User talk:Pichpich/Archive-2013

Category:Gang rape victims

I am ok with any consensus reached in the discussion. Naveed (talk) 06:34, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Duarte Pio

Pichpich,

Have no worries, I assumed that your revert of my additions was unintentional. I know that we have had many differences in the past, but I hope that we can be on better terms now and that we can come to a wise solution for the Duarte Pio article. Cheers, Cristiano Tomás (talk) 02:30, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Rename Category:Seasons in Indian Football

Please see my proposal to rename Category:Seasons in Indian Football to Category:Seasons in Indian football Hugo999 (talk) 10:24, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

No objections. Cheers, Pichpich (talk) 13:03, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Northern Ireland Child Support Agency

Hello Thanks for adding a notability tag to this article back in Jan 2008. I've just removed it, as it's a govt agency. If you disagree, you may want to take it to the Notability Noticeboard or AfD to get it looked at again. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 22:00, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Ambassadors of France to Germany, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nassau (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:47, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

re: your message

Hi Pichpich, I've left a reply to your message on my talk page -- Marek.69 ^talk 03:54, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

I think we've killed it...

Wikipedia:Database reports/Uncategorized categories that is, apart from those few that are "stuck" in the bot - good work. I've been slugging through some of Wikipedia:Database reports/Categories categorized in red-linked categories - mostly but not exclusively the date-related ones, it's typical that the bot decided to skip a week on that report just as I've got a good lump cleared. Le Deluge (talk) 06:36, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Victory!... for now. :-)

Database reports are fun. I spent a lot of time on the category-related ones but I'm not as active there as I used to be because I ended up feeling like this guy so it's great to here that you've taken over. Cheers, Pichpich (talk) 13:24, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

You don't get off that easily! Unfortunately my Wiki time tends to be rather sporadic so I'm not much good for ongoing maintenance, I tend to attack a backlog of something as a one-off thing to get it down to the point where someone won't be daunted by regular maintenance, then head off to a different backlog somewhere else. I doubt this Wiki session will be enough for all the red-linked cats but it would be nice to clear the year cats at least, maybe even get it down to one page.Le Deluge (talk) 17:15, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

I sincerely wish you all the best but my mind will be blown if you manage to get it to a single page. I always found that there were a large number of cases where it did not seem like a good idea to create the category but it didn't seem a better idea to remove entirely and if you want to clear the backlog almost entirely you'll have to attack these cases that require half an hour of figuring out whether this or that category truly belongs in our system. By the way, Wikipedia:Database reports/Red-linked categories with incoming links is a somewhat similar backlog but it's capped at 1000 pages so it's hard to measure progress. Cheers, Pichpich (talk) 17:36, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

I've has some ideas on getting some help on a long-term basis - may not be perfect but I'm a firm believer in perfection being the enemy of the good. I know the kind of cats you mean - I tend to take the view that it's better off getting them into some kind of hierarchy so that the "locals" can take a view rather than leaving them as orphans, but I agree some of them do take some thinking. One specific instance - is there an official line on "nnnn in old-colony"? I can see arguments for both creating a hierarchy under the old name and for keeping it all within the modern-day country(s) - I'm coming round to the idea of using old names for the categories that are required by the various eg establishment templates, and then modern names once you're out of the immediate hierarchy required by the templates. I have tended to avoid them though, not least because you're laying yourself open to having to create lots of new categories under the old name if you're not careful! I'll have a quick play with the Rlcwil report and knock off some of the most-linked ones - the sockpuppets are 20% of it and they would be very quick to do it with AWB but I'll leave them as a treat for the bot creator. Le Deluge (talk) 00:59, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes, nnnn in place that doesn't exist any more and nnnn in place that didn't exist at the time are just impossible to manage because there's no agreement on what should be done with them. (And every CfD I know that involved this issue ended up as a 50/50 no consensus whatsoever) Which is why I have the perfect solution: cowardly indifference! If someone feels passionately about creating Category:1845 in Italy, who am I to stand in the way? But more seriously, I've made it a point to only create categories that I believe are completely uncontroversial and will never be deleted. Unfortunately, as the next two sections of this talk page show, that doesn't quite work as well as I hoped. I'll take a closer look at your bot request tomorrow but my initial feeling is that although it's in principle a good idea to automate some of this, it will be hard in practice to make the bot simultaneously foolproof and useful. But maybe I'm too much of a pessimist. Best, Pichpich (talk) 02:02, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

I can sympathise with that view, and I obviously don't want to cause work unnecessarily. But that's where the backlog-clearance mindset is a bit different - the only way to achieve that goal of zero is if someone takes the hard decisions even if they're 51:49 one way or 49:51 the other. Obviously one gets rid of the obvious nonsense, but in general I'll tend to give plausible cases the benefit of the doubt - it's more important to get them unorphaned and let the locals make up their minds once the cats are in the local hierarchy. The costs of potential deletions are outweighed by the benefits of de-orphaning, it's not like the hierarchy is written in stone.

Thanks for that on former countries, I suspected as much. Cases like Italy are complicated by it making sense as a geographical entity, even if the political entity didn't exist, but eg ...in the UK makes no sense pre-1707, ...in Great Britain would do but we don't have ...in GB after 1707 so why should we before? So I think you've confirmed me in my way - old names make sense at the year level, and the templates then force you to use the same name for decades and centuries, but then plug them into the hierarchy of the modern name at the History of... level and maybe at the millennium level. I know the latter is inconsistent but feels appropriate.

On the sockpuppets, BattyBot has already filed a WP:BRFA, so that will be 200-odd gone soon. I've realised that it's not particularly efficient doing it by incoming links but I'll stick with it until the next bot run - I've done all with >8 links so far (about 110 plus some extras), hope to do 7 and maybe 6-links before the next run. And of course you always get waylaid - am I allowed a smile at the fact the WP Lutheranism cats were austerely devoid of any ornamentation like cat TOCs and navboxes? <g> Le Deluge (talk) 12:21, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

You may be interested in this, it looks like Rlcwil has ~60,000 potential cats. I'm suddenly a lot less interested in trying to clear it!!!!! Le Deluge (talk) 16:48, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

pfff. I can't believe you're chickening out. Come on, if we work together then it gets down to a very manageable ~30,000 categories each. :-)

Seriously though, after clearing hundreds (maybe even thousands) of entries in that backlog, I feel that I'm more useful at Wikipedia:Database reports/Red-linked categories with incoming links because there's less noise and it's easier to decide whether or not a category really deserves to be created. If we can get bots to clear the sockpuppet categories and the annoying WikiProject categories in that backlog, we'll get a sense of how much work needs to be done there. Pichpich (talk) 16:59, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Don't count on the Battybot proposal - it's proving surprisingly controversial, or at least one guy has decided WP:IDONTLIKEIT. As for the WikiProjects, I've started on the 412 red links that start Category:WikiProject... as you can see from my contributions - it's actually quite a fun mix as it doesn't have any of the assessment pages (which all start Redirect-Class etc) and it's as much about fixing links to old project names as creating new cats. It also takes you down some really dusty corners of Wikipedia - I'd never heard of things like Wikislice before. I'll see how I'm going on that 412, see whether my enthusiasm extends to the assessment cats as well, they're not terribly amenable to bots because each project seems to have its own conventions, and there's lots of oddities like the Christianity sub-projects going into eg the Christianity Redirects parent cat rather than the main Redirects cat. Personally it's the geographical Wikipedian ones that I find really boring - each continent seems to have its own layout of noticeboards etc, it's just fiddly. However I have just had a bit of a go at Category:Wikipedians in... and cleaned out most of the real "mistake" ones, although there's more to be done moving people from individual Wikipedian in Nowheresville cats up to state/province level. Having discovered that master list of categories I think the way to go is to use the report to identify potential groups like all the Category:Massachusetts_elections... and then use the master list to do them all in one go rather than waiting for a fraction of them to appear in the report. Maybe you're already doing that, it was new to me though. Set the limit up to 5000, then view the HTML source of the resulting page and paste it into Excel, then filter on contains "page does not exist" and you have a "concentrated" list of red links. Strip out the HTML junk and you've got a list that can be used in WP:AWB or whatever, I find these big reports/cat pages get quite slow on my PC so it's nice to have a more concentrated list. Oh yes, and there's Ccirlc I was going to work on, wasn't there? <g> Le Deluge (talk) 13:42, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Re: those "annoying WikiProject categories" - I've done the 400+ red links starting with Category:WikiProject..., and next on the list is a similar number beginning Category:Redirect-Class X articles and so on. To generate that second list, I downloaded pages of the master list starting with Redirect-Class etc (plus Wikipedia... to Z just because) and filtered out the blue links. I did 5000 at a time just because I could, which meant I ended up downloading about 150,000 category names, of which somewhere between 6500 and 7000 were red links. It's probably worse than it sounds because there's noticeably more red links in the Wikipedians... area, and I excluded the sockpuppet categories, it's probably 15% of the total red links. Over the last week I've cleaned out a lot of the rubbish, which has been vastly more timeconsuming than I ever imagined - I've launched several sockpuppet investigations, ended up deep inside some of the most complicated templates on the site, and spent a lot of time flipping between wiki and Google Translate for the non-ASCII categories! But the result of it is that I've got it down to <5000, and I've further concentrated it by splitting out 800+ football and education ones which I'll offer to the appropriate projects, and I knocked off all the US state election ones myself. So that's 4110 concentrated red links for you to play with over at User:Le_Deluge/categories (~300kb!) - have fun!Le Deluge (talk) 23:38, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Wow, nice work. Pretty impressive actually and I like the idea of separating out chunks that can be handled by specific projects. Projects are never as active as we wish but if any of them take the bait, it could be quite effective. I'll take a stab at the concentrated list though I must confess a certain Database-report fatigue. (except for this ingenious one which is so much fun I should selfishly keep it a secret) Cheers, Pichpich (talk) 07:38, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

The footy guys are certainly having a go at some of them, that's a pretty busy project though. It occurs to me that "albums" might make an easy filter to split off for the music guys too. What I was really hoping for was more opportunities to do what I did with the elections, get *all* the members of a particular type of cat and then attack it with the help of AWB and some Excel formulas based off the category name to fill in eg those annoying templates that take each digit of a year as a separate parameter. I knocked off ~100 in this batch - Texas, Tenessee etc, even though I swore I wouldn't, I'm almost tempted to just go fishing for the remaining state elections like Maine/Maryland/Mass whilst I've got the spreadsheet open... Otherwise I think I'll just do those Project ones and that'll be me done for a bit on this stuff. At some point when I've cleared my todo list a bit, I'll fix up a script to grab all the cats and do things properly.Le Deluge (talk) 00:07, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Category:Roads opened in 1946

Category:Roads opened in 1946, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. –TCN7JM 20:29, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Category:Roads opened in 1957

Category:Roads opened in 1957, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. –TCN7JM 20:35, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Zdeněk Zikán, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Besk (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:04, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Why?

Why did you remove my PROD and replace it with an AFD tag? —Theopolisme (talk) 03:24, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Hey man, what's with you lecturing me tonight? First you remove a perfectly valid BLPROD of mine and kindly point me to WP:BEFORE, only to realize that your source is Facebook and that the BLPROD should never have been removed. (apology accepted) Now you accuse me of "inexplicably" removing a PROD tag despite the fact that the sequence of events is crystal clear if you look at the article history. Come on... Pichpich (talk) 03:54, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

I apologize for my earlier error; Google's cache made it look like something it wasn't. I sincerely apologize. Regardless, the article history doesn't seem to make anything clear; could you explain? —Theopolisme (talk) 04:07, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Hmm. Looks like I misread the history myself so apologies back to you. This was probably a Twinkle glitch because I wouldn't have intentionally removed a prod from an article that I think probably deserved one (as you can tell from my nomination, I don't think too highly of it). Of course, blaming Twinkle is not a really good explanation either. I probably wrote my nomination while you were placing the prod which is why I didn't see it but Twinkle clearly did notice the prod tag since it removed it when placing the AfD notice. Bottom line this is my edit and even if it was unintentional, I'm responsible for it so apologies. In the end that stupid article will be zapped so all is well. Pichpich (talk) 05:04, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

And that's all that really matters. :) Thanks for the clear explanation..we all make mistakes [myself included]! —Theopolisme (talk) 05:18, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Fire-related categories

113 sub-categories of Category:19th-century fires and Category:20th-century fires, one of which you have created (Category:1934 fires), have been nominated for merging. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Waltham, The Duke of 17:12, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Robert John Murray

Can you please link to guideline you mention? Thanks In ictu oculi (talk) 13:24, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Sure. I've added the details to the RM discussion. Cheers, Pichpich (talk) 13:43, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Nalyvaichenko article

Agree on both, except that Id rather use a link to genuine host rather than scribd since anyone can upload "legitlookalike" copy of a newspaper, mind if we find something of the same content on another respective media? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greyskullpowerof (talk • contribs) 21:10, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

I think Ukrainian Weekly is pretty good because it's in English a nice feature which can be relatively hard to find for these subjects. A simple note accompanying the reference can point to the Ukrainian Weekly archives page. Pichpich (talk) 21:40, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Pichpich. You have new messages at Talk:Valentyn_Nalyvaichenko#.22deliberately_injected_compromising_material_of_fraudulent_nature.22.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

— Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 22:21, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

The reason why I changed the Mac Phee thing

I was making an ad

Quite interesting that you would find this appropriate. Pichpich (talk) 16:54, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Admin

Hi there. I came across your edits and found them to be very impressive. I'm sure you've been asked this before, but I'm wondering if you've considered running for adminship. I'd gladly nominate you if you want to take the leap, though if you'd rather not due to RfA being hell I understand. You strike me as someone who would be a bit more behind the scenes as an admin, and those are the type we need more of. Wizardman 04:02, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Wizardman. Thanks for the vote of confidence but I'll decline for now. I'll send you an email detailing the basic reasons behind that decision. Cheers, Pichpich (talk) 13:57, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

category: Chad Connelly

Can you help with some abusing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chad_Connelly? ThanksAlexstro (talk) 18:16, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the help. He's the Chairman of the State Party, so it is a bit harder to source a lot of the personal stuff, as much of it is more biographical. Will work on changing, and appreciate the help. Obviously saying he is a "mormon" instead of his religion, et. al, when he's Southern Baptist, and removing his website continuously and other changes that have been made are a bit out of line. Thanks for your help though, will work on fixing some of the citations.70.63.252.20 (talk) 19:29, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

I've replied on your talk page. User talk:Alexstro. Cheers, Pichpich (talk) 20:14, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

So how does it feel...

...to have a blown mind? <g> Le Deluge (talk) 11:10, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Well it's hard to think straight with a blown mind but I believe I'm pretty impressed. :-) Well done my friend. Pichpich (talk) 15:26, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Alyssa (stand-up comic) listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Alyssa (stand-up comic). Since you had some involvement with the Alyssa (stand-up comic) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Pichpich (talk) 19:08, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hans Vintler, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tyrol (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:15, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Discussion notice

You participated in the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (people)#RFC-birth date format conformity when used to disambiguate so I thought you might want to comment at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (people)#Birth date format conformity .28second round.29.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:04, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Dreams (Will Come Alive song)

A tag has been placed on Dreams (Will Come Alive song), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo, or other unlikely search term.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that administrators wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this.

"Dreams (Will Come Alive)" is the full correct title. "Will Come Alive" is not the song author. --BohemianRhapsody (talk) 00:47, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

That was fantastically idiotic on my part. Thanks for correcting the goof. Pichpich (talk) 01:18, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Margret Göbl, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Squaw Valley (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:15, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Are Historians really Social scientists??

Hi - You recently added Category:Social scientists as a parent cat for Category:Historians (which I believe is erroneous). So I want to invite you to participate in a discussion that I've opened on the larger question of History as one of the Social sciences. Regards, Cgingold (talk) 01:14, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Category:Bandy venues

Category:Bandy venues, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. DexDor (talk) 04:24, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited André Filippini, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Le Nouvelliste (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:10, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ross Montgomery (architect), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages East Los Angeles and Marymount College (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:04, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2013_December_4#Category:African_people_of_Arab_descent

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2013_December_4#Category:African_people_of_Arab_descent. You are being notified since you participated in a previous discussion on a similar theme Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 21:24, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hettie Shumway, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Humanist (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:11, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Earth to Echo, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Walt Disney Studios (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 18 December 2013 (UTC)