Loading AI tools
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Slakr. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 5 | ← | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | → | Archive 15 |
I spent quite a while creating a page for British actor Calvin Dean. Why everytime I create a page for this actor it gets deleted? He is a young actor who is known within the UK, and will from next year have a big film released worldwide. Surely pages like this should be kept online...pages which actually mean something, not like some other pages I've recently seen. Please explain, as it's very confusing! David19856 (talk) 16:10, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
- It was the subject of an articles for deletion (AFD) discussion that decided the article should be deleted due to lack of notability for people specifically entertainers. Articles that have been subject of AfDs that resulted in deletes generally qualify to be speedily deleted if recreated. Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Calvin Dean for the AFD discussion. If, however, you believe the circumstances from the original AfD have changed significantly that would now qualify the person under our notability guidelines, please consider opening a deletion review discussion. --slakr\ talk / 20:49, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
I noticed that you claimed - (Speedy deleted per (CSD A7), was an article about a company or corporation that didn't assert the importance or significance of its subject.) on the Ballet Nouveau Colorado page. It had just been created and was not complete. If you could give us information as to why you felt BNC is not significant we would be happy to correct that impression. While we cannot, for obvious reasons, publish this information yet, BNC will be featured as one of Dance Magazines 25 to Watch for this year. The dance world feels that BNC is fairly significant in the world of contemporary ballet.
Thank you for your assistance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by THDju (talk • contribs) 19:31, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
I spoke to the person who was writing the page. He said his internet signal gave out prior to finishing it. He will be rebuilding it soon with information to make it relevant, important, and signficant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by THDju (talk • contribs) 20:06, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
When this your answer on my Q.
You can help me perhaps.......!?
I SEND THIS TO YOUR BOT:
???? So far I know I use the four tildes!! Can you give me an example that I did not use the four?
With regards
Dr Karel J Labberté
Labberté K.J. 20:15, 13 October 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Labberté K.J. (talk • contribs)
HE IS NOT HUMAN, I HOPE YOU ARE! AND YOU SEE FOUR TILDES. (THE 4 MUSKETEERS!)
Labberté K.J. 21:25, 13 October 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Labberté K.J. (talk • contribs)
Go to "my preferences" -> uncheck raw signature and save. --slakr\ talk / 01:36, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
I want to use this as signature but its not accepted (html error) and my software men in Zurich don't understand, like me from MIT!!! But may be I'm to old you, see68, the flag of holland, KJL my name and the dogs......
can you tell me why?
Dr Karel J. Labberté
PS why a lot of wikipedians are behind a ???? name?, they must now in a fraction of seconds the name is change in a real name
Please answer on my user page commons, en or nl. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.92.221.152 (talk) 21:45, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
When this your answer on my Q.
You can help me perhaps.......!?
I SEND THIS TO YOUR BOT:
???? So far I know I use the four tildes!! Can you give me an example that I did not use the four?
With regards
Dr Karel J Labberté
Labberté K.J. 20:15, 13 October 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Labberté K.J. (talk • contribs)
HE IS NOT HUMAN, I HOPE YOU ARE! AND YOU SEE FOUR TILDES. (THE 4 MUSKETEERS!)
Labberté K.J. 21:25, 13 October 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Labberté K.J. (talk • contribs)
Go to "my preferences" -> uncheck raw signature and save. --slakr\ talk / 01:36, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
I want to use this as signature but its not accepted (html error) and my software men in Zurich don't understand, like me from MIT!!! But may be I'm to old you, see68, the flag of holland, KJL my name and the dogs......
can you tell me why?
Dr Karel J. Labberté
PS why a lot of wikipedians are behind a ???? name?, they must now in a fraction of seconds the name is change in a real name
Please answer on my user page commons, en or nl.
--86.92.221.152 (talk) 21:46, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
hey....i just randomly clicked on sumthin and it went to ur page thing.....im new on facebook and tryin to get as many frendz as i can....if u don't have one, u should make one and then add me.. http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1517144331&ref=profile ok, coolio...later stranger —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pishaww (talk • contribs) 22:41, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your help. I have to admit that the IP range block on Shup has been a bit of a pain. The IPexempt is something I was unaware of... I'll look into this a bit, but would appreciate any helpful pointers. Once again, this was a very helpful. Many thanks! Hiberniantears (talk) 03:43, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
- Additionally, take a look at my switch from soft block, to hard block, and back to soft block today. I can't figure out why ElSaxo was blocked by what was intended to be a soft IP block a few months back. He was unable to edit when signed in regardless of whether I had the IPblock at soft or hard. Not sure if I was missing something. ElSaxo does share a common trait with the socks that triggered the range block as far as uploading unsourced images is concerned, but I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt. Hiberniantears (talk) 04:49, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
Thanks so much for your help! Now the editing works correctly. About the IP block... If this happened because I have uploaded images with a wrong description, already a long time ago I have corrected all descriptions and now I try to upload them using the correct licensing. ElSaxo (talk) 17:49, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks Slakr! Sorry for the inconvenience ElSaxo. Hiberniantears (talk) 22:20, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
Signature problem is over!
--
KJL 68 Watchdog 10:36, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
There's a vandal pushing his POV and deleting the link to Eddie Villanueva and controversies section in this article: Jesus Is Lord Church —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nb22asa (talk • contribs) 03:39, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
For the record, both users are edit warring. That said, the text that was added is not supported by the reference, as the article says nothing about a donation; so, I understand the claim to the biographies of living persons policy (incorrectly sourced information is still unsourced information) and therefore the exception to the rule; for, unsourced information is better removed from the article than allowed to remain in it. Since there is an ongoing RFC regarding this information, I highly suggest keeping it off of the article until the assertion matches the source; and, then, if there is consensus to add it from the RFC, then do so; if not, then don't. --slakr\ talk / 04:30, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, thank you for your comments, Slakr. Please weigh in on the discussion's page as well. Wontonkok (talk) 17:18, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
I might need some help in creating an informative article that does not really giving publicity. Can you please advise me on that after reading the article I've wrote? Thank You. Qeassy (talk) 04:07, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
- Looks like it was deleted because it contained mostly fluff (and therefore read like a spam article). The best advice that I, personally, could give is to check out our conflicts of interest and notability guidelines (just in case), then write the article like a boring dictionary definition. Pretend like the reader knows nothing about it, doesn't share your interests, and just report the facts— good or bad. Be sure to source them as well. We've got a killer article on writing your first article which should also help you immensely. Cheers. --slakr\ talk / 03:52, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi Slakr, there was a user that you blocked back in February, Biometricsinstitute (talk · contribs), for a bad username, and they just resurfaced again and asked to be unblocked so they could change name. I hope you don't mind, I took the liberty of going ahead and unblocking them so that they could request a name change. If you have any concerns about this, let me know? I realize it was a judgment call on my part, and technically, I should have asked you first, but it seemed like a reasonable call to make. --Elonka 05:28, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
SineBot is generally useful, but sometimes I think it is too fast. For example, I just spotted some nonsense vandalism on Talk:Napoleon I of France, but before I could roll it back, SineBot had already signed it and I had to manually revert two edits instead of automatically doing one. Could you program SineBot to pause, for say five minutes, before signing new posts? --Russ (talk) 11:24, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
- It does this to avoid edit conflicts on high-traffic pages. Otherwise, it waits a minute or two before signing. It has basic vandalism checks in the algorithm, so it won't sign vandalism if it matches them. When I get around to it, I'll actually make a more fluid delay so that the bot automatically adjusts its delay based on how frequently the page is modified, as well. --slakr\ talk / 03:15, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
Does anyone exist who could fix this problem, that you might direct me to? Here's what I get when I sign with four tildes, and the comment I've started putting after doing so every time follows:
tooMuchData
00:03, 27 October 2008 (UTC) <--(that's where the tilde's go, but it always says "too much data" and gives the date: so I'm guessing the system will autosign for me after this arrow--)-->
- Not sure what you mean. Look in the top right of this page. Click my preferences -> user profile -> replace the content of "Signature" with your user name and uncheck the "raw signature" box. Then click save. That should probably fix it so that next time you use four tildes (~~~~) you should get your normal signature. --slakr\ talk / 03:12, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
Kurt,
I was reading your school page and noticed that we were not there. Could you please add us?
My email address is hageralice@yahoo.com
It is an interesting page and someone coming to the area would enjoy knowing about the city. Congratulations on all the information that has been published!
Sincerely, Alice Director of M. Christ. S. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.205.194.68 (talk) 20:49, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
- I'm a bit more on the administrative side of things, though there are a bunch of people who love writing new articles and might be interested in helping you out over at requested articles. Take a peek over there. Cheers =) --slakr\ talk / 03:10, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
I have seen that you are a part of WP:WIKISTATS. I was wondering whether you would be able to help me out, on the Special:Statistics page there is a section "active users" which is the number of registered users with at least 1 edit or action in the last month. At the moment it is around 160K, i was wondering whether there would be anyway to see how this figure has fluctuated in the past, is there anyway to find what this figure has been in the past? I would be particularly interested. I know that you are extremely busy on here so theres no rush. I had a look at the other members of the wikiproject and most of them seem to be inactive, one even left in 02! Thanks, best Monster Under Your Bed (talk) 03:25, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
Special:Contributions/SineBot. J.delanoygabsadds 07:20, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
A Request for comment/User conduct has been initated here regarding User:Roux (formerly User:PrinceOfCanada). As someone wish past interactions with this user, you are invited to comment. --G2bambino (talk) 16:52, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
Minor cosmetic issues, really. See and look at the bottom of this section Thanks! Regards. FangedFaerie (Talk | Edits) 17:45, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
When can he be unblocked? Please answer on his talk page. 76.110.175.48 (talk) 17:16, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi slakr. Could I ask you about this unblock decline? I was out of the loop for a few days and Guido got impatient and posted an unblock request. Partly my fault for not chivvying things along a bit more, but now we are in a strange situation where Guido's block will expire towards the end of November, and he may not feel he has to keep to the voluntary restrictions he had agreed to (and for the record, I have a bit more faith than you that he will keep to such an agreement). I'd much prefer to see him unblocked and voluntarily restricting himself on how he behaves on certain pages, rather than have things go back to the way they were before. Do you think you could waive your unblock decline and let David and me continue to talk to Guido about this? Carcharoth (talk) 20:36, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
- You're free to continue talking, and he can post another unblock request if he wants; but, after his performance in #wikipedia-en-unblock earlier today, I spent apparently 74 minutes trying to get him to realize he was in the wrong, apparently to no avail. Another admin, concurrently, was involved for around 45 minutes, and yet another one was active for the first 30. It ended with us eventually banning him after realizing it wasn't getting anywhere and he was repeatedly making inaccurate assertions. As a result, I have to respectfully decline rescinding the decline where I gladly would have done so had that episode not occurred. :\ --slakr\ talk / 02:37, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
- Oh. I wasn't aware of what had happened in #wikipedia-en-unblock. That's a bit annoying. There should be a way to record on-wiki that someone is asking to be unblocked on IRC. Or do you mean the unblock mailing list? Carcharoth (talk) 22:25, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
- OK. Guido is disputing your account of what happened on #wikipedia-en-unblock. Is it possible to e-mail me a log of the entire discussion? Carcharoth (talk) 23:46, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
- Oh. I wasn't aware of what had happened in #wikipedia-en-unblock. That's a bit annoying. There should be a way to record on-wiki that someone is asking to be unblocked on IRC. Or do you mean the unblock mailing list? Carcharoth (talk) 22:25, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
- I think it would be very useful to post it, if it's allowed. Guido has made some serious allegations against you and another admin. My guess is they are completely unfounded, and if that's the case it would be useful for people to consider in any future unblocking of him. But I'm not an admin, so it's nothing to do with me. --sciencewatcher (talk) 14:16, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
- Oh wow, I didn't even check the diff. High school bullies... *sigh*.... Well, I guess I'll just let everyone else decide for themselves, the log's @ User:Slakr/Temp/guidoUnblockLog. Alternatively, you can probably retrieve it from any of several other people who were idling on the channel. Cheers =) --slakr\ talk / 15:26, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for the e-mail of the log. The public posting should help others review it as well. From looking over it, I think you and nixeagle did fine, even if others might have come to a different conclusion. It's certainly not a black-and-white issue. Carcharoth (talk) 02:35, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
Is there some justification for the extremely brief grace period for adding a signature? Even just returning almost immediately to sign, I was hit by a "This page has been edited" due to the bot. Is there some technical reason it can't be 5 minutes? Michael.Niemann (talk) 02:32, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
- That would be more likely to cause edit conflicts with the person responding, or a later person on a busy talk page. It makes sense for the bot to respond right away. If you notice you forgot a signature, just leave it for a minute and then fix it. That will avoid conflicts with the bot. — Carl (CBM · talk) 22:44, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
Is it OK with you if I change the header of this item at WP:AN to remove the brackets? Section pointers don't work when the section header contains any template brackets. EdJohnston (talk) 23:48, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
I sent a few articles to Deletion Review at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2008 November 7 that were a part of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/J. J. Thiel that you closed. A few others from other related AfDs were also sent. There have been improvements made on these, but I wanted to get some feedback from more than just a few editors. Also, the West Precedence mentioned in the closure has actually been overturned and the article has been restored as now meeting WP:ATHLETE. You can read an essay at WP:CFBWEST if you like.
Hope you don't mind I went straight to DRV on these, and it's meant as no insult to you. I'm sure that you made a good faith closure of the AFD, but I think that the desire to get feedback from many editors is critical to this process on these particular articles.--Paul McDonald (talk) 19:15, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
- Not a problem at all, and no offense taken. In fact, I very much appreciate you going through the proper channels to voice your concerns. I mainly just try to stick to whatever policies/guidelines are official/de facto when trying to clear out the old AfDs. For what it's worth, that one was a pain in the ass to close, since the only things I had to work on were the AfDs mentioned in the keep/delete and the "official" WP:ATHLETE at the time. I should note, though, that while the prior AfD did factor in, ATHLETE required achieving the highest level of competition in amateur sports in order to satisfy notability (which would presumably be NCAA division 1). Otherwise, every college football player, 1st through nth string, playing at any school, would be notable enough for an encyclopedia entry.
- Walter J. West does, indeed, meet WP:ATHLETE, asserted by him playing in the Cotton Bowl, but not due to being a coach at a small school, which is probably why it has since been undeleted; so, I'd probably recommend against filing DRVs en masse due to it being undeleted, as the consensus to delete based on notability based solely on coaching a college team still appears to fail WP:ATHLETE. Of course, it's totally possible that I misinterpreted that guideline or am just plain wrong, so definitely feel free to WP:TROUT me. :P In any case, hopefully the DRV should clear that up. Cheers =) --slakr\ talk / 21:51, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
- What I've been doing is working on them one at a time and individually, so that each can have its own stand-alone decision. Some were obvious restores or merges, when the article existed under another name or I found a significant professional history. I figure this way we can really get an idea of what we're looking at.--Paul McDonald (talk) 21:59, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Sign the darn signature, fine. But don't leave a whole new section and message on the user's talk page, for what was a minor omission. Doing so is spamming...spamming by a robot. A robot that should be killed if it continues such behavior. TCO (talk) 14:41, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
- Yay, thanks for the kind words. It's always nice when someone takes time out of their day to leave constructive criticism. In return, I offer those of another:
Our situation on this earth seems strange. Every one of us appears here involuntarily and uninvited for a short stay, without knowing the whys and the wherefore. In our daily lives we only feel that man is here for the sake of others, for those whom we love and for many other beings whose fate is connected with our own. I am often worried at the thought that my life is based to such a large extent on the work of my fellow human beings and I am aware of my great indebtedness to them.
— Albert Einstein, My Credo (1932)
Well keep it off of my talk page. Add some sort of feature for that. It really does turd up the user talk pages. TCO (talk) 01:11, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
- I apologize if I didn't make the opt-out options clear enough. I've had a massive Frequently Asked Questions box at the top of this page with an answer to that very question. I also have had, what I thought to be, very clear instructions at User:SineBot for opting out and yet another copy of the FAQ on User talk:SineBot. I'm really not sure where else to put them or how to make them better. Perhaps you can help? --slakr\ talk / 20:10, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
- Ok. I see you realize the problem and have heart in place a little. Still, you should have the opt-out front and center on this page...not down a bit within second item.) Also, just put an opt-out in the message that is dropped ITSELF. Also, even reading the above it is confusing to me the difference in opting out from having the sigs signed and from having the messages left on my user talk page. It is the latter that bugs me. I don't mind the signing (and it is enough of a "chiding" to see that when I go look at a page where I forgot the sig. TCO (talk) 00:23, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
- Ah I agree. I should probably stick a quick link/guide of some sort at the top of User:SineBot. In terms of signing vs. talk page msging, one can only opt out of both. The rationale behind this is to encourage users to remember to sign their posts or be bugged every few days if they're highly active but not signing their posts. On the upside, the bot will only bug someone if they make 3 unsigned contribs in a day, and it won't bug people more than once every 3 days if I remember correctly. Unfortunately, I can't really alter
{{Unsigned}}and{{UnsignedIP}}to be bot-specific, as they're not only used by my bot but other editors as well who come across unsigned posts. --slakr\ talk / 04:14, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
- Ah I agree. I should probably stick a quick link/guide of some sort at the top of User:SineBot. In terms of signing vs. talk page msging, one can only opt out of both. The rationale behind this is to encourage users to remember to sign their posts or be bugged every few days if they're highly active but not signing their posts. On the upside, the bot will only bug someone if they make 3 unsigned contribs in a day, and it won't bug people more than once every 3 days if I remember correctly. Unfortunately, I can't really alter
Just DISABLE the bot overall from leaving talk page meessages. It is enough of a "scolding" to see it when you go to a page where you are in a discussion and notice the bot sig. Don't have it start a new section on talk page every time, it drops a sig. That is obnoxious overkill. TCO (talk) 12:47, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
I found Sinebot signing my comments even though I had signed it. Here is the diff link. Fatka (talk · contribs) 00:54, 10 November 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fatka (talk • contribs)
Another such instance. I am leaving this unsigned as Sinebot is going to sign it anyway. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fatka (talk • contribs) 01:13, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
- Okay, you have two colons prefixing your User:Fatka link, which isn't actually needed (and almost nobody does it) so I didn't account for it in my sig regex. I said I was gonna fix this a while ago but got tied up with real life and forgot since it was something so minor. It's now fixed, and full interwiki support should be good to go now. --slakr\ talk / 02:57, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
- sinebot did the same to me, i think. even more strangely, it hid my message. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ATmtoulouse&diff=250825176&oldid=250825041 if you check the history of the talk page, you'll see that my message disappeared after sinebot came in. i am not quite sure what happened here Theserialcomma (talk) 08:43, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
hello. did you review my situation? it hasn't happened again, but i'd still like to know what i could do to make sure it won't. thanks. Theserialcomma (talk) 05:06, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
- It's not a bot bug. Someone broke page rendering as a whole when they posted their comment, as they accidentally removed the closing tag of an html comment. Since SineBot adds html comments, it fixed page rendering by adding its signature; unfortunately, it made everything between the unclosed comment and its closed comment "disappear" --slakr\ talk / 17:43, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
thanks! Theserialcomma (talk) 22:46, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
One thing that I get a little annoyed about with regard to SineBot is that frequently I'll forget to sign something that I write on a talk page, and then I edit the page to add my signature only to get a conflict error from Wikipedia. My suggestion is to have SineBot wait a certain amount of time (my idea was 5 minutes) before signing an unsigned comment. -- Javawizard (talk) 08:42, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Is the source of SineBot available anywhere? I'd like to run it on my Wiki Hosting site (YourWiki), if possible. cmelbye (t/c) 05:53, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Despite being warned by you previously, this IP address, which is registered to e.Digital Corporation, continues to be used to make unsourced COI edits involving e.Digital in articles, most recently the Bill Boyer Jr. article. Thanks for taking any action you feel is warranted. OccamzRazor (talk) 02:55, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
"having an image in one's signature is highly discouraged"
Ahh... drat. I didn't know that. Thanks for catching that for me... I think ;) 
Berg Drop a Line ޗ pls 13:40, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
- OK. Sig is fixed. Thank-you again for informing me of this. Cheers, T Berg Drop a Line ޗ pls 14:34, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
I want to have a bot, a simple bot called "FrisianBot" who should watch articles on Frisian-related articles and check those for vandalism...
Or a "AmericanIndianBot" who can patrol Native American related articles. Will you help me do that, or do you know someone who could make a simple bot for me? J.B. (talk) 12:07, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
do bots work?--Accdude92 (talk) 15:15, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
- Naked, in the dark, all night long. I understand that this is awkward when visitors first see this in action. They're kind of like wiki administrators in that way. I wrote a limerick to help you better understand the bizarre culture of the bots:
- Bots work alone without pay
- No delay, no decay, no dismay
- Yet somehow they find
- A way to unwind
- When they strip and do bot cabaret.
Hi Slakr. This is a request for your SineBot to perhaps do an extra side task while it anyway is editing talk pages: To substitute manually added {{unsigned}} templates that were only transcluded.
Some days ago we stopped the two bots BotPuppet and Legobot since they were doing extra edits to talk pages just to substitute manually added {{unsigned}} templates. This has then been discussed at User talk:Master of Puppets#Why substitute "unsigned"?, at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Archive 57#Substitution, substitution, and at Wikipedia:Bot owners' noticeboard#User:BotPuppet.
Most of us think that doing edits only to do that substitution costs more than it is worth. But it also seems that perhaps most think that the {{unsigned}} template should be substituted. (Personally I don't have that much of a point of view on that.) And I see that your bot kind of uses substitution when it adds unsigned. (I assume your bot simply adds the full code, so it doesn't really use the {{unsigned}} template. But the result is the same.) So a neat solution would be if your bot did the substitution of the manually added cases, as a side task while your bot anyway is editing talk pages. That will pretty quickly fix most cases out there, without costing any extra resources at all.
--David Göthberg (talk) 07:13, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
About your bot, SineBot, there is something that you need to correct. You programmed this bot to use {{unsigned}} instead of {{subst:unsigned}}. You're supposed to substitute that template. Since your bot is not using the template correctly, look at what another robot, BotPuppet has to keep doing. -- IRP ☎ 14:27, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
- I believe you are mistaken. Although SineBot uses
{{unsigned}}, the template itself is used by more people than SineBot, and for the year and a half it's been active and for the over400,000500,000 edits it's made, it has always substituted the templates it uses. Please check its contributions list, which will demonstrate this clearly. Correlation does not imply causation. This is not the droid you're looking for. --slakr\ talk / 04:26, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
I been following the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITT_Tech article and its been in a edit war. The user McJeff has been undoing edits that add to the content of the article, the content that is being removed is valid, and does not violate any wiki laws. McJeff shows a strong opposition to any edits done which may reflect negativity on the articles subject.
You might want to look into this user, he may be conflicted, probably working for the company (and yes we do know companies edit/hide information from their own articles). The content Vecoort posted in this revision: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=ITT_Technical_Institute&oldid=253748690
is fine and i see no problem with it. 70.190.149.252 (talk) 07:18, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
- If I may, that article has been in an edit war for a while, with Veecort being blocked yesterday by you. Since he returned, Veecort has continued to make his changes without waiting for consensus as seen here (as IP), here , and seemingly here as the above IP. In the above IPs first edit, he reinstated Veecort's edit and accused McJeff of having a conflict of interest (while referring to himself as an "expert" on the subject).
- I consider Veecort's changes extremely WP:UNDUE, but I don't want to edit war over the subject. I did revert the IPs changes because I was hoping these editors could work it out on the talk page, but I wanted to bring this to your attention. Thanks in advance! Dayewalker (talk) 07:54, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
- I will be filing a sockpuppet report on User:Veecort and User:70.190.149.252. The slightly odd grammar syntax, particularly the use of parenthesis, is identical to Veecort's. McJeff (talk) 08:57, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
- I popped a quick Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Veecort, though you can also do an SSP as well. I'm just too lazy (and ready for bed). :P If you do run an SSP, drop a quick note on the RFCU page as well. Cheers =) --slakr\ talk / 09:09, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
- I'd have been too lazy too, except I was 3/4ths done the SSP when I read this. Linked the SSP from the Checkuser per your request, and vice versa while I was at it. McJeff (talk) 09:38, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
- Now there's another IP 164.156.231.55 (talk · contribs) reverting without explanation . Where do we go now? It seems this is a case of 3RR, edit warring, sockpuppetry, and conflict of interest. I don't even know where to start on this one. Dayewalker (talk) 19:36, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
- I'd have been too lazy too, except I was 3/4ths done the SSP when I read this. Linked the SSP from the Checkuser per your request, and vice versa while I was at it. McJeff (talk) 09:38, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
- I'm requesting semi-protection for the article. Also, here's the SSP on Veecort. McJeff (talk) 20:35, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
(undent) I also started a thread on AN/I about this... I'm sorry this is turning into such a mess. McJeff (talk) 22:59, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Slakr, could you take a look here on ANI please? Bishonen | talk 17:41, 26 November 2008 (UTC).
Hi,
Is your bot's source available for download somewhere? I'd like to run it on ro.wiki and I happen to be a PHP guy myself, so this should be a darn good place to start if it's licensed under an open license. Thanks! --Gutza T T+ 20:16, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
- Me again. After writing the message above I realized SineBot could be useful in several other projects, so other people must have asked the same question before -- I was intrigued by the consistent lack of any answer whatsoever in the newest archives, so 20 minutes later I finally found the reply I was looking for. It's certainly your choice as author not to release the code (not yet, or not ever), but as a minor courtesy for us stupid schmucks used with GNU FDL and the like you could include a minor note on your said choice on SineBot's page -- it would've saved me a lot of searching (trust me, it's no fun).
- Oh, and incidentally, failing to reply anything whatsoever is way more rude than clarifying things, especially since you're well into your right not to release the code -- not replying makes people keep coming back to your talk page, in hopes they did receive a reply after all, and finding they've been ignored. I hope you realize I'm not being personally aggravated by your lack of a reply, since I took it upon myself to look into the archives before you had any chance to reply, so I think I'm being reasonably objective here.
- At any rate, congratulations for the robot, I know I'll have a tough time replicating its functionality! :) --Gutza T T+ 21:21, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
- Per request, I added this to the FAQ. I apologize if the "my life is in chaos" notice at the top of this page wasn't explicit enough about my prioritizing of real life over Wikipedia, as well as not clarifying that that translates to prioritizing more major requests over minor ones. if you're looking to write your own, it's actually relatively easy; it just takes the motivation to do it. I wrote it in less than 3 days, let it run in read-only for a few after that to see if it was safe, then made adjustments over time as minor problems surfaced. --slakr\ talk / 22:06, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you for the courtesy, but seriously, if you want to make a difference add that note on SineBot's page, I don't think I would've found your FAQ when I was looking for this.
- Regarding your choice not to answer other people's inquiries -- hey, I can't complain, not only that I didn't wait for you to reply mine, but you actually did, so. But be honest here, you tend to voluntarily choose not to reply to such queries specifically, the pattern is obvious from the archives (trust me, I studied them ;-)). In that context, it's obviously your choice to prioritize anything in any way you please -- I didn't say it was illegal, I only said it was rude. --Gutza T T+ 22:27, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
- DUH!, FAQ, there, now I can see the light. I didn't read it. Ever. I only found it because I ended up being curious how I could've found it. People don't read stuff on talk pages -- it's sad, but it's true. I know they don't. I know I don't; I know nobody should expect them to. So don't. 'Cause they won't. A talk page is a talk page is a talk page, nobody expects to read any insights regarding their particular problem on talk pages. Great Wikipedia usability lesson there, for me as well -- I never expected to have such a huge blind spot. --Gutza T T+ 22:42, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
- Of course they wouldn't -- as such, I took the liberty of adding a small note on SineBot's user page. --Gutza T T+ 15:50, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi, ta for reverting the vandalism on my talk page. Is much appreciated. Cheers, Thenthornthing (talk) 09:14, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
Do you remember my query here from about a month ago about getting past numbers of active users in Special:Statistics. Do you think you might get the chance now to gather some numbers? If not, do you know who on the wiki might be able to help me with a quicker response time? Monster Under Your Bed (talk) 07:09, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
- Not ignoring you... just was delaying until I got in the mood for more sql. gimme a sec. --slakr\ talk / 07:38, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
- This might take longer than expected, as it'll prolly take too long to process using SQL. I'm thinking parsing the dump file using a small program written in C might be the best option. --slakr\ talk / 10:49, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
- no probs, leave me a note on my talk page when you have something done. there is no rush, just i am curious to see the figures. thought you had forgotten about it thats all. cheers Monster Under Your Bed (talk) 10:53, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
- This might take longer than expected, as it'll prolly take too long to process using SQL. I'm thinking parsing the dump file using a small program written in C might be the best option. --slakr\ talk / 10:49, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
Why is sinebot turned off? The contributions page does not show any activity since Nov. 30. --George100 (talk) 07:08, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
I think you should check this out. —Mythdon (talk • contribs) 19:32, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
Hey. As you provided administrative assistance during the dispute on ITT Technical Institute a couple weeks ago, I decided to come here for help. Basically, User:Veecort has returned to his original position of determination to include every single critical article he can find to the "Criticism" section of the article. I removed a few, got an odd message on my talk page, and thought it would be more prudent to ask the opinion of others than to argue one on one. Any chance you can have a look at what the article's like in its current state? I remain concerned about the COI of course, too. McJeff (talk) 01:49, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
Umm, you seem to be running the bot on your main account?? Martin 17:27, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, I had made an emergency bot to block open proxies that this one dude was/is using to perform huge amounts of spam. But, when I made the script, I forgot to switch its cookie file from that of SineBot's, so when it logged in using me SineBot started sending my the Slakr (instead of SineBot) cookies for a short while until I had figured out that I made the mistake. :P It's since been fixed. --slakr\ talk / 18:30, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
- Haha, it was weird, like Super-Slakr. Glad you fixed it :) Martin 22:52, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
I believe you will find this interesting:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:LGOutcast&action=history
Tan has decided to abuse his authority and lock off the person's only means of communication, merely for trying to ask you the question of what they were supposed to be doing.
You have done nothing yet. I surmise you have not even looked at the page, not that you would have reason or prompting to since Tan's action was deliberately designed to prevent anyone else even noticing the existence of the user he is abusing.
The question of whether Wikipedia's administration are mostly honest with a few bad apples like "Tan", or a collection of rotten apples with perhaps one or two honest ones in the whole barrel, is left to your next action. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.194.194.45 (talk) 00:33, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
Hi, You've removed the Pulsic page. I added this since Pulsic is an EDA company and has some unique technology in that area. In the EDA companies page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Electronic_design_automation_companies http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_EDA_companies You have a significant number of companies that are smaller, have less technology, fewer inventions. Either the list should be complete - something I think that would benefit everyone Or severely pruned and only the significant companies listed by whatever published criteria you wish to choose. Please apply the same logic to the EDA companies list that you used for Pulsic. Either re-instate Pulsic or remove the others. I don't mind which - as long as it is fair. I based the initial Pulsic entry on many of the current ones in that list. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lpople (talk • contribs) 08:44, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
- Simply being a company in a certain field isn't enough to be included. Please see our business frequently asked questions as well as our guidelines for notability of corporations. Your article didn't assert why it fit the latter. --slakr\ talk / 13:11, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarification. I'll put forward evidence of notability. In the meantime are you going to clean up the EDA section? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lpople (talk • contribs) 19:01, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I have attempted to upload a well written, and well cited entry on the music group, ULTRNX. This group is significant because they are the first place winners in the worldwide Digitalism remix competition. Why was it then deleted? Could you please allow it to be posted? Or could you send me a copy of it? The article is entitled ULTRNX.
I have increased 76.124.36.24 (talk · contribs)'s block to 72 hours. Actually, it was unintentional - I was responding to a report on WP:AN3 and apparently Wikipedia has a new "feature" where you can now change block settings without unblocking and reblocking. That's something annoying to get used to I guess. I didn't realize he was already blocked until I went to the talk page to leave the template and saw your block message there. If you want to commute it to the original 24 hours, I have no preference in the matter. --B (talk) 06:12, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
- Your puny blocks can't hold me! I'll track down your puppets and use my highly advanced, surface-to-puppet weaponry, pictured to the right. Then you shall be powerless, being a master of useless puppets! Muahahahahah! --slakr\ talk / 04:35, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
- You truly are soulless! Master of Puppets Call me MoP! :D 04:39, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
Please stop your bot from editing articles in Afc/Submissions. 77.103.71.10 (talk) 17:33, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
This is getting rather annoying 77.103.71.10 (talk) 17:41, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
- The bot signs, by default, in the Wikipedia talk: namespace as well. I have no idea why AFC is in the Wikipedia talk: namespace, though. So, stopping the bot from signing in it will require special coding first. Ideally, please obtain consensus for this first and I'll implement the changes. --slakr\ talk / 00:25, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
SInebot told me about signing talk pages and stuff. I know that, but what about the articles, please explain. THanks! Dcollins52Tell me what you think —Preceding undated comment was added at 16:26, 17 December 2008 (UTC).
- Usually one does not sign contributions in articles, as nobody owns an article, and any contributions are in the page's history. --slakr\ talk / 00:27, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 |
The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | |
| For fixing a heap of page-move vandalism, I award Slakr the Anti-Vandalism Barnstar! --Jh12 (talk) 07:25, 18 December 2008 (UTC) |
BdiCoface it's a company located in Israel and has it right for a company page at wikipedia, on what bases this page were deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bdiwiki (talk • contribs) 10:02, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Corporate Page Setup How do you set one up? Like a GM, Ford, Chrysler page, but obviously not them? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.37.95.34 (talk) 23:05, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
- Check out our article on writing your first article. That should get your started. --slakr\ talk / 21:05, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 |
The Barnstar of Helpingness | |
| Thank you for tracking down the issue in my .js! //roux 08:16, 19 December 2008 (UTC) |
Dear Slakr:
We, the me and the mouse in my pocket, would like you and your SineBot to bot the Sine, as it were, on our wikiterritory. The history of discourse will plainly show, that even today, wistful parlance has taken place at the Pl Wiki watering trough, Kawiarenka (the tiny café), at the (not only limited to the indecent, or when nuanced alternatively, not only limited to indecent) Propositions Table, .
Alas, it has come to be said, that you have refused (not ours, but our countrymen's) lent ears and entreaties b4. :(
Presently, the Polish Strategy is to wait until you relent and make the code public, at which time, we will steal it.
However, the time behavior of the above algorithm is best formally expressed, in Versed Polish Notation, as czekanie do usranej śmierci, which is highly nonlinear, and some even go on to allege, nondeterministically polypointless (one-to-one, and being stoned by the entire village while tied to a ten-foot pole).
So much for theory and diplomacy.
Before I take up threats and naked (penile jpeg) aggression, would you please consider just running the damn thing over on our site, like Sinebots do, much as, for example, User:Volkov runs his VolkovBot, but presumably with fewer moronic edits? :/
Cordially, Your Brother in Alms, --Mareklug talk 17:47, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
- I second every (second?) word in this plea - please, do consider allowing us, mere laymen from pl-wiki to use your code (it really, really is great!). You don't need to make the code public. All pl-wiki editors will be truly grateful to you! Pundit|utter 18:40, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Actually, studies have shown that when deprived of outside input, humans slip into a 25-hour cycle... I know, {{fact}}, but in this case it doesn't matter.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Quantumobserver (talk • contribs) 01:13, 25 December 2008
- The real reason is probably because I'm still young and comprise the ~80% of youth that cite themselves more active+energetic+whatever at later hours of the day. Apparently what happens is that when you're young and when you're old, there's instead a 20%/80% distribution of evening-active to morning-active, but during adolescence and young adulthood, the trend is reversed quickly to 80/20, then gradually returns to the original 20/80 by late adulthood.
- Some evolutionary psychs have posited that it might have something to do with it being advantageous for youth to break away from their "loser parents," which presumably would increase the chances of mating (through increased chances of buttsecks). Some social psychs say it might just be due to the pressures of traditional 9to5 jobs to establish rigorous sleep schedules during early adulthood. Don't have cites for it all nor do I remember what the technical terms are, but I'm almost certain we have it mentioned in an article somewhere on here. :P
- But anyway, going with the vampire story is much more fun. :P --slakr\ talk / 06:07, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
Slakr, your bot Sinbot has sent me a message that I should sign my posts, yet I already do. I have discovered that my signing button is broken and so is the 4 tildes. Help out please. Just look at the end of the comment. Dennisman 13:35, 25 December 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dennisman (talk • contribs)
See. Reply to me at this link. User Talk: Dennisman. Dennisman 13:37, 25 December 2008 (UTC) --Dennisman 13:37, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for sorting the problem out Slakr. I'm still relativly inexperenced on Wikipedia. Still, thanks. Dennisman (talk) 10:38, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
please come over to our wikipedia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 大天王皇子 (talk • contribs) 19:48, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
I think that your bot's messages were very convenient and helpful, but not as sexy as they could be. Please improve this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tzw100 (talk • contribs) 22:59, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
- Hmm... I'll look into that. — preceding comment was screamed wildly by a sexy user with a cute ass as the resounding echo in the waves of pleasure tolled the grim reminder that, while the embrace between the nubile lovers felt that it could endure an eternity, 01:27, 30 December 2008 (UTC) had approached.
For the record, here's what your bot writes:
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes (...) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 16:43, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
In general, I'm not a fan of WP bots, but your bot actually does something useful. One suggestion though, you could improve your bot by making the message less condescending. The current text assumes that the poster doesn't know about signing; when, in fact, they probably just forgot. Why not reword your bot's message along the following lines:
Hi there. I noticed that you forgot to sign a recent post you made to talk page XXX <put a link to the page there>. I have taken the liberty of signing your post for you. In case you aren't familiar with signing talk pages content, here are a couple of tips: you can sign entries by typing four tildes (...) at the end of your comment or by clicking the signature button located above the edit window. Signing talk pages content is useful because other contributors are able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! Christopher Rath (talk) 16:54, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
- It performs a {{subst:Tilde}}, a template that other editors also use. So, basically, if you think that
{{Tilde}}could use for a change for the better for the bot, chances are everyone else would benefit, too. I'd say open a discussion over at Template talk:Tilde so that others can possibly improve upon it too. Cheers =) --slakr\ talk / 17:33, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
Why don't you add the new Jimmy page section in the Bald Headed Woman Article? Please watch out from this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bald_Headed_Woman
I'd extended to the talk page with authentic sources:
Role of Jimmy Page
According to The Who's Official Website and various rock magazines, Jimmy Page has been credited for lead guitar work on the B-side of Bald Headed Woman.
References:
http://www.jimmypage.co.uk/biography.htm
http://www.vh1.com/artists/az/page_jimmy/4682556/lyric.jhtml
http://www.thewho.com/index.php?module=discography&discography_item_id=90 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.186.96.182 (talk) 20:23, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for deleting Żądło-Dąbrowski z Dąbrówki h. Radwan. You are right, that mistake was caused by my script. Thanks. :) — Aitias // discussion 00:32, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
While the deletion debate raged, I moved this article Radwan Dąbrowski-Żądło to
Żądło-Dąbrowski z Dąbrówki h. Radwan.
That was an attempt to fix what I considered surmountable problems within the article. SEE:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Radwan Dąbrowski-Żądło Family (3rd nomination)
The administrator who made the original deletion nomination has two recent arbitration cases against him, and he has since lost his administrator privileges.
My point -- I want a deletion review on the newly rewritten article "Żądło-Dąbrowski z Dąbrówki h. Radwan", but it's probably pointing to the old article "Radwan Dąbrowski-Żądło."
Everything seems to be mixed up. Any suggestions on how to proceed?
I can't see the old article, so I don't want the old contents reviewed.
Thanks -- Exxess (talk) 01:01, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
- First and foremost, the closing admin, Aitias (talk · contribs), is is an administrator. As such, that's good enough for me to enforce his deletion closure. Whether or not the nominator is or is not an administrator is irrelevant to me as I'm not the closing administrator— Aitias is.
- The result of the delete discussion on the article that was being discussed was to delete it. Moving it to a new name doesn't reverse that decision nor does recreating it under a new name, which qualifies the article for speedy deletion of an already-afded article. A lot of admins use an AfD closing script to automagically delete articles discussed in an AfD should the result of the discussion be to delete. Naturally, since the article had been moved in the interim, the script simply deleted the redirect left behind by he move, and I cleaned up.
- If, however, you feel that the article, under whatever name, should be undeleted, the dudes at deletion review should be able to help you out. I added comments to both the AfD and the deletes I made in order to help clarify what happened. My guess is it would be easiest to do everything as if you hadn't moved it, i.e., reference the actual AfD that closed as delete, then explain that the new name would be at "the new name". Also, be sure to state why the new incarnation fundamentally addresses the concerns of the AfD that resulted in delete.
Hello, I just wanted to let you know that the SineBot at the English Wikinews seems to be broken. It hasn't been working for a month (contribs here). Perhaps you could get it working again? Thanks, ♪TempoDiValse♪ 18:36, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi slakr,
I noticed that SineBot signed an article that was in the Articles for Creation queue . Since these are technically talk pages, but they could become actual articles eventually, I wonder if SineBot should be modified so that it doesn't modify pages under the AfC category? Thanks, Matt (talk) 06:45, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- I've explicitly hardcoded an exception for now as a kludge. :P The categorization of the AfC process under the Wikipedia talk: namespace (a change that looks like it occurred within the last few months) is where the problem originated. It should ignore any page starting with Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Submissions/ now. --slakr\ talk / 08:51, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
Hello, Can you please tell me how to have my deleted page restored? I wrote an artical yesterday about a photographer named Seth Sabal. I followed all the rules and established "notablity", sourced all my references and it was deleted. I think this might be a bias delete, based on old posts. I dont even know how about having this fixed, I think it should be included.
Now the editors are insinuating some things about my grammer, and I feel so angry. This is supposed to be a great resource for students like myself, Its even our class assignement to make a Wiki article. I am flabbergasted that it been so difficult with all the correct reference links and obvious notability. PhotobloggerNYT (talk) 20:52, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Can you please help me.
- It was the subject of an articles for deletion discussion. Please see the following for more info: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Seth Sabal. If you feel that the page was deleted incorrectly or the concerns raised by the deletion discussion are now fixed, please see this page, which outlines what to do next. --slakr\ talk / 08:56, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
Sinebot added two signatures it shouldn't have added ( and ) and I am removing them. In both cases there was already a clear signature with datestamp, resulting in posts with double signatures. Sinebot may have been confused because the signatures did not match the editor's name: the editor was just restoring previously deleted comments. --HYC (talk) 03:07, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- The user signed as another user; User:Critical Chris != User:Wayne shoter, thus the signature was invalid. --slakr\ talk / 05:20, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
I don't worry too much about signing things on talk pages because I know SineBot will sign for me. Recently, I forgot to sign a bunch of things and SineBot posted a message on my talk page reminding me to sign. This made me think it might be nice to have a third option for SineBot. {{AutoSignOK}} If this tag is present on a person's user or talk page, SineBot replaces the clunky:
Sample Comment -- Preceding unsigned comment added by Name (talk) 00:00, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
with:
Sample Comment -- Name (talk) 00:00, 1 January 2009 (UTC) autosigned
P.S. I agree with the above poster who said the message about not signing is a bit condescending. Could be improved.
RoyLeban (talk) 07:44, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
- I don't worry too much about signing things on talk pages because I know SineBot will sign for me.
- Don't get in a habit of doing this. The bot automatically ignores experienced users that forget to sign posts.
- Recently, I forgot to sign a bunch of things and SineBot posted a message on my talk page reminding me to sign.
- That's in part to annoy you into signing. It'll also only do so every 3 days, and only if you've made 3 unsigned posts within a day (if I recall correctly).
- This made me think it might be nice to have a third option for SineBot. {{AutoSignOK}}
- There's
{{YesAutosign}}(once I activate it). It would still{{tilde}}you, though, if simply stop signing your posts. I have absolutely no plans to actually cause the bot to add actual signatures. It's the user's responsibility to sign their posts— not the bot's.
- There's
- --slakr\ talk / 11:18, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
i left an imparial and factual account of he delta lodge page that was deleted, why was it so. I thought wiki pedia was all about fact i even provided sources from reputable journalists and city council meetings. I am starting to think that you guys are partisan apologists.... let the people read the facts and decide for them selves..... is this an encyclopedia or a commercial? —Preceding unsigned comment added by DeltaLodgeDown (talk • contribs) 21:44, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
- I have—well, had— no involvement in that page. However, since you felt it necessary to draw me in, it's pretty apparent you've created several accounts to advance your point of view. As a result, I've semi-protected the page and blocked this account.
- Please read our guideline against canvassing. Also please see our original research, verifiability, and other policies and guidelines.
- Evading blocks will result in an even smaller likelihood of whatever it is you're trying to insert being inserted, as we highly frown upon sockpuppetry.
"KURT’S TEXAN ANUS IS STRETCHED AND WIDENED BY GRAWP’S MASSIVE COCK."
- Hot.
- Can I get the movie rights to this? It'll be like Brokeback Mountain— except on Wikipedia. We can make really bad puns in it as well, like "y'all cum back now, ya hear?" and "everything's bigger in Texas, from our vast stretches of wide'n'open anus' to our massive cocks!" The spooge scene could involve the yelling of "yeehaw!"
- Already stretched'n'widened after what felt like giving birth the other day. Thought about taking a picture but decided against it.
Hi, Slakr! Is SineBot off? I saw several about three edits go unsigned at the help desk. It is only a few, but by SineBots usual standards, this seems to be something big :) Chamal talk 14:49, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for finally blocking this IP. At least 5 admins declined to do so, presumably because the user had removed the vandalism warnings form his talk (thus making it look like he was only warned twice when he was actually warned at least 10), before you finally came along. He was adding insults to my comments to other users, so of course I had to keep reverting him. Now I can finally go back to being productive :) --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:16, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
This is with reference to the following 2 articles- 1. Maratha kingdom and 2. Shivaji. Kindly tell me the procedure, which should be followed in improving these articles (or for that matter any article) and how can I help in getting these articles the ‘A’ rating? ThanksKesangh (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 09:13, 15 January 2009 (UTC).
your name is kurt? nahhhh...
w/o wax, =p (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 16:01, 15 January 2009 (UTC).
A few days ago you reverted some page move vanalism on Talk:Hannover CL.IV - I think, that somewhere along the way some content may have gone missing.Can you check and if so get it back?Nigel Ish (talk) 19:45, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Hey Slakr, just to let you know I've opened a new, more widely advertised discussion about T1 - I hope it's what you were looking to see. It's located at Wikipedia_talk:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#Removal_of_T1_redux. Dcoetzee 03:13, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for unblocking my account.
--Sujit 06:08, 28 January 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sujit (talk • contribs)
can you please let me edit the information on salman the persian. the information on it is fradulent on the page. thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Motlagh (talk • contribs) 14:32, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for unblocking me! I promise not to listen to any of moot's vandalism plans anymore. I was lucky you saw my unblocking request before the admin that blocked me did, since he doesn't believe me. Anyway, thanks again. It feels great to be back and contributing! --Koala (talk) 17:26, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
Those autosigning bots could be a bit more polite. [ Sorry! I didn't know that I should have signed my post! Iceblock (talk) 11:49, 29 January 2009 (UTC) Thanks, sinebot! I just haven't liked your way of telling us this simple fact! ]
- But when I know how an encyclopedia should be, your current practice is the most formal one. What do you think? --Iceblock (talk) 15:47, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
- In regards to the bot as well as proxy lists and ops in general, I have posted an ANI thread (permalink). Feel free to comment if you wish. ~ Troy (talk) 23:10, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi Slakr! ProcseeBot looks very useful. We don't like proxies over at YourWiki, so we're currently manually blocking large lists of proxies. Do you think it would be possible to let us have a copy of the source code so we could run the bot on our site also? If you were to let us, we would of course respect any license terms that you would set out for us (keeping the source private, etc). Thanks, cmelbye (t/c) 00:40, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, but no. You're welcome to scrape the IPs from its block log however. --slakr\ talk / 04:34, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- Scrape is such an ugly word. :-P If it helps, the API can easily output the bot's block log: just click here. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 05:16, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Does one exist? Can it be made? Vulture19 (talk) 23:01, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- Dunno. There's something at User:UBX/signsposts, but as far as I know there isn't one about sinebot explicitly catching people, but I could have missed it. --slakr\ talk / 01:26, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Please give a gap of maybe 6 hours after someone inserts an unsigned comment. Reverts of unwanted comments would be easier this way. An example is edit by Wajiharaza on Wikipedia_talk:Signatures today, which was advertisement. SineBot signed the comment the very next minute. This is disadvantageous in some ways:
- The improper edit doesn't show up in watchlists, rather it is SineBot's edit that shows up.
- The Rollback link is no longer available for the improper edit.
- Undo of the improper edit is disallowed because of SineBot's intermediate edit.
Jay (talk) 11:39, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
- I second this request, sineBot is great, but everytime we have to deal with vandalism is hard when SineBot already did the job. I would suggest to place a gap of several hours (six sound fine to me), that would give time to editors to rollback vandalism. Another option is a rollback option that rolls back the SineBot edits and edits of the editor that SineBot signed for. Thanks, Miguel.mateo (talk) 01:22, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- SineBot doesn't resolve edit conflicts (coding which would be a pain in the ass, and I'm loaded with work atm), so if an edit happens in the interim, it leaves the contribution unsigned. This already creates plenty of opportunity for people to complain to me that the bot didn't sign something it was supposed to. There are other reasons why the delay is what it is. You're welcome to rummage through my talk page's archives for the various threads along the lines of "sinebot didn't sign," "increase the delay," "decrease the delay," "zOMG SineBot signed vandalism," and the like to see why. I'll probably add in dynamic delays or something at some point.
- Should the rollback link disappear due to the intermediate edit, Don't Panic. I understand this can be a very traumatic experience, however, The Old Fashioned Way™ is still available. Sure, it involves three or four extra clicks and maybe a keystroke or two, but on the upside it burns at least twice the calories and allows you to make sure that there isn't any extra vandalism behind it.
- You can magically make bot edits in your watchlist disappear via my preferences -> watchlist -> hide bot edits from watchlist.
- --slakr\ talk / 04:15, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- I understand (1) a new generation of SineBot seems in place to do this job, which I recognize is a completely different monster. We understand (2), in my case it just frustartes me than when I try to do a rollback, SineBot already created an edit. However, I will manage to reduce my frustration going forward, since I do understand (1) which contradicts what we suggested. (3) does not help, on the countrary, you start "missing" important additions like "Cluebot" removing vandalism automatically; that creates extra more work on us the editors (trying to remove a vandalism that was already removed). What I would seriously suggest you is to put a paragraph here and in the Bot's talk page explaining why the delay is what it is, so you can reduce the number of people like us asking for the same thing. Just a suggestion though ... Thanks for your fast answer, Miguel.mateo (talk) 04:55, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- I concur with Miguel.mateo on the suggested addition to the FAQ. I understand that the current lack of delay is because of a bot limitation, and signing unsigned comments is not really time critical, like how removing vandalism is.
- If the bot has a limitation, and if as a result you would like human contributors to work around this temporarily, you can mention a timeline of when the fix will be available. If it was a human who was signing (hence validating) vandalism, there was no contest really. But a bot limitation should not result in denial of a useful and important Wikipedia feature (Undo) for the human contributors..
- I would like to watch edits of other bots, so would not want to use the hide option.
- Jay (talk) 07:55, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- I concur with Miguel.mateo on the suggested addition to the FAQ.
{{sofixit}} - If the bot has a limitation, Humans, like bots, have limitations, too. you would like human contributors to work around this temporarily, you can mention a timeline of when the fix will be available. I'd like them to work around it indefinitely. There is a delay, except on high priority pages. The delay, as far as I'm concerned, is a feature—an improvement—upon what the bot was replacing (HagermanBot), which had no delay at all. There is very basic vandalism detection, but nothing fancy and obviously nothing that would rival a human.
- I unfortunately can't develop SineBot full-time and have other priorities in life. If you'd be willing to donate money to the cause, I'd be all ears. However, past that, time is scarce, and while I understand the bot is imperfect, it's Good Enough™ until someone makes something better.
- --slakr\ talk / 09:35, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- I concur with Miguel.mateo on the suggested addition to the FAQ.
I want to appluad your efforts on SignBot. It is GENIUS.
I also have a request:
Could you import him to Wikia? Preferably the central Wikia, or the CP Fan Fiction Wiki], ect.?
WE NEED HIM!
We need him down at Wikia as much as he's needed at Wikipedia! —Preceding unsigned comment added by TurtleShroom (talk • contribs) 20:31, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Hello, on January 9 you said that you were moving servers and that you expected SineBot to be back up again soon. Is there a status update? It hasn't worked since December 12 and we desperately want it back. Cheers, --SVTCobra (talk) 18:16, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
I fear this may have been deleted because I copied the hammer and sickle article (I wanted a symbol based article for a template) as a template, but saved it before I had deleted the old hammer & sickle content. Uli —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ulrichroth (talk • contribs) 00:31, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Seems Sinebot is ignoring edit conflicts. Please fix! Bigbluefish (talk) 17:32, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
In this edit, SineBot accidentally deleted my comment. Is there any way to fix the programming to prevent it undoing any edits made since an unsigned comment? Bettia (bring on the trumpets!) 10:05, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Hi Kurt (Slakr). On Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#Signatures_that_have_no_link there's a discussion about some people who have configured their signatures to not show any link. Your name was mentioned, as an authority as to whether or not a bot could remedy this. Maybe you'd like to comment on that discussion. Thank you, SteelSkin (talk) 04:20, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
For a reason why it's unwise for sinebot to quote a comment in the edit summary when it signs, see this unfortunate edit. If you must identify the edit, it's probably better to give the timestamp. Once the comment is in the revision history it's much harder to remove. --TS 20:25, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
Wikiwand in your browser!
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Every time you click a link to Wikipedia, Wiktionary or Wikiquote in your browser's search results, it will show the modern Wikiwand interface.
Wikiwand extension is a five stars, simple, with minimum permission required to keep your browsing private, safe and transparent.
