User:Rich Farmbrough/Talk Archive Mega

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Contents

[edit] The Belgrave Line

Thanks heaps for the list of stations, and especially for making a start upon them.

But I think it duplicates information on the stations list proper.

It also only shares track after Ringwood, after you change trains to Ringwood, then you go on the Lilydale line.

Did you see Alamein line (the link)? That's pretty much the standard around here. EuropracBHIT 07:39, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC).

Yep, the Alamein line page is good.

I have to say I'm not knowledgeable about Melbourne, merely trying to create stubs with some value, working off the most needed stub list.

Perhaps best to cut and paste the list of sttions from the staion list?

Alternatively combining the articles once they get tho the level of the Alamein line into a Melbourne Train Lines article, with the appropriate re-directs.

I'm sure there will be errors even in such a simple stub (by the way I mistyped references on Lilydale page as well :).

I see you are invlved in the "To the northwest" project as wel :-) Rich Farmbrough 10:32, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)


Hi Rich, welcome to Wikipedia. I saw on your user page that you are a generalist, and that you want to write about GCHQ and maths stuff... are you a real life spy? (If I remember rightly "generalist" is the MI5/6 term for a spy... maybe it is at GCHQ too?) Pcb21| Pete 00:46, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC)

[edit] To East etc.

I'm totally baffled by the pages To West, To East, etc. which are currently listed on Votes for Deletion. Before I cast my own vote, I'd like to know why you created the pages and what they're for. It doesn't appear that any pages actually link to them. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 23:10, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Hello

Hi, and another belated welcome to you. If no one has pointed it out to you already, check out the useful info at the Wikipedia:Manual of Style. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 15:41, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)


[edit] Brent

Saw the edit on Brent..maybe it needs to be clearer. The Brent oilfield is of course named after the crude, but the crude is named after the goose (many of the Nth Sea fields are named after birds, eg Fulmar, Auk, Cormorant etc --GPoss 10:05, Aug 19, 2004 (UTC)

Now much better, thanks --GPoss 09:33, Aug 24, 2004 (UTC)


[edit] DHSS

IN case anyone is wondering http://search.direct.gov.uk/Search/SearchResults/fs/en?NP=4&PT1=&PO1=M&PI1=W&PT2=department+for+health+and+social+security&PO2=M&PI2=P&PT3=&PO3=C&PI3=W&PT4=&PO4=N&PI4=W&SC=all&SF=A&DD1=&DM1=&DY1=&DD2=&DM2=&DY2=&RO=R&TP=A&SC=all&MR=20&PG=1&HS=F&TB=R

(for) returns 33 hits whereas

http://search.direct.gov.uk/Search/SearchResults/fs/en?NP=4&PT1=&PO1=M&PI1=W&PT2=department+of+health+and+social+security&PO2=M&PI2=P&PT3=&PO3=C&PI3=W&PT4=&PO4=N&PI4=W&SC=all&SF=A&DD1=&DM1=&DY1=&DD2=&DM2=&DY2=&RO=R&TP=A&SC=all&MR=20&PG=1&HS=F&TB=R (of) returns 7074.

[edit] Curry's paradox

Hello. The reason your link to Curry's paradox did not work was your capitalization of the letter P. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style. Michael Hardy 23:19, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Graph

... also, you really do need to check your links. You wrote [[graph]], and that turns out to be a disambiguation page. What you needed was [[graph (mathematics)|graph]]. Similarly, some mathematicians writing on Wikipedia about the mathematician Niels Henrik Abel have linked to Abel, but that page is (of course!) about the son of Adam and Eve in the book of Genesis who was killed by his brother Cain. So always check your links. Michael Hardy 00:54, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Mmmm so there was an earlier Abel, I might have made the same mistake. So now which one did invent the commutative law for groups? Billlion 14:42, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Edit attribution

Hi Rich. Edits from 213.48.182.7 have now been reattributed to you. Regards Kate Turner | Talk 02:14, 2004 Sep 4 (UTC)

[edit] Welchman

Hi! I was thinking about an entry for Gordon Welchman, and stumbled across your conversation with User talk:Pcb21; I've just finished going through The Hut Six Story — perhaps we could knock up a page on him? If you're interested in cryptography topics (even from a generalist perspective!), you might find the Cryptography WikiProject of interest, and I'd welcome any review of Enigma machine, which I've been working on a little recently. — Matt 17:57, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Arda vs Middle-earth.

Rich, I'm putting this here, so that you don't change more articles about Arda/Middle-earth as the name for Tolkien's universe... When we're talking about J.R.R. Tolkien's Middle-earth universe, we're referring to the *fictional* universe he created, where "Middle-earth" is one of the most popular signifiers for it because most of the stories take place in there. If we were to use "Arda" by your argument, that would still be inaccurate since the entirety of the universe created by Iluvatar is "Ea" -- and infact even *that* would be inaccurate since Ea doesn't include the Timeless Halls where Iluvatar dwells.

In short -- yeah the universe described in J.R.R. Tolkien's books is called Ea, and the planet Arda, and only a continent is called "Middle-earth". But the phrase "Universe of Middle-earth" is just a signifier like "Universe of Battlestar Galactica" or "Universe of Babylon 5" We don't mean that the whole fictional universe is physically contained in those locations bearing that name. Aris Katsaris 23:56, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Image:StoneFigureonTrinityBridgeCrowland1.JPG

Hi! Did you take this photo yourself? Image:StoneFigureonTrinityBridgeCrowland1.JPG. If so, could you please indicate the license and copyright details on the image description page. If it is GFDL, make a note of that by placing {{GFDL}} in the description. — David Remahl 11:58, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Thnaks for your comment. The picture was by me (as I noted within seconds of uploading). Funnily enough, alhtough I inteded to put a version of that pic up anyway, I was doing it now to confirm the process, in order to help with "tagging" of pix. (Which I had not fully understood, so it was a worthwhile exercise!) Can you point me to the list of tags for licenseing pix? Rgds Rich Farmbrough 12:20, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Cool. Here is a list of the available image licensing tags: Wikipedia:Image copyright tags. — David Remahl 12:25, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks...

...for all the great maps! BCorr|Брайен 15:20, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Not my maps: "I wish!". Simply tagged all 3094+ as GFDL. Rich Farmbrough 15:44, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Maps

Eek! Could you slow down, or mark as minor, the image tagging? Recent Changes is getting swamped. —No-One Jones (m) 20:31, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Changed my prefernces to minor Rich Farmbrough some time 20 Sep 2004 (UTC).

[edit] Prophecy and stuff

[edit] Timeline of unfulfilled Christian Prophecy

(text copied from Talk:Timeline of unfulfilled Christian Prophecy)

I have looked briefly at some of these items. Most of those cases the "prophet" would be considered (at the time) a heretic, rather than a member of a mainstream church. I think a little more disclaimer is needed at the top, or a lot of deleteing. :) Also refs to the actual words of the "prophets", where possible. Rich Farmbrough 20:01, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

My personal feeling is that these people were heretics at the time and did not necessarily represent the enitre church. If we delete the "heretical" ones we might end up with only four (Armstrong, Miller, Russell and Jo Smith). I'm happy if you want to write a short disclaimer. One Salient Oversight 22:26, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] William M. Branham

(copied from Talk:William M. Branham)

I found

"that by 1977 all denominations would be consumed by the World Council of Churches under the control   
of the Roman Catholics, that the rapture would take place, and that the world would be destroyed."  
(Burgess and McGee, Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements, 96)

However this is quite a jump from what the article pages says! It's also the only _source_ I could find. The transcripts of (at least some of) his sermons are online, the one I found (http://www.nathan.co.za/message.asp?sermonum=1074) mentions WCC in a negative biblical context but that's about it (although I didn't read the whole thing).

I think we need a more authoratiative reference to say that he made the statemnt, and that he claimed it was divinly inspired prophecy.

I have removed this text until we have an authority.

At least one of his prophecies - that all Christian denominations would be controlled by the 
World Council of Churches by 1977 - 
has not come  to fruition.[1]

Rich Farmbrough 19:15, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)


Hi Rick. Just a query about your changing the William M. Branham article with regards to the prophecy that was not fulfilled. If you go to Google and type in "Branham" + "1977" +"False" you will find a large amount of pages. Considering this large amount of evidence I think it is important to include the phrase in the article. Moreover I am a little concerned that you chose to remove that part of the article when the rest of the article is so very biased and POV towards Branham.

So pretend you're me. You stumble upon the William M. Branham article and discover that the person who wrote it was obviously a big fan of Branham. However there is a cleanup notice on the page and you decide to put it on your long-term "to do" list in your mind. Then in the process of researching other articles, you discover some websites that state that Branham made a prediction that did not come true. Since you have already read a fiercely pro-Branham website that made it clear that Branham believed he was the prophet Elijah, you put two and two together and decide that he must have made a "false prophecy". You include this in one short sentence in the Branham article

Then someone comes along and removes that small sentence with the claim that it can't be verified objectively, while leaving the incredibly POV article untouched. Then you begin to wonder whether that person is a supporter of Branham who does not wish to have anything negative about him written in the article.

Of course I am not making any judgement either way. That's why I'm talking to you. But can you understand my unease at this point? One Salient Oversight 23:07, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

http://www.biblebelievers.org/thus1977.htm Should be of enormous help to our discussion here.

Also, how about this:

Branham proclaimed himself the angel of Revelation 3:14 and 10:7 and prophesied that by 1977 all denominations would be consumed by the World Council of Churches under the control of the Roman Catholics, that the Rapture would take place, and that the world would be destroyed. He died in 1965, but many of his followers expected him to be resurrected, some believing him to be God, others believing him to be virgin-born.
Branham's influence has continued in many churches where his prophecies are considered to be divinely inspired. His teaching on the power of the spoken word has been a characteristic of later revivalists. Kenneth Hagin identifies Branham as a prophet.
Burgess and McGee, editors, Dictionary of Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids, Michigan. p.96

This is from http://www.apologeticsindex.org/b05.html

Until either the above quote is proven to not exist, or until Burgess and McGee can be proven wrong, the quote should stand in the Branham article methinks. One Salient Oversight 23:29, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

And more:

There is a reference in each of these sermon transcripts to the year 1977 where he predicts something. In the last transcript he states And at 1906 the Laodicean church age set in, and I don't know when it'll end, but I predict it'll be done by 1977. I predict, not the Lord told me, but I predict it according to a vision that was showed me some years ago, that five of those things has (out of the seven)--has already taken place about.... That bit where he says "not the Lord told me" can't really be made to say anything. In the other three transcripts he makes it pretty clear that he was predicting something. One Salient Oversight 23:46, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Branham etc.

Yes, I understand how it seemed. It looks like I have stumbled into a controversy (outside Wikipedia) here. I certainly don't think Branham was anything special, I arrived there from the Timeline of unfulfilled Christian Prophecy page. The quote from Burgess and McGee (which both you and I found) seemed rather to overshadow the WCC thing. The sermon I looked at (and referenced), if anything contradicted it. "Gather the tares into bundles - Lutherian, baptist... are in the WCC" to paraphrase. Which would imply that that was one bundle of several. Cursory (I admit) research seemed to indicate that the "1977" element of his predictions was personal, not prophetic. To err is human (even if Brnham did it (in terms of facts) rather more than most). The references you gave seem to support this.

I have made some more edits to the Branham page, perhaps you could glance at them (some may underestimate his import).

Then I suggest re-inserting the "1977" under the "anomolies" section, as a prediction rather than a prophecy.

I see you are knowledgeable about the Charismatic and Pentecostal movements, can you confirm whether he was a major influence on the three movements mentioned in the article?

Is it possible to identify his seven prophecies and put them in the article? I find the "egg shaped car" rather amusing, but I couldn't (easily) find a definitive list of the prophecies. Rgds Rich Farmbrough 08:58, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Branham was instrumental in getting the Latter Rain Movement going in the 50s and 60s. It was so strange that the Assemblies of God declared it a heresy. Branham's teachings have been modified somewhat but are still being felt in the Charismatic and Pentecostal churches through things like Manifest Sons of God and Kingdom Now theology - the latter I believe has some major impact on how Christians in the US will vote at the next presidential election.
Thanks for dispelling any concerns I have. I'm fairly happy with the changes you are suggesting.
As far as his seven prophecies - I admit that I don't know a huge amount about the guy except some of the major stuff (including his denial of the Trinity). I suggest you search that South African website with a Google advanced search, looking for "seven prophecies" on that site.
Egg shaped car? I have no idea what this has to do with Branham but if it was received during one of his visions then I am not surprised. It might even make a good entry on the Timeline page if it is a prophecy. One Salient Oversight 10:06, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] GNU/GFDL

Hi,

You asked if my pics released under GNU are {{GFDL]], and the answer is yes they are, so if you would like to retag them, I'd be much endebted. Thanks

Peregrine981 03:36, Sep 28, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Please check links

On Vickers Vimy you changed a link [[British]] to [[UK|British]]. [[UK]] is in fact a disambiguation page, so your change did not improve the article. You should instead have made your link something like [[United Kingdom|British]]. Please check a link goes to where you think it does. Thanks, —Morven 20:16, Oct 1, 2004 (UTC)

My mistake. All being fixed now. Rich Farmbrough 15:32, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)
UK and British are not the same thing. At all. The United Kingdom is the entire Union, Britain is the island. For example, Northern Ireland *is* in the UK but is *not* in Britain. Might be advisable to leave links like that as-is Kiand 19:25, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)
British itself is a diasmbiguation page.Rich Farmbrough 12:27, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] UK/United Kingdom

I see that you keep changing "UK" to "United Kingdom". Is this a standard laid down in the MoS, or just your arbitrary personal decision? -- Jmabel 18:43, Oct 7, 2004 (UTC)

You've done this on a few pages I wrote or did the edit that put in UK. In each and every case, UK scans a lot better than United Kingdom. I'm chaning them to [[United Kingdom|UK]], as it makes more sense. I'd appreciate if you did this where it scans better. Thanks. Kiand 19:24, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)
[[UK]] is a disambiguation page. As Kiand points out [[United Kingdom|UK]] can look better than [[United Kingdom]] in some circumstances, indeed some changes were to that. Please feel free to change any that you wish to what you think looks best. I have disambiguated all references to UK (and they were all to United Kingdom:). Now back to [[British]]... Rich Farmbrough 22:46, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I'm with Kiand on this. And why on earth is UK a disambiguation page? It almost always has one meaning. I'd think that should be a redirect to United Kingdom and the disambiguation page should be UK (disambiguation). Oh, well. -- Jmabel 22:53, Oct 7, 2004 (UTC)
I agree, perhaps I should have been bolder and made the redirect. Rich Farmbrough 23:04, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I went ahead and made the redirect; this also concurs with the opinions on Talk:Uk. --Michael Snow 06:03, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Thanks Michael. Rich Farmbrough 08:40, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:
{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:
{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. Ram-Man (comment) (talk)[[]] 13:54, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)

  1. No wholesale [commercial use|hijacking] of the Wikipedia.
  2. Credit directly or indirectly through wikihistory.
  3. No real restriction on information which has been digested by sentients.
The GFDL (and CC-by-sa) allow commercial use, otherwise one could not sell printed material, but of course one must always allow free copying. Both supply credit. I'm not sure what you mean about "real restrictions on information", but part of the reason I am seeking multi-licensing from users is because your GFDL edits are restricted so that WikiTravel cannot use them because they use a different open/free license. Both licenses claim to be open and free, but the text of the license makes it clear that they can't be interchanged (without of course multi-licensing, which removes this restriction). Ram-Man (comment) (talk)[[]] 15:05, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Energy Development and Hubbert's Peak Theory

There is a little storm brewing at Hubbert peak concerning, well, many things. But currently concerning how to organize information concerning future development of energy schemes (phrased as "Oil Alternatives" or "Future energy development" depending on whom you ask). As you might guess, Hubbert Peak is an article that might be expected to draw a lot of public interest and heat; Energy development is not. We could use your input regarding how to proceed. Visit Talk:Hubbert Peak to contribute. Thanks for your consideration. Tom - Talk 21:07, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC)


[edit] I REALLY REALLY NEED YOUR HELP AND SUPPORT

See here for details: Wikipedia:Requests for Comment/user 220.233.86.223 --One Salient Oversight 05:37, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 32,000 megatons of TNT = 133 Exajoules by my calculation

See the math calculations at Talk:2004_Indian_Ocean_earthquake#How_much_energy.3F, perhaps you can verify if there's no mistake. -- Curps 21:02, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Replying on your tqlk page and at Talk:2004_Indian_Ocean_earthquake#How_much_energy.3F Rich Farmbrough 21:38, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)


[edit] To elope

Kindly see my note (same heading) in the "Witold Pilecki" discussion. Logologist 04:49, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Guiding Light

I answered your Charita Bauer question on Talk:Guiding Light. Mike H 22:12, Jan 21, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Elias Omega coding

Is there a reason that you moved Elias Omega coding to Elias omega coding? The capitalization was chosen to be consistent with Elias Gamma coding and Elias Delta coding but you haven't touched those. -- Antaeus Feldspar 01:31, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Jiří Weil

Jiří Weil test User:Rich_Farmbrough/Jiří Weil

[edit] Golf terms

Archaic. I thought I'd entered these somewhere. Need to check them again. Spoon 3 wood Brassie 2 wood / 4-5 iron Mashie 5-6 Iron Niblick 7-8 Iron

[edit] Adminship?

Hi Rich, has anybody asked whether you're interested in being an administrator? You've been around long enough to know your way around, and seem to have a pretty calm approach to things. I would be happy to nominate you if you are willing. Please let me know. --Michael Snow 21:05, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me nominate you. I've posted your nomination at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship. If you could go there and indicate your acceptance of the nomination, that would be great. Also posted there are some standard questions, if you wouldn't mind taking the time to answer them; some of the people considering admin candidates like to have a little more information, since they may not know much about you otherwise. --Michael Snow 17:15, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Congratulations, Rich!

Congratulations! It's my pleasure to let you know that, consensus being reached, you are now an administrator. You should read the relevant policies and other pages linked to from the administrators' reading list before carrying out tasks like deletion, protection, banning users, and editing protected pages such as the Main Page. Most of what you do is easily reversible by other sysops, apart from page history merges and image deletion, so please be especially careful with those. You might find the new administrators' how-to guide helpful. Cheers! -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 19:23, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks to everyone for considering and/or voting on Adminship.

Much appreciated, hope it's good for us all. Rich Farmbrough 20:16, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Votes for Deletion: February 15, 2005

Three VfD's are taking place on key Project of Alternative Medicine articles.

I am contacting you because you have in the past made a edit to Terms and concepts in alternative medicine. You added a write up on Iridology to this article. And, I would hate to see all your efforts to improve this article be wasted because other editors voted to delete it.

I need you to vote to KEEP the following.

Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/List_of_terms_and_concepts_used_in_alternative_medicine This article is extremely important to our project.

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/List of miscellaneous topics related to alternative medicine

And, vote to REDIRECT the following.

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Philosophy of alternative medicine

Please vote in favor of the Project on Alternative Medicine today, before it is too late.

-- John Gohde 16:06, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] BAPA UK or British

Thank you for copy editing the Amateur press association article. I used the word "British" and the associated wiki link British to describe BAPA because it was founded with members from the island of Great Britain. Subsequently it attracted members from Northern Ireland, Ireland (Eire) and elsewhere but originally it was British. I plan to revert the wiki link change of United Kingdom back to British. Is this OK with you? --Theo (Talk) 19:39, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Note: I've repaired links to the disambiguation page for "British" in the above paragraph, to reduce crowding on the "What links here" page for that article. Cheers! -- BD2412 talk 03:13, July 31, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Friendly question

I like the idea that editors such as yourself like to tidy things up (I enjoy creating new articles or contributing to articles that I am interested in); but what exactly is it that you are correcting? I am just curious. A number of my previous contributions have been referenced by your work, only you don't say what it is that you have done. If I knew (because it seems to be universal in nature), I would avoid doing whatever it is, or do whatever it is that isn't done, to avoid creating work. I am not in the least bit offended or critical, as I wrote, I like the idea that editors such as yourself exist (and if you didn't, you would have to be invented.) I just wish that I knew what it is that I am doing or not doing that is creating work. MPLX/MH 19:48, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] British/United Kingdom

Thanks for your correction in Yandabu Accord. I have changed the term British to United Kingdom.

Prabhakar 04:21, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

- - - -

I propose you take a look at Germanic peoples ones again. The context is clearly historical. Piping to the United Kingdom seems strange to me, and there already exists one such pipe, that maybe is a tad more appropriate. /Tuomas 14:28, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Eagle Scout

Hello. I wish to point out to you that over 1 million Eagle Scouts have achieved the rank since 1911. If you do the math, thats a little bit over 100,000 new Eagle Scouts a year. So it is still a rare occurance that a young man achieves Eagle Scout. Zscout370 00:26, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

  • Not that this undermines your point, but wouldn't that be 10,000 Eagle Scouts per year? --Milyle 08:43, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Pedro Lopez

I wonder if you've noticed that your "scratch" version of Pedro Lopez at User:Rich Farmbrough/Pedro Lopez actually shows up at Category:Hoaxes and the other categories that the scratch article has category tags for. If you're still using the scratch article but don't want it to show up on the category pages, you could try putting a colon inside the category tag, like this: [[:Category:Hoaxes]] This will turn it into a link to the category page rather than placing the page itself in the category. (this works, but for some reason I can't find it documented anywhere.) -- Antaeus Feldspar 19:52, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Ezekiel Polk

I expanded your note on Polk County, Missouri, and had an interesting and frustrating time trying to researh Ezekiel Polk. Hope I got it close to correct, and thanks for the idea. Lou I 21:44, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Caution: Factual accuracy

In the Gamma ray burst article, you introduced a factual inaccuracy. You marked in the article that BeppoSAX was healthy as of 1004 (which was rapidly changed by others to 2004), when in fact it was deorbited in 2003. Please use caution that you don't introduce similar factual inaccuracies on future edits; they can be difficult to spot and call into question all facts in the pedia. Thanks. --Milyle 08:41, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion

Hi ! Would you please delete these Redirects who have a typo in their title but not in their redirect:

  1. Pazerkampfwagen V - Does not exist ("n" missing)
  2. Pzkw VI - There's no such designation - either PzKw VI or PzKpfw VI but not this one.
  3. Junkers JU87B-1 - aircraft naming conventions say manufacturer + model number, but nod with subversion number included

There are still some other strange Redirect under Junkers Ju 87 - don't know where they origin from

I was working on eliminating chains of redirects and found these mistyped entries --Denniss 01:33, 2005 Mar 13 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Doug Malloy

The article was deleted as per a VFD voting[2] on the grounds that he wasn't notable. But please don't get me wrong, I might be missing something :) About the links pointing to the page, are they about the same person that was deleted? If not, maybe you could make a request for it to be written (or, of course, just write it yourself). Thanks for your message! -Frazzydee| 04:50, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Rachael McArthur

I've speedied Rachael McArthur, as requested. Why did you later want this not speeedied? Rich Farmbrough 17:02, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

  • Honestly, I can't remember the article, or removing a speedy. Sorry. Little curious now, though, but let it drop if you don't think it's a big deal, which I doubt it was. --InShaneee 02:29, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] California English

The article California English is being considered for undeletion, because the new article (which you can see at User:Nohat/California_English), bears no relation to the old article (at User:Nohat/Californian_Accent). --Angr 11:01, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Charter88

Rich, why didn't you incorporate the text on the Talk page into the article, or was it in the article and you removed it? I thought that a substantial part of the text was very helpful. Did you write it, or what is the history of it? MPLX/MH 20:09, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Disambiguation pages (sticky)

I noticed that you've done some disambiguation on [[British]] and others. I've been trying to do this as well. Any possibility of starting a project to do it? You can reply to this section. Thanks, Alphax τεχ 09:47, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

How would you envisage this working? Rich Farmbrough 11:24, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Ok, people check Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links (and the more updated one) and Category:Disambiguation for things to disambiguate. Where there is a clear alternative for a link target (eg. United States vs. America), it is inserted; where there is not, it is discussed. I realise the difficulty in maintaining such a thing, but ultimately, links to disambiguation pages lead to 2 pages being loaded per link followed - increasing server load and slowing down Wikipedia. Alphax τεχ 09:18, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Perhaps we need a Wikipedia:Disambiguation queries page. OTOh the people who are best placed to decide will be the regular editors of the page, if any. Rich Farmbrough 13:37, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
The hardest part is determining which disambiguation pages have the most incoming links - best determined by database dumps. In some disambiguation cases it's difficult to decide which alternative is best suited, so we need language & grammer experts working this (I'm neither). I wonder if we should post an expression of interest to the Village Pump or mailing list... Alphax τεχ 15:56, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I'm statting the diambiguation links from a database dump. Rich Farmbrough 19:35, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Cool! Where will you put them? Alphax τεχ 04:14, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Offline reports/This is one of the most linked to disambiguation pages Note that these sub-pages don't seem to update the main page unless it's edited. This could be due to using the Paris caches. Same could apply to the "You have new messages" Rich Farmbrough 10:14, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Have you seen Template:Purge? Or my monobook.js and monobook.css (copied from ABCD's? Anyway, good to see the list updated again. How often will the script be run? Alphax τεχ 12:37, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
It takes a few minutes of user time to do it, so whenever I notice the databse has been updated I will run it. Rich Farmbrough 16:47, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Time to reset the indent level... Now to rope in more people to help... Alphax τεχ 07:31, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

New database dump being d/l'd as we speak. Rich Farmbrough 15:57, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Cool... do you know of any other people that would regularly check these? I was wondering how long it would take to de-populate the incoming links. Alphax τεχ 00:22, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Page updated now. Rich Farmbrough 11:00, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Hey! The page was moved and is now part of Template:Active Wiki Fixup Projects. Good job! Alphax τεχ 12:13, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
BTW an new list is now uploaded. Rich Farmbrough 10:44, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
Neat. Alphax τεχ 05:48, 20 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] David Farmbrough

Not sure that the second link to [[Winchmore Hill] is needed as it's linked in an earlier instance. User:DavidFarmbrough 11 Apr 2005 17:22 (BST)

I guess you're right. Rich Farmbrough 16:37, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
And if you use <nowiki></nowiki> you can express wiki construct unwikily.Rich Farmbrough

[edit] Justin Canha and the Google Test

Hello, Rich. I just saw your justification to not speedy delete the Justin canha article, in the article's history page. Responding to my speedy deletion reason: "This is an article about someone with less than 500 hits on Google" , you said (sic): "Google hits do not a speedy deletion make".

Are we abolishing the Google Test?

Among other reasons to do a Google Test there is: ...to decide whether a person is famous enough to have an article or is just making the page because of vanity

--Abu Badali 17:15, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)

Firstly The Google test has always been and very likely always will remain an imperfect tool used to produce a general gauge of notability. It is not and should never be considered definitive.
Secondly notability or lack thereof is not a reason for speedy deletion neither is vanity. Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion
I agree that Justin Canha almost certainly “should” be speedied, but under the current policy it needs to go to VfD. Rich Farmbrough 19:24, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)


[edit] VFD

Just one more thing, Google Test was really voted for deletion. But the result was keep. --Abu Badali 17:23, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Hello.

Hello--Crestville 18:17, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Hello yourself :) Rich Farmbrough 15:26, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Hey, cheers!  :)--Crestville 22:17, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Persia

I notice you've been disambiguating links to Persia into Iran. Thanks, but please be aware that that article deals only with the country that's occupied that area since 1935, when the international community first began referring to it as Iran. Instances of Persia in more historical contexts--for instance, in ancient Roman, ancient Greek or Muslim history articles--should really be disambiguated to Persian Empire. Binabik80 03:23, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I was also going to comment that this is probably a bad idea. Most of the the changes I checked should really be disambigged to Persian Empire. It is similar to linking to [[Ancient Egypt|Egypt]] rather than [[Egypt]]. -- Solipsist 06:34, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I see you were reacting to the list at Wikipedia:Offline_reports/This_is_one_of_the_most_linked_to_disambiguation_pages. The fact that there are nearly 1500 Persia links, suggests that there could be an alternative solution, such as moving the current Persia to Persia (disambiguation) and making Persia a redirect to Persian Empire. However, there is already extensive discussion at Talk:Persia, which shows it is not a trivial issue. -- Solipsist 07:06, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
The problem with Persia is that the discussion, and the page itself, indicate that Iran is the correct disambig. There is a seperate page for Persian Empire, and I have changed a number of links from [[Persia]]n empire to [[Persian Empire]]. Iran includes a link to History of Iran which is also redirected from History of Persia. I'll leave it alone for now, and see what the discssion on talk:Persia brings forth. Rich Farmbrough 16:41, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
A number of the links you've made to Iran are clearly more appropriately made to Persian Empire, especially considering they are talking about events of 1,500-2,500 years ago. I've fixed some of them. As for History of Iran, the majority of it is on the 20th century, and the section on the older history notes that the main article is Persian Empire. I've fixed that re-direct to point to the article that actually has the information in it. Jayjg (talk) 04:14, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Shoot, I got involved today with the project and have had the same problems, including someone who was miffed with my edits following behinf me and reverting everything I did. I think maybe we need to have a more general topis Persia, which could cover (and link to) the ancient empire, the modern Iran, and the cultural articles.General Leppy
Hello. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary. Thanks, and happy editing.

bbx 01:20, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Trouble at Wiktionary

There is a user on Wiktionary that is outta control and he must be stopped. Will you ban Bobtail since you are an adminstrator and on Wiktionary, protect "Template:Hellenicindex" and "Template:Englishindex" to avoid vandalisms. Pumpie, 21:12 (UTC), Apr 23, 2005

[edit] Islamofascism VfD

Could you please explain the reasoning behind this decision? BrandonYusufToropov 20:01, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification, and for the suggestions on future edits. I'm partisan, I know, but it seemed to me that the "merge/redirect" + "delete" constituency was a working majority, and that it constituted something of a mandate for change. Could it have gone the other way, do you think? BrandonYusufToropov

Not sure how harmless it is, given the depth of anti-Muslim sentiment in the US and elsewhere, and the tendency of people to point to things like encyclopedia entries as evidence for the legitimacy of ideas that might otherwise be considered extremist and unacceptable. BrandonYusufToropov 22:00, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

I see your point. Thanks again for the ideas on editing. It seems to me it should be a much shorter article if it remains. BrandonYusufToropov 22:50, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Bergen

[edit] Germans vs Germany links

On several articles related to Czech Republic you changed link from Germans (as people) to Germany (as country). For example in Jihlava article the people link would be better - it is about events hundreds years ago when no state existed (and the people were identified more as Saxons, Bavarians etc than Germans). Pavel Vozenilek 10:29, 14 May 2005 (UTC)

Hmm, you are right. An article of its own would be needed for complete coverage. Pavel Vozenilek 10:56, 14 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Al Qaeda dates

Yeah, my first impulse was to revert, then I thought, well some of these seem kosher so I'll try editing... but then I saw you'd edited a date inside a link, at which point I figured I'd just revert. :) --Golbez 16:48, May 18, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Bot? (Nobot)

No I'm not using a bot. See User:Rich_Farmbrough.

Are you using a bot? [3] seems rather odd ([[September 11, 2001 attacks|[[11 September]]]] really won't work, honest). Please note that running a bot without prior permission is a Bad Thing, most especially so when you don't even leave an edit summary

James F. (talk) 10:06, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

Nor does one of the changes in this edit of Hansie Cronje. Well intentioned, but wrong. The template sorts out the linking, so it displays as "As of [[1 January]], 2005" -- ALoan (Talk) 18:17, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
this diff rather Rich Farmbrough 08:32 7 June 2006 (UTC).

Glad to sort out the Kissinger link; looks like there are problems on similar pages. Are you using a bot? Mackensen (talk) 18:20, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

No, no bot. Search and replace, then checking the diff. I was editing the Kissinger one when you fixed it. Rich Farmbrough 19:32, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Linking dates in references

I've noticed you're linking dates in references (e.g. here). I'm not sure if this is helpful - it just creates blue text that nobody will ever click on. Is your purpose to force the wiki to use local date settings? JFW | T@lk 21:17, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

Indeed per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Dates Rich Farmbrough 21:27, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

And why are you switching month and day order, when the MOS does not suggest it, and the actual articles linked to have the opposite format to the one you are switching to? Jayjg (talk) 22:59, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

Because it looks the same. [[17 october]] [[2003]] renders as 17 October 2003 wheras [[October 17]] [[2003]] renders as October 17, 2003. rgds, Rich Farmbrough 23:06, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't get it. Why switch October 17, 2003 to 17 October 2003? Jayjg (talk) 23:11, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

Let me be a lttle clearer. I make no effort to keep the original order becasue it doesn't matter. I am using search and replace to make the change. However, now you mention it there is one advantage, from time to time I have to revert a change, which is simple, more infrequently I part revert, manually. This would be easier with the same order, so thanks, I'll probably do that. Rich Farmbrough 23:22, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, it's not much clearer; why is it easier?

Because in the case in point I would edit "[[May 31]]" to "May 31" if I decided a change was wrong - less keystrokes and less chance of error. (E.G. date in a link, a direct quote, a template which imposes wikifying of dates, a URL.) (Except of course that in the case in point the date order wsn't changed anyway)

Also, don't you think the original authors had something in mind when they used that order?

Not in the vast majority of cases. Any more than they have something in mind when they say Anemia or Anaemia. When the layout is more important than the content, then the change should not be made, as in the examples above, or a proper name. When the idea is to refer to a period of time, then it is good that the users can see it in their desired format.

And finally, since the articles inevitably linked to say October 17, why not just link there? Jayjg (talk) 23:30, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

Neither format will be a redirect, so what does it matter? Rich Farmbrough 23:47, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

It's disconcerting, for one thing, and Wikipedia policy generally encourages leaving alternatives like this in the form created by the original author. It's much the same for English/American spellings. Jayjg (talk) 23:56, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

I don't see why it's disconcerting, since it's invisible, still never mind, with the changes I talked about I'll be doing what you want anyway. The example of Anemia/Aneamia was chosen to illustrate just such a point, generally it would be left alone, but in the article Anemia it's been regularised - it's not a big deal. Cheers, Rich Farmbrough 08:45, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

The MOS does not actually suggest linking dates in references. Also, the dates in references often follow a specific format (year, month, day) that is not actually dependant on locale (see Pubmed entries, such as PMID 15908442). May I ask you to not link dates in references. JFW | T@lk 10:22, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] What????

"... volume 31, September 1989" means that the September 1989 issue of a journal is a part of volume 31 of that journal. It is absurd to link that to 31 September, even if (or perhaps especially if) the month of September had 31 days. Michael Hardy 22:20, 26 May 2005 (UTC)


[edit] How do get rights to delete and undelete pages and stuff?

Is there a class you must take, or no? Antares33712 22:26, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Richard Vanderpool

Rich, please delete the article. It's a proven hoax (on the VfD talk page, you see all the information necessary to prove it was a hoax. I was in the speedy list, and seen it, and pulled it, thinking it was a valid article about an unfamous minor league baseball player. So I figured keep, even if for historical posterity. But seeing as it was a hoax, I feel VERY bad about pulling from the speedy. IF I adn't have done that, we would be wasting time on it.

Antares33712 22:38, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Balky deletes

Like 2 out of 3 times (or more) clicking 'confirm' gives "Error. Sorry- we have a problem... The wikimedia web server didn't return any response to your request."? Oh, yeah. Rather tiresome. I haven't been deleting much recently so I don't have a good feel for if it only started after the outage earlier today, or not. Niteowlneils 22:41, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Re: What to List on speedy deletion

Ok, fine, I'll cede. But my article on Nichole Arsenault was speedy-ed away from me, with no chance of a repost, yet this hoax is dragging on.

Antares33712 22:53, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

By that I mean, if that could be speedy-ed away, and the second editor nominated it for a speedy, and everything afterwards was vandalism, or adding more to the hoax, it should just be speedy-ed :-) Antares33712 22:55, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)


[edit] True, it was on VfU

But the VfU got due process. I may not agree, but it got due process. I feel the speedy was out of process, because a) I didn't repost the content, b) I agrued its merits when it had the explain-significance flag, and promsed to research and add and c) I wasn't a part of the original VfD vote (if I would have been there, I would have voted keep. I read on a wikipedia page were that can be useful in establishing due process. So for that reason, I feel the delete without due-process. But on that, I'm starting to get tired of sounding like a sour grape.  :-) Antares33712 23:20, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] True, I probably did put it first. I forgot

I forgot. Can you add those edits under my name to my count. But on the due process you see my point. If I get the information and try to repost (under Wikipedia guidelines since the article was a stub), I don't want to be labeled a vandal. Antares33712 23:31, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

PS: Can you email me the page. I was proud of the IPA pronounciation thing I did (lord, now I'm so vane :-) ) Antares33712 23:31, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

  • Wow, thanks! I wasn't excepting that. I can work on making the article more notable. Antares33712 13:28, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Ah, ok....thanks! Antares33712 15:46, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=SARS_coronavirus&diff=prev&oldid=11803311

[edit] Disambiguation scripts

I'm not sure what perl does with pipe characters (|), but I've made a little change to one of your scripts. Oh, and to fulfil one of my many pet peeves: When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labelled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:

Edit summary text box

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

When you leave the edit summary blank, some of your edits could be mistaken for vandalism and may be reverted, so please always briefly summarize your edits, especially when you are making subtle but important changes, like changing dates or numbers. Thank you. Alphax τεχ 11:04, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Histogenesis

Hi, I have no idea why histogenesis was deleted. Danny 03:35, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hi, it was probably like you said. If it was blank, I would have deleted it during an effort to get rid of speedy deletes. Sorry for any confusion. Danny 17:47, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion at Talk:Pakistan

Would you like to join the animated discussion on the Pakistan's talk page? The current issue is whether "Pakistan is famous for its support of Taliban and 9/11 terrorist" is a suitable sentence to start the article's first paragraph. Your contribution would be much appreciated, as the current discussion seems to be more of a dialog between Ragib and SamTr014 Talk:Pakistan. Thanks !--PrinceA 06:39, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Benazir Bhutto

R you interested in to join the discussion of cleaning up the article of Benazir Bhutto? Talk:Benazir Bhutto--Raju1 03:16, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Fathers' rights

Hi Rich, I noticed your changes to the dates on the Fathers' rights page. Perhaps you could explain how formatted dates improve the page? They add links to particular dates, eg. today is 24 June 2005 but are these links relevant or useful if no entry appears on the date pages to the 'event' from which they were linked? It seems like you are keen on date cleanup, I am just curious as to the purpose and rationale for this project. Any details cheerfully received. -Akiva Quinn 00:03, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Bot? - No bot

Are you running a bot to do disambiguation? You're missing an awful lot of edit summaries. Alphax τεχ 10:45, 24 June 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Date wikification bot? No bot

Are you running a bot to wikify dates? If so, you should fix your code to avoid false positives like [4] where you changed

on 5 September 665,000 Soviet prisoners were taken

to

on [[5 September]], [[665]],000 Soviet prisoners were taken

If you are running a bot, you need to follow the rules on Wikipedia:Bots, you need to run your bot under a separate account from your ordinary account, and you should announce your bot at Wikipedia talk:Bots to give other editors a chance to comment. Gdr 2005-06-30 19:46:41 (UTC)

No I'm not running a bot. Rich Farmbrough 6 July 2005 09:03 (UTC)

I also came across two different articles, where you changed the date format inappropriately (Vladimír Špidla and Calculating_the_day_of_the_week). I would advise you to fix the wikify bot to precede such errors and confusion.

cathack 6 July 2005 08:09 (UTC)
No I'm not running a bot. See my user page. Thanks for fixing the articles, prticularly day of week one which was an egregious oversight on my part. Rich Farmbrough 6 July 2005 09:03 (UTC)

[edit] Wikify Dates

Please see my user page. Rich Farmbrough 6 July 2005 09:03 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:2005 London...

I'm done, but I'll be keeping an eye on it. --Merovingian (t) (c) July 7, 2005 11:12 (UTC)

what's this with the 'gone in 60 seconds' note in the london bombings talk page? Adidas 00:54, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Ought to VfD but too lazy

Vaso Vukotic's Theory

[edit] Revert your own edits...

You're the first strange person who'll write "revert my own edits" on the edit summary column XDDD. Deryck C. 12:19, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Disambiguation scripts

Hello Rich, I noticed you generate the disambiguation link list and wanted to see if you would like to offload this duty. I have recently written wpfsck in Perl. It currently processes three cleanup projects while only requiring one scan over the cur and links dumps. Adding this to the existing cleanup projects would be simple and I am further developing a framework to automatically update and publish cleanup projects. As such this would become just another task it performs, but it would free you from the obligation. Regardless I have also created a Perl module you may find useful. It uses a callback system to facilitate processing of the dump files; the subroutine invoked gets a hash that is nearly identical to a $sth->fetchrow_hashref (if you know what that means, if not, it is very simple) and an optional second subroutine can be specified. This subroutine receives an identically structured hash but there are a few restrictions: the article text is read only and it is not safe to use regular expressions. The tradeoff is that memory copy operations can be avoided for articles you are not interested in and a significant performance boost. I also wrote a report generator that takes a list of articles and produces nicely formated cleanup projects. See this as an example. If you would like to use this code you are more than welcome. Lastly (whew, this is long winded), I have recently created the WikiProject help desk; in short its geeks taking requests for one off jobs that computers can do or helping people who use tools that have broken and they themselves don't know how to fix it. Right now there is little demand but I suspect that will change when word gets out. Are you interested? Thanks for the ear, Triddle 07:12, July 15, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Aircraft specification survey

Since you are a contributor to aircraft articles, you may be interested in a survey currently underway to help develop a revised version of our standard specifications section. Bobblewik 19:36, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 1000000000000000000

I do not think it was a good idea to move 1000000000000000000 to 1000000000000000000 (number). If you noticed, the article is being voted for deletion, so it is best to keep it in place while the vote takes place.

Second, by moving it, you made the link to the votes for deletion page invalid (well I did a redirect, but that does not change my point).

Can you move the article back please? Oleg Alexandrov 20:18, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

Hi Oleg.
I have closed the VfD (which has been running a long time), making 1000000000000000000 a redirect to 11th millennium and beyond. I have moved the content to 1000000000000000000 (number) where it belongs. I have put small note at the top of 11th millennium and beyond for anyone who gets redirected having entered 1000000000000000000 (or any other large number), and meant the number not the year. If you want to have 1000000000000000000 (number) deleted, then a seperate VfD could be used. Rich Farmbrough 20:46, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
I see. I was confused by the fact that the article was moved but the vfd notice was not removed (I mean, almost half of the day passed between the two).
About the new article 1000000000000000000 (number). I think this has no chance of developing into an encyclopedic article, so I do plan to vote it for deletion. Let us see how it goes. Oleg Alexandrov 21:01, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
You may well be right. Sorry I left the VfD notice in by mistake. Rich Farmbrough 21:08, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

Why did you close the VFD on 1000000000000000000 with redirect? The tally for the VFD was 5 or 6 for redirect (to different articles), 13 for delete. Are you ignoring the results of VFD? --A D Monroe III 00:56, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

Would deletion and recreation as a redirect pacify you? — David Remahl 01:00, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
I've put my thoughts on the 1000000000000000000 (number) VfD page. Rich Farmbrough 01:32, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
I read your comments. To summarize, you looked over the VFD results, disagreed with them (for reasons you stated), redirected the page, and then closed the VFD with the text "The result of the debate was move and replace with redirect" when you knew the result of the debate was to delete. Is this right? --A D Monroe III 02:03, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] African COTW

You showed support for the African Collaboration of the Week. This week Dar es Salaam was chosen. Please help improve it to featured-article standard.

[edit] VfD closure

Hi there. Per my comment in the VfD on the page you moved to, I'm wondering how you reached a "redirect" decision on Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/1000000000000000000. I count 15d, 5r which is a consensus to delete (imo). Note that Jarlaxle Artemis has sort-of voted twice. -Splash 23:00, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] date project

Please make sure your code does not mess up links to Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice of 8 July 1996. Cheers. – Kaihsu 19:51, August 10, 2005 (UTC)

Your date project work is partially or largely automated? May I suggest it is too automated?
I am going to suggest that your date project work on Camp Iguana [5] really wasn't helpful. I am going to suggest that you should only wikify a date if there is some reason why a reader would look up that date. In the external links section, when would it be useful to let a reader look up noteworthy events that occurred on, June 13, or July 27? Maybe if the external link was to an article that reflected on the anniversary of an event like 1941-12-7, or 2001-9-11. But those are special cases. Excess wikification just clutters up an article, and should be avoided. Sorry, but I don't see the value in the wikification of any of the dates you wikified in this article.
I looked at your contributions today. You wikified the dates in dozens of articles today, spending about one minute per article. Forgive me if I am concerned that this wasn't really long enough for you to read the articles in sufficient depth to make a meaningful decision as to whether wikifying those dates makes sense. -- Geo Swan 22:55, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
Please see my comments below exlaining the reasons most dates should be wikified, and giving refernces to the Manual of Style. Rich Farmbrough 23:23, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

I have noticed you "wikified" some dates on Leicester City. One of these datas was already in YYYY-MM-DD format, and thus correct for wiki according to style and formatting guidelines[6]. Guinness 18:17, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

Perfectly correct sir, Rich Farmbrough 10:02, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

You have wikified an Old Style date in Joseph Sunlight. Of course, that will link to the New Style date which I think is inappropriate. Any comments? Cutler 15:09, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Yes, this creates a non-ideal situation. However this is to allow date preferences to work. If you have them set you will see 11 September and September 11 ([[11 September]] and [[September 11]]) the same way. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers). Since linkage of the dates is very unimportant compared with the formatting, I think it's worth doing anyway. Realistically people are not going to click on the date link, and to link to the new-style date would break formatting, and posibly be obtuse. Ideally there would be seperate markup for dates, that wouldn't link by default. Rich Farmbrough 15:29, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] It's

Hi Rich! No, I’m not using a bot for the corrections I am currently doing, just a custom wiki editor. I have a registered bot for automated tasks, though (User:Diderobot). Cheers, Sam Hocevar 08:01, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] PlanetMath Exchange project

Hi Rich, welcome to the PlanetMath Exchange project! I've modified slightly the entries you made at Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics/PlanetMath Exchange/05-XX Combinatorics, to be consistent with the other entries and the style that has developed in the project. Hope you don't mind ;-) Thanks for contributing, It is a big project and we can use all the help we can get. You might want to consider adding your name to the "Participants" list at the bottom of the projects page here. Again thanks for helping out. Paul August 22:06, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wondrous numbers?

What are wondrous numbers? What are the wondrous numbers before and after 384? I searched the OEIS for the term "wondrous number" then a search for core sequences containing 384, but found nothing for this. PrimeFan 20:59, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Links

Hi Rich. You recently turned "23 October" into a link on 1956 Hungarian Revolution. Not that it bothers me much, but it was already a link in the previous sentence, and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links) discourages multiple links to the same page on the same screen, especially with dates, so I thought I'd call your attention to this. KissL 10:17, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

I'm also curious why you seem to be going around to numerous pages and turning every date into a link? The first time it is used on a page, fine, but otherwise it is overkill and muddies the page. Peyna 00:30, 7 September 2005 (UTC)


See Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers). This is to allow date preferences to work. If you set them you will see 11 September and September 11 ([[11 September]] and [[September 11]]) the same way. Rgds. Rich Farmbrough 15:30, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Multi-index notation

Hi Rich. Just one remark. You deleted a huge chunk of the article Multi-index notation without an edit summary and only with a minor edit flag. It took me a while to realize that it was you who put that fragment to start with, but it is good if you put an explanation next time. By the way, just before seeing your deletion I saw a (real this time) vandalism at real number where again stuff was deleted without explanation, so as you might guess I am not very pleased with text just vanishing unexpetedly. Thanks. Oleg Alexandrov 17:15, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Double-indent -- please don't

Hi, I notice you double-indented several formulas in several articles. Please don't, it violates the current style guidelines Wikipedia:Manual of Style (mathematics) (against which more than several thousand math articles are written). To change the guidelines, please discuss at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics. Don't be surprised if the double-colon usage is reverted to single-colon over time. linas 00:44, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

No problem. Please rewrite or otherwise improve any of those articles (some sorely need it). However for future reference the style guide currently says:

When displaying formulas on their own line, one should indent the line with one or more colons (:);

Rich Farmbrough 10:59, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Obliged?

Pardon my ignorance, but why did you put "obliged" instead of "obligated" in Anti-semitism? What is the difference between the two words? I thought "obliged" meant something similar to "pleasured" or something like that....

Thanks! --Sebastian Kessel 17:54, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Apart from a special use in biology obligate means pretty much the same as oblige. I am of the opinion that it is a back-formation from obligation that came about in the 15th or 16th century, and I find it ugly. For the wikitionary defn. of oblige see. Rich Farmbrough 20:05, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
Oh, that I didn't know! :) Thanks! --Sebastian Kessel 20:07, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

I was going to ask the same question about the similar edits made in the Liberty Law article. I think there is a difference between the two words; obligated implies there is a requirement defined by law or contract, obliged implies it is a moral or social requirement. (The wikitionary definition doesn't follow this, but unfortunately I don't regard it as being as authoritative as other dictionaries, which do make this distinction.) That said, I think obligated is the correct word in the context of this article. MK2 23:41, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

OED agrees that legal requirement is included, in its lengthy articles. More accessibly the American Heritage Dictionary says " To constrain by physical, legal, social, or moral means." Mirrim Webster has "to constrain by physical, moral, or legal force or by the exigencies of circumstance". Rgds, Rich Farmbrough 23:55, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
I'm not saying it's impossible to interpret obliged the way you're using it. But obligated conveys the meaning more accurately. MK2 04:28, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
"Until recently, the sense of this word has been restricted to positive and personal acts; and when moral duty or law binds a person to do something, the word oblige has been used. But this distinction is not now observed." Websters 1828.

"Obliged" is more common in British speech. That said, please stop converting one to the other because you find one "ugly". Thanks. Jayjg (talk) 03:56, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

Much obliged for your advice. Rich Farmbrough 16:16, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
Obligated has been in use for 500 years. I think you need to concede it's won a place in the language. MK2 04:26, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
Who would have thought the old word had so much blood in him? Rich Farmbrough 11:16, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

Hello, I see you have been reverting the American "obligated" to the British "obliged" even on American topics and pages that were written in AmEn. Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#National_varieties_of_English states that if the page is regarding a specific country (i.e., the US) then that country's style of English should be used. I am refering specifically to the MLB, NBA and US political pages you altered. It seems like you are compromizing the spirit of the guidelines in favor of your personal preference. The word "obligated" conveys a much stronger meaning on these pages and is languisticly more appropriate in American English. Would you mind please stop altering the word on the pages that are already written in American English? Have a good day!--CrazyTalk 19:00, September 1, 2005 (UTC)

Hallo. Rather than ugliness, redundancy is a valid criterion for removing parts of words, and the 'at' of obligated appears to be redundant even in this context. I say this as an English graduate and as a lawyer. I'm not sure I would bother editing an article just for the sake of it though. DavidFarmbrough 17:14 (BST) 12 September 2005

[edit] Orientated/oriented

Hi, a friendly heads-up: orientated is the usual British English spelling, so I use it in my articles. I appreciate the thought, though. ;) Mark1 04:24, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

With both these words the shorter (orient, oblige) is more widely used, and acceptable on both sides of the Atlantic. The extra syllable makes one (orientate) grate on American ears, the other (obligate) on British. It seems sensible to use the shorter version, but <meh>, if anyone wants to change my edits back, I'm not likely to be bothered. Rich Farmbrough 12:11, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 47, 11^6

Thanks for the 47 from the Doctor's aria. It's a little reaching, but I've added it to my list. Thanks also for the note about 11^6. I see PrimeFan added it to 1000000 (number) (together with 1331^2) but didn't tell me about it. I thought this number was on that sequence about the dying rabbits. ShutterBugTrekker 22:19, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Sitaxsentan

Now you've written sitaxsentan, would you mind also writing endothelin and bosentan? I now next to nothing about it but it sounds fascinating. JFW | T@lk 21:29, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Psalms of Confession

Thanks. Eugene van der Pijll 11:43, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] About the grammar edit on "Self-defence ..."

Obliged and obligated are synonymous. No further edits are required.

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=obligated

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=obliged

--J-Star 18:32, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikibreak

Having completed the first pass stats for the PlanetMath Exchange project, when I should have been doing Real Life, I am now taking a short Wikibreak. Rich Farmbrough 19:31, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

When you are back, you might be interested in checking out my suggestions for improving the Perl script. (Look at that, he wrote a 10 line script and is already talking wikibreak :) Oleg Alexandrov 21:58, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
I'm as back as I'll ever be :-) . Rich Farmbrough 14:48, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

The May Day Mystery

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/European Union member states at the 2004 Summer Olympics

You might be interested to have a look. Regards. --Pgreenfinch 13:10, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Open Proxies

I want to investigate some recent vandalism coming from many IPs, I saw your note on User:Func's talk page, I would appreciate any scripts that help test for open proxies. Rich Farmbrough 22:44, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

If you want to test a specific IP for an open proxy but you don't know on which port, your best best bet is to search for the IP on the web with google. If it finds something in a "list of open proxies" it'll usually include a port and you can try editing wikipedia through that proxy; if it works you can block it indefinitely. If that fails, you can also try port scanning the host to find open proxy ports. Try nmap. --fvw* 22:18, September 4, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] fountain

not at all, thanks. I always suprise how fast wikipedia communit correctis gramma or letter mistakes :). Regards Rafikk 20:30, September 10, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Science pearls

Hello,

Since you contributed in the past to the publications’ lists, I thought that you might be interested in this new project. I’ll be glad if you will continue contributing. Thanks,APH 09:36, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Solar Oven/Furnace

See Talk:Solar oven DavidFarmbrough 12 Sep 05

[edit] You marked the Camp Iguana article as {POV}, but you didn't say why?

You marked the Camp Iguana article as {POV}, but you didn't say why. Aren't you supposed to say why? May I ask you how you think we can reach a consensus as to when it is no longer POV if you don't say what you consider POV about it? -- Geo Swan 22:29, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

I saw your addition to the page, yesterday, and replied on Talk:Camp Iguana last night. Yes, the Bush administration made the claim that their suspects did not fall under the Geneva Conventions. But they were over-ruled by the Judicial Branch. The Judicial Branch had the final say here. Which, to my way of thinking, means that the official position of the US government, after some internal wrangling, is that the US government eventually acknowledged that they did have an obligation to have conducted "competent tribunals", in Afghanistan. This leaves me curious as to the value of including the claim. -- Geo Swan 15:40, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikify dates script

I'm sorry to say that this is breaking easy timelines... it messed up Prime Minister of New Zealand real good. Better check before you use it. Alphax τεχ 10:42, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the alert. There was another one, which I recognised as being special on the edit page, I would have spotted this one, but for Wikipedia's reluctance to show pages after an edit. I can prevent it recurring. Thanks again. Rich Farmbrough 13:41, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Rich, this also falls over when it comes across European date formats - e.g. this diff. In cases like this, where there's a mix of formats used, or where there's not enough context to tell the format of dates for sure, a script just seems like an easy way to be careless. (BTW, I do think wikifying loads of dates is a Good Thing, it's just that introducing errors in the process isn't!) sjorford #£@%&$?! 22:18, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, I catch most of these, and do it differently for mm/dd/yyyy. Sometimes you can't tell which format it is and have to research (which is a bummer). If I get it wrong the zz's are a warning. I've only found about two articles which mix the // styles, but
really takes the biscuit! There's only about 400 more articles to fix, then it's back to the "simple" dates where the month is in words. Thanks again, let me know if you see any more howlers. Rich Farmbrough 22:39, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Enola Gay

Hey Rich, I saw the edits you did on the Enola Gay page. Just curious if you have an interest in terms of the plane. Davidpdx 9/17/05 7:00 (UTC)

Only a general way. I was fixing all refernces to the "United States Army Air Force" to read "United States Army Air Forces" Rich Farmbrough 16:37, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

Rich - I noticed you wikified 1945 in the Paul Tibbets article when it was already wikified in the same paragraph. Most editors will only wikify the first occurance of linkable text in an article. I personally feel that in long articles, it is good to wikify text when it occurs in far separated sections, since the reader may not have read the section where the first link occurs. Just my 2 cents. --Rogerd 17:54, 18 September 2005 (UTC)


See Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers). This is to allow date preferences to work. If you set them you will see 11 September and September 11 ([[11 September]] and [[September 11]]) the same way.
In particular if your preference is set for ISO dates (1995-10-22) , it requires the year as well as the month to be wikified. Rich Farmbrough 18:03, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
I see. Thanks for explaining--Rogerd 18:32, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Dates / my sig

It's good to see another person is working on dates. I too have spent a quantity of time fixing incorrectly formatted dates and date links. I've been doing it manually, which has the advantage of being unlikely to cause problems, but is also painfully slow.

Thanks for commenting on my experiment. You're the first person to notice, as far as I know. How did you find it, by the way? I haven't been very active lately. —Ben Brockert (42) UE News 00:39, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

I want to sign my comments like this Rich Farmbrough 08:27 20 September 2005, and couldn't figure out how to do it so I searched user talk space, and found lots of /sig pages, including yours. I finally realised I could set up my nickname as xxx [[{{subst:CURRENTDAY}} {{subst:CURRENTMONTH}}]] etc.. but I still need to sign, save then edit/save again to get the subst to work. On the subject of dates in articles, most of my uncorrected mistakes (so far I've only been told about a handful in many thousands of edits) "escape" either because I've got over~tired or goggle eyed, or because the 'pedia responds too slowly, rather than any fundamental problem. Pretty much everything has to be checked because so many articles have links to September 11th, 2001 attacks!
Also there's loads of stuff in quotes, split onto mutliple lines, and in URLs. Any ideas for the sig, by the way?
Hmm. That's a clever idea, but no, I don't think it's currently possible. You might just put to the developers that sig dates should be wikified. —Ben Brockert (42) UE News 05:17, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Luther Page Rewrite Discussion on

See the Luther page talk. --CTSWyneken 01:26, 20 September 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Question on dates

Greetings! I note that you wikified a date on Windham, Ohio. All well and good, but the date wikified was merely the date I retrieved info from the village school's website. Somehow, I just don't have that high an opinion of myself as to think that's a notable date in the village's history. But that does bring to mind a question: Is every date mentioned in an article to be wikified per the Manual of Style? -- SwissCelt 11:39, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

The reason for wikifying dates is often not because the link is important, but rather that it is essential to make user preferences work (that little "preferences" link you see on your page when you are logged in). Gene Nygaard 21:10, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Japanese emperors

Hi. I notice you are on a bit of a mission to Wikify dates, which is a laudable goal. However, I wouldn't bother with any of the dates in the Japanese emperor articles. Japan used a completely different calendar system until 1873, and it isn't clear yet whether the dates in those articles are Gregorian/Julian dates or Japanese dates. If the latter, they shouldn't be Wikified. Anyway, there is a discussion going on at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (Japan-related articles) regarding how dates should be treated in Japanese articles. Probably should wait for that to conclude before making any more changes. I plan on going through and sorting through and cleaning up those dates at some point anyway. -Jefu 16:00, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] It's not a date, it's an edition name

Rich, I wonder if you noticed that at the top of my own user talk page I say I'll answer points there in preference to the questioner's talk page. Anyway, you asked there about a funny date, and I've answered you there. (If you'd like to discuss it further, please do so there rather than here.)

Irrelevantly, since you last commented on AfD/Charles Gauci I think the vehemence and provenance of that article's spirited defenses have made it look more obviously vanity. I've voted "userfy" (the user in question seems to have no interest in WP that's not directly relevant to himself). -- Hoary 09:27, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Date links

Hello there. I see your date bot took on a vast chunk of the calendar yesterday, linking all the dates in the top paragraphs of the mmmm-dd articles. Great work! Uh... I know it's a drag to be pressganged through the medium of your user talk page, but if you have a moment, and the inclination, please take a look at the linking dates discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Days of the year and, if you're feeling inspired, share a comment or two about why it's a good idea. Thanks. Hajor 14:05, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Replied there. It's not a bot, though, it's search and replace with manual checking! (Although the date pages were easy.) Rich Farmbrough 14:27, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Not a bot? Wow! Thanks for chipping in. Hajor 14:39, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

NIce to be appreciated Rich Farmbrough 15:18, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Charles Gauci

I would like to get your attention to the so-called discussion that is going on here since it has gone way out of hand. I have been attacked personally and so has another fellow Wikipedian. Can you moderate the discussion since unfortunately it has turned out to be a constant barrage of personal attacks and name-calling by those who want to keep the article? I personally won't post again there since the discussion page is no ground for personal wars. Regards --Roderick Mallia 12:22, 22 September 2005 (UTC) Admin mt.wiki

  • Its ok giving attacks but its not acceptable for those to argue a point with either roderick Mallia or Maltesedog. They should be placed on remand, as when asked for a detailed reply, one gets attacks right back. You will see many times when I ve asked for the arguements to be only based on the matter of discussion. Nothing else. --Tancarville 10:52, 22 September 2005 (EST)
    • I have examined the votes on the AfD, and reckoned that 6/3 in favour of deletion is sufficient consensus to delete, bearing in mind that little additional notability was established. Hence I have deleted the article and closed the debate. I would suggest that anyone who wishes to see an article of this name, provide clear evidence and justification of ntability to the votes for undeletion, which data could then be incorporated into the article. Perhaps wait until he has recieved his Maltese Republic award. For example, are the books he authored published by a notable publishing house? How many copies have sold. Are they cited as standard reference works. Has he published on pain management, and is he cited? What is the nature of the award from the Republic of Malta, and how many people recieve it each year? How many people have a title of similar rank to his? Did he write the "bird book" or is that someone else? etc.
    • On the subject of personal abuse in the AfD, what a shame! It did not advance any argument an iota, and resulted in more ill feeling than was probably intended. It is clear to a dispassionate observer where the abuse stemmed from, but one has to be aware that people feel personally attacked when their contributions to the 'pedia are attacked. I speak from experience.

rgds, Rich Farmbrough 14:20, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Don't change file names

Thanks for the date fixes, but you can't wikify a date in a file name. [7] (SEWilco)

Thanks for spotting. I thought I had avoided the pix, I have now gone back and done the other captions. Rgds, 'Rich Farmbrough' 13:32, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Reticular Formation

Hey Rich, I was just wondering what the reticulsar formation is and if it was similar to the reticular formation. Also, I wanted to know why my signature was taken off, i wrote the entire article with the exception of a few reticulsar edits.

[edit] Wikification of dates

Why, oh why, do you wikify dates? Babajobu 12:12, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Same reason you spell out small numbers. It's the right thing to do. Note that this is to allow date preferences to work. If you have them set you will see 11 September and September 11 ([[11 September]] and [[September 11]]) the same way. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers). Rich Farmbrough 15:06, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
Gasp! Okay, fine, I'll support date wikification if you support the spelling out of numbers under one hundred. My only concern is that 1) wikifying dates causes some articles to become overlinked, and that in those cases an additional link is a steep price to pay for the ability to choose "11 September" over "September 11". However, I will pocket those reservations in exchange for your support in my jihad against inappropriate numerals. Babajobu 15:46, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
And, from the way you have done the Wikifying of the dates, it looked like it was run by some type of script. Please tell us that you are doing this, so we can point you to the right direction so we can get your script a bot flag. Zach (Sound Off) 07:09, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Count Stephen Sant Fournier

This getting a bit too much, User:Maltesedog now is after another biography of mine and you feel he isnt taking this personal?? He is not making any sense nor is he communicating with the author directly like Administors have in the past. He automaticly places things into deletion. He must be stopped or banned. Please view what he has done before he continues deleting all of Maltese histories. Tancarville 06:46, 26 September 2005 (EST)

- Your not doing a thing about Maltesedog or Hoary?? Typical!! *Keep Tancarville 06:55, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

  • Dear Rich,

Placing articles for afd doesn't imply there's something wrong about the particular person who wrote them. Tancerville has valid articles, which form part of the collection in Wikipedia and are also of importance. However I cannot understand his insistance that I am abusing and placing unnecessary his articles for afd, bearing in mind that since the creation of wikipedia I have only placed 3 of his articles, without taking any consideration that they are his. I do not believe that I am not maintaing a neutral pov in this respect. I am not deleting all Maltese histories. There was concencus in wikipedia that Maltese Nobility, modern nobility should not be deleted only for the sake of being noble. It is not a question of placing articles into deletion. I have placed comments in the talk pages of the articles, but these were removed by Tanacerville. To me, this is intimidation not to place any more articles into afd. Debates occur in afd, it is not simply a question of rapidly removing articles, intense debates are generally done through afd and generally concencus is reached. I place the articles in the afd for others to see the opinions of others. Whether they want the deletion or not. It is not simply a matter of deleting a page without any consideration/discussion as Tancerville wishes to imply above. In view of the above, I would be grateful to comment on all the above so that to end this story once and for all.

However, I cannot understand why placing an opinion on the afd page for deletion can cause so much personal anger. Should I be intimidated by such users? I've had articles deleted such as the on the Mediterranean Region, now recreated ignoring all my work and intense research but if other users thought it was appropriate deletion, I said - I give up and did not keep insisting and taking it against the person who placed it for deletion. I am not against Maltese History far from it. I take active interest. But articles like Stephen Sant Fournier and the one of Charles Gauci, have nothing to do with history. These people are alive. Maltesedog 20:19, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Japanese Dates

I noticed that you wikified another Japanese date. The Japanese lunisolar calendar was completely different from the Western calendar. Therefore, wikifying them doesn't make any sense, because they do not correspond. -Jefu 23:07, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Khalistan

Could you please wikify the dates again in Khalistan? Your changes were lost when I reverted the changes of a persistent vandal. You have made the changes to a POV/vandalized version. Thanks! --Vivin Paliath (വിവിന് പാലിയത്)

No problem, Thanks a bunch! --Vivin Paliath (വിവിന് പാലിയത്)

[edit] dates in Russian personalia

Hi there Rich! just thought I'd share with you some odd peculiarity of the calendar in Russia (which you might not be aware of; sorry if I'm beating yet another dead horse... :) OK, so in Russian personalia, the dates of birth and death are often cited in both New Style and Old Style because in Russia, the calendar shift from the Julian to Gregorian has occured less than a century ago (!) and much of the published biographical data still show dates under both calendars or even under the Old Style only (causes confusion often, must I admit :)

For example, Ivan Goncharov article has the dates listed by the New Style, and these will be the ones that get recorded into the births/deaths Calendar and born/died Categories. And, the article also shows the dates under the Old Style for reference -- those were left unwikified intentionally. I'd be okay with leaving them wikified as long as they won't automatically go into the said Categories or events Calendars. Would they? not quite sure how exactly that works in the English wikipedia... I also feel that leaving them unwikified helps clarity as the "proper" dates stand out -- but this is certainly a one person opinion. What'd be your take on this? Regards - Introvert talk 23:16, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Suppose Ivan Ivanovitch was born 6 January 1813 NS 25 December 1812 OS.
As I see it there are four issues here:
  1. Will the "born in 1812" category include Ivan wrongly?
  2. Will the 1812 article include Ivan Iavanovitch on the OS birthday?
  3. Will the 25 December page include Ivan?
  4. Will it look OK?


  1. I don't think so, the process is smarter than that, and wiifying the date certainly won't affect it.
  2. No, that's a manual process (or the page wuld be overloaded).
  3. Ditto.
  4. Yes, I think because otherwise the date will look something like 6 January 1813 NS December 25 1812 OS to some users.


Rgds,
Rich Farmbrough 09:05, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
All right! Ivan Ivanovich will be properly tagged and logged :) Yes, I wasn't sure how the inclusion into the calendar categories works (I know that it is automated in the Russian wikipedia). If it is to remain manual, then... I shouldn't have taken your time. Regarding #4, like I said I do prefer the "otherwise" because this way, it helps the contemporary calendar dates properly stand out, but it is of course a matter of personal taste. Thank you again for taking time to explain - Introvert talk 03:19, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Careful with bot

Please note that I had to revert your edit here because what you wikified was not a date.

Also note that a date written in the month-day-year order properly needs a comma after the day and before the year, which you are removing on a mass scale, such as in this article. --Jiang 05:49, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

I will try to avoid pinyin in future! By the way it's not a bot, it's search and replace. Rich Farmbrough 09:14, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the prompt response. Usually the pinyin has tones instead of numbers, and with time, numbered pinyin will be converted to tones pinyin.

I would prefer that dates written in North American Month-day style by default not be purposely changed to European day-Month unless the subject is European as it would unnecessarily favor one style over the other. I don't think the edit here is appropriate because the subject is Chinese, and in China, dates are written Month-day and not day-month (but then again, the format is something like 2005.10.02 for today and not October 2, 2005, so I think no change in the default is the best solution for this case). --Jiang 09:37, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

2005.10.02 can be quickly wikified as [[2005-10-02]] which renders depending on your date preferences as 2005-10-02. Rich Farmbrough 22:07, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Spot the difference

OK. I give up. Unless you are a bot (in which case, here is my copy of the News Chronicle and I claim my £5) I've looked and I've looked, but I still can't see the difference you made with your "Wikify dates" edit to Jabbeke. -- Picapica 16:55, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

I was puzzled to start with as well, you had already done the date so my search and replace would have no effect, normally if an edit makes no difference, then it is not saved. But I must have been super observant, and removed the space before the closing square brackets around the website reference. Rich Farmbrough 22:14, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Edward St George

Many thanks for your comments regarding Steve Sant Fournier and also on Edward St George. Edward St George was born to the Count von Zimmermann Barbaro and had everything one can imagine with a silverlining. Though Edward after a life in the legal profession and other assocations, went into an unknown and turned around a community into one of the best in the world. His website biography done by his grandson doesnt really explain all of his generousity and legacies which a GREAT man had left behind. Edward married into the English gentry and nobility but never used his background as a basis of life but through hard work and determination. If Edward had lived another several years would have received a Knight Bachelor from HM, Queen of UK and Bahamas for his efforts. Tancarville 20:46, 3 October 2005 (EST)

[edit] Aircraft specs policy

Several weeks ago, you voted in the WikiProject Aircraft Specifications Survey. One of the results of the survey was that the specifications for the various aircraft articles will now be displayed using a template. Ericg and I have just finished developing that template; a lengthier bulletin can be found on the WT:Air talkpage. Naturally, we will need to begin a drive to update the aircraft articles. However, several topics in the survey did reach establish consensus, and they need to be resolved before we implement the template. It is crticial that we make some conclusion, so that updating of the specs can resume as soon as possible. You can take part in the discussions here. Thanks, Ingoolemo talk 06:03, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] "Wikify dates"

You made an edit to List of Native American tribes with the edit summary, "Wikify dates" [8] While the edit itself was a useful one, the difference between the edit summary and the change that you actually made makes it harder for someone like me who is verifying that any given edit wasn't vandalism. Please use descriptive edit summaries that match the changes you are making. Thanks. -Harmil 14:32, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

I had not realized what a compulsion this seems to be for you until I reviewed your recent edits. The following changes:
are just a sampling of your "Wikify dates" edits over the last couple of days. None of them have anything to do with dates, though they are not actually vandalism either. You seem to have a desire to contribute, so why are you so insistent on making the edit histories of these articles inaccurate? -Harmil 13:01, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
Simply a default edit summary, that didn't get turned off. Rich Farmbrough 17:54, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

You might want to be a bit more careful when you convert dates - see Silver Dollar City, specifically the various statments that "childern under 8 may ..." - that is NOT a date. N0YKG 21:57, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikimedia UK meeting

Hi Rich, there will probably be a meeting for the purpose of discussing Wikimedia UK this Sunday, which you might like to attend. You could add your name there if so. Cormaggio @ 23:55, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Hi Rich,

Princess Margaret of Prussia was also hit by some of the endless mess left by user:Arrigo if I remember well. I never had any dealings with that article apart from a piped link repair and a minor lay-out tweak.

As a suggestion, maybe ask user:deb, I believe she has more experience here than I have (about that type of Princesses) - Not so long ago I left her this note: diff --Francis Schonken 12:15, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Put up the merge templates for the two identical margaret(e)s (suggesting a direction for merging) nonetheless - PS, If you happen to see Cormaggio this WE, send him my regards! --Francis Schonken 12:32, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

I, FireFox hereby award you this Minor Barnstar for all your brilliant minor edits!
I, FireFox hereby award you this Minor Barnstar for all your brilliant minor edits!

FireFox 19:30, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 2005 South Asia earthquake

Image:WikiThanks.png Thank you for your contribution at 2005 South Asia earthquake. Please keep it up!!! Pradeepsomani (talk)

[edit] IP Address?

I don't know if I have a shared IP address. How would that happen? C2 aaron 12:57, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
It's sort of a high school. It's a school in a residential treatment facility. It has kids from different grades in it. Me, Justin, and Buddy (Aaron) are all in high school though. C2 aaron 13:44, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Me, Justintmartin, and Buddy Love

Me, Justintmartin, Buddy Love, and Brittany h 2 o share the same IP then. And, I edited Buddy's page for him. He asked me to. C2 aaron 13:22, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 9814072356

Just called by to say nice job on expanding 9814072356. FWIW, I have voted strong keep on its Afd page. Gandalf61 11:13, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Page Deletion

Are you an admin? Can you get LP aaron C2, P.I.D, Samantha Day, Sarah Love, and Brittany h2 o

deleted? 2 or 3 of them were created by Buddy Love, and 2 were created by me (sorry, it won't happen again). Thanks. C2 aaron 13:23, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

I typed to Jessica Liao, to give advice on kids. 10 or 15 minutes later, I went back to her talk page. I found out, Buddy Love had edited my advice, so his signature would be on it. I reverted it back already. C2 aaron 13:31, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Obliged

Sorry, but I have reverted several of your edits. Please don't change English from one form to another to suit personal preferences. - SimonP 14:58, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] autoblocks

The user#N blocks represent autoblocks of the underlying IP address when a particular username is blocked. This is implemented by the Mediawiki software. -- Curps 00:37, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Physical Effects of Abortion

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_Effects_of_Abortion can be changed to be more neutral. I have wikified and marked as not NPOV. It was marked as from the Catholic Encyclopedia...if we have a template for it, I assume that it's ok. raylu 16:16, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Page Deletion

This is LP aaron C2( C2 aaron ). Could you please delete my User and User talk pages or have them deleted? Thanks. LP aaron C2 17:57, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Overlinking

[9]: did you really mean to wikify the date on which I accessed a web reference? What is the point of that? -- Jmabel | Talk 05:32, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers). This is to allow date preferences to work. If you have them set them you will see 11 September and September 11 ([[11 September]] and [[September 11]]) the same way.
In particular if your preference is set for ISO dates (1995-10-22) , it requires the year as well as the month to be wikified. Rich Farmbrough 09:29, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Page Deletion

This is User:P I D ( C2 aaron ). Can you please delete my user and user talk pages? Preacher In Development 15:23, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

thank you but never mind

Pimp Juice 14:07, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] History of the administrative division of Russia

Hi, Rich! I should have probably mentioned this before, because you apparently are wikifying dates in bulk (in a semi-bot mode, perhaps?). Just wanted to let you know that the dates in the History of the administrative division of Russia series of articles (such as this one do not need to be wikified. The reason for that is that there are two sets of dates given—Gregorian and Julian. The Gregorian date is the main one, so it's linked. Linking the Julian date would be redundant (and not quite correct). The other dates/years are duplicates—the first instance is already linked, so there is no need to wikify the rest (otherwise it looks over-linked). Please let me know if you have questions. Thanks!—Ëzhiki (erinaceus amurensis) 00:40, 21 October 2005 (UTC)


Thanks for contating me. This is more about formatting than linkage. For example this is how Administrative divisions of Russia in 1713-1714 looks to someone with their date preferences set to number-month-year.

  • 19 May (May 8 in the Julian calendar), 1713 - the capital of Russia was moved from Moscow to St. Petersburg.
  • 28 July(17), 19 May 1713 - Riga Governorate was formed on the recently acquired lands in the north-west of Russia.
  • July 28(17), 1713 - Smolensk Governorate was abolished; its territory was divided between Moscow and Riga Governorates.

I would probably go for somthing like this.

I brought the years next to the dates for people who have their prefernces set to ISO date format, and also to avoid interrupting the flow of the date. I've moved the Russia link to the first occurance, and removed some bolding. I've also removed the word "was" but that's stylistic choice.

Meanwhile in the real article I've linked the second "July 28", for the moment, the rest I leave to you. I will try to avoid these articles for now, but I suspect I've done most of them.

In the longer term I may look at getting a slightly different markup for dates.

Regards,

Rich Farmbrough 09:32, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

Wow, you must get really tired explaining the same thing over and over again, to each and every person having a question, considering the magnitude of the changes. Anyway, thank you for explaining the bigger picture. Even though I have little to no compassion to people who want to see the dates in the "28 July" format, I understand poor suckers cannot live the other way around, so having a choice is a must :)
I am still, however, a little confused about duplicate dates. The admin division articles only have a few, but I can imagine some articles would get tons of identical date references. Linking them all to achieve the desired formatting effect overloads the page with redundant links, while not linking them leads to inconsistency of date display. Do you have a solution for this problem? No need to go into fine details; if this question had already been asked, I'd appreciate if you could just point me to the right discussion thread.
Same would probably apply to Julian/Gregorian dates—linking both of them is not really the right thing to do (because they both map to only one real-life day), but, as you mentioned, not linking them may break the formatting.
Again, thank you for taking time to write a detailed explanation. I am a date-linking freak myself :), but the issues above leave me somewhat concerned. Take care!—Ëzhiki (erinaceus amurensis) 12:34, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
Yes, I agree that in an ideal world dates should only really be blue and underlined if they are strictly important. That's what I meant about a diffenet markup. I've been thinkng something like <<September 23 1999>> or <<13 September>> etc. The possibilty also exists to put functionality to deal with OS dates, japanese dates, Jewish/Muslim dates etc. Ideally it would be extended to things like <<Cretaceous>> and <<11:15 pm UTC>>. The date linking project is about 80%+ complete I reckon (altough new ones will occur), and I've had probably only 20 enquiries, in every shade of politeness! One of the intersting things is it takes me to bakwaters of the 'pedia where I've found almost every solecism possible, which is useful for planning other cleanup projects. They will not be manual though! (If they happen at all.) Rich Farmbrough 12:46, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
Are the developers considering the new markup for that purpose yet, or is it more of a wish-list item?—Ëzhiki (erinaceus amurensis) 15:06, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Incorrect date wikifying

Hi Rich,

Properly-wikified dates are good, and I'm glad you're working on it. However, your bot has been making erroneous edits which I've had to revert. Consider this edit and my reversion. One is a direct quotation which shouldn't be modified. Also the dates in the infobox are already wikified by the template so that people don't have to remember to do it themselves. I'm not sure whether that's the right or wrong thing to do, but it's the way it's done, and if you wikify them again they end up as [[[[21 June]]]] which renders as [[21 June]]. I found another example where you'd done that too. I'm worried we're going to end up wasting a lot of time reverting your edits if you don't make a special case for that. Thanks. Stephen Turner 13:27, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

  • Yes, most of the cricket articles are so good I usually cancel the edit. I also made a change to search and replace some time ago, to ignore dates immediately preceded by an "=" sign, I can then override by inserting a space between the = and the date. However I've had a better idea...
  • In the round, I'm making a few uncorrected mistakes, but out of many thousand edits, and improving all the time. Quotes are hard, and can only be checked by inspection, (and sometimes the "quote" is a translated, in which case the wikifining is the right thing to do), but I can certainly exclude lines starting with ":".
  • Incidentally, beause of wikilag, I do a bunch of pages, check them, then the next bunch, arguably the checking is the weakest point of the process, and the better the rest, the weaker the checking gets. Also worth noting, the main part of wikifying dates is almost done.
Regards, Rich Farmbrough 14:08, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

Hi! I reverted part of your edit here because dates in URLs do definitively not need wikification. You might want to exclude this kind of behaviour from any automated processes. --zerofoks 20:01, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Request for Adminship

Rich, I would appreciate any input you have for my Request for Administrator. Thanks so much --Reflex Reaction 21:24, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Non-Western dates

Dude, we've had this discussion before. Non-Western dates (Empress Gemmei) do not correspond to Western dates, and therefore should not be wickified.

Dude, same answer.

[edit] 1st Cav dates

You should check out Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(dates_and_numbers) before editing more dates and deleting commas. The style is supposed to be either

and the styles should agree throughout the article.

(I will someday try to clean up that page, but it's such a mess, I've put it low on my list.) Hal Jespersen 00:34, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Just for you I've made them consistant. Rich Farmbrough 00:45, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] See note at top of page.

It's in big letters. Night night. Rich Farmbrough 00:40, 22 October 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Kent State shootings

You made a real mess of many dates in Kent State shootings. I've managed to remove all of the errors I found. Your little search and replace operation wikified several dates that shouldn't have been. One was inside a url (.../may4/...), and several were inside external links. One was already a link!

Thanks for fixing errors, you could have reverted the changes, or just notified me.

Since you actually call it "search and replace", I'm thinking you did this with just a text editor or word processor. As someone who was once employed to do some serious processing of legal documents in Perl, I can tell you you're going to have to do a lot better than that. Learn about Regular expressions for a start. And it's best you use a programming language, so you can construct logic when RE's are insufficient. Like making sure you're not making a link inside an existing link.

I'm using RegExps, there is a limit to what they can do.

But at least check your changes more carefully! And why are they all marked as minor? Imroy 13:00, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

I make about 0.1% mistakes, which I think is quite good. I generally find about 1% of speedy delete pages, about 1% of incorrectly titled pages, vandalism, user signed pages and all sorts of other rubbish. They are marked minor so as not to clog up the "recent changes" page. Rich Farmbrough 17:26, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
Please do something to prevent the script wikifying dates in signatures and so forth. Thanks. Rob Church Talk | FAHD 18:51, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Date edits - problem

Hey looks like your script tripped up when it ran across Charles Cardwell McCabe

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Charles_Cardwell_McCabe&diff=23922523&oldid=23850744

I came across it while on "random article patrol". You might want to review the edits it made to make sure it didn't break anything else. Keep up the good work. Megapixie 14:26, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for spotting this. It was a one-off reg-ex search and replace that went wrong, so it's not likely to affect other articles - but if you find any more errors, please let me know. Rich Farmbrough 18:45, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Just thought I'd let you know that I've noticed your bot wikifying dates in people's sigs when they sign after placing a {copyvio} tag on an article. I've never been sure why we (used to?) ask people to sign the article in these cases, but quite a few people do. This isn't important, particularly, I just thought I'd let you know. The one annoyance it does cause is that it's nice to be able to get the last diff from the CP listing and, when your bot is the last diff, it means accessin the history instead. Only a minor thing. -Splashtalk 22:28, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, taken care of. Rich Farmbrough 10:47, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism of Tookie Williams

Dear Rich,

I'm not experienced at talk, so if this is in the wrong place, my apologies. Someone has moved Tookie Williams page as follows: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Stanley_Williams_on_Wheels&action=history

Thanks, Beth

[edit] Spellsinger reverts

Rich, your bot added a link to The Weavers in the article that I've written. I've removed the link as the Weavers in Spellsinger are a group of sentient spiders, the one you linked to are a folk group. Hope you don't mind me sorting that out. Douglasnicol 18:31, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi, not me but you! No problem. P.S. Generally add new sections to the bottom of talk pages. Rich Farmbrough 13:44 13 March 2006 (UTC).
Ah, my mistake, sorry about that. Douglasnicol 17:54, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Movement to impeach George W. Bush

Dear Rich,

When I went to add citations in the press today in response to the NSA issue, I noticed that there had been a POV warning on this article [10]forever. Any suggestions?

Thanks, Beth --Beth Wellington 09:52, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for removing the POV tag, Rich. We'll see if it remains gone.--71.254.64.97 02:02, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Mirrorvax [11] added another warning to the site as soon as you took it down. This is really frustrating. What original research? This tagging seems to rise to vandalism. Any suggestions. If you check in the discussion, folks have already had extended discussions with him that have been unproductive. --Beth Wellington 02:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Dear Rich,

In the support for impeachment section, why is a subsection on media editorial by a reputable business magazine less encyclopedic than a subsection on entertainers? I don't want to get into an editing war that approaches a 3r infractin. Would you mind weighing in on Stbalbach's deleting this content to the discussion page? Thanks!--Beth Wellington 04:02, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Dear Rich,

[[12]] today by anonymous User:70.85.195.225 again tags this article. Could you take a look. Thanks.--Beth Wellington 18:45, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you for your vote on my RFA

Now that the voting has officially closed, I would like to thank you very much for supporting my candidacy for adminstrator and as of 18:36, 28 October 2005 (UTC) I am an administrator. I will make sure to use the additional power judiciously and I welcome any comments you may have. --Reflex Reaction 19:07, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

[13]

[edit] Happy Diwali

Image:Diwali.jpg
Tamaso ma jyotir gamaya ( Lead me from darkness to light.)
Wish you Happy Diwali

- P R A D E E P Somani (talk)
Feel free to send me e-mail.

[edit] Metrication in the UK

Metrication in the UK. Hi, I noticed your mention of aircraft parking as an exception to metrication law. I searched UK and EU sites for references to aircraft parking but found none. This exception does not exist in any legal reference I have seen. Can you provide any more background on the assertion?

Incidentally, the mention of aircraft height in the dti reference puzzled me at first. At first glance, I thought it was suggesting an exemption for the vertical dimension of the aircraft itself. That would be a weird exception and unlikely to be particularly of concern for aviation. However, it is merely an amiguous reference to use of the foot for altitude which is mentioned in legal documents e.g. Air Navigation Order. Many thanks. Bobblewik 11:01, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Reduce overlinking.

Some people add brackets to full dates for preferences to work. Solitary months and solitary years don't have preferences.

Our discussion made me notice that you do a lot with dates. I have started unlinking solitary year links and solitary month links with the summary:
Reduce overlinking. Some people add brackets to full dates for preferences to work. Solitary months and solitary years don't have preferences.

People do all sorts of bizarre things with dates and it is fairly random and unsatisfactory. There was a discussion about modification of the Wikipedia software so that dates are automatically recognised. This would do away with the need for editors to apply '[['. It was taken seriously at fairly high levels but it seems to have fizzled out. Can we both raise the issue again together? Bobblewik 15:08, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Baseball

Hello, I stumbled across Wikiproject:major league baseball. I see that it talks about the 2005-2006 season. This seems odd to me since it seems like a season is contained within one calendar year. There is currently no discussion page to the article. The page seems like it was created by a Bot, and you have the most recent edit, so I'm guessing you are the one to ask aobut this. Should it be changed, or is it correct? Johntex\talk 22:27, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

I know nothing about baseball, except what I learned form Peanuts and other American comedy. However I think the article refers to the "standings" i.e. rank which would hold between two seasons. USer:C2 aaron is a real person, a relativly new contributor, I'm not sure why this is a wikiproject: I've sort of asked him. Rich Farmbrough 23:16, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for the informaiton. I hope User:C2 aaron is not offended I thought s/he was a bot. I'll go ask him/her about it. Johntex\talk 23:29, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] C2 aaron

Aaron Ryland aka C2 is not Aaron Elwen, the problematic user who was blocked along with his sockpuppets. DavidGerard did an IP chekc and Aaron was using the same IP as the other user and that it was at a highschool. C2 has admitted to being friends with Aaron Elwen. C2 was blocked by the autoblock probably. Jobe6 Image:Peru flag large.png 23:15, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 363

Hmm... that's really weird. How did I make that mistake? Sure, I can undelete it for you. Linuxbeak | Talk 23:00, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] My RFA

Thank you very much for supporting my rather contentious request for adminship, but now that I've been promoted, I'd like to do a little dance here *DANCES*. If you have any specific issues/problems with me, please feel free to state them on my talk page so that I can work to prevent them in the future, and thanks once again!  ALKIVAR 07:43, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Okay

Hey what's up? Nuthin' much here. I'm ok. New placement. Ryland 16:46, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Clarification

The Joey page was a G1 (No meaningful content), but was also a duplicate article. ( See Joey (film) ) I should have been more clear, and for this, I apologise. Krzypntbllr 01:36, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Quizme

Hello, I came across this 'random article' and wondered whether this was something that should be referred to AfD. But I'm new to this and wanted to get your opinion, since you had already wikified it and knew something about it.Crusading composer 03:01, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Fair enough.Crusading composer 21:17, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 6 Music, etc. programme listings put in article

Hi Rich. I saw you made a language change to the BBC 6 Music article. Fine. My question, as an author and contributor, is that someone made a change to all the BBC rock station websites BBC Radio 1, BBC Radio 2, BBC 6 Music websites, using an ip address id, to put the entire current broadcast schedule, hour by hour, in the article. I have grave doubts about this. It seems too specific and burdensome to maintain. We had simply a listing of the presenters and show names before. Also, there is an external link to the BBC stations' websites for the schedules. I don't want to edit it out unless there's some concensus feeling. I put a comment on the BBC 6 Music discussion page, ( Talk:BBC_6_Music ) but so far nothing. The poster who changed it might be well-intentioned or fiddly based on his previous contribution history ( User_talk:217.33.74.20 ). Any suggestions ? -- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 22:28, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, very much, Rich. I'm fine with leaving it until or if things go awry. I appreciate your response. I was unsure of my Wiki-feet on this one ! We'll collectively try to keep it up to date. -- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 23:00, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] BBC sites and internal dead links

Hi Rich. An anonymous contributor made changes to many of the BBC sites (see above) but also just made internal article links where there were no supporting articles. He internally linked all names in the BBC 6 Music Past Presenter list. And other BBC radio articles where there are more names.

This is very hard, if there is a list of, say, ten or even thirty items, which ones are articles and which internal links are dead-ends. I had left them as plain text until I or someone had written a supporting article, then would change the plaintext name into an internal link to the new article. The anonymous contributor has done it to all names in all BBC radio articles. Lots of dead article links.

One can't distinguish which of a list of thirty presenters, have an article. One now has to try all thirty.

Is there some policy, or so you have a take on it ? Should internal pointers to non-existent articles be made when there's no obvious intention of the contributor's writing the supporting article ?

I think it disturbs the reader's flow to point to a number of contiguous dead articles.

Many thanks in advance. -- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 18:05, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Hi Rich. Got your message. Many thanks for your kind response. I agree also, that a slew of dead article links obfuscate the readability of the article and drilling down for more information. I guess a couple of dead article links, as you say, may encourage people to write articles. But in some of the BBC radio pages, the anonymous user made _all_ presenter names as Wikipedia articles, which is a bit more than a couple and may cause the end-reader to give up on trying to click on other live article links in the list. It's a lot of work to go and fix them. I will look into it.
The anonymous contributor who made the dead article links is User_talk:217.33.74.20 and has been asked about vandalism, although I would hesitate in this case to say it really obviously was.
But one other thing. Is it not the intention when making an article reference Wikipedia link, as opposed to plain text, that one will write the article shortly ? Otherwise, shouldn't one just leave it as plain text until he is ready to write the article ? Thanks for your guidance and help. -- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 19:49, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
Hi Rich. Many thanks for your further thoughts on the matter. I will follow your operative wisdom. I agree with all you and Sannse (sannse (talk)) said. I will work it out accordingly. I now know about the colours of article links that you and Sannse are talking about to distinguish a non-existent article pointer from a link to an existing and real article ! I hadn't paid attention to them before. Best wishes. -- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 20:06, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikimedia UK

You have expressed an interest in Wikimedia UK. Just to let you know I've posted a draft Memorandum of Association and Articles of Association of the proposed "Wikimedia UK" charitable company on Wikimedia UK/Memorandum of Association and Wikimedia UK/Articles of Association. It is proposed that these will receive initial approval by interested parties at a meeting on 27 November. I will put together a brief agenda for the more formal aspects of that meeting soon. Memo and Arts of Association are a company's constitution, and need to be agreed before the company is formed (though they can be changed at a later date). Please feel free to comment on the relevant talk pages (I'd rather the proposed drafts are left unedited so that it is easy to see what is going on) - particularly if there is something there that you would disagree with at the meeting, details of which can be found on the Wikimedia UK page on Wikimedia Meta-Wiki. Kind regards, jguk 19:17, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Jake Thackray

You asked about possible copyright infringement. I am a member of a Jake Thackray mailing list, and the original author of the sleeve notes is on the same list. I asked permission before I posted the entry, and sent a link to the entry to the list when I had completed it, so I don't think there will be an issue. Regards Chris Sunderland 12:43, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Loblolly

Hi Rich - I found this interesting discussion on the etymology [14] (from google's cache, as the original page appears to be defunct). It seems 'loblolly' has several meanings, including a mud hole, in which the pines sometimes grow - MPF 11:41, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Islamofascism

As far as I can tell, the AFD for this was never decided as a clear redirect. Would you agree? I'm asking as you were the closing admin. - Ta bu shi da yu 09:04, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Mohave

Hi Rich,

I noticed that you moved Mojave people to Mojave. This is incorrect, because as stated on the Mojave Desert page, Mojave is used to describe the desert, while Mohave is for the tribe. I am unable to move the page to Mohave however, because the Wiki won't let me. That's why I listed it on Requested Moves and added a note about it on the dicussion page. Perhaps you would be able to vote on Talk:Mojave? Thanks. --Hottentot 03:46, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

So could you please move Mohave to Mohave (disambiguation) and Mojave to Mohave? Thanks. --Hottentot 00:18, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
Yeah, you got it. Thanks! --Hottentot 00:23, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
I just found out that there is one more: would you be able to move Talk:Mojave to Talk:Mohave? --Hottentot 06:45, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
Ok, thanks. :-D --Hottentot 19:36, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Mediawiki redirects for deletion

You listed these, now at Wikipedia:Redirects for deletion/Old. I've moved all the reamining Template:VfD-<article name> into the wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ space, and deleted the redirects, can you advise what redirects are in the Mediawiki space? Rich Farmbrough 16:17, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Add the following code to your CSS style-sheet and then view the list of pages in Mediawiki. The redirects will be displayed in indented italics. Redirects don't belong in Mediawiki space -- it should be reserved only for system messages.
/*  Copy text starting after this line */

.allpagesredirect {
    font-style: italic;
    margin-left: 1em;
}

/*  Stop copying above this line */

Thanks very much for helping perform this maintenance. -- Netoholic @ 04:00, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Great job, Rich. -- Netoholic @ 03:25, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Arbitration accepted

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Webcomics has been accepted. Please place evidence at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Webcomics/Evidence. Proposals and comments may be placed at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Webcomics/Workshop. Fred Bauder 22:51, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Genocidal Massacre

Not to be aggressive Rich, but you're removing the Warrigal Creek massacre from the Genocidal Massacre page because "it's not in the time frame of the UN" is just plain arrogant and ignorant. Firstly, this doesn't change the fact it qualifies as an incident of Genocidal Massacre. Secondly, by your logic, the Armenian Genocide should be removed because it took place 30 years before the founding of the UN. I don't think you'd go as far as to do that. If you wish to talk about this further, please message me on my talk page. Evolver of Borg 22:10, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

By all means remove the Armenian incident, which should not be on the Genocidal massacre page. I moved the text to Warrigal Creek and did some research on the subject. For reaons I forget I didn't have time to re-write the apalling paragraph that was there, but I did put some references at the foot of the article, to help anyone who feels like creating a proper well sourced article. Rich Farmbrough 16:35, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
You understand when I say the Armenian Genocide I'm not referring to the Genocidal Massacre page but Genocide in general. The same principles apply to both. Evolver of Borg 21:00, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
Ah, then the same principle doesn't apply. This is about what belongs on which page, not what belongs on the 'pedia. Warrigal did not have a page before I created it. Rich Farmbrough 00:29, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
Wait wait wait. I think I'm confused. What exactly are we talking about, 'Warrigal Creek' or 'The Warrigal Creek Massacre'? If we're talking about the creek, good on you for writing the article. If we're talking about the massacre, then I'm confused about what exactly we're discussing. Are we saying that the massacre should remain on a seperate page and not the creek page, or something else? Slightly confused Evolver of Borg 01:24, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
My opinion is that if enough data for Warrigal Creek massacre to be a decent page can be found it should have it's own page. Ohterwise a section in Warrigal Creek. I think the information should be sourced, and if possible from (checked) primary sources. I've found the name of the stockman (?) who was killed, but I don't think my source is reliable enouigh to go in the article. Perhaps contemporary newspaer accounts exist? Rich Farmbrough 01:30, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
I've just "googled" "Warrigal Creek massacre -wikipedia" almost the only non-wikipedia refernces are to Gadener's article and the ref I cited above. Rich Farmbrough 01:46, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
I found out about the massacre about a year ago when I undertook a genocide studies course, but I think my notes were what I wrote down on the page. Could be more though. I'll check the resource we used. Evolver of Borg 05:52, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
Was Warrigal Creek never moved in the end, or has it just been reverted to? If the term "genocidal massacre" refers specifically to breaches of the UN Convention, then it should not be listed on that page... Nicolasdz 09:29, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
Rich, I have no particular information, but the date of the event seems to make it impossible to be a "genocidal massacre." Nicolasdz 19:17, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
Rich, for now, then, let's leave it be, and as soon as I have time I'll dig up some other examples, move the "Warrigal Creek" stuff to a separate article, and create a link in the main genocide article to "Genocidal Massacre."

[edit] Mañana Será Otro Dia

  • I don't know what you mean by "stayed too long" but it's there. --Dystopos 23:03, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
    • Ah. Perhaps if I had actually looked at the history I would have known what you were talking about. Ignore me. --Dystopos 23:05, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Cat:British institutions ->Cat British organisations

Becasue this was done by a mechanism other than "move", history is lost. Regards, Rich Farmbrough 19:06, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

Good point, though this is standard procedure at Wikipedia:Categories for deletion, whether or not a bot is involved. You might want to comment on the talk page there if you think this should be changed. -- Beland 02:27, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Zimbabwe

Thanks for your pass through the Zimbabwean history pages - much appreciated. Wizzy 06:43, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Crannog

Hi Rich, I am not quite sure where the contradiction is in the article that you refer to. All I can see is a slight ambiguity about the usual means of access to the crannog (canoe or causeway), but a one word change would fix this. Am I missing something? --Cactus.man 20:20, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply, glad to know I am not losing my marbles. I will do some checking and fix things up. Regards. --Cactus.man 08:56, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Reticular Formation

Hornby Article I think it is April 1st.

Also, Can you help me preserve my images? Most of them are taken from 1) the Internet, 2) Books from the 60's, 3) Bear et al. and Kandel et al.

[edit] Fred Phelps

I see that you recently edited the Fred Phelps article. This article is currently a nom for Featured Article. I kindly ask that you go vote on it. Thank you.

[edit] Wikification

Hi, I have seen several of your edits where you wikify new aricles tirelessly. Keep up the good work. However, some of the new articles are copy-paste jobs from websites and hence, mostly copyvios. Please check the content for copyvio on google & msn search engines (the latter is better as it tracks obscure sites also, imo) and tag them accordingly if they are copyvios - so that we can clear copyvios asap. --Gurubrahma 06:40, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi, I was refering to Jagtar Hawara. Thanks, --Gurubrahma 05:00, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Hi Rich, please help

I would like to request your help with serious NPOV and verifiability problems on the Arabic numerals page. I have mentioned it, yet again, here Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#December_17. Please help me recruit as many neutral and well-intending editors to the page to counter the strong and manifest bias. Regards, and thanks. csssclll (14:43, 17 December 2005 (UTC))


Hi Rich! Thanks for your intervention in this matter, and I hope things become normal on this article very soon. Our aim is to minimize any conflict. The change in article name was done with consensus, and was based on the following reasons:
  • "Arabic numeral" is a very common colloquial term for Hindu-Arabic (so fits one of the many criteria for naming on wikipedia), but it's not appropriate in the more formal context of the title of an encyclopedia article, which should be more rigorous in reflecting academic norms.
  • All other encyclopedias like Britannica [15], refer to the symbols exclusively as "Hindu-Arabic" everywhere they are mentioned. Articles in research papers and other encyclopedias (that are written by professional people who are rigorous scholars, who are paid a lot of money for their work, who are held accountable for what they write, and are peer-reviewed at many levels) exclusively use the term "Hindu-Arabic numerals".
  • According to another article on Britannica, titled "The Hindu-Arabic system" [16], the numerals are "commonly spoken of as Arabic but preferably as Hindu-Arabic."
  • Definitely preferred by scholars, e.g., as per Peter Wardley [17]
"`Hindu-arabic' is preferred over `arabic' as a more accurate and useful description for two reasons: first, it places primacy on the region where this system of numerical representation had its origins, the Indian sub-continent; and, second, it draws attention to the difference between the numerals currently used in Arabic countries and those adopted by Europeans after the introduction of various adaptations. The latter, of course, has become the internationally accepted system of numerical representation."
The editors who supported: User:kwamikagami, User:DaGizza, User:Frogular (changed later to weak support), User:Subramanian, User:Raj2004, User:Peyna, and User:deeptrivia (myself). User:csssclll, and User:Sam Spade were neutral. User:Vertaloni opposed at the time, but has since then accepted. User:csssclll does not dispute (at least did not dispute at that time) the name change. He wants certain things to be included in the article, and he has some other issues, like he wants Al Khwarizmi to be called Arab and not Persian. We have included many portions of his text in the article, and mentioned at many places the problems we have with some other portions. We haven't seen any reasonable responses to those objections. Thanks a lot for looking into the matter, and hoping to see some positive results soon! deeptrivia (talk) 15:52, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
Sure, Rich. I think when I last saw the naming conventions, I thought popularity was one of the many criteria to decide on a name. I'll be most willing to accept whatever the consensus is, in light of this new information. Thanks again! deeptrivia (talk) 16:06, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 24.187.170.46

Hi, Dilawar Singh Babbar seems to be a copyvio but I am not able to detect it. Sikh Light Infantry is a copyvio and I have tagged it so. Thanks for the heads up, I've failed to look at other contribs from an anon IP with copy-vio stuff. Now I know better. btw, good to see that you are getting into the numerals stuff (above). Sometime back, I had to block three users for 3RR violation (details in my latest archive, in case you are interested further and have time to kill). --Gurubrahma 16:01, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Obliged

Please stop changing obliged to obligated. The two words do not mean the same thing in some varities of English. - SimonP 17:13, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] UK Disambig

Hi there. I noticed your dab changing [[British]] to [[United Kingdom|British]]. I went ahead and changed it to British as it was an event that occured in 1702. I was wondering, since from your user page I assume you're from England, if you knew if there was a custom as to what to link the UK to? Should, for example, all events between 1707 and 1801 link to [[Kingdom of Great Britain]]? Linking to [[United Kingdom]] seems a little off to me, as it didn't exist at the time, but I'm not aware of any preexisting conventions or customs. Thanks! -Rebelguys2 23:57, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Date Wikification

Hi, Rich. I don't know whether this will affect the wikifying of dates that you do, but I thought you would want to comment if it does. Talk to you later, Kjkolb 03:02, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Surrey10

Just a heads-up that Surrey10 has struck again,at some length: [18]. I've reverted this spree, but I don't know what the longer-term solution is. Mark1 19:05, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Australia First Movement

I have reverted the link away from UK for British and made it British Empire, from which they wanted to seceed. No doubt their support from Irish catholics included people sympathetic to Irish Nationalists who may have been UK citizens. Harrypotter 22:43, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] High Court of Justice

The High Court is not a solely Eng institution. The correct link is [High Court of Justice|High Court]. Regards FedLawyer 10:38, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mike Neville

Never realised he had a mathematical connection. Mike Neville (anchorman) - was the PlanetMath paste a glitch? Charles Matthews 22:09, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mike Neville (anchorman)

Hi Rich. I have a strong suspicion that in this edit at the above-named article you made a mistake by inserting the planetmath template and putting it in the combinatorics category. I removed those for now, but please let me know if I was wrong. You can reply here. Thanks. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 01:53, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Exorcism video

Hi, I see that you deleted an entry that someone had appended to my Talk page. I hadn't bothered to check that video, but now I am curious. Was it porn or something? Did I miss anything worth seeing? 8-) All the best, Jorge Stolfi 16:41, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks... Jorge Stolfi 12:23, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AfD of MDM - Consultoria e Negócios Ltda.

Rich, I nominated this page a while back; you deleted it on December 27. I just noticed it has been recreated. I tried to re-nominate it for deletion, but when I put the tag in the top of the page, it linked to the old discussion, not a new one. So I'm not sure how to do that. I'd appreciate your help. Thanks. --Thunk 17:41, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] personal attacks

Why again can we not personally attack people?

No, this isn't an encyclopedia, nor any attempt to build one. An encyclopedia is based on verified facts. This isn't, but rather on whoever can log on most often to their page of choice. Wikipedia has great potential, but if you allow the status quo to continue, it will never be taken seriously by anyone with any serious standing in the academic community. But back to the point, my only personal attacks were the result of what was, at root, personal attacks against myself and two other posters, essentially calling us idiots, ignoring our serious concerns about a page, and taking control en masse. Immaturity by others is the sole root of my personal attacks, not any wish by myself to attack other users without cause. Since that situation, I've been trying to show the various fallacies of the system that need to be corrected to have something worthwhile at hand.

[edit] An old edit

I got a chuckle out of your "wikify dates" edit of the Long March 1 rocket. But treating that as if there were a date in that name and in the link to the [[Long March 1 rocket family]] screwed things up, royally! Gene Nygaard 21:42, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikify dates

I noticed your date wikifcation at University of Texas at Austin, and I reverted the change because it is not consistent with the examples given at WP:CITE. Generally, dates aren't wikified unless their wikification will add something to the article. I noticed that you have made this change to many articles. I was hoping that you might hold off for a second and come discuss the policy here. — Scm83x talk 23:52, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Be careful if you're using a bot or some other tool to wikify dates - one of the edits to United States Army changed "On 17 June 2,200 troops under Maj. Gen." to "On 17 June 2, 200 troops under Maj. Gen." — Rebelguys2 talk 23:02, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Ah well spotted. Rich Farmbrough. 19:49, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Also note that items should be linked only in their first instance, as per your edits to Type 209 submarine and Politics of Uruguay, to name a few. Note Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links)#Internal links and, to a lesser degree, Wikipedia:Make only links relevant to the context. — Rebelguys2 talk 23:09, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers). This is to allow date preferences to work. If you set them you will see 11 September and September 11 ([[11 September]] and [[September 11]]) the same way. Rgds. Rich Farmbrough. 19:49, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

The wiki style sheet [[19]] says that 20th century is preferred over Twentieth-Century. Why the recent changes? Rick Norwood 21:12, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

That's a lot more work than I would be willing to do on the question of whether 20th or Twentieth is preferable. Rick Norwood 23:51, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

  • While I appreciate that wikification of day and name allows preferences to work, I find it annoying to find extra links. I would have thought the preference would work something like Commonwealth versus US spelling. In Australia it is 11 September. In the US it is is September 11. The wikification to set up preferences runs counter to the beginning injunction at Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(dates_and_numbers)#Avoid_overlinking_dates although I appreciate that they go on later about preferences. Is it necessary though - or is it distracting? I think the latter.--A Y Arktos 00:48, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
At some point wikisyntax may allow date preferences and other regionalisation to work without links. Rich Farmbrough. 10:31, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
Please revert all the wikifications of dates done on references. It's not only confusing but useless. Jclerman 00:08, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

I noticed a problem with your edits to the Are You Are Missing Winner page here. One of the dates you wikified was emedded inside an external link (to a review of the LP), so 25 Nov. 2001 became 25 November 2001. The original format complied with that suggested at Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums, so I reverted it. I appreciate the effort you're putting into this project, though - I guess that's another pitfall for you to worry about ;) Flowerparty 16:17, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

  • Hi this edit also wikified a date in the title of some meeting minutes, ie within a web reference link, - not at all appropriate to my mind and I hve reverted. Regards--A Y Arktos 20:02, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
Hi Rich. You wikified the "accessed on" dates in the References section of Thomas Brownrigg, BBC Regional Programme and BBC General Forces Programme. I've reverted these wikifications, (a) because WP:CITE doesn't support linking of dates in the References section; and (b) because the wikified dates there are very confusing for anyone wanting to follow up the references supplied... which is the point of supplying references. Just wanted to let you know. Cheers! ➨ REDVERS 11:13, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
Hi again Rich. I've reverted one of the two changes you made to History of ITV, because WP:CITE doesn't support linking of dates in a references section and because wikified dates there are very confusing for anyone wanting to follow up the references supplied. Cheers! ➨ REDVERS 18:47, 16 February 2006 (UTC)


Thanks for the wikify date updates on some of my recent contributions - will get it right going forward. --Damate

While the wikifying of [[## Month]] is important, in many/most cases the year should be linked, according to WP:Dates. I'd expect, for example, that a biographical article would wikify the birth and death year but few, if any, others. Perhaps the Margaret Thatcher article might have her start and end years as PM wikified, but not the year in, say, the date of a particular meeting. —Whouk (talk) 12:31, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
Ah, that's clearer now. Thanks. —Whouk (talk) 13:00, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Myron Evans

Hi, I have just put up a new, shorter and more NPOV version (basically just excised some uncritical description of Evans alleged achievements). I'd love to be able to cite the source for his open letter (?) demanding election fo the Royal Society. IIRC, I found it somewhere, cited in the article, and then you moved it to the talk page? Whatever, I can't seem to find it on the web now at the pro-Evans website where I think we originally found it. Can you help me find the citation again? TIA ---CH 03:44, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Redirect of Leonard Stern (billionare)

Rich--looked at the redirect. Is there a way to rename the article as "Leonard N. Stern" and redirect it the other way. It seems to me that the current title is hardly encyclopedic. Even "(founder, Hartz Mountain Industries)" would be preferable, if the name by itself wouldn't be sufficient for people to find it. Thanks for your thoughts on this--Beth Wellington 23:05, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

I think I follow! Was there no prior discussion on the original billionaire page. If so, it seems to be missing.--Beth Wellington 23:25, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Corporate vandalism of Leonard N. Stern

Rich, this article has an odd edit on February 8 that eliminated all mention of impropriety. Also, this is the same man, as in the entry Leonard N. Stern. They need to be merged, rather than disambiguated by the tag billionaire. Help! --Beth Wellington 05:49, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Thank Rich. Won't have time to look at corporate bio today, but will try to work on it next week. --Beth Wellington 20:03, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Rich, Hartz has vandalized the page again, completely replacing it with its own content. Apparently, a stronger warning is in order?--Beth Wellington 21:25, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing this so quickly!--Beth Wellington 22:29, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

User:Deborah Stone went in again on 2/21/06 and vandalized this article, despite your polite request on 2/17 not to do so. Called it a "minor edit." This makes three times. Any way to stop this from happening?--Beth Wellington 17:30, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I check on it periodically. Blocking might work or perhaps she'll register for another account, like some here do.--Beth Wellington 17:58, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Leonard Stern (publisher)

Both Sterns have been publishers. The latter is Leonard B. Stern. There was no article, only a deadlink, so I researched and wrote one. Maybe you could do your magic and rename it and do the redirect? Thanks! --Beth Wellington 01:28, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

As per your request, moved the article to "Leonard B. Stern." First time I goofed and left (writer and publisher) in move, but fixed that and edited the disambiguation page to show the new article name. Hope I did everything right. This is the first time I've ever moved an article. If you find an error, let me know.--Beth Wellington 22:37, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

I just tried to edit the redirect as per yur instructions. Would you mind checking and see if it's right. Never encountered droodles Leonard B sounds nicer than Leonard N!Beth Wellington 21:35, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Droodles

Thanks for checking the redirect. Sorry the last note lacked punctuation--the sticky keys option invoked itself at the library and I would have had to reboot and lose what I was working on to get rid of them. Droodles are fun. There are a slew more at the droodles homepage. Did know Stern had published them, since I wrote his entry. Didn't realize Price was born in Charleston, WV. By the way, your note to the Hartz pr woman was very nicely done.--Beth Wellington 00:28, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Adolfo Farsari

Hi, Thanks for Wikifying the dates in the photographer articles I've been creating. Would you mind reading this article on Adolfo Farsari and suggesting on the featured article candidate page whether you think it's worthy of featured article status or not? No worries if not, but I'd like your sage commentary. Thanks. Pinkville 23:59, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/KJV

Hello,

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/KJV. Please add evidence to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/KJV/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/KJV/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, --Tony Sidaway 16:25, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Page name for temperature articles

To avoid flip-flopping between 'degree Fahrenheit' and 'Fahrenheit' or 'degree Celsius' and 'Celsius', I propose that we have a discussion on which we want. I see you have contributed on units of measurement, please express your opinion at Talk:Units of measurement. Thanks. bobblewik 22:09, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] My reversions

I reverted your two LoPbN edits that i've noticed so far, with a specific reason for each species of change w/in the page. If it's important enuf to you to ask why, i'll explain.
--Jerzyt 23:34, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Obliged

This is the third time I have contacted you about this issue, and you have yet to respond to me. Please stop changing obligated to obliged, the two words do not always mean the same thing. - SimonP 22:30, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for responding. I had left comments on your talk page twice in the past on this issue, but I guess you must have missed them. I note other users have also complained about these changes. I'm not sure if you are aware but obliged and obligated can have two different meanings. Consider these sentences:
He was obliged to her because of her actions
He was obligated to her because of her actions
They each mean a very different thing. One means he was grateful, the other that he was bound. - SimonP 22:53, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
The two words have become quite confused, so each is often now used in place of the other and many consider them as interchangeable. However, there is no reason to make articles less precise merely because you dislike a word. This reminds me of a recent conversation on the Village Pump. There is a natural tendency for the encyclopedia to move to "lowest common denominator English," there is no reason to help it along. - SimonP 23:28, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Responses

Hi, I hope you are not planning on indescrimnate reversion of my edits. It seems this is just the sort of behaviour that you are accused of in arbitration. Please also see Wikipedia:Administrators#Reverting. If you want ot discuss the meanings of the word, you had only to ask, rather than just say "I am reverting a few of your edits" then block reverting. Rich Farmbrough. 22:48, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. The distinction is not as clear cut as perhaps might first seem the case.
OED agrees that legal requirement is included in "oblige" (as opposed to obligate), in its lengthy articles. More accessibly the American Heritage Dictionary says " To constrain by physical, legal, social, or moral means." Mirrim Webster has "to constrain by physical, moral, or legal force or by the exigencies of circumstance".
Furthermore Webssters 1828 made the reverse distinction, saying of "Obligate" "Until recently, the sense of this word has been restricted to positive and personal acts; and when moral duty or law binds a person to do something, the word oblige has been used. But this distinction is not now observed."
There are of course cicumstances where "obligate" is to be preferred, in direct quotes and in the technical senses of the word from finance and more importantly biology.
Rich Farmbrough. 23:23, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Danish 1st and 2nd Divisions

Hey.

You can not change links and template boxes for Danish 1st and 2nd Divisions to first and second. There are created a lot of articles for those two divisions and EVERY SINGLE PLACE are there standing 1st and 2nd, so it isn't that easy changing it. If it should be with letters, the F and S in first and second must be capitalised. Kalaha 15:56, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Skyblue70707

His name is Skyblue70707, almost all his contributions seem to have been related to whatever Skybluz is. He seem to spend more time on his User: page than actually contributing real content to real articles. Maybe he is confused about what Wikipedia is. His name and that almost all he edited is related to Skybluz indicate that he have an agenda, and maybe he is only interested in promoting something with a direct relation to him. He seems rather silly and suspicous. Frap 17:40, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dates and Numbered lists

Thanks for wikifying my articles & for the tips! Akina66 22:34, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lots of edits to be had

You have been hitting a bunch of my pages recently with date fixes. If you are looking for a lot of pages that need date fixing go to my user page under pages I have created and you will see many that need help. I figured I'd throw it our there while you were on a roll--Looper5920 12:16, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Karen Dotrice

Hi! I had to repair some of your changes to this article; dates are automatically linked in refs, and your edits made the brackets visible (for example, [[18 February]]). Write me with any questions :) RadioKirk talk to me 00:11, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Well (and quickly) spotted, web reference templates are more of a problem for me now that references appear in the middle of articles as well as at the end. Rich Farmbrough. 00:20, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
Thank you! It just so happens, I wrote the article, so it's on my watchlist; the ref templates were changing in the middle of my efforts to win FA status, so I'm familiar with the confusion ;)
Incidentally, see my question on Talk:Matthew Garber. Rgds, Rich Farmbrough. 00:21, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
Did, and replied already ;) RadioKirk talk to me 00:26, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

The Minor Barnstar
Pretty much every article on my watchlist has been touched by the improvatory hand of Rich Farmborough, and I feel it is time I paid my dues to he :) Thanks Rich! Jdcooper 16:47, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] External link(s)

The last time I looked, the MoS was neutral between singular and plural, explaining that though using the plural when there was only one link was inaccurate, many editors preferred it. Has this changed? I can't remember where in all the mountains of material it was. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 18:34, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the link, and sorry to have made you late... Now that you're back, the section I was thinking of was Wikipedia:External links#"External links" vs "External link":
Some editors use the header "External link" if there is only one link, but others use "External links" in all cases. There is currently no consensus on which is better. Editors who always use the plural form may prefer it for any of the following reasons:
  1. experience shows that future editors often add links without changing the section heading
  2. people may be dissuaded from adding links to a section titled "External link" since it seems that there should only be one link
  3. using "External links" gives greater stylistic consistency to Wikipedia
The converse arguments are:
  1. Wikipedia's community-editing leads to prompt correction of such oversights.
  2. There is no evidence that a significant number of people would be dissuaded from adding links. Besides, additional links would often be redundant.
  3. Use of "External links" to head a section containing a single link is fundamentally incorrect, a poor precedent to set in an encyclopedia

--Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 18:51, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

"Wikipedia's community-editing leads to prompt correction of such oversights." Yes, I thought that that was a touch optimistic (although I've corrected a fair few singulars to plurals as I've wandered around the place). --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 23:16, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] My responses to Mel

Thanks for the comment. I'm just going out, so I'll check when I get back in. Rich Farmbrough. 18:40, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(headings)#Standard_headings_and_ordering (I'm going to be late now!) Rich Farmbrough. 18:45, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
Well "Wikipedia's community-editing leads to prompt correction of such oversights." is certainly dubious at best, there are at least 8,600 "External link" sections with more than one link! I'll concentrate on those, and a bunch of other things for now. Rich Farmbrough. 23:06, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Some stuff from Trey

I'm very confused. Judging from your contribs, you seem to be running a bot to change "External link" to "External links", but you didn't post your intention on Wikipedia talk:Bots to do so, and you're using your regular user account and not a bot account. Am I right on these points, or am I missing something? --TreyHarris 09:51, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

It looks like, based on consensus at Wikipedia talk:Bots, that you need to get approval prior to your edits whether or not you're using bot software once your edit frequency gets fast enough. You made over 500 edits in an hour, so that definitely qualifies. --TreyHarris 11:30, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ditto to Trey

Hi, no I'm not using a bot, although I probably should be. I got as far as registering a seperate account and looking at pywikipediabot, but it seemed very complicated. What I generally do is open bunch (99) of tabs in Firefox and batch edit the pages - sometimes it crashes Firefox. When I'm working on dates (which I don't think can be simply robotised, to many quotes, URLs, internal links etc.) I let myself get sidetracked on other formatting issues, but these external links I want to get out of the way. If you know of a simpler bot than pywikipeidabot I'd be very interseted (oh, I've looked at AWB as well which is a great tool.) Rich Farmbrough. 10:06, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Of coure the big advantage with a bot is that it can be throttled to a slow rate (say 1 per min) and left to its own devices (subject to proper testing of course). Rich Farmbrough. 10:46, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikifying Dates is often unnecessary

Hi. I noticed you wikified some dates on one of the essays of Franci Fukuyama (as well as quite a few other articles). I was wondering what was the purpose? I can understand wikifying dates when they are fairly relevant to the item being discussed. In this case, the date of publication is fairly arbitrary (the magazine is only published on Sundays - thus the exact date is clearly arbitrary, and the year 2006 is so common to so many things that it is almost irrelevant) and thus it is unlikely that the user is going to click on that date for more related information. In my experience, going around wikifying dates just beacuse they can be wikified only adds irrelevant noise. It isn't that different that me wikifying random words in a sentence -- while it is possible for me to do this, do you think it adds much value or is it more of a distraction and busywork? (unsigned comment by User:Bhouston)

See Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers). This is to allow date preferences to work. If you set them you will see 11 September and September 11 ([[11 September]] and [[September 11]]) the same way. It's cool if you sign messages on other people's talk pages with ~~~~. Rgds, Rich Farmbrough. 16:33, 21 February 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Overlinking dates

Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers: Please advise regarding your linking to arbitrary dates. This does not appear in line with the rationale expressed in Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers#Avoid overlinking dates, Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links), & Wikipedia:Only make links that are relevant to the context. -- Krash (Talk) 18:56, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi Krash. The overlinking aspect refers to things like October or October 2004 or October 2004 or 17th Century or 421 BC. Full dates like 11 September 2004 or September 11 will show up differently depending on how each user has his preferences set, and should be linked where they appear in article txt.
See Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Usage of links for date preferences. This is to allow date preferences to work. The section Avoid overlinking dates starts If the date does not contain a day and a month,. Rich Farmbrough. 21:14, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
Be that as it may, I think that Wikipedia would benefit from a less liberal application of the Manual of Style, remembering to only make links that are relevant to the context. Also, you misrepresented the quotation from Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers#Avoid overlinking dates). The complete quotation should read:
"If the date does not contain a day and a month, date preferences will not work, and square brackets will not respond to your readers' auto-formatting preferences. So unless there is a special relevance of the date link, there is no need to link it. This is an important point: simple months, years, decades and centuries should only be linked if there is a strong reason for doing so."
-- Krash (Talk) 23:06, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
"If the date does not contain a day and a month, date preferences will not work, and square brackets will not respond to your readers' auto-formatting preferences. So unless there is a special relevance of the date link, there is no need to link it. This is an important point: simple months, years, decades and centuries should only be linked if there is a strong reason for doing so." This is exactly the point I was making. "simple months, years, decades and centuries" is the subject of that paragraph, not full dates. Rich Farmbrough. 23:09, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
Hey Rich, I feel as if you are taking the rules too literally. If you are going to fix up dates please do it in the articles you are making other contributions to. I feel as if you are doing some type of strange "drive by overlinking" which you can just barely justify. I notice on this page that you have gotten more than a few complaints about this issue as well as a few warnings. --Ben Houston 22:03, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
Well over several ten of thousands of edits, I've probably had a dozen "complaints" and the same number of queries. Some of the complaints were justified (editing errors), which I have fixed, and some were not (almost all of those were happy after a simple explanation). Rich Farmbrough. 23:17, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
I agree with Krash. I came here to post a comment about your linking-dates in the external links for Sousveillance, and saw there were already some comments on the topic of over-linking. (imho) The spirit of the Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers#Avoid overlinking dates) rule, is to only link a date, if the date is an important aspect of the context. sep'11, jul'4, dec'24, jan'1, etc could/should be linked. But it's not useful if the date is arbitrary (a date of album release, article publication, etc). --Quiddity 22:41, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
Hi, this is to allow date preferences to work. If you set them you will see 11 September and September 11 ([[11 September]] and [[September 11]]) the same way. The MoS is very clear. Section 1.2 [20] explains date formatting. Section 1.2.1 is a caveat warning against linking just years or just months or just year-month combinations - which I generally remove when I come across them. Rich Farmbrough. 23:19, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
Understood. I think in the case of the sousveillance date-link, i'll just remove the date altogether, as it doesnt add anything or have relevance. thanks :) --Quiddity 23:21, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

While I welcome constructive contributions to the Joan of Arc article, I believe your contribution violated the clause at WP:NOT about random collections of unrelated information. When a page gets cluttered with trivial links it becomes harder for readers to glean meaningful information from chaff. It goes much too far to Wikilink every date where I confirmed a site access throughout a list of nearly seventy footnotes. You're an active editor and I'm sure usually a very productive one, but I see you've already disregarded feedback on this issue from several other editors.

I cannot share the opinion that every Wikipedia editor who does not complain is delighted with your work. I wasted half an hour this evening removing link clutter, time that I had planned to spend adding new footnotes and correcting some syntax problems in the article text. Then I visited your talk page, read how you dismissed several other comments, and almost decided it would be a further waste more of my time to give you any input. Rein this activity down to a reasonable level. You've gone overboard. 68.101.254.59 04:55, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] External link vs External links

"Some editors use the header "External link" if there is only one link, but others use "External links" in all cases. There is currently no consensus on which is better. Editors who always use the plural form may prefer it for any of the following reasons:

  1. experience shows that future editors often add links without changing the section heading
  2. people may be dissuaded from adding links to a section titled "External link" since it seems that there should only be one link
  3. using "External links" gives greater stylistic consistency to Wikipedia

The converse arguments are:

  1. Wikipedia's community-editing leads to prompt correction of such oversights.
  2. There is no evidence that a significant number of people would be dissuaded from adding links. Besides, additional links would often be redundant.
  3. Use of "External links" to head a section containing a single link is fundamentally incorrect, a poor precedent to set in an encyclopedia"

My own view is that 'link' looks better where there is only one link; looks wrong otherwise to me. I don't feel that strongly about it; nevertheless I may revert if you change singular ones to the plural description, as I have done in a couple of the Iain Banks book pages. Why not dig out other good links, and change it from singular to plural? Or else try and edit out my POV in (for example) Dead Air which I (and everybody I know who's read it) considers his weakest book. I wrote basically the entire article and I couldn't help let it show in what I wrote.

I've done a lot of work on developing all of the Banks book entries, so maybe you could discuss in talk if you want to change formatting like this? If nothing else I think all the Banks books should be fairly consistently treated. Thanks Guinnog 21:09, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi, Mel Etitis had already drawn my atention to these paragraphs, two comments up, and I am leaving singletons alone - there are enough misdescribed plurals(*). I would certainly not take offence at your changing back those in the Ian Banks canon where appropriate. I am afraid I have only read a few Iain Banks books (though almost all Iain M Banks) so I can't help much with that, but will do what I can. Rich Farmbrough. 21:23, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your edits. I have retained most of them, and standardised them across all the Banks books. See what you think. Guinnog 22:54, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Athletics Weekly

Your article Athletics Weekly has appeared in the Dead End Pages list because it is not wikified. Please consult the Wikipedia Guide to Layout for more information on how to write a good, wikified article. I would encourage you to revisit your submissions and {{wikify}} them. Thanks and happy editing! James084 03:09, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The anal wink

Thanks for putting in that link. As a physician I was bothered to see the information about misuse of a rectac exam put into a small article about a normal physiologic reflex, but with the social problem of spurious expert testimony the sad truth had to remain. The linked to article is better than the bit in anal wink. Kd4ttc 16:38, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

I was suprised the articles weren't linked! Good to be appreciated. Rich Farmbrough. 23:11, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

These things require such care here. There is a definite way to be politically correct on Wikipedia. I started to monitor anal wink on the random chance of seeing it on articles for deletion. folks thought it was a hoax, thinking such a bizarre name couldn't be real. I stopped the deletion with an explanation and it was sitting on my watch list mostly to prevent well meaning mistakes to delete. Well, you might be aware of how political injustice stories get a passionate following around here. So to my chagrin the misuse of a rectal exam gets added to the Anal Wink article. It looks sort of goofy there, but I dared not change it lest the wrath of historically-knowledgeable-wiki-enthusiasts start an edit war. So now I can clean the article up a bit and get the relevent bits separated and stay Wiki-PC! Thus my appreciation of haveing the better link included. It was amazing to read about what mischief can be done by an "authority." Steve Kd4ttc 23:24, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ILO redirect

Hi Rich. I noticed that you recently changed ILO to redirect to ILO (disambiguation). Previously it was set to International Labour Organization, and a {{redirect}} was on that page. It's no big deal, but are you opposed to my changing it back. After looking at the disambig page, I think it would be reasonable to assume that most ILO enquiries would be looking for the UN body. Cheers. --Bookandcoffee 21:33, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, you've got a good point about this. It could go both ways, and I'm not bothered enough to change it! (And if I did, then 6 months from now, someone else, who thinks different will talk to me about it, and I'd have to copy your note over to them... :) --Bookandcoffee 05:39, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] LINKS!!!

Hello,

I'm sorry you're having to go back and correct my edits involving External links. I know it should be links - my eyes just aren't picking it up. They will from now on. Thanks. Michael David 18:18, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Missing picture question

Hi there! I have contributed with the picture (that I named) Image:Spotted hyena Kenya.jpg, but as you can see, it's gone. I added it to the Hyena article last year. Since I am most active on the Norwegian Wikipedia, I did not see this until today... Can you help me find out why it has been deleted? Thanks!! Could you please answer on my own discussion page? :-) Regards, Helga76 22:28, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Opinionated material in MR-GO article

If you want this material to be kept, you need to provide better source citations for the opinions expressed in it, per the verifiability policy. See Talk:Mississippi River-Gulf Outlet Canal#MR-GO and the Port of New Orleans. Dpbsmith (talk) 00:27, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Shome mishtake... My edit was to make the bolded headings into real headings, wikify a few dates and remove a redundant phrase. Well done for improving the layout a good bit more, as to content, although I read one of the references, I don't feel qualified to make substantive changes. Rich Farmbrough. 00:38, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
Oops, my apologies... the material I'm concerned about was added by 24.252.127.38, not you. Sorry. Dpbsmith (talk) 01:56, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wilbur Ross

I don't even want to start thinking about moving this without help. It seems we should have the main entry under his full name: Wilbur L. Ross, Jr. That was one choice among about 4 or 5 (I may be exagerating) that refer to Wilbur Ross. Or maybe we should leave it at Wilbur Ross, since it's simplest? What do you think?--Beth Wellington 17:18, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation!--Beth Wellington 04:16, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Date links

Since you have taken an interest in date links. Please be kind enough to vote for my new bot application. bobblewik 20:04, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Huh?

Why? Dragons flight 22:30, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Changing dates

Hi,

Your "date correction" bot has done some damage to Yuriy Yekhanurov. Namely, it replaced parts of correct image name (i.e., within "*" in "*.jpg") with wikified dates. Can you modify the bot so that it does not replace text within [[Image:]] tag? Thanks. Sashazlv 04:35, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi, Thanks for spotting that. Incidentally it's not a bot, it's search and replace, I always do show changes before saving, and I normally spot problems with image names. I'm not sure if I can improve the search and replace to automatically avoid images. Thanks again. Rich Farmbrough 13:48 26 February 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Deletion of Shia views

I happened by chance to notice that a user called User:Blingpling is going around deleting Shia views in articles like Abu_Bakr. It's a bit out of my area but I thought you might be interested as you edited this page JQ 05:33, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rollback

Please do not patronise me. Thank you. Ambi 06:06, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The matter of Dr. James R. Russell's article

Hi Rich. Perhaps you can help out. I wrote Professor/Dr. James R. Russell's article as he is indeed a world known scholar in his field and very notable. I checked that his colleague, Dr. Wheeler Thackston had an article, which he has since 2004. They are both in the same department at Harvard, and on comparable par. Dr. Russell's opus "Zoroastrianism in Armenia" is a major work published by Harvard University amongst other works of his. The article is not a vanity article and Dr. Russell who occupies the Mashtots Chair in Armenian Studies, at Harvard University, which is a very prestigious chair, is more than noteworthy. As much as Dr. Wheeler Thackston is. Dr. Russell's article is James R. Russell. I have no idea who User_talk:Dsc is and why the person flagged it. The stated objections are not valid. The warning should be removed. I don't know where else to turn to. Thanks. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 20:56, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Rich for getting back on this situation. I will go do some other things. I hope someone keeps and eye on this. It's nutty. Cheers. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 22:27, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi Rich. Thanks for your kind message. It isn't really resolved. User:Sannse formerly of the Wikipedia arbitration committee had removed the warning in the light of reason, and the person User:Dsc has slapped on the warning again on Dr. James R. Russell's article without any discussion. I do hope this gets resolved but (a) I don't feel the warning is justified and it should not be there (b) the person has taken no time to discuss it as per your suggestion, and (c) I have no easy internet access on this end due to serious outages, and (d) the objection by the person does not stand up to reason and a test. I am writing this from a stand-up kiosk in a library. If you could do something appropriate, I would be appreciative. The person is acting in my opinion, irrationally. Thanks. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 21:06, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi Rich. Thanks for getting back to me. The debate on the Armenian Genocide has nothing to do with Dr. Russell's erudition and scholarly accomplishments. Plus, the website cited, is unsigned, and can't be rationally used for the article's merit, which is based on Russell's scholarly work. Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 22:20, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi Rich. See my comments there also, when you have a chance. I put more into the discussion with a level head. I am not part of nor versed in the Armenian debate. I take your points on the further citations on the articles and ISBN on the books. One has to chase these things down a bit when one has time. Thanks again. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 23:00, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi Rich. Thanks for your help on the matter. I hope it works out for all concerned in the middle to long run. Much appreciated. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 18:24, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi Rich. I fixed up the references, citations, ISBN numbers and other loose ends as per your suggestion. Thanks. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 02:41, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Hello Rich. Thanks for your kind help and suggestions. I think it might be all right now. It was a lot of work. As for a GFDL photo ... that might be a little tricky, but will look into it when I can. ;) Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 17:14, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Alberto Ríos

Rich, help! I created this article and then realized that because of the accent there should be a way to look it up under Alberto Rios but I didn't know how to back that page point back to the original. I recall something about temporary pages etc. but didn't want to muck it up. I just went back there and Alberto Rios is a candidate for speedy deletion. Thanks!--Beth Wellington 01:33, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Nmpenguin had taken care of it and now he's explained how to "do" for myself. Thanks, though.--Beth Wellington 17:09, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Date Discrepancies

Hello,

When I come across a discrepancy in an important date (e.g. Date of Birth or Death), where the date cited in a Wiki Article differs from other reliable sources, I always enter this fact in the Discussion section of that Article, and then ask what others' thoughts are on this. What I am reluctant to do is to unilaterally change the Date myself at that time. What do you think about this? Michael David 15:41, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Working Families for Wal-Mart

Rich, Cmh has POV problem with a story I started. When you have time, could you take a look and see what needs to be done to remove the tag. Thanks!--Beth Wellington 03:38, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Cmh removed the tag. Thanks! I've already thanked him on his talk page.--Beth Wellington 21:05, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

In a related issue, there's a vote to delete an admittedly rough article (but only a day old) that's odd, in that the arguments are poorly researched and all in favor of deletion. Could you take a look-see? Thanks!--Beth Wellington 05:42, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for weighing in. By the way, I didn't know you were in England until I saw the category at the bottom of your user page. Love the pig Latin and old English babel boxes. What a hoot! --Beth Wellington 01:26, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Question about banner on my Watchlist

Hi Rich. This is a silly question, I'm afraid. When I bring up my Watchlist, this banner apppears :

"Wikipedia e-mail confirmation has been enabled. To receive Wikipedia e-mail, you must go to Special:Confirmemail, request a code, and follow the link in the e-mail."

Is this just a general announcement which requires no action on my part, or is it saying something which requires my action ? Does it mean someone has requested to email me ? I don't have it setup for email intentionally. Thanks in advance as ever. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 17:51, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Rich for your kind response. I will look into it further. Bests --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 19:01, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Help

This message has just appeared on my Watchlist Page.


"Wikipedia e-mail confirmation has been enabled. To receive Wikipedia e-mail, you must go to Special:Confirmemail, request a code, and follow the link in the e-mail."

I followed the directions & received instructions to Log in; I did this; nothing further has happened. What am I missing? What does this mean? I'm still new here. Michael David 18:48, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Michael, this means that Wikipedia now "knows" you really have access to that email account. Imagine if someone put an enemy's email address and went around insulting people, to generate badmail. Or even f someone simply mistypes their email address. I don't know why this message was put on the watchlist, though, seems like a funny place for it. Rich Farmbrough 23:08 2 March 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Thank you!

Rich,

Thank you for the explanation of that e-mail message on my Watch List. It does make sense after all. My work (in many ways, life) has been sitting across from flesh and blood people trying to help them untangle the emotional knots they have found themselves in. There I'm comfortable because it's familiar to me. It's taking me longer to be comfortable sitting across from a machine that is essentially 1s & 0s. I am comfortable with the information within Wikipedia, where my task is to extract that information and, in my own way, hopefully improve on it. I saw that message & wondered what it was wanting me to do & why. Thanks for straightening it out for me. The wetter my feet get at this, the more comfortable I feel with the structure, the more I will be able to contribute to the content. Right now I'm still learning. Michael David 04:49, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Big Sur

Thanks for taking the time to read and make some fixes on this article. It's much appreciated.Scooterboss 11:58, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Please review

Paphos The Arsenio Hall Show Robert Scott (VC) Max Mosley Rich Farmbrough 21:34, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Standardisation units, imperial, metric etc

Hi Rich, As you describe yourself as a fixer, UK based & seem to have experience with bots to fix things, I wonder if you can help...

During recent discussions about featured article status for Chew Valley Lake I was challenged that the units (particularly for volume, but it applies to other areas) used in the article discriminated against some users eg;

"Even worse. "Customary" units are not provided throughout. " & "The other is the use of imperial gallons and cubic meters, neither of which are used in the U.S. (but who really wants to see acre-foot). Rmhermen 00:14, 1 March 2006 (UTC) Acre-foot certainly makes no sense, this unit isn't used in the UK as far as I know. Water volumes here are conventionally quoted as so many million gallons (Imperial ones of course, not US gallons). Cubic metres (not meters :-) might be a good choice. What a fine muddle we get into over units! Chris Jefferies 17:42, 2 March 2006 (UTC) But you see that you are giving British English readers two ways to understand the volume but giving American English readers zero. That doesn't seem right. Rmhermen 01:43, 3 March 2006 (UTC)"

Do you know of any policy on this & could your bot (or any other) semi-automatically standardise them & if necessary put in the volume measure in the other units expected? Rod 12:22, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] SmackBot re: Henry the Navigator

Your bot is making edits like this one: [[21]] which have no impact on the article as it appears to the user, nor on the workings of Wikipedia. These are merely stylistic preferences being enforced by a bot. This wastes storage space (for the edit entries in the database), bandwidth (for the edits themselves), and degrades Wikipedia's performance for no return on that investment. Please, tune your bot so that it does not make stylistic edits without a concrete benefit. -Harmil 16:20, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi Harmil,
Well, spotted, that edit should have changed "Early Life" to "Early life" (process already fixed), I think no more invisible edits should occur. I'll check a sample of a hundred, if you see any, please let me know. Rich Farmbrough 18:00 5 March 2006 (UTC).

This edit moved the stub template to a place three (!) lines below the interlanguage links instead of leaving it above the categories where it belongs. AFAIK interlanguage links should always be the at the bottom, below categories and person data.—Wikipeditor 13:31, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

This appears to be standard AWB ordering. It makes sense because the stub template will, presumably, be removed, so having it easy to find is a good idea. I'm not sure if there are any guidelines about it, I'll investigate, and ask on the AWB page. The two blank lines seem odd. Rich Farmbrough 15:13 7 March 2006 (UTC).
The extra lines allow for an icon on the stub which otherwise can overwirte text. Rich Farmbrough 12:18 8 March 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Wikitext readability

Hi. Thanks for cleaning up headings with smackbot. I noticed the bot eliminates spaces in all of a page's headings. I've always been adding those spaces, because it makes the heading text much more easily readable in the edit field if it doesn't run into the equals signs. Michael Z. 2006-03-05 17:18 Z

Example:

==External links==

== External links ==

Thank you for your cleanup edit on Austintown, Ohio.[22] I would ask, however, that you not remove spaces from the headings (as you did for "External links" but for no other heading), for the very reason cited above: it improves readability for editors without changing the displayed text. Far too many Wikipedia editors squeeze edited text so much down to the essentials, the result looks like it was meant for a 16KB TRS-80 computer. (Take a look at most of the TV-show articles' "Trivia" sections sometime — they're as bad as obfuscated C programs.) Because Wikipedia is not paper, we have the luxury to use spaces and blank lines judiciously to make it easier for editors to quickly scan articles for material they wish to edit. This is defeated when every optional space is squeezed out of the text. I would appreciate your assistance in not adding to this problem. Thank you. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 13:05, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
And now I see that your bot also removed a bunch of blank lines around headings for Herndon, Virginia.[23] I truly fear for the ease of editing of Wikipedia if you are making so many mass edits that you've managed to hit two random cities that I happened to be watching within 2 hours of each other. Please stop this counterproductive, pointless byte saving! ~ Jeff Q (talk) 13:20, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Smackbot: "Agjacent" counties

Hi there, I noticed that SmackBot had made some automated changes to Rockland County, New York, and in looking at them I realized that "Adjacent counties" was changed to "Agjacent counties." A cursory glance at other county articles that the bot edited shows that the mistake was made in several places. Just thought I'd let you know...is there a quick way of going back and fixing? Or do each of them need to be corrected individually?  :: Salvo (talk) 03:06, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll fix them. Rich Farmbrough 08:18 6 March 2006 (UTC).
Thanks :) :: Salvo (talk) 12:42, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Alcoholism article conflict

Hello Rich, I suppose it was inevitable. I find myself in the first conflict since coming to Wikipedia. It involves the Article on Alcoholism, most specifically the Section headed ‘Alcoholism as a disease’. This Section is extremely biased and presents facts that are simply not correct. For example, the paragraph “Currently there are no validated medical or scientific procedures or tests to determine if one has the so-called disease of alcoholism or if one is a carrier.” The use of the phrase ‘so-called’ speaks for itself, and, this is simply not true today. I attempted to correct it, but a person who identifies himself as “David Justin” immediately reversed my edit. His name is in red, and he does not have either a User or Talk Page. I made my case on the ‘Alcoholism” Discussion page under the heading ‘Alcoholism labeling>be careful’ in which I included this:

'Today, and for some time now, there are highly accurate tools and other instruments that can accurately diagnose the disease of alcoholism. This is but one of many: SUDDS-IV.'

David Justin's response was incomprehensible gibberish.

AND: the final paragraph of the main Article includes this:

The idea of "alcohol as a disease of the community" or an "environmentally mediated or caused disease" is not as widely discussed or I am not aware of it as much. I see alcohol as an "environmentally caused disease" in many cases.’

The use of the word “I” in an encyclopedia article is unheard of, and I believe represents one person’s very biased POV.

A great deal of progress has been made in the area if alcoholism diagnosis. I believe the Article in Wikipedia should reflect this fact.

I will not become involved in a debate with someone I know nothing about, or cannot communicate with directly. I do want this important Article to be accurate, and up to Wikipedia’s high standards. How do you think I should proceed from here?

Michael David 13:38, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Personally I would appreciate it if both of you would realize alcohol dependence is not a disease. Alcohol dependence can be treated in a couple of weeks tops and then the person is no longer alcohol dependent. If alcoholism is a disease we should be able to detect it whether we are drinking or not. In fact if it is a disease even though we have never had a sip of alcohol, we should be able to test and detect it. Does such a test exists? No. Can one take a blood test to determine if they have this so-called disease? And your link is not diagnosing a disease it is about diagnosing alcohol dependence. Alcohol dependence is not a disease.
And an "environmentally caused disease"? Is that like second hand smoke? A wiki article is not the place for you to promote your personal belief and definitions regarding alcoholism.
I just reworked the test part I added to the article in a fashion I think makes it more clear. Instead of removing my comments over and over how about discussing it on the talk page? And if this is an issue you want to pursue please find me a test for the disease of alcoholism. I'd like to take it to make sure I do not have it. In fact I'd like my 2 year old daughter to take the test to make sure she is nto walking around with this disease. If she has a disease called alcoholism I'd want her to know about it sooner than later so she can plan to abstain permanently.
Finally, the SUDDS-IV diagnostic criteria does not even mention the word disease. It talks about alcohol and drug addiction/dependence. Mr Christopher 16:09, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Rich

Thank you for your input regarding the ‘Alcoholism as a Disease’ issue. I have been a practicing psychotherapist for 40+ years, with a subspecialty in the Dependencies. I have seen tremendous progress in that time with professionals researching and finally solving some very touchy issues regarding the use and misuse of psychoactive chemicals & their effects on a person. The critical part of the ‘disease concept’ is that it removes this disorder from the hands of those who would paint it as simply a problem with the person’s behavior. Categorizing it that way has proven not only problematic with the self-concepts of the patient; frankly it has given ammunition to those who have tried to stand in the way of adequate funding for the research. I am not going to quibble with anyone over whether it’s a disease or not. The only person who needs to understand is the patient. All else is bullshit. Michael David 18:03, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Disambiguation needed

Rich, J.C. Penney (the store) and J. C. Penney (the man) are so close it seems like there should be some pointer between them. Thanks.--Beth Wellington 17:57, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for looking at it. My two cents (pennies?)--while it may be the usual practice, it is an arcane one which makes it hard for the non-editng user to find the correct content. (and hard even for the novice-editor user). Especially since there's little visual difference to the reader between the two. Don't know if those who do such things would want to consider this usage. Alternatively, I might have filed J. C. under his full name with a redirect from the initials. 'Nough said. So, are you this Richard Farmbrough] or is it just a common name?--Beth Wellington 17:26, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 2 Bot Visits

Hi, A page I created has had it's last two edits made by AWB assisted robots Bluebot & Smackbot ([24], [25]). It's good that you guys are cleaning up but couldn't you colloborate? What Smackbot did in visit 2, could have been done by Bluebot in visit 1. --kingboyk 02:55, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, there is some overlap between the tasks they've worked on - and the timings. SB is working on Caps in Headings BB is working on many different problems with "See also" and "External links". That's why we hit the same article. In theory it shouldn't matter because if the change is already done the second bot will do nothing - but we had slightly different settings/versions so a small change occurred. I've upgraded to the latest version since that run, so I hope that will not happen again. I've also requested a feature to reduce solely minor edits. Rich Farmbrough 11:27 8 March 2006 (UTC).
I believe Bluebot and Smackbot are owned by two different users. On the other hand, I also had a watched page visited by both bots, both commiting a minor error. I've detailed it below:
The following code:
<sup>[[Aleut Restitution Act of 1988#External Links|[1]]]</sup>
As you can see above, Bluebot (or Smackbot) judged [1]]] as a mistake, and fixed it by changing it to [[1]]. However, the singular [ and ] around 1 are decorative, and the other two ]]'s right of the "1" are to end the internal link.
Just to let you know about this, but on the other hand, I appreciate the work Smackbot has done! Kareeser|Talk! 06:02, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
This is very useful, and I will pass it back to the developer User:Bluemoose. Rich Farmbrough 11:27 8 March 2006 (UTC).
Thanks for that, and for your reply on my talk page. --kingboyk 19:50, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] SmackBot changes to aircraft articles

Please keep SmackBot away from aircraft articles using the airtemp template for specs. This template requires the use of </li> and <li> tags to properly format specs not included in the template. When SmackBot replaces these tags with the asterix, it messes up formatting. Thanks! - Emt147 Burninate! 06:05, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

OK, easily done. Rich Farmbrough 11:28 8 March 2006 (UTC).
P.S. AWB has been updated to avoid this problem in future. If it happens again please let me know. If you think there's a significantnumber of damaged articles, let me know and I will try to find them all and revert. Rich Farmbrough 17:24 8 March 2006 (UTC).

Only a couple of articles were affected but I wanted to give you a heads up. Thanks for taking care of that! - Emt147 Burninate! 20:35, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] smack bots change in Maruti Omni

Your bot tried to do something unsucessfully and had to rv its action. If you can tell me what 'RM caps in section headers' means I'll do it manually. thanks.

--hydkat 06:34, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing that, and for letting me know. Bluebot had already made the change, the bad change is a bug I think, and I will pass back to be fixed. Rich Farmbrough
Thanks for your reply. But you didn't tell what 'RM caps in section headers' means... I only have an assumption to go by :(.

--hydkat 11:35, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Remove capitals in section headers.  :) I guess you assumed right. Rich Farmbrough 11:39 8 March 2006 (UTC).

[edit] SmackBot: Parsis != Persian people

On 7 March Smackbot apparently added a bunch of people that are Parsis to Category:Persian people. Thats a far stretch. Calling Parsis "Persian people" is like calling descendants of the pilgrims who came over on the Mayflower "Britons". -- Fullstop 09:35, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Can you give me an example? Thank you. Rich Farmbrough 16:08 8 March 2006 (UTC).

Sorry, my mistake. Mea culpa. -- Fullstop 16:50, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Alcoholism Article Thoughts

Rich,

You’re right, there are two Sections entitled ‘Social Impact’. They both contain similar material. I believe one could be worked into a Section focusing on ‘Public Health Issues’.

Actually that would be merely like trying to rearrange the passengers on the Titanic hoping this would keep it from sinking. The fact of the matter is the entire Article needs a major reworking. It is trying to do & be too many things. The result: it merely creates confusion about a very important subject.

When I read the Article’s present form, I try to imagine an adolescent trying to make sense of their family life; knowing Dad or Mom is drunk all of the time; has heard the word ‘alcoholism’ used in school, and reaching for an encyclopedia to find out what it’s all about. I am in no way suggesting the encyclopedia should be geared to adolescents, but the average reader should be able to readily understand and to follow it. Anything beyond that and you have a textbook.

To me, an encyclopedia Article about a subject should state the current definition of that subject; a history of the birth, evolution and impact of that subject; and references to more in-depth materials the reader can go to if they want to learn more. It should never offer opinions, or even hint of bias. All this, of course, without being so dry it crumbles before you eyes. This is what writing style is all about.

Again, the present Article on ‘Alcoholism’ needs a great deal of work if it is to be helpful to anyone really trying to learn about it.

Be healthy. Michael David 14:37, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A note about AWB

See this edit by SmackBot - It did nothing but decapitalise "Trading Card Game", which is a proper noun. Are jobs like this suitable for a bot? --Celestianpower háblame 16:41, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for letting me know about this. You make two points, firstly that "Trading Card Game" is a proper noun. Certainly you could argue for "Pokemon Trading Card Game", "Neopets Trading Card Game" or "YU-GI-OH! Trading Card Game" needing capitals, I think it's harder to argue for the =term on it's own. Similarly I have a copy of "The Hobbit, the Book of the Film", I would not talk about it as the Book (that's reserved for THHGTTG or holy books :). To a lesser extent the same applies, for example, to Pepy's, one could say "in his Diaries" or equally reasonably "in his diaries"
Your second point, whether is this a job for a bot, is simpler. The bot isn't mindlessly replacing all section headings with slightly lower case variants, it's currently only changing about 200 specific headings - like "Selected Filmography" to "Selected filmography". Of course there's always the risk that someone's written book called Selected Filmography, but that is within the bounds of acceptable risk, IMHO. Rich Farmbrough 16:58 8 March 2006 (UTC).
Sorry, I got my wires crossed. The Pokemon ones are the only article with "in the trading card game" headers I assume - would it be possible to change this to "In the Pokémon Trading Card Game"? --Celestianpower háblame 17:03, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I would be happy to do that, probably tonight, maybe tomorrow. Rich Farmbrough 17:05 8 March 2006 (UTC).

Rich - also in this edit, you removed the spaces in the section headings and after each "*" (bullet point). I feel like those spaces help the readability of the articles source... and they don't affect how the page renders. Please don't change them arbitrarily. -- Netoholic @ 17:44, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

I would agree with the decrease in readability when editing (per [26] and related edits). Some of us don't have large screens and/or perfect eyes (any more!) — Bellhalla 18:32, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
OK since several people feel this way, I've turned of reduction in surplus white space. Rich Farmbrough 20:18 9 March 2006 (UTC).
Have you? I've just had Ethotoin and Felbamate touched by Smackbot (11th March). As far as I can see, the only reader-visible change was from "Side Effects" to "Side effects". I have no problem with that change if it brings the article into line with the MOS. However, there are over a dozen other invisible changes to each article, which make the Diff extremely hard to compare. These all involve whitespace that (AFAIK) only concern editors. Is there even any official consensus regarding which whitespace style is correct? I like to check "bot" changes as sometimes they do screw up the article (particularly foreign words) but having to compare whitespace changes is tedious in the extreme. In addition, it can make it near impossible to compare two human versions if a bot has done this much work in-between. Please, please change your bot so that the only diffs I see are ones that make a difference to the visible article, and only changes that are sanctioned by the MOS. I do appreciate that bots are useful (especially the ones upgrading my citation templates) but these hidden changes are quite harmful to the ability of editors to use the history mechanism and waste our time. Colin°Talk 10:50, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the note, for the rest of the capitalisation run, I've turned it off, and this time I've saved the settings.... Rich Farmbrough 10:57 11 March 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Oregon falls (sic)

Dear Rich, Yes i would just like to know Why you deleted my page. Oregon Falls is a very good band in fact it was my cousin dayton niemans band i know alot about that band and wasted alot of my time trying to make that page. I dont know who you are to delet a perfectly good page.The preceding unsigned comment was added by Poonch12 (talk • contribs) .

Answered on your talk page. Rich Farmbrough 19:32 8 March 2006 (UTC).
Hope you don't mind Rich, but I userfied it. It was still a valid speedy deletion and had no incoming links. He can work on it in his user space until he's satisfied WP:MUSIC and everyone's a winner :-) --kingboyk 19:58, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
NO probs. Rich Farmbrough 20:07 8 March 2006 (UTC).

[edit] ImDB

Interesting. I believe that ImDB allows juried submissions (I tried to straighten out the double entries on Leonard B. Stern). Of course, your common name might rule you out! If the information is readiliy accessible, I'd be glad to advise the Grand Poobahs over there.--Beth Wellington 17:41, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] An 'in depth' response

Rich,

(I never know where to post a direct response, on your page or mine – please bear with me, I’m still a kid here!)

No way did I mean to suggest controlling the depth of an Article. In some of my writings a person needs scuba gear. What I really mean involves the structure. As you know in technical writing there is first an abstract, where the reader can grasp the essentials of the subject; this is followed (if they care to go on) by the full text that includes all of the material. Perhaps in Wikipedia it could go something like this: The first that appears after a search would be the Main Article page containing the basic information relating to that subject; then, attached to each paragraph or section could be a ‘read more’ link by which they could go to another page that covers the deeper and more esoteric information. If I read you right, that’s what you were suggesting. I agree with you completely.

Be healthy. Michael David 20:37, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] SmackBot and George Jones

SmackBot broke a link in the George Jones article. [27] Everything is back to normal now, but you might want to somehow try to prevent the bot from doing that to other articles. Thanks. --TantalumTelluride 22:34, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Oh dear, that's a potential problem with AWB. I've reported it, and no doubt it will be fixed RSN. Thanks. Rich Farmbrough 23:02 8 March 2006 (UTC).

Also broke a link in the YMCA article[28] Cometward 21:52, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, AWB is now fixed, so I'd better find a way of identifying any past errors. Not to hard I think. Rich Farmbrough 22:02 10 March 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Smackbot, Caps and Dates

In its task of removing caps in headers, Smackbot is changing "Middle Ages" to "Middle ages" (as on the page List of French language authors) It seems to me the expression "Middle Ages" demands caps (see the article Middle Ages). On the same page Smackbot also changed the heading "20th Century" into "Twentieth century", which would be fine... if it changed all the other sections too (19th Century... 16th Century...), instead of leaving the page a hybrid of date formats. Should I go back in and change them all? -- NYArtsnWords 00:40, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. You might be right about the Middle Ages capitals - bother! I've done the rest of the centuries on that page. A mixed style page was a "known risk" - there are many thousand section headers on WP with unnecessary caps, I did the 15 most common recently, and am now doing the next 200+. Twentieth Century was in this batch, the others weren't, I guess I should have included them anyway, had I thought of it. Rich Farmbrough 01:11 9 March 2006 (UTC).
PS I'll check the MA thing and revert them if necessary. Rich Farmbrough 01:11 9 March 2006 (UTC).

While your making corrections, your bot ate a capital "C" in an Supreme Court "Opinion of the Court" subhead. Those should stay capitalized as well, since we're talking about "the Court" (but there was only the one digested). Cheers! BD2412 T 04:37, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

I see your point. Thanks for letting me know. Rich Farmbrough 20:59 9 March 2006 (UTC).

For Jesseca Turner, SmackBot is adding back-slashes to the section heading. See this edit. --Rob 11:44, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Sorted. Rich Farmbrough 11:49 10 March 2006 (UTC).

[edit] 1969 Coal Mine Safety and Health Act

Rich, I'm about to write an entry for the 1977 act. Is the title for this one correct, or should it be somehow otherwise named? I want to make the two consistent. Also, this article was started without a reference by by Alex Horovitz, who despite his bio note saying he contributes regularly to media plagarized it from the external source I've added as the reference in his original version,[29]. (The reference by the blocked sockpuppet was actually to the 1077 act.) You might want to take a peek and if you concur, let him know whatever wiki rule applies to this situation.--Beth Wellington 05:06, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

After looking at the indexing in the category for U.S. laws, I decided to use neither the year, which indexes everything from the twentieth century uner "1" nor the word "federal", which would index all federal laws under "f."

I think that Alex's original 1969 article was a copyright violation. Hopefully I've changed it enough that it is no longer the case. Should an administrator, if he or she agrees with my assessment on the original article point that out to him? It doesn't need to be listed now, as there is a reference and I've paraphrased.--Beth Wellington 23:24, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Been off-line and am leaving to drive tomorrow to Ohio to give a poetry reading, so didn't reply before now. I guess it's not a copyright violation, but it still seems right to give credit where credit is due. Love the word "crosspatch!" Superpowers? H-m-m-m. The ability to leap tall piles of data in a single bound. It's a bird. It's a plane. It's Wikiman! Seriously, i appreciate all your efforts. Your humble scribe, --Beth Wellington 04:11, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image Tagging for Image:Brimingham_Central_Library_fire_jan1879.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Brimingham_Central_Library_fire_jan1879.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see User talk:Carnildo/images. 10:48, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Notice of response

Hi, you asked me a question and I responded. Many thanks. bobblewik 16:07, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] regex

See User:Bobblewik/monobook.js/dates.js. Regards bobblewik 22:36, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] September 11 Wiki

Sounds good to me. If you can, please ask for some who have been active over there to support your nomination. If that doesn't happen I'll use discretion to do it in a few weeks until there is some community view on whether you should be one there. Jamesday 23:12, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

The Surreal Barnstar
I hereby award you (well, actually your SmackBot) this barnstar for all the constant edits that it's been doing to articles I've worked on. While I'm glad it's cleaning up my editing detrius, I can't help but feel that it's stalking me for some reason. ^_^;;; み使い Mitsukai 15:48, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rambot demographics to past tense

Hi there. I noticed that you've done a bit of work with some of the articles that were originally created by Rambot, putting the Demographics section into the past tense. I thoroughly agree that these look ridiculous in the present tense, and it's something that I've been doing as well, when I've hit the Random Article button and come across them. However, it's a pretty thankless task, and even with both of us plugging away, it'll take a while to get through all 30,000! Is this something that SmackBot would be able to help out with at all? --OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 17:30, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. I shall let them go for now, then, and let the bot handle them in its own time. Regarding complaints, you might just want to be aware of this, though I've also had no complaints about actual changes I've made. --OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 12:04, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Suicide sub-categories

Rich,

Something to think about.

I am currently writing a journal article on ‘creativity and suicide’ - exploring why creative persons take their own lives. As a part of my research I have constructed a rather extensive database of persons in history who have committed suicide and, importantly, the methods they have used. I know Wikipedia has an extensive list of persons who have committed suicide and, in some cases, the method. As I have been cruising Wiki I have been adding the method of suicide information to its Articles. Is there any way, or, for that matter would Wikipedia be interested in, somehow also creating a separate listing category based on the method of suicide. In the cases of drug OD I have also subcategorized the type of drug. Perhaps it could be done in the form of additional categories, e.g.: ‘Persons who have committed suicide by gunshot’. I still have a lot to learn about the mechanics of Wikipedia. I searched it to see if I could find any such categories, but couldn’t find any. If such categories exist, please let me know. If not, I would be willing to help with a project to create them.

Be healthy. Michael David 23:54, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Archive

See: Talk Archive Index

[edit] Smackbot alphabetizing categories

On pages for sports players, for examples Barrin Simpson, I think it would be a good idea if you did not alphabetize the categories. The categories were listed in a specific order for clarity, first the ones dealing with birth year and living people category, followed by the teams they have played for, sometimes in chronilogical order, sometimes not. By alphabetizing them it makes the categories look like a random mismash. Qutezuce 06:13, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

I can't scope it by article type, so for the rest of the capitalisation run, I've turned it off. Rich Farmbrough 10:55 11 March 2006 (UTC).
On the other hand, compare the list you had before, to what you think is good now. I don't think I broke anything there. Have you any other examples?Rich Farmbrough 11:39 11 March 2006 (UTC).
I'm not sure I'm seeing your point about not breaking anything. The edit your bot made ordered the categories: year of birth, team he played for, living people, team he played for. Before Smackbot it was ordered: team he played for, team he played for, year of birth, living people. After I editted after Smackbot it was ordered: year of birth, living people, team he played for, team he played for. My preference is that the teams he played for be grouped together, and that birth year/death year/living people be grouped, and other logical groupings of that nature. The article conformed to this preference before SmackBot, and after I editted after SmackBot, but not after SmackBot's edit.
For other examples of where I think categories should be grouped logically and not alphabetically, check out pretty much any person in Category:Canadian Football League players (or subcats), or Category:National Football League players (or subcats). For one specific example, look at Doug Flutie. With the number of categories on that page I think that grouping categories logically is even more important, otherwise it just becomes a random looking list.
I don't think that sports people are the only examples, but its the only one that comes to mind right now. For example, any person should have birth year/death year/living people grouped together for easy maintenance. Qutezuce 20:35, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
Doug has this list
 

[[Category:1962 births|Flutie, Doug]] [[Category:Roman Catholics|Flutie, Doug]] [[Category:American football quarterbacks|Flutie, Doug]] [[Category:Arab Americans|Flutie, Doug]] [[Category:Boston College Eagles football players|Flute, Doug]] [[Category:British Columbia Lions players|Flutie, Doug]] [[Category:Buffalo Bills players|Flutie, Doug]] [[Category:Calgary Stampeders players|Flutie, Doug]] [[Category:Chicago Bears players|Flutie, Doug]] [[Category:Heisman Trophy winners|Flutie, Doug]] [[Category:Living people|Flutie, Doug]] [[Category:New England Patriots players|Flutie, Doug]] [[Category:People from Maryland|Flutie, Doug]] [[Category:People from Massachusetts|Flutie, Doug]] [[Category:San Diego Chargers players|Flutie, Doug]] [[Category:Toronto Argonauts players|Flutie, Doug]] [[Category:United States Football League players|Flutie, Doug]]

Apart from Roman Catholic it's alpha order. Rich Farmbrough 13:45 19 March 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Felbamate rm caps in section header

Would you please revise the edit you made 10:59, 11 March 2006 (UTC). You have made "U.s." and "U.k.". If you are using a bot to do this, it should not be done under your account (I believe). If you are doing it manually then you are being rather careless. You are responsible for your edits regardless of how they are performed. Colin°Talk 11:41, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Further to my response on your talk page ("Of course"), please note that there is a currently a problem with Wikipedia displaying the wrong version of articles. I've just been around the block making the same changes several tiems because there's this problem, probably synchronising between the squid caches. That's probably why I didn't see my mistake. Rich Farmbrough 12:11 11 March 2006 (UTC).

See also your change to Epilepsy 11:50, 11 March 2006 (UTC). I strongly encourage your to use "Show changes" before submitting your edits. Colin°Talk 13:17, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Show changes wasn't helping, because the version being compared with was wrong. Believe me, I looked at almost every diff of every edit I made to those pages to try to work out what was happening - and I am not a novice at using Show changes or history. Rich Farmbrough 17:47 11 March 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Re: Anna Hazare

Hi there, I didn't add the inuse template to this article. Rupakbiswas did in this edit. Cheers, Cmdrjameson 17:57, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks for drawing my attention to the existance of inuse templates though, I hadn't known about them before now. Cheers, Cmdrjameson 18:07, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tennis - RM caps in section headers and/or minor fixes using

Hi, would you mind explaining me why you transformed the tennis files into something hardly readable, like in 1994_French_Open_-_Men's_Singles and so on? What was wrong with the originals? Regards, Darius Dhlomo

Sorry, a mistake. All fixed now. Let me know if you come across any others. Rich Farmbrough 18:37 11 March 2006 (UTC).
Thanks, mate!! Good work! Regards, Darius Dhlomo

[edit] Stub template should go after categories

In this edit you moved the stub template before the categories. This should not be done, as the stub category is less important than the others. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 18:34, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

How very odd. Further up may talk page you will see flamage because stubs went to the end, which is what has always happened if the "sort" option is on. I shall investigate further. Rich Farmbrough 18:42 11 March 2006 (UTC).
In your next edit you wikilinked a date that's part of an external link. That one is somewhat my fault though, as I forgot to add a references section. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 19:12, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
I've found the reason, the template was "California State Highway Stub" instead of "California-State-Highway-stub" I'm fixing about 100 pages, and moving the sutbs to the end. In at leat one case [30] it has been in the wrong position since day 1. Rich Farmbrough 12:37 19 March 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Cats

I too have had a stub template moved in an article I've been watching. Although the stub template generates a category (as do many other templates), it is not a category itself. It generates text and the editor will have placed it where he/she thinks best. Wrt sorting categories - please please stop this madness. Where is your authority that you can whizz through Wikipedia imposing your view of "tidy" on everyone else? If you can point to some where that there was a large consensus that it was a "good thing" to have sorted categories and that it was "essential" that all articles be brought into line, then I'll accept it.

In a number of complaints above you blame your tools. I'm sorry but you are responsible for your edits. If you can't control your tools and can't be bothered to check their effect with Show Changes then please find something more productive to do instead. Colin°Talk 21:33, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image Tagging Image:Exempt.gif

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Exempt.gif. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL-self}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{fairusein|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Shyam (T/C) 21:24, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

I've today replaced that with (self-made) Exempt.png. So I've deleted the gif. Rich Farmbrough 22:03 11 March 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Smackbot on article Carl

In article Carl, Smackbot changed [[Carl (name)]] to [['''Carl''' (name)]]. Perhaps you're auto-bolding the first instance of the article name. If that's the case please avoid that change inside wikilinks. Quarl (talk) 2006-03-11 21:57Z

THanks Quarl, we thought this was fixed. I'll check for all instances where this could have happened. Rich Farmbrough 22:00 11 March 2006 (UTC).
Cheers Quarl (talk) 2006-03-11 22:30Z

[edit] St Louis rename

Have you had a chance to get the St Louis redirects, I have a flagged bot sitting idle which can take care of those tonight, looking at your contribs it hasn't been done. I'll have my bot start away on them as I really need something to do :) -- Tawker 06:53, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Some of the sub-categories still need doing, (Category:Saint Louis University shouldn't change.) Rich Farmbrough 07:29 12 March 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Removing caps in section headers

Thanks for removing the caps from the section headers in epilepsy.

However, I noticed that you also removed caps from the text of an entire subsection, the one called 'Normal provocants'. (Check the article history.) I can't imagine that you did this on purpose. I wonder if you didn't use an automated method to do this; if so, perhaps you might be able to figure out where it went wrong.

Cheers, -ikkyu2 (talk) 08:38, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate the note. I can fix this problem with my editing aid, so it's really useful that you've told me. Rich Farmbrough 19:28 12 March 2006 (UTC).
I am glad to have been helpful. I often wish that I had the ability to code up such useful aids. -ikkyu2 (talk) 21:41, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] J. R. R. Tolkien

Hi! My name is Mike, and I wanted to let you know that this article is up for Featured Article Status! It is SOOO CLOSE! And as someone who has worked on this article a lot in the past (having checked the history) I thought you could help me fix the inline citations. As I have none of the books in question, I am out of luck, but thought real enthusiasts might be able to help. So, please help, or get those who you know can to help make Tolkien a featured article! Thanks much! Judgesurreal777 18:07, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] List of Arizona birds

I'm wondering if you botted this one. I don't quite see the point in wikifying the dates of first sightings of birds in a state, it seems extraneous and/or unuseful to do this. Birthdates and historical events make sense, but I'm not sure why the last edit was even made.  :/ -- Miwa 13:35, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

It has nothing to do with useful links. Just click on the "my preferences" link, or check out m:Help:Preferences under Date format. Gene Nygaard 17:16, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Gene has kindly replied for me. Rich Farmbrough 18:39 13 March 2006 (UTC).

[edit] MOT?

Hey Rich

After you edited MOT (test), it vanished. But it doesn't seem to be a deleted article. Any ideas?


[edit] Transwiki:Casualties of the September 11, 2001 attacks

Thanks for your welcome over on the memorial wiki! I just found it myself recently. Doc 14:52, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikified Dates

Please undo the "wikified" dates you made in the date articles. You have created circular references. That is, you've got date articles pointing back at themselves. Rklawton 22:57, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your note. You are perfectly correct that these are circular references, which are by and large a Bad Thing. However the badness has been ameliorated by the Wikimedia software (since about V1.3 or 1.4 I think) which displays them as bold instead of as links. Since the frist occurance should be bold anyway, this is ok. On the other hand, it also allows date prefernces to work. For a fuller discussion see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Days_of_the_year#Linking_dates_in_lead_paragraphs. Best regards, Rich Farmbrough 23:11 14 March 2006 (UTC).
That's good to know about circular references. I suppose the extra CPU cycles aren't all that significant. However, we now have bolded dates in places where they weren't bolded before (other than as the first word in the article). I'm rather hoping you will avoid this problem with the remaining date articles and review the date articles you've already edited for errors. On a separate note, I'd recommend against running BOTs against date articles anyway. Date articles have a high vandalism rate, and BOTS run the risk of masking such edits. Rklawton 23:20, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Coolio. I'll be able to review date articles on Monday, but with 366 articles to plow through, the fewer edits, the better. Rklawton 00:37, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] election table

All latest election results on a national level around the world are now in a template. This was a project for a couple of months and nobody really argued against it. The big advantage is that results can be used in more entries, and that the results are not diferent throughout Wikipedia. Electionworld = Wilfried (talk 18:26, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Smackbot and US Articles

G'day, It has been pointed out to me that Smackbot is trawling through the US Census articles and fixing layout. Would it be possible to have Smackbot add USA after each location so that it reads, "Horseshoe Falls, New York, USA." Most of the census articles fail to state that the location is in the US. As it is wiki style to actually indicate what country a place is located, this would be a wonderful task for Smackbot.

What do you think?

With best wishes,

Henry Maustrauser 09:28, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

That is a good idea, but may not be trivial, I'm looking to make another run through improving various solecisms. The MoS abbreviation is U.S. rather than USA though. Rich Farmbrough 10:00 16 March 2006 (UTC).
Thanks very much. Will you let me know if it can be done (or if you have the time to do it) and that way I can stop adding them manually. It gets a little tiresome! Thank you, Henry Maustrauser 11:06, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
Some are already happening! Also quite a lot have been done manually by various individuals. My current run will take about another 2 days, then I will re-build the replacement strings to take care of some of the 00.00 % and the redundant word "total" in "has a total population", together with the U.S. part. Anything else you spot about the census articles, please let me know. Rich Farmbrough 11:16 16 March 2006 (UTC).
You are wonderful! Thank you very much. I'll go off and edit something more edifying now. Cheers, Henry Maustrauser 11:18, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi—A bunch of your (SmackBot) Census revisions showed up on my watchlist, and since it became apparent to me that it was actually possible to do census data mass revisions (before it seemed to be like it'd be impossible, especially with over 600+ NJ municipality/CDP/area articles alone)... I wanted to comment that, currently, many articles' Census data sections begin at least one (if not more) sentence with numbers/percentages. This is bad English grammar—numbers beginning sentences should either be written as words (which obviously is not the solution to this, since the numbers aren't like "twenty-eight" or "seven"), or the sentence should be recast to start with something other than the number. Obviously this isn't your fault, but if it's something you could somehow correct while you're making these other corrections, it would be good. (Btw, I have never looked this up in the manual of style, but it's in many style/grammar manuals) Thanks. //MrD9 02:36, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

I'll have some thinks about this. Rich Farmbrough 08:59 17 March 2006 (UTC).

MoS... MoS... Which one? In Asutralian English, starting a sentence/paragraph with a number of percentage is OK if it makes things more readable. Starting with "Seventeen point nine percent" instead of "17.9%" seems silly. While we are at it, U.S.A. isn't used in Australia anymore, looks weird, not sure of the UK recommendation/usgae. Alex Law 16:15, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I think it is a debatable point, but if we can aovid it wihtout making the sentence tortuous, why not? WP has a preferred style (U.S.), which is fine by me. It may of course change in the future, but that's not a problem. Rich Farmbrough 16:26 21 March 2006 (UTC).
The issue of U.S. versus US has been debated at least half a dozen times in various locations around Wikipedia. The outcome has always been to prefer U.S. because that's the majority usage in the United States. Like American politics, American punctuation is very conservative. --153.18.99.87 23:32, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New regex

I have been testing a new regex in a file called 'datestest.js' (see my monobook). It has dramatically reduced two entire classes of false positives: ISO dates and dates that have the year at the left. It does have some 'misses' and some of these can be cured by running it twice (i.e. clicking on that 'datestest' tab a second or third time). Please let me know what you think. bobblewik 18:20, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Enlighten me

What benefit do the (hundreds of) apparent self-linking edits achieve (see e.g. [31]). Is it some date preferences issue you are sorting? Pcb21 Pete 23:45, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, most of them are already self-linked, I only had to do 62 days in the from 1st of July to the 31st of December, about a third of the total. It doesn't present any problems, because the software knows it is a a self link (just as it does with our sigs on our talk pages) an bolds it instead of creating a circular link. Rich Farmbrough 23:55 16 March 2006 (UTC).
Yes I agree it seems to be problem-free. I guess I just didn't get the point of the change - The ''' syntax just highlights in bold and the [[ ]] syntax does the same thing, after making the software figure out it is a self-link.. Maybe it is just making things standardized across all date pages? Pcb21 Pete 00:00, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
That plus if you had a page like "December 25 is the day after December 24" for some people it would look fine, for others it would look like "December 25 is the day after 24 December". Rich Farmbrough 00:04 17 March 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Minor SmackBot edit summary typo

Just a typo of general [32]. Just thought you'd like to know.--Drat (Talk) 01:22, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, much appreciated. Rich Farmbrough 01:24 17 March 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Underscores in wikilinks

Your Smackbot just screwed up a bunch of links in Top Gear. While it's good to remove underscores from wikilinks, don't do it in the anchor part i.e after the hash (#). The anchors are given specific names, which includes the underscore. All of those links to sections now simply go to the top of the article. Fix it. Imroy 19:37, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Er, no it didn't. The link anchor was wrong - to Emmy Award#The International Emmys instead of Emmy Award#International Emmys. The link to the Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution#Evolution VIII was fine. Rich Farmbrough 20:43 17 March 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Errors in SmackBot

[edit] Tense

I have just reverted a couple of SmackBot edits (Irvine, California and Cerritos, California), as I believe the Bot is wrong. When writing as of (insert year here) the population of (insert city here) .... the rest of the sentence should be in present tense, and not past tense. --Asbl 16:28, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know your view. Rich Farmbrough 23:20 18 March 2006 (UTC).
I think you are right if the text is being written at the time spoken of, "as of today we are getting lots of talk messages", but notif it is being written later "as of 12 BC there are no computers" is wrong whereas "as of 12 BC there were no computers" is right. What do you think? Rich Farmbrough 23:32 18 March 2006 (UTC).

Yes, I guess its a function of content, so it's probably best to not create a bot for this application. --Asbl 00:04, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Caps

It's also made a mistake in capitalization: in this diff, the first "as" should have stayed lowercase. -- stillnotelf has a talk page 17:13, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, I will have to scan through and fix these. Rich Farmbrough 23:20 18 March 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Caps and a blank line

SmackBot has made the same capitalization error in an edit to Centreville, Virginia,[33] as well as again removing blank lines that serve a purpose, this time between article content and categories, which are supposed to have separation to make the categories more visible. Please stop SmackBot immediately until you have reviewed Wikipedia style guidelines and have addressed the many problems that are being posted on this page. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 17:58, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, capital fixed I will search out and fix any others, however there is still, and always has been, a blank line before the categories. Rich Farmbrough 23:20 18 March 2006 (UTC).
My apologies about the blank line. The diff shows a blank line being removed between the Geolinks template and the category, but after your statement, I confirmed that the resultant page does indeed still have a blank line. I guess it's a diff oddity. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 02:43, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I saw that, if I had more energy I'd file a bug. Rich Farmbrough 11:50 19 March 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Smackbot escaping apostrophies

In this edit Smackbot inadvertently escaped the apostrophies in the title "Appearances in Playboy special editions". I've reverted this one, but I guess it's likely the same snafu has occurred elsewhere. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 16:30, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for telling me, it's only in some of the playmates articles. I promised to fix this, and am now doing so. Thanks again. Rich Farmbrough 00:09 19 March 2006 (UTC).
All fixed. Rich Farmbrough 11:17 19 March 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Smackbot grammar changes

I really don't think it's useful to change all Census 2000 data from present tense to past tense. Ideally we want to print current statistics. The Census 2000 statistics are the most current ones we have, so we use those. Putting it all in the past tense makes it sound like the cities don't exist anymore (or that their statistics are now significantly different, which is usually not the case). This might make sense for New Orleans, but not for other cities. Plus, we'll have to change them all back to present tense when the new Census is published. Instead, let's just leave them all present tense and use whatever are the most current statistics available.

Also, I object to Smackbot making two different types of edits at the same time. This makes it very tedious to revert just one of the changes (either tense or unicoding) should either one need to be reverted. Bots should only perform one type of edit at a time (at least in my opinion). For example, I love the unicode changes you are making, but hate the tense changes. Unfortunately there is no easy way I can keep one but not the other.Kaldari 05:01, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bot edit summary

Would it be possible to change the bot edit summary so that it is clearer that is is not primarily relinking nazi links? I come across it at different places, and it just looks so wierd to find it at places where there is no link at all..... KimvdLinde 17:34, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi, sorry I missed your comment on my talk page earlier. The correction of the links to Nazism is complete, but I would still be interested to know where you saw the edit summary, that idn't have a Nazi/Nazism link. Thanks Rich Farmbrough 11:32 27 March 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Smackbot: arrangement of interwikis

Hi Rich - your bot's rearrangement of the interwikis at Christmas tree is wrong in putting them in alphabetical order of the two-letter codes; they should be in alphabetical order of the language itself, which isn't always the same. Some important ones to watch for:

  • es: (Español) comes before eo: (Esperanto)
  • he: (Ivrit) comes after it: (Italian)
  • ja: (Nihongo) comes after nl: (Nederlands)
  • fi: (Suomi) comes just before sv: (Sverige)

Note that this is not a complete list of all the ones that need care in positioning! - thanks, MPF 18:27, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed by an automated bot. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. If you feel you have received this notice in error, please contact the bot owner // Tawkerbot2 23:24, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tawkerbot2

See the bots talk page, during that last squidward attack the diffs comming from the IRC feed were screwed up and it caused some problems with Tawkerbot2, sorry about that, by the time I noticed it (within a few seconds) there wasn't much I could do due to the massive squidward attack. -- Tawker 23:42, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thank You

Thank You!

J.Steinbock

[edit] Sortkey problems

In this edit you removed the space before the "Scenic" sortkey. This moved the article from the beginning of the category to after all the routes. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 11:01, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AWB

First of all, isn't it about time to archive this page? It's upwards of 145kb. Next, I have a question about your bot, SmackBot. What settings was it using when the bot made this edit? You can check out Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser#Quick Q for the context of my question. Thanks! --M@thwiz2020 23:04, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

These 367 pages should have self links, at least on the first occurence it supports date preferences. Therefore I always (try to) do these pages with manual intervention, or General changes turned off. I've been through the year twice checking and fixing manually, once last Sept, and once in the last few days, so I don't want to undo all that work! Rich Farmbrough 23:10 20 March 2006 (UTC).
PS you're right about the archiveing!
That's funny - while the AWB was still relatively young (about the end of last December), I went though the list of all the date articles and just did general fixes. But why 367 and not 366 (365 days plus leap day = 366)? As for the manual self-linker, you can write a simple regex to do this for you. Do a find-and-replace with regex turned on for:
Find: \|}(\r\n)*(''')?(\[\[)?(''')?(%%title%%)(''')?(\]\])?(''')?
Replace: |}\r\n[[%%title%%]]
This should (hopefully) make your task easier. I've already tested it and it works well, but only if the title of the article comes after the template close (for example, September 21). The regex allows for blank lines between the two, but no other text. I did this to avoid false positives, i.e., I don't want it to self-link all instances of the title on the page. If you have any problems with the regex, feel free to drop by! --M@thwiz2020 00:21, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
I see that you have a new regex. [34] The ironic thing is that, according to your comments, you want to prevent robots from delinking the date, yet you're using a robot to leave the comments! --M@thwiz2020 23:01, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] SmackBot not reviewing edits

Not reviewing every edit as required by AWB. Blindly piped UK and US in the List of all two-letter combinations.

--William Allen Simpson 13:19, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
Now configured to avoid that page. Rich Farmbrough 17:01 23 March 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Smackbot edit to delink month

I reverted this edit because it was incorrect. You may want to double check your bot. —Mike 03:02, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Now avoiding that kind of table. Rich Farmbrough 15:48 23 March 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Smackbot request

Hi, Rich. Could you, please, exclude the "xxxx in Fooian television" series (such as 1930 in television) from the Smackbot's delink list? These series is one of the few places where linking months makes sense (due to the way tables are laid out). I reverted the changes made so far. Thanks.—Ëzhiki (ërinacëus amurënsis) 13:35, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Certainly. Consider it done. Any other requests, or if this crops up again, please let me know. Rich Farmbrough 13:50 23 March 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Smackbot, I'm not sure if this is an improvement

Hi Rich, It's good to see the changes being made to the Vermont town pages with SmackBot. However, I feel that it's making some changes that are sort of hard to read in English and I'd like your opinion. The recent changes to the Groton, Vermont page changed this sentence "The per capita income for the town was $14,659. 10.5% of the population and 6.8% of families were below the poverty line. 11.9% of those under the age of 18 and 9.1% of those 65 and older were living below the poverty line." to this "The per capita income for the town was $14,659. Below the poverty line were 10.5% of people, 6.8% of families, 11.9% of those under 18 and 9.1% of those over 64."

The sentence that starts "Below the poverty line..." seems wonky. I realize this is trying to keep sentences from starting with numbers, but it seems like the old sentences were a little clearer, even if they had this grammatical undesireability, and I'd lean towards keeping it the old way or finding another solution. I don't feel super-strongly about this, but I wanted to know what you thought? Jessamyn (talk) 17:34, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm not altogether happy with it as it stands. Can you make a better suggestion? Rich Farmbrough 17:38 23 March 2006 (UTC).
I'm still having a hard time thinking of a way to do it without starting the sentence with a number. Possibly something slightly more non-traditional but a little easier to follow. "The town has 10.5% of its population living below the poverty line, which includes 6.8% of its families, 11.9% of its people under 19 and 9.1% of its people over 64." The "its" could maybe be dropped. An improvement? I'd prefer to err on the side of starting a sentence with a number, but that's just my personal preference. Jessamyn (talk) 04:41, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
I liked your version, however there' a technical difficulty inserting the word "town" (city, gore, CDP etc.), also "including" isn't quite right fo families. "There are 6.8% of families living below the poverty line and 10.5% of the population, including 11.9% of those under 19 and 9.1% of over 64s." Regards, Rich Farmbrough 13:08 24 March 2006 (UTC).
I think your latest suggestion is better than either how it looks now, or what SmackBot's original changes were "There are 6.8% of families living below the poverty line and 10.5% of the population, including 11.9% of those under 19 and 9.1% of over 64." certainly not perfect, but a big improvement. Jessamyn (talk) 13:19, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, I'll go with that for now, but running slowly to allow other people a chance to chip in with improvements. Rich Farmbrough 13:23 24 March 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Delinking months and days of week

I really appreciate your bot delinking months and days of the week from articles. I was wondering if it could also delink isolated years? For instance, the phrase "In June of 2001" is changed to "In June of 2001", but the MoS also recommends that isolated years not be linked, just like isolated months. I've manually removed the links from isolated dates in lots of articles (e.g.), but it's tiring to do manually. What do you think? Is this something you'd be willing to do? – Quadell (talk) (bounties) 17:58, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, count me in that coterie. I think a lot of the opposition is just against Bobblewik himself, and the perception that he's rude and negligent. (I haven't found this to be true, but some people seem to be of that opinion.) Anyway, it might be different if someone else, with a good reputation, were to try. If there's anything I can do toward this, let me know. – Quadell (talk) (bounties) 18:41, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Smackbot suggestion

There was some text on a page that looked like "June 15", which smackbot changed to "June 15". But obviously this should be changed to "June 15". If there's an easy way to recognize such constructs, fixing them would be helpful. — jdorje (talk) 17:23, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

You are quite right that this would be desirable, and I do a lot of date linking, but because of the current disagreements around the whole date delinking/linking scenario I am being rather circumspect with what I do with SmackBot. In theory, the example you quoted 15 refers to the year AD 15, so even on a technical level there are problems. However there are a number of poeple working on imporving the date links, and there is a request with the developers for a better system of implementing date preferences, so all is not lost. Rich Farmbrough 00:35 26 March 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Smackbot and Chemistry

Minor problem of Smackbot's, it will fix links formatted like ''I love [[encyclopedia]]s'' to ''I love [[encyclopedias]]'', but sometimes that's not the right behavior, see line 350 of this diff. Here it fixed [[Sulfur|S]]H to [[Sulfur|SH]], but the H is not supposed to be part of the underlining. (I instead piped it to thiol, which is better anyway.) Perhaps if you instructed it to not make this change when the display text is in all capital letters or otherwise oddly formatted? If there's no obvious way to tweak the program I wouldn't worry about it, it's not likely to come up very often, but I thought you should be warned. Thanks, -- stillnotelf has a talk page 23:35, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks I'm not sure how to do this but I'll think about it. Rich Farmbrough 23:36 24 March 2006 (UTC).
OK I've made a change, it its a little complicated by the fact that AWB does some of these off it's own bat, and some are doen through regular expressions I specify. I'll just give it a test. Rich Farmbrough 23:42 24 March 2006 (UTC).
Your initial reply was fast, but the fact that you've already thought out a possible fix is mind-boggling! wow! -- stillnotelf has a talk page 23:47, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
It seems to work, it should now be very limited in taking capitals into the [][]. Any other issues, please let me know. Rich Farmbrough 23:47 24 March 2006 (UTC).
Thanks, nice to be appreciated! R.

[edit] Capitalizing the first letter of all chemical names is incorrect

Smackbot went through the Synthesis and Production section of the article entitled Ammonia. It simplified most of the piped links to various chemicals, with which I have no quarrel at all. But at the same time it also capitalized the first letter of all the chemical names it encountered, which is incorrect usage unless the chemical name starts a sentence. Is there any way to make it recognize the difference between chemical names starting a sentence and chemical names which do not start sentences? (I have just finished changing those capitals back to lower case.

If there is some Wiki style guide that says the first letter of all chemical names should always be capitalized, then that guide is incorrect and something should be done to revise it. - mbeychok 00:23, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

No, I think this was just plain wrong. Let me see if I can fix it. Rich Farmbrough 00:29 25 March 2006 (UTC).
OK should be fixed now. Please let me know if you see any more issues like this. Rich Farmbrough 00:47 25 March 2006 (UTC).
Rich, thanks. - mbeychok 00:54, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Date Articles

Smackbot is removing the self-referencing date link from date articles. The date link is important because it allows the reader to see dates formatted according to their preference. As such, it's an exception to the self-referencing rule. Besides, with the new software, a self-referencing link is bolded but doesn't appear as a link, so it's no big deal anymore. If possible please roll back your edits to date articles, change the programming a bit, and try again. If not, it's going to take a lot of work to go back and update all those articles by hand. Thanks. Rklawton 02:44, 25 March 2006 (UTC) (see our conversation above [35]).

I have a solution, but it will have to wait until tomorrow. Regards. Rich Farmbrough 03:07 25 March 2006 (UTC).
  • OK implemented for April, it's not the most elegant solution, but I think it's unlikely to be changed by users or bots. (Incidentally there are a lot of people using AWB, and I have seen at least Bluebot delinking them as well.) If you have no great objection I'll do the rest of the year. Rich Farmbrough 11:33 25 March 2006 (UTC).

[edit] SmackBot's speed

I've got no particular objection to the formatting edits SmackBot is making, but I'm getting pretty frustrated with getting up every day to find half my watchlist full of masses of SmackBot edits. Would it be possible to slow things down a bit so it doesn't have that effect? Ambi 04:39, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

I will slow it down for the time being - but you must have a huge watchlist, I have over 1000 and only three SB edits on it. Regards, Rich Farmbrough 11:24 25 March 2006 (UTC).
I've only got a thousand, so it's quite possible it's just been running through those topics. Odd. Thanks, anyway. :) Ambi 11:25, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
You may wish to vote for this bug. Rich Farmbrough 21:18 25 March 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Bot changes to U.S. cities

Please be careful regarding your new bot changes to U.S. cities. Many of the changes are ungrammatical, with bad punctuation (example: the use of the comma for the last clause in the first paragraph of each article). You're changing article after article in this way, with these consistent errors. Badagnani 05:49, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for pointing that out. I assume you mean the last comma in "Snooland is a town in Polk County, West Virginia, U.S., at the 2000 census the population was 33." I would see that as a parenthetical comma: what would be the correct way to punctuate it? What other grammatical errors am I making? Regards, Rich Farmbrough 11:12 25 March 2006 (UTC).
P.S. I've fixed the missing "and". Rich Farmbrough 13:10 25 March 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Smackbot block

Hi Rich, I've blocked Smackbot for three hours because it was delinking years and months. I have no problem with this myself, but it's a bit of a hot issue at the moment, and both sides have agreed not to make any more changes for a day or so until it's discussed more thoroughly. See here for the latest discussion if you want to leave a comment. Sorry for interfering. Cheers, SlimVirgin (talk) 07:50, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Actually Rich, now that I check the edits more carefully, it seems only to be delinking days and months, which so far as I know, no one objects to, so I'm going to unblock it. My apologies. SlimVirgin (talk) 07:52, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
No problem. Rich Farmbrough 11:28 25 March 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Converters

I just thunk of something really cool, and I thought you might know if it has been discussed yet. How about an automatic "converter" for measurements so that all measures appear in the user's preferred format? Currency converters would also be interesting, too, though we might limit them to Pounds, Dollars, Yen, and Euros. The currency converter should be able to show the contemporary amount or today's equivalent (user's preference). Rklawton 20:40, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Here and here. Rich Farmbrough 20:50 25 March 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Links

You're making piped links look bad. For example, this bot changed Mac OS 9.2.2 to Mac OS 9.2.2 —This unsigned comment was added by Angelic Wraith (talkcontribs) .

Thanks, fixed. You say "for example", are there others you want to tell me about? Rich Farmbrough 23:53 25 March 2006 (UTC).

No >_> I'm not telling you :)

Uhh.. well they were on the Apple Macintosh page. I just meant it was doing that sort of thing. I reverted it so I don't see that it really matters. ^_- Dan 03:05, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Smackbot blocked

I have blocked SmackBot for three hours per a complaint on WP:AN/I and a few recent edits I saw delinking dates that should have just been reformatted and formatting trailing s's in piped links contrary to the Manual of Style. I don't know if these concerns have been raised before. If you have any questions, please ask me on my talk page or respond to the thread on AN/I. Hermione1980 01:07, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

A complaint has been made here as well. I'm not concerned with years being unlinked, I do that myself, but I am concerned about what Smackbot is supposedly doing with the trailing s in links. From the descriptions of others, I am not sure exactly what changes it is supposedly making. Is it changing [[computer]]s to [[computer|computers]] or to [[computers]]? The first is against the manual of style, see here, because it makes it harder to read when editing. The second will either lead to people having to go through a redirect or it will break links that don't have a redirect for the plural form. When editing, I usually make it so that users will be sent directly to a page instead of going through a redirect. Thanks, -- Kjkolb 02:55, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
HI Kjolb, unfortunately I'm autoblocked at the moment so I'm answering on my talk page. The answer is neither of the above. SmackBot is (was) changing things like [[computer|comptometer]]s to [[computer|comptometers]] very much in line with MoS. Also it's not unlinking years, only months and days of the week. Rich Farmbrough 12:02 26 March 2006 (UTC).
Oh yes and things like [[computer|computers]] to [[computer]]s. Rich Farmbrough 22:23 26 March 2006 (UTC).

Unblocked. Hermione1980 23:29, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Sweet, that should reduce my work. It's doing the opposite of what was claimed. I could not find any examples either way, when I did a quick check of the bot's edits. Sorry about the confusion, Kjkolb 02:21, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] SmackBot month delinking

An unfortunate side-effect of your current delinking of months meant that in a whole heap of Formula One articles, the team March Engineering, which was wrongly linked to the month as March has all become delinked. I know it shouldn't have been pointing to March but now it is difficult to find and correct those incorrect links that I've only just become aware of. Is there any way to find all of the occurences of this other than going through SmackBot's contribs? Thanks AlbinoMonkey (Talk) 07:36, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi, how about I give you a list of articles that include "Formula One" ,"Formula 1" or Formula one" and a link to March as of earlier this month. Rich Farmbrough 11:23 26 March 2006 (UTC).
OK here it is, all 224 articles - two have special characters but I'm sure you'll know the location of the real article. Some you may wish to ignore, like "2004" Rich Farmbrough 12:55 26 March 2006 (UTC).
Thanks! AlbinoMonkey (Talk) 08:21, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] SmackBot

See: Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approvals#SmackBot_and_AWB_operated_by_Rich_Farmbrough --Francis Schonken 10:30, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sep11 Adminship

Congratulations! You're now and admin at the 11 September Wiki. Have fun! :) Jamesday 22:09, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Remember that you can always take a break from edit wars or other strife. This place is supposed to be fun. :) Jamesday 22:22, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tawkerbot2

Yea, apparently there were some major major problems with Wikipedia, it appears to be fixed now, sorry about that -- Tawker 23:09, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] html commentary tags

See for instance template talk:footnotestext, comment by Omegatron [36] --Francis Schonken 01:00, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] SmackBot

Wow, it's done so many edits it took forever for me to get back to the time on March 24 which gave me my first concern. I think it had something to do with editing everything on Wikipedia in alphabetical order without some kind of explanation as to what it was doing. Nothing against you, but I think the bot flag was set much too easily without a real explanation of what edits you were planning on making. User:Zoe|(talk) 23:35, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Of Tom Sutton and brackets

That's brilliant! Using the "nowiki" code was genius — and, yes, it's way better to have the brackets themselves not be linked. Makes them stand out properly and eases potential confusion. Kudos to you, man! Spread the word! — Tenebrae 00:07, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Smackbot breaking rules of grammar

Ohiopyle is a borough located in Fayette County, Pennsylvania, U.S., at the 2000 census the population was 77.

Tell me what's wrong with this sentence. Kaldari 02:14, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

PLease tell me. Someone claimed that the last comma is wrong, but didn't reply to tell me in what way. If I know what is wrong I can easily fix it. BY the way, I did write a reply to your previous message, but must have lost it, sorry about that. Rich Farmbrough 02:23 28 March 2006 (UTC).
If you honestly need me to spell it out: In English, sentences are separated by periods, not commas. Also, I don't think the preposition "at" makes much sense in this context. What's wrong with "As of the 2000 census, blah had a population of 77"? That is a clear and concise sentence. I don't see any need to change it. Kaldari 02:31, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
OK, I see what you mean about the prepositon "in" would probably have been better. I'll leave the two sentence struture alone, although I think it's a bit verbose. Rich Farmbrough 02:36 28 March 2006 (UTC).
Will you be cleaning up the comma error? Kaldari 03:02, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
Yes. Rich Farmbrough 09:40 28 March 2006 (UTC).
Just a quick summary of what my previous reply would have said
Yes - we want up to date info and when we get the 2010 census data no doubt Rambot will import it. However it still does not seem right to talk in the present tense about something that is six years old. The population of the US has grown by about 10 million in this period, and Las Vegas by about 41%. Some of the really small places could have seen even more massive percentage changes.
On your second point, I agree with you in principle, however users do not like to see lots of small edits, becasue it "pollutes their watchlists". Perhpas this is something to discuss at talk-bots.
Well, I'm going to tear myself away from WP for a while and get a little real life. Regards, Rich Farmbrough 15:16 28 March 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Don't need expand if already labelled a stub.

Please read talk pages before removing expand tags. For example, on Annual report[37] I added the expand tag because I'd like that page expanded to include "Semi-annual report" and "Quarterly report". Thanks! Ewlyahoocom 19:57, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I've put the tag on the talk page. Rich Farmbrough 21:49 28 March 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Re: RegEx

Line 480 of parsers.cs (in the code) contains a function linksimplifier with comments "changes Dog to Dog and Dogs to Dogs". WP:AWB also lists under "general fixes" (in the manual towards the bottom) that it:

  • Simplifies links like Dog to Dog.
  • Simplifies links like Dogs to Dogs.

I looked at, while it simplifies Dogs to Dogs it will not simplify Changed to Changed, etc. I can't fully understand your request, but I believe that that is what you are looking for, and I can easily modify the code to allow for that. Just drop me a message to let me know. Thanks! --M@thwiz2020 00:15, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Regarding your first regex, the only way to skip dates is to get into the code. As for the second, why not replace it with </nowiki>$1$3 instead of $2$3</nowiki>? --M@thwiz2020 00:50, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
I doubt you'll get this message (since it's archived) but I'll leave it anyways. $1$3 is guaranteed to be a good link while $2$3 might not be. All in all, you need to edit the code. I'll see what I can do to modify Bluemoose's current regexs when I have time (Friday, probably). --M@thwiz2020 01:53, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

The order of this page may have been munged. Rich Farmbrough 22:32 5 May 2006 (UTC).


[edit] Spelling

Hi Rich,

I noticed an edit of yours [38] had the summary (Manually checked and maybye modified clean of pages listed via Wikipedia:Bad links#Encoded_characters using AWB).

Did you mean "maybe", or is it meant to be a pun? Andjam 01:12, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Sadly it is not a clever pun... Thanks. Rich Farmbrough 01:23 1 April 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Smackbot

Thanks for being receptive to criticism. I hope to be able to support future bot requests for Smackbot (of limited scope) since I do believe that the non-contentious edits performed by Smackbot were helpful. Kaldari 02:08, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sep11 wiki

Thanks for your comments. I've read through the various proposals to delete, move, etc. the wiki somewhere other than sep11.wikipedia.org. However, I'm not sure if anyone is moving toward a decision, and don't want to put too much work into cleaning up articles if they will just end up being deleted. I know memorywiki has taken the testimonials, but don't think they have taken the sep11:Tributes_to_individuals. Many of these presumably were articles originally written on Wikipedia, but moved to sep11 wiki (per WP:BIO). If the sep11 wiki is just completely deleted without moving or archiving these articles, then I think it leaves a void. Perhaps, the bio articles about the victims could be moved back to Wikipedia (with my watchlist growing accordingly), and the tributes to memorywiki. In my opinion, each victim is as notable and worthy of an article as the 19 hijackers are (and a few of the victims do have Wikipedia articles). Or, as a very last resort, I might be willing to take the database, buy a domain, hosting for it. --Aude (talk | contribs) 02:37, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

I've actually tried moving some of the more encyclopedic articles back into Wikipedia, but was met with harsh resistance. They were summarily deleted under the chant "Wikipedia is not a memorial". If the sept 11 wiki is ever closed (which is a big "if") I very seriously doubt the content would be deleted outright. At the worst, it will get archived into a big zip file. Kaldari 04:27, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Regex (cont'd)

See User_talk:Rich_Farmbrough/Talk_Archive_8#Re:_RegEx and User_talk:Mathwiz2020#RegEx

I was thinking about the regex script you wrote and, as soon as SourceForge CVS is back up and I can download the latest code, I'll work on adding your regex, plus the requested modifications, to AWB's general fixes. I just have one question. For the regex:

\[\[([^\]\|]+)\|(\1)([^\]\|\-\'\s]*)\]\] => [[$2]]$3

Why can't there be a hyphen or apostrophe after the pipe? Why not change [[Tom|Tom's]] to [[Tom]]'s and [[Tom|Tom-Jerry]] to [[Tom]]-Jerry? I understand, though, why you don't want to change [[Tom|Tom and Jerry]] to [[Tom]] and Jerry. Thanks. --M@thwiz2020 19:33, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Survey

I am conducting a survey on Wikipedia and would like to invite you to participate in the study. I've posted a message on wikien-l, but here is the link again in case you are not subscribed to that list-serv. Thanks a lot for your time! --Mermes 01:23, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Expand / stub

So many articles are marked stub that the system is a waste of time. "Expand" at least offers some hope that something will get done as it is less used. 62.31.55.223 05:05, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Please block

Notice you're an active admin. Can oyu please block: 64.160.211.191. Posted "I love the cock" in American Civil Rights. thanks. Avraham 15:43, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

That was fast, thanks. the vandalism was actually sitting there for about 20 minutes.

[edit] Transwiki "Periodic Report of the United States of America to the United Nations Committee Against Torture" to wikisource?

I recommended that Periodic Report of the United States of America to the United Nations Committee Against Torture be moved to wikisource. Like you I made some good faith edits to that article without realizing that it was not a summary of the document, but a cut and paste of the original.

Since you did some work on the article I thought you might want to voice an opinion on the transwiki. Have you ever been involved in a transwiki?

Cordially, Geo Swan 21:21, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Flag size

To my knowledger the flag size has consistently been 20px. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 14:38, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

No problem - this is just one of a number of IP based, unannounced, undescussed edits being done also in an inconsistant fashion. Yours was just the first "Named" user envolved. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 14:45, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Smackbot

I don't think putting the catgories into alphabetical order instead of a sensible order is "minor", I think it is considerable damage. If you are going to do this, please disclose that you are not making "minor edits", but it would be much better to stop doing it IMO. Osomec 20:09, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Block of 204.184.95.250

I noticed you temporarily blocked this IP address. Since his/her block has expired he/she has started vandalising again. I have issued a warning. Perhaps we can consider a more long-term ban? TydeNet 15:11, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Smackbot de-flagged

Hi Rich, as you may have noticed SmackBot was de-flagged a few days ago (see m:Requests_for_bot_status#en:User:SmackBot and [39])

Is it OK for you to move SmackBot's listing on WP:BOTS from Wikipedia:Bots#Bots with a flag to Wikipedia:Bots#Bots running without a flag?

Also, I'd be interested to know what your intentions are re. submitting a new bot request? If the tasks are well described and non-controversial, I don't see why I wouldn't support such request! --Francis Schonken 16:29, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Further I'd like to invite you not to use any other account at bot speed, for instance your most recent edits with the Rich Farmbrough account show:
  1. 13:51, 8 April 2006 (hist) (diff) m John D. Barrow (spelling) (top)
  2. 13:51, 8 April 2006 (hist) (diff) m Balata (spelling) (top)
  3. 13:51, 8 April 2006 (hist) (diff) m Tokusatsu (spelling) (top)
  4. 13:51, 8 April 2006 (hist) (diff) m Walther P99 (spelling) (top)
  5. 13:51, 8 April 2006 (hist) (diff) m Spennymoor (spelling) (top)
Five edits in less than a minute is at bot speed; and doing spelling corrections at bot speed is in itself a bit controversial... (it was one of the given reasons - not by me - why modbot's bot approval request was denied not so long ago...).
Sorry to make a fuss again, but please, behave ;) --Francis Schonken 16:35, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Your point taken too... I was surprised and checked quick edits in my last 500 contributions, what I found:

  1. Resulting from "tabbed browsing" after merging separate Bourgeois dab issues to Bourgeois (disambiguation):
    • 10:49, 29 March 2006 (hist) (diff) m Bourgeoisie (Bourgeois dab page)
    • 10:49, 29 March 2006 (hist) (diff) Louis Bourgeois (merging with "bourgeois" dab page) (top)
    • 10:49, 29 March 2006 (hist) (diff) Bourgeois (disambiguation) (expand) (top)
  2. Page moves with a page that has a non-empty talk page auto-create 4 edits in less than a minute (well, unless wikipedia is extremely slow),
    • 00:53, 27 March 2006 (hist) (diff) Talk:Al-Kitāb al-muḫtaṣar fī ḥisāb al-ğabr wa-l-muqābala (moved Talk:Al-Kitāb al-muḫtaṣar fī ḥisāb al-ğabr wa-l-muqābala to Talk:The Compendious Book on Calculation by Completion and Balancing: per wikipedia:naming conventions (books)#Title translations) (top)
    • 00:53, 27 March 2006 (hist) (diff) Al-Kitāb al-muḫtaṣar fī ḥisāb al-ğabr wa-l-muqābala (moved Al-Kitāb al-muḫtaṣar fī ḥisāb al-ğabr wa-l-muqābala to The Compendious Book on Calculation by Completion and Balancing: per wikipedia:naming conventions (books)#Title translations) (top)
    • 00:53, 27 March 2006 (hist) (diff) m Talk:The Compendious Book on Calculation by Completion and Balancing (moved Talk:Al-Kitāb al-muḫtaṣar fī ḥisāb al-ğabr wa-l-muqābala to Talk:The Compendious Book on Calculation by Completion and Balancing: per wikipedia:naming conventions (books)#Title translations) (top)
    • 00:53, 27 March 2006 (hist) (diff) m The Compendious Book on Calculation by Completion and Balancing (moved Al-Kitāb al-muḫtaṣar fī ḥisāb al-ğabr wa-l-muqābala to The Compendious Book on Calculation by Completion and Balancing: per wikipedia:naming conventions (books)#Title translations)
  3. Double redirect cleanup after a page move can also be somewhat speedier than than 1/30sec:
    • 01:06, 27 March 2006 (hist) (diff) m Al-Kitāb al-mukhtaṣar fī hīsāb al-ğabr wa’l-muqābala (avoiding double redirect) (top)
    • 01:06, 27 March 2006 (hist) (diff) m Al-Gabr (avoiding double redirect) (top)
    • 01:06, 27 March 2006 (hist) (diff) m Al-Jabr (avoiding double redirect) (top)

Notwithstanding that, I'm a bit suspicious of spelling corrections at 4 per minute on completely unrelated pages... my point is that one has to read sentences/paragraphs and check other issues (e.g. whether one isn't changing a hyperlink instead of making a typo correction etc...), I give you some examples:

  • (this one was done by a non-humanly-checked bot, so I hope you don't take offense I use this example; my point is that this change was done completely in accordance with current typo lists available in Wikipedia; and that it would've taken MORE THAN 15 SECs to realise [a] that this was nonsense; and [b] that the text between ".png|" and "|thumb" should've been removed instead of improved): diff changed:
    "[...] anual opening of the Congress [...]"
    to
    "[...], anal opening of the Congress [...]"
  • (this one is by you, you already acted on my remark regarding it, just mentioning again here in the context of 15 sec changes:) diff changed the Claude Debussy page in 5 places; it is my contention that one needs more than 3 secs per change for finding out that the 3rd of these changes was no-good (Chopin's → Chopin's)

Regards, --Francis Schonken 12:54, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Shock and Awe

The following posted on about 28 admin's talk pages by Larne. Rich  Farmbrough 17:19 9  April 2006 (UTC).

Hello Mr. Farmbrough, I don't want to cause any trouble because I'm new here (at least as an editor), so I'd like to talk off the record to a few good contributors about a problem I see on an article that you've edited. Your contributions seem solid, so maybe you can help me. I've been using the Wikipedia definition of "Shock and Awe" for several months because I like how it described the type of warfare that "Shock and Awe" is and also how it gave a link to a definition of "rapid dominance" (of which it claims to be a subset).

In the last couple of days, however, a user called JW1805 edited the article and I think he made the definition much worse.[40] It now says that "Shock and Awe is a military doctrine," whereas is used to say exactly what type of military doctrine it falls into: "Shock and Awe is a method of unconventional warfare." Isn't the old definition more informative? According to the definition of Conventional warfare, I don't think anyone could call it that. So, I think it's safe and informative to say that "Shock and Awe" fits into the definition of unconventional warfare, don't you?

Also JW1805 removed the link to "Rapid dominance," deleted the "Rapid dominance" article and redirected it to "Shock and Awe." Yet the "Shock and Awe" article still says, "Its authors label [shock and awe] a subset of Rapid Dominance." Does that make any sense to you? According to RUSI Journal 141:8-12 Oct '96, "Rapid dominance" is an "intellectual construct" whereas "Shock and awe" is one "method" of implementing that construct. Obviously they are not the same thing. So, why would JW1805 redirect "Rapid dominance" to "Shock and Awe?" Why would he delete the "Rapid dominance" article and the link it?

I went to JW1805's talk page to speak directly to him, but I read what others have said to him, and it seems to be the same story: if you are only one person complaining, JW1805 considers you a troublemaker and has his friends ban you, but if more than one person gets together and says the same thing, he listens. If you feel the same way as I about his edits to "Shock and Awe" and "Rapid dominance," I'm sure we can work together to get the best definition back in place. Are you up for something like that? --Larnue the dormouse 20:23, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

If you wanted to change content you might have succeeded had you not attempted to rope in loads of other editors. Rich Farmbrough 12:34 9 April 2006 (UTC).
Hi Rich, I would ask as a courtesy that you remove "Larnue's" (aka Zephram's) post from this page, which is a personal attack against me from a banned troll. See (Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Zephram Stark, Category:Wikipedia:Suspected sockpuppets of Zephram Stark, Wikipedia:Long_term_abuse#Zephram_Stark) for details about his modus operandi. He creates at least several sockpuppets a week, which are usually easy to spot, and they are banned. I'm just one the editors that reverts his edits (I could care less about what is in the Shock and Awe article.) Actually, your comment explains a lot about his behavior. If he really wanted to simply change the content, he could have made some attempt to behave more like an actual new editor. But his massive personal attack against me gave him away. He isn't interested in article content, just causing trouble. That's one of the reasons he was banned in the first place. --JW1805 (Talk) 14:53, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi JW, I would rather keep it on my talk page, until archived, it seems a fairly crude and feeble ploy, it would rather blacken the perpetrator's name than your own. Rich Farmbrough 17:19 9 April 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Smackbot on FastCGI

Smackbot just edited the mod_{perl|php|python} links in FastCGI, changing the underscores to spaces. The links still go to the proper pages, but I'd argue that the link text is incorrect. For once the links really should have an underscore in them! What do you think? Am I being too picky? Imroy 10:43, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, interesting problem. I've fixed up that page, but the general solution is harder, perhaps we need a stop list for some of these functions (still not perfect I know). Thanks for letting me know. Rich Farmbrough 11:33 14 April 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Stubs

Hi! I noticed that when Smackbot applies general fixes, it moves the stub note to the very bottom of the page (example). It was always my belief that stub messages should be following the article body, and then followed by categories and interwikis. Could you look into this, please? Not a big deal, but when I, for example, edit pages, I do not expect to see a stub message after the interwikis. Thanks!—Ëzhiki (ërinacëus amurënsis) • (yo?); 12:27, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

There's an archived discussion here. The salient points seem to be
  • There's not a mandated place.
  • Stubs are an editor feature (and a form of sef-reference) so belong at the end after user features. Regards. Rich Farmbrough 12:38 14 April 2006 (UTC).
Thanks for pointing me out to the archived discussion; while I was sure the issue had been discussed before, I was unable to find an archived thread on my own.
One question I still have is about your second point above. Stub notices are an editor's feature, true, but to the reader the categories will always show in the very bottom of the page, no matter where in the edit screen they are located. For the reader, it really makes no difference. For the sake of editors (those, who frequent the "edit this page" tab), however, wouldn't it be more convenient to leave the stubs immediately after the main text (i.e., before cats and interwikis), especially since the location isn't mandated anyway? I realize that "stubs-to-bottom" is an AWB feature, but somehow in the archived discussion nobody mentioned the point I am trying to make. What do you think?—Ëzhiki (ërinacëus amurënsis) • (yo?); 14:24, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
Stubs include a category, so they should definately come after any "real" categories. Before or after interwiki is debateable, perhaps it doesn't matter much. Rich Farmbrough 17:24 14 April 2006 (UTC).
I guess I simply do not understand the purpose. OK, suppose we put the stub notices after categories, but what's the point? It makes no difference to readers (cats will show up in the browser after stub notices anyway), and it makes no difference to most of the editors. It is a minor annoyance to editors like me, however, who are accustomed to seeing stub notices right after the main text. Now, on the other hand, if we put notices to where editors like me are accustomed to seeing them (right after text), it would have no effect whatsoever on readers (the article will look exactly the same), and those editors who did not care in the first place will continue to not care about it. Editors like me will get rid of the inconvenience. So, is it really worth to inconvenience some people just for the sake logical purity of the article's structure?
Speaking of "logical purity", I don't even see it. If the article structure is "text+stubs+cats+iw", then, if some stubs contain cats, it translates to "text+(stub+cat)+cats+iw" = "text+stub+cats+iw"—nice and logical. If we put stubs after main categories, then the final structure will look like "text+cats+(stub+cat)+iw"—category list flow is interrupted. What's the logic in that? No matter which way you put it, it does not make sense!
I am not trying to make a big deal out of it, lest you got that impression; it is admittedly a very insignificant point. It's just that I enjoy being logical as much as the next guy, and just couldn't miss a chance to debate such a woefully incongruous inconsistency. If I missed anything in my logic or if you are sick and tired of this discussion, please let me know—I have no intention of forcing you to continue discussion you do not enjoy (I'm only keeping it out of my eternal ever-burning desire to get to the bottom of things :). Best, —Ëzhiki (ërinacëus amurënsis) • (yo?); 18:07, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
If you look here you will see that having stub before cats gives a cat listing like this:
Categories: Northwestern Russia geography stubs | Cities and towns in Vologda Oblast.
Rich Farmbrough 21:10 14 April 2006 (UTC).
Ah, got you! Only took me what? A day?—Ëzhiki (ërinacëus amurënsis) • (yo?); 14:53, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Two little problems

[edit] Leonard N. Stern

Vandalism again! Cheers, --Beth Wellington 17:31, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ron Rash

Can you figure out why the "</ref>" is showing up in the reference section? I can't! I'm sure it's some small typo in my code I didn't catch, but I copied it exactly (I thought) from Alberto Rios, y no esta problemo ayi. Adios,--Beth Wellington 17:33, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Still having problems. Rash asked me to cite a news release instead and it's got a glitch and the library is closing.--Beth Wellington 22:03, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I got the template to work, but the article name, which should be in quotations is showing up in ital. Have a nice Easter or Passover or whatever, Cheers.--Beth Wellington 00:04, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Actions taken

I have blocked the anon IP, and left warnings on the other users pages that have done this in the past. Your ref problem was a /ref at the end of the article. Best wishes, Rich Farmbrough 21:03 14 April 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Too hasty

You were too hasty in editing Dandelin spheres. The applet is JDandelin, not J Dandelin. Michael Hardy 23:14, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Is it not then JDandelinEn ? Rich Farmbrough 23:17 15 April 2006 (UTC).

What is says conspicuously on the page that is linked to is JDandelin. I don't know where you got "En". Michael Hardy 23:24, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: 7=7?

I fixed the bug, thanks for pointing it out. BTW, please read the notice on top of the page and "Please post new messages to the bottom of my talk page" ;-) --Dijxtra 14:27, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A plea - Excessive deletion of blank lines

Hello Rich,

I'm sure you mean well by removing those blank lines between headers and text. But in fact, it makes no difference to the appearance of the article, and it also makes the articles harder to edit, by making a messy and hard-to-interpret edit screen. (Sensible people use white space on the page when writing, to help keep everything well organized.)

Might it be more useful to spend your time combating vandalism instead?

Thanks for listening. Yours sincerely, Opus33 00:43, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

I must admit I can also think of better ways to edit articles. Since the blank lines are not displayed, and since they make life so much clearer for editors who simply edit articles "in the raw", please restrict yourself to fixing problems rather that formatting text that very few people bother to look at, but many people use. I am currently resisting the temptation to waste my own time by reverting those edits where you have removed a blank line in this manner on pages where I've contributed. Fiddle Faddle 11:36, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
To back this plea up, Wikipedia itself, when it creates an article on (eg) a talk page such as this one, puts a blank line beneath the heading when you create a new topic using the "+" symbol. Now, that seems to me to be conclusive evidence that the blank line is meant to be there - the system is designed to do that itself. If it's good enough for the software it's good enough for me. Fiddle Faddle 21:27, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tide Mills, East Sussex

Is this the article you refer to? Rich Farmbrough 11:41 25 April 2006 (UTC).

Hi Rich,
I'm assuming you are responding to my note on your talk page? It is one of several articles you have been using AWB on recently. And I naturally have no objection to your fixing issues with the page(s) - indeed where there is an issue, either factual or of standards then "fixed" is what should happen.
I am simply pleading for blank lines that cause no issue in the published article to be left for ease of editor navigation. I know one can edit each section, but it is often easier to edit the totality of an article. I also know that many articles are inconsistent because some editors leave a blank line between a heading and the text and others do not. And some editors are not "self consistent" either.
Especially where headings are nested, blank lines after them make an editor's life easier when editing the entire article. Hence my plea on your talk page. I was interested that another editor had commented so joined with them in my request.
Fiddle Faddle 11:52, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
I was surprised, because the article in question I had actually added blank lines. Where I have removed blank lines it has been pretty much all manual, so your coming across one or more of these as well as Tide Mills, East Sussex seems coincidence. Regards. Rich Farmbrough 22:18 25 April 2006 (UTC).
Following this conversation is getting really hard. I guess it would have been easier if you had made your first response here rather than responding initially on my talk page and then copying that all (well most of it) over here. The answer is that there is either a real or a perceived issue that seems not to agree with what you say clearly that you have done when editing. Since what you are saying is that you inserted blank lines (presumably for edit legibility) and did this manually, but two of us are saying that this appears not to be the case, I guess the point is probably both made and responded to and over? Fiddle Faddle 00:18, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
Further to your response on my talk page, sure. Rich Farmbrough 11:16 26 April 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Daijiro Kato - Passed Away

Rich, HRC (Honda Racing Corporation) released a statement on Kato's death. The statement says "passed away" not "died". Please stop reverting it. Here is a link to the statement on SuperbikePlanet.com [41]. ♫ Bitch and Complain Sooner ♫ 02:11, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ISBN

Thanks fo rhe info. Had no idea. Copied the usage from some other page where it was wrong. so sorry. Cheers--Beth Wellington 23:14, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Passed away"

Can you provide a rationale for your crusade against these two harmless words? Thanks, Ghirla -трёп- 06:27, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

"Passed away" is usually a euphemism. It doesn't say what it means. It is idiomatic. It is not encyclopaedic in tone. It is verbose. (See also parrot sketch.) "Died" is accurate, clear, concise universal English. Incidentally it is mentioned explicitly at Wikipedia:How_to_write_a_great_article#writing. Rich Farmbrough 08:45 27 April 2006 (UTC).

[edit] UConn

I just saw your bot-assisted edits on Geno Auriemma. The article defines the colloqialism "UConn," which is used correctly in many articles about the basketball team. Your change left a couple of occasions like "his arrival at University of Connecticut," which is grammatically incorrect. It should never be used as first reference, but globally replacing UConn with University of Connecticut is a mistake, in my opinion.--Mike Selinker 14:06, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

  • Sounds like you've got it under control. It seems to me like the basketball (and, to a lesser extent, football) articles will be the most prone to problems. Especially watch the article UConn-Tennessee rivalry.--Mike Selinker 14:10, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] S. P. Timoshenko

[edit] Publications

I am new to Wikipedia. So I thought I would ask a question before editing this item. Is it permissible to list books authored by Timoshenko with others? Here are three books very important for the subject Engineering Mechanics . I would like to list those books.
  1. Theory of Plates and Shells S. P. Timoshenko with S. Woinosky-Krieger, McGraw Hill, second edition, 1959
  2. Theory of Elasticity S. P. Timoshenko with J. N. Goodier, McGraw Hill, Third edition, 1970
  3. Mechanics of Materials S. P. Timoshenko with J. M. Gere, D. Van Nostrand, First edition, 1972

Subhash 19:14, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

I would have thought Stephen Timoshenko#Publications would be a great place to list these. Rich Farmbrough 20:45 16 April 2006 (UTC).

[edit] AWB thrashing

What the heck are you doing? There's no reason to change 18th century to eighteenth century, and you didn't convert the article (a to an). Stop.

--William Allen Simpson 07:55, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Heck, I've found so many problems, I'm raising it at Wikipedia talk:Bots, and perhaps at the Village Pump.

--William Allen Simpson 08:49, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Maximilian von Spee

No references on this article at all, except one I just added. Do you know of anyone who likes do work on such? (Did write the person who started the article. Cheers,--Beth Wellington 01:04, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

No idea, perhaps this is a challenge for User:SuggestBot's owner, User:ForteTuba? Rich Farmbrough 18:44 18 April 2006 (UTC).

Done. Thanks for the info.--Beth Wellington 00:37, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] &sup2; replacements

I noticed your AWT replaced this special character entity in the Cell processor page with a superscript 2 character code (Unicode I presume). What is the advantage of this? Firefox does not find the super 2 character code in mm² when searching for the ASCII string "2". Is there a page that discusses the policy behind botification from markup entities to extended charcodes? MaxEnt 18:20, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

As you may know there are a number of ways of doing superscripts, particularly squares x² x² x2, x² and x2, that I know of. There are pros and cons for them all, but Wikipedia:How_to_edit_a_page#Character_formatting suggests using the Unicode for 1,2,3 (also there is a redirect sitting at km², for example). When you are editing a page you can select these from the box of funny characters just under the Save/Show/Show buttons. You can also cut and paste them into the Firefox search box, they will search and highlight in the same way as other characters. Regards, Rich Farmbrough 19:25 18 April 2006 (UTC).
Thanks for the link. Confusing. The sup notations render into single characters (as seen in FF "view source") but not the same way as the Unicode chars directly entered. The sup chars (1,2,3) have lower baselines and they are slightly wider too. When pasting the rendered page source into xemacs (non-Unicode build I guess), it came out like this:
x^(0) x¹ x² x³ x^(4)
x^(5) x^(6) x^(7) x^(8) x^(9)
This still doesn't explain the pref. for Unicode chars over the entity notation, which translates (for me at least) into characters from a different code block. I have a watch set here, no further need to edit my talk page. MaxEnt 19:50, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
There was discussion of this somewhere, the advantage with <sup> is that you can use the same format for any superscript. I'm not sure which are amenable to CSS, most mainstream browsers will have the ability to display them all (but complex math can get embedded into graphics, which breaks accessibility), though this may exclude things like phones and personal organisers. XEmacs has this to say "However, as of 2005, the released version depends on the unmaintained package called Mule-UCS to support Unicode, while GNU Emacs has had robust integrated Unicode support since before 2003. The development branch of XEmacs has had robust native support for external Unicode encodings since May 2002, but the internal Mule character sets are incomplete, and development seems stalled as of September 2005."
Interesting. Rich Farmbrough 21:14 18 April 2006 (UTC).
P.S. you might find this intersting, it goes into more detail than I care to. [42] Rich Farmbrough 21:14 18 April 2006 (UTC).
Yesterday I installed MediaWiki on a FC4 machine of my own for a research topic I'm pursuing, so I'm paying more attention to small details than a normal person might. I didn't know that about Xemacs, either. It worked better on the Win 2000 machine I was using at the time, and I've never bothered to switch since. I found you again checking out Wikipedia statistics pages. As a programmer I wouldn't be too keen on substituting out character entities in PHP source code for Unicode characters, but after I thought about it, it's probably more accessible for Wikipedia newbies to cut and paste character text (including char codes once regarded as non-primary) without encountering the entity syntax. At first it seemed strange that a bot/bot-assistant would target such a trivial difference, rather than say muddling up en-dashes with em-dashes, which is more significant in presentation. MaxEnt 00:49, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
Did you have any problems with images? I have set up two WM (1.4 I think) on RH 9, and never resolved some issues with certain image handling libraries. It still works, but you can't use all the formats, or re-size. Rich Farmbrough 07:31 19 April 2006 (UTC).
I was going to get back to you the other morning that WP was down. At that point I had equations rendering, but I hadn't enabled image upload yet. Made a pass at that today. Upload successful, but the MIME types are still foobared. Also added a cool little custom search enhancement to the Firefox search bar for my local MediaWiki. Sweet. Let's continue this discussion on my talk page which is less trafficked. MaxEnt 07:50, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Did you know? {{prod}} can have a parameter.

Hello there. You have proposed the article CLDR (Covenant Language and Development Resources) for deletion without providing a reason why in the {{prod}} template. You may be interested to know that you can add your reasoning like that: {{prod|Add reason for deletion here}}. This will make your reasoning show up in the article's deletion notice. It will also aid other users in considering your suggestion on the Proposed Deletions log. See also: How PROD works. Sandstein 20:00, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Brian Lara

You have changed the text form "passed away" to "died". Please tell me what is the difference? Is there any such need to do so. Shyam (T/C) 22:23, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

"Passed away" is usually a euphemism. It doesn't say what it means. It is idiomatic. It is not encyclopaedic in tone. It is verbose. (See also parrot sketch.) "Died" is accurate, clear, concise universal English. Regards, Rich Farmbrough 22:42 18 April 2006 (UTC).
Incidentally it is mentioned explicitly at Wikipedia:How_to_write_a_great_article#writing. Rich Farmbrough 23:03 18 April 2006 (UTC).
Thanks for clarification. Shyam (T/C) 03:43, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] EXIT festival

Thanks for cleaning it up a bit. Us non-native English speakers appreciate it. Have you considered visiting this year? :) Titanium 22:28, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

I should be so lucky! Rich Farmbrough 23:04 18 April 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Passed away --> died on Kali Yuga article

Hi Rich, I reverted the correction that you made to the Kali Yuga article for two reasons. One, 'passed away' is part of a direct quote in the article. The other, more important, is that 'passed away' in that passage refers to a number of years (4,994) passing away, rather than a person. There are a couple of years in my wild youth that seemingly 'died', rather than 'passed', but in this context it's probably not appropriate. Is this a bot that made the correction? Just curious. ॐ Priyanath 17:02, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Good call. Thanks. No it's not, there are about 1% quotes and about 1% correct usage. This was, unusually, both and I didn't spot it, must have been tired. Thanks again. Rich Farmbrough 15:57 22 April 2006 (UTC).

It's an easy mistake to make, even if you weren't tired. A few hours after I reverted it, someone else tried to change 'passed away' to 'elapsed', and then saw that it was a direct quote and reverted themselves. It is getting rather Monty Pythonish..... ॐ Priyanath 16:51, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Claudia Emerson

An anonymous poster reinserted a blog as an external source. I suspect it's the blog's owner, Mr. Purdy (gwpurdy@yahoo.com). The blog has no information of value not already listed in the article as an external source. I thought we didn't use blogs as sources. I think it's just an attempt to drive traffic to his site. I wouldn't drive traffice to my blog that way. And I have the same links available. What think ye?--Beth Wellington 21:28, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Mr. Purdy is very mad. He's even started a new blog to decry the situation. Sigh.--Beth Wellington 03:17, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm having trouble with dates in a template for references. Tried several things. None worked. I'm sure it's something simple. Help, please and let me know the fix. Thanks mr. Purdy's latest accomplishment. Linking to a site that took a poem from poetry without proper attribution, rather than linking to Poetry He proudly says NPR is using his screed against Wikipedia. He also brags that the admins here removed the complaints about him--actually it was just archived. Sigh redux.--Beth Wellington 00:51, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Rich, if you look at the reference section, when I tried to wikify dates in refernces, the brackets show. Thanks--Beth Wellington08:29, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

'Preciate it!--Beth Wellington 16:49, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 1WW Refactor

Please see Refactor and New discussion.

You were gracious enough to comment on 1WW; as you may know there are now seven competing proposals. On April 6 I suggested that I be permitted to refactor the proposal page into a single, unified proposal. It's my belief that most of us are tending toward the same or a similar restriction on wheel warring. I think it's unwieldy, though, as it stands. A fair number of editors have commented on these distinct versions but (precisely because they are so similar) no single one has gained undisputed consensus. I suggest that a single, improved version may fare better on its way to policy.

Just as I proposed the refactor, an editor brought to our attention yet another competing proposal, which I merged into the others, using the same format. Still another proposal has since been added, bringing the total to 7. The two new proposals are encountering an indifferent reception but they, too, have some merit.

At the time I suggested refactor, I also put myself forward as the editor to write the initial draft, based on the plurality of support for "my" version. Since the two new proposals have been added, this plurality has held.

I don't for a moment feel that this gives me any special right to dictate terms; rather I hope to draft a proposal uniting the best features of existing proposals. Unlike any of the seven currently competing versions, this refactor will be open to editing immediately by any editor. I will ask editors to refrain from supporting or opposing the new draft for the time being; instead, to edit the proposal to reflect their specific concerns. I believe the true consensus policy will then emerge, in true wiki fashion. After all, we're not so far apart.

I come to your talk page today to ask for your comment on this refactor. Clearly this will be a major change to the proposal page and I don't feel comfortable being quite that bold without some expression of interest in the idea. Once the new draft is in place, I hope also for your participation to polish it into a true expression of our values. Let's move forward with this complement to WP:3RR. John Reid 04:10, 22 April 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Really old regex request

About a month ago, you asked me to debug this regex. Well, I've implemeneted it into Martin's formatting script! Just added it to your monobook.js and you can click the "format" tab at the top to implement your regex, along with many others. I haven't addressed the BC/BCE problem yet but I probably will in about five minutes. --M@thwiz2020 21:41, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Fixing that problem would require me to change the code a lot and I don't want to do that right now although I might get around to it someday. Until then, the user must just be wary for any false positives. (If you're going to be running this code with Smackbot on date articles, though, then I will fix it soon.) Feel free to test out the code on User:Mathwiz2020/sandbox! --M@thwiz2020 21:48, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
Really [insert interrobang] What's the regex? And a few questions about your questions... I don't know perl, so what's tr? And what do you mean by a second row of tabs? Do you mean you want userpage, disucssion, edit... new row, format, something else, etc.? --M@thwiz2020 21:52, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
Okay, the only way to add "two rows" of tabs would be to have just one tab that, when you hover over it, produces a column of tabs beneath it (like a pop-out menu). --M@thwiz2020 22:08, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
What happened to him/her/it/miscellaneous pronoun for "bot"? --M@thwiz2020 21:53, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
Whoa, you must have the longest monobook.js file in history! My tip: move the census functions to User:Rich Farmbrough/monobook.js/census.js and then just include that file in your monobook.js file. As for the second line, I'm working on that code. --M@thwiz2020 22:10, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Back to the second row of tabs thing, I can't seem to figure it out. However, you can always do something like User:Bluemoose/monobook.js/catkey.js, which adds a button to the edit toolbar. (The button only works for adding text, though, it can't parse it.) --M@thwiz2020 00:22, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Hm, try this code:
function myFunction()
{
  var image = document.createElement("img");
  image.width = 23;
  image.height = 22;
  image.src = "http://www.something.com/something.png";
  image.border = 0;
  image.alt = "Do something";
  image.title = "Do something";
  image.style.cursor = "pointer";
  image.onclick = doSomething(document.getElementById('wpTextbox1').value);
  document.getElementById('toolbar').appendChild(image);
}
This should work. --M@thwiz2020 00:29, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
You can also add a link to the toolbox at left using Wikipedia:WikiProject_User_scripts/Scripts/addLink and parameter where = "p-tb". --M@thwiz2020 00:40, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bremgarten

Your bot to fix caps in headings changed 'In Germany' to 'In germany'. Colonies Chris 09:09, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

TYVM! Rich Farmbrough 10:31 30 April 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Ordinal numbers

I just saw that on Avagadro's number you've changed “19th century” to “nineteenth century.” I haven't found anything in Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(dates_and_numbers) that says ordinals are discouraged. In fact, I think they're a lot clearer in most cases. Further, the style page mentioned uses ordinal dates. Am I missing something? — Vijay 21:25, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes, you're quite right WP:MOSNUM does use ordinals, both numeric and spelt out. Many users, myself included, prefer to spell out smaller numbers (where the definition of smaller varies), in particular I see labelling centuries as numeric as note-taking style, and not suitable for an encyclopaedia. Rich Farmbrough 22:12 1 May 2006 (UTC).
I definitely agree that smaller numbers (I usually use the <100 definition, but I'm flexible) ought to be spelled out. Although I guess I usually have only applied it to cardinal numbers. I've never heard of "note-taking style," and I would be interested in knowing if any publications do use numeral ordinals. Of course, I usually try to make the suffix superscripted in that case, but most HTML renders superscripting quite ugly. Oh well. I guess that I'll denumeralize (new word!) ordinals when and if I see them. — Vijay 23:10, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ʻokina

I think you have found out now in the hard way that the { {okina} } template is not there for nothing. Maybe one day in future, when most Windows Explorer owners will have updated, we can do away with it. But not yet now, I am afraid. Still suggestions for improvement are welcome. --Tauʻolunga 06:37, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

That was a long time ago! Rich Farmbrough 09:40 3 May 2006 (UTC).

[edit] hey

hey this is me


[edit] Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

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

Stubs
WCWM
List of Korean ceramic artists and sculptors
Goldberry
Yoshiwara
Franz Hartmann
Boffin family
The Kids Will Have Their Say
Tar-Ciryatan
Lambengolmor
Lucas prime
List of wrestlers over 300 pounds
Volsunga saga
Ori
Hypercomplex number
Mountains of Moria
Individuation
Smith of Wootton Major
Lawrence Makoare
Centillion
Cleanup
List of monuments in the United States of America
Bored of the Rings
List of time periods
Merge
New York City Fire Department
Phoenix Film Critics Society Awards 2001
Ballot
Add Sources
Arwen
Dermott Brereton
Republics of the Soviet Union
Wikify
Steve DeVito
Peter York
Social Liberals (Austria)
Expand
British Afro-Caribbean community
I.L. Peretz
Random variate

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

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

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 11:46, 23 April 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Erik Satie

Please discontinue use of AWB for disturbing edits, like you did on the Erik Satie article [43] - What was your *reason* - if any - to change subtitle levels on that page? --Francis Schonken 08:03, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Standard appendices are generally level 2, and in the order "See also", "References", "Bibliography" and "External links" if present. I'm not sure what you mean by "disturbing". Rich Farmbrough 00:19 25 April 2006 (UTC).
Sorry, I'm not satisfied with that answer.
Seems like you either don't know the difference between "generally" and "always", or didn't check the net effect of your change neither before nor after saving.
Further, could you give me a guideline/policy reference indicating the validity of the "rule" you come up with here?
And with "disturbing", I mean: "disturbing". Again, from the fact that you're at loss what I mean with disturbing, it's quite clear you didn't check your edit nor before nor after saving.
Please answer on my talk page, I generally don't go around checking other people's talk pages. --Francis Schonken 07:29, 26 April 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Date proposal

Hello Rich,

I'm not sure if you're still interested in the Dates section of the Manual of Style, but I noticed you'd commented in previous discussions. I have made a proposal to completely rewrite this section, with the hope that people from both sides of the debate can agree on a text. Please do come along and discuss it at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (dates and numbers) if you're interested. I would like as many people as possible to comment, so that we can truly say we've reached a consensus.

Thanks,

Stephen Turner (Talk) 19:18, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 9/11 Wiki

On the main page of the 9/11 Wiki, there is a link to sep11:Wikipedia, a page only created since the main page link could not be changed without sysop privledges. Could you update the link to go to Wikipedia's Main Page (or similar) and delete sep11:Wikipedia? Also, you might want to look at the "speedy delete" page if you have time. Thanks! Timrem 02:35, 3 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Trial and conviction of Alfred Dreyfus for Portal:Law

Greetings, Rich. I've picked Trial and conviction of Alfred Dreyfus for theLaw portal's next "selected case". I saw that you did some editing on it, and was wondering if you would give it a run-through to determine if anything should be changed. In particular, the case should have a citation if possible, and should note legal appeals of the conviction, if any. Cheers! BD2412 T 16:08, 3 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Eh?

Hi, you might watch your AWB edits a little more closely. This, for example, contains this gem:

There were 15.8% of families and 19.2% of the population living below the poverty line, including 12.5% of under eighteens and 35.7% of those over 64.

That is pretty poor English by any standards. Of course the Rambot census jargon left lots of room for improvement, but this is not. olderwiser 17:17, 5 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Welcome to VandalProof!

Hi Rich Farmbrough/Talk Archive Mega, thank you for your interest in VandalProof and Congratulations! You are now one of our authorized users, so if you haven't already simply download VandalProof from our main page, install and you're ready to go!

If you have any problems please feel free to contact me or post a message on VandalProof's talk page. Once again congrats and welcome to our team! - Glen TC (Stollery) 22:56, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Response also posted on VandalProof disscussion pages

Give log into IE, and give it a shot, let me know the results and I will post that up on the welcome page, thanks.Eagle (talk) (desk) 23:30, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

If this does not work I will need infomation on your settings for wikipedia. Let me know
Ok, this has been seen before, try this solution, if it does not work, reply on the disscussion page... ditto if it works I want to know both ways thanks. (IE Script Warning help, click hereEagle (talk) (desk) 23:51, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
Was it the solution I gave you that worked??? If not tell me what you did.... Thanks, my job as a mod is mainly to smooth out this kind of stuff. Agian really appreciate it, you can post your response to my talk page:-).Eagle (talk) (desk) 00:21, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Lol... yes you absolutly NEED popups,

Add {{subst:navpop}} to your monobook, and let me know what happens or if you need help with my instructions. Eagle (talk) (desk) 00:28, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
Ok, tell me where that documentation is, and I will fix that right now:-) Tell me if you are working properly--- All features and everything... and thanks for asking for help.Eagle (talk) (desk) 00:32, 7 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Arlington County, Virginia

Hey Rich, I wanted to let you know that I have nominated Arlington County, Virginia as a candidate for US Collaboration of the Week. The article is in need of much help and with a little group effort, it could be brought to Featured Article status! I brought this to your attention as I have seen you have contributed to the article in the recent past. Please cast your vote with your signature at the US Collaboration of the Week page under Arlington County, Virginia. --Caponer 02:04, 7 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] test on vandal proof

Sounds good, I am having my own problems as well with vandal proof, have a look on my talk pageEagle talk 09:16, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you


[edit] Removed by scanning subsystem

I haven't seen it at all. Can you point out which one you were talking about. Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 16:04, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

That is very strange. Have you contacted the schools ISP? CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 17:35, 8 May 2006 (UTC)



Hi, I noticed you'd commented on an anon's page, who seems to be running software to prevent the posting of expletives. Quite likey it is a school. If this becomes widespread it will take some combatting. Have you seen it elsewhere? Rich Farmbrough 16:01 8 May 2006 (UTC).

Have a butchers at this diff. I'm scanning the most recent database dump to see if there's more - just found one in Glen Matlock. Rich Farmbrough 16:08 8 May 2006 (UTC).
Same IP. Only one I could find. Rich Farmbrough 16:18 8 May 2006 (UTC).
P.S. time to archive your talk page! Rich Farmbrough 16:08 8 May 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Date delinking

I am hopeful that Ambi can be encouraged to fully accept Quadell's remedy. Please look at my talk page. Thanks. bobblewik 19:02, 10 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] "passed away -> died using AWB".....

You're leaving a trail of morbidly amusing edit summaries behind you: at first glance I thought you were saying that these individuals had died using AWB. Now that's dedication to Wikipedia! Cheers, JDoorjam Talk 21:16, 10 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] -{{inuse}}

"The Lotus Case and Laser resurfacing have been "in use" since you created them..."

Fixed.

Folajimi 17:04, 11 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Death of Adolf Hitler

In the article Death of Adolf Hitler you modified the form "When she passed away on October 31" to "Immediately before she died". This is not about Kamato Hongo or her death. Use of her persona in connection with Adolf Hitler calls for very carefull choise of words. I have restored the original form. -- Petri Krohn 03:51, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

The original said that she was alive when she was dead. I thought that was a bad idea...Rich Farmbrough 18:13 13 May 2006 (UTC).


[edit] Date linking

Can you not delink dates such as December 2004? There has been no discussion about removing these. Rebecca 04:25, 12 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Areas: mi² or square miles?

Hello. I'm not sure if I have anything to add to the argument that hasn't already been said more eloquently. My personal opinion is that there isn't anything to be gained, and much to be lost, by using abbreviations that only appear once or twice in an article. Futhermore, I know that mi is an approved abbreviation for mile in the US, but most UK readers will need it spelling out, as mi is not common here (eg it does not appear in the 2000-page Chambers Dictionary, unlike m). Essentially though, I agree with the first dozen lines of Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_(dates_and_numbers)#Units. Mr Stephen 17:30, 12 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Merkey

Please don't post the amount of the settlement, as it will subject you to suit personally from Mr. Merkey. Bad idea.--BradPatrick 19:34, 12 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] DJ Pierre

Has an out-of-order category in the Cite-sources template - hence Pearle spots it. This is really symptomatic of self-ref cleanup tags which, perhaps, like stubs should not be at the top? Rich Farmbrough 13:51 11 May 2006 (UTC).

The problem was that someone inappropriately used subst: for {{unreferenced}}, which inserted a Category: link at the top of the page, where it does not belong. It is common practice for these templates to be at the top of the page, where they are most visible. I replaced the result of the subst: with the template itself. -- Beland 18:17, 13 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Proposed event policy for Wikicalendar

I recently posted some ideas about developing criteria for what should and should not be listed on Wikicalendar events at the Wikicalendar's talk page. Since you're actively involved in this project, I thought I'd let you know so that you can comment or add more suggestions. Thanks :). Fabricationary 23:43, 13 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] De-linking dates

Hi, I was just wondering why your bot de-linked the year-dates on Levi Yitzhak Bender article? Especially on his birth years? Thanks, Yoninah 07:07, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi, since it is notable in that he had more that one birth year

, I have re-linked them. In general dates are only linked when the links are useful WP:MOSNUM (the exception being if month and day of month are included when they respond to user preferences, e.g. 3 May). Historically every date was linked, which means there are many unnecessary links (the "sea of blue"), and, more importantly, new editors are copying this style. On a tangential point, a huge battle blew up several months ago when an editor proposed using a bot to de-link dates - so let me be clear this is not a bot. I have a bot account User:SmackBot ehich does useful clean up tasks. Rich Farmbrough 08:04 15 May 2006 (UTC).

Where did you get the idea he has more than one birth year? I'm the only one who's worked on this article, and there's no talk page saying otherwise. These are the dates provided by my published source, Breslov Research Institute.
In future articles, are you suggesting that if I don't know the month and day as well as year of birth/death, I shouldn't link the years? Thank you, Yoninah 18:41, 15 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] User_talk:193.112.229.150

Okay. Thanks for sorting that out! :) -- Tangotango 08:28, 15 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] "Passed away"

Thanks for your work in ridding Wikipedia of that irritating euphemism. AnnH 09:45, 15 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Changing image name

This is just to let you know that you should NOT change image spelling to any images, even if the spelling is incorrect. ie Changing an image that has "middle earth" to its proper "Middle-earth" Wikipedia will assume that it is a diffrent image and (assuming there is no image of that name) it won't show an image at all. Although it is appropriate to correct the spelling if it is in the image's captioning (the description below it).--Ted87 19:18, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

No I don't have it. Sorry. Are you a Tolkien/Middle-earth fan? If you are then you may be intrested in joining Wikiproject Middle-earth.


[edit] Amon Hen 171

Hi there. I saw your question about this on Ted's talk page. I have this issue of Amon Hen which has the article Tolkien and Beowulf by Michael Kennedy. What exactly do you want to check about it? Carcharoth 21:15, 17 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Middle-earth spelling changes

Hi again. I also saw the little discussion about changes to the spellings of Middle-earth. I saw the edits where you did this in the Tolkien article, but then reverted yourself. Was this because the "incorrect" spellings you picked up with AWB were actually incorrect spellings in book and essay titles that should be left as they are? Looking a bit more closely, I spot a certain Tolkien and Beowulf essay there! So I think I know why you wanted Amon Hen 171! I can confirm that on both the contents page and in the title, Middle-earth is spelt with a small 'e'. So I've taken the liberty of making that correction. Carcharoth 21:24, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Though actually, I see that the webpage on which this article was republished has it spelt as "Middle-Earth", so please revert me if you think it should be left with an "E". Carcharoth 21:28, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
And the Legendarium one is "e" and the Myth and Modernity one is "E" - from book covers on Amazon. The New York Times article, from Google searches (as NYT requires log-in) is "E". The Michael Martinez article is "E". And rummaging around various reliable websites leads me to think that the Caedmon audio cassette is "E" with no hyphen! So the only one I am unsure about is the Kennedy article - the original publication (Amon Hen) is "e", but the online version (and more importantly the more accessible version), is "E". Incidentially, should the reference say Amon Hen, when in fact it links to an online republication of the article? Carcharoth 21:40, 17 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] One Wonderful Day (Desperate Housewives episode) Quotes

Hi Rich. I just wanted to let you know that Dr. Craig did say "passed away" when informing Bree of Rex's death. I would know that since I have it on DVD. I changed it back to "passed away". If you have any comments, feel free to drop me a message or on the talk page. Cheater1908 18:40, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing that. Rich Farmbrough 11:26 21 May 2006 (UTC).


[edit] Minor barnstar

This is for excellence in minor edits - well done...!

The Minor Barnstar
For all those relentless minor edits! Keep up the good work Tyrenius 16:32, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Tyrenius 16:32, 22 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] PM

[44] Okay, 5 p.m. is fine. But not one minute later. :-p Femto 13:08, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Nice to know Femto keeps an eye on the pico. Rich Farmbrough 13:34 23 May 2006 (UTC).


[edit] Changes to Hordville, Nebraska

Hi, Rich, and thanks for your improvements to Hordville, Nebraska. I have just a couple of comments that might help you if you decide to continue making similar improvements to other city articles.

First, I noticed you changed the link [[square kilometer|km²]] to [[km²]]. To avoid the redirect, perhaps this should be changed to [[square kilometre|km²]] (note the -re spelling).

I also see that you improved the following pair of sentences:

11.2% of the population and 10.9% of families were below the poverty line. 9.8% of those under the age of 18 and 0.0% of those 65 and older were living below the poverty line.

Your revision was as follows, which is much better:

There were 10.9% of families and 11.2% of the population living below the poverty line, including 9.8% of under eighteens and none of those over 64.

I would suggest the wording below:

About 10.9% of families and 11.2% of the population were below the poverty line, including 9.8% of those under the age of 18 and none of those 65 and older.

To me, "under eighteens" sounds very clumsy; the original "those under the age of 18" sounds much better. I think you added "there were" to the beginning of the sentence to avoid starting it with a figure, but I don't like how that sounds. I tried to come up with a better way of wording that, and the best I could come up with is to use the word "about". After all, it appears that the Census Bureau does a little fiddling to come up with those numbers. There were 48 families in Hordville as of the 2000 Census. If five families lived under the poverty line, that would be 10.4% of families; if six lived in poverty, that would be 12.5%. So the 10.9% figure must be an estimate based on some statistical analysis, in which case "about" is appropriate. The same goes for the 11.2% figure.

Let me know what you think. —Bkell (talk) 18:10, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your constructive comments. On the first point, square kilometre was a redirect until earlier today, when I recreated it for the second time! So it's a considered decision to go for km², but admittedly a little arbitrary. On your second point, this is perhaps the most complicated part of the process, because the original wording of the poverty section was manifestly wrong, therefore a lot of manual changes occurred. I do take your point, and am not completely happy with any solution I've seen for wording this part, but I will review what I do in light of your comments. Because the changes are now fairly complex, (and I've done about 3,500 articles already) I may also finish the exercise as is, or very close, and come back with improved wording as a third pass. (The first pass was putting the census results in the past tense.) Rich Farmbrough 21:16 25 May 2006 (UTC).
P.S. I've now incorporated your suggestions for the poverty sentence. Thanks again. Rich Farmbrough 11:48 26 May 2006 (UTC).


[edit] edit summary

Can you remove the extra "using AWB" from smackbots edit summary, it currently says it twice. thanks Martin 15:03, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Well spotted. Rich Farmbrough 15:35 28 May 2006 (UTC).


[edit] 0.00% in census data

I noticed your bot's edit to Muenster, Texas and thought I'd let you know that I rather think that the 0.00 % figures in census data for a town is necessary for major races. It 1) establishes that the race makes up less than 0.005% of the population (0.00 is not the same as zero) and 2) reaffirms for the reader that the US Census isn't lumping that race under "other races". — Laura Scudder 14:55, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

On your first point, I had thought of that, for towns with a population of less tan 20,000 even one person should show up as .005% rounded up to .01%. I will not substitute 0.00% for towns with a substantially greater population, (although I suspect there will be few if any). Your second point is interesting, "other races" is fairly well explained in the article Race (United States Census) which is extensively linked to from every article. Perhaps putting "other races" in quotes would emphasise the meaning. See Muenster, Texas, let me know what you think. Rich Farmbrough 15:09 29 May 2006 (UTC).
P.S. The largest town I found with a 0.00% was New Richmond, Ohio, with a pop of just over 2000. Rich Farmbrough 13:48 30 May 2006 (UTC).

[edit] "Georgia" is at Georgia (U.S. state)

Please try to link the article rather than the dab page [45]. -- User:Docu

Strange, I was quite pleased that I was linking to the U.S. State page... Thanks for telling me. Rich Farmbrough 22:15 5 May 2006 (UTC).
Good idea BTW. I always wondered why the state wasn't linked. -- User:Docu

Around or before 07:57, 7 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Signpost updated for May 8th.

The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery



Volume 2, Issue 19 8 May 2006

About the Signpost


New worldwide rankings show Wikipedia strength outside US Meetups And Newsworthy International Assemblages
News and Notes: 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.

Before 08:06, 8 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Signpost updated for May 15th.

The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery



Volume 2, Issue 20 15 May 2006

About the Signpost


Publicity surrounds Chinese site reusing Wikipedia content German chapter prevails in Tron appeal
Meetups And Newsworthy International Assemblages News and Notes: Time 100 Gala, 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.

Before 08:06, 15 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Signpost updated for May 29th.

The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery



Volume 2, Issue 22 29 May 2006

About the Signpost


Semi-protection tweaks prompt debate over ideals Wikipedia administrator investigated after on-wiki dispute
Meetups And Newsworthy International Assemblages News and Notes: Wikimedia board resolutions, 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.

Before 08:06, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for May 22nd.

The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery



Volume 2, Issue 21 22 May 2006

About the Signpost


Project statistics updated, except for Wikipedia Deletion of metadata icons debated
Meetups And Newsworthy International Assemblages News and Notes: Wikimedia chapters report, 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.

About 08:06, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Scott Shields

Why is the MyDD article at this article, which I found when I referenced Shields in an edit to the Sago Mine disaster article? Shields is now the director of internet communications for the re-election campaign (well actually he was appointed--so maybe it's an election campaign) of Senator Bob Martinez (D-NJ). I'd be glad to update the article to actually match the title, if that won't mess things up.--Beth Wellington 18:34, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

No idea, it could do with some content. Rich Farmbrough 18:53 3 June 2006 (UTC).
OK, I also left a note for the last person to edit the article. I'll see what he suggests. Cheers,--Beth Wellington 19:15, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Seeking your help with units and images

My unit formatting script: User:Bobblewik/monobook.js/unitformatter.js sometimes changes image names. For example this edit. Do you have any suggestions as to a change that I could make to stop that? bobblewik 21:20, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

I have thought about this problem before, and not come up with a fix. But I now think maybe I can. I'll mull it over over night. Rich Farmbrough 22:26 4 June 2006 (UTC).
Just thought I'd let you know I have written a script to solve these replacement problems, it's under preliminary testing. Rich Farmbrough 07:23 9 June 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Signpost updated for June 5th.

The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery



Volume 2, Issue 23 5 June 2006

About the Signpost


New revision-hiding feature added Paper profiles Wales, slams Wikipedia business coverage
Meetups And Newsworthy International Assemblages New external tools
News and Notes: Wikimedia board resolutions, 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.

About 08:06, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Qohelet "The Prophet"?

Considering that Ecclesiastes belongs to the Writings, rather than to the Prophets would you mind stating your justification for adding the "The Prophet" to the title Qohelet?

I think that reading Ecclesiastes#"Qohelet" and "Ecclesiastes" would clarify the question.

--Ziusudra 14:36, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for drawing my attention, it should have been "The Preacher". This is an alternative name from King James Version. Reagrds, Rich Farmbrough 15:05 5 June 2006 (UTC).
That translation is already discussed in the next section in the same article, as I mentioned. No point in adding it to the first line (makes it KJV-centric). I would have let sleeping dogs lie. Cheers, Ziusudra 15:31, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Miscellania

I notice you have been editing trivia to miscellania on a number of TV episode pages. Isn't it spelled miscellanea? Why do you prefer this term to trivia? If you wouldn't mind could you please post any reply on my talk page as it looks a lot less busy than yours and will be easier for me to spot. --Opark 77 12:56, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Bother! You're correct, now I have to change them all. I prefer miscellanea to trivia because trivia is stuff that's not worth bothering with, and hence has no place in an encyclopedia. Rich Farmbrough 13:04 6 June 2006 (UTC).
Rich perhaps you should check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trivia regarding the definition of trivia. Dannycarlton 22:47, 6 June 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Matthew links

I noticed you are using AWB to wikilink to verses in Matthew. However, most (if not all) of the verses you are linking to are simply redirects. I think the more appropriate course of action to take would be to use template:bibleverse instead. What do you think?--Andrew c 17:25, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I am aware of Bibleverse, Bibleref, niv, wikisource, and one or two others. The slight problem is that none of these are supported on standalone copies of WP or paper copies, nor can we rely on them to always be there. I am also aware of the heateed discussions about bible verse articles. I also think a user is entitled to expect the text (a text) of a bible verse, plus some information about it if they look it up on WP. I am planning on writing a modest proposal, in the next few weeks, to try to solve some of these problems. This exercise is a warm up for that, as much as anything. Incidentally I have just read the article New Testament apocrypha, and am amazed at how much more there is to know about the early church. Rich Farmbrough 17:41 6 June 2006 (UTC).

note {{tl:Sourcetext}}

  • I am aware of Bibleverse, Bibleref, niv, wikisource, and one or two others. -- Bibleref has been deprecated. The wikisource template does not serve the same purpose as the other templates. Having multiple templates with similar function is stupid, I will admit, but seeing as how bibleref is being removed, a single, standard template is probably on the horizon.
  • The slight problem is that none of these are supported on standalone copies of WP or paper copies. Well, WP:NOT.
  • nor can we rely on them to always be there that is why we use templates. We can easily change what site the template links two, as opposed to using a direct external link.
  • This exercise is a warm up for that, as much as anything. Well then, I think you are going about this the wrong way. Make your proposal first, before making bold preemptive changes.
  • I also think a user is entitled to expect the text (a text) of a bible verse, plus some information about it if they look it up on WP. Once again, WP:NOT. We are not a primary source, or a collection of source material (that's Wikisource). We are not a bible commentary (that's wikibook). Once again, if you knew about the heated discussions about bible verse articles, then why are you circumventing the community?

In summary, I feel that if an article is already using one of the templates, and you add in links to the redirected bible verses, it gets confusing. If users are used to clicking on a link and being taken to biblegateway, then they click on your new links and get taken to the main gospel article, it can get very confusing.

This just in, I just looked at your edit history and noticed you creating over 500 blank redirect pages for the verses of Matthew. What in the world are you thinking???? --Andrew c 20:46, 6 June 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Prayer

Could you take a look at Prayer. A user constantly is adding a useless external link. I've done my three reverts for the day. It also seems like he's created additional usernames to back up his statements. Thanks. -- Jeff3000 20:22, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Looks like he's got the message. Rich Farmbrough 21:15 6 June 2006 (UTC).
No I'm waiting for someone to explain why in the world the link isn't allowed. Dannycarlton 22:49, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for voting on my RfA

Mahogany

Before 08:06, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ehren Watada

I you haven't already weighed in, you may want to take a look at [46]. I'd be intersted in your opinion on th eproposed AfD. Cheers, Beth --Beth Wellington 05:33, 9 June 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Trivia -> Miscellanea

I am curious as to why you are mass-changing instances of "Trivia" to "Micellanea". Is this some new guideline on Wikipedia, or is this just your own project? Just wondering so I can be "in the know". Thanks. RattleMan 03:24, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Just a thing I'm doing. However there have been some discssions at Wikipedia:Trivia. Rich Farmbrough 14:08 8 June 2006 (UTC).
Yes, I'd like to know as well. Everyone knows what "Trivia" means but "Miscellanea" just sounds... odd. Very odd. The word is not nearly as friendly. If this is a new Wikipedia guideline, I'd like to know how I could contribute to changing it back. Esn 03:15, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
Presumably you're referring to The Kid Brother? I replied to RattleMan on his talk page. The point is that "Trivia" is information which is not really of use or interest. Ideally information that is of interest should be in the article body, information that is not should not be in the article at all. Nonetheless miscellaneous useful information may need a section of it's own - calling that section "Trivia" invites the addition of facts such as "Harold Lloyd took more cream in his coffee making this film, than in the two previous films put together." You may well find a better name than I have used, please change it and let me know. See also Wikipedia:Trivia. Rich Farmbrough 09:28 9 June 2006 (GMT).

[edit] SmackBot edit to Forsyth County, North Carolina

Hey, would you mind redoing the SmackBot cleanup on Forsyth County, North Carolina? I reverted the edit because it was on top of some vandalism. Wmahan. 21:14, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Done. Rich Farmbrough 21:30 9 June 2006 (GMT).
Thanks! Wmahan. 21:36, 9 June 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Smackbot & External links

It'd be far more productive to remove bogus external links (per WP:EL) than switch between "External link"/External links". From the edit summary it seems like this bot is run under user supervision - so you could do it?

Getting rid of crap links has value, but stray plurals? Thanks/wangi 23:42, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, the replacement is automatic. I compile a list of articles with more than one link in the external links section by analysing a databse dump, and run the search and replace on those articles. I think it looks bad to say "External link" and have several.Rich Farmbrough 08:48 10 June 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Anglicanism and the Anglican Communion

Hello! I noticed that you have been a contributor to articles on Anglicanism and the Anglican Communion. You may be interested in checking out a new WikiProject - WikiProject Anglicanism. Please consider signing up and participating in this collaborative effort to improve and expand Anglican-related articles! Cheers! Fishhead64 23:30, 11 June 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Spacing

Hi Richard!

Thanks for the helpful info. I only just found it on th discussion page. I'll try to work with that in the future.

All the best!


--Amandajm 01:16, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lists of Bible verses

Hi, I noticed that you created a number of articles like List of chapters and verses in the Book of Job that consist entirely of redlinks. Do you have a useful purpose in mind for these articles? Since these individual verse articles don't now exist for the most part, the lists aren't really doing anything now ... and even once they do exist, categories or navigation templates would work just as well, IMO. A couple of them have been brought up on AFD ... and, given time, the whole lot will probably be deleted unless there is some reason for their existence. As a reminder, if you should decide that they are no longer useful, you can tag them with {{db-author}} to request that an administrator delete them. BigDT 12:33, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok ... there is a discussion going on at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of chapters and verses in the Book of Job ... you may want to mention your purpose there. Userfying them is probably a very good idea, though, as it would save the headache of arguing over what to do with them in the interim. BigDT 12:39, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for clearing up the Smackbot question I had and for all you and the bot do. Ruhrfisch 13:44, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't know what your proposed Smackbot code is, but see:

Regards. Keep up the good work. bobblewik 17:49, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for June 12th.

The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery



Volume 2, Issue 24 12 June 2006

About the Signpost


From the editor: RSS returns
English Wikipedia reaches 1,000 Featured Articles Administrator desysopped after sockpuppeting incident
Meetups And Newsworthy International Assemblages News and Notes: Wikimedia board resolutions, 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.

Message delivered by Ralbot 01:32, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pedro Lopez

Do you know what happened to the Pedro Lopez page? You did a lot of work on it, but it seems its been recently removed for copyvio or some such.--Cúchullain t/c 18:31, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Thansk for letting me know. I hope it is now fixed. Rich Farmbrough 22:35 12 June 2006 (GMT).
It's been marked for copyvio again, but at least this time the editor explained what parts exactly are problematic.--Cúchullain t/c 17:49, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
Looking through the history it seems the material in question was actually added by EliZZZa, who runs the site it originally came from. I doubt this new site has the copyright to it.--Cúchullain t/c 01:03, 14 June 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Category:Council elections in England - wikify dates

Hi Rich. Thanks for the offer to look at wikifying a large no. of dates on various pages. (Ref: User_talk:A_bit_iffy#Category:Council_elections_in_England_-_wikify_dates)

You asked me to put a list of the articles concerned here. However, as it would take me quite a while to produce such a list, and as all the articles have similar categorisation and naming, I'm wondering whether you could automate that part as well.

All the articles concerned are in subcategories of Category:Council elections in England, and all of the article names end " local elections".

Notes: It's possible some of the articles might happen not to have by-elections listed (because there haven't been any in recent history). Also, a small number of articles have had their "dd/mm/yyyy" dates wikified (usually by me).

Anyway, I hope you can help on this. If you want me to produce a list of the articles concerned, let me know. Cheers, --A bit iffy 11:21, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

That saved days - excellent stuff, Rich! Cheers, --A bit iffy 14:08, 13 June 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Some odd formats

I came across a lot of school articles with odd date formats. See Bear Creek Elementary School and its ilk. Just thought you might be interested. bobblewik 18:15, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

You may want to let him know. It seems quite a few of the BC school articles you're in the process of fixing were authored by one person. --Stephane Charette 23:33, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandal message from AOL user impersonating Jeff

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. -- Jeff3000 03:59, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
—The preceding comment was added by 205.188.117.65 (talkcontribs) .
The above comment was not by me, someone is impersonating me. The IP is from the US, and I don't live in the US. -- Jeff3000 01:50, 14 June 2006 (UTC)


[edit] wikifying dates

Hi Rich, I noticed you had wikified dates and years on the article Stephen Harper. I believe it is policy only to wikify the first mention of a particular date or year in an article, ie only the first 1995 for instance. Thanks, Kalsermar 15:38, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

It is indeed a guideline to link only the first occurrence of a link, except where style dictates otherwise. However dates that include the month and day number will format differently according to user preferences, and hence should almost always be linked thus 1 May 1999 (WP:DATES) - bare months, years, days of the week, seasons or centuries should almost never be linked. Rich Farmbrough 15:43 14 June 2006 (GMT).


[edit] Establishments by year

Many thanks for sorting out all the pages using AWB (must find out more) - that's saved me hours of work. By the way, way did you let me know that there is no year zero? I'm in the know about that - has a year cat been created for year zero? Greenshed 20:40, 15 June 2006 (UTC)


[edit] World Cup groups

There is a discussion going on about it. So please don't delete it till there is either consensus or no consensus. Kingjeff 22:37, 15 June 2006 (UTC)


Can you respect me and everyone else who is willing to discuss the proposed deletion? That's all I'm asking for. But please wait for consensus. Kingjeff 22:45, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] are you talking to me?

Hi, I received your message about FIFA 2006. You said:

These artices could do with a Nav-Box in my opinion. I'm to my bed, any chance you might whip one up? Rich Farmbrough 23:26 15 June 2006 (GMT).

Are you talking to me? I don't understand. --Neo-Jay 23:34, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I see. Many thanks. I have added this template to the rest of the group articles.--Neo-Jay 14:01, 16 June 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Bot account

Have you ever considered getting a bot account for some of your massive automated edits?--Andrew c 01:04, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I have one (see my FAQ). However every extension of purpose needs to be approved, which means for relatively small tasks (especially one offs) of only a few hundred edits it's quicker to do them manually, secondly my bot account does not have a bot-flag, because there is currently no process on en: for getting one, and thirdly any edit where there is a significant possibility of a human (or other) mistake needs to be done by an non-bot-flagged account, so that it does show up on recent changes etc., this includes manual test samples of big bot runs. Rich Farmbrough 12:17 16 June 2006 (GMT).
Well two things come to mind:
  • Don't edit too fast; consider opening a bot account if you are regularly making more than a few edits a minute.
  • Don't do anything controversial with it.
I think the first rule needs no explanation. (Your "estcattemp with estcat" edits over the course of 2 and a half hours, totalled around 700 edits, resulting in ~4.6 edits per minute). As for the controversial edits, massively changing "Trivia -> Miscellanea", and wikilinking Matthew bible verses to redirect pages, as opposed to using one of the EL templates, or simply avoiding the redirect by wikilinking only the word Matthew and leaving the verse numbers. But you already have a FAQ section regarding your edit behavior with AWB, so I doubt I am mentioning anything new to you.--Andrew c 13:45, 16 June 2006 (UTC)


[edit] RE:Navboxen

Fair enought. I had not seen it. kalaha 12:27, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for June 19th.

The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery



Volume 2, Issue 25 19 June 2006

About the Signpost


Foundation hires Brad Patrick as general counsel and interim executive director NY Times notices semi-protection policy
Meetups And Newsworthy International Assemblages Undeletion of images now made possible
Adam Carr's editing challenged by Australian MPs News and Notes: Project logo discussions, 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.

Message delivered by Ralbot 23:36, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Tnavbar-mini

Just to let you know.. I've done the centering on the templates you mentioned. Should be good to go now. ;-) Netscott 14:42, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm actually formulating something like that as we speak. :-) Netscott 15:03, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
Let's see how it looks:
New Template:Tnavbar-header
v  d  e

Netscott 15:08, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree... I'm trying to figure out how to make the default background color come through so that the template is universal. Netscott 15:16, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
The argument is defintely a solution but I'm just not sure if adding a third criteria is warranted if there's a way to make a whatever default color come through. You idea about actually using headin= and template=, etc. might make more sense as well... please continue to edit the new template as you see fit in that regard. Netscott 15:18, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
ok, I added a bgcolor= criteria... in accord with your idea... I still think there should be a way for the table color to be "transparent" in accord with whatever color is set by a given row. Here's an example below with the bgcolor set to #BFD7FF (like the Fifa template)
Incorporation of User:Rich Farmbrough's background color idea as found on template Template:Head-cum-Tnav
v  d  e

Netscott 15:42, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for you suggestion about the background color. I couldn't find a more universal solution that'd just have the formatting table be "transparent" to show a given color for a given row and work across most standard browsers. Myself and a couple of other editors had encountered this centering difficulty before and I'm not sure why it hadn't dawned on me to just make a centering header Tnavbar. After I solved the issue surrounding the Fifa templates it became perfectly logical to make one (as you came to the exact same conclusion). With the existence of the new header Tnavbar all of the previous "tough spots" that I recalled seeing previously came back to mind and I went about editing in the header... which is why it's use is already so extensive. Thanks for contacting me about the centering issue and spurring me on in that regard. Cheers! Netscott 11:37, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Statistics

You gave a statistic for what you call 'bare' years. I am not sure how you define that. Can you let me know where you got it from?

You gave me some pointers to statistics before and I filed them carefully but have forgotten where. I pulled up 40 'Random articles' tested them against my 'dates' tool. It wanted to edit 16 of them. That depressing 40% rate works out at 480,000 articles in Wikipedia. bobblewik 19:14, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bot approval

I have taken a break from WP:BOTS, when I "left" I thought Essjay's proposed system would be put to use and I am surprised it has not.

Perhaps the whole process should be modelled after Articles for deletion. Each bot gets a subpage (intially used for first running approval, and later for flag approval). On the subpage, discussion occurs and an approval group member "closes" the discussion with a decision (after 7 days or whatever). Two distinct sections would be set up on Bots/Requests for approvals - initial run approval and flag approval. When flag approval is granted, the bot operator lists a request at Requested bot flags (linking to the discussion etc).

Or you could just document and use the the last bit - the use of Requested bot flags. This would solve your current flag problem I think (and I don't know why it isn't being used at the moment).

I don't have the inclination to introduce this new method, but maybe you or others do.

I'm not sure what you mean by "Only the owner process is documented, not the approvals group process". Is this asking if a different system should be introduced? Or you want to remove its "arbitrary, virtually self appointed" nature (which is perhaps odd, but seems to work well)? I can't think of a safe alternative that works, and haven't seen one proposed.--Commander Keane 12:18, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Days of the week and months

Thanks for your comments. You are doing great work, thanks. Incidentally, one of the reasons why I mentioned User:Bobblewik/monobook.js/datebits.js is because it deals with 'month+year'. I just wanted to be sure that you are aware of that. Feel free to ignore it or use it as you think best. No response required. Regards bobblewik 16:52, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Vandalism" on Jane Gazzo's article

Hi Rich. 88.108.227.2 has twice removed relevant material from the article on Jane Gazzo --- which I continue to put back. Any ideas what can be done ? Bests --- Bob Wikiklrsc 15:05, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Rich, for your excellent suggestions and reply. Will do as you recommended. Bests Ever. --- Bob Wikiklrsc 15:15, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Rich, the anonymous contributor User:88.108.227.2 has done it again for a third time. I have done as you suggested, left a message on the anon's discussion page User_talk:88.108.227.2, and on Jane Gazzo's article discussion Talk:Jane_Gazzo, but I fear it will happen incessantly. Unfortunately, I have limited access to the internet in the next while, so it will be terribly difficult for me to guard against it or discuss or revert it. Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 17:44, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi Rich. Thanks for your kind reply. Okay, I will follow your advice. But some administrative action might need to be taken sometime soon, as you and the community deem necessary and appropriate. Bests ever. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 17:51, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Okay, Rich. Many thanks. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 17:52, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi Rich. Hmm. Point taken. It is a fan page of Jane's and keeps track of what she is doing in the music and entertainment business, albeit esconced in Tony's blog. "Occasionally acceptable links ... fan sites" in WP:EL might qualify ? Please let me know what you recommend and I will remove the link if it is objectionable by WP guidelines. Or you can remove it yourself if you think it is in violation as I am about to lose my access for the day or next few days possibly. I mean it is a fan page, but informative as to her doings around and it is the only way we currently have to know what Jane Gazzo might be up to. The anon contributor made no such cogent explanation as you did. Many Thanks as ever for you help and kindness. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 18:12, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi Rich. Anon editor User:88.108.227.2 continues to remove it without explanation. Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 13:12, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your help as ever, Rich. We'll see how it emerges. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 16:34, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi Rich. Anonymous contributor 88.108.227.2 has seemingly morphed into 88.108.130.43 and is adding seemingly spurious information to Jane Gazzo's article. At least, I can't verify that Jane Gazzo has an in-flight radio show on Emirates Airlines (88.108.130.43 mis-spelled this as "Emiritz"), quoting the contributor: " ... as well as the 'Download' in-flight radio show on Emiritz Airlines." I think this is spurious, but I have heard nothing about it, even though it is conceptually possible. I googled and tried to find any mention of it and failed to do so. Also, the airline is Emirates Airline, not as presented by the anonymous editor. I will edit it out and leave it for discussion again. I hope that's the right approach. Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 17:50, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi Rich. Thanks for your kind help in fixing this matter and verifying that Jane Gazzo is doing the in-flight show on Emirates Airline. Bests as always. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 17:31, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Infobox country changes

Hi Rich,
I reverted your edits to Template:Infobox country. It seems to have messed up the census fields. I did not see what the error could have been. I'd try again in a sandbox. Also, please see Template_talk:Infobox_Country#Census for more details. Regards,—MJCdetroit 21:40, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

For your reversion of my mistake on that template. Rich Farmbrough 22:07 23 June 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Sense in editing within comments?

Hi, just a question about SmackBot's edits to List of people by name: Taa-Taj [47]:

You're editing away links inside comments - those are quites taken from other pages via a script, and left here just for reference, not intended to be uncommented ever. Don't know if it's worth it spending even bot cycles on removing them. Your thought? --Alvestrand 21:10, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Your right that it's not worth editing these pieces of text, and in fact they should be avoided, like quotes, template names, image names URLs etc.. The difficulty in doing this is one of the reasons that there are not more bot edits. However I am working on code to avoid these edits, and I believe others may be too, so this should be a thing of the past in due course. Rich Farmbrough 21:16 25 June 2006 (GMT).

[edit] SmackBot's bot flag

Hi. Per Robchurch's approval [48], I have granted your bot a bot flag. Regards, Redux 13:49, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for June 26th.

The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery



Volume 2, Issue 26 26 June 2006

About the Signpost


Quicker deletion of non-compliant images proposed News and Notes: 100 x 1,000, 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.

Message delivered by Ralbot 23:05, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] PLEASE FOLLOW THE FORMAT

Please STOP changing Trivia to Miscallania. There was a format that you had to follow. Please stop changing it. Lil Flip246 17:22, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Disagreed. I like "Miscellania" better. "Trivia" is something trivial. `'mikka (t) 18:10, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
Lil Flip246:
  1. Please don't SHOUT.
  2. Those edits were a fortnight ago, you're acting as if I'm changing them as you change them back.
  3. What "format" do I "have to follow"?
  4. See Mikka's comment on my talk page. Also see WP:Trivia.
Rich Farmbrough 18:23 27 June 2006 (GMT).
Sorry about that. I was just shocked how everything changed. Lil Flip246 22:15, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lists of Registered Historic Places in XX County, Michigan

Hi, I noticed you editing a lot of the dates in these articles. I'm not sure if you're interested in such a cleanup task, but nearly all of the dates on these lists are exactly one month off from the dates in the national register listing database at NPS. The dates there are in numeric form and I suspect that whomever imported the data applied an incorrect algorithm to convert the dates into text. This is why there were dates such as February 31 -- which should have been January 31. Anyhow, ensuring that the actual dates are correct would involve either reimporting the data or massively tedious manual verification and correction. I think it might be best if the incorrect date information were simply removed from these articles. A very very few have been manually corrected, but in my estimation, the loss of such a detail would be negligible. I think removing the month, day portion and leaving only the year would be more than adequate and certainly bettern than incorrect information. Anyhow, I know that you're proficient either using AWB or with a bot to handle such mass edits, so I just wanted to suggest this as a possible project. Cheers. olderwiser 13:20, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] PGNx Media

Hello Rich, I noticed that you edited out the date links but didn't comment on whether the article should be removed. If you have time, I would appreciate any suggestions in order to keep the article. Thanks for your time. Thinkjose 00:38, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you! Thinkjose 17:38, 28 June 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Date Articles

Bluemoose is using AWB to change back the [[{{PAGENAME}}]] feature you added to the date articles. When I asked him about it he claimed that this "notice" (his words) was no longer necessary, and he reverted my corrections. Whether Bluemoose is correct or not, I do not know, so I thought I'd bring this to your attention. I'd appreciate it if you would let each of us know how the 367 date articles should be formatted. See April 30 for an example. Cheers, Rklawton 15:34, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mussolini

The entire article (or most of it) is a copyvio of the Jewish Virtual Library biography. We need to use the information, but rewrite it. It's almost obvious that it was derived from that web site. Aaрон Кинни (t) 22:22, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Okay. Sorry, but I was confused over this, because it's very difficult to discern if there is a copyvio in play or if ours is the original, sometimes. So should I just reinstate the intro text? I'm not real sure. Aaрон Кинни (t) 22:35, 29 June 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Sep11 Wiki

Hi, I'm Sannita, an it.wiki user.

I've seen you're admin on Sep11.wiki. Just a question: is it possible to find a "downloadble" version of the Memorial?

Just asking you 'cause I'm concerning on creating new articles on 9/11 and I've seen that the Wiki-Memorial is about to close.

I've already copied some infos, but I fear not to manage to finish my task "in time", you know.

So, may you help me? Please contact me on my talk page.

See ya. -- Sannita 23:41, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Date fragments delinked"

Please be careful here. Sometimes you must disambiguate, not delink, as in the case of march. (seePasodoble). `'mikka (t) 18:09, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. Yes, I saw that a very few uses were of a different sort of march (and indeed there is a film called May, among other things). But they don't have to be linked, and being unlinked is better than being linked to the wrong place. Still I am pleased to have achieved edits like this one. Rich Farmbrough 18:16 27 June 2006 (GMT).

Just wondering, but why are you delinking dates to begin with? I personaly don't see how Wikipedia gains anything from having less links to other articles, so is there some style guide or convention I'm not aware of? --Aknorals 09:04, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

It's only worth linking date like entities in a very few contexts.
  1. Where the date is itself important - so that there is value in following the link - decreasingly often as WP grows.
  2. When the text is about the entity e.g. a link to 2000 or 2001 in The Millennium.
  3. When a date includes a day and month, and formatting preferences will be invoked by linking it, e.g. 10 April 1962.
  4. There is also the process of linking to "[Year] [month] in <subject>" via a piped link, e.g. 1999 in television as 1999 - this eventually can suffer the same problem as the first point, and is seen by some as an undesireable Easter egg - i.e. taking te user to a difernt plce than expected..

See WP:DATE for details, and the talk page for 48 archived pages of wrangling over the exact meaning of "links valuable in context" and "the correct use of the non-breaking space" or "the endash". Rich Farmbrough 13:19 1 July 2006 (GMT).


[edit] Automated archival

Hey, I see that you have an automated archival service. Is there a way that I can have it too? bobblewik 12:47, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] IBM Research lab analysis of Wikipedia

Hi Rich. I ran into this on the IBM Research site. An analysis of some of Wikipedia, what they call a "history flow", to some extent, visually. FYI. [49] Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 13:26, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi Rich. Thanks for your kind reply as ever. I thought it was indeed fascinating, too. BTW, I tried to put a link and some text to it in the article on History_Flow but it dis-allowed it because the domain alphaworks\.ibm\.com is on the spam blacklist ??? What to do ? One can't update the article !

Spam protection filter From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search The page you tried to save was blocked by the spam filter because it contained a link to a blacklisted website. If you didn't add the link (see below), it was probably already in the current version of the page. Alternately, it might have been added by spyware on your computer. You will need to remove all instances of the blacklisted URL before you can save. If you believe that the link should not be listed on the spam blacklist, or that the spam filter is mistakenly blocking the edit, please leave a request on the spam blacklist talk page. The following is the section of the page that triggered the filter: The following text is what triggered our spam filter: http:(slash slash)www.alphaworks.ibm.com

Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 13:56, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Rich for changing the IBM History Flow tool article so it can be saved and updated. I am not sure, besides the obvious, why the IBM Alphaworks URL is in the Wikipedia Spam Blacklist. (?) [50]. Is there no way of finessing it besides chopping up the URL ... Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 14:53, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi Rich. Thanks for the information. I guess we'll leave it as it is until further action. Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 12:22, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Rich, for the information about the software pointed at in the external links. Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 12:25, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

For thousands of your excellent AWB-assisted edits I award you this Working Man's Barnstar. Jogers (talk) 19:58, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
For thousands of your excellent AWB-assisted edits I award you this Working Man's Barnstar. Jogers (talk) 19:58, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for getting rid of these unnecessary date links. Your work is appreciated. Regards, Jogers (talk) 19:58, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for July 3rd.

The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery



Volume 2, Issue 26 26 June 2006

About the Signpost


Angela Beesley resigns as Wikimedia Foundation trustee Requiring confirmed email suggested for uploads
Wikipedia cited by the England and Wales High Court Unblock requests directed to new mailing list
News and Notes: Wiktionary milestone, privacy policy update 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. 10:49, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Track listing formatting

Do you use a regular expression to place songs in quotation marks like this and this or do you just fix it by hand? Jogers (talk) 12:29, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! I guess it will take me some time before I figure out how it works. Take a look at the regexes I use to clean up album articles (User:Jogers/AWB). You may find something useful there. Jogers (talk) 12:44, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
It didn't work properly here. I hope that helps. Jogers (talk) 13:04, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
Here is another mistake. And my XML file: settings.xml. I'm afraid that most of these settings shouldn't be used in an automated bot, though. They are far from perfect yet and I still fix many things by hand. Jogers (talk) 13:39, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
There is another problem [51]. "(Die Elektrik)" is a part of the title in this case. I have no idea how such thing could automatically be distinguished from information about composers. Jogers (talk) 14:10, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
Thanks a lot! This is very convenient, I used to line them up by hand. By the way, when I make an edit like this I usually remove any remaining characters from the "Reviews" field so the professional reviews section of the infobox doesn't show up. Do you have any idea how to automatize this? Jogers (talk) 15:55, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
I'll try this out. Thank you for everything. If you improved any of these settings I would be very glad to know. My improvements and additions are usually reflected here. Regards, Jogers (talk) 17:43, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. I didn't have any problems with "this album" stuff. Some very unusual string of characters must have appeared in the text you tried to edit. The WikiProject Albums discourage from using piped links to "years in music" (see Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums#Style (Dating)) so this is why I remove them. Please be more careful with your edits. Here I don't know what happened, it must have something to do with your settings. Here the term "Album EP" doesn't make much sense. Here the list of reviews got screwed. Jogers (talk) 07:41, 6 July 2006 (UTC)


[edit] University of Richmond / Cry_Wolf

Thanks for cleaning up the year links on the University of Richmond page. But you also deleted underscores in links to the movie "Cry_Wolf." The proper title of the film does include the underscores. I've restored them, but wanted to let you know for future reference. WildCowboy 03:29, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Date links

On what grounds are you killing all of these on sight? Rebecca 23:18, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Protect Page

Hi, I noticed you said you'd clean up articles and preotect pages. You can do the one now, and the other is (should be) extremely rare. Rich Farmbrough 14:58 4 May 2006 (UTC).

Saw on my talk page you'd like some help protecting a page and cleaning it up just tell me what it is and I'll check it out Thanks, Mahogany
What I meant was, you don't need to be an admin to clean up pages, although it helps if you have lots of vandalism to roll back. I was referring to your comments on Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Xchrisblackx 2.Rich Farmbrough 16:57, 4 May 2006 (UTC).

[edit] AID

Thank you for your support of the Article Improvement Drive.
This week Recycling was selected to be improved to featured article status.
Hope you can help…

about 12:00, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Page of Sweet

forwenednes f. insolence, ANS 79-89.

forweoren == forworen

forweornan == forwiernan

forweornian to dry up, wither, fade, grow old,

 rot, decay, Æ.

forweorpan³ to throw, cast out, cast down,

 drive off, reject, throw away, squander, B.
 ['forwerpe']

forweorpnes f. migration, MtLl-7.

forweorðan³ (y) To perish, pass away, vanish,

 Mt; AO,CP,Æ.  f. on mōde be grieved.
 ['forworth']

forweorðenes == forwordenes

forweorðfullic excellent, Bo65¹⁵.

forweosnian == forwisnian

forwercan == forwyrcan; forwerd == foreweard

forwered == forwerod

forwerednes f. old age, SPs70¹⁸.

*forweren (WW217¹⁵) == forworen

forwerennes (RPs70¹⁸) == forwerednes

forwernedlice continently, W284⁸. [forwiernan]

forwerod worn out, very old, Æ. [werian]

forwesing f. destroying.

forwest == forewost

forwiernan (e, eo, i, y) to hinder, prohibit, prevent, repel, refuse, repudiate, deny, withhold, oppose, AO,B(y); CP.

for-wird, -wirn- == for-wyrd, -wiern-

forwisnian (eo) to wither away, dry up, decay, rot.

forwitan == forewitan

forwltolnes f. intelligence, diligence. [== fore-]

forwlencan to fill with pride, puff up, CP. ['forwlench']

forword I. n. iota, MtL¹⁸. II. == foreweard

forwordenes f. destruction, failure.

forwordenlic perishable, W263¹³.

forworen (pp. of *forweosan) decrepit, decayed

 OEG2109.

forworhta == forwyrhta

forwracned banished, RB82².

forwrecan⁵ to drive forth, carry away : expel,

 banish. 

forwrēgan to accuse, calumniate, Chr.

 ['forwray']

forwrēon¹ to cover over, LkR23⁴⁵.

forwrītan¹ to cut in two, B2705.

forwrīðan¹ to bind up, LCD 122a.

forwundian to wound, Chr, ['forwound']

forwundorlic very wonderful, GD, adv.

-līce.

forwurðan == forweorðan

forwyrcan (e) to do wrong, sin, Æ,CP. forworht

 mann criminal, CP : ruin, undo,
 destroy, Cr; Æ.AO.CP : condemn, convict,
 curse : forfeit : barricade, obstruct, close up.

forwyrd fn. destruction, ruin, fall, death,

 Æ.CP. [forweorðan]

*forwyrdan to perish, ANDR.

forwyrdendlic perishable.

forwyrht n. misdeed, MF 160.

forwyrhta m. agent, deputy : evil-doer, malefactor,

 ruined person.  [fore-]

forwyrnan (Æ) == forwiernan

forwyrnednes f. restraint, self-denial, continence,

 BH160¹⁰.

forwyrpnes f. casting out, LPs21⁷.

foryld == foreald; foryldan == forieldan

foryrman to reduce to poverty, bring low,

BH.W. [earm]

fossere m. spade. [L. fossorium]

*fōster == fōstor

fōstor n. sustenance, maintenance, food,

 nourishment, Lcd;Æ. ['foster']

fōstorbearn n. foster-child.

fōstorbrōðor m. 'foster-brother,' WW.

fōstorcild (e²) n. foster-child, ÆL.

fōstorfæder m. 'foster-father,' MH,

fōstorland n. land granted for the support of

 the recipients, Ct.  ['fosterland']

fōstorlēan n. payment for maintenance, LL

 442[2];MEN* [**EN small caps] 152.

fōstorling m. foster-child, nursling, WW.

 ['fosterling']

fōstormann m. bondsman, security.

fōstormōdor f. 'foster-mother,' MH.

*fōstornōð m. pasture, sustenance, EPs 22².

fōstorsweostor f. foster-sister.

fōstrað (e²) m. food : manna.

fōstrian to 'foster,' nourish, Sc(ē).

fōstring m. disciple, NG.

fōstur =- fōstor

fōt m. ds. fēt, fōte, nap. fēfc, fōtas foot (as

 limb and as measure), B,LL,NG; Æ,AO,
 CP.

fōtādl fn. gout in the feet.

fōtādlig having gout in the feet.

fōtbred n. foot-board, stirrup, WW107⁶.

fōtclātð m. 'commissura'? MtL9¹⁶.

±fōtcopsian, ±fōtcypsan to fetter, Pss.

fōt-cosp, -cops m. foot-fetter, Æ.

fōtcoðu f. gout in the feet, OEG.

fōtece m. gout in the feet, LCD*[**CD in small caps].

fōter n. darnel, tares, MtL13²⁷.

fōtfeter f. fetter for the feet, WW 1168. :

fōtgangende going on foot, OEG5254.

fōtgemearc n. foot-measurement, space of a

 foot, B3043.

fōtgemet n. foot-fetter, EPsl04¹⁸.

fōtgewǣde fn? covering for the feet, RB88¹⁴.

+fōtian to hasten up, MkL15⁴⁴.

fōt-lāst (Æ), -lǣst mf. footprint, spoor.

fōtlic on foot, pedestrian.

fōtmǣl n. foot-measure.

fōtmælum adv. step by step, by degrees,

 CM 883.

fōtrāp m. the loose part of the sheet by which

a sail is trimmed to the wind, 'propes,' WW
167¹¹.

fōtsceamol (e², e³, u³) m. footstool, Æ.

fōtsceanea m. foreleg, Lcd 1·*362. [v. 'shank']

fōtsetl n. footstool, CHE 1053C.

fōtsid reaching to the feet, NC289.

fōtspor n. footprints, spoor, LCD.*[**CD small caps]

fōtspure n.foot-rest,foot-support, CHR 1070E*[**small caps].

fōtstān m. base, pedestal, Æ.

fōtstapol m. footstep, LPsl7³⁷. Rich Farmbrough 14:40, 1 July 2006 (UTC).

[edit] California Adventure

I uploaded a scan of the back cover http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Music_From_Disney%27s_California_Adventure_%282001_CD%29 before 02:47, 10 July 2006 (UTC)


[edit] SmackBot on <i> tags

SmackBot seems to automatically replace <i> and </i> with ''. This is correct in many cases, where the italics are used for emphasis, but the two expressions are not always equivalent. For instance, Smackbot edited the article Embassy of the United States in Baghdad to remove italics tags around "The Times". In my opinion, this is not semantically correct, because the italics do not indicate emphasis, but instead designate The Times as a publication. Twinxor t 02:47, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for July 10th

The Wikipedia Signpost



Volume 2, Issue 28 10 July 2006

About the Signpost


Reuters tracks evolution of Ken Lay's death on Wikipedia Creating stable versions using existing software proposed
Meetups And Newsworthy International Assemblages News and Notes: Blocking changes, privacy policy update
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. before 20:11, 11 July 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Please help

I asked to be unblocked, but David Levy won't budge. I promise not to commit any blockable offenses. CoolKatt number 99999 20:11, 11 July 2006 (UTC)


[edit] User:CoolKatt number 99999

Might be worth considering an early unblock if you think the user is unlikely to repeat offend. Bear in mind, of course, a block is not a punishment but a means of protecting the wiki. Regards, Rich Farmbrough 20:32 11 July 2006 (GMT).

Immediately upon blocking, I offered to lift the block on the condition that CoolKatt discuss the disputed matter in good faith on the article's talk page and not revert again for at least 24 hours. CoolKatt then proceeded to post a message there, threatening to nominate the article for deletion if other editors refused to comply with his/her demands. Since that point, he/she has continually evaded the block (made possible by a bug that's currently being fixed) and threatened other users.
FYI, I reverted the addition of CoolKatt's message because of the aforementioned block evasion. (He/she shouldn't have been able to edit this page.) —David Levy 20:43, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Timeline of fictional future events

I thought years were supposed to be linked from that article, just as if it were a real "century" or "millennium" article. You recently removed the year links (and eliminated a number of dateth, which is good.) — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 15:27, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I debated putting the years back in, and can do quickly if you think it's a good idea (I was there primarily to deal with the month links). However for the 20th/21st C there will be eventually entries for almost every year, so the value of the links seem limited. Post about 2050 (?) the years redirect to centuries an millenia anyway. Let me know what you think. Rich Farmbrough 16:01 15 July 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Dates

Hi there: I guess I'm wrong, but I thought it was a Wiki convention if a year number was included in an article to make a link of it? Your bot has delinked a number in articles on my watch-list. No problem, just asking.--Anthony.bradbury 21:55, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Most helpful; thank you.--Anthony.bradbury 22:10, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
Rich, I've always adnired your stance on this controversial topic and I wondered if you might be interested in [52]
Apologies if you are not. --Guinnog 22:29, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bobblewik

You said: "Just to let you know that those who are familiar with this saga know that Bobblewik isn't using a bot." Is there anywhere were I can read about that? And were did he offer to talk to his detractors? (I guess that last one is his talk page). If you can get Bobblewik to explain why he removed the links he removed on related talk pages or in his edit summaries, feel free to use your administrator powers to unblock him yourself. - Mgm|(talk) 23:14, 16 July 2006 (UTC)


[edit] copyvio and ori redler

Hi Rich. I am going to be out of town some this week, and probably working on some personal side projects. I don't really have the time to track down what User:Ori Redler is doing, but today I had a quick look. I noticed on his talk page that you had asked him to follow procedure in the past, would you mind having a look at his edit history (no comments, natch) and/or helping him out so that we can get the copyvios tagged properly and those tagged improperly removed. I'm starting to think we're losing content to the big black copyvio banner. ... aa:talk 03:41, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for July 17th

The Wikipedia Signpost

Volume 2, Issue 29 17 July 2006

About the Signpost


Library of Congress, Holocaust Museum negotiate with Wikimedia Issue of article subjects requesting deletion taken up
Meetups And Newsworthy International Assemblages News and Notes: Blocking changes, single login
Wikipedia in the News Features and admins
The Report On Lengthy Litigation

Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View RSS Shortcut : WP:POST

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. Treebark (talk) 23:11, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Smackbot and "delinking months and days of week"?

Can I ask you a question? I often see SmackBot "[d]elink months and days of week &/or general fixes using AWB". Why would the bot delink months and days of the week? I had always been under the impression that it was good to hyperlink dates so that they would show up in the person's native date format -- e.g., June 26, 2006 is going to appear for me, when I save this and look back at it, like "June 26, 2006" -- but someone might see it as "26 June 2006" if that's how they have it set in Special:Preferences (see Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)). Can you fill me in on the rationale behind this? — Mike 01:48, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

You are right (I do quite alot of date linking for these format reasons), but not as far as things like linking just "Thursday" or "November" are concerned. Rich Farmbrough 08:49 24 July 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Signpost updated for July 24th

The Wikipedia Signpost

Volume 2, Issue 30 24 July 2006

About the Signpost


From the editor: Special report, writers wanted
Another country reportedly blocks Wikipedia School files suit against anonymous user(s)
Meetups And Newsworthy International Assemblages Wikipedia featured in The New Yorker
Election officials named to handle vote for board seat Report from the German Wikipedia
News and Notes: Biographies of living persons, milestones Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins The Report On Lengthy Litigation

Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View RSS Shortcut : WP:POST

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. --Michael Snow 04:00, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Clare Nasir article

Hi Rich. User:195.93.21.33 continues to vandalise Clare Nasir. I revert it, but maybe there's a bigger problem ? Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 20:42, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your kind reply, Rich, and help. I thought it might be the case of an AOL vandal, but was unsure positively. Cheers! --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 12:36, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Spelling

I'm sure this has been mentioned already, but "ISBN formatting problems &/or genreal fixes using AWB" (my emphasis)? Cheers --Pak21 17:29, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Rich Farmbrough 20:36 26 July 2006 (GMT).


[edit] Homelessness article vandalism

Hi Rich. Anonymous contributor, User:66.156.10.152 callously vandalised the Homelessness article, and I had a hard time fixing it since there were some legitimate changes since. It must have gone under the anti-vandalism bot's radar. Seems like a singular event for this contributor. I hope it stays that way. Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 17:45, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lebanon

Please see Talk:Lebanon for discussion about an edit you made to the Lebanon article. - Mark 04:05, 29 July 2006 (UTC)




[edit] weaklypaedia

Hopiakuta 05:17, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Responding to:

Hi

The picture you refer to is Image:Brothers Baptiste NIH.jpg.

You are correct that WP is biased towards The Western world Male interests Techno stuff English language subjects

On the first point you could look to Baidu Baike, on the fourth to 1 (etc). It is generally reckoned (by the "eventualists") that other subjects (than male and techno) will eventually catch up, and coverage is at least useful.

Perhaps you would like to write an article on Jeunes Agape to put this picture to better use.

Rgds, Rich Farmbrough 23:05 28 July 2006 (GMT).

Your list is:

Western world

Male interests

Techno stuff

English language subjects

Although these biases are bothersome, I have others on which I do obsess more, particularly regarding this photograph.

Please note that in the manner in which it had been presented, where I had originally seen it, on a "policy" page, they had been made to appear as each of:

vandals;

sockpuppets;

thieves;

communists;

others that I can't recall,...

Something seemed displaced, so, I looked closer.

I, suddenly, realized that they had been:

AfroAmerican;

twins;

disabled. None of the other [previous] categories seemed worthy.

I, therefore, felt that this would be confirmation that wiki, Mr. Wales, whatever, are:

handicappist;

antitwin;

racist.

Handicappism is a sort of racism directed @ oppressing disabled, opposing disability-access, enforcing bigotry, discrimination. Try asking politically-active disabled regarding the reaction to handicappist, handicappism.

Please note that it is not likely that these men even would know that we've written about them.

Please explain why you would encourage me to write on websites located in Walmart's favorite dictatorship??

?????????????????????????????????

That is just slightly Northeast of several of Exxon's preferred dictatorships.

As for scribing a better wikiarticle: well, I wrote one about racism. Naturally, it's deleted;

they've even denied me the historylog, repetitively.

It is not always simple to knock-over a wall.

Thank You,

DonFphrnqTaub Persina

Hopiakuta 05:17, 29 July 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Żagań.

Hello, Rich. Could you write an article about my city (Żagań) on Simple English Wikipedia? Kondzio1990 17:34, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Done, just for you. Rich Farmbrough 18:28 28 July 2006 (GMT).
Thank you very much. :-) Kondzio1990 11:02, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:Paperdolls.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Paperdolls.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 11:09, 29 July 2006 (UTC)



Hopiakuta 16:52, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Dear Mr. Rich_Farmbrough,

user:Rich_Farmbrough,

Thank You.

You've given me partial success.

Finally.

As you can see, it's been more than a month ago that I had discovered this photograph:

< http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:71.102.31.67 >;

< http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:71.102.31.67 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jeunes_Agape&oldid=66503755 >;

< http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Long_term_abuse/The_Doppleganger&oldid=59341492 >.

It is, now, beginning to receive some of its deserved honor.

Excellent.

I do hope that if I would suggest edits, they would not be automatically deleted.

Also, now, are you willing to assist me to retrieve the content deleted where I had attempted to create a page to confront this issue??

Please??

How can we prevent this from recurring??

Well, thank you f/ what you've assisted w/ just now.

Thank You,

DonFphrnqTaub Persina

Hopiakuta 16:52, 29 July 2006 (UTC)


Hopiakuta 16:52, 29 July 2006 (UTC)


[edit] User copy of page

new illustration for doppleganger
new illustration for doppleganger

User:Hopiakuta/Racism here with history. Incidentally, if you leave a message on my talk page, I will see it, there's no need to leave it elsewhere. As to the location of WP, it is spread around the world, and people have copies of it everywhere, so theres no need to discriminate against it on the grounds of geography. You may be interested in the articles on Ableism and Disablism as well as [53]. I'm not aware of any any work on twinism. On the matter of the use of the photograph, the page wasn't a policy page as such, and as you may know Teresa Knott removed the image as soon as she was aware of it. I don't think the poster intended it to be interpreted as a literal picture of the vandal - just two people where one was easy to confuse with the other. Similarly on the "female cyclist vandal" page a picture of a female cyclist does not imply that the the vandal is either a female or a cyclist, (although both are possible), that the kitten vandal is a kitten and so forth. Incidentally I was looking for a picture of paper dolls for the doppleganger page and found a GFDL one on Wikia. Regards, Rich Farmbrough 21:30 29 July 2006 (GMT).


Thank You very much.

This is the page that I want,

need:

< http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Hopiakuta/Racism&oldid=65242381 >.

"...if you leave a message on my talk page,..."

If I'd done more, it was to emphatically thank you, honor you f/ assisting me, in a way that others would know that you had come through.

Please do note that many others had not, even where they had suggested that they would.

As you can see from my page history, I only began, successful, comments a month ago. Ms. T. K. did alter the photograph; I am thankful. She did so subsequent to my posting various messages to pages where she had been posting. I believe that that is how she saw it.

I do suspect that that you've made the alterations that you've made subsequent to my messages.

If it was something else, that's okay; but, I do suspect that I'm correct.

Thank You f/ the references.

As f/ your explanation f/ the rampantly widespread racism, handicappism {handicappist}, bigotry, oppression, classism, bias,....

Please check on twentieth-century history:

Roughly half of racism in intentional.

Half is inadvertent.

Frequently, the solutions have actually compounded the original crime!! There are many such examples here.

&, as f/ kittens, if they would learn to typewrite, that would certainly alter this website.

Have you seen the pictures of President Vlad Putin's kitteny navel expedition [not "naval"]??

I do prefer "Tawny_Kitaen | Julie Kitaen".


I do know that we disagree on what the problem is; however, despite that, where may I present it, in a way that actual dialogue shall occur??

I've, already, presented it on many wikipages. I do need someplace better.


Thank You.

Hopiakuta 23:01, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

--Hopiakuta 23:01, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AWB album fixes suggestion

Please consider adding the template redirect evasion (Album infobox → Infobox Album) to your settings. Jogers (talk) 09:23, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Added Rich Farmbrough 16:10 30 July 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Signpost updated for July 31st

The Wikipedia Signpost

Volume 2, Issue 31 31 July 2006 About the Signpost

Onion riff prompts some to cry for change Professors criticize, praise Wikipedia in listserv discussions
Wikimania last-minute information Report from the Polish Wikipedia
News and notes Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins The Report On Lengthy Litigation

Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View RSS Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 03:24, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bose Headphone Family

I know that you have worked on Bose related pages before and I was hoping that I could get you involved with the discussion here! Thanks -- UKPhoenix79 07:17, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] US as abbreviation for United States

I saw you've been botting US to U.S.—is this reflecting some new WP policy? I think the version with periods looks awful, and it would seem to fall under the dictum of "leave it the way the author wrote it" unless superseded by some other style rule. /blahedo (t) 05:28, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

The (very old) guidance can be found under Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Acronyms_and_abbreviations:- When abbreviating United States, please use "U.S."; that is the more common style in that country. When referring to the United States in a long abbreviation (USA, USN, USAF), periods should not be used. When including the United States in a list of countries, do not abbreviate the "United States" (for example, "France and the United States", not "France and the U.S."). You can find detailed discussions on the talk page archive. Rich Farmbrough 09:34 6 August 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Signpost updated for August 7th

The Wikipedia Signpost

Volume 2, Issue 32 7 August 2006 About the Signpost

Guidance on publicity photos called dangerous False death information survives for a month in baseball biographies
Wikiversity officially announced by Wales Single-user login, stable versioning planned soon
Wales, others announce new projects at Wikimania Wikipedia satire leads to vandalism, protections
Early history of Wikipedia reviewed Report from the Polish Wikipedia
News and notes Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins The Report On Lengthy Litigation

Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View RSS Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:10, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism on Clare Nasir's article ... again

Hi Rich. User:195.93.21.33 vandalised Clare Nasir again. I reverted out the changes. Just to let you know. Thanks and Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 21:46, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi Rich. Anonymous contributors User:195.93.21.33 and User:195.93.21.67 et al., continue to put spurious material into Clare Nasir's article and her husband, Chris Hawkins. Annoyingly, quite frequently. Any ideas ? Or maybe I'm missing something obvious ! Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 19:42, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi Rich. Thanks. Umm ... I couldn't at all verify the cake bit or that Clare is leaving GMTV (I would really doubt that). It seemed fiddly, especially given other seemingly lewd article additions by anons to both Clare Nasir's article and her husband's, Chris Hawkins. Wasn't sure what to do. Whatever you feel is appropriate. Please give any guidance to me that you can, besides the common sense I might still possess. ;) I guess I could ask Chris, but that would be awkward given the nature of the additions. Bests and Thanks. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 22:04, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Rich, for all your help and guidance, as ever. Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 22:17, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WHA?

It seems you put in some very strange spam on the Slipknot (album) page. "Welcome to the Gerbil Cove"? Really.Schwarzes Nacht 13:00, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Try this diff [54]. I've left a {{tl:test1}}. Rich Farmbrough 21:17 10 August 2006 (GMT).


[edit] WP:AWB and Yo-Yo Ma Plays Ennio Morricone

===>Issues While I appreciate you fixing redirects and taking out the unnecessary nowiki tags, your edit on the tracklisting to this album made the formatting much worse. Take a look. You may want to do more previews before saving or figure out some new formula for these tracklistings. -Justin (koavf), talk, mail 15:59, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I knew I'd got it wrong and was searching for the article (I was distracted on the way to edit it). There's also a mistake in one with some Morse code, that I meant to fix manually, and am now searching for. I will find it... Thanks again. Rich Farmbrough 16:04 30 July 2006 (GMT).
found it Moving Pictures (album) Rich Farmbrough 18:08 30 July 2006 (GMT).


[edit] 9/11 Wiki

Willy on Wheels has been spotted at the September 11 Wiki. I've reverted his moves, and am requesting that he is blocked. Thanks! timrem 21:06, 10 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Tracklist Fixes

Re: Fuhai no Koibito et al. Is hyphen now the official punctuation for separating track title from track length? I always thought it was mdash (three days ago I had a guy going through some pages I watch changing dash to mdash, so your edits come as kind of a surprise to me). I work on a lot of album pages and I'd like to know which symbol to use.

Coach Z Ale 21:56, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

No, it's ndash. See [Wikipedia:WikiProject_Albums#Track_listing]. rgds. Rich Farmbrough 22:00 10 August 2006 (GMT).


[edit] US vs U.S.

I appreciate that the American usage is "U.S." but Wikipedia convention is to use a common style within a page, and the page on transatlantic aircraft plot is written in the British usage (being a British event), so should use "US". I wouldn't be particularly bothered by this, except there are various paragraphs with "UK" and "U.S." in close proximity, and the mixed usage looks very odd. (And yes, I do realise that the general Wikipedia policy is in the opposite direction.) Bluap 14:20, 11 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Logarithmic convolution

Thank you for copying Logarithmic convolution, your help with WP:PMEX is appreciated. I have a remark though. It is good that when you copy things you put a bit more care in how accurately things are copied (1≠ l), if LaTeX is properly formatted, and that the style correspond to existing Wikipedia conventions. I did some fixes which may illustrate better what I mean. You can reply here if you have comments. Cheers, Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 20:13, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I was mislead by the tex source "\ast_l" . Rich Farmbrough 21:39 12 August 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Now That's What I Call Music

Rich, I think that the changes you are making to some of the Now That's What I Call Music entries are wrong, and not to the format described in Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Albums/Archive_6#Various_Artists. If there is an update to this, please point me at it. -- Jbattersby 18:39, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

OK, I'll avoid them for now. Feel free to revert if you like. Having said that, the discussion at albums was inconclusive (as are a lot of discussions in that project - don't know why). Perhaps it's time to give some more thought to updating the guideline page?
Starting those articles makes you a kindred spirit, as I entered and corrected a lot of Now! track listings on the Free CDDB, may years ago. Rich Farmbrough 18:59 14 August 2006 (GMT).


[edit] International_Institute_of_Management

There's quite a debate on the deletion of this article and I've tried to verify what i could, change the tone a bit and weigh in to keep and improve. Could you look at what I've got there and see if the neutrality and verifiability tags are still needed? Also, if it merits keeping? As always, many thanks. Cheers,Your inclusionist pal in the U.S.--Beth Wellington 20:52, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment on the tags. It was deleted, but I restored it. The article was likewise deleted. Oh well--Beth Wellington 15:31, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

No probs. My comment wasn't deleted, though. Rgds Rich Farmbrough 11:38 19 August 2006 (GMT).


[edit] External link -> external links

Could you please identify the additional link in the section which was named "external link" on the article Electoral district of Castle Hill? Thanks!Garrie 22:11, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Of course. It is this one:

<!-- doesn't exist yet * [http://www.seo.nsw.gov.au/electoral_districts/district_index/the_hills District profile from the State Electoral Office] -->

<grin> Regards Rich Farmbrough 23:57 14 August 2006 (GMT).
Well that got me lmao. Garrie 00:12, 15 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Signpost updated for August 14

The Wikipedia Signpost

Volume 2, Issue 33 14 August 2006 About the Signpost

Editing for hire leads to intervention Meetups And Newsworthy International Assemblages
Report from the Chinese Wikipedia News and notes
Wikipedia in the News Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs and Internal Operational News The Report On Lengthy Litigation

Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View RSS Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:16, 15 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] User:Rich Farmbrough/Club Penguin

Are you nominating your user subpage for deletion? If so, can you use the {{db-author}} or {{db-owner}} tags to be sure, please?  (aeropagitica)   (talk)  22:11, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

No, thanks, Just recreated a delete page for deletion review. Rich Farmbrough 22:32 15 August 2006 (GMT).


[edit] coor dms template and AWB

How did you set AWB to apply the coor dms template? --Shanedidona 14:36, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

<datagridFAR find="(\d+)°(\d+)'(\d+)"\s*(N|S)o(u|r)th,\s*(\d+)°(\d+)'(\d+)"\s*(W|E)(est|ast)" replacewith="{{coor dms|$1|$2|$3|$4|$6|$7|$8|$9|city}}" />
However be careful it's not tested for the southern or eastern hemispheres. Rich Farmbrough 19:24 16 August 2006 (GMT).

Do I set that as a rule in AWB? --Shanedidona 19:39, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

You can paste it into the XML file, or put

(\d+)°(\d+)'(\d+)"\s*(N|S)o(u|r)th,\s*(\d+)°(\d+)'(\d+)"\s*(W|E)(est|ast)

in the left column and {{coor dms|$1|$2|$3|$4|$6|$7|$8|$9|city}}

in the right, tick the regex box. I did think of doing the radio masts with it. Rich Farmbrough 19:43 16 August 2006 (GMT).

Note you also want to change the "city" parameter to something more appropraite,, perhaps "landmark", I can't remember. Rich Farmbrough 19:44 16 August 2006 (GMT).


[edit] Linking years

I started de-linking years after I saw comments made by you to the effect that should be done, but there seems to be some dispute about this. I'm not an expert on MoS, and I wonder if you could add anything to the debate. It started on User talk:Harro5 and has continued on my talk page and on Rebecca's talk page. Tyrenius 05:12, 18 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] ISBNs for Sutton Court

Thanks for pointing out the ISBN problems on Sutton Court. I think I've fixed tem all but would be grateful if yu'd check.— Rod talk 21:11, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

That was quick. I've hyphenated them. They look fine. Rich Farmbrough 21:21 22 August 2006 (GMT).


[edit] Date links

Debate continues. Tyrenius 21:37, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mirabilis Media stub

Hello, made some modifications to the Mirabilis Media company stub. How can I complete the information on this company (shareholders, executives, etc?) and also wehn do we know it's not a stub anymore?

Best Regards.

Welcome to WP. I would suggest you ask for help on the Romanian WP, however there is a book called Who Owns Who that may help with corporate ownership. Rich Farmbrough 11:05 5 August 2006 (GMT).
(It's a judgement call when something ceases to be a stub.)
Thank you for your fast reply. I understand now that being or not a stub it's somewhow relative.
I can continue to edit that article, and I hope it would be accepted, as long as I am the owner of the company. My intention is to write three more chapters: history, internet properties (detailing the websites that company owns, and shareolders structure).
Best Regards.


OK, you should be aware of a few things:
Rich Farmbrough 15:00 5 August 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Long Island (Boston) v. Long Island, Massachusetts

Hi Rich. Question about nomenclature of articles. I basically made an article, for Long Island (Boston) using the form, "Long Island (Boston)" User:Halibut_Thyme changed this to Long Island, Massachusetts without discussion. None of the linking articles linking to it were changed. Any ideas ? I left a note on the contributor's page and no response so far: User_talk:Halibut_Thyme Bests and Thanks in advance. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 13:34, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Aye, Rich, Boston is not only in America. There is the original St. BOtolph'S TOwN (Boston) in Lincolnshire . However, there may be a lot of Long Island's in Massachusetts, as well ! I didn't seed the original article: I just added a lot of material to it after research. It seems to have been a talking point 13 February 2006 in Talk:Enclave#Long_Island. Also, the article links to Long Island (Boston) were left pointing to a redirect instead of the new article. That should be fixed. Hmm. So you're recommending that the main article stay as Long Island, Massachusetts ? Bests and Thanks. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 19:21, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Okay, Rich. Thanks for all the ideas. I am not sure of the statistical distribution of convention in WP for such an ambiguity. I will go all the way and make a 'Long Island, Boston, Massachusetts' article and move it all there. Okay ? And change the links. Ah, glad you're close to Lincs. Nice place. As I remember, Wikipedian Chris Horry (User:Zerbey --- notice in the photo Chris is wearing a NY Yankee baseball hat ... something which is anathema to a Boston, Massachusetts person ;)) is from the original Boston in Lincs ! Let me know that you agree with the move to the new article title. Thanks and Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 21:28, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi Rich. Done. Move to Long Island, Boston, Massachusetts. Some tidying left with links. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 21:02, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi Rich. All done as far as I can see. It now is Long Island, Boston, Massachusetts. Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 14:57, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi. Unfortunately none of this discussion got recorded on the article's talk page. So I was blissfully unaware of it when I renamed Long Island, Boston, Massachusetts to Long Island (Massachusetts). If I'd known I would have discussed it first. Still I stand by my reasoning - please see Talk:Long Island (Massachusetts). -- Chris j wood 09:56, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi Chris. I just wish I had known you were going to unilaterally do this. Oh well. The article should stay in one place now. It's been moved too often recently. I have given it as a reference to historians, scholars, and people at large. Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 13:26, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Miscellanea vs trivia

I noticed a couple recent edits of yours on album pages changing the Trivia sections to Miscellanea. What's the reasoning behind this? I didn't find anything with a few quick searches :\ ~Gertlex 05:25, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

The reason is that "Trivia" is information which is not really of use or interest. Ideally information that is of interest should be in the article body, information that is not should not be in the article at all. Nonetheless miscellaneous useful information may need a section of it's own - calling that section "Trivia" invites the addition of facts such as "Harold Lloyd took more cream in his coffee making this film, than in the two previous films put together." You may well find a better name than I have used, if so, please change it and let me know. See also Wikipedia:Trivia. Rich Farmbrough 20:04 20 August 2006 (GMT).

[edit] SmackBot

Rich, your latested bot task request has been approved: [55]. — xaosflux Talk 15:06, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Rich Farmbrough 18:59 19 August 2006 (GMT).

[edit] "External links"

Rich, this may relate to SmackBot more than you, but Wiki standard practice is to always make the header "External links" (plural) even if there's only one external link today.

Atlant 00:18, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Sadly even that is no consensus. Rich Farmbrough 06:47 22 August 2006 (GMT).
 :-( . But thanks for letting me know!
Atlant 12:03, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for August 21

The Wikipedia Signpost

Volume 2, Issue 34 21 August 2006 About the Signpost

Politician's staff criticizes Wikipedia after being caught editing it Board of Trustees elections continue with call for candidates
Report from the Swedish Wikipedia News and notes
Wikipedia in the News Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs and Internal Operational News The Report On Lengthy Litigation

Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View RSS Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 04:24, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Signing articles

Hi Rich. Contributor User_talk:Frank_J_Larkin did a nice job on the Moon Island and Hangman Island articles. He signed his name and town, "Frank J. Larkin Acton, MA" at the bottom of the article. I removed it and left a message on his discussion page. We don't sign articles as far as I know, right ? Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 15:36, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Theta Beta Potata PUNK HOUSE Deletion Review

[edit] Theta Beta Potata

This article was first started by me and was deleted back in May '06. I was reading the punk house article and saw that the link for the TBP article was no longer red so I clicked on it and there was an article back up, started by another user. I dont know who started it because, it was deleted soon after I saw it. The decision made in the "Article for Deletion" debate should be reconsidered. The article is about a punk house not a fratenal organization. It seems that the debate, run by User:ChrisB and results were reported by User:Mailer Diablo. I will post this on their talk pages. This is the first time I have requested a deletion review so please let me know what else I need to do. If there is anything. I am on wikipedia frequently and I want to learn. Thanks. Xsxex 16:28, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Clare Nasir article vandalism again

Rich, the moment someone lifted the protection on the Clare Nasir article, User:195.93.21.33 came right in immediately and vandalised it. Oh well. A shame. Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 21:10, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Rich, for your kind attention. It is a bit frustrating. Cheers. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 21:17, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I know it was not quite immediately, but it felt so, subjectively. Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 21:22, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Happened again, Rich, on 24th August. Vandalised by User:195.93.21.33, again, as is his habit. Reverted, but am at a loss. There are much more important things to do. *sigh* Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 18:26, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Rich, as ever, for your kind help. Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 18:35, 25 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] ISBN-'s

Hi noticed an insertion of - into an art I had been working on, could you point me to the rules on this, as all I have seen to date is the block of numbers on others entries. Thanks. SatuSuro 01:19, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

They are based on a table found on the ISBN Agency's web site here. I assume you know that the first part is language group, the second publisher (within lang group) the third a serial number and the last a check digit.

Regards, Rich Farmbrough 19:04 19 August 2006 (GMT).

Gawd I do hope you dont feel a need to go through my contributions list there are hundreds of arts with the - 's missing :) SatuSuro 13:44, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Fear not, my trusty SmackBot will be roped in to help. Rich Farmbrough 15:11 20 August 2006 (GMT).
  • Question: The unhyphenated ISBNs work fine for looking up a book, that's what we use in MARC records here in the library, and each one is unique. I agree that the standard says "The ten-digit number is divided into four parts of variable length, which must be separated clearly by hyphens or spaces" although it allows the hypens (spaces) to be omitted for data processing. So far as I can see, the hyphens do help you read the number if you know the code, but are not necessary. Or am I missing something? Bejnar 23:28, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
No you are quite right. To identify the book you need the number, for the extra information you need either the hyphens or the appropriate part of the hyphenation rules. Rich Farmbrough 18:46 29 August 2006 (GMT).

[edit] ISBNs in Indian Institutes of Technology

Hi,

I have fixed all I can find. Can you please check again to see if any other invalid ISBN in the article. Thanks, — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 15:03, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

This one I think is wrong becasue the check digit doesn't match ISBN 81-7033-526-9. Rich Farmbrough 15:08 23 August 2006 (GMT).
The source I used quoted it wrongly. I searched the net and found another source which quoted another ISBN (with a different last digit) having consistant digits. I have made the corrections. Thanks for pointing it out. — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 15:29, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Tale of Genji

I see you changed the hyphenation of an ISBN in The Tale of Genji, but also added a tag for an Category:Articles with invalid ISBNs. I followed the ISBN link, and the A9 (Amazon) search came up with the proper book. Other searches also returned correctly. What is invalid about the ISBN? Neier 23:20, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, the -0 comes up on Amazon.com, but not the -2. The Japanese site that is linked from the ISBN page doesn't seem to care about the final digit at all. 0, 2, 8, 9, all worked. So, you're calculations seem to be correct. Neier 23:33, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Chew Valley & the front page

Hi, as you spotted Chew Valley is to be on the front page next week. I'm going to be away on holiday & will have no web access so will not be able to counter any vandalism etc - would you be able to keep an eye on the page for me before & during 31st August? — Rod talk 14:42, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Rod, I'll do what I can beforehand, but the main page FA is always closely watched anyway, so have a relaxing holiday. Rich Farmbrough 14:44 24 August 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Otago Peninsula

Hi Rich - I notice you added an "invalid ISBN" tag to the Otago Peninsula article. Which ISBNs are the invalid ones? I have a couple of those books sitting in front of me, and the primary author of the article is User:Peter Entwisle, who is also the author of two of the listed books. Grutness...wha? 03:44, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

According to my calculations User:Rich_Farmbrough\Invalid_ISBNs, The Australian National University. ISBN 0-7315-0342-1. Rgds Rich Farmbrough 07:16 25 August 2006 (GMT).
Then your calculations are wrong. The ISBN on that book is identical to as it is written in the article - look here or here for confirmation of this fact. The same is true of the two books listed at Dunedin Public Art Gallery. In that instance, not only are the two ISBNs identical in book and article, but the books were both written by a primary writer of the article. Please double-check your information, because judging by the other comments below it looks like you are marking a lot of articles at the moment with incorrect allegations about ISBN numbers. Grutness...wha? 00:17, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
It seems the Australian National University has made a mistake and used both ISBN 0-7315-0342-1 (incorrect) and ISBN 0-7315-0342-2 (correct) for two different books. See here and here. Mushroom (Talk) 00:39, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
It also seems Dunedin used two ISBNs for the same book: ISBN 0-473-00263-0 (incorrect) and ISBN 0-473-00263-9 (correct), see here and here. Mushroom (Talk) 00:52, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
OK... that makes sense. Sorry about the grumbling :) Grutness...wha? 01:52, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] SCOTLAND'S FORgotten VALOUR

Commonwealth --> Commonwealth of Nations for VC's. Thanks for picking this up.

Really the title of the book (and the WP article) is Scotland's Forgotten Valour. To quote the article:

the typography of the title on the book uses capitalisation to contrast emphasis ("SCOTLAND'S FORgotten VALOUR"), to communicate additional meaning, namely a reference to the For Valour inscription on the medal -- and presumably the idea that valour is so much a part of the national character as to justify suggesting that "Scotland exists for the sake of valour".)

If you look it up on Amazon or isbndb, there is no special capitalisation - just Scotland's Forgotten Valour. Colonies Chris 13:35, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Invalid ISBN tag in Evan Mecham

I noticed that you recently added this article to Category:Articles with invalid ISBNs, and based upon User:Rich Farmbrough\Invalid ISBNs the ISBN that is apparently at issue is the one for the Watkins book. While I do not know what methodology you used to determine that the ISBN was incorrect, I am able to state that the number in the article matches the numbers listed for the book in the Library of Congress catalog and the Amazon listing for the book. The formatting of the number also matches the formatting used on the back cover of my local library's copy of the book. As a result of this information verifying the book's ISBN, I have reverted your addition of the article to this category. --Allen3 talk 15:23, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

The article said ISBN 0-668-09051-6 it is actually 0-688-09051-6, a subtle difference (I have corrected the article). The check (for most ISBNs I have labelled - some have digits missing) is by comparing the check digit (the last) whith what it would be assuming the rest of the number is correct. I don't label an incorrect hyphenation, I fix that. Regards, Rich Farmbrough 15:41 25 August 2006 (GMT).
That's what I get for reducing my caffeine consumption. Thanks --Allen3 talk 15:47, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Battleships

Hi there; I obviously have no problem of any kind with editors editing articles that I have written: but you have categorised a number of articles originally by me as "invalid ISBNs". And they are not; the ISBN numbers are those printed within the reference books used. Whether they have been changed I know not, but that would in any case not invalidate my point.--Anthony.bradbury 21:22, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi, Anthony, can you point me to one or two of the articles where I may be wrong? Rich Farmbrough 21:28 25 August 2006 (GMT).
Uneless you have now found and fixed ISBN's in which case, that's fine. Rich Farmbrough 21:31 25 August 2006 (GMT).

HMS Temeraire (1876), HMS Inflexible (1876), HMS Rodney (1884) and Ajax class battleships. I have reverted your incorrect edits - I have Parkes and Conway open beside me as I write, with the ISBN numbers in full view. I hope that you, or your bot if you are using one ,will not feel the need to make similar incorrect edits on the other sixty or so ship articles I have written?--Anthony.bradbury 21:43, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Newton's identities

Hi, Rich, what precisely is the problem with the ISBN's? I obtained them directly from the books themselves. Did someone vandalize them since I added them, or what? ---CH 21:37, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I've met Peter Cameron at QMC. Back on topic 981-02-4561-6 seems to be wrong as I calculate the check digit to be 0 (assuming the rest were correct), and indeed our own Schur polynomial, written by you (grin) confirms that it should be 981-02-4541-6. Rich Farmbrough 21:43 25 August 2006 (GMT).

See you were right about Landau & Lifschitz Classical Theory of Fields. I just changed last digit. The UW Library catalog gives another ISBN, probably because they have hardcover and I used the paperback Pergamon fourth edition.

Peter Cameron: good oh! I really enjoy his papers and books, in fact I am getting back into permutation groups at the moment (see Erlangen Program). Thanks for checking. Obviously I have been somewhat hasty in adding some of the ISBNs.---CH 21:48, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ISBNs

Looking at other recent entries on your talk page, it is clear that I am not alone in my dismay at your approach to ISBNs. May i suggest that you review your procedures?--Anthony.bradbury 21:45, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Read the entries, and see who was right. Rich Farmbrough 21:49 25 August 2006 (GMT).
Rich, I am not trying to start a fight; I am just saying that the ISBN numbers on the articles which I authored are the numbers printed on the flyleaves of the reference books in question. If they are printed wrong, so be it. Conway comes in five volumes;the volume from which I am drawing data relates to ships built between 1860 and 1905.--Anthony.bradbury 21:58, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the info. I just want to get to the bottom of this, of course I can have made a mistake. Rich Farmbrough 22:03 25 August 2006 (GMT).

Does the number vary with the year of publication? My copy of this volume is dated 1979 (Conway Maritime Press Ltd).--Anthony.bradbury 22:11, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

It can do if it's a different edition, I need to go back a step, though:

OK, let's see these are the HMS articles I found problems with

  1. HMS Electra (H27) ISBN 0-8600-7300-0 : 9 (HMS Electra (Frederick Miller Ltd, London, 1959)) get to that later.
  2. HMS Inflexible (1876) ISBN 0-85952-6043 : 6 - this is Parkes some other articles e.g. Nathaniel Barnaby it is ISBN 0-85052-6043
  3. HMS Polychrest ISBN 0000649916 : 0 (spurious zero - fixed.)
  4. HMS Rodney (1884) ISBN 09-85052-604 : 0 - this is Parkes with an extra "9"
  5. HMS Temeraire (1876) ISBN 09-85052-604 : 0 - this is Parkes with an extra "9"

So summary is Parkes is ISBN 0-85052-6043

RgdsRich Farmbrough 22:24 25 August 2006 (GMT).

Whatever you say. I make no comment about HMS Electra or HMS Polychrest, which I played no part in creating. As for Rodney, Temeraire and Inflexible, I just copied the printed ISBN on the inside cover of the book. It is 0-85052-6043 (Parkes} as all the articles state. If your calculations give a different number, then either your calculations or my printed copy of the book is wrong. Best wishes.--Anthony.bradbury 22:33, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi Anthony, it doesn't really matter, since all the articles are now fixed, but the last number you gave me is correct (bar a hyphen) and the articles were wrong, as my calculations suggested. "Inflexible" you fixed (but you labelled the fix a revert - having thought I changed the number, which I didn't), the other two I've removed the spurious "9" they now start 0-8 not 09-8. Regards. Rich Farmbrough 22:54 25 August 2006 (GMT).

No. I am sorry, and if my copy of the book is wrong then fair enough. But the hyphen is NOT wrong. The ISBN number for Parkes is 0-85052-6043. It is NOT 0-85052-604-3. Or the book is wrong. I am sitting here with it in front of me.--Anthony.bradbury 23:01, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
OK that's interesting, thanks. Rich Farmbrough 23:07 25 August 2006 (GMT).
And yes, the book should have the hyphen. Rich Farmbrough 23:12 25 August 2006 (GMT).

Ok, fine. But on my word of honour, it doesn't. Obviously you know what you are talking about. But I don't. Could you please tell me why you are so sure that you are right and the book is wrong?--Anthony.bradbury 23:16, 25 August 2006 (UTC)


Yes of course, I would have anyway but I didn't want to bore you. An ISBN is made up of four parts, the first identifies the "language area" a sort of nebulous concept, but 0 is English for example, However this part can be longer so that 99451 (or something like it) represents Congo . This means you can have lots of books in the English (or French - 2) sections, and not so many in the Congo - which makes sense. The next chunk is the publisher, and the same system applies. "Big" publishers get short numbers like Penguin - 14, and Yale I think 300. Then you get a serial number chosen by the publisher, this takes it to 9 digits, for example 0-593-01518 is an English book by Bantam Press, and probably their 1518th book. The last part is a check digit (or X) in this case 5 so the full ISBN is 0-593-01518-5. So that is what the four parts are. As to layout, the international ISBN agency "ISBN User Manual" states "The ten-digit number is divided into four parts of variable length, which must be separated clearly by hyphens or spaces" although it allows these to be omitted for internal data processing. (On Wikipedia we can't use spaces, because the ISBN magic doesn't work with them.) (Incidentally looking at a book on my desk, the ISBN is correctly hyphenated on the back above the bar code, and in the book's publishing data page, but not on the inside flap.) To confuse matters this will be changing on 1st Jan 2007, with the addition of a 978- before all ISBNs to make them compatible with EANs and allow more numbers to be introduced later with a 979- prefix.

Hope that makes sense, Rich Farmbrough 23:39 25 August 2006 (GMT).

Fair enough. Totally fair enough. I will insert the hyphen in all future articles, and go back and retro-insert it in the previous ones. But not now, because its time for bed!--Anthony.bradbury 23:50, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Me too!

[edit] ISBNs again

Hi--Exactly what is wrong with the ISBN 0-89886-238-8, which is the corrected entry I put on the Masherbrum page, which matches the LOC and Amazon, and which checks out (I cut and pasted into an auto-ISBN checker)? Thanks, Spireguy 22:22, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, your correction was correct, thanks for fixing it. Timing error on my part. Rich Farmbrough 22:28 25 August 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Articles with invalid ISBNs

You have now added this category to a number of articles for which I provided references. What is that about? I entered the ISBN numbers exactly as they appeared in the books. I find it hard to believe that so many of the ISBNs for books that I've used as references are invalid. -- Donald Albury(Talk) 23:20, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi Donald, can you give me an example or two, preferably on my talk page (click my surname).Rich Farmbrough 23:42 25 August 2006 (GMT).
I see now that they all involve the same library book. Let me check it out tomorrow and get back to you. - Donald Albury(Talk) 23:53, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Sorry to have bothered you. I've got them sorted now, including one or two articles you hadn't visited yet. -- Donald Albury 20:30, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
Good work. Rich Farmbrough 20:31 26 August 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Another timing error

Hogan Cup - I noticed the error when you listed it and fixed it, and you then added the article to ones with incorrect ISBN's, even though it had already been fixed. While checking ISBN's is very useful, I would suggest that you either adding the category when checking, or double check if adding it at a later date. Otherwise, if it is fixed in the time between checking and categorising, no one knows why you're adding the category. Might I suggest a HTML comment in the form of "add cat + <-- please check isbn's xxxxx-xxx-xxxxx and yyyy-yyyy-yyyyy --> which would cover most cases, and also let people know what isbn's are invalid where there are a lot of them). Regards, MartinRe 23:50, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Martin. Rich Farmbrough 23:53 25 August 2006 (GMT).

[edit] FYI, Smackbot detecting unfilled out infobox book

I noticed on this page: Alanna: The First Adventure that the invalid ISBN template got added due to the editor copying Wikipedia:WikiProject_Novels/ArticleTemplate without modifying this line:

 | isbn           = ~ISBN ~999999999~ (~hardcover~ edition) (prefer 1st edition)~

That line doesn't get displayed on the infobox when they forget to edit, so you are probably safe to leave it alone.

Thanks, RainbowCrane | Talk 02:10, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks that's a useful tip. Rich Farmbrough 15:53 26 August 2006 (GMT).

Actually it was this bit:

< !-- ==Release details== -->
< !-- ~*year, country, publisher ISBN 1234567890, Pub date DD Month Year, binding~ -->
< !--major publication history to be included here, not everything if too extensive-->
< !--example-->
< !--*1999, USA, C.S. Black & sons ISBN 8768768760, Pub date 1 April 1999, Hardback -->

I think. All similar examples have been dealt with. Rich Farmbrough 09:33 31 August 2006 (GMT).

[edit] ISBN.

What's wrong with the ISBN numbers at Robert Sheaffer? I got them directly from the book. Bubba73 (talk), 02:50, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Ditto on Kendrick Frazier. Bubba73 (talk), 02:52, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
Whoops. I found a typo in the second one. I'll check the other one. Bubba73 (talk), 02:58, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
Ditto. Both were my typos. Sorry about that.  !Bubba73 (talk), 03:03, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

It would be useful if you would mark which ISBNs are flawed, instead of just that there is a bad ISBN in an article. Some of these have a lot of ISBNs. - Jmabel | Talk 05:31, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

For example here you added Category:Articles with invalid ISBNs to Vilna Troupe. There are only two ISBNs in the article. Both look valid to me, and the University of Chicago appears to have both books ([56] [57]). - Jmabel | Talk 06:33, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
Hi, unfortunately this is not simple. And I'm sorry I re-added this to the category after you had fixed it, that was a mistake on my part. However if you look at Category:Articles with invalid ISBNs you will see a pointer to Rich_Farmbrough%5CInvalid_ISBNs where you can look up most of the articles currently in the category and find that in Vilna Troupe the problem ISBN identified was ISBN 973982722 1 whose check digit computes to 5 (as corrected by you). Thanks for fixing the ISBN and sorry again for readding the article. Rich Farmbrough 16:54 26 August 2006 (GMT).
Hmm. Would it be possible instead of just adding a category to add a template with a link to that page (or an equivalent in Wikipedia space)? It would make it easier for people to follow up. - Jmabel | Talk 18:03, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Homelessness article flags, etc.

Hi Rich. Anonymous contributor User:70.191.174.29 (User_talk:70.191.174.29) has put several flags up on the article on Homelessness. I think they're inappropriate. Many of us have worked hard on that article, and cited sources all over the place. And professionals in the field have read it, and have been quite impressed with it. The kinds of edits by that anonymous contributor User:70.191.174.29 have been odd. For example, changing, "Free-care clinics, especially for the homeless, exist and are usually over-burdened with patients. ..." to "Free-care clinics, especially for the homeless, exist but may be over-burdened with patients". That's a plain fact that was referenced. It's a highly questionable edit. I am going to remove the two new flags. Actually, I have taken the chance to roll back the article to a what I believe is a stable and sensible point. It was out of control. We can all start from that point and work our way by rational discussions up to where we want to be. I don't want to be involved in any Wikipedia wars, as I am a Wikipedia pacifist in practice. Please let me know your opinion. Thanks and Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 14:29, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Consider also the plea made to me by User:Patcat88 "homeless article going to hell" on my talk page (User talk:Wikiklrsc) ... I am not an admin, just a contributor and editor. I put talking points on the Talk:Homelessness and the other anonymous editor's talk page User_talk:70.191.174.29 for Wikipedia peace and sanity. I think I did, but also hope that I did the right thing. I have precious little time to edit and contribute, let alone internet access enough these days. Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 16:32, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Rich, for your contribution and help. I hope it is back under control now. Point well taken, Rich. I have always agreed that the article is largely from an American point of view. I tried to change that _a bit_ in the history section. Unfortunately, I didn't have good data or the time to find it all, for most other countries. I moved much into the article at Homelessness in the United States, Homelessness in Canada and the like. I hope other contributors will help to make it more universal, as I will endeavour to do, in future. Bests and Thanks. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 17:49, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Rich, you said in my talk page (User talk:Wikiklrsc): 'and needs some of the "archeolofy" removing from it.' ... whither "archeolofy" ? Archaeology ? A nonce word for 'archaic loftiness' ? Help. Regards. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 18:06, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

"vi: (1) substitutions made." ... thought it might be. ;) Bests and Thanks. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 18:11, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi Rich. So far, it all seems to have worked out well in the end. See User_talk:70.191.174.29. We'll all work together as it should be ! Bests and Thanks. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 16:37, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The plague you made on the article of keyboard protectors

Please consider carefully your choice of words before you press the button "save page" after editing wildly. Hereby, I advise you to use the show preview function wisely so that you will find out how ridiculous is your mischief before saving the page. Yfjonas 15:53, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

I hate to break it to you, but the original article, while showing a sharp and expressive mind, and a strong vocabulary, was in somewhat strange English to say the least, as was your comment on my talk page. Rgds, Rich Farmbrough 17:14 26 August 2006 (GMT).

[edit] ISBN request

Could you pls run your ISBN tool on User:Hlj/CWbibliography? Thanks, Hal Jespersen 16:22, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

I've hyphenated them. the following appear to be incorrect:

ISBN 0-89029-080-7 : 6 (calculated checksum) 
ISBN 0-89919-760-6 : 4 
ISBN 0-89029-015-4 : 6

Rich Farmbrough 16:59 27 August 2006 (GMT).

Thank you. I rechecked those 3 #s with the books themselves and they are as printed on the jackets. So somebody screwed up somewhere. Hal Jespersen 17:17, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

According to Amazon they are

  1. 0-89029-780-0
  2. 0-89919-790-6
  3. 0-89029-715-4

Rgds, Rich Farmbrough 17:28 27 August 2006 (GMT).

Thanks again. I guess I'll go with Amazon's. Hal Jespersen 17:43, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
WP:CITE gives examples, Smith, J. How to cite your sources, Random House, 2005. ISBN 1607000X and others, dropping any hyphens and any spaces but retaining a space between ISBN and the first number. The Library of Congress will accept an ISBN as a specific search in its Library Catalogs but only if all of the spaces and hyphens are removed, similarly. Like, ISBN 160700X as one example or ISBN 0890297800 as another example. Whatever works, have fun. Terryeo 23:26, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Questionable links ? added by an anonymous editor

Hi Rich. User:74.130.68.242 (User talk:74.130.68.242) (Special:Contributions/74.130.68.242) added a specific link [58] to many articles, including the article on a Homeless shelter, in order to collect a list of shelters in various US states. I wonder if it belongs in Wikipedia as it appears, although seemingly altruistic, a non-informational solicitation. Thoughts? Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc

Looks like whomp has it under control. Rich Farmbrough 22:28 27 August 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Projects/hiddenStructure

Rich Farmbrough said: What was/is this? Rich Farmbrough 23:28 27 August 2006 (GMT).

IIRC, someone requested that I do a search of the entire en.wikipedia datadump for templates that included something specific that needed to be fixed. I'm sure that project is long finished.

Usually I make notes when I create lists like that, I'm blanking it now.

-- That Guy, From That Show! 03:26, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WP:RFBOT

Please note your recent requests for expansion have been approved:

Thank you, — xaosflux Talk 03:39, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Moving an article

Hi Rich. I didn't know about the "move" tab when I did the move from Long Island (Boston) to Long Island, Boston, Massachusetts. Sorry. Thanks for the enlightenment ! Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 12:51, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] SmackBot request

Could I ask you to add Wikipedia:WikiProject Warhammer 40,000/References to the list of pages SmackBot will do ISBN reformatting for? I hope the reason for this request is fairly obvious. Cheers --Pak21 17:50, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Done Rich Farmbrough 18:03 28 August 2006 (GMT).
Thanks --Pak21 09:51, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ISBN reformatting

Hi Rich. Your bot has popped up on my watchlist a few times recently, and I must say I'm impressed with the ISBN reformatting. Nice work! (In saying this I'm assuming you're formatting them correctly, since I know next to nothing about how they should be formatted :)) --kingboyk 20:33, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the compliment. Yes, I have been as careful as I can, and after the first 12,000 edits no-one has complained about the formatting being wrong per se, although one guy thinks it's a waste of time, and one was convinced that they should be a block of characters. Incidentally there are about 2,600 regular expressions making up the hyphenation rule base, although it could be done in less. ISBN's that don't fit the hyphenation rules are labelled as invalid, and I have done a separate run to categorise those which don't match their checksum - many of which editors have already fixed. Rich Farmbrough 22:13 28 August 2006 (GMT).
2600 regular expressions?! My oh my. --kingboyk 08:06, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ebaums world vandalism

Have a look at this edit. Copy the new location into your address bar, hit enter, and it redirects you to [59], a 404 address. HawkerTyphoon 22:13, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Damn good question. Hit the admin noticeboard, maybe someone can shed light on it?
Domain names can only contain ASCII characters, but most of the world use non-latin scripts or want accents. So the IETF came up with a way to allow any Unicode character in a domain name component: you take out the non-ASCII characters, put "xn--" in front, and append "-" followed by some ASCII characters which specify which non-ASCII chars were removed, and where they were removed from. In this case, the "-nqh" encodes "a Greek lowercase omicron, after the w". Web browsers etc are supposed to automagically "deUnicodeise" URLs (and, um, reUnicodeise them too).
The take-home message is that any ASCIIised domain name containing "xn--" is an IDNA.
Since Wikipedia stores URLs in their Unicode form (as we should), to find URLs containing IDNAs you'd have to search for non-ASCII characters in the "host" part of the URL - maybe ^[a-z]+:/+[!-.0-~][^!-.0-~] would work, assuming we don't have URLs containing usernames or passwords with non-ASCII characters.
I hope this helps; sorry for over-explaining.
What I actually came here to do was thank you for having SmackBot go around and prettify all the ISBNs I've inserted into articles. So: thanks!
Cheers, CWC(talk) 03:04, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the info, and it's a pleasure. Rich Farmbrough 13:34 29 August 2006 (GMT).

[edit] ISBNs on Nakhichevan

Great work on the ISBN reformatting!

Could you have your bot re-format the ISBN tags on the Nakhichevan article? Thanks! -- Clevelander 23:15, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Will do. Rich Farmbrough 15:57 29 August 2006 (GMT).
Done. Rich Farmbrough 18:23 29 August 2006 (GMT).

[edit] The bot and ISBN-13

It is a waste of edits to merely checksum and add hyphens to ISBN-10 data, when we know that ISBN-13 will be the standard in four months. Automatic conversion is fairly trivial: discard the trailing check digit, prefix a "978", and calculate a new check digit according to these instructions (which differ from those for ISBN-10). The hyphenation is almost identical, only the leading "978" is separated from the rest with a hyphen. You can test your program against this online converter.

For example, to convert "ISBN 1598165747", which would be hyphenated as "1-59816-574-7", we:

  • Drop the trailing digit, here "7"; result: "159816574".
  • Prefix "978"; result: "978159816574".
  • Multiply odd digit positions by 3, where the rightmost digit is considered odd; result: 9,21,8,3,5,27,8,3,6,15,7,12.
  • Sum; result: 124.
  • Subtract the last digit from 10, and take the last digit of the answer; result: 6.
  • Append this check digit to number; result: "9781598165746".
  • Hyphenate; result: "978-1-59816-574-6".

It's really easy to do. However, I would recommend not converting invalid ISBN-10 data, to ease fixing. A beneficial side-effect would be to make the bad ISBN-10 numbers stand out from the converted ISBN-13 numbers. An unhelpful side-effect is that once bad numbers are fixed, they are likely to remain in the old format until the bot returns.

We must begin to change over. Naturally, there will be a few difficulties. The numbers printed in the books will no longer exactly match the numbers in the articles. Booksellers in the USA and Canada, especially those specializing in old books, may be slow to recognize the ISBN-13 form. And there will always be some resistance to change.

I suppose conversion could be limited to books in print, except I know of no free online source for that information. Or, we could provide both ISBNs. --KSmrqT 00:30, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I was looking at something like this User:Rich Farmbrough/ISBN template as the next stage. Thus (almost) all ISBN's would change at the right second, and the template could be substed out later. The test template works but doesn't support hyphens. So a new template is required which is actually easy to code, I'll do it later today or tomorrow. Rich Farmbrough 10:02 29 August 2006 (GMT).
With regard to changing over to ISBN-13 all at once, there could be problems with that.
  • Major libraries, such as Library of Congress, may not convert their catalogs all at once. Similarly Worldcat.
  • Our readers who search the web to buy the book will get Google hits on the ISBN-10 version, not the new one.
  • Existing physical books may most reliably be referred to with the ISBN used to purchase them, since editions can change.
If I cite a book from my own bookshelf, and an ISBN is already printed in it, should I post a different ISBN on Wikipedia?
But if I bring a new book home that has an ISBN-13, obviously I would use that for citations. EdJohnston 02:28, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Flagging an ISBN-13 wrongly *

I reverted your bot's edit flagging an ISBN as invalid. As far as I can see, it's correct, and it's identical to the ISBN listed on the Cambridge University Press website. I suspect that the bot labels all 13-digit ISBNs as invalid. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 01:57, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll check back over the list for any othe false positives. Rich Farmbrough 15:59 29 August 2006 (GMT).


[edit] Signpost updated for August 28th

The Wikipedia Signpost

Volume 2, Issue 35 28 August 2006 About the Signpost

A note from the editor
Interviews with Board of Trustees candidates Wikimedia Foundation CFO resigns
Wikimania recap Report from the Spanish Wikipedia
News and notes Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins The Report On Lengthy Litigation

Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View RSS Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:30, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] SmackBot/References query

It did a lovely job on the tone cluster and Henry Cowell ISBNs. I'm not sure it's directly relevant, but earlier today (before SmackBot's involvement...I think) I started having a problem with the References in "Tone cluster." The article comes up with "ghost' or "echo" (or whatever's the proper term of art) refs--so what should be note 1 reads inline and in the References (called "Notes") section as note 13 (or sometimes 7...or 10...or...). Everything connects properly in an informational way, but lord does it look awful, not to mention confusing. Any idea what the source of the problem is, and how to solve it? Best, Dan — DCGeist 04:35, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

No--I'm still seeing what should be footnote callout "1" as callout "13"--and then the text of the footnote appearing in the References (dba "Notes") both as note 1 and as note 13. All in all, instead of the proper total of 26 notes, I read 38 notes. I've checked a few other footnoted Wikipedia articles to make sure it's not an issue with my browser--no problem anywhere else. But you're reading it AOK--26 notes, not 38? Hardly know what to think. Thanks for checking. —DCGeist 09:34, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Tried shift-reload. No luck. Some gremlin must just be telling me to stop working on the article. Thanks again. Best, Dan —DCGeist 09:54, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Note this was Bugzilla:7162 Rich Farmbrough 10:08 1 September 2006 (GMT).


[edit] SmackBot and ISBN

I've noticed your bot making changes to a lot of book articles. Can you point me to a standard for quoting ISBN, as I've (wrongly?) always just quoted them as one long number in articles I write. If this is wrong, I'd like to be able to improve how I do it. Thanks --Guinnog 10:54, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

They are based on a table found on the ISBN Agency's web site here. I assume you know that the first part is language group, the second publisher (within lang group) the third a serial number and the last a check digit.

Regards, Rich Farmbrough 13:20 29 August 2006 (GMT).

Gosh! Fascinating. Thank you. No, apart from the checksum I didn't know any of that. --Guinnog 13:25, 29 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Hyphenated ISBNs

Great work on hyphenating ISBNs. I don't use hyphens, manually (I think the reward isn't worth the effort!), but if it's this easy to get them right with AWB, then hats off to you. :) —Serein 19:39, 29 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Ghost notes

While I'm reading "ISBN" and--this hour, at least--"tone cluster" as just fine. This seems like a Wikipedia server glitch, perhaps. I doubt it has anything to do with SmackBot (it doesn't even look from the history like the ISBN article's had SmackBot on it--recently anyway), but why don't you put SmackBot on string piano (another under my care) and let's see what, if anything, happens. —DCGeist 21:13, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes I was working on references, so I thought it was a WP problem not SB related. I would just like to have more data before logging a bug (but perhaps it's already been logged). Off to the back burner with it. Rich Farmbrough 21:50 29 August 2006 (GMT).
Already logged at Bugzilla:7162 Rich Farmbrough 08:51 30 August 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Articles with invalid ISBNs category

Rich, there is a problem with Category:Articles with invalid ISBNs -- it contains entries of articles not in the category. I posted something about this on the Village pump, believing it could be affecting other categories. In addition, User:SEWilco has written on my talk page "I just wanted to point out an unrelated oddity: The category text has some Template:tl usage which is not being transcluded". Alan Pascoe 08:34, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RfA thanks

Thank you very much for participating in my RFA, which closed successfully today with a result of (62/18/3). I will go very carefully at first, trying to make sure I don't mess up too badly using the tools, and will begin by re-reading all the high-quality feedback I received during the process, not least from those who opposed me. Any further advice/guidance will be gratefully accepted. I hope I will live up to your trust! Guinnog 14:30, 30 August 2006 (UTC)}


[edit] SmackBot's Edit Summary

Hi Rich. I've witnessed your bot's amazing work, and would like to nitpick by offering a suggestion. The edit summary left by SmackBot currents reads, "ISBN formatting &/or general fixes using AWB" -- the use of "and/" is redundant. Other than that, keep it running! Xiner 16:30, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Quite right! However it is clear, and not everone is a mathematician. It should really be "and sometimes" for this particular run. Rich Farmbrough 09:26 31 August 2006 (GMT).

[edit] ISBN

Thank you for the information, we will scan for any other occurances of this problem. Rich Farmbrough 15:34 30 August 2006 (GMT).

Re. "we will scan for any other occurances of this problem": is that built-in to the bot's algorithm? Is that re-iterate previous operations of the bot on this issue, before proceeding? Sorry, "we will scan for any other occurances of this problem" is not much of clear answer. --Francis Schonken 18:38, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Both and also identify any candidates which would have been a problem. Rich Farmbrough 18:40 30 August 2006 (GMT).
There were a total of 10 articles where this could have been a problem, all have been dealt with. Rich Farmbrough 09:32 31 August 2006 (GMT).
I did not say that the algorithm would be the same as mediawikis. ISBN XXX is valid under the mediawiki software, but completely invalid in real life as is ISBN 12312-1231-23131-3-4-34-1-3-1432

. Rich Farmbrough 11:14 31 August 2006 (GMT).

Incidentally calling someone a liar, or incompetant, even prefaced with the word "apparently" is both a breach of WP:NPA and not a good way to make co-operative progress. Rich Farmbrough 11:20 31 August 2006 (GMT).
Sorry, I don't know how to put this more precise, but whatever the bot does to "evaluate" an ISBN, it should first start to READ the numbers of the ISBN *exactly the same way" the automatic function does. If the bot reads "ISBN 0803913303 - " as if the hyphen is part of the ISBN {{invalid isbn|0803913303 - }} ([60]), while the usual algorithm has no trouble discerning that the hyphen is in this case not part of the ISBN (and certainly not part of an "invalid" ISBN) the bot programming should be changed.
I happened to have typed that ISBN [61], unless your bot stops insulting people that they don't know how to type valid ISBN's, while they apparently do know how to type them, it should be stopped entirely. --Francis Schonken 11:38, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
I understand what you want, and it is the same as what I want, really. That the bot make no mistakes. That is not the same as what you are asking for. However the bot run is finished to all intents and purposes, so I now need to address any problem edits after the fact. And I welcome anyone who tells me of a problem edit, because I can then fix it, and possibly a class of problems. And I accept that some people will be angry/annoyed, and that some of the edits will turn out to be correct, and some turn out to be wrong, and in one case the publisher had put an invalid number on the book. But really I have a few problems with a lot of your comments. If you can't be cheerful and freindly, can't you simply restrict yourself to stating the apparent problem, and requesting feedback, without resorting to commands, threats or insults? E.G. "Rich - this edit is wrong, I think your bot is counting the dash as part of the ISBN. Can you let me know what you do to fix it?" It's quicker for both parties, and less stress probably. Rich Farmbrough 12:00 31 August 2006 (GMT).


[edit] SmackBot problems with certain infoboxes *

Hopefully I'm not covering old ground here, I had a quick look and couldn't see anything! Some articles contain infoboxes with attributes such as "ISBN2=isbn no.", such as The Colour of Magic, for example; however, the bot's inserting a space between the attribute name's "ISBN" and "2" leaving the infobox with an undefined attribute. I don't know if it's a particularly prevalent problem or if it's just related to the Discworld series, but thought it was worth mentioning. Cheers,

-- Chris (blathercontribs) 22:29, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Chris, thanks for letting me know, Rich Farmbrough 09:20 31 August 2006 (GMT).


[edit] Buggy SmackBot edit

Here it had added formatting to image filename, causing the image to not display.

-- LoneFox 06:51, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, this should not happen, will pass to developers. Rich Farmbrough 10:03 31 August 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Please help removing insults

I thought

Apparently, SmackBot evaluates the viability of an ISBN differently from how the automatic ISBN function does (the ISBN function has no trouble to only include the ISBN number, excluding other numbers that follow on the same line). ([62])

more than friendly enough. That was my first comment. I had no clue this was linked with hyphens. I'm still not sure it is *exclusively* linked with hyphens.

Fair enough. At the time neither was I, I thought it was hyphens followed digits. What I did was
  • Fix the article in question.
  • Scanned for similar articles (finding ten, nine more and the original).
  • Changed the robot rules to deal with the situation correctly.
  • Fixed the articles and or ran the process against those articles. (Belt and braces approach.)
Rich Farmbrough 13:35 31 August 2006 (GMT).

It would be impolite if I would try to nail down the technical cause of a problem, for a bot for which I have no insight in its internal workings. I can only indicate the problem.

That's fine. Rich Farmbrough 13:35 31 August 2006 (GMT).

Apparently you had nailed the technical problem (which I derived from your consequent manual edit of Socrate)), but had not provided a solution. Sorry, if I raised my voice as a consequence of your lack of appropriate reaction (I was correct in assuming you were only trying to sooth temporarily, in order not to have to improve the bot).

See above.Rich Farmbrough 13:35 31 August 2006 (GMT).

But insults don't help, you're right there. For that reason I moved {{Invalid isbn}} to {{Please check ISBN}}. I'm sure you can get a bot or semibot change every occurence of {{Invalid isbn| to {{Please check ISBN| in a swiff (there are less than 50 pages transcluding that template currently – oops, wrong count, there are over 1000). Then you prevent that an error of the bot turns into an insult of the person who added a "false positive" ISBN. Thanks. --Francis Schonken 12:52, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, OK, I can live with that if it makes you happy. Rich Farmbrough 13:35 31 August 2006 (GMT).
I suppose I'd better put a bot approval request in. Rich Farmbrough, 13:18 4 September 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits

Is it posible to use the bot that used to work for this for other wikis? --Cat out 16:39, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't know, I expect so. I only ran a script against a datbase dump, that tool was sadly lost, however the historic relic from it Wikipedia:List of ips by number of edits shows that some IP's would have been among the top editors. I was thinking of (writing and) testing a new script against ang.wikipedia.org, since it's fairly trivial. Rich Farmbrough 16:49 29 August 2006 (GMT).
Interesting. Is there a privacy issue with that page? bobblewik 18:12, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
I don't see that there would be. Rich Farmbrough 18:44 29 August 2006 (GMT).
OK, thanks. Just a thought. bobblewik 18:37, 31 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] ISBN hyphenation: Wikipedia policy?

I have noticed your SmackBot hyphenating the ISBNs in several articles I work on. While I originally had them hyphenated myself, I was instructed to change that in a peer review a while back. Has there been a change in policy that they are now supposed to be hyphenated, or have you taken this upon yourself to do? Elric of Grans 23:59, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi Elric, please let me know which Peer review. Hyphenation (or spaces) is the standard according to the International ISBN Agency, and we can't use spaces. Rich Farmbrough 08:28 30 August 2006 (GMT).
It was in this one. I seem to recall there being more discussion on it, but part of the discussion in that PR also disappeared somewhere along the way – my guess is that it was among that. Could your bot also stop being 'helpful' with categories? I am getting sick of reverting that three or four times a day. To get categories sorted alphabetically you often need to place them above templates, but your bot keeps moving them back to the bottom (which ends up giving me a mish-mashed order). Elric of Grans 23:04, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Well it's done for now. I understand what your saying about categories, it raises two interesting points a. how should categories be ordered, and b. what to do about transcluded categories. The first has been thrashed out, and the conclusion reaced that alpahbetical order is not necessarily best (AWB used to order categories). The second is more probelmatical, I believe, for example that in general maintainance categories (and hence templates) should go after normal categories - and I thnk this is widely suported in principle. On the other hand it is common practice to put cleanup and wikify right at the top of articles. One off the things that AWB does in it's general options is to put interwiki at the end, and non-trancluded categories immediately before, so I will copy part of your comment and this reply onto the AWB talk page for discussion. Rich Farmbrough 09:43 31 August 2006 (GMT).
Here Rich Farmbrough 09:48 31 August 2006 (GMT).

Hi Rich, I spotted you and the bot hyphenating ISBNs in my watchlists and (correctly as it turned out) picking up some errors in a few of my ISBNs, which I've now corrected and de-cat-ed as ISBN errors; and I've read the ISBN FAQs. No disagreements; the question is what is wiki magic - I can't find it thru search? Pyrotec 19:51, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

That thing which makes ISBNs show as links without special mark-up. In general anything on the wiki that does something "automagically". Rich Farmbrough 20:35 31 August 2006 (GMT).


[edit] A minor bot issue

I noticed that your SmackBot recently edited David Duke, and wikified the name "David Duke" in a reference, thus creating a redundant wiki link. Is this supposed to happen? --Ryodox 23:26, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. It actually un-wikified the link. Rgds, Rich Farmbrough 09:59 31 August 2006 (GMT).
Oh, right. Stupid me; I somehow managed to confuse the new edit with the previous version.
--Ryodox 16:56, 31 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Chew Valley

Not a problem - and well done on the edits to it today --Mnemeson 15:52, 31 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Images not showing up after Smackbot runs

Rich, you wrote this on my talk page:

Yep, I found, I think, about 24 articles with two or more nested []s, only a few had ISBNs, so I was able to ensure the problem did not re-occur for this project. And of course programmers count "0, 1, many" so I hope that AWB will be made perfect soon! Any comments to my talk page please. Rich Farmbrough 11:08 31 August 2006 (GMT).

You said also that Smackbot caused the image not to show up due to 2 external links being in an image caption. One of the links was at the end of a caption. ISBNs were not a part of this particular problem. But are you saying that 24 images did not show up after that run of Smackbot? And has the problem been fixed? I need to know whether I can put 2 external links in a caption, especially if one link is at the end of the caption where the brackets stack up and confuse the bot. What about 3 or 4 external links in a caption? Does the problem only occur if one of the links is at the end of the image caption? --Timeshifter 19:24, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

No I forget the details, but I think one other article had been broken, possibly. The problem with the tool has been fixed Wikipedia_talk:AutoWikiBrowser#Nested_square_brackets_bug by the main developer and author of the tool, so apart from people using old versions, which won't last long (the tool itself will insist on being updated), you should be fine to put what you like. In fact you shouldn't worry too much anyway because it's easy to roll back an edit if needed. Rich Farmbrough 20:29 31 August 2006 (GMT).
Thanks. It looks like the problem has been fixed. The other note about it here on the same page says that the problem was occuring with just one external link in the caption too, if the link was at the end of the caption. But it has been fixed in any case.--Timeshifter 11:37, 1 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Date unlinking

I have seen you unlink dates. However, Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links)#Dates and numbers still lays out the Wikipedia style of linking dates and I know not of a rule prohibiting it. Are you enforcing a rule I am not aware of? --Liberlogos 05:42, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, the reference you give ("Where a date contains day, month, and year — 25 March 2004 — or day and month — February 10 — a link will permit the date preferences of the reader to operate. Day, month, and year must all be linked for the preference to work correctly.") is one I agree with, and I have linked many thousands of dates in these formats, see for example this diff from last night. However Wikipedia:Only make links that are relevant to the context means that entities such as bare years or other date fragments (e.g. "Monday", "1994", "May", "June 2015" should rarely be linked (although there are dissenters). (In the infancy of WP all these entities were linked as there was a plan to extract meta - data from them. Similarly there is a request to the mediawiki developers to provide a different way of allowing date prefernces to work than linking.) Rgs, Rich Farmbrough 09:12 1 September 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Published ISBN is invalid

I just removed the invalid ISBN category from the I'saka language article after double checking the book and a couple of library catalogues. Then I read up on ISBNs, calculated the checksum myself, and realized that the ISBN is indeed invalid. What should I do? The purpose of the category is the mark that something needs fixing, but it doesn't seem that there's anything to be fixed. Answer here and I'll take any action necessary. -- Ngio 12:27, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

ISBN Check can give "minimal change" ISBNs for invalid ones. In this case, should it possibly be 0858834545? Cheers --Pak21 12:38, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, but that's not it. The book I'm talking about is in the Australian National Library catalogue with the invalid ISBN [63]; this is also the ISBN printed in the book itself. -- Ngio 13:08, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Interestingly this is No. 554 in a series. This would indicate that the publisher incorrectly calculated the checksum. So while, ideally we should contact the ISBN authority, to find the correct solution, I would be inclined to put a temporary note in the article, since from the first of January the check digit will no longer be relevant, and it looks like the rest of the number is correct anyway. The article will then be a special case we have to work around for a while. Rich Farmbrough 13:17 29 August 2006 (GMT).
OK, so let's just leave things as they are. I'll copy this discussion to Talk:I'saka language. -- Ngio 14:28, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Additional comments there - interesting. Rich Farmbrough 20:02 29 August 2006 (GMT).
This particular book is in catalog.loc.gov, where the ISBN field is marked 'Cancelled ISBN'. It's possible that they do this whenever they receive a book for cataloging that has the wrong check digit. EdJohnston 01:51, 2 September 2006 (UTC)



[edit] Wikifying dates

Whichever bot you use to do this is deleting the comma between the day and the year in dates that are in the format Month day, year. This is an example.Chidom talk  18:41, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. It's OK because the wikimagic that renders dates according to preferences puts them in. SO you should see no difference between May 1, 123 and May 1, 123. Rgds, Rich Farmbrough, 18:49 1 September 2006 (GMT).
P.S. I fixed a big red Cite error on that article. Rich Farmbrough, 18:49 1 September 2006 (GMT).
Thanks. Wikimagic—something else I learned. As for the red link, I got one and missed the other ::::sigh::::; thanks for catching it.Chidom talk  18:57, 1 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Buckingham Palace article invalid ISBN on Olwen Headley's book

Hello Rich. Since I had an ISBN problem the other day I looked into a recent exchange you had with FClef about Buckingham Palace. In this case I suspect the ISBN really is wrong, so I sympathize with SmackBot. My comment to FClef was made here [64]. If FClef found this number in the actual book, we have to assume a mistake at the publisher's end. It's possible you could enumerate what you think should happen each time an ISBN is flagged. E.g. if it has a wrong check digit when printed in the book, should we just remove the ISBN from the article? EdJohnston 19:07, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I haven't spoken to FClef yet, I have just researched the book, and can confirm a leading 0 should be added. This may be because of the change from the British SBN to ISBN. Rich Farmbrough, 20:37 1 September 2006 (GMT).
Fixing the ISBN allows us to notice that Headley should be Hedley. Under that spelling the correct book shows up in the British Library! Also several books by that author at LOC though not that particular one. So we have to credit SmackBot on this one. EdJohnston 21:23, 1 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Trabancos River

Thanks for the fixes. I saw what SmackBot had done, but left it in because I have no familiarity with ISBN...err...validity issues. Are the ISBN numbers proper? I relied entirely on the Spanish language featured article authors when adding the references.--Fuhghettaboutit 22:23, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, they're all valid in that article. Rgds, Rich Farmbrough, 22:29 1 September 2006 (GMT).


[edit] A London Life

Removed bad trailing digit from ISBN, needs proper hyphenation. Published in 1962, I couldn't find a properly-hyphenated version ot this ISBN on the web. EdJohnston 03:05, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

KSmrq has kindly fixed this one. Rich Farmbrough, 09:35 2 September 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Olwen Headley Buckingham Palace book

Hi Rich - thanks for correcting this. –– FClef (talk) 12:08, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Grabby Award edits

You/the bot changed all the non-breaking hyphens: ‑ (&#8209;) to regular hyphens in this article; they were put there for a reason. Why the change?Chidom talk  23:34, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

I'll have to look this evening. Thanks for letting me know. Rich Farmbrough 07:25 1 September 2006 (GMT).
I assume you mean Adult Erotic Gay Video Awards: this edit does not change any non-breaking hyphens. Rich Farmbrough 10:15 1 September 2006 (GMT).

Sorry I wasn't clearer; it's not the article on the awards; it's the listing of the recipients of the awards (Grabby recipients): This edit changed the non-breaking hyphens to regular ones.Chidom talk  17:47, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

They are still the same character I think. See below.

[edit] New

co‑creatorco‑creatorco‑creator co‑creatorco‑creatorco‑creator co‑creator co‑creator co‑creator co‑creatorco‑creatorco‑creator co‑creatorco‑creatorco‑creator co‑creator co‑creator co‑creator co‑creatorco‑creatorco‑creator co‑creatorco‑creatorco‑creator co‑creator co‑creator co‑creator co‑creatorco‑creatorco‑creator co‑creatorco‑creatorco‑creator co‑creator co‑creator co‑creator co‑creatorco‑creatorco‑creator co‑creatorco‑creatorco‑creator co‑creator co‑creator co‑creator co‑creatorco‑creatorco‑creator co‑creatorco‑creatorco‑creator co‑creator co‑creator co‑creator co‑creatorco‑creatorco‑creator co‑creatorco‑creatorco‑creator co‑creator co‑creator co‑creator

[edit] Old

co‑creatorco‑creatorco‑creator co‑creatorco‑creatorco‑creator co‑creator co‑creator co‑creator co‑creatorco‑creatorco‑creator co‑creatorco‑creatorco‑creator co‑creator co‑creator co‑creator co‑creatorco‑creatorco‑creator co‑creatorco‑creatorco‑creator co‑creator co‑creator co‑creator co‑creatorco‑creatorco‑creator co‑creatorco‑creatorco‑creator co‑creator co‑creator co‑creator co‑creatorco‑creatorco‑creator co‑creatorco‑creatorco‑creator co‑creator co‑creator co‑creator co‑creatorco‑creatorco‑creator co‑creatorco‑creatorco‑creator co‑creator co‑creator co‑creator co‑creatorco‑creatorco‑creator co‑creatorco‑creatorco‑creator co‑creator co‑creator co‑creator

Rich Farmbrough, 18:37 1 September 2006 (GMT).

Incidentally it is not part of the HTML specification I believe, and on my browser (firefox) looks very short, almost dot like until I zoom in. Rgds, Rich Farmbrough, 18:40 1 September 2006 (GMT).

  • Well, shut my mouth and I'll be a bug-eyed mule! I suppose I could have tested the necessity of them; I got the HTML code from here, which seems to be a pretty thorough list. In most cases, a line break can occur at a regular hyphen, which is why I put them in. As for firefox, dunno why it doesn't handle the HTML properly. By the way, your hard work at all this is not unappreciated—thanks!Chidom talk  18:45, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Nice to be appreciated! Rich Farmbrough, 18:52 1 September 2006 (GMT).
  1. Thanks for you note about hyphens, in the example, the "old" has the HTML numeric encoding of the unicode as ASCII characters, which get interpreted by the browser, the "new" has I believe, the unicode character iteslf. Experimenting with the width of my browser window I wasn't able to make either break on the hyphens.
  2. I think there was an "invalid ISBN" on Dalek, as a dalekite you may care to take a look.

Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 14:50 4 September 2006 (GMT).


quick clarification: They are not the same character (they often have the same glyph, but have different line breaking behaviour). . Nor are characters defined by the HTML specification. Instead, characters are defined by the Unicode specification, which is then normatively referenced by the HTML specification. --Nantonos 08:57, 3 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Users and IPs

Is there any way for you to check if a user and an IP are the same?{Halbared 07:02, 2 September 2006 (UTC)}

checkuser Rich Farmbrough, 09:38 2 September 2006 (GMT).
Thanks for that Rich. I have tried to archive my talk page, but I don't think I have done it correctly, can you advise please?(Halbared 14:01, 2 September 2006 (UTC))
Hey Rich, how can I email you?(Halbared 13:09, 3 September 2006 (UTC))

[edit] The phrase 'Cancelled ISBN' already appears in Wikipedia

See the Ralph_Ginzburg article.

From the article:

100 Years of Lynchings edited by Ralph Ginzburg (New York: Lancer Books, 1962; Baltimore, MD: Black Classic Press, 1988, cancelled ISBN 933121180

The situation is murky, however. There could be some politics involved in the 'cancelling' of this ISBN, due to the various obscenity trials of Ginzburg. For instance, the number given in their records (above) is only 9 digits, where we expect 10 for an ISBN! If you put a zero in front of it, you get a valid ISBN, which however does not return anything when you search for it in LOC. So this is not a good example. It's just a case (confusing at best) where they use the phrase 'Cancelled ISBN'.

The pages containing publisher errors where 'Cancelled ISBN' could be needed are (so far):

  • 2-10-4 Both the old and new ISBNs for the Jack Farrell book are invalid. Marked as 'No ISBN available'. See my note on Talk:2-10-4.
  • A Certain Woman, Now marked as 'No ISBN available'. History comment says 'Please supply corrected ISBN if found.'
  • I'saka language, Now marked as 'No ISBN available'. Left link to online article by same authors.
  • Ahmad al-Alawi Now marked as 'No ISBN available'. Comment left in Talk page.
  • Ajahn Sobin S. Namto Now marked as 'No ISBN available'. Comment left in Talk page.
From Wikipedia's ISBN page I found this document, [65], which asserts: "Most national bibliographies and especially the Books in Print correct ISBN mistakes. The systems then provide cross references ("incorrect ISBN -> correct ISBN")."
It would be good to see an example of that, anywhere! EdJohnston 17:58, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Since writing the above I was able to get access to www.booksinprint.com. I found that it will not even ACCEPT an invalid ISBN in the search field. So much for the elegant (but nonexistent) solution hypothesized by the IETF document above. (I believe that Books In Print [Bowker] IS the American custodian of the ISBN system). How about we just DELETE from the articles all the ISBNs that are published invalid, of course after explaining properly on each Talk page why that's a reasonable thing to do? Otherwise these cancelled items (of which there might be 200 or so in all of Wikipedia) will need to be processed by hand after every robot visit. EdJohnston 00:37, 5 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Clarification on R.R. Bowker and ISBNs

From http://www.isbn.org/standards/home/index.asp:

"As the U.S. ISBN Agency, R R Bowker is the exclusive US source of publisher prefixes and accompanying ranges of ISBN numbers for eligible publishers. It provides information and advice on the uses of the ISBN System to publishers and the book trade and promotes the use of the Bookland EAN bar code format. In addition to their ISBN prefixes, publishers also register their titles for inclusion in the Bowker Books In Print databases."

So Bowker could police the invalid ISBNs if they chose to. At present there is no evidence that they try to correct mistakes or keep records on the ISBNs that are published invalid. You just can't search Books in Print for the invalid ones (though you can search Amazon and sometimes find the book you want). EdJohnston 03:02, 5 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Chew Valley edits

Thanks for your edits on Chew Valley while I was away. — Rod talk 07:39, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

you wrote: "Could you look at the "invalid ISBN's"., also for [[Chew Magma], Chew Lake and Chew, at some point?" I presume you mean Chew Magna & Chew Valley Lake but Chew is not anything to do with me or the valley - was there another one?— Rod talk 20:31, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
I've now fixed these ISBNs (with one exception I couldn't find which I've removed). I thought ISBNs were unique and fixed but obviously not.— Rod talk 08:22, 4 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Internet radio article

Hi Rich. I re-arranged the external links on the Internet radio article. One section, I made, "sample internet radio stations". It seems to be an advert area for odd-bit stations. I am not sure it should be there at all. Should it be deleted ? Thoughts ? Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 13:52, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ISBN hyphenation

I'm not convinced that hyphenation adds value; in fact, it may even be a liability in web searches. Also, correct hyphenation depends on the number. For example,

99921-58-10-7
9971-5-0210-0
960-87363-3-1
80-86119-13-0
4-8457-0667-9
0-14-015098-6
0-446-60098-9
0-8044-2957-X
0-85386-070-X
0-901690-54-6
0-9500000-0-0

are all correct. Worse still, the proper hyphenation is not determined by a centralized international authority, and requires consulting ever-changing tables like this one. There is a regular pattern for 10-digit numbers beginning with "0", but even books published in English need not be in that group. Is your bot prepared to cope? --KSmrqT 19:52, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it is up to date with the full hyphenation table. Rich Farmbrough, 19:58 3 September 2006 (GMT).
Where did you find a full international hypenation table? --KSmrqT 20:20, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
The table was found on the ISBN Agency's web site here. Rich Farmbrough, 20:28 3 September 2006 (GMT).
After the world converts to 13-digit ISBNs, won't it be hard to visually scan them (or copy them with pencil and paper) if they are unhyphenated? A better system would be fixed grouping of digits, as in the social security number. But that's out of our control. Perhaps WP could offer a script to do the hyphenation. Or add isbn.org/convertpub.asp to the Special:Booksources page so editors could use it routinely. EdJohnston 20:38, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
Last point is excellent. Rich Farmbrough, 20:42 3 September 2006 (GMT).
My reg-exes are published under the WP:AWB pages. Rich Farmbrough, 14:17 4 September 2006 (GMT).
Could you be more specific? I didn't see regular expressions anywhere, but I also don't know where to look. --KSmrqT 05:02, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Settings - they are auto generated from the table, and hence are a little long winded. Rich Farmbrough, 20:47 7 September 2006 (GMT).


[edit] Pygmies & Dwarves

FYI, re this edit, <str> doesn't strike text, <s> does. Guettarda 12:51, 5 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] You're gonna love this one!

Hi

My neck of the woods is the Westcountry in the UK. I was "wandering" around articles there when I spotted something that I was not sure about. Moretonhampstead - at the end of the page it states "This page contains information orginally provided by Moretonhampstead Development Trust" and I wondered about copyvio. Looking back I saw that it originally said "Written by the Moretonhampstead Development Trust" and that your edit [66] was the one that changed it. I guess I'm not really worried (and not experienced enough to knwo better!) but is this ok? Sorry to bug you but having found it I thought I ought to ask. Regards --Nigel (Talk) 16:35, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Makes perfect sense to me and all part of the learning curve. Thanks for the speedy answer - regards --Nigel (Talk) 18:18, 5 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Proposal to mark published-invalid ISBNs as 'No ISBN available'

Yet another invalid-as-published ISBN turned up in a book by Johan Cartigny in the Ahmad al-Alawi article. In this case I took the number out and marked the Cartigny book as 'No ISBN available', but left commentary as to what was happening. (See Talk:Ahmad al-Alawi as well). I left the invalid template in hidden text as a souvenir of the problem. Upon saving, the page took itself out of the invalid ISBN category, as expected. I hope this saves some work long term, because if you leave no mark on the page, a future editor could put back the bad ISBN, and if you leave the page in the invalid Category, the next ISBN-fixer will try again to fix it.

If this approach is not one you would adopt, please let me know, since I am working my way down through the Category to fix the invalid ones. As I go, I am only intending to suppress from the visible page the ones that were invalid-as-published).

Bowker's decision to refuse to search for the invalid ones has some logic to it, because the alternative is so much fuss and bother. Essentially Bowker is forcing the publisher of the invalid number to re-issue the book properly if they want to sell any copies through Books in Print. EdJohnston 19:02, 5 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Signpost updated for September 5th.

The Wikipedia Signpost

Volume 2, Issue 36 5 September 2006 About the Signpost

Everyking desysopped Explicit images spark debate
Report from the Italian Wikipedia The English Wikipedia reaches 1,000 administrators
Voting begins in Board elections Wikipedia in the news
News and notes Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and International Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View RSS Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:39, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Note to self

1930206151. Rich Farmbrough 11:42 31 August 2006 (GMT).

[edit] 13 digit ISBN

I looked at the following invalid isbn:

  • (1999) in J.K. Beatty, C.C. Petersen, A. Chaikin: The New Solar System, 4th, Cambridge press. ISBN 9780521645874. 

It seemed completly invalid at first, until I realised. Its using the 13 digit ISBN number. Unfortunatly, most libraries doesn't appear to track 13 digit isbn numbers yet. Don't know if you're accounting for this yet or not. Kevin_b_er 20:45, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi, Kevin, I'm working on it. It's one of the reasons I'm doing the project in the first place (see Template:Auto isbn). Thanks for the info. Rich Farmbrough, 20:52 1 September 2006 (GMT).
ISBN 9780521645874 is not an ISBN is an EAN article code for the ISBN which is possibly 052164587X. (note the difference final character which is check digit on a different scheme than the full EAN code). The EAN code is what is used for the bar coding used. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 12:57, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Just when you thought you knew something the world shifts from under your feet - thanks for the update. Nice use of shifting terminology EAN loses it's "European" meaning and ISBN-13 is shrunk to ISBN; leaving us all to be confused. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 13:36, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

On August 19 you fixed a broken (13 digit, written with spaces) ISBN in Margaret Mahy to one written with hyphens and 10 digits. However, you did not alter the last digit accordingly, so the link was broken. The trailing -0 has now been changed to -7. Please always verify that the resulting ISBN link works and actually points to the right book. ISBNs with 13 digits aren't broken per se, but having white space among the digits is wrong. When changing between 10 digits and 13 digits, the prefix is almost always 978 (except when it's 979), but the last digit, the checksum, also changes. --LA2 20:25, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, that was stupid of me. Rich Farmbrough, 20:58 7 September 2006 (GMT).

[edit] A Certain Woman: publisher error on ISBN?

From going down your list of books with invalid ISBNs, I came across one that looks like a publisher's error: [67] 1. Check digit doesn't match so it's invalid, 2. Book not in Library of Congress, 3. Not in Amazon, 4. Copy for sale on Ebay for $39.00, found by Google for the given ISBN, 5. Worldcat shows it at Harvard College Library where they have the entry shown below (with the bad ISBN). 6. Google shows another copy at a library in Holland, also with the bad ISBN.

Author : Arishima, Takeo, 1878-1923.
Title : A certain woman / Arishima Takeo ; translated, and with an introd. by Kenneth Strong.
Published : Tokyo : University of Tokyo Press ; [Forest Grove, Or. : distributed by ISBS], c1978.
Location : Harvard-Yenching W 5933 04 Holdings Availability
Location : Widener WID-LC PL801.R5 A813 x Holdings Availability
Description : 382 p. ; 24 cm.
Series : UNESCO collection of representative works : Japanese series
Notes : Translation of Aru onna.
Notes : Includes bibliographical references.
ISBN : 0680082377 :

I don't believe I can update the article to fix this, without just plain removing the ISBN. Or, I could add a note that ISBN is invalid due to a possible error by the publisher, but it can still be used for some web searches. Do you have a recommendation? The benefit to our readers from checking ISBNs is mostly when there is a GOOD ISBN somewhere in the world and we have a BAD one. If there is NO good ISBN, we should put in a suitable flag. Maybe a template?

I checked with the British Library, so yes, I think just a note at this point. There was another book like this, but i can't find the discussion. Rich Farmbrough, 13:08 2 September 2006 (GMT).
#Published ISBN is invalid here. Rich Farmbrough, 13:32 2 September 2006 (GMT).

[edit] I prefer to join the English page

Some users gave me advices how to edit my page and how I can introduce myself but there is still the same problem. I click to main page and then I'm trying to open the "edit page" but there still appears this f....ng index. I open this index and then there is an ampty page, I recognise that there, beside thet Start menu, appears a link which says "download", I click download and then another index(2) opens and so on.

[edit] I've solved my problem

I've already solved my problem by my own, but thanks for giving me advices

[edit] SmackBot is rejecting *valid* ISBN-13s

From American conservatism:

+ *Bruce Frohnen et al eds. American Conservatism: An Encyclopedia (2006) ISBN 9781932236446 Template:Invalid isbn, the most detailed reference book

But don't feel bad, Amazon rejects it as well! Amazon finds the book after you use isbn.org/converterpub.asp to make an ISBN-10 from the ISBN-13. EdJohnston 03:31, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WP:RFBOT

Task IX has been approved for immediate use, see Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/SmackBot for details. — xaosflux Talk 02:08, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jan 1, 2007 and 13-digit ISBN

Regarding the Jan 1, 2007 deadline, it's incorrect to assume that as of Jan 1 all ISBNs will be issued as 13-digit. From the [ISBN.org website http://www.isbn.org/standards/home/isbn/transition.asp], this quote:

The new 979 prefix will not be utilized until all 978 pre-fixes have been assigned. However, 13 digit ISBNs that begin with 979 can never be converted to 10 digit ISBNs. They have no 10 digit counterpart.

So as of Jan. 1 we should be prepared to start getting 13-digit ISBNs, but we'll still get mostly 10-digit ISBNs - especially since the ISBNs are entered for the most part by "real users" and not folks in the book industry.

Also, it's questionable whether we should be converting 10-digit ISBNs to 13-digit ISBNs for linking. That will probably work for vendor maintained databases, such as WorldCat, or for major catalogs, such as LoC or British Library. But I seriously doubt that most libraries are going to scan their DBs to reindex their 10-digit ISBNs as 13-digit. It will probably require a software upgrade on a library's part for their OPAC to understand the incoming 13-digit '978' as a valid 10-digit.

In addition, if the book has a 10-digit on the back and that's what the user put in their reference, that seems like the correct ISBN to display in the reference. 10-digits should still work for linking for the forseeable future, otherwise OPAC vendors would break almost every ISBN link into their OPAC.

I'm going to put this comment on the Auto isbn template page as well.

Thanks. RainbowCrane | Talk 15:21, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi Rainbow, the "sunrise" for 13 digit ISBNs was 1 January 2005. As to the support of 979s, I hope and believe this present exercise (with ISBNs, not Wikipedia) will be long out of the way before we need worry about them. I'm sure that most systems will continue ot support 10 digit ISBNS for a long time, but they are not required to. In terms of supporting 13 digit ISBNs all significant systems will need to support them natively, legacy data can be dealt with in two ways, either by checking the converted number as well as the input number (which is a trivial piece of programming) or by running a conversion routine on the data, which is almost as trivial, the hard part, potentially, being the change to allow longer numbers, which will have been needed anyway. Regardless we need to keep thinking about the best process, as I say "auto isbn" can be used in a number of different ways. Rich Farmbrough, 16:23 8 September 2006 (GMT).
While all OPAC vendors will probably be ready, my point was that many, many libraries won't upgrade for a while. I work in the library tech industry, and my company (who shall remain nameless) typically has to support legacy software releases for 6 months or a year, at minimum, because libraries have to coordinate upgrades with their school year, fiscal year, etc. So it's probably not going to work to switch to 13-digit for linking a book that has a 10-digit ISBN printed on the back - the links will break. We should trust our editors to enter the ISBN that's actually shown on the book, and use that ISBN for linking. If there's a 13-digit on the book and someone has cataloged it then it should be valid for linking, and we're fine, but we shouldn't convert all 10s to 13s.
Thanks RainbowCrane | Talk 16:46, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Easter egg link in your FAQ

Under the Dates section, point 4, you link to Easter egg, but contextually it should probably go to Easter egg (media). Just a thought. --Bdoserror 16:15, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Cheers. Rich Farmbrough, 16:23 8 September 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Deletion of quotes from the Poverty article

Hi Rich. Any comments on this deletion and discussion on the Poverty article ? User_talk:Ultramarine#Quotations_you_deleted_from_the_Poverty_article. Thanks and Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 18:34, 8 September 2006 (UTC) (talk)

Hi Rich. Thanks for your kind response. If I understand what you said, I would agree that quotations, for example, could be included in Wikipedia, as well as Wikiquote, etc. There is no easy linkage between WP and WQ. So, can one put pertinent quotes in articles in WP without having been told to put them in WQ or for fear they will get expurgated from WP ? --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 13:26, 9 September 2006 (UTC) (User talk:Wikiklrsc)

[edit] Ohio State ISBN

Thanks for the info. I just made the change, and it works fine.--Sam Harmon 21:37, 8 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] ISBN puzzle

Your smackbot placed invalid ISBN tags on several ISBNs in the Thomas Edison article. Apparently, from what I can make out in the ISBN article, we have to change the ISBN printed in older books to longer ones and remove the dashes. You page has FAQ but I don't see simple basic instructions for updating these arcane digit strings to some modern standard. Perhaps you could be so kind as to add a paragraph to the ISBN article telling explicitly and in simple terms what we should do to update ISBN numbers. I have never understood the point of them, nor have I ever heard of anyone making use of them. Most people go to a library or Amazon,com and find a book by author or title. It seem like it would make as much sense to add the Library of Congress catalog card number. But I really hate to see something I painstakingly typed into an article labelled as INVALID as if I had been careless typing (Typos happen all to often in fact). So when I checked some of the ISBNs which were invalid against what was printed in the book, I thought maybe the Bot had slipped a cog. Thanks Edison 22:14, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

This actually seems a bit more complicated. You've quoted amazon as having 0703304682, which it does for a book called "Edison a Biography", however the book in question is apparently just titled "Edison" which Amazon has as 0070330468 [68], these of course may indeed be the same book but it is certainly confusing. --pgk 22:37, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the info on SBNs, as I said elsewhere I'm certainly not an expert, just responding to a {{helpme}} request, and my little knowledge of stuffing a zero on the front appeared to work... --pgk 22:45, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
Pgk/Edison, the 0-07-033046-8 number that pgk found is probably the correct one. Reasons:
  1. The layout is consistent with the book
  2. (Most importantly) 0-07- is McGraw Hill's publisher ID
  3. The checksum is correct
I suspect that somewhere someone added a number on the end (as I did), and the data got "borged" - after all the purpose of ISBN searches is to enable people to find a book, so it makes sense to allow as many possible variants.
Good detective work pgk! Rich Farmbrough, 08:39 9 September 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Woojgie's ISBNs

I took the ISBN Nrs from the actual books on my shelf, I don't know how your automated computer routine came up with a different ISBN.--Woogie10w 22:49, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi Woogie, I'm afraid I will need a little more information. Which article would be a start. Rich Farmbrough, 08:39 9 September 2006 (GMT).
Woogie10w is refering to the World War II casualties article. Shanes 08:31, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for adding the zero, anyway Amazon also drops it for Dower's book ISBN Nr.--Woogie10w 16:47, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
Ok, both needed a leading zero. for example. Maybe SBN -> ISBN or just the 0 got left off for some reason. Rich Farmbrough, 09:25 9 September 2006 (GMT).

[edit] invalid ISBN

Your bot inserted an invalid ISBN notice to [Quartal and quintal harmony]. See: [69] and [70]

But the ISBN is quite valid: Amazon link, and DTV.

Is your bot equipped to verify ISBNs of books written in other languages? - Rainwarrior 00:46, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Ah! I missed one of the numbers. Okay, that makes me feel better about the bot. Thanks! (I should probably go fix the original German page it was taken from too...) - Rainwarrior 06:46, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
Yes it should work regardless of language area. Rich Farmbrough, 11:07 10 September 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Another invalid ISBN

Smackbot flagged ISBN 186448408X (Leichhardt: On the margins of the city, by Peter Reynolds) as being invalid on a number of articles, for example Ballast Point, New South Wales. It's an Australian book published by Allen & Unwin in 1997 and the ISBN was taken out of the front cover. The state library finds it OK here. Am I missing something? amitch 08:46, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Erm where to start...
  1. SB spotted the 9 digit incorrect number and labelled it with invalid
  2. You changed the number by adding an X on using AWB (presumably having got the X from the above library?), but changed it in the invalid tag as well.
  3. SB changed the name of the tag to something considered politer.

So no problem, you could simply remove the tag. I have done so for Ballast Point, and hyphenated the ISBN 1-86448-408-X. Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 09:41 9 September 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Stop!

Stop deleting my work, it takes time you know! from homersimpson742

[edit] More fun with ISBNs

  • How about a shortcut (like WP:INV) to save having to type: Category:Articles with invalid ISBNs. Should I create one?
  • By the way, every warning I have seen lately about an ISBN-13 is incorrect.
  • Can you point to the SmackBot code that does the check digit? I looked at the regexes but suspected I wasn't seeing the true source code.
  • SmackBot is still being confused by trailing hyphens. This sequence at Archimedes got it upset:
    ISBN 0-691-08421-1 - republished translation...
    I deleted the trailing hyphen and removed the warning. EdJohnston 04:10, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] PopMatters

Hi. I don't think you should be italicising instances of PopMatters – website titles aren't included in the italics guidelines at MoS:T. Thanks. --CapitalLetterBeginning 14:39, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi, Thanks for your note. Italics are used on the basis that it is a periodical/magazine. Our article describes it as such, do you think that's OK? Rich Farmbrough, 14:51 10 September 2006 (GMT).
Hmm, I don't really agree with the usage as I see webzines as being distinct from print periodicals/magazines. To give a few examples, Pitchfork Media, PlayLouder and Stylus Magazine are all similar in style and their titles are not italicised. --CapitalLetterBeginning 15:00, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
I've changed "magazine" in the opening line of the PopMatters article to "webzine" now. --CapitalLetterBeginning 15:05, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
SO I see, :). Rich Farmbrough, 15:08 10 September 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Spurious edits by User:24.119.239.54

Rich, User:24.119.239.54 has made some spurious edits Special:Contributions/24.119.239.54 to a number of articles, e.g. the one on Homelessness, most of which seem to border on vandalism. I've tried to re-edit the articles, but not all. The usual ideas ? Thanks and Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 15:13, 10 September 2006 (UTC) (talk)

[edit] Task X

Go ahead and run the template fix tasks for the bot, as it is approved.Voice-of-All 19:04, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Obligated = called?

For what reason did you change use of the word obligated to called in Iron Ring? I've never heard this terminology before, is it at one of the sources? BigNate37(T) 22:16, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for September 11th.

The Wikipedia Signpost

Volume 2, Issue 37 11 September 2006 About the Signpost

Carnildo resysopped Report from the Hungarian Wikipedia
News and notes Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and International Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View RSS Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:38, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Smackbot

Why add a template to an article just to say the below template is misplaced? (Diana Oughton, etc.) Why not set the bot to wipe or hide the template tag, leave a comment, and put the offending tag on the talk? -Ste|vertigo 01:01, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

This is SB's edit. The following edit put the template on. The template is designed to warn if it is on an article page, it is not a seperate action. I have moved the template to a talk page. Rich Farmbrough, 10:08 13 September 2006 (GMT).
whoops! -Ste|vertigo 14:22, 13 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Block Request

Please block sep11:User:Georgia guy, he has been vandalizing the Sept. 11 wiki. Thank you. Timrem 03:56, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Done, thanks. Rich Farmbrough, 10:08 13 September 2006 (GMT).

Sorry to bother you again, but sep11:User:Georgia gal has been making some of the same edits as Georgia guy had been... Timrem 20:02, 13 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] ISBN bot error, maybe

From Bill Gothard:

The ISBN seems to be valid. Its in a lot of places, including amazon. Another site confirms the checkdigit to be correct, though the LOC ISBN converter says it can't hyphenate it properly. Any help on this would be great. Kevin_b_er 04:00, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

As I understand it, no ISBN should start with a 6, it is a reserved range. I've looked unsuccesfully for information about other books published by the same people, perhaps you could email the publishers? Rich Farmbrough, 10:28 13 September 2006 (GMT).
There are] a lot of google hits for "ISBN 6" but not as many as if it were valid...

Rich Farmbrough, 11:10 13 September 2006 (GMT).

After research at Books in Print and other places, my guess is that some distributor has hijacked the ISBN field (using '6' as a prefix) and is putting their own inventory number in the rest of the field. This would temporarily work for them, because it could never collide with a real ISBN. If this surmise is right, then we should do nothing different than what we already do. That is, we should accept an ISBN as valid only when it is accepted by isbn.org/converterpub.asp. This means that we'd continue to require that the full set of ISBN rules be obeyed. We already know that Amazon doesn't care about validity, so it would not be a surprise that they just accept the word of the distributor. Bill Gothard's four books that are cataloged at LOC all have normal (valid-looking) ISBNs. It turns out the "How to Evaluate Music" is actually a cassette package anyway. So following my own (proposed) rule I'd mark this one as 'No ISBN available', hoping that if it has a real ISBN, someone might provide it in the future. I already checked that it has no OCLC number. EdJohnston 18:32, 13 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Clare Nasir's article

Hi Rich. Someone (User:Jaranda) un-protected Clare Nasir's article. Worried but holding. Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 18:11, 13 September 2006 (UTC) (talk)


[edit] sep11.wiki deletion reviews

Hey, I noticed you are active on the September 11 wiki. Maybe you can chime in at the current deletion review of sep11:Amadou Arflika and sep11:Mohammed Abed Al-Kareem which for whatever reason seems to have been lodged here on en.wiki. ~ trialsanderrors 21:25, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Winter Soldier

Hmm, interesting. I wonder how an apparently new anon would have found that. I'm fairly new to this article, having just seen the film. It's surprising that even now, so many years later, the testimony in the film is so disturbing to people that they want to cast doubt on the participants' credibility. I think people probably don't want the things discussed in the film to have really been true. If one doesn't learn from the past... Badagnani 22:31, 15 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Album format fixes

  • I do a lot of work with electronic music albums, so I just wanted to say thanks for doing all the format fixing with tracklists and all that. Keep up the awesome! Wickethewok 01:35, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Block on User:64.59.144.21

Rich, we got a complaint to unblock-en-l from a user using 64.59.144.21 that they'd been blocked, right after fixing vandalism to Joseph Goldberger (which you apparently mistakenly reverted but which was subsequently otherwise fixed).

Can you confirm that the current bock on 64.59.144.21 is anon-only, not a full IP address block? The block log note isn't clear.

Thank you. Georgewilliamherbert 23:29, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Album fixes

Hi, great job on the album article/infobox fixes. Just one thing I have fixed on a number of articles now, but I figured it might just be better to ask you about it: Is it necessary to exchange <li> tags with asterisks (e.g. as you did on Futures (album) or The Early November/I Am the Avalanche)? I'm sure it's (possibly even in most cases) useful, but I have only seen it mess up the continuity of numberings that don't begin at 1. Maybe you could change your AWB settings? Have a great day, HarryCane 13:31, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the update on the ol/li tags. Concerning Telegraphs in Negative/Mouths Trapped in Static... it's a different issue than the examples I posted earlier (bonus tracks on import/special editions) and I agree, a numbering starting from 16 is a little superfluous. Especially if the first track is in fact track 1 (on the CD), rather than that the first 15 tracks on the disc contain nothing but silence. Yet, I am not familiar with the band/album, and if it appears this way on the back of the case and since Wikipedia/html allows it, I think it doesn't hurt anyone if it's kept this way. I fixed the double numbering though, for aesthetics. Maybe a discussion should be started on the talk page. --HarryCane 15:31, 17 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] - –

Your AWB edits on album articles seem to have a common error, they add an extra dash in album track lists, so it appears as "- –" rather than just "–", an example being a recent edit [71].

So far it's happened to every album I've been watching, and it's getting rather annoying, please check your edits before saving them. ¬rehevkor¬ 22:19, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Caused by italic track lengths. That particular problem has now been fixed. Rich Farmbrough, 09:24 20 September 2006 (GMT).


[edit] Thanks for the help

Image:WikiThanks.png Thank you for blocking Dralobv. Obviously, your help was invaluable, as it always has been :-)MrFishGo Fish 16:40, 18 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Barnstar

Hope you don't mind, but I thought your endeavours should be recognised! --Guinnog 21:25, 18 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Infobox album modification

Hi there, since I see you are pretty active cleaning up album infoboxes, I thought I would let you know. Right now, the new infobox has only one problem: when the type is not recognized, and the background color is in hexadecimal, the infobox breaks (like Team Invasion Presents Keyshia Cole). Could you replace the background color with a value, or delete the background color (which is going to be the next modification for the template)? Just wanting to know. Thanks in advance. -- ReyBrujo 21:37, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

The background color is to be dropped. The template will select the background color from the chosen type. The {{Extra chronology}} has been replaced with {{Extra chronology 2}}, and the {{Extra album cover}} should be replaced with {{Extra album cover 2}} (or the contents of this later merged into the former one). -- ReyBrujo 22:06, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
The {{Extra chronology}} is used with the Single infobox, so it needs to keep the Background parameter. That is why a copy was made. After the album infobox is fixed, it should be possible to merge the extra templates just one. -- ReyBrujo 22:27, 18 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] WP:NC(GN)

I apologize for spamming your talk page, but since you had contributed in the past to the WP:NC(GN) proposal, which is currently ready for a wider consultation, I thought you might want to give it another look now and, hopefully, suggest some final improvements. Thanks. --Lysytalk 22:58, 18 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Signpost updated for September 18th.

The Wikipedia Signpost

Volume 2, Issue 38 18 September 2006 About the Signpost

"Citizendium" project aims to rival Wikipedia Report from the Simple English Wikipedia
News and notes In the news
Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and International Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View RSS Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:31, 19 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] ISBN 9780763629885

Your bot labelled this as a faulty ISBN, while a simple Google search shows it is correct. Did the bot didn't know about 13-digit ISBNs yet or is there another reason this got tagged? Article in question was Sam Stern, which I am cleaning. - Mgm|(talk) 12:33, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

  • I came across a page that said wikipedia ISBNs shouldn't have dashes when I clicked one of them... - Mgm|(talk) 04:56, 20 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Album infobox colors

Hello, you've done quite a few cleanups on album pages I've been working on as well, so you're probably the right person to ask. What's the deal with the colors now, are they determined by what type is entered or is light blue just the default which is used when no color is specified? Regards - Cyrus XIII 21:05, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, the album type now determines the colour. And there is a new colour scheme, which can be changed much more easily. See Wikipedia:WikiProject_Albums and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject_Albums for details. Rich Farmbrough, 21:49 19 September 2006 (GMT).
Thanks for the heads-up. :) - Cyrus XIII 22:04, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sam Leach/Vinnyk/Last Memento Of The Beatles

It looks like there has been another attempt to revive some of the fictions associated with this piece of merchandise: [72] shows. Could you help, please? DavidFarmbrough 09:21, 21 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Vincent Ruello

Hi there! I notice you locked this article again... I deleted it yesterday as part of a general campaign to clear out "protected deleted" pages after three months or so (see the admin noticeboard; the idea is that they're usually created by bored high schoolers who will drop the joke after awhile; there's currently about 3000 prot/del pages which are google-indexed and show up on Special:Random, which is undesirable). Of course this does not apply to all prot/del pages since some are the work of persistent vandals. Anyway I don't particularly care about this Vincent either way but I thought I'd give you a heads-up. Yours, >Radiant< 16:35, 21 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Clare Nasir article vandalism

Hi Rich. It didn't take too long after the article on Clare Nasir was unprotected for User:195.93.21.33 to vandalise it again, as is the anonymous user's habit. *Sigh* Any ideas ? I know it's a broken record. Luckily someone else reverted it. Bests and Thanks. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 18:19, 21 September 2006 (UTC) (User talk:Wikiklrsc)

[edit] About your List of common ISBN errors

Hi Rich, you sent me a pointer to this list on Sept. 5. Can you clarify what it means? What are the fields after each ISBN? I could use a list to fix ISBNs more quickly, if the same book is cited on more than one page.

On another subject, do you know why the word 'Wikipedia' has to be spelled out when looking for a list such as Wikipedia:List of pages with Invalid ISBNs? I was typing 'WP' instead and it didn't work. Thanks, EdJohnston 17:27, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

The calculated checksum, the number of occurrences (twice for some reason) and notes.
WP is a shortcut so pages like WP:AGF actually exist in the article space I think, and are redirects to Wikipedia namespace. Rich Farmbrough, 17:53 22 September 2006 (GMT).


[edit] RE:Rating-5

A 10 rating was something I had previously decided against creating. However, I just realised now (literally just now, even though it's so simple) that you could simply double the template. e.g. to get 7.5/10 use {{Rating-5|5}}{{Rating-5|2.5}} to get 5/5 stars2.5/5 stars. But if you want to compose one from the SVGs, by all means, go ahead (I think I public-domained them) - Рэдхот 18:27, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I actually just noticed that the description which is auto-added to the images makes it a bit messy. But if you want to extend it properly by modifying the SVGs you can. (Or creating a new template) - Рэдхот 18:29, 22 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] isbn

Well groovey!
Signed
International Anthropos of funk LoveMonkey 18:37, 22 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] About your edits on article Acute abdomen

Hi,

please note that a large portion of that article was copyvio. Could save you some work adding the {{wikify}} tag in the future.

--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 22:19, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] An automated message from Werdnabot

Hi there, I tried to archive your user talk page, but it seems that you have an error in your Werdnabot directive that prevented me from correctly archiving your User talk page. Please review this error, or contact Werdna648 for assistance. Werdnabot (DNBF)/T\C 11:55, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] An automated message from Werdnabot

Hi there, I tried to archive your user talk page, but it seems that you have an error in your Werdnabot directive that prevented me from correctly archiving your User talk page. Please review this error, or contact Werdna for assistance. Werdnabot (DNBF)/T\C 10:19, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] An automated message from Werdnabot

Hi there, I tried to archive your user talk page, but it seems that you have an error in your Werdnabot directive that prevented me from correctly archiving your User talk page. Please review this error, or contact Werdna for assistance. Werdnabot (DNBF)/T\C 15:53, 22 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Signpost updated for September 25th.

The Wikipedia Signpost

Volume 2, Issue 39 25 September 2006 About the Signpost

Erik Möller declared winner in Board of Trustees election Wikimania 2007 to be held in Taipei
Arbitration clerk Tony Sidaway resigns Report from the Dutch Wikipedia
News and notes Wikipedia in the news
Features and admins The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View RSS Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:04, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Useful edit summaries

Re: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Yoshiki_Takaya&diff=73917952&oldid=71059180

If you'd have written "Wikipedia:As_of#Deprecated "As of" pages, also non-rendered whitespace changes" in the edit summary rather than "Ced" (copy edit? copy editing involves changing something that's actually visible, no?) it'd've saved me five minutes wondering what you were on and looking through the MoS. I guess maybe your time is more important than other people's. 'Depreciation' doesn't say *why* it's worth me typing 11 extra characters of course, or worth you going round making edits that don't change the rendered page. --zippedmartin 04:58, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Fair comment about the edit summary. The idea behind deprecating the pages is to enable simpler review of "as-of" pages for updating: the whole mechanism may soon be replaced with Template:Update after and others. Rich Farmbrough, 08:51 27 September 2006 (GMT).
Thanks for the reply, especially as it wasn't the most recent of your edits... As of is a bit of an ugly backlink hack, but does have the benefit of getting the date visible in the article (and in not too artificial a manner), which I think's important for readers in some circumstances. Something worth noting in any template debate, maybe. --zippedmartin 13:46, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bot request

Your request for approval at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/SmackBot Task X was not completed fully or added to the Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval page. Are you planning on finishing this request or should it be archived and/or deleted? -- RM 04:27, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Edit count

I noticed here that you have the highest edit count for a non-bot account - congratulations! 0L1 17:26, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Cheers, Rich Farmbrough, 18:52 30 September 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Thanks for fixing the Indian Paths of Pennsylvania ISBN

Thanks for fixing the Indian Paths of Pennsylvania ISBN in Culbertson's Path. I had seen the tag that the ISBN was invalid, but it came off my personal copy of the book and I could not find a valid ISBN on line. I will replace the old ISBN with the working one on the six or seven other places I cite this book. Thanks again, I appreciate this very much, Ruhrfisch 01:13, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Admin intervention against vandalism

User:John254 had added a blatant vandalism tag, and the IP had vandalised twice more since than. The blatant vandal text says - 'without further warning'. Am I missing something? Catchpole 21:40, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

"Am I missing something" No, maybe I was. I'm reluctant to block when the user has been warned for their last act, so I missed the earlier "blatent". Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 21:54 1 October 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Wikipedians by number of edits

CC, you asked about gettign these data for another wiki, which one? Rich Farmbrough, 15:58 30 September 2006 (GMT).

Tr.wiki. :) --Cat out 16:24, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
Rich Farmbrough, 19:40 30 September 2006 (GMT).

Many thanks for putting this together again. Like most, I edit at a similar pace whether I'm being tallied or not, but IT is more fun this way. A low-tech guy, I haven't a clue how difficult this might be, but I imagine lots. Sfahey 13:39, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] British Royal Residences

Just to let you know, the link to the above on your talk page does not go anywhere. It links to a page that says no such category exists. Your list of dates don't link to anywhere either. Natalieduerinckx 19:50, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

The category has been moved. Which list of dates do you mean? Rich Farmbrough, 21:20 2 October 2006 (GMT).

I apolozise, I think I misunderstood your list of strange examples of dates on your user page, for real links. I tried to click on my birth date and it did not work, thats all. Silly of me to think that such an experienced user would make a mistake! Natalieduerinckx 22:22, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for October 2nd.

The Wikipedia Signpost

Volume 2, Issue 40 2 October 2006 About the Signpost

New speedy deletion criteria added News and notes
Wikipedia in the news Features and admins
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View RSS Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:37, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Internet Search Environment Number recently added to ISBN page

Rich, I'm writing about an apparent publicity campaign for a thing called the ISEN, or Internet Search Environment Number. An anonymous user just added a link to it on the ISBN page: [73]. In fact I see your name in the edit history of ISEN so you must have heard ot fit.

This led me to the ISEN page, that appears to me a candidate for deletion, due to WP:N and WP:SPAM. There is no international committee, no standards proposal here, no actual products tagged with the new proposed number, there is only a patent. There aren't even any white papers or full-length explanations. I'm thinking of starting a PROD or AfD on the ISEN article but probably wouldn't do so if I'm the only one who is bothered! Do you have an opinion?

I just saw this note by Rich Litwin [74] so I might write to him as well. I left a message on the talk page of the publicizer of the ISEN, at User_talk:24.166.27.241 but so far there is no response. EdJohnston 20:46, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Looking for advice on dealing with abusive & destructive editor

Hi, doesn't repeatedly blanking discussions from talk pages count as vandalism? The editor I have a complaint has done this many times on Talk:Hardcore punk. If it doesn't count as vandalism, what other options are there to stop an editor from repeatedly making destructive and innacurate edits to an article, posting personal attacks, deleting legitimate tags and citation requests, and has using several sock puppets instead of signing up for an account. The Wikipedia procedures and help pages are unjustifiably complicated, and not many people are willing to offer direct advice. Dealing with the offender directly does not seem like a viable option, since he is clearly out of control.Spylab 22:16, 3 October 2006 (UTC)Spylab


I would have no compunction about blocking this individual, in fact I've both welcomed and warned him on his user page, and left a warnings on at least one of his IP pages. However I don't like to block after the final warning unless vandalism recurs. If he vandalises again, let me know, or relist on the intervention page. You could list on 3RR now. Rich Farmbrough, 23:04 3 October 2006 (GMT).

The vandal referred to above has been adding innacurate vanity references to this article. Recently he has tampered with talk pages, reverted other edits, posted personal attacks, and used sock puppets.

I have never seen a more blatant case of abuse from an out-of-control user. It is difficult to understand why an admin would fail to act, given such clear evidence of abuse. Auto movil 22:51, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi the problem was presented as below:

Punknyc (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log), 75.215.220.237 (talkcontribsWHOISRDNS75.215.220.237 RBLsblock userblock log) and his countless sock puppets have: 1) repeatedly inserted uncited content into the hardcore punk article, overemphasizing the role of Bob Sallese, 2) has deleted legitimate facts, tags, and discussions, and 3) has made several personal attacks in his edit comments and on the Talk:Hardcore punk page. I have posted the proper warnings on the User:Punknyc talk page.Spylab 20:45, 3 October 2006 (UTC)Spylab

As it says at the top of the page "This page is intended to get administrator attention quickly when dealing with obvious and persistent vandals. For other problems with user behaviour requiring administrator intervention please report to WP:AN/I."
No time for more now. Rich Farmbrough, 23:04 3 October 2006 (GMT).

This is an obvious and persistent vandal. Therefore, this page is the correct venue from which to get administrator attention quickly.

The speed and industry at which this vandal, under numerous IP addresses, has reverted and/or changed this page over a period of roughly two years, outstrips the ability of reasonable users to correct the page. Please refer this matter to another admin if there is an issue of insufficient time to address Wikipedia matters. Auto movil 23:13, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

The vandalism began again today, on schedule. I have used one revert so far. Please review the article hardcore punk for continued vandalism by the user described above, who continues to violate multiple Wikipedia guidelines without sanction. Auto movil 16:16, 4 October 2006 (UTC)


Thanks for helping to resolve this issue fairly and promptly.

Best, Auto movil 17:15, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Offed ISCI

I asked Rlitwin, a librarian, to comment on the remaining external links on the ISBN page. He endorsed everything else, but said: "I don't know anything about ISCI. It seems to be an advertising industry standard? Not qualified to comment on that one."

Since it stands for *Industry* Standard Commercial Identifier, and since WP readers are unlikely to be looking up TV commercials by number, I decided we could probably do without it. EdJohnston 22:24, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] On to greater heights: the ESBN

Just now I was editing the ISBN page and noticed that ESBN is mentioned in the link section, and it points to esbn.org. That link isn't working! The numly.com site now has no mention of an ESBN. There is a surviving thing called ESN (Electronic Serial Number) but it only applies to things electronic. For instance, electronic books but not paper books. The ESN is the same as the Numly Number.

If the ESBN doesn't exist any more, does that make the ESBN article a candidate for speedy deletion? :-) EdJohnston 03:40, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

G11'd. Rich Farmbrough, 08:53 4 October 2006 (GMT).

Thanks! While you're at it, there is also a redirect ESBN -> Electronic Standard Book Number. EdJohnston 13:41, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Glitch in SmackBot

SmackBot currently changes "External link" to "External links", which is a valid change, but the edit summary is incorrect: "External links is plural as there are more than one". This is not the reason that validates the change. The change is valid because "External links" is the correct name, whether there happens to be one link in the section for externals links, or whether there happens to be more than one link in the section for external links, is not important. Gronky 12:46, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Sadly even that is no consensus. Rich Farmbrough, 12:49 5 October 2006 (GMT).
Amazing. How absurd. I've requested a rethink. Thanks for the link. Gronky 13:17, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reference to References

Hey, Smackbot just changed "Reference" to "References" when there was only one reference on Odigitrievsky Cathedral InvictaHOG 19:04, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

How very odd. Perhaps because it was the last section and was seen as including the "categories". Thanks. Rich Farmbrough, 19:51 5 October 2006 (GMT).

P.S. Easily fixed for the future. Rich Farmbrough, 19:51 5 October 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Afd

Hi. Would you mind having a look at my contribution to an Afd and let me know if I've overstated the case? It's Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/David_Eden. Not sure if you're a routine "Afd closer", I just want to know if I've gone over the top! Thanks --Dweller 22:40, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Not over the top, although I know what you mean. Looks like a stub worth saving. Rich Farmbrough, 22:47 5 October 2006 (GMT).
Thanks. --Dweller 22:49, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NYPUNK

Hi Richard, I took a look. Perhaps you could request a check user to see whether the IPs and accounts are related. I think you're probably right to proceed with semi-protection rather than blocking for the time being. SlimVirgin (talk) 07:22, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ISBN, Source help.

Please review the format the ISBN source for Olympic Pool (Montreal). Thanks. Flibirigit 21:10, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Parc olympique : Montréal / réd. Anne Gardon

Ville LaSalle : Les Messageries de presse Benjamin, 1992 48 p. : ill. ; 29 cm CDU : 072.5 COTE : MA 8943

hre.

The format is (now) correct, can't confirm the content. Regards Rich Farmbrough, 21:44 7 October 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Monterey clipper

Thanks for your correction and fixes. This note is to let you know I reverted the numbering scheme for the notes. The wiki system of notes is not good, but my hope is someone will make it better. -- meatclerk 04:48, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] PopMatters not in italics

Could you make SmackBot deitalicize PopMatters? It has been pointed out that it shouldn't be italicized because it is not a magazine as the article said before. Cheers, Jogers (talk) 16:50, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] vote

Hi Fellow-WikiPedian, This thing came up: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Where Troy Once Stood. Would you like to vote? Antiphus 20:08, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Nice bot

The title says it all. ReverendG 03:08, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bot problem

Your SmackBot just edited Louden Up Now, and in doing so it made a little problem. The band is !!!, and if the artist is listed like that, it breaks the table it's in. So, I had artist = [[!!!]] instead of [[!!!]]. However, your bot changed it back to [[!!!]] which broke the table. Is there anything you can do so that it doesn't do that again? Could you have it ignore [[!!!]]? Joltman 16:28, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. Just wanted to let you know there are two other articles with the same issue, !!! and Take Ecstasy With Me/Get Up, so you'll probably want to exclude them too. Joltman 17:07, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Problem with SmackBot

Please take a look at this. I guess that the bot needs some tweaking. Regards, Jogers (talk) 20:43, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, but it's pretty much manual from here on in. Rich Farmbrough, 21:02 9 October 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Don't want speedy deletion of Thomas Temple article

Hi Rich. Can you help on this ? User_talk:Mapetite526#Speedy_Deletion_of_Thomas_Temple_article_.3F. Thanks. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 22:04, 9 October 2006 (UTC) (talk)

Many thanks, Rich, for your kind help as ever. Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 12:39, 10 October 2006 (UTC) (talk)

[edit] Signpost updated for October 9th.

The Wikipedia Signpost

Volume 2, Issue 41 9 October 2006 About the Signpost

Interview with Board member Erik Möller Wall Street Journal associates Wikipedia with Grupthink
Account used to create paid corporate entries shut down Report from the Portuguese Wikipedia
News and notes Wikipedia in the news
Features and admins The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 17:15, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Admin help needed

I have reason to believe that User:Alec - U.K. is a vandal in diguise, he has been doing a lot of edits that are questionable, mixed with other edits that appear on the surface to be ok. However, it's quite possible he is slowly inserting incorrect information. He has made a large number of changes to railway stations, some of then clearly messing things up, others making substantial changes to inforamtion I cannot verify, together with a lot of oddball changes that are not per se wrong. I got your name as listed making a recent change to Streatham Hill railway station. My gut feel is that all his edits for all articles should be reverted as a precaution. --ArmadilloFromHell 02:46, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

I've looked, these seem well intentioned edits. I'll keep an eye, two when I can spare them. Rich Farmbrough, 11:58 13 October 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Clare Nasir and the vandal

Hi Rich. Of course, User:195.93.21.33 continues to vandalise Clare Nasir's article ! Luckily someone else found it this time. (cf. User_talk:195.93.21.33#Vandalism_of_Clare_Nasir.27s_article_again) Is there nothing that can be reasonably done ? I know, I know ... Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 19:58, 14 October 2006 (UTC) (talk)

Extended block this time. Rich Farmbrough, 20:24 14 October 2006 (GMT).
I have less patience with AOL IPs now, there are so many ways for the innocent to avoid being caught. Rich Farmbrough, 20:25 14 October 2006 (GMT).

Thanks, Rich, for your kind response and attention to the matter. I take your points on AOL now. Oddly enough, whilst editing other materials, I was just re-reading "Up the Organization" by Robert Townsend (1970) and especially (for a serious semi-demi-giggle) "The Peter Principle" by Dr. Laurence J. Peter (1969). Perhaps it was a synchronistic reading. ;) Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 20:45, 14 October 2006 (UTC) (talk)

[edit] Ernham RFC

Hi. I'm not here to argue with you, your contribution is very welcome and important (outside view). However I would like to give you my thoughts. Taking action like this is not something I do lightly. I have never had cause until now. Yes I have taken the personal attacks personally, including persistently being called a vandal. However I've ignored many instances of being called a vandal before raising the issue. In fact rather than getting more and more annoyed by it I have disengaged more and more; In the latest discussion:

  • [75] Please stop calling me a vandal
  • [76] After again being called a vandal and a stalker my response was "I'll ignore the last sentence. Please stop calling me a vandal. Vandalism is defined as "any addition, deletion, or change of content made in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia." I object in the strongest possible terms to any suggestion that I have vandalised any page. Please consider withdrawing your many remarks (talk page and edit summaries) calling me a vandal. "
  • [77] I told the user that due to the refusal to withdraw the vandal comment and continued abuse I saw no reason for continuing the discussion.

In a nutshell I'm concerned that after many warnings the user is continuing personal attacks and incivility rather than reconsidering their attitude. I don't want to drive this user away, I've helped where I can: help with ext. links and help with 3RR reporting. Thanks for your time, Mark83 21:17, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

I do understand - I read the user's talk page and a fair few diffs when I was looking at his "unblock" request. I think the other editors restraint was commendable. I wanted to share an approach that has got me out of flame wars before they started in the past. It is easy to see "our" point of view - i.e. that of an established, experienced editor, when looking at this type of dispute, harder to see that of a relative "newbie" we don't know. Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 21:29 14 October 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Re: Substed inforboxen

Yes, I was going to check how many articles were left in the category, and found only 58. Someone must have been working pretty hard there! I noticed it was subst'ed, and was thinking about replacing it with the infobox, but your suggestion does sense. I think it should not be too hard, I will base myself in existing ones like prod and afd. -- ReyBrujo 21:37, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RfC, alas.

I submitted an RfC on the user PUNKNYC, whom you warned about adding vanity content into the Hardcore Punk article. The warning went unheeded; he's still at it with the same persistence.

See RfC here.

Could you certify that you issued a warning? Thanks! Auto movil 21:59, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] SmackBot finding new ISBN errors?

Rich, I notice in SmackBot's log that he is hyphenating some more ISBNs. Does that mean there will be some new invalids added to the list? And is there any news on whether ISBN-13's can be checked successfully? EdJohnston 04:15, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi Ed, this is one of SmackBot's standard tasks, although it is now more intelligent (i.e. fixes incorrect hyphenations) it is aimed at articles with "ISBN:". It may well have picked up invalid ISBNs, but not likely to be more than a few, I probably need to improve the regular scan. Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 10:46 15 October 2006 (GMT).
Thanks for your reply.. On another matter, near the bottom of your user page, there is a cryptic error message about 'Allowed memory size'. Did you mean to have it there? EdJohnston 12:35, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
Congratualtions on being first to spot. I had a lot of WP errors there, most were moved off to a subpage, I left that by accident, but rather liked it. Rich Farmbrough, 12:37 15 October 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Question

Hi there! Long time no see. Could you tell me what "Ced" in an edit summary means? --HappyCamper 15:50, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Oh, "copy edit". I don't remember where I've come across your edits on Wikipedia before. SmackBot? My memory is failing me too. I know you've been here longer than me, and I've been here for more than a year and a half now. "One of the good guys around" I recall. --HappyCamper 16:08, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ISBN hyphenation

How do you determine the correct hyphenation for ISBNs? I use User:Diberri's PubMed tool sometimes to create book references, but it just leaves the ISBN as one long number. If Diberri knew how to calculate the correct hyphenation, and could incorporate it into his tool, that might reduce the number of ISBN hyphenations that need to be done by Smackbot. And it would make me feel better to know that I'm doing the citation right the first time, instead of waiting for Smackbot to fix it for me. Lyrl Talk Contribs 00:13, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Forgive me for interjecting an idea, after seeing your question to Rich Farmbrough. I tried out Diberri's tool. It's very handy and I might use it myself. However, it does lack that final step of hyphenating the ISBN. At present www.isbn.org/converterpub.asp is what I use for hyphenating. Perhaps Diberri's tool could be modified to invoke this as well? The advantage of the isbn.org script is it also does a full validity check, so it protects you against inserting an invalid ISBN into Wikipedia. I don't know if the source code for converterpub.asp is available, but you can always invoke the program via their website. EdJohnston 03:07, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
Hyphenation rules are here. Ed points out an online resource on my talk page. Rich Farmbrough, 09:23 16 October 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Update to Template:Update_after

Hi! I've made changes to Template:Update after (it now links to Category:Wikipedia articles in need of updating and As of), and made significant changes to the documentation at Template:Update_after (including documenting the built-in ability to add a comment, and a changes in where it's allowable to be used); please review, and provide comments at Template talk:Update after if you think any are appropriate. Thanks! --Scott McNay 03:50, 16 October 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Date quibbles

Hi there.

I've just partially reverted some changes you made to Dependency of Ireland on Great Britain Act 1719; you'd changed 23/11/1719 to a conventional written date. However, this is part of the title of the cited work, not normal text, and as such should probably be left in the unusual form - could you keep an eye out for situations like this in future? Shimgray | talk | 18:11, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I followed the link, although I didn't see the "Cite", I was still happy to change it. But I am biased against xx/xx/xxxx dates... I'm happy to leave it as well. Rich Farmbrough, 21:22 16 October 2006 (GMT).
I'm not too fond of them either, I confess, but I do worry about changing the title of things - there's always the risk it'll confuse matters for someone following the cite later. Shimgray | talk | 22:58, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for October 16th.

The Wikipedia Signpost

Volume 2, Issue 42 16 October 2006 About the Signpost

Wikipedia partially unblocked in mainland China $100 million copyright fund stems discussion
Floyd Landis adopts "the Wikipedia defense" as appeal strategy News and notes: Logo votes begin, milestones
Wikipedia in the news Features and admins
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 18:11, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Quite odd...

Hi Rich, Could you step into Hardcore Punk for a moment? The same user as before is refusing to respond to the RfC on his actions, while still editing/reverting, etc. as usual. Even more oddly, his latest comeback is, "User:Auto movil should respond to the RfC concerning his persistent violations" -- when there is no such RfC. One is supposed to assume good faith, but it's honestly becoming hard to assume that this isn't some kind of weird practical joke -- or a psychological test of some sort... Auto movil 03:26, 18 October 2006 (UTC)


[edit] WPCD2

Richard, I am not sure if you are the right person to talk to. I am in the process of starting the second WP CD version which will run to about 4000 articles. At present the clean up of these articles is done by script and then volunteer (we have lots of physical volunteers here). I wondered if stealing some of smackbots ideas might help us increase the proportion of the clean up which could be done automatically or give us more flags. I can obviously write a script to detect say "hello mum" on pages but am really after some kind of list of changes needed. Feel like helping? --BozMo talk 08:21, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Article list is here, subject to screening by volunteers on suitability for children and possible late additions from 0.5. Dream is to release a 2007 CD selection just in time for Christmas and get a Sunday paper to distribute it for free with the supplement. Timing depends though on whether the clean up and CSS etc from last year still works (which basically depends on if the wikimedia software has changed since I clean up in HTML). There have been 27000 downloads of the first WPCD, some of which we know for certain we on copied over 100 times so we are probably going to put a bit more effort in generally this time.

[edit] Um,

He just keeps reverting the edits, won't respond to the RfC or abide by warnings. The new thing is to make up counter-accusations, accusing others of exactly what he's doing (e.g., my talk page).

This is the gentleman at Hardcore Punk, btw. What happens if someone just ignores an RfC, ignores final warnings, etc? Is there another process that can be put into effect? Auto movil 19:45, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for stepping in. Auto movil 03:20, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NETZ Page

Thanks for your help and guiding me for article on NETZ.Shub_iitkgp

[edit] Roy Harper albums

Thanks for your help with the Roy Harper stuff I have been working on. However, a lot of the album colors, Live, Studio, Compilation etc... are now messed up. Can you put them back ??? Stephenjh

Hi, I have not intentionally changed any colours. Can you give me an example? Rich Farmbrough, 11:21 17 September 2006 (GMT).
HI this is due to changes in the colours generated by template:Infobox Album. Rich Farmbrough, 13:09 18 September 2006 (GMT).

I was quite careful to use the correct colours, but even though the colour is defined as e.g. Orange (Studio album) it shows as light blue. It is fairly straightforward to see the errors where they exist, it has affected a number of Roy Harper albums and I was asking for your assistance as you have had input into most of the 17 Harper album reviews I worked on, and also made changes to the Infobox coding. Stephenjh

Hello, the Infobox Album has changed recently, it takes the album type and generates the colour from that, so that the "background" parameter is now useless (and will be removed in time). The colour scheme has also changed, more details at template:Infobox Album and template talk:Infobox Album. Rich Farmbrough, 09:08 19 September 2006 (GMT).
  • The colour scheme hadn't changed last time I looked! Ah well, I guess I'll have to allow others (or bots) to change everything as I simply don't have the time to create articles that need to be constantly updated due to colour and formatting fickleness \ updates. I thought they were fairly "solid" and informative articles too... Stephenjh

Please archive 08:26, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] question about a band whose page you edited

I noticed that you edited the entry for The Fray's Movement EP (2002). I was wondering if I could ask you a question or two about this CD (I thought since you edited the page, you might know the answer). I apologize if this area is the wrong place to ask. Is there any way I could email you? Thank you very much in advance for your help. Sincerely, Elizabeth Moore (elizabeth m moore at yale edu)

If you look just under the search box, you will see a number of links called the toolbox. One of them is "email this user". Unfortuantely I know nothing about The Fray or their albums, I have been making a number of stylistic and technical changes to many album pages. However the cover does look like a picture of the inside of a Metro Cammel underground train (or maybe not).

Rich Farmbrough, 09:06 21 September 2006 (GMT).

Please archive 08:26, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Note to self

Check User:Webmasters response. Rich Farmbrough, 21:32 7 October 2006 (GMT).

Please archive 08:26, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 1994 San Marino Grand Prix

Heya, just a quick point about the F1 race reports such as the above, the dates in the Infobox are automatically wikilinked, there's no need to add the brackets (and doing so simply causes the brackets to be visible in the article). Thanks, Alexj2002 19:21, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Please archive 08:26, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Date fragments

Hi, Rich! I've just spotted this edit of yours, and I thought I'd ask for a favor.

Linking single years is a habit I acquired in the past two years, and which is very hard to get rid of. I often catch myself linking single years without even thinking that I really shouldn't be doing it. One example is the dates of the Censuses, such as those you corrected in the diff above.

There are currently mighty many references to the 1989 Soviet Census and to the 2002 Russian Census. All of them are constructed as follows:

Population: xxx,xxx (2002 Census); yyy,yyy (1989 Census)

Since you are obviously not making all the changes by hand, would you consider adding an algorithm replacing the formatting above with this:

Population: xxx,xxxx (2002 Census); yyy,yyy (1989 Census)

I'll make an effort to switch, too; it's just that I really don't want to go back and change all existing formatting by hand.

This, of course, is by no means urgent, but I'd appreciate if you could let me know if it could be done. Thanks!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 18:26, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi, this is fairly straightforward, I have started on the fixes. Rich Farmbrough, 22:06 20 October 2006 (GMT).
Can you look at Kemerovo pop 522,6 thousand - does tht mean 6,522? Rich Farmbrough, 22:34 20 October 2006 (GMT).
Thanks for catching it and for your help with cleaning this up. Population of Kemerovo is around half a million; I corrected the numbers. The number has most likely been added by a Russian—in Russian, a comma is used as a decimal separator, and a space to separate thousands. Just a useless fact you might be interested in knowing :)—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 23:36, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
Pleasure. Should all be done now. Rich Farmbrough, 21:29 22 October 2006 (GMT).
Thank you again for your time and efforts. While my three-day watchlist now stands at 1,500 items, that inconvenience is well-offset by the fact that I won't have to make all those changes manually :) Please let me know if there is anything I can help with.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 14:20, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for October 23rd.

The Wikipedia Signpost

Volume 2, Issue 43 23 October 2006 About the Signpost

Report from the Finnish Wikipedia News and notes: Donation currencies added, milestones
Wikipedia in the news Features and admins
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:31, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dates in Global spread of H5N1 in 2006

Thank you for taking the time to do these. After spending a lot of hours changing the refs to {{cite}}, it's really gratifying to see you take up the torch and bring them to the next level. Thanks! Waitak 14:47, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User:162.39.180.2 link-spammed a lot of Education related articles

Hi Rich. User:162.39.180.2 just put a spurious external link (under the guise of a link called "Education Software") into many many articles on education, etc. (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=162.39.180.2) Unfortunately, I just now don't have time to fix them. I just wanted to point it out. Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 18:01, 27 October 2006 (UTC) (talk)

User:Zuzz has reverted all except one, now fixed. Thanks for letting me know. Rich Farmbrough, 19:18 27 October 2006 (GMT).

Thanks, Rich, very much. Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 19:59, 27 October 2006 (UTC) (talk)

[edit] Signpost updated for October 30th.

The Wikipedia Signpost

Volume 2, Issue 44 30 October 2006 About the Signpost

Wales resigns chair position as reorganization underway Hypothetical valuation of Wikipedia scrutinized
Work underway to purge plagiarized text from articles Librarian creates video course about Wikipedia
Report from the Japanese Wikipedia News and notes: Commemorative mosaic started, milestones
Features and admins The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:28, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Admin

Do you think I should run again? AzaToth 20:32, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedians by number of edits

You know on the top of Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits it says:

This list is derived from "stub-meta-history.xml.gz" dated around 23 September 2006 found at http://download.wikimedia.org/enwiki/20060920/.

I was looking around on there and I found another successful dump of information of "stub-meta-history.xml.gz" located at http://download.wikimedia.org/enwiki/20061104/

Could you see if you could update it with this information? semper fiMoe 02:21, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

I have been watching the dumps, so enwiki-20041104-stub-meta-history is download:ing, currently at 21%, with 65 hours remaining. For some reason it's transferring at 10k, perhaps the server has been throttled. Rich Farmbrough, 12:44 6 November 2006 (GMT).


[edit] Albert Fish

If your still interested in more on Albert Fish, I have access to the New York Times archive for a month. They have several large articles in pdf format. Do you know if you can recover the ASCII text from a pdf document? I know the NYT does an OCR scan and that text is stored in the pdf as an index so you can find the article in a text search. I wantr to be able to recover some of the pre 1923 articles without retyping them. Even just for short quotes, its easy to make a transcription error. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 17:51, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Jumping in here to say that the version of Adobe Acrobat Professional that I'm using (7.0 for Mac) has the ability to save a PDF file as text. You could always try that. A security feature might conceivably block it, but it's worth a try. Naturally this only works when the PDF has associated text, which is true in your case. EdJohnston 20:28, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your input would be appreciated

I've started a Virtual classroom for Wikipedians to learn by each others' example. Currently we are comparing the user interfaces we each use in making use of and work on Wikipedia (operating systems, programs, browsers, extensions, scripts, settings/features, navigation set ups, etc). You are one of the most advanced users I've ever come across, and I hope you will stop by and share with us how you have your computer set up for working on Wikipedia, so the rest of us can learn by your example. Interiot has been kind enough to help get things started by describing some tools and techniques he uses, and I hope you will too. Sincerely,  The Transhumanist   02:31, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for November 6th.

The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery



Volume 2, Issue 45 6 November 2006 About the Signpost

Arbitration election campaigns begin Blogger studies Wikipedia appearance in search results
Intelligence wiki receives media attention Report from the German Wikipedia
News and notes: Foundation donation, milestones Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:28, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for the input

I appreciate it. I learned some interesting points from your tips. I'm sure others will too. Thank you.  The Transhumanist   11:47, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Secrets of SmackBot?

Hello Rich! Tawkerbot and Werdnabot seem to require an administrator to block them if they malfunction. SmackBot is more user-friendly because it will stop if anyone posts a comment to its Talk page. Was it hard to add this capability? Should the other robots consider the same thing? EdJohnston 18:27, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

It was easy because SmackBot is really just an account. It's edits are either done using Firefox and Javascript and hence I will see the "New messages" box, or more commonly AWB which stops on a talk page message anyway. Having said that I have had a few anon IP's leaving "moo" or whatever on the talk page, which is annoying. TB and WB are both more likely to be subject of vandalistic attacks, so it may not be a good idea for them. Rich Farmbrough, 19:21 8 November 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Virtual classroom update

I've written a translation of Interiot's "geekspeak" post. It took me hours to figure out what he was talking about. Some pretty cool tricks, now described in easy to follow steps. I've also thrown in some of my own tricks, have updated my notes on the interface I use, and have answered students questions in the questions and comments section at the bottom of the page. Let me know if the page is helping in any way. Hope to see ya there again soon.  The Transhumanist   23:38, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I read it. Unfortunately I can't get middle-click to work for me at the moment, it's right click <T> for me. Rich Farmbrough, 10:23 11 November 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Unilateral removal of the history section in ABC article

Hi Rich

We have an unpleasant situation about to develop over this action by one "cyberjunkie" ("cj"), who decided all of a sudden that he'd move the entire History section of the ABC article to a new daughter article, without replacing it with a summary. The history section was almost entirely written more than a year ago.

Since this action on 12 September, the section has languished with no text at all under its title, save a link to the daughter article.The action has, in effect, gutted the article, leaving what appear to be insubstantial fragments without a core. It's must be odd to the newcomer to be denied a summary of the history and to move straight onto a chunky section on "funding and relationship with government" without knowing where how the institution arose.

Now, it's not that I disagree with him that the History section was written in greater detail than you'd normally expect in summary style. (A related issue is that the rest of the article may need to be fleshed out in the opposite direction to achieve satisfactory summary coverage of the topic—perhaps the optimal balance needs to be debated on the talk page.) What I do object to is

  • (1) his failure to raise the matter on the talk page beforehand, and
  • (2) provide replacement text with the summary style that he's using as his stated rationale for the removal.

The edit comment for the removal was "split (will summarise later)", whereas I'd have been pleased to see a summary written before the removal, for immediate replacement.

I've raised the matter on the talk page, and Cyberjunkie has responded negatively:

I think a total blank is worse than a long history. Please create a summary soon. Your action has resulted in damage to the overall article, IMV. Tony 11:16, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Whereas, I disagree. --cj | talk 12:41, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

I can see that this is getting nowhere. I wonder whether you agree that he should either undertake to write a summary section in the near future (I suggest three or four paragraphs) or reinstate the text and raise the issue on the talk page.

I'd appreciate knowing your opinion. The ABC's talk page is here. Tony 13:52, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply, Rich. Not entirely sorted, since the text that has been provided recently needs to be significantly longer, IMV. But at least it's not a gaping hole. Tony 03:24, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rating-3 template

Hey Rich, I'll be more than happy to take care of that (might make a rating-6 also, as they've been known to exist). I'll get the code set up in a few hours, and create the images when I get home from work. I'll let you know when Rating-3 is complete, and set links on the existing templates. I think we need to find an appropriate place to advertise these, as I've not seen a mention of them anywhere in the Wikiprojects. Not sure where would be most appropriate though. Also been thinking about modifying the existing templates to accept 0.1 incriments of input, while still using the half-star icons, but I'll worry about that later. Thoughts? -- Huntster T@C 20:13, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Aye, I saw that comment, which is what got me thinking about allowing actual imput of 6.9 which would render the approximate amount of stars and alt text. It's just a concept idea, and I don't know how difficult it would be to impliment it. -- Huntster T@C 20:23, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Just letting you know that {{Template:Rating-3}} and {{Template:Rating-6}} have now been created. I still need to create the graphics, but I should have that done around 12-14:00 ET Monday. Also, that full decimal system works fine, and I don't see any need for additional graphics outside of the half-star system already in place. Cheers! -- Huntster T@C 04:56, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Okay, just updating that images are finished and everything is ready to go. I wanted to ask, though, about your Rating-10 template. The resulting image is very wide, and somewhat unwieldy with the current infoboxes. To that end, would you mind if I created some custom, smaller stars for this template, and rework the code? My thought is to reduce the size to about 60 to 70% of current, so it is longer than the other ratings, but not so wide that it doesn't fit well inside the infobox. -- Huntster T@C 19:14, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, make any sane changes you like. Rich Farmbrough, 20:52 13 November 2006 (GMT).
Alright, changes finally made to {{Template:Rating-10}}. If you don't like it, please revert. -- Huntster T@C 10:57, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Delinking Dates

Hi Rich. So what's the policy with linking dates? I thought I had read some Wiki guide that said linking dates is helpful because it lets people display dates in different formats. Is that not the case? Personally, I couldn't care less, but I want to do the right thing. Thanks! Dfass 14:19, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, absolutely right. But formatting will only be applied where the month and day number are present - e.g. April 13 or 12 May 1977. Things like "2002", "January" and "March 1997" by themselves should only be linked under normal "make links only where relevent in context" guidelines. E.G. "May" in the article Maypole or maybe "1066" in Battle of Hastings, "Friday" in Sabbath and so forth. Rich Farmbrough, 14:41 13 November 2006 (GMT).
OK, thanks a lot. Makes sense. Appreciated. (Saves me time, too!) Dfass 14:57, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Another thing you may find useful to know is house style on headings WP:MSH. Basically things are only capitalised if they would be in normal English usage. Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 17:08 13 November 2006 (GMT).

[edit] NETZ

I've put NETZ up for speedy deletion since it is essentially empty / provides little or no context. Hu 21:10, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

I suggest that you or the other editor put up the {{inuse}} tag if the intention is seriously to provide content. Hu 21:37, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for November 13th.

The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery



Volume 2, Issue 46 13 November 2006 About the Signpost

Full accessibility, dramatic growth reported for Chinese Wikipedia ArbCom elections: Information on Elections
Report identifies Wikipedia as a leader in non-US traffic News and notes: Board passes four resolutions, milestones
Wikipedia in the News Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:22, 14 November 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Edit counter

The better solution for edit-counting might be (barring integration with Wikimedia) to take an rc feed as AntiVandal-Bot does and once a user has been queried keep their counts updated. I could run a baseline of non-deleted edits at a given dump date, but it would be of limited use becasue of synchronisation issues. What do you think? Rich Farmbrough, 12:03 14 November 2006 (GMT).

1) at that point, you'd more or less have another toolserver. And while we do need either the existing toolserver to work, or a new one to be created, I don't have the skill to do it. And 2) I don't see the point in making a specialized toolserver that only does edit counts, because there are many other pretty important apps that run on the toolserver (probably more important than edit counting). --Interiot 12:53, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I was thinking on the current toolserver. It would be zero load on the main servers. Perhaps I need to apply for a toolserver account. Rich Farmbrough, 21:57 14 November 2006 (GMT).
Additional help is always welcomed. As I said, we really do have a large number of tools that are very useful to run, and several are more important than the edit counter (for instance, commons has a tool that checks whether an image is used on any server before deleting a commons image. Since enwiki and other servers don't replicate to the toolserver, commons deleters have to check these servers by hand every time they delete an image... that's just one toolserver tool that's important to get working). So if you'd like to help, it really would be best to get the general database replication working. Working on only the edit counter would be working on a bandaid that will be discarded once the/a toolserver starts working again.
DaBpunkt has been working on importing a recent static dump of the enwiki database, but it's crashing for an unknown reason every time they try to import it. --Interiot 22:08, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Yes replication would render it moot, but is the problem on the toolserver? Rich Farmbrough, 22:15 14 November 2006 (GMT).
Incidentally I've been trying for about 10 days to download a partial dump, there's serious problems there too. Rich Farmbrough, 22:19 14 November 2006 (GMT).
MySQL crashes when they import the static dump. I haven't heard whether they know why it might be crashing, but one would think that if it's the toolserver mysql that's crashing, that the problem is likely on the toolserver side. (is that what you were asking?) --Interiot 22:34, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
No, not really, I was asking about the main reason that replication stopped in the first place, which seemed to be because of the way the en wiki was set up. Perhaps it's worth talking to DaBpunkt as you suggest. Rich Farmbrough, 22:40 14 November 2006 (GMT).
Oh, that. Um, first it was an architecture change (multiple masters to replicate from, which MySQL doesn't do natively). But DaBpunkt hacked a way around that. His replication code was a little buggy at first, but we've fixed almost all the bugs we know about. Then the increasing number of edits by all wikis overwhelmed the disk I/O the toolserver has, so they stopped enwiki just so dewiki and all the others wouldn't indefinitely lag. They ordered a new RAID card, got someone to drive out to Amsterdam, found out it was incompatible. Ordered a second one, drove out there, got it installed okay. So replag was 100+ days by then, so they had to import a static dump rather than trying to replicate the whole way through 100 days, and last I heard they were having problems importing the dump. --Interiot 22:50, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ollie Harrington

Dunno if this is an AWB problem or what, but you just added Category:Living people and Category:Year of birth unknown to the article, and Harrington is dead and his birthyear is in the article. I've fixed it, but thought you might want to know in case something is off with AWB. Gamaliel 00:23, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

My fault, I was confused by the subst'ed {{:tl:lifetime}}, out of which AWB pulled the categories. I had meant to go back to the article. Proabaly best not to subst that template though. Rich Farmbrough, 10:01 15 November 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Signature

Hoi: I saw over on Transhumanist's page you had modified your signature to work with only three tildes. I tried playing around with some {{date}} and {{time}} changes to my sig, but I couldn't get them to work without leaving weird templates and stuff in the signature. I also tried adding in ~~~~~ which struck me as fairly clever, but I guess the developers disabled recursive signatures... So how did you do it? --Gwern (contribs) 00:45, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Preferences raw ''[[User:Rich Farmbrough|Rich]] [[User talk:Rich Farmbrough|Farmbrough]]'', {{subst:CURRENTTIME}} [[{{subst:CURRENTDAY}} {{subst:CURRENTMONTHNAME}}]] [[{{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}]] (GMT). And it took me some time to figure out... Rich Farmbrough, 09:33 15 November 2006 (GMT).
Neat! I'm adding it over on Transhumanist in case anyone else was wondering. --Gwern (contribs) 19:19 15 November 2006 (GMT)

[edit] Virtual classroom lesson #2

Well, we've moved on to our second lesson in the Virtual classroom, though each lesson is continuous so we may see more additions to the interface share and compare discussions as well. The current topic of discussion is "stubbing," with a short course to kick things off provided by our resident expert on the subject, Grutness.

To help keep track of what's going on, here's a template you can place at the top of your userpage or talk page:

Virtual classroom lessons
6. Yuser, on fighting linkspam
5. Learning the ropes
4. Elaragirl, about deletion and deletionism
3. The Rambling Man, on vandalism
2. Grutness's guide to stubbing
1. Compare your user interfaces with what others use
0. Coaching section - active training-in-progress
Miscellaneous questions and comments - anything goes
 .
 .
 .

Discussions planned for the future include scripts, and another on bots. But my head is still spinning from comparing interfaces. I still have some questions left to ask on that subject!

Hope to see you at the Virtual classroom again soon.  The Transhumanist    14:09, 16 November 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Re: User:The Transhumanist/Virtual classroom#Some script-related questions

I've left you some questions about your monobook.js at the virtual classroom.  The Transhumanist   12:47, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Citing articles without ISBN numbers?

I saw your bot leave a note on a Royal Enfield isbn tag, and thought you might be able to help me with a citation query? User:Seasalt/Ducati Sources shows some primary sources (Ian Falloon magazine articles) used in Ducati Motor Holding, Ducati Quattrovalvole motorcycles and Ducati V-twin motorcycles. I cannot find any ISBN number in them. If these are even able to be used, what format would i properly cite them in? Just one example should suffice. --Seasalt 03:32, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Don't magazines use ISSNs? --Gwern (contribs) 06:16 18 November 2006 (GMT)
Gwern is correct ISSN XXXX-XXXX. You can either use {{:tl:Cite journal}} or follow Wikipedia:Citing_sources (or, of course make it up as you go along). Rich Farmbrough, 10:18 18 November 2006 (GMT).
Yes, if you can find an ISSN for this magazine. Searching online proved fruitless. --KSmrqT 20:04, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
The ISSN portal allows a month's free trial access. Rich Farmbrough, 21:41 18 November 2006 (GMT).

So far, fruitless. no sign of issn. Have sent query to publishers and local issn office. Do you have to have an issn or isbn number in a reference? The Citing sources harvard referencing paragraph seems to suggest that Publisher or ISSN/ISBN is acceptable?Seasalt 12:29, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

No absolutely not a requirement. And indeed ISBNs are edition specific, so can be a hinderance in some ways. Rich Farmbrough, 12:35 19 November 2006 (GMT).
If no ISSN can be found, I think it might be sufficient to give complete ordering information for the actual magazine that you have. That would include the mailing address of the publisher. However, when I went to the web site of the apparent publisher, Federal Publishing Company of Australia, they did not include any magazine called 'Modern Ducati'. This kind of problem makes you wonder if the magazine actually exists, or if the person who originally checked the article wrote the info down correctly. As an alternative, you might look to use one of Ian Falloon's books on Ducati motorcycles, which definitely exist and can be found on Amazon. EdJohnston 03:24, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
Every piece of information included with a reference can help a reader find the source, so we like to include id numbers like ISBN and ISSN when we have them. We also like to include the publisher and the date and other auxiliary information. It can happen that a book has been published in hardcover and softcover versions, and by more than one publishing house. Older classics may be republished with commentary, or in a new translation. Multiple editions may exist. Sometimes these things are critical; often, not. The most important thing is, if you have a helpful or vital reference, include what information you have. Maybe someone else can fill in missing data, if it exists.
Consider two examples: William Shakespeare's tragedy Othello, and Douglas Adams' comedy The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. Besides modern versions, we can find two different "original" versions of the Shakespeare online at the British Library site. And Adams' tale exists in numerous variations, including radio, book, and television. If we are speaking of these works in general terms, it probably doesn't matter which version we consult; but if we are doing critical analysis, the differences may be the heart of our discussion. --KSmrqT 08:56, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
And on a more prosaic level, any reference to page numbers in a book, needs a clear definition of the edition used. Rich Farmbrough, 11:15 20 November 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Thanks for your support!

A week ago I nominated myself, hoping to be able to help Wikipedia as an administrator as much as a WikiGnome. I am very glad many others shared my thoughts, including you. Thank you for your trust! Be sure I will use these tools to protect and prevent and not to harass or punish. Should you feel I am overreacting, pat me so that I can correct myself. With some luck, this won't modify the time I spend at the different WikiProjects, including Album. Thanks again! ReyBrujo 20:51, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Replacing 13-digit ISBN by 16-digit codes

Hi Rich. I don't understand this edit by your bot. It replaced a 13-digit ISBN by a 16-digit code. I reverted it for the moment; could you please check? Cheers, Jitse Niesen (talk) 05:51, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Many thanks, this was an odd bug, well worth catching. Thanks for your help on other ISBNs. PLease let me know if you see any more strangeness, and if it's since now, please halt the bot. Rich Farmbrough, 12:54 19 November 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Moving (US) pages to (U.S.)

Could I ask you to undo those moves until we settle the debate? I mean the disambiguators, not pages like First aerial victory by the U.S. military, those I don't mind at all.

Thanks a lot! hike395 07:29, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

OK, I guess we can leave them inconsistent for a while. Thanks hike395 04:56, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sago Mine Disaster

Hope you're well. Could you check for the vandalism by the anon. user and delete it without reversing the entry. Didn't notice it when I made a small change. I couldn't figure a way to go to line 114 without scrolling down. Is there a way?

This same anon. user did a minor vandalism on my user page, but I fixed that. I suspect someone should keep an eye on his larky edits.

P.S. The anti-wiki blog e y e o n l i n e reached huge proportions until he quieted down on in August My novelist friend in FL has no idea who he is, despite the fact that he portrays himself as a famous writer. Eye keeps deriding me by name. Such is the lot for those of us who write without alias, alas. Cheers, --Beth Wellington 22:57, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

  • Thanks for your reply. Was trying to avoid the deletion from an earlier version, so as to preserve later changes. That's why I asked for an easy way to get to a specific line.

Thanks for the link. The wikiarticle says that U n g a r e t t i, the poet Mr. P translated for G r a n d s t r e e t, etc., is one of the foremost of his country in his century, but looking at said translations <allinfoaboutpoetry.com/features/ungaretti> I can't agree, unless something was, by Mr. P, "lost in translation." And to set the record straight I neither know E m e r e r s o n personally, nor operate any fan clubs. And she lives on the opposite side of Virginia. Sort of like saying everybody in Wales knows everybody in London. I never responded, neither on his blog nor mine, since Mr. P does seem to be perpetually p'd off at us and to have a lot more time than I do to pursue his snit.  :} --Beth Wellington 17:00, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

  • I'm not a programmer so I won't be writing any java script. off for Thanksgiving and need to turn in an article, first. Check this out, if you want to do instead of pursuing Mr. P:

Commentary: Mountaintop Removal Sites - "Strip Mining on Steroids" Beth Wellington's commentary delves into the complex history of this controversial mining operation, with background that highlights corporate and public interest positions, as well as relevant legislative history.

http://www.llrx.com/extras/mountaintopremoval.htm

(Still a draft, but she wanted something by Sunday night and she sends out notices to her list of updates.)--Beth Wellington 17:39, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

--Beth Wellington 17:39, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Editcountitis

Hey Rich!

Thanks for updating the list. As an editor with severe editcountitis, I always get a thrill out of seeing the new list. As I understand things, it's not very easy to update because it's so unwieldy, so thanks for taking the time and effort. Oh, and congrats on staying on top 'o the list. :)

Happy editing, Firsfron of Ronchester 04:56, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

It's a pleasure. Rich Farmbrough, 10:57 21 November 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Signpost updated for November 20th.

The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery



Volume 2, Issue 47 20 November 2006 About the Signpost

One week later, Wikipedia reblocked in mainland China Military history dominates writing contest
News and notes: Wikibooks donation, milestones Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:45, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for catching my forgetting to date the wikify tag, etc

I completely forgot to date my wikify, etc, tags on a bunch of articles.. thanks for the catch. Perel 08:44, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ISBNs

Yeah, in the rest of the world I usually see them with hyphens, but here on Wikipedia I've seen them more often without - as long as the hyphenated ISBNs bring you to the right page, it's fine with me. ThanksTvoz 07:54, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Just an opinion on an image's fair use

Just thought I'd request your inputs as a third party. Image:Iraqi Sniper.jpg is an image from NY times. It is a controversial photo that raised some eyebrows in USA for being unpatriotic (sources provided in image summary). user slimvirgin notes in the talk page that it doesn't fall under fair use since it's of some commercial value, though it's almost 1/2 year old photo. I can scale down the resolution if needed but I have uploaded this just like the Muhammad cartoon for the image itself being a bit controversial. pl give some pointers in this direction or point me to someone who might be well versed in these image issues. Thanks. Idleguy 08:34, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] SmackBot, uncat, and stubs

I notice that SmackBot is adding {{uncat}} to articles that have stub categories. This proved somewhat contentious when Bluebot was doing this: see the discussion at WT:CAT, and the bot's talk page. I suggested by way of a compromise measure instead tagging these with {{uncatstub}}, which puts them in a separate maintenance category, which met with some agreement, and hopefully keeps all parties at-least-somewhat-happy. (And I've been redoing these that way with Alaibot.) If you're agreeable to doing so, and it's not too inconvenient to tweak the script, could you tag those that way too? Thanks. Alai 21:54, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

OK, just checking you were aware of the discussion -- though I think my bot may be passing you in that regard. :) A handful being tagged with {{uncat}} probably won't attract much controversy, just so long as it's not greatly enlarging the uncat-cat, as BB was. Alai 22:04, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your very high edit count

May I ask how you have acquired an edit count of over 150,000? What do you do on Wikipedia? You must feel utterly exhuasted! Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 21:05, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

I read WP, and fix errors I find. When I fix an error I like to fix all instances of it, sometimes this can be done by hand, sometimes it has to be. Where possible I get my bot (SmackBot) to do it, but even then I will run a few hundred edits testing the process. For example almost every album article has been modified by SmackBot, but there are other changes that can't be fully automated. Rich Farmbrough, 21:54 25 November 2006 (GMT).
I see. Thankyou for your prompt reply. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 21:57, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Ah ha! You're a cyborg...half bot, half man...I knew it!  :-) —Doug Bell talk 05:01, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WP:RFBOT

Your recent bot approvals request has been Approved for Trial. Please see the request page for details. -- RM 18:03, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WP:RFBOT

Your recent bot approvals request has been approved. Please see the request page for details. -- RM 18:39, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:Ejaculation

Why did you revert my comment on that talk page? It's not like it was vandalism, as it's not the actual article. It was merely having a sense of humour. The Duke of Rich Farmbrough 03:24, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] SmackBot and the unreferenced tag

Looks like a good start. I know some other maintenance tags have the "All articles X" supercat, but do you think that's really necessary since we have Category:Articles lacking sources? I was hoping to be able to 'move' {{unreferenced}} instances to only subcategories so we could walk through the above category, but you know more about AWB than I do. What do you advise (up to and including me getting AWB to help out)? Nevermind, did a few edits and I see where it removes it from the supercat. Pretty slick. -- nae'blis 04:58, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you for your support at RFA

I wasn't going to send thank-you cards, but the emotional impact of hitting WP:100 (and doing so unanimously!) changed my mind. So I appreciate your very considered support for me at RFA, and hope you'll let me know if I can do anything for you in the future. Cheers! -- nae'blis 00:06, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for November 27th.

The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery



Volume 2, Issue 48 27 November 2006 About the Signpost

Arbitration Committee elections: Candidate profiles Steward elections begin
Group apologizes for using Wikipedia name in online arts fundraiser News and notes: 1.5 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  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 01:54, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I'm sorry...

...but what are you talking about? I loaned my account to my friend yesterday, so if he did something using my account I apologize. The Duke of Rich Farmbrough 06:41, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, yeah.. Rich Farmbrough, 23:06 29 November 2006 (GMT).

Thanks for the info Chief! --Darrendeng 09:40, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WHIPS

Hi, Rich Farmbrough. Thank your for your correction at "WHIPS"

Could you please explain me the meaning of "Ced Date fragments". To avoid this error in the future I must understand the whys.

Thank you.Randroide 11:05, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

O.K. Copy that, specially the part about the dates linking. Thank you, Rich Farmbrough. Randroide 11:13, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikifying dates

Is it really necessary to wlink every single date in an article, no matter how insignificant it may be to the article? Two of the three you recently did in Bitis arietans are only for when I accessed certain external links and have nothing to do with the article. No offense, but isn't this overdoing it a bit? (PS -- You can answer here, as I've temporarily added your talk page on my watchlist.) --Jwinius 11:53, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

When a date includes a day and month, user formatting preferences ("my prefernces" "Date and time") will be invoked by linking it, e.g. [[10 April]] can show as either April 10 or 10 April, and hence should almost always be linked. Any associated year should also be linked viz: 10 April 1962 because the software can display this as 1962-04-10 for those who have their date preferences set to ISO. In due course a feature may be added to MediaWiki allow a different syntax from linking to do this. Rich Farmbrough, 12:21 29 November 2006 (GMT).
That's swell, but what's the point? I can understand wlinking the date of a famous person's birth or death, for example, since that might be significant to some readers ("Oh, look: he died on the same day as such-and-such was born!"), but why wlink something so arbitrary as the date that an external link was accessed? --Jwinius 12:44, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
It's not the linking that's important, it's the formatting. (The wikisyntax currently overloads the double square brackets operator. The developers have been asked to provide a different syntax.) If you have your date preferences set you will see all these dates in your preferred format, otherwise you will see a mish-mash of formats. Rich Farmbrough, 14:05 29 November 2006 (GMT).
Oops! Sorry, I wasn't reading you right at first, but I do now. I'll be sure to follow your example from now on. Cheers! --Jwinius 02:27, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] SmackBot behavior

You should change SmackBot to use {{linkless}} instead of {{orphan}} because 'orphan' redirects to 'linkless'. — Chris53516 (Talk) 21:44, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Here's a strange Edit summary recently entered:

(diff) (hist) . . m Thermite; 13:43:52 . . SmackBot (Talk | contribs) (Proj album changes/Fmt track listing/Date fragments delinked &/or gen fixes using AWB)

It sure doesn't look like it corresponds to the change made. FYI. — EncMstr 22:04, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dating tags

Acknowledge message. Thanks. --meatclerk 22:01, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Error but not obvioisly bad enough to stop Smackbot for.

See [78]. There are two issues here 1) I'm not sure it should be subbing in talk space 2) it certainly shouldn't be subbing in when it has nowikis around it. JoshuaZ 07:51, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Rich Farmbrough, 07:54 1 December 2006 (GMT).
I've rolled back a few more that I saw in the bots recent contribs. All with the nowiki template around them. JoshuaZ 07:56, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks again. Should avoid nowikis now. Rich Farmbrough, 07:57 1 December 2006 (GMT).
Note that some of them may have the nowikis slightly farther away from the template in question such as this one. JoshuaZ 07:59, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
Actually, looking at some of the recent ones I had to revert (I've only looked at a small fraction of its edits) it may make sense to only do it on talk pages if the tag is in the header. (see for example [79] ). Last comment about your bot. I promise. JoshuaZ 08:03, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
Hmm. All live transclusions should get something done to them so that they eventually get human attention, even if that is to "nowiki" them. And I think all the nowiki's are being avoided, that example would be just before I made the change. Your comments are most welcome, as they have improved what's being done. Rich Farmbrough, 09:27 1 December 2006 (GMT).

There was an edit made to Talk:Gaussian integral at 7:59 GMT today that broke both these rules (talk space and nowiki). That is, after your comment at 7:57; dunno if you've fixed it since. Cheers, Lunch 22:35, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, in future I'll only be looking at pages where the template is invoked so less likely to be a problem, but I will test to see if theres a bug, or just a timing or other mistake by me. Rich Farmbrough, 22:52 1 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Date linking

Hi. I wondered if you would be interested in contributing to User talk:Guinnog/date linking? --Guinnog 18:24, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Subst tags

Sorry, I was told 2 weeks ago by another editor to use the subst tag to reduce strain on the servers and prevent blanking of the tag. Would you be so kind as to point me towards a resource that explains when and when not to use them? Cheers. L0b0t 21:18, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Always use it for prod and afd, or they won't work properly. Wikipedia:Template substitution explains the pros and cons, reasons to subst and not, and gives lists of "always, sometimes and never". Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 21:24 1 December 2006 (GMT).
Thanks, I will learn it and follow it in future. Cheers. L0b0t 21:35, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ISSN link question

Please see my entry at Talk:International_Standard_Serial_Number; I'm hoping you can figure out a fix! :-) I was getting ready to fix some ISSNs and ISBNs, and now realize I have a headache, and better not do so now. Regards, Keesiewonder 14:25, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

See my response on the above talk page for a temporary ISSN checker you can use. EdJohnston 18:19, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
Excellent! Somehow, I knew you'd come up with something. Thank you! Keesiewonder 22:34, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Smackbot and {{notability}} / {{importance}}

You chose an unfortunate moment to start date-tagging these; per this discussion, I'd been back-sorting these by month of original tagging, and had it down to a remainder, almost all from November... which have now been tagged as December, which will now be rather large by the time the month is out. Perhaps I should have mentioned this earlier... Alai 17:06, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about that. I've just done something similar for "unreferenced", although more rough and ready (I missed the nuance of cl_timestamp). We could move all the dec category to nov fairly simply, what do you think? Rich Farmbrough, 19:37 2 December 2006 (GMT).
P.S. Annoying that the dump has failed yet again. Rich Farmbrough, 19:39 2 December 2006 (GMT).
I didn't think of using the timestamp myself, until Radiant suggested it. I was thinking of something along those lines: but don't do them all, I have a list of the category contents from early-ish on Dec 1st, I'll use that. Alai 19:41, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for doing APUG. Rich Farmbrough, 19:46 2 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Peanuts on popular culture

Thanks for your prompt follow-up on the glitch, and your advice on this article. I removed the unreferenced tag and gave my reasons. Someone put it back and gave his or her reasons. Good enough! At least it no longer exists in am informational vacuum. Have a great day! Karen | Talk | contribs 23:21, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] {{admin}}

Please take a look at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#WP:LA. Cheers, NoSeptember 08:16, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Importance Template

Thanks![80] I thought it should take a date field, but I couldn't remember the syntax and {{importance}} doesn't specify how. I'll have to remember that one. -- JLaTondre 15:26, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

My pleasure, but don't worry, various bots date such monthly maintenance templates. Rich Farmbrough, 15:28 3 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] ISBNs and the SmackBot

Please take a look at this edit: It breaks the info box for Discworld. I don't know if you should exception it or if you can write the code to see it as not an ISBN to fix. Thanks, Dimitrii 02:14, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Health Wiki Research

A colleague and I are conducting a study on health wikis. We are looking at how wikis co-construct health information and create communities. We noticed that you are a frequent contributor to Wikipedia on health topics.

Please consider taking our survey here.

This research will help wikipedia and other wikis understand how health information is co-created and used.

We are from James Madison University in Harrisonburg, Virginia. The project was approved by our university research committee and members of the Wikipedia Foundation.

Thanks, --Sharlene Thompson 18:04, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia Research Project Results

The results from my research project are available User:Nonplus/survey. Nonplus 13:37, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Rich Farmbrough, 13:40 5 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Signpost updated for December 4th.

The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery



Volume 2, Issue 49 4 December 2006 About the Signpost

Arbitration Committee elections open The Seigenthaler incident: One year later
Wikimedia celebrates Commons milestone, plans fundraiser Wikipedia wins award in one country, reported blocked in another
News and notes: Steward elections continue, milestones Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:50, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Linking years when the day/month is present

I see you fixed my date formatting at Christopher Spencer (author) from [[May 25]] 1969 to [[May 25]] [[1969]]. I thought wikilinking the year was always optional, but I've discovered I was wrong. Has it always been like that, or has it changed? Regards, Mr Stephen 15:05, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Certainly for a very long time. It is of course only a guideline. Rich Farmbrough, 15:06 5 December 2006 (GMT).
Thanks for the information. Memo to self: read the MOS again. Regards, Mr Stephen 16:12, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Formatting

Hi Rich. I'm wondering why you reformat edits, specifically by removing the spacing in headings. -- Fyslee 17:11, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Just how I (and a lot of editors) prefer it. Rich Farmbrough, 22:32 5 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Minor Smackbot problem

In this edit on Washington State Route 240, obviously the word Reference should have been capitalized, and I have no preference for the placement of the stub category -- but in moving it to the bottom, you added an extra line of whitespace. Reverted here.

Like I said... it's a very minor Smackbot problem. ;-) -- NORTH talk 00:19, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. This is standard WP:AWB behaviour if "general fixes" is selected, presumably for readability of the wikisource. As you say, very minor one way or the other. Rich Farmbrough, 09:45 9 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Your move of Oregon Superintendent of Public Instruction for capitalization

Just double checking, since the applicable MOS article states:

When referring to a specific office, generally use uppercase: "The British Prime Minister is Tony Blair."

It then waffles by adding that other manuals indicate lower case in the absence of the article, "the," and does not seem to contemplate the use of the title of an elected official as the title of an article at all.

So, I looked for guidance by titles of correlary articles elsewhere in Wikipedia (e.g., California Superintendent of Public Instruction), and styled accordingly.

I'm new enough at this that I am certainly not making a protest. I am just wondering if there an amplified version of the MOS somewhere that might address this issue more fully, so that I can avoid titling articles in a manner which requires such moves in the future. -- J-M Jgilhousen 10:42, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

You may very well be right. I wasn't asking for a revert, simply clarification. I am attempting to at least appear educable. You know, old dogs, etc. -- J-M Jgilhousen 10:48, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pacific Western University

Was this an AWB edit? Either way, it's not wise to perform such edits on protected pages, particularly those protected as Office Actions. Chick Bowen 23:09, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, just saw that you'd posted about this on the talk page first. Even though you got no response from Danny there, I'd still say in future it would be best to avoid such edits. Chick Bowen 23:12, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
Well, common sense says that it's OK to make the edit, paranoia says don't. WP runs on a bit of both! But PWU was the only article on the whole of WP with an undated tag of that kind, so as the change was non-substantive I went ahead. However it does leave the situation with these Office actions as very unsatisfactory, even if understandable to some extent. Rich Farmbrough, 23:17 6 December 2006 (GMT).
I understand what you mean about paranoia, but my thinking is that the best way to avoid debate about what counts as a substantive edit is not to edit them at all. Yes, I agree that the whole situation is unsatisfactory, but there seems to be an agreement (one that Danny has enforced rather strenuously) that WP:Office is the only policy to which IAR doesn't apply. I meant my comment originally solely as advice, though, take it or leave it. Chick Bowen 23:29, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
Yes, taken in that spirit. Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 23:37 6 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Template parameters, named vs. ordinal

Hi, be careful with these. Some use "date=" and some use {{{1}}} and some are undated. While it would proabably be good to make them all "date=" it would need to be planned carefully. Your recent changes to Template:Unreferencedsect threw hundreds of articles out of their dated categories. Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 14:58 7 December 2006 (GMT).

Ok. Thanks for catching that. Are named parameters generally favored over ordinal ones? While it is a bit more work for the user, named parameters will allow for easier modification to the template (an important thing in a wiki), and don't cause problems with meta-templates which take multiple parameters, like {{tlx}} and {{tlrow}}. Hmm. -- PatrickFisher 15:06, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
The answer is, as usual, "it depends". But with these cleanup templates a number of bots add the date parameter, so the extra work is negligable. And having the bots do it means you don't get things like "Devember" as I typed earlier today, or more subtley "december"- lower case "d". Also if you add a named parameter to a template and it is unused, it doesn't matter, as you hint above. Rich Farmbrough, 15:17 7 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Countess de Castiglione

Hi

I was just wondering why this article may need a "cleanup"...

Thx for answering

Sincerily Paris75000 21:30, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I didn't tag it, merely dated the tag. However Ihave attempted to cleanup links, dates, capitalisation etc. Have a look. Rich Farmbrough, 21:40 8 December 2006 (GMT).


Thx, best greetings, Bye Paris75000 21:45, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Doing something about the ridiculous date autoformatting/linking mess

Dear Rich—you may be interested in putting your name to, or at least commenting on this new push to get the developers to create a parallel syntax that separates autoformatting and linking functions. IMV, it would go a long way towards fixing the untidy blueing of trivial chronological items, and would probably calm the nastiness between the anti- and pro-linking factions in the project. The proposal is to retain the existing function, to reduce the risk of objection from pro-linkers. Tony 14:37, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, left out the link:

Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_(dates_and_numbers)#A_new_parallel_syntax_for_autoformatting_dates —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tony1 (talkcontribs) 14:50, 9 December 2006 (UTC).

[edit] SmackBot and Linkless/Orphan tag

I see that SmackBot is currently changing {{linkless-date}} to {{orphan}}. Given that Template:Orphan redirects to Template:Linkless, wouldn't it be more consistent to change it to {{linkless}}?

Yours for nitty-gritty details.... --Alvestrand 19:29, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Would be nice to be consistent. Where should the debate be held? --Alvestrand 21:06, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category:All articles lacking sources

I asked for the rationale for this category at Template talk:Unreferenced#Category:All articles lacking sources. Seeing that you created the category, I thought that you would probably be able to answer my question. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 02:57, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I've answered at Template talk:Unreferenced#Category:All articles lacking sources. Rich Farmbrough, 21:55 10 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] The List

Hey Rich,

On the list you have User:Template namespace initialisation script listed as a regular user. Isn't this a bot? Firsfron of Ronchester 05:15, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, how strange... Rich Farmbrough, 11:28 10 December 2006 (GMT).
Ah User:Portal namespace initialisation script is flagged as a bot, but not User:Template namespace initialisation script. Mystery solved. I have manually changed it. Rich Farmbrough, 11:40 10 December 2006 (GMT).
See also [81] Rich Farmbrough, 11:43 10 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Can u help

Rich, it is probably unfortunate for u sometimes looking like someone who knows wiki procedure, but here's a query. (It may be outside yr ambit, but who to ask?) I made a very dumb edit referring to Russian "looting" of the BMW factory, (what was i thinking? aaaargh!), in a Cossack motorcycle article in the early hours one night. Because of my involvement, I'm a bit close to it to be safe talking to this guy that has made this post on the MotorcyclingProject discussion page. (IP address only). Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Motorcycling#Vandalism by POV and misinformation I do not want to do the wrong thing here. Seasalt 13:46, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Do you have any advice on dealing with this? Is this sort of post permitted? Seasalt 13:46, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, you could take it as a personal attack, or lack of [{WP:AGF]]. Or, if you can manage it, leave it alone. As an uninvolved party assuming good faith, it is clear to me from that talk page that your intentions were honorable, and that the IP has overreacted a bit, and not quite managed to calm down. Bottom line, the article is fixed, no-one is likely to think the worse of you (apart from the anon, possibly, whcih you can't do much about), forget it and move on. Rich Farmbrough, 14:01 8 December 2006 (GMT).
Special:Contributions/203.206.103.188 has now registered as Special:Contributions/M-72 and has continued his argument. He looks like a stayer. There are no admins or third parties who limit this? He seems to have good Russian motorcycle knowledge, looking at his posts so far, but WP:AGF does not seem to register. You will possibly be exasperated with me for asking, but if he is going to persist it is going to be very difficult. Seasalt 13:15, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you Rich. Just seeing a couple of posts made me feel better anyway. If I am lucky, he will read the Five Pillars, and ease up. Much appreciated. Seasalt 11:39, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rest

[edit] Have a rest

The Xing aknowledges your hard work, and offers you a rest in his garden.

The Xing 19:15, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Anon IP

Personal attacks have no place on Wikipedia, and you will get blocked in short order if you persist with them. Rich Farmbrough, 20:13 10 December 2006 (GMT).

I believe, by showing up in my talk page, you are referring to NetSnipe's remarks to me of 'fucking care' and 'you are paranoid', right? And if not, why not? 81.131.101.50 20:16, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ISBN vs. AWP

Hi Rich, I'm a relative new player who has a high interest in authors, book cataloging, ISBN tracking and such. I happened to go by the Margaret Truman page a bit ago and noticed that the ISBN groups on her page were messed up. I have researched and installed the ISBN data onto a number of author pages and living with a retired librarian I think I have a pretty good understanding of this system. In looking at the history on the Truman page I saw that you had done some formatting of the ISBN's using AWP. I just looked at the page on AP and just briefly reviewed it. I also have a copy of the work that I did on that page originally. My first (and only, at this point) is that AWP doesn't like ISBN. It has misaligned the ISBN structure on the Truman page. Please review the ISBN page on Wiki. Currently there is a 10 digit layout consisting of the following: X-XXX-XXXXX-X In 2007 it expands to 13 digits of X-XXX-XXXXXXXX-X. Both systems use a 4 block group. The main change is the expansion of the third block. I don't understand what AWP did but in some cases it changed the size of the 2nd data block and even eliminated the dashes. The main problem that I see is that the publishing industry has jumped the gun and started putting the 13 digit assignments in their new books but their structure is all over the spectrum and one publisher even created a five block data structure. For the time being, I would recommend taking a "wait and see" approach. You cannot rely on LoC (Library of Congress) since they use a straight number string with no dashes. The Wiki standard for ISBN states that a post-2007 ISBN might be four OR five data blocks. Additionally, there is no requirement for a publisher to assign an ISBN to a book or display it, HOWEVER, Bookstoreswill only deal with books bearing an ISBN. Isn't that just precious? And then there is the EAN barcode. I will re-correct the Truman page but I thought I'd let you know about this issue. Have a great day. 66.242.209.79 22:28, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello Rich and Ekotkie. I disagree with User:Ekotkie's recent changes to Margaret Truman, and I'm concerned he believes the publisher code is always 3 digits long. I replied at more length on his talk page [82]. EdJohnston 20:31, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sorry

Sorry, I realized too late that I wasn't logged on for my last msg. Ekotkie 22:30, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] date-links

Rich—I agree entirely with your comments in their own frame, but I'm very concerned that adding any detail beyond the current minimalist approach will sink the push with the developers. I even hope that they don't get back to us and ask for input on these, because that will invite a huge debate on their patch, and possibly capsize the request.

This is a fear that I've acquired from reading the previous attempt at Bugzilla, and from comments by MattWrigth et al. Keeping it minimalist also, in a way, empowers the developers, which is my strategy. Make it easy for them and make them feel in control.

Since whatever change they make should be relatively easy for them, technically, my strategy would be to go with it and make another request for improving the functionality down the track, when people have seen that "hey, it can be changed; it can be better". Further changes won't mean undoing much, I'm thinking.

What do you think?

Tony 00:31, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for December 11th.

The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery



Volume 2, Issue 50 11 December 2006 About the Signpost

From the editor: New feature
Board of Trustees expanded as three new members are appointed Wikimedia Foundation releases financial audit
Arbitration Committee elections continue, extra seat available Female-only wiki mailing list draws fire
Trolling organization's article deleted WikiWorld comic: "Redshirt"
News and notes: Fundraiser plans, milestones Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:16, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Greeting, fellow bot operator

I see that you are listed as a fellow bot operator. I have been regorganising the wikipedia bot help pages to try and provide more information for those who want to learn how to create a bot or have quesitons relating to how to run a bot on wikipedia (more nuts-and-bolts than the existing policy page, which deals with what you are allowed to do, not how you would go about doing it). I've made a start at Wikipedia:Creating_a_bot but could do with any feedback at all. I could do with any programming-language specific information that you can provide as well as any suggestions for improving the article. I'm leaving this same message with 5 other bot operators, to encourage them to pass on the knowledge we have learned developing our bots to the "next generation" of wikipedia bot-builders! Cheers - PocklingtonDan 15:22, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Glad you liked the look of PockBot. Unfortunately, it seems someone might have blocked it at the moment, its having difficulty writing its results to wikipedia despite its code remaining unchanged. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by PocklingtonDan (talkcontribs) 17:08, 12 December 2006 (UTC).

[edit] bug in PocKleanBot

It shouldn't have written more than once. Dammit, a bug. Please feel free to block until I can fix this. - PocklingtonDan 19:44, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] No hurry for this

You might like to consider replacing: "You should use this section to discuss possible resolution of the problem and achieve consensus for action. Only when there is a consensus that the article is now cleaned up should you then de-list it by deleting the cleanup tag from the article, this causes the article to drop off the monthly cleanup-needed list page." with: "You can use this section to discuss possible resolution of the problem and achieve consensus for action. When there is a consensus that the article is cleaned up please remove the cleanup tag from the article."

Main reason, asking and offering instead of instructing, some wpians are very sensitive... Also no need to explain what the tag does, they probably either understand in a broad way, or don't care about the details. Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 20:01 12 December 2006 (GMT).

Thanks, done now. I have also found and fixed the bug that made it able to write twice tot he same user's tlak page, it was due to an earlier change when I went from pringting the templates to subst:ing them - PocklingtonDan 20:20, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hi Dan

Don't be downhearted. Rich Farmbrough, 21:01 12 December 2006 (GMT).

Thank you, but I have withdrawn the bot, it's too much hassle! - PocklingtonDan 08:32, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WPCD

Hi Richard. Any chance you could run smackbot over http://2007-wikipedia-cd-selection.fixedreference.org/wp/index/alpha.htm and see if you can pick up any obvious recent added grafiti? --BozMo talk 17:12, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Mainly to check and get rid of obscenities (or tell me if they are part of an article) plus signature grafiti ;eqokgnw;evn type. --BozMo talk 18:12, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

OK thanks. I was given a bad steer then! --BozMo talk 21:05, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] References

Or more strictly references. There is a system that means the references (footnotes, whatever) can be entered in the text body, and show up together where <references /> is entered. So to edit the references just edit the whole article if it's short. Or clcik on the ^ next to the ref in question, whcih will take you to the place it occurs in the article. There is another system where the text is at the end, but it's used less now. Rich Farmbrough, 19:40 13 December 2006 (GMT).

Hi Rich, I dabbled a bit tonight with that ^ business and it worked like a dream. Wish I had known that earlier as I would have wiped out a few more faulty ISBN's I am puzzled a bit by the fact that in some cases, doing a full page edit doesn't always give you the data for reference items. I will stick with this other way when I need it. Thanks for the tip. BTW, did you use a bot to run that ISBN check in the first place? Did it install those "too long/too short templates? Nice touch. Going cross-eyed doing on-screen hunts for those templates. Lots of work ahead.Ekotkie 07:20, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Hi Ed, yes I used my bot account User:SmackBot. I started out removing ":" from "ISBN:" and it snowballed. I've just improved the regular expressions to label checksum errors, so I'm doing another run. (Previously I could only label the article as a whole.) I'm considering migrating ISBNs to 13 digits, but I know there would be a lot of disagreement about such a move. Rich Farmbrough, 09:23 14 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Update on previous findings about published-invalid ISBNs

Hello Rich. I felt that your Talk page deserved to have the latest info about published-invalid ISBNs. Rather than make edits to your archive page for 5 Sept 2006, here are some previous items, copied over and updated with new info.

2-10-4. Jack Farrell, 'North American Steam Locomotives: the Berkshire and Texas Types'. The ISBN originally given in WP was 91-571-3151-2, which is invalid. It seems most likely to be a copying error, rather than published invalid. (Can't be sure without seeing a physical copy of the book). I updated the WP article with the correct ISBN, 0-915713-15-2.

A Certain Woman, by Areo Takishima, published 1978. Now marked in WP as 'No ISBN available'. Originally published with ISBN 0680082377, which is invalid. The Library of Congress still has it entered under the bad ISBN and even finds it by that number using an ISBN search.

I'saka language lists 'I'saka grammar' by Mark Donohoe and Lila San Roque, published in 2004. Now marked as 'No ISBN available'. WP originally gave the ISBN 0-85883-554-4, which is invalid. No replacement for the bad ISBN is currently available. LOC lists the book in its catalog, but does not given an ISBN for it, and MARC offset 020 is an empty field.

Ahmad al-Alawi lists a book by Johan Cartigny, 'Cheikh Al Alawi. Documents et temoignages.' Listed in the Univ of Michigan catalog with ISBN 0290529021, which is invalid. Now marked as 'No ISBN available'.

Ajahn Sobin S. Namto lists a book called 'Insight meditation: practical steps to ultimate truth'. The WP editor who created the page says ISBN 947-8357-85-6 is printed in the book, which is invalid. Now marked as 'No ISBN available'. Comment left in Talk page.

Rose: A color of darkness, by Amon Liner. Published with the invalid ISBN 0-932112-09-2 printed in the book. Since then it has been re-issued with a valid ISBN, namely 0-932112-09-9. The WP article has been updated with the new number.

A Google search for the phrase 'Cancelled ISBN' also comes up with this hit: [83], which cites the book Andrew Wilton, 'Journey through the Alps', with 'cancelled ISBN' 3856347756. This book is found in the LOC but with no ISBN listed.

I had previously surmised that the Library of Congress was actually attempting to track good and bad ISBNs for the same book, using the terminology 'cancelled ISBN', but the records I have kept are not good enough to document any actual cases. Certainly the LOC do not seem to filter out bad ISBNs when you search, and in some cases they still deliver book records under their original bad ISBN, which is something that booksinprint.com and abebooks.com admirably refuse to do. Those libraries and services that overtly flag bad ISBNs are truly the most customer-friendly long-term, because not knowing you have a bad ISBN is just storing up trouble for the future. Unfortunately worldcat.org won't flag a bad ISBN and just tells you the book is not found. You still need to use isbn.org/converterpub.asp in case of doubt. EdJohnston 03:06, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

This is a trivial edit to delay Werdnabot's archiving of the bad ISBNs from your Talk page for a few more days! I suppose I could go ahead and start maintaining my own list of bad ISBNs as a sub-page, or even put it in Wikipedia space. EdJohnston 18:01, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Most copied to Category talk:Articles with invalid ISBNs . Rich Farmbrough, 12:55 14 December 2006 (GMT).
Thanks for finding a good place for the info! EdJohnston 16:50, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ISBN page

Do you mind if I go through your list of duff ISBNs and strike out/delete those which have already been done? I was proposing in the first place to split it into more manageable sections. If you're intending to update it any time soon, would it be better if I waited for you? TIA HAND —Phil | Talk 17:27, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Go for it, but not if it's too much work, the new run will identify bad checksums in the article. Rich Farmbrough, 19:59 14 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Extra job for Smackbot

Apropos of the above, I notice that Smackbot has been doing a sterling job formatting ISBNs with proper hyphenation. However, I don't think the poor dear is noticing a rather annoying (and to me rather disturbing) bodge which seems to have sprouted up. There is at least one user who seems to think that  [[Special:Booksources/0441008534|ISBN 0-441-00853-4]]  is better than simply  ISBN 0-441-00853-4 , and Smackbot doesn't seem to notice this. I have checked with Tim Starling who seems to think there is no danger of the magic word ceasing to work any time soon. I was wondering whether Smackbot could be persuaded to remove the annoying extra layer of crud as part of its work? In the meantime, would you be amenable to sharing the AWB specs you are using for the ISBN stuff, which look to be pretty awesome. TIA HAND —Phil | Talk 17:44, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Answered on user talkp page, essentially saying yes. Rich Farmbrough, 13:12 15 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Delete some bad ISBNs as an experiment?

Rich, do you think User:Shantavira's suggestion might have some merit? (from [84]). The invalid ISBNs might simply be deleted, with an appropriate comment. We could try that out, for a sample of 20 bad ISBNs from the list, and see if the regular editors are moved to do something reasonable in response? There is a hidden benefit, that bad ISBNs are probably more common in less-used references that may not be all that important in Wikipedia. Of course, data is needed to prove this is wise. What do you think? EdJohnston 22:26, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Commented on the cat talk page. Rich Farmbrough, 09:36 15 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Bot double insertion of ISBN check template

See this edit on Overseas Chinese, inserted a {{Please check ISBN}} when one was already there. Thanks cab 00:29, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll need to smarten this up a bit. Rich Farmbrough, 09:35 15 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] A couple of ISBNs which appear to be valid

SmackBot has tagged a couple of ISBN's in articles on my watchlist in the last few hours which appear to be valid. See Robert Muldoon and Moeraki. I can find these books in the National Library of New Zealand (via Special:Booksources) and in other New Zealand libraries using this ISBN. Is it possible that not all ISBN's adhere to the checksum rules that SmackBot is using?-gadfium 00:52, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Discussion at User_talk:Gadfium.

[edit] SmackBot edit of Flow-based programming (FBP)

FBP has (had) 4 sections all referring to other technologies which all have articles in Wikipedia, e.g. Jackson Structured Programming (JSP). I had titled each section with an article reference. SmackBot removed the square brackets, so now I have to change the wording a bit to work the article references back in, e.g. change "This methodology" to "The Jackson Structured Programming methodology". a) This seems unnecessary, although I don't mind doing it if it is really necessary, but b) People don't really like me making changes to this article as I am the inventor, so there is a risk of WP:COI, etc. Do you have recommendations? Thanks. Jpaulm 03:18, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

The reason you should avoid links in headers is that it creates problems linking to sections e.g. Flow-based programming#concepts. However I have reverted that particular change. Rich Farmbrough, 08:06 15 December 2006 (GMT).
The best way is probably to use the {{main}} template instead of putting links in the section header: see Flow-based programming now. HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 09:01, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
Or possibly {{details}} Rich Farmbrough, 09:55 15 December 2006 (GMT).

Thanks, everyone! That's very pretty! I wasn't aware of the {{main}} template. Thanks for your help! Jpaulm 15:11, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] technical request

Rich—Thanks for your support on this matter, which means a lot from someone who's way up there in that list of who's done the most edits. I agree with your concerns about date-ranges and the blessed comma, but let's see if we can KISS (keep it simple, stupid) for the moment. We may be in a better possition to lobby for further changes subsequently. Image:Smile.png Tony 03:37, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Yep, more than happy with that. Rich Farmbrough, 13:11 15 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] SmackBot edit to quadratic programming

A recent edit by SmackBot was just to insert a single space between the interwiki language links and a stub tag (and nothing else). If you can, please change the bot's behavior so that it doesn't make such trivial edits. Thanks, Lunch 02:47, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, this shouldn't have happened, and I will try not to let it happen again. Rich Farmbrough, 08:24 15 December 2006 (GMT).

Okey dokey. No problem. Lunch 16:48, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mergeinto broken by your bot

This edit to One-form broke a mergeinto tag. -- David Woolley 17:23, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, it's likely this was manually assisted mistyping. Rich Farmbrough, 10:09 16 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Fundamental Analysis

All the ratios you put in the discussion page at fundamental analysis are all at financial ratios. There is a link on the page already Retail Investor 02:32, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I noticed there were some ratios, but the reason I put the info there was that the place I moved it from was redirected there, with the old article left in place. Generally this represents an unfinished merge, and it is important under GFDL to attribute work. If this wasn't merged into the FA article, and is of no use elsewhere (unless it was copied there) then remove it from the talk page by all means. Rich Farmbrough, 10:09 16 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] ISBN

Hi, According to Amazon.co.uk it is 0-7110-2521-5. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Portrait-Cheshire-Lines-Committee-Dyckhoff/dp/0711025215 Rgds, Rich Farmbrough, 15:22 16 December 2006 (GMT).

Rich. I've checked again. Either Amazon are wrong (could it be?) or it is a misprint in the book. Best wishes. Peter I. Vardy 15:26, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
Hi Peter, very occaisionally the book has the wrong number on it. See Category talk:Articles with invalid ISBNs. this wuld appear to be one of those. Rich Farmbrough, 17:57 16 December 2006 (GMT).
Rich. You're right again! Fascinating. I'm pretty new to Wikipedia and learn a lot every day. Happy Christmas. Peter I. Vardy 22:58, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ISBN formatting use

Hi Rich Farmbrough. I often come across articles with an edit by your trusty bot which reformats ISBNs, for example, from 0871141027 to 0-87114-102-7:

SmackBot (Talk | contribs) (ISBN formatting/gen fixes using AWB)

It appears to make little difference to the WikiMedia magic ISBN keyword. Is there value in reformatting the number? — EncMstr 20:06, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

ISBNs should be thirteen characters long until the end of 2006 - according to the standard: nine digits, three dashes or spaces and one check digit than can be a digit or X. However wiki magic that makes ISBNs linkable will not work with spaces so we have to use the dash or close the characters up. Therefore I remove ":"s between the "ISBN" and the "number", and hyphenate the ISBN according to the rules published by the International ISBN Agency[85]. This means
  1. Wikimagic will now work
  2. The ISBN is correctly formatted
  3. language area and publisher can be told from the ISBN together with other hints.
At the same time I flag any invalid ISBNs, there are currently over 1600 articles in this category. Rich Farmbrough, 20:30 16 December 2006 (GMT).
You mean *ten* characters long, right? EdJohnston 03:52, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
No, I'm counting the seperators... Rich Farmbrough, 10:56 18 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] where does smackbot get its dash(es)?

i notice i've been wasting your bot's time when i can't find the fully formated isbns, that is dashed into language publisher etc. i add them when i can, but often i have to use a library cat that leaves them out. how does smackbot find the full isbns? (can check here for reply)   bsnowball  11:28, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

The rules can be found here: http://www.isbn-international.org/en/identifiers/List-of-Ranges.pdf. But it's fine to leave it for the bot to fix as well. Rgds, Rich Farmbrough, 12:27 17 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Cathedrals

Thank you for leaving messages re inadequate ISBNs. I've fixed the problems.

--Amandajm 11:50, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Excellent! Rich Farmbrough, 12:29 17 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Smackbot makes typos?

I was quite entertained by this. Smackbot tried to leave a template on a page, but typo'd the template name: diff. I have fixed this one, but I hope it isn't making more.. Telsa (talk) 20:51, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Luckily that was the only one. Probably me typing. Thanks for letting me know. Rich Farmbrough, 22:46 17 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] slamming the lack of botbrain

hey Rich - I hope you know I didn't mean you when I called your bot "brainless" (John Lennon edit summary). I was just being grumpy, because it removed some wikilinks ffrom a heading that I had been trying to preserve. But apparently links in headers are frowned on, and if it isn't your bot it'll be some other bot, so I gave up and incorporated the link into the text which, I have to admit, is probably better anyway. I am sure you have a brain. It's the bot's that I was questioning. (Hey, I'm happier if bots don't have brains - that's entirely too scary to contemplate.) No offense taken, I hope, because none was meant. Tvoz 03:46, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

No problem. Rich Farmbrough, 09:51 18 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] New form for ISBNs?

I've noticed that SmackBot is changing the way the Isbns are listed. Is there a new form? The Isbns I have included in articles are (I thought) properly formatted (see diffs here: [86]

just curious and thanks. Jeffpw 09:37, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi Jeff, the hyphens in ISBNs are not in a fixed pattern, but vary according to the way greater or smaller parts of the range are assigned to different publishers, and indeed different "lanuguage areas". See the ISBN article for more deatils or http://www.isbn-international.org/en/identifiers/List-of-Ranges.pdf for the full hyphenation rules. Rgds, Rich Farmbrough, 09:57 18 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Smack Bot

Hi - I'm trying to work how you write a bot. Would you give me the code for the above bot so I can fiddle? What language is it written in? Triangle e 11:53, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

The software I use is WP:AWB in C# - source and executables on sourcefourge. Some of the XML configuration files I wrote are available at Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Settings in regular expressions. Other frameworks available include pywikipedia in Python, and various bots published in perl. See also Wikipedia:Creating_a_bot and WP:BOT. Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 12:05 18 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Blocking SharedIPEDUs

Please use {{schoolblock}} as your reason for blocking school IPs. Do not use "repeated vandalism" as your reason since it only confounds other users on the same IP address and we get a lot of complaints sent to unblock-en-l from confused staff members. I'd appreciate it if you'd undo all your recent blocks and fix the block reason. Thanks. --  Netsnipe  ►  14:30, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

You could also take the effort to spellcheck your messages if you're not going to use standard blocking templates such as {{test5}} {{test7}} and {{anonblock}}. This example comes across as a bit unprofessional. --  Netsnipe  ►  14:37, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, I hadn't seen anonblock before - I was going to make one, or have standard way of inserting the message. The only problem with anonblock is that it says "currently" disabled - this will become out of date. Rich Farmbrough, 15:44 18 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] using new nobots template but not opt-in - acceptable?

Thank you for your comments during PocKleanBot's recent bot RFA. I'm (manually! no spamming! :-P ) contacting the bot operators and admins who commented on the bot's RFA to find out what their position would be to running the bot obeying the new nobots template but not using opt-in. Would this be acceptable to you or not? I think the nobots template is a great idea and I wish it had been introduced years ago and was more widespread. The only problem I can see running the bot this way is that there's going to be a whole lot of people out there who haven't heard of the nobots template and a few of those more violently opposed to bots adding a message to their tlak page will doubtless get irate just like last time. I would be interested in hearing your comments. - PocklingtonDan 15:25, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User:Pco

OK, she's withdrawn her legal threat, or says she has; wanna unblock her? (I generally don't reverse another admin's actions without consulting.) --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 18:18, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Already done by Jossi, message left last night. Rich Farmbrough, 09:19 19 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Thanks

Thanks, Rich! In terms of who else has been fixing the ISBNs, JesseW comes to mind. He also created the useful Template:OCLC, and has recommended worldcat use. Ekotkie has been helping recently, even after we jumped on him for his first ISBN correction. RainbowCrane started helping in late August after your previous ISBN run and did quite a few, but he's not edited since 19 Oct and I'm afraid he may have left WP. Kevin Breitenstein did a lot of ISBN fixes. I may have overlooked other people who also helped. EdJohnston 02:52, 19 December 2006 (UTC)


Likewise; thanks for noticing Rich.! John Vandenberg 03:30, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for December 18th.

The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery



Volume 2, Issue 51 18 December 2006 About the Signpost

From the editor: Holiday publication
Elections conclude, arbitrators to be chosen Wikimedia Foundation fundraiser opens
WikiWorld comic: "Dr. Seuss" News and notes: Fundraiser plans, milestones
Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:22, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] SmackBot

In one of its ISBN checking sweeps, I see smackbot is putting isbn followed by the corrected number. In some cases where the isbn is in a template this leads repetition of the word isbn, see for example [87]. (It might be easier to fix the template, let me know ;))Tim! 08:14, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

It would be preferable to change the templates, as it would create consistencey both with normal text and most other templates. I already differentiate between Isbn= and isbn=, which is not ideal - these are all traps for future editors. Will you change the template? Incidentally ISBN magic won't accept spaces (although they are valid delimiters - you can see the reason). Rich Farmbrough, 09:31 19 December 2006 (GMT).
OK the developers have made a liar of me, ISBN will accept spaces now, I think this will cause "breakage" due to run on (ISBN 1 123 123141 17/12/2006 for example) but is theoretically good. Rich Farmbrough, 09:34 19 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] About the end of summer

I did some book articles, and the Template:Cite book (edit talk links history) was finicky about taking the dashes (as in wouldn't at all), not to mention the new ISBN13 instead of the soon to be done away with ISBN10. About then, the system software was supposed to start accepting the ISBN13's. Is this an additional update? Are you aware of this template and do you know whether the sub-template for the ISBN within is now taking what I see your talk is filled with comments and questions about. (I ran across an answer you gave here which raised the question.) Thanks -- I'm playing catch up-- had some RL crunch time. // FrankB 08:20, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Cordell, Bruce R.; Jeff Grubb, David Yu (September 2001). Manual of the Planes. Wizards of the Coast. ISBN 798-0-7869-1850-8. 

looks ok? Rich Farmbrough, 10:12 19 December 2006 (GMT).

  • Yeah, thanks-- I jes knew it wasn't ca. end of summer. Pardon the Brain fart. Up too late I guess--I could and should have just tested it myself. // FrankB 15:33, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
    • OH MY! LOL Me thimnks me D&D library is a bit dated--imagine that, being 25+ years old. The sad part, I didn't even see a title I recognize in the template
         ~;-(

      Wonder what I can get on ebay taking bids. Nawh! Be worth even more in another 25! // FrankB 15:43, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
      • People are collecting now - not so much the mainstream stuff, but 1st ed Deities, original, and some other stuff. I recently sold my diplomacy and chat magazines. Rich Farmbrough, 19:00 19 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Marfan Syndrome Article Graffiti Attacks

I have reviewed the history of changes on the Marfan Syndrome article over the past few weeks and have noticed an occasional graffito is written into the article. The vandals perpetrating these attacks usually do it without logging in, thus leaving no contributor trace. I recommend that whenever any of the responsibly acting contributors log in to do some more editing, first look at the most recent edit. If it is an anonymous edit, just revert the article to the previous edit before doing more edits. Leeirons 13:41, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Curious

Hi Rich, Everytime I feel like I'm making headway on ISBN's, more errors show up....((Sigh)) I have been running across a statement "Calculated check digit (X) doesn't match" In a couple cases, when I find the title and ISBN, they are in agreement with what is already there. My sources are Abebooks. Many times I will plug the ISBN into the "search for" and it will error out but I have had some that don't. This gets a bit time consuming with a number of windows opened up. For the most part if the number checks out I cancel the template and press on. That has only happened 3-4 times. I normally can spot the error. Thoughts?? I am tempted to set those aside. I have also found a couple titles that listed 13 digit ISBN's. I have loaded them in lieu of the 10. I don't know who else may be doing this but I don't want to get cross-wise with a process or future step. Any problems with this??Ekotkie 00:49, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

I moved this from your userpage, I figured it was left there by mistake. Cheers KOS | talk 20:03, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks Kos Rich Farmbrough, 23:26 19 December 2006 (GMT).
And my thanks also. I think I was drinking too much coffee and the word "discussion" didn't looked like "User talk". Rich, I can assure you that I only remove templates on those ISBN's that I have corrected. If I can't fix it/find it, I leave it. I was just remarking to myself the other days about how I couldn't seem to get out of the "A's".....haha Abebooks has even been good about finding some of the foreign ones. Some care must be taken since some titles do not appear there exactly as someone has put on a Wiki page. Thanks to many page creators who do leave a good trail of data. It has aided me to a great degree to ensure I am posting even the right version of a book. Rich, the award you have bestowed was way too kind. You need to give one to your Bot. And kindly ask the Bot to slow down a tad......Ekotkie 01:34, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] isbn-check.de support for ISBN-13 is imminent

See Tomas Schild's comment EdJohnston 00:39, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 425 Greatest Books of All Time

As requested by Smackbot, notability has been added. Can template now be removed? Thanks. Pepso 11:50, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, of course. But SmackBot doesn't add the tags, merely dates them. MakeRocketGoNow added the tag. Rich Farmbrough, 14:55 20 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Cleanup

I assume that this robot tagging has to do with eo

To me was truncated. However I can perhaps partially reply: my bot is not generally tagging articles it is mainly dating existing tags to help with the cleanup effort. If that doesn't answer your partly asked question, please drop the rest of the question off at may talk page. Rich Farmbrough, 11:01 20 December 2006 (GMT).
Briefly, it's not clear to me what, if anything, needs to be cleaned up in Nomina Anatomica. Btarski 19:57, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jack Hobbs article ISBN

The bot has flagged an ISBN in a reference in this article as invalid because it only has 9 digits. I took the ISBN from the publication data page of the book, which was published in the UK in 1969. Now it may not be an ISBN at all, as it didn't say that it was, but it certainly looked like one. I see that ISBNs had only begun to be used in the UK a couple of years before, so is it possible that they had not yet acquired the current format? One possiblity is that simply inserting a zero at the start of the number would make it valid, but doing this would be a guess on my part. It might be better simply to delete it. Any thoughts? Thanks. JH 10:46, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

You are right in every important respect. I have added the 0 and removed the tag. It is safe to do this for UK and some US books between about 1968 and 1972, I think. You can test on http://www.isbn-check.com/, or usually find the book on Amazon, Abebooks, Libray of Congress etc. by clicking on the ISBN. Best wishes, Rich Farmbrough, 11:09 20 December 2006 (GMT).
Thsnks for your help. JH 18:09, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Arthur M Young

Hi Rich. Strange one. The above was noted for ISBN correction.(understatement, it had 7 ISBN errors) The bot picked on one title, "The Bell Notes", BUT the page author listed three ISBN's for this entry based on reprints. The bot did not select which one was bad. I have only found one of the references in a correct condition. I can re-write that book reference to reflect the correct entry that I found but kind of hate to do that since only one of three is in error. I can only assume that the page author wanted to give as much reference data as possible. I have noticed that the bot does not always list the faulty ISBN in the template. This info is handy as I can compare the new data against a version of the bad data and see if it was merely an issue of a leading or trailing number that got dropped. In cases where it is not given I typically drop my new data into a blank spot so I can compare.(extra steps) Sometimes there is a radical difference between the bad ISBN and the new data I have found. Correctness, of course, is the order of the day.

Is there some way to indicate when a reviewer has looked at an entry and been unable to resolve a solution. I have no idea how many people are looking at the incorrect ISBN listings. It seems like many could be plowing over the same ground. Have a great dayEkotkie 19:15, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Another example. Arthur Rostron. There is a book listed by author Walter Lord. The book came out in 1955 yet it has an ISBN. Oh, there are reprints of this book that do have ISBN's but the date shouldn't be 1955. EdJohnson recommended using the latest data and I tend to agree but shouldn't that decision come from the page originator? If we follow that idea, we must be assured that a reviewer does, in fact, change/add the date used. There may be something in the 1955 book that didn't get carried through to one that does have an ISBN. Maybe not. I have spent extra time trying to match up dates (where given) with the actual book. Maybe, we should just give the ISBN and also list the associated date.
Rich, the comment location I was hoping for was to put it on the page of CAT INVALID right next to the page title. I don't see how to access that data and am not sure of an appropriate code to put in that area. Putting it in the template will still waste time for folks.Ekotkie 03:12, 21 December 2006 (UTC)Oops...I was logged offEkotkie 03:12, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

It's hard to give a general answer, but A Night to Remember is a popular book that must have sold 50 zillion copies. Also the two articles involved don't have any page references into the book, so it's unlikely they would care if you replace the old ISBN with the number of a current edition. If it was a rare scholarly book, perhaps it would make a difference. EdJohnston 04:32, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] CAT:INVALID

Due to overwhelming popular demand, there is now a shortcut: CAT:INVALID -> Category:Articles with invalid ISBNs. Of course you can type 'cat:invalid' for convenience. Since so many people are fixing ISBNs now, they'll want this :-). EdJohnston 19:23, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mea culpa...

...and many thanks for the tip! Robertissimo 11:06, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reference/s

Re.above plural. Thanks for reassuring me that it was contentious, sometime. I created the page only recently (my first) and did read it on a help page somewhere, not MoS, as you rightly point out. Is there somewhere to advise of inconsistency (yet another) in ref/cite/footnote help pages. Or have I just done so!? Note; to my mind singular is correct and latter 'accepted error' but not worried about it. Do hope citing is improved on wiki, I wasted a lot of time chasing my tail on help pages Best wishes for season Fred.e 16:16, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ISBN - What are you talking about???

  ISBN
  Hi, the first ISBN in the "works" section seems invalid. Are you able to check it? Rich
  Farmbrough 19:02 20 December 2006 (UTC).
  • I have no idea what ARTICLE you are talking about? Can you be more specific? --Ludvikus 20:22, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Corrected as follows:

   * Ovladenie vremenem
   [ed.] Michael Hagemeister
   (Munchen: O. Sager, 1983)
   ISBN 3-87690-231-2  (& not ISBN 3-87690-232-1)

Yours truly, --Ludvikus 22:09, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Benito Mussolini

I've had a look at the April suggestion that this was a copyvio, and it seems to be true. Can we pass belated thanks back to the person who spotted this? Rich Farmbrough, 19:08 21 December 2006 (GMT).

Oh boy, that's crazy. I'll see what I can do. I'm not a OTRS person now, so I'll have to contact someone else to do it. -- Zanimum 21:05, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ISBN Lyman School for Boys

I note that your BOT keeps changing the format of ISBN numbers for some unknown reason, leaving them in an inconsistent state. Could you please tell me what you think the "Correct" format of an ISBN is? Here is an example:
^ a b Miller, Jerome G. (1991). Last One Over the Wall. Ohio State University Press. ISBN 0-8142-0758-8.
^ a b c d e Johnson, Richard B. (2006). Abominable Firebug. iUniverse. ISBN 0-595-38667-9.

They used to be

0-8142-0758-8
0-5953-8667-0
n-nnnn-nnnn-n

Thanks ---LymanSchool 13:19, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

If I may interject, you seem to have the mistaken impression that the number of digits between hyphens should be fixed. That is not how the standard works, and for a good reason. A major publisher will need many more numbers for its books than a small publisher. Also, there are more small publishers than large ones. If the standard assigned equal ranges to each, it wouldn't work. So, the publisher with number 595 is a moderately large publisher, and gets a block of 5-digit numbers to distinguish their books; and the publisher with number 8142 is a moderately small publisher, and gets a block of 4-digit numbers. But wait, there's more. That leading "0" indicates an English-language publication, of which there are an enormous number. More general, we have a country code, with small countries that publish few works having a large code number leaving less room for publisher and item numbers.
Our ISBN article explains a little, and links to an official site that explains in detail. If you want to check the hyphenation, feed the digits to one of the on-line ISBN converters. You will find that "0-5953-8667-0" has an erroneous check digit (the final "0" should be a "9"), and that it should be hypenated as "0-595-38667-9". --KSmrqT 12:51, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Smackbot and uncategorized tag

Smackbot recently tagged The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy as being uncategorized. The article, however, was already in a (stub) category. Was this edit intentional? Simões (talk/contribs) 18:29, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi, ideally it should have added {{uncatstub}}. But, yes, it is intentional. Rich Farmbrough, 00:38 23 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] ISBN querie on Guy Middleton Page

. The ISBN printed on both the cover and the publishing data page of the book is as stated, 0-06-093507-3. I agree that the check digit appears to be 8, but shouldn't the printed number be given? We do not know if the error is in the base number or the check digit. The listing in Amazon gives the same number as in the book.

Excuse me while I jump in here. I just looked at the title and ISBN for this book and I made two minor corrections. In checking the ISBN in Abebooks I found that this is one of thse things that gets updated. Your listed ISBN is against "edition #14 and was put out in 2001" so I added those two points. Were you aware that there is a 2003 edition out (and maybe more)? I think your ISBN is ok.Ekotkie 03:27, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

The copy I have is the 2001 edition, which also gives ISSN of 1066-2712.

DonJay 20:06, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

The problem was actually the other book "The Film Encyclopedia by Ephraim Katz - Published by Collins - ISBN "0-06-074214-0"": Here the ISBN had the check digit from the 13 digit ISBN. I've put the 13 digit one in. Rich Farmbrough, 08:11 23 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] ISBN hyphens

I noticed that SmackBot put hpyphens into ISBNs on History of rail transport in Great Britain to 1830m which is all well and good. However, I'm intigued as to how they are placed.... four ISBNs were changed from to no hyphens to 0-7153-7603-9, 1-898937-42-7, 0-434-98083-8 and 1-84033-077-5 respectively - four different ways of grouping the digits. Is there any deeper significance to the different ways of grouping? Tompw (talk) 22:38, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Yep, the second group of numbers represents the publisher, the system is designed for smaller publishers to get longer ID's (later in the numeric range - say beginning with 7,8 or 9), there are more of these (because they are allowed to be longer) but correspondingly less actual numbers - which is OK because they'll publish fewer books. See ISBN for more detail. Really big publishers (Penguin, Oxford, Cambridge) have the ids 00 to 19. Rich Farmbrough, 08:15 23 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Oops

Hi Rich, I just edited a bunch of "B's" and I wasn't logged in. Sorry.... I have started leaving (cannot find xxxx) statements in the B section. I hope to go back and do the same in the "A's" I finally caught up with that speedy little bot....Ekotkie 03:07, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bot run

OK, the run is done. Why don't you consider making a new area of review and start it by moving all the "A's"left on the current invalid file. I have checked and no new "A's" have shown up. I am now into the "B's". Happy holiday Ekotkie 18:42, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh-oh....all of the A's have changed color back to true blue instead of haze blue (If someone has looked at an item) Any idea why that happened? How can we keep track of our progress?
Would you please put the Invalid ISBN Counter on that page just like the one you are using here on your page?Ekotkie 20:17, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Library of Congress can't find the 13 digit ISBNs

Rich, the Smackbot robot changed the 10 digit ISBNs to 13 digit ISBNs in UK Dispersion Modelling Bureau and in Unit Operations of Chemical Engineering. As a result, one could no longer click on the ISBNs and then look them up in the Library of Congress or other libraries ... whereas one could do that with the 10 digit ISBNs. I don't know how many other articles have had the same change made by the robot. (I reverted the changes made in the above two articles).

That defeats the purpose of including the ISBNs in the book citation template. Please stop the robot from changing to the 13 digit ISBN's until a solution is found to this problem. - mbeychok 18:50, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

I'd concur with this - ten digit ISBNs don't become magically obsolete in a week, they just become superceded, but most of the resources will still expect ISBN-10s. Leaving aside the touchy issue of retroactively renumbering sources, this really doesn't seem to give us much practical benefit other than looking modern... Shimgray | talk | 19:00, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

I've blocked the bot for now as this conversion seems to be registering multiple complaints. Dragons flight 19:36, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

See also: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#The_Smackbot_robot_is_making_ISBN_changes_that_are_no_good. Dragons flight 20:40, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for the barnstar.

I'm on a hiatus from Wikipedia at the momement, generally due to my belief that we here at WP just have too many edits per second per reviewer, but I am happy about my ISBN/OCLC work, so thanks for the recognition. Your ISBN bot work has been certainly useful, too. JesseW, the juggling janitor 08:00, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Traffic

Hi, I have an idea to increase traffic to Wikipedia significantly. Many people are now using Wikipedia as a search engine. Wikipedia's searching has a snag which needs some good coding. There are perhaps more than 1 million misspelled searches being made every day... how do i know? I don't, it could be much more than one million, you find out. My idea, which has probably been thought of before is to supply a - Did you mean Such as Such? - by matching misspelled words and terms to their most relevant article. At present this is in place suggestion for terminology sorting based on relevancy, but not for misspellings. Please let me know what you think, and if you could assist with proposing it. Thanks. frummer 00:52, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

no, i think we need to get rid of redirects. There are a few reasons why. About the server load, whose the man to ask on that? About the algorithm, we can talk more about it once we know, there would be a trail period, i think. Another idea is to integrate a dropdown in the search field so as to enable searches in wikicommons, wiktionary etc in two clicks, similar to ie7's. frummer 09:26, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
? frummer 07:43, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Homelessness article and possible promotion again ?

Hi Rich. Happy Holidays ! I had a question about an addition by an anonymous editor who has posted the material before and it was taken out due to promotional reasons. The user, User: 71.231.50.116 added a section in the Homelessness article on "Ending Homelessness". It might be a promo for the organisation. Thoughts ? The user has been warned already and the material taken out. User talk:71.231.50.116. Best Wishes and Happy Christmas ! --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 19:24, 24 December 2006 (UTC) (talk)

Thanks Rich ! Merry Christmas ! --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 14:07, 25 December 2006 (UTC) (talk

[edit] SmackBot ISBN edits

I've seen several cases where SmackBot found errors in ISBN numbers. In the article it leaves a message "please check ISBN ... too short". For the edit summary, it leaves "ISBN formatting/gen fixes using AWB)". If it is leaving a "please check", I think it would be better to leave a more descriptive edit summary, such as "please check ISBN", so a person will know to look at it. (I fixed a few today.) Bubba73 (talk), 23:35, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi, well done fixing ISBNs. Good idea about the edit summary, I will think about it before the next run. Thanks. Rich Farmbrough, 16:05 27 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] ISBNs & 13 digits

Hi, I see your bot has been making lots of ISBN fixes in pages in my watch list - thanks. Will you be able to automatically change them to the 13 digit versions or do I need to start going through & doing them manually? — Rod talk 21:44, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi Rod, yes in principle it can do it. I'm only 90% sure it's a good idea. If you have some articles suitable for testing the principle it would be a good pace to start. Rich Farmbrough, 21:47 21 December 2006 (GMT).
Why might it not be a good idea - presumably all the library catalogues , booksellers etc will be migrating to the 13 digit version?— Rod talk 08:34, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
Well the start date was 1/1/2005 and an awful lot don't seem to have done it yet, with 9 days to go. We could do with a proper survey. I quote myself...
It seems most European libraries are not accepting 13 digits yet. Compare:
Looking at the Karlsruhe the first returns many hists, the second hardly any
does a little better. Rich Farmbrough, 11:31 18 December 2006 (GMT).
Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 09:19 22 December 2006 (GMT).

OK well if none of the other sources are actually implementing it we could probably sensibly leave it for a while - I only asked because I've just sent a new document to the British Library & it had to have the 13 digit ISBN included.— Rod talk 10:02, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, that's a good sign anyway. I did have a scheme that would have swapped over at midnight - see {{auto isbn}}. Rich Farmbrough, 10:14 22 December 2006 (GMT).
I see you've done one (Robert Dunning) on Charterhouse, Somerset but it doesn't work when you click on the ISBN & go to amazon.co.uk (which I tend to use), for other test on pages I've done many of the refs on you could try Chew Valley or Chew Valley Lake, which are both FA or Chew Stoke, Chew Magna, Kennet and Avon Canal and Mendip Hills which are GA status.— Rod talk 12:50, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
Yes, you're right, all the Amazon's fail, Barnes and Noble, Alibris and Abebooks all work. It's very patchy, and many people seem to be waiting to the last minute. (It's also hard to find a good ISBN for testing - anything popular enough to be world-wide seems to be publishe in many languages/fromats.) I've emailed Amazon. It may be possible (but silly in a way) to re-write book sources to coerce 13 digit ISBNs back to 10, if the right parser functions have been introduced. Anyway, I have done a few hundred articles to seed the collective conciousness, I may just let it trickle away (there are 84,000 ISBNy articles). Rich Farmbrough, 13:48 23 December 2006 (GMT).
Having had some time to think about this more, I'm considering using multiple ISBNs. By providing a 10-digit number we can allow easy entry and verification against what is printed in older books. By providing a 13-digit number we support the new standard. Better still, we support books that have both a hardcover and a softcover edition; these have distinct ISBNs. It's a little cumbersome, but maybe it's worth it. --KSmrqT 12:58, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
On the Chew Valley artcile I've tested "Ekwall, Eilert (1928). English River-Names. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-869119-8" & it fails on both Amazon & Barnes & Noble. The one I had to send to the BL had a different final digit in the 13 digit version as well as the initial 3 added ie 1-86043-399-5 becomes 978-1-86043-399-3 this may be complicating the additions?— Rod talk 14:18, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

I had heard that a new 13-digit ISBN numbers were being introduced, and it's nice that Amazon now supports this new format, but is it really necessary for us to convert all of our existing references that have 10-digit ISBN numbers to 13-digit codes? None of the books I own have 13-digit ISBN numbers, so I'm in favor of leaving those references the way they are. You don't really expect us to convert all of the 10-digit codes, do you? If so, checking for mistakes is going to become that much more tedious. In my opinion, it would be better to do something else, like simply changing the labels for the old codes from "ISBN" to "ISBN-10" instead. --Jwinius 21:15, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

I hope you have consulted widely about this. Old ISBN contain errors and you risk introducing new ones, severing references to obscure citations, that may remain unnoticed. If your advice from librarians (not singular), reseachers, booksellers, et al condones your approach, I will say no more. Your chastising categorising could do with improvement too. Do you focus on what you like, not what you hate on Wikipaedia? A new user, Fred 14:44, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User:SmackBot edits

Hello Rich! Great bot you're running, but I noticed SmackBot making a couple minor errors [88], [89]. See here for a few more. Hope you can figure out what went wrong! Cheers, Dar-Ape 16:32, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, fixed. Rich Farmbrough, 16:36 26 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Reference

Dear Mr Farmborough, Can you please give an explanation to:

... appropriate MoS. I come down on the plural, while I am against computers making number mistakes in onter contrexts, I prefer the consistancy. I also run ...

if there is one. Should I check my 'References library'? Toodles, Fred 16:44, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] SmackBot edit summaries

I was looking through the edit history of an article, and noticed that there's an error in the edit summary: Replace deprecated tmeplate using AWB. As you can proably see by now, template is spelled wrong in the edit summary. Can this be fixed? --GVOLTT 06:41, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for December 26th.

The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery



Volume 2, Issue 52 26 December 2006 About the Signpost

Seven arbitrators chosen Wikipedia classroom assignments on the rise
WikiWorld comic: "Molasses" News and notes: Stewards appointed, milestones
Wikipedia in the news Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:26, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reference and ISBN

No doubt you are working your way through after your wikibreak, thanks for quick reply. I will sleep on all this, but the end user, the reader, reads the first category of the 'better than start' article as containing wrong information. And it does not. See the LISWA site previously forwarded.

But you are attempting to communicate with editors, I presume, in effect, 'There is a mistake here.' Otherwise you would simply remove it. Please remove cat if you haven't already. George Temple-Poole Fred 15:47, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi Fred, I've fixed the ISBN in George Temple-Poole . Rgds, Rich Farmbrough, 15:00 28 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Thakur Sher Singh Parmar

I appreciate your intelligent hardwork n sincerity.No one can doubt your intentions , yet I must say you are unnecessarily making edits and unnecessarily making unrequired comments on Thakur Sher Singh Parmar page.Stop it, please. Amita karpe 14:44, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello, as far as I knoww I havenever commented on Thakur Sher Singh Parmar, although my WP:BOT did date the cleanup tags that were on it. Rich Farmbrough, 14:58 28 December 2006 (GMT).

P.S. I would suggest you choose a username and stick to it. RF.

[edit] History of Pakistan

This page has been blocked due to edit war by Indian contributors rewriting Pakistani history from Indian perspective. It has been blocked for too long. I would like to request that this page be unblocked. Siddiqui 17:12, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks.
Siddiqui 18:11, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ISBN messes

Could you lend an answer to my question on this talk page Wikipedia_talk:List_of_pages_with_Invalid_ISBNs and/or clarify the reason why we have both a list and an category of invalid ISBNs? I've spent a fair amount of time recently cleaning up some ISBNs, and intend to do more as I'm able. I just don't want to do it 'wrong.' Thanks! Keesiewonder 20:43, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

  • Excellent; it is not a trouble for me to remove them once I fix them. Perhaps you can also weigh in on my issue here: Talk:Zeynelabidin_Zinar. I'd like to just replace the ISBN with the OCLC, but would appreciate a second opinion. Thanks! Keesiewonder 21:09, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi, hope you don't mind but I fixed a few of the identified ISBNs by looking them up at the National Library of Australia catalogue, and one at the equivalent Finnish catalogue. Usually it was one digit mistranscribed, or two transposed, that was causing the problem. Orderinchaos78 21:05, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your recent ISBN fixes. Your repaired versions looked OK to me. EdJohnston 22:15, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tantiusques

Noting you made some minor edits to my Tantiusques article got me thinking about what a largely unnoticed and thankless task those sorts of edits are. Converting to metric, and vice versa, is a task I admit I've usually shirked. Therefore, this is a note to say "thanks". Happy New Year. HouseOfScandal 21:22, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] don't take it to heart

Don't take it to heart.I was merely trying to cross check if the mail system works or not by writing to you.I 'm convinced it works ,as I received reply from you.I did not mean it seriously.I had picked up your address randomly, as it didn't look indian.Rest assured I am sticking to my chosen identity. Amita karpe 13:56, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] PGNx Media

Rich Farmbrough,

Please take a look at this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2006_December_30#.5B.5BPGNx_Media.5D.5D

A few months ago, you voted to keep the article because the website had established itself as a notable reviews outlet. If you could please reiterate this vote in the new process, I would be much indebted. Infomanager 21:33, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

  • Thank you! As I asked the other administrator, if you have any suggestions on how to make clearer the notability or focus of the website, I would be extremely thankful! Infomanager 21:47, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Hi Rich. Just a friendly reminder that canvassing is highly controversial and strongly discouraged on Wikipedia. As such, I would encourage you to be careful when participating in debates to which you have been individually invited. Thanks! --Alan Au 09:32, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] SmackBot & K'daai

On 16 December SmackBot fixed ISBN formatting on the references in the K'daai article, which was great. But it also added a wikify tag. I would like a little instruction here. What needs to be done to wikify the K'daai article? Or is it just a vagary of SmackBot? --Bejnar 19:40, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

It is a feature of WP:AWB to tag articles with wikify or uncategorised. The wikify tag is based I believe on the number of wiki-links in the article. If it seems inappropriate, by all means remove it. Rich Farmbrough, 20:56 31 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Unresolvable ISBNs

While I am here, occasionally SmackBot notes a check digit failure in an ISBN. Most of the time, it was my typo, or a leading zero was removed; however occasionally when I check WorldCat for the ISBN it comes back with the same invalid one. My guess is that the original cataloger made the error, and everyone since has copied it. Should I leave the bad ISBNs or should I delete them? --Bejnar 19:40, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Worth chatting with other ISBN hunters (User:EdJohnston comes to mind), I don't have a very strong feeling one way or the other. If you leave it, I would suggest leaving the template, and possibly putting in an HTML comment.

Rich Farmbrough, 20:56 31 December 2006 (GMT).

[edit] Cat:Invalid

Just finished the "C's". Going to take a bit of a breather. Its lonely at the bottom of the pitEkotkie 23:06, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Well done! Rich Farmbrough, 23:37 31 December 2006 (GMT).
Ah ... it's not too, too lonely! I am glad the Cs that you're through with are still tagged, though. I found one that had given you difficulty. Carl Schuch. I have some Os that I'm working on, and will then pass through these Cs. We'll get it done! Keesiewonder 00:11, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
Only 2514 left.... Rich Farmbrough, 00:36 1 January 2007 (GMT).

[edit] "Cannot Locate"

I recognize I am a relative newcomer to WP and to fixing ISBNs. (i.e. please don't bite the newcomers; I'll try to not bite the elders.) However, I have to say I do not particularly like the tendency to insert "cannot locate" after ISBNs that are tagged as being in error. Please see Anatoly Zverev for an example. I trust there is a way to insert this text so it does not appear as part of the article for the basic reader (as opposed to the ISBN hunters/fixers); I think I've already done this myself sometime in the last several weeks. Plus, for those that truly, truly truly cannot be found with a valid ISBN, there are at least three other numbers that can be used and linked to (OCLC, LCCN, ASIN). Please note more times than not, I am finding I am able to find a valid ISBN, though: see this for an example.

I am content that the "cannot locate" items appear to remain tagged as having an invalid ISBN, and am of the type that will come along and relatively quietly really clean them up rather than leave them 97% finished. I certainly am not as fast as other folks at fixing these, so maybe such a work flow, even with the unprofessional looking (to me, anyway) "cannot locate" is perfectly fine. Just thought I'd share my observation on this ... Thanks for your time. And please move this elsewhere if you find it appropriate. Kind Regards, Keesiewonder 13:03, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. Please see my talk page as I've asked an additional thing there ... Keesiewonder 13:23, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
Happy New Year to you too! :-) ... Just one more thing: what is "these" in "these are all cut and paste from articles?" Keesiewonder 13:46, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok; I think I'm on the same page as you now. I must have asked my original question in a thread from another day poorly. I was wondering whether it would be a good idea to store the invalid and/or canceled ISBNs on article talk pages, especially when changing a SmackBot identified ISBN in error to an OCLC. I like the idea of keeping the "bad" ISBN around, but do not want it to get flagged by SmackBot if I store it on an article's talk page for safe keeping. It sounds like you are saying that article talk pages are not processed, so I could optionally store said "bad" ISBNs there w/o triggering SmackBot. I was not (yet) (intentionally) asking about ISBNs flagged on user talk pages ... but, when I am perplexed by this, I will hopefully remember what you've told me today. Regards, Keesiewonder 14:05, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template talk:New

Plz see reply. Template talk:New. Cheers. frummer 21:38, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cannot Find Tags

I have just finished removing all (cannot find) tags from CAT:INVALID pages, A,B,C,D, and that small part of E that I have just started working on. Those were the only ones I worked on. Any use of a tag that I used was to note the absence of a correct ISBN was only intended to flag this error to a user who was looking for a particular reference and might attempt to use one that was in error. It was not to cause heartburn as to the quality of the pages product or the author of the page. I seriously doubt that a typical user will go into edit mode to verify the accuracy of an ISBN, thus, I elevated the comment to the visible area for all to see. This was intended to be a short term solution and would allow others to use additional resources to find and correct the defective ISBN. I am currently using 6 different tools to search out ISBN's. In all honesty I feel the best answer, at this juncture is to just eliminate the errant ISBN and press on. There are over 2000 ISBN that need to be resolved. Let the user seek out his/her own ISBN, if one is even needed. I would rather give the readership an accurate title and author's name then to give them a bogus ISBN.Ekotkie 06:22, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Sounds fine ... I feel we're all essentially saying the same thing albeit in slightly different ways. Keesiewonder 11:58, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
I agree, I won't lose sleep over removal of incorrect ISBNs, or their being left in the "do later" pile. Rich Farmbrough, 12:06 3 January 2007 (GMT).

[edit] Signpost updated for January 2nd, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery



Volume 3, Issue 1 2 January 2007 About the Signpost

Effort to modify fair use policy aborted Esperanza organization disbanded after deletion discussion
WikiWorld comic: "Thagomizer" News and notes: Fundraiser continues, milestones
Wikipedia in the news Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:37, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ASIN template and the A-list

Thanks for the ASIN template. I don't really like ASINs either, and can stop using them if you wish. I like to have it available as a compromise if others dislike removal of a 'bad' ISBN. I have feelers out regarding Argentine rock on the outstanding A list since I was not able to quickly solve it myself. Regards, Keesiewonder 13:26, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Rich! This is the first I've heard of an ASIN template, but since it seems to have been created, would you consider adding a comment about it over on Category talk:Articles with invalid ISBNs? It could help out with difficult books which have no known valid ISBN but can be found in Amazon. EdJohnston 23:47, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi Ed, I am not sure that ASINs are necessary for books. I have found that for most cases, an OCLC was readily found. Note: User:Shimgray/ASIN So far I have only found one book that I could only find an ASIN for ([90]), and in that case, only a http://amazon.fr link displayed the book, making the {{ASIN}} template useless. However if an ASIN is all that someone has, I'm all for them using the {{ASIN}} template so it helps others find the OCLC.
There are many articles that use ASINs. Via google, I quickly found ASINs are in use on WP for books (Raymond Cattell (Books) and Edith Cavell) and audio/video publications (Christopher Parkening, Julian Bream and Patty Larkin). I have no idea about audio/video identification schemes ..., yet. John Vandenberg 01:06, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikilinking dates

Thanks for your input on this topic. If I'm interpreting you incorrectly at [91], please let me know. I'd rather have the dates all wikilinked if that is current policy since, I assume, doing so would help bring an article just one tiny step closer to FA status. Keesiewonder 10:55, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Admin (again)

Perhaps it's time now for it? or what do you say? AzaToth 16:28, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Info on the ISBN-fixing activity now on my user page

Hello Rich. Take a look at the new version of my user page where I tried to summarize the ISBN-fixing activity. Let me know if I missed out on some useful bit of advice for newcomers. So far, there has not been a real project for this work, but it wouldn't hurt if the effort looked a bit respectable, since our changes are sometimes questioned by people who don't know what it's about or why we're doing it. The 'members' of the project are simply the set of people who have been fixing ISBNs lately, using either the list or the category. Please comment if you can think of anything to add. EdJohnston 23:40, 5 January 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Albert Fish

Come back and check the article. I rewrote a lot based on primary sources, and the secondary contemporary reports in the New York Times. Most of the previous article had sensational material from the tabloids of the time, based on speculation, and his own delusional testimony. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 09:25, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Delinking years

In your recent edit to Little Britain you delinked a number of years. I'm interested in your reasoning here. The Manual of Style indicates that there is no consensus when it comes to the linking of bare years. Is there a reason beyond personal preference that you delinked these? Chovain 02:07, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, actually there is consensus to "make only links useful in context" the spectrum of disagreement is about what constitutes "useful in context", and even here there is general agreement that there are too many linked years. In this article the links to 2001, 2003 and 2006 are of little or no use, even links to 2003 in television would be of limited use, as it does not mention the show, nor really provide a context. Rich Farmbrough, 11:47 7 January 2007 (GMT).

[edit] Typos in Chess

Your change of "truely" -> "truly" in Chess was a bad edit. Quotes must retain the original spelling even if anachronistic. 24.177.112.146 07:55, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I realised that, but didn't correct the edit summary. Rich Farmbrough, 10:04 7 January 2007 (GMT).

[edit] Queen Elizabeth Elementary School (New Westminster)

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Queen Elizabeth Elementary School (New Westminster), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. --Eastmain 20:31, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Vis-à-vis has also been proposed for deletion. NickelShoe (Talk) 01:42, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for January 8th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery



Volume 3, Issue 2 8 January 2007 About the Signpost

Special: 2006 in Review Another newspaper columnist found to have plagiarized Wikipedia
Blogs track attempts to manipulate articles Nutritional beef cooks PR editor
WikiWorld comic: "Facial Hair" News and notes: Fundraiser continues, milestones
Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:00, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] JS

Nope :-( - My JS still doesn't work correctly either even with Deskana's change undone - perhaps the devs have changed something? thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 11:19, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:List of pages with Invalid ISBNs: new version planned?

Hello Rich! The List that you generated on 22 Aug 06 is dwindling fast, under the onslaught of the new army of ISBN-fixers. It's down to less than 200 entries, while about 2066 pages are still known to have problems (via the Category). Since the List has become so popular, is there any chance you could generate a new one? I understand it has to be made via an off-line operation that only you know how to do. EdJohnston 23:17, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Ed, there's not much point re-generating it as it stood, because it's checksum problems only. The early version scanned a databse dump for checksum problems to create a list of articles, and then (if you remember) SmackBot simply added a category to the article, the editor then had to guess which ISBN had a checksum problem - or use the list. The current version is run against every aricle with "ISBN" in it, about 84,000 at the last count, and labels the individual problem ISBNs, so the category should be sufficient. The only advantage to the list is that you can spot when an ISBN error is common to a bunch of articles. Perhaps I'll consider createing a list for this purpose when the next database dump is done, sorted by ISBN no. Rich Farmbrough, 23:51 9 January 2007 (GMT).
A list of common mistakes (i.e. only invalid ISBNs having more than one occurrence) grouped by invalid ISBN would be great, as tackling those would have the greatest effect.
As an aside, the reason why I started tackling the list was so that it could be removed, to make it simpler to explain where the army should focus their efforts. The problem with the list is that entries become stale (at the moment about a third of the problems have been fixed already). These stale entries still need to be re-checked, as I've found cases where people remove the tag or remove the invalid ISBN. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jayvdb (talkcontribs) 01:13, 10 January 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Trammel points

smackbot is a smart bot. How did he get programmed? --Johnalden 01:58, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. He is usually using AWB, for these changes he replaces a suprisingly large number of variants of about eight basic templates with a canonical version, plus date parameters based on WP:Magic Words. He also makes some of the changes that are programmed into AWB as "general changes". The way the templates are written means that undated copes of the templates put the articels into categories where they can be easily recognised. Rich Farmbrough, 09:50 10 January 2007 (GMT).

[edit] Gmail chat

Oh, you don't have to install the standalone version. If you activate it in your Gmail account, when ever Gmail is open the chat is open without installing the useless standalone version. Sorry, I should have made it clear, let me see if it shows you online. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talkcontribs) 16:05, 10 January 2007 (UTC). OK, I understand! I use Gmail as my POP client, since it has the largest capacity and the messages are stored on a server, I dont use a PC based mail reader anymore.

[edit] Template:Copyedit

Template:Copyedit now includes a date parameter. Would you mind running SmackBot on articles tagged with {{copyedit}} as well? Thanks so much! Gzkn 05:20, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Not a problem, provided we start with a "lump" in January. Rich Farmbrough, 09:52 10 January 2007 (GMT).
Also, just letting you know that the date parameter works like {{copyedit|date=January 2007}} not {{copyedit|January 2007}}. Gzkn 06:28, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Good I think date= is much better. Rich Farmbrough, 09:51 10 January 2007 (GMT).
Thanks so much! A date parameter to {{expand}} and {{verify}} would be good as well. I'm not sure how much it would add to {{fact}} though...and I'm not sure how to display the date either...it would be pretty ugly. However, I'm not an administrator, and all three of those templates are fully protected. So, unfortunately, I can't add the date param. Gzkn 01:07, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Albert Fish

Hello, yes Albert Fish got much better, I read about 15 articles in the New York Times plus the crime library. All other web sites cited had exaggerated claims and, made up quotes. He admitted two killings and was a suspect in a few others, but not the hundreds originally cited. I also think his letter and the confession provide the best information. Do you have Gmail yet? The New York Times archive is great, I was just reading Orville Wright's obituary today. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 15:27, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Did you activate Gmail chat yet? Its very handy for quick communication and to see if other Wikipedians are online. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 15:37, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Looks like we both spoke too soon about Albert Fish, someone just added lots of material from the sensational book.

Keep an eye on the Fish story for me, a third opinion is the best way to avoid an edit war. I just want to make sure everything is attributed and that the sensation claims that aren't part of trial, or press coverage are attributes to an author in the test.

  • Avoid: Fish killed over 100 children.
  • Better: Fish told his psychiatrist that he had killed over 100 children.
  • Avoid: Fish was the 'Brooklyn Vampire'.
  • Better: Detective King believed Fish to be responsible for the killings of several children in New York that were never solved.

I also linked to another serial killer that was sentenced death that had the same MO as Fish, he came up as a suspect in the killings before Fish was caught. Cheers.

If you want to read any of the Fish stories from the NYT let me know, I have them all downloaded already. Just check the bibliography.

--Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 19:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] My RFA

Hey, thanks so much for supporting my recent RFA. A number of editors considered that I wasn't ready for the mop yet and unfortunately the RFA did not succeed (69/26/11). There are a number of areas which I will be working on (including changing my username) in the next few months in order to allay the fears of those who opposed my election to administrator.

I'd like to take this opportunity to thank you sincerely for your support over the past week. I've been blown away by the level of interest taken in my RFA and appreciate the time and energy dedicated by all the editors who have contributed to it, support, oppose and neutral alike. I hope to bump into you again soon and look forward to serving you and Wikipedia in any way I can. Cheers! The Rambling Man 19:10, 11 January 2007 (UTC) (the non-admin, formerly known as Budgiekiller)

To receive a support from a WP legend such as yourself makes me proud to be part of the project. Thanks again. The Rambling Man 19:10, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dated Templates

Can you elaborate in longhand. I am not sure I understand what you said. Otherwise send me to a page somewhere with the appropriate detail. TonyTheTiger 20:43, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] HoC

Thanks. I was wondering what you were talking about until I realized that that was one of my subpages. I wanted to know the countries of our top editors. How did you come across it? -- Earl Andrew - talk 03:24, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] A request for assistance

Would you support the concept of moving the Earhart "myths" to a separate page or article? The reason for my suggesting this is that the main article should be an accurate and scholarly work while the speculation and conspiracy theories surrounding the disappearance of Amelia Earhart are interesting, they belong in a unique section. Most researchers, as you know, discount the many theories and speculation that has arisen in the years following her last flight. Go onto the Earhart discussion page and register your vote/comments...and a Happy New Year to you as well. Bzuk 02:50, 3 January 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Winter of 1976-1977

Hey, since you are an admin who visited this page, Winter of 1976-1977, I thought I would ask your advice. I am a relatively newer Wikipedian. Do you think it is time to tag this page with AfD or should we give it more time? It seems to be a topic that not much is available on, and a fairly local perspective as well. Thanks! Fundamentaldan 21:01, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Judgement

Hey Ed K, there is no team leader! Just use your best judgment. EdJohnston 04:51, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

I treat folks with admin privileges as "folks in charge" or at the least, experienced "go-to" folks. Besides, I seemed to offend some when I decided to leave my comments visible to all. I truly consider Wiki to be a great "Work in Progress" and nothing that folks should be ashamed of. All reference books have errors, thats why they get revised. I have wondered all along just how many people even noticed the flag note at the bottom of the page indicating a invalid isbn? (ya, I saw tonights note in the Cat section) When you stop and think about it, if a person is sensitive to how something "might look" to others, (A lack of professionalism) what is the the difference in the note at the bottom of the page? All very strange to me. Right now I am using a "three strikes rule" I have three search tools open at the same time. I try title and authors name in each tool. If that fails, it gets the "hidden indicator" that will then await someone else to look for it, especially difficult to locate if its from the referenced section (^). At this rate, we might be done by summer............But thats ok, I have other projects to fiddle with.Ekotkie 05:18, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi Ed, I'm not an administrator, but I enjoy the suggestion. See Wikipedia:List_of_administrators to figure out who actually is (e.g. Rich Farmbrough). EdJohnston 05:44, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi Rich, in a recent discussion, I stood corrected in *assuming* that EdJ was an administrator. For what it is worth, I feel like he would probably make a good admin. He certainly seems to have the right stuff for the job. I'd like to recommend that you give consideration in making him one. FWIW. Have a great day.Ekotkie 21:50, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Various

Notes for informtion - not necessarily connected in any way.

  1. Email. You can email users using the "email this user" system. However with talk pages, you get the message when you are on WP which I find helpful, for most things. Sensitive stuff can always go by email if needed.
    Oh, I understand and have used this method. Wiki mail is a bit strange as compared to e-mail.
  2. Admin. Anyone can propose anyone for administrator, as I have recently done with User:AzaToth - one of our template geniuses. I will ask Ed if he's interested. There's a process which can someitmes be painful for candidates...
    Well, it wasn't a joke. I feel like he has the right disposition to do a great job. And yes, I understand all too well what you mean by the pain in the process.
  3. I tend to scan with SmackBot when a data base dump has been completed. This means I can pick likely articles to set SmackBot on, last time 'round it was anything with "ISBN" in it.
    A couple observations about SmackBot. I have been through a bunch of editing and the following may just be flukes but they have stood out:
    1. I have found ISBN errors that SmackBot did not catch. This occurred where ISBN was short and colorwise, was black as opposed to blue when it is correct.
    2. I have found the Invalid template placed in the middle of an existing ISBN that may have been correct had it not intersected in the middle like it did.
    3. I have found ISBN's that were flagged as bad but located by the same manner through various reliable sources. You have read my "3 strikes rule". If I found flagged ISBN through my process, I clipped the template and passed it on, as stated.
    4. I strongly support removing the invalid ISBN data once it has been reviewed by two people. Leave the book.doc name and author but get rid of the ISBN. Maybe create an HTML flag note to leave for a page owner, but press on.
  4. People often come across as "grumpy" on WP, sometimes they are, but often it's just terse writing. People like you who are a little more relaxed and polite in style generally help defuse situations when they do arise. Never worry to much about what someone says on WP.
    I have no axe to grind or in need of a feather in my hat. Being retired gives me great latitude in this respect. I can go take a nap or seek out another project needing my attention. I am building some small electronic robots to torment my cat and dog (just kidding) I am a bit intrigued by these software bots used here. I tip my hat to the creators.

Erm that's it for now. Best wishes, Rich Farmbrough, 23:04 12 January 2007 (GMT).

Have a great day. We have an inbound ice storm headed for the next two days. Second one this season. I will batten down the hatches.Ekotkie 01:14, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ISBN troubles

the bot had some trouble in the article List of Naruto media because of the article editor's format:

the bot read past the 10 digit ISBN and into the page numbers. As a programmer myself the bot performance makes sence to me since it needed to consider the possibility of a 13 digit code. I replaced the hyphen with an ndash hoping this with fix the problem. For example:

I think everything in the article is fixed now but I didn't verify all the Japaneses ISBNs. Thanks for all your work. --Droll 03:40, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AzaToth's RFA

I thought that the convention for new RFAs was to add a "2" or "(2nd)" behind the name, rather than moving the original away from the page. The "2" would certainly help in accessibility. I quote from WP:RFA/N, "To create a second nomination, simply put the number 2 after the nominee's username." – Chacor 00:39, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Ah, doubtless. I wanted to use the magic button to be sure the formatting was right, by all means move the pages if you think it necessary. Rich Farmbrough, 09:42 10 January 2007 (GMT).
The first RfA was heavily discussed, so your move did mess up a bunch of archived links (I fixed some at WT:RFA, WP:BN and Signpost). Live and learn, but please don't do that again. Cheers, NoSeptember 21:05, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Franklin, Virginia

You just recently removed some content from citations that I added in the article on Franklin, Virginia. Specifically, you removed the publisher information and replaced it with "Southampton County Historical Society." Is there something i am unfamiliar with that was the reason for this change? I am just a little confused, I checked the book out of the library, got the information from inside the front cover. If I have made a mistake, please let me know and I will gladly try to fix it and prevent it in the future. Thanks again! -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 05:31, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi, according to Amazon (ASIN B000JF398Q, ASIN B0007395WY , ASIN B000J9Y6L6) it is published by Southampton County Historical Society, Southampton County Historical Society, and Wiliam Byrd Press respectivly. The same goes for Abebooks. I would suspect that Southampton County Historical Society is the publishers and WBP the printers. As for the ISBN, 87-063258 is clearly not one. Possibly, if this was part of a series it may be an ISSN - ISSN 8706-3258. It is also possible that the book was published by two organisations simultaneously. Would you be able to examine the book again? Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 14:06 13 January 2007 (GMT).
Yea, I will go check it out again! Thanks for the information on the topic, it was much appreciated. I will let you know what I find out. Thanks again! -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 16:41, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: AWB versions etc

Hi, Rich. Thanks for yor proposal, I use it immediately: please enable 3.1.0.0 :) MaxSem 16:08, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Did you see

Please let me know if you spot any SmackBot errors (especially of a new type). Rich Farmbrough, 17:54 13 January 2007 (GMT).

the latest note in the Cat:invalid area for the K Row?
Sorry you may have missed my dialog with Chris on the VA. Article. He was going to recheck out that ISBN data at his local library. I suspected that the book was a very limited edition talking to history related matters in that area.Ekotkie 18:34, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Monobook problem

I posted this at VP, but maybe you will see it faster here. Check this diff. This was the the update ABCD did on January 11 (most likely the day ABCD noticed his monobook was broken, and fixed it). -- ReyBrujo 03:45, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Smackbot

I'm not sure what happened here. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 14:11, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I am... I lost my main PC and had to retpye somr stuff, and got it wrong. Thansk for telling me. Rich Farmbrough, 14:41 14 January 2007 (GMT).

[edit] Greetings

Hi. Your bot made a few edits on a page I watchlisted,[92] and while it did make improvements, I thought you might want to know a couple of things it could do better. The replacement of the Cite-missing template disturbed the infobox on the right side of the page, and graduation dates (e.g., '02) was expanded to 2002. Thanks anyway though. Xiner (talk, email) 01:44, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

You're right about the year issue, and I'll probably revert my own reverts later. As for the cleanup tags, the bot-corrected version[93] renders the new tag across the page at 800x600. I guess my resolution isn't the most common. Xiner (talk, email) 16:03, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm posting a note to Talk:Turn Left about the date issue. Please contribute your thoughts. Thanks. Xiner (talk, email) 16:18, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tony Terran

Sentence that mentions Tony Terran on page 56 chapter 6 (Phil Spector & The Wrecking Crew) in Hal Blaine's book

"Steve Douglas was usually on sax along with Nino Tempo (April Stevens and Nono had the big hit Deep Purple), Jay Migliori and Roy Caton on trumpet along with Ollie Mitchell and Tony Terran." —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Daveterran (talkcontribs) 19:00, 14 January 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Hi Rich

Thank you so much for helping with the article! I just asked my dad about Charles and Henry, and the names didn't ring a bell. It's very possible he could have worked with them though. What did they do in the entertainment business?--Daveterran 23:50, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Hi Rich

My dad probably recorded with the Spinners, but he would not have known any of the band members other than saying hi informally. Since that bass player worked with Wynton, my dad probably didn't know him either because I don't think my dad ever worked with Wynton.--Daveterran 00:06, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

My dad doesn't know a lot of the younger cats like Wynton and his musicians. He did some touring with older guys like Dizzy Gillespie, Freddy Hubbard, Benny Goodman, etc. Sadly, most of the people my dad worked with are dead. Are you a musician?--Daveterran 00:11, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] {{fact}} and {{expand}}?

SmackBot is dating {{fact}} and {{expand}}, which do not seem to be dated templates when I just checked. Am I wrong about this? I also didn't see them in the list of tags the bot cleans up. --Keitei (talk) 04:33, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

You're right, expand should become "dated" soon, and will be fairly easy. Fact and verify I am only dating in articles I am already visiting to date other tags, I expect them to become "dated" over the next few weeks. Rich Farmbrough, 10:48 15 January 2007 (GMT).
Maybe my observation is more for whomever maintains the {{cite ...}} templates. I've noticed that at least for me, they do not seem to know about wikilinking dates. For instance, please see this edit I made: [94]. Putting the retrieved date inside the braces yields red dates, for me. Keesiewonder 22:48, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it looks ok because I did this
{{cite encyclopedia | title =Lutheranism | encyclopedia =The Catholic Encyclopedia | volume =IX | pages = | publisher =Robert Appleton Company | date =1910 | id = | url =http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09458a.htm | accessdate =}} Retrieved on [[January 14]], [[2007]]

instead of this

{{cite encyclopedia | title =Lutheranism | encyclopedia =The Catholic Encyclopedia | volume =IX | pages = | publisher =Robert Appleton Company | date =1910 | id = | url =http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09458a.htm | accessdate = Retrieved on [[January 14]], [[2007]]}} Please note position of closing pair of }}. Keesiewonder 01:36, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

This should work, though:
{{cite encyclopedia | title =Lutheranism | encyclopedia =The Catholic Encyclopedia | volume =IX | pages = | publisher =Robert Appleton Company | date =1910 | id = | url =http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09458a.htm | accessdate = 2007-01-14}}
the YYYY-MM-DD format is, I believe, what is required for the accessdate field of the "cite" templates. They are linked as part of the template, also, so don't put brackets around them. Lyrl Talk C 00:55, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Ah - Good to know, Lyrl! I hadn't picked up on the YYYY-MM-DD yet. Thanks for pointing that out!!! Keesiewonder 01:36, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Well actually you can put "accessdate=12 November| accessyear=2007" or accessmonthday=12 January|accessyear=2007 .. confusing, eh?

[edit] COinS

Responded.Omegatron 14:55, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello Rich! I'm commenting under COinS, because it could be a related issue. Here [95] I suggested that SmackBot may not be programmed to handle the 'isbn=' keyword that was recently added to 'cite book'. Diberri has already changed his tool, apparently, to use the new 'cite book' syntax. Please reply at User_talk:Diberri#Wikipedia_template_filling. if I am correct in suspecting this. EdJohnston 22:23, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] caps section?

what do you mean by this on the Kristi Tauti. I am afraid that I do not understand.Angel,Isaac 22:07, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] SmackBot inserted lots of copies of image

In two edits on the condom page (diff), the bot first replaced all <!-- --> tags with ⌊⌊⌊⌊0⌋⌋⌋⌋, and then replaced the characters with copies of an image from the beginning of the article. (It also dated the citation needed and expandsect tags.) Any idea why it would insert random characters and images like that? Lyrl Talk C 00:51, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

I think a history glitch. Rich Farmbrough, 11:54 17 January 2007 (GMT).

[edit] Signpost updated for January 15th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery



Volume 3, Issue 3 15 January 2007 About the Signpost

Special: 2006 in Review, Part II New arbitrators interviewed
Cascading protection feature added WikiWorld comic: "Apples and Oranges"
News and notes: Fundraiser breaks $1,000,000, milestones Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:04, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Royal Court and States Building ISBN

My copy of The Royal Court and States Building, Philip Le Brocq, 1998, Jersey states:

  • ISBN 0 9533223 0

Man vyi 07:46, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for fixing my mistake!

[96] Sebastian 16:06, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

It's a pleasure, but it only worked on the first category, whcih is very strange... Rich Farmbrough, 16:38 11 January 2007 (GMT).
Weird! I'll look into it! — Sebastian 18:26, 11 January 2007 (UTC)    (I stopped watching this page as of 03:54, 17 January 2007 (UTC). If you would like to continue the talk, please do so here and let me know.)
I can't figure it out, and I posted a question on the helpdesk. — Sebastian 18:43, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
I did eventually figure it out - there were some hidden characters before the colons. — Sebastian 03:54, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List of NYPD Blue characters SmackBot

Uhh...what is your bot smoking? It removed the links from the titles which were placed there to link to the characters. A list just isn't a list if you don't have the characters' wikipedia articles linked to. Without it you have a very, very dead page with no further information on them. Please clean it up; I don't want to change it yet incase this is the intended function of your bot (if so I apologize). SMC 08:32, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, you shouldn't have links in headers, both as a matter of stlye, and technically, people who have selected "click on section header to edit" will be unable ot click on the link. I've revised the layout. Rich Farmbrough, 09:39 16 January 2007 (GMT).
Thanks. 144.134.35.134 23:19, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] SmackBot dating maintenance tags on talk pages

I respectfully submit that this edit is not particularly helpful to the goal of keeping a list-of-things-needing-to-be-done well sorted. Perhaps it would be an idea to exclude talk space from the tag-dating process? When maintenance tags appear on talk pages it is most often because they are being talked about, or as part of text that was moved from articlespace for documentation purposes. Henning Makholm 00:44, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

There are three points here:
  • When talking about tags ideally use {{tl}} to give the effect {{expand}}.
  • Secondly using tags still put pages into the categories, so they need someone to take them out (and in fact I have done this with most of the tags SB looks at).
  • Thirdly there is a group of editors who believe that cleanup tags should go on talk pages, hence the several thousand talk pages tagged {{expand}}.
Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 09:45 17 January 2007 (GMT).
P.S. I generally do talk pages by hand. RF/

[edit] Suggested wikification

Hello. You recently suggested that someone Wikify an article I wrote called Russian traditions and superstitions. I'm confused as to what needs to happen in order to "wikify" it. Could you make a more concrete suggestion, because I'm not quite sure what I need to do to it. Thank you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Abbadonnergal (talkcontribs) 15:55, 17 January 2007 (UTC).

Hi, you want user:69.208.78.151, SmackBot merely dates such notices. However you may fiond the advice you need at WP:WIKIFY. Rich Farmbrough, 16:29 17 January 2007 (GMT).

[edit] Pairing of ISBN-10s and -13s

Hi Rich, this is just a reply to your recent comment [97] over at cat:invalid. My point is just that every ISBN-13 beginning with 978 has a twin that's an ISBN-10. (This is even dramatized by the fact that Amazon uses that trick to look up ISBN-13s by first transforming to an ISBN-10, as you can see by watching the URL in the address bar). So as long as the 978's continue to be issued there is an effective pair (ISBN-10, ISBN-13) of which either part suffices to identify the book, since either one can be transformed into the other according to a rule. Our only uncertainty is about when the first 979 ISBNs will come out because then the trick stops working. Of course I am mentioning this as part of my go-slow campaign on converting WP over to ISBN-13. My theory (and I'm open to rebuttals here) is that ISBN-10s provided as part of a book reference will continue to work indefinitely, although isbn.org has not sworn in blood that that is the case.

If my theory continues to hold, then since every old-style ISBN is now in truth a pair of equivalent codes (one 10-digit, the other 13-digit) we are not truly gaining anything by flipping a reference over from the 10-digit version to the 13-digit version. When the first 979 codes appear, they only exist in a 13-digit version, so there is no conversion required there. So in either case, doing a length conversion via SmackBot seems unnecessary. Until such time that isbn.org brings down the hammer and tells all book dealers and libraries to reject ISBN-10s, which seems unlikely to happen. After all, CODENs are still in use, and so are LCCNs, and libraries are not removing them from their files. Though I guess a person is not going to succeed in ordering a book these days using either one.

It does seem reasonable to enter every book published in 2007 or later into WP with an ISBN-13, however. EdJohnston 02:47, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I'm sure 10 digits will be acceptable to most (existing) systems for a very long time, I might suggest an earlier start date for using 13 digits than 1/1/7 - 1/1/5 for instance. Bear in mind that the ISBN agency says: ""ISBN data output – general considerations All external transmission of the ISBN should utilise the 13-digit manifestation after 1 January 2007." Regardless no bulk transformation is very likely on WP, so the cross-over date will be ragged. Rich Farmbrough, 10:23 18 January 2007 (GMT).

[edit] Thoughts?

Would you leave the charles whitham references alone? I am trying to sort this out - I have had some delays - I will try to sort it out in the next 24 hours SatuSuro 06:57, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Just received this. This has been an ongoing struggle with this gent to accept the fact that the ISBN shown should just be dropped. It predates the ISBN process as I have indicated in the error (M=Row). He has already admitted to errors in these citations. I have completely researched this effort including going to the national library in Australia. This has been an issue for weeks now and has not been resolved by him. Thoughts? Ekotkie 14:40, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
Well we are in no hurry. Which article is it? SatuSuro is usually a good guy. Rich Farmbrough, 15:13 18 January 2007 (GMT).
Look for the M=row items calling out Tasmania. The first one I just now looked at had two more refs to the same book/author but the errant isbn has been dropped. That is all I recommended him to do. I sure don't need his excessive chatter on the subject, just do it. He may be a good guy to you but even kessie asked me to back off on him weeks ago because of a futiure Whitman citation and I did. He is slow to perform. He even had Kessie's assistance. Is there any way you can put out a hunt for that book and kill the isbn ref en masse? He has some sort of hangup about the Cat Invalid tag and how it is casting a bad light on the Whitman fellow. That isn't true. Whitman didn't create the page. He needs to get a grip. I tried extra hard to search for that elusive 2003 book short isbn he has inserted. No dice. Ekotkie 00:43, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Please see this and this and let me know if you have any questions. Thanks! Keesiewonder 01:12, 19 January 2007 (UTC) P.S. I guess it'd help me to know exactly which articles are in question too. I don't think there's any need to back off, but, rather, perhaps, follow the model of what he and I came up with my my subpage. Keesiewonder 01:16, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Gawd the weird and wonderful world of wikipedia. For a start I have started Charles Whitham article very long after I said I would, my apologies to all over that. The Tasmanian State Library and Australian National Library do not have the 2003 edition (which is being sold in Queenstown currently) - what happened was that the typist in Queenstown when the proofs were being made left out a number - the interesting thing is the Tasmanian State Library refused to offer any solution to the wrong isbn and pointed the finger elsewhere. The solution provided by Keesiwonder - I am very pleased with and have nothing but very positive reaction to such help. I am sorry that I have lacked sufficient Witiquette respect to Ekotkie, but (a) I created all the articles which had Whitham in the reference (b) I dont have a PC so I cannot do a quick AWB solution - I use an imac.... (c) My unreserved apologies to all - I have a 4,000 + page watchlist - am living a complicated real life during my childrens school holidays - and am trying to cope with vandalism and edit wars as well as work on stubs in three separate WP projects - if I cannot do something straight away - I would think I have a grip on more than what is said above! I seem to spend my daylight hours trying to enthuse new users to understand WP:Civility god only hope others can do it without extra encouragement .
  • (d) Just in case there are further items about this - (1) the Whitham edition of 2003 had a wrong isbn, and there appear to be no current means to ascertaining the correct form. (2) The stub Charles Whitham has the full details of the book (3) unless some smart cookie with AWB use gets in before me - I will go to every article with the citation and attempt to establish a citation that refers back to the Charles Whitham article for full details. May we all be given the grace of patience and understanding in this new year and only bite vandals. SatuSuro 05:09, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
BTW thanks rich for your comment about me -it is appreciated SatuSuro 05:11, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

So ... I maintain that if we want to help SatSuro out with the numerous Whitman references, if we follow the style at this link we'll get something off our list and his ... :-) ... i.e. dropping the ISBN is fine if other info is retained. Keesiewonder 09:37, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

As long as there is no sign of the isbn number under any circumstances - I would prefer a link back to the article about whitham SatuSuro 09:46, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Understood; I've updated my sub-user page. Keesiewonder 09:58, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks!

Hey, thanks for getting my signature to work right. It's very much appreciated. .V. -- (TalkEmail) 22:16, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hello

Regarding the article New Ash Green - you have edited, have you got any green idea about the origin of the name?

Eliko 23:20, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Apart from a new green (as in foliage and/or grass) development near Ash? Rich Farmbrough, 23:39 18 January 2007 (GMT).

[edit] Template:cite book

I fixed all the cite book errors I could find. As you said there were not as many as I feared. The only one I could not fix was History of Ukraine as it is protected. Thanks for the advice. --Droll 06:59, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Ukraine done. Rich Farmbrough, 10:46 19 January 2007 (GMT).

[edit] Stubs

Rich, when is a stub page no longer considered a stub? I have developed a page for John Lescroart, author, and installed a lot of data, including personal content. Also curious about this funny looking red book that appears next to the flag at the lower left of the page. I've clicked on it and the outline doesn't really tell me much. Also need a bit of clarification about the internal Wiki mail. I have found comments, addressed to me, on various peoples talk pages that never were placed on my talk page. Quite frankly I am a bit dismayed that since I don't go running around looking at other peoples talk pages for mail to myself, I have failed to respond to comments directed to me. In using this clumsy internal mail system I have always directed my comments to another person to their page. I do not find this being reciprocated in kind. Having used e-mail since I first used it on Arpnet I have always tried to respond in a professional and timely manner. Now I find that since I do not read other peoples talk pages, that I am out of the loop. Comments? Ekotkie 23:07, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I think the flag is for the country, the book for "novelist". If you think it's no longer a stub, remove the stub designation - in this case I think it's justified. I generally reply on peoples own talk pages (and put the reply on my own for my "records"), and generally look for a reply on mine. Soemtimes I forget and only put the reply on one talk page, meaning to copy it later. I rarely check back on other's talk pages, but I know some people do. Some people put "instructions" on the top of their talk pages. Some people use their watchlists to keep an eye for a reply (see my talk page "Thanks for fixing my mistake!" User:Sebastian seems to have a system for this that changes his signiture). One thing that may help is if you set your signiture to include a link to your talk page. A system that has been tried, and almost works is like the following section, which is shared across both pages, put doesn't trigger the orange mesasge bar, and may not always show updates...

Rgds, Rich Farmbrough, 23:25 19 January 2007 (GMT).

[edit] Shared section

Some dummy text for demoing it.

Rich Farmbrough, 23:25 19 January 2007 (GMT).

Oh-oh....you just lost me with that term. Ekotkie 23:44, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
As soon as I dropped the stub comment, the funny red book symbol went away. Ekotkie 17:43, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
"Justified" to leave or remove? I have a bit more to add to that page but I'm trying to be care about encroachment on the authors site.
(Justified to remove.) RF

I will have to mull about this mail business. It seems quite haphazard and prone to potential info loss. Not healthy for a "team work environment". For sure I couldn't built an airplane this way. Ekotkie 23:50, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't call it mail... the Wikimedia software works pretty well for the actual articles, less well for policy and talk. Despite the constant improvement the fact that it is still to some extent "string and sealing wax" is shown by the layers of complexity in templates, guidelines, bots etc.
Rich Farmbrough, 10:05 20 January 2007 (GMT).
The vision that comes to my mind is "string and tin can" Ekotkie 21:15, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bot edits to template_talk pages

These two edits are a bit odd: [98] [99] What was the bot trying to do? --- RockMFR 18:36, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

In theory self-ref templates should have a categry parameter which allows their illustrative use, while overriding the categorisation. Rich Farmbrough, 18:43 20 January 2007 (GMT).
P.S. now implemented for these two templates. Rich Farmbrough, 18:52 20 January 2007 (GMT).

[edit] CT:INV proposal (to reduce breakup of conversations)

Hello Rich. EdK has noted that messages relayed through other people's talk pages may not reach the intended recipient. I suggest we might try physically moving new ISBN-related discussion threads from individual talk pages over to Category talk:Articles with invalid ISBNs. Since I can't speak for others, I thought I might begin doing it for conversations that begin on my own User_talk that concern specific ISBNs. Each time I do such a move I'd leave a pointer behind. I assume that anyone fixing ISBNs these days probably has a watch set on the Category talk page, so they wouldn't miss seeing any messages left there.

I tried to do that in reporting repair progress but other then getting responses, it didn't seem to connect with others doing repairs. It certainly would have avoided some of the communication disconnects that have occurred. I really don't think that this system is "communication friendly". I learned very early on that if you want someone to receive your comments, put them on their page.......EdK

While we're at it, does anyone object if I create a new shortcut? I propose CT:INV to point to Category talk:Articles with invalid ISBNs. EdJohnston 20:27, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't know if this is a Firefox point but once typed in my system retains the words. Now when I want to go to that area I merely type the "c" and it call out all "c" related paths that I have used. The same applies to all typing like that, at least on my system it does. Ekotkie 21:27, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
Yep, but I use various machines and browesers, and look at a lot of categories! So yes, it could be useful to me. Rich Farmbrough, 22:15 20 January 2007 (GMT).

Centralized communication can be a good thing; we always have user talk pages if we prefer for whatever reason. I don't have a preference on a new shortcut, other than if it'd help someone, do it. I am not in the habit of using them much. Keesiewonder talk 22:21, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Uncategorised stubs

Whoops - looks like I misunderstood the reason for these. There was an earlier template and category for "uncategorised stubs" that was simply everything in Cat:Stubs that no-one could think of the correct stub type for. It was deleted via WP:SFD as being a bad idea. I had somehow thought these were the same idea. Apologies. Grutness...wha? 22:50, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD Nomination: Danny Graham

An article that you have been involved in editing, Danny Graham, has been listed by me at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Danny Graham. Please look there to see why this is, if you are interested in whether it should be deleted. Thank you. --Jerry lavoie 05:34, 21 January 2007 (UTC) Jerry lavoie 05:34, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Tufte "Ced Date fragments delinked"

Ha, great, thanks; that's what Dr. Tufte would want! --CliffC 23:12, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please use the plus tab when starting new conversations on talk pages

Please use this tab to start new talk page conversations.

When you add new sections to talk pages like you did to create User talk:Cacycle/wikEd#Documentation, it would help if you used the + tab rather than simply editing the last conversation. When I saw you posted in User talk:Cacycle/wikEd#I can host some wikEd-related galleries for you, I thought you were replying to me. Will (Talk - contribs) 00:23, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Hmm.../ Point made. Rich Farmbrough, 09:49 22 January 2007 (GMT).

The template I used was brand new. Do you think the wording needs adjustment? Will (Talk - contribs) 10:27, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for January 22nd, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery



Volume 3, Issue 4 22 January 2007 About the Signpost

Wikipedia modifies handling of "nofollow" tag WikiWorld comic: "Truthiness"
News and notes: Talk page template, milestones Wikipedia in the News
Features and admins The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:43, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Articles to be trimmed

The category you wrote, Category:Articles to be trimmed, is uncategorized. Please help improve it by adding it to one or more categories, so it may be associated with related categories.Eli Falk 06:52, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Long ISBNs

Are we now using long ISBNs? Is there a particular procedure for changing them over? I was wondering because not all the links in Special:Booksources seem capable of handling them, although at least one (Amazon UK) does now when it failed previously (which is nice). TIA HAND —Phil | Talk 16:06, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Phil, Really we need to monitor the booksources until we reach a critical level. However Wikipedia pressure or requests may actually convince some to change over. Also there is a little resistance (which I sympathaise with upto a point) to having other than the "printed" ISBN as the reference. The third problem is my disk with the scripts on is in a bit of bother at the moment. Rich Farmbrough, 17:02 23 January 2007 (GMT).
I had a problem with Amazon accepting unhyphenated ISBN-13, but not hyphenated. It might be worth checking elsewhere for the same phenomenon. --KSmrqT 18:49, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
I thought booksources stripped the hyphens? Rich Farmbrough, 20:08 23 January 2007 (GMT).
That I do not know; I entered the number manually at Amazon. --KSmrqT 22:07, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
FWIW, Worldcat seems to be automatically offering both ISBN and ISBN-13s now for their records. --Gwern (contribs) 22:30 23 January 2007 (GMT)
PS No reason not to use full ISBNs for any new entries. Rich Farmbrough, 10:40 24 January 2007 (GMT).

In doing so I would still highly recommend NOT to use any hyphens. IMHO, this is a potential problem area. Ekotkie 22:54, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Smackbot erroneously removed underscore from a link

Just a heads up: In this edit, while correctly adding a date to a {{fact}} tag, it erroneously "corrected" the link Cry_Wolf to Cry Wolf. While usually underscores in links is wrong, in this case it's correct (per Cry_Wolf). It might be good for SmackBot to note in the edit summary if it's doing underscore removal. — Alan De Smet | Talk 04:12, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

This is a (generally useful) feature of the underlying AWB software. I have put in a feature request, which will deal with these special cases. Rich Farmbrough, 19:17 26 January 2007 (GMT).


[edit] Thank you!

I just wanted to express my appreciation for your work, and consequently the work of Smackbot, in correcting my linking and style errors in the past month or so. Not only has it kept the articles up to standard despite my bumbling efforts, but I'm slowly learning how to do these things (so the bot won't have to follow me around - I'm sure it has better things to do). Thanks again for all your hard work! *Vendetta* (whois talk edits) 15:16, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AWB Request:Don't complain of empty categories - Added

Hi, Just to let you know, i've sorted the complainging about categories, so it will wait till its loaded all categories before it complains

As per my response Wikipedia_talk:AutoWikiBrowser/Feature_requests#Don.27t_complain_of_empty_categories

I decided to go with the complain, but not until its loaded all the categories. It will make a list as it goes through of any bad categories, and then display a message box at the end to teh user listing them all. Then the user isnt left wondering what went wrong, and it wont interrupt the page loading from category process.


Cheers


Reedy Boy 21:16, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] SmackBot error?

You probably already know about problem edits like this. I left a note on SmackBot's talk too ... Keesiewonder talk 21:37, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, {{Fact}} needs a date= parameter. Was that what you meant? Rich Farmbrough, 23:04 30 March 2007 (GMT).
  • Please click on the link above, then click on "Revision as of 09:44, March 28, 2007" (or the revision in the right column), then scroll down and look at the categories. One is in red, that should not be. Maybe the infobox cannot handle fact templates with dates? Hope that is clearer. If not, let me know and I'll try again ... Keesiewonder talk 23:12, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Ah yes, there is some "smart" code in the infobox that puts commas in numbers more thatn 3 digits long. (All very well....) I had forgotten about that. Article fixed up now. Rich Farmbrough, 08:15 31 March 2007 (GMT).

[edit] Please date-fix "LocateMe"

There's a new Template:LocateMe; please will you add it to SmackBots patrol for date-fixing? Thank you. Andy Mabbett 00:21, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Done. Rich Farmbrough, 10:53 1 April 2007 (GMT).
Thank you. Andy Mabbett 17:10, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
Sorry - and Template:LocateMeBot, please (100 instances today; future bot edits should include the date). Andy Mabbett 22:45, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] proposal about maintenance templates

There is a proposal here to make a new maintenance template that would allow multiple issues to be adddressed within a single messagebox. Would you be willing to modify SmackBot to add dates to such a template, and is there any particular way of structuring the syntax of the template that would make it easier? This is all at the early proposal stage, and I wanted to let you know before anything is settled. CMummert · talk 12:17, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I would, and the proposed syntax would work reasonably well. Rich Farmbrough, 12:34 2 April 2007 (GMT).

[edit] AWB weirdness

This was an odd edit. There happens to be an 's version what is a redirect, but... weird. Can you expand on this bug report with your version info, etc? Thanx. — RevRagnarok Talk Contrib 14:28, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

D'oh. OK I guess it's all good ;) — RevRagnarok Talk Contrib 16:25, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for contacting me anyway. Rich Farmbrough, 17:01 2 April 2007 (GMT).

[edit] Signpost updated for April 2nd, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery



Volume 3, Issue 14 2 April 2007 About the Signpost

Poll finds people think Wikipedia "somewhat reliable" Wikipedia biographical errors attract more attention
Association of Members' Advocates nominated for deletion Reference desk work leads to New York Times correction
WikiWorld comic: "Charles Lane" News and notes: Alexa, Version 0.5, attribution poll
Wikipedia in the news Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:14, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bot message

Thansk for your response; I'll do as you suggest in future. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 14:36, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Claudia Costa

You flagged my page at Claudia Costa...why? what material do you feel is being misused? Please let me know.

First of all I didn't tag the page, merely dated an exisiting tag. Secondly it's not considered "your" page (see WP:OWN). Thirdly the problem, which is not as major as it may seem, is that there is no source for the data, as Zimbardo Cookie Experiment said "It's definitely unreferenced. I'm not saying it's wrong, but it's unreferenced. Please see WP:ATTRIB" Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 19:00 5 April 2007 (GMT).

[edit] I saw that you may have edited the article on the Kabbalah

Hi! I just formed a new project, Wikipedia: WikiProject Kabbalah, would you like to join? It is in great need of your assistance. Thanks. Lighthead 22:59, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Propose move SmackBot -> MassageBot

SmackBot does what computers should do, making life easier for people. Hate the name. The names FixBot, Doh!Bot, OopsBot, CleanBot, HaHaBot, TouchupBot, MassageBot, ConsistencyBot would all refer more to the function performed, rather than to its unwarranted Smack on the user. I'm already smacked by WP vandalism and WP politics, not to mention real life, I don't work on Wikipedia to be smacked yet again. I'll cop to a Massage, though. So, in future, please log all edits to articles I work on as by MassageBot. --Lexein 01:56, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

<grin> Think of it as the smack at the end of a Swedish massage, or the smack of a Homer like pate when saying Doh! Whatever makes you comfortable... The name was never intended as a reprimand, although some users have taken it as such, just a passing pun. Regards Rich Farmbrough, 07:41 6 April 2007 (GMT).
In other languages