This is a list of redirects created by and only edited by user Neelix.
Full list: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User:Anomie/Neelix_list&oldid=689340000
It would be interesting to know, but probably difficult to determine, how many redirects were deleted on November 5, the day before this list was created. 100? 1,000? More? There are already 50,000+ here but it seems like a lot had been deleted over the previous 24 hours. Liz Read! Talk! 00:22, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
I've been removing some red links to get this page under control but I realized that I don't know what the purpose of this page is. Is the goal to keep all the contributions for reference? Else, should we first remove all the red links? Then can we remove the pages that were decided as keep per RFD? -- Ricky81682 ( talk) 01:05, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Now I see what you are talking about at ANi. I see value in retaining the redlinks as they help us see patterns. It is also a lot of work to remove the redlinks because you can't see what is red in edit. I'd love to chunk this into roughly 0-9999, 10000s, 20000s, 30000s, 40000-end or even smaller chunks. Another good idea would be for editors to adopt a chunk and put their name on that chunk to screen check everything - reduce the overlapping effort. Legacypac ( talk) 22:20, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
I mostly edit using a tablet, so loading a list like that is pretty much impossible for me, and probably a lot of other users as well, which is at least partly why I have just been dipping in and out at RFD instead of coming at it directly. If you guys can find some way to break it up into reasonable chunks, that'd be great. I'm also thinking that adding a temporary note at WP:CSD#G6 about this might help prevent further misunderstandings. I imagine someone could have done this a while ago but probably nobody thought it would take this long to deal with. Its such a ridiculously huge number of pages the mind just kind of recoils from the reality of it. Beeblebrox ( talk) 00:57, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
I can load the list on my laptop, but not get it loaded in edit mode. So can't split it. Legacypac ( talk) 01:01, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
Maybe User:Tavix can split it as he edited it before. Break into User_talk:Anomie/Neelix_list/1 User_talk:Anomie/Neelix_list/2 etc. Legacypac ( talk) 01:14, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
Awesome! Now I can edit the sublists. Anyone object if we remove deleted or confirmed ok redirects from these sublists as we go? If an editor thinks its unquestionably reasonable, it survives RfD or gets retargeted/built into a page etc we delete from the sublist. That way we can eventually declare the job finished. Legacypac ( talk)
Are the talk page redirects relevant? Aren't they just paralleling the main redirect? Do you think they could just be removed? Or at least removed if the mainspace page one is there too? -- 06:10, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
I've just processed the
redirects sorted by target to show how many remain for each of those top 1000. The full list's in
my sandbox at the moment; as an example, here are the first 10:
1.
Insulated glazing (399 redirects, 8 remaining)
2.
French conjugation (314 redirects, 3 remaining)
3.
Polycephaly (174 redirects, 36 remaining)
4.
Crystal gazing (129 redirects, 8 remaining)
5.
Chartreuse (color) (126 redirects, 7 remaining)
6.
Hypersexuality (126 redirects, 2 remaining)
7.
String trimmer (125 redirects, 123 remaining)
8.
The world, the flesh, and the devil (123 redirects, 111 remaining)
9.
Boasting (117 redirects, 13 remaining)
10.
Glacier ice accumulation (116 redirects, 88 remaining)
(Yes, there's an error in the target link at #5)
I've also got a detailed listing of remaining redirects to the top 1000, starting thus:
1.
Insulated glazing (399 redirects, 8 remaining)
Triple-glazing
Triple glazed
Triple-glazed
Double-glazing
Double glazed
Double-glazed
Insulated glaze
Insulated glazes
2.
French conjugation (314 redirects, 3 remaining)
French conjugations
French verb conjugations
Basic French verb conjugation
3.
Polycephaly (174 redirects, 36 remaining)
Threeheaded
Three-heads
Threeheads
Threehead
Three head
Three-head
Do either of these look useful? If so I could break them into manageable pages.
NebY (
talk)
00:34, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Nice work. User:Anomie/Neelix_list/1 to User:Anomie/Neelix_list/5 are working great to process down the redirects as checked/deleted etc. Generally he built the redirects to a given target all in a row so they are already grouped by target on these lists. The by target info sure shows the breadth of stupidity and some areas we should check carefully.
7. String trimmer (125 redirects, 123 remaining) could use a review.
8. The world, the flesh, and the devil needs another go over, checking if the variations have any real world use. Some were kept at a mass RfD but were never evaluated one by one properly. Legacypac ( talk) 00:46, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Unfortunately we are not done with breasts related redirects yet. I just got over 20 100% fake phrase/word redirects to a breast cancer screening process deleted, and there are many more related ones to check. Legacypac ( talk) 01:40, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
Any way we can automate the deletion of redlinks on the lists? Legacypac ( talk) 12:49, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
/info/en/?search=User:Ivanvector/Neelix_RfD_list showing some precedents.
The To Do Lists /info/en/?search=User:Anomie/Neelix_list
Legacypac ( talk) 10:49, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
User:Tavix, breaking the redirects out into section based on what should be done is the opposite of helpful. Just do what needs doing and remove them. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 06:27, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
Got it. I just added a short sentence below each X1 section explaining this that could have avoided this entire time-wasting conversation. I'm rather amazed that people think I object to something that I'm only learning about right now. Documentation is a good thing, people. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 06:46, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello. I was going through the Hognose redirects by Neelix, and I came across a few redirects that were not on the list. These were because the redirects were converted into disambiguation pages: See Spread head and Spread-heads for example. I wanted to let you know in case there were some overlooked Neelix redirects -- MrLinkinPark333 ( talk) 01:36, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
{{
ec}}
!). I don't expect others to do likewise, but for myself I find it helpful I note from your "sweep" a few minutes ago, which presumably because of time differences etc I was the only contributor to either, I had about twice as many keepers as X1 deleters (about 25 to 49 I think it was): but that is partly because it's easier to make an obvious keep than an obvious delete or burden RfD with the less obvious ones. It is certainly much easier for both nominator and admin to have the X1 criterion rather than having to take them all individually to CSD. I am aware of the history of arguing whether "all neelix redirects should just be blank deleted and start again" etc and as far as I took out of that, there is not carte blanche to mass delete things just because they are Neelix, i.e. they have to have the minimum of a strawman argument that had anyone else created them they would have gone the same way.{{
-r}}
section by section, as that is useful to me to check the history of the redirect etc rather than the target, but I can't do it per-list as it's too big for the inbuilt editor. The find/replace terms I use are "# [[" to replace with "# {{-r|" and "]] -->" to replace with "}} -->". That seems to work quite well. To check the target, one still has the target link there as well of course. I did suggest we did this ages ago but nobody took up the suggestion. A one-off bot run over all four (three?) remaining lists ould be good, but I am hopeless at suggesting that kind of thing.
Si Trew (
talk)
08:50, 29 September 2016 (UTC)I've done that before (I created the NeelOldLan template that is currently in use), and I can make some updates if needed. Could you explain exactly what the change that you want is - it might be as simple as changing a couple of characters in a template. Tazerdadog ( talk) 08:54, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
(cut 'n' paste from Anomie List 4)
Seven years ago, less two months, consenus was achieved at RfD for deleting every multifarious name for a noble. That consensus still stands, as far as I know, as it has never been discussed since. We do not need every single possible combination of every noble's name, that is what the search engine is for. Neelix has maybe read that, perhaps I am after all as the nominator of that because that was Dec 2019 and Neelix started proliferating the combinatorial explosion of redirects in early 2010, although never got as far as Alf Freddie Candide of Windy-Grates.
I need to make this plain: Neelix made a mistake to add these in bulk, and I for one do not believe that he is lightning fingers and added them individually, because I am on a quick computer and I know how long it takes me to mark on as keep and rcat it, and I am lightning fingers too. I've been touch typing since i was seven, thirty-seven years ago, on a proper keyboard where you have to hit the sodding things and you get a noisy response back if you get it wrong. Or am I confusing it with a piano? But I do believe that Neelix created this combinatorial explosion in good faith when the search engine was not as good as it now is. I do not believe for a second that Neelix created any of these redirects maliciously or for any kind of personal gain, money or status. Having gone through thousands of them, Neelix has I would characterise as a somewhat Christian bent, perhaps Evangelical but would be a good Anglo-Catholic if he lived in England, but he is not a bad man and I will sodding well defend him if anyone says he is. He made a mistake, that's all. A big one, but he didn't kill anyone, he didn't steal from anyone, he didn't cause an earthquake or start the Irish Potato Famine (I am not Irish) because of not bothering to do something he could do, he just did too much. Si Trew ( talk) 15:59, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
I believe this job is finally done, having just deleted the last few hundred x1/g6 neelix redirects. It was a long tough slog, and I don't even know how many people were involved in total, but it looks like it is finally completed. Beeblebrox ( talk) 00:31, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
A list of such redirects was created by User:Unready after I made a request at VPT. It can be found at User:Anomie/Neelix list/6. I'm going to pretty it up a little, and then get to work. There are 20,059 such redirects. Tazerdadog ( talk) 05:39, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
This is a list of redirects created by and only edited by user Neelix.
Full list: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User:Anomie/Neelix_list&oldid=689340000
It would be interesting to know, but probably difficult to determine, how many redirects were deleted on November 5, the day before this list was created. 100? 1,000? More? There are already 50,000+ here but it seems like a lot had been deleted over the previous 24 hours. Liz Read! Talk! 00:22, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
I've been removing some red links to get this page under control but I realized that I don't know what the purpose of this page is. Is the goal to keep all the contributions for reference? Else, should we first remove all the red links? Then can we remove the pages that were decided as keep per RFD? -- Ricky81682 ( talk) 01:05, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Now I see what you are talking about at ANi. I see value in retaining the redlinks as they help us see patterns. It is also a lot of work to remove the redlinks because you can't see what is red in edit. I'd love to chunk this into roughly 0-9999, 10000s, 20000s, 30000s, 40000-end or even smaller chunks. Another good idea would be for editors to adopt a chunk and put their name on that chunk to screen check everything - reduce the overlapping effort. Legacypac ( talk) 22:20, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
I mostly edit using a tablet, so loading a list like that is pretty much impossible for me, and probably a lot of other users as well, which is at least partly why I have just been dipping in and out at RFD instead of coming at it directly. If you guys can find some way to break it up into reasonable chunks, that'd be great. I'm also thinking that adding a temporary note at WP:CSD#G6 about this might help prevent further misunderstandings. I imagine someone could have done this a while ago but probably nobody thought it would take this long to deal with. Its such a ridiculously huge number of pages the mind just kind of recoils from the reality of it. Beeblebrox ( talk) 00:57, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
I can load the list on my laptop, but not get it loaded in edit mode. So can't split it. Legacypac ( talk) 01:01, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
Maybe User:Tavix can split it as he edited it before. Break into User_talk:Anomie/Neelix_list/1 User_talk:Anomie/Neelix_list/2 etc. Legacypac ( talk) 01:14, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
Awesome! Now I can edit the sublists. Anyone object if we remove deleted or confirmed ok redirects from these sublists as we go? If an editor thinks its unquestionably reasonable, it survives RfD or gets retargeted/built into a page etc we delete from the sublist. That way we can eventually declare the job finished. Legacypac ( talk)
Are the talk page redirects relevant? Aren't they just paralleling the main redirect? Do you think they could just be removed? Or at least removed if the mainspace page one is there too? -- 06:10, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
I've just processed the
redirects sorted by target to show how many remain for each of those top 1000. The full list's in
my sandbox at the moment; as an example, here are the first 10:
1.
Insulated glazing (399 redirects, 8 remaining)
2.
French conjugation (314 redirects, 3 remaining)
3.
Polycephaly (174 redirects, 36 remaining)
4.
Crystal gazing (129 redirects, 8 remaining)
5.
Chartreuse (color) (126 redirects, 7 remaining)
6.
Hypersexuality (126 redirects, 2 remaining)
7.
String trimmer (125 redirects, 123 remaining)
8.
The world, the flesh, and the devil (123 redirects, 111 remaining)
9.
Boasting (117 redirects, 13 remaining)
10.
Glacier ice accumulation (116 redirects, 88 remaining)
(Yes, there's an error in the target link at #5)
I've also got a detailed listing of remaining redirects to the top 1000, starting thus:
1.
Insulated glazing (399 redirects, 8 remaining)
Triple-glazing
Triple glazed
Triple-glazed
Double-glazing
Double glazed
Double-glazed
Insulated glaze
Insulated glazes
2.
French conjugation (314 redirects, 3 remaining)
French conjugations
French verb conjugations
Basic French verb conjugation
3.
Polycephaly (174 redirects, 36 remaining)
Threeheaded
Three-heads
Threeheads
Threehead
Three head
Three-head
Do either of these look useful? If so I could break them into manageable pages.
NebY (
talk)
00:34, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Nice work. User:Anomie/Neelix_list/1 to User:Anomie/Neelix_list/5 are working great to process down the redirects as checked/deleted etc. Generally he built the redirects to a given target all in a row so they are already grouped by target on these lists. The by target info sure shows the breadth of stupidity and some areas we should check carefully.
7. String trimmer (125 redirects, 123 remaining) could use a review.
8. The world, the flesh, and the devil needs another go over, checking if the variations have any real world use. Some were kept at a mass RfD but were never evaluated one by one properly. Legacypac ( talk) 00:46, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Unfortunately we are not done with breasts related redirects yet. I just got over 20 100% fake phrase/word redirects to a breast cancer screening process deleted, and there are many more related ones to check. Legacypac ( talk) 01:40, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
Any way we can automate the deletion of redlinks on the lists? Legacypac ( talk) 12:49, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
/info/en/?search=User:Ivanvector/Neelix_RfD_list showing some precedents.
The To Do Lists /info/en/?search=User:Anomie/Neelix_list
Legacypac ( talk) 10:49, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
User:Tavix, breaking the redirects out into section based on what should be done is the opposite of helpful. Just do what needs doing and remove them. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 06:27, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
Got it. I just added a short sentence below each X1 section explaining this that could have avoided this entire time-wasting conversation. I'm rather amazed that people think I object to something that I'm only learning about right now. Documentation is a good thing, people. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 06:46, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello. I was going through the Hognose redirects by Neelix, and I came across a few redirects that were not on the list. These were because the redirects were converted into disambiguation pages: See Spread head and Spread-heads for example. I wanted to let you know in case there were some overlooked Neelix redirects -- MrLinkinPark333 ( talk) 01:36, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
{{
ec}}
!). I don't expect others to do likewise, but for myself I find it helpful I note from your "sweep" a few minutes ago, which presumably because of time differences etc I was the only contributor to either, I had about twice as many keepers as X1 deleters (about 25 to 49 I think it was): but that is partly because it's easier to make an obvious keep than an obvious delete or burden RfD with the less obvious ones. It is certainly much easier for both nominator and admin to have the X1 criterion rather than having to take them all individually to CSD. I am aware of the history of arguing whether "all neelix redirects should just be blank deleted and start again" etc and as far as I took out of that, there is not carte blanche to mass delete things just because they are Neelix, i.e. they have to have the minimum of a strawman argument that had anyone else created them they would have gone the same way.{{
-r}}
section by section, as that is useful to me to check the history of the redirect etc rather than the target, but I can't do it per-list as it's too big for the inbuilt editor. The find/replace terms I use are "# [[" to replace with "# {{-r|" and "]] -->" to replace with "}} -->". That seems to work quite well. To check the target, one still has the target link there as well of course. I did suggest we did this ages ago but nobody took up the suggestion. A one-off bot run over all four (three?) remaining lists ould be good, but I am hopeless at suggesting that kind of thing.
Si Trew (
talk)
08:50, 29 September 2016 (UTC)I've done that before (I created the NeelOldLan template that is currently in use), and I can make some updates if needed. Could you explain exactly what the change that you want is - it might be as simple as changing a couple of characters in a template. Tazerdadog ( talk) 08:54, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
(cut 'n' paste from Anomie List 4)
Seven years ago, less two months, consenus was achieved at RfD for deleting every multifarious name for a noble. That consensus still stands, as far as I know, as it has never been discussed since. We do not need every single possible combination of every noble's name, that is what the search engine is for. Neelix has maybe read that, perhaps I am after all as the nominator of that because that was Dec 2019 and Neelix started proliferating the combinatorial explosion of redirects in early 2010, although never got as far as Alf Freddie Candide of Windy-Grates.
I need to make this plain: Neelix made a mistake to add these in bulk, and I for one do not believe that he is lightning fingers and added them individually, because I am on a quick computer and I know how long it takes me to mark on as keep and rcat it, and I am lightning fingers too. I've been touch typing since i was seven, thirty-seven years ago, on a proper keyboard where you have to hit the sodding things and you get a noisy response back if you get it wrong. Or am I confusing it with a piano? But I do believe that Neelix created this combinatorial explosion in good faith when the search engine was not as good as it now is. I do not believe for a second that Neelix created any of these redirects maliciously or for any kind of personal gain, money or status. Having gone through thousands of them, Neelix has I would characterise as a somewhat Christian bent, perhaps Evangelical but would be a good Anglo-Catholic if he lived in England, but he is not a bad man and I will sodding well defend him if anyone says he is. He made a mistake, that's all. A big one, but he didn't kill anyone, he didn't steal from anyone, he didn't cause an earthquake or start the Irish Potato Famine (I am not Irish) because of not bothering to do something he could do, he just did too much. Si Trew ( talk) 15:59, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
I believe this job is finally done, having just deleted the last few hundred x1/g6 neelix redirects. It was a long tough slog, and I don't even know how many people were involved in total, but it looks like it is finally completed. Beeblebrox ( talk) 00:31, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
A list of such redirects was created by User:Unready after I made a request at VPT. It can be found at User:Anomie/Neelix list/6. I'm going to pretty it up a little, and then get to work. There are 20,059 such redirects. Tazerdadog ( talk) 05:39, 15 November 2016 (UTC)