User talk:TutterMouse

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from User:TutterMouse)
Jump to: navigation, search

Wherever a conversation begins, it should continue at the same place. If I left you something, please use {{ping|TutterMouse}} or similar methods to ping me via Echo if you're replying and need my response. You don't need to leave talkback notices and if you left me something, I shall ping you if I need to respond.

Huggle message[edit]

Hey TutterMouse! You are receiving this message because you are subscribed at

I have recently launched a new downloads for beta testers that contains nightly builds of huggle, eg. versions that are built every day from our master branch and contains latest huggle. These builds are currently provided only for Windows and Ubuntu. You can find them here:

Please keep in mind that these don't have any automatic updates and if you download and start using nightly build, you will need to update it yourself! So don't get yourself to running old version, it's possible to install both stable and nightly huggle, which is what I suggest.

Keep the bug reports coming to phabricator: Many thanks! Petrb (talk) 10:04, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

CHECKWIKI error 81[edit]

Error 81 was disactivated in English Wikipedia after consensus against it. Has the consensus changed? -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:55, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

@Magioladitis: I read the talkpage for the project around the time it was deactivated to see whether or not consensus was reached (courtesy link to discussion) and it looks like there was a consensus to keep it active but it was deactivated by the one person who didn't want it active. According to that I'm reflecting consensus rather than going against it but if a consensus opposing keeping it active was held elsewhere I'd like to read about it. tutterMouse (talk) 19:44, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Just as a followup, I was reverted by Bgwhite who opposed keeping it active when the discussion was had seemingly under the principle "it happens too much" (apparently ISBN errors are fine though equally numerous) so I feel like it's unilateral decision making. I'm okay with being corrected though as long as there's something definite and if we need to reassess consensus I'm fine with that as well. tutterMouse (talk) 19:59, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
I do not have strong opinion on that. I only know that when my bot tried to fix those I got a lot of complains. Moreover, AWB's logic has been restricted not to work in all cases because of complains. You could start a new discussion about it. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:52, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
If you gain consensus for a bot run, my bot can finish the entire list within a few days. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:45, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
I don't have a strong opinion either, I thought merely that it's an odd task to stop doing because I used to do it before it was deactivated and helped in a small way, it wasn't like the queues were insurmountable for it. It's a task that requires human checking and not all tasks can be automated. Anyway, while AWB cannot handle it, Wiki Cleaner does a good job as it's only semi-automated and you do need to verify anything it suggests. I could go poll folk on the project talk page, see if things have shifted but opinion wasn't exactly against it before, just indifferent to a point. tutterMouse (talk) 01:26, 16 April 2015 (UTC)