This page 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. |
Hey, I don't understand why the page I created was deleted. It was about a band, that was featured on a compilation album (Which was one of the requirements). Not to mention these guys have been featured on numerous college radio stations. And were on a Mainstream radio station. So yea, what the hell?
Drv7788 ( talk) 22:54, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
I see that you cleaned up the mess from a vandal page move, but if you go to the page it is still only a redirect. Can you please restore the old version? Wizard191 ( talk) 14:37, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
you forgot to move the grawppage back to Scarlett Johansen before you deleted it. Now there's nothing there >.< Nar Matteru ( talk) 12:27, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
A Happy New Year and thank you for your help in reverting some boring page move vandal. However the page move revert bot is sometimes deleting a page without moving it back first, e. g. here or here including the talk pages (both regarding the vandal moves from December 31). Imagine this would happen twice for the same page, e. g. you would have 1,987 revisions of Mace Windu mixed together with 407 revisions of Rod Blagojevich corruption charges at *H A66 ER ?, enjoy separating them out. Please fix this. Thank you again. -- Oxymoron 83 12:33, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
Pretty pls your script to for a succesful move before deleting redirect. [2]. -- slakr\ talk / 12:52, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Moet and glass.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.
For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. -- ImageTaggingBot ( talk) 02:05, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
If I put this on my userpage will it actually update my status or is it a joke? Top Gear Freak 19:47, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
Three issues have been published since the last deliver: November 24, December 1, and January 3.
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 45 | 24 November 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 46 | 1 December 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
ArbCom elections: Elections open | Wikipedia in the news |
WikiProject Report: WikiProject Solar System | Features and admins |
The Report on Lengthy Litigation |
| ||
Volume 5, Issue 1 | 3 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.-- ragesoss ( talk) 21:42, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Would you mind blocking Mr friendly sockpuppet from editing his user talk as well? Otherwise i fear it will be a long day cleaning up after him :). Excirial ( Contact me, Contribs) 14:22, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
Hey, looking through your log of blocks, I see that you seem to be routinely blocking the user's access to the emailuser function and/or their ability to access their talk page. I understand that some of these are for the ever-elusive "grawp", but the rationale for this block's options:
05:03, January 4, 2009 Chris G (Talk | contribs | block) blocked 88.87.133.70 (Talk) (anon. only, account creation blocked, e-mail blocked, cannot edit own talk page) with an expiry time of 6 months ({{ blocked proxy}}) (unblock | change block)
is much less clear cut, and I'd certainly argue that a proxy shouldn't have talk page editing disabled. Blocking of talk page editing should be used only as a last-resort measure for if a user is known/expected to abuse their talk page. Indeed, to be quite honest, if you're doing an indefinite ban on a grawp sock, I'd not bother and just put protection on the page if the problem arose.
Thanks, Mart inp23 14:37, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
You've officially ruined my clean block log :( now I'm a Grawp.
The Helpful One 13:49, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
I just flagged Pattonbot, [3] but the code on Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Approved is confusing. Since I am apparently stupid, could you update it for me? :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 00:05, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Is there a policy I'm not seeing that prohibits this kind of redirect? Tennis expert ( talk) 00:53, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
They are not "broken". I just created a new article entitled Toyota Championships. When someone clicks that link or types "Toyota Championships" in the search box, a blue link with fr:Tournoi du New Jersey appears. When you click on that link, you are taken to the appropriate article in French Wikipedia. That is exactly what I intended; therefore, I do not understand how this can be called "broken". Tennis expert ( talk) 05:44, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for being bold and approving DeadLinkBOT. I was beginning to think it would never get approved. I promise it won't cause any problems. :) -- ThaddeusB ( talk) 22:09, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 5, Issue 2 | 10 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.-- ragesoss ( talk) 20:00, 11 January 2009 (UTC) §hepBot ( Disable) 18:59, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
Have fun with it [4]. ~ Troy ( talk) 00:40, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
This. Can you leave some blocks for me too? ;P. Spencer T♦ C 01:11, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
CVU Anti-Vandalism Award | ||
Thanks for all your hard work dealing with vandalism by providing blocks to certain anon users that performed abusive edits to articles. Versus22 talk 07:15, 14 January 2009 (UTC) |
Hello, that was quick! Thank you very much. Nakor ( talk) 03:57, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 5, Issue 3 | 17 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.-- ragesoss ( talk) 21:12, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Delievered by SoxBot II ( talk) at 23:23, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Do you plan on doing anything with this? I assumed that your account might have been compromised at the time, but perhaps I am mistaken. ~ Troy ( talk) 02:41, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 5, Issue 4 | 24 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.-- ragesoss ( talk) 03:08, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
Delivered at 03:44, 25 January 2009 (UTC) by §hepBot ( Disable)
The approval request for AntiAbuseBot makes no mention of automatically protecting pages. Please remove this feature and seek approval in the usual way. -- Gurch ( talk) 16:40, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
I have adapted the block for User:Xkoalax so he can add an unblock message to his talkpage. He seems quite a normal editor who made one (big?) mistake. I had a short chat with the user on IRC, and a look at his contributions makes me think that the indef-total block is a bit harsh (but I may be mistaken). Could you have a look at the block/request (if the request is ready). Thanks. -- Dirk Beetstra T C 17:30, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Hmm, well .. the user has been unblocked by Slackr, but maybe you want to have a second look. -- Dirk Beetstra T C 18:49, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Beautiful. Good work. I'm very happy to see this. You could almost call it "PwnBot." Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 14:58, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
You have been paged because a user has reported a high level of vandalism and you are listed as a contact.
This is an automatically generated message. If problems occur, please contact User:nathanww. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bmurphy ( talk • contribs) 16:57, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I might be missing something, because I'm just checking my watchlist now after twenty-five days, but what in the world was this for? Apparently you also blocked User:Thehelpfulone. Why are you hardblocking users for "abuse" indefinitely without unblocking them, or am I missing something? ~ A H 1( T C U) 02:56, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
See [6]. DuncanHill ( talk) 04:17, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm all in favor of admin-bots blocking abusive users, but I think the bot needs to be a lot more careful about who it blocks, what it says when it blocks (i.e. give a reason, not just "abuse"), and be less quick to automatically indefinite hardblock. This is why admin-bots took so long to get approved -- don't mess it up, please. Andre ( talk) 05:53, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
This page 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. |
Hey, I don't understand why the page I created was deleted. It was about a band, that was featured on a compilation album (Which was one of the requirements). Not to mention these guys have been featured on numerous college radio stations. And were on a Mainstream radio station. So yea, what the hell?
Drv7788 ( talk) 22:54, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
I see that you cleaned up the mess from a vandal page move, but if you go to the page it is still only a redirect. Can you please restore the old version? Wizard191 ( talk) 14:37, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
you forgot to move the grawppage back to Scarlett Johansen before you deleted it. Now there's nothing there >.< Nar Matteru ( talk) 12:27, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
A Happy New Year and thank you for your help in reverting some boring page move vandal. However the page move revert bot is sometimes deleting a page without moving it back first, e. g. here or here including the talk pages (both regarding the vandal moves from December 31). Imagine this would happen twice for the same page, e. g. you would have 1,987 revisions of Mace Windu mixed together with 407 revisions of Rod Blagojevich corruption charges at *H A66 ER ?, enjoy separating them out. Please fix this. Thank you again. -- Oxymoron 83 12:33, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
Pretty pls your script to for a succesful move before deleting redirect. [2]. -- slakr\ talk / 12:52, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Moet and glass.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.
For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. -- ImageTaggingBot ( talk) 02:05, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
If I put this on my userpage will it actually update my status or is it a joke? Top Gear Freak 19:47, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
Three issues have been published since the last deliver: November 24, December 1, and January 3.
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 45 | 24 November 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 46 | 1 December 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
ArbCom elections: Elections open | Wikipedia in the news |
WikiProject Report: WikiProject Solar System | Features and admins |
The Report on Lengthy Litigation |
| ||
Volume 5, Issue 1 | 3 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.-- ragesoss ( talk) 21:42, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Would you mind blocking Mr friendly sockpuppet from editing his user talk as well? Otherwise i fear it will be a long day cleaning up after him :). Excirial ( Contact me, Contribs) 14:22, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
Hey, looking through your log of blocks, I see that you seem to be routinely blocking the user's access to the emailuser function and/or their ability to access their talk page. I understand that some of these are for the ever-elusive "grawp", but the rationale for this block's options:
05:03, January 4, 2009 Chris G (Talk | contribs | block) blocked 88.87.133.70 (Talk) (anon. only, account creation blocked, e-mail blocked, cannot edit own talk page) with an expiry time of 6 months ({{ blocked proxy}}) (unblock | change block)
is much less clear cut, and I'd certainly argue that a proxy shouldn't have talk page editing disabled. Blocking of talk page editing should be used only as a last-resort measure for if a user is known/expected to abuse their talk page. Indeed, to be quite honest, if you're doing an indefinite ban on a grawp sock, I'd not bother and just put protection on the page if the problem arose.
Thanks, Mart inp23 14:37, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
You've officially ruined my clean block log :( now I'm a Grawp.
The Helpful One 13:49, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
I just flagged Pattonbot, [3] but the code on Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Approved is confusing. Since I am apparently stupid, could you update it for me? :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 00:05, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Is there a policy I'm not seeing that prohibits this kind of redirect? Tennis expert ( talk) 00:53, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
They are not "broken". I just created a new article entitled Toyota Championships. When someone clicks that link or types "Toyota Championships" in the search box, a blue link with fr:Tournoi du New Jersey appears. When you click on that link, you are taken to the appropriate article in French Wikipedia. That is exactly what I intended; therefore, I do not understand how this can be called "broken". Tennis expert ( talk) 05:44, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for being bold and approving DeadLinkBOT. I was beginning to think it would never get approved. I promise it won't cause any problems. :) -- ThaddeusB ( talk) 22:09, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 5, Issue 2 | 10 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.-- ragesoss ( talk) 20:00, 11 January 2009 (UTC) §hepBot ( Disable) 18:59, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
Have fun with it [4]. ~ Troy ( talk) 00:40, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
This. Can you leave some blocks for me too? ;P. Spencer T♦ C 01:11, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
CVU Anti-Vandalism Award | ||
Thanks for all your hard work dealing with vandalism by providing blocks to certain anon users that performed abusive edits to articles. Versus22 talk 07:15, 14 January 2009 (UTC) |
Hello, that was quick! Thank you very much. Nakor ( talk) 03:57, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 5, Issue 3 | 17 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.-- ragesoss ( talk) 21:12, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Delievered by SoxBot II ( talk) at 23:23, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Do you plan on doing anything with this? I assumed that your account might have been compromised at the time, but perhaps I am mistaken. ~ Troy ( talk) 02:41, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 5, Issue 4 | 24 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.-- ragesoss ( talk) 03:08, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
Delivered at 03:44, 25 January 2009 (UTC) by §hepBot ( Disable)
The approval request for AntiAbuseBot makes no mention of automatically protecting pages. Please remove this feature and seek approval in the usual way. -- Gurch ( talk) 16:40, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
I have adapted the block for User:Xkoalax so he can add an unblock message to his talkpage. He seems quite a normal editor who made one (big?) mistake. I had a short chat with the user on IRC, and a look at his contributions makes me think that the indef-total block is a bit harsh (but I may be mistaken). Could you have a look at the block/request (if the request is ready). Thanks. -- Dirk Beetstra T C 17:30, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Hmm, well .. the user has been unblocked by Slackr, but maybe you want to have a second look. -- Dirk Beetstra T C 18:49, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Beautiful. Good work. I'm very happy to see this. You could almost call it "PwnBot." Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 14:58, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
You have been paged because a user has reported a high level of vandalism and you are listed as a contact.
This is an automatically generated message. If problems occur, please contact User:nathanww. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bmurphy ( talk • contribs) 16:57, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I might be missing something, because I'm just checking my watchlist now after twenty-five days, but what in the world was this for? Apparently you also blocked User:Thehelpfulone. Why are you hardblocking users for "abuse" indefinitely without unblocking them, or am I missing something? ~ A H 1( T C U) 02:56, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
See [6]. DuncanHill ( talk) 04:17, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm all in favor of admin-bots blocking abusive users, but I think the bot needs to be a lot more careful about who it blocks, what it says when it blocks (i.e. give a reason, not just "abuse"), and be less quick to automatically indefinite hardblock. This is why admin-bots took so long to get approved -- don't mess it up, please. Andre ( talk) 05:53, 30 January 2009 (UTC)