User talk:Twp

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome!

Hello Twp, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! 

Susvolans ⇔ 17:01, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Errors

Thanks for correcting my spelling errors and typos on White Mountain Art. Is there a spell checker in order to avoid this in the future? JJ 14:30, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Your Edits

I'd like to discuss your edits concerning the Willey tradgedy. I'm new to wikipedia, so please bear with me.

Is there a standard format for dates? I find 28 August 1826 unusual. I see that it allows for two links, but are they necessary? I don't like abbreviations, since I don't feed they're necessary. How about "the notch between Mounts Willey and Webster?" Your edits do not make it clear that the Willey family had both parents and five children at the home at the time of the mudslide. Did you leave out the Bible because it can't be verified? Did you leave out the "buried under ..." because it's too graphic? I also suggest using an 'mdash' in the sentence containing "... allure — tradegy and nature — was ..."

I don't want to edit your edits until we have had a discussion. Is this the place for the discussion, or is it better on the White Mountain Art discussion page?

Thanks for your patience.

I just noticed that you are a software engineer, as I was for many years. I am now retired, but we could probably compare notes about the past.

JJ 14:44, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

  • People often seem to discuss article changes both on the User Talk pages and on the individual article Talk pages .... I prefer discussing matters about a particular article on its Talk page for the benefit of anyone who comes along later, so I'll answer your questions there. :-) Tim Pierce 17:57, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Williamsburg, Brooklyn

so I've ended up with edits by you, seeing no other way to reply I guess I'll post it here:

> From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit. Jump to: navigation, search
>
> Hi, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia! Regarding the Williamsburg, Brooklyn page, 
> please bear in mind the advice at Wikipedia:Make only links relevant to the context, particularly 
> the bit about not adding lots of links to articles that don't go anywhere. I don't think there's 
> anything wrong with including information about the music scene in the Williamsburg article, but 
> having lots of links to individual small bands (even the ones that work) seem distracting from the
> main purpose of the page. Tim Pierce 16:59, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I disagree, if for no other reason than because what is small or unimportant to one, is not so much to another. Put simply; it's very much in the eye of the beholder. Further, I think I'd probably challenge your assessment and credentials for deciding what is or isn't "small."

The page we're discussing will most likely be used by someone planning a trip or possibly contemplating a move to Williamsburg, Brooklyn. Since the section in question is about music, clearly having links to the relevant players in the scene will help someone know where to start in their exploration of the scene. Linking to those bands' and businesses' entries will help someone reserach and see what is to their taste. It also serves as a historic document. Furthermore - what's distracting about some text being clickable and in blue?

I would understand editing if someone were using the Encyclopedia for the purposes of self-promotion (which I have read and seen unchallenged countless times). That is not the case here, the object is to list as much relevant information as possible. 69.86.83.250 07:05, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi, and thanks for writing back! The principle of keeping only to relevant links is part of the Wikipedia style guide, and is defined in Wikipedia:Make only links relevant to the context. If the bands actually do have Wikipedia entries already, then it makes sense to link to them, but if there's no Wikipedia page there then there's no point creating a broken link for them.
I would personally find it distracting to be reading up on an encyclopedia page for a city and find it dominated by the music section with links to lots of local bands, but that is definitely an "eye of the beholder" thing and not part of Wikipedia policy :-)
And, for what it's worth, there are already well-established guidelines for whether or not a musical act is notable enough for its own Wikipedia entry: see WP:MUSIC. You don't have to take my word on that. :-)
Are Frank's Museum or Formaldehyde Blues Train still playing anywhere? It's been years since I've seen them and I can't find anything about them on the web.
I appreciate your willingness to talk about the issue :-) Tim Pierce 12:57, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
Frankie lives in Italy these days, and FBT have just recently gotten back together with the founding line up and two former members of Frank's Museum... http://www.myspace.com/formaldehydebluestrain - Deek 12/28/06 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DeekSkusting (talk • contribs) 02:33, 29 December 2006 (UTC).

[edit] JDL

Your version looks just fine; protection has been removed; go ahead. DS 14:18, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

  • I need to read this more closely, but it looks at first glance like you really cleaned this up. Although I would have preferred that the Doran testimony be ditched completely, you do present it fairly. Thanks for your work. -- JJay 19:20, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] your AfD nomination

just out of curiosity, on what basis did you nominate Whatever People Say I Am, That's What I'm Not for deletion? Given that albums such as The Man Who or Free All Angels, or absolutely countless other albums from relatively small bands are found across Wikipedia? You described the Arctic Monkeys as 'small' or words to that effect... what exactly constitutes this definition? UK#1? Most anticipated album of 2006? Favourite for the Mercury Music Prize? I'm really at a loss, and can't help feeling I'm missing out on something. Deano 20:52, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

  • Hi - I'm not going to debate the issue at great length; I nominated the article for deletion, my reasoning is there, and there's probably not much more to say :-) but essentially I don't agree with adding an article for an as-yet-unreleased debut album by a band that has been recording for less than a year, no matter how popular their singles or live performances have been. Wikipedia obviously disagrees with me, and that's fine :-) I still think that it runs afoul of the principle that Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. I'm not impressed by a lot of the music entries I've found and think that mostly WP should stick to bands, not individual albums and almost never individual songs. Tim Pierce 21:52, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Okay that's a fair enough POV. Thanks for clearing that up! Deano 22:08, 20 December 2005 (UTC)


Hi mate - hope you're well. Please don't take this the wrong way, but I thought you'd like to see what happened to the "not-yet-released album by a minor English band". Even I am amazed! Take your pick from BBC, Bloomberg, Guardian Unlimited or The Telegraph. Who would have thunk it, eh? Deano (Talk) 17:08, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Same-sex sources

Here are some unsourced statements:

  • When it does, an estimated 155 million people worldwide, or approximately 2.5% of the world's total population, will live in places where same-sex marriage exists.
  • In China, especially in the southern province of Fujian where male love was especially cultivated, men would marry youths in elaborate ceremonies.
  • In ancient Rome, the Emperor Nero is reported to have married, at different times, two other men in wedding ceremonies.
  • Reform Judaism, the largest branch of Judaism outside Israel, allows religious weddings for same-sex couples within their synagogues, provided they are both adherents of the Jewish faith.
  • In Alaska in 1998, a preliminary court ruling required state attorneys to demonstrate a compelling state interest for banning same-sex marriages
  • Some writers have advanced the idea that the term "marriage" should be restricted to a religious context and that state and federal governments should not be involved in a religious rite.
  • Some other people object to same-sex marriage on the grounds that the purpose of marriage is a procreative partnership and that the same-sex partnership is inherently sterile.
  • Some opponents also claim that allowing same-sex marriage will blur other common law precedents and lead to the legalization of various other perceived undesirable marriages

In addition, if the references used a standard reference system, the article would be much closer to featured level. – Quadell (talk) (bounties) 07:04, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rememberance at Habbaniya IRAQ

I closed this AfD discussion as no consensus, but User:MONGO and User:Squiddy provided some places you might feel like merging the article to. Regards, howcheng {chat} 19:58, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Syriacs are not Syrians!

Hi

I would appreciate if you could remove the redirect from list of syriacs from list of syrians, due to that syrians and syriacs arent the same people. Syrians today are arabs. syriacs are (arameans/assyrians) Suryoyo 02:22, 2 January 2006 (UTC)


The thing is that the complexity of the name assyrian, syriacs, arameans, chaldeans is still debated. Currently "assyrians" is a more political name and syriacs is more uniting name for all arameans, chaldeans, assyrians. I think we can leave both and due time we will adjust those to lists. Suryoyo 02:28, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding afd vote

I'd like to encourage you to reconsider your vote on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel R. Anderson, particularly for Anderson himself. I you look at the first section of his revised article, it is evident he is a major force in the children's television industry, having helped develop Blue's Clues, Dora the Explorer, and Go! Diego Go!, the three highest rated programs currrently for kids 2-5 years old. -- user:zanimum

  • Hi -- I agree that the programs that you mention are culturally significant, but without knowing to what degree Daniel Anderson was "involved" with developing them, it's hard for me to say that it makes sense to devote a Wikipedia entry to him, let alone the other members of the Sesame Beginnings board. Quite honestly, I respectfully think that you've let your enthusiasm get away with you on the whole Sesame Beginnings front, and am hard-pressed to justify the entries for Crown Crafts, Hamco and AD Sutton too. :-) Tim Pierce 20:45, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tim Pierce

As seen above, the article about you is currently up for deletion. If it matters to you whether the article stays or goes, you may wish to vote or at least comment. --Metropolitan90 05:13, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Derek Vestey

Good research on the obituary. I have access to Newsbank, which includes The Telegraph, but for some reason it wasn't there.

I'm not massively interested in financial stuff, but there's a wealth of untapped material about the Vestey Group. The reverberations are still continuing from the co-founders reorganising the company c.1915-1920 into various overseas entities so that it could function in the UK but avoid paying UK income tax. See [1] and [2]. Tearlach 02:33, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Edit war at WP:AUTO

There's currently an edit war going on at WP:AUTO, with Democritus trying to insert the language he proposed in the Deborah McGuinness case, despite a lack of consensus for it. We've started a section to discuss his language on the talk page. Please contribute your opinion if you're interested. Thanks. -- BrianH123 04:30, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Hello there! Seems you've been here before: Talk:FC Universitatea Craiova; coming from Romanian wikipedia where the article was disputed, it seems that I've touched a soft spot; just to let you know... :) --Vlad 12:54, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
I've never been on the Romanian wikipedia. I encountered this change while reading WP:AUTO. If you want to fill me in on the background though, feel free to post to my talk page.--BrianH123 06:10, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Arctic Monkeys

The page you wanted to have deleted about the Arctic Monkey's debut album where you refered to Arctic Monkeys as "a minor English band", I would like to inform you now that Arctic Monkeys have had 2 no. 1 singles in the UK and their album is set to become the fastest selling debut album ever, outselling all the other albums in the top 30 combined, and selling 120,000 in the first 24 hours. This is not malicious in any way, I just wanted to inform you :-) Arctic Monkeys —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.5.135.13 (talk • contribs)


[edit] Image:CateBlanchett.png

Thanks for uploading Image:CateBlanchett.png. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Oden 19:08, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Smile

RedRollerskate has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

[edit] Your CFD nomination

I've moved this to Wikipedia:User categories for discussion#Category:User en as it's a user category not an article category. Timrollpickering 21:23, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:COW

WP:COW is Wikipedia:Can of worms. I said that it did not exist and basically wrot that in as a joke (which I say it doesn't exist in my statement). Maybe I should write an essay using that shortcut just so I can say it exists.--Wizardman 03:20, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I went and made WP:COW an essay just for the heck of it, in case you care :).--Wizardman 16:40, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 'Who

Okay, I guess I can see your point about it and so I've self reverted, maybe I was a bit to drastic in reverting you so prematurely. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 16:59, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:AllardLowenstein.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:AllardLowenstein.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages 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 non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MER-C 13:06, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Photographs of Saints

Statues and other images are acceptable as well, and the photograph request is the only extant one for any such images. I've also seen the same request used on articles relating to several people who died before the advent of modern photography. On that basis, I was led to believe that the request was not literally so much for a literal photograph as an image of the subject. If I am wrong, of course, please feel free to remove the tags. John Carter 13:37, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Twp!

Your username makes me laugh! "Twp" is Welsh for "stupid". Sorry… The Jade Knight 05:37, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] PhotoCatBot

Hi, just wondered if you had seen how PhotoCatBot works with {{WikiProjectBannerShell}} and {{WPBiography}}. WikiProjectBannerShell can't nest the box thrown up with the needs-photo=yes parameter of WPBiography. See [3] for example. Just looks a bit weird! Regards, SeveroTC 21:23, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

You are right about the advantages of needs-photo=yes as it is very powerful. I think your solution of hiding the photoreq box as part of the nesting would be achievable and would work. Regards, SeveroTC 23:18, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

...for your work on the Minuteman Bikeway, especially regarding its length, vindicating my efforts to have the correct information shown. Your research and edits should largely eliminate any remaining ambiguity facing the reader. It is unfortunate the distance ever became controversial, all because (apparently) someone couldn't count from zero to ten, or the mileposts were chiselled improperly. Best regards, Hertz1888 17:10, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

  • Ain't it a pain! FWIW, I think the editors urging to stick with published sources were actually correct; Wikipedia articles should stick to claims that can be verified by independent sources, even when we know that the truth is different and can easily be confirmed by measuring it ourselves. It's often frustrating but I think that it is crucial to Wikipedia's character. Anyway, that's why I wanted to find reputable sources that confirmed the length of the trail, to put any doubt behind it. :-) Tim Pierce 17:37, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
  • A blessing most of the time, yes, and a curse sometimes. As Galileo and Giordano Bruno found out, tragically, there are times when all the published "authorities" are wrong. Talk about frustration. Hertz1888 17:54, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Wikipedia requested photographs

I did not really add, I changed a new bad cat Category:No_image_available to Category:Wikipedia requested photographs, not sure if it is possible to add {{reqphoto}} to talk page instead. Will see what I can do, but do not have time for 1-2 days. Will try to clean up after that. thanks! --Stefan talk 23:47, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Pretty sure i can do it resonably automated with AWB, but I do not have the time now, will do it kate on Sunday. --Stefan talk 00:16, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
Have now removed all the added categories from the main pages and added {{reqphoto}} where needed. Hope your bot can fix it up even more, thanks! --Stefan talk 00:28, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bot error

Your bot insists on changing the status of the Hospital Tycoon talkpage to show that a screenshot is present on the main article, even though the only image present is of the DVD cover (which isn't a screenshot). Although trivial, it is quite annoying as it doesn't make use of the purpose of having the messagebox there on the talkpage, if it is getting removed. Could you try and prevent the bot from doing this? Bungle (talk • contribs) 22:19, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi, apologies for my error. I noticed where it was moving the "request photo" template, but overlooked it replacing it with the more accurate parameter in the cvgproj template (I mistakenly interpreted it as "screenshot exists=yes", rather than "screenshot needed=yes"). This is obviously something I overlooked and not something that your bot has made a mistake on. Again, my apologies for my error. Bungle (talk • contribs) 22:40, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

My compliments on the PhotoCatBot that you made, although the bot doesn't seem to be able identify the presents of images that are hotlinked from Wikimedia Commons such as the photo in the article about Vanessa_Rousso , PhotoCatBot left This message on the talk page even though the article has this photo image:Venessa_Russo.jpg which is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike 2.0. ▪◦▪≡ЅiREX≡Talk 14:46, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

You're quite right, but this is actually a deliberate omission -- see User talk:PhotoCatBot for recent discussion. I will add something to the bot's main user page that explains this more clearly. Tim Pierce 16:47, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
My apologies, I see now, I misunderstood its function ▪◦▪≡ЅiREX≡Talk 21:28, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
No worries -- I agree it seems counterintuitive at first. :-) Tim Pierce 21:31, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:Lonewolf BC and Jonestown

I haven't been a part of the discussion at Talk:Jonestown at all, but I did notice your comment made today regarding Lonewolf BC (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfa · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · checkuser · socks) and his obstinate resistance to compromise, especially the following: "You have not objected when I announced my intent to act on what appears to me to be consensus, yet you consistently revert the article when I do act on them." From my experiences with this user over the past couple of months - most notably at Rideau Hall and, to a lesser extent, British monarchy - I have seen exactly what you allude to: little to no comments offered in discussion, but many officious reverts.

If he does proceed to stand in the way of process, I'll be willing to be the second nominee for opening an RfC/U. I've already previously contacted him on his talk page regarding his behaviour (something he did not like at all). --G2bambino 15:51, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Fishes#Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of fish and Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of fishes

Hi! Not clear to me why you created Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of fish and why your bot adds it when Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of fishes exists, but does not really matter so before I merge can you say that it is OK to merge ...fish to ...fishes, or is there a good reson to merge the other way?? and probably better to answer at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Fishes. --Stefan talk 01:07, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I have now changed all uses of Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of fish to Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of fishes and asked for Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of fish to be deleted, please change your bot to use Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of fishes. --Stefan talk 13:57, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Done! Thanks for your help and sorry again about the mistake. Tim Pierce 14:44, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, no problem! I'm also just trying to help. --Stefan talk 14:56, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Alexander Wendt

You caught me vandalizing the page by Alexander Wendt. I was trying to humorously call attention to an obviously bullshit article. However, I looked closer through the history and did a WHOIS search on the IP that created the article... and you will never guess what I found

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Alexander_Wendt —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.39.212.2 (talk) 05:00, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

(Answered at Talk:Alexander Wendt -- Tim Pierce 05:15, 15 September 2007 (UTC))

[edit] Bug report PhotoCatBot (talk · contribs)

I Angelbo award you this Vitruvian Barnstar for your excellent work on your bot design and programming, in particular for your bot PhotoCatBot
I Angelbo award you this Vitruvian Barnstar for your excellent work on your bot design and programming, in particular for your bot PhotoCatBot

Hi Twp according to this diff your bot can not handle more than one photo request templates, I fixed template in the mentioned diff.
Best regards and happy editing Mads Angelbo Talk / Contribs 11:57, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

You're quite right; I hadn't anticipated that the bot might encounter an article with more than one {{reqphoto}} template on the talk page. I will try to put together a fix for that today. Thanks for the bug report! Tim Pierce 13:50, 15 September 2007 (UTC)


Thanks for the swift response, and for cleaning up the article about the sirius patrol. I did not even know that there excisted a request diagramme template.By the way I hereby give you the Vitruvian Barnstar, also known as the Da Vinci Barnstar for your bot work
Best regards and happy editing Mads Angelbo Talk / Contribs 21:14, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] PhotoCatBot malfunction

Your bot did this which suggests it does not understand the |of= parameter of {{reqphoto}} or {{reqphotoin}}. —dgiestc 01:39, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for catching that! You're quite right - I had overlooked that {{reqphotoin}} supports the "of=" parameter. I've stopped the bot and will restart it after fixing this bug. Tim Pierce 14:33, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] reqphotoin

Thanks for the fantastic work with the reqphoto template and your bot. When I created reqphotoin it was a bit of a rush job, my original plan was to get the regional categories up and running first and then to add parameters for topics (I was thinking along the lines of "politicians", "celbrities", "cricketers", "engineering", "science", "buildings"), with an eye on date (for example we might want to dig up historic photographs from particular times, pre-1900 or from the interwar period...) then to find some way to cram all these as parameters back onto the original reqphoto template. Have a look at my original post on the problem a few days before I created reqphotoin and you'll see that our minds seem to have been thinking in very similar ways!

The reqphotoin template was only meant to be a temporary fix before bashing out the required more sophisticated template code with optional parameters, but I've been waylaid for a while (busy/ill).

I still think it's possible that some sort of "old photographs" request system would be good; for example it may well be possible to obtain a photo for a 1950's film star who is long dead but it's not true that he's "photographable" in the same way as a modern one. Food for thought, though.

And I've just seen something awesome at Wikipedia talk:Requested pictures#Map of requests - just how cool is this map? Or this one? Or this one (a bit more relevant for you)? I think it definitely justifies the creation of these categories!

I think it might be worth adding a link to that in the text of {{Howtoreqphotoin}} (hmm, I ought to make sure I provide some documentation for that at some point) so that it appears in all the regional requested photo categories. It's already been done on a few categories using {{GeoGroupTemplate}} but it might as well be added to {{Howtoreqphotoin}} so that it appears on the lot. I'll have a word to the creator of {{GeoGroupTemplate}} about it...

Anway, thanks a lot - I definitely don't have a problem about reqphotoin being deprecated, its purpose seems to have been served! TheGrappler 17:56, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] PhotoCatBot

How often does this bot run, or how is it started? There appears to be articles in the top level category that meet the criteria for edit. Traveler100 (talk) 06:36, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

I've been taking a bit of an unexpected wikibreak and the bot has not recently been running. I'll get it back online soon. Tim Pierce (talk) 01:21, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Request

Hello Tim, Can your PhotoCatBot read taskforce parameters on {{WP India}}? If tamilnadu=yes, then add {{reqphoto|in=Tamil Nadu}} to categorize under Wikipedia requested photographs in Tamil Nadu. We had created taskforces to avoid template clutter and let the parent project handle the template maintenance. This request only applies to geographic taskforces, states and cities. Please let me if this can be implemented and if you need any additional information. Thanks, Ganeshk (talk) 14:35, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Can the bot also add image-needed=yes to the project templates while adding reqphoto template? I just added some code to automatically categorize articles based on taskforces parameters. But it requires image-needed to be "yes". Regards, Ganeshk (talk) 15:11, 19 April 2008 (UTC)