User talk:Tim1357/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

blocked

Wow that sucks. I hope this gets cleared up quickly. I'll be watching. Equazcion (talk) 13:04, 28 Oct 2009 (UTC)

yea ill watch my ip address. It encompasses a bunch of people. If that happens again, then Ill just use the secure server. Peace Tim1357 (talk) 17:19, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Tim1357. You have new messages at Btilm's talk page.
Message added 01:30, 29 October 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

 Btilm  01:30, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Your comment

The "List of Drug:x" is what name of the drug started with that character, or intinal. your example is D, meaning all drug name what started with D, e.g. dalfopristin. Thank you. Bus88MRT (talk) 02:28, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

yes thank you for pointing that out. I made a goof. That was the last remaining article who's most recent edit was from 2005, so i guess i ruined that. ! Tim1357 (talk) 02:31, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:The Inherited (movie poster0.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:The Inherited (movie poster0.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 04:28, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

 Done Forgot to delete after failed AfD. Tim1357 (talk) 10:55, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Joe Chill.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Joe Chill.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 04:35, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

 Done Tim1357 (talk) 10:51, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Freak Show movie poster.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Freak Show movie poster.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 04:37, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

 Done Tim1357 (talk) 10:49, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Skills Like this (movie poster).jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Skills Like this (movie poster).jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 04:42, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

 Done (deleted because of existence of new, identical image.) Tim1357 (talk) 10:54, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Sentence Function

Hello there.

Hi, wasn't sure how to message you but i figure you can delete this as soon as you read it. I just wanted to let you know that I originally started the 'Sentence Function' article (you can check this yourself) and was merely reverting my two interrogatives back to what they were originally as I need two separate examples: 'what do you want?' is an example of a question procurring previously unknown information, while 'is david gay?' is a question validation for a preconceived notion. This is not any form of tagging. Thank you.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Nimic86 (talk • contribs) 00:00, 3 November 2009

Copied here from User page, after incorrect posting. AJCham 00:33, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

WP:FILMS October Newsletter

The October 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. The newsletter includes details on the current membership roll call to readd your name from the inactive list to the active list. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:12, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

D.G.E. Hall article

Dear Tim, thanks for your offer of help with my article on D.G.E. Hall. I have to admit that I am completely new to writing and editing Wikipedia articles. I did try to study and follow all guidelines but it seems I am not getting it right. I believe the subject matter is of interest: D.G.E. Hall wrote the definitive history on SE Asia and was the leading authority on the region at the time when world focused on Vietnam, Cambodia, etc.

I realise I need a couple more references and will get them soon.

I have posted a photograph of D.G.E Hall to Wikimedia Commons, I now need to work out how to use this in the article.

Thanks very much for your offer of help. I greatly appreciate it.Chriseve (talk) 00:05, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

I did some improvements to the article. Right now the article is unreferenced, other then the autobiography. I would suggest adding some more references. Other then that you shouldn't be worried (right now) about loosing your article. I am waiting for a response from the user who suggested the overhaul in the first place, Ill report back when I hear from him. Tim1357 (talk) 00:22, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you so much. I am very grateful. I will get a couple of other references.Chriseve (talk) 01:49, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

I didn't have anything better to do, so i went ahead and fixed the article. Looks better now if I don't say myself. I used all your information, I just re-formatted it. Also, I added an infobox. Infoboxes are those nifty little things you see on the sides of articles. I think they add to the encyclopedia-ness of the article. Anyways, I added what information I saw on the article. Fill in any of the fields that you can find and reference (and its ok to leave some blank). Ask me any questions you want. --Tim1357 (talk) 00:02, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

You have a message

Hello, Tim1357. You have new messages at Whpq's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

22:14, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

About the edit war

Yes, I am participating in an edit war, I admit, but bear in mind that not only I but also is the IP 69.125.77.106 which is also participating in the edit war. I knew something about this would happen, but tell me not only to me, Tell the IP, which is not only in this war, but also insists that placing a redirection is invalid. I was explaining it but he just does not understand, so this edit war. I apologize for that, will not happen again. Archibald Leitch (talk) 02:39, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

I warned the IP too. Tim1357 (talk) 02:41, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

(However, I agree with you, the name should have accent marks) Tim1357 (talk) 02:42, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Tim, I'm here because the IP is keeping with the edit war and puting the redirection again. Try to make him undertsnd please.Archibald Leitch (talk) 16:06, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Questionable Revert...

Hi Tim, can you help me? I made a change on the "Post Falls, Idaho" page, and your bot keeps reverting my change for "Andrew Seltice". My change is justified, because someone before me, has linked "Andrew Seltice" to "Jesus Christ". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.79.7.18 (talk • contribs)

 Done responded Tim1357 (talk) 19:05, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Watching the watchmen

Thanks for keeping me honest. I just started using Huggle, and that bed red revert-and-warn button is hard to avoid. --SquidSK ^(1MC•log) 17:06, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

I understand, I've done it too! Tim1357 (talk) 17:08, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Drayton Manor Theme Park

Just a note to say how impressed I am by the speed you reverted this vandalism. Jan1naD ^{(talk • contrib)} 21:05, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Tim1357 (talk) 21:09, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Adding Sources

Could you please explain to me how to add a source when editing an article?Cheddarjack (talk) 22:18, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Sure! To add cite something, put it between two <ref> tags. So that means, if you wanted to cite google.com, you would add <ref>google.com</ref>. Note the forward slash at the end of the second <ref> tag. The source will automaticaly be added to the Reference section of the article with a footnote. Good Luck! Tim1357 (talk) 22:28, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

tim

hello tim removeing all jatt clans from khatri clan its mainly in hindu no sarder or singh in khatri —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.133.125.152 (talk) 23:30, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Block Review Por Favor (moved from user talk:PhilKnight)

Hey ther PhilKnight,

I was wondering what the reason was behind the block on User:Cheddarjack. It seems that the last edits he/she made were legitimate. If you could, either un-block him/her or reply on my talk page. Thanks Tim1357 (talk) 22:32, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Tim, I blocked the account because it engaged in vandalism. I don't consider that asking a couple of questions makes any difference. PhilKnight (talk) 22:34, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes but were they not in god faith? The only vandalism like edits appear to be the ones saying that Disaster Movie Was the "worst movie.... He/she later defended that edit, citing the reception. If they were in good faith, then they were not deliberate attempts to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia. . Tim1357 (talk) 22:39, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Also, take a look at the user's talk page, where there is an unblock request going on. Tim1357 (talk) 22:43, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Looking more closely, I agree, the only edit that is definitely wrong is the unsourced opinion. I've unblocked on that basis. PhilKnight (talk) 22:48, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I am going to help this user a long so that this doesn't happen again. Cheers! Tim1357 (talk) 22:49, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes I felt awful for reporting him -- since I based it all on that one edit and the multiple warnings on his page. After I reported him, I looked through his contributions, and seen a lot of box office (gross on films) changes on different films. I thought oh great, more reverting. But after I read through and seen that all of the edits were actually genuine, and I even seen that one he made on Disaster Movie and didn't think that was vandalism. He was just adding what another site had said (obviously he didn't/don't fully understand WP guidelines). So I understand why he got all those warnings, because it did appear he was vandalizing and we should have AGF (which can be difficult, I admit). I'm just glad PhilKnight got it sorted out in a timely fashion -- and lesson learned on my part.  :)

PS: Great job at reverting the IP vandalism on Ice-T, I was about to click roll it back, but you caught it. --Mike Allen ^{talk · contribs} 00:50, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

LCHS edit

I can see taking out the objective material, but why do a blanket deletion? Way to delete factual material in there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.244.114.41 (talk) 23:13, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, yore right. My anti-vandalism software reverted all of it. In any case, the other removed content was not very neutral, feel free to add it back (this time without the objective material) Tim1357 (talk) 23:18, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

So you're not even reading what content you're removing, you just rely on a software program to do it? Great.98.244.114.41 (talk) 23:25, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Nope, i reverted the edit that said "cool guy" (or whatever it was) and the software reverted the previous one as well (assuming that it was un-constructive too). Like I said, feel free to re-add the section on wrestling. Ask any more questions you have here! Good Luck! Tim1357 (talk) 23:28, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I see, thanks for the quick replies 98.244.114.41 (talk) 23:33, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

No Problem Tim1357 (talk) 23:35, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

hi

Would you please indicate what I have vandalized. 152.3.249.70 (talk) 04:15, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh my gosh! Jesus that was a stupid mistake! Uh *slaps self on face* i am SOOO sorry. I am restoring all of your edits now. Hold tight, and please accept my most humble apology. Tim1357 (talk) 04:18, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

 Done I still can't believe how dumb I am. Sorry Again! Tim1357 (talk) 04:26, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

And yelled at original contributor (the one who redirected to Sims 3) Tim1357 (talk) 04:37, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks bro. 152.3.249.37 (talk) 05:04, 17 November 2009 (UTC) (same person as 152.3.249.70, but not intentionally IP hopping)

GNUstep

I disagree with your revert on GNUstep. The link to EggPlant was in good faith, because developers are porting it from Mac OS X with the help of GNUstep (just see the GNUstep mailing list). --TMC1221 (talk) 02:04, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh really? I guess i need to read the style guideline on external links because it seemed kind of spammy. Then again, I hate external link sections (they all seem to me to be link dumps-sections). Also, it was listed as a spam link on WP:Wikiproject Spam. In any case, I did not assume bad faith, I just reverted it because It was not a very resourceful link (see www.testplant.com): it adds no information to the subject. But you are entitled to your opinion, and Iwill not contest you reverting my edit. Tim1357 (talk) 02:09, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Hey Tim

Hey Tim, remember the guy who kept removing content from the Mistabishi article? Its happened again Newportpriory's Talk page I was wondering If you was able to do something about it? Cheers Jayflux (talk) 16:51, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Gave him a friendly reminder. Tim1357 (talk) 22:42, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism

Hello dear comrade. This same user has been creating multiple accounts and hasn't stopped hounding my edits or user page for the last 5 years. I don't know how to deal with this problem. His ip addresses are synonymous with 166.137.6.132, 166.137.8.158, 166.137.6.25, 166.137.9.58. All have a 166.137 denomination. He also uses other computers and runs around to annoy and instigate problems from different accounts. I've tried to avoid it entirely in the past, but what he does is put up afd (article for deletion) proposals on many of the articles I've worked on, or even deletes much of my information, or just plain vandalizes my user and talk page. I don't know why this person does this, but is there a way to block this person entirely from editing in a way that we can avoid this problem entirely. He instigates me to revert his vandalism and I've been blocked before for breaking the 3rr rule on numerous articles; where I've reverted his madness over 3 times; and that's resulted in my being blocked before. I seriously want to avoid that dilemma, so I'm hoping my asking for help doesn't fall on deaf ears. There has to be a way to stop this person from vandalizing and adding nonsense and gibberish on my user and talk pages. I appreciate any and all help I can receive. - Zarbon (talk) 14:40, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

So, I will try to address all of your concerns. You have the right to remove the AFD templates, so you are right there. However, IP socks are a bit iffy. Sometimes IP addresses change, due to the ISP. I suggest that you bring this up at WP:AN/I. They are a bit better at these complex conflicts. In fact, Ill do that for you, however I am not going to side with anyone, and whatever happens will happen. Ill send you the link when I've finished. Tim1357 (talk) 04:01, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, seems like he is already blocked, and cannot create any more accounts. Tell me if you have any more problems! Tim1357 (talk) 04:06, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Top of the morning!

Listen to me, keep an eye on Brendan Filone. there is some heavy vandalism going on there. I have reverted a IP of Zarbon (yeah, the guy above). Until we meet again... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lord Freeza (talk • contribs) 15:29, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

This user Lord Freeza is yet another sockpuppet of the aforementioned ip addresses. He has been adding afd tags like I had warned prior; he is also the person responsible for having all the numerous sockpuppets. He has a long history of following my contributions and either vandalizing or reverting them, or adding afd tags. Please help me deal with this situation. I had hoped that he would have stopped this incessant vandalism and gibberish, but after 5 years, he's still an idiot and has continued the same moronic behavior. - Zarbon (talk) 16:13, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

SmackBot

You may not know that there is currently a discussion at WT:CITE about whether replacing duplicate footnotes with "named" footnotes should be required. That discussion needs to conclude before anyone can discuss the order of footnotes, because the use of named footnotes is the only way to cause footnotes to appear out of numerical order in the first place. I do agree that, once the issue of named footnotes is resolved, the issue of numerical order should also be addressed. WP:CITE is the appropriate page to discuss requirements on formatting of references. — Carl (CBM · talk) 13:12, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Biosynthesis of nonproteinogenic amino acid (SVG).svg

A tag has been placed on File:Biosynthesis of nonproteinogenic amino acid (SVG).svg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

• Please avoid generating images using a tracing utility and uploading them straight to Wikipedia. Firstly, the image you uploaded mentioned above contained a linked raster graphic and so couldn't be rendered by the Wikimedia server. Secondly, the image you uploaded over the corresponding PNG file was in SVG format - the file type has to correspond with the file extension of the file on the server, otherwise things get very messy (and broken). Thirdly, images that are generated by tracing tools are in general lower quality than the original raster graphics - particularly if the originals contain text, lines, and antialiasing (the antialiasing results in multiple shapes being created; the lines result in splodges, and the text is converted to loosely-similar shapes rather than SVG text - all of which were evident in the image you uploaded). If you are interested in learning to create or convert SVG illustrations for Wikipedia, I suggest you ask at the Graphic Lab for some advice. Stannered (talk) 20:43, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Yea, the images I've been trying to upload only work on my machine. Also, I looked for some sort of tutorial from the Graphics lab, but there is none, so I was on my own. Thanks for the suggestions, I've pretty much given up on becoming a member of the graphics lab, its to confusing and tedious. Tim1357 (talk) 21:23, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism Revert

Hi. Sorry about bringing back the vandalism on Hindu Temple, it was accidental. Thanks for bringing back the good version. *Pepperpiggle*^*Sign!* 21:30, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

No problem Tim1357 (talk) 21:33, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Rollback!

Hello Tim, I have rollback and I use Huggle, but I saw one of your edits where you reverted 3 different editors at once with Huggle. How did you rollback multiple users in Huggle? Thanks! Kevinmon•talk•trib 21:45, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

See those blue arrows on the top of the huggle window? You can use those to navigate through the page's history. When you find the good revision, and if you revert to it, Huggle mentions all of the editors whose edits you are reverting, in the edit summary. I think that makes sense. Ask me any more questions that you have! Tim1357 (talk) 22:30, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

My Account

Hy Tim, i would like to delete all my contributions and to delete my account, Regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by Milance (talk • contribs) 01:33, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry but i cannot delete your articles. There is a disclaimer at the end of every edit page that states as follows.

You irrevocably agree to release your contributions under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL.

So, you can only have an article deleted if you are the only real contributor to it. Give me a list of articles that meet that criteria and I can help you from there. Tim1357 (talk) 01:54, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Very well then about the articles, i would still like to delete my account. Is that ok? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Milance (talk • contribs) 14:18, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

According to the policy on deleting an account you can have your user page deleted (it is already) and you talk page deleted. Also, you can re-name your account if you wish, but all of your edits must still be assigned to some user account. Would you like me to delete your talk page?. Tim1357 (talk) 16:57, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, please, delete it. Thank you, Regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by Milance (talk • contribs) 00:19, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Y Deleted Tim1357 (talk) 20:46, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting vandalism on my talk page!

Message From Xenu has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Thank you Tim1357 (talk) 20:44, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

My Post

Can you please unrevert my post as it CONSTRUCTIVELY shows how Karl Blossfeldt died in 1932. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.106.70.203 (talk) 19:53, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Sure thing, my bad. Y reverted! Tim1357 (talk) 19:57, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thank you for letting me know the page is on its way to be deleted. Everytime I try to blank it or something, the page just got reverted to the incorrect merged text. —Preceding unsigned comment added by NAVREF (talk • contribs) 20:09, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Yep, it had been deleted Tim1357 (talk) 20:40, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

untill->until

I know its nearly inevitable when using AWB or something similar that when one has altered many pages, not to look too carefully at what is being altered, but please be careful in the case of this edit you altered spellings within a {{quotation}}. If one reads the quote it is easy to see that the spelling with in the quotation is archaic and one needs to look at the source to see if it is or is not a spelling mistake. --PBS (talk) 08:43, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Whoops! sorry i didn't see the {{quotation}} or know that "untill" was an archaic spelling of "until". Thanks for the heads up! Tim1357 (talk) 16:28, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Its not so much archaic, but spelling was not consistent (No dictionaries), so spellings vary from person to person, for example in this particular quoted text "dominions" and "ninth" are spelt Domynions and nynth. Further the text like this are often hand written and transcribed into print at a later date, the secondary sources that exist in things like Google Books, often chose to transcribe them in different ways, so the same text can be found with different spelling etc in different sources. -- PBS (talk) 16:39, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

America's Amry

OK, first you claim every point has to be NPOV but then it appears that's only if you don't like what's being said, you can't have both a NPOV and controversy, that's obvious, so the section needs to go period, also throughout the article non NPOV is stated as well which was removed as well as mere lies, non Col. developes this game a team of programmers does, get you heads out of your asses your waring period!— Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.48.252.144 (talk • contribs)
User was blocked02:47, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

User:Hlj

Discussion copied from Valkyrie Red's Talk Page

{{help me}} There's this user who is being completely biased and unfair in several arguments I'm having with him regarding the American Civil War. He isn't reasonable, always gets his little Wikipedian friends to support him and reports me for the 3RR rule thing, just because I started it first. How do I report him or get him kicked out of the Civil War project on Wikipedia? Thanks!— Preceding unsigned comment added by Valkyrie Red (talk • contribs)

Well, ill try and help you guys figure stuff out, let me take a look through what's happened and ill get back in a sec. Tim1357 (talk) 02:52, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Im having trouble finding where the conflict has been. Who is the user that you have a dispute with? Tim1357 (talk) 03:07, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Hal Jaspersen, but he goes by HLJ whenever he's signing his posts.Red Wiki 03:16, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Im sorry i cant find one example of you two crossing paths. To the best of my knowledge, neither of you have ever edited American Civil War. Please give me a link to a diff or something. Tim1357 (talk) 03:51, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Plus Hlj hasn't edited in like 3 months! Tim1357 (talk)`

Hi Tim - I think Red is referring to the TL;DR discussios at Talk:Battle of Gettysburg; here and here.

And, erm, good luck with that! AJCham 05:44, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, it seems like you guys had a fairly civil conversation, it may have been a bit heated, but it seemed fair. As for your blocks, I cannot do anything. Im sorry to say that you brok the 3 Revert Rule. Even if it is a meaningful reason, you should never revert a good faith edit more then twice. The best thing to do, when you have conflicts like this, is go to the corresponding wikipeoject's talk page and ask for input. More then likely, you will get more then you neeed. Finally, you can ask for a topic ban for Hal Jasperson at AN/I but it will probably not come to anything. As far as I can see, he did not do anything wrong. Ask any questions here, Ill try to get back to you sooner then I have! Tim1357 (talk) 00:00, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Moved from "HLJ" Section on this page.

Hey Tim, just wanted to tell you that he hasn't only been bugging me on Talk:Battle of Gettysburg but also here andhere.

Hope you can helpRed Wiki 02:51, 26 November 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added byValkyrie Red (talk • contribs)

Still I see no reason why he is being unfair. Maybe I am missing something big, but he seems completely reasonable. I have looked through all of your conversations, and it seems like you two are simply having content disputes, which is perfectly suited to the article's talk page. Im going to see if I can get Hal to comment here, to see what he thinks. Tim1357 (talk) 03:04, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

reversion in Aptostichus angelinajoleae

I would greatly appreciate answering here. 188.134.5.40 (talk) 20:16, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Yresponded Tim1357 (talk) 20:44, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Y And again Tim1357 (talk) 19:37, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

TUSC token e69aafecfaa339a46b4697fcbab8b5e1

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account! Tim1357 (talk) 21:21, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Diet soda

That wasn't a vandalism edit; artificial sweeteners are proven to be worse for your health than sugar. Also, if you look at your revision, you restored the vandalism that I corrected a few days ago. Why? 98.216.203.117 (talk) 02:53, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

I never said it was vandalism what i said was:

Please do not add content without citing verifiable and reliable sources

. It is important to cite anything and everything that you change in the encyclopedia. I restored the vandalism by accident (removed again here) because when I hit "revert" it reverts to the last revision that wasn't yours. In other words, it was my screw up. Thank you for removing the vandalism in the first place, and don't hesitate to ask me any more questions! Tim1357 (talk) 02:59, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

How do I cite info? 98.216.203.117 (talk) 03:01, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, anything you put between two <ref> tags becomes a footnote at the end of the page. For example, if I wanted to cite google.com , I would put it in the article like this <ref>google.com</ref>. There are more fancy ways to do it, but this way gets the job done. Remember that the source has to be secondary and reliable. Tim1357 (talk) 03:20, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Kambiz Roshan ravan

Mr Roshan Ravan is a renowned Iranian composer. I will rich this article soon. I urge you to refer to the Farsi version of the article in Persian Wikipedia service and observe the article. --Goodmanjoon (talk) 19:48, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Mediabizbloggers

Hello Tim1357, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of Mediabizbloggers - a page you tagged - because: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. NW (Talk) 00:48, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I brought it to WP:AFD instead. Thanks! Tim1357 (talk) 00:51, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Request for Reconsideration of Deletion / Canasta

Hello Tim -

I posted a request for reconsideration of deletion to Alphachimp on October 1st. I see that Alphachimp doesn't appear to be very active any longer.

See my argument there

Would you be able to help me with this request? Thanks -

Gouache23 (talk) 13:27, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
{{adminhelp}}

Sure, the NPR source seems to bee good enough to assert notability. I ask the admin to unserfy the article in question, and Ill help the user get it ready to be moved to the main-space. thanks! Tim1357 (talk) 16:17, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

I have undeleted it to Wikipedia:Article Incubator/Canasta (band). That gives you and Gouache23 a month to get it ready for the mainspace. This is a useful but fairly new idea: see Wikipedia:Article Incubator for details of how it works. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 16:33, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Ok, that works too. Thanks! Tim1357 (talk) 16:34, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Daily FfD pages and this discussion

I haven't heard back from him. You asked me to let you know.--Rockfang (talk) 06:20, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Okey Dokey, Ill get to it this weekend. Would you want the bot to add a box to all the previous days? Or just start from current? Tim1357 (talk) 12:46, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

You could just start from the current I'm thinking. Thank you for this.--Rockfang (talk) 12:52, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

And just every night at midnight kinda thing? Tim1357 (talk) 22:34, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Every new day (12 am) going with UTC time would be my suggestion. Or maybe like 5-10 minutes later to make sure Zorglbot has started the new day's FfD page.--Rockfang (talk) 05:16, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

The tool discussed on IRC

I thought I would let you know, I've posted the motivation and purpose statement for CollabRC (tenatively-named), the tool I was discussing in IRC a few days ago that I would like to develop to improve the capabilities of rollbackers on Wikipedia. I thought you might be interested in it and wanted to invite you personally to look it over and let me know if you have any specific features or criticisms that may be constructive for the project. I hope you don't feel this is inappropriate canvassing; I just respect you and figured you might want to get a better idea of where I am going, and I value your input. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns, or if you have any comments regarding the project itself, feel free to bring it up on the talk page there. Thanks! --Shirik (talk) 06:15, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Tim1357. You have new messages at User_talk:Shirik/CollabRC#Sample sets.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Shirik (talk) 18:20, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Database dumps

The way to process these is by scanning them which is actually pretty quick. The articles "only" dump takes between eight minutes and an hour, depending on what I am doing with it - probably it could be sped up more. I use perl, I can write a script in a few minutes from scratcch and if it is one I already have something similar, even quicker. For example I was trying to find a language stub I created, the following code listed all where I am the last editor. (Didn't actually find the stub, but that's another story.)

 
while(<>){
     chomp;
     if(/<title>(.*)<\/title>/){$title=$1;}
     if(/<username>(.*)<\/username>/){
         if($1 eq "Rich Farmbrough"){
             $mine=1;
         }
         else {$mine=0;}
     }
     if ($mine ==1 && /lang-stub/){print "$title\n";}
}

Rich Farmbrough, 10:54, 19 December 2009 (UTC).

igloo

Hi Tim1357, and thanks for your interest in igloo. Before using the program, please read the following information carefully - failure to do so may result in your test access being revoked.

igloo is a JavaScript-powered, browser-based anti-vandalism tool, which means you do not have to download or install anything on your computer and it will work on multiple operating systems. However, it does mean that the performance relies on that of your browser and it may operate more slowly than downloaded programs. You must have either Mozilla Firefox 3+ or Google Chrome to use igloo, as it is currently incompatible with other browsers.

igloo relies on a system called iglooNet to assist you in finding and reverting vandalism. It is this system that transforms the program from a pretty version of recent changes to an actual anti-vandalism tool. Naturally, this is beyond the power of a client-side program, and igloo will regularly communicate with an external, non-Wikimedia server. Because of things like server logs, and the iglooNet abuse tracker, this may allow your IP address to be attached to your username - something which is otherwise impossible on Wikipedia. If you do not want this to happen, you MUST NOT USE IGLOO.

If you decide that you do want to test igloo, please keep in mind that it not wholly stable, and you may experience problems where it performs an invalid edit, or other unwanted action. If this happens, fix any mistakes you've made, apologise to anyone you've offended, and let me know. I don't take any responsibility for your use of the program - if you aren't willing to fix any errors, don't use it.

igloo is already quite powerful. The following is a simple guide to using the program:

• The igloo interface is similar to that of other software, including huggle. Recent changes appear on the left, and diffs appear on the right.
• igloo sorts diffs based on iglooNet data so that edits most likely to be vandalism are displayed first. You can press spacebar to view the top diff, or click on any diff to view it directly.
• When you find vandalism, press 'Q' or click the revert button to revert the change, and issue a warning to the user. igloo automatically issues the correct warning. It will ignore existing warnings that are more than 5 days old, and restart from the beginning.
• The iglooNet assertion system tags clean and dirty edits with colour coding - if it suspects an edit is vandalism, it will be flagged as red, and if it believes it to be clean, it will tag it green.
• At any time, you can re-review diffs you have already seen by pressing backspace or using the icons to move through the diff history.

If you have any questions, comments, suggestions or other feedback, I'd love to know. If you hate it, and won't be using it again, please let me know why - and I'll remove you from the test whitelist. If you now try and use igloo, you should find that it will allow you to use the program. Thanks, and good luck! Ale_Jrb^talk 10:42, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Percy Jackson task force

Erm, no thanks. I only made two edits to that article and they were anti-vandalism. Tim1357 (talk) 22:29, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

RfD nomination of "D" Is for DubbyndashThe Lustmord Dub Mixes

I have nominated "D" Is for DubbyndashThe Lustmord Dub Mixes (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. — The Man in Question (in question) 21:23, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Removing 'R uncategorized'

} Hi, I noticed that you've begun removing transclusions of Template:R uncategorized (per WP:TFD/H). I just wanted to let you know that there is already an almost-completed bot request for this task (see Wikipedia:Bot requests/Archive 33#Orphaning a template. While you are more than welcome to continue and your involvement is definitely appreciated, the template has several thousand transclusions, so I don't know if you want to undertake the task... –BLACK FALCON ^(TALK) 22:01, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Yreplied Tim1357 (talk) 22:16, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I admit that I have no idea about the average duration of a BRFA, but I suppose that I'm also in no hurry... :) If you're willing and it's not a hardship for you to help orphan the template, then by all means please don't let me stop you. –BLACK FALCON ^(TALK) 22:45, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Bot Account

} Your bot account is not to be used for normal editing. Q ^{T C} 05:32, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, sometimes I log-in under my bot to fix things and forget to log out. Could you give me a diff of the one you were referencing in particular? Tim1357 (talk) 05:52, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Going through all the edits it looks like you realized your mistake, but it was the BRFA WildBot. Q ^{T C} 05:56, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

OK, thanks! Tim1357 (talk) 05:58, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

}

Hello, Tim1357. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/MWOAPBot.
Message added 23:47, 29 December 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

MWOAP (talk) 23:47, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

}

Hello, Tim1357. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/MWOAPBot.
Message added 18:20, 30 December 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

MWOAP (talk) 18:20, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		The Barnstar of Diligence may be awarded in recognition of...community service. This barnstar is awarded to Tim1357 for his valiant volunteering to create a bot. Thank you for your efforts, you are a real benefit to the project.Ikip 18:19, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Aww shucks... Tim1357 (talk) 18:34, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Infobox in need of more info

Template:Infobox in need of more info has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:14, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Yep, newbie mistake. Ill !vote for deletion. Tim1357 (talk) 18:16, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

No prob. We all gotta learn somehow!

Thanks for the very prompt response. Happy New Year! --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:25, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Volunteer

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}} Hi Tim-- noticed you're very active on the Wikipedia:Bot_requests page. I'd like to volunteer my time to build up some bots, its just not clear to me if there is a backlog of bots or anything I can help with. If there is, or something comes up, I'd be happy to help. Cheers. jhe_iv (talk) 07:49, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Sure we can always use more help. If you have any coding experience, I suggest you familiarize yourself with the frameworks that wikipedia has. Right now, there is no real backlog per say. I am pretty in-experienced, but if you see some work to do that includes a bot, that you are interested in, offer your services! Tim1357 (talk) 02:29, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

DASHBot thought

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}}} It recently moved, as t will, a page with a - in the title to a page with a – in the title. That's fine, I expect. It is pedantic because someone decided to be pedantic with the hyphens. Go them! And your implementation helps them be pedantic. I happen to find that rather silly, but doubtless a consensus developed for the idea, and ordinary mortals now need to remember something else. But that is a rant that belongs somewhere else.

What it didn't spot/doesn't spot, perhaps cannot spot, is that there was a navigational template on the page that referred to the old article name.

I know a redirect will always handle this, but we have become used to those templates showing the current page in 'bold, and this will not happen with a redirect. So I edited the template and all is well. Not that it was not well before my edit, but it just wasn't 100% well.

In case you wonder which edit I'm talking about, it was to Navy League in Australia and the Sea Cadets - Early History, but many such edits will have nav templates

Since bot operators like a challenge I thought I'd challenge you to look at this and automate it, too! Fiddle Faddle (talk) 11:15, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your response! To answer your question, there are already bots that change redirects in the template namespace. (I believe they do the disambiguation pages aswell). I could try to find one of said bots, and get them to do a run. Ill report back here (and leave a note on your talk page) when I find one. Tim1357 (talk) 15:57, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

God bless your DashBot Tim...the countless hours you've saving me making minor edits on silly athletics competition articles. Sillyfolkboy (talk) (edits)^{Join WikiProject Athletics!} 01:33, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Referencing

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}} I received a notification from the bot about missing references. I am not aware how you programmed it, but it does fail to check the links that I provided along with a respective article about one or the other person. Maybe the bot needs to be checked or let me know how I can avoid him. A lot of persons might not be widely publicized in news or other articles while they do their portion of influence in cultural or political life. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 18:02, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi there, thanks for your response! I am sorry that you were annoyed by the bot. When I made the bot, I did not want to have it make the judgement of weather or not an article is suitably referenced. We figured that human editors would be much better suited to make that call. Tim1357 (talk) 18:06, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Actually I poorly chose words to describe my interactions with your bot. Nonetheless, I am favoring any actions that would improve the introduced articles and will try to provide more information on the subject whenever there will be a chance. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 18:17, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Ok, Thanks! Drop me a line if you have any other concerns. Tim1357 (talk) 18:22, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

DASHbot needs a {{Prod}} check

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}} Gday. DASHbot moved a page with a {{prod}} tag. Could I suggest that the bot be programmed to skip such pages. Thanks. billinghurst (talk) 21:39, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Well I'm all done with the mass move (for now). Sorry if I created more work for you. Tim1357 (talk) 04:00, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

DASHBot

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}} It shouldn't mark its user talk page posts (e.g., [1]) as minor edits. Cheers, postdlf (talk) 07:33, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Updated code, thanks for the heads up! Tim1357 (talk) 07:43, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Bot

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}} I stumbled on a bot message in my watchlist and thought it a great idea, but you might want to link to [[Category:All unreferenced BLPs]] somewhere in the message so people (like me) who might be willing to attack the backlog can find it easily. Would be good "advertising" for such work. . . (John User:Jwy talk) 16:57, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Good idea:  Done Tim1357 (talk) 18:12, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

DASHBot suggestion

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}} Yo Tim, it seems from the above page that there have been a few false positives and otherwise off-key reports from DASHBot on the unsourced BLP task. While a certain number of these are unavoidable in an automated process, might I suggest you tone down the wording of the reports in order to avoid rubbing contributors the wrong way? Instead of "I am a bot alerting you that x of the articles that you created is an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person.", you might write "appear(s) to be an unsourced biography of a living person" or "has/have been tagged as an unsourced biography of a living person". Regards,  Skomorokh  20:18, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

I was thinking exactly that! Good idea. Tim1357 (talk) 20:23, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Great! Mahalo,  Skomorokh  20:25, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

I changed the message, leave any other concerns here. Tim1357 (talk) 20:26, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}}}

Hello, Tim1357. You have new messages at Bongomatic's talk page.
Message added 23:17, 2 January 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

^Bongo_matic 23:17, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Your bot

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}}} Hi there; your bot is accusing me of creating an article Diwakar Pundir which is an unreferenced BLP. My involvement with this article was in 2006 when I userfied it. No other involvement ever. Your bot needs spanking. (I have waited over three years to make that joke). --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 22:30, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes. For some reason that page does not show the history before you userfied it. Do you have any idea for why this is? (Normally when you move a page it brings the article's history along with it.) Tim1357 (talk) 22:38, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

I have no idea. It is over three years ago, I was a new editor and could easily have done it wrong. --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 23:00, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

It appears (according to the move log) that you did it correctly. But also, the article's history gives you the credit for starting the article. Im confused. Tim1357 (talk) 23:07, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

References

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}} Happy New Year! I have already put some references into my early articles (chess, athlete, boxing, history, etc.), so I will also do it for these ones. -- Mibelz 15:25, 5 Jan 2010 (CET)

Great, glad to hear it! Tim1357 (talk) 01:24, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Really minor nitpicky request, please don't hate me

Would you, when you have a chance, please change the text of the warning to "to ensure verifiability" rather than "to insure verifiability"? While dictionaries have been slowly allowing insure to mean ensure, the two words have drastically different meanings, and keeping them distinct in text is preferable (read: I feel pain whenever I read insure where ensure was the appropriate word). If you're not talking about insurance, you want ensure.

This has been a message from your friendly neighborhood language freak. :-) —ShadowRanger ^(talk|stalk) 20:41, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Error

The bot just tagged Victoria Corderi which has a good reference. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 19:09, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Yep, it seems it does. The message said that it was tagged as an unreferenced blp. We did not want to have the bot weather the article was adequately referenced. Tim1357 (talk) 19:12, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

DASHbot

I'm not here to complain about getting a message considering the articles it notified me about are without references (there's external links however, but that's not the point). But I am here to ask if there's anyway for the bot to determine if the editor is new and doesn't need the "Thanks for contributions!" and the links to BLP policies considering I've been a regular contributor since Sep. 08 and don't need the newbie type welcome. If this is impossible then no worries. Cheers,--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 23:38, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Hey Giants27. It is possible to determine if users are newbie, but I think it is kind of needless. IMO there is nothing wrong with saying 'thank you for your contributions'. Tim1357 (talk) 01:23, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. "Thank you for you contributions" sounds sort of like a welcome message to me considering it includes links to policies that usually an experienced editor is most likely familiar with. For the relevant policy see WP:DTR. Cheers,--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 23:03, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

OK. But there is nothing wrong with saying thank you for your contributions. I start a lot of my personal messages (often to regulars) with 'Thank you for your contributions'. I think it is kind of courteous. I think it is important for us to thank everyone, not just the newbies.Tim1357 (talk) 23:14, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for suggession about my article Mehr Abdul Haq .He has been died as i wrote in my article .I knew him personly .how i give reference when any reference is not available on inter net. about although in site about his award on his on no 5 yet sellpings are wrong Maher Abdul

http://www.academy.gov.pk/nationallit.html

Khwaja Ghulam Farid Award

 (Seraiki Language) 

Another reference is available in Urdu encyclopedia feroz sons Lahore published in pakistan 3th 4th edition 2005 --Rasoolpuri(talk) 10:11, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Brfa

Sorry, I'm not a BRFA pro. Where am I supposed to comment, exactly? Hipocrite (talk) 21:35, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

That was an accident, I couln't figure out how to reply using the droid. Sorry! Tim1357 (talk) 02:38, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Thoughts about the bot

In theory, this looks like a good idea, unfortunately, notifying the article creator rather than those who add substantial content might not really be all that helpful in older articles. For example, I was notified about Ajay Jadeja. After I deleted it as a clear copyvio in 2005, I createda tiny stub since it seemed clear the person was notable. The article has obviously grown a great deal since then; as I hoped, someone with interest in the subject came along and fleshed things out. I'm very unlikely to return and do any work on the article; there are probably other articles out there that are similar due to my work with copyvios on Wikipedia. Anyways, thought it might be helpful to think about whether or not notifying folks about stubs or articles they worked on several years ago is really going to be useful; many editors don't stick around that long and it makes me wonder if a lot of these messages will just go unread. Shell ^babelfish 10:16, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment Shell. The message you received is the only message you will receive. The hope of the messaging was to get the attention of active users (like yourself). Unfortunalty, there were some unforeseen errors in the method that we used to determine who created what. I have stopped the bot, and I am going to find a way to parse out the users that are not active any more (maybe with a threshold of 6 months). I encourage you to leave any other concerns/questions you have here. If you want, you may bring the issue to WT:BLP, as they were the ones who sanctioned the bot. Good Luck, and thank you again. Tim1357 (talk) 16:20, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Just to clarify, I didn't mind the message at all and I think the bot is a good idea for combating problematic BLPs, I was just wondering if there was a way that wasn't incredibly difficult to see about notifying active users or folks who added a lot of information to the article. If you're already looking into it a similar idea, I think that's great and I think it will be quite an improvement for the bot. Anything we can do to poke people into BLP compliance is a good thing :) Shell ^babelfish 17:19, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

When the idea first started, I generated a list of users who were major contributors to the articles. However, I found that most of the time, the creator and the largest contributor were the same person. Im not sure how to do it based on actual size of contributions, maybe ill go toWikipedia:Database_reports to see if they can help. Tim1357 (talk) 21:34, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Concerns about DASHBot created Reception sections

Hi! I've been semi-following the debate regarding the relocation of album ratings, so it's no surprise to see your bot now implementing these changes. However, there's a couple of issues that you may or may not be aware of and I just wanted to bring them to your attention (sorry if this isn't the right place to do this). Firstly, when the bot creates a new "Reception" section and adds the "Professional ratings" box, if the article has no inline refs (and therefore no references tag), you get a red warning message at the bottom of the page. I know that articles should have inline refs and a ref section but in the real world, an awful lot of them don’t. Secondly, I thought that the bot was supposed to search to see if there was already a section heading with the word "Reception" in it, but in the Led Zeppelin article the bot seems to have stuck the ratings box in the "Recording and production" section - how come?

Thirdly, isn’t arbitrarily creating a Reception section going to cause a huge amount of work for Wikipedians where smaller, stub size articles are concerned? Chances are that these articles won’t have a dedicated section specifically dealing with the album’s reception and that means that someone’s got to then relocate the relevant few sentences or paragraph to the newly created section. I’ve just done this in the wake of a DASHBot edit over on theSimon and Garfunkel's Greatest Hits article and while it's not a big deal for one article, I can see this creating an awful lot of work for Wikipedians in the long run. Just my tupence on the matter though, you understand?

My last point is actually a request and is related to the issue of the bot locating a "Prefessional ratings" box if a Reception section if one already exists; I see from the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Albums#Bot-work that someone asked if the bot could be programmed to recognize phrases like "Release and reception", "Reviews", "Reception and aftermath", "Promotion and reception", and "Critical reception". I would also like to suggest titles with the word "Legacy" in them, like "Release and legacy". Many thanks! --Kohoutek1138 (talk) 03:49, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

This is exactly the reason I asked for an extended testing period! Thanks you so much for finding that error. I fixed my code (and the article) so that It would find the appropriate section. Anyways I added the word legacy to the group of words to look for. I also have it only convert refs if there is already ref tags already in the article. Please come back with any concerns you have, they help me more then you know. Tim1357 (talk) 16:15, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

DASHBot

Hi, Tim. I just got notified by the bot, which in general I think is useful (in my case, I'd written those articles many years ago and had entirely forgotten about them, though there was very little in them to be sourced). There is one thing, though, that I wanted to point out. The bot's talk page message currently says, "Please note that all biographies of living persons must be sourced." Now, many people have suggested that should be the case, but currently it is not part of policy. The policy is, "Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion," which is rather different. Currently your bot might give the impression that it's enforcing a policy that doesn't exist, which seems drama-inducing--perhaps a more conservative wording would be a good idea? Just a suggestion. Chick Bowen 01:07, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Hey Chick Bowen, thanks for your feedback. In the first sentance of Wikipedia:BLP#Reliable_sources, it say:

Material about living persons must be sourced very carefully. Without reliable third-party sources, it may include original research and unverifiable statements, and could lead to libel claims.

Ask any questions/express any more concerns that you have; I'm glad to hear them. Tim1357 (talk) 02:27, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Well. . . look, I hate to complain about this, because basically I'm on your side here as a long-time enforcer of BLP policy. But what you quote is a little different from the bolded statement the bot is placing on people's talk pages; in context, it's clear that BLP in general refers to biographical information specifically. Have a look at the two articles the bot pinged me about, Stephen Orgel and Gerald Moore (scholar). Since I received the notice I've added some basic sources, since they're easy enough to be found for the minimal information that was in them. But basically, these don't qualify as biographies at all; they're just minimal identification of the subjects; in fact, both of them were well-sourced by the standards of early 2006, when they were written: they noted the books they'd written, and those books contain the relevant information in their author bios (granted this is not sufficient now, but that's not my point). I just think the bot would make a better case for sourcing BLPs if the talk page message contained an argument for why it's important that BLPs be sourced, rather than a statement that makes it sound like unsourced BLPs would be deleted, which is not current policy. I think this is important, too, because the bot is tagging old articles. The message looks like a user warning message, which I was somewhat surprised to get about articles I wrote four years ago and don't remember. Feel free to ignore me (or perhaps see if anyone else agrees with me), but I'd suggest removing the blue exclamation point and the bolded text and saying something more like: "The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to insureverifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources." This is more neutrally worded, it's non-threatening, and, in my view, it's more accurate to current consensus. Anyway, think it over. Chick Bowen 03:15, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Believe it or not, I actually completley agree with you. When I originally wrote the message, and asked for comment at WP:BLP they asked me to make the message more assertive. I had my concerns about having a bot being so firm. I envisioned a message that was more of a kind reminder. Anyways I stopped the bot. I encourage you to look at the template at user:tim1357/temp. It's a little funky because it's meant to be substed. I am traveling today bu I'll try to work you on this. Tim1357 (talk) 15:09, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. What do you think about my wording above? Granted it's longer--but you'll save space if you drop the icon. :) Chick Bowen 03:15, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Dashbot again

Thanks for your quick response to my earlier post. So now the issue for today...  ; ) The bot doesn't recognize when the earliest edits in an article's history are completely unrelated to the BLP content. Regarding this BLP noticefor Capone (rapper), I never edited that article or even that title. In 2006, I moved the existing Capone to Capone (disambiguation), and then made Capone a redirect to Al Capone. Two years later, someone else changed that redirect into an article on the rapper Capone, which was then moved to Capone (rapper) recently (see history here). All rather convoluted. But perhaps you could program your bot to ignore edits that are only redirects, so that the "creator" is then the first non-redirect edit in the article's history? postdlf (talk) 23:40, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

The bot has been having trouble with these weird double move situations. I have no idea how to prevent it, actually. I have stopped the bot for now, hopefully I will be able to figure these things out soon. Tim1357 (talk) 02:32, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Ur message

The only source I used was wikipedia itself. I don't know how to source on wikipedia other than saying in the edit descrition. Emperor001 (talk) 22:49, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

You use the references that are used in the wikipedia article you want to cite.

For example: If there was information in Article: USA about the White house, I would find the references in USA that was pertinent toWhite house. Otherwise, wikipedia cannot reference itself. Good luck! Tim1357 (talk) 23:00, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

STOP PLEASE

about Frans Duijts You're now the third one who sayd or better cried to me: don't write about persons. But okay, i'll stop writing for the English one. I'm a Dutchman and I don't want that English nerd are crying to me that I do something not exactly the way which it should be. I'm getting angry so STOP PLEASE

daan2 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Daan2 (talk •contribs) 21:17, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

I am very sorry to hear that I annoyed you. Please do not let this ruin wikipedia for you. If you would like to complain about the nature of the bot, please go to WT:BLP. They requested that I code the bot. Tim1357 (talk) 22:16, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Not mine

Rather than telling me about BLPunreferenced pages, you'd be better off looking into who has been doing improper copy-and-paste moves which make it appear that the creation of a redirect is the first thing that was done in an article.

I'd guess that somewhere among the redirects to these articles, you will find one with a considerable history which will help you identify the creators of these articles:

1. Jiří Kylián - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
2. Ruhul Amin (film director) - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
3. Misono - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Maybe some of those improper moves should be fixed too; do you know whose attention to call that to? Gene Nygaard (talk) 18:54, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Gosh, I'm sorry. It looks like there were some improper cut and paste moves done, that make it look like you were the initial contributor to those articles. Ill add requests to have their histories merged. Tim1357 (talk) 19:23, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Why did your bot leave me this message?

[2] First, I created the article in 2004. There should be a statute of limitations on creator notifications. Second, the "UnreferencedBLP" tag was removed on 20 December, yet the bot notified me on 2 January. Thanks, The Hero of This Nation (talk) 17:54, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry about that. This is because the list was generated a few weeks ago. Your article must have changed in the period in-between. Ask me any more questions you have. Tim1357 (talk) 18:09, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Reply: Unreferenced BLPs

Thanks for pointing out about the unreferenced article through your BOT. References are now added in the lead of the article, and the BLP tag is removed. Cheers, -- Rajith Mohan ^{(Talk to me..)} 10:17, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. You were of the few that I tested the bot on. : ) Tim1357 (talk) 02:29, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

One of the articles you warned me about had references, so I am guessing you are going purely by the fact an article has a no sources tag on it which is not really accurate because people sometimes put those tags on for not having enough references so it needs to check if there are actual references on the page as well. -DJSasso (talk) 16:07, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your input. We thought about that, but the problem we faced, however, is that we did not want to leave it up to a bot to decide if an article is suitably referenced. I encourage you to remove the tag, because you are much better suited to make the call. Tim1357 (talk) 16:13, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs Bot message

Hi, Your bot alerted me "that 7 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons." - 6 of those were correct & I have since added references, however Bridget Wishart already had about 7 refs - not sure is there is some parameter not being picked up.— Rod ^talk 21:24, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Hey Rodw. Thanks for your comment. We did not want to have the bot assess weather the articles were suitably referenced, so we left it up to the more competent human editors. Thanks! Tim1357 (talk) 21:53, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Rainer Brüninghaus

The article you tagged is more or less a direct translation from the German version of Wikipedia which is also unreferenced.Brüninghaus is a sideman, he has no website. The article is accurate and contains nothing contentious.Your unreferenced tag is mere nit-picking.Paul210 (talk) 00:26, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs Bot message for an article in which I did not contribute

I should love neither to get credit nor to welcome any criticism for the material I have not posted. However that has happened by the bot you are managing. I received the message regarding the following article to which I have not contributed.

1. Darshan Jariwala - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Hope to see you in action removing the message on my talk page.

I posted the above message here on your talk page but it did not go through. I am posting it again.

Dr. Dinesh Karia^{(Talk) (contribs)} 00:49, 9 January 2010 (UTC

(also replied on Dineshjk's talk page)It seems that you created the article. I am not sure what is wrong here. Tim1357 (talk) 04:15, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Oh I am sorry, I should have written like, "My initial article contained only the well-known facts about Darshan Jariwala like his mother and his background and it was so much known to the public that it did not require any reference. Later on the added material was not posted by me."

Sorry again for an unclear message.

Dr. Dinesh Karia^{(Talk) (contribs)} 13:56, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Gerry McNee

Again, a completely uncontroversial article. There are no real biographical sources for McNee. However, in creating the article. I made one. Now you have messed up Google searches for this name with your nit-picking tag. Paul210 (talk) 7:32 pm, Today (UTC−5)

Unreferenced BLPs

The (stub) article does in fact have a reference and lists several additional references for which article material has not yet been written. I do not understand why the bot made this mistake. --EncycloPetey (talk) 05:58, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Marco Kreuzpaintner

Hi, I have recived a message from your bot DASHBot, where you said that I should give sources for the Article about Marco Kreuzpaintner. The thing is that I translated the Article about Marco Kreuzpaintner on the Wikipedia on the German language on the English language, and then I made the Article on the Wikipedia on the English language! In that Article there are only two references! Should I then place those in this Article? Thanks for your help! --The Nerd from Earth (talk) 20:31, 9 January 2010 (CEST)

Certianly! Any reference (even those in other languages) are better then no references. Just make sure they are reliable and verifiable. Tim1357 (talk) 00:16, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Vatican City is not the smallest country in terms of population

According to the Wikipedia article 'List of countries by population', http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population , Pitcairn Islands is the smallest country in terms of population, with a population of only 50, while in this article it says "At approximately 44 hectares (110 acres) (0.44 km2), and with a population of barely over 800, it is the smallest country in the world by both population and area." I think they should change that just to be a bit more accurate :) Girija0025 (talk) 07:05, 10 January 2010 (UTC)GirijaGirija0025 (talk) 07:05, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Vatican City is not the smallest country in terms of area

I —Preceding unsigned comment added by Girija0025 (talk • contribs) 07:00, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Nomination

I have nominated you for BAG membership at Wikipedia:Bot Approvals Group/nominations/Tim1357, please review the nomination and if you accept, transclude it to WT:BAG and notify the appropriate places listed in the policy with a neutral notifcation message. Good luck. MBisanz ^talk 18:34, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you and  Done Tim1357 (talk) 17:59, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Dane Bowers

Hi. I saw that you have edited in the article Dane Bowers. His biography is to be updated in the article. I have some references that will add to develop it more. 132.208.68.173 (talk) 16:05, 13 January 2010 (UTC)