User talk:Betacommand: Difference between revisions
Carcharoth (talk | contribs) →Other question at that request: new section |
Betacommand (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 120: | Line 120: | ||
Betacommand, have you seen the earlier questions from MBisanz at that bot request? ''"If I could ask the question of which of BCB's 4-phase NFCC approach have been included in this bots approach? Will this bot follow the no-bot tag rules for userspace and usertalkspace?"'' Just letting you know in case you missed them. And on a personal note, can we please try and get something sorted out amicably? I ''do'' want to see a separation of the non-free image task from the other tasks, but if, as MZMcBride said [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Betacommand&diff=prev&oldid=196173998 here], the name of the bot was chosen to tally with my proposal, it would make sense that others code the other stuff that is needed. Unless you really want to do all the coding yourself. [[User:Carcharoth|Carcharoth]] ([[User talk:Carcharoth|talk]]) 12:50, 6 March 2008 (UTC) |
Betacommand, have you seen the earlier questions from MBisanz at that bot request? ''"If I could ask the question of which of BCB's 4-phase NFCC approach have been included in this bots approach? Will this bot follow the no-bot tag rules for userspace and usertalkspace?"'' Just letting you know in case you missed them. And on a personal note, can we please try and get something sorted out amicably? I ''do'' want to see a separation of the non-free image task from the other tasks, but if, as MZMcBride said [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Betacommand&diff=prev&oldid=196173998 here], the name of the bot was chosen to tally with my proposal, it would make sense that others code the other stuff that is needed. Unless you really want to do all the coding yourself. [[User:Carcharoth|Carcharoth]] ([[User talk:Carcharoth|talk]]) 12:50, 6 March 2008 (UTC) |
||
:all current phases will be transfered to the new account. I dont like the idea that more than one programmers code is being run on the same account. As I have stated my proposal is an all or none deal. Im tempted to just withdraw it now and say fuck it, and quit trying to be nice. at ever turn I seem to get harassment. [[User talk:Betacommand|β<sup><sub>command</sub></sup>]] 12:56, 6 March 2008 (UTC) |
Revision as of 12:56, 6 March 2008
−6073 days left
If you are here to register a complaint regarding my edits, before doing so please note:
|
- 20060127
- 20060409
- 20060508
- 20060713
- 20060906
- 20061017
- 20061117
- 20061207
- 20070101
- 20070201
- 20070301
- 20070401
- 20070501
- 20070601
- 20070701
- 20070801
- 20070901
- 20071101
- 20071201
- 20080101
- 20080201
- 20080301
- 20080401
- 20080501
- 20080601
- 20080701
- 20080801
- 20080901
- 20081001
- 20081101
- 20081201
- 20090101
- 20090201
- 20090301
- 20090401
- 20090701
- 20090801
- 20090901
- 20091001
- 20091101
- 20091201
- 20100101
- 20100201
- 20100301
- 20100401
- 20100501
- 20100601
- 20100701
The Original Barnstar | ||
Because of your repeated kindness and willingness to help others when nobody else will even know about it, I sincerely thank you. You've helped me build an army of... well, I'll just leave it there. :-D east.718 at 01:16, December 16, 2007 |
Man, you are tough!
You take all these comments, and don't get discouraged over them! I don't think I could ever deal with all this...you have quite the tough skin! Following the ways of Compwhizii...
Soxred93 | talk bot has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
bypass redirect, making way for new template
Re: actions by BetacommandBot (talk · contribs) - thank you! Cirt (talk) 21:39, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
Removal of redlinked categories
Hi Betacommand
I see that your bot is now busy removing redlinked category entries from articles, in addition to its other tasks. Just to take one as an example, I see that in this edit it removed Category:Conservative MPs from Robert Gascoyne-Cecil, 5th Marquess of Salisbury. The edit summary was "removing Category:Conservative_MPs" - there weas no explanation of why this was done.
This was not helpful: the correct category is at Category:Conservative MPs (UK), and problems such as this are much more likely to be picked up if the categtory is a redlink than if it is simply removed.
I have just checked Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/BetacommandBot, and at the top of that page there is a very clear list of the tasks for which is aproved, and this is not one of them. I have also checked Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval, and can find no sign of any recent authorisation there.
I presume that I must have missed something, so please can you explain where and when BetacommandBot was authorised to perform this task this task. Thanks! --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:48, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
- its CfD work. removing deleted/non-existent categories is something that BCBot has been doing for a long time. βcommand 16:44, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
- You didn't answer the question, which was "please can you explain where and when BetacommandBot was authorised to perform this task this task?" BrownHairedGirl raises a good point, and the removal of redlinked user catagories has no benifit and is only going to rile people up as well. Where was this bot task authorized again? ➪HiDrNick! 17:39, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
- here is approval for CfD work, which is what Im going, removing deleted/non-existent categories. βcommand 17:44, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
- You didn't answer the question, which was "please can you explain where and when BetacommandBot was authorised to perform this task this task?" BrownHairedGirl raises a good point, and the removal of redlinked user catagories has no benifit and is only going to rile people up as well. Where was this bot task authorized again? ➪HiDrNick! 17:39, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
- This isn't doing CfD work though - it's removing all red linked cats, and some which shouldn't be removed. People sometimes want red linked cats in their userspace, yet BCBot is removing them for no reason. There's a lot of debate about this, if you want to carry on removing every red linked cat then get approval, but I seriously doubt you will get it without a lot of discussion. when people clear out CfD cats, they work from lists - not every single red linked cats. Ryan Postlethwaite 17:52, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
- Bot blocked - you haven't got approval. Obviously I'll take this to AN/I for a review. Ryan Postlethwaite 17:59, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
I object to these edits: [1] [2] —Ashley Y 06:36, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Vandalproof
Hi! How are you? I am a registered user of Vandalproof and have been using the application for the past couple of months. However, I havent been able to use the application for the past two days. Whenever I open the application, I get a message asking me to update to a newer version. However, the version I use is VP137. I dont understand the meaning of this message. Also, being a recent changes patroller, I find it very difficult to warn vandals without Vandalproof. Could you please help me? -Ravichandar 19:33, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
- due to recent changes in the site, vandalproof needed updating. βcommand 21:12, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for March 3rd, 2008.
Weekly Delivery |
---|
| ||
Volume 4, Issue 10 | 3 March 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:18, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Other question at that request
Betacommand, have you seen the earlier questions from MBisanz at that bot request? "If I could ask the question of which of BCB's 4-phase NFCC approach have been included in this bots approach? Will this bot follow the no-bot tag rules for userspace and usertalkspace?" Just letting you know in case you missed them. And on a personal note, can we please try and get something sorted out amicably? I do want to see a separation of the non-free image task from the other tasks, but if, as MZMcBride said here, the name of the bot was chosen to tally with my proposal, it would make sense that others code the other stuff that is needed. Unless you really want to do all the coding yourself. Carcharoth (talk) 12:50, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
- all current phases will be transfered to the new account. I dont like the idea that more than one programmers code is being run on the same account. As I have stated my proposal is an all or none deal. Im tempted to just withdraw it now and say fuck it, and quit trying to be nice. at ever turn I seem to get harassment. βcommand 12:56, 6 March 2008 (UTC)