User talk:Bluemoose/archive3

• /archive1
• /archive2

Thanks!

Thanks for your support in my recent RFA! All those extra buttons might not be a big deal, but getting all this positive feedback sure is, please let me know if you have any problems or comments regarding how I use all these shiny new levers and cranks! Rx StrangeLove 00:33, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Prelim-pruning the Hotlist

Greetings! I had originally posted only the first 500 of each letter because of copyright concerns; some thought that posting only a portion at a time might make it more likely the list could be used. As it is, though, I think the consensus is that it would not be a copyright infringement either way.

As it is, though, one problem with the list is that it desperately needs pruning. For instance, entries like Adolf Hitler and Albert Einstein exist, and I know without looking that the Einstein mentioned in Britannica and Columbia has an article in Wikipedia. So before I posted the first 500 of each letter, I performed a preliminary pruning - not to remove all blue links, and not to check each one, but to remove those blue links that I was 99% certain were not false-positives. For example, we have an entry for John Loudon McAdam. I know without looking that the chances are high that the EB's John Loudon McAdam is the same as ours. Otherwise, there would have to be 2 encyclopedic people with the same first, middle, and last names, and we would have to have the bad luck of picking the one that EB doesn't mention without also including the one EB does. Possible, but not likely. For the entry John Wycliffe, it is much more likely, and I would probably not prune that one out (without checking).

So I've done a preliminary pruning for the ones listed, but not for the other ones. Before those are listed, I'd like to prelim-prune them, or have you or someone else do them. I've prelim-pruned the first 1000 unlisted A's, but that's all. Would you be willing to do some of those? – Quadell ^(talk) 14:44, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

A through E are up here. – Quadell ^(talk) 22:16, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Nonsense & Co.

Thank you for deleting "Profitseeker"!

Great! Perhaps an article like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/24SevenOffice also should be deleted? This article goes back to August 4th, so why is it still there?

And should the user user:sleepyhead81 , who submitted the advertisement, not be deleted too?

See discussion under: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Help_desk "Where does this stuff come from?"

And thank you for deleting me user:Egocentric •••• But 24SevenOffice is still there....! What's going on?

Thanks, I got my point tested, and the message is clear; any user can add an article about a company (big or 'small'?) ! into Wikipedia and it's not violating any rules! So if I add an article, about my own company or the company I work in, it's ok? Egocentric 15:14, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alleged causes of Hurricane Katrina

I realize that there were strong feelings on both sides with respect to the outcome of the AfD for this article, now located at Alternative theories regarding Hurricane Katrina. I would like to assure those who expressed concerns about the content, tone, and potential for degradation of this article that I intend for it to continue to exist only as long as is necessary to draw the contributions of fringe theorists away from the more substantial Hurricane Katrina articles. Once interest in this topic dies down, I'll quietly trim and merge this information into the appropriate general-topic articles. In the interim, I will carefully watch this page to prevent it from being abused, and I will continue to work towards making this article NPOV, properly sourced, and useful to those seeking an accurate record of the hysterics that so often follows catastrophe. Cheers. -- BD2412 ^talk 00:50, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for your vote

I appreciate your vote in my successful RfA. If you every need anything just ask. I hope I can live up to expectations. - Trevor MacInnis(Talk | Contribs) 12:43, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion/Proposal/Blatant copyvio material

I think a specific closing date and time should be set for this vote. Perhaps one week for the start of voting? DES ^(talk) 22:04, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

Thank you

Hello, I thank you for your support to my adminship. We shall surely interact more. --Bhadani 09:58, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

Picture for you

A Blue moose for user:Bluemoose

Every time I see your userpage, I expect to see some kind of amusing logo, only to be disappointed. So I've gone ahead and made one for you :) →Raul654 17:51, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

My RfA

Thanks for participating and supporting me in my RfA, I hope I will not let you down. Molotov (talk) 18:04, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Admin?

Thank you for the suggestion. I first posted oon wikipedia a few days after you did, so perhaps it is fitting that you became an admin first. I eould like the recognition, and the extra tools, but it is not a big thing for me. i have been involved in a number of rather heated policy debates -- over the spoiler templates, the last set of CSD proposals, the current copyright CSD, the GNAA page deletion thing, and the current Undeletion policy proposals and the VfU/Deletion review proposal. If you don't think that makes me too contraversial to pass RfA and you think I would make a good admin, please do.

Note I would still use speedy tags -- I belive in the tag and bag rule. except for obvious vandalism and true patent nonsense, i would generally only speedy delete a page that anothr editor had tagged, and would tag pages I found for another admin's attention. DES ^(talk) 14:30, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

You wrote: Part of the reason I thought of nomiating you was after our discussions on speedying blatant copyvio stuff, you were very calm/rational (like an admin should be), I dont think you are controversial, from what I have seen I feel sure you would pass with ease. However it is really up to you, I would feel terribly guilty if I nominated you then it failed due to some "heated" debate you may have had in the past. Martin 15:29, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Again thank you. I have always tried to be calm and rational on such matters. I have sometimes had stong views, and I have stated them as strongly and as persuasively as I knew how, but trying to give reasons, and to yield to consensus when it formed. I don't really know if the people "against" realy think ill of me, or just dislike some of my ideas. Sure, let's give it a try. If the nom fails, well, that won't really do any harm, and at least I'll know. It woudn't be the first time. I was elected the chairman of my professional assocation, and then defeated for re-election. This past spring I ran for township council in the town where I live. i put lots and lots of time and money into that, and got only 16% of the vote. so be it. "Behold the turtle, who never gets anywhere unless he sticks his neck out." Once more, thanks. DES ^(talk) 17:40, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Edited your user page

Hi, Bluemoose. I edited your user page (and on de:, too). Feel free to change them back if you preferred the old version. Mainly it was changing external links to wikilinks (and adding interwikis), and I also added a Babel template on your German page to indicate that you don't speak German (I have the same on my German page). Hope you don't mind me intruding! — Knowledge Seeker দ 03:05, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

My RfA

Thanks you for your support in my RfA. I also wanted to mention that I just read your thoughts on the future of wikipedia on your userpage, and you make some good points. I have concerns as well, though I'm not ebtirely sure of the best way to address them. -R. fiend 16:39, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Translation

Hallo Martin! I have translated the following article de:Neurofibromatose Typ 2 into an english version Neurofibromatosis Type 2. I posted a request for help to one of my english collegues (jfdwolff) but he does not react. So I dont no why, but nevertheles I need some information. Perhaps you can help me. In the german wikipedia I initiated a hole list of articles, (one became featered articel) circeling around the topic neurocutaneous diseases. These are lacking partly in the english wikipedia as I can see. So my idea is to contribute to the english community the work I have already done. But my english is not extremly good and I dont know the "hows" and "whys". The articles, if they will be translated, need some form of contribution of native speakers and people who know the formalities. If you think its worth, please have a look at it and let me know. Sincerely yours Andy.we 21:42, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Hallo Martin! Your help is welcome and your contribution to the neurofibromatoses will be encouraging for me. (oh my godness this english is a cruelty:). Nevertheless I will go on to do another translation. There are two articles which I think will be worth to translate because the lemmas are red in the english wikipedia: The article "Phakomatosen" is an definition of the term and of the historical development of the usage of the term "Phakomatosen". The article "Neurocutaneus Diseases" will indroduce an categorisation from a dermatologic viewpoint. My featered article Neurofibromatosis type 1 may be translated but there exist an english version and I will not produce a collision. The article Von Hippel Lindau Disease is not ready for translation, I have to do some work on it. An article about Tuberous sclerosis exists but I did no contributions to it. The Ataxia teleangiectasia is to be written. My ultimate plan is to write about the rare forms of Neurofibromatosis (the segmental form) which will perhaps finish the job. Greetings Andy.we 23:49, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for your support

Thank you for your kind support of my recent nomination on RfA. Best regards, RobertG ♬ talk 08:29, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

George Routledge

Sorry about overwriting yours, but I think my markup was better :-) Anyway, thanks for jumping at this! --Magnus Manske 10:36, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Been a while

Hey Martin - Long time no see. You've become an admin and forgotten about us lowly regular users, huh? :) I don't know if you saw my note at the project page. If you have a chance would you mind taking a look at my proposal for revamping the Game theory article on the talk page? If you're too busy, no problem. I'd just like to get a few more eyes looking at it. Thanks! --best, kevin ···Kzollman | Talk··· 01:31, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Martin - No problem! It looks like most people want to keep the matrices more or less like they are now. So, I really don't have much to do. The two pages that really need to get changed are Game theory and payoff matrix, which will get done when I revamp the game theory page. (This is what inspired me to change the game theory page!) I've added some stuff on game theory, but I've been distracted a lot by doing easier tasks like AfD and Disambig repair. Revamping game theory will be my penance. :) --best, kevin ···Kzollman | Talk··· 23:44, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your support

Thank you very much for your support on my nomination for adminship. Now that I have been made an admin, I will do my best to live up to the truest you and the community have placed in me. If you ever see my doing something you think is incorrect or questionable, or does not live up to the standards that should be expected of an admin, please let me know. And particular thanks for choosing to nominate me. DES ^(talk) 15:21, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for supporting my RfA

Dear Martin: I would like to thank you very much for your support on my RfA. I am most honoured by the trust that has been placed in me by yourself and other members of the Wikipedia community, especially since I did not conform to the standard edit-count criteria usually expected of administrator candidates. I promise to only use my administrative privileges to assist the community in doing good work, and also to be calm, considerate and careful in working to make Wikipedia a better place. I look forward to working with you on Wikipedia in the future. Best regards, --NicholasTurnbull | (talk) (e-mail) (cabal) 04:47, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

A8

The shiny new A8 appears to have a gaping hole in it which has been identified over at Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion. As the initiator of that proposal, could you proffer your thoughts? -Splash^talk

Date issue

The date was changed only to reflect most of the other dates I have seen on wikipedia. Not a big Deal to me. What is the reasoning? -apayne

Invitation

Hi, Would you be interested in joining WikiProject Business and Economics?. Thanks. --Pamri • Talk 07:14, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

Block of User:66.189.47.112

Greetings. I noted from [1] that you blocked the (apparently) static IP 66.189.47.112. I readly grant that this user is a vandal; I could find no contributions by this user that were not some form of vandalism. However, at Wikipedia:Blocking_policy#Vandalism it states "For static IPs, such blocks should initially last 24 hours, but repeat violators may be blocked for a maximum of one month". Katefan0 blocked for 24 hours on 2 October 2005. The vandal came back right after that and began vandalizing again. The next step should have been to block this static IP for a month. Instead, you applied an indefinite block on 11 October 2005. I think this was out of the bounds of policy. I'd like to ask you to unblock this user, and re-apply a block lasting until 11 November 2005. Additionally, a note should be left on this IP's talk page that they have been blocked and why they've been blocked. Additionally, it might be nice to point out to them that they are wasting their time with the vandalism, as despite all his/her efforts to vandalize, it's all been undone and suggest they contribute positively to Wikipedia instead, which doesn't waste their time. All the best, --Durin 15:50, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

A few things

Hi Martin! I decided to put the new game theory article up so since the article was on the main page. Its not as refined as I had hoped, but I'm pretty happy with it. Take a look if you get a chance. The second thing, I was thinking about nominating myself for adminship. I don't have a good sense for what people are looking for, and I would rather not nominate myself if it would be contentious. Do you think I'd be likely to pass muster? If so, I'll go ahead and put myself up. Thanks, and I hope all is well. --best, kevin ···Kzollman | Talk··· 16:21, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Wow that was fast :) Thanks in advance for taking a look at the article. I'm always worried when I make huge revisions, I'm accustom to writing in a style that is not always readable by non-philosophers (well, maybe not even readable by philosophers either :). If you wouldn't mind nominating me, I would appreciate it. But, please, don't feel obligated; if you feel put out at all I can go ahead and do it myself. I did go through the recent RfAs and it looked like I would pass, but I thought I would check just to be sure I wasn't being selectively blind to something important. --best, kevin ···Kzollman | Talk··· 16:39, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Martin - I've accepted the nomination and posted it on WP:RfA. Thank you very much! --best, kevin ···Kzollman | Talk··· 18:30, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Wow! Do you really think the article would have a chance for being a featured article? I've not been through that process before, but I'll go look into it. Thanks for looking at the article! --best, kevin ···Kzollman | Talk··· 15:41, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Impostors

D'oh! I knew I knew your name from somewhere. You had signed my RFA comments, but it didnt click until I seen your name in RC. I went through about 7000 user creation logs this morning blocking vandalbot accounts, and I seen what could possibly have been 3 or 4 impostors of you. I couldn't put my finger on it, I just kept noticing moose. If I have a chance I will try to go find them and make sure, then block them. I'm exhausted right now. ∞Who?¿? 16:29, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Re: RFA

Thank you very much. I would be honoured to be considered as an administrator. I will go and accept on Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/CambridgeBayWeather and also answer the questions. CambridgeBayWeather 04:54, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

I'm a little confused as to which button to click at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/nominate. If I use the first then I nominate myself but I'm not nominating someone else so I can't use the second. CambridgeBayWeather 10:59, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

• On CBW's RfA (and if the VC find out about the PC then we'll all be put on KP) you said "first edit 11-06-05". Hmm. Let's do the time warp again! If his first edit was then, perhaps we should then retroactively make him an admin, just to stay...reverse..consistent? :) --Durin 13:21, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
  • RE: "you've totally lost me". Lost in translation. American style, 11-06-2005 is November 6th, 2005...the future. Over there, it's June 11th. International standard is yyyy-mm-dd. Just remember you're dealing with an international audience :) --Durin 02:18, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

No need to create a dupe section, so I'll just respond here. I am honored you would want to nominate my for admin, but Aranda56 and Redwolf24 just recently nominated me :) The nom is at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/GregAsche if you want to voice your opinion of me. Thanks again for your kind words. -Greg Asche (talk) 22:47, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

FSF RFA

I'm hanging by a thin thread, so thanks for your support. :) freestylefrappe 00:29, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

My RfA

Thanks, Bluemoose, for your support of my RfA! Your last minute vote is what helped me pass the bar. I promise to do a good job using the keys to the janitor's closet. >: Roby Wayne ^{Talk • Hist • E@} 01:54, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

My RfA

Martin - Thanks for kind words in the nomination and vote on my RfA, I really appreciate it. I hope that I will live up to everyone's expectations. On another note, I will probably submit Game theory for peer review this weekend. We'll see what they have to say. --best, kevin ···Kzollman | Talk··· 05:03, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks For The Vote

Thanks for the support, I'm glad you think that I deserve to have admin powers, although others don't, if what the vote is now a sign of things to come, I ain't going to get the mop. But thanks for the support still. Private Butcher 18:16, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

Request for Adminstrator

Martin, I would appreciate any input you have for my Request for Administrator. Thanks so much --Reflex Reaction 21:00, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

Enabled email for Edcolins

On Ed Collins' RfA, just to let you know, he has set his email ID. Thank you! --Celestianpower ^hablamé 09:15, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Barnstar

I, Gaius Cornelius hereby award you this Minor Barnstar for all your brilliant minor edits! Gaius Cornelius 19:14, 23 October 2005 (UTC).

CBW RfA

Thank you for nominating me and voting on my RfA. If you have any concerns over my actions please let me know. Thanks CambridgeBayWeather 23:04, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

the wub's RfA

Thanks a lot for your support on my RfA, I really appreciate it. the wub "?!" 12:43, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Titoxd's RfA

Thank you!

Thank you for supporting me in my RfA. I never thought I would get so much support! Thanks to your help, my nomination was the 10th most supported RfA in Wikipedia history. Now, please keep an eye out on me while I learn the new tools, ok? Thanks again! Titoxd^(?!?) 17:05, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Blocked by Curps

My new and unused bot User:Bluebot was blocked by User:Curps, this has the effect of autoblocking me as well, and I don't seem to be able to unblock myself, now I can only edit my talk page.

Curps; 1) had no reason to block my bot account, 2) gave no reason other than "contact an administrator", 3) Does not have an email address and therefore cannot be contacted regarding the block.

How can this situation be resolved? Martin 18:34, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Nice one

Thanks for that mate, being blocked is amazingly annoying. Martin 19:08, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Your welcome, having been controvercially blocked twice now I can empathise. The wikipedia needs more rewards, and less punishments. We are volunteers after all, not prisoners, and focusing on punishments (blocks, arbcom, criticism) as we do drives away good contributors, and encourages malevolent ones. Sam Spade 19:14, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Statistics on future of Wikipedia

I just saw your comments on your userpage and found them to be very interesting. You might find User:Durin/Flaws of interest. Just some ramblings on my part, but it's somewhat related to what you've written. --Durin 22:25, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

• I tend to agree with the line of thought that if we ban anonymous IPs from editing, that editors with ill intent will just create account to do the same. So, I don't think banning anonymous editing will help. I hate the idea of adding heirarchy into the project. However, I think the following idea has merit (if difficult to implement under the current software): Identify the top 1,000 most vandalized main space articles using some periodically automatic method of doing so (this is complex). Restrict editing to those articles to editors who have been around for at least a month and made at least 100 edits (or some other arbitrary metric that serves to limit attacks on these articles). I am involved in a proposed wiki project for a hobby of mine, and the issue of vandalism has come up. My response to this has been to indicate that only members of the organization can have accounts, and only logged in users can edit. This makes people accountable. Here in Wikipedia, we can not realistically do that; there is no membership. But, we can take steps to defend the largest problems areas. All the vandal fighting that is being done, and which is so much of a focus of many an admin's work, is essentially wasted effort; it does not contribute to expanding and improving the encyclopedia. --Durin 23:05, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

I like the idea about resticting anonymous editing from AOL IPs. There's no way to block them, there isn't even any way to talk to them. I tried accessing Wikipedia through AOL - every page had the orange "you have new messages" message. It's distracting - I would hate to try to look up something on Wikipedia via AOL. (And, by the way, if you use AOL through a broadband connection you still get the "new IP with every page" thing. Guettarda 23:08, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

I tend to feel that a balance of anonymous editing and control of vandalism without increasing administrative overhead is a better solution. My thoughts are to add a delay to article updating so that administrators and concerned wikicitizens have time to evaluate edits at a more leisurely pace. Your thoughts? Grika Ⓣ 23:07, 1 November 2005 (UTC) BTW, I came here by way following the trail of your very effective bot.

Thank you for your vote on my RFA

Now that the voting has officially closed, I would like to thank you very much for supporting my candidacy for adminstrator and as of 18:36, 28 October 2005 (UTC) I am an administrator. I will make sure to use the additional power judiciously and I welcome any comments you may have. --Reflex Reaction 19:38, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

Admin

Thank you for the offer, however I decline it for now. I previously nominated myself and it did not turn out very well, so I would like more time to pass first. But good luck with your bot. NSR (talk) 02:36, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Bot question

Hi, you noticed I wanted to run a replace.py bot Bluebot, I was just testing it, and was wondering - as a c# programmer used to visual studio 2005, not all this command line stuff - is there anyway of putting my information (such as what i want to find and replace it with etc.) in a file, so I dont have to type it out at the command prompt each time I want to run it, apologies if that is a dumb question for some reason or if you are the wrong person to ask. thanks! Martin 16:35, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Don't worry, I can just cut n' paste it into the command prompt, stupid me. Martin 16:40, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

• With most command shells, you can just put the commands in a text file, and then run that file as a command. (You may need to set its permissions to make it executable.) -- Beland 23:25, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

• Another bot question: does it only change capitals? I have checked like 10 changes made by the bot and they all are about capitals. Anything else it can do? ;) And who decided it should be lowercase? (just asking) Renata3 04:35, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

• And could it make more descriptive edit summaries? Renata3 04:47, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Subst

Please check it out, I've advertised it for community suggestions. Replacing {{template}} with {{subst:template}} would indeed work, and of course you can search from the template's whatlinkshere list. Radiant_>|< 23:03, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Your wonderful bot and recent changes

Hi Bluemoose, I really appreciate the sterling work your bot is doing. I noticed that its edits are appearing in recent changes - I think that's not meant to happen, officially. Please could you see about changing that? From memory, Wikipedia:Bots is the place to go to read about this. Thanks! Lupin|talk|popups 02:41, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Hi, Bluemoose. I'm also a fan of your bot. I always fix these particular inconsistencies when I see them; it's good to know I'll be seeing fewer of them in the future! By the way, one thing to watch out for, though I'm not sure what can be done, is situations like this, where you end up with two ==See also== sections in the same article. —HorsePunchKid→龜 03:45, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Bot edit summaries

Just thinking you might like to change the wording of your bot's edit summary. As it stands, it refers to deviations from the Manual of Style as errors, which they aren't. Consider something like:

Bringing External links and See also sections in line with Manual of Style recommendations

Just a thought. Rob Church ^{Talk | FAHD} 09:50, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

Possible flawed bot edit

See Bluebot edit at Computer-aided design —Preceding unsigned comment added by Freeformer (talk • contribs) 2005-11-02 15:39

This is the relevant diff. I'm not sure I would consider this so much a problem with the bot as a problem with the article. The article has a Related Topics section that is largely redundant to its own See also section. The two sections should simply be combined. This is sort of similar to what I mentioned above. If the bot introduces a second See also or External links section, it should flag it somehow as needing a merger. —HorsePunchKid→龜 20:52, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

Not my bots fault if it has a level 2 "related topics" section in the middle of an article, "related topics" means the same thing as "see also" anyway, so my bot only highlighted an existing problem, rather than create a new one. Fixed now, thanks! Martin 21:07, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

Well, the key being that it didn't really "highlight" the problem at all, hence the suggestion. ;) Could you have it use a different edit summary ("Fixed, but needs attention") if a redundant section is found? —HorsePunchKid→龜 23:07, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

In a word, no, it is a stanard replace.py bot and I don't know how to change it without learning python, but I'm not too bothered, as it doesnt actually introduce any errors, it just makes an existing error conform to the manual of style. thanks - Martin 23:18, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

No problem, thanks anyway! I'll just keep an eye out for these sorts of situations. I'm marginally competent with Python; though I do detest it, I'm happy to help if you need anything. —HorsePunchKid→龜 01:01, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

links or link

Bluebot changed Memphis Minnie from "External Links" to "External link". Now of course the lower case "L" is proper, but droping the "S"? Why did Bluebot do that? Not enough to eat for breakfast? WikiDon 16:34, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

No it didn't, check the diff. Martin 16:45, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks to your bot

I realize that bots don't talk, but their masters do, and thus, I'm writing this to your talk page. Thank you for coding such an excellent bot. I've realize he's quite new, but I have already seen him around correcting external links and see also to fit with the manual of style. What will you think of next? Again, thanks. -[[User:Mysekurity|Mysekurity]] ^{[[additions | e-mail]]} _{05:07, 4 November 2005 (UTC)} Oh, and the answer is "If a bot could code code, a bot [would?] code code :)

Asking some services to Bluebot

Hi,

Bluebot is doing some great work on a set of page I'm editing. Thanks!

If I (or anyone else) would like Bluebot to perform some task, where should I ask? I suggest you use User_talk:Bluebot for accepting new request. Reply to David Latapie 01:50, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Any requests should go here, as I don't check bluebots talk very much. thanks - Martin 10:26, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

2 Not particularly related things.

Hey BlueMoose,

First I'd like to ask you a question. I've noticed that your BlueBot is appearing very frequently on my watchlist as having made minor edits to my watched pages. I'm not particularly technical minded (I was proud of myself when i recently succeeded in plugging in a new mouse without hurting myself), but i was just wondering if this is design or coincidence. Is your bot the edit contributions either of me or someone with similar interests to me?

I'm not getting paranoid or anything, in fact i'm very much glad for what your bot is doing - but is it wikistalking me!!

Secondly then, I was interested by what you said on you future of wikipedia section on your User Page. I think you should remember that wikipedia is, if not to the same extent as it is an encyclopedia, an experiment in humanity - and maybe you should reflect that in your comments. Unless of course you do not feel this is the case. I'm not trying to criticise, but I wonder where you stand on that issue.

Ahkayah cuarenta y siete 16:19, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks (for the reply)

Ahkayah cuarenta y siete 21:58, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

A great bot

Your bot is doing great work. I did a lot of these changes by hand as I saw them. I am glad your bot is doing it automatically. Fantastic. Bobblewik 01:43, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Subst-bot

Since Wikipedia:Subst has gotten a lot of feedback, how about going ahead with the bot? Start with a couple of non-contested templates, e.g. test1-6 and afd; you can always add more later. Radiant_>|< 16:50, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

• Perhaps if changes are made to a user's talk page the bot could add a section "Subst-bot was here" with content "Templates on this page were substituted as per Wikipedia:Subst" This would avoid the "what msg" reaction. It would also draw laots of eyes to the project, perhaps. DES ^(talk) 20:04, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Bot Bug

Please teach your bot to respect nowiki tags, e.g. [2]. It is probably not a big deal in that context, but I can just see the subst bot adding "subst" tags to all sorts of discussions about templates, which are better left for humans to figure out. For example if I write "It is better to use {{subst:test}} rather than {{subst:test}}", then I have a strong expectation that no one should turn both of those references into "{{subst:test}}". Dragons flight 23:47, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Fixed. Martin 00:06, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Please teach your bot not to edit other people's comments in Talk pages. User:Zoe|^(talk) 02:51, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Please teach yourself to be polite and civil Zoe. --207.108.137.199 07:16, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

lol, that wasn't me, my ip starts with 88. Martin 09:22, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

question about licence

Hi, i dont speak english good but i have one question for you. Its about pictures. If I take some pics from en.wikipedia and put them in some article in serbian wikipedia do i derogate copyright? I think you would understand me. User:Sladja811

FireFox RFA

Bluemoose/archive3

---

Thanks for your support on my request for adminship.

The final outcome was (96/2/0), so I am now an administrator. If you ever have any queries about my actions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Again, thanks!

FireFox 18:10, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Barnstar for you!

Another one for your barn. Thanks for being a great guy. --Reflex Reaction (talk)• 23:01, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

I, Reflex Reaction award this barnstar to Bluemoose for being a generally all around nice guy and judicious use of his support in WP:RFA

Bot Request

Hello Martin, I recently saw your 'bot at work and saw that you invited people to make your 'bot do some work. :-) Would it be possible for you to code a NotificationBot quickly? Right now AllyUnion has one, but he says it'll be a while before it's back up; in either case, the last run had some bugs. AllyUnion's bot is great, but it would be wonderful if we could have two notification bots (one acting as a backup) that would leave messages on user talk pages. Do you think you would be willing to do this? Thanks a lot. Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk | W_S 01:00, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk | W_S 20:20, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Template replacement by bot

Thanks, that seems to be just what was needed. I don't know why some didn't take. The one I've looked at so far wasn't in a separate paragraph, it was inlined inside a discussion: maybe that confused your bot? I'll clean up the residue over the next day or so: are you OK if I have some more to do later? Thanks again —Phil | Talk 08:04, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Thank you

Very much for your kind support of my adminship. I'll do my best to live up to your and my other supporters' expectations. If you have any comments or concerns on my actions as an administrator, please let me know. Thank you! — MC MasterChef :: Leave a tip — 14:30, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

preemptive strikes

Hello Blue Moose:

As the author or contributer to a lot of articles that fall into the sculptor American/sculptor United States categories [or what ever they are] my watch-list took a big hit today after your bot had moved through. However I was quite surprised to discover that this uninvited and preemptive strike was done by an administrator, at the same time that such a change appeared to be getting voted down else where.

Please check out this page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_%28categories%29/Usage_of_American

I look forward to reading your thoughts on this subject. Carptrash 19:08, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Blue Moose - I owe you an apology and would do it if I could spell it. Anyway, I thought [and then wrote before checking, a bad habit brought about be eating too much cheese] that you'd changed scultpure TO "United States" instead of "American" and I see that I got it wrong, so I'm sorry for all the things that I thought about you. Life is good. Carptrash 04:31, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Bluebot

Hi. I was wondering about the template subst'ing - isn't that going to reduce consistency in articles as templates change over time? Guettarda 20:35, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Could you please stop changing the template lived which generates exactly the same categories as those you're replacing it with? It just makes no sense at all. Thank you. --Barbatus 14:45, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

... I see. Frankly, these particular categories make little sense to me; I'd prefer to get rid of 'em.

Here's a probably more important issue: stub templates with pictues. Don't they put additional strain on servers?

Thanks for the answer. —Barbatus 15:06, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Bot

You mentioned using a bot on Wikipedia. Is there an easy way to set up one's own bot? I have several ideas that I'd like to work on, but the one time I tried setting up a bot, I got nowhere. — BRIAN0918 • 2005-11-10 19:53

User:192.88.124.202

I just wanted to let you know that I have unblocked this IP. It is a violation of the Wikipedia:Blocking policy to block an IP indefinitely unless it is an Open proxy, this also happened to be a college's IP which means that it was shared by any number of users. Jtkiefer ^{T | @ | C} ----- 23:35, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Why did your bot leave me a message?

Your name

Are you Lumpy from Happy Tree Friends? ;) The Wookieepedian 08:20, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

File:Lumpy2 1024x768.jpg

Rats! ;) The Wookieepedian 09:11, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

From Baruch

Thank you for your welcoming. So you know the I initially contribute to the French part of Wikipedia. I like to have the articles I creat translated in English and I sometimes translate English articles in French. Your blue moose is great. Best! Baruch1677 14:54, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Bluebot

The bot apparently takes any reference to Encyclopaedia Britannica 1911 and renders it "This article incorporates text from the 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica, which is in the public domain." This is not invariably true: see Marches and many others. Are External links to the on-line version also re-rendered in this formula? --Wetman 02:51, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Got your message: if that's all it's doing, then I'm unnecessarily alarmed! Wetman 09:00, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

I'm afraid that the References section is for primary resources. An encyclopaedia is a secondary resource, and would not normally be under References, but under External links (except in the case where different sources were being compared to point up different interpretations). Also, the text of the article itself is derived from the 1911 Britannica, so it is inappropriate to count as a reference the work upon which the text is based—you wouldn't go to that document to cross-check the facts that are quoted, because they started off being the same, by definition. Your bot seems to be doing the wrong thing.

I will raise this issue in a few places to see if there is concensus for what you are doing, because it is just wrong, as far as I am concerned. Noisy | Talk 09:33, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Please stop until you have demonstrated that there is consensus. Thank you. Noisy | Talk 10:11, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Reversion

Hello Bluemoose. In this edit, you rolled back an anonymous editor's substitution of the word "References" for "Bibliography". While you may believe that one word is better than the other in that article, I wonder if you might consider reverting such edits with an edit summary in future, and not with your admin rollback button. Reversions arising from content disagreements should not be made with rollback, which is intended for use mainly against vandals; the user in question deserves an edit summary telling him why you think his edit was not an improvement. This is especially so with new users—which he appears to be (it is his first contrib)—who may be confused when they see their edit disappear and only a rather mysterious edit summary on the history page. I'm not terribly miffed or anything—it's the sort of mistake we all make from time to time—but I thought I'd just drop by and ping your page about it. Very kind regards encephalon 09:20, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Bluebot Blocked

Your bot is out of line of proposed objectives and an objection has been raised by Noisy. Please resolve all questions and objections at Wikipedia talk:Bots. --AllyUnion (talk) 13:59, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Unblocking

Please re-read the policies on blocking and unblocking, especially the part that says:

If you have been blocked, you must not unblock yourself even if you believe the block 
is unfair, inappropriate, or in error. Instead, contact another administrator through e-mail, 
IRC, the mailing list, or by leaving a note on your talk page.

Regards, Nandesuka 16:56, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

I don't really have an opinion about the bot issue, as I haven't been following it. I think if you want to bot to be unblocked, the right thing to do is to ask on Talk:Bots or on AN/I for another admin to unblock it, not to unblock it yourself. A better path might be to spend the week gathering consensus about what the bot is supposed to do. It's clear (from a cursory reading of Talk:Bot) that there is a disagreement, and users will look to you as an admin to get an idea of how they should behave. Why not meet the objections, and then you'll be able to proceed without controversy? Nandesuka 17:10, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Martin - After the bit on ANI, I checked the conversation on Talk:bots. Am I right in understanding that you will stop your bot from making 1911 changes for the time being? If so, I will hapily unblock your bot, since Noisy seems not to object to anything else. This would satisfy Nandesuka, and it gives me the chance to unblock something :) --best, kevin ···Kzollman | Talk··· 17:40, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

I have unblocked and left at note at WP:ANI, Bluebot may now continue his (or her?) bluebotness. Don't let politicking get you down! :) --best, kevin ···Kzollman | Talk··· 18:00, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Cfd closures

Hey, thanks for the help with WP:CFD lately. I have been pretty much w/o net access for 3 weeks, and Kbdank71 has been doing all the cleanup again. Hopefully soon I will be back on fulltime and can resume normal activities, but your work has been appreciated. Thanks again. «»Who?¿?^meta 15:16, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Test cricket

Hi Martin. I saw your question on jguk's talk page and thought I'd confirm on his behalf: there is definitely consensus among the cricketing community (especially Wikipedia's) that capital-t Test is the only correct form. I can't point you to a direct discussion on the matter, but I know it's been touched upon and almost every relevant article is in the capital-t form. The main reason the categories aren't is that someone made a mistake a long time ago and no-one has seen fit to correct it yet. I suspect sloth as the main reason... Thanks for the help, [[Sam Korn]] 17:04, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Sorry for butting in, but I can point to a direct discussion on the matter: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Cricket/archive2#"Test" or "test" And thanks for doing this :) Sam Vimes 17:19, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

CricketcategoryBot

Thank you for your offer on my talkpage. Yes, there is consensus on WP:Cricket to use "Test" rather than "test". In a poll a while I go, I was the only one preferring "test", and I'm happy to accede to the majority. No-one who has joined since then has made any comment about the issue. If you're happy to sort the Test cricketers categories out, it would be appreciated (it started off as "test" as I started the categories, and we decided it was too much work to change things when the decision to use "Test" elsewhere was reached), jguk 19:47, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for this - it's appreciated, jguk 11:01, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Category:Colour to Category:Color

When closing the cfd Category:Colour to Category:Color you stated Merge into color, as colour only had one article in it. 15 votes, I count 8 merge to colour, 6 to color and 1 to hue. I'd say that's a no consensus, surely? Sorry if there's an obvious answer, just curious and it strikes me a little off. User:Steve block talk 22:02, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

And it appears that User:DreamGuy went through while the CFD was ongoing removing articles from Cat:colour - SoM 12:00, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure what the answer is, but if the above as posted by SoM is true, then it makes the outcome as it stands a little more off. I don't know how these things are decided, I'm not an admin, but if one has to be merged into the other, meaning that they can't both be left, I guess I expected the majority position to win. User:Steve block talk 13:47, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Mailing list? Is that where things get referred? I wasn't aware there was a mailing list. However, if you found none of the arguments compelling, and aren't amenable to considering reversing the decision, there's probably no sense arguing the toss. Thanks for the explanation anyway. Steve block talk 14:12, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Admin? Hmm, I don't know about skeletons in the closet, how do you mean? I've crossed swords with the odd person here and there when we haven't seen eye to eye, that sort of thing. It's all in my talk page archives, not exactly closeted. Steve block talk 14:30, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Aye, go on then. Steve block talk 16:27, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Thank you, I'm quite honoured and I accept. Steve block talk 07:57, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Bluebot task

Could you remove 3+ empty lines in articles -- always looks messy.

Lotsofissues 22:14, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

John Dale#Education (characterisation of Louisiana Baptist University)

I'm the primary author of the linked article. I fully believe you, and I bet you and are of the same type so I'd agree with you that it is worth noting in the article. But that brings up my point: I'm worried that "considered a rumour mill" is (because it could be considered a pejorative) will attract a NPOV dispute (see Talk:R. Albert Mohler, Jr. for an example of what I'd like to avoid.) So is there some way we can say the same thing but justify it a bit? I wikified "diploma mill", and changed it to "considered by some..." That includes me! Alan Canon 23:27, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

Bluebot

Hi. Would you please put a LEASH on that damned bot of yours? It is annoying enough when it mindlessly changes the names of sections, but when it goes altering templates, it is borderline VANDALISM. Thank you for your cooperation. Regards,--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 00:35, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

FWIW, R.D.H. appears to be referring to this edit. I do not see the problem with it. R.D.H., if you haven't seen it yet, you may want to read Wikipedia:Subst. {{prettytable}} is definitely listed as something to subst in articles. You'll see some possibly related discussion already. —HorsePunchKid→龜 2005-10-19 04:52:55Z

Me an admin candidate?

Hello, Martin. Somehow I missed your note on my talk page about possible adminship. I've read the guide you pointed me to. It sounds like something that might benefit me somewhat in combatting vandalism, at least. I do not have much confidence that the nomination would be successful:

1. I have no idea what my edit count is (nor do I particularly want to know), though I suspect it meets most voters' thresholds.
2. I don't think I'm very well known; would there be enough votes to create a consensus?
3. I have made my share of contentious edits, though I don't think I have made any permanent enemies. :)

Anyway, I would accept a nomination, but I would appreciate your input before proceeding with it, if you still would consider nominating me. Thanks, in any case! —HorsePunchKid→龜 2005-10-19 04:47:05Z

Replied. :) —HorsePunchKid→龜 2005-10-21 06:05:14Z

Replied again, thanks for the warning. —HorsePunchKid→龜 2005-10-22 02:31:10Z

Hello again, Martin! Thank you for your generously kind nomination. I have accepted and responded to the initial set of questions. I look forward to the feedback, regardless of the result! —HorsePunchKid→龜 2005-10-23 07:32:04Z

Could Bluebot please fix RSS redirects?

Could Bluebot please change wikilinks RSS feed and RSS (protocol) so that they link directly to RSS (file format)? If this is outside of Bluebot's capabilities, do you know of a robot that could do this? Theshibboleth 04:46, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

I meant, could the links within the pages be changed so that users are not redirected at all? Theshibboleth 01:21, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Common heading overcapitalisation

Hi,

Your bot is doing great work. I note that it dealt very well with overcapitalisation of section headings. Can I offer some more examples?

There are quite a few in aerospace articles. I have tackled the following and automation would be a great help. For example:

• Mission Characteristics
• Mission Highlights
• Mission Insignia
• Mission Parameters
• Support Crew

Anyway, the following two articles give examples of what I mean. Tupolev Tu-110 Apollo 17

I know that table headings might be more controversial than section headings. So perhaps you may wish to just do section headings and not table headings. I will understand if you want to do neither, it is just a suggestion. Thanks. Bobblewik 17:55, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

{{Prettytable}}

Is it possible to check for pages where this template was expanded before it used the wikitable class? Susvolans ⇔ 14:00, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

The advantage is that the class is part of the stylesheet and can be customised. Susvolans ⇔ 15:54, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Speaking of silly

My "silly" templates have been removed from their respective articles. I have also marked the "silly" templates for speedy deletion. (Never let it be said I don't clean up my own messes.)

While I'm on the subject of "silly", here are a few other "silly" things I've done lately on behalf of Wikipedia.

• I've been spending countless "silly" hours perusing libraries so that I could provide references for articles. (More often for material written by someone else.)

• Last summer, I was "silly" enough to drive 150 miles to the nearest library that had a copy of the original Arkham House edition of Tales of the Cthulhu Mythos so that I could verify the quote in Cthulhu mythos article.

• I was "silly" enough to search for and acquire at my own expense numerous out-of-print books so that I could write better articles.

You're right, I am "silly". But I'm not "silly" enough to continue wasting my precious time contributing to Wikipedia.

RlyehRising 02:54, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

• Correction: I will be leaving Wikipedia...eventually (I have no doubt about this—my interests wax and wan), but this is not a good enough reason. RlyehRising 04:47, 23 November 2005 (UTC)