User talk:Magioladitis/Archive 1

Active discussions
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 5

Welcome!

Hello, Magioladitis, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! 

User:Mikereichold | User_talk:Mikereichold 19:46, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Vergis?

Hi, I'll keep an eye out for the ballot paper you mentioned.

On another note, are you sure Vergis ran in the election. The Ministry of Interior website doesn't mention him (http://194.176.113.1/dimos.aspx?id=105). It's a great site by the way. --Damac 21:26, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

It must be late. His name is there. Sorry about that! --Damac 21:27, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the ballot. I am looking the results from (http://elections.ypes.gr) and Vergis is there. -- Magioladitis 21:29, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Treaties

Thanks for contributing to the List of treaties article. I would appreciate any other contributions you might have pertaining to treaties in general. If you want, please sign your name at Wikipedia:WikiProject Treaties if you are interested in writing treaty articles, editing them, etc. If not, thanks anyway for your help. Later. Deucalionite 14:11, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Greg Yaitanes

No problem. I don't know why, but that page was really hard for me too. It was like a math puzzle or something. - Peregrine Fisher 22:16, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

thanks.html

thanks.html —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.61.222.205 (talk) 16:41, 6 February 2007 (UTC).

Just a little heads up on the TV station posts...

You might have to do a little reverting before to change the "established in..." categories. We have an idiot running around these boards named "BenH". That account has been banned, but we caught him sockpuppeting under various IP addresses.

You can see his rap sheet here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Suspected_Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_BenH

If the previous author goes by these names or addresses -- best to revert them. What he says in these changes are either false and/or unnecessary.

Many thanks.

-- azumanga 00:59, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Question

Got a bit of a problem. There are some of Clear Channel radio stations that are now under "BT Triple Crown Merger Co." (a private company that is pretty much still Clear Channel), should I put the merger company name in small italics under Clear Channel or just put Clear Channel and leave it at that? - SVRTVDude (Yell - Toil) 19:48, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Better place your question here. I just entered the Project and I still don't know the policy. -- Magioladitis 20:29, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Okie Dokie...Thanks Dude:) - SVRTVDude (Yell - Toil) 20:48, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

TV stations

In reference to:

[BenH] is really confussing me. Should i remove all the stub tags he adds or only the ABC, NBC, etc.? I never could imagine it would be so difficult to change the categories! -- Magioladitis 13:38, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Please do -- the stub tags are meant only for short articles, and stubs for cities, states, etc. are not meant to be catch alls. Also, state-related categories should only be for the station's city of license, not the entire coverage area. Finally, the use of "|W***" or "|K***" at the end of categories (with the astreisks being the rest of the call letters) is unnecessary, as Wikipedia places them in order by the first letter automatically.

Hope this helps. -- azumanga 17:35, 22 February 2007 (UTC)


Heroes.

I didn't delete ANYTHING on the talk page. I reorganized it. Someone tried to 'gather' all the talk about page length into one section, but did so by duplicating all of both sections, creating two Identical threads on the page. People were answering in both threads. I combined both threads back into one extended thread. Use the edit history to compare the before and after, and you'll see what I mean. Here is what I did. ThuranX 21:23, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I understand that. I don't understand why you can't wait til lthe season's over. We've gone through this entire sections nad length thing twice before, at least. Every time, we agree to WAIT till the season's over, so we can assess the entire page wit the sesason's fill of hindsight. Anything else seems reckless. For example: We won't need lengthy articles on each of Sylar's victims in three more seasons, a list would be fine, probably one that includes victim name, power they had, season and episode. But now, with only what, 17? episodes out, they seem more important. Reflecting in hindsight would be a great plan. What if Sylar's dead at the end of Volume one? (the first season). Then we'd need a simple table on his page, and nothign on the minor characters page, which will probably be held for recurrent minor characters who cross seasons. Right now, examples of such character APPEAR to be Ando, Linderman, Claire's brother and mother, but we have to wait and see. A little patience will kill no one. Finally, have you joined the WP:HEROES yet? we could use more editors if you haven't. ThuranX 01:03, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Radio Disney Page

I'd love to update that page to add the contests they did. Could you revise this?

Contests

Radio Disney also gives out cool prizes. If you win a contest, you are in the running to win a Grand Prize, which usually consists of meeting a Radio Disney artist or going on an all expenses paid trip. (Usually a dude ranch, a Disney theme park, etc)

  • 'Codeword of the Day'-The codeword is given out a few times every hour.
  • 'Bud and Iggy's 'Where Are We?' ' Bud and Iggy are lost and it is up to you to find out where they are. Three clues were given out.
  • 'Backwards Bop'-A snippet of a song was played backward. You had to try and guess what the song is forward (1996-2001)
  • ''Slowpoke Snippet-Exactly like Backwards Bop, only the song was slowed down (1996-2001)
  • 'My Dog's Better Than Your Dog'Callers call in with their pet dog and tries to get them to bark on command. (1997-2001)
  • 'I Did Something Cool In School'A Just Plain Mark and Zippy contest done weekly. Callers call in, and tell about something they did in school. The most interesting one wins (1996-2001)
  • 'I Just Found Out'Another Just Plain Mark and Zippy weekly contest. Callers call in, telling about something they found out, either in school, at home, etc.
  • 'I Had A Bad Day Because'The third of Just Plain Mark and Zippy's contest. The caller who had the worst bad day wins (1996-2001)
  • 'Just Plain Mark and Zippy's Island' This was done every Friday afternoon. Kids would send in their made up stores about being stranded on a deserted island. The story would contain three song titles in the sentences and those songs would be played and you would win a prize.

An example of a story would be "My family went on a boat trip to Hawaii, but on our way, our boat capsized, so we had to swim to a nearby island. When we finally got to land, we came across a sign that said "Welcome to the beautiful island of C'est La Vie

And that particular song would be played and this continued for two more songs.


  • 'Battle of the Cities' Two callers from different cities would call in. (During Mark and Zippy's show) and three questions would be given out. The caller who answers the most questions wins and gets bragging rights for their city.


Atlanta2003 08:55, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

TV

and? Just because some TV shows use them does not mean there's a consensus to apply them wiki-wide. They're not needed in the context of the articles. Matthew 13:36, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Why not? The summary changes vert often until we watch the episodes and for one more reason: many people add unconfirmed info and this is a goos warning before we remove it.
No they do not change very often, the template is not a warning not to add unconfirmed information, a simple hidden comment would do that, also alerting the adders to WP:ATT, none the less the tags are unneeded clutter. Matthew 13:48, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
You're welcome to get consensus for the "warning" to be added, there is however none to add it, and as in my opinion it is unneeded I have again removed it (you're welcomed to remove it from the Lost LOE if it so pleases you). Matthew 14:27, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
The last time these warnings were discussed the consensus was to only apply them to shows in which the shows running is possibly an issue, or something could drastically change suddenly, a page properly cited would not need these warnings. Matthew 14:37, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Jericho episode.

Hey Magioladitis, You recently deleted the episode that I had added on the Jericho wiki. The information about that episode is stated on the official jericho wiki, in the "Ask the producers" section (see here: http://jerichowiki.cbs.com/page/Ask+the+Producers ). Just thought I'd let you know. Thanks Mrx9898 09:03, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey. Thanks. I just glimshed the episode list in the official Jericho wiki and the episode wasn't there. Sorry for deleting. -- Magioladitis 16:04, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Don't "sub-categorize" footballers

Hello. May I ask you not to "sub-categorize" footballers by removing the nationality categories, such as Category:Spanish footballers, even when they are included in a sub-category such as Category:Spain international footballers. The standard practice is to always include them in the super-category concerning its nationality. This is suggested by the guideline Wikipedia:Categorization and subcategories#Incomplete sets of subcategories. So duplication of categories is preferred. Thanks. Chanheigeorge 00:49, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

ok. Thanks for the information. -- Magioladitis 09:22, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

List of Prison Break minor characters

That is certainly a fair point you raise about the Imdb, so I would think better of citing it. However, the page you linked was merely the "series cast and crew," which only lists actors that are credited as being in 2 or more episodes. You'll also notice no listing for "Kristine Kellerman" on that page either. TV.com also lists Tina Holmes as playing "Kristine Pace". Granted, it also has some user-created content, but in my experience, the credits tend to be more accurate than the Imdb with regard to recently aired episodes. Would this be justifiable as a secondary source? Thanks for the input. -Juansmith 06:01, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

I think you are right although I checked and I think TV.com is also a non-reliable source. I checked the official Prison Break board and her surname is certainly Pace. I believe you've done an excellent work with this! -- Magioladitis 00:18, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi. The character was originally listed as "Kristine Pace" but later in the episode, "Fin Del Camino", in the scene where Paul Kellerman is about to commit suicide, he writes her name down as "Kristine Kellerman". I think we should follow the name mentioned in the episode itself. What Prison Break board are you referring to? Do you mean the forum? By the way, there was a similar change of name for "Jane Phillips", who was actually credited as "Jane Barrow" in an earlier episode. Regards, Ladida 10:20, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi. First of all i want to comment that I haven't watched the two last episodes yet. It seems the thing with Kellerman's sister last name to be more complicated than I believed. Well, the steps i did were the following:
  • I checked the boards of the official page and everybody calls her "Pace".
  • I checked the 2 official press releases at the Futon Critic from both episodes she appears and the name was again "Pace". Especially, check here for the official press release of her last appearance.
If i may guess something is that Kristine Kellerman was married and changed her last name to Pace. In fact I have no problem to be stated either as Pace or Kellerman. I think if in the series she was never mentioned as "Pace" and you say that she was mentioned once as "Kellerman" is better to have her with the latter name. I ll not attempt any other edit to the name until the thing is completely cleared. (Wow! I wrote many things finally!) -- Magioladitis 11:16, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

The press releases are kind of dodgy with names like spelling Sara as "Sarah". I noticed that "Pace" was used in the press releases and in TV Guide which gets its info from press releases. That was the reason I added the character with that name prior to the episode "Fin Del Camino". Her last name was never spoken out loud but Paul Kellerman later wrote it down so ... I don't know ... Thanks for your reply, by the way. :) Ladida 14:58, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Ladida - I just checked my recording of "Fin del Camino", and you're correct. He writes her name down on the envelope as Kristine Kellerman. Good call. Her name may very well be Kristine Pace (and for some reason he referred to her by her maiden name), but I'd say we have no official basis by which to confirm that. -Juansmith 17:08, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm going to copy the content of this discussion over to the talk page for the article, since it seems to belong there more appropriately. -Juansmith 17:09, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Christopher Lloyd (gardener)

Thanks for your edit to Christopher Lloyd (gardener). Unfortunately, Arts and Crafts with a capital C refers to the Arts and Crafts movement. Nathaniel Lloyd's work was in the Arts and Crafts' style. His posters were not about arts and crafts. --Bejnar 02:42, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. -- Magioladitis 09:05, 23 April 2007 (UTC)


Molly Walker

because your edit removed random chunks, leaving poor grammar and fragmented sentences. While I rebuilt the first part, I forgot the second part. I'll fix it now. ThuranX 13:08, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm trying to find ways to shorten a little bit the descriptions. They are to detailed. English grammar is not my strong point... yet. -- Magioladitis 13:16, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

they are rarely too detailed, and you seem mostly to be shortening the shorter descriptions, which can result in large blank spots due to the size of the images accompanying each character. There's little point to removing much more, many of these entries have been revised shorter before many times. ThuranX 13:19, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

KKE

Sorry about that. I was editing out of a version prior to your edit, and accidentally deleted your edit. --Soman 11:05, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi,

Following your advise I post my point of view in your talk page.

As I understand you have study a bit of KKE history. In my opinion you missed the point of the existance of the Greek Communist party ( in particular) or any other Communist or "Communist" Party elswhere. I don't want to give a lecture - this is not my point at all- so I will be sort.

The Communist Party of Greece, was founded under the Marxist-Leninist Theory and is still under this ideology. Throughout its 90 year history, although it had turns that brought questions on its character, it never deviated from its original roots. Furthermore, KKE kept the same organization chart all those years - otherwise we couldn't refer to it as a Leninist Party.

Although KKE disolved the greek local organizations in 1950, a small underground organization was still existing in order to sustain the political line that KKE was embrashing those years for peaceful action in Greece. It never disolved the organisations in the Sosialist States and the Central Comitee of the Party was still working with headquarters in Romania. This can be found in all KKE documents but here I talk out of personal experie on these issues.

Splits and rejections of the KKE were held throughout its 90 year old history, but never a party created from KKE's split had neither the power or the same political agenta.

Last but not least, KKE members that entered the Party all these 90 years are still members of KKE and- for what is worth- these members were the katalyst that kept KKE a Marxist Leninist party on the crisis of 1991.

About Elections: Main KKE political line is the creation of coalitions based on peoples political formations and common goals. Under this respect Peoples front on '30s, EAM on '40s, EDA on 1950-1967, United Left on 1974, Synaspismos on 1988, PAME on 1998 are under the same political umbrella: Coalitions of the left winged group of citizens or parties. Even today, although "KKE" was the title in the election several small groups were also joining this effort.

Under the above prespective, KKE has a history of 90 years. You can't detach any of these years from this solid history line.—Preceding unsigned comment added by DKAce (talkcontribs)

I think we should move this discussion to Talk:Communist Party of Greece. I'm going to cut the above comment and post it there.--Damac 07:09, 28 September 2007 (UTC)


Re: Oliver Close

Hi, I noticed that you started the article on Oliver Close Estate, which has a link from the Leyton article. The article has a history that you could probably draw on to expand it. -- Rob C (Alarob) 18:16, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I just made some changes following Wikipedia:Dead-end pages. I haven't checked the article's history. I just saw that the article was meant to redirect to Leyton. Should we try to expand the article or revert to redirection? -- Magioladitis 18:22, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
Since there's a link at Leyton to Oliver Close, I'm in favor of fixing up a short article. It's a housing estate that was demolished in 1997, as I remember, and somehow it ended up on my watchlist. I wasn't involved in the AfD discussion. It appears that thousands of people have lived there, so it's as notable as any of our small towns that we cover so diligently over here in the States. I mean, I started Elko, Georgia, so can't pretend that Oliver Close isn't notable enough. -- Rob C (Alarob) 18:27, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
OK then. I agree it should be a separate article. I can only make small improvements since I am not familiar with the subject. Right now i am adding tags,links and categories to articles. -- Magioladitis 18:34, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
No problem; I'll jump to it when I can. This weekend I expect. -- Rob C (Alarob) 18:36, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

OK, it's a bit longer now. I found an archaeological report online! -- Rob C (Alarob) 21:17, 9 June 2007 (UTC)


Template:Deadend

Hey, I noticed you are a regular DEP contributor, so I wanted your opinion.

I have made a new template, at Template:Deadend. Could you please comment and/or vote on the templates talk page (here)?

Thanks! Matt/TheFearow (Talk) (Contribs) (Bot) 04:14, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Your article

I took a look at Upasana Vaduthala. It still needs work, but it's better than before. I see no reason to delete it.

If you would like people to help improve the article, I suggest that you leave a note at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject India asking for assistance.

Best regards. YechielMan 15:26, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi!

I noticed some tagging you were doing at new pages patrol. We need help so thanks! Just wanted to drop you a message about one issue. When you tag an article for speedy deletion, it really needs to fall into a specific speedy deletion criteria, which are listed at WP:CSD. There are a pretty short list of speedy deletion tags that are used often which tell you in their text the criteria they are used under (you can memorize them pretty quickly because their names tell you the criteria).

Here's a list of pretty much all of them: {{db-bio}}, {{db-group}}, {{db-web}}, {{db-nonsense}}, {{db-empty}}, {{db-nocontext}}, {{db-band}}, {{db-club}}, {{db-attack}}, {{db-repost}}, {{db-vandal}}, {{db-spam}}, {{db-copyvio|url=url of source}}, {{db-redirtypo}}, {{db-redirnone}}, {{db-blanked}} and {{db-talk}}. The generic deletion tag is pretty much only useful for articles that fit some criteria but further explanation is needed. If nothing fits, the typical thing to do is to use a {{prod}} tag. If that is removed, or the deletion is controversial, the article can be listed at AFD. Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit 15:39, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Great! Since you should be armed with all the information in the area, on a related issue, it is often appropriate to leave a message on a creating user's talk page when tagging. For instance, for articles tagged as db-bio/db-band/db-group (CSD A7), {{nn-warn}} is useful (all of these templates, unlike the db deletion templates, should be substituted and have parameters for the name of the article being referred to in the warning, so you would format them like so: {{subst:nn-warn|name of article}}--~~~~). For empty articles (CSD A1 and A3): {{empty-warn}}. For attack pages (CSD G10): {{attack}}. For nonsense (CSD G1): {{Nonsensepages}}, and generic, "please stop creating crap": {{test1article}}, (which succeeds to {{test2article}} and so on, or {{uw-create}} (which succeeds to {{uw-create2}} and so on.
For articles that you have prodded (done by placing the {{prod}}, template like this {{subst:prod|your rationale for why the article should be deleted}}; a very useful template for newpages patrol), you can add to the author's talk page {{prodwarning}}. You can explore various warning templates at WP:UTM. If you have any questions about newpages patrol, or anything else, please do not hesitate to drop me a message.--Fuhghettaboutit 15:55, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Helicopter NPOV

Re this edit on List of Coalition aircraft losses in Iraq. You say it is NPOV to report the American version of events and that both sources must be cited. Perhaps we can include the militant claim, but only in the form I had it in. Why? First, the militants have exaggerated many helicopter death tolls, so why is this the only one cited? Second, surely the American military is a more credible source on this matter--If we are to believe them about every other helicopter crash, why provide a counter-source for this incident? And how would the militants even know how many passengers were on the craft? PBP 16:16, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I think the NPOV says that we have to present both sides of the event equaly. Why believe that the militants have exaggerated the tolls and not that the US Army are decresing the number of deaths? (I don't say that they certainly do it but I think you get my point). It would be good if you had cross referenced for all the cases. Of course, we are using referenced from Western media because it's more easy for us to find. Moreover, for some cases I checked in Al-Jazzera for example, the numbers of the casualties were exactly the same. Of course, I didn't have the time to do it for all the cases. The way you suggest to be written obviously implies that the US sources are more trustworthy than the others and I don't think this is a NPOV. Friendly, Magioladitis 16:50, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Overlinking

Thanks for your help on the Titanic passengers page :) I wasn't aware that there was a policy against overlinking, but it does help to reduce the size! Morhange 08:40, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I also found out about this policy by luck and I think it's a cool one. Nice work with the aritcle. We saved the aricle from deletion but now steps must be done in order to make it a good article. I have some suggestions: 1. Make the table sortable, 2. Instead of using italics put a column "Saved" with a Y or N, 3. divide the Hometown in two columns Hometown and Homecountry for better sorting. Moreover, can you explain me what is this "m" next to same ages? I don't get it. Keep the good work! -- Magioladitis 08:48, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
I thought about adding the Saved column, I just didn't want to make it too cluttered; the same with the hometown/country, though I did think about adding the flags for nationality in replacement of the country. Also, how can I make the table sortable? I'm not new to Wiki, per se, but I just edit mostly, I'm not familiar with all the cool albeit advanced things you can do. Also, the "m" stands for months, and it's only for the infant passengers. I didn't want to put 0, because I think of a newborn when I see that, and I didn't want to put 1, because they weren't one. I think I could length it to mos. or something like that to clarify. Morhange 08:58, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Just saw your new edits! WOW! Very cool! The only problem I have is with the ages, now all the babies are messing up the age column by appearing under other ages, instead of being grouped at the top above the year-olds. Morhange 09:08, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Condemned_(band)

Hi. Thank you for your response and understanding. I have cleaned up the article and re-written the page. If you have a second could you take a look and let me know if you have anymore suggestions to avoid deletion? It is very true as you point out that the sources for reviews etc in death metal aren't going to be in the likes of Rolling Stones magazine ;) . Mojowibble 18:58, 11 July 2007 (UTC)


Cobo

Hi. Sorry it took so long for me to get back to you. I wasn't intending to take a break from Wikipedia, yet one sort of happened and I haven't edited in several weeks. In response to your question, it was perfectly all right for you to create Cobo. The page I deleted was garbage - I believe the text was "Cobo - long hair - his sister's hot" or something like that. Creating a non-garbage page at a title that happened to have previously been used for a nonsense page is no problem at all. Natalie 20:37, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

List of Coalition aircraft losses in Iraq

Hi, Magioladitis. You were right about there being three Puma crashes, that was my mistake. However, the Harring Report is incorrect in its facts. If you compare the two pages, you will see that the Harring Report has copied the Wikipedia page word for word; using it as a source would mean we were using ourselves as a source! I don't know why they inserted the info about casualties to the three crashes in question, since I can find no sources outside that site that says people died in those crashes. Iraq Coalition Casualties, which lists all official deaths, shows no one dying in those crashes on those days. It must be an error on Harring's side. Hope this clears things up. PBP 05:46, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

I will wait, but like I said, the Harring Report seems to just have copied its text from our site. Of course GNU allows that, but he really shouldn't cite other sources if he got it from us. And after a bit of searching, given the tail number provided on the page, I have found a reference to the Oct 30 crash: http://home.att.net/~jbaugher/2000.html . Helicopter number 5211 is listed as: "Crashed with 6-6th Cav Oct 30, 2003 near Balad AAF, Iraq. Force landed after inflight fire. Crew exited safely but aircraft burnt out." PBP 16:18, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

WP:PROD on The 123rd FA Cup final

Please have a look at WP:PROD#How_to_nominate. Prod nomination should contain a reason as to why you think it should be deleted. Thanks. KTC 06:19, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment. In fact, i have requested a speedy delete of the article at first and there have given a reason. The speedy was declined and then i proposed a prod but I forgot to add the reason again. I'll be more careful in the future -- Magioladitis 07:09, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

DEFAULTSORT and accents

Howdy. A non-obvious bit of wiki-trivia is that, to get correct English sorting in categories, the letters in sort keys in DEFAULTSORT and category statements need to be stripped of accents. As an example, for Pedro Julio Sánchez, the correct form is: {{DEFAULTSORT:Sanchez, Pedro Julio}}, and not {{DEFAULTSORT:Sánchez, Pedro Julio}} (with the accented "a"). The problem is that the Wikipedia database use binary sorting, where "á" comes after "z", instead of with/near "a". This is a long-standing bug in Wikipedia that isn't going to be fixed any time soon (it really is a hard problem to fix correctly). See also WP:Categorization_of_people#Ordering_names_in_a_category. Studerby 00:50, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

SrCl2•6H2O

Hi. Take a second look to that page. See that all the content is already in [[Strontium chloride] in more detail. Moreover, SrCl2•6H2O is orphan and it's obscure to have a redirect with the chemical formula of a Chloride. I checked many of them and there is no other redirects of a formula. This is only in special cases, e.g. [[H2O]. -- Magioladitis 17:33, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

I wasn't endorsing the article - I was just objecting to your speedy deletion tag. Your the one who blanked the article and created the redirect and then nominated it as a bad redirect. Thats an inappropriate use of the speedy tag. WP:PROD would have been more appropriate. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 17:45, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
ok. Maybe I had to nominate it immediately for speedy without fixing it first a little bit. But, I wanted, in case speedy is not appropriate, to have the redirect page instead of the duplicated article. I think, in fact, I did two steps in one. In any case the article shouldn't remain since there is a better page containing all the info already. Thanks. -- Magioladitis 17:52, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
A redirect seems fine to me. Redirects are cheep anyway. You could nominate it at WP:RFD perhapses. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 17:55, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

OAKKE

Hi, I noticed your edit of election results on the OAKKE page. When I was in Greece I was told that the electorate of OAKKE mainly consisted of aging KKE sympathizers who selected the wrong party by mistake. Is there any substance to such a statement and, more importantly, would there be any way to source that? --Soman 18:56, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi. This theory is spread mainly from KKE supporters to downgrade any influence small parties, using the word "Communist" in their title, may have or it's mainly said as a joke between people.. It is said the same for M-L KKE in some cases and less for KKE (m-l). I don't think there is any real basis one that and I don't think there is any reliable source for something like that.

Some people may get confused but I don't think that is the majority but a very small minority which it may be smaller than old people voting using ballots from previous elections(!) [This is happening because candidates post ballots with their name marked and some older people use them again after some years!]. The only thing I have read about confusing OAKKE with KKE is a letter to Rizospastis (KKE's newspaper) in 2004 from one of their members claiming that in a polling station there were counted 3 votes for OAKKE and none for KKE even if he and his family had voted KKE there. Btw, you are doing a wonderful job in Wikipedia -- Magioladitis 07:52, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, I'm also very grateful for your contributions here. I have another question: At Movement for the United in Action Left the word 'CGT union' is mentioned. Which union is this? GSEE? PAME? -Soman 15:15, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
It's GSEE. Kostopoulos disagreed with PAME and left a little before its foundation. One of the reasons of his expulsion from KKE was his support to a French-like 35-hours-per-week model which declared by publishing a book without the party's approval. -- Magioladitis 15:31, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Interesting article on KEKKE. I found [1], is that a personal blog or an actual organization. Did KEKKE themselves use the term Marxist-Leninist-Stalinist? What do we know about OKMLE? Did they have exiles in Albania? --Soman 15:49, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
I really have to learn Greek at some point. I found [2]. Is it correct, judging from the forum post, to say that OKMLE broke away from KKE(m-l) in 1973? What is PPSP? --Soman 15:52, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
I'll try to start the article for OKMLE probably today. I have to check some notes I have. OKMLE's blog is maintained by Anasintaxi. I am not sure if the the term M-L-S was first used by KEKKE or by Anasintaxi. I'll check my archive of newspapers. OKMLE didn't split from KKE (m-l), that's incorrect. OKMLE was created from KKE members. OKMLE was connected with the Labour Party (Albania). They never affiliated themselves with OMLE or KKE(m-l) because of the critique the maoists did to Zachariades. Sofianos, who was a leading figure of the Zachariadists in Tashkent, and his wife were participated in the establishment of the the "Temporary CP of KKE", later KKE (m-l) (not the one who occurred from OMLE's split but the one before). The left KKE (m-l) almost immediately. Sofianos died in the socialist countries and never got connected with OKMLE or the Zachariadists in Greece. If he did, he would probably be their leader.
PPSP (Progressive All-student Syndicalist Platform) was the student platform of KKE (m-l). -- Magioladitis 17:03, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
This just gets more and more interesting. Generally the pro-albanian parties emerged out of splits of the maoist parties around 1978-1980. This was apparently not the case in Greece. Was there no pro-Albania group in Greece prior to 1982? PPSP was the front of the maoist KKE(m-l) or Sofianos' KKE(m-l)? How was the relation between OKMLE and Albania? Did OKMLE have radio broadcasts from Albania? (like the spanish PCE(m-l) used to have). --Soman 19:19, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
There was no pro-Albania groups in Greece prior to 1982. The majority of the DSE guerilas who were font of Zachariades and later following the Party of Labour remained in the socialist countries. I am not sure of the exact relation between OKMLE and Albania. Their newspaper printed radio broadcasts and brochures were also published. They didn't have a radio station. In the blog there are at least two brochures with radio broadcasts. PSPS was the front of the maoist KKE(m-l) (that succeeded OMLE). The first KKE(m-l), consisted of communists in the SSR and leaded by P. Daniilidis, was united in 60s with the group of communists around the magazine "Anagenissi", leaded by G. Hotzeas and I. Iordanidis, in Greece to create OMLE. They later, after Mao's death split in KKE(m-l) and M-LKKE .

Btw, here and here there are two articles about the Tashkent events in English. -- Magioladitis 20:17, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Looking for your advice on Wikipedia:WikiProject Red Link Recovery/Capitalisation

Hi, I saw on Wikipedia:WikiProject Red Link Recovery/Capitalisation/2 that you cleared a bunch of the fixed wikilinks. Should I be doing this while I fix things on Red Links page 3 ? I'm new to the red link recovery project. -- Guroadrunner 23:39, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I noticed your contributions to WikiProject Red Link Recovery. Please read the instructions carefully. If you handled a case and corrected the link then delete the entry, not just strike it. Keep up the good work. Friendly, Magioladitis 11:59, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi again. While working on Red Link/3 do the following:

When you correct a suggestion, or the red link doesn't exist at the page then delete the entry of the red link/3. (not just strike it).

Strike only cases you can't handle and the suggestion is not correct. We need the exceptions only for not including them at the next time the list is generated.

You don't have to type "no" everytime. "xxxx vs yyyy" would do the job (since the repaired entries are deleted).

Take care with entries with special characters. due to a problem of the generated list some entries appear as red links but there are not. Better don't touch these links or do a further research to fix them.

Your contributions are really helpful. If you follow above suggestions I think we'll cooperate perfectly to finish this project. Friendly, Magioladitis 09:05, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

I wanted to drop a friendly note that http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Red_Link_Recovery/Capitalisation/5 is complete. I think I did exactly what you do when a section is done, but if you want to check it over, feel free. Guroadrunner 09:45, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
You did fine in the last section. Well done! With your help we are really speeding now! -- Magioladitis 11:08, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Projected seats

Thanks for updating the election article. Just a question. Is the projected seats distribution your own math or you take it from elsewhere? We can't have the former and the latter needs a source. Thanks, --Irpen 18:58, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

I am not the one who put them in the article. I did a small research in the net for that and I didn't find something. I was about to ask for citation. -- Magioladitis 19:02, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Austrlaian films

Hi see WikiPorject Films discussion and the notice at the top of the Category:Australian films. Splitting films by genre for each country is highly confusing . Category:American films remains intact and so should every country especially Australia -this is a WikiProject Films convention and Australia shouldbn;t be any different. The categories are currently all up for cfd The Wild West guy 14:02, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Categorizing films as AUstralian films. Australian comedy films, Comedy films etc is over categorization and makes finding the films in the A-Z of Australian films very difficult. Often many categories overlap some films are both drama and comedy and it duplicates and confuses our filing system. There are only about 250 films from Australia currently on wikipedia that is only one page and a half . Its not as if we have twenty pages in this categoryThe Wild West guy 14:06, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Well what shouldn't have been done was moving films out of Category:Australian films to begin with. This is a very important category that they are filed A-Z -all of them. There was a clear message not to do this per standard for each country -film categories should be kept as simplfied as possible. The Wild West guy 14:10, 7 October 2007 (UTC)


Please take this to one central talk location at the australian project noticeboard - otherwise the issue will not get adequately sorted out SatuSuro 14:13, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Please take any further comments to Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board - individual talk pages are not relevant to a project wide issue like this SatuSuro 14:16, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Minister for/Ministry of

Hi,

As an English speaker, I believe the correct usage is Minister for .../Ministry of .... For consistency's sake on Wikipedia, I'd ask you to revert your recent move of Minister of National Education and Religious Affairs (Greece). As the logo of the Ministry makes clear, in English it is the "Ministry of". For some reason, I cannot access the site to see how the minister is referred to.

And just because a Greek establishment writes its title a particular way in English does not automatically mean that this is correct. Mistakes and bad English are very common here.

I also disagree with your abbreviating of the party names in the lists of ministers. Outside readers do not automatically know what ND, PASOK, etc., means. Abbreviating them achieves very little in my view. --Damac 20:46, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

If you look at Category:Lists of government ministers of the United Kingdom, you'll notice that most of the present-day Secretaries of State (=Minister) are Secretaries of State for ... The same applies for the articles in Category:Irish Government. So, that seems to be how English speakers in the European Union do things. I remember looking this up and weighing up all the options when I started most of those Minister for ... articles for Greece.--Damac 21:11, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Richard Kalvar

This is a friendly reminder to be sure, when proposing an article for deletion using {{prod}} to include a reason in the tag, by adding {{prod|[REASON]}}. Also, please make sure the reason you give is explicit about your concern regarding the article. Thanks! Steve block Talk 22:14, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Greek MPs sortable table

Excellent work, Magioladitis! Well done

Any idea how we can get the names to sort alphabetically? Do we need do change them to "Surname, Name" format? We can use a pipe link for those MPs with articles.--Damac 18:59, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Just had a look around. This is how its done for a list of British Labour MPs.--Damac 19:08, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
I think having two columns, one with Name and one with Last name/First name look good. You can do it like that. The columns "entered for the first time" and the next one I think they are not needed. Let's go and make and "Last/name" column! Btw, I think the color in the LAOS rows is a little bit dark and the name is not so clear for someone to see. -- Magioladitis 20:03, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Use of AWB

Hi, Sorry if you think I'm being pedantic but I think you should read WP:AWB#Rules_of_use before making edits like this one. Regards King of the North East (T/C) 19:38, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Continuation of RedLink Capitalisation project

It looks like we have a lot of people helping complete list at Wikipedia:WikiProject Red Link Recovery/Capitalisation now, which is great.

Do you know if it is possible to do another database dump list to continue the project from a more recent dump (we are working from redlinks found in May). Something like Wikipedia:WikiProject Red Link Recovery/Capitalisation II ?

Users Aspects, CultureDrone, Ohthelameness, Florrie, and CheMechanical all deserve praise, among others.

Message CC: User:topbanana at this message, because he/she set up the lists.

Cheers, -- Guroadrunner 09:50, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

We can just recreate the list when we finish with the current dump. -- Magioladitis 13:52, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Sounds great! Guroadrunner 00:20, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Close a debate

Thanks. -- RG2 11:47, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Earl

Are you asking for help creating the season articles? Right now I'm swamped with school, work, and some other articles on Wikipedia I'm trying to clean up. The best I can do at the moment is show you the season articles I worked on, and tell you to copy that format--if you like it. Smallville (season 1) is the most developed season article on Wikipedia, but I don't think Earl has that much information. So, Smallville (season 2), and any season after this, can show you what to do for limited information articles. If you have a lot of trivia from the episodes, just create a "trivia" section to dump it all in until you can work in into legitimate sections. If you don't want an article, then I suggest looking at Lost (season 1) (and the seasons that follow that). Those pages are technically "list" pages, and not "articles". From what I can tell, all of those season lists are featured lists. Just go on My Name is Earl (season 1) and copy whatever page you like the best--but remove everything except the coding, because you wouldn't be able to use Lost or Smallville information. If you are worried about creating it, you could start at User:Magioladitis/sandbox, and work on the pages there. This way, when you are comfortable with what you have you can move it over to the mainspace. Whatever you choose I'll keep an eye out to help whenever there is a snag--or you could message me if you have a question--I just don't have the time necessary to create a completely new page at the moment.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 14:33, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

It's up to you. You could technically write an article where you summarized each episode into one coherent plot section, or you could do like I did with Smallville and use the general table from the LOE page and put the synopses there. My reasoning for doing it that way over the other was because of all the different writers/directors/airdates/titles for each episode, it just seemed liked the most logical organization to me. But, you may find a better one. There is nothing set in stone, as the Smallville season pages are probably the first of their kind to be organized in that manner. Whatever works best.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 16:52, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

OK Mags

OK Mag. fair enough, just want to keep this article on the up and up. This page has to be fair & unbalanced, & I'm tried of these left wing nutts who hate G.W. Bush & want to slamm this war at the expense of coalition military lives. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.118.37.151 (talk) 05:36, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thank you for your barnstar! :-)

Guroadrunner (talk) 06:54, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Heroes merging

Greetings. Just wondering if I could ask you a quick question. Is their a particular reason you want to merge all the supporting/recurring character articles in the Heroes article? You just seem so passionate about it, I was wondering what your thought process was. I was under the impression that at Wikipedia, users could start articles on whatever things they felt were important. I am not mad or anythng, so I hope my tone doesnt sound that way. I am just curious. Does wikipedia have to preserve the amount of articles it has or something. I just feel like it doesnt hurt anyone for the articles to stay...what the harm in having them? If someone is looking up Eden or Molly for example, maybe they do want to know more detail than 10 lines can emcompass...you know? But, anyway, I am just asking because I am not goingt o argue the merges anymore, seeing as to how I am fighting a loosing battle...lol...but I am just curious so in the future when merging comes up again, I can make a better arguement based on wikipedia policy. Thanks for your reply...BIG TEETH SMILE.--Chrisisinchrist (talk) 23:02, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi!! It's really cool because i just wanted to write you something because I felt very bad with the whole situation. I certainly don't have anything against you or Heroes TV series. I am a great fun of it. Moreover, if you check my contributions in Talk:List of My Name Is Earl episodes i tried to save My name is Earl episodes with no success.
Two things really bother me: The low quality of the articles and that some people create articles exactly after a character's first appearance. My logic is the following: In the beginning we have some information about a character. We add it in the main article. After that the information becomes more and we have feedback from media sources. Then, we proceed to an independent article.
I took me a while to understand why we can't say "Alejandro WAS a fictional character" or the policy of WP:FICTION but now I agree with it.
I was not planning to merge articles immediately. This is not something I did. In many case months pass after an article is tagged to me merged and usually this helps people to be motivated to improve it. Check the Talk page of Ted Sprague. Someone anonymous requested time to improve the article. I didn't touch it for 2 weeks and I wasn't planning to touch it for more time if it was necessary. Afterall, we have life outside wikipedia as well.
I wish I had access to US media and help you improve the Molly Walker article. I ll try something but check my contributions I am really doing many things for Wikipedia.
Really friendly, Magioladitis (talk) 23:16, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


I hope I don't disappoint you to continue contribution to the articles about Heroes. Your's small addition in Molly's article today really helps in to the improvement of its quality. An idea is that you can keep expanding the summaries for the characters in the main article and collecting some information in your Sandbox or something and then re-create article that have been merged. :)
PS Btw, your contributions to The Company (Heroes) are great. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:26, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Check Nikki and Paulo article from Lost. This article was so good that took a star. It's considered now as a model article. I don't expect this level but gives the idea of the structure. Magioladitis (talk) 23:29, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for clearing things up. I fully understand the merging and I respect what is being done. I guess the good thing is, as the series grow, there is still a slim possibility that some of these minor characters will be reintroduced and their articles can be expanded. Hopefully we can get more real world content for their sections to make them more notable. Thanks. I did have a question. Are you an editor? If so, I really need some honest tips of how to improve the Company page on heroes. I hate the tag that is on their, but i understand why the article was tag. I just dont know how to go about improving the article so that it is less in universe. I think it is too detailed for Wikipedia. Any suggestions on what I can do?--Chrisisinchrist (talk) 23:37, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Heroes is a funny series. The plot is distributed in to many characters. I think this is the main reason it's difficult to have good article for some secondary characters. Many people contribute so little. I still can understand why DL or Simone who were supposed to be main characters appeared so little. I think we are not indenting to re-introduce old characters but keep introducing new characters all the time.
In order to get rid of the in-universe tag try using expressions like "According to the plot" or "In episode the audience is introduced with one more member of the Company", etc. Moreover the "Status" column in the two tables is not correct according to the guideline. Try adding "As of season 2" or remove the columns and just keep them in the talk page as I did to the tables from the List of Heroes characters. -- Magioladitis (talk) 00:11, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the tips and the advice. I did a little work on the page today. I see you also made a great add. I am going to research the Company and see what kind of real world things I can find from Tim Kring and the producers about the production and concept history of the Company to better the article and take it out of universe. thanks for the help and advice. and thanks for clearing things up about the merging. i wont fight you about it anymore...laugh out loud...okay...see you on the editing boards soon!!--Chrisisinchrist (talk) 03:10, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
One more tip: I think the Company article needs a paragraph, after the leading one, telling tha the Company plays an important role to the Heroes' plot because the story is around it, most of the characters are connected with the company, its a very important element of the series, blah, blah. Something like this. See you on the boards. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:39, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

I dont know if this is where you put barnstars, but this is for you

  The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
For helping me when you didnt have to and for being nice, kind and respectful to all the users on the message boards Chrisisinchrist (talk) 18:32, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Arco

It seems to be a federation of parties, rather than a new party. See it:La Sinistra - L'Arcobaleno. Don't know very much more myself. --Soman (talk) 12:51, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Aviation accidents and incidents in Iraq War

Hi. I can sort out all helicopters, but then of course will need your help and your suggestions. After completing the list, I can post it in your sandbox (if you don’t mind) or in mine (I work in Russian Wikipedia, will give you a link). What do you think? 195.248.189.182 (talk) 14:40, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Use mine. No problem. Delete all the content that there is there. User:Magioladitis/Sandbox. -- Magioladitis (talk) 14:48, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Beta version is completed. I’ve added many serials, details of incidents, unit numbers and several new losses.
  • First of all, it should be checked for typos, grammar mistakes, style, wikification etc. I’ve changed many parts, so could be mistakes.
  • Second, this version meant just to show what I did find. Sections must be merged in some way and section names changed (I didn’t think about it yet). In the beginning of every section, it’s my own commentary to make things clear, it must be replaced with something more meaningful :).
  • I don’t know what to do with disputable cases, but we should do something.
  • I didn’t put sources for many obvious cases, but can do it if they are needed. Also I can try to find additional info on some individual aircraft.
And you can write here, I'm watching your talk page. 195.248.189.182 (talk) 21:41, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
First of all I'll announce the reordering to the talk page of the article. Then, we can check very detailed all the cases year by year. You did a wonderful job. I am doing many edits every day and I participate in many projects so it was difficult for me to do something like this! I'll check and correct any links that have problems. I hope that more users are helping. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:50, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi again. Sorry, I was busy these days and for some reason didn’t noticed your post on my talk page. I think you should post new version which is in your sandbox (though “Aircraft Shot Down” sections doesn't looks good and probably must be upgraded or put on talk page until someone could rewrite it). And then… we’ll see. Maybe I’ll make some minor updates. Anyway, thank you for the work you've done. 195.248.189.182 (talk) 10:16, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Molly Walker

Thanks. When I heard the podcast, I was sooooo excited because I knew I finally had some good stuff to add to Molly's article. I am going to keep researching so I can continue to improve it.--Chrisisinchrist (talk) 16:58, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Admin

I've seen in your User page you would like to be administrator, I've checked your contributions and I think you deserve it. Many cleaning stuff, lots of contributions and no dispute with any other user. Would you refuse my invitation if I propose you as a candidate? Cheers, --Xtv - (my talk) - (que dius que què?) 05:07, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

It would be my honor if you nominate me. :) -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:09, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

I thought I still had some time before the RfA was going to close. I was probably going to vote "support". I guess I missed my chance. --Coppertwig (talk) 02:46, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Comment at AFD

What Family Guy fan-sites have you been visiting? :-p Brad (talk) 13:42, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Your NPWatcher application

Dear Magioladitis,

Thank you for applying for NPWatcher! You've been approved to use it. Before you run the program, please check the changelog on the application page to see if there is a newer release (or just add the main page (here) to your watchlist). Report any bugs or feature suggestion here. If you need help, feel free to contact me or join NPWatcher.

Qst 14:03, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Shot down vs Crash landing

You should separate the shoot downs vs. loss due to mechanical failure. in the New "Coalition aircraft loss in Iraq". I have the Shoot downs already listed, check out your sandbox last sectionANigg (talk) 23:18, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

rfa

sure, no problem. sorry, though, that you didn't make it. Get some more experience with the speedies, and in a few months you'll be a shoo-in. best, --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 23:46, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Re. to post on my talk page

Your quite welcome. I think you're a great editor and if you keep up the good work, I'm sure your next RfA will be successful. :) Maser (Talk!) 02:03, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

2008

Can't be, Cyprus is only two hours ahead of UTC, I am one hour ahead. Here it is 22:54. Ergo, it is not yet midnight in Cyprus. Or is Cyprus still using summer time?- J Logan t: 21:55, 31 December 2007 (UTC)


CSD R3

I've declined the speedy tag you placed on "It's Great to Be Back". The reason is:

Not recently created, as required by CSD R3

For your information, עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 12:58, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

The misnomer part of R3 also requires the redirect to be recently created. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 13:05, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I moved your comment back to the main csd talk page. The other one was completely inactive since 2006, it just never got marked as historical. — Carl (CBM · talk) 13:59, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

You're right about the search box; there remains the possibility of in-text citation somewhere. In general, redirects that are not 'manifestly inaccurate or confusing are not speediable. Other admins may have been letting these slip through (because, really, redirects are hard to care about), but this minor little things are more benefit to the encyclopedia than they are harm to it.

I appreciate the work you've done, but -- since redirects are cheap -- I'd really suggest you devote your energy to something else. I'll stop de-tagging these, however, and you'll probably be lucky enough to get someone who will delete them for you! Best wishes, Xoloz (talk) 16:22, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Be advised that CSD R3 is for "recently-created redirect page"s. Redirects from 2004 don't apply. Brianga (talk) 12:16, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Honestly, I don't even think those are recent enough. I'll leave them for another admin to decide. Brianga (talk) 12:48, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

I noticed that you have nominated a lot of articles for speedy deletion per WP:CSD#R3, "Recently created redirects from implausible typos or misnomers". As the criterion indicates, these redirects have to be created recently. Some of the redirects you nominated were created back in 2003 or 2004. Redirects this old are not covered by R3, they need to go through RFD. AecisBrievenbus 01:58, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

I note that since this message, you have nominated two more old redirects for speedy deletion under R3, "Everyone's entitled to their opinion" from 2007 and 'Reddest Red' from 2006. Redirects this old do not fall under the "recently-created" clause of the speedy deletion criterion. Such redirects need to go through RFD. You're doing an excellent job clearing Wikipedia of unnecessary redirects, but please keep this in mind. AecisBrievenbus 16:11, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Greece earthquake

Hello! I see you edited the magnitude of this event from 6.1 to 6.5 using news agencies as your reference. I think 6.5 was in fact the preliminary (early stages) magnitude that was given, because the Greece Geodynamic Institute (the source of many of the news agencies) is now quoting 6.1 (http://www.gein.noa.gr/services/recent-earth.html) along with the USGS. The EMSC also quotes 6.2.

(I posted this here because things like this can potentially start an edit war) RapidR (talk) 14:05, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Re:About AWB and reflist

Yeah.. Just had a look at it, the regex doesnt even match the outer bits of <span class="small"><references/></span>...

Bloody thing!

If you have already worked out how to fix it, let me know

Reedy Boy 19:08, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Ok, tweaked regex, but not commited. Now will match div or span... Just need to stop it matching only the inner bit now! Reedy Boy 19:12, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

rev 1959, just doesnt actually fix what the french wp problem was... Reedy Boy 20:05, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Greek Left

Hi. Could you have a look at Greek Left, regarding the notability concerns raised in that article. --Soman (talk) 01:17, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Thx

For the invitation and compliment. I had a go and I'll try and find sometime in the future. Cheers Victuallers (talk) 08:27, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

?

sorry to bother you like this, but could you have a look at Talk:Communist Party of India (Marxist)? It a conflict that was been going on for some time now, and is starting to spill over to various other articles as well. --Soman (talk) 14:17, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

thank you for your reply. My approach is to scrap the controversies section, but to integrate critical comments and details into history chapter. In my opinion, thats the best way to de-fork the article. --Soman (talk) 15:57, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, I read your second comment before reading the first. I'll give a brief summary. --Soman (talk) 16:05, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
  • In december a user called User:Govind Vallabhdas began rewriting the lead, based a complete conspiracy theory on the caste aspecty. (see this edit) Since then this user has not been heard of.
  • User:Ghanadar galpa picked up the tread, and began reverting back these claims.
  • After the allegations on higher caste domination was taken out of the intro, it came down to the 'controversies' section, which then began to grow in an spiralling way.
  • then came a discussion on the talk page, which just gets more and more absurd.
  • Consistent in this has been a fraudlent use of sources. Sources which predates CPI(M)'s foundation are used to describe the party. Different academics are attributed opinions they haven't expressed in writing.
  • Another feature is constant problems in engaging in meaningful discussions, as User:Ghanadar galpa's answer remains the same, to attack his opponents by insinuations rather than responding the actual questions.

--Soman (talk) 16:30, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder, i've archived the talk now. I really wish there was a less byte-heavy way to do bot deletion warnings. --Soman (talk) 21:19, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Database scan and AWB

In response to your earlier request, please see: User talk:Gaius Cornelius/article list —Preceding comment was added at 18:37, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

"Insector" Haga is NOT an implausible typo

I do not understand the rationale behind considering "Insector" Haga an "implausible typo" - I restored the redirect immediately.

The VIZ Media books with that character sometimes render the name "Insector" Haga- Remember that "Insector" is a title and not an actual name. WhisperToMe (talk) 20:57, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

The English language Volume 1 Yu-Gi-Oh! Duelist (or at least early publications of this) have the name in quotes.

The Japanese language does not use "quotes" in the same way - Remember that in Japanese the format of a name is Family name given name - But Haga's "full name" starts with katakana, a foreign script. Japanese people do not use katakana as family names and "Insector" is certainly NOT a family name. WhisperToMe (talk) 21:08, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Kingbotk plugin for Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools

We're responded at User_talk:Kingbotk/Plugin#Wikipedia:WikiProject_Schools. You might be able to use a generic template (ask for help if you need it); if not, Sam (User:Reedy Boy) has said he will write the necessary code for you. Sam has access to the kingbotk plugin code too and if I'm not around - which is often the case - give him a nudge! --kingboyk (talk) 19:16, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:AutoWikiBrowser/Feature_requests#Move_orphan_tags_on_the_top

I've replied on there...

Doable, and useful.. Just need some help as to some other things. As it seems (unless im just not thinking right), that AWB doesnt move any to the top, just adds them there if it is indeed adding them

Any help/suggestions appreciated!

Reedy Boy 23:30, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Locateme

Thanks for your message - I'll be glad to add the date, I just didn't know one could! How is it done please? DuncanHill (talk) 12:24, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

I've just looked at how you've done it on the articles I had put locateme on - I'll be sure to do it in future. DuncanHill (talk) 12:26, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
With some Cornish locations that need co-ordinates, I do have the OS grid ref. Is there a template that, given the OS grid ref, will produce the co-ordinates on an article? DuncanHill (talk) 12:33, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks - I'll probably just stick to tagging for the time being! I have worked out how to use the grid ref to produce a link to mapping resources, but, like you, I do find the co-ordinates thing a tad confusing. Best wishes, DuncanHill (talk) 12:45, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Candice Wilmer

The merge is complete. Thanks for letting me know we got approval for it. Check it out, I think I did a good job with it! And I kept the picture with Niki becoming Candice :) The no erz (talk) 01:51, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Brush Creek, California

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Brush Creek, California, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 09:44, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I believe all three are talking about the place near Oroville, not the creek. --NE2 11:01, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
If you can write the stub, do so; otherwise we can wait for it to be deleted (or you can tag it with {{db-self}}). --NE2 11:03, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Looks good; I added a bit. --NE2 11:32, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Mancini variations

I'd doublecheck those Deadend project pages. I'm not absolutely sure they fit the criteria for "fixed", so I wasn't prepared to take them out entirely. Trekphiler (talk) 12:54, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

My major concern was taking out "deadend" & "orphan" tags indiscriminately. I linked out from them a lot, but may have mistakenly del "orphan" tags without linking in. Maybe not a crisis, but worthy somebody having a glance at. Trekphiler (talk) 13:04, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
That's the problem... Go ahead & take 'em off the list. Next time I go back, I'll get any you missed. I'm going to look & see what tags I took off. Trekphiler (talk) 13:10, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

peer review

I was wondering if you could take some time out of your schedule to head over to the Heroes (TV series) talkpage and give us an honest peer review. The page has gone through some major changes in the last few months, and it would be fantastic if a prominent editor/contributor like yourself, could head over and give us at the Heroes Wikiproject some sound opinion and ideas on improvements for the page. We have all worked very hard at improving the page, and we need great outside, reliable and trustworthy users to come over and help us improve. I you are interested in joining the peer review discussion with other prominent users/contributors, much like yourself, please follow the link. Thank you very much for your help and your continued effort to improve Wikipedia and its quality! Wikipedia:Peer review/Heroes (TV series)/archive2--Chrisisinchrist (talk) 05:50, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Photopoulos Syndrome

When searching for 'Photopoulos' on wikipedia, "Photopoulos Syndrome", listed as a medical dealing with aberrations in puberty comes up. This syndrome is MADE UP. It does not exist in any medical literature.

I keep removing it, but you insist on putting it back up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.170.221.88 (talk) 21:26, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Stuart, Iowa

I'm sorry if it seems repetitive, but please leave all the geographic coördinates in articles such as Stuart, Iowa. That's the nationwide standard for US municipality articles. Nyttend (talk) 23:17, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Minorities in Greece

Did you read what I wrote on the discussion page? If it is for officially recognized minorities, then why are Slavs there, why are Arvanites there and why are Vlachs there? If the Muslim minority as a whole is to be discussed, then the sections on the Pomaks and the Roma should be moved to that section as well, and it should be moved to the religious minorities section; Greece's Muslim minority doesn't consist of "Muslims, Pomaks and Roma". You speak of neutrality and consensus, that the Muslim minority includes Turks is the consensus of everyone, from the Greek government to foreign encyclopedias. Only fanatical nationalists out of touch with reality could possible disagree. Dolavon —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dolavon (talkcontribs) 16:29, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

What do you think of the article now? It has one Muslim section which is further divided into two subsections: Turks and Pomaks (which reflects the official Greek position, there would also be a Muslim Roma section, but there is little to write there). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dolavon (talkcontribs) 16:43, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I'm sorry about that. At least it has been sorted it out now.Dolavon (talk) 20:16, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure. You see, Armenians, Jews and Muslims in Greece are, as well as being religious minorities, also linguistic, cultural and ethnic minorities, all with ties to other countries. Perhaps the generic Roma could be moved to the "Linguistic and cultural minorities" section and the current "Ethnic minorities" section be renamed to something like "Other minorities". What do you think?Dolavon (talk) 23:33, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

OK.Dolavon (talk) 00:26, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Red Link Recovery/Repeated letters

Guys, congratulations on finishing WikiProject Red Link Recovery/Diacritics. Let's work on repeated letters section! Do you understand what should we do? Can you explain it to me? --PeterCantropus (talk) 01:17, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Names of candidates

First of all, there is a long tradition in Cyprus about names and their transliteration. There is no LATIN form of names, there is a latinised spelling. Casoulides, Demetris, Christophias, Costas etc. The names I gave are correct, the names provided by the Govt are wrong, because they follow the "standardisation" rules, like *Lefkosia, which is entirely wrong.

Neo ^ (talk) 08:27, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Εδώ Κύπρος. In Cyprus we have specific rules, and only the transliterated system is so messy. Let Cyprus articles to me... I don't interfere with your politicians, don't interfere with mine.Neo ^ (talk) 15:40, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

cfd/afd political stuff

Hi, could you have a look at some of the AfD which I have commented on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2008 February 19? sinc., --Soman (talk) 16:03, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

hi. could you have a look at this cfd? --Soman (talk) 14:41, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

You might be interest in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Communist propaganda‎. --Soman (talk) 18:47, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Hidden Page

  Destructo 087's Hidden Page
Well done finding Destructo's Hidden Page--DestructoTalk to me 02:47, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Here you go, Destructo.

List of aviation accidents and incidents during the Iraq War

  • ...You'll get informed that the page name was discussed and decided by many users not a long ago.

My apologies and thanks for your alert. I've just renamed the page as above, removing "Coalition" but retaining "List of" (in common with other similar lists) and "during the" ("in Iraq War" isn't grammatically correct). Hope all will be okay now. Sardanaphalus (talk) 10:26, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

David Morrieson Panton

I notice it's nominated for copyright issues. I read the xt link piece, & while it's clearly the source of the article, I don't see copying. Trekphiler (talk) 06:18, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

re:Funny Games

Hi. I'd agree, but I think most people aren't even aware of the original. I'm not sure how a disambig should work for two films of the same name. Off the top of my head, I searched for The Man Who Knew Too Much and that links to the disambig page, and not the more "well known" version of the film (albeit, it does have other articles on the page, apart from the 2 films). Maybe raise this on the talk pages for the 2 films, and redirect if necessary. Lugnuts (talk) 15:54, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Adding a TV Station to the "Stations That Were Established In 1948"

For some reason, I could not add the TV station WTVR-TV to this list. WTVR began operation on April 22, 1948, and was the first television station in the South. Please check the Wiki listing for WTVR-TV, and add that station to the list under that category. Thanks! Csneed (talk) 01:08, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you sir! Csneed (talk) 00:49, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Wild Horses RFD

This is in regards to your comment at RFD regarding the Wild Horses redirect -- There's already a dab page at Wild Horses which lists both American bands and a British band with that name. I don't think we need two dab pages. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters(Broken clamshellsOtter chirps) 00:36, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Rollback

After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

  • Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
  • Rollback can only be used to revert vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
  • Rollback may be removed at any time.

If you do not want rollback, then contact me and I'll remove it. I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, just leave me a message on my talk page. Happy editing! Malinaccier (talk) 00:33, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Democratic regional union

Hello. I just saw that you edited back a change I made in 'Democratic Regional Union' article as vandalism. What I did was to remove the claim that the party was founded in March 2003. The party had already been contesting in the 2000 election and therefore it cannot have been founded in 2003. My contribution therefore was logical. Please be careful when you claim that a contribution was vandalism.160.5.241.167 (talk) 22:04, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

You are right. It was my mistake and I apologise for that. Both the wrong year and the revert. Please use the summary box the explain your actions, this will minimize wrong warning messages. One small detail: I didn't give you a vandalism warning but I warning for removing useful content. As you may check, I have corrected the year in the article. Friendly, Magioladitis (talk) 23:16, 4 April 2008 (UTC)


BD sort

Hi. I think is not a very good idea to change birth-death categories to BD. I noticed many problems that may be caused by that. Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser|AWB]] for example is making exactly the opposite of what you are doing. Also if we have DEFAULTSORT it's easier to compare it with listas in the Talk page. It is very good that you remove diacritics but please don't convert everything to BD. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:50, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi. First time I've heard of problems with BD. I discovered it half a year back or so and have converted from typing defaultsort and two categories, both because it is much faster (-> less error prone) to edit and ensures that the birth and death data are entered together. The fraction of bios with only birth or death categories surely must have dropped a lot since its introduction. Could you point me a to discussion on this topic? I'm unfamiliar with 'listas'. Cheers, Afasmit (talk) 14:37, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
It seems, we 've been doing the opposite job for some time! Check Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser/Bugs#BD-SORT for the bug in AWB and that it tries to do the opposite of what you do. (So, I had to go and remove Lifetime, BD for many articles to avoid this problem when someone makes general fixes). Secondly, check that many people use {{Lived}} to produce the two categories and defaultsort and thirdly, check Category talk:Biography articles with listas parameter about listas. It would be my pleasure to read your opinion. -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:49, 12 April 2008 (UTC)


I don't think we've been doing quite "the opposite job" ;-) I understand that AWB has bugs handling BIRTH-DEATH-DEFAULTSORT and BD-SORT. Same for BD? Seems like something to be fixed in AWB rather I'm happy to use "Lifetime" instead, just never seen it anywhere yet. Wouldn't it be easier to fix the bug in AWB, since there must be tens of thousands of DB usages already? If there is a compelling reason, a bot should be able to replace all occurrences of BD with Lifetime, though I notice that AWB also fails to handle Lifetime properly (good that you caught it; that was a painful edit to baby James, "Year of death unknown"). For the reasons I mentioned above, I would greatly prefer a combined sort and lifetime/birth-death category.
And now I remember having seen the listas term; I agree with the last comment on that discussion that, if listas is necessary and a bot can be written, information from defaultsort and BD/Lifetime should automatically be copied to listas. There is a lot more to sorting people's name than failing to capitalize or removing diacritics, and over time categories like "Living people" have been cleaned up extensively (not just by me). Cheers, Afasmit (talk) 16:33, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your quick reply. AWB has problems with all of them (Lifetime, BD, BD-SORT, etc.). Obviously, it handles them the same way. I mostly use Lifetime, because it's the real thing and tI think is more understandable for an editor than the "mysterious" BD. :) Right now only Lifetime and BD (as a redirect of Lifetime) exist. I agree with you that the guys dealing with AWB have to deactivate the replacement of Lifetime and, as you probably saw, I suggested that in their talk page. Cheers, Magioladitis (talk) 16:44, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

lifetime and defaultsort

Hi, can I ask you to rethink your replacing of the lifetime template with the defaultsort template. The lifetime template does everything that the defaultsort does plus it adds the categories for year of birth and death. See {{lifetime}}. Defaultsort can be used only for articles not pertaining to people. I've already replaced many defaultsorts with lifetimes and saw that you reverted a few of them. For An Angel (talk) 17:58, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, so I guess it was unintentional on your part because of a bug with AWD. So it seems you would be okay with me adding back lifetime? I've done all my edits manually so I never ran into any problems. For An Angel (talk) 18:15, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Response

My opinion is that Communist Party of Byelorussia, which contains misleading claims on history, should be deleted, perhaps then a redirect. --Soman (talk) 05:33, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Anastasis Michael

Are you really going to make me drag it through AFD? There were no legitimate claims of notability. See WP:BIO#Politicians: failed political candidates are not automatically eligible for articles, unless they meet the criteria in other ways. Take it to deletion review if you really want to go through all that. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 18:32, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Anastasis Michael

An article that you have been involved in editing, Anastasis Michael, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anastasis Michael. Thank you. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 21:26, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Morani Doesn't exist even unlinked here: List of cities, towns and villages in Cyprus
Where is it? - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 21:40, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Alias edits

I am confused by your removal of the status from all of the character articles. You say that the status depends on the episode but this series is over. The final status of the characters is known. Otto4711 (talk) 14:31, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Portions of your userpage were plagerised

Hi, just letting you know that User:AnalWinkee copied significant portions of personal information from your userpage to his/hers own userpage, his/her reasons for doing this are unknown. I have removed personal information, such as your userboxes, edit count etc and renamed sections on your travels to show that they are your sections and not his/hers. Thankyou and happy editing!  Atyndall93 | talk  09:48, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Nofootnotes

I assume you know what you are doing, but I am not altogether sure. Give me some idea that this edit turned out the same what you expected it would look like now for the article Fyrefly. Do you see what I mean?--Gavin Collins (talk) 20:41, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for keeping it clean List of aviation accidents and incidents during the Iraq War. April 30, 2008 - An American B-2A Stealth Bomber was shot down over Bagdad. "Alomost comical" Some people, man!!. Thank you again for your watchful eyeANigg (talk) 06:58, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Damon Grant

I'll try and expand the article asap, there has been a fair amount of coverage on Damon, he's one of the more notable Brookside characters to be honest. Hiding T 15:36, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

  • Hi, there's definitely a lot of source material out there to have a decent short article with real world context. I'll try and have it worked up this evening. Hiding T 15:56, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
    • I have rewritten the article, see Damon Grant. Hopefully that demonstrates the character's notability and cultural importance. Hiding T 23:19, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

speedy redirects

These can only be done fort he reason specified in WP:CSD. All other requests must go to WP:RfD. I have therefore declined your request for a speedy delete of the Redirect of Thomas Sweeney to List of Brookside Characters for the reason of " is an unnecessary redirect to a list of fictional characters. Confuses with US politician with the same name" . The name problem can be dealt with by disambiguation. DGG (talk) 13:10, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

in general for these characters, I see you've prodded a number of them, but wouldn't redirects be better than the prods? DGG (talk) 14:30, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Leiths Group

I added some references to Leiths Group. You may want to revisit Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Leiths Group. --Eastmain (talk) 23:54, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Your afd nominations

I don't know ifd you're aware but you can nominated multiple linked articles in one afd. It's much easier for both the nominator and the editors commenting. You can find out how to do it at WP:BUNDLE --neonwhite user page talk 02:43, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Redirects

Per WP:SOAP which you quote, a redirect to the list would seem better; but some of the characters, such as Phillip chancellor III are such long running characters that there might be discussion in the various sources on the series--dont delete , please, until you look for it. DGG (talk) 00:18, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Debbie McGrath

It would have been preferable to allow me to develop the article at Debbie McGrath or discuss it with me rather than list it for deletion. Once a deletion debate is underway it limits the extent to which an article can be edited, ruling out merges and redirects. After the work I had invested in Damon Grant, I thought that would demonstrate the good faith I have and allow you to assume good faith in me and my intentions. All the best, Hiding T 14:12, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Blake's 7 Status Removal

I'm a little confused by your removal of the status tags from the Blake's 7 characters. Status is an indication of the nature of the characters at the end of the series. Especially with a series like B7, which is subject to all kinds of rumors of resurrection and ended on an ambiguous note, the status of the characters at the end of the series is relevant to the real (not in-) universe.

Hal 10000.0 (talk) 03:58, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi. From my point of view, infoboxes are supposed to give a short description of the character for readers who want to take a general idea of the character's profile. This should apply for users watching previous episodes for the first time as well. Check talk the discussion for the Lost infobox and mainly the discussion for Heroes infobox. There were more discussion, not caused by me, but I can't find them right now. I remember, that for some time, some Lost fans were using "Location" in order to describe "status" after the latter's deletion :)

See that conditions such "alive", "dead" depend on the episode you watch and when writing about fiction there is not "current status". Check discussions about the use of the term "former". Moreover, other conditions like "imprisoned", "wounded", etc. are a perfect area for speculations.

Lastly, if you search all the character's infoboxes, i don't think that you can find any other reporting the "status" anymore.

I think all the other options in Blake's 7 infoboxes are just fine. Friendly, Magioladitis (talk) 08:36, 9 May 2008 (UTC)


Thanks for the reply. It sounds reasonable.

Hal 10000.0 (talk) 03:46, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Yobot added category to Talk:Alma Wheeler Smith

Yobot (talk · contribs) added the category [[Category:Place of birth missing (living people)|Smith, Alma Wheeler]] to Talk:Alma Wheeler Smith. I removed the category from the talk page and added it to the article page, Alma Wheeler Smith. I hope this is okay. --Eastmain (talk) 02:12, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

  • Sorry, my mistake. I see that the [[Category:Place of birth missing (living people)]] is intended for talk pages, not article pages. I restored the category to Talk:Alma Wheeler Smith --Eastmain (talk) 02:31, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Indonesian articles

There was tagging about 12 hours go which claimed no birth date when there were - any problem with the bt? SatuSuro 09:26, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Heheheh - thats fine - there are some eccentric styles not usually WP MOS in some of the arts - thats probably the problem - I will get around to checking later - my watch list is too big - thanks for replying ! SatuSuro 00:27, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Removal of cat

Hi, can you tell me why you made this edit? It wasn't currect, and I hope you are not doing that to other articles as well. Badagnani (talk) 20:13, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi, you seem to have done the same in this edit. Can you please stop and reverse these mistaken edits? Badagnani (talk) 20:14, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Hello, would you please address this issue rather than continuing with your bot run? Thank you, Badagnani (talk) 20:16, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi, you've just done it twice more, rather than address this problem here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Manuel_Vega&diff=prev&oldid=227270453

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ramon_Te_Wake&diff=prev&oldid=227270495

Would you please stop and address this issue, and reverse your mistaken edits? Many thanks for this, Badagnani (talk) 20:18, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Hello, would you please address this issue instead of continuing with your bot run? You have just removed several "Date of birth missing" categories, that were correct. In those cases, the date of birth was indeed unknown (we had only the year). The "Date of birth missing" cat (which is different from a "Year of birth missing" cat) should remain. Badagnani (talk) 20:21, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

You also removed the cat from articles where the individual's year of birth and date of birth were missing, and the lead said, "born ca. 1970." That was wrong and please do not do it. You also removed the category "Date of birth missing" from individuals who unquestionably are public figures, such as John Yoo. That was equally wrong. In both cases, it's clear that the automated manner of doing this allowed you to make incorrect removals. Please now go back and undo the mistaken edits you made. Badagnani (talk) 20:30, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Please stop

Please stop. You just removed the "Date of birth missing" category from an article of someone whose date of birth is missing. [3]. Please stop. Badagnani (talk) 20:32, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Please stop. You are not helping by simply removing a cat, and not replacing it with a proper cat, in the proper place. It is destructive and I ask you to please stop. Badagnani (talk) 20:34, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

I second Badagnani's request. The program that you are running is leaving misinformation on many pages. Look at this page Murray Melvin. We know what year he was born. We don't know what date he was born. These categories are for people to be able to tell what information is missing and the year of birth is NOT missing for this person. You probably need to go back and reverse all that this bot has done. Your help in this will be appreciated. MarnetteD | Talk 20:52, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
Just because date of birth can go on to talk pages (and this wasn't always the case) doesn't meant that year of birth should go on a page where the year of birth already exists. Also just because a task is approved doesn't mean that it is doing the correct your bot was leaving incorrect information on pages. You might want to make yourself aware of what happened to betacommandbot whose tasks were also "approved". You did not think through all of the ramifications of this program that you ran. That kind of thing happens. As long as you fix the mistakes then you can learn from this and move on. Happy editing. MarnetteD | Talk 21:45, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
You are still putting the year of birth missing category on pages where the year of birth is NOT missing. See Peter Howell (actor) and the above mentioned Murray Melsin for examples. Please stop this. MarnetteD | Talk 21:49, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Robert Russell (English actor)

Yobot replaced the "Date of birth missing" with "Year of birth missing" in the article page. The year of birth is not missing, the date of birth is. I removed "Year of birth missing" and added "Date of birth missing" to the talk page which is where it belongs. I think the bot may be making other similar errors. Please look into this. Regards, Leofric1 (talk) 20:54, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Re:Date of birth missing (2nd warning)

I do not recall doing this. Please remind me. --I'm an Editorofthewiki[citation needed] 21:01, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Date of birth missing on talk page

Thanks for letting me know - I hadn't seen anything to the effect that this policy had changed. When creating the Art Drysdale page I simply looked for all existing categories and put the article into all that applied. My recent edit was due to an edit (by a Bot, I think) which seems to be replacing "Date of Birth Missing" with "Year of Birth Missing," which I instinctively saw as wrong given that the year is right there in the article. Given that there are probably hundreds if not thousands of biography articles done in a similar way, I imagine there must now several hours of editing that needs to be done to fix this. Wencer (talk) 15:23, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Badagnani

A user you have recent interaction with is the subject of an ANI discussion here. Please feel free to comment. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 19:34, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Date of birth missing (living people)

Thanks for the correction. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters(Broken clamshellsOtter chirpsHELP!) 20:38, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Bug reports and feature requests

In response to your question (permanent link), see Wikipedia:Bug reports and feature requests. --Teratornis (talk) 04:04, 20 August 2008 (UTC)


A few 'bad' tags

I came across a few of Yobot's tags today that didn't look kosher. Letting you know in case it turns out to be a symptom of a problem.

  • Del Martin and Phyllis Lyon - the 'living' parameter in the WPBIO tag was changed to 'no', but this article is about multiple people. I corrected it.
  • Northern Illinois University shooting - not sure why this got tagged with WPBIO at all, but it's about multiple people, many of whom are still living, so the living=no parameter was incorrect. I corrected the parameter, but didn't remove the tag.
  • 2008 stabbings at Beijing Drum Tower - not sure why this was tagged WPBIO either, but living=no was inappropriate as several named victims are still alive. Someone else removed the tag entirely.
I replied. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:32, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Yobot

What's the deal with this edit? [4] It's most certainly supported in the article that the character is female and has brown hair (there's a photo, even). Maybe that feature needs to be struck from the bot, this reversion was unhelpful. -- AvatarMN (talk) 06:30, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Yobot & "fictional characters"

It is making numerous changes that directly contract WikiProject Comics editorial guidelines and exemplars. --Tenebrae (talk) 20:45, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Each project has subheads specific to the needs and most accurate fits of its content. WikiProject Comics editorial guidelines, derived through consensus after months of effort, use "Fictional character biography."
Please do not make unilateral changes without even any discussion with the Project members. --Tenebrae (talk) 20:52, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/exemplars.
I understand your wish for uniformity and consistency. However, there is no "one-size-fits-all," which is why all the various Projects exist. --Tenebrae (talk) 20:55, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
S'okay — as I said, I empathize with the desire for stylebook standards. Bots are often a bit of a blunt tool, and a scalpel approach is sometimes needed.
Ok. I am sorry for that. I added that in the last moment to avoid unwanted addition of a link there from by bot, which originally adds links to fictional character, the first time encountered in the article. There is one more problem: I have a spelling error! "backgound" instead of "background". I am so sorry about that. -- Magioladitis (talk) 20:57, 11 October 2008 (UTC)


Is there any you might be able to help me revert these changes in the WikiProject Comics entries? I'm working on them one by one, manually, and I'm still in the Bs. Thanks for any help.--Tenebrae (talk) 21:00, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
I 'll make my bot do the reverse change. The spelling error will help afterall. (Easier to find the wrong string) There is a small question for how to obtain the list but I 'm working for it. My apologies again. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:02, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Well, there's a list here, if that helps.
Thanks very much for your care and understanding! --Tenebrae (talk) 21:04, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Bot started running. Let's wait for the first results. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:13, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
What I saw looked good. Thanks again for all your congeniality and effort. And I must say, I'm impressed with your having created what, with some tweaking, seems like it could be a very, very useful bot. Best of luck on your future Wiki endeavors! --Tenebrae (talk) 04:30, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

4 questions...

  1. What exactly is the 'bot's change of "Fictional character biography" to "Character's backgound" based on? Could you also have the 'bot provide a link in it's edit summary to the discussion or guide line section?
  2. That in so ding the 'bot is inserting a spelling error on every article it edits since it leaving the "r" out of "background"?
  3. Is the 'bot supposed to be creating links out of nothing? See here where the bot found "fictional character" in the text and decided to create a link.
  4. Are you aware that the above situation is breaking links? See here where the 'bot decided to create a link out of "fictional character" even though the phrase was in the middle of a longer link call.

- J Greb (talk) 20:51, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Magioladitis, I'm looking at this, and I don't even see approval for the change you were making. Am I missing something? Please respond on this page.--Rockfang (talk) 21:13, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

It was a mistake of the moment. I encountered some articles having "Fictional character biography" and I tried to prevent my bot from linking it. It was a mistake over another mistake (I didn't find my original settings file for adding links to fictional character). The bot is reversing the edits right now. I did between 200-300 edits. I am so sorry about that. Check discussion above as well. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:16, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Mission accomplished. All wrong edits were reverted. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:18, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Category destruction

You missed this one and this one. Please check what other categories were affected. - Fayenatic (talk) 07:52, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Re: Bo Sanchez

You have my most sincere apologies. I was simply quite confused. My misunderstanding, my mistake, my apologies. Cliff smith talk 04:04, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Category:Place of birth missing (living people)

Hello, Magioladitis. You have new messages at 72.75.82.202's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

YOB instead of DOB. Check instructions

Yup, I know the difference, and if I tagged an article incorrectly, it would have been an inadvert mistake. Just let me know if there are any articles you'd like me to fix. --Rosiestep (talk) 01:52, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Yobot task 10

Shouldn't {{BD}} just be redirected, rather than substituted? — Arthur Rubin (talk) 19:18, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I just noticed your message. Well, since we are doing the job I think completely substituting BD has many advantages. Probably, you have in mind the discussion about {{Lifetime}}. By having the categories fixed we skip the problem that the categories have to be rendered each time by the server, it's easier for newbies and bots to detect categories, etc. The last discussion didn't reach a consensus for Lifetime but it was a good motive for us to get rid of BD (because it's name doesn't show that it uses defaultsort) and add the substitution function for Lifetime. Friendly, Magioladitis (talk) 20:10, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Or replaced by {{Lifetime}}? Could you please stop this bot until we have established consensus about this?  Sandstein  21:54, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi. There is no consensus to have Lifetime or YOB/YOD categories. The only consensus is that BD should not exist. Since BD has to go, can go either way. Am I wrong? Right now there are far more articles without Lifetime. If we decide to add it everywhere, 20,000 articles won't change anything. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:10, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Comment: I am not substituting Lifetime or BIRTH-DEATH-SORT. Only BD. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:16, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Could you please point me to the discussion where consensus was established to remove BD by bot in all articles instead of just redirecting it to Lifetime, and to the bot task request for this? I am concerned that your bot is making thousands of automated edits without consensus, and will block it if necessary until that is made clear. Thanks,  Sandstein  06:28, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
You can check Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Yobot 3. I have this link already in th bot's page along with a short explanation. As I said I am not substituting Lifetime nor BIRTH-DEATH-SORT. I am not doing anything against consensus. You can also check the discussion in Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2008 May 22 and there is no consensus to change everything into Lifetime. I don't understand what the problem exactly is. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:35, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Thank you. Please stop substituting BD and change it to Lifetime instead. The TfD discussion that you linked to resulted in a "keep" for {{Lifetime}}. This indicates that people do want a template of this sort. They just don't want it called "BD" (although you haven't yet told me where that consensus was reached). The bot request was imprecise in this regard, allowing for either replacement or substitution, and at any rate bot approval does not replace consensus. Thanks,  Sandstein  16:16, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
I agree with Sandstein on this one, what the bot is doing now is really quite annoying. Manxruler (talk) 17:46, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
If you read the discussion carefully, you will see that "keep" just meant "not delete". Adding Lifetime where yob/yod categories already exist is considered nonconstructive. Moreover, this discussion resulted to the addition of a subst option to Lifetime. Finally, if you check the discussion for the bot, the talk page of lifetime there were many suggestions that the use of defaulsort within the template must be obvious to the editors. I did many actions for that. There are many examples of people keep adding defaultsort even if it's used in BD. I informed in the template of Lifetime what I want to do with BD and there was no problem with that. Finally, as I said since BD has to go, it can go either way. If you want to start replacing BD with Lifetime is ok to me. using my bot it's easier to substitute and I find many advantages in doing this. -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:52, 21 November 2008 (UTC)


re:Noncontructive editing

Hi. This edit of your is considered as nonconstructive. Please read discussion in Template talk:Lifetime. -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:56, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

This edit is ok to me. The other is not. -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:57, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

You're going to have to explain that one for me. I don't really understand, after looking at the link you provided. Those pretty harsh words should be better explained. Manxruler (talk) 18:03, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

If I understood your above statements and your statements on my talk page correctly "Lifetime" is ok, but "DEFAULTSORT", once put in place, is untouchable? Manxruler (talk) 18:12, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi. Sorry, if you felt I used hard language. Replacing 2 categories and defaultsort with lifetime makes no good. There is no difference in the result. Sorry, but I am busy right now. I'll add you details soon. Have a nice day/evening. Magioladitis (talk) 18:28, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. Have a nice evening you as well. Manxruler (talk) 18:32, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi again. I now have some more time for an answer, yesterday I was really busy. Take a look at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2008 May 22. I suggested many times that a consensus is reached in one important thing: To choose between Lifetime and DEFAULTSORT+categories and make a suggestion to editors what is the preferable method. I think the closure was a bit hasty and non enlightening. Reading the discussion it was clear that many people find Lifetime useful and use it. It was clear also that something has to be done with DEFAULTSORT. Probably go outside the template. Moreover, since there is no consensus for a preferable method, to go and substitute everything with one method against the other is something nonconstructive, it will make no difference what people see on the screen. It's like something runs AWB just to move stubs to the bottom of an article. Finally, I informed about my actions and thoughts in Template talk:Lifetime. I have made comments about everything concerning this template, warned about possible issues. You can participate in there to help us.

Replacing BD with Lifetime is ok to me. for the moment at least. The important thing right now is to get rid of BD and handle Lifetime later. So, edits for replace BD are constructive. I find it is easier with my bot to substitute it and I also prefer defaultsort from lifetime but I won't touch Lifetime until a consensus is reached. I ensure you that if people decide that everything has to be converted in Lifetime I 'll run a bot to help in this. I hope my answer covers you. Friendly, Magioladitis (talk) 09:29, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Sure. It covers the issue nicely. Thanks. Manxruler (talk) 09:39, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Slight problem

Here. --Closedmouth (talk) 15:11, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Interesting. I reported two bugs myself in Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser/Bugs. I'll download the new AWB snapshot which is supposed to detect and warn about duplicated defaultsorts. These kind of problems enforce my opinion that Lifetime has to be removed completely. -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:14, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Some more cases: [5], [6], [7]. -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:30, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

No problem. These dupes are directly caused by the lifetime's vagueness in use. How are people to know it enforces its own DEFAULTSORT? Silly and pointless template. --Closedmouth (talk) 15:39, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Exactly! I keep reporting different kind of problems caused by the use of Lifetime and hopefully I'll bring the subject under discussion again soon. As step 1, we have to get rid of BD. Especially, [8] shows that many editors may are using a template but don't really know how it works. -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:42, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
On the contrary, it is a very useful template: see below as to BD, which redirects to it. Peterkingiron (talk) 00:27, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

BD template

Why are you converting dozens of biographic articles from the BD template to Defaultsort + birth & death categories. This is totally unnecessary. Has some one decided that the BD template should be deleted? if so who? The BD template is convenient to use, and much more concise than the "full" alternative. It has been my practice (and that of other Biography article editors to change this TO the BD template when we find the other. Why are you undoing our work? Such a major change should not be made without VERY WIDE consultation, but nothing has been flagged up on the peerage project or the history related AFD page, both of which I watch. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:01, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi! Please allow me to say not dozens but thousands! But I have also two questions. Why you are deleting also the two blank lines which were left before the stubies? According to WP:Stub: "It is usually desirable to leave two blank lines between the first stub template and whatever precedes it." Also there is a sence to leave two blank lines before the navboxes this extra space was also for a reason - don't crowd navboxes into references. Kind regards Doma-w (talk) 20:52, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
About th lines before the stubs, I think you have to report it to WP:AWB. I am just using the general fixes of AWB. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:37, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your answer. OK, I havn't know this. Kind regrads Doma-w (talk) 22:46, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

FYI, I believe that this marks the third personal attack on you. If they are not reverted, I think it should be reported. DOUBLEBLUE (talk) 00:18, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

I wrote on the editor's talk page this. I am not planning to report anything even if I a little sad for being accused for vandalism and by messages like this and this. I think there is a big misunderstood and has to be resolved soon. Thanks for backing me up. I certainly couldn't do it alone this. It's already late here and I need some sleep. Have a nice day/evening. -- Magioladitis (talk) 00:25, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for recent advice. I have removed an offensive sentence, but I would still suggest you consult widely before making major changes. Peterkingiron (talk) 00:24, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
My steps were the following: I informed in the talk page of Lifetime that they are problems with BD, after some time I asked to be removed and I was adviced to create a bot. I applied for a bot and after a more than a month the bot was approved. I informed the talk page of Lifetime again. Many editors have seen it, including some of the people implementing AWB. Anyway, I am pretty sure that your problem is not BD itself but you want to keep Lifetime in articles, maybe if I was just renaming BD with Lifetime, you wouldn't have problem but I find many pros in completely substituting. Anyway, I hope we solve this by cooperating and calm discussion. Right now I am a bit tired, it's already late in here. Have a nice day/evening. Magioladitis (talk) 00:34, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Not every one watches every page. I have not normally thought I needed to watch template pages and such like. I suspect that applies to a lot of other writers/editors of biography. I have seen a similar problem with editors deciding on talk pages immediately after an AFD discussion to take action contrary to the outcome of that discussion. Talk pages provide a good forum for discussing content, but not wider implications of major changes. That is why we have AFD, CFD, RFD, etc. I did get angry last night, and expressed myslef more forcefully than I should have. I must apologise for that. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:18, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

BD Substitution Problem

Your bot continued to subst the BD template after it had been tagged for RFD. This means it put the RFD template and the redirect into the article. See example. Looking at Category:Redirects for deletion, I'm guess there are well over 100 of these cases. Can you please fix this mess? Thanks. -- JLaTondre (talk) 14:38, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for telling. This is a result that yesterday I acted a bit hasty and I forgot to shut my bot down before going to RfD. I'll try to fix the mess asap. Friendly, Magioladitis (talk) 17:26, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Year of birth missing vs Date of birth missing

Hi, I always try and use 'Year' but with the amount of articles I create I sometimes use 'Date' accidentally - force of habit! Regards, GiantSnowman 12:05, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Your bot

please do not remove the blp tag, as happened with Matthew Shepherd, such an automated move is unhelpful as we need blp tagging to be visible for articles containing info about living people, as this one does due to mentioning his murderers, who are living and need blp consideration. Thanks, SqueakBox 20:59, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I am not sure how "blp" works. I am just using the Kingbotk plugin of WP:AWB. Better report any bugs or disagreements in User talk:Kingbotk/Plugin. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 21:06, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

False positive for Yobot's task 9

Just so you know, I reverted this edit. The article is about a creative duo, one of whom is dead but the other is still living, so WP:BLP still applies. —Quasirandom (talk) 04:27, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Louisa Maria Teresa Stuart

Thank you very much for reverting the change made by your bot Yobot, but I don't understand how or why it substituted {{rfd}} #REDIRECT [[Template:Lifetime]] for {{BD|1692|1712|Stuart, Louisa Maria}}, with the edit summary "substituting BD using AWB". Could you please explain? Xn4 (talk) 23:07, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

I sent BD to RfD and I thought I had stooped by bot but... I hadn't and in some articles it substituted the template including the RfD tag. :) Everything is ok now. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:25, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Ah, now I understand. Many thanks for your reply, which reassures me! Xn4 (talk) 23:29, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Sorry

Last I looked into it, it seemed OK. I'll avoid it in future. --User:AlbertHerring Io son l'orecchio e tu la bocca: parla! 14:54, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Yobot

I'm very confused by your edit here. Since at the time of this edit and at the time of making that edit Yobot did have a bot flag. I've confirmed that with Special:UserRights/Yobot and you should be able to see it if you sign into the account and go to special:preferences. It can also be seen here. Are you saying the bot should no longer be flagged? - Taxman Talk 22:22, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Re Year of birth missing

Thanks for the heads up regarding the categories. Pinkadelica Say it... 23:43, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: Category

Thanks for the heads-up. Didn't know there was a difference. =Nichalp «Talk»= 11:36, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Yobot

I was investigating bot possibilities surrounding the whole Living people categorisation system, and realised you sort of had the monopoly. I did manage to do a couple of useful things! Just thought I'd let you know, if you need any basic grunt work doing or whatever. - Jarry1250 (t, c) 18:52, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi. I checked LivingBot and it does a great job! I corrected a couple of false positives but in general your bot works fine. I think we can cooperate. I am waiting for ideas.

Since you are using php I think you can do more things than AWB. For example I wanted to do the task you requested as well but I was restricted by the 25,000 articles limit of AWB.

One thing we certainly have to look at is Category:Year of birth unknown. This category is intended for use on discussion pages after new consensus and there are about 3,000 articles there. We have to move the category from article to talk page. Can you help with that? The big problem that I see is that many editors write "unknown" and mean "missing". -- Magioladitis 20:14, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, LivingBot could definitely help with that. It doesn't seem too much of a challenge to me, but a clear way of automatically assessing whether they meant missing or unknown may be needed. Simply transferring from article to talk (without judgement on what they meant) would be no problem at all, I think. - Jarry1250 (t, c) 20:32, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

This is an example that people don't exactly know what they are talking about. And, imagine, I just picked two articles randomly and the second seemed not to be the case of an unknown yob. Maybe it's better to short other issues first until we think of something (for example I have thought to move only the articles that have a death category and the date is before 1800 or something).

Right now I thought of something you could really help. You can do a job similar to my task 2. Run though articles in Category:Year of birth missing (living people) and if a death category exists replace the first category with Category:Year of birth missing. -- Magioladitis 20:39, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Yeah I agree and was thinking much the same i.e. to do the obvious ones first. On the latter point, I can go one better than just checking a death category exists, I can actually assess them, like I did with Living people (people do add death categories incorrectly). I'll file a BRFA and work on the code in the meantime, though don't expect anything to happen for a day or two. - Jarry1250 (t, c) 20:46, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Edit to WPBiography template at Talk:Abdul Rahim Sarban

Yobot's 15:41, 21 January 2009 edit to Talk:Abdul Rahim Sarban incorrectly changed "living=no" to "living=yes" in the WPBiography template. Abdul Rahim Sarban is clearly dead. The article has a section /* Death */. The article overall suffers from a lack of citations as is discussed on the talk page, and it does not provide either a date of birth or a date of death. I can understand a bot labeling someone as living if the WPBiography template was silent on the issue, but I cannot understand a bot changing the decision that has had human review. I suggest that you might want to check the bot's algorithum in that regard. --Bejnar (talk) 05:41, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Adding WPBIO banner to inappropriate places

Yobot appears to be bannering for the WPBIO project any number of pages that are for organizations of people, not just people. Is this on purpose? A brief sample from its recent edits:

Also some clearly inappropriate things are getting tagged:

Methinks you should look at what it's doing. Magic♪piano 23:46, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Jericho characters

I trimmed the first two. I know nothing of the series, so you may want to make sure that I didn't screw anything up badly before I bother to continue. TTN (talk) 12:17, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

hello, i was not soapboxing, merely correcting an error in nomenclature, the jennings and rall site, though it is a property name of the jericho concept, was made exclusively for the tom tooman game. please note this. thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.164.73.162 (talk) 14:19, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

RE: Removing correct tags.

Ah, sorry about that. It appeared he had gone and tagged every Darkstalkers article himself while setting the date added tags to April instead of May to try and force deletion/merging without the proper amount of time. Thanks for catching things and fixing them. Nezu Chiza (talk) 20:46, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Brookside template

I figured every other British soap opera template (The ones still on TV) has this setup and found it best to follow suit. I know it seems lazy but I was going for some Uniformity as not to clutter to up the articles with family fields. Conquistdor2k6. 12 May 2008 09:53 (UTC)

adminship

Hey. I've seen your recent work and was thinking that you might be ready for another go at adminship at WP:RFA. Only thing I ask before I have no problems with nomming you is how your CSD work since your last candidacy has improved. Let me know if you think you're up for it. Wizardman 02:54, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Alright. I should have the template and everything up in a few days. Until then, just take the time to prepare answers to the first three questions, and familiarize yourself with the process (since you've had an RfA before this should be no problem. so long as we know you've improved on CSD stuff you're fine) Wizardman 00:55, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
I got one more question before I feel ready to transclude. Any examples of some nice articles you've written that I can see? That seems to be a very common reason to oppose these days and I couldn't find much upon looking myself. Wizardman 03:34, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Article writing seems good. However... I think the recent involvement in the fiction realm (one of the most divisive areas right now) as well as no glaring need for the tools make me feel that this next RfA might not pass at this time, yet. So I made the nomination and everything, but I'm going to hold off on it for now. Participate in WP:AFD and CAT:CSD and the like some more, and I may feel more comfortable with a nomination in a few weeks. Wizardman 03:36, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Just so you know, I have restored the Edie Britt page to its former glory.

Just so you know, I have restored the Edie Britt page to its former glory. AdamDeanHall (talk) 13:19, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Stop removing information from the Edie Britt page. Just leave it as it is, OK?!! AdamDeanHall (talk) 21:35, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Could you please tell me why you changed "was" to "is" on the Edie Britt page? I thought the women of Wisteria Lane had seen the last of her in the episode Mother Said. AdamDeanHall (talk) 22:37, 28 May 2008 (UTC)


Nikodim Tsarknias

What are you talking about? I simply changed "Slavic Macedonian" to "Ethnic Macedonian." We don't identify as Slavic Macedonian, I respect core-politics, but politics have nothing to do with self-determination. Mactruth (talk) 00:51, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Minorities in Greece

The picture it was compared to was deleted, showing only the "Macedonian Slavs as Bulgarian" picture. I thought it to be Bulgarian POV. Mactruth (talk) 00:59, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Both maps are now present. Mactruth (talk) 01:06, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Magioladitis, our ethnicity is constantly being denied, many trying to show we are not "Ethnic Macedonian" by stating we are "Bulgarian" or "Greek" or give us a new name like "Skopjan" or "Slav-Macedonian." You just don't understand what its like for peoples of the same religion and region to act that way.

I included "Officially recognized by Greece as Slav-Macedonian" but he does not state that, he and everyone else states (ethnic) Macedonian. Mactruth (talk) 01:14, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: Prison Break

Well, it's gonna be tough, but why are you sending it to me personally? I'm not a merger. I don't do big stuff on Wikipedia. Just tell me that merging those episodes takes within an hour, then I'm willing to do it. But I'm not if it takes more time. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 00:20, 21 May 2008 (UTC) By the way I wasn't saying that I'm willing to do it, I was giving a suggestion. I do have plans in my live. I'm not sure if I can merge them all, let me think about it. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 00:22, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

DH

Could you not have kept some babes? It was nice. or like, fixed the re-directs? o)

--Cokeandpoprocks (talk) 19:03, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Accursed

By all means mark articles such as 'Certain accursed ones of no significance' with "re dirty po" but as the incomprehensible message above hints, you must fix the redirects first. In this case, this edit and another to a user talk page were needed. -- RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 20:43, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I was planning to fix the redirect. I had the window open when the phone rang. :)
I always open a new window with the whatlinksto in the redirect I have nominated for speedy deletion and I wait until it's deleted, then I fix the redirects. Thanks. Friendly, Magioladitis (talk) 20:56, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Redirects from foreign languages

Hi. I have a question because you are the most expert in redirects I know. About the Redirects from foreign languages. Did we end up in something at the end? I think we did and we could proceed and form it as Wikipedia's policy. Am I wrong? -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:18, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Back in February, I boldly closed the discussion and tagged the conclusion as an essay. No one has reverted me yet so I'm assuming people are comfortable with that decision. As an essay, you can start using it to guide decisions (and I have occasionally). If you think it should be promoted past mere essay status, I'd recommend 1) a different title that pulls it out of the sub-page format, 2) a user-friendly shortcut and 3) some advertising. Or we can leave it as is. I'm comfortable either way.

Thanks for reminding me of the page. By the way, I also expanded the note about historical placenames. Revert it if you disagree. Rossami (talk) 16:23, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree with the historic names and I think you did a wonderful job with that. Your idea to start a more centralised discussion was brilliant. I am not familiar in working with guidelines and essays, so I have to read a bit about it. The whole thing came into my mind after a discussion in here Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2008 May 22. We certainly need to promote this essay a bit and we need an easy-to-remember shortcut. I'll try to think of something but I am not very good in these things. Friendly, Magioladitis (talk) 17:16, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Alexander Mahone

I was mainly concerned with vandalism. I guess if I would have checked up on you, my concerns would have been eased. I was just working on categorizing and making it more clear and concise. Thank you for clearing that up. Bmwilliams08 (talk) 00:07, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

BIRTH-DEATH-SORT vs Lifetime

I hadn't noticed this was a redirect -- I will start using Lifetime instead. Thanks for pointing out the TfD! -- KathrynLybarger (talk) 14:22, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Can you help?

Hi. I noticed that my IP address has been used to vandalise an article a few weeks ago (article titled "Camel") on the 17th of May and I saw you were the user who sent me the messages pertaining to this issue. There was a person who had access to our internet while he stayed at our house for short period of time, and I would just like to know how did he vandalise the article? What was the vandalism concerning on the article "Camel"?

I apologise that my IP was recorded as vandalising a page and thank you deleting it.

Any further information about this case you be appreciated, as I'm worried about what the person would have done elsewhere on wikipedia, and would just like to know the details or how I can find out what text was edited during the vandalism.

Thank you, from Ethan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.170.92.55 (talk) 06:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

D. N. Pritt

We would seem to be fighting over contradictory WP policy here. In using the short form I followed the Wikipedia:Naming conventions (people) instruction to use "The name that is most generally recognisable". D. N. Pritt is the most usual form of address both in 'dead tree' works and on the web, despite what has been WP practice. In the election results pages the official form 'Denis Nowell Pritt' is obviously appropriate, hence the piping. Philip Cross (talk) 20:36, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Contested prod for Melissa Hurst

Hi. Are you contesting the prod of Melissa Hurst? -- Magioladitis 08:08, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

No, 79.68.250.15 (talk) already contested the deletion. --Closedmouth (talk) 08:10, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

This was just a vandalism. Single edit, no edit summary, no reason in talk page. -- Magioladitis 08:37, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

From WP:PROD: "Contested deletions: If anyone, including the article's creator, removes a {{prod}} tag from an article for any reason, do not put it back, except when the removal is clearly not an objection to deletion (such as blanking the entire article). If the edit is not obviously vandalism, do not restore tag, even if the tag was apparently removed in bad faith. If you still believe that the article needs to be deleted, list it on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion." --Closedmouth (talk) 13:15, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Keyword: "for any reason". The prod was removed for "no reason". Moreover, single edit by this account shows "vandalism" and I reverted as "vandalism". Friendly, Magioladitis 13:28, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

No, it was removed because the user didn't think the article should be deleted. The whole point of the proposed deletion system is that it's used for uncontroversial deletions that nobody would object to, so that AFD doesn't get bogged down with articles that don't really need to be discussed; if anyone removes the prod notice, it means the deletion isn't uncontroversial. Although it's encouraged for people to explain why they are contesting the prod, it's not compulsory, and it doesn't constitute vandalism if they don't --Closedmouth (talk) 13:35, 30 May 2008 (UTC)


Hi again. I sent it for AfD but because you are contesting the prod for a reason. (I take it as "I believe at least one editor disagrees with deletion") Why do you believe that the user just disagrees and it wasn't a vandalism? Since there is no edit summary we can't conclude that. I think it was a vandalism but I didn't give it a warning because I keep 5% of uncertainty. A reason would be "I don't' think so" or "I like this article" but no summary and no other edits in general? Let's see if this user will at least give a reason for keeping it in the Afd page. I'll leave him message in his talk page. Friendly,- Magioladitis 13:42, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I just added a warning to the user's talk page hoping from his participation in the Afd discussion. -- Magioladitis 13:47, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Why don't I think it was vandalism? Because I'm assuming good faith. The lack of edit summary means I have no evidence for or against it being vandalism, so I assume it wasn't, and that the user genuinely wanted the article to be kept. And again, I'm not contesting the prod, the user who first removed the tag is. --Closedmouth (talk) 13:51, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Regarding this article, would it be OK for me to move it now to the List of past minor and recurring characters from Hollyoaks as I proposed in the AfD, or should I wait for the outcome of said AfD? ~~ [Jam][talk] 18:53, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I've replied on my talk page. ~~ [Jam][talk] 19:21, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

List of original characters

Not really bad, it means the same. Ultra! 15:46, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about that.

I just can't help myself when I randomly come across Vinozhito's article. ;)3rdAlcove (talk) 23:29, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Mammomax

When did a decision to have Mammomax redirected to the List of Brotherhood of Mutants members page occur? Rtkat3 (talk) 8:36, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Marcus Walton is back

It seems that the NON-NOTABLE Marcus Walton has returned. It should be permanently deleted, not redirected. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.69.107.37 (talk) 22:13, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Katherine Mayfair to be promoted

Did you check the discussion for the template? I believe that Katherine should be added. Since she has become one of them, why not add her as well. She is friends with them at the finale, she played poker with them five years on. She's even a regular cast member named right after the four main housewives. Don't you think this is enough evidence to be in the main cast?124.188.180.129 (talk) 01:59, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

H&A Template

I usually remove these once a character's left the show ala the other shows. Just out of curiosity; Why have you put them back in? -- Conq 17:36 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Pretty much all the articles of past characters. --Conq 17:45 19 June 2008 (UTC)

The H&A Navibox basically. It's on a lot of pages of characters who have long since left. -- Conq 17:45 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: Talk:Emma Taylor

Sorry about that -- I didn't notice that I had followed a redirect. You're right; I deleted per your original request. — xDanielx T/C\R 23:05, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Talk pages tagged for deletion

Hi there; you have recently tagged a large number of blank talk pages for deletion. Please note that a blank talk page does not qualify for speedy deletion - please stop doing this. --Anthony.bradbury"talk" 11:28, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Ok, let me put it this way. If you do not stop tagging empty talk pages for speedy deletion you will become a possible candidate for blocking. I say again, please stop. --Anthony.bradbury"talk" 11:37, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi there; clearly we have a different approach to empty talk pages. Please talk to me. --Anthony.bradbury"talk" 11:41, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I hope you didn't give me waring while I was tagging because I just noticed them all. Let's discuss it. First of all: Should redirects have project banners? I think not. They is nothing there to improve. Secondly, since these talk pages have nothing should be deleted? My answer is yes. What is your opinion? Friendly, Magioladitis (talk) 12:15, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi there; simple answer - an empty article talk page should not be deleted. Please see WP:CSD. Many articles do not have comments in their talk pages, and they just sit and wait for comments. Please leave them alone. --Anthony.bradbury"talk" 12:18, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Db-blanktalk reads: "It is a blank talk page with no substantial edit history". The talk pages I nonimated have only a banner addition. -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:19, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

I say again: blank article talk pages are not subject to deletion. Please let us not argue over this point: I have reverted already most if not all of your speedy tags. --Anthony.bradbury"talk" 12:22, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but I am afraid I do disagree. A blank article talkpage is not, repeat not subject to deletion. --Anthony.bradbury"talk" 12:32, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

You have contested several of my decisions, which you have every right to do. Please go to WP:DRV if you feel that you have been seriously disadvantaged.--Anthony.bradbury"talk" 12:45, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Db-blanktalk refers only to talk pages where no corresponding article exists. Are you arguing that redirects do not count as articles? If so, make that clear. Paul B (talk) 12:55, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
No, the wording on the template is irrelevant. It is the wording of the criteria that matter. Please read the actual Criteria for speedy deletion [9] Paul B (talk) 13:07, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
I can't make any sense of what you are saying now. You seem to be being argumentative for the sake of it. The talk page point is clearly 8. My link was set up for readability, so the 8 came in mid screen. You even quoted it yourself so why are you now denying it? Paul B (talk) 13:15, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
Please note that I had no intention of artginmg with you. I was asking for clarification of whetrher or not you were suggesting that redirects do not count as articles. I have not found discussion with you productive. Paul B (talk) 14:12, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Coronation Street characters

Hey, just a friendly heads up - I've noticed a couple of times recently you've merged long gone CS characters into the List of recurring and minor Coronation Street characters article. Someone actually created List of past recurring and minor Coronation Street characters a few weeks ago, which would probably be a better receptacle in future :) Frickative 08:51, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

afd

i you feel like, please feel free to comment on the this afd. --Soman (talk) 16:38, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

cleanup tags in Dbabbitt's sandbox

Hi there!

I am currently working hard on cleaning up articles tagged for copy edit, and found User:Dbabbitt/Sandbox tagged since July 2008. I noticed that you recently changed all the tags on that page from February to July 2008 in this edit. Was there a reason for this, and is there a reason why the long list of tags should not be deleted?

Thanks.

-Samuel Tan 13:51, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply :) Anyway I doubt the category of articles needing copy edit will get whittled down so much that the tags in his sandbox will need to be deleted heh. Thanks :) -Samuel Tan 16:07, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Db-blanktalk

Template:Db-blanktalk has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. -- Ned Scott 06:44, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Olympiakos Kato Achaia

How much information is in that article, does that article have the full information? Will it be kept or to be removed? What happened to that article in the Greek version? Pumpie (talk) 22:13, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

1st remark: This team doesn't play in any national division. It plays in the third (the last) division of Achaia, a local division.

2nd remark: After your comment I found that the article exists in el:Α.Π.Σ. Ολυμπιακός Πατρών, so it's not true that it was deleted (still the link indicated doesn't exist). 3rd remark: If you think we have to keep the article, please remove the prod. I still have the impression that the team is not notable enough but I am not sure about the notability rules for the football team. Friendly, Magioladitis (talk) 22:40, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

On the decision on the questioning if that article is to be deleted, it is uncertain. I think it will not be restored until it has a very few information, the only way to do it for now is redirect the article to the Achaia Football Guild Union along with all the teams formerly edited (e.g. Sageika). In that case, the talking cannot go on. That article on that Wikipedia has been removed and when it is removed for not, instead of deleting, redirect Olympiakos Kato Achaia to the Achaia Football Guild Union and delink Olympiakos Kato Achaia. We know the team is not in the national division and does not have much fame since its population is over 5,000. It will not be restored when some notable information is added later. Pumpie (talk) 01:58, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

WPGR

Um, why? Sure it's a fictionalized version, but it is the same subject.--Marhawkman (talk) 05:34, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Since I did a lot of removing the last days I am not sure to which one you are referring to, but let me give the general idea. An editor, now banned, added tenths of articles with short relation to Greece in the project (along with 2 other projects). WPGR is dealing with articles that have direct relation to Greece and not indirect. For example "Xena" is not even part of the Greek mythology! Some films using characters called "Hercules" etc but are not really related to the Greek history or mythology can be handled better from other projects, but not from WPGR. The same stands for the fictional Marvel/DC characters with the Greek god names. The project is not interesting in these articles. Friendly, Magioladitis 10:28, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Ah, sorry, it was "List of characters in Hercules and Xena". It's mostly a catalogue of mythological figures shown in those TV shows.--Marhawkman (talk) 10:31, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Just take a look in User_talk:Dimadick#About your Wikiproject tagging again. Many editors disagreed with this mass tagging. I am not working on the Greek Mythology project so I am not sure, but since I am no the WPGR for some time, I am quite definite that these articles are outside of the scope of the project. -- Magioladitis 10:43, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't really have strong feelings either way. i was more curious why it was done than upset about it.--Marhawkman (talk) 10:45, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Coronation Street durations

Firstly, I did not know that you were behind Yobot, so this is not me being biased because of the ongoing debates about WP:WPEE related things.

I just wanted to say, the duration fields that you are removing from infoboxes are there because characters come and go between their first and last dates, so they are handy to see which years a character appeared in the show. Was it discussed anywhere before you decided to remove them all? If not, please raise the issue at WT:WPEE before doing this to any EastEnders articles, as I for one will object to this, and would like to have my say before you make the decision to do this to any EastEnders articles. Thanks. -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 15:07, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Absuridties abound

I really don't care what that article says. Fact remains the character in question "did" die on the show, saying otherwise defies all logic. The character died of a heart attack. That's an undesputable fact. Sardonicone (talk) 14:33, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

I read it, and no where does it say "characters..are not born or die" of course they do. Again, you're interpretation is not an aboslute one, and thinking as such is absurd Sardonicone (talk) 19:06, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Charmed Pages

Hi there, I was just wondering if you could point me in the direction of the discussion to remove the "Status" line from the Charmed pages, as I pretty much don't agree with removing it. Thanks! Tavy08 (talk) 18:45, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi. From my point of view, infoboxes are supposed to give a short description of the character for readers who want to take a general idea of the character's profile. This should apply for users watching previous episodes for the first time as well. Check talk the discussion for the Lost infobox and mainly the discussion for Heroes infobox. There were more discussion, not caused by me, but I can't find them right now. I remember, that for some time, some Lost fans were using "Location" in order to describe "status" after the latter's deletion :)

See that conditions such "alive", "dead" depend on the episode you watch and when writing about fiction there is not "current status". Check discussions about the use of the term "former". Moreover, other conditions like "imprisoned", "wounded", etc. are a perfect area for speculations.

Lastly, if you search all the character's infoboxes, i don't think that you can find any other reporting the "status" anymore. Check recent discussion in Template_talk:Coronation_Street_character#.22Status.22.

Friendly, Magioladitis (talk) 18:48, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, I agree and disagree but I understand your explanation, so let's leave it as is. Thanks for the speedy reply, I was a little worried you were just randomly removing all the "Status" lines for no reason since I couldn't find any discussions on it.

Thanks once again. Tavy08 (talk) 18:57, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

No problem. It would be much better if I had started a discussion in template's talk page first but I checked and the talk page was blank. I am trying to improve articles about fictional characters by adding link to fictional character, replacing History/Biography with "Character's background" according to Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction) and removed status from templates. In many cases I am proposing merge to more general templates like {{Infobox character}} and {{Infobox soap character}}. It seems that the Infobox Charm character can't be merged. Have a nice day! -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:04, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

TfD Discussion on Template:U.S. State Senate Majority Leaders

In response to my nomination of Template:U.S. State Senate Majority Leaders for deletion and your related comments, User:Jack Cox has corrected the template so that it longer duplicates Template:U.S. State Treasurers. I have left comments on both the aforemention TfD discussion page and his UserPage indicating that I no longer support deleting the template. --TommyBoy (talk) 04:16, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

'24' redirects

Hi, I'm just curious as to why you've removed the information from some 24 character pages (such as Renee Walker and Jonas Hodges for example) -- they were already redirects before you edited the page. The idea was that editors would be able to update/maintain the character pages and add references etc as news became public but still keep those pages as redirects since the upcoming season hasn't yet aired. Thought that was a smart idea, but if we broke some rules or whatever I'd like to know about it. Thanks! SeanMooney (talk) 10:42, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Mandy Dingle

I don't intend to take this any further, but I find your actions very disappointing. Instead of actually working to keep the info, but making a potted biography with infobox etc on a past characters page, you've just removed the whole article - thus losing all the information. It always seems to be Emmerdale and Coronation Street characters this happens to, never EastEnders, despite many of them being purley in-universe.--UpDown (talk) 14:17, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

The notability tag put by someone a year ago (and none removed) says, if notability cannot be established, the article should be deleted, merged or redirected. Since prod was rejected, I think converting to a redirect to a list, reserving the article's history, is the best solution until someone presents an improved version of the article with references or something like that. I encourage you to write an article with short summaries about past characters of the show. All the information is in article's history. In Coronation Streets this helps me copy the whole content there. I am not an expert in writing summaries and certainly not have the time to do it. Friendly, -- Magioladitis (talk) 14:25, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

This is a good way to avoid notability problems think: List of past recurring and minor Coronation Street characters. If you start it I can help by adding information there. -- Magioladitis (talk) 14:26, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

List of past Coronation Street characters (1990-1999)

Hi, sorry, but I had to revert back to a version of this article before you made changes with your bot. The vandal ip that continuously alters dates had been tampering with it and it was simpler just to revert to a version before. Will you be able to do the Bot changes again? --GunGagdinMoan 18:50, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, the ip has been blocked, but only for a week. Annoying that they dont just do it indefinitely, he's only here to vandalise! GunGagdinMoan 19:01, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Delinking dates

Hi,

I just saw your feature request at AWB. It will be interesting to see the response. In the meantime, you can run the monobook script for yourself. Just go to User:Magioladitis/monobook.js and, at the bottom, add:

importScript('User:Lightmouse/monobook.js/script.js');

then save the page. Then clear your cache according to the instructions. That is all. When you next edit a page, look in the 'toolbox' at the bottom left below 'What links here'. You will see 'Delink dates to dmy' and 'Delink dates to mdy' plus some other handy options. Try it and let me know how you get on. Lightmouse (talk) 11:21, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Coronation Street

The Coronation Street template i think should be used for all the characters, including past characters, after all, they're still Coronation Street characters! Ced 9:23, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

I can't seem to get colour on the profile of Luigi on List of past recurring and minor Coronation Street characters, why? Ced 10:12, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry. What was wrong was that the color i used was like this:#FOE68C rather than like this: #F0E68C, with a O instead of a zero, i must have realised and changed it before you looked, that's why you saw it right on your screen. Ced 11:24, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

I agree, actually, theres not really any point in the Past recurring and minor article, many of the characters set on the others were minor anyway, although maybe before doing this nominate it for deletion or bring it up on the WikiProject. Ced 12:40, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Heroes characters.

You sent a message to me about references needed from NBC for list of Heroes characters. But in the page itself, only a few of the characters actually have references to them. Noah Gray-Cabey appeared in season 3 episode 2, therefore he recurred in this season. Please don't revert pages back to the way you like them just because you have a problem with the truth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.234.212.81 (talk) 01:25, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

merging

I am glad to see you placed merge tags in the proper way, rather than follow the bad advice you were given by TTN, to merge without discussion. It's doing just that which got him blocked before, and I'm surprised he didn't remember. DGG (talk) 03:51, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Sockpuppet Max Mux

In theory he is guilty of committing Sockpuppetry, but please don't report him, hes still new to wikipedia and he forgets to log in a lot. I've told him this many of times, but he forgets. Could you just remind him to log in as well, that would be most helpful. Regards Ijanderson (talk) 12:20, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm well I'll give him one last warning over everything and if he violates anything else again, we'll have to report him. Regards Ijanderson (talk) 12:26, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Yes he does need to be fully taught wikipedia's polices. Also he is not that good with English, he is German. He is editing from a University in Germnay (ive forgotten which one), but i found this out by checking is IP address. Regards Ijanderson (talk) 12:41, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm very careful now to log me in every time. Max Mux (talk) 18:57, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

User:Infoart / AfD

I took a look at the two articles by Infoart which you prod'd, have added some refs and think they pass the bar. Wikipedia:WikiProject Visual arts has done a lot of work with this editor, reviewing over 150 of his articles, deleting some and cutting material that didn't meet wiki policies. You might like to post on the project talk page to get a review of anything that seems questionable to ascertain whether refs exist or deletion is the way forward. If you do nom anything for AfD, please list at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Visual arts. If you're not happy still with the two articles, let me know and I'll add to them, but they are not top of my priority list. Ty 00:23, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for converting the URLs to refs. Ty 02:03, 9 October 2008 (UTC)


Thanks for the vote of confidence. As you've been encountering articles by Infoart, you might like to have this link Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Visual arts/Infoart articles to check out any others you come across. That's not to say that is final of course, but the participants are very experienced art editors with a good deal of knowledge and would have found a reason to validate an article, doubtless being prepared to explain why and maybe improve it if requested. It's also worth bearing in mind that Infoart's contributions focus on artists in the collection of the Saatchi Gallery which in itself does contribute to notability. Ty 18:43, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Template:BD

Template:BD already redirects to Template:Lifetime. I don't know what more you needed so I removed your request. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 07:46, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, you should first replace all links to it with links to lifetime. Nobody is going to delete a template that's heavily linked like that. Then you can request it for deletion via TFD. Better yet, go to TFD first and see if anyone else wants to redirect deleted. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 10:34, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

notify

when i tag articles for speedy deletion, i tag them via Twinkle, it notifies the original creator, but i'll suggest to the creators of Twinkle that it be changed to notify the top contributer of the article as well, because that seems reasonable. - -The Spooky One (talk to me) 21:05, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Admin

Hey again. I remember back in May I was thinking of nomming you but decided not to. (Didn't realize it was that long ago, wow) Well, after looking at your contributions again, I do think you would certainly make a capable admin. And actually after looking at our discussion from way back when, I don't really remember why I decided against nomming you (i say why in the commments but still don't quite get my rationale). So if you'd like to go for it this time I'll gladly nom you. I promise I won't back down this time. :) Wizardman 01:20, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Awesome. Here's the template, answer the questions and transclude when you're ready. Wizardman 19:17, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Happy Editing and Good Luck! I hope your RfA passes; you'll be a great admin. RockManQ (talk) 04:37, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

LKP cc 1st sec

well, its a valid subject, but the material in the article is simply copied from Communist Party of Lithuania. Perhaps a merge back with the main article is the best, until the LKP article expands significantly. --Soman (talk) 19:39, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Quick Question

Hey Magioladitis, I had a quick question: just wondering - have you ever had an article raised to GA, FA, FL, or anything else? Btw, I plan on supporting your RfA soon. iMatthew (talk) 00:40, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for contacting me. I mainly work by creating new articles. I am trying to give List of aviation accidents and incidents during the Iraq War a B class rating (you may look if the article has the proper supporting materials and if yes... we have a B article) but I never had significantly improve an article, so far, to raise it for GA, GL or FA. I am planning to work harder in the future in some biographies of Greek politicians. I have some material for Kostas Kappos. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 07:44, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
Ok, thanks! iMatthew (talk) 10:56, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

French commune infoboxes

Hi. We have a large back log of French commune articles to add the infoboxes from French wikipedia Status check. All that needs doing is copying the infobox directly from the French wikipedia equivalent. Please see Vulaines. All that needs doing for each article is cutting and pasting the infobox from French wiki into every article which must be bot compatible. So for Vulaines all it requires is pasting the infobox into it from here and pasting it into the english wiki article. COuld somebody please programme a bot or use some form of coding to help complete the task in hours rather than months? Blofeld of SPECTRE (talk) 11:48, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Section length, Book titles, et al.

Hi. Can you read this section and then offer your opinion on the points raised? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 14:04, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Re: R from merge

Oh, sorry. I didn't really understand what it was for but thought it would be no longer applicable. Thanks for putting it back. U-Mos (talk) 14:42, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Follow-up: Issues brought up in RFA by Caspian blue

Hi, Magioladitis. I'm posting this as a follow-up to my "Support" comment in your RfA. I suggested that you address some of the issues brought up by Caspian blue. I'd like to explain that a bit. Concerning his comment on WP:AN3#Badagnani reported by Magioladitis, I have two suggestions for the future. First, perhaps you could discuss the issue a teeny bit more with the other party (rather than conversing through the edit summaries). I noticed your notes on his talk page; that was good. Perhaps you could've added something like, "I'm going to move this category over to the talk page according to the instructions on the category, okay?" Second, (using the above case as an example) you might have done what you did to resolve the conflict first, rather than reverting Badagnani's restoration at all or reporting him to AN3. I noticed you reported him to 3RR, then decided to move the category to the talk page about two hours later. I like how you listened to the user's suggestion even though it wasn't the most politely worded suggestion. Maybe in the future, you could do things like that before or instead of reporting the other party. I don't think he should've been blocked for the conflict, especially since he didn't object to you moving the category. That's just my opinion.

My advice: in conflicts, kindly consider how you can peacefully resolve the conflicts by talking it over politely with the other parties or taking the initiative as you did in this case. Try to make blocking unnecessary if you can. I think that as you do this, you'll find that your interactions with other editors will be more enjoyable and less dramatic than the interactions of people who don't do this.

I think you are a good editor who deserves the mop, and that you do have good interactions with other editors. I hope my feedback helps you. : )

Also, I would look up the policy mentioned in Question 6 and give an answer for it. I'd hate to see a rush of pile-on Q6 opposes ruin an RfA that deserves to pass.

I hope I've given you some useful feedback. I hope you get the mop—you'll make a good admin. Cheers! SunDragon34 (talk) 00:23, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

List of aviation accidents and incidents during the Iraq War

Just a heads-up: it looks like some of the items on the list are copy-pasted straight from their cited sources. That will kill B- and GA- assessments faster than just about anything. Since this is one of your pet projects, I thought you ought to know. I'll try to help you go through and rewrite them. Between the two of us, it shouldn't take too long. Actually, if I hadn't just noticed this, I was going to bump it up to C-class or B-class (or nom it, depending on the Wikiproject rules). That each item has a citation is pretty impressive. Happy editing! SunDragon34 (talk) 01:34, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Magioladitis. You have new messages at SunDragon34's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

ANA

Hello, Magioladitis. You have new messages at BalkanFever's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Your RFA

Best wishes for your RFA.-- Tinu Cherian - 13:12, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Your AWB feature request

I have revived your AWB feature request. See: Wikipedia_talk:AutoWikiBrowser/Feature_requests#Delinking_dates_according_to_the_new_format. Regards Lightmouse (talk) 15:36, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Nepal

Hello, Magioladitis. You have new messages at Soman's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Adminship

Congratulations, you are now an administrator! Now is the time to visit the Wikipedia:New admin school and, if you haven't already, to look through the Wikipedia:Administrators' how-to guide and Wikipedia:Administrators' reading list. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me, or at the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. Warofdreams talk 19:19, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations! --Soman (talk) 19:26, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
Congrats, just remember be bold and WP:DDTMP :D RockManQ (talk) 20:34, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
Hey, I see you're mopping up already. Way to go! I'm available if you ever have questions.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 00:30, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
Congrats! Ecoleetage (talk) 04:10, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
Congrats! AdjustShift (talk) 07:17, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations, here's your mop. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 13:53, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Rockdetector deletion

Greetings Magioladitis. Ive seen that you deleted Rockdetector. I can't find any discussion about it or something...what were the circumstances?--  LYKANTROP  10:10, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

It was deleted as an expired uncontested prod which was posted on 00:32, 19 October 2008 with reason "no assertion of notability, fails WP:WEB, not a single hit on Gnews". I sent you the deleted content by email. -- Magioladitis 10:46, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Oh, thanks you for your great answer! But does every "prod" get deleted just because of the propose, which is not answered by anyone? I mean, Rockdetector is the biggest rock databease on the internet, it published several books and it is a reliable source. How does this fail WP:WEB?--  LYKANTROP  11:43, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
To answer the question about "prods". If an editor puts a "prod" tag on an article and it stays there for 5 days, it may be deleted. However, anybody, including the page creator, can remove the prod tag. It's for deletions assumed to be "uncontroversial". --Ron Ritzman (talk) 14:14, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
From the moment you wrote me this message, I am searching for more data (check that i almost did no edits after that). According to WP:WEB the site need non trivial media coverage (more details on the page) and I didn't find any. On the other hand I think I have to revert it, at least because it's heavily linked within Wikipedia. Please not that it's my first day as an admin. Can you provide me any media coverage for this site? -- Magioladitis 11:52, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
That is allright, I am not angry or something. Just a small deletion-error.
I must note that WP:WEB says that a website "is deemed notable based on meeting any one of the following criteria..." Not all of the criteria.
Some media coverage:
Rockdetector had positive responses from Digby Pearson- Managing Director of Earache Records; and Blabbermouth, a reliable source, which is hosted by huge American rock record label Roadrunner Records (the source was here, but they recently changed their website and now it shows this. Bad luck). But we also have working sources such as further feedback from Blabbermouth here and here or another source here: the introduction of this.
I hope this helps :) --  LYKANTROP  12:12, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
I am undeleting it and I am informing the prod nominator. Thanks for the sources. -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:17, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
No problem. If there is something important going on about that page, you can inform me.--  LYKANTROP  12:20, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the note, i don't think any of those sources are remotely reliable (blabbermouth.net all but says so at the foot of the page), the orginal reason for a proposed deletion was that, after an extensive search, i could find no mention of the site in reliable sources. I don't think there is any indication that it passes Wikipedia:Notability (web) but i'll take it to an afd for a final decision but as far as i can see this is just a personal site of little note created by a non-notable author. --neon white talk 18:46, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

prod vs redirect

For minor characters with articles that cannot really be justified, such as Regina Morrow, it's probably better to redirect rather than prod. It's fairly generally agreed that the names are appropriate redirects. So when I see them on prod, I redirect to the main article of the list if the names are included in the list of minor characters, assuming there will be support, since at least one other person thought the main article inappropriate. If you want to use this device for calling them to attention, in practice I try to catch all the appropriate ones from PRODSUM. (If its a major character, I remove the prod).If it look totally trivial, I leave the prod.) Of course, this is not the way it is really supposed to be done--it's supposed instead to be discussed on the talk pages-- but it does work as a practical measure. IDGG (talk) 17:39, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

AWB

Thanks for that, forgot to set it to skip, and also I didn't think. Loading that module now, thanks again for the reminder. neuro(talk) 23:48, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Unmounted module, there is not currently clear consensus in favour of mass/automated delinking of all dates. neuro(talk) 23:55, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
Oh, right. Well, I am leaving it unmounted because I am uncomfortable judging whether 'there is a reason to [link dates]'. neuro(talk) 00:03, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Congrats!

Hey, congrats on the successful RfA! I know you'll do a good job. SunDragon34 (talk) 06:12, 29 October 2008 (UTC)


Villages

Ignore Mick McGhee. The rudest and most cynical editor I;ve ever come across on here. Uses every opportunity to slag my efforts on wikipedia off. Not pleasant and totally unacceptable to mention it as a joke at an unrelated AFD. Dr. Blofeld (talk) 13:13, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Angela Petrelli

Why have I received a message telling me that I made unconstructive edits to the page about Angela Petrelli when I haven't even visited the page? My IP is not shared, my network secure and I am the only person using it at the moment... explain? 122.57.224.34 (talk) 23:19, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Kathy Brookman

Hello. Has the article about Emmerdale character Kathy Brookman/Bates been deleted? Only she was a major character over many years and there would be third party refs and notablity for her. I really hope it hasn't been deleted.--UpDown (talk) 12:22, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

I've just worked out that the redirect Kathy Brookman was deleted yesterday - thus removing the entire edit history for the article. I realise it wasn't you who deleted the redirect - the article is at Kathy Glover - but can the redirect be restored for edit history purposes?--UpDown (talk) 12:31, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Fair City characters

Given the apparent nature of the show, without the usual separation of principal and subsidiary charactrs and its clear national importance, a paragraph on each of the characters would make sense, and either the main article or the existing character list article would probably be the place to merge them to. I'm suggesting this for all the ones you prodded. I agree completely that separate articles for each character make sense, and I will support a proper merge if it is challenged.I thought about just redirects, but its reasonable to have some information. Please note this is an editorial, not an administrative action. DGG (talk) 16:52, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Prison Break characters

Hello, I was just wondering that since some of the characer articles are to be merged, what is to become of their images? Should they be on the specific character's section of the minor characters article? Thanks. -- Matthew R Dunn (talk) 14:43, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, I think it depends. We can add some images but I think in general images just for decoration should be avoided. Better back them up in your hard disk for any case. -- Magioladitis 20:43, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm not hoping to keep every image, just to keep the odd one there. I've been thinking, and since much of the character images are put into the actor articles which don't have their own images, I could just place them there (putting Frank Tancredi image to the John Heard article). Nonetheless, I'll take your advice, and save them just in case. -- Matthew R Dunn (talk) 20:56, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
I agree with you. I think we have to merge every secondary character in the List and then perform a serious cleanup. It's a shame such a popular TV series to have such bad articles. -- Magioladitis 20:59, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Image

Hey Magioladitis, when you get a chance would you be able to resurrect this image for me please? Image:Betty.jpg It got orphaned and deleted due to a merge that had no consensus, but is no longer orphaned. Many thanks.--GunGagdinMoan 22:46, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Law & Order: Special Victims Unit episodes

Hi. I was the one who tagged all L&O eps 1.5 months ago for lack of notability, and I intended to redirect them in December. Before you AfD all the other L&O, wouldn't it be less bureaucratic to just redirect them all citing the first AfD? Or do you fear edit-wars with IPs and fanboys (in which case AfD absolutely is the right option)? – sgeureka tc 21:56, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I am completely fine with the redirects. I just checked season 6. On episode really its worth to stay as an article. The one with the Emmy award. All the rest can be redirected. I was just worried because the consensus for one of the worst quality episodes was "merge" and not delete or redirect and I am afraid that redirects will start to get reverted in the "don't redirect unless you fit the information in the list of episodes" logic. I can withdraw if you start a discussion in the talk page of each season and I can support redirect. Right now I was about to go to sleep. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:23, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
There's little point in withdrawing fiction AfDs that were started unless an AfDed article has improved to B-class. In my experience, AfDing controversial/potentially-notable-but-still-"crap" fiction articles leads to keep results often enough to turn subsequent merge proposals into "but the the AfD said keep" fan filibustering, so I usually redirect such articles with a note saying "No WP:NOTABILITY established for 2 months. Don't restore this article without establishing notability." Works most of the time. – sgeureka tc 00:34, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

AFD

What is it with you and Super Robot Wars? I'm trying very hard to assume good faith, but I'm having trouble when you flood AFD with so many entries with the same reasoning. If you use the same reasoning on all of them, they should be bundled in one nomination so commenters can apply the same reasoning to all noms without commenting in each of them. Your causing them extra work. And why haven't you even considered the idea of merging all these articles in a list (after cutting out the majority of PLOT details) or even simply redirecting as a plausible search term?

Also your nomination didn't show you did any research in the topic of your article despite the deletion policy saying that is the last resort for articles that cannot be verified after reasonable efforts. - Mgm|(talk) 00:13, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I am really sorry for all theses AfDs. TTN tried to do them altogether and it was rejected. I tried to do 4 of them altogether and it seems they are still disagreements with that. I proposed deletion (PROD) for about ten of them to avoid this discussion and DGG rejected them. (I am planning to send him an email, probably tomorrow I am bit tired right now). I'll do my best to create list of characters for a tv series but not for characters which appear in one or two video games. I really believe there is nothing there to be saved. I haven't looked a lot of what's happening with all this fiction articles around, when I find that really shouldn't be around I am nominating it. This is the last bunch of Super Robots characters. One way or another this discussion will end in five days. Again, I am sorry for flooding. This is the first time I am sending so many articles in AfD. -- Magioladitis (talk) 00:24, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

you didn't send that email yet, so I am answering it in advance. If a good faith argument will be raised to support keeping the article, it is not a valid prod. How can it be, when anyone can remove the tag? And articles deleted by prod can be restored on request. But if what they need is merging or redirection, they shouldnt be in either place. If an argument can be made for merge, or even redirect, it does not belong on either prod or afd. Sometimes when I see things on prod that should clearly be redirected, I do just that, as any editor can. DGG (talk) 22:57, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jackie Merrick

I redirected the page to finish the merge. - Mgm|(talk) 09:41, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

User:Danite123

Can I suggest that you retract this edit [10] to User talk:Danite123. It is pretty clear that the user in question intends only to contact other users for an article which could be to the benefit of Wikipedia as a whole, and the edits to talk pages that he is making are not deliberately disruptive. I think in this position a retraction of the template and a friendly point in the correct direction would be a better outcome for all parties than accusing the user of vandalism and allowing that to sit on the page. Cheers, Apterygial talkstalkinsane idea 05:31, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Clarification

Hello! You said here that the character is from a show. Please note that I am unaware of any Underworld television show. If there is one and I somehow missed it, then, darn as I might watch it! :) Anyway, the franchise includes a video game, three movies (two released and one coming out in a month or so), and novelizations of the first two films, as well as a comic book adaptation of the upcoming film, but again, I don't think there was a TV show. This particular character appears in at least one film and one of the novelizations (I don't know if he appears in the game or what role he will or will not have in the upcoming film). Best, --A NobodyMy talk 02:33, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, you are right. I really enjoyed the films but I guess I tend to forget names. When I realised that he is the father of the two evil protagonists I changed by opinion. Why there isn't any List of characters available? I think it would be much better. -- Magioladitis (talk) 02:35, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
I would not be opposed to a list of characters instead for some of the secondary characters and I would certainly be willing to help edit it. I would say that Selene (Underworld) as the main character in the first two films and one of two selectable characters in the video game merits her own article. Raze (Underworld) is also notable as one of two playable characters in the video game and I was able to start a reception section on him (see Raze_(Underworld)#Reception). I think that Michael Corvin is also worthy of an article as I was able to start a Michael_Corvin#Production and Michael_Corvin#Reception section for him. Also, please note that they made action figures of Michael, Raze, Viktor, Lucian, and Selene. The protagonist of Underworld: Rise of the Lycans may also be worthy of an article too depending on what kind of coverage is in reviews and interviews associated with that film's release. Now for the other characters who are not the protagonists of either the films or games and thus for whom production and reception sections would be more difficult to start, a character list would probably be an appropriate compromise that I would be willing to support. I really think that we all need to come up with some kind of compromises with the fictional character ones that everyone should be able to live with. I can usually find sources if they exist so my feeling is if I can at least start a development and reception section using Google News and Google Books results then the article has potential and should be kept; if I can verify the information, but not do much beyond just confirming the character appeared in whatever film or game or who portrayed the character, then a merge and redirect is the way to go; and finally if even I cannot add one source to the article then deletion or redirecting would be appropriate. I am, however, generally only going to comment in the ones where I am really confident the article has enough potential that it really should not be outright deleted. But I think these standards are reaonable? What do you think? Best, --A NobodyMy talk 02:47, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
I think that with the elements you describe one of the best list of articles can be described. I think we should include there Lucian, Viktor, Sonja, Markus Corvinus, Kraven, Alexander Corvinus, William Corvinus, Raze. We can have a list of characters with many references, real world information (like a section called "Action figures", etc.) and with short character's profiles instead of exhaustive plot descriptions. If can find enough sources for Michael Corvin, it can be a separate article, but I am not sure yet. Selene is the main character but the article is very weak. Why really? If you are willing to start this article, I can help as well and write this in the AfD. I can't do it alone. In fact if wouldn't have noticed that Underworld characters were send to AfD, if I was not going to fix the infoboxes. -- Magioladitis (talk) 10:40, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
I would of course be willing to help work on such a list and to continue to do what I can with any articles for Selene or any other characters who may be worthy of their own article. We could rank the characters by degrees of notablility for determing the list's organization:
Characters who appeared in all three films and thus all three novelizations/graphic novelizations of the films.
Characters who appeared in two of the films and novelizations.
Characters who appeared in one film and novelization.
Characters who had an action figure made of him/her (Lucian, Michael, Raze, Selene, and Viktor).
Characters who were playable characters in the video game (Raze and Selene).
Characters who were non-playable characters in the game.
Those with multiple or starring appearances in different media can be considered main characters and those who are important to the stories, but haven't had multiple appearances secondary characters. Given our discussion here, do you think it would be worth trying to see if TTN and Thumperward would allow us to take this route as a compromise and thus withdraw the two active discussions so we can proceed? Best, --A NobodyMy talk 15:42, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
A wrote a message to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Corvin. I think none will have a problem if we create a good article. I think we can start by creating the article including the important information found. Even if articles get deleted, which I doubt, I still have access to the code, since I am an admin. As you may know, I am usually pro of deleting unreferenced articles for fictional characters but in this case we have 3 films, novels, a video game and action figures. A lot and good material. -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:12, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
Cool and I am happy that even though you and I are probably more often than not in disagreement about these fictional character articles (I usually favor keeping in some capacity) that we are able to work together here. On a side note, for the next ten days or so my on-wiki time will be incredibly limited due to final exam week. Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 15:47, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
No problem. Take your time. We have access to the material so we can create a good article and nothing will be lost. Good luck with your exams, they are far more important for you right now. -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:54, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Okay, when I do have time, should I start the list in my userspace first or just begin it in the mainspace? Best, --A NobodyMy talk 15:55, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
Start it in your userpage in order to avoid any tagging and as soon as we have something good to show we can put it in a new article and people can contribute on it. Cheers. Magioladitis (talk) 16:09, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
Okay, please see User:A Nobody/Underworld characters (I figure it's Saturday, I need a break from school...). Please see Talk:Underworld_(film_series)#Characters. There seems to be support for a list like ours and given the previews and upcoming reviews of the prequel being released this month, I think it might be a good idea to put in mainspace where more potential editors will see it and be able to help out. See how already this month, news sources are starting to preview the new film with comments on the characters. The current article can obviously have some of the plot information trimmed, but given the calls for a character list on that talk page, I think now might be a good time to get some more hands on this one. What do you think? Best, --A NobodyMy talk 16:28, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

plyed -> played

Hello,

Thank you for attempting to contribute to the typo regrexes. Unfortunately, I had to remove your new rule "plyed -> played" because the typo in question doesn't always mean played. A good portion of the time, the user meant plied instead. Therefore, it can't be autofixed. The "plyed" typo does seem quite common so I may try to work through some of them manually in the near future.

Also, when you add a rule to RegExTypoFix, please put it at the top of the new additions section located at the top. This way other users can easily check it for errors.--ThaddeusB (talk) 17:45, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Please block and delete revisions

Hello, you recently blocked User:Briana C.K. Scouecks for 12 hours for vandalism on Brian Beacock. Would you please consider blocking the account indefinitely for vandalism, and also as a violation of WP:USERNAME? The user's name, said aloud, is a personal attack on Mr. Beacock (I won't repeat it but it involves cocks). Could you also delete the person's edits from the page history of Brian Beacock because of that? Thank you. LovesMacs (talk) 01:03, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Your bot

Hello, Magioladitis!
Your bot is working uncorrect: it brokes orders into the categories. [11], [12], [13], [14], [15] and numerous others examples. Couldn't you correct mistakes of your bot? -- Worobiew (talk) 12:42, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi. This bug is not due to my bot. I am just using AWB to to substitute BD. I can send you the my AWB settings if you want. The only things is done is to substitute BD according to the procedure described in Template:Lifetime. I noticed a couple of bus myself and I reported them to AWB. Please, if possible just fix the pipes in the categories and don't re-add BD. Friendly, Magioladitis (talk) 13:04, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

I reported the bug: [16]. -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:07, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Hello, your bot continues to destroy: [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22] etc. Please, pacify it. Thank you. -- Worobiew (talk) 15:44, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
I made some tests with AWB v.4.5.1.1 and I thought the bug was fixed. I am sorry for that. I'll fix everything you report. -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:44, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
I'll be running the substitution with general fixed turned off. This fixes the problem. -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:30, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
O.K., thank you. It seems to me, all is correct. Thanks for undertsanding and helping. -- Worobiew (talk) 02:15, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tim Carney

Wow, a month since you nominated it and it's still not closed! :) I would close it myself as it's an obvious merge, but I'm not an admin. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 18:08, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

--A NobodyMy talk 02:12, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Castiel

Hey, a while ago you proposed that Castiel be merged into the list of minor Supernatural characters. However, I've been cleaning up his page and adding stuff, but the article needs a picture. I tried uploading one, but couldn't get it to work. If you have any free time, do you mind uploading a useable pic of Castiel to be used in the article? Preferably both of these pics: http://flickr.com/photos/31021759@N07/2922406220 and http://flickr.com/photos/38117284@N00/2887197999/ Thanks. Ophois (talk) 00:17, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: Infobox Court Case

I will quite happily go through and update the other parameters to remove the underscore (I must have not read the botreq closely enough!). As for the massive image, that was caused by imagesize= parameter being called but left blank. I have fixed the error, but that is an issue with the template rather than the bot. After a little investigation, I found that if the imagesize parameter is called and left blank, as happened in the article in question, instead of defaulting to 180px, the image is displayed at its native resolution (in this case ~2000x1500px). I will amend the template code to prevent this from happening. RichardΩ612 Ɣ ɸ 11:55, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Hello Magioladitis, I've been asked to tell you about this by User:Richard0612:

Your bot and the images on Template:Infobox Court Case
Richard, your bot has screwed up, I'm afraid. It's deleted images on tonnes of case I've been putting up, especially the ones you'll find in. I think it's deleted the image field altogether. Here's one example: Olley v Marlborough Court Hotel. This is a bit annoying, so can you please fix them all, and get back to me. I'm not sure what it was meant to do (image resizing?) but unfortunately it's had bad side effects. I actually don't see why it's necessary to have any default image at all. Wikidea 17:04, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Apparently you've got something to do with this? Can you please tell Richard to put it back how it was? Wikidea 17:31, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, apparently you were the wrong person, according to an updated comment on my talk page from Richard! Wikidea 18:40, 4 January 2009 (UTC)


Kathy Bates Merrick/Tate/Glover/Brookman/whatever

I know she's more commonly known as Glover, but Brookman was the name she went under when she returned in 2005.

Conquistador2k6 00:08, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Rod Calloway

I concur on the deletion of this article. Mark 05:13, 12 January 2009 (UTC) Msavidge (talkcontribs)

This article was deleted via AfD procedure. Check Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rod Calloway. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 08:40, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Years of birth missing (living people)

LivingBot on log-only mode gave me this list of 22 articles that need to be updated. Enough to warrant a bot, or do you want to go through them manually? - Jarry1250 (t, c) 20:19, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Great. I was expecting more results. I'll do these manually. But I think you can request an approval for this task so we can reuse in the future and automatically change them. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:46, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Interesting. Gene Barth had a wrong death category caused by vandalism. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:53, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Ok, since your bot can make lists I think you can make lists with all biography articles having problems with categories and update them regularly. For example categories having two YOB categories (probably the one of the them to be YOB missing), etc. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:05, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Good ideas. I should add, in the interests of clarity, that that list was checked by me before posting it, and a few false positives removed. I think human checking (not editing) is always going to have to play a part in many of LivingBot's operations. - Jarry1250 (t, c) 17:13, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

YOB vs DOB

Thanks for the note. Ooops. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 00:27, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

YOB vs Lifetime

So what if there is no consensus? I'm still doing it. I can't be punished for it, it's just a matter of preference. Until someone says - "Don't ever use that" I will use it with my edits. Why else would it exist? It is used very often, if not all the time lately.Cosprings (talk) 00:22, 17 January 2009 (UTC) The lifetime template replaces the YOB/D Categories, as it does the living people category. I am sick of seeing YOB/D out of order alphabetically or just randomly inserted with the other cats. I will continue to use this template.Cosprings (talk) 01:10, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Template:Grammar

I notice you rightly closed and redirected. As per discussion, if it's not possible to have the above template redirect (in some magic way) to copyedit|for=grammar, should a bot (eg. mine) be made to mass replace all existing uses? - Jarry1250 (t, c) 12:11, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

I had in mind to make a bot run for that . If you can do it with your bot I would be more than happy.

PS If you can please raise your voice about BD in Template talk:Lifetime as well in order we reach a consensus some day. - Magioladitis 12:19, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Hmm... I'll try to work out what my exact opinions are before posting on that, otherwise I might just make things worse. BRFA filed by the way (please improve the wording as you see fit). - Jarry1250 (t, c) 12:43, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Syntax Error (film)

An article that you have been involved in editing, Syntax Error (film), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Syntax Error (film). Thank you. Schuym1 (talk) 23:12, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Underworld update

Something to keep an eye is this, i.e. the character list may have a chance of additional sources if a TV show is indeed made. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 05:35, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Request for reversal of closure

With regards to Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2009 January 23#Template:Discussion top, Template:Discussion bottom which you were the closing admin of I have prepared a DRV nomination. I will however present the text for your perusal before posting it, thus you may reconsider your closure more of your own initiative. I will emphasize that I did mention in the course of the debate the fact that the templates were not tagged appropriately, just in case you missed that essential bit.

Template:Discussion top, Template:Discussion bottom

Template:Discussion top (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) (restore | cache)) Template:Discussion bottom (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) (restore | cache))

TFD discussion. Closed as Speedy keep

I assert that the discussion was inappropriately closed due to the fact the the two nominated templates were never issued the {{TFD}} template to alert users about the nomination. The templates are both editprotected and requests on their repspective talk pages to have them tagged per deletion process guidelines were declined, spuriously asserting that they were in use on "less than 5 pages" thus no point was seen in adding the notification to any of them. In truth, the templates adorn more than 1500 pages. As a consequence of this slip only a very few people who happened to access the Templates for deletion page for other reasons (or that were given a person-to-person heads-up) would be alerted to the existence of the discussion.

As response to my post to the English Wikipedia mailing list, WikiEn-l, about the nomination, commenters there immediately corroborated by sentiements and also presented perspectives that did not surface in the short time the TFD was allowed to stand, unannounced.[23][24]

If the nomination is relisted, which is my request, I will be sensitive to views that describe areas (particularly noticeboards) where the templates have proven highly useful without any of the ill effects which was the basis for my nomination, and I will present a sympathetic posture to intermediary solutions such as limiting the use of the template to only certain pages / types of pages / namespaces. __~~~~

__meco (talk) 10:29, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi. In fact, according to the discussion so far, after almost 3 days I think that there was forming a clear snowball keep. Moreover, as far as I understand you are questioning the procedure being held often in Wikipedia talk pages and not only the templates themselves. So, I think you have to start a discussion about consensus-building process and if this procedure is in contradiction with it. Thus, IMHO, you have to find a more appropriate place to do this discussion and not the TfD page. Of course, you can start a new TfD if you think it was closed improperly but still I think this is not the correct procedure to discuss your concerns about the consensus-building process. -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:11, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Sarah, Plain and Tall (film)

Regarding Sarah, Plain and Tall (film), can I have your source for those parameters' being deprecated? I'm trying to improve the template, but I didn't know they were (though deprecating them is probably a good idea, don't get me wrong). - Jarry1250 (t, c) 17:00, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

I'll duplicate the deprecation across to {{Infobox Television film}}, as you suggest. (Though it might have been a bit premature to call them deprecated on a different template that didn't call them deprecated!) - Jarry1250 (t, c) 17:30, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Definitely - I quite agree. I've opened up a discussion to deprecate on {{Infobox Television film}}'s talk. If you could post some appropriate links to the old discussion there, that would be really helpful. - Jarry1250 (t, c) 17:35, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Re:Lifetime Reply

Lifetime template was considered for deletion on 2008 May 22. The result of the discussion was keep. Therefore, I added Lifetime template.. This edit is stopped until there is a consensus building. --KANESUE 12:34, 1 February 2009 (UTC) My English may be inappropriate, because I am Japanese. If you discover a mistake, I want you to correct it.

Edit summeries

Sorry about that. I usually intend to add a summary, but always seem to forget about it anyway. I'll try and add them in the future. Darthdyas (talk) 02:09, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Article issues

Yes you would need something like {{#if:{{{reason|}}}{{{section|}}}{{{article|}}}{{{Contradict|}}}{{{Criticisms|}}}{{{Notable|}}}{{{Peacock|}}}{{{Plot|}}}{{{Prose|}}}{{{Update|}}}{{{criticism|}}}{{{dispute|}}}{{{how-to|}}}{{{How-to|}}}{{{peacocks|}}}{{{primarysource|}}}{{{weasels|}}}{{{unreferenced|}}}{{{unref|}}}{{{BLPunsourced|}}}{{{citationstyle|}}}{{{refimprove|}}}{{{roughtranslation|}}}{{{onesource|}}}{{{primarysources|}}}{{{laundry|}}}{{{review|}}}{{{fansite|}}}{{{prose|}}}{{{spam|}}}{{{howto|}}}{{{plot|}}}{{{contradict|}}}{{{intromissing|}}}{{{toolong|}}}{{{intro-toolong|}}}{{{restructure|}}}{{{update|}}}{{{jargon|}}}{{{peacock|}}}{{{POV|}}}{{{NPOV|}}}{{{pov|}}}{{{npov|}}}{{{OR|}}}{{{or|}}}{{{disputed|}}}{{{synthesis|}}}{{{criticisms|}}}{{{blpdispute|}}}{{{weasel|}}}{{{notable|}}}{{{notability|}}}{{{globalize|}}}{{{tone|}}}{{{story|}}}{{{essay|}}}{{{essay-like|}}}{{{advert|}}}{{{travelguide|}}}{{{gameguide|}}}{{{context|}}}{{{confusing|}}}{{{deadend|}}}{{{technical|}}}{{{fiction|}}}{{{fiction|}}}{{{fiction|}}}{{{in-universe-cat|}}}{{{expert|}}}{{{long|}}}{{{verylong|}}}{{{examplefarm|}}}{{{expand|}}}{{{do-attempt|}}}{{{orphan|}}}{{{copyedit|}}}{{{rewrite|}}}{{{citecheck|}}}{{{unbalanced|}}}{{{biased|}}}{{{quotefarm|}}}{{{wikify|}}}{{{trivia|}}}{{{cleanup|}}}{{{COI|}}}{{{coi|}}}{{{sections|}}}{{{laundrylists|}}}{{{tooshort|}}}{{{intro-tooshort|}}}{{{in-universe|}}}{{{autobiography|}}}{{{histinfo|}}}{{{recent|}}}{{{incomplete|}}}{{{proseline|}}}{{{likeresume|}}}{{{importance|}}}{{{introrewrite|}}}{{{category|}}}{{{unencyclopedic|}}}{{{self-published|}}}{{{newsrelease|}}}{{{hoax|}}}{{{colloquial|}}}{{{3O|}}}{{{text|}}}{{{grammar|}}}{{{crystal|}}}||No arguments provided}}

Rich Farmbrough, 18:13 5 February 2009 (UTC).

Nancy Landry

You wrote you were moving Category:Place of birth missing (living people), but you didn't move the category, you deleted it. Would you please reinstate it? Thanks. Hekerui (talk) 23:54, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I see, you put it on the talk page. Is this how it's officially done? Okay. Hekerui (talk) 23:56, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
I just got your message lol Hekerui (talk) 23:57, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
I am doing in two steps: First I add it in the talk page (message:Adding...) and then I delete it from the article (message:Moving...). All these categories (except from Year of...) must be placed in the talk pages. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:58, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
I figured that out by myself, but you're very fast in answering so you answered before I could write that I understand. Hekerui (talk) 00:00, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Du hast Recht - das ist mein letzter Eintrag dazu, versprochen! :D lg Hekerui (talk) 00:03, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Two Questions — Curiosity, not Criticism

Why is it important to explicitly state living=no? I understand the need for living=yes, blp is a very sensitive issue.

Why did you decide to implement the movement of administrative categories off the main space to the Talk page after 15 months of no activity and no apparent harm? (I personally believe that the "consensus" to move the categories was an instance of "If 50,000 Frenchmen say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing" and analogous to the geocentric theory of the universe.) That is to say, no one else had taken on the task of mucking up the talk pages, why did you start to do it?

JimCubb (talk) 04:03, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi. For "living=no" you can find answers in Template_talk:WPBiography/Archive_3#Request_for_comments_-_living.3Dno and in User:Kingbotk. The result of the short discussion held was that "living=no" should be added, so everybody know that the parameter has been dealt. If the parameter was missing I would go and check if I am dealing with a blp. Kingbotk has been doing the job long before me.

For the other issues you can check discussion in here and in there. The main idea is that an article is complete without place of birth, date of birth, etc. This information just adds to the article.

I think the main question you have to ask is what are we going to do with Category:Year of birth unknown and Category:Year of death unknown! There are intended for use on discussion pages but I have the impression that I go and move them there I'll start an edit war. This is the reason I am not dealing with them yet. -- Magioladitis 06:33, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I have added living=yes to more pages than should have been necessary. I am actually pleased about the reason for living =no. Reducing confusion is always a good thing.

As with a number of issues I disagree that an article about a person is complete without some information about date and place of birth. If the information is not available the person is not sufficiently notable to have an article. If this were an additional criterion for notability thousands of one-sentence bios could be deletion, mainly professional sports people. (I have added the listas parameter to too many soccer players whose talk page was larger than their biography.)

Thank you for the information.

JimCubb (talk) 02:50, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Does your note mean that living=no and blp=no are no longer necessary? I still want to get groups of any kind out of WP Biog but persons should either be living or not, correct?

JimCubb (talk) 20:29, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Got it! Is some one working on the blp problem?

JimCubb (talk) 20:40, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Shouldn't the blp parameter perform the same as the living parameter? From a selfish standpoint I like the idea of typing fewer characters when I apply WPBS to a dead person.

JimCubb (talk) 20:47, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

It appears that, after a period of neglect, at least one person is working on the Bios without a living parameter. It also appears that new pages are being added as quickly as old ones are being removed. I wish a concerted effort go be applied to those pages as is being applied to the pages without a listas parameter.

JimCubb (talk) 21:03, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Isn't that another reason for not including groups of people in the project? Everytime a musician dies some poor editor will have to go through every group in which the musician played and check each group for surviving members to determine if the group is living or not. This could become a pain in the butt very quickly.

If have asked the admin who put the backlog tag on the listas problem category to do the same to the living problem category. It really helped with the listas problem. (I am trying to avoid thinking about how many pages that have a listas parameter have a wrong parameter. There are 457 pages after "Z".)

JimCubb (talk) 21:24, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

After I saw what happened after the backlog tag was put on the missing listas category it seemed like the smart thing to do. Once the missing listas and missing living categories are empty I will ad them to my list of pages to check as soon as I log in. Actually, since I never log out, I have the DEFAULTSORT comflict page bookmarked and start there. I then move to the "importance should be priority" category. Then I go to the missing listas category. I will catch the new missing listas and missing living pages when it becomes easy to do so. Then I will skimm the pages that have a listas parameter to look for the ones that are out of place. I know I will find pages like Ptolemy I Soter that had the listas parameter set to "Soter, Ptolemy I". I also know that when I find a series of such pages the change will have been made so long ago that the offending editor will not even remember making it. The editor will certainly not be willing to correct the errors. I have hit that brick wall too many times to assume acceptance of personal responsibility.

JimCubb (talk) 22:08, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Template:1911 talk

Hi, what's going on with Template:1911 talk? The deletion discussion outcome was to delete, but the Template is still there. Secondly, why is there nothing in the Template's edit History which indicates that there was ever a deletion template added to it? The last edit to the Template was back in January. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 01:00, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

The template will be deleted as soon as I orphaned it. -- Magioladitis (talk) 01:04, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Oh, thanks, I thought something wrong had happened. See, we newbies make newbie mistakes. Thanks for replying. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 01:05, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

No problem. The procedure I'll follow is the same: First ensure that for all talk pages with the 1911 talk template the corresponding article has the 1911, then remove the 1911 talk template from all talk pages and then delete it. The procedure will finish in the next 24 hours. -- Magioladitis (talk) 01:08, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Marissa Moore

Hello! Please reconsider as I have found a number of sources and have begun revising the article accordingly. Thanks! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 18:25, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Iran Nonproliferation Act of 2000

Hi. I just noticed that you speedy deleted this page back in October because you considered it to be "‎R3: Recent redirect from implausible typo, link, or misnomer". As implausible as you might think it to be, the Act does in fact exist. Check it out here. Please restore the page. Thanks.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 01:11, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi. I didn't delete the article, which by the way, still exists. I deleted a redirect that had quotes. Quotes should not be used that way. -- Magioladitis (talk) 01:31, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Oh. Good. Thanks.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 01:46, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Lifetime

My bad. I read about the template, but I guess I didn't finish reading the whole page. Thanks for letting me know. JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 14:44, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

No problem. This template is widely misused. Happy editing. You are doing great job with gnome edits. -- Magioladitis (talk) 14:52, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Cyclone3

Hello there, if I understand this correctly, You're the last in line of the Cyclone3 deletion process. If not, please hint me to someone who is :)

I'm a bit confused by the reasoning for the Cyclone3 article deletion. I'm not really persuaded that this framework is not notable. There's too many of CMS frameworks and systems in PHP on Wikipedia that are far less notable, whilst providing nothing special. Cyclone3 is as far as I know the only framework that is opensource, and joins together Perl and XUL to provide an expert solution for basically anything. From what I see, it's the second and last Perl-based system that's (well, was, atm) noted in Wikipedia. Is there any reason to NOT let people know, that there actually ARE systems that don't use PHP?

If there are any reasons other than "notability" for deletion, I'm not aware of them, the notability-lack is the only reason I've found. What can be done to undelete the article and put it back where it belongs? Thank you. --Deb00t (talk) 19:31, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi. Yes, I am the one who deleted. You found me. :) Well, the reason I deleted was that the AfD was open for 10 days, none wrote anything against the nomination, two editors said there are notability issues, they are many of CMS frameworks and systems in PHP and a small google search didn't give me anything notable. Moreover, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a reason to keep. Neither that 2-3 pages so it. So, what can we do now? a) I can restore the article in a subpage in your userspace, where you can edit it, improve it and after you have fond better references, you can reuploaded in the mainspace and see what happens. b) You can address to the Wikipedia:Deletion review and request undeletion. There more administrators can write their opinions. I'm sorry, but I can't just undelete an article that was deleted via AfD. I could do it if it was a PROD. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 20:11, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

TFD assistance

I need some help manipulating the Feb 12 log. I am added a couple of similar templates that should increase the volume of traffic on the discussion.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:41, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

1911 tag

Hi...just letting you know that I have finished adding the {{1911}} tag to all appropriate pages. --Eastlaw talk ⁄ contribs 22:35, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Grand Rapids, Michigan

Dear Magioladitis, please see my comments in the discussion page of that article. Thanks you. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 01:55, 15 February 2009 (UTC) Stan

Smackbot needs adjustment.

Edits like this one, where no date tag was added, IMHO, should be avoided. Smackbot is now forced to edit every single article. Can you adjust this in order Smackbot is not case sensitive? -- Magioladitis (talk) 00:58, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

"Date" is not a valid parameter name for the template. Rich Farmbrough, 15:19 16 February 2009 (UTC).

BD template substitutions

Your recent set of AWB-assisted substitutions of the BD template for DEFAULTSORT wasn't flawless. It seems to have snagged on a prior occurrence of the characters "BD" within an article, as evidenced by this edit. —ADavidB 10:35, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I noticed it. It's being fixed. -- Magioladitis (talk) 10:36, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Why aren't you substituting BD with Template:Lifetime instead of the categories? Several people, including myself, are making Lifetime-templates out of biographies with only DEFAULTSORT... lil2mas (talk) 21:01, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Check discussion in Template talk:Lifetime and write your opinion as well, please. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:54, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
I have now written my opinion on the issue. lil2mas (talk) 23:06, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

I was just curious as to why Yobot is subst'ing {{BD}}. Guettarda (talk) 16:03, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

There is a discussion in Template talk:Lifetime. -- Magioladitis (talk) 00:10, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
I have not read that discussion, but this should not be done as long as the template documentation reads: "Please, don't replace DEFAULTSORT, xxxx births, yyyy deaths with this template. There is no consensus for this action." __meco (talk) 22:22, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
I'm having to arrest myself for speeding here. I seem to have a reversed perception of what took place here. I still think it is ill-advised though to set a bot to do this. It does appear to be controversial as it effectively marginalizes the Lifetime template. __meco (talk) 22:33, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

AWB Page Maintenance/Cleanup

Thanks! :)

Reedy 01:24, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Smile!

Rules for bd/category living people

Hi, I sometimes see people sticking BD in instead of categories and then I see Yobot sticking in categories instead of BD. I'm very confused. Is this talked about somewhere? like what is the best thing? Alio The Fool 17:18, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

ok. I think that then all the bds should be changed to default sort and the bd thing deleted because theres no reason to keep it. Alio The Fool 17:35, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
It's still confusing to me because some people still are changing it to bd/lifetime. Alio The Fool 22:34, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
Well, they shouldn't. I tried to notify many of them. Changes to bd have dramatically dropped down after substitutions. (It's not even in the documentation so people are ignoring it). Lifetime is still high. Some people think they understand the policy. I had the same problem with people keep adding categories in mainspace while they should be doing it in talk pages (for example Category:Date of birth missing). -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:50, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
One person has already been notified. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:55, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Leonard_Zhakata&action=history Big problem. A lot of people doing it all over. Thats just one article that I nominated for deletion and someone screwed up the categories because they don't know the right categories to use and they're using Lifetime. Alio The Fool 00:33, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Since the specific editor added it in an article that didn't have any categories, they isn't a lot we can do. They should subst it but there is no consensus pro or against any method yet. People must not replace already existed categories. Ok, I now it's confusing but there was lack of will to reach a better consensus until now. Let me summarise it a bit:

  • People should not replace yob/yod categories with lifetime
  • In new articles use the method you like more (I think you sense the problem in this temporary decision). The methods are:
    • Directly add DEFAULTSORT and the categories
    • Add Lifetime using subst
    • Add Lifetime
  • BD has always to be substituted (no similar consensus for Lifetime yet). A bot is doing this job every 3-4 days.

-- Magioladitis (talk) 07:57, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Yobot "error"

I hesitate to call this a real error but Yobot just added the WPBio template to Talk:Haraldskær Woman when the article is not a bio. Just an FYI. – ukexpat (talk) 14:48, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. The tag was added because of the Category:500 BC deaths found on the article's page. This is the first false positive of this kind I ever encountered. -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:35, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Filmbio actor templates

Hi. In general, there is not an issue at all with combining WPBiography templates on talk pages, but very occasionally, there's a good reason why separate templates, such as musician and actor bios like Michael Jackson or James Brown. They are probably indisputedly biographies of top priority for WP Musician, but WP:ACTOR determines the top priority articles by consensus and is strictly limited to 100 articles. Neither of those two qualify as biographies of actors that are of top priority and at present, there is no other way to designate differing priority for them in a combined template. You likely won't find that very often, although it seems to creep up on the Jackson page a bit. Just wanted to let you know. Thanks. Wildhartlivie (talk) 08:58, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

William H. Mumler

What policy page are you basing that on? The {{lifetime}} template, intended for article space, allows for the unknown year of birth category... J Milburn (talk) 23:02, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Ok, good, thanks for the clarification. J Milburn (talk) 19:03, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Error

Just found an incorrect edit by this bot back in January. Can you reassure me that this was a one-off or could there be hundreds like this? Thanks, — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:45, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Back in January Yobot removed many deprecated templates. I cheched and the problem is only in Grocers talk. There were at about 40 occurrences of this template. I fixed the problem in many talk pages. Thanks. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:55, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Okay I am reassured :) Thanks, — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:58, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Baronets

You seem to be doing User_talk:Erik9bot#Baronets_2 ??? Kittybrewster 21:30, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

It is terrific. Should I delete the request from Erik9bot? Kittybrewster 21:41, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Yobot (talk · contribs)

I'm not sure what these changes actually did, but it's hidden all of the banner templates so that they're completely inaccessible to readers and editors. Can you help? — pd_THOR | =/\= | 04:50, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I am just using Kingbotk plugin. I don't know how that happened and it's the first time I encounter something like this. Better report the bug in User talk:Kingbotk/Plugin. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 18:25, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I reported the bug and I proposed a fix. My bot's edit didn't make things worse, it just didn't fix the template completely. Thanks for reporting -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:22, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Glitched again. — pd_THOR | =/\= | 19:05, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

The problem is caused by editors adding blp wrongfully. I proposed a fix in bith AWB and KingbotK plugin to deal with these problems in the future. Yobot is adding blp in WPBS and living=yes to Talk pages of living individuals. The reason we have both living=yes and blp=yes is discussed in the Talk page of the Wikiproject Biography. It was agreed that this is a way to a) verify that the article was really checked that it's referring to a living person and b) to avoid problem when WPBS is removed and the individual banners remain. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:12, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Yobot on FAs

Re this, I think that the WikiProject Biography details should most definitely not take precedence over the fact that an article is of Featured quality. Perhaps there's an argument for the BLP warnings appearing at the top, but there's no justification for the WikiProject banner taking precedence. --Dweller (talk) 12:10, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

For that matter, there's no argument for WP Biog taking precedence over the Cricket WikiProject either, especially as it's the latter that did the work to get the article to FA. --Dweller (talk) 12:11, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Kingbotk places automatically WPBiopgraphy on the top, mainly because of the blp warning and secondly for the listas parameter. -- Magioladitis (talk) 14:54, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

You need to take responsibility for your own edits. It is not sufficient to say "Kingbotk does it this way". And to direct people querying your edits to make a bug report about the AWB plugin is unbelievable! Each edit your bot makes must be accountable for otherwise the bot must be stopped. In this case I agree that the edits were not appropriate. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:11, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

What I meant is exactly this. WPBiography has to go on the top on the 99% of the cases and that's the reason the plugin does it. The bot has less than 0.01% false positives. (I have 2-3 reports in tenths of thousands of edits). This kind of mass edits helps bots, plugins, programs to get better. -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:17, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

The WP Biography header should be adapted to split the two parts. It's inappropriate for WP Biog to be above FA box. Please could you take this up. --Dweller (talk) 16:51, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
I'll report this in KingbotK. Is there any discussion/consensus for that? -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:54, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
So far, just my opinion. I posted at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Biography#Your_WikiProject_banner_on_FAs but I hardly expect overwhelming support in that forum! --Dweller (talk) 17:03, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Saw this posted at the Biography project. Is there an actual requirement for the BLP notice to go at the very top of a talk page, and is it necessary for the banner to go top for the |listas= parameter to work properly? I am not aware that either is the case, though to be fair I am also not aware of any formal requirement for the FA box to go above banners (though I agree that that's how it should be). The actual order in which banners are placed is trivial in the extreme, regardless of who did what and the perceived relevance of each project. PC78 (talk) 17:23, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I think it's time we form a WP:LAYOUT policy for talk pages as well. How can we start a centralised discussion? My talk page is not the perfect place for something like that. -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:32, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Yobot tagging redirects

Should Yobot be tagging redirects like this Talk:Julián de Guzmán?--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 16:48, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I am fixing this manually in every opportunity. This is caused because the article is not a redirect but the talk page is due to incomplete move or other reasons (in this instance the article was moved after the list was created). -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:51, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

In the future Yobot will automatically skip a page if it is a redirect. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:25, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Frances Lennon

Can you explain the reason for your recent addition to the Frances Lennon talk page regarding biographies of living persons, stating that "Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous" what exactly is it on that page that you feel is controversial, poorly sourced or potentially libel.User:greg78uk (talk) 21:14, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

This is a standard template added to the talk page of all living individuals to prevent the addition of "controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous". -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:41, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Happy Saint Patrick’s Day!

On behalf of the Wikipedia:Kindness Campaign, we just want to spread Wikipedia:WikiLove by wishing you a Happy Saint Patrick’s Day! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 16:13, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Claude Juste Alexandre Legrand duplicate article

Help! The recently created Claude Juste Alexandre Legrand article is a duplicate of an earlier Claude Legrand article. The picture in the new article is nice, but the older article has much more information. Some sort of merge is indicated. I am a frequent article writer but I'm not sure who to talk to or what needs to be done about this situation. Thanks. Djmaschek (talk) 01:34, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Consequent link?

Hi, I'm puzzled by this edit summary: "consequent link have to be avoided, if possible". Please would you explain here? - Fayenatic (talk) 21:09, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

I meant "one after the other" :S Manual of Style reads: "If possible, avoid placing two links next to each other in the text so they look like a single link, as in [[film]] [[actress]] (film actress). Consider rephrasing the sentence, omitting one of the links, or using a single more specific link instead." -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:29, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I get it now–"consequent" as in "consecutive" and "subsequent" at the same time! :-) Thanks, I hadn't read that guideline before, but it makes sense. - Fayenatic (talk) 10:42, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Moving cat from X to Talk:X, or just adding it to Talk:X?

In this edit, as for at least one other I've noticed, your bot said that it was m (Moving Category:Year of birth unknown from article to talk page, where it should be. Please read instructions. using AWB); however, there was no corresponding removal of the category from the article. This seems odd. -- Hoary (talk) 11:20, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

I am loading a list of about 300 articles and the bot is working in two phases. In the first it adds the category in the talk page of all the articles and in the second it's removing it from the article page. This is the easiest and faster way to do it when using AWB. -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:07, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

OK, but then you may wish to have its summary read something like m (Adding Category:Year of birth unknown (in article) to talk page, using AWB; will soon return to remove it from article). -- Hoary (talk) 12:52, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Yobot

I have blocked Yobot because of edits like this - it was removing the category from the talk page, despite saying it was moving the category to the talk page. Once this is fixed, the bot can be unblocked by any admin without further reference to me. BencherliteTalk 12:26, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Fixed. I forgot to switch to article pages for phase two. -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:30, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Fine, glad it's sorted. Regards, BencherliteTalk 12:33, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
This is my first block :( -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:34, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Apologies for breaking your clean record, but <offers small crumb of comfort> at least being blocked prevented the bot from making even more of a mess to be cleaned up later. (I hadn't spotted before blocking that the bot's userpage says to edit its talkpage to stop it running. However, the talkpage (to which I went first) redirects to yours!) BencherliteTalk 12:40, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
An edit to Yobot's talk page would alert AWB and the bot would stop immediately. But, it's ok, I am glad that you noticed the mistake so quickly and prevented me by doing double work to a batch of 500 articles. I'll write a more clear message to Yobot's page that people must edit the page even if it is a redirect. Thanks. -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:45, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
And the link in the box at the top could be edit the talk page, or something like that, to bypass the redirect. BencherliteTalk 12:53, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
On a vaguely related note... the edit summary for these edits is "Moving Category:Year of birth unknown from article to talk page, where it should be. Please read instructions. using AWB."
I've been seeing a lot of these on my watchlist, and the "please read instructions" bit is quite annoying. Most of these categories have been in articles for ages - long before the instructions were added in December - and it's a bit irritating to constantly see a message which seems to be telling people off for going against instructions that weren't there!
If you could rephrase this to something a little less blunt, it'd be great... Shimgray | talk | 14:18, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
I changed it to "...per instructions in category's talk page". Any better suggestions? -- Magioladitis (talk) 14:19, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
That sounds good, thanks. Sorry for the trouble, this is just me being a little touchy :-) Shimgray | talk | 14:40, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

cat: YD missing

Per [25]: if you are saying that these4 categories are for talk pages, then put them there, not just delete them here. - 7-bubёn >t 21:27, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

This is also a redirect you are talking about. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:31, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Adding biographical headers to fictional characters

Your robot seems to be adding biographical headers to fictional characters like Black Knight (comics) and Black Knight (Sir Percy), as well as a fictional location Avalon (Marvel Comics)‎. I doubt this is some new initiative and it might be worth checking on other recent edits. (Emperor (talk) 18:54, 28 March 2009 (UTC))

You are also adding the biography tag to castles, books, villages, swords, and forests. Please stop your bot to discuss this before it gets blocked. Thanks. -- zzuuzz (talk) 18:58, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
It has just added the biography banner to Cadbury Castle, Somerset & Chalice Well neither of which are people - something is going wrong.— Rod talk 19:09, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
OK. Yobot has stooped. Problem found Category:Arthurian characters is under Category:6th-century rulers. Yobot went into subcategories of Category:6th-century rulers. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:09, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for stopping. I was going to say, articles such as Dubris, Caledonian Forest, Bodmin Moor, and Battlefield (Doctor Who) would be typical of the problem. -- zzuuzz (talk) 19:13, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
I think that Arthurian legend is misplaced. I've been running to xx-century people since morning with no problems. I made a list with the errors and I'll start reverting immediately. Always remember to first stop bot by adding a message to its talk page before reporting. This reduces the errors produced. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:15, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
All errors were fixed. I apologise for the mistake. I still think the category is placed. It has to go under 6th century but not under 6th-century people. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:56, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
This edit was the source of the error. I removed the wrong subcategorisation. -- Magioladitis (talk) 20:53, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
A quick note that I've just removed the biographical header from the fictional character Amadis de Gaula - apparently, one of this batch which hadn't been reverted since. PWilkinson (talk) 17:43, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Category:10th-century rulers, People sorting

should not add articles by hand!

Well, I am adding them with HotCat, but I am open to better ideas. For example I have a seaveral requests out for BOT help on...

  1. Adding articles to categories from list(s), such as here but I have more ready to post most any time.
  2. Sorting articles to finish creating such lists here. (See also here.) This would be a big help most of all since I have already developed the non-date infomation for all these people.

Would you be able to help? --Carlaude (talk) 10:53, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

I apologise for the confusing edit summary. What you should do is to add the category to the articles using HotCat. Not add the articles in the category. Create a list of what is to be done and I may be able to help you. -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:21, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll work on that.
BTW-- my seeming list of the articles on the category page, was tempory and just articles I need to go back to for that project. --Carlaude (talk) 21:54, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
You can create a subpage under your User page. Read Wikipedia:Subpages for that purpose. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:06, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Felicia Tilman

This is a request for the revert of the profile of Felicia Tilman to a singular profile, rather than a merged profile. The character is very notable and popular within Desperate Housewives and therefore has a lot of background information which is vital for the character's own story, but impossible to fit in to a merged profile as it would appear too extensive. I therefore request that this change be made as the character aided a large amount of the plot and does hold great notability within the show.

It should also be noted that characters such as Danielle Katz had their own profiles. This is an example of singular profiles for characters who have both left the show {like Felicia Tilman}, and who have had a more smaller involvement in plot developments within the show. —Preceding unsigned comment added by EEMM1991 (talkcontribs) 22:45, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Please create a subpage in your userspace and try to establish notability by adding real world information, interviews, articles from newspapers, references from mass media, etc. As soon as you have an good version of the article you can put it in the place of the merge. The article is protected for a week to avoid edit warring. If you have any questions please don't hesitate to ask me. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:16, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Johann Peter Beaulieu

Thanks for taking care of the Claude Legrand situation. Unfortunately, Neddyseagoon has again duplicated an article I wrote, though this time my article Johann Peter Beaulieu was only around 3 weeks before the duplicate Johann von Beaulieu was created. This time the duplicate article has only 2 lines. I just added birth and death dates and places, from a new source, to the original article. I sent Neddyseagoon a (I hope) tactful note asking him to do a careful search before creating a new article. Who is responsible for deleting superfluous articles such as Johann von Beaulieu? Thank you. Djmaschek (talk) 04:46, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

I'll fix that. You can always read Help:Merging and moving pages. When you locate duplicate articles, it is recommended to add {{mergeto}} template or in the case is just an exact copy of the original one you can request deletion. This one is not the case. I think we can just redirect it to the article you created noting that this is an alternative spelling of the same person. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:06, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Yobot tagging architecture as biography

I noticed that your bot tagged Hassan Tower, Chellah, Torre del Oro, and Giralda as biography pages when they are buildings, not people.--Bkwillwm (talk) 16:42, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for reporting. The articles are under Category:Almohad dynasty which turns out that contains not only biographies. I fixed the rest. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 17:23, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

your AWB bug

Hi, I need an answer from you to be able to resolve your AWB bug. Thanks Rjwilmsi 20:30, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Yobot and living= params

Yobot is having a hard time handling the living= parameter at Talk:Del Martin and Phyllis Lyon (edit | article | history | links | watch | logs) as the article is about two people, one deceased and one living. I know there aren't a whole lot of articles about multiple people, so I'm not surprised the bot is confused, but I have a mini heart attack every time, thinking poor Phyllis must have passed on. I thought of adding a {{nobots}} tag, but I don't see Yobot in Category:Wikipedia bots which are exclusion compliant, so I suspect that wouldn't have any effect. Can you help? Maralia (talk) 17:20, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

OK. No problem. I'll add the article in my "false positives" list. It's only the second article with this problem. Thanks for reporting. -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:50, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for handling this so quickly :) Maralia (talk) 17:55, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
I just undid several of your automated edits, and I'm letting you know in case you haven't watchlisted them. cygnis insignis 17:27, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. Yobot should not enter Category:Robert Brown (botanist). I made a check to all the subategories of Category:18th-century birth but it seems I missed that one. -- Magioladitis (talk) 18:20, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
You did it again. If it helps, I expect any author's category would contain just one applicable article. Regards, cygnis insignis 18:05, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
I think I found the source of the problem this time. This is the only category contained in year and death categories. The article should be there and not the whole category itself. I apologise from my error once more. I hope I won't repeat it. -- Magioladitis (talk) 18:22, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

The WikiProject Greece April 2009 newsletter

The April 2009 issue of the WikiProject Greece newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.--Yannismarou (talk) 02:20, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Yobot error

Seems that Yobot made an error here, where it moved the BLP parameter to the result of a move request from over a year ago. A bit confusing there. — Σxplicit 22:05, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Weird indeed. I reported it in User talk:Kingbotk/Plugin. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:15, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Christian saint & martyr categories

Per your offer, I have created a list of all the updates to the Christian saint & martyr categories. Can you get a bot to add & remove the listed articles from the particular categories.
They are at User:Carlaude/Notes#List C
Let me know if there is any trouble. If a category cannot be found to be removed it is probally because I already removed it while compling the list, etc.--Carlaude (talk) 05:56, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Great job. I am on it but. I already filled out an official request to get approval. Check Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Yobot 7. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:03, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Cool.
If and when you can do this soon (in less than 4 days) I can create the few categories that are not already created. Or I can just create those categories afterward. --Carlaude (talk) 17:43, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
You might want to express your opinion in Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Yobot 7 and explain some things about the categorisation. For example, how did you create the list, why this is important, etc. You are more expert than I am. -- Magioladitis (talk)
Awesome job. You are very deserving your new Wikipedia Bot Builder Award. --Carlaude (talk) 06:55, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
I am preparing some more category lists I hope you can help with once they are ready.--Carlaude (talk) 06:55, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
Just tell when they are ready and remember to ring a bell to the corresponding Wikiproject so people are aware of what you are planning to do. -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:09, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
Heads up! What you appear to be trying to do is move Category:Religious organizations established in the 14th century and Category:Religious organizations established in the 13th century to Category:Christian monasteries established in the 13th century (for example). This does not seem to have worked for London Charterhouse or Order of Poor Ladies‎. The second, as you can see are nuns, so not in a monastery in any case. There may be others. HTH Kbthompson (talk) 00:01, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
What you may not know a monastery is a place for monastics of either gender, whether monks or nuns. The Order of Poor Ladies‎ however, is not a monastery a different reason; it is a Religious order that can be made up of, for example, many monasteries. --Carlaude (talk) 03:35, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Yobot tagging living people as dead

Yobot appears to be tagging living people as dead. Examples: [26][27] Rami R 15:57, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Fixed this two. It seems that there Israeli journalists are incorrectly subcategorired somehow. I am looking it. The errors produced should not be that many since I was now tagging articles that were not tagged before in the subcategories of Category:Old Testament people. If you can help locating the problem, I would be thankful. -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:06, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
another example, this one isn't a journalist. Also note that the second example isn't Israeli, but rather Syrian. Doesn't the bot produce some sort of subcategory trace log? Rami R 18:20, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
I fixed everything (hopefully) by adding cate:Living people and living=yes, where appropriate. I have a log in the bot's page in which category it was running in which day, to help easy tracing. The rest can be done by the contributions page. The person above is reported as Israeli. -- Magioladitis (talk) 18:32, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
But is there a trace of how the bot reached Imanuel Rosen from Category:Old Testament people? Rami R 18:48, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
No, this is a mystery for me right now. I am now looking all today's edits that added "living=no" to talk pages, one-by-one. -- Magioladitis (talk) 18:57, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
It seems the list got mixed with another list, which I don't know where it came from. I apologise for the confusion. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:29, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
Problem is located between 15:40 and 15:51 today. I'll fix the rest later. -- Magioladitis (talk) 20:43, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
Fixed everything. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:07, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Musicalization of Fiction / Intermediality

Hiya,

I'm new to Wikipedia and tried to get a project going in University in which the assignment was to write a wikipedia article. The two articles which have come out of that were both deleted and I would just like to inquire as to what we may have done wrong.

The articles in question are: "Musicalization of Fiction" and "Intermediality"

Cheers! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Twotwentyseven (talkcontribs) 14:05, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

An award

  The Wikipedia Bot Builder Award
For improving the categorization of hundreds of early Christian historical figures (along with many other helpful tasks), I award you this token of appreciation. – Quadell (talk) 20:32, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Magioladitis. You have new messages at Drilnoth's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Drilnoth (TCL) 21:52, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Re: Felicia Tilman

Hello, Magioladitis. You have new messages at Lord Opeth's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Talk:Cormoran

Hi, could you tell me why you deleted Talk:Cormoran please? DuncanHill (talk) 21:01, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Hello? DuncanHill (talk) 22:11, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

I created this page by accident by adding falsely a banner of the Wikiproject biography, so I deleted it. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:27, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

OK, thanks - I couldn't remember if there had been anything on it before. There are a couple of Wikiproject banners which probably should be on it, that's why I thought it might have been a slip. DuncanHill (talk) 22:32, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

April Wine, not a person

Article April Wine - This article frequently gets tagged (usually by bots) in a manner that suggests "April Wine" is a living person, rather than a GROUP of living people. I never quite understand its purpose, but describing a group of people as a "person" just seems very incorrect to me. Is there a way to mark this article in such a way that bots understand that the name "April Wine" refers to a rock group, and not an individual? (i.e. it's defaultsort is equal to its natural default name) -- WikHead (talk) 22:55, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

April Wine is a musical group. So it's under the scope of Wikiproject biography which deal with individuals and groups of them. Since at least one member of the group is alive the talk page has to be tagged with a banner warning editors to respect the policy on biographies of living persons. This is standard procedure of Wikipedia for living persons. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:02, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Now I understand what you meant. I resolved the problem with "listas", caused by other editors' falsely semi-automatic edits. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:04, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for clearing that up for me :). I guess that means that I can safely delete the reply message I was just about to send you, concerning the listas issue, lol. Thanks again, and have yourself a pleasant day -- WikHead (talk) 23:33, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Musicalization of Fiction / Intermediality

Hiya,

I'm new to Wikipedia and tried to get a project going in University in which the assignment was to write a wikipedia article. The two articles which have come out of that were both deleted and I would just like to inquire as to what we may have done wrong.

The articles in question are: "Musicalization of Fiction" and "Intermediality"

Thanx.

Twotwentyseven (talk) 12:17, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Twotwentyseven-- Maybe you should say something about why you want to create these articles-- that Wikipedia does not seem to need-- rather than articles Wikipedia does need. --Carlaude (talk) 19:27, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Both articles were deleted via prod method. I can recover them if asked and give them a chance to improve or go though a proper AfD. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:29, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Minor Yobot bug

Hello! In

this edit, Yobot added {{WPBiography}} to the talk page of a disambiguation page. It obviously was intended for Talk:Sam Lloyd, which redirected to Talk:Sam Lloyd (disambiguation) because the disambiguation page formerly occupied the title Sam Lloyd. (This was my fault for neglecting to remove the talk page redirect when I moved the pages.)

As this sort of situation is fairly common, it would be helpful if Yobot's code were modified to notice when an article's talk page redirects elsewhere, in which case it should check whether that talk page corresponds to another existent (non-redirect) page. (If so, it should replace the redirect with a new talk page instead of tagging the talk page to which the redirect leads.)

Thanks! —David Levy 01:17, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for reporting! To what I have seen so far, this situation is not common. I may have encountered a very few articles among thousands with the same problem and usually I was able to fix them manually. I 'll try to implement your idea. On the other hand keep in mind that Dab pages, can be tagged with Wpbiography. 4,000+ dab pages are tagged with WPBiography banner. What I am doing so far is to have a list with Dab pages that living is set (in 99% of the cases it shouldn't) and check each page manually. Thanks again. -- 04:17, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your prompt response!
Another possible scenario is one in which an article titled Person's Name is moved to Person's Name (profession) to make room for the article of a more notable person with the same name. Unless and until a new talk page is created at Talk:Person's Name (or other manual intervention occurs}, it will redirect to Talk:Person's Name (profession). This means that when Yobot attempts to tag the talk page for the article Person's Name, it will instead tag the talk page for the article Person's Name (profession), and the resultant tag will contain no obviously incorrect parameter through which to spot it. The modification suggested above would prevent this (however uncommon it may be), and I appreciate your efforts to implement it.
Thanks again! —David Levy 05:18, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Till now I have two safelocks: The talk page is not edited if the article doesn't exist and the talk page is not edited if it's a redirect. Yobot doesn't follow redirects as well to minimise problems caused by incomplete moves. That's why I say the case above is a rare one. I 'll try to think of something. -- Magioladitis (talk) 10:16, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Oh, I may have misunderstood the situation; I was under the impression that Yobot followed the redirect from Talk:Sam Lloyd to Talk:Sam Lloyd (disambiguation). Was I mistaken? —David Levy 12:19, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Oh, you are right. I disactivated the skip yesterday by accident. The whole discussion above is nonsense then. Found and fixed. I though the whole discussion for a page being a redirect itself, having yob/yod categories and a talk page as well! (That would be really rare!) Thanks!!! -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:34, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Thank you! —David Levy 12:49, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Rollback

I accidentally undid your edit to User talk:Jennavecia, but reverted my mistake straight away. Sorry about that and happy editing. Nev1 (talk) 14:07, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Christian organizations by century established at User:Carlaude/Notes#List A

I have created lists of Christian organizations by century at User:Carlaude/Notes#List A. They are currently listed under Religious organizations by century of establishment or subCategories there-of.
Can your bot to add & remove the listed articles from the particular categories requested? Let me know if there is any trouble. If and when you can do this soon (in less than 4 days) I can create the categories that are not already created. Or you can or I can just create those categories afterward.
I will ring in at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Christianity#Categorising Christian organizations by century in a few minutes. I will also handle the very short lists there at List A by hand once I make the needed categories. Thank you. --Carlaude (talk) 06:39, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I can help you with this as soon as you have a confirmation from the Project. After that you have to create the categories by hand. I think it's a better idea to wait so some other editors take a look at it than starting immediately. Leave it for a day of two. -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:00, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Sure.--Carlaude (talk) 08:47, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Unless you think there is something else to wait for, I will begin creating all the categories for this, etc, soon. --Carlaude (talk) 03:10, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I have made these and some of these this evening. Any idea if this is a suitable order to fill the categories in... so I am not to far ahead of you. --Carlaude (talk) 09:03, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
It looks ok to me. We can start filling them with articles I think. Only note that I ll available for 2 more days and then in a week again. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:10, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Yes, go ahead.
I have only created some categories for them but do anything you can when you are ready.--Carlaude (talk) 09:45, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
BTW-- needed to change [[:Category:Christian church congregations established in the 00th century]] to [[:Category:Church buildings established in the 00th century]] --Carlaude (talk) 17:35, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

How is it going? It looks like you have not had a chance to do any yet.
Due to questions raised at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 May 4, I have put all the monastery articles in one palce, User:Carlaude/Notes2#List A, and I am asking you will do them next/first. Questions?

church disambig relisting

What on earth is going on, there is discussion at the previous TfD for the church disambig template deletion proposal, and i was just commenting too, and then the entire thread gets deleted by you. I undid your deletion. Generally, the consensus is Keep, by my interpretation. I am not active at TfD usually so i don't know what practice usually is, but it seems unhelpful to delete an open thread and to "relist" by copying it to a new TfD date not on the watchlist of people involved. I see now that you did that, copying all but my new comment there, which strips away the edit history, too. I don't see what "relisting" has to offer. There has been adequate discussion and in my view the closing action should be Keep. What on earth does one have to do to defend a decent template, is it forever subject to relisting? What on earth is your opinion about the template. It just seems lame for u to relist it and prolong something that has been well enough concluded, especially without your own consideration of what has been said. Anyhow, i did Undo your deletion from the previous location. Please discuss, or i will proceed to close the previous discussion as Keep and delete your relisting. doncram (talk) 01:01, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Yobot - Herbie

On March 14, Yobot added Herbie, an article about a fictional automobile, to WP:BIOGRAPHY. Just thought you should know. Rklear (talk) 03:11, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

  • Looking further, it doesn't appear to be a Yobot problem. Someone else added year of birth and Living people categories to the article. Sorry for the interruption. Rklear (talk) 03:22, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

ChrisO hands out illegal warning

I just got a warning from ChrisO for 'Original Research.' I was editing the list in the Macedonia Name Dispute page and I had just removed a reference used fort he Dutch position as it was a dead link. Then I noticed the two GOVT references on this page: [[28]] both point to Denmark using FYROM or FYR Macedonia yet Denmark was in the list under 'List of countries to be sorted.' I moved Denmark to countries which use FYROM, ChrisO immediately reverted stating you need a source that states how Denmark uses the name, not infer it yourself from a random document. I then informed him, the 'random document were two Danish Govt Pages that were already there as references concerning Denmark and reverted. ChrisO then proceeded to revert and dish me out with an 'Original Research Warning.' This time he changed his story and stated: you are inferring Denmark's position, but the documents you cite do not say anything about whether Denmark recognises the constitutional name or not. This is interesting. Most of the list is made up of Embassy pages using the word Macedonia, and immediately they are on the list, under countries who recognise the Republic of Macedonia. I wonder how many of those editors received warnings from ChrisO? I am going to make this action of ChrisO stick as his behaviour in general has downgraded the neutrality Administrators are supposed to have. Any help on how to make him come to account for this action would be most appreciated. He has put the case down here:[[29]] Reaper7 (talk) 13:58, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

talk

Did you read my comments above?--Carlaude (talk) 19:07, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi. I am sorry I am very busy this week. I can't do anything to help your until weekend. I was planning to write you a message about that. I was on wikipedia only for some minutes between breaks and there is no time for serious work. -- Magioladitis (talk) 06:59, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Are still able to help me with this?
Eight categories I created for this project were deleted today as "C1: Empty category". --Carlaude (talk) 16:42, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for all your work here. I have now created all the User:Carlaude/Notes and User:Carlaude/Notes2 project categories except these 3 below.

I will create them again next week (if you do not restore them before) when you expect to have more time. Do not forget all the Christian monasteries categories are waiting at User:Carlaude/Notes2. Let me know if I can help in any other way. --Carlaude (talk) 06:45, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

I would suggest that you add manually (using HotCat) categories in list with less than 10 items. There is not worth loading them in AWB. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:26, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Sure. I will empty those as soon as I am able. --Carlaude (talk) 11:37, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Done. --Carlaude talk 18:39, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Re: Expand

Hello, Magioladitis. You have new messages at Rehman Abubakr's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Neo-Stalinism

I appreciate the feedback at Talk:Neo-Stalinism. I would consider it a keep-worthy article even if in bad form now, but if you'd like to weight in on deleting or keeping Category:Neo-Stalinism and Category:Neo-Stalinist organisations, they're up for discussion here.

Best, PasswordUsername (talk) 20:51, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Biophys' links

Magioladitis, would you mind taking a look at the revision to Neo-Stalinism? I removed three of Biophys' "references" for the definition of Stalinism on my last edit – (1) and the World Socialist Website (2) don't actually use the term, so we can't use them as sources for defining it. The Jamestown article you added is a dead link (it actually links to something else --(3)) – because these don't even mention the word "neo-Stalinism." (How can they possibly be used as sources for defining it?) I gave an edit summary and explained on the talk page, but he reverted back and warned me that I had already made three revisions... I'd really appreciate it if you could step in, because this false impression of these corraborating sources could actually be used in the category dispute. PasswordUsername (talk) 01:31, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

I removed these refs some time ago [30]. There are plenty of others which use the term in a certain sense. No rush. Let's look at sources and fix it.Biophys (talk) 01:48, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Desperate Housewives characters

Hey there!! I would like to know your opinion about this project I have regarding the character pages on Desperate Housewives. I think that the current list of characters is really long and it is a mess, especially with the lots of redirects and the repeated section names (Immediate family, Season 1 introduced acquaintances, etc.) As the series is not completed yet, new information is being added not only to the current articles but also to the sections in the list of characters. I have also proposed to merge characters like Paul and Zach Young and Betty Applewhite to the list. All of this will eventually get it larger and unreadable.

My proposal is to create 5 pages under the name of "Acquaintances of (the housewife's name)", namely Susan, Lynette, Bree, Gabrielle and Edie. I suggest this as the Wikipage on Notability states that minor characters should be sorted in minor characters' lists. This 5 pages as well as the current list of characters would get a section per character (similar to Characters of Final Fantasy VIII). For this, I also propose to merge more articles of characters that were important only in one season or that are secondary. In my opinion, only Susan, Lynette, Bree, Gabrielle, Edie, Mary Alice, Mike, Carlos, Tom, Orson, Katherine, Andrew, Julie and McCluskey would keep an individual article, the rest (Rex, Danielle, Dave, Betty, Paul, etc.) would be sorted into the lists of acquaintances or into the list. The sum of individual articles and lists of acquaintances plus the list of characters is 20 Desperate Housewives characters related pages.

Nonetheless, I would make several drafts in my user subpages to give your a more clear idea of how this may look like. Greetings! --LoЯd ۞pεth 05:26, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Template:Heroes

Hi, I noticed you removed the pic from the template, and your comment was "pics in templates?" I'm somewhat confused by this comment, since the template has a parameter specifically for images. just64helpin (talk) 13:46, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

I think it's about WP:ICONDECORATION, or not? -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:06, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Deletion...?

Sorry if this is a dumb question, but if you are an administrator, why are you tagging things for speedy deletion? Why not just delete them if you think they meet the criteria? As an aside, I don't see anything about Diane Yatauro that meets speedy criteria. Just the fact that it was created by someone associated with her doesn't seem like an obvious deletion to me. --Laser brain (talk) 22:17, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

The article was deleted 3 times and speedily recreated with the same content by the same editor who created it at the very first time and look self-referenced. Still, since I am not 100% that has to be deleted and a second opinion of another administrator can solve this. Never delete if you are not 100% sure. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:38, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Gotcha. I was just making sure there isn't a rule I missed somewhere. I'm a fairly new admin. Anyway, my opinion is that it's not eligible for speedy. --Laser brain (talk) 22:48, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
OK. Then you can do one of your first administrator actions by declining my speedy tag. :) As a general rule I am not speedy deleting anything if it hasn't been tagged first unless it's a newly created article. This one is not, that's why I preferred this method. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:56, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Nom me?

Hi Magioladitis,

You're an administrator that I feel I have had a good amount of interaction with, so I'm wondering if you would be comfortable nominating me for adminship. I hope that you view our interactions as positive, even despite our current conversation about DefaultsortBot. It's been almost three months since my last RfA, and I feel I've racked up a good amount of knowledge and experience in that time (hopefully I've addressed most of the concerns that the opposers at my last RfA brought up). If you are/aren't comfortable and/or close to it, I'd be happy to answer whatever questions you have, and accept any feedback you're willing to give. I'm looking forward to what you have to say. Thanks, Matt (talk) 04:01, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! :-) I'll warn you, there haven't been a whole lot of articles that I've contributed significantly to -- about the only one that comes to mind is MG Wallace F. Randolph. And it's mainly because I feel that I suck at writing articles, otherwise I would. Matt (talk) 07:49, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
Magio -- can you resend the email? I think my ISP is set to block Wikipedia emails. I just changed and confirmed a new email address in my preferences. Thanks, Matt (talk) 01:13, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Will you please tell Michu1945 to stop putting birthdates on the Edie Britt page?

Will you please tell Michu1945 to stop putting birthdates on the Edie Britt page? If he does that one more time, I'm gonna be very, very ticked off. AdamDeanHall (talk) 22:42, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

BLP

I am aware of what BLP stands for and admit I made a mistake, hardly unexpected given the number of articles I've been tagging so that we can deal with the obscene number of completely unsourced articles about football (and living footballers). At least the article is (properly) tagged as unsourced now. King of the North East 22:12, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

No problem! I just gave you some heads up. Keep the good work! -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:19, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Professor Asaduzzaman is dead

Professor Asaduzzaman died on 28 March 2008.[1]

The change by yobot must be considered as vandalism.----Cool BD (talk) 03:41, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "Prof Asaduzzaman passes away". The daily Star. 2008-03-29. Retrieved 2009-06-01. Check date values in: |date= (help)

hey

Hey Magioladitis, I think I owe you an apology here. I'm sorry for getting so uppity and all. To be honest, I wasn't expecting all the other comments (not that I didn't appreciate the support), but I do apologize for being so precious about my work and reputation here. Hopefully we're are on good terms, and please don't hesitate to mention my mistakes again. I make a ton of em. But, if I wasn't making mistakes, I wouldn't be trying very hard ... lol. Hey .. you have a good one. Sorry our first meeting was so awkward, but I hope we're friends now. ;)? — Ched :  ?  03:24, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Dimitris Melissanidis

You referred to a "better version" of an article in this edit. However, if you look carefully you'll see that in that BLP most of the information is not found in the source which is given. Moreover, the name is misspelled--the spelling in English is given in the Forbes reference in the version of the article I restored. Look through the history and you'll see a laundry list of IPs adding unverified information to the article. Rather than redirecting to the original misspelling in an article in direct violation of WP:BLP, you could have considered issuing a block or two or protection for the article. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 21:33, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

  • I know, but the English sources spell it "Dimitris," so there should have been no reason for that IP to re-redirect. More troubling, however, is the constant reinsertion of unverified material, for which references are given (well, one references, given two or three different ways) that obviously do not verify the added statements. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 21:40, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
    • "Take one and improve it. Take the other one and redirect to the other"--that's what I've been trying to do. Drmies (talk) 21:41, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I don't know if you care much for AfD discussions, but I saw one that needs some Greek help: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Παπανικολάου Κωνσταντίνος. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 00:35, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Harry Wainwright

It's no big deal, but Yobot keeps tagging him as "alive". --Old Moonraker (talk) 05:14, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

This is expected, because someone used Lifetime completely wrong [31]. Found and fixed. -- Magioladitis (talk) 06:10, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks.--Old Moonraker (talk) 07:25, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Barry Wood (football)

. . . is dead. Since 1971, as stated in article. Yobot disagreed.[32] This is my first encounter with Yobot Task 9 making such a change; to forestall future efforts at resurrection, do I need to do anything other than reverting this? Thank you,--Arxiloxos (talk) 05:47, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

The list was loaded 2 days ago with 30,000 articles. This happened after the list was loaded. Reverting does the job and there will be no "resurrection" unless someone readds category:Living people. This problems appeared mainly last two-three weeks because we have many editors categorising people and sometimes are a bit hasty. -- Magioladitis (talk) 06:20, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
OK, I just wanted to make sure I wasn't doing something wrong. Thanks very much for the explanation. Best,--Arxiloxos (talk) 06:30, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Usually every 8 hours I am checking the articles that changed from no to yes. As you may see in Special:Contributions/Magioladitis there were some cases which were tagged wrongly and I corrected, but there were not many really for the size of the list loaded. -- Magioladitis (talk) 06:41, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Yes, before I wrote you, I skimmed the last 1500 or so Yobot edits for no-->yes changes, and found that it was exactly as you say, virtually all of them were correct--in fact, I found only one other apparently erroneous change in 3 pages of edits. Which is why I thought maybe I had an errant tag in the article, or something else that I needed to fix, which wouldn't have been surprising since I've just done a rather extensive expansion of this former stub. Every 8 hours, eh? Thanks for standing guard! --Arxiloxos (talk) 07:14, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Yobot

Magioladitis,

Anomie and I have left messages on Yobot's talk page. We've noticed that it's going through removing "|nested=yes" from a bunch of pages, and while I personally don't have any objections to it, we can't find that it's been approved for that task. Can you clarify that for us? Thanks, Matt (talk) 21:02, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

I already answered to to Anomie's talk page immediately when I saw the message to my talk page. It was a mistake. I had two AWB's running and I thought I closed this one and obviously I forgot. I am not planning to run through any templates and remove nested. I just wanted to make some test edits (less than 50) to gather more information about a bug I reported in WP:AWB/BUGS. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:06, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Ah, ok. I didn't think to check Anomie's talk page. Matt (talk) 21:40, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Date of death unknown

My mistake, thanks. Though I would like to note that this is rather inappropriate use of rollback. Regards, –Juliancolton | Talk 18:51, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

reminder

Are still able to help me with this? User:Carlaude/Notes
There are about 1500 changes I hope you can work on. --Carlaude talk 06:37, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks--Carlaude talk 08:00, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

RE: Categories in talk pages

Okay, I've read it. Wow, we Wikipedians can argue endlessly about nothing! The discussions, esp. in the CfD... yeah. I'll just be applying consensus on this one; I've no interest in debating it. Thanks for the heads up. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 13:19, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

eyes

Want to have a glance at Karl Kroeger tone of lead (past tense), and dob suggest no longer living. I looked at bio link, didn't see anything .. added the year of death unknown, but didn't add the Poss. live one. thx. — Ched :  ?  17:05, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

more

Is there a cut off point or points that we go from Living people, to Possibly living people, to Year of death unknown? 1910's .. 1920's .. etc.

I think I get the distinction between unknown and missing (it may be known, but not listed out of privacy per BLP). Let me know if I've got the wrong ideas here. — Ched :  ?  17:29, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

I would put anyone under 110 years old in Possible Living people, anyone that lived after the 17th-century as year of death missing and ancient people as year of death unknown. Missing can be because the person who adds the information doesn't know it, we don't have sources now but probably there are, it's hidden due to privacy etc. Unknown means that it's unlikely to obtain this information. Btw: You are going great job! -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:38, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

eyes 4 BLP

Loreen Rice Lucas. Want to check my edits to this one (including talk page). I included the listas, I put dob unknown due to 1916 era. Also, is it proper to have both Poss AND Living people. I'll check article again later to see if you tweaked as I know you're busy often. Thx ;) — Ched :  ?  18:32, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

  • Also: in re-reading the relevant cat descriptions I'm still not clear on something. I'm running into a lot of stubs that have no info on birth. When I add "Year of birth missing (living people)" to the article page - is it also appropriate to add "Date of birth missing (living people)" to the talk page? OR .. does the "Year" imply the "Date" by its inclusion? — Ched :  ?  19:09, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Poss Living people and Living people are mutually excluded categories.
  • Add DOB/DOD unknown/missing in talk page only if you think it's important that this articles has it.
  • Add YOB in article page and DOB in talk page if everything is missing and the latter is important.

-- Magioladitis (talk) 10:56, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Spelling error in Yobot's edit summaries

Diff. Category:Licing people is quite the typo; fortunately, it adds Category:Living people just fine. — Σxplicit 22:50, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

I noticed and corrected. Thanks for reporting. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:52, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Protected redirect

Hey there!! I see that Preston and Porter Scavo is a protected link that redirects to the list of DH characters. I wonder if you could please fix the link and redirect it to Acquaintances of Lynette Scavo#Preston and Porter Scavo. Thanks!! --LoЯd ۞pεth 19:40, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Done. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:43, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Adding living to articles on dead people

Re this edit by User:Yobot. The article subject is a deceased musician, not a group with at least one living member; I removed the living=yes and blp params. -- JHunterJ (talk) 16:13, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for reporting and fixing. -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:58, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Could you please help us so that we don't violate the three-revert rule?

User_talk:68.73.93.130 and I are in an editing war over WCIU-TV. Could you please resolve this so that we don't violate the three-revert rule? Neither one of us owns this page, anyway. AdamDeanHall (talk) 22:54, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Category:Possible cut-and-paste moves

Hi Magio,

I'm going to stop DefaultsortBot from adding this category to any more articles, and I'm going to go through with AWB and detag all the articles that it's done, as I now have a better system -- see User:Mikaey/Possible cut-and-paste moves. Thanks, Matt (talk) 08:39, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Re:WP Biography

Hello, Magioladitis. You have new messages at Tinucherian's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

-- Tinu Cherian - 04:51, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Historical Incidents vs. Biographies

A few pages that have been tagged by Yobot as being biographies are historical incidents rather than biographies. The two that I most recently found are 2006 Harris County, Texas hate crime assault & 2009 Napier shootings. While they may contain biographical sections they are not biographies but stories of historical incidents.

Fortunately, Yobot does not add a listas parameter to the project banner and all the articles that Yobot tags end up in Category:Biography articles without listas parameter a category I am trying to de-populate. I am deleting the banners where they are inappropriate.

JimCubb (talk) 20:38, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

listas

Hey Magioladitis, hope you're doing well today. When you get a chance, would you check Talk:Mao Gao-wen to see if I got the listas right. I'm never sure with names that aren't Americanish. Especially hyphenated ones. Thanks. Cheers. ;) — Ched :  ?  18:59, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

If it were me (sorry for responding to this one Magio), I think I would have done "Mao, Gao-wen". I think most Chinese names fall into the "surname given-name" format. Matt (talk) 19:09, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
P.S., congrats on your RfA. Matt (talk) 19:10, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Re

Hi Magioladitis. I was wondering why Yobot keeps adding the {{WPBiography}} to Talk:Re. Thanks. DH85868993 (talk) 15:03, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Hm... it seems to be a bug in AWB. I am 100% I loaded Talk:Re: and not Talk:Re. I reported this bug. Thanks. -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:00, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Yobot replacing lifetime for no benefit

Why did Yobot replace {{lifetime}} with its constituant parts here, here and here? Mark Hurd (talk) 15:43, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

I've been adding Category:Living people in all articles Wikipedia:Uncategorized biographies of living people which don't contain the string "Living people". Next time I'll be more careful. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 17:08, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
In the last two cases Lifeitme as misplaced as well. It should be under the categories. -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:25, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
I agree with you, but that does not have consensus. Mark Hurd (talk) 17:34, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
As I just wrote at Template_talk:Lifetime#Placement while I was resolving the conflicts in the pages that populated Category:Pages with DEFAULTSORT conflicts I did some checking regarding the placement of the {{DEFAULTSORT}}. I have read that the sort value, the final parameter, in the {{lifetime}} template works the same way as {{DEFAULTSORT}}
Any category tag that is above the template is sorted according to the page name or according to the pipe within the category tag if there was one. A pipe in a tag below the {{DEFAULTSORT}} does not create a DEFAULTSORT conflict. (Icelanders use this to good advantage.)
My observations may be faulty, your results may differ, but I do not think so.
JimCubb (talk) 20:13, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the comments on the subject. I am following the discussion in Template talk:Lifetime. -- Magioladitis (talk) 20:51, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Could you please explain further...

Could you please explain how Talk:Duane M. Grubb came to be deleted? I see you recorded WP:CSD#G6. It is on my watchlist. I don't remember why. Did I start this article? If so, can you let me know your concerns?

Thanks! Geo Swan (talk) 01:26, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi. The redirect is still there. You created the article and now it's a redirect which I didn't delete. I deleted the talk page because the all three edits on it were automated tagging in MILHIST/WPBIO so there was no valuable edit history and the talk page was only confusing. -- Magioladitis (talk) 06:02, 28 June 2009 (UTC)


Could you please explain further...

Could you please explain how Talk:Duane M. Grubb came to be deleted? I see you recorded WP:CSD#G6. It is on my watchlist. I don't remember why. Did I start this article? If so, can you let me know your concerns?

Thanks! Geo Swan (talk) 01:26, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi. The redirect is still there. You created the article and now it's a redirect which I didn't delete. I deleted the talk page because the all three edits on it were automated tagging in MILHIST/WPBIO so there was no valuable edit history and the talk page was only confusing. -- Magioladitis (talk) 06:02, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

BLP

Thanks for your kind comment and the info on the BLP tag; I wasn't sure if I should leave it or not; I defaulted to keeping it in case someone needed it for another reason. In the future I will just delete it if the person is no longer living. It's an interesting project to help clean up; a lot of non-living people are on the list, tho; I wonder why. Cheers, --FeanorStar7 (talk) 09:18, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

AWB Plugin

You back yet? Reedy 17:57, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Gotcha!

Re: your revert - got it! I should have looked more closely at the tables - Joe Higgens and the SP weren't represented in the Parliament prior to the election, and so weren't part of the EUL-NGL. I'm glad I described your first edit as WP:AGF, or I'd be really embarrassed right now ;-)

Cheers, TFOWRThis flag once was red 18:58, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

It's not your fault. Until the groups are formed the tables are really confusing. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:46, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Merging Andrew Dornenburg and Karen Page

Hello, Magioladitis … The more I think about it, we should keep the individual articles

and zap Andrew Dornenburg and Karen Page (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) … OTOH, they both suck like a bilge pump, and need a lot of work to be brought up to Wikipedia standards, IMHO, which is probably why you've left them alone … I personally have no interest in trying to "improve" such blatant vanispamcruftisement. :-)

Happy Editing! — 138.88.93.15 (talk · contribs) 00:48, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

I think you described it with the best possible way. In the beginning I thought to add five or six tags to each one of them but I couldn't bother. Feel free to do some actions. I find it more natural that we have an article for both of them since they act as a duo but I am ok both ways. -- Magioladitis (talk) 06:14, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Copy that … I've stuck a {{Prod}} on the article … perhaps you'd be willing to add a {{Prod-2}}? BTW, I just noticed that one of the subjects created all of them! — 138.88.93.15 (talk) 11:34, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
If this is true then they have to be deleted as self published. -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:35, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
My bad … KarenAPage (talk · contribs) created only two of the three … her's was created by an anon back when they still had creation rights Sorry, I linked the wrong article … KarenAPage (talk · contribs) did in fact create all three of them … OTOH, I know of no specific policy that allows WP:COI or WP:AUTO as a sufficient reason for deletion. — 138.88.93.15 (talk) 15:40, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
  Done … the PROD has expired, and it was deleted. :-) — 138.88.7.48 (talk) 16:50, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Well done. I am still wondering about the original articles. Maybe we should just add some tags. They are certainly using peacock sentences. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:42, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Awb-bug-0906.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Awb-bug-0906.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. – Quadell (talk) 13:15, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Double Checking

Hey Magio, when you have a free moment, would you mind checking the redirect Ann Axel and its talk page to see that I understand the directions correctly? Thanks, and Cheers. ;) — Ched :  ?  04:22, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I think you did great. No need to have tags for every redirect. We already have 720,000+ articles in the project. Moreover, there is no reason to have blp tag for redirects. Keep contributing in the project! Cheers, Magioladitis (talk) 06:44, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Original research

Thanks for the correspondance. In regards to your question, well we can directly cite then the Season 5 Clip show that was aired before the season finale, I don't have the title with me, but can certainly add that to the citation. In it, Carlton Cuse and Damon Lindlehoff BOTH address the Island's "Calling" to Hurley, where they are talking about Hurley and his goings on from the time Sayid springs him from the Asylum to the time he returns to the Island. At that point ,they had not addressed how Hurley knew where to be (the thing with Jacob being a major secret, of course). But they do address the Island wanting to bring Hurley back and "Hurley Knows it". Thanks for the correspondence, feel free to reply on my own page. Whippletheduck (talk) 07:12, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

19th-century people, categorizing by bot

Okay, thanks.
Can you still help with this? User:Carlaude/Notes or other categorizing by bot?
I have some I am uploading soon in other category if you would find a different area more interesting... or is just a time thing? --Carlaude:Talk 08:39, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

  The Editor's Barnstar
For creating List of Diagnosis: Murder characters and BOLDly merging several charcter articles into it, I hereby give you this barnstar. Thank you for preserving this information in a sensible fashion. --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:58, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Warnings?

What warnings??

Reedy 23:38, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Did I say something about warning somewhere? I don't know to what are you referring to. :S -- Magioladitis (talk) 06:32, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Yobot mistake

Hi Magioladitis, just wanted to let you know of a mistake that I've found: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chinmaya_Mission&diff=289979785&oldid=288918955. Also this article isn't one that Yobot would usually deal with. eug (talk) 06:16, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for reporting. You are right. This is not one of Yobot's usual tasks. This was supposed to be part of a special task Yobot performed by partially dealing with a list found in User:Carlaude/Notes. -- Magioladitis (talk) 06:26, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Excessive classification

What has Yobot been doing, classifying various Australian and British coins under WPBiography? Also the Elizabeth Cross which is a new medal, not a person, and in no way subject to WPB. -- Arwel Parry (talk) 09:19, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

I noticed that and I thought I fixed everything. I tried to work with Category:Fijian politicians. Thus, Fijian politicians -> Heads of state of Fiji -> Monarchy in Fiji -> Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom. In my opinion the last category is NOT a subcategory of Monarchy in Fiji. The article about Elizabeth II can be there but not her category. My apologies, Magioladitis (talk) 09:28, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
This list indicates that many UK monarchs were Heads of state of Fiji, not just Elizabeth II. Normally we would use category by the name of "Monarchs of Fiji" rather than "Monarchy in Fiji". But the list makes it seem like they were heads of state of Fiji only (not monarchs of Fiji).Carlaude:Talk 10:31, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks Carlaude. Yes, I think the category should be Monarchs of Fiji and the article of Elizabeth II should be included, not the category. -- Magioladitis (talk) 10:48, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Not sure

When you have time, would you look at the redirect Anthony Burns (politician) which points to a "place". I think there is probably a better tag, but I don't know what it is. On a personal note, I am so grateful for you kind words of encouragement. I know that in reality that I have much to learn, but I really appreciate the "pat on the back". Thanks Magio, and I hope I'm not pestering you too much. ;) — Ched :  ?  22:38, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

No problem! I think the correct is Template:R from people. This is not a common situation because the name is not mentioned in the target article! Check also my edit in the talk page. I like cooperating with you Ched! Cheers, Magioladitis (talk) 22:47, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Hey .. I like learning from you Magio ... lol ;) (I'll check out those links) — Ched :  ?  22:53, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

WT:WAF

Let's resume this discussion in a few weeks. I don't think there's any chance of getting anywhere when my points are being subjugated to a relentless campaign of misinterpretation by the IP. Hopefully, he'll be gone by then. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 05:58, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

OK. No problem. I was a little busy following this subject right now too. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 06:26, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Please explain

I fail to understand the rationale behind your second edit to Wikipedia:List of monthly maintenance categories with templates. The first edit removed a recently deleted template. Thank you for that. But the second edit removed two active and relevant templates from a list of templates. Would you please explain that. I have reverted that last edit in the mean time. Debresser (talk) 22:25, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I gave a more detailed answer now I hope. If I am mistaken please revert again. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 17:26, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm sorry. Now idea how I could have missed that. Thanks. Debresser (talk) 22:26, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
No problem. Thanks for contacting me! I spent ten minutes looking at this page and wondering if my eyes were playing tricks. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:50, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Removing nested=yes

FWIW, there's no particular need for this sort of edit, the obsolete parameter does no harm and WikiProject tagging bots can easily enough remove those parameters as they make more useful edits. Anomie 13:00, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

You are right but at least in the list of what transcludes Template:WPB there are not so many left. Less than 300 articles to be checked. Anyway, I'll stop it but I'm afraid that as long as new editors see that the parameter still exists they 'll keep adding it to new articles. -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:07, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
Even if they do, what's the problem? Anomie 14:02, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Removal of Juice Ortiz/Otto Delaney?

I don't think the Juice Ortiz page should be deleted as it has references and sources to support it, and it is reasonably well written. Same goes for Otto Delaney. Please explain why you think they should be removed.

You can check my arguments in the AfDs (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Juice Ortiz and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Otto Delaney). Please participate there. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 22:47, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

more BLP questions

Hey Magio, more BLP questions from the staff ;). I ran across my first redirect to a Band at Ben Bridwell. I looked all over for a "tag" to put on it, then it dawned on me that the item:

  • ... a redirect from a person to another person or group then change |class= to NA and add |non-bio= with value yes

might mean to just pipe those parameters right into the redirect link?

Yes? .. No?

when you get a free moment, would you have a look to see if I did it right? Thanks, Ched — Ched :  ?  19:38, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

hmmmm ... reading and thinking: should it maybe be, add: {{R from member|class=NA|non-bio=yes}}? rather than the link? — Ched :  ?  20:13, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
I've been a little busy today. I think you did fine. I don't know if we have formulated a rule for that yet but I would do the same as you did. Thanks for contacting me. Maybe we can write down the different cases and present them to the WPBiography.

I think/thought {{R from member}} doesn't allow any parameters.-- Magioladitis (talk) 20:18, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Change to Template:WPBiography

Hi there. I've left this comment at the discussion about the change made to Template:WPBiography to depopulate Category:Biography articles with listas parameter. Since you took part in that discussion, and I'm objecting to the change that was made, would you be able to comment there? Carcharoth (talk) 22:16, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Birth cats

Is User:Pascal666/living a task that Yobot could help with? --Pascal666 07:18, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

That wouldn't be a big problem for Yobot I think but the last few days I started questioning the necessity of Category:Year of birth missing and Category:Year of birth missing (living people). We have to start being more specific if we want things to improve. I did this change. Of course, I can help by adding birth category but we have to start better categorising people by decade or century of birth. A large list of people with unknown birth year is not helping. -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:28, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Did you come to any further decisions? --Pascal666 03:15, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
What is your opinion about my suggestion? I'll try to help after the weekend. I am really busy right now. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 07:40, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for your sound judgment here. --GHcool (talk) 17:28, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

You are welcome. I followed the discussion in this one as well. I was familiar with the subject. These templates are seriously pushing a certain POV. Moreover, this one was awfully created. -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:37, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Atmosphir Creation Protection

I was trying to create an article on a video game called Atmosphir. Upon me trying to create this article I ran into a protection policy on the article stating that only administrators could create this article. IF possible I would like this protection decreased to semi-protection so I can create an informative article. Please get back to me on my talk page. Thank you. Piandcompany (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:58, 28 July 2009 (UTC).

Link Trail

[33]

Do we need the a-z too?

Will be updated to site in the next scap :)

Reedy 06:36, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! That's great news. Yes, we need the a-z too. -- Magioladitis (talk) 06:38, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

List of The Boondocks characters

Hello again, Magioladitis … I (along with Some Other Editor) have reverted the redirects that you did to several articles last week:

I do not believe that there was consensus on merging them, the {{merge}} templates had not been removed, but most importantly, the {{The Boondocks}} template had not been modified to remove the wikilinks for these characters … as I stated on the talk page, I am neutral on the merges, but I feel that there should be further discussion … perhaps an AfD of all four articles (as a group) is the way to go?

Happy Editing! — 138.88.7.48 (talk · contribs) 10:58, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

In similar AfDs commented that these things should not be brought in AfD and that editors should be bold. the modification of the temmplate could come later. The important is that these articles have no reason to exist. -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:45, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
Well, if you'd done the requisite housekeeping (removing the merge templates and modifying the characters template) then this never would have come to my attention … and it appears that I am not alone in thinking that they need more discussion, but I fear just leaving messages on article talk pages will not attract enough attention for a timely discussion, whereas an AfD certainly would. — 138.88.7.48 (talk) 15:58, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
If you think they have to be deleted, you are welcome to bring them for AfD. I am puzzled right now what I should do in these cases but you have to know that AfD is not the place to discuss merges. -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:07, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
D'oh! … I didn't mean for the AfD to discuss merging, but to discuss their deletion and redirect with the argument that "the descriptions in the List article are sufficient, and that they are not worthy of stand-alone articles." … Sorry for the mis-communication. :-) — 138.88.7.48 (talk) 17:33, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Bot

Hi, thank you for your comment, I managed not to get these kinds of edits, please tell me if you notice anything or if you want some wikiproject tagging. 70.183.7.183 (talk) 11:37, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Don't forget to set AWB to Remove |nested= as well. -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:52, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

I hope I'm saying this right ... lol.

OK, first, my apologies. I'm still confused. I recently had a conversation with User:MZMcBride about this here. I've read through some of this stuff a bunch of times, and I guess I'm still not understanding. My thinking is this:

  1. The article is the target. (from: Wikipedia:Redirect).
  2. putting the labels on redirects doesn't really do anything. (from my conversation with MZM).
  3. Robert Holding is the article aka target.
  4. Earl Holding is the redirect
  • I am (was) seeing it as "Robert Holding" is in a category of "targets" redirected -from- an alternate spelling of "Earl Holding"
  • I know this isn't what MZM was saying to me, but it was rather what I gathered from the "from" vs. "to" discussion.
  • When I read: Pages using this link may be updated to link directly to the target page. on Template:R from alternative spelling, that's where I probably developed my misunderstanding.

Hopefully, if you can understand my own muddled mess of confusion in my mind - you'll be able to explain it to me to where I have the right understanding. I am sorry to trouble you with this, I feel like I've been a terrible inconvenience, and I do appreciate you help here. Again, I am sorry, it's just that the wording on the various pages seems conflicting sometimes - and I'm trying to sort it out rationally in my own mind. Thanks. — Ched :  ?  09:23, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

By the way, I'll gladly go back and fix my mistakes - once I understand what is right and what is wrong. ;) — Ched :  ?  09:28, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
I corrected some as well :P Don't worry we all do mistakes. Perhaps you should slow down your edits when starting something you haven't done before and wait for feedback. Happy editing! -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:40, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
OK .. but I still don't understand. Is there a single page that explains this that I can read through to try to figure it out? — Ched :  ?  09:41, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Well, I think the discussion you linked me to is... confusing. The word "from" has a different meaning in that context. you put the template in the redirect so you have a Redirect from a misspelling (for example) to an article. (or from a band member to a band, since you are using a lot this lately).Is maybe WP:TMR what you are looking for? -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:50, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Yes - I think that looks like it might help a LOT. I just finished going back through everything prior to that conversation, and removed all the "R from anything" from articles too. Again, I am sorry. — Ched :  ?  10:04, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

False negative by Yobot

This edit was incorrect: as can be seen by the article, one half of the duo is, yes, dead but the other is alive. Does its logic take into account the possibility of an article about two people, one living the other dead? —Quasirandom (talk) 14:12, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! As you may read in User:Yobot I have a list of false positives before running any project I am removing articles found in that list. You are welcome to add more false positives. Thanks again. Magioladitis (talk) 14:26, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Hm... this article was already in my list and I am 100% sure that I used the list to exclude false positives. Funny. -- Magioladitis (talk) 14:28, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Uh oh. Long experience as a technical writer and editor makes me worry when a programmer says "Funny." —Quasirandom (talk) 17:01, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
The word "Weird" probably is better. Maybe I compared the lists before converting them both in talk pages. I apologise for that. Usually, I am very careful with false positives. -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:03, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

User:Iyeru42

Any reason why you extended the block on this user? I already blocked him for 72 hours and was keeping an eye on him in case he started up again. Besides one outburst today he didn't seem to be the standard vandal here. Garion96 (talk) 16:43, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

After you blocked him, he threatened to keep vandalising. Feel free to reduce the blocking as a move of good faith. Do you think the account was compromised or something? I checked all the its edits and a big part has been reverted but they are also good edits. -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:57, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Nah, I just think he went overboard, the threat was still a part of that. I quess I was hoping he would be ok again after 72 hours (instead of a month), from looking at his current edits, I'm not so sure. Garion96 (talk) 21:38, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
I am having a discussion with him. Let's see how it goes. We can unblock at any time as soon as we understand what happened. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:42, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
...and here's the answer. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:43, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Éric Doligé

Hi Magio,

I wonder if you could take a look at this page. I don't see a particularly good reason why this page was deleted. If there is a reason, let me know, but if not, could you take care of undeleting it for me? Thanks, Mikaey, Devil's advocate 07:05, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. It was a mistake. This move must have confused me. -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:16, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Prods for EE characters

Hey, just thought you might like to know that we're discussing which characters could and should be merged here, so if you have any you have concerns about, you might be interested in bringing them up there :) GunGagdinMoan 23:35, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip. I didn't know that. -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:40, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

a couple more 1632 templates

I tagged these last week and they're still here; I don't see them showing up in the categories, so there may be a twinkle tagging issue. Anyway, they should go; all of this mess is going. Cheers, Jack Merridew 08:39, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and then Category:1632 series cites templates can go ;) Cheers, Jack Merridew 08:40, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
All gone now. :) -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:47, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
enough to make one like redink. terima kasih. Cheers, Jack Merridew 11:21, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

lost filming locations

Hi. I want to thank you for stepping in before I got to far into the mess I was creating this morning. It shows I have a lot more reading to do about how to edit properly for wikipedia. I wanted to ask if you think I'm on the right track for starting a new "Lost" article. I have seen how editers have occasionally want to add to the lost locations but many are not considered significant for the main page. I was hoping to start a page that would redirect at the top of filming locations to a article dedicated for just that topic. I started a sandbox roughdraft I would like you to see. I would cite and source all of what I have writtn but am sure some will jump all over it if Im Bold and insert it. can you take a look if you get a chance as you are a well respected editor /administater. User:B.s.n.r.n./Sandbox. thanks B.s.n. (R.N.) 17:44, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

There is a perfect place to ask questions about that and ask for help to expand this article. This is the Wikipedia:WikiProject Lost. Ask their opinion there by posting a message to the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Lost. You can find out if someone else had the same idea or is already preparing something or if the creation of this article was discussed in the past. Happy editing! -- Magioladitis (talk) 18:08, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

List of The Boondocks characters ... redux

Hello again, Magioladitis … I missed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rollo Goodlove until after it was closed … what about the other articles discussed on Talk:List of The Boondocks characters and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject The Boondocks? BTW, I removed Rollo Goodlove from the navbox Template:The Boondocks. — 141.156.175.125 (talk) 10:36, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Tagging templates for speedy deletion

Hi there. I guess you should know this, so forgive me lecturing you but please remember to use <noinclude></noinclude> tags when tagging templates for speedy deletion as you did at Template:Ally Mcbeal character. Regards SoWhy 13:03, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Could Yobot Have Put The Biography Banner On Non Biographical Articles?

Hi!

Now that V is done in Category:Biography articles without listas parameter I am skimming through W to see which articles are really obvious fixes. I have run across a few that are not biographies such as Women in engineering, Women in piracy, Women in the American Revolution, Women in warfare (1750–1799) and World War I prisoners of war in Germany. Will you or your bot be upset if I remove the banner?

JimCubb (talk) 19:34, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

i am ntthe newhoadded thm there. i think it's kingbot. removing them it's a wise decision. -- --Magioladitis (talk) 21:48, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

RE: Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:M*A*S*H (2nd nomination)

Thank you for allowing me to redirect Portal:M*A*S*H and for closing the deletion discussion.

  The Barnstar of Peace
The Barnstar of Peace is awarded to users who have helped to resolve, peacefully, conflicts on Wikipedia.

This barnstar is awarded to Magioladitis for peacefully resolving a MFD discussion. Thank you. Ikip (talk) 00:12, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Sigh, I thought maybe you would start redirecting these, instead of putting them up for deletion. Can we redirect Portal:Futurama to Wikipedia:WikiProject Futurama? Please let me know here or on the MfD. Thanks. Ikip (talk) 18:31, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
Ditto for Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Battlestar Galactica. thanks. Ikip (talk) 00:38, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
I am troubled that you were still advocating deletion in Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Battlestar Galactica.(talk) 14:28, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

comment on Wikipedia_talk:AutoWikiBrowser#Placement_of_footnotes_templates.

You may be interested to comment on Wikipedia_talk:AutoWikiBrowser#Placement_of_footnotes_templates. Thanks Rjwilmsi 11:26, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dana Sterling

As we both know, AFD is not a poll or a head count but an AFD can't be closed "delete" when every single !vote is a keep so that's how I closed this debate and a doubt it could have been closed any differently by anybody else. I would recommend waiting a few months and nominating this again or recommend a merge to somewhere.

This sort of reminds me of the Victor Drazen AFD we both were involved with last year. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:30, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for contacting me. What I see is:
  • Hyperionsteel emphasized keep twice (double !voted),
  • Cerebellum just !voted per Hyperionsteel, (this is not an argument_
  • Jll commented twice (at least in the second time they were some weak arguments)
  • An anonymous IP (less than a month of edits) gave a link not about the character.
Maybe, it could be relisted instead of closed. Anyway,... -- Magioladitis (talk) 01:39, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
I might have done that if it hadn't already been relisted once as the !votes were rather weak but 14 days is enough for the level of participation that it had. In any case it's not a BLP so it's not doing any harm staying for the time being. (and no I would never !vote like that) Also, as a minor fictional character it's likely mergable somewhere. The Victor Drazen article I mentioned earlier was eventually merged without any help from AFD.
What might help with future AFDs is if you sort them. The Dana Sterling AFD wasn't sorted even though it could have been added to the lists of both fiction and anime and manga related debates. If you did this then your AFDs might get other participants besides the usual crowd of "fanboys" and inclusionists. Here is a collection of scripts that makes this easy. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:15, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks again. I agree it's not that important. I usually sort the AfDs but this time I totally forgot. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:20, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

On actors and navboxes

This is coming out of a discussion that is currently at the TV project talk page.

Part of the discussion is that a consensus sees to be coming out of the TfDs to eliminate cast navboxes and/or cast sections. In asking the editor that is pointing to this, he directed me to the TfDs you put forward for Smallville Cast and RaisingtheBar. I was wondering if more than just these two cases have been put forward.

The reason I ask is that I'm looking at {{Batman actors}} and {{Superman actors}} which seem to fall into the "not a good idea" category, and if there is a general consensus not to create these types of 'boxes, I'd like to be able to point to that.

Thanks,

- J Greb (talk) 16:45, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Amusing category

Here. Rich Farmbrough, 08:17, 1 September 2009 (UTC).

LOL. -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:49, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Another for the black museum. Rich Farmbrough, 22:04, 2 September 2009 (UTC).

I think it's time to proceed in replacing lifetime in the case of living people. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:10, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
I agree. And dead people. And I was going to ask you to file a RFBA for YoBot to do it. Or SmackBot can do it, but I'm short on the energy for the bureaucracy right now. Incidentally there are still a bunch of people replacing existing stuff with lifetime. Rich Farmbrough, 08:28, 3 September 2009 (UTC).
I am aware. I keep writing messages to talk pages to prevent people from that. Some editors find it as a way to increase their edit count. Maybe we could fill an RFBA and let both Yobot and SmackBot to clean it. This will save us time. Good news: BD is not used anymore. There was no use of it the last month. -- Magioladitis (talk) 10:01, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
Bad news, I manually substed a bunch of them. I think once lifetime is cleansed from the system, people will stop seeing it and thinking it is "neat". Rich Farmbrough, 10:15, 3 September 2009 (UTC).
I am expecting after full cleaning of Lifetime a period of 6 months that people will still replace defaultsort+categories with lifetime. I ve no proble with people using lifetime to save energy from adding ds+cats. Lifetime is expanding because of people replacing ds+cats. If they see that bots regualry clean this, they ll stop. -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:42, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
I expect {{lifetime}} to become better known and more properly applied in the future. (I have yet to find a case where it has been improperly applied. I am taking Rich's word for it that there are a significant number.) Editors have learned that {{DEFAULTSORT}} should not be on the talk page because that is the function of |listas= and that {{blp}} is not necessary because |living= in the WPBiography banner serves the purpose when there is no shell and |blp= serves the purpose if there is a shell. Most people can conquer the learning curve.
JimCubb (talk) 22:37, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
Why have two ways to add categories and a template that slows down servers? -- Moreover, I can't be applied to all cases. We have many articles for multiple people where multiple birth and death categories are needed. Magioladitis (talk) 23:38, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
First of all, where is the evidence that the template slows servers? I have yet to see any difference.
Second, the articles about multiple people are a very small fraction of the articles in question. There are more than 700,000 Biographies. How many articles about multiple people are there. An article about a group of people is not a biography, a story of a person's life, it is an article about a group.
Where is the harm in having two tags for the same category? The article does not appear twice in the category. The category is not listed twice at the bottom of the article.
You and Rich have devised a solution for a very minor problem. As has been noted on Template talk:Lifetime your consensus for this solution consists of only the two of you and both of you have ignored requests to take your private conversation to the proper page.
JimCubb (talk) 03:24, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

RE: San Fransisco

I agree with that. However, I changed it because San Fransisco, California is a redirect. In the future, should I make it San Fransisco, California? Jwalte04 (talk) 18:06, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Not needed?

Living persons flags on biog lists that list dates of titles won, but no other personal data. Help WP save money by doing less! Ref Talk:Dancesport World Champions (Professional Standard) and similar. And, second, I'm not really sure whether a biog flag is appropriate in any event... Macdonald-ross (talk) 07:22, 5 September 2009 (UTC)‎

I removed them from the project. It's a bit tricky. It's not clear if they belong to the project of not. I think you are right but strictly speaking it's a list of people. I'll post something in the project. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 09:51, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Yobot and lists of governors

What is the logic used to declare lists of governors as BLPs? Any statement they could make involving a living person is very limited, as limited as any other article on any subject, why are these singled out? --Golbez (talk) 17:27, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi. I set them as "yes" because they contain a leading paragraph and probably text about persons in the list that they still alive. Sometimes the line between "yes" and "no" is not that clear. If you have a better suggestion if what I hope to do, please write it to me. For the lords case, since the article contained almost no text I set almost all of them as "no". I put only 2 of them manually as "yes" because the last person of each list is still alive. I didn't know exactly how to handle it. Probably you can just reset to "no" since apart from the names there is no personal data, the talk page is unlikely to used for a specific person and so the {{blp}} is useless.Thanks, -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:52, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
My impression was, these articles have about as much information on a living governor as the article on United States has on living people, probably less, yet no one would consider that for BLP. There's a line between a BLP article and other articles, though all articles must fall under BLP provisions. I'm not sure what tagging these lists as BLP articles accomplishes. --Golbez (talk) 19:14, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
OK. Feel free to set them as "no". I'll leave a message to Wikiproject Biography. It seems that we have to set all lists to "no" minus extreme exceptions. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:25, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Honda

Sorry to bother you with this, but who requested the move to Edmond Honda? The only reason I ask is because awhile back User:Mr.bonus raised a veritable one man campaign against naming the article that, as well in the case of Ken Masters, Sakura Kasugano and several others. Is it alright to assume that this has admin backing now?--Kung Fu Man (talk) 00:57, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

User:UKER requested a deletion to move. After deleting and moving I realised that there was a long history behind this action which I was not aware. I did the action without reading the history thoroughly because I assumed good faith. I don't really support or oppose the action. I am completely neutral on the subject. Please resolve this by discussing with User:UKER and/or the article's talk page. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 06:11, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Deletion review for 40billion.com

An editor has asked for a deletion review of 40billion.com. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review.

Deletion of category:Pages within the scope of WikiProject Physics (WP Astronomy Banner)

You recently deleted the empty category "Pages within the scope of WikiProject Physics (WP Astronomy Banner)" on the grounds C1:empty category. However, this is a maintenance category, which is supposed to be empty, as was described on the category page. This mistake has been made in the past and correct so the least you could have done was check the page logs before deleting. Anyway, then page should be restored with page history.(TimothyRias (talk) 10:06, 8 September 2009 (UTC))

I dont' understand why this category is needed. Even the name selection seems a bit weird. Can you explain me please?--Magioladitis (talk) 10:53, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
If you don't understand then ask before you do.
Basically it is used for a legacy feature of the {{astronomy}} template, which allows the astro=yes switch to tag articles which should also have the {{physics}} template. This category lists the articles that use that switch (which should then be tagged and assessed.) If this seems like a roundabout way of doing things, thats because it is. But as long as that option exists on the {{astronomy}} template, this category should exist to record its use. I'm annoyed enough by the fact that it is necessary at all to monitor it. This is exacerbated by random admin's doing before they think and deleting without consultation. (TimothyRias (talk) 13:03, 9 September 2009 (UTC))
Before deleting it the category was tagged for 7 days. In to my eye it looked as an abandoned parameter. A more comprehensive name is necessary. I'll bring the subject to the Village Pump to ask for more opinions. -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:30, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
Since the category had been undeleted before (and recently!), it should not have been PRODed but sent straight to CfD, in which case the involved projects should have been notified.(TimothyRias (talk) 13:41, 9 September 2009 (UTC))
Its hasn't been PRODed. It was tagged for speedy deletion as an empty category (criterion C1). The reason I deleted it is the following: By its name, it concerns all articles having a specific banner (WP Astronomy Banner) and have to change to another one. In to my eyes this seemed like a procedure than now is over. -- Magioladitis (talk) 14:25, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
Well, since it had been previously undeleted it certainly did not qualify for CSD. Also since the category description explicitly stated that it should be empty, C1 did not apply in the first place. And no the procedure is not over on occasion articles are still tagged in this way. (They should not be in the first place, but that is a different story.) (TimothyRias (talk) 14:36, 9 September 2009 (UTC))
Problem resolved after discussion in project. -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:00, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

AWB snapshots

Thanks. I had no idea what Rjwilmsi was talking about. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 14:25, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Template:Article issues

Hey Magioladitis, in this edit you left out the closing bold triple apostrophe. It's partly my fault though cause in the edit request I put the apostrophes after the full stop. Could you fix it please? Thanks. kollision (talk) 22:45, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Removal of BetaCommandBot posts on talk pages

Hey. Not sure if its a regular thing you are doing or just something that happened once. I noticed you deleted an old post about fair use images from a talk page. If I could make a request, could you hold off from doing that on albums songs and bands? WP:PROGROCK is attempting to undelete a LOT of images that BetCommandBot deleted 2 years ago. Thanks - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 15:20, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for informing me. I didn't know about that.Are you using the warnings on the pages to track the files you want? -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:36, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
The warnings just let me know that there was an image deleted that was on that article. If its been replaced by a new image of the cover, then I don't need it. However, a lot of albums/songs have no cover and the talk page has one of those notices. Those are the cases where I grab the image name. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 16:35, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Yobot 8

I've speedily approved YoBot's BRfA. See Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Yobot 8 for details. Thanks :) - Kingpin13 (talk) 13:54, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!! -- Magioladitis (talk) 14:48, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

New list

Wikipedia:Uncategorized biographies of living people/BLPPotential/9 seems to contain a lot of Category:Possibly living people members. I'm skipping articles in that cat and AWB's already ignored over 300 :( --Closedmouth (talk) 14:23, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Lifetime

Just curious, which page did you mean? I don't usually use "Lifetime". All Hallow's (talk) 22:14, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Bingo, you're right. I accidentally reverted that poor "Smackbot" robot. All Hallow's (talk) 22:22, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Yobot 9

Hey there, just letting you know that Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Yobot 9 has been approved. What I've approved it for should cover what you want it to do. Let me know if I've misunderstood anything. Best, - Kingpin13 (talk) 20:12, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. :) -- Magioladitis (talk) 20:13, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Something wrong with the Bot?

The new way of giving references below the reference heading, inside the reference-tags, seems to not be handled correctly, see [34]. Nsaa (talk) 22:57, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Known bug of AWB. Already reported. I stopped the bot and manual edits. I just discovered that AWB development team is shipping the wrong revision. Check this link. It's supposed to be rev5459 but in fact it's an older subversion where the bug is not fixed. Thanks for reporting. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:04, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

AWB

Yes I am "in" the page swap bug. We have a regression? I'll update in the not to distant future , both for me and SB.

The new refs bug, did you see my workaround? Not ideal but useful. Rich Farmbrough, 00:10, 25 September 2009 (UTC).


Anti-revisionist Internationals

Why not have the Unity and Struggle and International newsletter as anti-revisionist internationals? I realize that these subcats are for the constituent parties, but wasn't that the idea? I was planning on making a subcat for RIM which would contain its sections, and there would be a larger cat containing all of the anti-revisionist international groups. You see were I'm going with this?--Dudeman5685 (talk) 00:12, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Some facts: Parties of ICMLPO(U&S) are anti-revisionist parties and members of ICMLPO(U&S).So they have to sub-categorised in these categories. There are not internationals so the should not be under any "internationals" category. On the ither hand ICMLPO(U&S) is an international (and now I am referring to the article itself). -- Magioladitis (talk) 06:49, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Please put the TalkHeader templates back on the motorcycling articles.

I put the {{tl:talkheader}} template on those pages for a reason. We have lots of people who come to the pages asking where to buy parts for their motorcycle, or other off-topic discussions. Unless there is some good reason why they must be removed, please put them back. Thanks.--Dbratland (talk) 16:00, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

I left it in all the articles that have comments and deleted many off-topic messages. Many of them were in banner-only talk pages. If you notice that people keep adding off-topic messages please add them back. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 16:14, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
I have noticed that people keep adding off-topic messages. Believe me, I have noticed. It happens all the time. I have also noticed that putting the talkheader template there at the top helps to head them off before they post. That's why I put it there. It serves a purpose, even on blank talk pages. Can you tell me what purpose is served by you deleting them all?--Dbratland (talk) 16:31, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
Another editor above asked me not to just move the talkheader on the top but to remove it if there are only banners. This discussion was also on the past in many places. There are already blp warnings in many motorcycle clubs. Adding the banner to every motorcycle article won't really help. But let's see what we can do: How many articles do you think we have to tag? I removed it to less than 80 if i remember correctly. Friendly, Magioladitis (talk) 16:35, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
I still don't understand what purpose was served by deleting these. What was the goal? Anyway, you can start by putting the talkheader on the following back:

Talk:Intermot
Talk:Ducati 749
Talk:Honda Trials Motorcycles
Talk:Honda DN-01
Talk:Motorcycle windshield
Talk:Motorcycle weight
Talk:List of Harley-Davidson motorcycles
Talk:F-head engine
Talk:Harley-Davidson Model 7D
Talk:Kawasaki Z750
Talk:SBFreaks
Talk:Yankee (motorcycle)
Talk:Dell'Orto
Talk:Harley-Davidson engine timeline
Talk:Rainbow Motorcycle Club
Talk:Push start
Talk:History of electric motorcycles and scooters
Talk:Gypsy tour
Talk:Renthal
Talk:Motorcycle frame slider
Talk:Timing retard eliminator
Talk:Hans B. Pacejka
Talk:Ducati 748
Talk:River Run Riot
Talk:Madass
Talk:Shaft effect
Talk:Bobber (motorcycle)
Talk:American IronHorse
Talk:Cutdown‎
--Dbratland (talk) 01:54, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Maybe you have to read instructions in {{talkheader}}. Not all talk pages should have this template. Take for example History of electric motorcycles and scooters. It was created in 2007 and nobody commented on the talk page. You created the talk page in July and still none went to comment. Another example is Gypsy tour which is a redirect and redirects usually don't get any comments. Why have a banner there? I am sorry but the cases above don't see to be needing a talkheader, at this moment at least. (3 on the list you gave me had the banner. 2 were about clubs. So, I removed them from your list). -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:01, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
Is it unclear to you why the talkheader is on pages that don't yet have comments? The purpose is to avoid off-topic comments in the first place, and it works. In general maybe there is no need for that, but on the motorcycling articles, there is. Since I have made clear there is a benefit to having it there, and you are unable to point out any benefit to removing it, would you please put them back now?--Dbratland (talk) 16:01, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
I added most of them in my watchlist. Let's experiment a bit. If we have off-topic comments in the next month I'll add immediately the talk header. This tag is overused and somehow we have to start looking how it goes. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 16:32, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
Overused? What does that mean? Are we going to run out of tags? I'm asking you to please tell me what the problem is that you think you're fixing. Would you either tell me what the purpose is, or else admit that deleting these tags serves no purpose? --Dbratland (talk) 16:40, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
Overuse of this template gives the impression to many editors that it has to be in every talk page and that's certainly not the purpose of this template. Sometimes is better to have a short amount of banners/tags to allow people comment under them. Friendly, Magioladitis (talk) 18:25, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
Shouldn't we do some kind of experiment to prove that editors are being made to think it's required on every talk page? Also, can you explain how banners prevent commenting? Is there some technical issue I'm unaware of?--Dbratland (talk) 01:36, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
I think what Magioladitis is driving at is that {{talkheader}} is not meant to be used pre-emptively. It should be placed only when there is a need for it. Otherwise it just takes up vertical space. –xenotalk 01:56, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Yes. I understand it was not originally intended to use it preemptively. I have re-purposed the banner and used it preemptively. I have even placed it on pages with no comments at all. My observation has been that using it preemptively has worked. So now I'm to understand that the problem is a shortage of vertical space? Even on talk pages with zero comments, there is not enough vertical space? That's a challenging concept to grasp. I suppose I would be satisfied if the talkheader were put back on all the pages except those that have too many banners, or for whatever reason, are running short of vertical space. Seems fair enough. --Dbratland (talk) 02:36, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
The consensus right now is different. The manual of talkheader clearly says that it should not be placed in empty pages and it was a similar consensus for talk pages only with banners (I've no idea why the manual doesn't reflect that). I think the discussion should continue in Template talk:Talk header. I just followed the guidelines. -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:57, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
"I have re-purposed the banner and used it preemptively. " Well...Don't! =) –xenotalk 22:03, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Do not replace Lifetime with DEFAULTSORT

To do so is contrary to guidelines and lacks consensus. Even though I generally prefer {{lifetime}} I only use it when all the information is present but no category tags have been applied. Your high-handed replacements of {{lifetime}} on Vladimir Alekseyevich Kornilov and Victor Regnier have been reverted. JimCubb (talk) 20:09, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

There is a discussion in Template talk:Lifetime. Since more editors want this to be replaced and they are stronger arguments, consensus has changed. -- Magioladitis (talk) 20:13, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

The discussion has been going on for a long time and I have contributed to it. As I noted there recently, only you and Rich are in favor of replacing {{lifetime}} and at least five editors have expressed a desire to keep it. The loudest and least accurate editors do not constitute a consensus. In this case, and this is not a democracy, the loudest and least accurate editors are not even in the majority.

Just out of curiosity, how is it that sometimes your spelling and grammar are perfect and other times there are serious errors? Is there more than one of you? JimCubb (talk) 23:04, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

It's not only me and Rich. Read again the comments of Studerby , DoubleBlue and others. PS I do a lot of mistakes while writing. I usually don't pay attention and I type fast. I usually have to go back and reread my comment. It's cool that you are the first to mention. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:53, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Dates

Hi. I've been involved in a discussion about date formats which is now taking place at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (dates and numbers). A couple of comments vis-a-vis the yobot that you are using for cleanup. It is my view (at least) that the current language in the MOS does not permit use of the YYYY-MM-DD format in references (though the bot is applying it in references); the MOS says at [35]:

YYYY-MM-DD style dates (1976-05-31) are uncommon in English prose, and should not be used within sentences. However, they may be useful in long lists and tables for conciseness. (If the only purpose why they are used in a particular table is ease of comparison, consider using 1 November 2008.) Because some perceive dates in that style to be in conformance with the current ISO 8601 standard, that format should never be used for a date that is not in the (proleptic) Gregorian calendar, nor for any year outside the range 1583 through 9999.").

And it certainly does not mandate it). That could change, as the issue is under discussion, but 2/3 of those who have spoken so far also appear to be against its use in references. One matter that has confused things is the extent to which it is (against policy, I would argue) used now in footnotes -- I've made the point that that may not reflect preferences of Wikipedia editors, as your bot and at least one other bot have been busy turning references into that format. I wanted to apprise you of the situation both because it may interest you, it may impact your desire to let the bot continue to make such changes (unless/until the policy clearly allows for it), and of course you may wish to correct any misstatements I've made or otherwise contribute. Many thanks.--Epeefleche (talk) 06:46, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

I had no idea. You say that YYYY-MM-DD format should not be used in |date= and |accessdate=? I have to read carefully the new MOSDATE probably. Only one thing: Yobot is just using WP:AWB for that. Maybe, you have to write a comment there as well. Thanks. -- Magioladitis (talk) 00:46, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
I'm saying that while the guidance today (and at the time of the edits) forbids the use in certain circumstances, and only permits it in certain others, it does not overtly permit that format to be used in refs. Those who were involved in the formation of that guidance language indicate that leaving refs out was not inadvertent. However, there is now a proposal to make it clear in the text of the guidance that such format cannot be used in refs. At the moment, that proposal is not attracting consensus support. You can follow the discussion at [36]. In the one instance I noted that the bot you were using made that change, it made it from the format that Major League Baseball (it was an article about a major league baseball player) and others use (MM/DD/YYYY), which was not deprecated at the time of the bot edit, but is now (as of just a few days ago). I have no idea whether the bot was limiting its edits to that changes from format or not, but as mentioned in any event at the time of the edits that format was not deprecated. Tx for your suggestion -- I've also left essentially the same information there.--Epeefleche (talk) 06:51, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Devils Diciples Page

Thank you for the new format, the artical on the Boston Devils Diciple and his problem with the Angels is still incorect (he was from another club calling themselves our name) We have no problems with nor them with us (the Angels) But we can live with the artical because we both (Angels and Diciples) know the truth. I will attempt to find some other artical or proof later to prove it. I suppose you could email both of us (81 & 44) and ask. But anyway, I am Satisfied none the less. Thanks again. --Detroit44 (talk) 17:16, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Thracen Turkish Minority

Such a funny boy from Greece.There is a minority who has a name "Batı Trakya Türk Azınlığı" - "The Turkish Minority of W.T."There are also some Pomaks and Romas.They are not Turk but just like Turks Moslem too.There are three minority.The biggest-head one is Tourkos.Pomaks fells themselves like a Turk as a Muslim.Wikipedia isnt the voice of Greece...

Talkheader

I don't think you understand. I'm saying that (a) edits like [37] seem to have no point and (b) what would actually be useful would be removing this sort of overzealous use of talkheader. --NE2 22:28, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

I understood. My plan was to make all the cleanups written in WP:TPL at once. But due to bugs of AWB it's impossible right now. During this process I reported 5 (five) bugs. This replacement it was like step 1. I'll continue manually and not automatic mainly due to a serious bug and of course due to the things you just noticed. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:34, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Are these bugs the cause of this yobot edit to project banner parameters? I ask because I don't see the value in a bot making these invisible cleanups, unless it is in the course of another useful edit. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 18:07, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Another editor noticed that as well. It was a mistake. For now on these changes will happen only if assession if done as well. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:45, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Cats in templates

Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#incategory:_search - Another good reason not to do it. Rich Farmbrough, 02:45, 5 October 2009 (UTC).


Note the date changes Epeeflechee mentions above are from deprecated xx/xx/xxxx dates to xxxx-xx-xx. I logged a bug at AWB to restrict these changes slightly. Rich Farmbrough, 02:47, 5 October 2009 (UTC).

Yobot and Bio tagging (auto-stub)

Looks like Xenobot is destined to follow in Yobot's footsteps ... Have you considered adding auto-stub to the task? –xenotalk 13:08, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

That's a good idea. I'll do it. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 13:31, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Cool. Will be a bit extra work to pre-parse for the -stub}} template but will save extra edits down the road. –xenotalk 13:39, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
I am loading lists that usually are interesections of categories. I can add some stub categories on it. For example: Articles in categories deaths in the last 123 years and footballer stubs they ll be tagged in WPBiography with living=no, class=stub and sports-wokr-group=yes. Additionally Football banner with class=stub will be added. -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:45, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Sure, that works too. I typically just run over the mainspace pages to look for the stub template. Football is one of the big 10 backlogged. –xenotalk 13:49, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Recreation of deleted templates

See Template talk:Convert#kmbot. 76.227.79.204 (talk) 19:33, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Lie quadric

Καλησπέρα, (με συγχωρείς κατ' αρχήν για τα Ελληνικά, αλλά τα αγγλικά μου είναι εντελώς δυσανάλογα στο τι καταλαβαίνω και στο τί μπορώ να πω :) Μήπως ξέρεις πως αποδίδεται αυτό στα ελληνικά, όπου έψαξα το βρήκα αμετάφραστο. Και αν δεν σου κάνει κόπο, όποτε και αν μπορείς να ρίξεις μια ματιά στο el:Απολλώνιο πρόβλημα (ελπίζω να μην τραβάς τα μαλλιά σου μετά βέβαια :). Ευχαριστώ εκ των προτέρων! --Egmontaz talk 19:55, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Θα το κοιτάξω αύριο. Με μια πρώτη ματιά το άρθρο μου φάνηκε πολύ καλό. Πολύ καλή δουλειά! Τον όρο "quadric" εγώ στη μεταπτυχιακή μου τον είχα αφήσιε αματάφραστο. Δεν είχα βρει πουθενά στη βιβλιογραφεία ελληνικό όρο. Με είχαν παροτρύνει να εισάγω έναν αλλά δεν το έκανα. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:00, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Ευχαριστώ! (λίγο καθυστερημένα, νόμιζα ότι το είχα ήδη κάνει, αλλά κάτι στράβωσε μάλλον..)--Egmontaz talk 16:54, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Bands

Hi Magio, how you doing these days? .. Hope all is well, it's been a while. Anyway, a question came up on my talk page, so I started a thread here that I'd be interested in some feedback on. Thanks. — Ched :  ?  20:49, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Edwin Lawrence Godkin

On a recent trip to England, I photographed Godkin's headstone in a graveyard in a tiny village. I did not know who he was but the headstone was some much detailed than the rest so I took a picture. I just Googled him and see he has a wiki page. Looking to send the pic to someone for consideration of posting it to Godwin's wiki page. If interested email me at: dtanke@hotmail.com and I will forward it to you for consideration. Thanks, Darren (Drumheller, Alberta, Canada). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.154.85.237 (talk) 17:45, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

October 2009

  Hello. When you patrol new pages, all articles that you have looked at should be marked patrolled, whether you marked them for deletion or deemed them acceptable, unless you are not sure. This saves time and work by informing fellow patrollers of your review of the page so that they do not duplicate efforts. Thank you. Gosox5555 (talk) 23:18, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Nice, but I am not sure to what exactly you are referring to. -- Magioladitis (talk) 00:36, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of political party infoboxes

Hi, it would be great if you could let me help with the replacement of the political party infoboxes. In particular, for the Korean ones, you didn't substitute the template, but instead just deleted it. I have been replacing the backends of these templates to allow them to be substituted so no information is lost. I can fix the problem after the fact, but it means reverting your edits to recover the deleted template, then substituting it, then re-deleting it and it's hard to find all the cases where the template was replaced. I'm happy to do the work. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:13, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

I am sure I replaced them first. Check this example. I forgot to change 1-2 parameters. I ll be more carefull from now on.
I think we don't need a see also section in infoboxes. "See also" must go at the bottom of the article. Especiallz, link to elections doesn't always make sense. Some minor parties don't participate in the elections. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:17, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
In the example you cited, you missed the colorcode and country parameters. Like I said, it's not that big of a deal, but I don't think removing these parameters is entirely uncontroversial. Thanks for all the hard work! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:09, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

This one could probably go, {{Infobox Bulgarian Political Party}}. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:49, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

I think I did better in this one. :) I deleted Infobox Bulgarian Political Party. You are welcome but I think you are doing more work than me by replacing AND correcting my mistakes :). So, you deserve a big thank you. -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:02, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, what you did there is exactly what I was hoping for. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 17:45, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

I suppose the discussion applies to {{Infobox Italy Former Political Party}} as well. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 00:12, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

FYI, for the former/defunct/disbanded political parties, there is a disbanded parameter which changes the "leader" to "former leader". I now expanded it for all the positions, so Rally for the Republic is now the same as it was before the switch (with disbanded = yes). Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:53, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
I just found this one: {{Political party}}. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:54, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
Great job. The above template can be deleted in the same process with all the others. There is a consensus for unification and this one is completely unused now. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:00, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Tech help

Hi Magioladitis, is there any code I can add in my monobook.js which will make me see by default all collapsed banners of the BannerShell in talk pages uncollapsed? Thanks. Hoverfish Talk 15:01, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Please ignore above, I posted my request under Template talk:WikiProjectBannerShell#Tech help. Hoverfish Talk 10:37, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I am a bit busy lately I didn't have enough time to check it. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk)

Cleaning up film articles with AWB

Hello - I've noticed you've been cleaning up film article infoboxes using AWB. According to the AWB page:

  1. Don't edit too quickly; consider opening a bot account if you are regularly making more than a few edits a minute.
  2. Avoid making insignificant or inconsequential edits ... or something equally trivial.

For the first point you're making several edits per minute and for the second, IMO I see removal of a parameter that is hidden anyway to be trivial. Thanks. Lugnuts (talk) 06:54, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

I used AWB only to open the pages and then I manually edited. I did 50 edits and my edit ratio was 2-3 edits per minute, this is not much. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:08, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Triage...

Need to work over the AWB bugs and FR pages. Tidy them up, yada yada...

On windows 7 now, with 8gb ram :D, and a new motherboard. Hopefully fixes my damned BSOD's

Reedy 12:39, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Template talk:Infobox Football biography

Hi, You deleted this redirect, but there are still lots of inbound links to it. What happened? Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 06:55, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Reverted. Thanks. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:18, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Disbanded

Hello, Magioladitis. You have new messages at Plastikspork's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Category:Protestant congregations established in the 20th century

Yobot moved a good number of Roman Catholic dioceses (established in the 21st century) also into "Category:Protestant congregations established in the 20th century" back in July. I just ran across it now. Not sure why or if there are like errors for other centuries. Can you look into this? Thanks. Carlaude:Talk 11:59, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

I just followed the list you gave me. Maybe I forgot to change 20 with 21 in this particular one. Can you check? -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:26, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank You-Yobot!

For doing what you did, on the: Talk:Peter Kanavelic‎ & Talk:Josip Hatze‎. Sir Floyd (talk) 14:07, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

incorrect fix

Regarding this, Category:Date of birth unknown with Category:Year of birth missing (living people). As it is, the edit just hides the fact we don't know what his birthdate is. You may want to change your script. - BanyanTree 00:55, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

About your comment. You can read instructions Category:Date of birth unknown. It reads: This category is intended for the discussion pages of articles about deceased individuals, primarily from antiquity (although, in some cases, reaching into the 19th century). This is not a category for living people. This is also written clearly: This category should not include individuals in Category:Living people.
In User:Yobot I have a guide of how all these categories apply. If you still have questions you can conctact me.
Thanks and happy editing, Magioladitis (talk) 08:52, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
I apologize. I was unclear in my original post.
I recognize Category:Date of birth unknown was incorrect. It was a mistake I probably reached trying to remember the category tree off the top of my head. However, a useful edit would have been to replace the incorrect category with the correct one (Category:Year of birth missing (living people)), rather than simply removing it. There was a reason I included a category stating that I couldn't find a birthdate.
If I had to choose between signaling that I simply can't find a birthdate for this person or not, and need some help, - versus picking the wrong category about whether he's alive or dead, when it's clear from the text that he's alive - then I would choose to be wrong on the alive-dead category axis and correct on the birthdate exists-doesn't exist axis. If you're not willing to fix these completely by replacing it with the correct category, I'd prefer you just not make the edit. (I imagine a script replacing the category for articles that are both in Living people and Date of birth unknown, and not in any birth year categories, in Category:Year of birth missing (living people) would be relatively straightforward.) As it is, I consider the removal of that category to put the article in a marginally worse state, since the sole utility of those categories from my perspective is to signal for assistance. - BanyanTree 12:11, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
You are right on that. I was planning to add the year of birth missing category after the removal. That's what I originally do. Checik [38] for example. I should trust my bot scripts more than my manual edits. Thanks for contacting. -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:57, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

ArgumentOutOfRangeException in InterWikiComparer..ctor

Hi. Ok, thanks. Kauczuk (talk) 21:00, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

AWB error

Hi Mag, just letting you know of an error in your recent AWB run, as seen here. Note the break in the "talk header" template, resulting in "tal kheader". Huntster (t @ c) 21:01, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. It was error caused by me. It was not automated change but manual. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:02, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Request For Modification

Your transclusion of the {{WPBiography}} currently includes only |living=, |class= and |priority=. Would you please change this to reflect the current documentation and replace |priority= with |listas=? The priority parameter is now only to be used in conjunction with work groups whereas the listas parameter is supposed to be on each talk page that is tagged with the banner.

Thank you for your cooperation. JimCubb (talk) 23:00, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

I am using AWB/KingbotK plugin. I can ask that the |listas= is added as well. -- Magioladitis (talk) 02:45, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Wrong edit summaries

This was working fine earlier, but the last two that hit my watchlist were wrong: [39] you didn't find football on a hockey players article.--Crossmr (talk) 11:23, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for reporting. I forgot to change the edit summary after AWB crashed due to a bug. ~700 articles were correctly updated but with wrong summary. -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:36, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

XmlException in ApiEdit.CheckForErrors

I am afraid I can't. AWB hasn't been doing what is can do for me. It doesn't change the spacing like it is suppose to (genfixes?). It doesn't add the {{uncategorized}} tag for me on articles that have a hidden category. And a lot of other problems. What can I do to fix all of this? Btilm 21:54, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I do have that version. I think I might have been the (first) one to report the problem. Btilm 03:35, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

World War I Aviators and Living People Category

Hi Magioladitis,

I noticed that you/Yobot added dozens of World War I aces who were born in the 1890s to the category "Living people", but I don't really feel that this is appropriate since there are only three surviving veterans of the conflict and, certainly, if there were aces in the 110s and 120s, we'd have heard of them. Could all of these individuals perhaps be added to the "Year of death missing" category instead? Cheers, CP 03:04, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, you are right. We had this discussion and I am one of those who said that these people have to be categorised as dead. Right now I am very busy in real life and I can't do it. If you could do that I would be thankful. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 19:58, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Done. Phew. Cheers, CP 02:21, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks! I send you my wikilove. :) -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:41, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Coronation Street character infobox

Hi, sorry if I've got this wrong, but I seem to remember a good few months back you took the Template: Infobox Coronation Street character to TfD. I've tried and failed to find the discussion that came of that, and seeing as I've drawn a blank, I thought I'd just let you know that the template has been re-created and added back into a lot of articles, in case you're interested in upholding the previous deletion. Frickative 22:21, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

The infobox is almost the same with Infobox soap character and I do