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 10 | ← | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | → | Archive 20 |
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. |
Not sure why you closed the ANI:Bgwhite. As I point out in the discussion it wasn't a content dispute. It was my attempt to cooperate with him on what he wanted not to use "font" tag then bash me with that I can't use the font tag (plus) repeatedly. If you can't figure out what is going on don't post or close such a thread. Spshu ( talk) 18:30, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi, Your initial evaluation of the photo File:1924 Walter John Baker.jpg, from the Bain collection, seemed rather good. I'm wondering what made you change your mind and conclude that it was "not published in us, only in UK" [1]? Can it not qualify for the PD-Bain tag like the other photos of the collection? -- Asclepias ( talk) 19:46, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please inform other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent software changes
VisualEditor news
Future software changes
{{DISPLAYTITLE:''title''}}
more than once will soon show a warning. You can use {{DISPLAYTITLE:''title''|noerror}}
to hide it.
[14]
[15]Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by MediaWiki message delivery • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
07:49, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
happy to help
Thank you, advanced clarinettist, for quality administrative service on "a few Wikias", for helping with articles for creation and fighting vandalism, for your
bot, for "I will also learn from criticism" and "something amusing for those who read to the bottom", - you are an
awesome Wikipedian!
Why not add now? WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT says that future routes with a confirmed start date and a source should be added now. We can remove the start date and reference when they actually start. These are not WP:CRYSTALBALL. They are confirmed by the airline with a start date. Please state at WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT where we should added future destinations when they are close to the start date? 68.119.73.36 ( talk) 05:03, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
In a way it does not really matter but for your information non-admins do not close community ban discussions. Common sense dictates that if a block was required to enforce a ban, a non-admin would be unable to do this. If you feel strongly about this, I suggest discussing changing the wording of CBAN, or running for adminship. Best, -- John ( talk) 14:17, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
I wanted to create a page in english for a french author who has been the subject of a good deal of my research. I have never done this before, so I had a few questions. Firstly, is this the proper place to ask such questions? Secondly, do I simply create a new page and then link it to the page in the original language? Finally, can I use citations in the source language for the page in english? I'm sorry that they are all basic questions, but one has to start somewhere, and you seem to know what you are doing. Thanks User:Mdann52 — Preceding unsigned comment added by DigitalPraxis ( talk • contribs) 12:28, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
@Mdann52, thank you for all your help. Last question, I promise:) How do I set it up so that a search for Edouard Louis redirects to the page for Édouard Louis (with the accent)? -- DigitalPraxis ( talk) 12:41, 14 July 2014 (UTC) Perhaps I have one more question for you, User:Mdann52 ... and then really, I'll leave you alone! What exactly does this mean: "Warning: Default sort key "Louis, Édouard" overrides earlier default sort key "Louis, Edouard". It appears at the bottom of the page I created yesterday - with your help. Thanks, -- DigitalPraxis ( talk) 08:40, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
You might enjoy something other than cookies. Thanks for your graphingnesses! See also this, which is amongst the future of automated citation formatting in VE and part of the direction toward normalizing citations, eventually into wikidata. (dtm from IRC) — Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 23:07, 15 July 2014 (UTC) |
Thank you for your reply. So there is nothing special I have to do, no auto or archivenow parameter to set or anything? Here is the code on the page now:
- Sweet Nightmares 13:56, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
I have made some changes to Draft:Meadow Arts, which might be worth being reviewed. -- NearEMPTiness ( talk) 20:43, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
I'm a bit concerned about the fact you've rolled back my latest edit to Akademiks, and that this was done without messaging me. I added a source for the deleted reference, so why have you reverted this with the message "I suggest you email me before revert OTRS actions" (which feels a little rude to me)? CLW ( talk) 10:17, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
Recently you cleaned up my submission at Draft:Dedlen and I have resubmitted it. I just hit the resubmit button and saved it. I don't know if the reviewer's previous comment are supposed to remain or if the submit notice should go on top again. Could you clean it up for me again? Thank you! Dedlen ( talk) 19:58, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
Dear Mdann52,
Thank you for informing me of the three edit rule after my fourth attempted edit of the Shapelle Corby entry. The "edit war" you explained was interesting as it seems that it was you I was sparring with. So can you tell me what investment you have in limiting the information truly available on all circumstances surrounding this story? Plus, who is AlanS associated with to want to stop the inclusion of the link I wish to share with the world?
Kind regards Techy-rat — Preceding unsigned comment added by Techy-rat ( talk • contribs) 14:26, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
Ohhhh AlanS, what a two edged sword you wield. What I wanted included in the article was to bring a balance of information to this matter. Why is it an issue to have this link where I placed it? Tech-rat — Preceding unsigned comment added by Techy-rat ( talk • contribs) 01:55, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi, Mdann52. I've changed your closing statement at "Continuation of disruptive activity by a SPA account" on ANI, as there seemed to be an error in it. Both the accounts have been indeffed as sockmaster + sock, not just given a month off. Hope you don't mind, it seemed simpler to just change it. I appreciate the good work you do at ANI. Regards, Bishonen | talk 16:51, 19 July 2014 (UTC).
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please inform other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent software changes
VisualEditor news
Future software changes
Problems
Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by MediaWiki message delivery • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
07:42, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
On the log of edit history of the article Monarch buttrfly the following edit was posted: 07:49, July 15, 2014 User:Mdann52 (talk | contribs]]) m . . (68,291 bytes) (-635) . . (→top: rv link to copyvio material (Ticket:2014071510000218))
I would like to maintain that no copyright infringement was done. I referenced a url to a website, a normal and typical practice. No copyrighted material (the raw data itself) was/is used in this section of the article. No word-for-word text was copied from the reference and then pasted to the article.
There seems to be some confusion of what constitues a copyright violation. I can only say that this/these users are well-intentioned and are responding in good faith, wishing to enhance and improve the article. I have been privately contacted by a representive of Southwest Monarch Study via email. I would rather resolve this issue with the assistance other editors who have the expertise of determining copyright violations here on wikipedia rather than thru private corespondance.
bpage ( talk) 02:44, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
@ Mdann52:, how do I get my status on my talk page like you have on the top right hand corner of yours? Is there some sort of code I need to insert? AlanS ( talk) 10:31, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
Ollieinc ( talk) 00:54, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please inform other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent software changes
VisualEditor news
Future software changes
Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by MediaWiki message delivery • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
08:09, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi Mdann52, we are to release a new major version of huggle, but we did receive almost no feedback from our beta testing team, which you are a part of (see https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Huggle/Members). It would be of a great help if you could download it (if you have windows, all you need to do is getting http://tools.wmflabs.org/huggle/files/huggle3.1.0beta.exe and putting it to a folder where you have installed huggle) and test it. You can always get a help with making it @ #huggle connect!
Major changes:
In case you found a bug, please report it to bugzilla: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/buglist.cgi?product=Huggle&list_id=147663 thank you! Petrb ( talk) 10:12, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi Mdann52, sorry I haven't been able to complete the new task for my lessons. I've been a bit busy for the past month, so I have been only editing those articles that are related to my interest at the moment. But I will complete those tasks within the next week for sure, just want to let you know in case you wonder why I've been so quiet. Thank you very much.-- TerryAlex ( talk) 02:13, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Hey, Mdann52. Are you willing to certify the basis of the disputes relating to the pending RfC/U on Dan56? Harmelodix ( talk) 20:36, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
I understand why you tried to close it, but I disagree because a non-admin closure resulted in the failing of the RFC 1 and the issue persisted and grew because of that controversial action. Your closure and assessment of situation at this point results in nothing - just a lot of wasted time and effort for nothing. Kww will not allow exceptions (it would undo it by its very nature) and the persistent attempts to mass-remove (resulting in its OWN edit filter) absolutely make it clear that the "status quo" is unacceptable to all parties. Something needs to be done lest we have a fourth RFC - resolving even just one of the issues in this RFC would greatly go to resolving it. Even if its just an analysis of the allegations vs evidence and separating the gross issues with Rotlink's actual actions - regardless of any consensus on their origin. I hope you understand and forgive me for asking that you revert yourself and allowing an admin or three-admin closure and assessment of the situation. ChrisGualtieri ( talk) 23:56, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
I'm having trouble understanding your closure to Wikipedia:Archive.is RFC 3. It says "it ships be noted". Should this be "it should be noted"? Hawkeye7 ( talk) 02:54, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
I'm going to join in here and ask that you undo your close as well. WP:NAC is for non-contentious closes, and I don't believe that RFC qualifies. There were three very specific, independent questions in the RFC as well, and I would like to see someone go through and provide a careful weighting of arguments for and against each of the three points as well. Your declaration of a somewhat blurry consensus to not do much of anything didn't help resolve anything, and close like that puts out out of reach of a non-admin close pretty much by definition.— Kww( talk) 03:01, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please inform other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Tech News updates
Recent software changes
VisualEditor news
Future software changes
Translations:
namespace on wikis using the
Translate extension will no longer be indexed by search engines.
[75]Problems
Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by MediaWiki message delivery • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
07:37, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
I assume this was accidental? — Dark 10:34, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
As far as your concern with kingsleys page, don't. It was clearly meant as a joke and there was not a reason to change it. Also, don't send me a warning. Ever. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prnis 364 ( talk • contribs) 20:13, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi Mdann52: 1 Please re-open the discussion at Wikipedia:Bot requests/Archive 61#Create a BOT to alphabetize and organize categories automatically that you shut off within barely 24 hours (!) basically allowing only one POV to be expressed and not allowing me or others the time to respond to the various opposing views. 2 I had placed notifications at a number of WP discussion boards and no doubt many others would have commented had you not cut off the discussion. 3 I hope you are not afraid of anything by the way that you acted so hastily. 4 While many editors expressed their opposing POVs not really based on solid established fixed WP policies, just on so-called nebulous "conventions" while this subject is important in light of the massive proliferation of categories casing confusion on articles. 5 Many of the POV's expressed assume that what they have to say is "well-known" but it is not! 6 I can assure that I have been categorizing articles and creating many categories since the inception of categories about ten years ago on WP and I have NEVER come across ANY requirement to abide by ANY rules for all WP categories, that is reflected in the wide array of opinions as to how to categorize. 7 Some say "do it more or less like this" and others say "do it more or less like that" while others say "it would interfere with something" or "it does not interfere with anything", all very confusing just like the state of categories are themselves. 8 Unless there are "mini infoboxes" on each article about how categories are to be applied and used, right now the system is a total unholy mess and no one is willing to do anything about it. 9 My proposal comes after a long period of thought and I can defend my position quite well, but you never gave me any chance, since by the time I got around to looking at it again only 24 hours later, you had cut off the discussion/s, so please re-open it for at least a week or longer and remove yourself as an involved editor due to the way you cut it off. Thank you in advance. 10 I am not sure if you are an admin or not, if you are an admin I will appeal your move, if you are not an admin I cannot understand why you did what you did without letting a proper debate develop. 11 This was not a "VOTE" it was simply a discussion to elicit IDEAS and SUGGESTIONS for a BOT to be created and not to be read the "riot act"! 12 Also since have Wikipedia:Mass message senders "authorization" how can I or anyone know that you did not simply send out a "mass appeal" to get the result? You need to be more cautious! 13 P.S. Next time let me know on my talk page what you did and let me know what you plan to do with this request. Thanks, IZAK ( talk) 11:13, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Archive 114#Create a BOT to alphabetize and organize categories automatically. Thank you, IZAK ( talk) 22:36, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
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 10 | ← | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | → | Archive 20 |
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. |
Not sure why you closed the ANI:Bgwhite. As I point out in the discussion it wasn't a content dispute. It was my attempt to cooperate with him on what he wanted not to use "font" tag then bash me with that I can't use the font tag (plus) repeatedly. If you can't figure out what is going on don't post or close such a thread. Spshu ( talk) 18:30, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi, Your initial evaluation of the photo File:1924 Walter John Baker.jpg, from the Bain collection, seemed rather good. I'm wondering what made you change your mind and conclude that it was "not published in us, only in UK" [1]? Can it not qualify for the PD-Bain tag like the other photos of the collection? -- Asclepias ( talk) 19:46, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please inform other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent software changes
VisualEditor news
Future software changes
{{DISPLAYTITLE:''title''}}
more than once will soon show a warning. You can use {{DISPLAYTITLE:''title''|noerror}}
to hide it.
[14]
[15]Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by MediaWiki message delivery • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
07:49, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
happy to help
Thank you, advanced clarinettist, for quality administrative service on "a few Wikias", for helping with articles for creation and fighting vandalism, for your
bot, for "I will also learn from criticism" and "something amusing for those who read to the bottom", - you are an
awesome Wikipedian!
Why not add now? WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT says that future routes with a confirmed start date and a source should be added now. We can remove the start date and reference when they actually start. These are not WP:CRYSTALBALL. They are confirmed by the airline with a start date. Please state at WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT where we should added future destinations when they are close to the start date? 68.119.73.36 ( talk) 05:03, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
In a way it does not really matter but for your information non-admins do not close community ban discussions. Common sense dictates that if a block was required to enforce a ban, a non-admin would be unable to do this. If you feel strongly about this, I suggest discussing changing the wording of CBAN, or running for adminship. Best, -- John ( talk) 14:17, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
I wanted to create a page in english for a french author who has been the subject of a good deal of my research. I have never done this before, so I had a few questions. Firstly, is this the proper place to ask such questions? Secondly, do I simply create a new page and then link it to the page in the original language? Finally, can I use citations in the source language for the page in english? I'm sorry that they are all basic questions, but one has to start somewhere, and you seem to know what you are doing. Thanks User:Mdann52 — Preceding unsigned comment added by DigitalPraxis ( talk • contribs) 12:28, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
@Mdann52, thank you for all your help. Last question, I promise:) How do I set it up so that a search for Edouard Louis redirects to the page for Édouard Louis (with the accent)? -- DigitalPraxis ( talk) 12:41, 14 July 2014 (UTC) Perhaps I have one more question for you, User:Mdann52 ... and then really, I'll leave you alone! What exactly does this mean: "Warning: Default sort key "Louis, Édouard" overrides earlier default sort key "Louis, Edouard". It appears at the bottom of the page I created yesterday - with your help. Thanks, -- DigitalPraxis ( talk) 08:40, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
You might enjoy something other than cookies. Thanks for your graphingnesses! See also this, which is amongst the future of automated citation formatting in VE and part of the direction toward normalizing citations, eventually into wikidata. (dtm from IRC) — Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 23:07, 15 July 2014 (UTC) |
Thank you for your reply. So there is nothing special I have to do, no auto or archivenow parameter to set or anything? Here is the code on the page now:
- Sweet Nightmares 13:56, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
I have made some changes to Draft:Meadow Arts, which might be worth being reviewed. -- NearEMPTiness ( talk) 20:43, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
I'm a bit concerned about the fact you've rolled back my latest edit to Akademiks, and that this was done without messaging me. I added a source for the deleted reference, so why have you reverted this with the message "I suggest you email me before revert OTRS actions" (which feels a little rude to me)? CLW ( talk) 10:17, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
Recently you cleaned up my submission at Draft:Dedlen and I have resubmitted it. I just hit the resubmit button and saved it. I don't know if the reviewer's previous comment are supposed to remain or if the submit notice should go on top again. Could you clean it up for me again? Thank you! Dedlen ( talk) 19:58, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
Dear Mdann52,
Thank you for informing me of the three edit rule after my fourth attempted edit of the Shapelle Corby entry. The "edit war" you explained was interesting as it seems that it was you I was sparring with. So can you tell me what investment you have in limiting the information truly available on all circumstances surrounding this story? Plus, who is AlanS associated with to want to stop the inclusion of the link I wish to share with the world?
Kind regards Techy-rat — Preceding unsigned comment added by Techy-rat ( talk • contribs) 14:26, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
Ohhhh AlanS, what a two edged sword you wield. What I wanted included in the article was to bring a balance of information to this matter. Why is it an issue to have this link where I placed it? Tech-rat — Preceding unsigned comment added by Techy-rat ( talk • contribs) 01:55, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi, Mdann52. I've changed your closing statement at "Continuation of disruptive activity by a SPA account" on ANI, as there seemed to be an error in it. Both the accounts have been indeffed as sockmaster + sock, not just given a month off. Hope you don't mind, it seemed simpler to just change it. I appreciate the good work you do at ANI. Regards, Bishonen | talk 16:51, 19 July 2014 (UTC).
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please inform other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent software changes
VisualEditor news
Future software changes
Problems
Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by MediaWiki message delivery • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
07:42, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
On the log of edit history of the article Monarch buttrfly the following edit was posted: 07:49, July 15, 2014 User:Mdann52 (talk | contribs]]) m . . (68,291 bytes) (-635) . . (→top: rv link to copyvio material (Ticket:2014071510000218))
I would like to maintain that no copyright infringement was done. I referenced a url to a website, a normal and typical practice. No copyrighted material (the raw data itself) was/is used in this section of the article. No word-for-word text was copied from the reference and then pasted to the article.
There seems to be some confusion of what constitues a copyright violation. I can only say that this/these users are well-intentioned and are responding in good faith, wishing to enhance and improve the article. I have been privately contacted by a representive of Southwest Monarch Study via email. I would rather resolve this issue with the assistance other editors who have the expertise of determining copyright violations here on wikipedia rather than thru private corespondance.
bpage ( talk) 02:44, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
@ Mdann52:, how do I get my status on my talk page like you have on the top right hand corner of yours? Is there some sort of code I need to insert? AlanS ( talk) 10:31, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
Ollieinc ( talk) 00:54, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please inform other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent software changes
VisualEditor news
Future software changes
Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by MediaWiki message delivery • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
08:09, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi Mdann52, we are to release a new major version of huggle, but we did receive almost no feedback from our beta testing team, which you are a part of (see https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Huggle/Members). It would be of a great help if you could download it (if you have windows, all you need to do is getting http://tools.wmflabs.org/huggle/files/huggle3.1.0beta.exe and putting it to a folder where you have installed huggle) and test it. You can always get a help with making it @ #huggle connect!
Major changes:
In case you found a bug, please report it to bugzilla: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/buglist.cgi?product=Huggle&list_id=147663 thank you! Petrb ( talk) 10:12, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi Mdann52, sorry I haven't been able to complete the new task for my lessons. I've been a bit busy for the past month, so I have been only editing those articles that are related to my interest at the moment. But I will complete those tasks within the next week for sure, just want to let you know in case you wonder why I've been so quiet. Thank you very much.-- TerryAlex ( talk) 02:13, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Hey, Mdann52. Are you willing to certify the basis of the disputes relating to the pending RfC/U on Dan56? Harmelodix ( talk) 20:36, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
I understand why you tried to close it, but I disagree because a non-admin closure resulted in the failing of the RFC 1 and the issue persisted and grew because of that controversial action. Your closure and assessment of situation at this point results in nothing - just a lot of wasted time and effort for nothing. Kww will not allow exceptions (it would undo it by its very nature) and the persistent attempts to mass-remove (resulting in its OWN edit filter) absolutely make it clear that the "status quo" is unacceptable to all parties. Something needs to be done lest we have a fourth RFC - resolving even just one of the issues in this RFC would greatly go to resolving it. Even if its just an analysis of the allegations vs evidence and separating the gross issues with Rotlink's actual actions - regardless of any consensus on their origin. I hope you understand and forgive me for asking that you revert yourself and allowing an admin or three-admin closure and assessment of the situation. ChrisGualtieri ( talk) 23:56, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
I'm having trouble understanding your closure to Wikipedia:Archive.is RFC 3. It says "it ships be noted". Should this be "it should be noted"? Hawkeye7 ( talk) 02:54, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
I'm going to join in here and ask that you undo your close as well. WP:NAC is for non-contentious closes, and I don't believe that RFC qualifies. There were three very specific, independent questions in the RFC as well, and I would like to see someone go through and provide a careful weighting of arguments for and against each of the three points as well. Your declaration of a somewhat blurry consensus to not do much of anything didn't help resolve anything, and close like that puts out out of reach of a non-admin close pretty much by definition.— Kww( talk) 03:01, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please inform other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Tech News updates
Recent software changes
VisualEditor news
Future software changes
Translations:
namespace on wikis using the
Translate extension will no longer be indexed by search engines.
[75]Problems
Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by MediaWiki message delivery • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
07:37, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
I assume this was accidental? — Dark 10:34, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
As far as your concern with kingsleys page, don't. It was clearly meant as a joke and there was not a reason to change it. Also, don't send me a warning. Ever. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prnis 364 ( talk • contribs) 20:13, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi Mdann52: 1 Please re-open the discussion at Wikipedia:Bot requests/Archive 61#Create a BOT to alphabetize and organize categories automatically that you shut off within barely 24 hours (!) basically allowing only one POV to be expressed and not allowing me or others the time to respond to the various opposing views. 2 I had placed notifications at a number of WP discussion boards and no doubt many others would have commented had you not cut off the discussion. 3 I hope you are not afraid of anything by the way that you acted so hastily. 4 While many editors expressed their opposing POVs not really based on solid established fixed WP policies, just on so-called nebulous "conventions" while this subject is important in light of the massive proliferation of categories casing confusion on articles. 5 Many of the POV's expressed assume that what they have to say is "well-known" but it is not! 6 I can assure that I have been categorizing articles and creating many categories since the inception of categories about ten years ago on WP and I have NEVER come across ANY requirement to abide by ANY rules for all WP categories, that is reflected in the wide array of opinions as to how to categorize. 7 Some say "do it more or less like this" and others say "do it more or less like that" while others say "it would interfere with something" or "it does not interfere with anything", all very confusing just like the state of categories are themselves. 8 Unless there are "mini infoboxes" on each article about how categories are to be applied and used, right now the system is a total unholy mess and no one is willing to do anything about it. 9 My proposal comes after a long period of thought and I can defend my position quite well, but you never gave me any chance, since by the time I got around to looking at it again only 24 hours later, you had cut off the discussion/s, so please re-open it for at least a week or longer and remove yourself as an involved editor due to the way you cut it off. Thank you in advance. 10 I am not sure if you are an admin or not, if you are an admin I will appeal your move, if you are not an admin I cannot understand why you did what you did without letting a proper debate develop. 11 This was not a "VOTE" it was simply a discussion to elicit IDEAS and SUGGESTIONS for a BOT to be created and not to be read the "riot act"! 12 Also since have Wikipedia:Mass message senders "authorization" how can I or anyone know that you did not simply send out a "mass appeal" to get the result? You need to be more cautious! 13 P.S. Next time let me know on my talk page what you did and let me know what you plan to do with this request. Thanks, IZAK ( talk) 11:13, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Archive 114#Create a BOT to alphabetize and organize categories automatically. Thank you, IZAK ( talk) 22:36, 5 August 2014 (UTC)