02, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

While entirely agreeing with your reasoning for deletion, I must now harbor a brief but fiery hatred for you for your role in removing it. … … … Okay, done. :-) —ShadowRanger ^(talk|stalk) 20:05, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

! ;> –xeno^talk 20:06, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Given the above-mentioned fiasco about the "vandalised" page, please spare a thought for those of us trying to reach consensus with Zlykinskyja in the article that she is passionate about!. Cheers. Bluewave (talk) 11:16, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

April Fools

Who are the amazing mad admins who came up with the humor on the front page. Whoever they are, they are awesome!--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{Le†'s Go Buffalo! (sign)} 14:21, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

It's an April 1st tradition... Not sure where it's organized. I take no credit whatsoever ;p –xeno^talk 14:23, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Aww, I bet you could have come up with some of that humor.--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{Le†'s Go Buffalo! (sign)} 14:25, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Better than the old days where we just would unprotect the front page and let people have a go. :eek: Syrthiss (talk) 14:35, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Xenobot!

I see that Xenobot is sorting up a storm. That's awesome. Question: is Xenobot going off a new list, or the old list? Because since the old list of 700 essays was generated, about 350 more have had the project banner added to them. Also, do you think it would be wise for Xenobot to assign an importance of N/A to categories? Because a high importance category bumps what would have been a high importance essay down. ɳorɑfʈ ^Talk! 14:33, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I think cats should be NA importance. We can ask MZMcBride to exclude them. I've manually bumped up the two essays that were knocked out of high and mid importance due to the category:Wikipedia essays. It's going off [2] which was generated today to include the scores in the final column. –xeno^talk 14:35, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

• FYI the category pages need to be created. –xeno^talk 14:43, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Oh yeah, good call. I'm on it. ɳorɑfʈ ^Talk! 14:46, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Unprotection of John Pershing

I am doing my best to behave in a professional manner here. Since you were the one who protected the article, I am seeking your counsel. On the talkpage, I have reiterated that the information is sourced, and that I will return it upon unprotection. I have also acknoweledged the possibility that I will be reverted. I have no intention of edit warring, or violating 3RR, or anything else. I will instead seek formal mediation. On the talkpage, Baseball Bugs has said that I "will be blocked so fast it will make my head spin" if I return it. Now, perhaps he meant "reverted", I don't know. Please tell me, do I have any reason to fear actually being blocked if I edit the article in a professional manner?Mk5384 (talk) 16:24, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

I suppose that depends on if a consensus has formed (I haven't looked). If there is a strong consensus in place and you make edits contrary to that, it might be considered a form of disruptive editing. I don't think it would be an immediate block, though. –xeno^talk 16:26, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. And, my apologies, the actual quote was that my head would "swim", not "spin". Bugs has also said that the nickname is non-negotiable, and it is OUT (his capitalisation); the same kinds of unilateral statements for which I was warned. There is no consensus for either version, although the tide does appear to be turning against mine. I plan to return it once. Then when I am reverted, which I almost certainly will be, I will seek formal mediation.Mk5384 (talk) 16:44, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Again, for the record, I protected m:The Wrong Version and have no opinion on what the right version is. –xeno^talk 16:46, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Archive top

Xeno, two requests, for your consideration:

1. I think we should wrap the first positional parameter into the quote box: remove the separate line, and change the {{{result|}}} parameters to {{{result|{{{1|}}}}}}. what do you think?
2. I'd like to add the same quote box format to {{discussion top}}, but since discussion top is collapsible (if I remember correctly) that might cause issues. I'll sandbox it if you think it's a good idea so that we can play with it.

let me know. --Ludwigs2 20:22, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Sounds reasonable. (No I think discussion top has collapsibility) –xeno^talk 20:24, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for that.Mk5384 (talk) 02:20, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
I would just like to add, without getting into any discussions of what was right or wrong, that I made over 1000 edits without incident before this debacle. So if you expect to see me blocked again, I have a feeling you'll be pleasantly surprised.Mk5384 (talk) 02:37, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

You might be interested in this posting [3] which was one of the first actions the user made once the block was lifted. Seems to be going right back into the previous pattern of behavior. Guess we'll see what happens here. -OberRanks (talk) 04:31, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Let's try to give them some breathing room, hopefully they'll take the advice on board and modify their approach. –xeno^talk 14:24, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for helping me with that.Mk5384 (talk) 15:06, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

No problem. Check your email for some candid advice. –xeno^talk 15:08, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

I will. Thanks.Mk5384 (talk) 15:14, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Question about an old proposal

I wondered if anything came of this proposal you made in August Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Archive 66#Automated creation of stubs (Semi-automated stub creation), or if something similar has occurred since. I commented "weak oppose" at the time, but have since become very in favor of that-sort of restriction, after dealing with a few of these mass creations.

Was there any policy progress on this, or something similar, then or after that you're aware of? Shadowjams (talk) 06:43, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

It was integrated into the bot policy, see Wikipedia:BOTPOL#Assisted editing guidelines. –xeno^talk 14:42, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

NA category essays: Sick 'em, Xenobot!

I'm not sure why they are there, but there are about 150 essays in Category:NA-importance Wikipedia essays. Can we turn Xenobot loose on them somehow? ɳorɑfʈ ^Talk! 17:53, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Not quite sure why these didn't get picked up in the first run. I'll get to it shortly. –xeno^talk 23:26, 2 April 2010 (UTC)  Done

Arbitrary Deletion of Privacy Concerns Section within Assisted GPS Page

Please would you not arbitrarily delete sections of pages when you could just as easily have googled for valid, verifiable sources of information to corroborate the section that you deemed unsourced. You could also have flagged the section for deletion allowing others time to review, improve etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Traytor (talk • contribs) 20:11, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

I didn't arbitrarily delete it - I deliberately deleted it. None of the sources you provided (except for the Wikipedia page which isn't acceptable as a source) mention the word GPS. –xeno^talk 21:54, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Ok. First I didn't start this section of the article. I added to it and improved it acting in good faith. Having read the content I thought it important to add key points and have further improved it by finding supporting references. In response to your snipe over the lack of the mention of the word "GPS" within the sources (though the content included GPS within its broader scope) I have further referenced a source that meets the criteria you demand. On the topic of Wikipedia policies, I would respectfully suggest that you have not acted within the pivotal "assumption of good faith" principle and would ask that you adhere to this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Traytor (talk • contribs) 22:26, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

I think this material belongs elsewhere, like a specific article on monitoring of cell phones by law enforcement. It seems malplaced in an article on Assisted GPS (especially the bits on "live audio and video"). –xeno^talk 22:34, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

That would be a great first article. Here's another source: [4]. –xeno^talk 22:38, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Mobile phone tracking#Privacy also touches on some of this. –xeno^talk 22:43, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

I concede that the article may benefit from trimming or further edits to improve its clarity. Yet I would argue strongly that the privacy issue is intrinsic to the topic of A-GPS. A-GPS is being rapidly rolled into a wide range of new cellular telephone models and has huge implications both in terms of questionable government activity as well as questionable hacking activity that can readily occur. Relegating this matter to a separate article would in my view fail to cover a core issue with respect to the widespread deployment of A-GPS. As newer phones feature A-GPS technology "under the hood" many consumers don't know that it's there or understand how it might impact their lives. I would suggest that it is in the public interest to highlight the potential for questionable government monitoring and/or questionable monitoring by hackers, stalkers, etc. This belongs within the A-GPS article for A-GPS can by definition only occur in GPS devices that are also cellular telephones and this technology is relatively new in terms of its widespread deployment.Traytor (talk) 22:49, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't think it should be removed entirely. I just think that the majority of this material belongs elsewhere. A few sentences about how assisted GPS makes it far easier than triangulation to track someone with a cell phone and a pointer to an article on cell phone monitoring generally would probably be best. –xeno^talk 22:55, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Sounds reasonable. Heading out for the evening but will make those edits tomorrow though feel free to edit it in my absence. :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Traytor (talk • contribs) 23:05, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Essays Barnstar

		Wikiproject Essays Barnstar
		I hereby award you the Essays Barnstar, for your assistance in getting every essay in Category:Wikipedia essays assigned an importance level, according to Wikiproject WP Essays. Your participation was instrumental in changing how Wikipedia essays are classified and categorized, which provides both increased ease of access and better understanding of each essay's relative impact on Wikipedia. ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 04:29, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

(In honor of your work, your talk page is now the first publication of this award template. I have not yet given it a template.)

• Update: Template here: {{WP essays barnstar}} ɳorɑfʈ ^Talk! 06:49, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Glad to be of service. –xeno^talk 12:37, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Haggard's Law

Any chance I can get a copy of what was on the article page before the deletion? If it doesn't violate any rules maybe I could just get a copy and paste to user:Tmtoulouse/Haggard's Law? Tmtoulouse (talk) 06:11, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Per reasons outlined here, I don't think it would be appropriate to host this content on Wikipedia at all. I've emailed it to you. –xeno^talk 12:36, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, no problem not having it on WP just wanted a copy as I do have a home for it...with a bit more expansion. Cheers! Tmtoulouse (talk) 19:38, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

db-empty

Hi there. Could you take a look at your coding of {{db-empty}}? When used on any page, it does not put the category in CAT:CSD, thus pages tagged with this tag will never be noticed by an admin. Regards SoWhy 08:20, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. Still not quite sure what's going wrong there, but this should fix it for now. A bad hack, but ok for government work. Maybe if Amalthea or some other higher template wizard is watching they can let me know what's going wrong. I believe it's the cat handler. –xeno^talk 18:31, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

db-empty cont'd

Regarding /Archive 22#{{db-empty}} (your archiving is too fast), problem was that MediaWiki discerns between an undefined parameter and a defined empty parameter. The parameter fall-back logic {{{ Foo | Bar }}} only evaluates to "Bar" if the parameter "Foo" was undefined. With {{db-a3 | category={{{category|}}} }} in the {{db-empty}} wrapper template you actually always define a parameter "category", which comes in as a defined empty parameter in the inner template when it was undefined in the outer template.
The way I rewrote it is a bit hackish as well, it should be more robust than your workaround which would have had problems with renamed categories.
Cheers, Amalthea 13:31, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

I'll have to finish my morning coffee before I'll have a chance understanding this. Thanks =) –xeno^talk 13:35, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Template talk

Db-meta#Category suppression

You are invited to join the discussion at Template talk:Db-meta#Category suppression. Funandtrvl (talk) 17:18, 6 April 2010 (UTC) (Using {{Please see}}) --Funandtrvl (talk) 17:18, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

This is related to the above. I thought I had it fixed, but I guess now it's broken again. =) I blame Amalthea, tbh. Might be more trouble than it's worth- maybe I should just turn it back into a redirect to db-a3. –xeno^talk 17:24, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

For once I am not to be blamed, was a different bork that came directly from usage of {{db-catempty}}, not {{db-empty}}. Amalthea 18:15, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

imo it is still your fault in a roundabout way ;p. –xeno^talk 18:16, 6 April 2010 (UTC) (kidding, of course)

Xenobot question

Howdy, I am developing a Xenobot request for WP:JAZZ. Its banner template contains additional parameters for articles about albums ("album=yes") and articles about songs, compositions, singles etc. ("song=yes"). I am wondering if you prefer three separate requests (i.e. one for Jazz albums, one for Jazz songs, and one for everything else) or can it be one request? The way the request template is formatted, I am assuming the former, but figured I would ask. Thank you, -- Gyrofrog (talk) 17:40, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

A single request is probably better. Just rejig the preload template to explain what needs done: it's not set in stone. –xeno^talk 17:42, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

OK, thank you! -- Gyrofrog (talk) 17:55, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Another question. The category lists are on subpages in my user space. Can I leave them there, or should I place them on the project's own subpages? -- Gyrofrog (talk) 18:10, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Doesn't matter where they are but I would prefer if they didn't go away in the near future, they're helpful for error-checking down the road (i.e. don't db-u1 them). –xeno^talk 18:17, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Understood. Thanx again. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 18:23, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Template:Cite interview

• (to xeno) On an unrelated note. Since you are very familiar with templates, would you be able to provide assistance at Template talk:Cite interview#Archivedate, archiveurl? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 08:31, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Hmm... Amalthea! =) –xeno^talk 14:04, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

I really need to unwatch this page soon.
I'll take a look, but that's not going to be trivial and will take a bit, since it really should be reworked to use {{Citation/core}}, which is a rather gross job.
Amalthea 14:42, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

;P

...which is exactly the reason I passed the buck to a much more competent individual! –xeno^talk 14:46, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, if you put it like that ...  Done. More or less. Amalthea 16:00, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I didn't feel like thinking this morning =) –xeno^talk 16:05, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

"Pickbothmanlol trolling"

It occurs to me that that statement is redundant. :) This impostoring also has been the work of Pioneercourthouse, and for all I know they might be one and the same, although PCH has not edited as himself in awhile, so a checkuser wouldn't like turn anything up. The name "Pickbothmanlol" also kind-of suggests "Axmann8", who's the first user I know of that the troll tried to get into further trouble by impostoring him, around a year ago. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:03, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Confused; you think it's Axmann8? –xeno^talk 12:35, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

No, it just might be someone imitating Axmann8, as they did last summer. I'm just saying it could be that PCH and PBML might be the same guy. But checkusers were never able to totally pin down PCH because his IP's were from all over the place. And I don't know where PBML is based. PCH appears to have been based in Portland, OR, but that's not altogether certain. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:05, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

I must say, I'm curious as to which "both" I should be picking. –xeno^talk 16:05, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Don't "ax" me! :) Yeh, that username is kind of mysterious. I was just thinking that there's such a thing as a pickaxe, and the Axmann8 impostors chose synonyms and/or homonyms of axe + man + 8. I would ask PMBL, except I've fed the troll too much already, and I doubt I would get a useful answer. :( ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:18, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Blazer Knight

As you have his profile linked to yours I thought you should know that Wez committed suicide on the 22/03/2010. I am one of his friends in Austrailia and I only found out about it last night.

I'm sorry You had to hear it from me like this if you didn't Know already.

Felix Sullivan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.171.119.185 (talk) 03:18, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

=( I'm sorry to hear this. He was an enthusiastic adoptee and dedicated editor. –xeno^talk 12:31, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Very sad. I wonder what were the circumstances? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:18, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Deleted Page Mindtime Backup

Mindtime Backup (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Hi,

I created a page about Mindtime Backup but it was deleted. Can u tell me why? Because some other online backup companies have their own page to. This page was the same style and provided the same information.

Kind regards, —Preceding unsigned comment added by MTuin (talk • contribs) 14:19, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

It was deleted because it did not "indicate the importance or significance of the subject", in other words: appeared not to meet our notability guidelines. See WP:CORP. –xeno^talk 14:21, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

The WPVG Newsletter (Q1 2010)

VG Newsletter delivery

Could I trouble you for another delivery? (Guyinblack25 ^talk 16:22, 7 April 2010 (UTC))

That time again? Awesome, means I have another paid sick day to take. –xeno^talk 16:24, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

 Done =) –xeno^talk 17:32, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter
Volume 3, No. 1 — 1st Quarter, 2010
Previous issue | Next issue

Project At a Glance
As of Q1 2010, the project has:

• 131 Featured Articles
• 36 Featured Lists
• 12 Featured Topics

• 36 A-Class Articles
• 384 Good Articles
• 5 Good Topics

---

Content

• Changes to Featured and Good content
• News items and announcements

• Feature: VG Task forces
• Featured editor: Sabre

---

Project Navigation

• VG Project Main pages

  • Main project – talk
  • Project category – talk
  • Portal – talk

  VG Project Departments

  • Assessment – talk
  • Cleanup – talk
  • Peer review – talk

   

  • Reference library – talk
  • Newsletter – talk
  • Video game images – talk

To receive future editions of this newsletter, click here to sign up on the distribution list.

• Newsletter delivery by xenobot 17:20, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Getting personal?

SOrry - but that editor has made personal remarks about me - totally un called for - while I have tried my best to remain cool and calm with him - have you censured him? please see the discussion page where he has referred to me as a 'giant dick'. I don't know who he's been talking to but speculating on the size of my manhood is well out of order! PsychoActiveKineticInternational TransVersal (talk) 19:45, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

I didn't notice that. I'm having trouble keeping up, which is why I sent it to mediation. I wish a mediator would show up =) I left him a warning. –xeno^talk 19:49, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

OK thanks - I understand this must be alot to keep tracks on. I'm going to sit out of this for a while now and try and cool down. CHeers. PsychoActiveKineticInternational TransVersal (talk) 19:51, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. Please also consider striking the 'nicknames' you've ascribed. –xeno^talk 19:53, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

I have tried my best to remain polite but I have consistently been attacked and insulted by Paki.tv and Harrypotter despite my numerous calls for good-faith discussion, apologies and explanations. The only reason why I suggested they were "giant dicks" is because Harrypotter pointed me to Wikipedia:Please be a giant dick, so we can ban you page to suggest that I have been a “Biggus Dickus”. --Loremaster (talk) 20:13, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

British Museum-related articles

Hi, Kingpin13 suggested that you might be able to help me tag articles (via a bot or script or some such) as being related to the British Museum. It's not precisely a WikiProject (yet?) (it's a sort of experimental project that will be helpful for collaboration with galleries, libraries, archives, museums, et cetera; I'm helping Witty lama) but it uses a WikiProject-style tag, {{BM-related}}.

I need to get all of the (talk pages of the) articles in the category British Museum tagged, excepting the subcategories British Museum-related articles by importance, British Museum-related articles by quality, and People associated with the British Museum.

I also would like to have all of the ratings, of both quality and importance, from other WikiProject templates copied to the template wherever possible, using the lowest rating applicable in cases of conflict. Ideally, if there's no quality information available from WikiProject template(s), automatically checking if the article is a stub would be a bonus.

Can you help me with this? I'd do it myself, but I can't use AWB and it would be an awful lot of work to do manually. Thanks, {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 18:09, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Sure, can do. I will do this after the current bot task is complete (See User:Xenobot/R). –xeno^talk 20:10, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Shall Category:People associated with the Natural History Museum also be excluded? Do you want categories tagged as well? FYI the worklist: [5] (excludes the previously mentioned cat) –xeno^talk 20:27, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much.

It's probably better to exclude people-categories in general; Witty lama's concerned about this as prevention of COI problems. I don't have much of an opinion on whether category pages are included (probably worthwhile; I'll double-check afterwards that all of the proper classification categories are in place), and the worklist looks good.

This deserves emphasizing: thank you very much for the help, I really appreciate it. :) {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 22:22, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

No problem at all. Typically I will use an edit summary suchlike "Tagging for WP:XXX". I see you have WP:GLAM/BM, but this is still red-linked. Do you think you could prepare at least some rough page so at least there is something people can click through to read about the project? thanks, –xeno^talk 14:22, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Done. I've made a rather rough draft, but it should give people a general idea of what the project's about. {{Nihiltres|talk|edits|⚡}} 05:14, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

•  Task complete., see User:Xenobot/R#WP:GLAM/BM. –xeno^talk 15:15, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Re: Jazz bot

Re I certainly don't object if you move the template to {{WikiProject Jazz}}. Also, regarding inheritance, I think the default level is sufficient for this effort. Thanks, -- Gyrofrog (talk) 17:30, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Ok  Done also  Task running... Let me know if you notice any issues. –xeno^talk 17:36, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Deleted Page Kratos Defense Information Technology Solutions

Hello! One of the pages I created was deleted and I would really like to be able to try again. Is there any chance that you could send me a copy of the deleted page? (name in title). I've put questions out on how I can make it better so that it can be a sticky, useful Wikipedia article. Now I just need the original text so I can make changes. I appreciate your time and help in this matter. Doppler2 (talk) 19:07, 8 April 2010 (UTC)Doppler2

Y Emailed. –xeno^talk 19:11, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

sorry about that

I copied your sig, I hope you didn't take offence, it just seemed like without hatting it was unlikely to simmer down. Unomi (talk) 22:24, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

That's fine. By tweaking it, I gave notice that I had no issue with the hatting. With the later comments, it actually kind of became "less resolved" than when I tagged it anyway. As an aside, the conversation at Template talk:Hidden archive top may be of interest to you... –xeno^talk 22:25, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, it seems like I used it as it has become intended then :) I am not a huge fan of user pages in general, but the conversation seemed ill-suited for ani and unlikely to offer the kind of broad policy clarification we would need to hold everyone compliant. Unomi (talk) 22:39, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Some disagree. Unomi (talk) 22:41, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

MFD

If it happens, could you let me know? As I've opined on the AN/I page, it should be OK to inform me of the change of venue. Dlohcierekim 00:16, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Sure. –xeno^talk 00:18, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, let me know too. Thanks! Dreadstar ☥ 01:18, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Well I was kind of hoping someone who actually wanted the content gone would start the MFD. I don't really have an opinion on it one way or the other. –xeno^talk 01:21, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Don't look at me :). Dlohcierekim 01:27, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, gosh, now I'm all confused and have no dea what's WP-right or WP-wrong, so...well...just color me uninvolved. Sorry for all the confusion I added. Dreadstar ☥ 01:29, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

If you feel strongly about the content, nominate it at MFD. I'm far too busy to be your proxy. –xeno^talk 01:30, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Hey! The first version made me laugh! But..prolly not the most PC thing to say...although...it matched mine un-pc comment rather well... :) Dreadstar ☥ 01:53, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

I thought it best not go into the archives =) –xeno^talk 02:22, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Signpost

The mention was nothing. Hey can you do another tagging effort.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:34, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

lol how did I know this would happen =]. Sure, after the current/pending tasks. –xeno^talk 13:35, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

IP unblocks

Am I right in thinking you unblocked some long term blocked IPs last month? For some reason I thought you were monitoring these. You unblocked a school, 64.8.133.231 (talk · contribs) at 15:56, 23 March 2010, vandalism began again at 18:41, 23 March 2010, less than 3 hours later. Is there a way of checking on any others you unblocked at the same time? I've reblocked for a year by the way. Dougweller (talk) 18:49, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

I have them on my watchlist, so I look for them being warned. But obviously am not online 24/7. To see others you can see my logs. I just spot checked a bunch and saw no new edits. –xeno^talk 18:53, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Ah, that's how you do it, I should have experimented more. I guess I was just lucky. :-)Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 19:01, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

If they had a watch to actually "watch" users' contributions that would be great for situations like this. Unfortunately there is not. Oh, and I of course have no issues with reblocks being issued, but preferably for maximum of 1 year. There is an ongoing discussion at Wikipedia talk:Blocking IP addresses#IP block length with rough support for this ceiling. –xeno^talk 19:03, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

‘Crats

• 124 Support vs. 27 oppose? I think there’s some ‘splainin in order here; I don’t get it. Must be a high hurdle, because on the surface, I should be addressing you as “Your ‘cratship.” Greg L (talk) 19:20, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Indeed, 'cratship has a fairly high barrier for entry. 82% is on the low end of the promotion range for RFB. –xeno^talk 19:25, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

E-mail

Xeno. My apologies -I have received your kind note but have not had time to reply. Needless to say I agree whole-heartedly with your observations, and also regret the outburst the other day that I did not handle well. I will try to find the time to reply in detail. Pedro :  Chat  22:07, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

No worries. =) Be well, Pedro. –xeno^talk 22:58, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

My user talk

Thanks a million for helping with that one guy. =) I've been busy as hell. :( --slakr^\ talk / 00:03, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

No sweat! I know the feeling. –xeno^talk 15:28, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Akola city

Hi. Can you move this to Akola. Thanks. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 20:45, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

 Done –xeno^talk 23:36, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

otheruses4

You mentioned a BRFA for replacing the otheruses4 template, which was not passed. Do you remember which one it was? — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:19, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

I was talking about the old BOTREQ thread, not BRFA. –xeno^talk 11:21, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Editing restrictions

I'm not sure, but I said that I wanted to revamp completely Pichilemu after its failed GA review. Can I edit it? HJ Mitchell said it was going to be watched by him, at least. --MW talk contribs 16:20, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Please first discuss this with your mentor. If he decides that you can edit it directly, then you may edit it under the conditions of the block. –xeno^talk 16:22, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Clarified further [6]

Page protection

I have placed the article Dayton, Ohio on the Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. The article has been the target of repeated vandalism and "silly" edits for several months. If there is anyway that you could review my request, it would be greatly appriciated. Thanks! Texas141 (talk) 19:54, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Commented there. –xeno^talk 20:19, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

A request

Hi, can you please block my account? I need to concentrate on working but get distracted rather too easily! I know about wikibreak enforcer but unfortunately worked out how to get around that working. I noticed that WP:BLOCKME says these requests are normally refused but it would be very helpful if you could. If not then can you think of any other way to do it? Thanks a lot Smartse (talk) 21:00, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Please contact one of the fine individuals at Category:Administrators willing to consider requests for self blocking. –xeno^talk 21:06, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Smartse (talk) 22:16, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Tell me..

What you interpreted as community consensus contained the following: MisterWiki is expressly forbidden from removing any comments from other editors from his talk page except for routine archiving how did that get changed to: Until otherwise approved by an administrator or community consensus, you are restricted to edit only in your user space and subspace or your mentor's userspace and subspace (including talk pages) except when approved by your mentor.. It is bad enough that there was no clear consensus for this unblock but to go and alter the restrictions loosening them further than to what only some agreed to is a further insult.--Crossmr (talk) 23:50, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

That was actually changed to "3. He is forbidden from removing comments from his talk page excluding clear and obvious vandalism. In cases where there might be a disagreement over what constitutes vandalism, he shall leave the comment and request it be reviewed by his mentor. Routine archiving is permitted, with a reasonable delay of at least a few days prior to archiving material." - which is actually tighter in my opinion. –xeno^talk 01:03, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Bot assisted moves

Was wondering if you were gonna set your bot loose on those Ontario highways yet? It's been two weeks, and the overwhelming majority agree with Ontario Highway X. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 16:34, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

I will try and get to this today or tomorrow. Cheers, –xeno^talk 16:28, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Cool. Thank you :) - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 23:17, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

My Python seems not to be working from here, I'll have to try it from home. Unless someone is watching and wants to run it. The pairs are here [7] and I was going to python movepages.py -pairs:moves.txt -summary:"Standardize per [[Wikipedia talk:CANADA#Proposal to rename all highway articles|discussion]]"

–xeno^talk 15:44, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

I assume only admins can run it, and not me? - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 01:31, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

It's running now. It makes more sense to me now why to do it this way: when looking up a disambig article on a highway, the first thing you will read is the province name. –xeno^talk 01:51, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

• This is  Done. And to answer your question, no; anyone can run Python but should typically only be used by a bot account or in cases of clear consensus such as this one. –xeno^talk 15:11, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Pitru Paksha

Hi. Can you quickly delete File:Pitru Paksha.jpg I just uploaded on here. I am going to reupload in the commons with link to authorisation. Can you quickly do this me for me? Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 17:31, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

 Done –xeno^talk 17:33, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, Can you or Colton mark this image as approved in the commons at the date given under the license stated by the author? I just don't want any difficulties at a later date. I believe there is an approved for release at given date thing with a tick. Could you do this or get somebody to? Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 17:36, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Typically the copyright owner would send something through to OTRS, or whatever. Images and licensing isn't really my forte. –xeno^talk 17:45, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

OTRS is a nightmare. I was given permission to upload the Sera Monastery images a month ago and still the commons admins have not authorised it. Do flickr images need "OTRS" if they are marked as under an acceptable license? Nope. They just need to be approved. OK hopefully Colton can do it. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 17:47, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Is it marked online under an acceptable license somewhere? –xeno^talk 17:55, 13 April 2010 (UTC) Never mind - I see the license release under the twitpic. It looks fine to me. There is a category for Flickr-reviewed images, doesn't appear to be one for licensed by twitpic. So just leave it, I think. –xeno^talk 18:00, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

PopMusicWillNeverBeLowBrow

Regarding this comment, it's not actually intended to be at the RfA (I don't think), it's meant as a reply to PhantomSteve at User_talk:PopMusicWillNeverBeLowBrow. However, I'm not sure if the comment is entirely appropriate anyway.. - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 23:17, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Eh. Confusing. I copied it to the discussion section anyway. –xeno^talk 23:18, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for your recent actions, regarding Talk:Keith Henson. Much appreciated. -- Cirt (talk) 22:50, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

No worries. Cheers, –xeno^talk 12:26, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Heh, I love that particular phraseology... -- Cirt (talk) 21:36, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Deja vu!. –xeno^talk 22:49, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

User:Patrickrox11

I've temporarily blocked Patrickrox11 (talk · contribs), but based on your comment yesterday, are you thinking what I am, that the account might have been compromised? —C.Fred (talk) 03:50, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I wondered. Not really sure, to be honest. Might have just lost interest in being a constructive contributor, or maybe a little brother used the cached password. *shrug*. –xeno^talk 12:26, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Re: Jazz bot

Thanks again! Regarding Category:Unassessed Jazz articles, I experimented with the sandbox to see what 2,500 characters looks like. Based on what I saw ([8]), I would personally rank 2,500 bytes as "Start" class, and would've said 500 bytes would be a better threshold. To me, "stub" means one, or maybe two paragraphs (though I don't imagine that could be consistently measured). That's just me - we may want to take that back to WP:JAZZ, but I'd be interested to hear what you had to say, as well. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 19:12, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Start-class requires the article "provide enough sources to establish verifiability", so it's not a good idea to have a bot assess higher than stub if we're talking about pagesize. Of course, that doesn't mean I couldn't run the class=stub with 500 bytes and under instead, but I am hesitant to do start and higher based on size. See Wikipedia talk:SONGS#Xenobot to auto-assess articles based on their pagesize for some related discussion. –xeno^talk 19:19, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't mean trying to assess "Start" (or greater). I meant classify stubs under 500 bytes instead of 2,500. But having read that discussion - particularly CBM's statistics and reasoning that infoboxes use a lot of bytes - 2,500 seems a better number than 500. I gather that you've arrived at 2,500 being a "magic" number, and that's what I'd have been interested in hearing about. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 19:30, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I just figured 2500 was a nice round number, rounded down to the nearest 500'th from the 3rd quartile figure. Note AWB can also use "word count" but I'm not exactly sure how it counts the words. I gather it counts those outside templates, which would correct for infobox bloat... –xeno^talk 19:32, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

If it can do a word count, then it looks like 2,500 bytes is 350 to 375 words. Either way, I'd say go for it, and thanx once again. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 21:44, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

My Userpage

I requested that I could remove info my userpage, not delete the whole thing. Please put it back. Clerkenwell TALK PAGE!" Contribs 20:52, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

You are at the end of a very short rope here. I can restore your userpage, but then I think I will block you for attempting to use the {{editprotected}} request deceptively. Or we can leave it as is. I will send you the text of your userpage and you can restore it at the end of the three months (or when Theresa knott agrees to unprotect it). Which is it? –xeno^talk 20:54, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Deciptevely? How so? Theresa said other admins can unblock it I think. Clerkenwell TALK PAGE!" Contribs 20:55, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Because you know very-well it was protected for your inappropriate prank, but you made it out to seem like it was for putting non-free content. Userpages are not the be-all-end-all of Wikipedia and the consensus at ANI was that if you were to be unblocked, it was to contribute to the encyclopedia - not your userpage. –xeno^talk 20:56, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I forgot why she blocked me, and I corrected it, sorry. Fine, send me the text and I will ask for an unblock in a few weeks. Clerkenwell TALK PAGE!" Contribs 21:00, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

It's in your email box. –xeno^talk 21:00, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

ThanksClerkenwell TALK PAGE!" Contribs 21:16, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the speedy reverts!

Thank you very much for the speedy reverts of the mass template changes! You just saved me a huge ache in my mouse-clicking finger! — Kralizec! (talk) 18:54, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

No problem! See User:Voice of All/UsefulJS#Admin rollback/deletion tools and backlog bar (Requires Addtab) and the below script for how I did it... –xeno^talk 19:06, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

importScript('User:Mr.Z-man/rollbackSummary.js'); // allows tweaking of rollback edit summary

You're Right

I apologized to Immunize. I should have stepped up with advice on his chances of passing. I've apologized to him on his talk and I'd like to thank you for calling me out on it. I deserved it. TNXMan 20:51, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the note Tnxman. I'm sure things will work out. –xeno^talk 00:44, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Message

I just wanted to apologise for my wrongdoings and thanks for sorting things out. I feel I need to leave so I shouldn't be any more trouble here. I am giving this barnstar as a small token of appreciation.

		The Original Barnstar
		For looking the project and helping thing run smoothly. Set Sail For The Seven Seas 315° 2' 15" NET 21:00, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Farewell, Set Sail For The Seven Seas 315° 2' 15" NET 21:00, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

I actually like the template alot; I just don't think it needed to be deployed on such a wide scale. Don't sweat this minor incident. –xeno^talk 00:07, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Analyzed essay ranking

Hi, xeno, Wikid77 here. I have analyzed the essay ranking & recommended:

• Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Essays#Adjusting essays in categories of rank
• Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Essays#Some essays to be re-ranked

I see ranking has just begun, hence those suggestions. -User_talk:Wikid77 22:35, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

I looked at your suggestions and they look great. Will reply in more detail later. –xeno^talk 00:47, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

BAG nomination

Hi there xeno. I was wondering if you'd be interested in running for the Bot Approvals Group? I think you're a great help at bot areas, and feel that +BAG would aid you there. If you're interested let me know, and I'd be willing to give you a nomination statement if you want :) - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 21:36, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

I would be honoured to be nominated. Thank you, –xeno^talk 00:02, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Brilliant. I've created the nomination page at Wikipedia:Bot Approvals Group/nominations/Xeno, please follow the instructions at WP:BOTPOL#Bot_Approvals_Group, and transclude and accept the nomination when you're ready. Best, - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 07:19, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

All  Done. Thanks again, Kingpin13. –xeno^talk 20:01, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

What do you think of that?

[9] -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:11, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Pretty wasteful edit imo. –xeno^talk 17:34, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Not only that. Yobot creates new templates that have an empty priority parameter (this was the older consensus and KBk plugin needs update). LaraBot probably does the same. After that, ListasBot comes and delete the parameter! -- Magioladitis (talk) 18:40, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Isn't priority= deprecated unless there is a task force or something? Even so, I don't see the need to make an edit just to remove it. Heck, the vast majority of WPBio tagged talk pages never even get looked at or edited, so removing vestigal code seems wasteful indeed. –xeno^talk 19:20, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

New features

I looked. What am I missing?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:56, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

You'll see that many "B" class articles Xenobot recently identified are sorted under "4". If the tagging run had picked up an FA, FL, or GA, you would have seen them under 1,2, or 3 (respectively). See the legend at the top of the category. –xeno^talk 20:58, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Stubs

Wow, that was quick! Thanks, foreigner. Kdammers (talk) 01:37, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

=) –xeno^talk 01:38, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Hiding stuff I don't want to see

Howdy. I noticed here you commented that you remove that notice with your css page. If I wanted to get rid of it as well, would the code below work for me if I wanted to do the same? I wanted to make sure before I mess with my css page.

div.mw-tos-summary {
    display: none;
}

--Rockfang (talk) 05:10, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

That should do it. Give it a shot; even if it's wrong it won't break things terribly. –xeno^talk 13:11, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Formatting question

Now that all the hullabaloo has (hopefully) died down, I was hoping that I could seek your help on an unrelated manner. Try as I might, I can not figure how to insert something alphabetically into a list, without disturbing the continuity of the list itself. I have tried again and again to get this right, and am most embarassed that I can't seem to be able to figur out something so simple. However, I figured that rather than run the risk of screwing up a page that I'm trying to edit, I might as well seek help. I would appreciate it if you could respond. All the best-Mk5384 (talk) 08:25, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

P.S.-When you told me that you expected to see me blocked again in the near future, I told you I though you would be pleasantly surprised. Thanks again for going to bat for me.Mk5384 (talk) 08:27, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

I only expected to see you reblocked if you continued in the same manner :). No problem. –xeno^talk 13:13, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Could you give me an example?–xeno^talk 13:13, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes. On the List of The Cosby Show Characters, under "Noteable Guest Stars", I was attempting to insert Roscoe Lee Browne between Valerie Briscoe-Hooks, and Betty Carter. I was unable to do it whilst maintaining the continuity of the list.Mk5384 (talk) 13:29, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, the issue is you did not place it on a new line... –xeno^talk 15:32, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

At the risk of sounding incrdeibly stupid, how do I do that?Mk5384 (talk) 16:56, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

What browser are you using? Perhaps it is a display issue. Bulleted and numbered lists start on a new line (a fresh line, hit <enter> to go to the next line).

• 1
• 2
• 3

1. A
2. B
3. C... –xeno^talk 17:06, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

I had a feeling it was something incredibly simple that I was overlooking. Many thanks!Mk5384 (talk) 17:25, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Any time! Happy editing =) –xeno^talk 17:26, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Bot

Would you be willing to deliver courtesy notices to this project? Thanks, mono 00:17, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I have added you to EdwardsBot's access list. See User:EdwardsBot/Instructions. –xeno^talk 00:31, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you!--mono 00:14, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Misclick

Sorry, that was a misclick and I didn't notice till i saw your revert. thanks and sorry.--Cube lurker (talk) 16:58, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

No sweat. –xeno^talk 17:02, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

This made me smile... — Satori Son 18:06, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

heh =) –xeno^talk 18:08, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Joining in

Hi. Thanks for joining in my discussion with another admin, Tanthalas39. I would of course appreciate if you decided not to slap me with a boiler plate answer. You saw that I complained over a version that the article is locked on and though "oh another moron that doesn't understand that locking is not endorsment" but if you cared to read what I wrote you would have seen that a) I already mentioned that in my post b) this particular issue is a tiny bit more complex than what a jolly person might think. It does make users feel like their contributions are worthless when you behave like that you know. I am telling you this in good faith so that you could help us instead of mocking us. Instead of actually joining the real hard discussion you posted funny images, and by that you have also, in my opinion, slapped admins and all other users who were involved in a long and complicated decision at the AfD. And if I were a spoiled user who cannot accept views different to his and has no respect for others as he believes that his opinion is somehow supreme over everybody else, I would feel happy to see that the disrespect of WP institutions, admins and involved users is taken so lightly by admins and that I can obviously continue vandalizing. Of course I am talking about a particular user and you can find more about who it is at the ANI throuh a link that I gave.--Avala (talk) 19:02, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

My intent was not to make you feel that your contributions are worthless or to "mock" or "slap" anyone. However, the guidance at m:The Wrong Version (or, more seriously, Wikipedia:PROT#Content disputes) is not less relevant because there was an AFD decision. If there is an edit war, the protecting admin should step in and protect whatever version is there at the time of the request for protection to allow consensus-building to take place. If consensus develops on the talk page for the "merged" version, then an {{editprotected}} request can be initiated to restore that version. But the first-responder is not suppose to make a choice. –xeno^talk 19:05, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Huh? Is this about the me and Polish plane crash article? Jack Merridew 19:13, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I believe so. –xeno^talk 19:18, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Fine but I still think that once involved you need to actually finish the job and not leave it to hang there. Also I still think that our work is seen as worthless if the user who calls our work "shite", "silliness", "ignorable" and "rote platitudes" is not ever warned. Also a few quotes from ANI "On the contrary, although the text is a bit long, the point is perfectly valid. If the outcome of AfD was to merge, it's no good pretending it was really to delete, but the admin was too polite to say it. If that is what is happening." or as another user described Jack's behavior - "because they can't act like adults and respect the outcome of the Afd, or send it to Drv.". And finally I disagree that admins can't protect decisions of the AfD. By not doing that Wikipeda is going to descent into chaos, deleted articles will resurface in a matter of seconds and then we will have to go through some lengthy bureaucratic process to delete them again, only in order not to somehow hurt the feelings of those who have utter disrespect for the community and insitutions built to protect this project.--Avala (talk) 19:30, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Well sometimes 'finishing the job' means patiently standing on the sidelines and letting consensus develop. Protecting admins are meant to be neutral parties, they shouldn't also jump in and start arguing the issues. It appears this is now at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 April 19#International response to the 2010 Polish Air Force Tu-154 crash. –xeno^talk 19:32, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Why did it get to this point? Why was there no admin response before? I can see on his talk page that he was indeed warned which is a prerequest for admins to react and his respoonse to that was that this is not the first time someone is trying to warn him with a message - "You may not realize it, but the "community" gets things wrong. A *lot*" and then he continued to revert edits. Why didn't you act then preventively? I know it's much easier to let things boil and then click close while hoping someone else will sort it out somewhere somehow but it's not going away as you can see.--Avala (talk) 19:45, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I guess because admins aren't omnipresent... The thoughtful words dated Oct 8, 2009 (ironically, by Tanthalas) at User:Xeno/misc#Some thoughtful stuff are also relevant. My own amateur opinion (deletion and merging,- article content in general - isn't my speciality) is that a "merge" decision at AFD can't really "force" material to remain in situ at the target article forever, i.e. it does not override editorial judgment. DRV should clarify this. –xeno^talk 19:50, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Of course. However the AfD was closed two days ago. Questioning it now already is a bit unfair and undemocratic and is caused solely "because they can't act like adults and respect the outcome of the Afd, or send it to Drv." DRV is a good place but not now as there is absolutely nothing new that can be brought there that wasn't seen on 65kb AfD. As for the quote, yes I understand we all make mistakes but it is then much better to accept it when someone point it out than dragging the issue and thus causing more damage. I am not mad that the action wasn't made on time or that the action made was not made with enough knowledge of the issue in question, but now that all facts are known including the issue of warnings, and the issue of AfD - its date, size and respect of it, I think there is no point in going on with the first decision that was made before admins were met will of the details.--Avala (talk) 20:07, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Merge doesn't typically mean "cut and paste the whole thing", though. The resulting article was 165kb! –xeno^talk 20:10, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I added a few more words now, sorry about that.--Avala (talk) 20:11, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Regarding the extra words: I'm not sure what outcome you're looking for here. –xeno^talk 20:14, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

As for the point raised I will quote User:Elen of the Roads: ", although the text is a bit long, the point is perfectly valid. If the outcome of AfD was to merge, it's no good pretending it was really to delete, but the admin was too polite to say it. If that is what is happening." And as for the merge, I tried to make it acceptable to everyone by placing the text into collapsible template and many liked it but it wasn't enough for all. It will never be enough for all, some will not accept the state until it is all erased but then we will have those who will accept nothing but the full inclusion so that is why I tried to find a compromise solution.--Avala (talk) 20:14, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't really have much more useful to say, but geez if that article isn't hard to edit with all those flags. Really slows things down. Must be hell on the rendering engine. –xeno^talk 20:16, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

The outcome I expect is that admins decide on this now that they have all the necessary information. It is never too late to correct the mistake. If admins weren't there when this user began violating difficult AfD decision, if admins weren't there when this user was warned, if admins weren't there when he continued, if admins weren't there when the issue was raised at ANI, if admins weren't there when the article was locked on a version that will effectively cause more chaos because of the not so easily made AfD closing decision - they have no reason or excuse not to be here now.--Avala (talk) 20:21, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

The merge decision was not to merge the entire article into the target (collapsible tables or otherwise), otherwise the admin would have done it. It was to condense the material and then merge it. As it stands now, I've restored the article since it's at DRV. That's about all I'm willing and able to do at this point, not being a contenty-type-guy (who can ably condense it) and not willing to edit-through-protection to make the article 165kb again (as I don't think that represents the spirit of Arbitrarily0's decision - see [10]). Best to wait for the DRV to run. Remember - there is no deadline. –xeno^talk 20:25, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

filmographies rfc closed

Hi. The RFC at WT:ACTOR#Filmographies has closed and some large number of actor bios are going to need a bot-pass. Nutshell is that the extant tables are going to get a lot of hard-coded markup removed and the header-row refactored to use a template. I'm going to ask a few template folks if they see any technical tweaks that should be made first, but am thinking that we can get this rolling pretty soon. The template is {{Filmography table headings}} (and is discussed at WT:ACTOR#table headings via templates) and the most common forms of current table implementation are described at WT:ACTOR#hard-coded markup. Once the dust settles, I'll prepare a few examples and offer you diffs to serve as reference as to what I'm seeking your bot to perform. The current version of Anna Kendrick^oldid is pretty much what we're shooting for. I'm open to ideas as to how this should all be done and expect to start an implementation notes section over on that talk page. Cheers, Jack Merridew 17:52, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Can you give me at least 3 to 5 diffs that make the change in a single edit so I can understand what the desired result is? Thanks, –xeno^talk 17:56, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Sure. I've got a bit of discussion started (WT:ACTOR#Implementation discussion) and will drop you nice diffs pretty soon. Thanks. Jack Merridew 18:32, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Cheers, Jack Merridew 18:32, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Could you peek at:

• User talk:Thumperward#care to review a template implementation?

Chris is floating the notion of a full table refactor as a suite of templates. Something like {{Episode List}} and the relates ones, I think. This would be a much more complex Search/Replace. Is this sort of thing doable via your bot, or others?

• WT:ACTOR#Implementation discussion
  is the best place to discuss most of this.

Cheers, Jack Merridew 20:19, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

It's starting to get more complicated, so you might need a more competent botwriter - yes... Maybe, maybe not. Can certainly give it the 'ole college try once it's all ready to go... –xeno^talk 20:21, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Prolly not going to involve the rows, at this point, just the opening and close of the table. I'll keep you posted. Cheers, Jack Merridew 02:25, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Sounds good... –xeno^talk 15:11, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Wildbot on Talk:New World Order (conspiracy theory)

Hello Xeno. Can you tell me how to stop User:WildBot from editing Talk:New World Order (conspiracy theory) article? I keep removing it cause its work is done but keeps coming back with a mistaken analysis. --Loremaster (talk) 16:43, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Now that Iron Dream is simply a redirect it should not come back. If it does, ask user:Josh Parris... –xeno^talk 18:02, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Name changing

Hello Xeno, sorry for bothering you with something that might be normal but I'm a contributor on WP in French and I'm less familiar with WP:en.I'd like to have the unified login matching my main account on WP:fr (and now on Commons too) with the name: Ben5. Someone as created an account that has no edit (but one entry in the logs: it created another account Ben75..something that has no contribution either). I've left a request on Wikipedia:Changing username/Usurpations and the bot said "This user has entries in their Wikipedia user logs. Usernames with any logged actions, other than user creations, may not be usurped." + there's the red X sign. I don't know if that means it cannot be done at all or if I just have to wait. If that's the case, again, sorry for bothering you. I'm just not sure I'm understanding this... Thanks for the help! Inslack (talk) 20:15, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Commented there. Looks like you're good to go. Might just need to wait 7 days tho. –xeno^talk 20:20, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you Xeno, 7 days won't be a problem, I just wasn't sure if I had to do or expect anything else! Inslack (talk) 20:36, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Note re: Causa sui

Hello. This is to let you know that there is now a discussion at AN/I regarding an issue that you commented on here.--Epeefleche (talk) 06:04, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Commented there: [11]. –xeno^talk 12:55, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Causa sui

While I would agree with your view of things in general, I find the archiving of the thread premature despite the fact that it was being side-tracked about the rights and wrongs of BLP violations. Quite a few admins have stated their belief that he was wrong, but he hasn't got so much as a trout slap. Causa still obviously believes he did nothing wrong, and is likely to repeat this behaviour if something similar happens again. It's just this sort of not resolving flagrant abuses which perpetuates the abuse by admins, IMHO. Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 00:54, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Please do feel free to re-open it, though I think HJ Mitchell's statement said it best [12]. If Causa repeats this behaviour (I doubt he will.), RFCU would be appropriate. –xeno^talk 00:59, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

No I doubt he will either, for the time being, being centre-stage and in the spotlight. What he does later, however, is anyone's guess. Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 01:38, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

You'll notice I re-opened the thread after commentary continued. I guess you were right in that folks still had more to say. –xeno^talk 01:40, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

• Yeah I did see that; I actually use my contribs page as a makeshift watchlist for this kind of thing. Thanks anyway for keeping me informed. --causa sui (talk) 05:52, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

  My watchlist having grown to a nearly unmanageable 15,780+ some odd members, I also use "my contributions" as a watchlist of sorts. You may find a recent script I requested helpful... It hides the "(top)" edits so you can see which pages were updated since you wrote there. –xeno^talk 15:11, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

importScript ('User:Ale_jrb/Scripts/tophide.js'); //     (toggle to hide "top" edits)
var topHideDefault = 'show'; //

That's pretty cool. I'll give it a try, thanks. --causa sui (talk) 18:32, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

You might find this interesting

[13]

Might want to pass your thanks along to our anonymous friend. I will be. --causa sui (talk)

Yes, they had more patience than I and seemed to explain things better as well. They're deserving of barnstars and praise. Thanks for the note and your willingness to work through this. See [14]. –xeno^talk 15:23, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't think it's helpful to describe my statement as a non-apology apology. I think you are kicking me while down. I don't want to start another channel of debate, but I ask you to rethink that remark. --causa sui (talk) 17:28, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

So done [15]. Cheers, –xeno^talk 17:30, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Frankly, I thought that the phrase non-apology apology was not only more precisely accurate, but much more civil than some of the alternatives that come to mind would have been.--Epeefleche (talk) 18:36, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Reverted you...

I disagree that Causa sui should have a right to privacy of previous usernames, and have explained my reasoning in the revert. If you REALLY feel that he should be extended that measure of privacy, then go ahead and re-revert me and I won't further contest it. Cheers, Jclemens (talk) 21:30, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

I think it's not relevant to the present issue, and some past history was already brought up. –xeno^talk 22:22, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

I disagree as well, for reasons I explain on my talk page in my discussion with him. I also think that his talk pages under his prior name which have been deleted should be restored to public view, redacting of course any personal information that would clearly identify him (his name is so common that I don't view that as such).--Epeefleche (talk) 21:34, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

There are only about 6 deleted edits among both his old talk pages; just the redirects to the new one; i.e. User talk:Causa sui contains his entire talk page history. –xeno^talk 22:22, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Tears for Fears discography

Hi Xeno. Can you please protect the Tears for Fears discography page? I'm having difficulty with a IP editor who keeps using different IP addresses to revert edits. Besides myself, three other editors (Dottiewest1fan & Endalecomplex & Wysprgr2005) have reverted this IP but he/she keeps coming back under a new IP to revert the intro to the article to reflect their preferred version. Consensus appears to prefer the edit that this IP dislikes. It looks like this problem has been happening since December 2009. Here are diffs concerning this situation: [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] [28] [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] [34]

Thanks. Caden ^cool 10:50, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Xeno the IP has reverted again but I can't do nothing because I'm close now to the 3rr limit. By the way I'm convinced the IP is a sock. Caden ^cool 11:44, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

• Please initiate a discussion on the talk page of the article discussing the two versions and seek input at WT:DISCOGS. Just at a quick blush, "This is the ..." seems like a terribly unencyclopedic way to start an article. –xeno^talk 12:31, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Okay I seeked for opinions from other editors at WT:DISCOG. Did I do this right? Caden ^cool 15:00, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes, but it's best to put the actual discussion on the article talk page with a request for editors to comment there. –xeno^talk 15:03, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Hey Xeno this is the IP under a username. Check and you will see the exact wording, writing style etc, it's the same person. It's the same bunch of IP addresses from the diffs I gave you above. I believe that user is a sock and owns all those edits as far back as December. Furthermore he/she was accused of being a sock before. I read something about it in their history. Caden ^cool 14:11, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Other than writing style do you have anything to back up this claim? –xeno^talk 14:13, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

If you read all of the diffs I gave you, and if you read all the posts involving my interaction with the IP, you will see that it's the same person. I can't explain it to you. You need to trust me and just please read all diffs. Caden ^cool 14:19, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Unless they start double-voting or something there's not too much that can be done. You ask them if they are the IP... –xeno^talk 14:21, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Dude I asked the editor and they deny being the IP. Anyway I took your advice and posted at WT:WPMUSIC and at the talk page of Tears for Fears dicography. Can you please tell me if I did this right? Caden ^cool 08:29, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it looks fine. –xeno^talk 17:56, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Falling rain

Hi. Many months ago I proposed that Falling rain was blacklisted. It contains false population and altitude data and out of date railway markings etc which lesser informed individuals don't know about. The deletion was endorsed by a number of active geography contrbutors such as myself, Orderinchaos, Darwinek and others. What a waste of my time. Look at this. We now have hundreds of fresh new stubs with false data using this source. Great one. I don't have a problem with the new stubs except for the source and data which is false. Falling rain should be blacklisted asap. Can you or Amalthea please see this through and perhaps we can organize a bot to remove the link and data from all of the articles it is currently used in. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 14:27, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

I left a comment there about the mass-creation without BRFA. Where was this Falling rain thing discussed? Probably best to continue at User talk:Mattgirling to keep it all together. –xeno^talk 14:35, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

It was discussed months ago at the whote list/black list page I can't recall where. I am very surprised it was not seen through. It is used in 9000 articles, probably 10,000 now. Many of the Pakistan.India andd African articles use it to reference altitude and evne population!! A Tibetan town known to have 35,000 inhabitants according to official sources, falling rain claims 800!! It definately needs to be black listed asap to prevent people like Matt using it in good faith. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 14:55, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

You will need to dredge up those past discussions if you want this link added to the blacklist. –xeno^talk 15:04, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

I found a diff. You'll need to dig up the archives though to find the full discussion. I believe it was redirected to another page. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 15:46, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Yea, MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist#Fallingrain.com ... Probably best to follow the advice given by A.B. there. –xeno^talk 15:49, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Found another diff. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 15:51, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Yea, the thread in its entirety is here: MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist/Archives/2010/02#Fallingrain.com. See my above comment. –xeno^talk 15:58, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

See MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist#Fallingrain.com. The A.B has proposed that 900 links to falling rain are removed as a trial and if there are no complaints then is happy to support it. Could your move 900 further external links to falling rain using your bot? Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 14:50, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Commented there. –xeno^talk 15:07, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I hadn't noticed, no. LOL. Honestly though if any seriously objects to the removal of the links and blacklisting of that site I'll give em ten gross blunder example of why such a course of action is valid. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 14:40, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Well since the ones that I am working on presently were added by you, and requested to be removed by you, this seems to be a fairly low-volume task (for the moment). Not sure about the next phase. –xeno^talk 14:42, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Naajaat. 63 people according to the 2007 census. Fallingrain claims it is uninhabited. Does that kind of consistent blunder really need consensus to agree it is an unreliable source? Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 14:59, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

You've just deleted the Fallingrain external link at Skelani which was useful because it provided readily visible maps - no extra clicking. The latitude and longitude information is confirmed by other sites and the population figure is not implausible even given the demographic issues since the 1991 census. So I'd have opted to keep that link had anyone been bothered to ask. Opbeith (talk) 15:01, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Please feel free to undo the bot and add {{bots|deny=Xenobot}} to the page to prevent the bot revisiting it. But please discuss further at MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist#Fallingrain.com; my bot is merely doing what I've been asked to - and what seems to have consensus. –xeno^talk 15:04, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for that considerate reply. I'll leave it as I've learned that once people have their teeth into something at Wikipedia it saves energy better used for other purposes to recognise which way the wind's blowing. The idea of deleting the subject rather than using it to warn people tells me enough. But I appreciated the decent reply. Opbeith (talk) 16:39, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

No problem. I'm not quite sure I understand what you mean by "deleting the subject rather than using it to warn people", though? –xeno^talk 18:37, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

search and replace patterns

Hi. I've dropped a set of diffs at:

• WT:ACTOR#search and replace patterns

The two forms of all the old code that are most prevalent are the ones described in the RfC:

• WT:ACTOR#hard-coded markup

There are a lot of less-used variants out there, too, and I'm not really done finding all the edge cases.

I believe these patterns of hard-coded markup appear in articles far outside of the scope of Category:Actors and whatever category best covers "filmmakers". Such matches probably should not be automatically converted to use a filmograpy-specific template; better would be the generation of a list that can be reviewed to determine the appropriate action.

It would be best to continue this discussion there in order that the remedial actions taken be associated with the RfC they're being performed in response to.

Cheers, Jack Merridew 16:53, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

• What's with that argument between you and User:Wildhartlivie? Are there objections to this task, or is that unrelated? –xeno^talk 18:32, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

  She supported a slightly earlier version of the template and has not specifically objected post RfC-close. She is, clearly, attacking me there and elsewhere. She seems intent on dragging all this out indefinitely. Cheers, Jack Merridew 18:43, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

  But other than that, the change has wide support? –xeno^talk 18:43, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

  I believe so. I am, however, going to float a quick poll to be sure. Cheers, Jack Merridew 18:59, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

I would like a copy of the deleted article Kody Lapointe

Hi Xeno,

I was not aware that I could not Write a Personal Biography of myself because I did not read anything I just wanted to write one. I would like to Retrieve a copy of this article for myself so I may save it on my computer. I apologize for doing this, next time I will read all the information before posting anything. If it possible to retrieve thispage it would be greatly apreciated. Please Email the Copy to: <email removed by X!>

Thanks,

Kody Lapointe

Emailed. Please do not re-create this. –xeno^talk 16:02, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

BAG

Congrats on the +BAG :D. You're welcome re. the nomination :). Best, - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 19:41, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks =] Looking forward to helping out! –xeno^talk 19:43, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Question re: HJ Mitchell RFA comment

Wasn't really on topic for the RFA, but I'm interested in your reasoning on this.[35] For me, blindly reverting because "the crat did it, it must be right" is the exact sort of judging edits beacause of who made them, and not impartially examining the issue, that causes problems around here. IMHO If anything the context makes it more troubling, not less? Your thoughts?--Cube lurker (talk) 18:18, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

I wasn't necessarily trying to dissuade anyone from opposing over it, but merely suggesting they review the background before doing so. Your question is an interesting one, I'll have to think about it. –xeno^talk 18:25, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough.--Cube lurker (talk) 18:29, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

After thinking about it, you're probably right; however, I still think if this is the only time the user ever misused rollback that it would not cause me to oppose. –xeno^talk 13:45, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

We have a limited number of opportunities to answer the question, how will this person use the tools in a matter of a degree of complexity. We can look past those examples. We just can't be surprised later.--Cube lurker (talk) 15:20, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

your edit to my talkpage (strange AWB bug)

Has basically deleted everything apart from your message. Off2riorob (talk) 15:56, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Careful with that AWB

I don't think that this edit can be what you intended!   pablo_hablo. 15:58, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Ah thank you. No worries, apart for the people at AWB, ta. Off2riorob (talk) 16:00, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

• Thanks both, for the note. Very strange bug, I will look into this right away. Also Durova's [36]. –xeno^talk 16:02, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Reported @ Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser/Bugs#AWB blanks some talk pages before appending a notice. –xeno^talk 16:55, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Trollish remarks/harassment

Hello, Xeno. On my talk page, there is a certain user Wispanow (talk · contribs) who keeps posting trollish remark and harassing me (thrice today already~!), should I take this to ANI or just a note from you would do? Thoughts? --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™} 18:33, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

You want the user to stop posting to your talk page? –xeno^talk 18:36, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

I just want Dave1185 to stop his harassment. Wispanow (talk) 18:37, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps Dave1185 should go ← and you should go → and everyone will be happy? –xeno^talk 18:39, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

• Well, since his remarks are nothing short of harassing me despite me having disengaged from him, what are the other options available, if I may ask? Also, note that for the past 30 minutes or so, he's been "haunting" my talk page, while I have left his alone, without any prejudice. What gives? --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™} 18:40, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

• I guess you could post to ANI. But may be best to wait and see if Wispanow takes my advice. –xeno^talk 18:42, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

• Point taken, last chance given. FWIW, I'm going remove his trollish remark on my talk page but if he does it again, its ANI for him this time. Cheers~! --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™} 18:44, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

• I suppose as a parting word of advice, disengaging usually involves stop calling eachother trollish =) –xeno^talk 18:47, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

• Nothing trollish about him, its his remarks that are. Focus on the content, not the editor... I remember this clearly. Cheers~! --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™} 18:52, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

• Splitting hairs, imo. –xeno^talk 18:56, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

• If Dave1185 don´t stops his Trollish remarks/harassment, i will take him to ANI. I doubt he would listen to such simple request but who knows? Wispanow (talk) 18:57, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

• Xeno, see what I mean now? I'm going to debus now per WP:DENY, toodles~! --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™} 19:00, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

• Just a little respect? Is this possible? Wispanow (talk) 19:08, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

My talk page

I understand why you removed this link[37] since it's redundant since I'm already on the talk page. What I don't understand is what you're getting at in the edit summary. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:17, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

The image is licensed under cc-by-sa which requires attribution to the author. Typically attribution for images is provided by linking back to the image page; so changing the link breaks the chain-of-attribution. Don't worry: I know this is a fairly unknown fact and you didn't do it purposely. I fear that, despite my recent change, top icon has probably lead many, many users to violate image licenses unawares. –xeno^talk 22:18, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

I think I got it from another user's page and didn't know there was any "license" associated with it. What is non-free content doing here anyway? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:34, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

It's free (freely licensed), but requires attribution. (Versus public domain which is free and doesn't.) –xeno^talk 22:35, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

So, other than having it removed from one's page, what's the penalty for failing to attribute? Should I send 25 cents to the author? :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:11, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

heh. I think you should write out on your talk page, 100 times, "I will not violate the licenses of cc-by-sa images." –xeno^talk 23:13, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

I could do you one better. I could do it 128 times. >:) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:25, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

New user on the JP Talk Page

Since you were involved in the protection of the John Pershing article, please see my comments regarding the appearance of a "new" user with apparent knowledge of the article and Wikipedia policies and procedures. In my off-the-record view, this is quite obviously someone who has edited before creating this new account to bolster support. However, I can prove nothing and don't want to go against WP:AGF. We have just had that article become such a battlefield the last thing we need is a WP:SOCK or WP:MEAT issue. -OberRanks (talk) 20:04, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Hm, after reading their explanation probably best just to give them the benefit of the doubt, AGF, and see how it goes. –xeno^talk 20:20, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

It might not be a bad idea to run an ip trace on this. You will notice on the user talk page who appeared right away to "welcome" the new user. I have to be very careful here in what I say because I do not want to go against good faith and accuse without evidence. I might be wrong and this might be exactly as explained - but, this is just a little bit too convenient, especially since this user's views are now being cited to place disputed material back in the article [38]. To get right down to it, I think it is a sockpuppet account and I think you know who I think it is a sockpuppet of. Can you check it out? If I am wrong, deepest apologies. -OberRanks (talk) 17:56, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

You'll have to file at WP:SPI and present your evidence. It's fairly minor, but I do note they are signing right next to the full stop at the end of their comment ''(.~~~~)'', which isn't common. I will be fairly disappointed if the person you are hinting at turns to be the one running the account. I hope it isn't. –xeno^talk 18:02, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Mmmm, the matter of the signing post is of extreme interest. However, I probably will let this one lie for now. I did a close examination of the various posts and there is some grammar and syntax difference between the two user's methods of writing so it might not be the same person. Obviously, if this new user reappears, supporting any and everything that the other one does then I sure there would be a good case. But for now, its not worth it since no disruption has been attempted. -OberRanks (talk) 20:04, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

I came to your talk page to seek your advice on something else, and just saw that. And I'm pretty goddamn mad. (Not at you, of course.) In the first place, I have never done anything in secret here. What really pisses me off, is all of the bending over backwards I have done over the past few weeks, to be both civil and appropriate. And what infuriates me, is that OberRanks would come to your talk page and do this, rather than asking me directly. "I think it's a sockpuppet account, and you know who I think it is a sock puppet of"? Are you kidding me? You have my full permission, blessing, and even insistence to investigate this fully. And then I sure as hell hope there's going to be some form of punishment for his falsely accusing me of sockpuppetry.Mk5384 (talk) 14:24, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Back to why I was here in the first place...

On the John Pershing page, user Aunt Entropy posted a comment that I had made on the talk page of Genesis Creation myth. (Please take a look.) It was completely unrelated to the Pershing issues, and as such, deliberately misleading. I removed it, stated that I had removed it, gave my reasons, and notified the user who posted it. OberRanks (who else?) raised a fuss about this, and I wanted to make sure that I was within my rights to do this.Mk5384 (talk) 14:55, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Strictly speaking, nothing in WP:TPG would preclude such a line of argument. If you feel it is irrelevant, you could rebut or ask the user to refactor. –xeno^talk 15:57, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Damn right I appeared right away to welcome (without quotations) the new user. In the first place, that's what we're supposed to do. Secondly, the very first thing that OberRanks did was to attack this poor person. He violated AGF, NPA, and "don't bite the newcomers" all at once. "Mmmm, the matter of the signing post is of extreme interest"? Who in the hell does he think he is? Then he did "a close examination", and discovered "grammar and syntax differences"? Is he a goddamn detective? And he's decided to let this lie? Sorry, but I will not. Please tell me how to pursue this.Mk5384 (talk) 15:02, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

I just should point out that noone has made any formal accusations here. Xeno and I were having a off-the-record discussion about this just because of how it looked. At face value, it looked very suspicious and that is why we were talking about it. But, at the end of the day, there is no evidence, no disruption, and no further activity from this account. This is exactly why this has gone nowhere except on this talk page. I am sorry it upset you. This was posted nowhere except here and no charges were ever made on any formal noticeboard. In short - Xeno and I were just talking about it. -OberRanks (talk) 15:07, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

If you wanted an off the record discussion, you should have used private e-mail. You accused me of sockpuppetry, and it was not "off the record". I could care less if there's been activity from the account. You can be damn sure that no one's going to accuse me of anything based on what another user does or dosen't do. And there will be formal charges made. And there is no "we" having this discussion. You came here, and engaged Xeno. When you say, "Xeno and I were having a conversation because of how it looked", that's horseshit. Please don't try to pretend that Xeno was concerned about this.Mk5384 (talk) 15:20, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

You should be aware that I do not use private e-mail on Wikipedia due a case under my old account User:Husnock where several users sent e-mails threatening my family. Since then, I confine all my business on Wikipedia and avoid any outside contact or use of my real-world e-mail; there's just too many crazy people out there. Again, sorry you're mad. If you would like to file charges, feel free to do so. I again stress that since this was two users talking on a user page, and this never made it to any kind of noticeboard or the mainspace of an article, there probably wont be much done about it. BTW, Xeno, apologies for continuing to post on your talk page about this. -OberRanks (talk) 15:29, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Private e-mail, or not, don't pretend it was off the record, and don't pretend that Xeno was at all concerned about it.Mk5384 (talk) 15:35, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

I noticed on the ANI thread that you said you will be busy. When you are free, please drop me a quick note, and let me know how best to handle this situation. As far as the sockpuppet thing, I'll report myself, if that's what I have to do to get this investigated.Mk5384 (talk) 16:37, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

And please take note that OberRanks is only "sorry that I'm mad". He is not sorry for his behaviour.Mk5384 (talk) 19:50, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

OberRanks was careful not to mention you by name, so really only you, me, OberRanks, and the lamppost would've known who s/he was talking about. There is always the chance on questioning about possible sockpuppetry to falsely accuse someone. I'm not really sure if this has ever been reconciled on Wikipedia: due to the wiki-model, most queries must be initiated on-wiki (i.e. at WP:SPI). Not being too familiar with SPI and checkuser processes, I'm not really sure what actions you would take over this grievance. –xeno^talk 22:30, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Xeno, you know that I respect you, and I don't want to fill your time with trivial nonsense. Yes, OberRanks was careful not to mention me by name. He was also careful to make it very, very clear to whom he was referring. I have no idea who Kind Journalist is, or what his or her agenda is. I have posted what OberRanks said on Kind Journalist's talk page, and have gotten no response. All I do know, is that it isn't I, nor do I know this person. Again, I would like the sockpuppetry issue investigated.Mk5384 (talk) 08:15, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Please bear with me while I seek advice on this matter. –xeno^talk 12:52, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

arbitrary break (Pershing)

FYI, xeno, I've reported this user here for a vareity of reasons and mentioned this thread as part of the problem. -OberRanks (talk) 13:39, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I've commented there. –xeno^talk 13:41, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Of course, I'll bear with you. But in the meanwhile, OberRanks has resumed his daily trips to ANI to report me for some imaginary infraction, and it's really getting old. As long as he can somehow manage, at any cost, to keep the focus on me, he feels he won't have to answer for himself and his rulebreaking.Mk5384 (talk) 14:31, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

I haven't heard back from the individual yet, but per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SPI/Checkuser criteria and letters (perm) - in particular "C" under "When it might be appropriate " (the vote is not closed) and the third row for "When it is usually not appropriate" basically indicate that checkuser would not be appropriate here. If you wish to initiate a grievance against OberRanks over this situation, WP:ANI would be the venue - however, I would suggest a "reboot" between you two; and either another attempt at mediation, or an {{RFCtag}} on the issue to gather more outside voices. –xeno^talk 18:32, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, for the record, I totally knew OberRanks was referring to Mk5384, it's no secret. I guessed Mk5384 was his #1 suspect even before he implied it. I wasn't aware that I had to, and I'm doubtful that I really do, but I would sanction any investigation into the possible inseparability of my identity from Mk5384's, or any other user's. I would strongly encourage it, actually, since that seems to be what Mk5384 wants. I personally like the theatre and confusion of it all, but I would be (and have been) offended if someone else was mistaken for me, and I certainly wouldn't want someone else speaking for me, so to whatever ancient forces may be listening; investigate away.Kind Journalist (talk) 18:40, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for that, Kind Journalist. I realise that you find it humorous, and I too, would probably see the humor in it were it not for the seriousness of the situation.Mk5384 (talk) 22:43, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Xeno, please tell me what can be done about OberRanks and his SP nonsense. He has now began to bully yet another new user. Kind Journalist and I have both agreed to a full investigation. I can't speak for the latest user, but something has to be done. Talk about "don't bite the newcomers". The first thing that these poor people have to do here is defend themselves against accusations of sockpuppetry. Now, at ANI, Baseball Bugs has jumped on OR's SP wagon. Please get this investigation underway. OberRanks has now changed his accusations to meatpuppetry. Per Wikipedia's very definition, he has accused me of recruiting users to post on the Pershing talk page to support my position. Like the SP charge, this is 100 % false. I do not know either of these users in the most remote way. PLEASE investigate this. Even if OR and BB won't wind up being punished, they at least need to be made to stop their attacks.Mk5384 (talk) 04:28, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

I asked another, more active, checkuser to comment here but I still don't think a check would be run in this case. I also opined at the ANI thread in a new subsection. If you feel it necessary, you could initiate an ANI thread about OberRanks; but I think you would both do well to stop arguing at eachother, (comment on content, not contributors) and start arguing to 'the audience'. –xeno^talk 13:48, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Look- I understand what you're saying. However, the fact is that OberRanks has both falesly accused me, here, and elsewhere, and has told outright lies about me at ANI. This has moved far beyond the scope of AGF, and I don't see why I should lie down and take it.Mk5384 (talk) 15:07, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Then, by all means, gather your diffs and report to ANI. I still think you would both do well to de-escalate and focus on the content issue - otherwise you might find yourselves in a bidirectional interaction ban which would probably require a topic ban from the Pershing article to be effective. –xeno^talk 15:11, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't plan on pursuing this any further. The two sock accounts appear to have no connection to MK and the admin board topic went unanswered by most administrators. In the end, that turned out to be a good thing since it looks like they let us "battle it out" and meanwhile new users arrived on the Pershing article to voice their opinions. My standard response to any further charges to MK will simply be that this is a dead issue and I plan no further dispute or debate. -OberRanks (talk) 15:19, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Indeed; I was just coming here to add a "see [39]" to my above comment. –xeno^talk 15:28, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Of course, it went unanswered. That's because it's just the latest round of your trivial nonsense, mixed with outright lies. You created this entire mess, and in typical fashion, instead of apologising, you choose to just walk away. Some "soldier" you are!Mk5384 (talk) 22:45, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

The content issue is being dealt with at RFC so hopefully this matter will soon be concluded. I would ask you both to remain civil; and perhaps simply stop commenting at/about eachother. –xeno^talk 22:48, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

arbitrary break 2 (Pershing)

BTW, Xeno, TY for fixing the RfC I put on the talk page. I had a feeling I hadn't done it right, but had to leave.Mk5384 (talk) 22:56, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

No worries. Cheers, –xeno^talk 22:58, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Sounds good to me too, Xeno. I would ask you to maybe point out to MK that cracks about my military service are clearing violating WP:NPA. The diffs are adding up on that - so far, I've found 4 clear cases of inappropriate comments about my service in the United States armed forces. -OberRanks (talk) 23:13, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

This is why I asked him to remain civil in my reply to him. WP:CIV is a policy I rarely (if ever) enforce, due to various reasons that I won't go into at this time; however, you may post at WP:WQA if he doesn't stop (though I hope he will). –xeno^talk 23:15, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't understand. I simply don't believe that OberRanks is in the military. How, in the world, is it inappropriate, or a personal attack, no less? Is he honestly trying to imply that I'm not entitled to my opinion? And, Xeno; with all due respect, what about OR, and his myriad personal attacks on me?Mk5384 (talk) 04:01, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

If you have an edit diff of an actual personal attack against you, i.e. where I called you a name or some other inappropriate gesture, then please take it to WP:ANI. Please note that reporting you on noticeboards for actions in articles, which are then backed up with evidence from your own edit diffs, are not really seen by anyone (except maybe you) as a personal attack. I suggest that if you wish to pursue this, you leave Xeno alone and take it to the noticeboard. Tell the administrators about the lies, the conspiracy, and the efforts to discredit you that you seem to think are happening. I'm sure they will be happy to listen to what you have to say. -OberRanks (talk) 05:14, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

OK; well I suggest that you leave Xeno alone, as you were the one who got Xeno involved in this nonsense in the first place. Here is just one example of your personal attacks: saying that my refusing to believe that you are in the military is a " serious, offensive, sinister attack". And, again you are doing this passive agressive bullshit. You came to Xeno's talk page, started all of this, continued to post here for days, and now suggest that I leave Xeno alone. Xeno is my friend. Please don't speak for them.Mk5384 (talk) 12:49, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

I intentionally asked both parties to remain civil (not to single anyone out), and stop commenting at/about eachother. Hopefully the SPI case will be accepted, exonerate you, and then perhaps OberRanks may see fit to apologize for the mistaken allegation. And by then, the content issue should be sorted out and you can go your separate ways? You two don't seem to get on very well together; this is a big wiki - no need to be constantly butting heads. –xeno^talk 12:51, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

I hope so too, Xeno. It would be quite odd for the SPI case to be rejected when the accused is the one most forcefully asking that it be investigated.Mk5384 (talk) 12:56, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

You are wise indeed, Xeno. I'm taking a 2-3 months break from the Pershing article and said all there is to be said about MK; with this recent thing about me not really being in the military, this whole thing is getting a bit too personal. I am also finding that the more I respond, the more it seems like I am part of the problem. Best to walk away from this. Thanks for all your help. -OberRanks (talk) 15:08, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

After being cleared, I have now been told that no action will be taken against those who falsely accused me. Please tell me there's something that I can do.Mk5384 (talk) 18:34, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

You could post at ANI, but I doubt anyone would take any action as it would have the potential to create a chilling effect for filing SPI reports. Best to just move on, I think. –xeno^talk 18:51, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

I haven't followed this hoopla and only caught some aspects on my watchlist, but let me interject that the purpose of this project is building an encyclopedia, and all actions and processes are supposed to be improving it.
What "actions" do you have in mind that would further this project's goal, in this particular case?
Amalthea 19:04, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

It's also unfortunate that the checkuser did not "look outside the box" (as far as we know) to find out who the puppetmaster for "Excessively Brief" is. A good guess would be the perennial troublemaker called "Light current", as it fits his M.O. (appearing to impersonate someone in order to get them into further trouble). If it was in fact LC, the checkuser might have decided to do nothing based on denying recognition. But SPI's can be frustrating to us peons when it seems like nothing useful comes of them. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:13, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

It is unfortunate, as I would have welcomed it.Mk5384 (talk) 22:57, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Don't count on getting a satisfactory answer, but it could be worthwhile to ask the checkuser directly about it. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:06, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Whilst we may continue to disagree about Pershing, I appreciate your help.Mk5384 (talk) 23:09, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

I feel special

Finally, I create an article that doesn't get deleted. I feel special, here it is. Any criticisms?--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{Le†'s Go Buffalo! (sign)} 01:00, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Looks good. =) I'm no article writer, but maybe try to loosen up the prose a bit. "He..." ... "He..." ... "Lamoreaux..." ... "Lamoreaux..." ... "Lamoreaux..." just seems a little repetitive. That's all I got! –xeno^talk 13:53, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip, I'm already working on 3 others. I'll keep that in mind.--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{Le†'s Go Buffalo! (sign)} 14:38, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

I made some changes, any better?--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{Le†'s Go Buffalo! (sign)} 16:28, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

The subsections help a bit, yea. But really, I'm not the person to be coming to for advice on article-writing =) –xeno^talk 16:29, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

And to think I thought you knew it all! *Wink*--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{Le†'s Go Buffalo! (sign)} 19:14, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Help!

Can't change the image size for some damn reason I don't know. No matter what I put the size to be, the image doesn't change!--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†He is Risen!(sign)} 19:40, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

On the above-noted page? I tried changing it to 500px and it definitely changed (preview only, of course). Nevermind I see it was another page: this is why (missing_underscore). –xeno^talk 19:42, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Good cause I was confused. I'm not that observant.--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†He is Risen!(sign)} 19:47, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Rollback

Hi Xeno! I've seen you active on ANI (and helping people generally), and I'm always happy to make new friends, so I thought I'd come to you for this request. I'm becoming more active here on WIkipedia, and as my watchlist has been expanding I've increasingly come across minor vandalism such as: [40] [41] [42]. It would save considerable time if I could use the rollback feature to revert edits such as these. If you feel so inclined, I would appreciate it if you could add this feature to my set. Stephen B Streater (talk) 20:33, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Of course! [43] Though, you won't be able to make lulzworthy statements such as your first diff unless you use something like the below =) Enjoy! –xeno^talk 20:36, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

importScript('User:Mr.Z-man/rollbackSummary.js'); // allows tweaking of rollback edit summary

Thanks for that, and for your messages too :-) Stephen B Streater (talk) 20:38, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Help please

[44] Will you help him please? --causa sui (talk) 16:40, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Sure, if he asks me to be his filter I can do so. –xeno^talk 16:45, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, he's not asking. This is bordering on harassment, in my opinion. --causa sui (talk) 19:29, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

I suppose you could ask him to not post further to your talk page (suggesting that if he has further concerns, they be raised at a central venue such as RFC/U or one of the noticeboards). –xeno^talk 19:35, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

• Xeno: Especially in light of the comments at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents/Causa sui, which closed so recently, I'm more than a little concerned by the nature of the recent edits by Causa that GL has pointed out. WP:AGF is of course my starting point, but it does not require that editors continue to assume good faith in the presence of contrary evidence. These edit summaries and edits are so "off", that IMHO they are disruptive. I tried raising my concerns to him directly. His response was to delete my note, characterizing it as "rude, aggressive comments and personal attacks". I'm not quite sure how that fits in with his obligations under WP:ADMIN to "respond promptly and civilly to queries about their Wikipedia-related conduct ... and to justify them when needed."--Epeefleche (talk) 18:21, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

• As indicated above, WP:RFC/U may be an appropriate venue to discuss these matters if user talk page discussions have not alleviated your concerns. –xeno^talk 19:44, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
• If you are unwilling to assume good faith, then discussion between us is pointless. --causa sui (talk) 20:02, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
• Responding to your added bit: I believe that line from ADMIN primarily refers to actions taken whilst wearing an administrative hat. –xeno^talk 20:05, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

• Thanks for getting back to me on the "added bit". I think, actually, that it refers to actions taken while not wearing the admin hat. This becomes clear when one looks at the entire sentence. The full sentence reads: "Administrators are expected to respond promptly and civilly to queries about their Wikipedia-related conduct and administrator actions and to justify them when needed." The second part of the italicized bit refers only to their admin actions. But the first part is more encompassing, and especially in light of the second part it is clear that had it only applied to their admin actions, the scriveners could have so limited it. Rather, they left it as a broader obligation. Tell me if I'm wrong, but I fail to see how the deletion and above reply by Causa to my note (which was not personal in the least) was responsive per the wp:admin obligation.--Epeefleche (talk) 20:19, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

• I'll be happy to discuss content edits with you if you would have a discussion instead of an inquisition. The policy does not obligate me to accept abuse from you. You and Greg L should both learn something from how xeno (talk · contribs) approached me about the exact same issue on the exact same talk page. That's an example of how to carry on rational, productive discussion when editors disagree about something. If you can't do that, then further contact between us is harassing, and we should just steer clear of each other. --causa sui (talk) 20:21, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

• In deference to Xeno's below request, I'll limit my discussion here to my question to him.--Epeefleche (talk) 20:34, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

• I was half-joking. Please do feel free to continue here if it will help to alleviate concerns. But keep it cool. –xeno^talk 20:45, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

• Hmmm… I come here to leave a post for xeno and instead find a faux appeal for “help” from Causa sui. This is a transparent attempt at posturing; every single editor who dares take Causa sui to task for improper edits is met with crocodile tears and false accusations (like this) that they are engaging in “personal attacks” and “failing to assume good faith.” This is a tactic Causa sui darn near needs to file a patent on as he has honed it to a fine art. To Causa sui: other editors shouldn’t have to go to public venues like Administrator’s Noticeboards to deal with you if you’d just listen to reason like this on your own talk page. Greg L (talk) 19:55, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

• Let's try to draw back the rhetoric a bit...I've already got one long, drawn-out thread on my talk page - I don't have room for another! If there are concerns that need to be discussed - and user talk page discussion isn't bearing fruit, perhaps mediation or RFC/U would be in order. –xeno^talk 20:05, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

• Every single editor, huh? How about xeno? Didn't map that data point did you? --causa sui (talk) 20:02, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

• I have also managed to criticise Causa sui without retaliation. There is obviously a mutual misunderstanding going on which has led to mistrust. Issues get amplified with interaction. It is much easier to see the storms developing from the outside. Initially no one is at fault, but the unintentional mutual provocations lead to instabilities in the interaction between you. I'm sure either side could fix the problems, but if both sides could change it would mean less work for both. In my plan, the fixes for each side would be different. The question is, would people rather be proved right and continue this disfunctional interaction, or give up that option in order to work productively together? Stephen B Streater (talk) 20:38, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

AWB questions

Hi, as you seem to know a lot about getting the most out of AWB can I ask you some questions. As I'm very much a newbie with the tool.

• I'd like to work on all articles that have {{WikiProject Chess}} on the talk page. I been looking for an export of Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:WikiProject_Chess, but as stuck on how to export.
• Is it possible to do a find on a talk page and a replace on an article page or vice-versa. For example can you find "living=yes" on the talk page and add Category:Living people on the article page?
• Where do I find options to look at page size? I don't see them and was under the impression you where able using AWB to create a report for WP:SONGS.

Thanks for any help you get give. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 13:05, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

1. Use AWB to build a list of "What transcludes page". Alternatively, build from the category Category:WikiProject Chess articles. –xeno^talk 13:16, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

   Yes, this works. 'What transcludes page (all NS)' to Template:WikiProject Chess. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 00:36, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

2. To do this, you would use Special:Export, paste the list of talk pages, use AWB's database scanner on the resultant .XML dump to search for "living=yes", and then convert the results to mainspace pages. (That being said, there are bots that trawl for living people to do the needful on both the article and the talk page - you'll probably find not much work to do).

   Special:Export is a bit limited as you can't recurse categories and many categories(the Bio ones I want to use) are talk pages. Otherwise this is fine. Results for chess grandmasters was a few false positives so not going to mark up many BLP's here. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 00:36, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

   Use AWB's listmaker to make the list of articles you want to export, then scan them. Alternatively, you can just use "Pre-parse mode" and skip if not contains (the string you are looking for). –xeno^talk 00:44, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

   Both of those options are really useful. Thank you. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 01:34, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

3. In the database scanner.

–xeno^talk 13:16, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Off to check it out :) Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 13:17, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

The bot(s?) that scan for living people? I'm only aware of database reports. The reason I was looking to do this with AWB is because there seems to be quite a few! It's not difficult to manually find bio's that are not tagged as living people. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 13:40, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

The appropriately named User:LivingBot =) (...though it appears it hasn't been doing this for a little while??? so maybe disregard my above note) –xeno^talk 13:41, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Good link. So now I'm thinking that Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/LivingBot_10 puts living=yes on the talk page, so unlikely that looking for living=yes would find missing Category:Living people from the article. So checking that might be fruitless. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 13:50, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

There's other bots that do this as well, and as I said, LivingBot appears not to be doing those living tasks as often so you might find work to be done after all. –xeno^talk 13:52, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Category:Unassessed biography articles

I'd like to check this category to see if there are unreferenced BLP's in there. Now I can't use Special:Export as the cateogry is of talk pages. If I use AWB and Make a list is limits the number of pages to 25000. The category contains 108,667 articles at the moment, is there a way I can check them all? Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 02:09, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

You would need a bot or admin account to be able to look for more than 25,000 results. –xeno^talk 12:39, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Or maybe you could do it for me? My pre-parse run took 3 hours to run and reduced 25000 articles into only 33! Do you have a few spare hours? Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 13:25, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

This is probably because there are already other bots trawling for unreferenced BLPs... I can email you the full list I suppose, you can use AWB to convert them from talk pages and the list splitter to make them into more reasonable chunks for Special:Export. –xeno^talk 13:27, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

I didn't expect many matches, so was delighted with the pre-parse method. email won't work there are to many to export and resulting file for 100,000 unassessed bios will be 250Mb plus in size. I can't receive email that big. ;) Instead could I give you category and pre-parse skipping info and you do a pre-parse run to determine matches - the green list that will be given should be quite small when done. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 13:47, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

The list itself in plaintext format is only 1.93 megs; you can preparse it yourself (or chop it in half and paste into Special:Export) at that point =). –xeno^talk 13:49, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

ah, I see. A list of article names. So I can copy paste into AWB? Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 13:51, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes, but AWB will probably hang if you try to paste a list this big. I would use Make list->Text file. –xeno^talk 13:53, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Incidentally, the export for the articles was actually closer to 475 megs!... Since I've already got it downloaded, I can run a db scan on it, rather than you doing a long preparse, if you like. –xeno^talk 14:16, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Yeah great. So here is the only criteria I ran to get 10,000 down to 33. The database scanner has some similar options.

• Skip->Match->Contains->Category:Living people
• Skip->Match->Doesn't contain->birth date and age

So what results is articles containing 'birth date and age' but are not marked as 'Category:Living people'. And yeah, 475 Mb a bit of an underestimate, at least I said 250Mb plus ;) Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 14:29, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

[45] There ya go. –xeno^talk 14:58, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 15:38, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Found out the 25000 limit doesn't exist if it's multiple categories. I did a 4 level recurses of Category:B-Class articles and had a list of 160000+ articles without any problem. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 23:10, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Yep - the limit is for any one particular query; recursing through categories is many different queries. You should think about filing for a bot approval so that you can bypass the limits when desired. –xeno^talk 23:19, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

I'd like that, but I don't have a bot. Do I? How do I get a bot or is in some way AWB without the limits considered a bot? Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 23:24, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes, AWB has a "bot mode". So you can apply for a simple bot approval using AWB as the framework. –xeno^talk 13:21, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Will file for Bot approval later today. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 14:05, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

requested. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 00:02, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

• Can you do me a favour and go through these pages to add living=yes or no to the talk pages? Thanks! –xeno^talk 13:21, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

If I'm not mistaken that is an entirely manual progress. The ones I checked may or may not be alive and there is no category to determine either way. But yeah, I will get to it. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 13:36, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

I believe that - in the absence of proof otherwise - we default to living=yes. –xeno^talk 13:37, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Completed this. Not all where bios, so they don't have bio tags now. It feels awkward to declare someone living without any proof or reference either. I'd have thought something like 'assumed living' is more appropriate. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 21:52, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Removal of blank "living" parameter

I've come across a few edits in which your bot removed an existing blank |living= parameter. This wasn't intentional, was it? I always include "living" and "class" in WPBiography whether I know the values or not. As I'm not familiar with the plugin, I don't know if this was done completely by the plugin or if there was additional bot coding which did it. I didn't see any mention of this on the plugin talk page. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 23:40, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

I believe WP:Plugin++ is doing it... I'll have to check it out. –xeno^talk 23:44, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Yep, it's the plugin. I've filed a bug report and added logic to re-add the blank parameter in the meantime. –xeno^talk 12:44, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

• Here [46] are the articles that Xenobot worked on that now have no living= param. –xeno^talk 13:20, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for looking into it. I've restored the "living" to all of those pages (also adding or fixing the "listas" on almost half of them while I was at it). MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 20:46, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Ah - thanks for that. I probably should have mentioned I asked someone above to actually go thru and add the values as well; might've saved you some work. –xeno^talk 20:48, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, it'll make it a tiny bit easier for SunCreator to take care of. It was no trouble for me, as I used my existing AWB settings, and it was worth it to add/fix the listas values. I had also added a few "living" values and removed a non-applicable WPBiography, so I'll delete them from the page to prevent wasting SunCreator's time. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 21:06, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Cool. Thanks, –xeno^talk 21:08, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

William Keith

My question is abut XenoBot and how it determines if an article is a stub. I am a contributor to William Keith (artist), which was assessed by XenoBot as a stub. Is this article really a stub? I am not saying that this article is perfect and I look forward to making additional improvements, but here's a description I found of a stub:

"Provides very little meaningful content; may be little more than a dictionary definition."

I think that this article exceeds that description. It has 28 sentences and 9 references about a 19th century artist, and includes several images. Is that really a stub? Cullen328 (talk) 23:53, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

I think it prolly classed it as a stub because all of the stub tags(3) at the bottom of the page. Heironymous Rowe (talk) 00:14, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Indeed. The article is far beyond stub. I don't have time to properly class it atm, but it's easily a C or B. –xeno^talk 00:18, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much. So is the best solution at this time just to remove the stub tags? I assume that the stub tags go back to a time when the article was much smaller. Can your bot be improved to check the date of the stub tags and then check to see if substantial content has been added after that date? Sorry if my questions are naive, but I haven't been involved with assessing articles - I spend most of my Wikipedia time trying to write and improve articles. Cullen328 (talk) 14:55, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Indeed - they were there before you started improving it. In future if you improve an article beyond stub (even a short article with sufficient references to satisfy WP:V may be considered "start" at least), be sure to remove any lingering stub templates.

It would be too complicated to figure out when the stub tags were added, but what I could do is check the pagesize of the article and not tag articles of a certain byte or word length.

Keep up the good work, and thank you for your suggestion. –xeno^talk 14:57, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome, and it is a pleasure to work with you and learn from you. Cullen328 (talk) 15:01, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Assistance Required

Hey Xeno, even though I have come to rely on Jade for coding help, I bet I could quickly ask you a favor. See my Sandbox? Well at the bottom of that page is a look at what I would like my user page to look like, I want to have the image be the background rather than the blue color. Only it would be nice for the tabs and infobox to overlap the background image. Sorry, my coding isn't spectacular. Could you find a minute to help?--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Canucks! (sign)} 15:22, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Too complicated for me, I'm afraid. Not sure how to get an image to be a background image without HTML tags. Maybe imagemap? These search results may help (but seem to indicate it's not possible). You might ask User:Jack Merridew. –xeno^talk 16:42, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Check out iMatthews old user page (the way it was prior to his retirement) and AE's. That is what I mean.--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Canucks! (sign)} 16:58, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Looks really complicated. Lots of div statements. Try to emulate their code - make sure you attribute when copying. –xeno^talk 17:01, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Think I got it now, see for yourself on my sandbox, now I just have to align the tabs to the right and get the info box in there. Your right, it is complicated.--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Canucks! (sign)} 17:37, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Finished, after about a half-hour. How does it look?--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Canucks! (sign)} 19:35, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Looks nice but it's hard to read the "Who I am" and "Contact" text. –xeno^talk 19:38, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

What could make it easier to read? Different size, color, etc?--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Canucks! (sign)} 19:47, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

A background. –xeno^talk 19:51, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Ha, very funny. Maybe if i just make the font bold it will be easier to read... wait you mean have the tab backgrounds be white? For a second I thought you wanted me to ditch the photo.--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Canucks! (sign)} 19:55, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes, a white background for that dropdown. –xeno^talk 19:57, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

What am I doing wrong? I must be coding it wrong. How can I make the tab's background white?--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Canucks! (sign)} 20:10, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

[47] –xeno^talk 20:16, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Heh, I knew that. Hey thanks, you never let me down.--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Canucks! (sign)} 20:17, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

 Done--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Canucks! (sign)} 20:31, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

re: Suggestion

I did that with the Bio template but it seems that somehow I can't do it with the Miltiary one :(, anyway thank you very much for your concern :) --Saud (talk) 17:36, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

I fixed it, thanks --Saud (talk) 19:06, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Tags

Yes, you are right. The curse of copying rather then thinking. My appologes for creating extra work for you. Calistemon (talk) 20:26, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

No worries, there wasn't many. Thanks, –xeno^talk 20:28, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

RE : Er, I chose r3

Thanks for the heads up. I replied on my talkpage explaining why. - Mailer Diablo 21:33, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Mono

User talk:Mono#Fake signatures — beginning to not appreciate your access list decision here.... --MZMcBride (talk) 15:45, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Mmm...indeed. Let me know if you'd like me to revoke. –xeno^talk 18:12, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Revoked per their response. –xeno^talk 00:50, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Cool, thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 02:40, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

I have warned him before. Apparently, it doesn't seem like I got my point across. Hope it sinks in this time. I've responded about Xenobot's tagging run at WT:MAC. Thanks, Airplaneman ✈ 02:13, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Red Sox template

Hey. I noticed that you asked Koavf about fixing the messes with the template from a year ago back in February. I've been trying to fix what I can (manually of course, nearly all of the mid-importance tags are invalid that I'm seeing). Would you be able to get me an updated list of any baseball articles that still have two baseball templates on the talk page? I can knock them out in a couple days, I'm tired of still seeing things double templated with different assessments and importances. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 20:20, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Sure can. I'll have them for you in the morning. –xeno^talk 22:47, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

[48] There y'ar. Thanks for volunteering to clean these up. –xeno^talk 01:20, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for putting them up. About half are fixed so far, the rest should be fixed the next couple days. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 03:17, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Just wondering...

What "comments at the village pump" that I made led you to your oppose at my RfA? Immunize (talk) 17:48, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

I didn't oppose, I was neutral. If I recall correctly, it was because of your tendency to make or support obviously unsuitable proposals. –xeno^talk 18:15, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Which of my comments at a proposal led you to your neutral opinion, the one where rollbackers and sysop's could self-replicate, or the one where normal users could delete there one userspaces? Immunize (talk) 13:50, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Both, also: Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 60#Proposal to treat IP addresses and vandalism-only accounts equally., Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Archive 73#Why are IP's allowed to edit?, Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Archive 73#Autoconfirmed status, Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Archive 74#Set higher standards for rollbackers. –xeno^talk 13:57, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Email

Wondering how do you get someones email address (if they don't mind you having it) as I need to reacquire User:Malke 2010's email but she might not respond for sometime. Is there even a way to do so? 'The Ninjalemming' 17:16, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

No, unless they tell it to you or reply to an email you send via Special:EmailUser/Malke 2010. –xeno^talk 17:19, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Sent an email there so am waiting for a response, thanks though. 'The Ninjalemming' 17:41, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Christ lemming! You didn't know that? I am shocked that you were not aware of the fact you could do that!--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Canucks! (sign)} 11:41, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm a technical retard you know *now wheres the the 'wavey' looking button*. Oh, and you both get a hug <hug>, sorry I couldn't resist =P 'The Ninjalemming' 17:21, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Well, for a techinical retard your pretty good with Wikipedia. I'm surprised that any good editors consider themselves technologically inept.--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Canucks! (sign)} 13:04, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

AIV

Thanks for clearing that out. I swear, it seems like there are never enough admins around the place. :) ALI ^{nom nom} 19:00, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

It's dirty work, but somebody's gotta do it... –xeno^talk 19:01, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm on strike for a 50% pay increase. No, make that 75%. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:04, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

What kind of effect does a strike have on a volunteer position? Do they start giving out salaries? ALI ^{nom nom} 19:06, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Admins are hopeless addicts. A strike wouldn't last. They couldn't even lock us out. –xeno^talk 19:09, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Plus there are all those potential scabs. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:11, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

AWB links on page.

Is it possible in AWB to find links on page to a search page. e.g. jewelery typo search? The links on page doesn't appear to work for such a page. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 22:48, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Make list->Source->Wiki search. See also Wikipedia:AWB/MAN#Make list. =) –xeno^talk 22:49, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Love it! Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 23:09, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Be sure to update it wherever you can. It needs loving. –xeno^talk 23:10, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

WP:SONGS unassessed run.

If the WP:SONGS request gets approved remember the album/discog exclude categories are to be finalized before the bot run, although much easier now using AWB and won't have to create manual list of album categories. Phaw :) SunCreator ^(talk) 17:26, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Hm... The pending task actually only seeks to auto-assess in Category:Unassessed song articles, so there shouldn't be any need to exclude anything... No? –xeno^talk 17:35, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Good point, seems I have forgot what was planned before. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 17:44, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

WIkiProject Econ tagging

Would you mind filling in for Kingpin, who's been having some technical difficulties? It's just the one list I've sent him so far, and I've been told you might be able to handle it. Details are at User_talk:Kingpin13/archive/2010 > April > WikiProject tagging. Thanks, - Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 19:33, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Sure... Though it might make more sense to give me a list of categories from whence these came, rather than a static list of articles. Do you want me to inherit classes? (Kind of mixed messages at that archive) –xeno^talk 19:40, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes, if possible, but the priority is getting them tagged at all. Those would be from Category:Economists, I think, but you have to be careful not to go too deep. - Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 19:55, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Your project doesn't appear to have tagged many articles under Category:Economics's subcategories either, but since this looks to be a BLP-related thing I'll run with this for now. –xeno^talk 20:27, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

All in good time, my man, all in good time. Oh, and thanks again. - Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 20:32, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Can I start editing my page again?

It's been about a month.

Clerkenwell TALK PAGE!" Contribs 19:36, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Let me ping Theresa. –xeno^talk 19:43, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Ok, but no tomfoolery. And I would advise you to keep the personal details to a minimum. –xeno^talk 23:17, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Yay, thanks. Clerkenwell TALK PAGE!" Contribs 21:48, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your helpful suggestion re geonotice action request in the administrators noticeboard. It was much apprecitaed. Linnah (talk) 07:51, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

No problem. –xeno^talk 12:58, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

173.160.8.81

Hello. On the 4th you blocked 173.160.8.81 (talk · contribs) for 31 hours for vandalizing Levi Johnston. He just recieved a level 1 warning for the same sort of post, but I thought you might like to look at it and consider something a little stronger. Thanks.--Cube lurker (talk) 17:38, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. They're gone for another week. –xeno^talk 17:48, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Anytime, and thanks.--Cube lurker (talk) 17:49, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

D'oh!!

Xeno, whoa, geez, I'm really sorry about that! My hand slipped and I just accidentally hit the rollback link while your talk page was at the top of my watchlist--I didn't even mean to click on anything at all, I was just moving the mouse... Anyway, I've rolled that back now, but I apologize--I've never done that before and don't expect it to happen again. Sorry! • CinchBug • 23:06, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Don't mention it. Happens all the time. =) –xeno^talk 00:10, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi.

Hi there. As you moderate on here, and since another mod is stalking my edits under 45g.... I thought I'd post my problem on here.

I frequently use an account called 45g to edit on here. But a really annoying member (not a mod) keeps putting rubbish on my talk page. The mod I referred to is her friend from Encyclopedia Dramatica. Whenever I remove what she's added, Snaisybelle comes back a week later to deface it again.SynchPedro86 (talk) 17:28, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Snaisybelle

You should ask them to stop posting to your talk page unless it's to notify of you of a noticeboard discussion, or something. –xeno^talk 17:54, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

This is already being discussed at Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#45g.2C_Michaeldsuarez.2C_and_Snaisybelle, and it was discussed at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive609#45g.2C_Michaeldsuarez.2C_and_Snaisybelle a week ago. Also, 45g is now trying to deceive me and Snaisybelle by creating alternate accounts and talking to a sysop behind our backs. I'm seriously disappointed in 45g behavior. I'm now going to start a sockpuppetry investigation due to this deception. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 17:34, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

It's hardly a deceptive sock if he self-discloses... I concur with David Fuchs: [49]. Just stay away from eachother. –xeno^talk 18:36, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Alright, I'm stopping. I've also asked my colleague Snaisybelle to stop as well. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 19:15, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you kindly. –xeno^talk 19:17, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Delete

I thinks it's safe to say you can delete this Image that has been nominated since March, it is now orphaned and now longer needed thanks to someone uploading a new photo of Miller.--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Canucks! (sign)} 17:38, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Not quite... "This is a file from the Wikimedia Commons." [50]. –xeno^talk 17:47, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Oh, I thought Wikipedia admins had power in the Commons too. Well, you should at least notify an admin of Commons about it.--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Canucks! (sign)} 20:16, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

eh...I dunno, I think they're busy deleting reams and reams of porn. –xeno^talk 20:17, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Ha...haha...hahahahahahaha! That is hilarious, and to think I thought there was always an admin that had a moment to do a favor.--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Canucks! (sign)} 20:29, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Try commons:User talk:Martin H.; I think that's the last commons admin I dealt with. –xeno^talk 20:31, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Response is still pending. I notifyied him yesterday but a response has yet to be given. I wonder why, he has been on and doing plenty since then. Oh well, I guess I shall have to wait.--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Canucks! (sign)} 18:54, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

I think I'll stay as far away from commons as possible for the time being. There is a shitstorm over there, and I don't fancy having any shit on me. –xeno^talk 19:17, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Canucks! (sign)} 19:26, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Task 6.2

I meant to say that it would be better to decide what should be displayed on infobox, flag/noflag - linked/unlinked. Once this is known simply convert all the infoboxen to the country name, and put the appropriate display features in Infobox settlement. We then can use "ISO 3166 code" to pull the code

Reasons:

1. Consistent look and feel
2. Error checks the country name (spelling etc)
3. Doesn't rely on, or create a new field, which can go out of sync, and will be needed on new uses.

Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 14:49, 7 May 2010 (UTC).

I don't really have an opinion one way or the other. I think it would be a harder sell as it would remove the customizable ability of subdivision_name/name1, but maybe raise this at Template talk:Infobox settlement. –xeno^talk 14:53, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Something weird

What do you think of this? I then noticed that for the past three and a half years, the editor in question has been trying to prove that exact point (on the Gettysburg talk page archive). The fact that they are also won't admit to the sock is also concerning. I'm just wondering if anything further should be done, i.e. me reaching out to help them. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 15:04, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Both points-of-view seem to have received appropriate treatment in the article at Battle of Gettysburg#Decisive victory?. –xeno^talk 15:07, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Bot adding coordinates

Right now we generally have coordinates in place articles about twice, sometimes, three times. An effort on the part of the coord-aficionados, I guess. I don't suppose the bot can check for redundancies. It would be nicer to remove redundant coordinates or maybe all coordinates since I don't see the general use of them anyway. Maps are more useful IMO. Thanks. Student7 (talk) 20:30, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

I'll have to look further into this. Thank you for your comments. –xeno^talk 03:39, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Zombie userbox

Oops! I didn't notice it. Thanks for the tip. I thought it was an actual user, and could be offended by editing of his subpage. Pikolas (talk) 21:15, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

No problem! Happy userboxing, –xeno^talk 03:39, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Election page

Hi! Just in case you're not aware, you're being discussed here. Figured you'd probably like to be notified. Regards, Jafeluv (talk) 21:32, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the note. –xeno^talk 03:39, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

bot's turn, soon...

• WT:ACTOR#search and replace patterns

I floated an objections-check there three days ago, and there are none. I also note this comment by WHL, which is accepting of the notion. I believe this is fine to proceed with. Let me know if you'd like me to dig up more examples or if I can otherwise help. Cheers, Jack Merridew 22:59, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Just going to put a fake future timestamp to keep this here for a while. –xeno^talk 04:20, 20 May 2010 (UTC) I'll file a bot request soon...

• What's this all about? –xeno^talk 13:28, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Blocked user

User talk:98.16.213.157 has repeatedly changed the block template as well as insert profanities that have needed to be reverted. Though you should know --Tommy2010 11:40, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Reblocked with talk page access disallowed - thanks. –xeno^talk 18:26, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Could you also probably block another IP for deliberately misspelling many, many, many words in one edit as seen here? It really annoys me, way more than any other type of vandalism Tommy2010 13:53, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Report was good at the time, but is now stale. Re-report if this user resumes vandalising.; best to report to WP:AIV to get eyes on it at the appropriate time. –xeno^talk 18:26, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Interview with the signpost

Hi Xeno, the Signpost is doing a story about WikiProject Essays, and I thought I'd invite you to interview with me. Check out Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom/WikiProject desk/Interviews and answer any/all of the questions. Just answer under my answers. ɳorɑfʈ ^Talk! 13:15, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the invite, I appreciate it - but I really don't have anything to add to those questions and answers. –xeno^talk 18:27, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Fringe userbox transclusion

Hey, I'm trying to transclude your Fringe userboxes into Wikipedia:Userboxes/Media/Television (shows)/Science-fiction and fantasy#Fringe but I'm not getting the simplified version to transclude correctly. Could you take a look at it, maybe split the simplified version to a separate userbox?
--Gyrobo (talk) 03:02, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Sure :) [51]. –xeno^talk 03:22, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

{{User:UBXeno/Fringe}}

This user watches Fringe.

who's using it?

Thank you!
--Gyrobo (talk) 03:24, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for fixing my ANI post. I was in a rush because I really need some good advice. Joe Chill (talk) 19:42, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

No problem, but in future WP:EAR is probably a better venue for this type of thing. –xeno^talk 19:43, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

At least the admins that replied are being nice about it. Usually if I post something there on mistake, they are antagonistic. Joe Chill (talk) 19:50, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

thankyou Xeno, I had been asking some admins to help me delete the right stuff magzine article, thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.130.36.127 (talk) 12:56, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

No problem. –xeno^talk 13:00, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Macintosh Rename

Hello Xeno. I know you have expressed an interest in the proposed rename of WikiProject Macintosh; I am contacting you because of that. It seems that consensus has been reached and some administrator actions are required, as noted here. Would it be possible for you perform those actions for the project?--moɳo 23:43, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

 Done –xeno^talk 12:30, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

hahahaha

You're right. But the guilt and the impishness of using a new account gives me such a rush.

In all seriousness, thanks for the invitation, but I'll just wait this out. I really shouldn't be editing until then ... AGradman / talk. See User:Xeno at 02:16, Tuesday 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough. FWIW "user:Andrew Gradman" does not exist; you should create the user account if you are going to use it for redirects. –xeno^talk 12:30, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

(still cheating) yes, that's a good idea, I'll create that account. (soon -- I'm not editing wikipedia right now). AGradman / talk. See User:Xeno at 04:12, Wednesday 12 May 2010 (UTC)

DABlinks

I recently got approved for moving DABlinks on the top. In the next couple of days, we ll have an improved code to merge DABlinks. Check Wikipedia_talk:AutoWikiBrowser/Feature_requests#Merge_DABlinks. Do you think I need another BRFA to do a run bot as soon as we have covered all cases or I am covered from the last one? DABlinks merging can be counted as "move on the top" since it removes the unnecessary break lines improving accessibility. Pages affected in first run: ~2,000 -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:14, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

It should probably be fine to run it under the same banner. –xeno^talk 12:30, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Making me chuckle

Your first post here made me chuckle. Thank you. It was primarily the "furiously" part. :) Rockfang (talk) 22:34, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

heh. I was furiously clicking, fwiw =p –xeno^talk 22:40, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Block

Do you think most admins will block on one final warning, if I mention it is a sock of brucejenner? CTJF83 chat 03:30, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes, the "only" warning is fine in this case. I blocked on sight anyway, recognized them from the other day. –xeno^talk 03:32, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Ok, I'll link to the user if I encounter an admin who doesn't know of his/her actions. Thanks, CTJF83 chat 17:34, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Ugh! You archived too fast! Can we think about semi-protecting his main vandalism pages, so we won't have to deal with him as much. CTJF83 chat 03:15, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

heh, I was trying to hibernate. What are the main targets? –xeno^talk 12:30, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Mostly gay, and gay marriage related pages, I can get specifics if you want. CTJF83 chat 16:15, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Marriage, Same-sex marriage, Same-sex marriage in Iowa, Homosexual agenda, Homophobic propaganda, those are the main ones. CTJF83 chat 16:22, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

I've added these pages to my watchlist and will monitor them and semi-protect if the situation worsens. –xeno^talk 18:25, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Ok, thanks, CTJF83 chat 18:27, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

FYI

Hi Xeno. I notice you granted User:DC rollback rights on 7 February 2010. I thought you should be aware of my recent message at User talk:DC regarding possible removal of the privilege and indeed blocking subsequent to any continued problematic editing. Please say if you think I have been unduly harsh there. Best wishes, --John (talk) 04:12, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Hm, was that the only instance? While I personally don't condone it (as it's rude and uncollegial), for some time it has been tolerated to use rollback on your own user space. As for the problematic editing in general, I haven't looked into that further so I'll defer to your judgment there. –xeno^talk 12:30, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I had forgotten that. I will modify the message I left accordingly. My concern about edit-warring remains. --John (talk) 13:53, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Memory fails me

I forget what used to go after the "xeno". Does that make me a bad person? 216.136.12.34 (talk) 13:33, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes. Yes it does. =) –xeno^talk 13:35, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Yay! Poor man's checkuser - party at my place! Also, WTF is with all those ANI edits man? Get a grip. SHEFFIELDSTEEL^TALK 20:15, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

I know, I really botched that one. –xeno^talk 20:18, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Oops

Thank you - my mistake. Pedro :  Chat  20:08, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

No problem. For the historical record, I also put back your attempted 'resolved'. Hope that's ok. –xeno^talk 20:09, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Yep, I saw - thanks. Matt turned up and archived the whole bloody thing which defies belief. At least a resolved is not a "that's it over" thing. I've undone his complete archive as clearly debate continues. Thanks Xeno. Pedro :  Chat  20:11, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Indeed the wrapping seemed premature. At least a "resolved" permits further discussion. I've half a mind to now, {{hat}} it, just to be a cunt. –xeno^talk 20:12, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

One would think so. Never mind - I'm going to cuddle up with the present Mrs Pedro so will bid you good night :) Pedro :  Chat  20:14, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

G'nite =) –xeno^talk 20:16, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

• Stop breaking AN/I. You're going to get such a finger-waving... HalfShadow 20:15, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Heh. That was indeed a failure of epic proportions, even for me. –xeno^talk 20:16, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Bot...

I hope that this was good. If it wasn't, ask for me, please! :) Thanks! --Tadija^speaks 20:21, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Question

1. 03:37, 14 May 2010 92.40.111.55 (Talk) (9,835 bytes) (→Welcome to Georgie's Italian Restaurant: new section)
2. 09:10, 13 May 2010 62.245.113.102 (Talk) (9,752 bytes) (→ANAL RAPE: new section)
3. 09:57, 11 May 2010 68.28.104.254 (Talk) (814 bytes) (undo)

Xeno, I want you to take a look at the above edits on my discussion page and then tell me frankly why aren't you guys monitoring the situation? And I thought you guys love to whack-a-mole? Thoughts? --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™} 23:57, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Hm, I've added the page to my watchlist. However, I do concur with Theresa [52], you seem to have brought this on yourself by feeding the trolls and allowing yourself to be the victim. Report to AIV if the page is vandalized and no one takes action. –xeno^talk 13:20, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Tbsdy

Note

I believe some new information came to light after I stepped away from the PC. I am fine with any actions taken in my absence. –xeno^talk 00:07, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

• Please either blank my comment entirely, or leave it alone. It's a signed and dated comment, so to have it changed by another is not on. DuncanHill (talk) 03:07, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

of course. Mea culpa. –xeno^talk 03:14, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Apologies

I completely forgot to do your dump scan. I'm doing it now. Sorry! (I replied on WT:DDR) Tim1357 ^talk 17:37, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

On that note, I am also doing you other database scan request. Tim1357 ^talk 18:32, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Much obliged, Tim! –xeno^talk 02:19, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Where's Tsbdy?

I don't remember why I had Tsbdy's page on my watchlist, but I'm curious as to what happened to him. I remember his user page. Baby girl. Very cute. Did she leave, too? Thanks.Malke2010 00:38, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

He's sailed off into the great blue yonder. –xeno^talk 02:15, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Sorry to hear that. He was a good admin. What happened?Malke2010 16:33, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

See here. –xeno^talk 16:35, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Define 'anchor', please.

I've never seen that term used before. HalfShadow 16:21, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

See [53]. It means to add the {{anchor}} template so the old section links (in watchlists, page history, etc.) don't break. –xeno^talk 16:25, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

I've never actually seen anyone use that before. Neat. HalfShadow 16:27, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

yea, it's a best practice that people still need to become acquainted with. I should probably document it somewhere. –xeno^talk 16:32, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the pp-notice

Thanks :). -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 17:34, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

No problem =) –xeno^talk 17:36, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

MK5384

Hello, Xeno. I'm glad everything worked out amicably. I would just like to mention a couple of things. First, I have amassed quite an extensive block log, which others have been quick to use against me. The truth of the matter is, that the 2 block extensions that followed the first were found to be unjust, and reversed. The next block came when I made a single edit to the Pershing article after it was unprotected. This came after I had made numerous promises that I would not edit war, and also discussed the proposed edit at length with the protecting admin (you). The block was reversed almost immediately. Then, in the process of unblocking me, the blocking admin accidentally re-blocked me. So, out of 7 incedents, we have 2 that are genuine. Is there any way of expunging, or at least providing an explanation in the log, of these other blocks? Secondly, I really take issue with what OberRanks said at ANI about me. I do not "frequently pick up on a topic, and make endless edits in an effort to get my version approved". He stated that I started, and restarted, ect. the Pershing debate, when, in fact, I wasn't even involved when OR began that debate with a number of other users. He claimed that I think that I am never wrong, ect., when examples of my admitting error and apologising can be found in many places. And the fact (which he knows) is, that, a number of users sided with me during the whole Pershing debate. I am not opining that he shouldn't be permitted to post his thoughts about me. But he said a number of things about me that were outright lies, and it isn't the first time he's done it. Can something at least be said to him to get him to stop with all of this?Mk5384 (talk) 20:17, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Most admins are competent enough to distill a block log into incidents, rather than looking at the raw count and they also do note when particular blocks are quickly reversed, etc. As far as OberRanks, you could file at WP:WQA or WP:ANI if you want some uninvolved parties to look at their behaviour towards you. –xeno^talk 20:22, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your advice. I would really prefer to not file against OberRanks, unless it becomes absolutely necessary. I left a civil, rather detailed note on his talk page. If you have the time to look at it, and tell me what you think, I would be much obliged. All the best-Mk5384 (talk) 01:21, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

OberRanks removed the entire post, which is certainly his right. However, he did so with the edit summary, "recall that I asked you not to post on my talk page". There is a smidgen of truth to this, as he did, indeed, make that request back in March. However, he had no problem with my friendly posts there in early April. Then on April 25, when I made understandably angry posts there, after his resumption of his obsessive feud against me, he still makes no request for me to not post there. His edit summary is another excellent example of his unacceptable behaviour. Whilst he has refrained from telling an outright lie in this case, he has deliberately attempted to manipulate the truth to make it seem as though I should have known that he didn't want me to post there. I'll take his behaviour in this case to mean that he is finally left with nothing to say in his defence. Hopefully, the message got through, and this will no longer be an issue. I would appreciate it if you would still take a look at it. Just in case he does not stop, and I am forced to take the action you suggested, I would prefer for an admin to see the fact that I left him a civil, concise explanation of his unacceptable behaviour, and politely asked him to stop. Thanks again for your time.Mk5384 (talk) 08:10, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

I saw the message and it seems fine. You wrote "The best thing to do, would be for the two of us to completely steer clear of each other, unless it's absolutely exigent." and s/he later wrote (in a reply to Parrot of Doom) "I'm happy enough to steer clear of this guy for now." So it's obvious they read the message and hopefully you guys can go your separate ways now. –xeno^talk 13:06, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Sounds perfect to me. Thank you again.Mk5384 (talk) 13:31, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Actually, now that I've read it myself, I'm not so sure. In his response to POD, he continues to slander me; again with a mixture of half-truths, and outright lies. As long as he keeps it to his own talk page, I guess I'll continue to let it go.Mk5384 (talk) 13:46, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

[54] –xeno^talk 13:56, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Xenobot MKV run for WP:APPLE

Star

		What a Brilliant Idea Barnstar
		For Xenobot MKV's great work for all projects, especially WP:APPLE. Thanks! moɳo 00:57, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for this, by the way =) 13:15, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Is XBMKV scheduled to run for WP:APPLE as discussed on WT:APPLE? I'm planning a Unassessed Article Backlog Clearing Drive and wanted to get those (unaffiliated) articles out before I begin. Thanks, moɳo 23:00, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

The only thing left the bot can do is rate articles based on their length (i.e. 2500 bytes - rate as stub). If you would like to gather consensus for that, I can do it. –xeno^talk 02:15, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Weren't there categories that we decided not to include (mainly games)?--moɳo 02:20, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Probably best to detag manually; David Fuchs made a good point that certain 'killer apps' would likely be of interest to Apple editors. I've removed the categories from future runs though. –xeno^talk 02:22, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

• Check out Category:Automatically assessed Apple Inc. articles. Note the featured articles (1) and good articles (3). –xeno^talk 02:33, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

There are about 700 articles that are unassessed. There is no way the project wants to detag them all by hand.--moɳo 00:20, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

It's not the video games that are filling up that category. I can change the logic to 'liberal' and I'll make a note on the talk page about assessing via pagelength. –xeno^talk 13:07, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Banner Templates

I see that you've moved the WP Aviation template to a more standardise name. As part of the unreferenced BLP fight, we have been getting DASHBot to make lists of UBLPs by WikiProject daily, but they rely on using the actual template name, not a redirect. Can you please have a look at User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects/Templates and see if you recognise any other Templates that you've moved, and maybe you could use the list to target other templates to be standardised - but please update the Dashbot list so our updates continue to work. Thanks, The-Pope (talk) 14:36, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the note. I will be mindful of this. I'll actually process that whole list to look for redirects, since I'm not the only one who moves templates to standard WikiProject Foo form. –xeno^talk 14:38, 18 May 2010 (UTC) (none found)

Re the none found... I compiled most of the list and was very careful to avoid redirects, so I was surprised to see corrections being made tonight. I was thinking of approaching someone, somewhere, about standardising WikiProject setups after struggling through this process, but I've had enough pushback from some projects already for what I consider mild proposals to bother at this point in time. The range of template names from the list is very good evidence that the haphazard Project system is close to being broken. Feel free to standardise away... but please update our list if you do. Thanks, The-Pope (talk) 15:21, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Will do. And I agree, it is somewhat problematic when WikiProject templates don't at least have the word "Project" in them. Cheers, –xeno^talk 15:30, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Slovaks in Hungary

I'm looking for feedback (good or bad) on my actions in this case. I'd appreciated your comments here. Dpmuk (talk) 15:34, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

I agree with both of your points (Userfication is tantamount to deleteion, and Process is important), but I haven't reviewed the situation in enough depth (nor do I have time to do so) to make an informed opinion as to the invocations of IAR were appropriate in this case. See also my comment at ANI. –xeno^talk 15:40, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough. I'm not expecting replies from everyone but wanted to get some views. Thanks for the comment above. Dpmuk (talk) 15:42, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Complicated question

You know Infoboxes? Well, I am a member of another wiki and the infobox template would come in handy. However, the code for it is very complicated to me, so many internal templates and such that do not exist on this other wiki. I want to translate it so it can be used on this site, how can I do this without any other templates or stuff en.wikipedia? If it require as ton of effort than I'll just drop the idea completely.--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Sharks! (sign)†} 15:26, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Well you can look at the bottom of the page in the edit window to Pages transcluded onto the current version of this page: that will show you its dependencies. You could either subst the ones you don't want to also import, or import them as well. I think it's easier to do the latter. –xeno^talk 15:31, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry I don't copy. I know what your talking about when you mentioned Pages transcluded onto the current version of this page:, but I don't know exactly what to do from there. I know what you mean by subst, sort of, but I'm not sure exactly what to do next.--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Sharks! (sign)†} 12:26, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

You would either have to import those sub-templates or create a version of Template:Infobox that had all the subtemplates hardcoded. Needless to say, it's probably easier just to import the subtemplates. –xeno^talk 13:00, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

You mean I have to copy the code of every single sub-template and import it to this other site. Ugh, too much work. All right, I guess I have no choice.--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Sharks! (sign)†} 14:18, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Try using "Special:Export" and clicking "Include templates". –xeno^talk 14:19, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

All of the subpages or just the infobox page?--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Sharks! (sign)†} 14:32, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure if the 'include templates' will include all the necessary child templates. Try it and see, I guess. –xeno^talk 14:34, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

I got an error, any programs needed?--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Sharks! (sign)†} 14:40, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

What error? After downloading it, you use Special:Import on the other wiki. –xeno^talk 14:42, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

I am going to proverbially slap myself now.--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Sharks! (sign)†} 14:44, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Damn it! It's limited to admins and there's only one admin. I'll have to talk to him.--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Sharks! (sign)†} 14:49, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

=) –xeno^talk 14:50, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Don't be surprised to see me come back with more questions, this admin is not online 24/7 like you are.--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Sharks! (sign)†} 15:04, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Well I did exactly as you said; exported, saved, imported; and this is what I got. All the cild templates were imported, but something is not quite right. Is something wrong, did I do it right? If so, what the hell do I do now?!--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Sharks! (sign)†} 11:09, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

As an experiment, I uploaded the child templates of the child templates, but no luck so far. What do I do!?--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Sharks! (sign)†} 12:35, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

My best guess is that the wiki doesn't have parserFunctions enabled. –xeno^talk 13:10, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

There is always a catch, okay, how do I enable parserFunctions?--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Sharks! (sign)†} 14:07, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Dunno, I've never been involved with a wiki on that level. See mw:extension:ParserFunctions I guess. –xeno^talk 14:08, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm screwed, this is too confusing for programmer of my stature. All of this work just to get a stinking infobox template and it didn't even work out in the end anyways. Sigh...--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Sharks! (sign)†} 14:16, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Whoever owns the wiki should be able to help. –xeno^talk 14:19, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Trust me, he's no smarter than myself. He hired me to work on templates and the userspace, since he was not able to himself. Wait, what do you mean by the owner, does the owner have abilities above the admins?--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Sharks! (sign)†} 14:25, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes... They should be able to install extensions, etc. –xeno^talk 14:29, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

In that case I'll send him a copy of this conversation as well as instructions on how to do it. I'll see what can be done. Pray for me--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Sharks! (sign)†} 14:32, 19 May 2010 (UTC).

I think he successfully did it, but I'll let you be the judge of that. It appears I do need the doc subpage for every single template though and I need to remove any categories and wikipedia links. See for yourself.--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Sharks! (sign)†} 01:17, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Yep. Looks good. –xeno^talk 13:13, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

I officialy declare it  Done--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Sharks! (sign)†} 16:35, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Awesome. Glad to help. –xeno^talk 16:37, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Proposal

Xeno, I can understand your edit[55], but it is a real problem already. Any suggestions as to where I can get this discussed and/or solved? Fram (talk) 14:05, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

I agree it's a real problem - but presently mostly affected by good faith actions. If it becomes widely known it could become a vector for abuse. I'm searching bugzilla, could've sworn there was a bug filed on it already, but maybe not... –xeno^talk 14:07, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

[56] Fram (talk) 14:10, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Nice find. You beat me. Better with bugzilla than you claim? –xeno^talk 14:14, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Apparently :-) On the other hand, I'm now creatign an account to be able to vote on the proposal, so that gives an idea of how much I have been involved with it until now... Fram (talk) 14:21, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

I changed the name, to make it easier to find in searches =) –xeno^talk 14:32, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Dreamweaver - Notice of move

I would think that letting folk know when you force a move of a discussion to another page, you would contact the initiator of that discussion, right? - Jack Sebastian (talk) 18:17, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Not typically - that is why a pointer is left for a brief period. –xeno^talk 18:18, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict) WP:MULTI states, "If you find a fragmented discussion, it may be desirable to move all posts to one location, and linking to it. Make sure you state clearly in edit summaries and on talk pages what you have done and why." I don't know if Xeno did (though I expect so) – but if so, that satisfies the requirement. ╟─TreasuryTag►cabinet─╢ 18:19, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Indeed, I noted the new location in the edit summary. Figured that the watchlist would lead interested parties back to grandma's house. –xeno^talk 18:20, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Well, I guess its a good thing I had watchlisted the page while the convo was going on. Is there a policy or guideline you utilized in deciding to force the page elsewhere, or was that just your own decision? Yeah, but it wasn't a fragmented conversation - Jack Sebastian (talk) 18:21, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

It looks like it was moved because it was in the wrong place. WP:AN is only for "issues affecting administrators generally - announcements, notifications, information, and other matters of general administrator interest." Your point belonged on the page to which it was moved. ╟─TreasuryTag►Regent─╢ 18:27, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict) See the header at WP:AN, most relevant being the first sentence of What these pages are not. And yes, it's always a good idea to keep places of interest on your watchlist. (The "fragmented" thing is a red herring) Just FYI if you're not sure where to raise something and it's not really "administrativey" you could go to WP:EAR for a general purpose location to question about things like this. –xeno^talk 18:27, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip, Xeno. :) - Jack Sebastian (talk) 18:32, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Sure thing. I wish I'd known about WP:EAR when I was a newer editor. Seems to be one of those lesser-advertised venues. –xeno^talk 18:34, 19 May 2010 (UTC) (poorly advertised no longer, my friends!)

Dreamweavers...

Ta! I was just on my way to do just that when I realised you'd beat me to it. I'd foolishly assumed that "anthology" in some bizarre way meant "song"... TFOWR^propaganda 18:33, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

No problem =) –xeno^talk 18:34, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Plaxico

He put himself in prison, not us. But if the consensus is to not have a linked article on the matter (and I don't recall ever being notified of such discussion, but I could be just forgetful), then that's the way it is. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:16, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

The decision in Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Plaxico was KEEP, so citing that link as a reason to delete it is not exactly appropriate. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:19, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict) See Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Plaxico (2nd nomination). Many there opined that keeping the redirect would still be inappropriate: institutionalizing and encouraging the ridicule of this living person. It's simply not on. –xeno^talk 17:20, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

So someone didn't get their way, so they nominated it again. That figures. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:21, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

And again, I was unaware that the subject was being discussed, and the decision was about 50/50, and the DELETE was ramrodded based apparently on the fear that someone sitting in prison for shooting himself was going to sue us for reminding the public that he's sitting in prison for shooting himself. Yah, shoor, yoo betcha. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:23, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Luckily the closing admin is not a head-counter. –xeno^talk 17:24, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

So anyone saying "Keep" was being ignored anyway. That figures. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:27, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

I doubt they were ignored, but I'm sure the closing admin realized that the BLP concerns trump those who want to have a nifty in-joke that we can use to ridicule this guy from now until the end of time. –xeno^talk 17:29, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Ridiculing the poster, not Plaxico so much. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:34, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict) "...the problem is that Wikipedia project space is being used to give a derogatory neologism added cultural weight. For Wikipedia, or any encyclopedia, to dispassionately report that a neologism exists may be appropriate if sufficient evidence exists for the existence of the neologism. If the "plaxico" neologism really does exist then Wikipedia can reasonably report on this in its article on Plaxico Burris and perhaps in the "list of neologisms" article. But for it to adopt the neologism as part of its community jargon is inconsistent with the sort of dispassionate detachment that ought to be part and parcel of being an encyclopedia author, especially when the neologism is not yet well-rooted in the common lexicon...." -Kelly Martin [57]. –xeno^talk 17:24, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

So any future references would just take a little more effort: "Plaxico". I don't use that expression much anymore, though, as it's kind of old news. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:27, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

As it should be. –xeno^talk 17:28, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Had I known a redirect was forbidden, I wouldn't have posted it. I could understand an entire article getting deleted (despite the fact it had sources), but deleting a redirect seems like overkill. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:33, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm not blaming you for not knowing or saying you created this with malicious intent. But keeping a redirect does not alleviate any of the concerns raised in the MFD (which resulted in the redirects being deleted along with the essay), which is why I've deleted it per G4. –xeno^talk 17:43, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Well, I just wish I had known about the nominations. But I won't try to have it re-added, as it's not important enough. And it's old news now anyway. It's like continuing to make fun of Dan Quayle for spelling it "potatoe". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:46, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

You could go to DRV, of course - but you are right, it's old news and we should use the more intuitive names that don't have underlying concerns. I think the image of a boomerang coming back to hit someone in the face is more lulzworthy anyway. –xeno^talk 17:47, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I like your boomerang metaphor, as it doesn't require much explanation. Going to DRV over "Plaxico" would be silly. Besides which, it might work against my next RfA. :b ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:54, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Heh.. Not sure if you're joking or not. But my tongue still hurts from when I bit it to not speak up here. FWIW, even though I still think you spend far too much time there than is healthy (for anyone, really), and sometimes prolong threads that have already reached their natural end, I've seen a marked improvement over the last time we discussed this. –xeno^talk 17:58, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

I may have failed to mention that I definitely plan on filing another RfA, the day after the next Chicago Cubs World Series victory parade. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:07, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

I've tried to do better at sticking to business and picking appropriate battles, but I'm not perfect. 0:) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:10, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Ah. So right after the Maple Leafs win the cup? –xeno^talk 18:08, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Oh, now you're really putting some strict conditions on it. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:10, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

I thought of this site,[58] which I'm amazed is still up, but sadly they seem to have removed the item where he said "The Maple Leafs are still in the playoffs!" ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:14, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Oh THAT guy. He was the bees knees. "There are no tanks in Baghdad!" –xeno^talk 18:16, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

I did find a reference to the Red Wings on one page. Really, if they're making any money from their site, they ought to be giving "Baghdad Bob" a royalty. I had a theory at the time that maybe he had crossed over from a parallel universe in which Saddam was actually winning the war. In a sense, that was true. If I can find the Leafs thing, I'll e-mail it to you. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:22, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

• So, Xeno, which part--be specific, please--of WP:BLP does WP:PLAXICO violate? Jclemens (talk) 18:52, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

  "Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid: it is not our job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives, and the possibility of harm to living subjects must always be considered when exercising editorial judgment." –xeno^talk 18:53, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

  Are you asserting with a straight face that WP:PLAXICO is "the primary vehicle for the spread of titilating claim about [Burris]"? Jclemens (talk) 18:58, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

  It's not a BLP violation, but apparently some think it is, and it's not important enough to make a big thing of. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:01, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

  My thoughts on this were best summarized by Kelly Martin, I've quoted them above at 17:24, 19 May 2010. However, if you think that having WP:PLAXICO redirect to WP:Don't shoot yourself in the foot is important and doesn't violate our policies on living persons (I think BLP should probably be renamed because indeed this is not a biography as such) then feel free to file at WP:DRV. –xeno^talk 19:03, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

  So do you agree with Bugs and I, that there's no particular BLP violation, even though it might be tasteless and better off gone, or would you like to set forth an actually defensible argument about how it is, in fact, a BLP violation? I have no problem with you or anyone else saying "this is tasteless and makes us look bad", which I agree with. Rather, my problem is with well-meaning editors and administrators who should know better who cite BLP in inappropriate ways (WP:CRYBLP), that have nothing to do with the central nature (WP:COREBLP) of BLP. Jclemens (talk) 00:44, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

  So, Do you agree with me an harry and john? It is impressive to see an editor quoting and encouraging his own very recently written essay. Off2riorob (talk) 01:00, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

  Essays, plural. BLP is too important to waste its moral imperative being nice to people who've publicly shot themselves in the foot. Jclemens (talk) 01:12, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

  Yes "essays".... that would be nice if it were balanced, but editors push for their personal issues, an editor likes to add negative content to a BLP of a person that they do not like and they like to remove content about a person they like, it is all so personal and private, we are not supposed to mention the elephant. That is why BLP has to be strong enough to protect the living subject of our articles from that desire, to name and shame and use the wikipedia to publish to the world such issues as yet unknown to the world, as in, the local put your foot in it titillation and issues of minor notability that have not been widely reported and that some editors would seek to propagate through the vehicle of wikipedia. Off2riorob (talk) 01:21, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Plaxico con't

So in my mind, that's not BLP at all--that's NPOV. I oppose sticking NPOV under the umbrella of BLP at all, which is the main point I am getting at in WP:COREBLP. BLP is not a license to remove negative information about a person whom RS'es cover in a mostly negative light. NPOV expects we reflect those negative sources... If we suppress Plaxico's personal failings, we'd be violating UNDUE by not accurately reflecting his RS'ed coverage. Jclemens (talk) 01:46, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Plaxico's "personal failings" have received due treatment in Plaxico Burress. Project-space is not the place to propagate such memes; if it doesn't violates the letter of BLP, it certainly violates the spirit. You seem to agree above that it is 'tasteless and better off gone'; so if you would like me to withdraw my comment that it violates a specific section of BLP, consider it withdrawn. –xeno^talk 12:40, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you.

Would you object to a soft redirect along these lines being put in place at WP:PLAXICO? "Plaxico Burress was sentenced to jail in 200whatever for accidentally shooting himself.(cite) An essay on (don't shoot yourself in the foot) formerly resided at this location, but the community has decided(link to 2nd AfD) that making fun of Mr. Burress' misadventures is inappropriate. Furthermore, outside of Wikipedia, the term "Plaxico effect" has been cited in RS to mean something entirely different(cite I found via Google news archive). Please use (wikilink to don't shoot yourself in the foot) for all future references to Wikipedia participants undermining their own position, e.g. by reporting a situation where their own behavior merits sanctions." Says what was there, says why we nuked it, and encourages editors to use the new essay. Jclemens (talk) 15:49, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Having WP:Plaxico bluelinked in any form still allows people at ANI to go "LOL WP:PLAXICO" even if the content at the target discourages them from doing so. This is in turn counter-productive to the goal of eliminating this meme from Wikipedia's lexicon. Wikidemon did pen something like this, see [59] (I deleted it per G4). I still think having this bluelinked in any form violates the spirit of the decision established at the 2nd MFD. However, if you still think this content should exist in this form, please do feel free to reverse my deletion of Wikidemon's content (at which time I will bring it to MFD) or you can bring my deletion to DRV. I do note that if you type "WP:Plaxico" into the search box you are directed to the MFDs - so if some wikiarchaeologist is really trying to figure out what Plaxico means when they see it in discussions, it is not an arduous task to to track it down. –xeno^talk 15:55, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

You don't think your recognizance that BLP is only applicable (at best) "in spirit" somewhat damages the close rationale in the 2nd AfD? I'd say the admission is sufficient grounds to overturn the decision, since no "BLP" deletion vote was policy-based... but that's not my point. People can laugh about Plaxico all they want, and there are plenty of ways that truly malicious people could continue to ridicule him, no matter what the community deletes. (BEANS, but I can email a few ideas to you if you don't see 'em right away) The fact remains that for several months that was a reasonably popular essay, which has been superseded for good reason. A soft redirect, well cited, does at least as much good as harm, and I would contend substantially more good. Jclemens (talk) 19:54, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

No, I don't. Just because the BLP policy as written doesn't specifically echo the very common-sense reason for deleting the essay/redirect/softredirect doesn't mean that deleting it to be sensitive to living persons (i.e. discouraging the institutionalized ridicule of Mr. Burress) is not a good idea. The BLP policy perhaps needs to be updated after the recent upheaval. We'll have to agree to disagree on this, please do feel free to take either of the courses of action I suggested above to break the deadlock. (You could, of course, also DRV the 2nd MFD on the grounds that the essay doesn't violate the 'letter' of WP:BLP, but I think you would find most users would dismiss that line of argument as mere semantics. I share your disdain for users that WP:CRYBLP on matters that aren't BLP problems, but I think the main issue here is that BLP needs to be expanded or made clear that it cover other concerns that aren't specifically for biographical articles) –xeno^talk 19:58, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough, I'll go the userspace draft + DRV route first, I expect. Jclemens (talk) 20:22, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

For the record, when I earlier said that the material might not violate the letter of BLP, this was only because I didn't have time to comb through the BLP policy page. Looking now, there does appear to be some statements that would support the suppression of the meme (such as "Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced, poorly sourced, or not related to making content choices, should be removed, deleted, or oversighted as appropriate"). In any case, please do take this to a wider venue if you feel it is important - so it's not just us ping-ponging back and forth. –xeno^talk 20:28, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Two things: 1) it's hardly unsourced, and 2) where on earth did the "not related to making content choices" verbiage come from? At any rate. Jclemens (talk) 21:15, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

We should just stick with the boomerang metaphor henceforth. Pretty much everyone knows that the stereotypical boomerang comes back to the one who threw it, unless it hits a kangaroo or something. When you have to explain the Plaxico reference half the time you use it, it kind of loses its mojo (a little bit higher, and Plaxico would have lost his mojo too, but that's another story). ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:27, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Absolutely. Kangaroo could refer to someone other than the OP in the discussion who does something daft and gets themselves blocked instead of the reported user. –xeno^talk 23:05, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

(ec) Aha. SV did it here. Looks like a logic accident, so I've reverted it to what it was. Jclemens (talk) 21:29, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Re: Bugs, I'm not interested in enabling PLAXICO as a used link going forward, just explaining the past use for those who happen to stumble on old discussions. Jclemens (talk) 21:29, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

That's fair. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:52, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

As a meme, it is unsourced. I do believe someone was working something up in userspace on it, though. –xeno^talk 22:14, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

It's worse than unsourced... it's sourced to mean entirely different things! Jclemens (talk) 22:19, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

That's not "Plaxicoed", it's the "Plaxico effect." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:37, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

So we're propagating a disparaging meme and our meme doesn't even dovetail with the reliable sources meme! The horror ;> –xeno^talk 22:21, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

When the first attempt was made at the article, I think someone found a source that apparently pre-dated its use in wikipedia. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:32, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

If you google [plaxico as a verb], you will find quite a few references, including some from right around the time of the incident. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:41, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

This,[60] for example, which indicates the term was already in circulation less than a week after the incident. The real issue now might be whether it still has currency or if it's just one of those expressions that dies over time. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:45, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Here's another, from barely 3 days after the incident:[61] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:48, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

I would not object if this meme, reliably sourced, made it into Mr. Burress' article. If people still then make the decision to refer to Mr. Burress whenever someone at ANI does something stupid, that is their choice. (However, I wouldn't advise it - people have been blocked for ridiculing living persons at ANI.) It is the "Wikipedia:" in front of the page that gives me great pause - we cannot contribute to it by having an entry in project space. If you want to add the history lesson to some "List of stuff not to do" (or WP:BJAODN), I would be OK with that too - it is a historical relic that is ultimately of benefit to future editors to avoid repeating mistakes. But creating a page or redirect from anything that starts with [[Wikipedia: and contains "Plaxico" is not appropriate (except for the MFDs, of course. The history is available, the text on request). Would that be a good compromise? –xeno^talk 22:53, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

I get what you're saying, I just disagree that a soft redirect, explaining what happened and why, would do more harm than good. Jclemens (talk) 23:05, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Because with the soft redirect in place the links continue to accumulate. The meme grows, and Wikipedia is responsible. Again - the history lesson: that's a great idea. But there should be no redirect pointing there. –xeno^talk 23:09, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

I guess I have a bit more faith in the average Wikipedia editor to not link to a soft redirect that tells them where they should be linking. :-) Jclemens (talk) 00:49, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

WP:APPLE again

Could you change the logic to "Liberal" and assess by size, running the bot ASAP?--moɳo 23:46, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Sure. –xeno^talk 12:54, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, moɳo 16:43, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

• This is  Done. Still 577 left. Happy assessing, –xeno^talk 20:47, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

EVIL ADMIN IS EVIL

Cute. :-) Thanks. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 16:12, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

muhwhahaahaha i r rouge. –xeno^talk 16:13, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

As long as I've got your attention, could you take a look at Special:Contributions/StevenBlack, and his interactions with User:Victoriaedwards? I can't decide if he's just cleaning up after a well-meaning suboptimal editor, or if he's being over-the-top. I have a history with him, so I can't judge properly. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 16:20, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

I have to agree with StevenBlack, the details being added don't belong in every single school (though they certainly have a place in Education in Ontario). –xeno^talk 16:28, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

While I wouldn't disagree there, it seems to me like there are less-badgering ways to go about removing the info.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 16:37, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I can understand their frustration but reviewing the talk page discussion and various edit summaries perhaps could have been toned down. –xeno^talk 16:40, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

You can use USer:KingpinBot/override btw :D - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 16:56, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

hehe... I remember seeing you use it at one of the RFP pages but I thought it would still display a "done" taking away from the joke (but now I see it doesn't). Cheers, –xeno^talk 16:59, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Recognition

		The Admin's Barnstar
		I award this to you, Xeno (I also like your sig), for blocking disruptive vandals on my talk page quickly. Thank you and enjoy! Tommy2010 has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching! Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}! Tommy2010 21:25, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Wow I don't think I've ever had a cookie wrapped in a barnstar before. Thanks =) –xeno^talk 22:21, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Seeking Advice

I would like to seek your counsel, as to the appropriate way to handle an issue I have. The issue is with User:John, an administrator. Just so there's no misunderstanding, let me first tell you the same thing I said on John's talk page. I assume good faith, and I find John to be a fine editor, a competent admin, and a nice guy. My issue is the fact that John redirected almost every article for the individual songs on the Pink Floyd album, The Final Cut. Whilst I do not insinuate that it violated the letter of any policy, it was, in my opinion, a hasty decision. I said this on The Final Cut talk page, on John's talk page, and at WP:FLOYD. At WP:DRV, the first step suggested, is to politely ask the admin in question to reconsider, which I did. He responded that, as they were redirected, WP:DRV is not applicable. I politely responded that, whether redirect, delete, or something else, the fact is that the articles no longer exist, and it is my opinion that they should be returned, and tagged with the appropriate proposals. This would give others the opportunity to attempt to prove notability. I politely requested that John tell me where I should raise the issue, if WP:DRV does not apply. I have received no response. Again, I can't stress enough, that I'm sure he knows what he's doing, and acted in good faith. The last thing I need is to get on the bad side of another admin. However, I firmly believe that they should not have been redirected without first being tagged with a proposal to redirect. And again, I have stated this on the article's talk page, the admin's talk page, and WP:FLOYD, and have also respectfully asked the admin to reconsider his decision. I believe I have taken all of the appropriate steps. What should my next step be? Where should I go to respectfully request that the articles be returned?Mk5384 (talk) 05:38, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Without making any comment on specific actions by User:John or the notability of any of the songs in question, it seems to me very clear that WP:NSONGS does not support your desire to have individual articles: Most songs do not rise to notability for an independent article and should redirect to another relevant article, such as for the songwriter, a prominent album or for the artist who prominently performed the song. Having said that, I think that if you can make a case for one or more songs having individual articles, you should do so either at an appropriate project page or the talk page of the album it is redirected to. The best way, in my opinion, to make such a case is to actually write an article for the song, demonstrating why it has independent notability, and then present it to members of the appropriate project (and/or watchers of the talk page for the album or artist) for comment. Developing consensus for an individual article is the best approach. I definitely think this is a per-article effort. You will find it very difficult to gain consensus that an entire album's worth of songs (or nearly an entire album's worth) should have individual articles, and any discussion on that will be tedious. This is because (if it generates enough interest to start with) it will rapidly devolve into "well I agree with 1, 2, and 7" and "I like 2, 5, and 6" and "4 should never have an article" and so on. Pick the most notable song, write an article in your userspace, and go from there. Invite editors you know of who would be interested in contributing to such articles to join you in creating a userspace article. When it's ready and consensus exists for creating it, move it to the appropriate title (or ask an admin to do so). When you get through with the first song, you will be much better able to decide what consensus is likely to exist for further individual articles, what interest level there is in writing such articles, and what your own energy level is in championing such effort. And remember...there is no WP:DEADLINE.  Frank  |  talk  12:22, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

My work is cut out for me - Thank you, Frank =) Mk5384, while a bold redirect can be reverted per WP:BRD; in this case, you should probably follow Frank's advice as it is spot-on. –xeno^talk 12:54, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Maybe I wasn't quite clear. I did not mean to infer that I have the "desire to have individual articles". It was just my position that the articles were redirected in a very hasty manner. When I protested this, John asked what it was, in my opinion, that made the songs notable enough for articles. I found it impossible to answer this question after the fact. I wanted (and wanted other users to have) the opportunity to examine the articles one by one; to look at what was written in each, and to see what references were used to build the articles.Mk5384 (talk) 21:40, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

The articles can still be examined and discussed by linking to the oldid... –xeno^talk 22:16, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

I didn't realise that. It was still, in my opinion, premature, but in light of that insight, probably not worth pursuing at this point. As always, thanks for your help!Mk5384 (talk) 22:35, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

For example, if you were interested in The Post War Dream (song), and you clicked that link, it would bring you to the album's page. However, below the title of the article, it would then say "(Redirected from The Post War Dream (song))", and if you click that link, it will send you to that page, without redirecting you. (Notice the "&redirect=no" after the url for the page.) Going to the history of that page, you can see the revision just before the redirect; here is a link to it. You can get to the others in a similar fashion; this is left as exercise for the reader... :-)  Frank  |  talk  22:47, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Yeah; I finally figured it out. No one ever accused me of being the brightest editor here. Ivy league educated, and all. I wish they would have learned me about computers.Mk5384 (talk) 14:15, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Chicago tagging

Could you do another tagging run.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 02:38, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Probably won't be many, but I'll take a look after the pending tasks. –xeno^talk 12:25, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Comppro's signature

He's ignored all the instructions over his signature. Would you agree that it's time for a block? Best, ╟─TreasuryTag►constablewick─╢ 06:00, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Final warning issued [62]. –xeno^talk 12:19, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Ta. ╟─TreasuryTag►stannator─╢ 12:20, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

TreasuryTag, this is an editor with 200-something edits, who had his talk page slashdotted yesterday with a flurry of issues. It is highly likely that he simply didn't read the reminder at the top of his talk page, which is why xeno rightly moved it down to make it more obvious. It's just a signature of an inexperienced editor, not that of an admin, let's get in a dialog with him first. As far as I'm concerned a block will hardly ever be necessary over a signature with such a low-key editor. Is there significant damage or disruption a block would prevent?
Amalthea 13:02, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Indeed; I suspect that perhaps he hasn't gotten used to making sure there aren't other messages on the page when the 'orange banner' only shows you the latest. Looks to be a good-faith user. –xeno^talk 13:14, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

200-something edits is neither here nor there, except for meaning that he should know our WP:SIG guidline. Even if it weren't for the fact that three editors have given him four or five instructions to change it. I simply find it very difficult to believe that he failed to see every single one of the warnings [63] [64] [65] [66]

Incidentally, he doesn't seem all that mature anyway... ╟─TreasuryTag►ballotbox─╢ 14:48, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

I agree with the last statement. In my book that's another reason to take him by the hand and show him the ropes instead of banhammering him, unless he turns out to be completely incapable of change. Amalthea 15:02, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

The Meteo Show

A group of students and I have recently created a video series numerous other people have requested to learn about. The article for The Meteo Show, however, has been deleted for being supposedly "insignificant." I would like to have the article sent to me so I may add extra reliable sources in hopes it will remain on Wikipedia. I would also like to use the deleted article to post somewhere else for others to learn about it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Banjo999 (talk • contribs) 12:28, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

This brings back fond memories of the shows I worked on in high school AV class. We used to broadcast them to the school every week. Unfortunately, I doubt that this will ever be able to meet the general notability guidelines, can you email me and I will send it to you? –xeno^talk 12:36, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

It never ends

It seems I'll never stop coming to you for help, this time it's about the templates I exported. The pages were imported perfectly fine, but I notice the infobox template is always pinned to the left as well as any other infoboxes. Also, their is no border or background color to the infoboxes or any of the documents that normally are colored a light blue. What's wring?--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Sharks! (sign)†} 14:40, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Just a guess, you probably need to duplicate MediaWiki:Common.css at your local wiki. –xeno^talk 14:43, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Precisamente. Amalthea 14:48, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

So export the page under the same name, or just copy the code and insert it into a page under the same name?--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Sharks! (sign)†} 16:40, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Probably best to export it for attribution purposes. –xeno^talk 16:57, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Xeno	This user comes to Xeno with almost all of his questions.

 Done You my friend are a genius.--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Sharks! (sign)†} 17:23, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Epic =) –xeno^talk 17:25, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Indeed. It's very true.--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Sharks! (sign)†} 20:14, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Reverted edit

Hi, I'm doing a process of many AWB TypoFixs. I noticed that some of my edits are being reverted/deleted but without the editor letting me know. It would be impractical to watch all the pages I edit but somehow I'd like to see what is reverted so that I don't repeat the same spelling mistake/correction or whatever it is. Is there perhaps some method of knowing which of my article edits are reverted, using AWB or any other method. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 18:09, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Not a perfect science, but you could add this to your personal javascript

importScript('User:Markhurd/hidetopcontrib.js'); //        (toggle to hide "top" edits)

that adds a button to hide your (top) edits from Special:Contributions. The ones that are not longer "top" have been subsequently edited. Popups will help you to preview the page history. –xeno^talk 18:11, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Pretty good! Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 18:36, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Since you were interested

Just dropping you a line now that the User:Superm401/Compare link.js script I mentioned the other day at VPT is working. It is indeed very useful - diffs drove me crazy before I found it. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 13:14, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I've already been benefiting from this script. Saves me having to click the input box to compare revisions and copypasta the address. I love it! –xeno^talk 14:58, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

About that 1 min block comment

where you said "Seems like victim-blaming to suggest they should rename to avoid situations like this."

I thought by saying "but you should consider renaming your account in any event" [emphasis added], that what I was saying would have been clear. I'm just aware of how many accusations can be attached to a Wikipedia name, and how far the effects of those accusations can go. Anonymity can indeed bring the bad side of many people, but I think non-anonymity can also do so (see for example the recently closed AH case, which was what I had in mind). I'm sorry if it seemed that I was 'blaming the victim', but that wasn't my intention. Ncmvocalist (talk) 04:39, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Replied via WP:SMS: no worries, i understand.

You are busy?

Hi, Xeno. I just wanted to ask you about User:Xenobot/R#WP:SERBIA. Is everything ok? --Tadija^speaks 17:41, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes, sorry... I meant to get to this the other day but got distracted. I'll try to have it run sometime soon. –xeno^talk 18:04, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

A question about your project tagging bot

Is the bot capable of recursive scans of categories, or do you need the list to have every single category that is a source? The-Pope (talk) 16:44, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

The problem with recursive scan is that most category trees are hopelessly polluted. If you give me a top-level cat I can generate a list of child categories and you can review. –xeno^talk 16:46, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

One example is Boxing. Category:Boxers by nationality has almost 5000 articles in it - WP:Boxing has only 1400 in total. Makes the DASHBot UBLP lists a bit worthless. I'll check both the full cat tree and with the project before submitting the request, but it would be a lot easier if recursive scans were used. Badminton and Fencing are others with well defined by nationality cats, but poor project allocation. The music ones are worse, on both cat tree and project allocations, so I'll continue to do them manually for a while. Cheers, The-Pope (talk) 17:18, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

That category tree (starting at Boxers by nationality) is very clean and contains only boxing-related categories. –xeno^talk 17:28, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

You can use {{subst:User talk:Xenobot/R|WP:BOXING|WP:WikiProject Boxing/categories}} to easily make a section (including header) at the WikiProject and then hit 'Submit a new request' at User:Xenobot/R. –xeno^talk 02:51, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Advice re: Serbia tagging

Xeno, i need your help.

Just prior your bot tagging, those categories were deleted

1. Category:Cities, towns and villages in Serbia
2. Category:Cities, towns and villages in Kosovo
3. Category:Cities, towns and villages in Vojvodina
4. Category:Cities, towns and villages in Central Serbia

And moved to those:

1. Category:Populated places in Serbia
2. Category:Populated places in Kosovo
3. Category:Populated places in Vojvodina
4. Category:Populated places in Central Serbia

Is it possible to expand tagging for those 4 categories, as they are very important for our WikiProject? Thanks very, very much! --Tadija^speaks 23:07, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

I made the list prior to the categories being renamed, so their members should have all been tagged. Let me know if it appears otherwise. –xeno^talk 23:09, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Oh, my God, yes, you are right! :)) Thanks, i have only one more WP for tagging. Will send soon. --Tadija^speaks 23:12, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

No worries =) –xeno^talk 23:13, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Please delete

Could you please delete File:Elakala Waterfalls Swirling Pool Mossy Rocks.jpg? I thought I was on Commons and added a category which is non-existent on EnWiki, so the only content is

[[Category:Elakala Waterfall]]

. Then I tried to nominate it for FFD, but a bot closed it as 'Wrong forum'. Please delete it (on EmWiki of course, not on Commons!). Thank you, --The High Fin Sperm Whale 05:46, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Done. Next time, just stick a {{db-f2}} on it. Amalthea 08:49, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Cheers =) –xeno^talk 17:51, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Justin Bieber/nonautoconfirmedtalk#Controversy and Criticism

If around, can you look at the {{editsemiprotected}} on Talk:Justin Bieber/nonautoconfirmedtalk#Controversy and Criticism please, ta.  Chzz  ►  13:49, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Commented there, thanks. –xeno^talk 13:56, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

LOOKS LIKE SOMEONE HAS BIEBER FEVER! --MZMcBride (talk) 21:55, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Another ANI thread

Since you are a BAG member and commented on the previous thread, I wanted to give you a link to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Rich Farmbrough and unapproved bot jobs (again). I also left some comments for another BAG member at User talk:Kingpin13#RF on ANI. — Carl (CBM · talk) 16:17, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note - I will take a look and comment if I have anything useful to say. –xeno^talk 16:18, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks but...!

Thanks for this. However, I only found out about it because I happened to "cheat" on my forced Wikibreak by disabling Javascript and checking my watchlist sneakily. (Ah the joys of Wikipediholism!) Could I humbly request that such changes be announced to the affected WikiProject in future so that even if they are all napping they will still find out by checking their talkpage? Also, can we still use {{Contemporary music}} or should we now use {{WikiProject Contemporary music}}? The doc still claims the former and I assume the redirect from the old page sorts out all the old templates already on talkpages so we don't really need to arrange a bot run to replace old with new. However, should we now start using the new template name? Or does it matter? Presumably the doc should be updated to reflect the move, whetever else is true (I can do that, of course) but should it say use {{WikiProject Contemporary music}} only or use either one or the other? --Jubilee♫clipman 21:33, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Hm... Probably a good idea. I've been kind of flip-flopping between just boldly moving and making formal requested moves, depending on the relative activity of the WikiProject. You can continue to use the redirect and it will work fine - personal preference, really. Mind you, Xenobot will bypass the redirect if it is there for some other reason. The documentation should probably be updated to reflect the new name. –xeno^talk 22:00, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Xeno. That all makes sense. I'll update the docs now --Jubilee♫clipman 22:30, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

A question...

Currently at WP:DERM we have a small section providing links to various data, but I wanted to know if you would help us expand that section to provide more types of interesting data that people can use? Any help creating regularly and automatically generated types of project data would be great. Overall, I would love to provide readers with data that be be used to track the project growth/development. Regardless, thank you for your work on Wikipedia. ---kilbad (talk) 23:25, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Sure, I will take a look in the morning. –xeno^talk 01:33, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you so much. Also, I am not sure if automatically generated and updated graphs are possible on wikipedia, but, if so, trending data with charts would be very cool. ---kilbad (talk) 01:44, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

It would be cool if there was a bot or toolserver thingy that would graph the monthly change in number of X-class articles for a project. Of course, that's entirely beyond my capabilities, but might be something to suggest at WP:BOTREQ or WP:VPT. –xeno^talk 14:11, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Canadian?

Hey there Xeno, good luck on your RfB. I had a question come up for me when I was checking out your userpage but I didn't want to pose it on your RfB 'cuz it's not really relevant. One of your userboxes mention you're Canadian. May I ask which province you're in? (I may have already asked you this before, I don't remember) I'm just curious because I'm in B.C., and also wondering during what time period you're normally active in? I guess this could be relevant somehow to your RfB... it may even help it in fact: if we knew what time of day you'd be active in as a bureaucrat, and if that's a time of day during which there's usually no active crats on duty, we could be helping to ensure that there's always a crat around when one is needed! :) -- œ^™ 07:32, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

May I also interject and wish you the very best of luck. So far you look on course for a victory, but who knows...! ╟─TreasuryTag►secretariat─╢ 12:13, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Don't say stuff like that out loud - you'll jinx it. --Floquenbeam (talk) 12:32, 28 May 2010 (UTC) (p.s. good luck X)

Thanks. =) –xeno^talk 12:36, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Sure, I'm in Ontario. I'm typically active during business hours (12:30 UTC thru 19:00 UTC), and then off-and-on evenings and weekends. –xeno^talk 12:36, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Tans talkpage

Hi, I see you blanked Tans talkpage and added the retired template after getting an email from him. Since then there have been a few edtis from users cryptic and come back soon comments and the lke, I have cleaned them a couple of times in good faith as housekeeping of a retired users page as I have seen this done in similar situations. I have been asked to replace the comments by user Toddst1 and although I don't really agree I was in the process of replacing them and I was reverted agsain by anouther user saying they don't need to be replaced. Would you please clarify the position, or the general accepted norm, thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 13:10, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure that there is a generally accepted norm, nor do I think Tan would mind if they are there or not... Probably best to just leave it as-is, but I'll see if I can clarify with Tan. –xeno^talk 13:12, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

It is as I have seen in such cases very common practice as they have retired there is no reason to talk to them. Yes, if you can please clarify, thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 13:21, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

As I guessed, he's not particularly bothered one way or the other. So best to just leave it as-is. –xeno^talk 14:09, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Right thank you for the inquiry. Off2riorob (talk) 14:12, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Lenka

Hi Xeno could you please undo the 2 edits made by a IP today who removed my sourced content and who messed up my hard work on the Lenka article. His/her edits looked like vandalism to me. Thanks. Caden ^cool 14:41, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Ok, this is  Done. I think you've asked me to do this because you're not sure how to revert to an older version. You can do this by viewing the history , clicking the version prior to the undesirable edits (the "oldid"), clicking "edit" and pressing "save page" after entering with an appropriate edit summary. You might also look into installing Twinkle which will allow you to revert a series of edits with the option of providing an edit summary. See Help:Reverting for more, and let me know if you have any questions on this. –xeno^talk 14:47, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Xeno. And yes I know how to revert but it would not let me and so I came to you. Could you please keep an eye on Lenka? I noticed just now the IP 212 has removed sourced chart content before and he uses different IP addresses to do so. His/her pattern is the same and it's frustrating. Caden ^cool 15:09, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Sure, it's on my watchlist. –xeno^talk 15:11, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks so much! Caden ^cool 15:15, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

I put it on my watchlist as well, since the article may be prone to trouble. ;) decltype (talk) 16:00, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

I guess it's just me

Just thought I'd follow up a little on Q5. If I didn't know who you were, I'd read It's been nearly two-and-a-half years since I've been an active contributor as "It's been nearly 2.5 years since I was an active contributor". If this sentence means what you intended it to mean (and is not even ambiguous), then my English is worse than I thought. I'm probably going to seek clarification at WP:RD/L :).

For some reason I could have sworn you were not a native speaker. Here's a few more examples from the RfB:

Adminship should be "no big deal" but they are powerful tools. Adminship gives access to the tools, I would probably have written something like: "Adminship isn't a big deal, but the tools are powerful." or somesuch.

(...) one must be thorough in their assessment of the discussion. This looks weird to me because of the "one -> their". Wouldn't either "one must be thorough in one's assessment" or "[bureaucrats] must be thorough in their assessment" have been better?

Good luck in the rest of your RfB. It looks good so far. Regards, decltype (talk) 16:00, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Ahh - now I see the ambiguity! Thanks for clarifying, I didn't see it - but you're probably right. And yes, I guess I personified the tools there - probably because the block button speaks to me, you see (in riddles). The final bit singular they; which I use often find myself using on Wikipedia due to not knowing the gender of most editors and not wanting to make incorrect assumptions. I guess if I were to offer up an excuse, it's that I copypasta'd much of that from my first RfB; and the text was mostly written while it was already in full swing (they were expansions to my initial answers which, according to some respondents, left something to be desired). –xeno^talk 16:14, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for the explanation. I am familiar with singular they but do not use it so often as I've found it to cause a bit of confusion for people not familiar with it, e.g.[67] For example, I have no objections to To promote a candidate, one has to be sure that they enjoy the trust of the community. I just found the example above a bit ungrammatical, for some reason. But again, I'm probably wrong about it. Regards, decltype (talk) 16:31, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

I must admit formal grammar was never my strong suit. =) –xeno^talk 16:51, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

I hate the singular they. I wish we had a common word in English that meant "he or she" or "his or her". That would be immensely useful. Useight (talk) 18:58, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Well, xey have tried to come up with one but it hasn't gained much currency. –xeno^talk 19:00, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, and I know of sie, but I don't know how to pronounce it. Useight (talk) 19:02, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Sir Floyd

User talk:Sir Floyd (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi.. again.. busy day. Sir Floyd has asked me to retire him in a similar manner to the way you retired Tan, could you delete and redirect Sir Floyds user page in the same way as you did Tans? Off2riorob (talk) 16:03, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Confirmed via email and  Done. –xeno^talk 16:16, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Many thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 16:27, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Zeno the talkpage is immediatey being edited by another editor, addiing a blocked template, is there any need for that? Off2riorob (talk) 16:38, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 16:42, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Should be sorted, I think. –xeno^talk 16:48, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

For what it's worth, as I commented here, while WP:TPO permits "Personal talk page cleanup" it doesn't really say that it may be done by proxy. –xeno^talk 16:57, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

So who can do it then? Off2riorob (talk) 17:05, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

The user themself may remove comments and also blank anything on their talk page as long as it isn't an exception of WP:BLANKING. –xeno^talk 17:06, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

The guideline doesn't say that it can not be done by proxy and with authourity from the user. Off2riorob (talk) 17:09, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Indeed, but neither does it say that it can. At WP:BLANKING the words "their own" is bolded, which I assume is meant to preclude users from removing comments from other users' talk pages. –xeno^talk 17:11, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

How can you remove comments from your talkpage when you are indef blocked, you can't can you. Off2riorob (talk) 17:15, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Blocked users can still edit their talk page, unless talk page access has been revoked: this doesn't seem to be the case. –xeno^talk 17:19, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Your RfB

For some reason, it isn't working correctly with the {{User:X!/RfX Report}} template. It says that it is pending closure, even though you just opened it. Not sure why it would do that, but I thought you should know. Hi878 (talk) 01:52, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Fixed. Good luck with your RFB! (X! · talk)  · @123  ·  01:56, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

• Thanks, both. =) –xeno^talk 02:47, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

I second the goodluck bit.   «l| Promethean ™|l»  (talk) 11:53, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Cheers mate. Good to see you! –xeno^talk 13:20, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

• My deepest apologies. I've supported your RfB, so that's you scuppered mate! ;-) Malleus Fatuorum 14:13, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

You evil bastard! ;> –xeno^talk 14:16, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

I just want to say good luck. I was new and loved you as an admin and now would love to see you become a bureaucrat. —Tommy2010 14:52, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Appreciate it =) –xeno^talk 16:11, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Chicago tagging

Are we somewhere on the list yet?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:52, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

I'll try and run it today. –xeno^talk 12:36, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

 Done, see User talk:Xenobot Mk V/requests#WP:CHICAGO for a recap. –xeno^talk 18:06, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:26, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the run. You found us another GA and another FA.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 06:27, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Recent death template

Hi, Xeno. I put a recent death template on the article for John William Finn. Could you tell me how long it's customary to leave a template under such circumstances. This person was 100 years old, and as such, I find it unlikely that many new details will be coming forward in the near future. All the best-Mk5384 (talk) 04:59, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

There is guidance on this at Template:Recent death. It seems that someone else already took it down per the same. Cheers, –xeno^talk 13:22, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. By the way, I was happy to support your RfB!! All the best-Mk5384 (talk) 13:55, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

No worries. Thanks =) –xeno^talk 16:11, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Submit request form or the template?

After seeing how you reformatted the boxing and college basketball Xenobot requests into an anchor/template, should I be using that template directly or still using the submit request button? I have a few more to do after these ones. The-Pope (talk) 05:44, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Either way. It may be easier to use the submit form, I don't mind collapsing it for you. –xeno^talk 13:21, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

If the project is standard (i.e. WP:WikiProject Foo/Categories and Template:WikiProject Foo - caps sensitive), and with default tagging options and logic, you simply type {{/cfg|project=Foo|notes=~~~~}} and try to find a popular == WP:CAPS == shortcut used by the project for the title. –xeno^talk 16:11, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

It reminded me about your question

Hi Xeno, you've asked me once why did I put this image File:Triggerfish bite.JPG to my underwater gallery, and I told you story about triggerfish bites. Few days ago I swam next to a turtle. Suddenly out of nowhere Picasso triggerfish appeared. He bitten turtle few times, and the turtle jerked. I was not able to take the image of the bite itself because I was distracted trying not to get bitten myself, but for few seconds the turtle and me swam over his nest the fish continuously attacked both of us File:Rhinecanthus aculeatus is attacking Chelonia mydas.jpg.So that situation reminded me about your question. Best wishes.--Mbz1 (talk) 15:39, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Beautiful photo! Thank you for the note =) –xeno^talk 16:03, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

question

I don't understand why there has to be a bureaucrat? It is just bureaucratic? ha ha ha

If there are bureaucrats, why not senior bureaucrat, associate arbitrator, regulator, auditor, assistant vice president, controller, chancellor?

Or why not eliminate bureaucrats? What do they do that others cannot do (or be given the power to do)? Sorry if this is a dumb question with an obvious answer. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 16:19, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Bureaucrats have an extremely limited role over-and-above administrators: change usernames (the reason to restrict this is because username changes of users with many edits put a heavy toll on the job queue, so must be done at the right time; username changes are also somewhat discouraged in that it makes things confusing for someone to be always changing names); add but not remove the following userrights: sysop bureaucrat; and add and remove the userright bot (among a few other minor jobs that have accrued to them). While it's peculiar to have a bureaucrat role in something that is not a bureaucracy, the name is from quite a long time ago and fairly heavily entrenched (like administrator) - so changing it is probably more trouble than it's worth. –xeno^talk 16:29, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

I see that bureaucrats determine RFAs. Could RFAs be determined simply by an objective formula? For example, points for number of edits, points for tenure (length of time), points for AIV posts, points for FA and GA, negative points for incivility (to be assigned by others with the caveat that false assignment of negative points results in a block of themselves). Those that qualify for the job by points would be subject to immediate recall or veto so that manipulation of points can be addressed. This is certainly version 1.0 but is a stab at an objective, computerized system. In theory, an objective system reduces discrimination. Discrimination is bad and, in some cases, illegal. (note: this is not a legal threat, using the word illegal. It is just a fact. For example, discrimination by race is illegal in many countries) Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 16:24, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Proposals have been made to automate the process, but none have gained significant traction as far as I can recall. I don't think it's possible to reduce the way the community decides RFAs to a formula. –xeno^talk 16:31, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Conference invite

Feel free to attend. I only issued 5 invitations. User:Suomi Finland 2009/Wikipedia Improvement Conference 2010 Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 19:23, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the invitation but I will have to decline; my time over the next few days is limited. For what it's worth, limiting participation probably isn't the best way to go about things, especially given the focus of the conference. –xeno^talk 19:26, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Actually I want 100 people to attend but I dare not send 100 invitations. I posted 5 on the 5 most famous Wikipedians that I know. Jimbo Wales is #1. You are #5. I am sure I missed many, many others. Feel free to pass your invitation to somebody else. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 19:34, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Oh, I misunderstood. Best of luck! –xeno^talk 19:39, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

"The most famous Wikipedians you know" are Jayron, Xeno, Jimbo and Carcharoth? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.4.115.182 (talk) 19:36, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar thank you!

Hi, Xeno, thank you for the barnstar and for kind words about my underwater images!

Here are two more turtles for you. Best wishes.--Mbz1 (talk) 20:59, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Not a dictionary

Please check out Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lady. Thanks.Kitfoxxe (talk) 02:27, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Werhwalt misrepresenting the truth

Would you please inform this "admin" in the strobgest possible way, that I have not attempted to fool you in any way [68]. Thank you.  Giacomo  12:08, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

This should be sufficient, I believe? –xeno^talk 12:37, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Wellperhaps you would like to mention prominently to Wehwalt who appears keen to deliberatly peddle another myth and lie. What a hypocritivcal bloody place this is.  Giacomo  12:43, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Good idea...in case he isn't watching the RFB, I've left him a note [69]. –xeno^talk 12:49, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Question about opting in for Xenobot

When listing all of the categories to be covered by the project, do you have to list the subpages also or do they automatically get included? Thanks J04n(talk page) 13:38, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

You mean the subcategories? Xenobot typically will not recurse through to subcategories because the category system is fairly wonky, i.e. you start with Category:Geography of Canada and can end up at Category:Geography of Portland, Oregon (proof). If you have a particular top-level category in mind, I can give you a list of all its subcategories and you can verify it from there. –xeno^talk 13:42, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I meant subcategories; Category:Heavy metal was what I had in mind. J04n(talk page) 14:06, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Over 2200 categories across over 20,000 articles. I segregated the "albums" at the bottom of the list. –xeno^talk 14:20, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm asking this to identify uncategorized unreferenced BLPs, so omitting the categories containing albums or songs would work just fine. Thanks J04n(talk page) 16:23, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

The same amount of human work is required either way, but I've trimmed those off for now. Feel free to decide whether you want the limited or full-run, file a request at User:Xenobot/R and add {{subst:User talk:Xenobot/R|WP:METAL|Wikipedia:WikiProject Metal/Categories}} to the WikiProject talk page to ensure there is consensus for the run. –xeno^talk 16:28, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Great, I posted on the project talk page and will file the request if the consensus is to proceed. J04n(talk page) 21:47, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Template:Cite movie

Hi Xeno, I was going to create this as a redirect to Template:Cite video, but saw that you'd requested the page be deleted. Can I go ahead and do this anyway? – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 01:54, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

I did? I don't think so =) I have no objections to that redirect... –xeno^talk 01:58, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Oi! My brain has music on the mind at the moment. I meant Template:Cite movie. I re-created it as a redirect, but here's the log, although I'm sure you'll remember something you actually did lol. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 02:12, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

No problem. And yes, that's totally fine. Someone had tried making some kind of actual new template there and then requested deletion, but it makes perfect sense as a redirect. Cheers, –xeno^talk 02:18, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Great, thank you! – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 02:25, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the Xenobot runs so far...

and sorry for still not getting the format right! Do you want me to move the /categories pages to /Categories? Not related to Xenobot Mk V, but related to the UBLP task, the renaming/standardisation of the WikiProject Templates is causing the lists some problems. See History of Wikipedia:WikiProject Ohio/Unreferenced BLPs and Eurovision for the drop-off and slow recovery of the lists. I'm not sure if it's a job-queue issue, or something in DASHBot's code (I'm cross posting this to Tim's talk page too) that makes it slow to recognise a template move. Can I ask that you stop standardising the template names until we work out what the issue is? Thanks. The-Pope (talk) 15:21, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Don't worry about c(C)ategories anymore, I've made the template recognize both. It could be a job queue issue. I've mostly stopped renaming templates for now (but there are a few in the WP:RM hopper), so let me know when it is sorted. Possibly taking a while to catch up since I moved a bunch in a short period of time. –xeno^talk 15:24, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for taking out the trash

I appreciate you cleaning up the mess... ah, it's fun being an admin, eh? --Ckatz^chat_spy 23:07, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

i HAS SHINY BUTONZ. –xeno^talk 23:09, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Yeah that was stupid

Thanks so much. Can you hide that diff? Again, thanks Xeno —Tommy2010 17:41, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

done. and replied. Can you hide that (my) IP? Thanks and sorry for the hassle —Tommy2010 17:46, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Yep. No worries. –xeno^talk 17:48, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

but seriously

Thank you so much, I feel a huge sense of relief thanks to you. are you a bureaucrat yet? —Tommy2010 17:56, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Glad to be of assistance. And nope - RFB is still running. –xeno^talk 17:57, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

BTW, I won't be online when it closes, so congrats on that strong showing in advance. :) (And the closing crat can count this as support, if required) Amalthea 18:06, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

You evil fiend! –xeno^talk 18:07, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

What, I balanced it with the above support, no?
Q 14: Do you pledge to read all 61,915,542 pages when evaluating consensus? Amalthea 18:18, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Someone set up us the bomb. –xeno^talk 19:48, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

IP Talk maintenance

Thanks for pointing out WP:Blanking, but it says there: "For IP editors, templates in Category:Shared IP header templates and notes left for other users sharing the same IP address." and that template was incorrectly put by someone other than at this IP. -12.7.202.2 (talk) 18:23, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Shared IP templates can be placed by anyone, not just the user of the IP. That probably requires some disambiguation. (now done) –xeno^talk 18:24, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Re: Just amazing

Okay done. Gary King (talk) 18:53, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Doesn't seem to work... Basically what I want is for a redlink to send me to [70] for example. –xeno^talk 18:56, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

 Works for me That's what it does now. Try this: File:Foo.png. It should go to here. I don't think it should go to the empty page like your example link, where the user can't do anything like re-upload the image. Gary King (talk) 19:02, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Could you make me such a script? (or install a variable into the existing one) I have no desire to upload any image, I want to be able to get to the page like [71] so I can see the deleted edits, &c. (Could have sworn it used to do this?) Probably needs to be a different script altogether? or maybe even a css hack. –xeno^talk 19:05, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Before the MediaWiki code change, red-linked files went to the "Upload file" page, which has links to the deletion logs for both Wikipedia and the Commons at the top of the page. So this script just duplicates that feature; you can access deletion logs from that page. It's better this way because if you just link directly to the page, then it will only show deletion logs for Wikipedia; if the image was deleted and now appears in an article as a red link, for instance, then when you click on it, it will say the image never existed when in fact it was deleted on Commons. Gary King (talk) 19:15, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Ah. Well, I'd still love to just be sent to the &redlink=1 page. If possible =) [with the caveat you've astutely noted that if I see no deleted edits, I'm looking for a commons image that was never here!]. –xeno^talk 19:17, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

I added a link to edit the file next to the deletion logs now. Also, if you just want all red-linked files to go directly to the edit page, use showUploadDeletionLogs = {}; showUploadDeletionLogs.linkToFileEdit = true; Gary King (talk) 19:37, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Ah - good man! Thanks again. I'll toy around with it. =) –xeno^talk 19:38, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Was not working earlier. Now fixed. Gary King (talk) 19:45, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Il est parfait! Merci =) –xeno^talk 19:47, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Administrative/block question

I'm just curious. I see many admins block users with a template as the reason like {{softerblock}}... does the template show up somehow in the block if a user tries to edit? —Tommy2010 20:33, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes... The users see MediaWiki:Blockedtext, and when a templated reason is used, it expands just the way as if I transcluded it here. –xeno^talk 20:34, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

ooohhhhhh that's what it looks like. —Tommy2010 20:51, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

AfD close

Could you close this AfD please, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nicholas van Praag Off2riorob (talk) 20:40, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

 Done and courtesy blanked AFD. –xeno^talk 20:57, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Could I close it myself as delete and blank the talkpage and the article and tag them for housekeeping deletion? Off2riorob (talk) 20:43, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Probably not advised. –xeno^talk 20:48, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Why not? Off2riorob (talk) 20:57, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Non-admin closures ending in delete, I mean. –xeno^talk 20:57, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for closing it. If a discussion is as clear as that one I don't see anything to stop me doing as I suggested? Off2riorob (talk) 20:57, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Deletion isn't really my area of focus, but see Wikipedia:NAC#Inappropriate closures. –xeno^talk 21:00, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Non-admin closure: Inappropriate closures...The result will require action by an administrator: * Deletion.. this is only an essay, clearly it is better avoided...but I could do it if I felt it was beneficial to the project. Off2riorob (talk) 21:03, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

I know it's only an essay, but as far as I know the advice is generally well-regarded... Asking an admin to delete an AFD you had closed as "delete" is probably somewhat controversial in-and-of-itself, so G6 by definition wouldn't apply. –xeno^talk 21:05, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

OK, many thanks for the explanation and again, for the closure. Off2riorob (talk) 21:07, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

No worries. –xeno^talk 21:08, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

same old...

Hi Xeno. Happy to see you cruising to a well deserved win in your RfB. Since our last discussion about OberRanks, you will see that I have indeed, completely steered clear of him, and I have not posted any comments about him anywhere. Perhaps he just can't bear to be ignored. He has now posted on Baseball Bugs' (a user with whom I have disagreed, but also shared a laugh or two, and with whom I certainly have no issues) that I am a "loud mouthed teenage exchange student from England". First I was a sock of an unknown user, then 2 new users were socks of me; now this. It's mildly amusing, and I'm not going to do anything about it at the moment. I just wanted to make you aware of the fact (in case it escalates to the point where action does need to be taken), that he is still obsessed with this, and just can't leave it alone. All the best-Mk5384 (talk) 23:05, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the note. –xeno^talk 03:34, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your response.Mk5384 (talk) 04:05, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Xenobot Mk V

I was thinking about utilizing Xenobot Mk V for WikiProject military history. However, it seems that we are only interested in implementing it if it supports task forces. Does it support task forces, and if it does not, would it be relatively easy to add functionality? I know it's crazy right now with RfB going on, but I'm just querying you while I'm available and thinking of it. NativeForeigner ^Talk/_Contribs 01:41, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Task forces are fully supported. Just put the preferred template name suchlike: {{WPMILHIST|Canadian=yes}}. –xeno^talk 03:34, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

"Wouldn't last"

Hey, I tried... :-)--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:04, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

And presumed congratulations. :-)--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:05, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Gun jumpers, the lot of you! –xeno^talk 19:07, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Welcome back =) –xeno^talk 19:17, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Hat closer arg

Aha. Learn something new every day! Thanks. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 20:06, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

No problem. It's actually something that was installed not too long ago. (And to be honest, it wouldn't have technically worked until I added it into the second row as well [72], since you left a closing statement). –xeno^talk 20:08, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Crat mailing list

Congratulations on your new hat, and welcome to the mailing list. Don't worry if you don't get much mail - there isn't much. --Dweller (talk) 14:50, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

USURP Townie

Hi; Yes, I am user Townie in the Catalan wikipedia, and I'm the one requesting the usurpation for the English one. --Townie2 (talk) 15:30, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Please confirm from your main account at ca.wiki. –xeno^talk 15:43, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Justin Bieber

Why do people keep vandalizing Justin Bieber? I can't even edit the article because of these idiots - FutureMrsBieber —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.50.197.207 (talk) 20:45, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

I guess just because he's wildly popular... It's unfortunate. Not even registered users can edit it right now, but you can prepare a draft edit and use the {{editprotected}} template to request an administrator synch the changes. –xeno^talk 20:50, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Stupid Bieber haters. I wish they would all just get a life - FutureMrsBieber

Delink

My apologies for linking to your page without permission. Thank you for undoing it with this edit.

N419BH 21:58, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

No worries! Probably my fault for putting it in the documentation =) –xeno^talk 01:15, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Ctrl+Alt+Del

This seems to have been resolved, but for what it's worth it looks to me like the problematic edits have all been suppressed, and that there's therefore no issue having the page undeleted. Steve Smith (talk) 01:36, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, I'll do the needful. –xeno^talk 16:37, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the *.  :) NawlinWiki (talk) 19:32, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Concratulations

I am proud to be the first to congratulate you on your recent RfB. I wish you luck with the wrench. ~NerdyScienceDude (✉ • ✐) 14:52, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

*blink* looks still open to me! –xeno^talk 14:53, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, and I'm just creating the army of sockpuppets to ruin it now :) Nope, I think it's a pretty certain pass, so jolly well done!! ╟─TreasuryTag►ballotbox─╢ 14:54, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

At a boy, Beurocrat Xeno. GoodDay (talk) 15:10, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm proud to still congratulate Xeno early before closure!! :p I'm excited for Wikipedia because of this promotion, I expect great things to come from you Xeno! —Tommy2010 15:23, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

I assure you that you will be sorely disappointed. ;p –xeno^talk 15:38, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

• Beat-the-nom support Beat-the-close congratulations: !Too many 'crats. TFOWR^{idle vapourings} 15:43, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

• The chickens! They have not hatched! –xeno^talk 19:25, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

• Oh, stop that. You are going to be a bureaucrat, and you know it. :) Hi878 (talk) 19:30, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

• LOL —Tommy2010 22:05, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

• Never had a doubt CONGRATS I smell chicken on the grill  :-) Mlpearc pull my chain 'Tribs 19:59, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

• Never have I see a rowdier crowd of jinxing well-wishers! (Really, can't we get a picture of some chicken that's already been nicely charred for that article?) –xeno^talk 20:09, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

• By my reckoning, based on personal experience, you can still work in an extra 1.53142857 opposes in the next four hours. I'll be rootin' ya on! Juliancolton (talk) 20:22, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
• In my mind, with each of those posts I keep hearing the Psycho violins playing "jinx, Jinx, JINX". Amalthea 20:24, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

• Sorry xeno, I thought the same thing, I will keep an eye out for a better one....... Mlpearc pull my chain 'Tribs 23:04, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

So...

You have 40 minutes left. Where is this wave of opposes that you seem to be so worried about? :) Hi878 (talk) 00:12, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Wait for it...! –xeno^talk 00:42, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Still waiting... Ten minutes left... Hi878 (talk) 00:45, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Now five... ~NerdyScienceDude (✉ • ✐) 00:50, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Two..this could be close mes thinks =P 'The Ninjalemming' 00:53, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

One...hold your breath Xeno, till you get the new fancy tools 'The Ninjalemming' 00:54, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations, you are now a beurothingy 'The Ninjalemming' 00:55, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Stuff

It's not to late to voice my opinion in the 'crat thing is it, because it is a certain nooo...I keed I keed, anyway yeah I'll add my vote of yes onto the other 170 whatever and leave the 12 opposes alone. But also, incase you care, I've left an update of my current status on my talk page...the writting style seems kinda blogy so, if you want to use your new 'crat powers and clean it up that's fine by me. I'm just sayin'. See you later dude. And good luck with trying to get 200 supports in the next...however long it is. 'The Ninjalemming' 00:31, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

'tis never too late =) –xeno^talk 00:42, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Going in the last five minutes 'The Ninjalemming' 00:50, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Done, could be the last 'The Ninjalemming' 00:53, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Times Up!

Congratulations on your RfB.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 00:55, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

and I'll paste here as well, congratulations dude =P Only second damn 'The Ninjalemming' 00:56, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

You are now #6 on WP:100. :) Congratulations. Hi878 (talk) 00:57, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations Xeno! Ale_Jrb^talk 01:10, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Bit flipped. Congrats! — Rlevse • Talk • 02:28, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Oh yeah. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 02:29, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Gratz, and best of luck with ... whatever it is crats do. - Dank (push to talk) 02:33, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

• Thanks all =) –xeno^talk 02:41, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Congrats on the...what is it, shovel? Tim Song (talk) 02:42, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
• Congrats, xeno. Well-deserved. :) Good luck. Connormah (talk | contribs) 02:48, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Congrats. Maybe you'll be able to flip your first crat bit in the next few weeks... hinthint... (X! · talk)  · @162  ·  02:52, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

• Sounds like X! wants his cratship back soon. Anyway, it's over! Good luck with your brand new wrench. ~NerdyScienceDude (✉ • ✐) 03:02, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

• Congrats for the upgrade!! (Even though I really have no idea what it is that you'll be doing....) (he-he) --Funandtrvl (talk) 02:56, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
• Now that you got the plunger, go do some work. :P Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 03:07, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
• +moar concrats. Jack Merridew 03:11, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
• Congratulations. Thank you for the work you do, Xeno.- Sinneed 03:47, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
• Echoing the above, congratulations on the passed RfB :) - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 06:31, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
• Congratulations to our 3rd most supported crat ever. Jafeluv (talk) 06:55, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
  • I'm honoured to be in such good company. –xeno^talk 13:08, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
• Congratulations, all the best, --Taelus (Talk) 06:56, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
• Congratulations, I think you will be a great crat. So don't you dare disappoint me ;-) Regards SoWhy 10:06, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
• Congratz on your successful RfB! Good luck with the additional tools, BejinhanTalk 10:15, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
• Congratulations this time. Well deserved, I'm sure. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:18, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
• Plungers, shovels... don't bombard the poor guy! Juliancolton (talk) 11:36, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Thanks again all =) –xeno^talk 13:08, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
• Congrats, now get to work :)--SPhilbrickT 13:15, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
• And a congrats from me, too. That's right. Just because I'm absent doesn't mean you're not being watched....Useight's Public Sock (talk) 13:58, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

  Should I be worried?! =) –xeno^talk 16:38, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

  Well, watchlisted. Useight's Public Sock (talk) 15:55, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

• Well done dude. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:00, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
• Congratulations, my friend! I seem to be late to this party, but I'm sure you'll do an excellent job. I'm not sure why you'd want such a dull job, but you're certainly qualified ;). Best of luck to you and, while I'm here, thanks for all the advice you've given me. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:48, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

  Mindless repetition is my middle name! Mindless repetition is my middle name! Mindless repetition is my middle name! –xeno^talk 16:38, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

• Congratulations from me also, a well deserved RfB pass. Good luck with the new tools. Camaron · Christopher · talk 17:42, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
• Well-placed trust. Kudos to the community and best wishes to Xeno. --78.34.239.244 (talk) 15:47, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
• Congratulations. There was once a user who opposed all or nearly all RFA saying that those were power hungry people (or maybe some other explanation). He never did that to RFBs! Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 19:50, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
• Congratulations. I usually follow your talk page but it seems I missed your candidacy. I just found out. I would certainly support you. Anyway, you took a lot of votes anyway and that means that the community trusts you for this position. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:42, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

  No worries =) Once again all, thanks for the well-wishes. –xeno^talk 16:38, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

• Congrats, and thanks for the barnstar!   — Jeff G. ツ 21:33, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
• Congrats, my friend! Well done. :) GlassCobra 02:46, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

In lieu of thankspam

Two years ago to this day, the community saw fit to make me an administrator and I was humbled; I am once again humbled by the comments offered at my 2nd RFB. I look forward to putting this wrench to good use: continuing to work behind the scenes of this great tome of knowledge keeping the cogs greased, and I'll do my best not to drop the spanner in the works. =) –xeno^talk 13:05, 4 June 2010

Justin Bieber Talk Page

Can someone please explain why this page [73] has been blocked? FutureMrsBieber —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.50.197.207 (talk) 18:35, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

(It's protected, not "blocked") Because people were vandalizing that page as well. You can make comments here: Talk:Justin Bieber/nonautoconfirmedtalk; alternatively, have you considered creating an account? –xeno^talk 12:47, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

name change request

Someone said I should change my user name. It is confusing to do. Please change it to RIPGC. RIP Gary Coleman (talk) 02:46, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

 Done –xeno^talk 12:38, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. Don't misunderstand, my old name was not "I am Gary Coleman". I also saw that there are several other RIP+Name usernames but I will let them take care of themselves. RIPGC (talk) 03:51, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

template:divhide

Wack a rat. It seems that now we have placed warnings on templates about inappropriate usage such as {{hidden archive top}} and {{collapse top}} that some people have moved on to using {{divhide}} which is being reversed in a all to familiar way. It is not clear to me what extra functionality "divhide" has that "collpase top" or "{{{collapse}}" has but as you are the main author of it, please consider whether it could be merged into one of the other templates and if not please add to it a similar explicit prohibition against inappropriate use on talk pages that has been added to the other templates. If it is not meant to be used on talk pages then we should add a line of code that makes it transparent on talk pages.-- PBS (talk) 03:58, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Warning added [74]. The extra functionality is, of course, the nice appealing blue colour that comes by default. –xeno^talk 12:36, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. -- PBS (talk) 02:10, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Second Opinion Request

It's been awhile, hope you've been well. If you have time, I would like to hear your opinion on this. If not, no worries :P Washburnmav (talk) 00:36, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Problem resolved itself, no need for further review. Happy editing :) Washburnmav (talk) 01:14, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Good to see you again, Washburnmav! –xeno^talk 01:20, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Your comments

Please read my post here [75]. Your help and advice is falling on deaf ears. While I do not mean to stalk this user, this string of disruptive edits, personal attacks, and noticeboard discussions are hard to avoid. I hope something can be done about this. -OberRanks (talk) 04:07, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

It looks like other admins have commented on their talk page already; you might consider filing the RFC/U you are preparing - so Mk5384 can receive input from uninvolved community members. –xeno^talk 12:44, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

MKs response to this will totally dictate how I proceed. If the user appears to calm down (once again) and cooperate with others, there probably is no need for further action. Angry rants, however, and calls for punishments will surely lead to the RFC you mentioned. -OberRanks (talk) 13:42, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Alright. By the way, I would be remiss if I didn't point out this archived thread. –xeno^talk 19:02, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't deny that thread at all. I would also be remiss if I did not point out that MKs handle was never once used in that thread [76]. MK immediately assumed the comment was about him, and apparently had discovered it by monitoring talk pages and user contributions of those he had been in previous disputes with. That discussion never went anywhere but on a user page and I was simply stating something I was told by another individual off-Wiki. Probably wasn't the best thing to do, judgment wise, I admit that. -OberRanks (talk) 19:35, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Was also wondering if you would be willing to certify the RFC/UC. Based on this most recent diff [77], which is clearly another veiled statement about my military service, I think an RFC might be a good idea at this point. -OberRanks (talk) 01:32, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I will certify an RFCU (by the same token, if Mk5384 chose to open an RFC/U I would certify that as well). –xeno^talk 12:33, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

About changing user name

I finished changing my name. And I want to have an unification login.

Previous user using this account enable unification login in ja.wikipedia.org, too.

Can't log on to ja.wikipedia.org. What can I do? I need help.

Seemed like in Japanese Wikipedia did not have Changing user name article. Silvergoat (Chinese: 銀羊) 06:12, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

See ja:WP:CHU. –xeno^talk 12:31, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you so much! Silvergoat (Chinese: 銀羊) 17:59, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you kindly

Thanks for your help with my new username! I appreciate it. Eponymous (talk) 03:35, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

No problem. Enjoy =) –xeno^talk 03:37, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

TjBot

Hi Xeno, Thanks for your message. I am trying to request a bot status at WP:BRFA but seems that I can't as I have already been denied. Any suggestions ? Thanks — Tjmoel  ^bicara 04:52, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Simply add a "2" to the name of the BRFA page. After saving it, you can modify the "Newbot" link to point to simply "TjBot". –xeno^talk 04:55, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Xeno, doing it now. Cheers — Tjmoel  ^bicara 05:03, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

No problem! –xeno^talk 05:21, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks again Xeno. It is approved !! Cheers — Tjmoel  ^bicara 11:39, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

No problem - happy botting. –xeno^talk 12:40, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Your assistance is requested

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3APresident_of_the_United_States&action=historysubmit&diff=366936932&oldid=365088324

On the chance this is actually contact info for someone other than the editor who added this, is there some way that you can delete the edit from the article history? You may want to look into the editor's history and see if this is going on elsewhere. Thanks, Abrazame (talk) 06:04, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Xeno, I saw this and removed the info (name, email, phone no. etc). Abrazame, thanks for the notification. Cheers. --Ckatz^chat_spy 06:49, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your assistance, Ckatz. –xeno^talk 12:42, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

FYI Abrazame, if you set you an email in your preferences, you can use Special:Emailuser/Oversight for stuff like phone numbers, addresses, etc., that must be scrubbed. This way it's not in the public eye. Thank you for bringing this to our attention! –xeno^talk 12:42, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you. I'd posted here because I saw picking an individual admin as preferable to a widely viewed AN/I kind of page. Following my post here, and considering that you may have logged off for the day/night, I found my way to a page that listed an e-mail address for this sort of issue, to which I sent an alert as well. Having found that private route, I'll go that way should I encounter the situation again, but I thank you both again for your responses and help. Abrazame (talk) 14:49, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Soap

I'd remove them entirely, as recommended by the nom guideline page. He'll pass anyway. Amalthea 10:27, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Probably right. Looks like the candidate took care of it. –xeno^talk 12:39, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Heh, he's a smart candidate, I kinda hoped he would. :) Amalthea 12:58, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for supporting and following my problem and my Bot Problem :D . With respect --Bersam (talk) 21:01, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Sure thing. Happy botting, –xeno^talk 21:02, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Congrats!

I just saw you in The Signpost. Congratulations on your 'cratship! ɳorɑfʈ ^Talk! 13:23, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Oh, I'm famous now? Awesome! Hey by the way, I've been meaning to get around to this, but there's some essays that need tagged in Category:Wikipedia supplemental essays. Only a handful so probably easier to just do manually. –xeno^talk 13:27, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

I too read the news. Congrats!--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:58, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

I think I got them all, just now. Thanks for pointing them out. ɳorɑfʈ ^Talk! 16:28, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Just wanted to pop in and say grats on crats too. I've noticed your excellent work scattered all over the place, and you definitely deserve it. Torchiest ^talk/_contribs 14:01, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Hey Xeno. I extend my congratulations as you are well deserving of your new status.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:04, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

• ^^ Thanks peeps =) ^^ –xeno^talk 14:51, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Neil Armstrong move protection

After doing a bunch of batch protections today, I went though to tweak a couple manually and saw that you had already fixed the indef move protection on Neil Armstrong. Thanks!! — Kralizec! (talk) 15:18, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Not a problem. I actually don't think it's ever been move-vandalized, but high-profile page that is unlikely to be moved without discussion, so... –xeno^talk 15:25, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Vector on an iPhone

Since you have an iPhone, you might be interested in this. ~NerdyScienceDude (✉ • ✐) 14:33, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

I have an iPhone, but I turned Vector off the day it went live. Thank you for the note. –xeno^talk 14:34, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Username change

Hello,

I thought I would keep you posted on my username change. As you know fingers had to be crossed on if all my edits would transfer to my new username. The good news is that all my preferences, adminship, logs, and user pages appear to have been transferred successfully. The bad news is that none of my edits have moved at all, with only edits I have made since the re-name appearing in CT Cooper's contributions, with all others in Camaron's contributions. I see two possibilities here: a) the edit transfer is stuck somewhere in the job queue, which for Wikipedia is currently at 300,000+, or b) MediaWiki gave up when it came to transferring my edits, and I will have to talk to a developer on fixing the issue. I don't know how fast the job queue moves, so I can't say which is the case at the moment. Do you have any thoughts on this? CT Cooper (talk) 17:29, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I had a similar issue when I was renamed. They should hopefully start moving soon. If nothing happens within a week or two, start poking around. –xeno^talk 17:31, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I will see what happens in the next week. CT Cooper (talk) 18:10, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Xennoo!

Hello my new favorite crat. I saw you protected Justin Bieber- but I think he attracts even more vandalism than Lady gaga does- I mean we have tweens vandalizing random stuff about him all over wikipedia. Suggest that it is [edit=autoconfirmed] (indefinite) [move=sysop] (indef)? Thank you Tommy2010 [message] 20:07, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Right now it is protected for 3 months. It seems like a good candidate for "L2 pending changes". Let's wait and see. –xeno^talk 03:59, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank spam!

Hello, Xeno. You have new messages at User:TFOWR/Thankspam.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

And thanks for fixing up the RfA here and there - going through an RfA gave me a new appreciation of the little tasks that I normally take for granted. TFOWR 20:39, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks for providing me with a really easy RFA to deliberate upon for my first closure =). Cheers, –xeno^talk 04:08, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Usurp on it.wiki

Done. Bye! --Roberto Segnali all'Indiano 08:22, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Great - thanks! Now to figure out m:interwiki.py... –xeno^talk 15:45, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

All your base

just made a comment on your ayb userbox talk page, not sure if you would see it there so just giving you a heads up EdwardLane (talk) 09:09, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Replied there. Cheers, –xeno^talk 15:45, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

You might have been lucky that time

I looked at the usurp page and didn't find a "Reverting possible vandalism" right after it for deleting over 60,000 characters. Good thing it was done before ClueBot was fully active again. mechamind90 04:20, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

I doubt ClueBot would revert an administrator, but best to check with Cobi on that =). –xeno^talk 08:11, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, ClueBot did revert a Rollback by user Technopat once. Not an admin according to the category list, but I'm pretty sure the undo was a Rollback. mechamind90 15:46, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Pretty sure ClueBot has some Laws of Robotics and Thou Shalt Not Revert Admins is near the top ;p –xeno^talk 16:52, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

New BRFA?

Hey Xeno, you recently approved my BRFA for DodoBot when it was automatically inheriting only the class parameter of project banners. I've improved it to inherit B-Class Checklists, and I was wondering, will I need to open a new BRFA or is the task similar enough to not require new approval? - EdoDodo ^talk 08:35, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

No, it's fine under the authority of WikiProject tagging - as long as the project consents. –xeno^talk 16:51, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Of course, thanks! - EdoDodo ^talk 16:56, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Suggestion: since the edit summaries, watchlist, recent changes, already provide a link to the bot's userpage by way of, well, the bot's username, you might consider using your (Bot) prefix to link to the BRFA (I use redirects to save space). –xeno^talk 17:08, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Will do this for future edits, thanks for the tip! - EdoDodo ^talk 17:30, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Just wondering...

(Knowing that I can edit your talk page) Is m:User:Xeno 2 your alternate account there? The user has redirected his talk and userpage to yours. --Diego Grez ^{let's talk} 18:19, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Yep. Thanks for looking out. =) –xeno^talk 18:57, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Good. Thanks for clarifying. :) --Diego Grez ^{let's talk} 19:00, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Do I have to wait for zh:WP:USURP approval?

My username change request from Spal is pending in WP:USURP. You suggested me to try zh:WP:USURP first. I've posted a request there. Can I have the username change request in English Wikipedia done sooner. My primary interest lies in English Wikipedia only. -- Susam Pal 21:43, 13 June 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Susam pal (talk • contribs)

This is  Done. Happy editing, –xeno^talk 21:49, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

My admin request

I have a question what do i have to as an administrator to i have to spend most of my day on wikipedia editing articles making improvements, stopping vandalism, and what advantages do i have than normal users, do i have the ability to block users, delete pages? please answer i will maybe try again in a couple of months.Youndbuckerz (talk) 02:00, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Administrators aren't bound to do any particular thing, they're still volunteers. See Wikipedia:Administrators for an overview, but yes blocking, deleting, protecting, etc. is part of the administrator role. There are some excellent pages out there you help you become familiar with the administrative areas, I would suggest you start with Wikipedia:How to pass an RfA and branch out from there. –xeno^talk 02:15, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Re: "somebody please speedy admin this guy" on ANI

Awww...ya ruined the fun. :) Was just about to put that it had hit 156. Take Care Dude...NeutralHomer • Talk • 03:04, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

CRAT ABUSE!! Now, how will I ever find out the number of supports Soap has? --Floquenbeam (talk) 03:07, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

• Sorry for being a spoilsport =) –xeno^talk 03:08, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your help!

Thanks for your help! This message is from my new account. AlexHe34 (talk) 13:10, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

No prob =) –xeno^talk 13:10, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Remember..

..when you said I would be dissapointed? Well I am dissaaappoinnteddddd. (just kidding!) That's okay. I appreciate the feedback. Tommy2010 [message] 19:21, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

When I make a guarantee, I stick to it! ;p –xeno^talk 19:33, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Johnnyseeds

Note that they added a spamlink to the same website, 16 minutes AFTER filing the CUN request; and now they've asked the spam article be restored. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:47, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

I just noticed the username was recreated, but still redirected to Brooktrout55, which is why I thought they hadn't edited since 6 June. –xeno^talk 20:49, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

FWIW they linked to their article, from pre-existing wikitext, not to their website. –xeno^talk 20:51, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Removing auto-thingy

Yes please, I would like this removed [78] apparently losing this "right" means that everytime I write a page some Admin will have to read it to make sure I don't use naughty words. I hope it is Wizardman forced to read every boring word I write to impress upon him that I do still write. Giacomo  22:06, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Looks like this was taken care of. Cheers, –xeno^talk 01:02, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Volleyball

I have seen that you edited some volleyball articles. Some players articles, most of them looks outdated. I would like to improve players by country. Could you please choose a country to contribute with? Please take a look on Yekaterina Gamova, Hélia Souza, Serena Ortolani and Kenia Carcaces for a model to follow. Please can you please improve some volleyball players with infobox and some addons? References are very important. Let me know. Oscar987 23:16, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

It must have been my bot. I don't really edit volleyball biographies... –xeno^talk 01:03, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Stalled renames

Hello, Xeno. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Changing username/Usurpations.
Message added 03:27, 15 June 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I have added a follow-up comment. ~NerdyScienceDude (✉ • ✐) 03:28, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Mmm... Yes. Probably best for him to find a dev or reopen bugzilla:17313. –xeno^talk 03:31, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Reviewer

I believe you made an error at WP:PERM when granting reviewer rights. Rather than giving me reviewer rights, it seems you have given me autoreivewer rights. Was this an actual error, or is it my mistake? Immunize (talk) 17:53, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Woops!  Fixed, thank you for noticing and bringing it to my attention. –xeno^talk 17:56, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

How do I use this right. Are pending changes already here? Immunize (talk) 17:59, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Not yet. (See Wikipedia:Reviewing#Reviewing_process) –xeno^talk 18:02, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Within 1-2 weeks? Immunize (talk) 18:03, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Last I heard, today or tomorrow. –xeno^talk 18:04, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Hello and thank you for the quick response to my request for reviewer rights. Best, MarmadukePercy (talk) 19:49, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Sure thing =) –xeno^talk 19:51, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

bundled rights (question for tps'ers)

The bundled rights (Working title, subject to change. "Bundled rights" suggested by Floquenbeam) usergroup contains the rights of the account creator, confirmed, autoreviewers, reviewers, and rollbackers usergroups. It is intended to consolidate rights and does not confer any additional rights over-and-above those it contains. The right is generally granted to users with several of these userrights already. When granting the flag, reviewing administrators should examine the criteria for the missing userrights in making their decision.

Any comments from the peanut gallery? I was going to submit a proposal, but then I had a vision in my head: the shitstorms that would occur every time this userright were removed. Does the potential for drama outweigh the benefit of consolidated rights? –xeno^talk 03:34, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

IMHO, the inevitable shitstorms would outweigh the benefits. Actually, I can only think of one benefit anyway, and it's fairly tiny (making user rights log slightly easier to read). Any others? Also, if you do go ahead with it, please oh please don't call it "super user", that is going to offend a group of very vocal people, for no reason, and make it too attractive for MMORPG players to request. Perhaps something more boring, like "bundled userrights". --Floquenbeam (talk) 13:47, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

You're probably right; and yes, the name could use work - 'trusted users' was my first idea but that's even worse for a number of reasons. –xeno^talk 13:50, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Only thing worse: "Junior Admin". --Floquenbeam (talk) 13:51, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Some of those rights are really only for people with "special needs", like ACC and autoreviewer. I don't think there's that many people that need all those rights. It seems like there are only about 10-12 users who are both accountcreators and autoreviewers, for example. On the other hand, I suppose the same argument could be made for bundling all those rights into adminship (but let's not go there). decltype (talk) 14:55, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Indeed, I'm starting more and more to disfavour the idea. In part because it has the potential to create a caste system (or more of one, if you please). –xeno^talk 14:58, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Just some food for thought, 3 users currently hold all four (account creator, autoreviewer, reviewer, rollbacker). –xeno^talk 15:32, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps they should be directed towards WP:RFA? (Not that I have any idea who they are...) Courcelles (talk) 16:48, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Why should they be punished in that way? Seems rather unfair. Malleus Fatuorum 16:52, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Perhaps =) [one is a former admin]. (Jusy Ctrl-F for the italicized text immediately prior to your note in this list) –xeno^talk 16:52, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Update: now there are six of them (presumably because more Reviewers have been added). I know that in at least one case, the 'accountcreator' userright was given to someone who only needed to override the title blacklist, and did not work with account creation, so I could see a reason for leaving it in the bundle if the bundle is ever created. Possibly also edit filter access, at least 'abusefilter-view-private' rather than the one that actually allows them to modify. I think that bundling userrights may be good because having too many "hats" may create the impression that someone is seeking out the userrights for the sake of having them rather than using them, regardless of whether it's true. But other than that, I don't see any reason to create a bundled userright. —Soap— 15:19, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't see any reason for those to be bundled OR unbundled. Another class for convenience sake is probably not worth the dramah, but if there is to be a "trusted users" group, I see no reason why it shouldn't also include IP block exempt, which I've had far more reason to use prior to my RfA than account creator. Jclemens (talk) 05:36, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Yea, I'm more and more starting to realize that the small benefit of having the rights consolidated is dwarfed by all the problems it raises, some which can't even be mentioned for beany reasons. As for ipbe, I could see the (ipblock-exempt) being added - but not (torunblocked). –xeno^talk 12:58, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

User:Xenocidic

I think you should say that this is your bot somewhere on your userpage as it redirects to your userpage. It can confuse new editors. Thanks --Everyone Dies In the End (talk) 11:47, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

'Tis linked from my userpage. Not a bot, by the way, the Xenocidic account is used for semi-automatic editing. –xeno^talk 12:43, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

A deleted talk page

Hello Xeno. I want to ask you if the deletion of this page by a retired admin was in accordance with policy or not. You should see this relevant page. Thanks. Sole Soul (talk) 12:44, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

The rules and customs on deletion of talk pages seems to change so often, it's hard to keep up. I'm not a fan of talk pages of established users, or admins, being deleted unless there are exceptional circumstances. Previous owner cites 'privacy reasons'. –xeno^talk 12:48, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

kb

"Stop treating tags with hidden comments or spaces in parameter names as bad tags." Reply: This is related to the messed regexes. I have collected all the bug reports from WP:AWB/B and we ll probably fix all at once. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:48, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

This is great news. We also need a class=Image or class=File. Making the inheritance built-in would be cool too. –xeno^talk 12:43, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Interaction ban?

I've gone ahead and prepared an ANI report, in the case that that is what needs to be done. I would still rather not do that, for the same reasons I stated before. I find it childish, and a waste of time that could be spent doing something much more productive. I had you look at the message I left him before, and you said that it was fine. I had hoped, at that point, that this would finally be put to rest. I made you aware of the post that he later left on Bugs' talk page. This came after you suggested to him that he drop the issue. When you questioned him about this, he responded that he was repeating something that he had heard off-wiki. The fact that this user is discussing me off-wiki should be a red flag. And now, we have his latest intrusion. I had a brief conflict with another user, which was rather quickly settled. This conflict was examined, and summarily dismissed at an adminisrtators' notice board. The user expressed to me her desire for the issue to be dropped, which I said was commendable, and the issue was closed. This is where OberRanks decided step in. He left a note on my talk page, saying that he had notified a series of administrators that, "we appear to have yet another situation". This is just about as clear a case of harassment as there can be. My question is this: Is there such a thing as an interaction ban here? I think I remember seeing the term used. If such a thing does exist, I can't think of a situation where it would apply more perfectly. What do you think about this? All the best- Mk5384 (talk) 06:18, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, an interaction ban is one remedy that you could propose. Keep in mind that your heated comments of the other day (threatening socking, etc.) are not going to play in your favour, so you may wish to disavow those comments up front (made in the heat of the moment, etc.). –xeno^talk 12:42, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

The comments that I made were certainly made out of frustration. I read the comments at ANI, and saw that he stated there that he would leave me alone. If he lives up to that, then there will be no need for me to do anything. I do hope that this issue is finally put to rest. Thanks for everything. Mk5384 (talk) 23:13, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Sounds good. –xeno^talk 02:38, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

I'd been hoping that your not voting for me during the RfA was a sign that you would be the one to close it! With SoxBot being down, I was worried people would not realize that my RfA had expired. Thank you for paying such close attention. —Soap— 15:15, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks for giving me an easy one to do, my work was cut out for me =). And yes, the SoxBot counter confused me for a few seconds there! –xeno^talk 15:20, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Award

Congratulations Xeno! You have been awarded a Smiley-Face for being such a great person. I hope you enjoy it very much!

HUGE SMILEY IS HUGE. –xenotalk 20:11, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Have a great day! --Loofus5 (talk) 20:09, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Pending changes Pending changes going live 15 June 2010

FYI in case anybody did not notice, Wikipedia:Pending changes will likely be enabled today or tomorrow. If you would like the 'reviewer' userright, you can request it here, or at WP:PERM/RW. It will be granted to users who deal with "vandalism, [are] familiar with basic content policies such as the policy on living people, and have a reasonable level of experience editing Wikipedia. It is recommended to read the reviewing guideline, where the reviewing process is detailed, as well as expectations for a reviewer." (from Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Header) –xeno^talk 14:41, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Pending changes is on a two-month trial until 15 August 2010

Wikipedia:Reviewing process is a good quick primer as to what it's all about and how to use it.

See Wikipedia:Pending changes/Testing to muck about. –xeno^talk 03:08, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

I note that I now have reviewer rights.

Let me see if I have the gist of this new system. It's essentially semi-semi-protection, yes?

That is, instead of not being able to edit at all, a random IP can 'edit' a page and then the edit sort of sits in limbo until a named account comes along and either says 'That's a good edit' or 'That's a bad edit'? HalfShadow 06:02, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)No, it's essentially a system where edits are reviewed. If an IP or new user edits a page where reviewer rights are required to be accepted, a pending changes tab appears at the top and a reviewer reviews it: ie: accepts the edit, or reverts it before it is saved. See labs.flaggedrevs.wikimedia.org and you can see it in action. Tommy2010 [message] 06:05, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

• Pretty much... See Wikipedia:Reviewing#Reviewing process. –xeno^talk 12:45, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the Reviewer rights

I appreciate the Reviewer rights I was granted. How did I get chosen for this and why if you don't mind my asking? Chris (talk) 13:33, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

I found you on WP:DBR/PRC and recognized your name. –xeno^talk 13:36, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Hello! Just saying thanks for my reviewer rights too =) Fin©™ 13:41, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks from me too. I'll try and do my best. Um, do I need to apply for rollback, which would have been very useful in dealing with vandalism on a number of occasions? Martinevans123 (talk) 19:59, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

My word, that was quick. Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:26, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

No problem. Happy editing, –xeno^talk 22:03, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Is that a template you were leaving people? Or would you mind if I napped the text to inform the folks I imposed the group on yesterday? :) Amalthea 14:53, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

It's {{subst:reviewer-notice}}. While you're here, I was going to ask you if you could create a simple script that would flip the bit with the log summary "User can be trusted with reviewer" and leave the note for the user. –xeno^talk 14:56, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm a bit swamped with work this week, but I've actually already written a short, local program that flips bits for a given list of users. I haven't used it yet since I didn't have time to go through the lists myself, like I said at WT:DBR#Reviewers. I can very quickly extend it to leave a message, of course. To clear your BAG conscience, it's slow, needs periodic acknowledgment from me, and would halt automatically if my talk page were edited.
Can do that if you wouldn't mind that I actually flip the bit (unless you send me your password ... muhahahaha).
Amalthea 15:31, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

I was more talking about for one-offs, but that sounds great [you running the script, not me giving you my password ;p] too (I actually mentioned your diabolical plan here). –xeno^talk 15:33, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Script for granting reviewer

Ah, what the hell, I'll stay long:

MakeReviewerConfig = {
    groupReason : "User can be trusted with reviewer",
    sectionHeader : "You are now a Reviewer",
    sectionBody : "{{subst\:reviewer-notice}} ~~\~~"
};

importScript("User:Amalthea/MakeReviewer.js");

Config defaults to the above values and can be omitted. Script is a quick-shot, so it's not pretty, doesn't check whether the user already is a reviewer, and could use a dozen other improvements.
Offer to mass-flip a list of editors stands. Cheers, Amalthea 16:33, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

You a freakin' awesome. Probably best to discuss a mass-flipping somewhere central. Just to confirm, it doesn't revoke the right in case they already have it? –xeno^talk 16:34, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

It doesn't remove it, but it would still leave a message. Amalthea 16:37, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

That's fine and actually desirable imo. –xeno^talk 16:38, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

This looks totally awesome, but how do I use it? I copied the above into my monobook.js (don't use Vector) and hit ctl-F5 a few times. On what page should I be to have this appear as an option in my toolbox? I tried going to a user page, a user talk page, normal page and didn't see anything. What very obvious step am I missing? Thanks! Karanacs (talk) 16:50, 15 June 2010 (UTC) Now I see the tab at the top - next mind, and thank you!! Karanacs (talk) 16:53, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

You should see a new button along the top called "make reviewer". Do you have very much custom stuff up there? It might be getting drowned out. Try Ctrl-Shift-R. –xeno^talk 16:59, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Was already resolved, see Karanacs' second edit here. Xeno, feel free to set the default config in the script to whatever seems best. I just wrote the first thing I saw being used. Amalthea 17:11, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Probably snuck in with the new-and-improved-but-sometimes-wonky-ec-handler. The defaults seem fine... I prefer "Reviewer granted" to "You are now a Reviewer" but since I can set it myself, I'm not bothered. –xeno^talk 17:15, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Requests for permissions as Reviewer

Hello. Yesterday I requested 'reviewer' permissions (archived here) but did not receive a reply. Does this mean that I was simply missed out or that my request was refused? MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk) 16:09, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

It was  Done, but I guess the granting admin forgot to note it. –xeno^talk 16:13, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Okay thanks a lot. I'm not surprised with the amount of entries! You guys are doing a great job, keep it up. MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk) 16:16, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

No problem - thanks =) –xeno^talk 16:17, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Editors needing reviewer rights

Hi Xeno, I'm about to go offline for a bit, but here are a few I think of off the top of my head (and I'm sure your TPSers will add on):

Completed

• Greg L (talk · contribs)
• HWV258 (talk · contribs)
• BlueEarth (talk · contribs)
• Gwillhickers (talk · contribs)
• Jrh7925 (talk · contribs)
• Ocrasaroon (talk · contribs)

Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 18:06, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

6 done. –xeno^talk 18:10, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Re: Reviewer granted

Thanks Xeno. But I'm not sure I know how this right works. Is it for patrolling edits on recent changes? Thanks, --The High Fin Sperm Whale 20:46, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Reviewing process, you won't notice anything different yet as the change hasn't actually gone live yet. –xeno^talk 20:46, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Yup. Much obliged. Thanks --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:16, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

My pleasure. –xeno^talk 22:03, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

I like to also add a thanks. What did i do to get it? wiooiw (talk) 22:38, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

I've been granting it with a pretty wide dispersal, to editors who I recognize as folks who haven't tried to destroy the wikipedia, and (for-the-most-part) have other userrights. –xeno^talk 22:42, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Reviewer user-right

You granted the reviewer user right to me a few days back. Thanks, and warm regards. ♪ ♫ Wifione ♫ ♪ _―Œ ^{♣Łeave Ξ мessage♣} 14:11, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

No worries. Enjoy, –xeno^talk 14:16, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

I must say that I am honored, but I'm not sure why you chose me. What's the occasion?--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Hawks! (sign)†} 23:40, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

It's for the pending change trial. I knew you would use it constructively, or at the very least, not use it unconstructively ;p. –xeno^talk 01:12, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Ha, what is that supposed to mean?--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Hawks! (sign)†} 13:08, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

It means I know you won't cause harm with it =) –xeno^talk 13:12, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Good, now what's the deal? Why create an entirely new permission? I still don't understand completely why the happened.--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{†Go Hawks! (sign)†} 13:45, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, see WP:Pending changes. It's supposed to re-enfranchise IP editors; i.e. replacing semi-protection with pending changes where appropriate. –xeno^talk 13:47, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

My master already has reviewer. Could I also please have reviewer? ~NerdyScienceSock (✉ • ✐) 02:43, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Sure,  Done. –xeno^talk 02:48, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks lots...

...For giving me the reviewer rights. However, when I have clicked on a link that says, "needs revision" or something like that, it just comes up displaying the normal "diff". How would I review something and put it forward? Or accept it? Or whatever yea... anyways, please help! Mr little irish^(talk) 08:09, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Cancel that... Found it in a discussion above :) Mr little irish^(talk) 08:12, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Cool. Let me know if you need anything else. –xeno^talk 12:58, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

zOMG rights :)

Thanks [79] ! Pedro :  Chat  13:46, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

No problem Parker ;p –xeno^talk 13:48, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Do you have a minute?

You happened to be the first admin who popped up on my watchlist. :) Could you have a look at WP:ITN/C#French floods with a view to posting it please? I'd post it myself but I'm the nominator and it seems the only other available admin is the author of the article! There are admin instructions available if you need them. Thanks, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:33, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

eWW .. main page work.. let me look. –xeno^talk 15:37, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

•  Done, but I no doubt screwed something up or forgot something, so please double check my work. –xeno^talk 15:46, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

You did pretty well actually! Thanks for that. :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts?

10 hours

10 hours isn't sufficient. Time zones and all that. There is a reason we let threads go 24 hours before archiving. Closing them prematurely encourages editors not to contribute to them--Crossmr (talk) 22:53, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

What more needed to be discussed? –xeno^talk 22:59, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

We'll never know will we? Even after the close other users came by to acknowledge that it looked like circling the wagons. Knee-capping discussions doesn't serve the community.--Crossmr (talk) 23:41, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Neither does prolonging them indefinitely long after they've served their purpose. –xeno^talk 00:22, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

10 hours wasn't indefinite, and since Gwen has failed to take responsibility for her actions or admit her misinterpretation of policy, then the purpose was still being served. Just because you don't see a purpose doesn't mean there isn't one. This isn't a case where someone was coming back and pinging it once a day to keep it on the noticeboard for 5 or 6 days past its stale date. 24 hour archive is there for a reason--Crossmr (talk) 03:46, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

I think you misunderstand the purpose of AN/ANI. It is for issues that require immediate administrative attention. Once the proximal issue is resolved, any concerns of a systemic or long-term nature should be taken up at more appropriate venues. Please see User talk:Gwen Gale or WP:RFC/U. If you still want to unarchive the ANI thread, go ahead. –xeno^talk 11:58, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Godwin's Law

I was unaware of this fallacy. Thank you for pointing it out to me.

I found the article enlightening.

The Transhumanist 19:15, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

No problem =) –xeno^talk 19:24, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Bot issue

Re this edit. The bot broke the banner. Renata (talk) 02:56, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. The banner was technically broken since this edit (says "blp" instead of "blp=yes"), but until my bot moved things around it just didn't appear broken. I don't think this will happen very often. Cheers, –xeno^talk 03:35, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Delinking script

Thanks for disabling it. SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 19:53, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

No worries. –xeno^talk 19:55, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

I understand that we are all trying to do good here, and appreciate your efforts. But I wonder whether the disabling does not have some unintended, adverse consequences. Respectfully.--Epeefleche (talk) 02:47, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

You could fork the script with appropriate attribution if you wanted to fix it or continue using it as is. If others are using it, are they aware of the errors and that they need to be thoroughly reviewed before saving? If not, I am hesitant to re-enable it until they are per WP:EDITH. Let me know what the best course of action is here, I really only disabled it on request. –xeno^talk 03:42, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

I've expanded on the above here. –xeno^talk 15:20, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Looking for help

Would you be able to help us with the following? Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine#Could someone help me get some e-mail addresses? ---kilbad (talk)

A bot like that is beyond my capabilities; you might try WP:BOTREQ. –xeno^talk 11:43, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

script

You left a note to OhC on my page. I never considered that you were acting in any way but impartially. Indeed, I was concerned at the suggestion that others might use it before it has been thoroughly tweaked, checked and tested. I suspect that OhC is much better than I am at coding. Tony (talk) 16:44, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

The message was also for you - feel free to debug and re-enable it once complete. Thank you for the note. –xeno^talk 18:42, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Le AutoWikiBrowser Cosa

Hi Xeno. I have noticed that my old username is still at Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage. Could you replace it with my current username please? It's not like I'm going to use it right now, but it's better to leave it good. Thanks in advance. Cheers. --Diego Grez ^{let's talk} 17:14, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

This is  Done. =) –xeno^talk 18:42, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks :) --Diego Grez ^{let's talk} 19:00, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Removing a page from Google

Hey Xeno, you know everything and seem to be online: If you read Google's instructions on removing a link from their index, http://www.google.com/support/websearch/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=164734 one of the steps is to make sure the page returns a 401 or 404 error. I have a feeling we don't do that; if I type a URL for a non-existant page, I get an actual page: "this page doesn't exist, but you can create it, and by the way here's a deletion log". I'm helpless with HTML, but am I right that this isn't the same as a 401 or 404 error? If so, do you know what an editor should do if they want a deleted WP page off the Google index? We usually tell them "this is a Google problem, not a WP problem", but if WP is set up to break Google's normal method of page removal, perhaps we shouldn't wash our hands too quickly. --Floquenbeam (talk) 15:29, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

I think the best thing to do would be to follow the instructions for "The page has changed and I want the outdated information removed" OR simply follow the instructions for complete removal regardless. For future reference a 404 error looks something like this: http://example.com/something –xeno^talk 15:33, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

I'll try that, but I don't think it's that easy. You have to enter what content was removed, and the name of the article is still on the deletion log page. Anyway, I created a page, John Q. X. Ferblestein Jr.. It was indexed by Google 3 minutes later. Now it's deleted, and I've followed Google's instructions for cache removal; I'll see if it works, and if so, how long it takes. But if you Google "Ukrainian hippopotamus" (in quotes), my page shows up.

This request comes up often enough that when I finally figure how to do it, I think I'll write a WP:space page about it. Especially since I think Wikipedia handles non-existant pages in such a way that it defeats Google's primary method.

Thanks for the suggestion. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:44, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

It may take time, but Google will eventually remove the results. –xeno^talk 18:44, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

If you redirect a deleted page then it should also update Google's cache. Google likes to keep deleted Wikipedia pages for a particularly long time (they have a lot of bots—their cache updates every minute or so, but for deleted pages, they tend to keep them for about a week), so if you redirect a page, then that usually updates their cache to show whatever you're redirecting to instead of the deleted page. Gary King (talk) 16:36, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

RFC on Researcher userright

Hi Xeno. FYI. Thanks. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 19:08, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I don't have much more to contribute there, but I share your concerns. –xeno^talk 15:08, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

It was only an FYI but thank you for the feedback. Take care. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 14:54, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

My usurpation

Is everything okay for this to be done by June 24? Feedback (talk) 22:02, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

It looks ok. I had a slight concern that the username could be confusing, but it should be fine. –xeno^talk 15:08, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks xeno, I really appreciate it. Feedback (talk) 19:30, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

WP:VIET

Do I need to do anything extra that you need? YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 00:42, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Hm, no that'll do. I'm curious why you don't want the bot to detect the {{stub}} templates, though. The task will run once the OLYMPICS task completes, which is on a short hiatus in between auto-stub and inherit phases. –xeno^talk 00:49, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Pending changes went live 15 June; on trial until 15 August

Wikipedia:Pending changes has been enabled on a trial basis. If you would like the 'reviewer' userright, you can request it here, or at WP:PERM/RW. It will be granted to users who deal with "vandalism, [are] familiar with basic content policies such as the policy on living people, and have a reasonable level of experience editing Wikipedia. It is recommended to read the reviewing guideline, where the reviewing process is detailed, as well as expectations for a reviewer." (from Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Header) –xeno^talk

Pending changes is on a two-month trial until 15 August 2010

Wikipedia:Reviewing process is a good quick primer as to what it's all about and how to use it.

See Wikipedia:Pending changes/Testing to muck about. –xeno^talk 03:08, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Script for granting reviewer (written by Amalthea)

MakeReviewerConfig = {
    groupReason : "User can be trusted with reviewer",
    sectionHeader : "You are now a Reviewer",
    sectionBody : "{{subst\:reviewer-notice}} ~~\~~"
};

importScript("User:Amalthea/MakeReviewer.js");

WPBS

I don't know if it possible but I need a list with all WPBS including WPBiography with |living=yes not having |blp=yes. I m really concerned on talk pages of living people not showing the blp tag. Can you help me on that? Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 22:13, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Hm, I think I've just gained access to the toolserver - so maybe. –xeno^talk 00:17, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

There's a clause at the top of WPBiography that provides {BLP} if living is yes. Rich Farmbrough, 07:10, 21 June 2010 (UTC).

Yes, but when WPBiography is inside a shell, living=yes needs to be set. –xeno^talk 15:04, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

I hesitate to suggest an alternative system of bannering where that wouldn't be a problem. In fact I won't. Rich Farmbrough, 17:16, 21 June 2010 (UTC).

I see two options. One: We run an exhaustive search on talk pages transcluding WPBS (and redirects) and are in category Biography articles of living people (aka WPBiography with living=yes) and we add |blp=yes to those which don't. Two: We make a tracking category "Talk pages transcluding WPBS with blp parameter" and we compare it to talk pages transcluding WPBS (and redirects) and are in the category Biography articles of living people. -- Magioladitis (talk) 06:47, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks ...

... for the words of encouragement on my talk page about my RfA. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:25, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Sure thing. As long as you are always willing to self-reflect, you'll do just fine. Cheers, –xeno^talk 14:26, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Rename/Usurp request

Hey Xeno. I hope this is okay to do this directly here, but I was wondering if you could Usurp my name to User:Tomster. User is registered, but no edits, since 2006. Please leave a message for any problems if I need to go to the CHU page. Thanks,  – Tommy [message] 15:32, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

You'll need to go through the motions, I'll mark your current pending request as notdone. You really should carefully consider whether you want to risk having your contributions split and having to wait for a developer to fix your name... –xeno^talk 15:33, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Hm. Contribs split?  – Tommy [message] 16:04, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Renames for users with very many edits can stall out, resulting in the edits not moving completely, or at all. See bugzilla:17313, WT:CHU#Stalled renames. –xeno^talk 16:07, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Wow. okay thank you. I'll re-consider my options and file a CHU request for a name unregistered. Thanks for that.  – Tommy [message] 16:10, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

It actually doesn't matter if you are usurping or moving to a brand-new name. So if Tomster is your desired name, and you are willing to take the risk, then have at it. –xeno^talk 16:11, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure actually >.< I don't want to be perceived as having a childish username.  – Tommy [message] 16:33, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

FWIW, I think your current name is fine. But if you do decide to change it, make sure you are satisfied with your new name and won't want to change it down the road. As you tack on more and more contribs, the harder it will be on the server to rename it... –xeno^talk 16:35, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks again.  – Tommy [message] 16:41, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Disambiguation Issues

Hello. I wasn't sure where to go with this problem, but hopefully you can help. I am trying to create a page for a music album called "Again and Again", however a different album from the one which I wish to write about also exists with the same name. Can you help me to create a new page for the new album? Many thanks. Wowbobwow12 (talk) 18:00, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

You would create the new album at Again and Again (''Foo'' album) where Foo is the name of the band. Then you can put a wp:hatnote at the top of Again and Again (album) pointing to the other page. –xeno^talk 18:05, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Reviewer granted question

Thank you for the review rights. Do you know where I give feedback on the flagged revisions and reviewing and such? I have been looking at it and I think that this revisions thing is a backlog waiting to happen and a bad idea. --Alpha Quadrant (talk) 20:10, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

• WT:Pending changes probably. I assume we will have some kind of a !vote towards the end of the trial. –xeno^talk 20:12, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
• Concerning "backlog waiting to happen", why do you think so? At the moment, a Huggle-user can almost keep up with reviewing all incoming edits of non-whitelisted users. Huggle-users are redundantly checking edits, at the moment. Pending changes would allow to coordinate that effort to avoid that redundancy, so even if pending changes were activated for all articles (which has never been the plan) I'm confident that they alone could handle the bulk of all incoming edits that way. How many non-trivial edits of non-autoconfirmed edits do we get, really? Amalthea 20:30, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

  Thanks, I know that Huggle is a great way to review non whitelisted users, but reviewing does not have such a tool. I think it is just another way to start a backlog, especially if they plan to convert all of wikipedia to it. --Alpha Quadrant (talk) 21:34, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

  Not yet, since there isn't even a hint of a backlog with reviewing. But creating such a tool, possibly on the basis of Kuggle or Kissle, would be really easy, and since the workload would be reduced by avoiding redundancies (while increasing the scope a bit in return) I am convinced that we could handle a huge amount of pages under that protection, with the benefit of increased quality of our articles.
  But again, there are no plans to switch all articles.
  Amalthea 21:51, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Help Requested

Resolved

 – Talk page stalkers of the world unite!

Hi, im not sure if you qualified but your probably are, could you give this file i just uploaded a quick review. Im not sure when someone is going to get around to doing it so i thought i would ask. Image. I just need someone to approve its upload from flickr and file licensing are correct and all that good stuff :) Thank you. (CK)Lakeshade✽talk2me 21:18, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Has been dealt with, thank anyway :) (CK)Lakeshade✽talk2me 21:27, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

By me. :) Normally there's no need to explicitly request a review, sooner or later someone will come by anyway.
I've also uploaded a version with a higher resolution, found behind the "All Sizes" link right above the image.
Amalthea 21:31, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

MK

I wanted to say (a belated) thank you to you, for reverting the vandalism to my user page. Also, in an effort to put past unplesantries behind me, I was considering removing some of the more crude comments that I made from my talk page. However, I did not want to make it seem as though I was attempting to alter any discussions that took place, or "sweep anything under the rug". Would this be inappropriate? All the best-Mk5384 (talk) 21:18, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Probably best to strike and/or archive the material. –xeno^talk 23:42, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Collateral damage?

After reviewing some of the earlier silly vandalism edits, it dawned on me that I became a collateral damage after the perpetrator started to target PMDrive1061 (talk · contribs), probably due to my much earlier tagging of his IP(s) for silly vandalism edits (repeated the stunt of posting lewd remarks after his main account Desmond Ying (talk · contribs) was blocked) and PMD just happened to be on his tail when NawlinWiki nailed him. Anyhow, its his life and he can chose to be whatever he wants to be, even if it means consuming himself in the process. Oh well, life goes on. Best. --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™} 18:24, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Peculiar indeed. –xeno^talk 18:27, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Raccoon trouble

The vandalism wasn't me, or it wasn't my intent. I noticed the vandalism to the intro section of the FA and leaped in to fix it. It seems that several others were doing the same thing at the same time, and signals may have been crossed (it took an inordinately long time for the server to respond). You'll notice that I got the missing first paragraph back where it belonged a moment later (18:08: vandalism restoration), once my failure to do it earlier became apparent. --Piledhigheranddeeper (talk) 18:22, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Must've been some kind of edit-conflict wonkery. No worries. –xeno^talk 18:27, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Sigs Question

I "host" mine (for lack of a better term) in userspace at User:Neutralhomer/Sig and just have the link {{subst:User:Neutralhomer/Sig}} in "My Preferences". Never had any complaints on this, but just wanted to make sure that it is cool under the rules. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 19:18, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

It's cool as long as the expanded sig is within guidelines. Which it seems to be. I believe I am the admin you spoke of at ANI, by the way ;p –xeno^talk 19:20, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

I thought you were, but couldn't remember....can't remember my name half the time. :) Thanks! - NeutralHomer • Talk • 19:22, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Yea, I helped you make bots recognize your sig, iirc =] –xeno^talk 19:25, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Oh yeah, now I remember, cause it was goofed up on the WP:TVS page. One thing sat there for weeks after several archives. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 19:40, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank for those helps. :-) Toddst1 (talk) 20:25, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

i DOES GRAMAR? –xeno^talk 20:26, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, and a question

Thanks. Now... Have I otherwise done this right? I have not created an RfA before. I still need to transclude the request somewhere, right? Herostratus (talk) 15:10, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, you transclude it at WP:RFA once it's ready. –xeno^talk 15:16, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Query

Please see [80]. This is a wholly inappropriate comment, it is a violation of WP:NPA, it is an inappropriate "Support" comment as it states no rationale about the candidate himself whatsoever, but is instead purely abuse of the RFA page in order to attack another editor. It is conduct wholly unbecoming of an administrator. What do you think is the proper place to address this, as the admin is refusing to redact the comment? I am coming to you for advice, because you are a bureaucrat who has edited the RFA pages, and because it is not appropriate to use the RFA location to attack other editors in this manner. Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 16:45, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Seems like an WP:WQA issue maybe? I'm not sure that any bureaucrat will even touch that RFA in a bureaucratic capacity now or after it expires (I certainly won't, and my comments there should be read as if I was wearing an editor or admin's hat). –xeno^talk 16:49, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

As a point of order, MZMcBride is on another of his adminship breaks. Will we ever see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/MZMcBride 4? Time will tell! (or will it?) –xeno^talk 17:13, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Posted a query about this, to WT:RFA. -- Cirt (talk) 20:10, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the note. –xeno^talk 20:13, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Xeno, per suggestion from Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship#Is it appropriate to violate WP:NPA policy during RFA?, can the text be replaced with, "Support, if for no other reason than to offset Cirt, who in this case I strongly disagree with". ? Thank you, -- Cirt (talk) 20:56, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't think that would really jive with WP:TPO. Can't you just ignore it? –xeno^talk 20:59, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Alright. Hopefully the inappropriate behavior pattern by the user in question will not repeat again in the future. Thanks for your advice, -- Cirt (talk) 21:02, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Question re giving notice

Xeno, do you think it would be alright to post a matter-of-fact notice to the individuals that participated in Admin recall petition for Herostratus - that the RFA page is now ongoing? This would be intended to be posted to both the users that supported, and those that opposed, the idea at the recall petition. Sound good? Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 20:10, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

That seems sensible. –xeno^talk 20:12, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply. And,  Done. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 20:23, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Name change

You recently granted a request to change a username from FloridaHospital to FLHGRI. However, since the Florida Hospital hosts an activity known as the Global Robotic Institute, whose activities this user has been promoting on Wikipedia, it appears that the new name may be no better than the previous. What is the policy in such a case? WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 18:48, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Ah. I searched for the acronym but didn't find anything. I'll leave them a note. Thanks! –xeno^talk 18:49, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Further to PRPLwiki (talk · contribs) -- after you userfied his article, he immediately recreated it (see Dr. Vipul Patel). I've communicated with him about this already, but because I was the one who initally tagged it for deletion, he may feel I have an axe to grind. Perhaps an independent voice might help in the matter. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 21:17, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Commented at their talk page. Thank you for your diligence. I've protected the mainspace page for 3 days. I'm logging off shortly. –xeno^talk 21:29, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

KnowIG

Hi, Xeno! I have to let you know that KnowIG (talk · contribs) – who you cautioned earlier for an improper signature – is now making threats (and unsigned threats at that!) to "bully" and such, as well as making personal attacks. Could you perhaps issue them with a final warning? Best, ╟─TreasuryTag►CANUKUS─╢ 21:15, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Oh, and they're deleting my comments from your talkpage – not good. ╟─TreasuryTag►without portfolio─╢ 21:22, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

• I am being bullyed by the above user thank youKnowIG (talk) 21:20, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

  Interesting idea—could you provide some evidence, though, because I find it hard to believe that I could do such a thing...! ╟─TreasuryTag►Africa, Asia and the UN─╢ 21:21, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

• KnowIG, I'd suggest just dropping it and moving on. If you have an ongoing issue you need assistance with, please see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution rather than issuing threats to "bully [users] back". I'm logging off shortly, so I hope this defuses on its own. –xeno^talk 21:25, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

RFC filed

Please participate in the dispute resolution process. –xenotalk 23:23, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Wanted to advise of you of this: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Mk5384 in case you wanted to certify it. -OberRanks (talk) 22:26, 23 June 2010 (UTC) WP:CANVASS -Mk5384 (talk) 23:20, 23 June 2010 (UTC) One of the requirements of an RFC is to notify other users who have been involved in the dispute so that they can endorse, certify, or reject the motion, so this can hardly be called canvassing. The RFC on your conduct is now certified with one further endorsement, meaning that three users (so far) have agreed your behavior needs to change. You also really shouldn't have modified Sarek's post to your talk page to blank out my name [81], as what you did was technically alter the posting of another user to distort information. I would suggest taking this seriously - if you completely ignore it and then there is another incident, that will weigh heavily against you. On the other hand, if you think this was filed in malice, take it to WP:ANI. -OberRanks (talk) 12:45, 24 June 2010 (UTC) It is canvassing. You're begging others to come to an RfC that I've openly stated I'm not even going to read, much less respond to. It was most certainly filed in malice. I'm not going to take it anywhere, as unlike you, I spend my time here improving articles; not harassing others. Rather than go to ANI, the best course of action is to just ignore it.Mk5384 (talk) 13:56, 24 June 2010 (UTC) Thank you for the note. I haven't been keeping up with the latest developments, so I'm not really in a position to participate. Hopefully Mk5384 will revisit his position to not look at the RFC/U so that he can take on board any constructive criticism the community may offer. –xenotalk 17:59, 24 June 2010 (UTC) I have no idea what's going on with the RfC. I do see, though, that OberRanks has already been admonished for making changes to it after it was certified, which seems like par for the course. I hope you can see why I'm not taking this seriously.Mk5384 (talk) 20:44, 24 June 2010 (UTC) Although you don't see eye-to-eye with the filer, you can still draw something positive from the RFC/U if other users provide advice on how to modify your approach to Wikipedia with harmonious editing as the goal. –xenotalk 20:49, 24 June 2010 (UTC) Like I told Sarek, if ANYONE else had filed it, I would be interested. But the fact that he's already broken the rules should speak volumes as to the motive in this case.Mk5384 (talk) 20:52, 24 June 2010 (UTC) Well, you could always just skip over the parts who wrote to the comments from others. –xenotalk 20:54, 24 June 2010 (UTC) Did you mean "parts he wrote"? In any event, MK is outright refusing to even look at the RFC [82]. Unfortunate, because that will now be documented via edit histories if he ever goes up for another lengthy block or an indef ban. -OberRanks (talk) 22:09, 24 June 2010 (UTC) It's only unfortunate, because he has been denied his 15 seconds of fame. It's humorous that he thinks that much of himself, that he's certain my refusing to read a ridiculous piece of trivia will weigh against me in the future.Mk5384 (talk) 23:20, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you...

...for the protection of my user page. Cheers, --Jezebel'sPonyo^shhh 15:29, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

No problem. –xeno^talk 17:59, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Problem with the rename

Any time I access Commons under my old user name ("Raaggio"), I automatically log in on Enwiki as "Raaggio" as well. This has made me do some edits to my userpage as Raaggio. I do not want to be automatically logged in under my former username, can you tell me what's going on? Thanks, Feedback (talk) 19:33, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

You could delete the global SUL for Raaggio m:SR/SUL, or get yourself renamed on commons to unify. –xeno^talk 20:33, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm having a slight issue with a certain user

This guy is being insanely rude (see here) and is reverting a sourced edit for Miss May I, stating it to be melodic hardcore, and replacing it with four unreliable sources (Indiestar, Last.fm, Topix, and Metal Underground) and then threatening to "find [me] and molest [me]." I'm sorry, but I really don't want to put up with this guy. Any advice? I've tried being polite, but he's overly obsessed with being a dick. --ҚЯĀŽΨÇÉV13 22:00, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

That's beyond the pale. Blocked 24h. –xeno^talk 22:06, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Much obliged. --ҚЯĀŽΨÇÉV13 22:10, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Please have a look

Hi. I am kinda new and was not sure what to do but the below article looked pretty odd and you were one of the last editors. Please look at the "Jennifer Abbott" article. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lyncs (talk • contribs) 03:56, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. It appears this user added some information to the wrong Jennifer Abbott's article. I've undone the change. –xeno^talk 12:39, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Wow, thanks for that award! Hope I can earn it!! And thanks for looking into that issue. Hopefully, I will be able to contribute something here. Take care. Lyncs (talk) 02:46, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Commons migration

Thank you for the usurp! Otherwise, I have a account on Commons, with 2000 edit and 800 pictures under the name "Sitron", where I must go for transfer this account under the name "Citron" on commons? Thanks for your answers. Cordialy--Citron (talk) 13:19, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Do you own "commons:User:Citron"? (seems so because it is attached to your sul?) Make a post at commons:Project:Changing username. –xeno^talk 13:21, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Never mind this, I found a commons bureaucrat to take care of it for you. For the enwikibooks, see wikibooks:project:changing username. –xeno^talk 13:43, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Waw! It's fast! Thanks! I will go on enwikibooks now. =) --Citron (talk) 13:51, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

No problem. Here are the links for the other-language Wikipediae:

• da:WP:USURP
• de:Wikipedia:USURP
• ja:WP:USURP#Usurpation
• ko:WP:USURP
• pt:WP:USURP
• ru:WP:USURP
• zh:Wikipedia:USURP

Happy unifying! –xeno^talk 13:55, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Will not do further editing

I think it is proper to respond that I will not do anymore further editing. Will change my password into something forgettable and let fade into obscurity. Yet if it is acceptable by Wikipedia standards I might in the future do some proper edits for some game and music pages under an apparent I.P address and disregard using a account (Less hassle to not have to manage internet accounts these days). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jw5no3kzwq (talk • contribs) 13:34, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note - I wasn't sure if you meant to continue contributing. That's fine (IP editing, etc.). You can also come back as a new pseudonym per WP:CLEANSTART - if you wish. –xeno^talk 13:37, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Usurpation talk page problems

My usurpation (from Snurks to Theodolite) was recently carried out by MBisanz but I think he must have made a mistake of some kind because my talk page currently redirects to a "usurpation" page and all my old/archived talk is still at User talk:Snurks. I left a message about this on MBisanz's talk page but he hasn't replied or done anything about it. Is everything working as normal (i.e., my talk page starts over now that I have a new username) or is something messed up? Thanks. Theodolite ➹ 16:50, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

•  Fixed –xeno^talk 16:54, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Now that's service! Theodolite ➹ 17:01, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, come again! –xeno^talk 17:18, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Request

Hey Xeno,

I, along with many others, am having a problem with user:Hammersoft. This user keeps going around Wikipedia and editing peoples user boxes (usually removing images). This person has been banned in the past. Could you take a look into this when you're not too busy? Thank you, --Suplemental (talk) 18:07, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Is there a discussion somewhere? I know that he often removes fair use images from user space as they are not allowed outside the mainspace. –xeno^talk 18:09, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

• The closest thing to discussion is here, where he describes me as a "drunken sailor", having a "sad existence", and a "disturbed individual". Since I've never edited anything that he's edited, I'm unaware of what edits he thinks are problematic, as he did not cite any specific edits. I've never been banned for anything related to this sort of removal work, just a (false) 3RR violation 1.5 years ago. --Hammersoft (talk) 19:11, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

• Of note; this editor has now conducted three edits (as of this writing) undoing my removals of non-free content from userspace [83][84][85]. I've reverted the re-additions of WP:NFCC #9 violating content. You may wish to keep an eye on further edits from him. --Hammersoft (talk) 23:15, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

DYK for 2010 Central Canada earthquake

— Rlevse • Talk • 00:03, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Congrats on the DYK, but if it is possible, I could add to it. The quake was also felt as far south as Wheeling, West Virginia per this edit. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 00:07, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Just noticed those are now the current DYKs as of about 2 minutes ago. Oh well....you could still add it to the article. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 00:14, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Bot Request

Hi there. I left a request on the WP:BTR page and have been told that you (or rather, your bot) may be able to help. Would you be able to have a look at the request (WP:BTR#French footballers) and tell me whether your bot would be able to do this as I realise that your bot usually tags talk pages where the template does not already exist, whereas I need a parameter adding to existing templates. If you can help, I will sumbit a request on the Xenobot Mk V talk page. Cheers, BigDom 06:05, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Sure, just file a request to take a spot in the queue. You could also see if user:DodoBot is available.. –xeno^talk 16:20, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Sure, I would be happy to do it on DodoBot, will run it tomorrow if that's fine with you. - EdoDodo ^talk 16:42, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Just one question, for Category:French footballers, do you want me to tag the subcategories (Category:New Caledonian footballers, Category:Réunionnais footballers, etc.) as well? - EdoDodo ^talk 16:49, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, tomorrow will be fine. I hadn't thought of those, but seeing as they are overseas territories of France, I think they do come under the scope of the task force and will update the project page accordingly, so could you tag them please. Cheers, BigDom 17:25, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I've created a list of pages that will be tagged at User:DodoBot/FrenchFootball. Seems all good to me, but you might want to quickly check it to make sure I don't tag any irrelevant articles (not saying you need to check through all the articles there, just a quick skim through to check I'm not tagging a wrong category). The total of articles that will be tagged is 5527. - EdoDodo ^talk 17:37, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Cheers, that page looks in order to me. Thanks again, BigDom 17:54, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome, will run it tomorrow. - EdoDodo ^talk 17:58, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Bot question

when preparing a list of categories for tagging, do we have to state every category which is listed as a sub-category, or will the bot automatically process sub categories as well?

Thanks - Happysailor ^(Talk) 15:28, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

The bot doesn't go into subcategories because the category tree isn't laid out the way one would always expect. Geography of Canada eventually gets to Category:Geography of Portland, Oregon, for example. If you have a top-level or a few top-level categories I can scan thru and print a list of all the subcategories for your review. –xeno^talk 15:46, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Request

Hello Xeno,

I know we don't see eye-to-eye very often (or frankly at all), but I was wondering if you could help me? I believe I am being harassed on my talk page.

--Suplemental (talk) 16:25, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

If you no longer want comments in that section, you could add {{subst:archive top}} and {{subst:archive bottom}} around the top and bottom of the thread. –xeno^talk 16:31, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm not an admin, so I can't help here

Please see here. Something needs to be done immediately. Feedback (talk) 18:17, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Commented there, thanks. –xeno^talk 18:22, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for 'reviewer' userright

How did I earn it? Do all accounts with X edits get it? Alio The Fool 22:14, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Pretty much. I was handing it out pretty widely to established users. –xeno^talk 00:24, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Your proposal re Diego Grez edit restrictions enacted

Per community consensus on AN, I have enacted the proposal that you made, and notified Diego and HJ Mitchell. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 18:02, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I think the listing at WP:RESTRICT probably needs tweaking. I'm not sure if that first bit is even still in effect. –xeno^talk 18:04, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for actioning my username/usurpation request. Much appreciated. Everton Dasent (talk) 23:00, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

No problem. Happy editing, –xeno^talk 23:02, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you.

I lubz you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.127.129.194 (talk) 23:04, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Sure thing; but I would be remiss if I didn't point you in the direction of the guidelines on canvassing. –xeno^talk 23:06, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

I did three. Just a weedle. Should I go and be all honorable and contact three of the inclusionists? (say "nah" please.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.127.129.194 (talk) 23:09, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Meh =\ –xeno^talk 23:13, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

MK

I wanted to get your advice about something. I said that I would not participate in the RFC, and I stand by it. I also said that I would not read it, which I will not. However, as OberRanks has a separate user account, the majority of which was devoted to the RFC he wanted to file, I'm sure I've seen the better part of what it contains. (Although he was admonished by Sarek for adding to it after it was certified, so I can only imagine what else it contains.) As I have said, the only reason I have refused to participate is because of who filed it. It was filed with the intention of being able to continue to harass me. Perhaps I have given the wrong impression, as I am, indeed interested in what others have to say. I won't get involved with the RFC for reasons I stated, plus the fact that I have no desire to go back and forth with OberRanks. (As you know, I have already proposed an interaction ban between myself and this user.) I would like for members of the community to have the opportunity to opine on my time here at Wikipedia. I would also like to tell my side of a few different stories in an enviornment that is not hostile, or prejudiced. Would it be appropriate for me to create a page (it's far too much to do it on my talk page) where I can explain several incidents that took place, provide examples of numerous other editors with whom I've worked harmoniously, provide numerous examples of situations where I've admitted to being in the wrong/and or apologised, provide numerous examples where I've compromised or walked away completely rather than edit war, and finally, provide numerous examples of both lies OberRanks has told about me, as well as examples of inappropriate behaviour on his part? Thank you in advance for your time. All the best-Mk5384 (talk) 22:31, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

I suppose you could, but I think it would be far more effective to simply write a response at the RFC, even if that means breaking your word not to look at it. –xeno^talk 22:33, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Honestly Xeno, it's not about breaking my word. It's about the desire to refrain from arguments and heated discussion. It's also about the desire to discuss things in an enviornment that hasn't been poisoned by a certain user's epicaricacy. I'm suggesting that route because I believe that that is what would be most effective. I understand that RfCs are typically closed after 30 days. Would it be proper to wait until it is closed?Mk5384 (talk) 08:38, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps I'll just let it go. As long as OberRanks avoids me after the RfC is closed it may be better to just move on. I'd still like your opinion, just in case I change my mind. My concern, judging by his past behaviour, that he's not going to avoid me. In that case, I think it would be helpful to have cited examples of his lies and harassment.Mk5384 (talk) 08:54, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

One more question. Suppose I did read the RfC. Suppose OberRanks lied about me in the RfC itself, and I could show that? What would happen as a result of that? I could care less about seeing him blocked. But would that at least be grounds for an interaction ban that would stick?Mk5384 (talk) 09:54, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

My opinion remains that you review the RFC, pay special attention to the Comments from others, and write a response RFC. People tend to take a fairly dim view of individuals who simply ignore RFC/Us about them ("silence as an admission of guilt"). If there are untruths or half-truths then you should highlight that in a response. I can't speculate what would happen because it's a hypothetical, but you are of course free to file an RFC/U on OberRanks. –xeno^talk 12:34, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

So, if I can show that he has already lied about me in the very RfC that he started, that's not grounds for a block? How in the world would anyone expect me to take the RfC seriously, under those circumstances?Mk5384 (talk) 13:07, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia has no 'criminal code' whereby x offense necessary leads to y sanction. RFCs are meant to gather community opinion about a particular issue, and typically do not end in sanctions being handed down. They're more a consensus-building or dispute-resolving process. –xeno^talk 13:10, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Then that's ridiculous. If you're telling me that the person who files an RfC is free to tell lies without fear of repercussions, then what's the point of it? How can the person who files the RfC; i.e. the one who is attempting to gather community opinion, be free to be untruthful in the process?Mk5384 (talk) 13:20, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

I didn't say that; I just said that it won't necessarily result in a block. You might want to review wikipedia:blocking policy to understand why it doesn't work the way you think it should. If you demonstrate that OberRanks has told untruths, and that there is a pattern of this, then he may be admonished, warned, etc., against future behaviour. Of course, you'll have to first demonstrate that which probably involves responding to the RFC. –xeno^talk 13:24, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

In the RfC that he filed? If I can show this then he may be admonished? Just forget about it.Mk5384 (talk) 13:39, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't have all the answers. You have yet to demonstrate anything, so I really can't speculate much more than I already have. –xeno^talk 13:40, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

I know you don't have all the answers. Sorry if I made it seem like I was taking it out on you.Mk5384 (talk) 13:57, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

No worries. –xeno^talk 13:59, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Mentorship

Xeno, I opened up a discussion here regarding the possibility of you becoming a mentor for MK. -OberRanks (talk) 17:17, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

I've never participated in formal mentoring before, so I'm not sure quite what it entails. Of course, anything would be strictly voluntary on the part of Mk5384. –xeno^talk 17:20, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

As you know, Xeno I often come to this page seeking advice. Whilst your advice has been extremely helpful to me, and I am certainly greatful, I have no interest in any sort of a formal mentorship.Mk5384 (talk) 18:50, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

No worries. I must admit I doubt I would be of much use as a formal mentor (I'm quite lazy, you see). My talk page is always open, though. –xeno^talk 18:54, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, and I'm sure I will continue to come to your talk page, and hound you mercilessly for advice.Mk5384 (talk) 18:59, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

And again, I will respond in the RfC proper, if OberRanks will agree to an interaction ban if I can show that he's lying about me in the RfC itself. I, in turn, will agree ahead of time to a voluntary lifetime ban from Wikipedia if he isn't.Mk5384 (talk) 19:05, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

You might want to really think about what you said there. You are claiming that the RFC contains lies, but the evidence on that page is a list of diffs to your own edits. The RFC is also certified and endorsed by several other users. I am not going to make any "deals" to get you to participate in the RFC, but if you feel it was filed in malice and contains lies and false statements, report it to WP:ANI or, at the very least, respond to the RFC itself. If what you are saying is true, I will most certainly be immediately disciplined by the Wikipedia community. -OberRanks (talk) 19:30, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Also, for the record, as of today, I count 11 users on that RFC who have endorsed and certified that your behavior needs to change. I don't see how we can all be lying. -OberRanks (talk) 19:36, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

The only person that I said is lying is you. I stand by what I said. If you haven't lied about me in the RfC, I will accept a lifetime ban from Wikipedia, effective immediately. But if you have, you agree to leave me alone for all Wikiternity.Mk5384 (talk) 19:39, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

You should bring that up at the RFC talk page and present your evidence that I filed a false RFC containing lies. I'll accept whatever sanctions the community sees fit, including a permanent interaction ban and a lengthy block on my own account if what you say is true. -OberRanks (talk) 19:44, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

I'll present very quick proof; not evidence, that you have lied in the RfC. Again, only if you agree ahead of time to leave me alone permenantly. Not "what the community sees fit", as Xeno, above states there will likely be little penalty for lying.Mk5384 (talk) 19:50, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Xeno, with your permission, I would like to copy this thread to the RFC talk page. A lot of this discussion should be documented and its hard to do that simply with diffs. -OberRanks (talk) 20:00, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Just ensure you copy the permanent link of the revision you harvest the material from and note it the edit summary when you paste it. –xeno^talk 20:01, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Done, thank you. I would also ask that if MK has any further concerns or wants to pursue this claim of lies on the RFC he bring his concerns to the RFC talk page. SHould he continue to post here, I would encourage you to either copy them yourself or direct MK to the proper place for this discussion. -OberRanks (talk) 20:08, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

I have already spelled out the terms under which I will respond at the RfC itself. I am finished with this discussion. If OberRanks agrees to an interaction ban upon proof of lying, (of course with the stipulation that I agree to a lifetime ban if I am wrong) I will respond. If he does not, I will not. Sorry to have cluttered your talk page with all of this, Xeno. The ball is now in his court.Mk5384 (talk) 20:18, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Please to be starting a page for me

Gertrude friedberg. She has a de.wiki page although she was a New Yorker. That page has references including her NYT obituary. She had one SF minor classic from the 60s and was a playright in the 40s.

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gertrude_Friedberg

http://www.nytimes.com/1989/09/20/obituaries/gertrude-t-friedberg-playwright-81.html?pagewanted=1

She has at least one redlink in a list type thing on Wiki. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.127.129.194 (talk) 04:42, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

You could try posting all the sources at WP:AFC. –xeno^talk 12:50, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

re closing of Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Herostratus 2

I have written to the other two editors who will be closing this RfA as follows. I hope this is correct and acceptable, and would appreciate your assistance in taking care of anything I have overlooked. Herostratus (talk) 14:46, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

:I have added a form at the top of Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Herostratus 2 for each of the three closing editors. All you need to do is remove either the "was" or "was not", and sign. I think you should not add any comment there (you can on the talk page if you wish, I guess). All three editors should vote, even if the first two have voted the same way, making the third vote moot. The third editor voting should then add the templates described at Wikipedia:Bureaucrats#Promotions and RfX closures -- either {{subst:rfap}}/{{subst:rfab}} or {{subst:rfaf}}/{{subst:rfab}} -- to the top and bottom of the page, and perform the other actions described there, e.g. editing either Wikipedia:Successful requests for adminship or Wikipedia:Unsuccessful adminship candidacies (Chronological). Also Wikipedia:Standing reconfirmations would need to be edited, and perhaps other places as well. If assistance is needed, I suggest asking User:Xeno as she has been helpful in the technical aspects of this process. Herostratus (talk) 14:46, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Sure. At first glance, I would note there is two pages for unsuccessful, a chronological, and an alphabetical. –xeno^talk 14:48, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Gwen's concern is reasonable, it is traditional for an closer to write a statement in a closure that may prove to be contentious. –xeno^talk 15:26, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

I've done this to give people a push in the right direction. –xeno^talk 16:13, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

• My apologizes, I though it was just waiting for another editor to close when I did this on the Herostratus RfA. Didn't mean to goof things up. - NeutralHomer • Talk • 16:19, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

No worries at all; I know it was done in good faith. –xeno^talk 16:20, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Request

Can you please courtesy blank the talk page, Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Herostratus 2, or at the very least, please blank the subsection which disparages a WP:BLP subject (Dickson) ? Thank you. -- Cirt (talk) 17:47, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

 Done, thanks. –xeno^talk 17:49, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Xeno, thank you very much! :) -- Cirt (talk) 17:56, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

i've sent u an email xeno. – Tommy [message] 20:02, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia in Culture

While exploring the depths of Wikipedia, I suddenly stumbled onto this particular article. If I'm not mistaken, most, if not the entirety, of the page violates WP:Beans. If it does, shouldn't it be moved to Wikipedia namespace. :| TelCoNaSpVe :| 15:22, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

It's been kept thrice at AFD, so I'm certainly not going to unilaterally overturn those decisions by moving it... You could renominate it, but I would suggest reviewing the past discussions to see why it's still there... –xeno^talk 15:24, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Excellent use of the word "thrice", Xeno.Mk5384 (talk) 22:04, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Nice

[86] Please feel free to make changes, Xeno. It's about this - trying to increase the number and retention rate of new editors, while improving the quality of newbie contributions. Anthony (talk) 15:53, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Cool. For some reason I thought it was related to this, because of the relation to a medical topic. =) –xeno^talk 15:55, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I saw that. I think we have to get this reader-editor conversion process much smoother and the respect level much higher before we try enticing professors to participate. Though both are achievable, and quickly, it's first things first. Anthony (talk) 16:13, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Best of luck, this is a worthy endeavour. –xeno^talk 20:22, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

User:Diego Grez/Pichilemu

Could you btw history merge the article with the main one? If it isn't much harder, please do the same for User:Diego Grez/2010 Pichilemu earthquake, User:Diego Grez/Los Navegantes and User:Diego Grez/She Wants to Dance with Me. Thanks sir! --Diego Grez ^{let's talk} 18:13, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

 Doing... –xeno^talk 18:28, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

•  Done wow that was a PITA. Can you please double check, I've tried to ensure none of the changes in between were lost, but I may have missed something. –xeno^talk 18:49, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

• Thanks sir again! Everything seems excellent! :-) --Diego Grez ^{let's talk} 20:19, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

infobox settlement task (user:xenobot/6.2)

Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Xenobot 6.2

No edits since May 4th. I wonder what's up. Shouldn't the bot working on its Infobox settlement task (6.2)? --Stepheng3 (talk) 04:11, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

I was actually doing a bit of fact-finding on the title coordinates issue. I'll probably get started this weekend. –xeno^talk 13:22, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Great. If there's anything I can do to help, please let me know. --Stepheng3 (talk) 16:06, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

ready to roll?

Extended content

No edits since May 15th, and I wonder what's up. Shouldn't the bot working on its Infobox settlement task (6.2)? --Stepheng3 (talk) 04:16, 2 June 2010 (UTC) Yes, I need to get rolling on this. But I'm still not entirely sold on the title coordinates... Should they really be added to every article - even very small ones where the inline coordinates are seen above-the-fold? (I think the answer is yes because external tools grep the coordinates from the title line, but I guess I'm just looking for some assurance) –xenotalk 12:33, 2 June 2010 (UTC) For the record, I did make WT:CITIES#Bot to add title coordinates to about 65,000 articles this thread that only had one response (User talk:Xeno/Archive 22#Bot adding coordinates). –xenotalk 13:17, 2 June 2010 (UTC) Well, I (still) support the infobox coordinates appearing in the title. But if you're nervous about proceeding without a clearer consensus then maybe you should set the bot working on region codes only. --Stepheng3 (talk) 19:51, 2 June 2010 (UTC) I think maybe what I'll do is several hundred that add title coordinates a day (and unlimited number of just adding coord_region) and see if any complaints trickle in. I will commence this task before the week is out soon. –xenotalk 19:57, 2 June 2010 (UTC) That sounds like a reasonable plan. --Stepheng3 (talk) 20:49, 2 June 2010 (UTC) Note that there's a proposal afoot to rename {{Infobox settlement}}. Is there any chance the rename (if it goes through) might confuse the bot? --Stepheng3 (talk) 22:16, 2 June 2010 (UTC) Erm. No - but it would make sense to delay the bot until the template is renamed, so it can bypass the redirect on the way through... Since it's already going to be there, that is. –xenotalk 03:42, 3 June 2010 (UTC) (Dramatic sigh) Now I'll regret bringing that detail to your attention. Ah well, there's still no deadline. Cheers, --Stepheng3 (talk) 04:53, 3 June 2010 (UTC) Is the template ever used on unpopulated places? If so, wouldn't that make the name unsuitable? –xenotalk 12:41, 3 June 2010 (UTC) It does get used on articles about ghost towns (such as Agua Fria, California) but as far as I know it's only used for places (and regions) that were inhabited by humans at some point. --Stepheng3 (talk) 15:52, 3 June 2010 (UTC) Ok. I'll go ahead with commencing the task anyway and we'll see what happens. –xenotalk 15:59, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

infobox settlement task running

•  Task running [87]... Please keep an eye on Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Xb, this will show whenever the coordinates_region isn't properly supplied. –xeno^talk 13:56, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Extended content

Double infoboxen?! –xenotalk 14:23, 8 June 2010 (UTC) So many of these already have coordinates_type set. In this case, isn't the coordinates_region vestigal? Should I only be operating on things that transclude CountryAbbr? –xenotalk 22:14, 8 June 2010 (UTC) I think you're right. If coordinates_type= is specified, the bot can skip setting coordinates_region=. --Stepheng3 (talk) 04:54, 9 June 2010 (UTC) k. I'm going to roll again on another 500 for inline,title'ing in the morning followed by another run on those already having title coords, transcluding CountryAbbr/without coord_type. –xenotalk 04:56, 9 June 2010 (UTC) Hei. For Greenland's infoboxen, you should set 'coordinates_region = GL' rather than 'coordinates_region = DK'. Algkalv (talk) 15:48, 9 June 2010 (UTC) Can you show me where this happened? You mean like here? Hmm... {{CountryAbbr|Kingdom of Denmark|Greenland}}, result is ... –xenotalk 15:50, 9 June 2010 (UTC) Aasiaat. By the way, this param could go together with other coord params. It was inserted way up. Just a pedantic nit ;) Well, time to fix some old templates then. From 2009/06 (2008 referendum implementation) it's an equivalent country in the federacy (Kingdom of Denmark). Various geo places such as islands have the GL param, so what you are referring to must be quite ancient ;) Algkalv (talk) 15:55, 9 June 2010 (UTC) Xenobot will no longer make this mistake [88], I will see if there are any others that have this erroneously set. –xenotalk 15:56, 9 June 2010 (UTC) Thank you! Algkalv (talk) 15:58, 9 June 2010 (UTC) Also inforrmed the CountryAbbr folks: Template talk:CountryAbbr#FYI DK vs. GL. –xenotalk 16:01, 9 June 2010 (UTC) I'll look into moving it with its coordinate friends... Thank you for the bug report and comments! –xenotalk 16:01, 9 June 2010 (UTC) The following pages contain coordinates_region = DK , they seem ok, yes? Árnafjørður; Argir; Ánir; Akrar; Aakirkeby; Aarhus; Ærøskøbing; –xenotalk 16:20, 9 June 2010 (UTC) I noticed Aasiaat, because I have all regional pages on the watchlist ;) There are no other instances that I'm aware of. I just wanted to let you know while the bot was still at 'A', because two days ago another boot looped categories, so the sooner one can get the news to the Overlords, the better... ;) Greetings and thank you for your prompt response! Algkalv (talk) 16:53, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

infobox settlement task con't

Extended content

I've run into a couple instances ([89] and [90]) where the bot added "coordinates_region = US-X" for locations in Colorado. These should be US-CO, of course. Not a disaster by any means, but please look into this when you get a chance. --Stepheng3 (talk) 18:40, 9 June 2010 (UTC) This is because of the capital "F" in the flag template, should not occur after about 17:28 [91]. We should install a maintenance category for US-X and CA-X. –xenotalk 18:51, 9 June 2010 (UTC) I wonder how many people who bypassed image->file broke the countryAbbr matrix: [92] [93] [94] [95]. –xenotalk 19:06, 9 June 2010 (UTC) Looks at all these that were broken by non-standard subdiv_name entries: [96] –xenotalk 17:02, 10 June 2010 (UTC) For the reasons you cite, I shall be grateful when the bot run is complete and {{CountryAbbr}} is out of the loop. Let me know if I can help in any way. --Stepheng3 (talk) 18:54, 10 June 2010 (UTC) Could you please smarten up the bot, so it doesn't generate illegal region codes? I'm specifically concerned about "US-X" [97] ("US" would be preferable), "CA-X" [98] ("CA" would be preferable), and "IN-X" ("IN" would be preferable). --Stepheng3 (talk) 19:03, 10 June 2010 (UTC) Unfortunately the bot doesn't know that the code is going to be illegal when it substs it (and remember that CA-X/US-X/IN-X is what is being passed prior to the bot arriving there in the first place). A maintenance category should probably be installed. Alternatively, I could create local versions of State/ProvAbbr/etc. that supply simply the country but not the province code when it fails. Thoughts? –xenotalk 19:12, 10 June 2010 (UTC) Category:Infobox settlement uses with imprecise region codes. –xenotalk 19:44, 10 June 2010 (UTC) The maintenance category is not, by itself, very helpful. I can easily find these errors the next day in Dispenser's report. Can't the bot look at the code it put in the parameter and do a second edit if the code is invalid? Can't it go through the maintenance category and clean up after itself? --Stepheng3 (talk) 00:53, 12 June 2010 (UTC) Yes, I'm already doing this. They're nonstandard cases for the most part, have to be fixed manually (or programmed for, if they happen often enough). There are certain ones transcluding Xb that I don't know what to put: Kosovo and other disputed areas, for example. If you use AWB, I can send you the settings files to make it easier... –xenotalk 02:43, 12 June 2010 (UTC) I'm not an AWB user. For Kosovo, I think we should use RS-KM, per the discussion here. --Stepheng3 (talk) 17:32, 13 June 2010 (UTC) Sounds good. –xenotalk 17:35, 13 June 2010 (UTC) And the rest? (de-facto|de-jure|israeli controlled|Nagorno(-| )Karabakh|Abkhazia|claimed by|Ethiopia.*?Kenya|Ancient Egypt) –xenotalk 17:56, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Further discussion on disputed regions moved to #region code unknown.

region code unknown

I think the Golan Heights articles should be coded with a template that transcludes to a blank string -- both IL and SY have codes for the region, and whichever we choose, someone will be offended. --Stepheng3 (talk) 22:00, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Template:Xb displays a blank string. So it could be a useful marker for finding keeping track of problematic regions with respect to region codes. In the meanwhile, I'll keep a list in the section below #region code unknown - please help me out. World geography is not my strong suit =). –xeno^talk 02:02, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Many of these are in the disputed territory governed by the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, which is not yet recognized as an independant nation. I suggest coding these with a template that trancludes as AZ (Azerbaijan) for the time being. --Stepheng3 (talk) 04:41, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Mauritania corresponds to region:MR. --Stepheng3 (talk) 04:43, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Fixed both of those. {{xb|NKR}} will pass AZ for now. –xeno^talk 05:03, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

How about {{Xb|GH}} for locations in the Golan Heights. (Should display no text.) --Stepheng3 (talk) 16:38, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

 Done, but used GHE to distinguish from Ghana. –xeno^talk 17:07, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

And for Abkhazia, I suggest {{Xb|AB}} which should, for the moment, display GE-AB. --Stepheng3 (talk) 16:45, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

 Done, but used ABK for consistency with other 3LAs in use. Is Tskhinvali part of this too, or seperate? –xeno^talk 17:07, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Tskhinvali is in South Ossetia, which is a different separatist movement in Georgia. If you create an {{Xb}} code for it, it should probably display GE-SK for now. --Stepheng3 (talk) 17:41, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Ok, using {{xb|SOO}}. –xeno^talk 17:43, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

For the Hala'ib triangle, I suggest using region:EG (for Egypt). --Stepheng3 (talk) 16:51, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

But isn't it disputed? –xeno^talk 17:07, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, it's disputed, but I think it's clear that Egypt has it and is going to keep it. I suppose you could make up an {{Xb}} code for it, just in case the Sudan ever wins it back. --Stepheng3 (talk) 17:41, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

I would just rather remain neutral on the whole thing than to declare 'EG', so using {{xb|HTR}}. –xeno^talk 17:43, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Fine with me. Note that there are a many, many disputed territories in the world, so this discussion will be an ongoing one. Perhaps it's time to move to Template talk:Xb. --Stepheng3 (talk) 18:02, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm surprised more haven't popped up, as there's only 3675 articles left in the worklist for Infobox settlement uses transcluding CountryAbbr with inline,title already set. –xeno^talk 18:06, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Moyale is a border community. I suggest leaving the iso_region blank, as we do for mountains, rivers, etc. that lie on international borders. --Stepheng3 (talk) 18:04, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Cool. Just Ancient Egypt then =) Thinis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) –xeno^talk 18:09, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

geobox?

Template:Geobox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Should we start thinking about targeting geoboxen too? –xeno^talk 16:26, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Geobox should eventually be fixed to stop using CountryAbbr, but I'm too swamped to help with that project right now. Maybe in August. --Stepheng3 (talk) 00:16, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Sounds fine. The bot could use a rest after this ;p –xeno^talk 18:10, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

phase I complete

Y Phase I complete

Initial run targeted Infobox settlement uses transcluding CountryAbbr with inline,title set - approximately 82174 uses of countryAbbr were bypassed. semi-automated Error correction edits are useful in seeing where CountryAbbr might have been unable to provide a result due to the variance in parameters supplied to subdivision_name & _name1.

Many thanks to user:Stepheng3 for his expert assistance on matters of a geographical/political nature. =) –xeno^talk 22:58, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

infobox settlement task complete

Special:Contributions/Xenobot

Category:Infobox settlement uses with imprecise region codes (-1)

(Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Xb)

Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Xenobot 6.2

Y Phase I complete

Initial run targeted Infobox settlement uses transcluding CountryAbbr with inline,title set - approximately 82174 uses of countryAbbr were bypassed. semi-automated Error correction edits are useful in seeing where CountryAbbr might have been unable to provide a result due to the variance in parameters supplied to subdivision_name & _name1.

Discussion regarding Phase I has been archived to User talk:Xeno/Archive 22#user:xenobot/6.2.

Phase II

Phase II of the task will find Infobox settlement uses transcluding CountryAbbr and not displaying title coordinates, supply the region code and add the title coordinates to standardize the articles.

 Task running.... –xeno^talk 15:17, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

region code unknown

See Category:Infobox settlement uses with imprecise region codes which now includes Xb uses without a parameter or unrecognized parameter. –xeno^talk 14:03, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

I cleaned it out earlier today. --Stepheng3 (talk) 03:54, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Appreciate it. –xeno^talk 15:53, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Catalonia = ES ? –xeno^talk 17:29, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes. To be more precise, it would be ES-CT. --Stepheng3 (talk) 03:49, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

• {{done|Task complete.}} I think we're just about finished here. Any of the remaining 11000+ uses of CountryAbbr probably result from geobox; which we've agreed to table for now. –xeno^talk 15:53, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Might've jumped the gun here; CatScan 2.0 found some more. –xeno^talk 17:38, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Do you know of any more templates calling infobox settlement like these. Easy elimination of CountryAbbr, there. –xeno^talk 15:52, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

These edits could probably do with a bit of spot-checking, they had to rejig things a little. –xeno^talk 16:32, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

coordinates_region

Sure, no problem. I'll leave it to Xenobot to fix the articles I've already written. TheCatalyst31 ^{Reaction•Creation} 17:45, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Yep, that's fine. Cheers, –xeno^talk 17:49, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Y Phase II complete

• I think, at long last, this task is pretty much complete. Or, at least the portion of the task that seeks and destroys CountryAbbr uses resulting from Infobox settlement. Over 31,000 uses of CountryAbbr were bypassed in this phase. –xeno^talk 18:15, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Do not archive until 04:20, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Phase III

The third and final phase of this task seeks to standardize Infobox settlement uses that do not display title coordinates and set |coordinates_display=inline,title. It would probably be worthwhile to add the coordinates_region here, even when it's vestigal. –xeno^talk 15:10, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Task will commence shortly. –xeno^talk 19:13, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

•  Task running.... –xeno^talk 19:33, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Many of these are Infobox settlement wrappers - Template:Infobox Italian comune (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), Template:Infobox Serbia municipality (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), Template:Infobox German Bundesland (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), etc. Shouldn't the display be set in those wrappers? –xeno^talk 19:39, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
  • For some reason, the bot is stepping in many of its' own footprints. I must have fudged something up when I built my initial lists. –xeno^talk 19:54, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Bot adding coordinates to settlements in Slovenia

Just a note ... coordinates already exist in the info box on the right side of the page for each settlement ... do not really have to be repeated in the title. See for example Olešče where existing cooridinates under the map and bot added coordinates above the map. Simply not needed. Kaktus999 (talk) 06:29, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

I know that it seems somewhat redundant; the reason for this is because certain tools that harvest the coordinates to do magic take it from the title line. Prior to the bot, a majority of infobox settlement articles had coordinates both inline and in the title, so the bot simply standardized the others. If you want to set a particular article back you can just change "inline,title" to "inline". If you have a batch of articles you want changed back (like a category) and have a consensus from a WikiProject to remove the title coordinates, please let me know and I will run the bot in reverse =) –xeno^talk 12:34, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

All finished

• This task is Y complete (I think). –xeno^talk 12:34, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Archive 15

←

Archive 20

Archive 21

Archive 22

Archive 23

Archive 24

Archive 25