User talk:Jarry1250/Archive 2

Re:User:AfDStatBot

Sure, although I have to warn you, my code is awfully messy and barely commented - not yet ready for public distribution. Can I get your e-mail address and send it to you that way? You can send me an e-mail with your address if you don't want to disclose it publicly. Stu ^(aeiou)_{I'm Researching Wikipedia} 00:12, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Incorrect tagging as living person

Bot continues to tag Max Whittier article as "Living Person" though he is long dead. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiTracker (talk • contribs) 00:00, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

At the current moment of time, all such mistake are because the article has been tagged with the category "XXX (living people)". It would not make this mistake if it had been correctly tagged to start with. I have corrected the article Max Whittier here. - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 18:11, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

bot miss' to add date and does not write the the first letter big.

see headline. --84.44.153.157 (talk) 21:02, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

I assume you're referring to the changes regards grammar -> copyedit? copyedit (without a capitalised first letter) is used on the documentation and a perfectly legitimate way of writing the template name. As for the date, I'm leaving that to other bots experienced in the art of date tagging - SmackBot, for one. - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 11:27, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Strange

So, "I have two fewer dogs than my neighbor" is clearly right, while "I have two less dogs than my neighbor" is clearly wrong, but the situation is ambiguous and leaning towards less in the case of one? Surprising and strange. Not something I would be inclined to edit an article specifically to fix one way or the other, anyway. What did surprise me is that while "one chomosome fewer" sounded right, but a little oddly arranged to me, once I inverted it, it had to become "one fewer chromosomes" to sound right any more.—Kww(talk) 22:33, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Interested in BAG membership?

Hi, I was wondering whether you'd be interested in joining the Bot Approvals Group? I've seen you around BRFA and other bot-related pages and you always make clueful comments and evidently know what you're talking about when it comes to bots (both in terms of programming and policy). Seeing as there's quite a backlog at BRFA at the moment, it would certainly be useful to have more active BAG members. If you decide that you are interested, I'd be more than happy to nominate you! Richard⁰⁶¹² 19:11, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

With regards to multiple nominations, BAG nominations are usually self-noms (like mine, one of many), or have one nominator (Fritzpoll's and Anomie's are the most recent examples), so it is not required. However, if you want to try and find a co-nom, feel free! Richard⁰⁶¹² 19:33, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

The nomination is here, accept and transclude to the BAG talk page when ready! Richard⁰⁶¹² 20:13, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Heh. Tetrachromacy

Apologies! I made the "anti-vandalism revert" before it occurred to check your edit history. (Revert was response to "could be made to have four" (ah!) and "this may not be enough to change humans' perception of color" (ah! ah!)) The article is laying out the hypothesis that some people *already* have four color receptors. In the existing text, the editor was (quite artfully) glossing controversies and theories about what exactly is meant by that. The following paragraph clarifies -- but only if it is understood as experimental support for the theory of the previous para. Regards, Piano non troppo (talk) 12:59, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

ISBN parameter

Your modifications to these parameters are unnecessary and would be involving the vast majority of Book related (especially fiction) articles. "it is in the minority" in your rationale is just not true. Can we discuss this before you go any further. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 13:32, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Sure thing. I'm happy to have it here, or if you have an irc client, that might be preferable. Only a small and limited number of edits which are already in the pipework will be made now, I've emergency stopped the bot. - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 13:43, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

No irc I am afraid! Appreciate the stop and the chat all before we have had it of course.! My concerns are basically two fold, why the "need" for the change, when there is no harm being done currently. Secondly the changes made have not always allowed for the complexities of the inputs being amended against that parameter. Particularly where people have "wrongly" input ISBN-10 or ISBN-13 or similar, input more than one ISBN (for difference editions etc). That will do for now. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 15:13, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

I think you just accidentally (?) deleted the reasons why I think that the bot is improving articles: namely to introduce consistency, and to de-clutter infoboxes of extraneous text. This then leads to better linebreaking and so forth. I can appreciate your concerns about some of the complexities; maybe you could give some nice, hard examples LivingBot could learn from? - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 15:28, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Review the "23" examples so far worked on and you can see some of the inconsistencies within entries introduced. I have fixed each of these, so you will need to look at the Bot contributions!. Sometimes by rationalising the numbers of ISBNs used as some were repetitious. "If" you could restrict the bot to working on the simplest of examples (i.e. those with just one "ISBN 1234567890") then I would withdraw my objections. However if you are working on anything more complex you have to be "very" careful. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 15:54, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

accidentally (?) - absolutely - sorry. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 15:55, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I'll tell you what. I'll make it only edit the simplest of cases, let it work through those, and then let's see where we stand. Agreed? - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 15:59, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Agreed - if you can ensure this - best to try a few first before letting it loose. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 17:36, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Your request for rollback

After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
• Rollback can be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback may be removed at any time.

If you no longer want rollback, then contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some information on how to use rollback, you can view this page. I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, just leave me a message if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Happy editing! PeterSymonds (talk) 13:35, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for grabbing the typos

Do feel free to add well cited stuff to User:Timtrent/Joyce McKinney while it's in development, too. It may take a little while to get it into the main article space because a prior version was deleted and salted. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 15:35, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Error

Diff Added a : instead of a | §hep^Talk 17:24, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Good spot. Now fixed. - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 18:18, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

BAG nomination successful!

I've closed your BAG nomination as successful... which really shouldn't be surprising, since you asked about it on BN, and you got unanimous support. ;) EVula // talk // ☯ // 17:26, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations! And I'm glad you liked my userbox. Anomie⚔ 04:36, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost — February 23, 2009

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 8, which includes these articles:

• Philosophers analyze Wikipedia as a knowledge source
• An automated article monitoring system for WikiProjects
• News and notes: Wikimania, usability, picture contest, milestones
• Wikipedia in the news: Lessons for Brits, patent citations
• Dispatches: Hundredth Featured sound approaches
• Wikiproject report: WikiProject Islam
• Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

The kinks are still being worked out in a new design for these Signpost deliveries, and we apologize for the plain format for this week.

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 01:50, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Help

I need some help and tips on creating good articles. I have made David wyatt (illustrator) and Larklight Trilogy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by XXRonaldo007XX (talk • contribs) 19:47, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the help —Preceding unsigned comment added by XXRonaldo007XX (talk • contribs) 20:13, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

How do u like make facts in the side? XXRonaldo007XX (talk) 20:17, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

request

could you add things to my Larklight Trilogy page please?XXRonaldo007XX (talk) 20:56, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

How do you add pictures to my Larklight Trilogy page?XXRonaldo007XX (talk) 16:42, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Commenting on BRFAs

Thanks for your message & the help with my bot request. As far as commenting on BRFAs goes I don't understand enough about what Bots can & can't do or should & shouldn't do to be able to make really helpful comments - but I'll bear it in mind.— Rod ^talk 21:34, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

The bot might not be needed after all - my watchlist has lit up with AWB contributions from User:Erik9 fixing these broken links.— Rod ^talk 10:50, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost — 2 March 2009

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 9, which includes these articles:

• Books extension enabled
• News and notes: Stewards, Wikimania bids, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia's role in journalism, Smarter Wikipedia, Skittles
• Dispatches: WikiProject Ships Featured topic and Good topics
• Wikiproject report: WikiProject Norse History and Culture
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 08:16, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Polbot blocked

Greetings. Polbot was blocked by User:Docu, due to a concern about its function. Perhaps you could comment at Wikipedia talk:Bots/Requests for approval#Block of Polbot? Thanks, – Quadell ^(talk) 14:04, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

help!

Hey can u help me with Ashlie Michelles page?? I am her rep and am a bit confused! THANKYOU! (GoSentWin (talk) 20:37, 5 March 2009 (UTC))

Firstly, new comments go at the bottom of my talk page, not the top. Secondly, if you are he rep you shouldn't be editing the page without really well sourcing everything. Period. You may also want to WP:YFA to see how to go about doing this. - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 20:40, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Faith in Place rewritten

Hi, this article has been rewritten, if you could please revisit Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Faith in Place to see if your concerns have been addressed. If not I would be happy to address any outstanding issues. Thank you! -- Banjeboi 10:59, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Notability has been established enough to strike my delete vote. - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 11:14, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough, you might want to indicate neutral or keep or something and if it's not a keep explain why so any issues can be addressed. -- Banjeboi 13:11, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Hong's paradox

Hi. I hope you don't think I shot your fox - I was looking it up when you PRODded it, and then saw on my watch-list that it had been dePRODded. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 13:12, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia bots by name

Hi, I'm a bit busy myself actually, but I'll resume coding the status parameter updating bot at the weekend, and I'll be happy to change the category as well (may as well do everything in one edit, as you said). Richard⁰⁶¹² 11:30, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Really sorry about this, but it turns out that I've been more busy than I anticipated! As such I haven't had much chance to do any coding, so if you or anyone else wants to give it a shot, feel free. Sorry again. Richard⁰⁶¹² 19:25, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Church of rob boyle

Cheers, I figured being total nonsense if would have gone into the patent nonsense category. Seems I need to reread the criteria! Thanks for the heads up!

Cabe6403 ^{(Talk•Sign!)} 17:26, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Changing the name of an article

Jarry- you helped me with keeping up the TalentTrove page yesterday and now i have a question regarding this. I want to change the name of the page from TalentTrove to Talent Trove. I was looking in how to do this and saw it was possible but could not find out how to do it. do i need to have 10 edits before i can perform this function? and are those 10 edits just edits i make to the page i created? any help you can give would be great. Thank You MichaelScott569 (talk) 14:50, 10 March 2009 (UTC)