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. |
Howdy, Rick. Can you come to Boulder's event for the 10th anniversary celebration of Wikipedia? Any ideas for what we might want to do? Perhaps you could talk about being an admin, etc? Know anyone else we should especially invite or engage? ★NealMcB★ ( talk) 23:02, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi Rick, in order that a TOC gets automatically shown in WP:List of administrators, I have divided the subpages of WP:List of administrators/Active now into 4 subpages:
instead of the previous 3 subpages:
In order for that to work, I guess the bot has to be adapted as well. Maybe my changes were a bit too bold. If that's the case feel free to undo my changes in this area and go back to the previous 3 subpages.-- Berny68 ( talk) 06:00, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
contribs = getcontribs(admin)
if inactive(contribs) then
consider this admin inactive
else if semiactive(contribs) then
consider this admin semi-active
else
consider this admin active
fi
# name # name <noinclude> == next letter == </noinclude> # name # name
# name # name # name # name
# name # name # name # name
Hi Rick. I'm wondering if there is a Commons task that Rick Bot might be able to do. I know it keeps WP:LA up to date. Could it do the same thing with a similar list of Commons OTRS members? As you can see from the link, there is a usergroup there. If it can do that, there is an additional data point that would be particularly helpful on Commons: languages. This seems easy enough to gather from userpages, as both babel templates and userpages use the same coding, e.g., en, en-N, or en-3, always followed by }}, ]], or |. Of course, I've never programmed anything before, so I may be way off. As an alternative, if volunteers created and maintained a bot-readable list correlating users with language codes, could the bot incorporate that data into a list similar to WP:LA?-- Chaser ( talk) 06:25, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
OK, I started a thread on this, but all the people discussing it did so on Commons. There is support there to proceed. Do you want me to do a mockup and then you tell me whether it's possible? Or how do you want to proceed? commons:User:Chaser/OTRS_members is a first draft. It would also be useful if editors could add language info themselves for those that do not make it machine-readable on their userpages. I could see just checking where someone is most active to take an educated guess at native language, for example. Would we need a separate section for editors to maintain that, or would it be better if editors did the language coding to begin with? There are about 350 of these, so I could probably get a couple of people to help me if the bot can sort them by activity level afterwards. I'm just not sure what is easily programmable.-- Chaser ( talk) 04:38, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
If you can just have your bot do the activity level once, I can take care of the language information. The first step would be a big help and you could just dump the results on en.wiki without the necessity of a bot flag for Commons.-- Chaser ( talk) 20:41, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
Let me introduce myself: I was the guy who asked all the dumb questions. I loved that presentation you made today, I'm really grateful I got a chance to meet a real-life admin! Many thanks for presenting, I never would've though of using subpages as slides. And it was really in-depth. Anyway, happy WP anniversary! —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse ( talk • contribs • wikia) 01:39, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
Template:Delcomment has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. — This, that, and the other (talk) 06:57, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
Totally out of the blue request here and maybe I should be asking Sam W, but is there any news on WP:CATI? I've been hoping for a long time to hear more, but seems dead over there. What could I do to help? What happened to our dream of the semantic web? :) Donama ( talk) 05:56, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
It was very nice to meet you in Boulder last Saturday. It seems like 766 active administrators should be more than enough for the English-language Wikipedia. Are you sure w:en needs any more?
I've had very few disputes with other editors. The most notable was a conflict with a group of editors promoting the List of sovereign states as the only legitimate list of countries on Wikipedia. While I had no issues with the list, I did object to sovereignty as the only measure of what constituted a country. This Eurocentric notion of sovereignty includes such world powers as Vatican City, San Marino, Monaco, and Liechtenstein, but dismisses such countries as Puerto Rico, French Polynesia, Guam, and Greenland. I attempted what I considered to be a legitimate work-around, but I was blocked for 24 hours by Philip Baird Shearer for a "disruptive contribution". I believe I have learned from this incident. Yours aye, Buaidh 17:09, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
Rick, what is the best way to print out a Wikipedia article? User:WAlanDavis / ( talk) 04:12, 25 January 2011 (UTC) Oops, nevermind. I just found the answer at the bottom of a long list of stuff on the left. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WAlanDavis ( talk • contribs) 04:18, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
I find myself utterly perplexed by this current dispute, which has now escalated to the Arbitration Committee(!). Would it be possible for you to give me a short summary of what is currently being disputed? NW ( Talk) 15:13, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
If you'd like a different response, please ask on my talk page. Glkanter ( talk) 01:53, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Monty Hall problem/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Monty Hall problem/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, ( X! · talk) · @143 · 02:26, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
The count of active admins has plummeted over the past few days [4]. Has there been a change in the bot? — Carl ( CBM · talk) 13:10, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Monty Hall problem/Evidence#Timeline for Evidence, Proposed Decision. On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Dougweller ( talk) 16:45, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi Rick. You may remember me from such articles as Monty Hall problem. [6] I am writing to confess that I have put words in your mouth. [7] Please feel free to slap me with a trout if I have overstepped. ~ Ningauble ( talk) 21:36, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
Rick, please be strong and help to discern and to keep apart those two quite "different pairs of shoes". The lemma MHP should show all that interesting and iridescent "historical" background, also. But please help readers to get the paradox and to conquer that "paradox", and help them, in showing that "conditional probability" is able to even come to terms with actually absurdest presuppositions. Would be fine if you could do that for the readers. Thank you. Kind regards, Gerhardvalentin ( talk) 22:05, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 1313 Mockingbird Lane is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1313 Mockingbird Lane until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Soundvisions1 ( talk) 14:35, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
Just to let you know, since you seemed to be the main target for his ire, Glkanter finally went so ott that he is currently blocked and his userpage has been CSD G10 deleted. -- Elen of the Roads ( talk) 16:47, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
As to your question - while I co-edited and worked those 2 articles to FA status I was not listed as a co-nom on those 2 articles. I reverted my edit there [8] - and changed back to 6 from 8 FAs here [9]. Somewhat of a confusing process - having worked those articles at the time - thanks for the clarification... Modernist ( talk) 04:31, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
An arbitration case regarding Monty Hall problem has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following is a summary of the sanctions that were enacted:
For the Arbitration Committee, NW ( Talk) 00:49, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
I note that this draft page has been dormant for over a year. Please blank or delete it until you are ready to post the RFCU. Will Beback talk 23:45, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
I have nominated Monty Hall problem for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Tijfo098 ( talk) 22:56, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
Are you willing to have Rick Bot do WP:WBFSN?-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 22:16, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
I've compiled the 2007 list at Wikipedia:Featured sounds promoted in 2007. Basically, the bot would look for Promoted blah.ogg (blah.ogg would go under the Sound column), then it'd look for Nominate and Support then take the user name of the nominator and use that under the Nominator column. At the moment Featured sounds isn't going to go live on the Main Page (the code's being worked out) so that is there as a placeholder. Would this be feasible? Regards, — James ( Talk • Contribs) • 6:40pm • 08:40, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi Rick. I hope this edit [10] was in error, I added Modernist after a discussion between himself and yourself on his talk. Modernist was a primarary edior on the page, but I thoughtlessly omitted him in the nom statement back in the day. I'd like to see him get credit there, if thats ok. Thanks and best. Ceoil 10:09, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
All Wikipedians are cordially invited to the Colorado celebration of the 2011 Great American Wiknic on June 25. We will meet Saturday afternoon from 3:00 to 5:00 at the D Note, 7519 Grandview Avenue in Arvada. Please e-mail Jacques Delaguerre at Special:EmailUser/Jaxdelaguerre if you plan to attend. Be there or be square! – Buaidh 01:17, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
Quick question: if an admin hadn't edited in three months, but had made a logged action, would they still be listed at WP:LOA/I? – xeno talk 13:33, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
← Further to [12], have you had a chance to work on updating the bot to also consider logged actions when determining inactivity? – xeno talk 15:12, 10 August 2011 (UTC) Somewhat less important would be getting rid of the peculiar block of whitespace [13].
Someone edited Wikipedia:List of administrators, and now the count of active admins has jumped to over 1,500. I don't know why people decide to edit these sorts of things without checking with the bot operator, they must not realize the pages aren't manually editable. If I undo the changes, will the bot recover automatically tomorrow? — Carl ( CBM · talk) 11:43, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
The count of active admins has plummeted recently. If you have a spare moment sometime, could you double-check that everything is right? — Carl ( CBM · talk) 10:47, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
I think something went wrong with Rick Bot here; it seems to have decided that all former FAs have been re-promoted, among other things. Ucucha ( talk) 12:42, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
Your code for Wikipedia:List of administrators/Inactive still includes a blank line for every new year even when in those years no admin became inactive. On thing I would personally like to see on that list as well would be a section of those who just became active again unless that is a major undertaking. Thanks. Agathoclea ( talk) 09:59, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
Thanks! Sasata ( talk) 20:42, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Greetings. I am reading through the old Bot Policy archives and came across a mention that you might update Rick Bot to keep the Wikipedia:Bots/Status page up-to-date (this was back in 2008). I'm just wondering if anything ever became of that. I am doing an academic project on Wikipedia bots and their creators/operators, and I've been working with the Wikipedia:Bots/Status page, though I know it's not completely correct anymore. Just thought I'd say hello and see if you have any info on lists of bots, or would like to chat in general about Wikipedia bots and your work in that area. Thanks in advance... UOJComm ( talk) 21:41, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by featured topic nominations has a mistake right in the first star (the link is broken due to [[[)... and all stars are rusted, despite most topics being active. And your bot won't allow manual fixing! Can you do anything? igordebraga ≠ 14:38, 15 December 2011 (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. |
Howdy, Rick. Can you come to Boulder's event for the 10th anniversary celebration of Wikipedia? Any ideas for what we might want to do? Perhaps you could talk about being an admin, etc? Know anyone else we should especially invite or engage? ★NealMcB★ ( talk) 23:02, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi Rick, in order that a TOC gets automatically shown in WP:List of administrators, I have divided the subpages of WP:List of administrators/Active now into 4 subpages:
instead of the previous 3 subpages:
In order for that to work, I guess the bot has to be adapted as well. Maybe my changes were a bit too bold. If that's the case feel free to undo my changes in this area and go back to the previous 3 subpages.-- Berny68 ( talk) 06:00, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
contribs = getcontribs(admin)
if inactive(contribs) then
consider this admin inactive
else if semiactive(contribs) then
consider this admin semi-active
else
consider this admin active
fi
# name # name <noinclude> == next letter == </noinclude> # name # name
# name # name # name # name
# name # name # name # name
Hi Rick. I'm wondering if there is a Commons task that Rick Bot might be able to do. I know it keeps WP:LA up to date. Could it do the same thing with a similar list of Commons OTRS members? As you can see from the link, there is a usergroup there. If it can do that, there is an additional data point that would be particularly helpful on Commons: languages. This seems easy enough to gather from userpages, as both babel templates and userpages use the same coding, e.g., en, en-N, or en-3, always followed by }}, ]], or |. Of course, I've never programmed anything before, so I may be way off. As an alternative, if volunteers created and maintained a bot-readable list correlating users with language codes, could the bot incorporate that data into a list similar to WP:LA?-- Chaser ( talk) 06:25, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
OK, I started a thread on this, but all the people discussing it did so on Commons. There is support there to proceed. Do you want me to do a mockup and then you tell me whether it's possible? Or how do you want to proceed? commons:User:Chaser/OTRS_members is a first draft. It would also be useful if editors could add language info themselves for those that do not make it machine-readable on their userpages. I could see just checking where someone is most active to take an educated guess at native language, for example. Would we need a separate section for editors to maintain that, or would it be better if editors did the language coding to begin with? There are about 350 of these, so I could probably get a couple of people to help me if the bot can sort them by activity level afterwards. I'm just not sure what is easily programmable.-- Chaser ( talk) 04:38, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
If you can just have your bot do the activity level once, I can take care of the language information. The first step would be a big help and you could just dump the results on en.wiki without the necessity of a bot flag for Commons.-- Chaser ( talk) 20:41, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
Let me introduce myself: I was the guy who asked all the dumb questions. I loved that presentation you made today, I'm really grateful I got a chance to meet a real-life admin! Many thanks for presenting, I never would've though of using subpages as slides. And it was really in-depth. Anyway, happy WP anniversary! —Preceding signed comment added by Nicky Nouse ( talk • contribs • wikia) 01:39, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
Template:Delcomment has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. — This, that, and the other (talk) 06:57, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
Totally out of the blue request here and maybe I should be asking Sam W, but is there any news on WP:CATI? I've been hoping for a long time to hear more, but seems dead over there. What could I do to help? What happened to our dream of the semantic web? :) Donama ( talk) 05:56, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
It was very nice to meet you in Boulder last Saturday. It seems like 766 active administrators should be more than enough for the English-language Wikipedia. Are you sure w:en needs any more?
I've had very few disputes with other editors. The most notable was a conflict with a group of editors promoting the List of sovereign states as the only legitimate list of countries on Wikipedia. While I had no issues with the list, I did object to sovereignty as the only measure of what constituted a country. This Eurocentric notion of sovereignty includes such world powers as Vatican City, San Marino, Monaco, and Liechtenstein, but dismisses such countries as Puerto Rico, French Polynesia, Guam, and Greenland. I attempted what I considered to be a legitimate work-around, but I was blocked for 24 hours by Philip Baird Shearer for a "disruptive contribution". I believe I have learned from this incident. Yours aye, Buaidh 17:09, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
Rick, what is the best way to print out a Wikipedia article? User:WAlanDavis / ( talk) 04:12, 25 January 2011 (UTC) Oops, nevermind. I just found the answer at the bottom of a long list of stuff on the left. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WAlanDavis ( talk • contribs) 04:18, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
I find myself utterly perplexed by this current dispute, which has now escalated to the Arbitration Committee(!). Would it be possible for you to give me a short summary of what is currently being disputed? NW ( Talk) 15:13, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
If you'd like a different response, please ask on my talk page. Glkanter ( talk) 01:53, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Monty Hall problem/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Monty Hall problem/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, ( X! · talk) · @143 · 02:26, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
The count of active admins has plummeted over the past few days [4]. Has there been a change in the bot? — Carl ( CBM · talk) 13:10, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Monty Hall problem/Evidence#Timeline for Evidence, Proposed Decision. On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Dougweller ( talk) 16:45, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi Rick. You may remember me from such articles as Monty Hall problem. [6] I am writing to confess that I have put words in your mouth. [7] Please feel free to slap me with a trout if I have overstepped. ~ Ningauble ( talk) 21:36, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
Rick, please be strong and help to discern and to keep apart those two quite "different pairs of shoes". The lemma MHP should show all that interesting and iridescent "historical" background, also. But please help readers to get the paradox and to conquer that "paradox", and help them, in showing that "conditional probability" is able to even come to terms with actually absurdest presuppositions. Would be fine if you could do that for the readers. Thank you. Kind regards, Gerhardvalentin ( talk) 22:05, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 1313 Mockingbird Lane is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1313 Mockingbird Lane until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Soundvisions1 ( talk) 14:35, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
Just to let you know, since you seemed to be the main target for his ire, Glkanter finally went so ott that he is currently blocked and his userpage has been CSD G10 deleted. -- Elen of the Roads ( talk) 16:47, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
As to your question - while I co-edited and worked those 2 articles to FA status I was not listed as a co-nom on those 2 articles. I reverted my edit there [8] - and changed back to 6 from 8 FAs here [9]. Somewhat of a confusing process - having worked those articles at the time - thanks for the clarification... Modernist ( talk) 04:31, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
An arbitration case regarding Monty Hall problem has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following is a summary of the sanctions that were enacted:
For the Arbitration Committee, NW ( Talk) 00:49, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
I note that this draft page has been dormant for over a year. Please blank or delete it until you are ready to post the RFCU. Will Beback talk 23:45, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
I have nominated Monty Hall problem for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Tijfo098 ( talk) 22:56, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
Are you willing to have Rick Bot do WP:WBFSN?-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 22:16, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
I've compiled the 2007 list at Wikipedia:Featured sounds promoted in 2007. Basically, the bot would look for Promoted blah.ogg (blah.ogg would go under the Sound column), then it'd look for Nominate and Support then take the user name of the nominator and use that under the Nominator column. At the moment Featured sounds isn't going to go live on the Main Page (the code's being worked out) so that is there as a placeholder. Would this be feasible? Regards, — James ( Talk • Contribs) • 6:40pm • 08:40, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi Rick. I hope this edit [10] was in error, I added Modernist after a discussion between himself and yourself on his talk. Modernist was a primarary edior on the page, but I thoughtlessly omitted him in the nom statement back in the day. I'd like to see him get credit there, if thats ok. Thanks and best. Ceoil 10:09, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
All Wikipedians are cordially invited to the Colorado celebration of the 2011 Great American Wiknic on June 25. We will meet Saturday afternoon from 3:00 to 5:00 at the D Note, 7519 Grandview Avenue in Arvada. Please e-mail Jacques Delaguerre at Special:EmailUser/Jaxdelaguerre if you plan to attend. Be there or be square! – Buaidh 01:17, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
Quick question: if an admin hadn't edited in three months, but had made a logged action, would they still be listed at WP:LOA/I? – xeno talk 13:33, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
← Further to [12], have you had a chance to work on updating the bot to also consider logged actions when determining inactivity? – xeno talk 15:12, 10 August 2011 (UTC) Somewhat less important would be getting rid of the peculiar block of whitespace [13].
Someone edited Wikipedia:List of administrators, and now the count of active admins has jumped to over 1,500. I don't know why people decide to edit these sorts of things without checking with the bot operator, they must not realize the pages aren't manually editable. If I undo the changes, will the bot recover automatically tomorrow? — Carl ( CBM · talk) 11:43, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
The count of active admins has plummeted recently. If you have a spare moment sometime, could you double-check that everything is right? — Carl ( CBM · talk) 10:47, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
I think something went wrong with Rick Bot here; it seems to have decided that all former FAs have been re-promoted, among other things. Ucucha ( talk) 12:42, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
Your code for Wikipedia:List of administrators/Inactive still includes a blank line for every new year even when in those years no admin became inactive. On thing I would personally like to see on that list as well would be a section of those who just became active again unless that is a major undertaking. Thanks. Agathoclea ( talk) 09:59, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
Thanks! Sasata ( talk) 20:42, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Greetings. I am reading through the old Bot Policy archives and came across a mention that you might update Rick Bot to keep the Wikipedia:Bots/Status page up-to-date (this was back in 2008). I'm just wondering if anything ever became of that. I am doing an academic project on Wikipedia bots and their creators/operators, and I've been working with the Wikipedia:Bots/Status page, though I know it's not completely correct anymore. Just thought I'd say hello and see if you have any info on lists of bots, or would like to chat in general about Wikipedia bots and your work in that area. Thanks in advance... UOJComm ( talk) 21:41, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by featured topic nominations has a mistake right in the first star (the link is broken due to [[[)... and all stars are rusted, despite most topics being active. And your bot won't allow manual fixing! Can you do anything? igordebraga ≠ 14:38, 15 December 2011 (UTC)