Misplaced Pages

User talk:Rich Farmbrough: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 20:29, 28 September 2010 editRich Farmbrough (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors1,725,884 edits →Parser functions on my userpage← Previous edit Revision as of 20:32, 28 September 2010 edit undoRich Farmbrough (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors1,725,884 editsm lets have a clean outNext edit →
Line 4: Line 4:
<!--Many thanks to WB--> <!--Many thanks to WB-->
{{User:MiszaBot/config {{User:MiszaBot/config
|algo = old(1d) |algo = old(1h)
|archive = User talk:Rich Farmbrough/Archive/%(year)d%(monthnameshort)s |archive = User talk:Rich Farmbrough/Archive/%(year)d%(monthnameshort)s
}} }}
Line 23: Line 23:
<!--{{TOC left}}--> <!--{{TOC left}}-->
</noinclude> </noinclude>

== Test ==

<!-- this is a mirror thread, please be careful with it. -->
{{Mirror thread|7357}}
<!-- this is a mirror thread, please be careful with it. -->

== CFD Notice ==

{{tmbox
| small =
| type = delete
| text = The related ''']''' has been nominated for '''deletion, merging, or renaming]''' You are encouraged to join the ''']''' on the ] page. <!-- Generated by Template:Cfdnotice -->
}}]

== SmackBot clarify tag ==

SmackBot corrected a clarify tag in ]. This is how I incorrectly added the tag - <nowiki>{{Clarify| September 2010}}</nowiki>. But is how SmackBot corrected - <nowiki>{{Clarify| September 2010|date=September 2010}}</nowiki>.
btw - What do you think of this link for ]. ] (]) 21:11, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
:Yes I know, I can't assume that parameter 1 is intended to be a date - especially as leaving it should be harmless. I could, I suppose, only do so if it is the current month year. Nice link. '']&nbsp;]'', 21:13, 20 September 2010 (UTC).
:: Odd. Yesterday and today, when I click on the bork link I made, an error box pops up,
::''Stop running this script? A script on this page is causing Internet Explorer to run slowly. If it continues to run, your computer might become unresponsive. "Yes" "No".''
::Should I take this to ]? ] (]) 00:11, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
:::Oh I get that a lot on Firefox, at least it tells you what the script is. IE won't even run on my main machine, speaking of borken. '']&nbsp;]'', 12:58, 26 September 2010 (UTC).

== Could you ''not'' capitalize citation template in the future? ==

Like you did (and presumably elsewhere). They are standardized to lowercase all across Misplaced Pages. Thanks. <span style="font-variant:small-caps; whitespace:nowrap;">] {] / ] / ] / ]}</span> 22:21, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
:Indeed, the <nowiki>{{Cite</nowiki> looks out of place when compared to the standard. Also, you probably shouldn't change the ==spacing around headings== either (see ]). All of these little changes make it harder to read the diff. –]] 22:25, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
::And can't you just ''please'' use a bot-flaged account for those edits so that they don't always fill up my watchlist? I'm normally all for consistency and cleanup tasks, and fine with bots making edits like {{diff2|386665670|this}} as long as I don't see them in my watchlist and they are clearly marked as a bot-made edits in the history (although I find it odd that you seem to be pushing your personal capitalization preference, I've yet to see consensus for any of this). You're obviously letting it run in auto-mode anyway, and have bot accounts. Use them. ] 09:15, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
::: No comment at all? ] 14:08, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
::::I've moved stuff across to botland. '']&nbsp;]'', 14:10, 25 September 2010 (UTC).
::::: Thanks. ] 13:39, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
, could you stop capitalizing those templates? It's really annoying. <span style="font-variant:small-caps; whitespace:nowrap;">] {] / ] / ] / ]}</span> 10:00, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
:I'll make some changes. '']&nbsp;]'', 10:06, 26 September 2010 (UTC).
::Building a new ruleset now. '']&nbsp;]'', 11:29, 26 September 2010 (UTC).
:::Built manual ruleset to exclude canonical template names for cite templates when creating canonicalization rules, unfortunately reckoned without {{tl|Cite_Web}} etc. '']&nbsp;]'', 11:29, 26 September 2010 (UTC).
::::<s>Also a bug in the build process. '']&nbsp;]'', 11:36, 26 September 2010 (UTC).</s>
&larr; You're still doing it as far as I can tell? Please stop capitalizing template names - if the editors who put it there made a human decision to use small case, you should not use an automated process to change it absent consensus to do so. –]] 13:58, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
:See build (manual) 550, I'm in the middle of some manual runs on stuff like "3 january 3" and I'm not going to retype all the specialist rules. '']&nbsp;]'', 14:11, 26 September 2010 (UTC).
::If you're doing a run ''focused'' on stuff like "3 January 3" (which is noble, useful and helpful), could I ask ''why'' are any there capitalisation shuffling rules enabled? The ], you investigated and after approximately three hours traced the issue down to an unexpected interaction between rule-sets. If you're not (intentionally) using a rule at any one moment, please ''do not'' have it enabled. In this case, please do not have capitalisation adjusting rules enabled, unless you are exclusively on a capitalisation adjusting run—'''and''' doing the latter on the basis of a previously '''agreed and documented''' project-wide mandate. —] (]) 15:11, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
:::It's the pull of opposites. Minimising the number of edits vs. making them clear. It's crazy to fix a date, fix a DEFAULTSORT, date a tag via three seperate edits when it can all be done in one. Moreover really minor but worthwhile changes (like moving a ref after punctuation, or replacing "Web reference" with "Cite web") are generally not considered "worth" even a bot minor edit, but are good rolled into other stuff. '']&nbsp;]'', 15:19, 26 September 2010 (UTC).
::::Yes, these are all (date formatting, DEFAULTSORT, dated cite) noble, clear-cut and good. Capitialisation adjustments are ''not'' clear-cut and—looking further up this conversation—are not universally considered ''good''. Please disable capitalisation adjustments '''unless''' there is a project-wide concensus for them (which at the moment, does not appear to be the case). —] (]) 19:13, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
:::::Progress? —] (]) 17:32, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

<big><big><big>?</big></big></big>. If you keep acting like a deficient bot, I swear next time I'm going to ask an admin to block you like they would a deficient bot. <span style="font-variant:small-caps; whitespace:nowrap;">] {] / ] / ] / ]}</span> 20:14, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

== ] ==

Hello Rich, I've your edits to ] because they were causing huge red letters to appear on articles that Template:Unreferenced was transcluded on. Regards, ]] 03:47, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
:I think that was just a caching effect, form the earlier edit. See ]. '']&nbsp;]'', 03:50, 23 September 2010 (UTC).
::Oh, OK. Works now! :) Thanks, ]] 20:46, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

== ] ==

], who you blocked for 3 hours, is at it again, adding redundant cleanup tags with dates from 2-3 years ago, interwiki links to nonexistent articles, and linked dates inside {{tlx|Persondata}}. I got BOLD and blocked him for 31 hours instead of going through the motions at ANI, but if you think it would be more appropriate I can open up a thread there just to get consensus. <b class="IPA">]</b>&nbsp;(]) 16:41, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
:That's the right next step. It's almost like 121 is a training AI, replicating the types of additions to articles that are most often not reverted. '']&nbsp;]'', 19:09, 25 September 2010 (UTC).
::I went ahead and blocked the IP for a year, it seems like there's nothing good to come out of leaving it unblocked. <b class="IPA">]</b>&nbsp;(]) 01:38, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
::(BTW, I did leave a note at ANI yesterday, see ], but no one ever responded. I guess there was more interesting drama elsewhere... <b class="IPA">]</b>&nbsp;(]) 01:38, 27 September 2010 (UTC))

== HIIII ==

<!-- You can change the title above, please give me a LINK to at least one problem article below in the case of bugs/errors
Thanks for leaving a message. Rich Farmbrough-->

Originally sourced and properly cited']' a category of national awards before 1968 box info was deleted - Citation requested to support the editor named Shshshsh 24 hrs ago claim support needed. Please protect National Film Award article by vandalism list of national awards among 'Rashtrapati Award 'deleted in the last 24 hrs by that editor please try to undo the edit if he again commits to vandalism. support needed from you thank you. please protect if Shshshsh deletes the National award list again.Report him to the administrator full support requested, your originally edited National award article was completely deleted through vandalism by the user 'Shshshsh ' support requested to (Prabhu6 (talk) 12:02, 25 September 2010 (UTC)). <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:{{tick|18}} Answered on user's talk page. '']&nbsp;]'', 07:07, 26 September 2010 (UTC).

== Expansion of lifetime can lead to duplicate categories, DEFAULTSORT ==

E.g. the expansion of {{tl|lifetime}} can lead to duplicate categories and DEFAULTSORT. Would you add logic for this (could invoke MetaDataSorter after such an expansion to clean up). ] 16:46, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
:This shouldn't happen much, if at all (that was 2009), as 1. lifetime is now very rare, 2. SB invocations start with GF's ''after'' F&R, and only gradually do I manually change them to "before" to deal with intransigent items. If I could invoke General Fixes both before ''and'' after search and replace... Incidentally the duplicates are there anyway, just not visible. This is one of the reasons for expansion of the template. '']&nbsp;]'', 19:16, 25 September 2010 (UTC).
::I hadn't seen it was last year, thought it was three weeks ago. No worries then. ] 21:35, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

== Burma ==

Hi Rich. Can you do a similar run for Burma like you did with Chinese counties cleaning the infoboxes. Basically the infoboxes of the towns and ] need stripping like . They are far too bloated and empty. ALso many of them contain "religion=Buddhism and an empty government parameter which should be removed as in the Tuimu example and replaced with the time zone given. Also the division names need linking properly. If you see ] now you'll see what I mean. Can you go through the town by division/state ] and clean them and the ]. Note that some of them are called states not divisions so in the infobox you just need to change Division to "State". Please though can you at least keep the very basic paramters like image skyline, pushpin map option, area, population and altitude. You can remove flag/shield option too as obtaining those are unlikely.♦ ] 17:00, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Any response?♦ ] 21:24, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
:State/division - just pick that form the article name? '']&nbsp;]'', 21:58, 25 September 2010 (UTC).
::Incidentally I sorted the categories out, thy were a bit of a mess, sub-catting various "people in foo" cats, etc. ~~

Nice one. That'll do. Don't worry about anymmore as I'm gradually going through anyway and replacing the infoboxes/cleaning up the articles.♦ ] 13:34, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

== Smackbot question - tagger code ==

When Smackbot is adding categories such as {{cl|Living people}} or birth and death year categories to an article that's tagged as being uncategorized, would it be possible to also have it switch the tag from {{tl|uncategorized}} to {{tl|morecat}}? Not a big deal if not, but I thought it worth asking anyway, because I've come across a few articles today where that would have been helpful. ] (]) 23:19, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
:Yes, it would be a useful AWB function - AWB is very conservative about uncat, though, assuming that any unrecognised template might hide a category - which mostly they don't or shouldn't. Comics especially has a wonderful categorising mechanism, but of course the cats aren't in the page source and don't work with intersections etc. This sort of project specific cleverness is a real problem sometimes. '']&nbsp;]'', 23:30, 25 September 2010 (UTC).
::We use the API to get categories, so whether they're explicit in page or not doesn't matter. ] 21:36, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
:::Maybe so, but the tagger code I saw looked a the page text. I'll check it out tomorrow. '']&nbsp;]'', 21:40, 27 September 2010 (UTC).
<pre>
// skip article if contains any template except for stub templates
// because templates may provide categories/references
foreach (Match m in WikiRegexes.Template.Matches(articleText))
{
if (!(WikiRegexes.Stub.IsMatch(m.Value)
|| WikiRegexes.Uncat.IsMatch(m.Value)
|| WikiRegexes.DeadEnd.IsMatch(m.Value)
|| WikiRegexes.Wikify.IsMatch(m.Value)
|| WikiRegexes.Orphan.IsMatch(m.Value)
|| WikiRegexes.ReferenceList.IsMatch(m.Value)
|| WikiRegexes.NewUnReviewedArticle.IsMatch(m.Value)
|| m.Value.Contains("subst")))
{
summary = PrepareTaggerEditSummary();

return articleText;
}
}
</pre>
::::'']&nbsp;]'', 18:00, 28 September 2010 (UTC).

== SmackBot uncategorized ==

<!-- You can change the title above, please give me a LINK to at least one problem article below in the case of bugs/errors
Thanks for leaving a message. Rich Farmbrough-->

In SmackBot incorrectly tagged an article as uncategorized — there is a comment at the bottom of the article clearly state that the appropriate categories are present at redirects rather than at the article itself, but the comment is obviously human-readable only. Is there a way to automatically inform bots such as SmackBot that the categorization of articles such as this one is not problematic, to prevent it from coming around and making the same bad edit again? —] (]) 06:19, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
:Well not a good way! Let me look closer. '']&nbsp;]'', 06:20, 26 September 2010 (UTC).
::
:{{tick|18}} Answered on user's talk page. '']&nbsp;]'', 07:41, 26 September 2010 (UTC).

== SmackBot ==

<!-- You can change the title above, please give me a LINK to at least one problem article below in the case of bugs/errors
Thanks for leaving a message. Rich Farmbrough-->
Hi Rich
I added references to an article I am working on titled "]", could you please let me know if it satisfies the notability and/or references for wiki. Any feedback is greatly appreciated. Regards.
:
:{{tick|18}} Answered on user's talk page. '']&nbsp;]'', 14:33, 26 September 2010 (UTC).

== Thanks ==

{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;"
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | ]
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Redirect Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | Despite our disagreements on other sundry matters, I would like to extend my sincere thanks and gratitude for generating the AWB rules for the list of WikiProject banner redirects used in ]. –]] 14:33, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
|}
:You are welcome. Speaking of Xenbobots, did the Chicagoland problems resolve themselves? '']&nbsp;]'', 14:36, 26 September 2010 (UTC).
::Hmm, you'll have to jog my memory? I am working without the assistance of a beverage made by straining hot water through ground beans. –]] 14:40, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
:::I too have an empty earthenware container at my elbow. It's one of Xenobot IV(?)'s project labelling tasks. WikiProject Chicago. However many of the pages once labelled were disputed and now have various "nobots" templates on their talk pages. I know you suggest this as one solution on your bot's talk page, but it has two flaws: firstly it doesn't solve the underlying problem, whether it is mis-categorisation, or poor project definition (assuming the banner doesn't belong), secondly if a project wants to include pages with little or no apparent connection to the subject of the project, it's not really for the pages "owners" to say them nay. Anyway the reason I ask is that I periodically try to clean up bots/nobots, and have managed to remove a couple of hundred plus (not least from the templates with red-links pages which were all denying AWB for no real reason - although that got me into updating the pages, which are quite owned at the moment). '']&nbsp;]'', 14:49, 26 September 2010 (UTC).
::::Ah yes. It's a bit of a dispute over how wide a metropolitan area spans. One user feels that CHI is casting their net too wide, but on the other hand (as you note), projects are generally free to set their scope as wide as they wish. I didn't really feel like getting in the middle of it, to be honest, so I was fine with them denying Xenobot on a case-by-case basis. –]] 15:32, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

== cite vs Cite ==

At , you used AWB to change multiple occurrences of "cite web" to "Cite web". Why? The ] explicitly uses the lower case version. ] (]) 15:49, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
:Yes some of the documentation does although it is not prescriptive in that sense. However
# Template:Web reference
# Template:Web-reference
# Template:Web cite
# Template:Cite website
# Template:Cite-web
# Template:Citeweb
# Template:Web
# Misplaced Pages:Citeweb
# Template:Web citation
# Template:Cite url
# Cite web
# Misplaced Pages:Cite web
# Template:Cite blog
# Template:Cite Web
# Template:Cite webpage
# Template:Cita web
# Template:Lien web
# Template:C web
# Template:Cit web
# Template:Cw
# Template:Cite tweet
all redirect to {{Tl|Cite web}}, and from the 6 September I started to pick these up. Capitalising is an added bonus (the majority of templates are capitalised), although there are some people that have objected, notably Amalthea for reasons of watchlist noise (which seems valid), for that reason I have created a new manual version of the clean-up rules that skips some of these corrections. '']&nbsp;]'', 04:20, 27 September 2010 (UTC).
: Actually, whether capitalizing templates really is a "bonus" is yet to be determined. I haven't seen objections to bypassing redirects, but many complaints about changing e.g. <code><nowiki>{{cite web|</nowiki></code> to <code><nowiki>{{Cite web|</nowiki></code>. I think I see your reasoning, and can see it as a good guideline to improve readability ''in meta templates''. Not so much in articles though.<br>You'd save yourself much grief (and, from the looks of it, an ANI thread or RFCU sooner or later) if you just stopped changing capitalization of the first letter of transcluded templates (cites, tags, reflist, ...) and looked for consensus at some pump first. As I've said elsewhere, I'm in principle all for cleanup tasks and canonicalization, but this ''is'' a consensus driven community project – if members of the community object, you'll need to look for consensus, as annoying as it may be. I know you don't normally have BAG approve all your tasks, and you've been given lots of leeway since you generally stay within the important BAG guidelines. In this case though you aren't. ] 12:35, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
::Indeed in meta-templates it has the big advantage of making .....{{{{entity and ....{{{{{Entity clear nine times out of ten (or more). But there is not really much objection except to the Cite family, and that mainly since I have been busy manually over the last few days - and I understand the reasoning since "cite" is seen as something that fits into running text (I did cap a lot in numbered or bulleted lists with no complaints). In fact it rarely ''is''in running text, it is usually offset from (or at least within) a sentence with ref tags, but as I said I have done a rebuild so I get a separate manual fixes that won't cap inline cites, unless it's replacing a redirect. (Well at the moment it will ail with most redirects but that's another story.) I completed one of the 8 tasks I was working on yesterday, another will be done in a couple of minutes, one I think I can bot (I will have to check my BRFAs) and the rest I might put on hold anyway as I want to look at 0.8, and work on Mirror Bot. '']&nbsp;]'', 12:47, 27 September 2010 (UTC).

:::I don't understand what "redirect" has to do with this. When you actually go to the ] page, the '''examples''' are in all lower case. This has nothing to do with page names, but instead is the '''fact''' that the examples and the new text '''do not agree'''. As a result, I think it is wrong to use mixed case anytime, even when "it's replacing a redirect". ] (]) 18:41, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

:::As noted in several other places on just the recent talk activity, the lowercase is used in examples and the lower case seems to be want is preferred. If you wish to change the direction of Misplaced Pages, this can be done by gaining traction for a policy on the matter, rather than eroding the standardisation that there ''is''. —] (]) 17:36, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

I must have mis-read what was said above. The bot "cite journal" to "Cite journal". Also "cite news", "cite web", and more. Please stop. ] (]) 19:00, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

== ] ==

Hi,

I just wondered why you interchanges {{tl|flagicon}} with its redirect {{tl|Flag icon}}, like you did and amongst many? Anyway, I thought that general Misplaced Pages consensus is you don't make an edit to a page just to update the template name, according to ]? ] (]) 21:25, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
*Yes you are quite right (by and large) you don't make an edit to a page just to update the template name, in the first edit I replaced mark-up with a template ( Edit summary - ''replace markup with template and general fixes.'') in this case <nowiki><br clear="all"></nowiki> with {{Tl|Clear}}, added a DEFAULTSORT and a couple of other minor changes, in the second (''Datefixes and general fixes'') replaced "22 April 22" with "22 April", and {{Tl|bda}} with {{Tl|Birth date and age}}. And there also lies the nub (or the rub, or the rub of the nub) - "bda", <nowiki><br clear="all"></nowiki>, "flagicon" and "commonscat" (common scat?) are less readable than "Birth date and age", "Clear" "Flag icon" and "Commons category". And what is more they are less memorable, don't conform to simple rules to help users predict and remember the names of templates (whole words, normal capitalisation, no extra underscores, hyphens, Infobox foo, not Foo infobox etc.). And while none of these things is insurmountable, a simple interface encourages new users - I ''do'' remember when the only mark-up I knew was == '' - and a few minutes earlier not even that. There is a steep learning curve with Misplaced Pages, and we need to make it as shallow as possible. '']&nbsp;]'', 03:48, 27 September 2010 (UTC).

== Help with the ] representatives editing their clients' articles ==

Twice in this month, I've found some funky wtiting, and look to the talk page of the article, only to discover that the ] article was being edited by one of her ] executives, using a ]ed photo which had been hanging in King's ] ..."with King's permission". ?!! Today, the ] page had an album inserted into their article. A photo of former members from that band that I uploaded a year ago to ] came under scrutiny by a new user at Commons, who asked to delete the image "because the people in the photo were no longer in the band". (I should have guessed this was the problem).. my response was to ask whether I should delete photographs of ] since he no longer plays with ]! I was incredulous that anyone would ask to delete a photo that ''could'' be used in discussing the history of the band from ''Commons''!! Today, I read on the talk page that the primary editor of what is a redundant article- with the text merely repeating the lead-- identifies themself as a new editor but never registered in the usual manner so it's not possible to leave a template on their talk page if they haven't got one! What to do with these people??!!--] (]) 01:59, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

:Tbanks. I never learned how to really interact with other ]s on the ]s, mainly being a Wikignome type, cleaning up after others. Just wanted to be sure that my efforts with these outsiders with definite ] interests regarding their clients don't screw up the BLP pages. I watched while others had a helluva time with the record folks on the article for ] (] backup guitarist)-- who has now taken ]'s place in the touring band, if not permanently. --] (]) 15:42, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

== ] ==

Hi {{PAGENAME}}! an article you have contributed to, has been selected for the Misplaced Pages Version 0.8. offline release on DVD and iPhone. If you would like to make any last minutes changes or improvements, you are most welcome to do so. Deadline is midnight UTC on Monday, 11 October. See also: ].--] (]) 04:47, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
:Cool! '']&nbsp;]'', 04:48, 27 September 2010 (UTC).
== Talkback ==

{{talkback|Kudpung|ts=05:07, 27 September 2010 (UTC)}}
== Talkback ==

{{talkback|Kudpung|ts=06:09, 27 September 2010 (UTC)}}
BTW if you're watching my tp anyway, I'll drop these silly tb templates.

== Radio City 1386AM ==

Rich

You posted an Orphan article notice on the article I posted about ] any chance you can take another look I have added some more links just curious how many links are required for an article to not be classified an orphan?

Thanks David <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 14:27, 27 September 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:{{tick|18}} Answered on user's talk page. '']&nbsp;]'', 14:31, 27 September 2010 (UTC).

Thanks Alot, new to the Wiki World so not sure on the etiquette of removing what others have added.

David <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 14:36, 27 September 2010 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== SmackBot ==

<!-- You can change the title above, please give me a LINK to at least one problem article below in the case of bugs/errors
Thanks for leaving a message. Rich Farmbrough-->

Hi Rich,
Please, check the article "]", which was improved. since you taged it. Thanks (] (]) 16:18, 27 September 2010 (UTC))

Thfnks Rich, for giving me a hand. Its looks better now.(] (]) 23:32, 27 September 2010 (UTC))

== SWAT and WADS conferences ==

Hidden maintenance categories don't make an article properly categorized, and neither do the presence of categories on redirects. If ] doesn't have at least one visible content category directly ''on'' it, then it's still an uncategorized article that needs to be tagged as an uncategorized article. ] (]) 18:42, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
: ] does say that every article needs to have at least one category on it. ] (]) 18:56, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
:: Is there any good reason why certain articles should be ''exempt'' from the rules that apply to most others? If so, then why bother having a category system at all? ] (]) 18:58, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
::: Categorization tagging isn't something I do because I particularly like being perceived as an obsessive-compulsive little "rules for the sake of rules" geek. I certainly don't ''enjoy'' sitting here for hours on end clicking "save" in AWB over and over again — but when there's a backlog of almost 50,000 uncategorized articles, as there was two months ago when I started devoting almost all of my Misplaced Pages attention to this particular task, it's something that has to get done. I don't really see the point in essentializing it into a debate about whether there are "inherent" reasons why the rule is what it is. The simple fact that the rule is there, in and of itself, means that it's not particularly my responsibility to justify why an article ''should'' be categorized — it's the job of the other person to justify why a special ''exception'' to the rule should be made in their particular case. ] (]) 19:39, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

== ''The Signpost'': 27 September 2010 ==

<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
{{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/{{#switch: 1
| 1 = 2010-09-27
| 2 = Volume 6, Issue 39
| 3 = 2010-09-20
| 4 = 2010-10-04
}}}}
</div>
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">''']''' &middot; ] &middot; ] &middot; ] (]) 21:55, 27 September 2010 (UTC)</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0074 -->

== Parser functions on my userpage ==

I got the following warning message in preview mode of my userpage. I'm not sufficiently technically-minded to appreciate what it means. Any help in deciphering it would be most appreciated:<blockquote>Warning: This page contains too many expensive parser function calls.

It should have less than 500 calls, there are now 546 calls.</blockquote>
I suspect it may have to do with the cleanup category boxes there. Thanks. --] ] 01:32, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
{{Tl|Dating maintenance categories progress box}}
:Yes indeed it is quite irritating that "expensive" parser function calls - in this case "if exists" are hard limited to 500 per page. You can call {{some template that doesn't exist}} or make a ] - which ''must'' invoke some kind of "exists" functionality - which mean that blue links do too, so it is kinda silly (maybe a bugzilla). And I wanted a nice dashboard of all the progress boxes, sigh. However, good news is ... (as documented on my ]<sup></sup> - currently broken!) the progress box (abocve) on the right which is a rely helpful management tool for working with SmackBot. '']&nbsp;]'', 03:48, 28 September 2010 (UTC).

== Making work ==

Hi Dude!
Made a little AWB re-work (month days) for you here () with an edit conflict situation. I got most of it (your updates to the old) manually... but had to balance a stale edit I'd started hours back and left in my que. If it matters run the BOT again to lengthen those month names! Be well. // <b>]</b><font color="green">]</font> 01:37, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
:Thanks for letting me know. I'll pick the article up again sooner or later, or someone/something else will. '']&nbsp;]'', 03:51, 28 September 2010 (UTC).

== ], AWB and the cite tool ==

Hi Rich. Regarding {{diff|British Waterways|387461092|386736038|your recent edit to British Waterways}} article. I noticed that AWB changed the template names from '''{{!xt|cite}}''' to '''{{xt|Cite}}'''. Reason for commenting is that the two cites I added last week used the new popup cite template tool in the editor: '''{{!xt|cite}}''' is being added by this new tool, rather than '''{{xt|Cite}}'''. This would seem to be creating extra work for you (well, for AWB!) -- ] (]) 08:41, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
:OK thanks for the note. It's not a big deal and the latest versions of my manual tools are skipping it anyway, but useful to know. '']&nbsp;]'', 08:42, 28 September 2010 (UTC).
{{collapse top|Off topic content}}
::Based on the number of ''separate'' conversations opened precisely on this topic, I think the capitalisation adjustments ''are'' "a big deal", and not just for the odd person. Please, take heed of the crowd and remove the rules performing capitalisation adjustments from circulation. Please put the controversial rules ''beyond use'' and ensure that they do not silently re-appear a few months down the road (unless it is with a clear, documented, project-wide mandate). —] (]) 17:40, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
{{Collapse bottom}}

== Clarify date from /// format ==

Hello. Please can you keep AWB out of the <code>title=</code> parameter of cite templates, as in . thanks, ] (]) 09:05, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
:I'll see what I can do.... '']&nbsp;]'', 09:13, 28 September 2010 (UTC).
{{collapse top|Off topic content}}
::'''Please stop''' capitalisation adjustments for template names. There are four unarchived topics on the this Talk page in the last week alone. Rich: you have been repeatedly asked by increasing numbers of editors to not make such changes. Rather than being vague and non-committal. Can we please have some '''action''': please stop the bot activity (Smackbot ''and'' your "manual" ruleset) until such as time as the rules have been removed. The continuance is causing conflict and stressed editors, and these are not things that I like seeing on Misplaced Pages. —] (]) 17:31, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
:::this topic is about dates not capitalisation. '']&nbsp;]'', 17:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC).
::::Above at 13:58, 26 September 2010 , I was referring to templates in general. I've been meaning to start an RFC on this so that you can see that the community is not in favour of your changing template capilization to suit your personal preference, but I'm having a hard time finding a good venue. –]] 18:56, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
:::::This topic is still not about capitalisation, nor is the one by Struway a request not to capitalise. There are threads about the desirability of caps. This is not one. '']&nbsp;]'', 20:20, 28 September 2010 (UTC).
{{collapse bottom}}

== Find sources ==

Hi Rich. Two things:

*Adding "Find sources" to {{tl|unreferenced}} was a great idea.
*Shouldn't it also be in {{tl|BLP unsourced}} as well? ] (]) 10:36, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
:* Thanks!
:* Done. '']&nbsp;]'', 10:39, 28 September 2010 (UTC).
:::Thanks. ] (]) 10:45, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

== Correspond with me ==

Do you want to correspond with me e-mail? I from Czech Republic and I want to be better in English. Write me on my takl page. Hi ] (]) 10:36, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
: I think, private e-mail. My e-mail is XXXX . I know, how it goes on wiki. ] (]) 10:55, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
::Cool. '']&nbsp;]'', 10:57, 28 September 2010 (UTC).
:: It means yes? ] (]) 10:58, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
::: Yes. '']&nbsp;]'', 10:59, 28 September 2010 (UTC).
::: OK :-), I will write you, about me as soon as possible. I can not wait. Hi ] (]) 11:01, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

== ] tagged uncategorised - really? ==

] (]) 15:20, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
:That's a pretty silly mistake tbh. Especially since it took 13 minutes to fix... ] ] 15:25, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
::NOtified 15:20, reverted 15:21- Between 0 and 120 seconds. Took you at least 180 seconds to say how slow I am. '']&nbsp;]'', 15:28, 28 September 2010 (UTC).
: Ehhh, everyone makes mistakes. :/ ] 15:45, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

== Orphan ==

Hey, Mr Farmbrough. Does Neuroscience stubs count as a category? ] 15:31, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
:Not for the purpose of "uncategorised", "orphans" are pages which are not linked ''to'' by another page. '']&nbsp;]'', 15:35, 28 September 2010 (UTC).
::I added ] to ]. '']&nbsp;]'', 15:37, 28 September 2010 (UTC).
:::Cool. ] 19:15, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

== More Burma ==

HI RIch I have another task request. Can you go through the ] by area and simply add ] to the capital/seat of the townships. Note don't add this category to the articles on townships themsevles but to the "principal towns". Effectively it should produce a very useful category of the main cities and towns in Burma and allow people to work through them later like ] etc. There should be over 300 although some of the townships and capitals have yet to be started majority are in place though.♦ ] 19:04, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Mmm maybe I'd better do it manually, give me a good chance to see what needs doing anyway..♦ ] 20:01, 28 September 2010 (UTC)



==Threads== ==Threads==

Revision as of 20:32, 28 September 2010


Note: I will generally answer on your talk page (and usually copy here), and look for your responses here. If you see my answer here and it's not on your talk page, I'm either not happy with it (haven't finished writing it), or I forgot to copy it over. However I can't (borked watchlist among other reasons) watch your talk page (sorry), so reply here. R.F.

FAQ

Please feel free to read my FAQ. R.F.

Full ArQuive

Alternatively browse my Talk Archive Index. R.F.

FarmBLOGh

Or follow my blog. R.F.


Threads

I understand people feel strongly about things, but please try to keep your conversations in the appropriate threads. Rich Farmbrough, 20:23, 28 September 2010 (UTC).

User talk:Rich Farmbrough: Difference between revisions Add topic