User talk:Rjwilmsi/Archives/2011/June

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Bad bot edit

When you have a chance, I thought you might want to look into why your bot made this edit. It's obviously not useful as it destroyed the redirect at the page. I've already reverted the bad edit, but I know that seeing bad edits is generally useful to bot owners so that they can work out the bot bugs. - TexasAndroid (talk) 13:27, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I've sorted the problem and tagged the page as it should have been done the first time. Rjwilmsi 14:42, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
here is another instance. - TexasAndroid (talk) 15:59, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
Also fixed, and now tagged correctly. Thanks Rjwilmsi 07:17, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Finnish election

Also the refs were replaced/swap[ped and the lang refs replaced for some reason [1](Lihaas (talk) 04:35, 3 June 2011 (UTC)).

That edit did two things: put the references in numerical order per convention, and secondly remove duplicate |language=Finnish from some of the citations. Rjwilmsi 06:38, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Jessica Watson

Hi Rjwilmisi, you may want to keep your eye on this page. It appears that a user by the name Skol fir has been making non-sense edits. Ggolof65 (talk) 01:20, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you, Rjwilmsi, for your recent helpful copyediting to the article, Santorum (neologism). Much appreciated. ;) Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 14:21, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Bot Error involving Author's name in reference

I noticed that your bot made an edit on Alaska Airlines' page that put in Puget Sound for the first and last name of an author for this reference on that article. This is the 2nd time the bot has made that edit on that page--I've reverted it both times on the basis that Puget Sound is not the author's name, and the reference doesn't have an author listed there in the first place. So could you please make sure that the bot doesn't do this anymore? Thanks, Compdude123 (talk) 03:16, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Exception added to bot logic, and article updated to set missing |work=. Rjwilmsi 07:15, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for making this change. Hopefully, there aren't a bunch of other articles where your bot made this error. —Compdude123 (talk) 20:41, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Re: Feedback

It's weird because before I wrote the Tech Report full time, I used to write a BRFA section for it. I should definitely bring it back, you're right. Thanks! - Jarry1250 [Weasel? Discuss.] 17:59, 24 June 2011 (UTC)