User talk:SatyrBot/Archive 9
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 5 | ← | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 |
Logic
Your bot has added a bunch of articles on decision theory to Wikiproject Logic. Why? IMO there is no relation between decision theory and logic. --Zvika 08:41, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
- Agreed, the bot seems to be adding a huge number of inappropriate articles. I noticed its message at Talk:Hyperbolic discounting. That is a topic in psychology and economics. (As an aside, the logic project infobox is pretty beefy, too.) Jeremy Tobacman 09:36, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
- The bot is just tagging the categories that the WikiProject Logic had designated after a week of consideration. The initial list may seem over inclusive. There may also be some particular articles in a category that don't fit. In this case, there is a relationship between decision theory and logic. Some of these articles could use the attention of people interested in logic.
- In any case, if it is or is not included, lets get a maximum baseline of articles so we can "see what we have." We may find some patterns that will be useful. Then we can take out what really doesn't belong. Be well, Gregbard 09:41, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the comments. I've asked WP:Logic to review some of the categories for misplaced banners (see below). One comment, though - "how real or ideal decision-makers make or should make decisions, and how optimal decisions can be reached" would seem to me (an admitted layman) to belong squarely in the "Logic" category... But I'll add that cat to the list to review if you'd like. Sorry for the over-tagging! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 14:42, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Decision theory might be (remotely) related to logic, just as any field of mathematics is related to any other. That doesn't mean it should be part of WikiProject Logic. Please realize that having a bot gives you a lot of power. None of us can go and revert all of the changes you've done, which is what I certainly would have done if it had been one or two mistagged articles. So, in the future, please consult people who are knowledgeable in the field before, not after, you run your bot on something like this. --Zvika 18:46, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Nevermore (how about "never before")
In the future NEVER run this kind of tagging without first consulting with people who are active in the area in questgion. Your bot actually created a HUGE amount of manual work to clean-up after mislabelling. `'Míkka 17:34, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
- The categories were considered for a week. The bot didn't get started for a while, and there was actually two weeks to comment on it. Furthermore the category discussion was publicized at the logic portal, the wikiproject, and at the "to do" template that people have on their talk pages. What makes you say that these categories aren't going to benefit form wikiproject logic? That doesn't seem to make any sense. There may be some articles in each category that won't fit, but that is expected. These categories seem a perfectly appropriate place to find logic articles. Gregbard 22:11, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
- Your wikiproject logic suffers form lack of logic. First it has to make an order with categories. See User talk:SatyrTN. `'Míkka 22:40, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
- The categories were considered for a week. The bot didn't get started for a while, and there was actually two weeks to comment on it. Furthermore the category discussion was publicized at the logic portal, the wikiproject, and at the "to do" template that people have on their talk pages. What makes you say that these categories aren't going to benefit form wikiproject logic? That doesn't seem to make any sense. There may be some articles in each category that won't fit, but that is expected. These categories seem a perfectly appropriate place to find logic articles. Gregbard 22:11, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
- I think the ease of removal make it not such a problem. Apparently there are a lot fewer articles than I thought. I tell you what there Mikkalai, I've been waiting a while for this. I guess waiting is okay, however I don't see the crisis. I appreciate your recent clean up of some categories on pages too (except game theory -that should stay in under math logic at least). This has already had it's due process. It's time to move forward. Don't worry, I think you will get what you want out of it. Be well, Gregbard 22:58, 31 July 2007 (UTC)