User talk:Peelbot

Physics tag

Can you please stop tagging every single article in the encyclopedia with the physics wikiproject tag? There's no reason for that. — Omegatron 15:38, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I concur. The bot seems to have gone "off the rails", and is tagging non-physics articles.--Srleffler 16:38, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can you both provide a bit more information than that, please? Which articles have I mis-tagged? I'm only tagging articles within the categories listed at User:Peelbot/Physics categories, no more, and 99.9% of articles within those should be physics-related. Mike Peel 17:04, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Examples from the last fifty edits (some less appropriate than others):

I assume if you continue back in the list of edits, you will find more inappropriate cases, with similar frequency of occurrence. It would be good if you would go back and fix these before running the bot again.--Srleffler 23:33, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Running through these:

Vulcan (hypothetical planet) -- I'd count that as physics, heading towards astronomy. It was physical laws that suggested that the planet was present.
Vorpal -- that _did_ have physics content in it, until you split off the physics bit. I've now moved over the physics tag to the new page.
Vitalism -- you're right here. It's in Category:Obsolete scientific theories, which I should have gone through more carefully. I'll go back and check through that category shortly.
Visual acuity -- I'm not sure why this one's in Category:Physical quantity, tbh.
Vacuum plasmaspraying -- already detected, and fixed.
Trepidation -- borderline astronomy/physics. I can't see the harm in it being tagged as physics.
Transmitter power output -- again, borderline, methinks.

I'll check through the categories I've already tagged, and will tag, in the next few days to find any more occurrences like these. Most cases seem to be either articles in the wrong categories, or mixed categories that I haven't picked up on. Thanks. Mike Peel 00:16, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm all set up to tag the last batch of categories, but I'll hold off for the next 24 hours. If there are no further comments by then, I'll run the batch. Mike Peel 21:59, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You should probably remove Category:Ballistics from your bot's to-do list, and go through that one by hand. Many of the articles are not really "physics". I suspect this is part of the problem: categories whose topic is certainly a field of physics, but many of the articles within fall outside the subject matter usually considered "physics". --Srleffler 23:39, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Has anyone ever tried to get rid of these pointless Wikiproject tags? I'm sure it's been tried once without consensus, but I don't know where the discussion was. — Omegatron 00:50, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm unexpectedly busy this evening and in the near future; I'll try to get these issues resolved as soon as I can, most likely at the weekend. In the meantime, this bot will be inactive. Mike Peel 15:38, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've put the list of articles that I have yet to run through at User:Peelbot/To tag. I'll remove non-physics ones from that list, and seek approval from people that have left comments here, before running through it with Peelbot.

After that list, a phase change in my tagging approach will take place, where I will no longer be tagging whole categories; instead, I hope to be able to compare categories with a list of those that have already been tagged, and then compare those that haven't been tagged with a blacklist, before checking through the remainder individually to make sure they're physics-related and then tagging them with Peelbot.

I will remain pretty busy for the next week; I aim to do most of this after the 15 December 2006. Mike Peel 22:51, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mike,

A few more that seemed off target:

I know that some physicists tend to think that everything is part of physics: biology is just physics with a few specialized constraints. But I don't think you're taking that point of view. I'm just removing these inappropriate tags as I find them. The tags probably wouldn't be so irritating if they weren't put at the head of the talk page, ahead of all the other tags. Putting a Physics tag at the end of the list would be a little more modest. --SteveMcCluskey 03:01, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]