|This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page. Please direct any additional comments to the current talk page.|
My edits on Naming conventions (Colleges of the UK)
I reverted you because I was misreading the spelling you used (for some reason I saw 'fictious'). I reverted back to your version when I realised I had read it wrong. -- Donald Albury 21:28, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
- No worries. Until you left a message on my talk page I was blissfully unaware of all this. Incidentally you didn't revert the revert you made, so I've just gone and done it! :) Cheers, CmdrObot 21:44, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I think you're running a spelling checker on Everyones Internet "sp (2): Everyones→Everyone's". "Everyone's" is correct English, but unfortunately their trademark is "Everyones Internet" with the bad spelling. Could you disable the spell check for this. Thanks. Rwendland 23:26, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for letting me know about that, Rwendland. I've added it to my exception list. Cheers, CmdrObot 23:39, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Hello, the bot keeps changing the "U.K." in U.K. Squeeze to "UK" throughout the article. The spelling within the context of this album does in fact include periods, and should be kept that way in the article. Thanks! Mrmctorso 06:14, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
- Oh, OK, sorry about that. I've added that to my exception list. Cheers, CmdrObot 21:46, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
You made an error in this article on your revision dated 10 September 2006 at 02:41 UTC. In your edit, you mistook the Pokémon Seaking for the word 'seeking'. I have made the change where appropriate. -- A. Exeunt 02:48, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
- Ah, thanks. I've added that to my exception list. You learn something new every day! :)
- Cheers, CmdrObot 02:51, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
Parlement vs. Parliament
Just a heads up... I noticed CmdrObot has been automatically replacing Parlement with Parliament, which – in the context of pages on the Ancien Régime in France or the Government of France – is a mistake. --NYArtsnWords 03:26, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
- Ah, very sorry about that. I'll watch out for the French usage in future. Cheers, CmdrObot 03:34, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
Captain Barbell TV Series
Hi! You made a mistake in the Captain Barbell (TV Series) page. In the edit you changed the name "Villian" into the word "Villain", but Villian is actually the family name of some of the characters in the show. Could you pls fix this? Thanks! SapphireJeans 03:30, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
- Ah, sorry about that. I've fixed it now. Cheers, CmdrObot 03:33, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
Re this diff, "vigorous" is the correct spelling according to my dictionary. I don't know if "vigourous" is American English or just plain wrong, but either way the edit was incorrect for an Australian article. Snottygobble 05:07, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
- *sigh* just plain wrong, I'm afraid. Thanks for noticing that. I only added that erroneous entry to my spell list recently so I can go back and fix the handful of articles where it was used. Cheers, CmdrObot 12:57, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
foreward -> forward
You might want to make your bot a little bit more careful about changing foreward into forward. In this edit the correct meaning was not "forward" but rather "foreword". Qutezuce 09:05, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
- Ah, thanks for that. I've seen this occur quite a few times, and generally catch it before I approve the edits the bot is about to make. I guess this time it just slipped through the net. Cheers, CmdrObot 12:54, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your minor edits in the article Belo Horizonte. You have the gratitude of the people from this city.
Cheiro de lysoform 20:43, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
"Noone" versus "no one" or "no-one"
I just noticed that you'd changed "noone" to "no-one" wherever the former spelling had originally appeared in the article on Indeterminacy in philosophy, and I have a question regarding the categorisation of these fixes as addressing spelling errors:
I have always spelled the word "noone" as a single, compound word with neither space nor hyphen because of its similarity to, and shared etymology with, the words "someone", "anyone", and "everyone". I've seen my preferred spelling listed as a "common spelling error" in print on more than one occasion, but I've also seen the very same spelling in print often enough that I consider its use to be an "error" not of spelling but of style, if it is, in fact, an error (and if, indeed, an "error of style" is even really possible). But I do realise that we co-authors of Wikipedia articles ought at least to try to conform to some standard style and to agree upon which spellings are to be used in those articles.
Oddly, I tend to use certain British spellings quite often-- despite my having lived in the U.S. since my birth-- for two simple reasons: namely, that they're more common in texts of particularly strong influence on my own writing than are their American counterparts and that the British literary tradition is, quite evidently (and, in my own opinion, rather obviously), a more-consistent and better-established superset of the divergent and supposedly-equally-valid "American English", since the former is the linguistic parent of the latter; however, I usually only use my own preferred spellings in discussion pages, user pages, et cetera, in order to avoid unproductive arguments with other users over whether the commonness of a given spelling is the only evidence necessary to its being demonstrably (and exclusively) correct. For the same reason as for my preference of British spellings to American ones-- i.e., since I don't think that the commonness of some particular spelling of a word (or of some given definition of a word, for that matter) is the sole determinant of its correctness-- I must disagree even with "expert" writers of books on spelling and style whenever they seem to regard uncommon spellings as incorrect solely because they are uncommon.
Out of mere curiosity about whether this change reflects Wikipedia's standards rather than a disputable, albeit perfectly viable, view, I must ask you whether the spelling "no-one" is a part of some kind of Official Wikipedia Spelling Canon or simply a spelling that you prefer for other reasons. Whatever the case, I'm keeping your edits, since it's certainly true that "noone" is becoming an increasingly uncommon spelling, and since Wikipedia's articles should, indeed, reflect common usage and spelling.
Regards, and thanks very much for your time,
Tastyummy 03:32, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
P.S. I took part in the Scripps-Howard National Spelling Bee on two occasions as a child, having won the school-, county-, and regional-level competitions necessary to participation therein, and I've also achieved perfect scores on both the verbal and writing sections of the SAT on two occasions, so I do actually have some credentials in the weird world of spelling, whatever, if anything, their actual value might be.
- Hi there. Apologies for not replying to your message for a few days. I didn't notice it at the top of talk page (the wikipedia convention is to append new messages to the bottom of the user's talk page, unless you're continuing an existing thread of conversation).
- I'm not using "no-one" because of any particular wikipedia style guide, but simply because I thought it was correct, and it's what my spellchecker suggested. However, after looking at a couple of dictionaries (OED and Merriam-Webster), I wonder if "no one" would in fact be the preferred form. In general, hyphenation tends to get dropped from English spellings as time goes on, and my spellchecker seems inclined to suggest hyphens far more often than it should.
- My main reasons for disliking "noone" is that when reading it's not automatically obvious how to break up the word. When reading it, I read as far as "noo" (as I would with "noose", "nook", "noodle", "noon", etc), turn that into a syllable and then get stuck with the extraneous "ne". Then I realise this can't be the correct interpretation, backtrack, and see it should be divided up into "no one". Not the end of the world by any means, but a little disconcerting all the same. There are a handful of other words I have this experience with, but I can't think what they are at the moment. Thankfully the same effect doesn't occur with "everyone" or "someone", as "every" and "some" have clear boundaries that are recognised easily.
- Cheers, CmdrObot 14:32, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Space inserted after dot in middle of name
Hi, just wanted to point out a small bad edit, which was changing "Art.Net" to "Art. Net" diff. (Art.Net is the name of a web site, which uses that particular capitalization). I suspect there are probably some other sites in the .net domain that do the same, so it might be worth checking for something like that. Thanks, --MCB 03:49, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
- Hi there. Thanks for catching that. The intent of that particular rule in my bot is to catch cases where someone doesn't correctly put a space between the end of one sentence and the start of another. It does this by looking for lower case characters, a full-stop, and an uppercase character. It also rules out some common cases (eg 'IMAGE.JPG'). As you suggested, foo.Net is probably used in a product name quite frequently, so I've added it (and a handful of other similar cases) as exceptions. Cheers! CmdrObot 20:36, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
- Super - thanks for the reply. Best, --MCB 20:50, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
- My apologies. I thought I knew a bit of physics, but I'd never heard of dilatons. Ah, the wacky world of string theory; although I guess I've learned something new for today! :) Thanks for catching that. Cheers, CmdrObot 20:45, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
copright / coprighted
Howdy. We apparently have a number of pages mentioning "copright" or "coprighted". I've also xposted this to User talk:JoeBot, however you guys divvy things up. Thanks. -- Writtenonsand 22:30, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks. I actually already had "copright" on my misspellings list, but for some reason had missed out "coprighted". If I come across any pages with them on it, they'll get fixed up automatically. Cheers, CmdrObot 22:42, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
The bot's been changing sucesfull to successfull (as in ). I'm pretty sure the correction should be to 'successful'. Unless this is a British/American spelling difference... - AKeen 00:44, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
- I thought it was a British/American thing, but it turns out it isn't. Both British and American English use 'successful' as you say. I've fixed the spelling in the bot. Thanks! CmdrObot 13:50, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
"inspite" in historical document
while "in spite" is, in fact, the correct form for "inspite," your bot doesn't seem to understand that the translation of the philippine declaration of independence should be left alone =) -- von 01:43, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks. I've made a note of that article in my bot's exception list. 'inspite' won't get changed again. Cheers, CmdrObot 13:55, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
uk.rec.sheds => UK.rec.sheds
In this edit you changed "uk.rec.sheds" to "UK.rec.sheds". Clearly when "uk" is the Usenet heirarchy component it should not be capitalised. Good-o on the other edits, though. EdC 22:15, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
- Ah, my apologies. I was catching the incorrect capitalization of UK in domain names, but I didn't think of the Usenet hierarchy. I've modified the bot to avoid those situations. Cheers, CmdrObot 23:37, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
I would like a bot that changes all instances of:
''et. al.'', thereby making them italic (as they ought to be).
- This sounds like a good idea. Before I go ahead with it, could you tell me are there any style guide recommendations (or similar) saying what the preferred appearance is on Wikipedia? Cheers, CmdrObot 23:40, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
- Hey, so beware that it's et al. (no period after et)--et is Latin for "and"; al. is an abbrevation for the Latin alii, which means "others" (and my friends all thought those 5 years of Latin I took were wasted ;-) --Jhfrontz 14:40, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, and the ref for the exact wording is the MOS:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_%28abbreviations%29et alii (and others) et al.
By all means write the bot, and fix them both.. DGG 03:42, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, and the ref for the exact wording is the MOS:
- Hi there,
- sorry about the long delay, but I've finally gotten around to beefing up my bot a little, and now it should be able to handle et al. properly. Just for the hell of it, I've added in vitro, in vivo, and in silico too. Typographical Nirvana awaits :) Cheers, CmdrObot 00:16, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
Section header format
I don't know if CmdrObot is already doing this, but I think it would be helpful to have a 'bot fix up the section header lines as shown in Help:Wiki markup examples#Organizing your writing -- sections, paragraphs, lists and lines. I often perform external spelling checks by cutting and pasting the articles in whole or in part into Microsoft Word. The automatic spellcheck-as-you-type feature marks as errors anywhere the "==" sequence is run into the header text, but is clueless about fixing the errors. I routinely add a space between the "==" sequences and the text. This would be a tremendous timesaver for Wikipedians such as I and it has no effect on the appearance of the section headers. —QuicksilverT @ 06:12, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
CmdrObot recently corrected "heterogenous" to "heterogeneous". I checked with WordNet, and both spellings are acceptable. arj 22:43, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for pointing that out. I've removed it from my spelling corrections list. CmdrObot 22:54, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
Legionnaires vs. Legionaires
Hi, the bot seems to be changing the odd sports team called the "Legionaires" to the "Legionnaires". I know that "Legionnaires" is the proper English spelling... but for some reason some Canadian teams spell it "Legionaires"... Is there anyway we can avoid these changes? DMighton 09:40, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
- Absolutely. I'll special-case the capitalized version of the word and leave that unmodified. Do you think that'll fix it? Cheers, CmdrObot 19:45, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
- Without a doubt... thank you very much. DMighton 20:26, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
- This is just my two cents, but wouldn't this prevent the bot from correcting a misspelling of the word if it occurs at the beginning of a sentence? --Shawn81 12:42, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
- Hi Shawn, yes it certainly does, but I'd prefer to miss a few words at random than to miscorrect words. I have a similar problem where a word is misspelt, but the misspelling is the same as the correct spelling of another word (eg reed/read, rogue/rouge). Unfortunately my bot just isn't sophisticated enough to handle these kind of scenarios. Keep in mind though, my bot isn't aiming at perfection: it's just there to pick up a whole class of low hanging fruit.
- In any event, I did a search of my local dump of the current Wikipedia articles, and the word doesn't show up very often. Hope this helps. Cheers, CmdrObot 18:31, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
One for the exceptions list
Hi...could you add Projet Orange to the exceptions list? I realize that "projet" is a fairly common misspelling for "project", but in this particular case it's actually the correct spelling of the band's name — while they perform English material now, they started off as a francophone band from Quebec City and originally named themselves in French. (The bot made the change on Simon Wilcox, a musician who's collaborated with the band in the past. I've already fixed it back.) Thanks. Bearcat 23:54, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
- Hi Bearcat, my apologies for miscorrecting Projet on the Simon Wilcox page; exception duly noted! I've checked and as it turns out I've already got Projet down as an exception on the Projet Orange page, and I'll watch out for this one in future. Cheers, CmdrObot 00:04, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
Archaeology "corrected" to archeology
Wikipedia doesn't generally "correct" international or British spellings to American ones. Think how tiresome this is outside the US. --Wetman 07:16, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
- Hi Wetman, I agree about leaving American/British spelling as is, if my bot's doing that, it's certainly not intentional. Could you tell me what article you're referring to? I've just checked my bot's spelling substitutions list and i doesn't change any word into 'archeology'. Thanks, CmdrObot 00:54, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
- Dang, now I can't find it in my contributions history. What good is that? --Wetman 03:19, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
contant corrected to content
This could equally well be mis-typed 'constant' (as has been done on several math-based articles) Googolian 21:58, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
- Hi there. Thanks for noticing this, occasionally I do slip up and let a mistaken correction through, and it's good to get told when this happens. Could you tell me what article this change was in please? Oh, and if you could sign your postings to talk pages with ~~~~ (4 tildes) in future it would help lots. Cheers, CmdrObot 01:03, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
Wot is it you know that Daniel Defoe doesn't
In 1727, Daniel Defoe really did say of the villages of Hackney
All these, except the Wyck-house, are within a few years so encreas'd in buildings, and so fully inhabited, that there is no comparison to be made between their present and past state: Every separate hamlet is encreas'd, and some of them more than treble as big as formerly; Indeed as this whole town is included in the bills of mortality, tho' no where joining to London, it is in some respects to be call'd a part of it. This town is so remarkable for the retreat of wealthy citizens, that there is at this time near a hundred coaches kept in it; tho' I will not join with a certain satyrical author, who said of Hackney, that there were more coaches than Christians in it.
If the poor man had wanted to be born 300 years later, he would have asked his parents to wait ....
Take thy beak from out my heart, and take thy form from off my door Quoth the raven, `Nevermore.' 09:12, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Adj.1.satyrical - of or relating to or having the characteristics of a satyr; "this satyric old man pursues young girls"
- I did sign it, for some reason, the whole edit went screwy (see quote, if your screen is 40 foot wide .... ah, sorted). I do appreciate your work with attrocious spelling, esp mine; but quotes are a problem. Kbthompson 08:46, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
The 3D Gamemaker
You need to stop correcting algorythm in this article. This is the name of a song on their Cipher Method album. The title is actually algorythm, NOT algorithm The Steve 07:24, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
- Steve, duly noted. I've added an exception for this article to my exceptions lists. Apologies for the disruption. CmdrObot 02:11, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
- Cheers! Algorythm is a great song BTW The Steve 09:03, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
- Hi Ken,
- I did a little research on this one, and it turns out I was correct on both counts. "supersede" is generally regarded as the preferred spelling of the word. See here and here.
- Also, "today's commercial spreadsheets" is definitely the correct usage. "todays" means the plural of the noun "today", which doesn't make sense as there's only ever one thing called "today". "today's", on the other hand, indicates the possessive, i.e. "spreadsheets of today".
- Unless you have any objections, I'll reapply my changes at some point soon. Cheers, CmdrObot 19:31, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
This is a Beatles-related article; as such, British spellings apply as per policy. "Elabourate" is thus the correct spelling. Zephyrad 00:59, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- Err, yes, normally I'd agree, except the British spelling is also 'elaborate' and there is no such word as 'elabourate'. I just checked the Oxford English Dictionary to make sure. Cheers, CmdrObot 01:19, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- Well, I won't argue with the fine people at Oxford... but it does make me question all the times I've seen it spelled with a "U" in books. ;-) Zephyrad 01:34, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- Elaborate comes not from labour (Anglo-French) but directly from the Latin. That's why elabourate doesn't exist in books. --Wetman 05:55, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
Runaway Bot! Runaway Bot!
The bot is changing international 'knowledgeable" to American "knowledgable". I'm a New Yorker myself, but isn't this a little ruthless on our poor overseas allies? Seriously, these things don't need to be regimented quite so strictly. --Wetman 05:51, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- Hi again Wetman. Could you tell me tell me where this happened? I have a number of rules where I change definitely incorrect spellings such as 'knowlegeable' (note the missing 'd') to 'knowledgeable', but none where I turn anything into 'knowledgable'. Cheers, CmdrObot 21:15, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- Ah excellent. Thanks. CmdrObot 14:22, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
"soild" => "solid"
- Thanks for that. I guess I should have proofed a bit more carefully. Cheers, CmdrObot 21:17, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
The former spelling is used and appears to be standard in the context of dancehall reggae (being derived from "ragga" = reggae).
From the OED
- ragamuffin, n. and a.
- Freq. in form raggamuffin. = RAGGA n.
1986 ‘JUNIOR DELGADO’ (title of song) Raggamuffin year. 1989 Face Jan. 23/1 ‘It's not ragamuffin,’ says Rob Smith, ‘but it's got a reggae feel to it.’ 1991 Source Dec. 60/2 As raggamuffin lyrics over hip-hop beats become more common, the Fu-Shnickens are right on top of the trend. 1993 Independent 11 June 24/1 It has given an identity to second- and third-generation black Britons who feel no desire to assimilate into the mainstream: raggamuffins pepper their talk with thick Jamaican slang, even if their parents were born in Birmingham. 2001 Ottawa Sun (Electronic ed.) 22 June, Raggamuffin reggae bash with Bingie Barker every Thurs.
Guettarda 13:37, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for that. I'll remove it from my spell list. Cheers, CmdrObot 14:24, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
Lynn Coulter AfD notice
An article that you have been involved in editing, Lynn Coulter, has been listed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lynn Coulter. Please look there to see why this is, if you are interested in whether it should be deleted. Thank you. --A. B. 17:47, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
PS Your edit was minor (compacting an amazon link), so you may or may not be interested, but I am letting all the involved editors know.
Brown Band name miscorrection
Your bot has falsely corrected the name of Doogi Ballon to Doogi Balloon on the Brown University Band page. I'd appreciate if you'd put that page on your exclude list. Thanks! Yoshi MCF 17:06, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Sir, I see that you often run spell check on some of my articles. Thanks. Can you run the same on these two articles mentioned in the message title as well or could you show me how to. Thanks againDineshkannambadi 21:52, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
- No problem. I've spell checked both of those for you. If you're interested in spell checking from within your web browser, you might like to take a look at Firefox 2.0. It includes a built in spellchecker. All the best, CmdrObot 01:22, 8 November 2006 (UTC)