User:Eagle 101/Talk/Archive/3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

< User:Eagle 101 | Talk | Archive
You have new messages (last change).
Talk Archive: April 2006
This is a talk page archive of Eagle_101. These are archives, please go to my talk page if you want to talk to me.

I do ALL my archiving by hand.

If there is something in this archive that I mistakenly archived, feel free to bring it back out of this archive (copy and paste it, but do remove it out of the archive), and put on my talk page. If you should do this, please add it to a new section at the bottom of my talk page and put a signed reason why you thought it should not be archived yet.

Archives
old stuff  •  March 2006  •  April 2006  •  May 2006  •  June 2006  •  July 2006  •  August 2006  •  September 2006  •  October 2006  •  November 2006  •  December 2006  •  January 2007  •  Febuary 2007  •  March 2007
Table of Contents

Contents

[edit] Wiki Vacation

I am no longer on wikibreakEagle (talk) (desk) 19:27, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] You have my support

Be assured of my support - even when we differ. I have to say I have suffered much the same type of treatment. And this place does seem to be awash with egos. No names of course but this behaviour is potentially a serious problem for the life of this encyclopedia. Much as life as a whole of course. I for one will welcome you back. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page) 07:33, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] From Alba: immediate problems resolved

Hi Eagle:

I've spoken to Zoe regarding the bot problem. As I understand it, the only problem was indeed the {{cleanup}} --> {{stub}} behavior, which had objectors we didn't know existed. (Check my and her talk page for our discussion.) In addition, a perusal of Zoe's user talk shows she (he?) has a more general problem with being abrupt and gruff, although willing enough to calm down later.

I'm sorry you had such a bad experience. I should have suggested that the bot test be put off until I was around to discuss its features and implementation. I'll be back on Monday so maybe we can restart the bot test then -- please don't start it before then!! If we do that, and I'm around to field the non-technical questions on bot behavior, then we can perhaps get the ball rolling. Please don't run off entirely; I think these problems are a lot less than emotional responses on all sides have made them, and I am a strong believer that assuming good faith can carry us a long way.

Anyway, I hope you're feeling better and that we can get Gnome rolling along soon. Take care.

Alba 14:15, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A bit o' revision on the Gnome bot coding

Hey Eagle, based on comments by User:Beland, let's reprogram Gnome to add tags rather than pulling them out of cleanup altogether. The reasoning is twofold:

    1. Cleanup might be referring to multiple problems
    2. keeping the stuff in the cleanup category lets us make sure we're killing it all, whereas splitting it into myriad categories makes keeping up with the statistics harder

Nonetheless, the serious nature of the cleanup problem requires this bot and more. Check out the Wikipedia:Cleanup process/Cleanup sorting proposal page to see how far this has gotten.

I've also revised the GnomeBot task list and reasoning to match all this, as you asked. Alba 22:44, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] cleanup taskforce

I saw your note on the cleanup taskforce list for March. You can grab any of the unassigned articles and assign them to yourself. A lot of the assigned articles were assigned to people who are now inactive and could be (should be) reassigned.

Would you be interested in programming a bot to help keep track of which members are active? I'm thinking of something that would go through Wikipedia:Cleanup Taskforce/Members/Members by interest and for each person check how many contributions they've made in the last month and prepare a new page that would list those who have few or no contributions in that time marked as inactive. There are other tasks that a bot could help with too. RJFJR 20:09, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Colonel Marksman

Yo, you helped me earlier, and I thought you would help me again.

How do you create a page that formally does not exist (the one I'm trying to work on is NASV) and make a redirect route link to a page that DOES exist (NASV is NASB, the difference is Version, and Bible, but essentially the same thing). So, in a search for NASV, I wanted to make a redirect route to the NASB page.

[edit] Colonel Marksman again

I made a page on the "Battle of the Kegs" (kinda funny, check it out urself), but I when I thought someone deleted it, I found out it was just case sensitive.


... ????

PS: I forgot about the Colonel Marksman 02:32, 4 April 2006 (UTC), but yeah, I know it's there.

[edit] Novel stubs list done

Come back soon... Her Pegship 19:26, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes - and thanks for your efforts here. Both you and Her Pegship thanks :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 13:15, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bot Ideas - and welcome back

Hi

Welcome back - short breaks can be good too - I did leave a few small ideas for the gnome bot they are the last two in your archive2. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page) 07:49, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Ok - Fuel for the BOT and it's list creation - I would say any category with Novels at the end of it's title. e.g. {Spy novels}. I think that should cover it, Thanks :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 16:07, 6 April 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Cleanup and WikiProjects

Hi, I see you are envolved with the Cleanup TaskForce

I am a member of Archaeology WikiProject, so I noticed the template inclusion in the end of their Main Page. Can you just give me a short summary on what the idea is and where it has got to as it at first sight looks like a very good idea to get into the other two project I am part of "Sports Olympics" and "Novels" (but that one you know about. Regards :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 13:18, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

If you didn't understand you may not be the one to ask. But is the end of the WP:ARCHAEO project page is a section call "Pages Needing Attention" that include a template inclision from the Cleanup project pages. I think I know what they are about but thought you might know more. Anyway on the Novels bot work front no problem about the delay, there is now real hurry pleant of other things to do. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 19:45, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gnome (bot)

Thanks for your changes to the criteria. My only concern was the removals of the cleanup tags, but if your bot performs as the page you linked to indicates, then I have no problems. User:Zoe|(talk) 17:59, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unblock please

--- I blocked my self by attempting to run User:Gnome (Bot), I asked and User:Zoe agreed to unblock the bot. But apparetnly Zoe did not realize that another admin also blocked the bot for the same reason. (i.e. zoe blocked, and than 1 day later another admin blocked as well) both blocks were indefinate. If you don't belive me look at User:Gnome (Bot)'s Block log. In addition look at my previous message, posted by zoe above

If you have any questions please post them here on my talk page as my I.P. address is blocked.Eagle (talk) (desk) 15:41, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

It doesn't work like that, the unblock Zoe entered should have resolved the problem. You need to give more details as to what the block message actually says... --pgk(talk) 23:02, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Here is the block log from the bot...
  • 20:25, 6 April 2006 Zoe unblocked Gnome (Bot) (contribs) (user wants to try changing it)
  • 07:37, 28 March 2006 Grutness blocked "Gnome (Bot) (contribs)" with an expiry time of indefinite (repeatedly replacing abd cleanup templates - even though asked to stop. This is the second such block)
  • 18:44, 27 March 2006 Zoe blocked "Gnome (Bot) (contribs)" with an expiry time of indefinite (inappropriate bot)
Some how I triggered the autoblock, it cites User:Grutness as the blocking admin. (on the auto block) Let me know If I need to give you my IPEagle (talk) (desk) 23:06, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
I presume you're now unblocked? All I did was to unblock the username and the autoblock one more time to clear it because more than one block on the username was placed. The blocking message cited Grutness's block because both Zoe's block and the autoblock by Zoe had been lifted, but Grutness's block had not. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 00:27, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
No, now I am bocked by User:Zoe the original blocker... At least now I am not seeing grutness's block... Personally I am confused.Eagle (talk) (desk) 00:33, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
Hmm... just to clarify, the bot's account is blocked, correct? Flcelloguy (A note?) 00:34, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Here is the second message... This is now from the original block....

  • Your user name or IP address has been blocked from editing.
  • You were blocked by Zoe for the following reason (see our blocking policy):
  • "inappropriate bot"
You triggered an autoblock before I could unblock that a minute ago; I've tried again. See if it works now... :-) Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 00:39, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
Did it work? Freakofnurture also applied a one second block to the bot account; the shortest block automatically overrides all the other blocks, so that make it work (unless you edited in the one second you were re-blocked, but I doubt it.) Let me know if you're able to edit from the bot account now. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 00:43, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
Great! I'm not sure, as I haven't reviewed the block and/or the circumstances around it. All I saw was that the blocking administrator had meant to unblock you and that it didn't work. Since I don't know the specifics of this case, I'm only going to give a generalization: unauthorized bots (i.e. bots that did not follow the process at WP:BOTS) and bots doing destructive things are usually blocked infinitely. Note that infinitely does not mean forever; all it means is that the account is blocked until the issues are sorted out and the account is unblocked. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 00:46, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
Again, because I haven't looked at your specific case, I can't comment. All I can say is that I'm happy that the unblock that the blocking administrator placed is now properly fulfilled. :-) Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 00:50, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
No problem! Flcelloguy (A note?) 00:52, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome Email

Just wanted to say thanks for the 'welcome' message you sent, its always great to be said hello to when new! And i got some useful links into the bargain. Ollie 21:10, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

  • If you have this page watched, I thank you for your thank you, and good luck with wikipedia. (I will post this on your page as soon as an admin deciedes to unblock me... I can't even get there attention...)Eagle (talk) (desk) 23:00, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] substing stubs

Apparently some people either enter {{subst:foo-stub}} instead of {{foo-stub}}, or copy the content from [[Template:Foo-stub]] into the article. This is annoying because it removes the article from [[Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Foo-stub]], and has a chance of also removing it from [[Category:Foo stubs]] if somebody else comes along and removes the category. Thus we can end up with stubs we (from a functional viewpoint) don't know about, but which appear (when viewing the page) to be correctly tagged. However, I think that all stub templates include id="stub" which may, due to ideosynchracies, be written with or without spaces, and with either "double quotes" or 'single quotes' or maybe even with no quotes at all. So your bot should search each page it comes across for the following regex in the wikitext (updated it a bit):

id\s*\=\s*[\"\']?stub[\"\']?

That should catch any substed stubs. In addition to this you could also check for manually added stub categories like this:

\[\[\s*[Cc]ategory\s*\:[\s\w]+\sstubs\s*\|?\s*[\S\s]*\]\]

And manually intervene in those cases as well. — Apr. 9, '06 [02:33] <freakofnurxture|talk>

Ok. Try substing various stubs into a sandbox page to test the regexes, as I'm not quite sure on some parts. — Apr. 9, '06 [02:52] <freakofnurxture|talk>

[edit] Gnome (Bot) topic sorting: fantastic!

Eagle, this is awesome!

  • What topics are you covering right now?
  • How are you doing the sorting? If you are putting it in a category, such as Category:Chemistry, that would be perfect. Beland has been reprogramming his bot, Pearle, to maintain WP:PNA with cleanup, expert, and expand lists. All Pearle needs is for target pages to have a cleanup tag AND the correct category on them.
    • So we'll have
      • Pearle (Bot) lists all pages it can find and dumps to a 'leftovers' file everything it can't classify.
      • Gnome (Bot) notices the cleanup tag, adds the wikify/stub/etc. notices and categorizes
      • Pearle (Bot) lists the page on WP:PNA and changes cleanup to cleanup-date
      • Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting sorts the stubs posted
    • and everything is ready to be tackled by the relevant experts. This will work great!
  • The key words to start with are the names of the categories. We'll need to do test runs to see what it can and can't pick up. If we can avoid false positives, even a low percentage of successful categorizations is good as it reduces the number that must be sorted by hand. Clearly this will be trial and error. Start with the names of the categories on WP:PNA.
  • I think you should talk some more with Beland; it looks like your Gnome and his Pearle will be working hand-in-hand. I don't know if Gnome will be better aimed at Wikipedia in general or at the 'leftovers' list Pearle will make on its runs... talk to Beland and see. Pearle is doing list generation and maintenance (like adding dates to the cleanup tags), while you're doing mainly interpretation of article content.
  • When archiving, do you move the page and create a new talk page, or do you just do a massive cut-n-paste to a new archive page? I've never done this before (obviously)...
  • And don't forget to document what Gnome is doing on its task list page!!
  • You're doing awesome, keep it up! Alba 05:49, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User:Beland and User:Pearle

I've already mentioned you to Beland several times; just go ahead and leave a message on his talk page. Be sure to mention me and the Cleanup sorting proposal. Alba 03:39, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Novels Infobox missing list

Hi,

Thanks for the list, I have modified the top of the list with a few guidance notes. If you want to give those a quick look over and revise or trim as you think best. Then I think we can move it to Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/NovelsWithoutInfobox I think that location an name covers the scan you have done and also those that my be added when we dip into the genre novels. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 08:00, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] email re: block

I don't see any blocks in the block log for either your username or the IP address in question. So it's likely that this was an autoblock (placed on another user) that affected you because your ISP assigned you the same IP address. Autoblocks are temporary and should clear up after a while. Unfortunately, with the Wikipedia software as currently written, autoblocks are placed automatically and inevitably innocent users are sometimes affected. There's nothing that administrators can do about this. -- Curps 08:32, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Don't actually autocategorize, just make lists for now

If you don't actually make edits to pages, people can't yet criticize them yet, eh? Alba 04:53, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ask the experts

I don't know about keywords, Eagle; it's so daunting a problem that I avoided trying to write an auto-categorization bot for precisely that reason. You could do statistical studies on the articles of a category and find the most common words that are not common across all Wikipedia articles; that would be effective but not necessarily easy. A simpler idea would be to go to each WikiProject, identify the key players, then message them for suggestions (identifying yourself and the purpose of the project first). Alba 19:11, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Statistically improbable phrases

You know, this is pretty close to what Amazon does now with "Statistically Improbable Phrases"... might check their website and search on some general texts in each area. (I'm sure their algorithm is classified :-( but maybe there are hints of how it works on the web.) I'd start with the natural sciences, the way I am on WP:PNA -- but that's mainly so our efforts can parallel. I'd guess Archaeology and Anthropology, and maybe Meteorology/Weather, would be the most obscure among those. Sorry to make more work -- if it's too much, ditch the idea. 19:24, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Remember that you can search for multiple words

... thus increasing your confidence. If you do go through with a statistical study, the ratio of (in category / outside category) could be used as a score for each word. Then you could sum up the score for a whole article and set a threshold with arbitrary specificity and sensitivity. Alba 19:49, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] There's no central list; you'll have to search book by book

Sorry. And I was just thinking off the top of my head there. Alba 20:04, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A poor quality bot is of no use

But is it possible to run the stuff that is not autocategorization first? I.e., can you run one part (the wikify, etc.) while working on the autocategorization? Alba 20:11, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] That's okay

It'll probably take that long to get WP:PNA ready for bot updating anyway. Alba 20:26, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] We're considering merging WP:CU and WP:PNA

... with the bot User:Pearle going ahead and sorting anything that already has a tag into the categories on WP:PNA. That leaves the uncategorized stuff, which is what the categorization function of Gnome will be most needed for.

Gnome's wikify, list, etc. functions would need to operate on the whole of WP:CU, yes! But there's no need to do work twice!

Oh, and so we can keep track of everything, the cleanup-date tag stays even after sorting. We kill the cleanup tag only once we're done with it. That's why I changed the task list for Gnome to stop deleting stuff out of Cleanup entirely, and just add tags. Keeping cleanup-date saves us from having to create wikify-date, expand-date, and mumbojumbo-date. :-) Alba 20:35, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Beland is missing for days at a time, d/t real life

so Don't panic. He hasn't called me back in a while either. Now, as to what Gnome is now doing:

  • Gnome classifies cleanup, moving lists, images, and disambigs to their own cleanup categories, and adding wikify, stub, etc. notices -- but without deleting a cleanup notice.
  • Once you get it coded, Gnome will also classify by topic those articles not already classified. Pearle can maintain the lists of articles by topic once they are classified into a category, but it can't assign categories. That's Gnome's job.

It's basically the same set of jobs -- we're just reconfiguring so it fits in with others' efforts.

Clear now? :-) Alba 20:46, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

The page you seek is Wikipedia:Cleanup process/Cleanup sorting proposal, my son. Alba 20:51, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
actually, I'm not sure. let's discuss it with others. Alba 20:54, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A separate article with the same title

I want to start an article on "natural person", that is, refering to a enity, NOT a living, breathing, human being, where an article already exists.

How do I do that?

[edit] Re: Proposal to help Perle with WP:CU

Pearle does not have a pre-programmed list of categories that she uses to find articles for WP:PNA. For each topic, the categories listed under "Categories covered" section and linked from any portals listed are read, and their immediate subcategories.

The problem of dealing with "leftover" articles from the PNA page is a little different than the general problem of auto-categorization. For PNA, the problem is not to assign articles to categories, but to assign categories to topics, and hopefully WikiProjects. In some cases, a topic page may be too full, and a new one will need to be created. In other cases, there may be no appropriate WikiProject, or only a very general one.

Theoretically, looking at category relationships should be more reliable than using keywords. If Y is a subcategory of category Y, and category Z is on-topic, then category Y might be on-topic, too. In practice, I have found that sometimes Z, a subcategory of Y, is on-topic, and sometimes it is off-topic. Human intervention is really needed to resolve the question.

The easiest way to do this would be to sort the "leftover" articles by category membership, and indicate if any of the categories listed are descendants of any categories already on PNA. It's easy for Pearle to do this, since she will already be reading in category lists from PNA topics, and constructing the leftover list.

I expect that most of the "leftover" articles will be in categories, just not any that are already listed on WP:PNA. For articles that are not in any categories at all (i.e. those on Special:Uncategorizedpages) the universe of targets should of course be all Wikipedia categories, not just those on WP:PNA. I would be wary of privileging those listed on WP:PNA in any way, as this is likely to worsen the sorting algorithm.

Back when there were far more uncategorized articles than there are today, I made some attempts to suggest categories for articles. You can see the results on Wikipedia:Auto-categorization.

A huge number were actually bot-created articles on United States municipalities, and so were easily and reliably classified automatically. After that, things became more difficult. The approach I was using was to extract links from the "See also" sections of articles, and see which categories those articles are in. This works well if there are a lot of links there, which is more often true for older, established articles than today's situation, where mostly only newer, shorter articles are uncategorized. (That may not be entirely true yet; I'm not sure.)

If you wanted to look at article contents, it doesn't seem very scalable to have humans pick keywords for each category, and it's unclear that it would be faster for them to do that than it would to simply categorize all the articles manually. (There are tens of thousands of categories, after all.) Given that you already have articles assigned to categories, it would be easy enough to take a statistical approach instead. What I would do is look at word frequency, constructing a "signature" for each category in Wikipedia. You should be able to numerically identify and suppress words that have no sorting value (that would be common in many categories) like "the" or "see" and "also". You would then determine a "signature" for each uncategorized article, and find the "closest" category match. (You could get fancy and look at N-grams. I'm not sure whether that would help or hurt reliability, but it would certainly take a lot longer to run.)

The primary drawback to this kind of statistical analysis would be that it would probably take a large amount of CPU time and a fair amount of storage space. It would certainly have to be done offline, using a database dump. Whether you're using keywords or word frequency, there's the problem that new, unfinished articles tend to be semantically and statistically different than older, well-written articles. That will reduce reliability of many matching algorithms, but perhaps not enough to make them useless.

Regardless of the method used for auto-categorization, it's exceedingly unlikely to be reliable enough for a bot to add articles to categories by itself. (I would expect there would be a lot of complaints if anything more than say, one in a hundred articles were misclassified.) A good way to deal with this would be to have the bot make a list of suggested categorizations, and let human editors actually put articles into the right categories. If there's a way to distinguish "strong" matches from "weak" ones, sorting along that axis and putting the best matches first would help increase productivity. Once an article was classified by a human (whether by looking at the list or independently), it would no longer show up on subsequent reports.

-- Beland 14:37, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Ok categorization will be a low priority for me than.

My bot adds the wikify, expert, cleanup-list, disambig-cleanup, and several other tags, Is this still needed, if so, where should I start... I was originally operating in WP:CU--operating on the monthly cleanup articles in the backlog. My bot only ADDS tags, it does not remove any tags... with possible exeption to disambig-cleanup and cleanup-list. (will depend on what others think... does not matter to me).Eagle (talk) (desk) 22:16, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

I probably should have stated... the bot I am refering to is User:Gnome (Bot). and these functions are already programmed and ready to go.

[edit] My bad on the Infobox link

Hi Eagle! Sorry, I misunderstood your message. Thanks for tidying up after me. Btw, if you want to try out your gnome bot I have an experiment I want to try. Let me know when you have time. Cheers - Her Pegship 03:30, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, I'm involved (as you know) in both the Books and Films WikiProjects; I would like to get a list of articles which include information about both a book and a film. I'm guessing your bot looks for articles with certain text in the article body, right? So is it possible to search all the articles (gulp!) under Cat:Films for the phrase "based on" or "novel"? If that's too big, I can take it one lump at a time, for example Cat:Comedy films, Cat:Horror films, etc. Thanks for considering it. Her Pegship 03:41, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
No rush, just part of my ongoing obsession with tidiness. :P Can you start with articles that contain both these exact strings: "based on" and "Comedy films"? I want to see how this goes... Thanks again!
OK, in Cat:Films, any articles containing the phrase "based on". Does that make more sense? I don't actually understand programming, so I'm not sure I'm phrasing this right. Cheers, Her Pegship 04:02, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
Gotcha. How about: in Cat:Films, any articles containing the phrases "based on" and the word "book" (since I'm working on films based on non-fiction as well)? Her Pegship 04:09, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Film cats

The sub-cats I'm interested in are:

  • Children's films
  • Comedy films
  • Drama films
  • Fantasy films
  • Horror films
  • Romance films
  • Science fiction films
  • War films
  • Western films

(I forgot there were soooo many.) and yes, please go ahead and use both terms. I'm hoping to augment my List of fiction works made into feature films and List of non-fiction works made into feature films as well as add Category:Films based on books to such articles. Thanks - (until tomorrow!) Her Pegship 05:06, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Good morning! I want to create separate full articles for the book and the film for each one, since invariably the film departs from the book to some degree and is a separate work of art. Splitting them is the first step; then if there isn't much content the article is made a stub, at which point I'll bring the stubs to the attention of the various WikiProjects and begin filling them out. Obviously a life-long project! I'm a librarian, so this kind of ordering appeals to me. Please, ask away. Her Pegship 15:07, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
Nah, I'm just a glutton for punishment. I'll probably pass out when I see the lists, but it's repetitive, mindless, good to do for relaxation, and more useful than playing solitaire. Thanks, Eagle. Her Pegship 21:33, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
What "text" are you putting in the Film article after you deal with it... you will need to make some reference to the existance of the book article. - In the film article, if there isn't one already, I'll make a reference and a link to the written work, and vice versa in the book article. Cheers, Her Pegship 23:38, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
If you'd like to see a sample of my "split work", take a look at Death on the Nile and Death on the Nile (1978 film) - that's my most recent one; I created the latter article from parts excised from the former. I usually put the book link somewhere in the beginning paragraph, and in the novel article I put a "see also" reference. Her Pegship 03:30, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
Aha, I see what you're getting at. Something your code will recognize and "ignore" the article. Hm, how about <!--Split film/book article intentional - Please do not remove this comment--> ?
Yay, thank you! Let us begin with thriller films, please. Her Pegship 01:31, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Redirect Page

About that redirect page we have... um... I guess you misunderstood me.

Is there a way we can take the "page" NASV, and make it nonexistant, with an "automatic" redirect to the page on NASB? Many pages will have no page on the exact wording, but will instead redirect automatically page to the actual article (e.g. typing "Drift Racing" in the search will redirect to the "drift racing" page but the top left-hand corner will note "redirected from "Drift racing"). I've seen it with other wording too. I also made a page on the "Battle of the Kegs"... but it's case sensitive! ???Colonel Marksman 03:43, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

  • THANKS! All of that makes perfect sense.
  • And it's working already (was there a data dump last night or something?) NASV now goes directly to NASB. Perfect. And wikipedia is the "one encyopedia to rule them all". Wehaw! Colonel Marksman 12:50, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Book to novel autolist is complete

This one should be refreshed - possibly every month - just so we don't let it get away from us. We'll see how it goes after that. OK :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 14:56, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Having said that this is nearly a month since we completed this - so a new run might be in order. With the new format (10 article headings) might be nice. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 15:23, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
Can we have a rerun of this Books --> Novels list - to see if any others have crept in. Thanks :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:45, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/NovelsWithoutInfobox

seems to be working well. Bit more complex to work on that the last one. Starting to focus a few on the content of the article as well which is good, but does mean it slows us down a bit. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 14:56, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Good idea (the new format) - although I would do it on our next refresh - some have already made many amendments to the list already and I suspect that these would be lost on a refresh. However all future runs should include you new format (10 titles per heading sould be about right!) Thanks :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 15:19, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
Ok, in the sandbox then! Thanks :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 15:25, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
That looks very good don't knwo how you do this so quickly, marvelous! Fine go for a full run. Is it possible to put a "Bot Run date" out in the header to the list, thanks :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 18:28, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
Ah, "List last regenerated authomatically - date" - is that clearer. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 18:42, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
Seems great - just added the "generation date" :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 07:38, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Novels stub category validation - Bot Job

I have been asked "I notice there is no stub category for horror novels, political novels, or comedy novels"

Could we use the bot to find out if any Book or Novel stubs fit those genre (one at a time I think) - Ideally giving something like a crude character and word count (to give objective stub measurement) Let me know.

Oh yes the aim being to see if there is a case for such stubs. Yes, if many - No, if there are only a few. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 15:16, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Ok, two ways, Firstly, All {{book-stub}} and {{novel-stub}} where "Horror" is used in the text, or categories - listing should give Character Count and/or Word Count (i.e. article size)

Secondly, All articles in a category ending "*novels" where "Horror" is used in the text, or categories - listing should give Character Count and/or Word Count (i.e. article size) Can these be done, and do they sound about right for the purpose intended? :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 15:32, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

However my experience tells me that many articles are written by novice editors (who don't know too much) and they are often small and are not marked as stubs. Often with no categorization either. Ok what would you suggest then. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 15:50, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
Your reasoning stub category - not quite if it has a stub it "Should" be in the category. If the stub template is configured correctly. However people can add an article direct to the category. Unusual but can happen. Does that help. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 16:31, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Novels talk page notice check - Bot Job

How about a listing of all articles that claim to be Novels which do not have the project notice {{NovelsWikiProject}} in the article talk page. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 15:16, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

start out of "Cat:Novels" Thanks :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 18:18, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Blank edit box

Hmm, yes, that happens for me too. "Civil" is a word I wish were put into practice more where I work - at a high school, where the youngsters take manners kind of, um, loosely. :P Her Pegship 18:10, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] References

Do references have to be websites? Colonel Marksman 18:37, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

No, see WP:CITET for all the details of how to use template:cite etc. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 18:41, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Results from Films/novels work page

Howdy! Just so you know:

  • Abre los ojos mentions a novel by Philip K. Dick but is not based on a novel, and also doesn't include the words "based on" in the text.
  • The Alzheimer Case mentions the novel but has no further details, so there's not enough for even a stub article on it.

More to come... Her Pegship 19:14, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I see you are claiming to be updating a Film-->Novels list. Which one is that - new to me! :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 07:27, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Results part deux

Here's the result from the second batch. If you would rather I put these on the work page, or just delete the links without listing them here, let me know. You may have already noted these issues. Cheers, Her Pegship 19:39, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

And thanks for fixing my edit problem on my userpage! Cheers, Her Pegship 21:19, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome to VandalProof!

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Eagle 101/Talk/Archive/3! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. AmiDaniel (Talk) 01:03, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandal Tags

Hi :) I usually do use the warning tags, but sometimes I get lazy and skip it. I'll be sure to use them in the future. Qtoktok 05:40, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rebuttal

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Oral_Roberts&diff=next&oldid=47366795

But Oral Roberts is 88, right?

Replied on talk page... (next time sign please)
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.247.102.100 (talk • contribs).

[edit] Reverting of my edit on Lou Dobbs

Hi, you've reverted my edit and i'm not sure why. Please see Talk:Lou_Dobbs#Removed_Dobbswatch.com_.26_Opinion_Journal thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.254.126.222 (talk • contribs).---When archived, will go into unsigned section

  • I appologized, but this user eventally violated 3RR, Eagle (talk) (desk) 01:48, 23 April 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Welcome to Films Based on Books!

Nice to have you "officially" on board. And I can't tell you how many times I have made that same code oops... Cheers! Her Pegship 00:45, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RE:my warning to AmiDaniel

I think I probably clicked in that warning button accidentally. I can't remember doing that, but it is highly unlikely there's other explanation. Fetofs Hello! 01:33, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

The warning button only functions correctly on talk pages. Fetofs Hello! 01:40, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
User talk:Eagle 101/Sandbox---this is the testing box. I will give instructions.Eagle (talk) (desk) 01:43, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
Yes, you should've asked it earlier (I was), but now I'm curious to know about your theory... Fetofs Hello! 01:47, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
No, I stick with the original msclick on his talk page version. I'll remove that comment. Fetofs Hello! 01:53, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proof of Oral's possible insanity.

Link to proof:

[1]—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.247.102.100 (talk • contribs).

Replied to above, I told him/her that wikipedia cannot be used to cite itself. Eagle (talk) (desk) 04:05, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User:68.185.73.62

I just blocked and deleted all of his fake "blocked" messages, I think thats the best way to do it -- Tawker 06:55, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I think its best to report it to AIV. What I did was delete all of the blocked messages that IP added to user talk pages, he was the only editor so it was just easier to delete them (that way the new messages thing doesn't come up) -- Tawker 06:57, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] List of mobile network operators

Could you please clearly elaborate why my updates were reverted? For example, the SmarTone group is now operating the mobile network in the name of SmarTone-Vodafone[2]. Thanks!

mainbody

Thanks for your elaboration :->
mainbody

Nicholas S. Milligan

The Bola Tie page lists some famous bola tie wearers, but some are incorrect. 1)Robert Evans wore a belly charm, not a bolo tie. He bought it from a belly dancer for (I believe) $1,000, but I'm not sure and it was a lucky charm for him.

2)Harlan Sanders is actually Harland Sanders according to Wikipedia so it's either wrong on the bola tie site or his site. In addition, he wears a black bow tie, not a bola tie.

Therefore, I request that these two be removed from the famous wearers of the bola tie.

--Nicholas S. Milligan

[edit] We know you're out there

I'm at home sick & just chipping away at the films/novels list. I'm checking all the articles for false hits or already-separated items, then I'll go back and "do the splits". Enjoy your time free of the all-consuming technology. Cheers, Her Pegship 19:21, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] VandalProof Moderators

Sorry, forgot to post this when I made you a mod:

Thank you for your willingness in helping me out with VandalProof! You've now been made a moderator, so when you load VandalProof the next time, you should see 'Moderator' in front of your username, and you should also find the Moderate List item under the User Tools menu. I've made a very basic page explaining what's expected of moderators and how to do certain tasks, which can be found here: User:AmiDaniel/VandalProof/ModeratorTools. If you change your mind and don't want to moderate, please contact me. Again, thanks! AmiDaniel (Talk) 06:52, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for May 1st.

The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery


Volume 2, Issue 18 1 May 2006

About the Signpost
Campaign manager resigns over Wikipedia edit Meetups And Newsworthy International Assemblages
Assorted honors for Jimmy Wales News and Notes: 4 million articles, milestones
Wikipedia in the News Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report On Lengthy Litigation
Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line

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

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../e/a/g/User%7EEagle_101_Talk_Archive_3_83d1.html"