User talk:DASHBot

Confusion

I'm confused as to why the logo for the User:RootSquared/Ironworker Management Progressive Action Cooperative Trust would be removed when logos for International Association of Bridge, Structural, Ornamental and Reinforcing Iron Workers or AFL-CIO or Reliant Energy are fine to leave posted...RootSquared 14:42, 19 February 2010

Heya

The cool thing about bots is that their cluelessness often makes me laugh. Thanks for that :) guillom 01:19, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

I would agree. ZooPro 05:45, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback, do you have specifics that were particularly 'clueless'? :) Tim1357 (talk) 03:20, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Please bring down the hammer

Hey Dash, I appreciate your diligence, but it only goes halfway. You left me a message about non-free imagery on my user page, and that's nice, but the next step for you is to punish the perpetrator, the insidious and well-known troublemaker User:ChildofMidnight. I think a three-month topic ban and a year of barrel duty would be a good start. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 05:05, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Umm, I don't think that is necessary at all. It was probably a mistake! : ) Tim1357 (talk) 03:20, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

It's MY Book: I Hold the Copyright

On my User Page, you removed the photograph of my own book, to which I hold the copyright!

If you want to use that Image on your talk page, then you have to release it under a Free License. Tim1357 (talk) 03:20, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

That is what I've done, as far as I can tell. Ephraem 16:29, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Fair use images

Is it OK if I put links to the images, but not actually add the images themselves? Thanks and God bless! Master Frederique (talk) 03:13, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Yep, thats fine! Tim1357 (talk) 03:20, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Left on my page:

The following section was left on my page:

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Pedant! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 668 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

1. Louis Berger - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 00:10, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Issues with the above

Your link: verifiability is a link to a redirect someone probably added in response to your code error.

Louis Berger, having been dead for 14 years, is no longer a living person. You can remove him from the backlog.

He's been dead longer than Wikipedia has existed, so his biography was never a BLP issue.

I left the article as a stub, because with all of the information I had available, it was still a stub. If I had added more info I would have referenced it.

Every fact in the article is presented on this page.

Please don't bot-post to my page if you can help it, it's annoying and never seems to be appropriate whenever it happens. User:Pedant (talk) 01:07, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Pendant, Thanks for your comments! It should be a relief that you will not receive another notice; it was a one time thing! Additionally, if you believe the article no longer meets the criteria of an unreferenced Biogrophy of a Living Person, I suggest you remove the unreferencedBLP tag yourself, giving adequate rational in the edit summary, of course. Tim1357 (talk) 00:42, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

My biography of a living person

Today I have corrected the footnotes of the entry Hiroshi Miyazawa. (Johnkatz1972 (talk) 08:54, 10 February 2010 (UTC))

Cool, thanks for your help! Tim1357 (talk) 00:42, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

DASHBot infringing Wikipedia:OUTING#Posting_of_personal_information

Hi. I am concerned that the 'log' aspect of DASHBot's operation is infringing Wikipedia:OUTING#Posting_of_personal_information in the Wikipedia:Harassment article. While I approve of the removal of non-free images and keeping a record of removed non-free images may be acceptable, I question linking them to the pages of users they were found on, and think this should stop as it is technically 'outing' and a harassment. I quote from the Harassment page: 'Posting another person's personal information is harassment, unless that person voluntarily had posted his or her own information, or links to such information, on Wikipedia.'

I see a link to my Userpage in the log. What say you? Caspar (talk) 20:37, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

To tell you the truth I never thought of it that way. Would it be better if the bot stored the log as a list of diffs, instead of listing the page as well? 67.142.130.39 (talk) 01:55, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Glad to have bent your mind round to seeing it this way! And it sure does seem to be the case to me. So, by 'a list of diffs' do you mean to abbreviate 'differences' or are diffs in that context a Wikipedia tech term I'm unaware of? Basically what I was thinking was to just make sure no source page that the image was deleted from was recorded, either directly or indirectly, in the log. That would suffice to prevent an outing breach. Any other information logged would be fine, so long as it didn't conflict with this or other Wikipedia rules. In other words I think DASHBot is obliged to err on the side of discretion who it inflicts its business on. Although it is of course courteous to discreetly inform each offending user what DASHBot has done, on their own talk page. Caspar (talk) 03:10, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Hey 67.142.130.39. This debate is hotting up on the bot's operator Tim1357's User_talk:Tim1357 page. I'm continuing it there. Caspar (talk) 13:40, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Buzzkill

Buzzkill Lucas Duke (talk) 05:11, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Great! Tim1357 (talk) 00:42, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Need More Info

Unreferenced BLPs

Information.svg Hello Pkeets! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 42,122 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the

tag. Here is the article:

  1. Jody Linscott - Find sources: "Jody Linscott" – news · books · scholar · images

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 17:43, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

I need better information on what problems need fixing on this page. I'm not responsible for everything there, and am unable to reference info that other users have left. To me the article looks to be fairly well sourced. The personal info comes from an interview with Linscott and the professional info comes from standard listings. Also, I don't see the tag on the page. Pkeets (talk) 19:17, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Non-Free Image Removal=

DASHbot removed use of a non-free image that was restored from a previous removal by SkierDude (?). The proper citations for use have already been posted, and this image needs to remain intact. Other pages using logos for oil & gas industry companies were inspected for proper citation before the past two restorations. If something else is missing, the bot and/or living editor needs to indicate exactly WHAT is wrong with the usage. 97.65.238.170 (talk) 21:52, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

The policy is pretty straight forward, any non free images must be in the article space. I suggest you use a place holder image while you work on it in your user-space. Thanks! Tim1357 (talk) 00:42, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Diva Page

The page was originally Diva (TV series) until User:Peparazzi moved it to Diva (Philippine TV series) and Diva (Philippines TV series). I just wanted to correct it because there is no other series in wikipedia that is called Diva, so the "Philippines" in the title, that Peparazzi added, is not needed. Can you help me find a solution to restore it to Diva (TV series), this isn't the first time this happened, Peparazzi also redirected First Time (TV series) to First Time (Philippine TV series), which I also tried fixing. Thank you, -- ISWAK3 (talk) 06:58, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Not all images are swept

Resolved

 – Tim1357 (talk) 21:36, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Regarding this edit - it's a fair cop; I was testing out an infobox mod that I did a couple of days ago, and hadn't cleared up afterwards. However, I think that DASHBot has done what we in the trade call a "half-assed job"; the image in question was specified twice in the sandbox, using two different methods, and DASHBot only cleaned up the one. This is the image that it fixed:

{{Infobox concert tour |
  | image = [[Image:RogerWatersInTheFleshTour.gif|195px]]
}}

and this is the one that it skipped:

{{Infobox concert tour |
  | image_name = RogerWatersInTheFleshTour.gif
  | image_size= 195
  | alt= Alt Text
}}

The infobox template takes those three fields and assembles them into an image specifier thus:

[[Image:{{{image_name}}}|{{min|200|{{{image_size|}}}}}px|alt={{{Alt|}}}]]

which, after parameter substitution, gives:

[[Image:RogerWatersInTheFleshTour.gif|{{min|200|195}}px|alt=Alt Text]]

Is the 'bot designed that way; or is it not possible to code for that sort of thing? This is not the only infobox template which uses that technique. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:26, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

There are a bazillion ways that an image can be included in the page, so I fixed this particular instance. Thanks for that catch! Tim1357 (talk) 21:36, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

My Stuff!

You removed almost all of my scans....particularly of documents that are in my possession. I am a new user and don't understand why you would remove items from my sandbox without prior discussion. I have been adopted by Stinging Swarm, who has been extremely helpful in getting me to where my page WAS, and ensuring I was following all the appropriate guidelines....please sdvise. Belleami (talk) 18:44, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Hey Belleami, my bot removed those images because they are tagged as fair-use images. These images must meet the requirements set out on WP:NFCC, for legal reasons. Im sorry for any inconvenience. Tim1357 (talk) 00:42, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Resource

I've added a resource for the article you mentioned (Mario R. Ramil). Items in the article not included in the resource were not contributed by me. Thanks. Tarong (talk) 22:06, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Ok, Thanks! Tim1357 (talk) 01:09, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Stop It

Will you stop with those blackouts my image on the page Gran Turismo Raceway--Diogo Maurício (talk) 14:35, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

As stated in the bot's message, these images were removed because they do not meet the legal criteria that all non-free images be used in the article space. Tim1357 (talk) 01:09, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

removing a logo from a userspace draft page

In this edit, DASHBot removed the logo from a userspace draft page. In this specific case, the draft article is unlikely to survive many hours in article space before being speedily deleted, so no great harm has been done. In general, though, it might be worthwhile to have DASHBot either ignore userspace pages tagged as {{userspace draft}} or to simply tag them as potential problems rather than delete a non-free image. I realize that a userspace draft page is not an article, but treating it as if it were reduces the risk of alienating a newbie. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 02:46, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

I am sorry to say that the policy on WP:NFCC are pretty straight forward. For legal reasons, all non-free images (logos included) must be used in the article-space. For the meantime, I suggest using a placeholder image of a similar size, just so you can get the formatting right. Tim1357 (talk) 01:09, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Non free images

Hi

I just wanted to apologise for the non-free image in my userpage. I just totally forgot that when I created that box that I'd uploaded The Bill's image as being non-free. Trust me, I've been a Wikipedia editor of many a year now, never done it before, never will do it again, I just genuinely forgot how I'd uploaded the image and thought I could use it :)

Please accept my apologies --5 albert square (talk) 21:09, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Please do not worry. My own bot has removed images from my own userspace! Tim1357 (talk) 00:42, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Could I upload another screenshot related to The Bill and use that in the box? For example a screenshot of one of the policeman, say it's being used for promotional purposes only to be used on my userpage and use that image? I hope that makes sense! --5 albert square (talk) 21:14, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Hey there Bot!

Thank you for your contributions! I am an editor, not a bot, alerting you that a bot message asking/telling/admonishing/warning/whatever: In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use files to your user-space drafts or your talk page[1] is more than a bit presumptious. If you were a person and not a bot, you would see that the particular image which you (quite properly) removed, wasn't put on my talkpage by me - it was put on my talkpage by another editor altogether as an attachment to a message they left.[2] Though I have not made a scientific survey, I would venture to guess that that is pretty much the typical situation when it comes to images on user talkpages - someone else put them there. I'm sure that exactly the opposite is true of userpages.

So, the message strikes me as a wee off-putting and officious, nothwithstanding that I am certain that it was not intended that way.

Perhaps, being a nice little bot that is simply trying to do its job, you could advise your master that the message might be reworded just a wee bit when it's dealing with talkpages?

Thanks so much. Keep up the good work. Fladrif (talk) 15:37, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Vtvfilm.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Vtvfilm.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. feydey (talk) 19:23, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi Bot

I`m soory for Inserted non-free Images on my User Page. but allwas I have Upload files Problems.I want to make some of Template:قوالب.but I dont Know What it mean in English.So Can you help me Please? Thanks.. Medhat Montasser (talk) 14:38, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Message from Bclrocks10

Wat the hell! you deleted my megan fox picture and my survivor logos too. my gosh, i am the villain of wikipedia, so be that way. I am the boss of the villains. (talk) 10:10, 12 March 2010 (EST)