User talk:GoingBatty

Eagles

Thanks for catching the errors on the Eagles page! I've changed them; but you shouldn't be afraid to be bold and make those changes yourself if they are correct and would improve the article. Thanks for helping improve the pages! Cheers :> Doc9871 (talk) 07:58, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

The Kinks

Hello there, GoingBatty. I noticed some of your recent contributions to The Kinks articles, and just wanted to say "Thank You"; you're doing some great work. - I.M.S. (talk) 22:41, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

My pleasure! GoingBatty (talk) 22:43, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Delaware Stadium

So how do people describe the stadium--is it "Tubby Raymond Field at Delaware Stadium" or something like that? Figured that would be good to have in the infobox ... Blueboy96 21:06, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

People describe the stadium as "Delaware Stadium". While it would be correct to describe the field as "Tubby Raymond Field at Delaware Stadium", most people wouldn't be so verbose. Thanks for all the work you've been doing to improve the Delaware-related articles! GoingBatty (talk) 23:34, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

AWB --> Automatic correction

Hello, Thank you for combing through Kelly Rowland (album) using AWB. However, when script tools such as AWB are used they conflict with MOS:ITALICS because they removed '' marks from the references. Per MOS:ITALICS only magazines and publications etc. should italicized but because the {{cite web}} automatically italcizes anything which appears in the "work=" field the '' are required to unitalicize websites etc. --Lil-unique1 (talk) 14:25, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

I've reread {{cite web}} and MOS:ITALICS and agree with you. I've submitted a bug report to AWB for this issue, which has already been addressed.

However, you may also want to see the discussion on this topic at Template talk:Cite web There's a claim that web sites should be italicized, so I've asked if MOS:ITALICS should be updated. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 15:06, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Edit Semi-protected

Hey, when you've answered an editsemiprotected request like you did on Talk:The Beatles, remember to change the {{editsemiprotected}} into a {{tlx|editsemiprotected}} to remove the request from the open request category. Thanks, Stickee (talk) 08:12, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi Stickee - thanks for educating me, although Template:Editsemiprotected suggests that we use {{tlf|editsemiprotected}} instead of {{tlx|editsemiprotected}} when the edit is complete. What's the difference? GoingBatty (talk) 13:43, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

It doesn't really matter which is used; tlx and tlf just change how it looks. tlx looks like this: {{editsemiprotected}} and tlf like this: {{editsemiprotected}}. I personally prefer the tlx with a link in it but whatever is fine. Thanks, Stickee (talk) 21:58, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Restrict orphan tagging

Hi. I noticed some edits of your using AWB. You may want to activate "Restrict orphan tagging to linkless pages", which is the current consensus for orphan pages. You tagged some articles as orphan which have 1 or 2 links. This is correct by the strict definition of WP:ORPHAN but current consensus advices that we focus in pages with no incoming links. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 16:29, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi Magioladitis - Thanks for the message. I've read Wikipedia:Orphan#Criteria and set the AWB option as you suggested. GoingBatty (talk) 22:43, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi.

I have noticed some of your edits using AWB, and think your orphan tagging is still a bit draconian. At least two of the articles you have tagged as orphans recently ( turret sponge and encrusting turret sponge ) were marked as orphans despite having several links.

I hope this can be fixed, though since I don't have any knowledge of how AWB works, I cannot suggest a course of (automated) action.

Thanks. Seascapeza (talk) 04:08, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

As I mentioned above, I've set AWB to only tag articles as orphans that have no incoming links, because Wikipedia:Orphan#Criteria states "it is recommended to only place the {{orphan}} tag if the article has ZERO incoming links from other articles." Special:WhatLinksHere/Turret sponge and Special:WhatLinksHere/Encrusting turret sponge indicate there are no incoming links from other articles. Could you please explain what is Draconian about following this recommendation? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 04:17, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Sure.

The sponge section of Wikipedia is very sadly underrepresented. So. We have to start somewhere. We have overall sponge articles and some articles on class and family and precious little below that in zoological ranking. The articles I am writing are about species and genera which fit in below class and family. All of them link in to classes and family and finally (working upwards) to sponge phyla. Is that not enough? These are children articles, if you will, of other articles, not weird offshoots which have no place anywhere on Wikipedia. I notice your specialities are mostly in popular culture -- please can you try to see that zoology doesn't work in quite the same way?

The sponge articles (in this instance) have their place in Wikipedia, are not orphaned, in terms of the fact that they fit perfectly well into their rankings in the overall Linnaean scheme of things, and there is a serious possibility that they will never have any incoming links to them. They however, cannot be considered orphans because unlike say, an article on my great uncle Sydney, they do fit into the overall grand Linnaean scheme of living things.

good enough? Seascapeza (talk) 21:42, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Seascapeza - I'm concerned that you seem to think that because I tagged your articles as orphans, I was labelling them as "weird offshoots which have no place anywhere on Wikipedia." On the contrary, it's obvious that you're doing a great job creating articles in the specialty you're passionate about. Yes, it's true my specialties are mostly in popular culture. On the day I made the edits in question, I was spending time reviewing new articles when some of the articles you wrote came in to my queue. Many new articles have much more serious problems than being an orphan that require assistance from other editors, but yours are better than most.

Whether an article is about popular culture, zoology, or any other topic, the definition of an orphan on Wikipedia is the same. I urge you to read Wikipedia:Orphan, where the first paragraph states "These pages can still be found by searching Wikipedia, but it is preferable that they can also be reachable by links from related pages; it is therefore helpful to add links from other suitable pages with similar and/or related information. De-orphaning articles is an important aspect of building the web."

Deleting orphaned articles would be Draconian, which of course I didn't do. Tagging them with a template that encourages you and other editors to "Please introduce links to this page from related articles" is far from Draconian - it is simply asking people to help make your articles easier to find.

Maybe someday you or your fellow editors will create additional articles to complete the Linnaean taxonomy, so that Haliclona links to Haliclona (haliclona) which could link to turret sponge and encrusting turret sponge. Your article in process of a list of marine animals of the Cape Peninsula would be another great way to de-orphan the articles.

I hope you'll see that I was acting in good faith by making edits which I thought would improve these articles, or help encourage others to do so. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:34, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

P.S. I've never been scuba diving before, but I'd love to try it sometime. The closest I get to seeing marine life is taking my kids to aquariums a couple times a year.

Community reassessment of Anne Marie Louise d'Orléans, Duchess of Montpensier

Hello, just to let you know a Community Good Article Reassessment of an article you recently contributed to, Anne Marie Louise d'Orléans, Duchess of Montpensier, has been made as an editor doesn't feel that it meets all of the GA criteria yet. The reassessment can be found at the article reassessment page. Please feel free to make any comments there. Regards,

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Fridae'sDoom (talk) at 02:58, 12 September 2010 (UTC).

Uncategorized stubs

At present, the Uncategorized Articles list doesn't recognize {{uncategorized stub}} when differentiating between "tagged" and "untagged" articles, so if I don't use the main {{uncategorized}}, then the article fails to drop off the "untagged" list (and that makes it impossible to actually clear the "untagged" backlog, which is still over 10,000 articles even after I've spent two months doing almost nothing but tagging articles).

I've already asked User:JaGa to revise the toolserver programming so that it recognizes articles with {{uncategorized stub}} and/or {{morecat}} as being tagged — but until he actually does so, I have to use {{uncategorized}} as it's the only one that actually reduces the size of the untagged articles list. Bearcat (talk) 03:08, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

How would that fix the problem of the number of articles on the toolserver list? Bearcat (talk) 03:20, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Heh, no worries. For what it's worth, the last time I checked in, he assured me that he hadn't forgotten about my request and just hadn't had a chance to get to it yet. I agree, it would make things better all around (and would save me the hassle of constantly having to explain why I'm tagging articles that have stub categories, too...) And for an added bonus, I've also had to try to sneak around a completely different bot that automatically detags articles that have category declarations on them — even if they're hidden maintenance categories like Category:Year of birth missing that also don't actually count as "categorized". Grrrrrr.

But then again, once I do finally get that list under control it'll be a lot easier to stay on top of category maintenance all around, given that I'm identifying and asking for fixes on the problems that crop up as I'm going through the list. Short term pain for long term gain, I guess. Bearcat (talk) 03:34, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Unlinking sources

Please explain Why would you unlink the publisher of some references, as you did in this edit? Please respond on my talk at your earliest convenience. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:44, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Curiouser and curiouser I never got a response the last time I asked (and sorry for bothering you again.) Sigh. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:46, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Hope springs eternal! —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:37, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Weather radar

Hi,

In this article, you changed the variable "authors" for "coauthors" in the template {{Cite web}} a couple of times. This caused the names of all the authors not being shown as this template need to have an "author" filed before the "coauthors" field is considered. I had to use one of the author in the field "author" to fix the problem. I'm just letting you know that for your future corrections. Pierre cb (talk) 14:28, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I made the change because the "authors" parameter is not valid, but I should have previewed the results before saving my change. I've updated the {{Cite web}} documentation to make it explicit that the "author" parameter must be used in conjunction with the "coauthors" parameter. Thanks again! GoingBatty (talk) 19:20, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Actor Rebellion of 1733

Hey, just wanted to drop you a quick note regarding Actor Rebellion of 1733: I've reverted your "typo fix" since the title actually does read "Commedian". Thanks, and keep up the good work. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR^♯♭ 02:42, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for the problem, and thanks for letting me know. How about we change the code to {{sic|hide=y|Comm|edian}} so it will still display as "Commedian" but no one else will make the same mistake I did? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 02:59, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Honestly didn't know such a template existed. I've added that in now; thanks for the tip! ɳOCTURNEɳOIR^♯♭ 03:04, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Arnolfini

I reverted your edit. InBetween [sic] is the name of the festival, it is not a type. Try checking out the references before attempting to fix things which don't need fixing! Jezhotwells (talk) 20:45, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for the problem, and thanks for letting me know. I have gone back read the reference as you suggested, and confirmed that "Inbetween" (lowercase "b") is the name of the festival. I apologize for presuming it was a typo. Similar to the solution in the comment above, how about we change the code to {{sic|hide=y|In|between}} so it will still display as "Inbetween" but no one else will make the same mistake I did? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 23:29, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Went ahead and made the change suggested above - please let me know what you think. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 03:23, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

A barnstar for you

		The Cleanup Barnstar
		Nice work of typo fixing! bender235 (talk) 23:25, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

And by the way, I think you should apply for Reviewer status. —bender235 (talk) 00:24, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Bender235! I'll have to read the requirements to be a reviewer and see if that would be a good fit for me. Thanks again! GoingBatty (talk) 15:43, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

		The Typo Team Barnstar
		Here's another one for ya, keep up the good work! ;) œ™ 07:03, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much! I've added the Typo Team userbox to my talk page. GoingBatty (talk) 20:16, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Uncategorized stubs

Good news...finally got the change implemented, so pages tagged with {{uncategorized stub}} don't get listed as "untagged" anymore. So I can finally start using that template properly! (*grin*) Bearcat (talk) 17:46, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations! Thanks for sharing the news. GoingBatty (talk) 20:23, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Heroninos Archive

I have specified that two of the source are in English because (a)this is a subject where at one time all the key publications were in Italian,(b) the sources are published in a German journal (where most of the articles are in German) and (c) one is by an Italian author (who usually writes in Italian). Please stop blindly reverting me. You are not a bot, there is no need to act like one. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 23:19, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for the problem, Elen. I picked up your article from the Check Wikipedia list. I think I accidentally picked it up twice because AWB was not successful in cleaning up the identified issues. (I'll leave those for you to resolve as part of your construction.) It appears AWB removes the parameter language=English because the {{Cite Journal}} documentation states "English is assumed and should not be specified." Even without the "(in English)" note in the reference, I would assume the sources are in English because the article titles specified in the references are in English. You may want to modify your references to find another creative way to specify these are in English, so no one else "fixes" them in the future. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 23:45, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the note. Sorry I was a bit snappy - it was doing it twice that annoyed me, and I tend to mistrust automated tools anyway. The other two 'problems' are no such things - one is the correct formatting for the footnote anchors (AWB obviously not picking up on the pipe here), and I can't tell what it's looking at in the other one, as the formatting does not look like that on the page. Ah well. Thanks for explaining. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 00:37, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

I appreciate your follow-up, Elen. I took a closer look at the two syntax issues that Check Wikipedia found:

1. The same reference - <ref>[[#Rathbone1991|Rathbone (1991) p1]]</ref> - is used twice in the article (second and third paragraphs). AWB normally does this kind of combination - maybe it's the wikilinks and footnote anchors inside the reference tags that it doesn't expect? Per WP:REFNAME, I suggest these be changed to <ref name="Rathbone1991p1">Rathbone (1991) p1</ref> in the second paragraph, and <ref name="Rathbone1991p1" /> in the third paragraph, so they're grouped together in the Notes section at the bottom of the page.
2. In the second paragraph, the reference tags are inside the quotation. Per WP:REFPUN, I suggest this be changed to "one of the largest coherent groups of documents from the [[Roman Empire]]."<ref> etc.

I'd be happy to help with manual (non-AWB) edits if you like, but don't want to get in the way of the rest of your work. Just let me know. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 01:20, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the offer. The effect I am after is the last example at Wikipedia:Citing sources/Example edits for different methods, which I'm doing with wikilinks. My understanding of refname is that in order to have Rathbone (1991 p1)etc I would have to create a full citation for p1, a full citation for p2 etc. However, from what you are saying, I could create one citation for Rathbone's book and give that a refname, then use the <ref name=Rathbone>Rathbone p1</ref> format. How does this format the references section - can I still use both reflist and reflist|2 to create notes and a bibliography? Elen of the Roads (talk) 12:54, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

OK, I updated the references for "Rathbone 1991, pp. 1". Do you want to try to do a few? GoingBatty (talk) 18:15, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Apologies. RL intervened (whaddya mean, I've got to work). Actually, I don't think what you did was a right lot of help, as it just converted the references to Harvard refs, which wasn't what I was trying to do at all (did I point you to the wrong bit in the link?). However, let me test what I said above, as this may work. Elen of the Roads (talk) 23:01, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorry I misinterpreted your link. The important part of what I was trying to do was combine two instances of the same reference into the same note. Whether you use Harvard refs or not is secondary to that. Good luck with your edits! Let me know if you want any help. GoingBatty (talk) 23:09, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

S'okay, I figured it out. I think what you did will prolly work. Thanks for all your help. Elen of the Roads (talk) 23:16, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Actually no, you can see the problem [1]. The Harvard template isn't allowing me to specify page numbers in the footnotes, the way the linked version did.Elen of the Roads (talk) 23:23, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

The issue was that you were using the same ref name = value for different references. Try looking at the edit I just made to combine references and see what you think. GoingBatty (talk) 23:33, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Much better. Also, now, when you click on the link in the notes, it takes you to the reference, which the links method doesn't. So the first time you cite the page, you do <ref name="Foo2000p1"> {{Harvnb|Foo|2000|pp=1}}</ref> and the next time, you just do <ref name=Foo2001p1/> I think we've got there.Elen of the Roads (talk) 23:51, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

re Grigori Engelhardt

Thanks for the typo fixes in this article! Herostratus (talk) 06:07, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

My pleasure! GoingBatty (talk) 22:55, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Vítkov arson attack of 2009

Hello, I saw that you cleaned up my Tatra T77 article some time ago, and I see that you are of typo team. Could you please copy-edit Vítkov arson attack of 2009 for me? Thank you very much. Cimmerian praetor (talk) 08:39, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Done - happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 23:44, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your help with that! Cimmerian praetor (talk) 10:43, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

copy paste

Hi Going batty, if you want to rename an article it is important to use the move function rather than use cut and paste, especially if you are then going to propose the article for deletion. This is because the edit history includes the attribution to the original authors. I've cleaned up Dr Dr. ϢereSpielChequers 22:06, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. I tried to use the move function on Doctor doctor please, but got an error because Doctor Doctor (UFO song) already existed as an article that simply redirected to the album. I understand your concern about the attribution and apologizing for not reading the error that I see now is in red and bold. Thanks for setting me straight - I'll get it right next time. GoingBatty (talk) 22:36, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

No problems, you might find wp:merge useful next time you want to do something like that. ϢereSpielChequers 22:41, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

reason for tag?

Hello. Can you be specific about what you had in mind in this edit? Michael Hardy (talk) 20:22, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Michael - one of AWB's general fixes is to append {{Wikify}} if article has less than 3 wikilinks or the number of wikilinks is smaller than 0.25% of the article's size. I also added a link to finite group theory, which you may want to readd. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 22:34, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Albert Muis thank adding links

Hello GoingBatty,

Thanks for edding links on the Albert Muis article wich I have also translated in dutch and french on wikipedia néetherlands and French who needs also the same links, but I'm only a beginner on the wikipedia community,links:http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Muis and http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Muis

Altough Albert Muis was a Dutch artist for presicion and singularity of this project, if you can see and look for the justice of this article.

Thanks a lot, Sincerly Jurgen borgers —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jurgenborgers (talk • contribs) 20:38, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Jurgen - thanks for the feebdack. You may want to read Wikipedia:References for beginners. I only edit on the English Wikipedia. If you need any assistance with the Albert Muis article, please be specific as to how I can be of service. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 20:47, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

SAP Sourcing Edits

Hi GoingBatty,

Thanks for edits via AWB on the SAP Sourcing page. I am also a newbie. I did a comparison of the last 2 versions and though the comparison highlighted about 5 sections, in only one could I see any difference. What exactly was changed?

Also, I corrected some of the issues a previous editor cited, and now I want to know how I can remove some of the warnings (without violating any rules). How do I do this?

Thanks in advance for your help.

Daniel —Preceding unsigned comment added by Daniel.b.wroblewski (talk • contribs) 12:10, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Daniel - To see what was changes were made on an article, you can click on the "View history" link at the top of SAP Sourcing. The changes I made were to bold the words SAP Sourcing in the lead, remove the underscores from a wikilink, and add {{DEFAULTSORT}}. To remove some of the warnings, edit the article and remove the appropriate parameters from the {{Multiple issues}} template. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 17:59, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. I was just worried if I removed the warning and the original person who put them there was not satisfied that I had done enough to improve the article, then I would get in trouble. Daniel.b.wroblewski (talk) 06:48, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Another editor may disagree with you, but as long as you act in good faith, you won't get in trouble. GoingBatty (talk) 15:06, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

{{Delaware Fightin' Blue Hens Football}} edit

Hi- I wanted to get your opinion on something regarding an edit you just made to the Delaware football template ([2]). I disagree that the links should be removed even though those years did not field football teams. The reason is because every season will be condensed into decade-long articles (such as how William & Mary Tribe football, 1900–1909 is set up, for example). Very few individual seasons' articles warrant their own article entirely. When there is no team fielded due to World War II, as is the case with 1943 William & Mary Tribe football team, the blue link to that season will just redirect the reader right to the spot in the decade-long article, which isn't inconvenient since all 10 years are on that page anyway. If it took the reader to its own article for pretty much no reason, then yeah I agree it shouldn't be there. The strike-through on the template indicates that no team was fielded that year anyway, so if they want to see the exact reason why then they can just click on the link and see for themselves (again, akin to 1943 W&M). Also, the W&M and Richmond football templates use this stylization, so consistency shouldn't be messed up, IMO. Jrcla2 (talk) 15:35, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Since your intent is to create Delaware Fightin' Blue Hens football, 1940-1949 and then have 1943 Delaware Fightin' Blue Hens football team redirect to a section in the decade article, I reverted my edit. Thanks for taking the time to provide this detailed message instead of just reverting my edit, and looking forward to seeing the articles! GoingBatty (talk) 15:44, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

AWB edits for The Last Tightrope Dancer in Armenia

Hi, is there anyway you can fine-tune your AWB wikification? Your recent edits The Last Tightrope Dancer in Armenia defaultsorted it as such, beginning with the article "The." When clearly it should be sorted under L for Last. I'm afraid I don't know much about AWB myself, but there has got to be a way to adjust or stop this. best, Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:59, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Shawn - after reading WP:SORT, I agree with you. I manually fixed the article, and submitted an AWB feature request. Thanks for the feedback, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 23:22, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Articles	Date	Time
The Daffy Doc	Nov. 26	9:12 AM Hi! Thank You For Editing my article about The Daffy Doc! Leave me a message on my talk page! Here's a table of articles you helped me on! Thom323 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thom323 (talk • contribs) 15:06, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

AWB bug reports over multiple issues – all together would be better for me

Regarding your AWB bug reports over multiple issues, it would be more helpful to me if you could report all missing parameters and inconsistencies in one go, rather than piecemeal. Reporting and fixing one by one is going to take much more if my time. Thanks Rjwilmsi 08:29, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

I've just been reporting issues as I find them, not trying to find them (although maybe I should). I will be happy to combine multiple {{Multiple issues}} issues in one bug report for you. Thanks for all the work you've been doing to fix these! GoingBatty (talk) 00:35, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

John Kenworthy

Hi GoingBatty,

I notice you did a clean up for my new article "John Kenworthy" created on the 25th Nov, but the template at the top is still there. I thought this was supposed to be removed once the article was reviewed & cleaned up. I asked how long this would take via the feedback page on the 27th Nov, but it is still pending. As you have already reviewed the page can you please help with the template. Please let me know.

Thanks Gavin 11:14, 2 December 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Reachforthesky (talk • contribs)

Hi Gavin - My AWB edit to fix parentheses and remove stub tags was not a complete review. Since you asked so nicely, I have done a review for you and removed the template. Your help to disambiguate the link to Kestral would be helpful. You may also want to use {{Cite book}} for your references.

When you create new sections in talk pages, don't forget to add a section header and sign your posts using ~~~~. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 17:57, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Contractions

I saw your temporary note at Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser/Typos. I think the typo fixer should not attempt to undo any contractions. I set up a typo-fixing run to fix "before it's too late", but quickly abandoned it. If the text uses contractions I think it will usually need a full copy-edit, well beyond anything that AWB can do. -- John of Reading (talk) 18:41, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

I agree with you that there there would be too many false positives. I initially thought that all the "good" contractions would be inside quotations (which aren't impacted by the typo fixer). As I hit the "Save page" button, I realized that there would be lots of song/album/book/movie titles with contractions that we would NOT want the typo fixer to change, which is why I quickly self-reverted my suggestion. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 03:18, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Possible AWB error

This edit looks like a possible AWB error in inserting "primarysources = May 2010December 2010", although it's possible something else happened there. Please check and file a bug report if necessary, thanks. Anomie⚔ 20:48, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for not catching this mistake before saving my edit. I've filed this bug report. GoingBatty (talk) 22:19, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Ryan Kennedy Page

I'm sorry I directly reverted whatever changes you made to the Ryan Kennedy page, I just read something and kind of think i souldn't have reverted it, though can you please explain what changes did you made here. Nasirakd (talk) 19:58, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the message, but it doesn't appear that you reverted my change. GoingBatty (talk) 20:02, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Deprecated parameters

User:Yobot/Multiple issues contains a custom module to replace/remove deprecated parameters in Multiple Issues. Feel free to use it if you like it. -- Magioladitis (talk) 14:29, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for introducing me to the world of custom modules. I had to add a semicolon at the end of "ArticleText = ArticleText2" to make it work with User:GoingBatty/Sandbox I see you've already cleaned up the deprecated parameters, but I can think of another use for this. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 16:03, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

batman forever

Hello,

thanks for your corrections regard my links / information on the UK Version of Batman Returns. However: After your correction there was a mistake in the text (the first censored version is rated bbfc 15, then they released a second version which was less censored and rated bbfc 12 but still released as bbfc 15 due to the bonus material). I tried to correct that mistake. I just wanted to tell you, so that you would not think I would ignore your suggestions.

kind regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.185.45.233 (talk) 02:33, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. Looking back I can see that I made a mistake, and your correction is now more clear. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 02:37, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Conservative Political Action Conference

Thanks for making changes to the article! Very useful formatting fixes. Andrewman327 (talk) 22:35, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

My pleasure - thanks for the note! GoingBatty (talk) 00:22, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Doesn't always add Persondata

Status	Resolved
Description	AWB doesn't always add {{Persondata}} to biographical articles
To duplicate:	Try Benjamin Kim
Site URL:	en.wikipedia.org
Operating system	Windows XP
.NET FW Version	2.0.50727.1873
AWB version	5.2.0.1 SVN 7522
Workaround	Manually add
Fixed in version

diff. Page had incorrect value in |Background=

Thanks Magioladitis! GoingBatty (talk) 03:34, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your work on Wikipedia

Hello GoingBatty, Thank for all your corrections in Women's Hockey pages. Pass a good week-end --Geneviève (talk) 14:37, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

My pleasure - thanks for the note, and hope you have a good weekend too! GoingBatty (talk) 14:39, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Doesn't remove all date ordinals

Status	Not a bug in AWB, has been referred
Description	AWB removes some, but not all, date ordinals GoingBatty (talk) 21:35, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
To duplicate:	Try Spalding Grammar School
Site URL:	en.wikipedia.org
Operating system	Windows XP
.NET FW Version	2.0.50727.1873
AWB version	5.2.0.1 SVN 7522
Workaround	Manually remove
Fixed in version

Deliberate to avoid introducing bad grammar. Documentation updated. Rjwilmsi 17:10, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

OK, but the updated documentation doesn't seem to match the issue this article had. GoingBatty (talk) 02:56, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

We try to be on the safe side always. -- Magioladitis (talk) 03:00, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Inline citations

Just want to let you know that you made a mistake in tagging Standardized testing and its effects as not containing any WP:inline citations.

The bits that say things like "(Kohn 1)" are WP:Parenthetical references, the second most popular form of inline citations on the English Wikipedia.

I've fixed it for you. As a general rule, I've found that whenever an article has a list of citations that spells out the URL inside angle brackets (like <http//:example.com>), then the editor is probably following the MLA citation style quite closely, and it's worth a close look for parenthetical citations. They are most subtle than ref tags. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:02, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to point this out to me, and for fixing my mistake. I'll be more careful in future edits.

I took another look at the article and believe I've fixed the links in the lead that needed clarification/disambiguation. Please let me know if there's a problem with these changes. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 01:48, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Wikify tags

Hello Going Batty. I notice you removing Wikify tags that still need work on layout. If you check, wikifying isn't just about wikilinks and fixing typos but also Layout and markup. Many articles that you remove the tags still need to be broken into sections. The AWB tool you use doesn't really give good assessment if an article is sufficiently wikified, it's your responsibility to check yourself each time AWB suggests an action on an article. It's up to you, but maybe you would like to go back through the articles you've wikified and see if they can use sections? Slightsmile (talk) 04:53, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi Slightsmile. I'll stop editing now and take a second look at my edits tomorrow. If there are any that need to be broken into sections, I'll add the sections myself or add {{Sections}} to the article. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 05:12, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Reminder for self per MOS:HEAD - "Headings provide an overview in the table of contents and allow readers to navigate through the text more easily." GoingBatty (talk) 18:18, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

OK, I just reviewed my last 28 edits where I removed the {{wikify}} template. I added {{Sections}} to Bela Vista and Joe Bauman (see below), but the others already had sections or seemed too small for sections. You mentioned "Many articles that you remove the tags still need to be broken into sections." Before I review the other 200+ edits, would you care to comment on any specific edit? Now to respond to your other comment below.... GoingBatty (talk) 04:27, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

I looked at a few yesterday, I don't remember specific ones. I rightly or wrongly extrapolated "many" from the ones I saw that I felt were not wikified. I'm packing it in for today but I'll see if I can get into going through your edits tomorrow (have to be in the mood). Slightsmile (talk) 04:47, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

I have reviewed each edit from January 12-13 where I removed the {{wikify}} template, and re-edited about 40 articles to add section headers, add {{sections}} and/or other clean-up. If you have any specific concerns about any individual edits, please let me know. Thanks again! GoingBatty (talk) 00:24, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

I think that's good you going back to them like that. I've gone through a few so far and did some fixing where I could.

• 55th FAMAS Awards - I've never really been sure how to fix articles that are dominated by lists with little or no prose. Those would be good ones to leave on the wikify list - someone out does know what to do. Also dominated by lists - Advance (horse),
• Ampeg V Series - I don't know if it's just me but I don't like "br" page breaks in an article.
• Wazir Ali - Good, except I couldn't figure out what the asterisks beside the scores are for. They're out of place on a wikipedia article and I would have just left it on the wikfy list for someone else to figure out.
• Carl August Ameln - Good, I added two wls.
• American Democracy Project (AASCU initiative) - I did some additional, should be fine now.
• Dan Anderson (sifu) - I don't know about the sub-sections under "Dan Anderson’s credits include", too much.
• Simon Anderson - Hope you don't mind, I think it needs a wikify tag.
• Good : The Amygdaloids, American Airlines C.R. Smith Museum

I'll continue going through them when I can. Slightsmile (talk) 20:13, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. In response to your concerns above, I made the following updates:

• 55th FAMAS Awards already has {{cleanup}} as part of {{Multiple issues}}, so it seems that {{wikify}} would be redundant. I added {{lead too short}} and did a little copyediting.
• The <br /> tags in Ampeg V Series didn't bother me, since they're not visible on the page. However, I removed them and added bullets instead.
• The source of the statistics in Wazir Ali also shows the asterisks without any explanation. I added {{unclear section}} and added a note on the talk page.
• I removed the subsections on Dan Anderson (sifu) and made some other improvements.
• I won't revert your edit to Simon Anderson (or any others that you choose to put the wikify tag back on). Your edit summary brings up an interesting point that articles tagged with {{wikify}} may get updated faster than those with something else.

Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 22:27, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Removal of tag

Could you advise why you removed the wikify template from Joe Bauman? I tagged it recently as it needs headers and other formatting/layout fixes - none of those changes were made, but the tag was still removed. --Jezebel'sPonyo^{bons mots} 14:51, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi Ponyo - AWB's logic for adding/removing {{wikify}} only looks at the number of wikilinks, not other "wikification". The edit summary you used for your edit was "requires wikification - headers, MOSBIO fixes etc". I've added {{sections}} and {{cleanup-biography}} to the article, which hopefully will make it clearer to future editors what should be done on this article. Looking forward to your thoughts on this. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 17:52, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

If that is AWB's "logic", then it needs to be modified as that clearly is not the intent of the wikify template. The template instructions state:

"Note that although this template is commonly used when a page has no wikilinks, it is not limited to just that. It could also refer to any form of wiki-markup, such as bolding/italicizing of text or formatting standard headings and layout, including the addition of infoboxes and other templates, ie 'wikification'"

The clean-up tag you replaced the wikify tag with is not correct - it states "This biographical article needs more biographical information on the subject" - which is untrue. I strongly suggest that the wikify tags not be removed solely on the basis of whether the article has wikilinks or not as this is not the only purpose of the wikify tag. --Jezebel'sPonyo^{bons mots} 18:53, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

There was a recently archived discussion on the AWB talk page about the {{wikify}} template, but I'm not aware of any changes to the AWB code. You may wish to start a new discussion or submit a feature request for the AWB developers to consider a suggestion. (I'm not a developer.)

Template messages "are to foster improvement of the encyclopedia and to notify readers about possible problems." My interpretation of that is that the goal of adding a template is to communicate to other editors what could be done to make an article better.

I'm sorry that I misinterpreted your edit summary of "MOSBIO fixes etc". If you would like to add {{wikify}} back to this article, I won't remove it. However, I'm concerned that another editor (with or without AWB) may also misinterpret your intent and remove it again without making the changes you want. If you would like to explain what other improvements you think need to be made to Joe Bauman (either here or on Talk:Joe Bauman), maybe together we can find a template that would be more descriptive, or improve the article ourselves?

Thanks again for taking the time to chat with me. GoingBatty (talk) 03:58, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

If I may weigh in, this is a dialogue I participated in last month on this topic. Slightsmile (talk) 04:09, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for sharing a link to that discussion. I like your comment: "Somebody went through the trouble of placing those tags for a reason." Guess my problem is that it's hard for me to figure out why they added the tags. Therefore, to ensure I'm not making things worse, I'm going to find other edits to make, and let the WP:Wikiproject Wikify members work on the {{wikify}} backlog. Thanks again! GoingBatty (talk) 04:33, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

William W. Wood

Whatever you were trying to do in your edit to the article on William W. Wood inadvertently messed up the succession box. Please could you have a look at your edit, and try to figure out what you did wrong.

I have reverted the edit, as a messed up succession box is undesirable.

Just out of interest, what were you trying to achieve?--Toddy1 (talk) 21:03, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Sorry about that. While applying some general fixes to new articles, I messed up this article because the succession box was missing the {{s-end}} template. I've redone the edit, and added the template. Thanks for letting me know! GoingBatty (talk) 21:16, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Please could you do the same fix for James Wilson King.--Toddy1 (talk) 21:21, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

 Done - and I added {{s-end}} before clicking Save this time! I also submitted an AWB feature request to generate an alert when an editor encounters an article with {{s-start}} with no {{s-end}}. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 21:31, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

LGBT articles in Brazil

Hello! In FEBRUARY, in the Supreme Federal Court of Brazil will be aproved the *SAME-SEX MARRIAGE IN BRAZIL* ([3]), and the pages LGBT rights in Brazil and Recognition of same-sex unions in Brazil need of you. Because will generate a heavy traffic on these pages, and we need you to help in the English spelling of these pages, you understand me? Please help me. Hentzer (talk) 12:00, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

I took a quick look at these two articles, and didn't notice any obvious spelling mistakes. I'll give them a more thorough reading later. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 18:47, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Re: Typo fixes

		The Typo Team Medal
		For your work in fixing over half a thousand typos over the course of the last few days, I hereby award you this Typo Team Medal! Sophus Bie (talk) 14:10, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Nice job, and welcome to the team! Sophus Bie ^(talk) 14:10, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks so much! Will do some more soon! GoingBatty (talk) 00:04, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

New AWB snapshot available

Better download this http://toolserver.org/~awb/snapshots/AutoWikiBrowser5201_rev7571.zip More accurate wikifying as you requested and some more stuff amongst bugfix on Multiple issues. -- Magioladitis (talk) 01:44, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

 Done - thanks for the heads up! GoingBatty (talk) 02:18, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the corrections in the article Kinna McInroe. Lucid1978 (talk) 16:16, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

My pleasure - just made a couple more corrections for you. Thanks for the note! GoingBatty (talk) 03:15, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Battle of Debrecen order of battle 2

The creation of this article was a mistake on my part. I've asked Buckshot06 to delete the article. Cheers, W. B. Wilson (talk) 16:16, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

You can also place {{db-author}} on the page, which will alert everyone that you want to delete a page you created. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 16:24, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

The/the Beatles

Yes folks, it's here again. Please look at this link [4] and leave your vote. I thank you.--andreasegde (talk) 08:07, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the invite. GoingBatty (talk) 17:55, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for looking at Jimmy Earl

Dear GoingBatty,

Thanks for looking at Jimmy Earl. It is great to have typos magically corrected. However, it is a shame for anyone to spend their time on an article that is being restructured. I have been "going batty" trying to edit text while dodging clumsy inline references, and consequently, I have begun to put all the references in a block at the end. I hope you will have time to take another look when this process is complete.

I noticed that you unlinked the links to musicians in the discography that have links in the text. The intent here was to make it easy for a person browsing through the article to get some information quickly without wading through a lot of text. Nevertheless, I am aware of the convention to avoid multiple links, and am generally comfortable with what was done.

However, there is one exception. In the text, the link to it:Pino Daniele#Collaborazioni goes to his italian article, which gives a list of his collaborators; in the discography, the link Pino Daniele goes to his English article, which does not list collaborators, but which is more appropriate in an English article. Any comments?

Thanks again for your help. Deer*lake (talk) 19:13, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi Deer*lake - thanks for the note.

I didn't know that you were in the middle of a restructuring. I see you've added a note to that effect since my edit. You might want to use the {{In use}} template instead, as many AWB users (and bots using AWB) will skip articles with this template.

My edit removed some wikilinks, but not because they were multiple links. One of the general fixes that AWB makes is to delink wikilinks in headings per MOS:HEAD.

My vote would be to link to Pino Daniele instead of it:Pino Daniele#Collaborazioni. I think it would be more valuable for people who view Jimmy Earl and are interested in getting more information about Daniele to see the English article then to see a list of his collaborators.

If you'll drop me another note when you're done with your restructuring, I'll be happy to give your article another look. Thanks again, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 01:15, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your offer to take another look at Jimmy Earl. Whenever you have time, It is finally ready to be looked at. I tried In use and Underconstruction, and will use them in the future, when it is appropriate. I understand now the reasons for keeping links out of headers, and will do so in the future. Once again, thanks for your help. --- Deer*lake (talk) 21:54, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

OK, made a bunch of edits to the article - hope you like them! GoingBatty (talk) 02:46, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

You did a lot of work, which I appreciate. With one exception discussed below, I agree with everything you did. I was sorry to see the first names go, but I realize that they could not survive in the Wikipedia environment. The exception is putting Jimmy Earl in the category Berklee College of Music alumni. Although Berklee takes every opportunity it gets to claim him as an alumnus, he attended for only one year and never graduated. Because it is contrary to the facts to put him in the category, I am inclined to remove that reference. What do you think? Yet again, thanks for your help. -- Deer*lake (talk) 14:45, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

According to the Wikipedia article for "alumnus", some sources define alumni as students who have graduated, while others would also include former students who did not graduate as alumni. Category:Berklee College of Music alumni states "Persons and ensembles in this category have attended at least one semester or summer program at Berklee and have achieved a level of notability in their respective field in the music industry, or other branches of the entertainment industry, or who have gained notability for achievements other than in the field of entertainment." Therefore, I think it is appropriate to include Earl in this category, especially now that you said that Berklee also considers him an alumnus. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 15:46, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

OK. I am happy to leave him in the category. Now, I'm going to let the article "rest" for a few days. Thanks for all your help. Deer*lake (talk) 17:05, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

February Disambig challenge

Greetings! I've challenged my fellow disambiguators to help knock out more than a thousand disambig links a day for the month of February, and every bit helps. Please check out the list at Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links and see if you can get in the game for this month. Cheers! bd2412 T 03:37, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

 Doing... but I hope you mean collectively (not individually) more than 1000 per day. GoingBatty (talk) 05:02, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

If we could do a thousand a day per person, that would be crazy. With thirty people doing that, we'd clean up the entire backlog in a month. So far, so good on the average, though - and thanks! bd2412 T 16:07, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Merge

An article that you have been involved in editing, Anthony Hall (Buckinghamshire) has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going to the article and clicking on the (Discuss) link at the top of the article, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Peacekeeper 1234 15:42, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Asterisks on cricket scores...

...mean that the batsman was not out at the end of the innings. It's a fairly standard notation but you're right, (on Wazir Ali), that it shouldn't be used without explanation. I'll amend that article and draw it to the attention of the cricket project. In Infoboxes it's fairly commonplace to use a * link. Johnlp (talk) 23:51, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. See the #Wikify tags section above for the discussion that drove me to add the {{unclear section}} tag on the article. GoingBatty (talk) 01:34, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Quick Draw Batty

Hey Mate, thanks for the contrib tot he World Enviro day (Orphan, uncatagorised), but just give it me minute or two! I was writing the page as quick as I could! It's closer to finished now and will be done shortly (from my end anyhoo). Thanks for keeping us on our toes!

Peace

Hi Yobsta - thanks for the feedback. I can see how tagging a page with maintenance templates when it's less than an hour old can be frustrating. I just made one more constructive edit to your new page. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 17:36, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

I just noticed that you removed the {{orphan}} template from World Environment Day Awards, even though there are no incoming links to your new article. You may want to introduce links to your page from related articles. Good luck! GoingBatty (talk) 04:34, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Be careful of you AWB edits

Although they are fine with me I noticed you were recently doing some edits that could be construed by some as being minor and in violation of the AWB rules of use. For example in this edit you only removed of and this edit where it appears you only removed some white space and casing. I also notice that your edit summeries are very vague and could lead some to complain about that as well. --Kumioko (talk) 14:50, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi Kumioko - thanks for the note. You're right - I should have marked both of these as minor edits. I saved the second edit to remove the incorrect commas in the dates. I would not have made the edit if it was only changing whitespace and the casing in the infobox, which would have been a insignificant or inconsequential edit. Remember when we previously discussed generic edit summaries? I'm open to suggestions as to how to make them better. Thanks for the reminder to get me back on track! GoingBatty (talk) 16:51, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

No problem and like I said I have personally no problem with the edits you are making but since I got my access revoked fro doing these types of edits I wanted to let other users know before the same happens to them. --Kumioko (talk) 16:58, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Your thoughtfulness is appreciated. Hope you get your access restored soon! GoingBatty (talk) 21:50, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks but its probably not going to get restored. I have retired from Wikipedia editing so i have no use for it now. Cheers. --Kumioko (talk) 22:27, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Please take a look at Severn Records

Dear Going Batty; You may remember my article Jimmy Earl, which you cleaned up and improved. Now, I have written a new article User:Deer*lake/Severn Records, which I think is about ready to move into article space. I hope you will have time to look it over before this happens. I have not yet put it in any categories, but expect to do so when the article gets its final name. On a completely different subject, in the article Crownsville, Maryland, under Local Schools, there is one listed as "Derek's house of pain". This looks inappropriate to me, but I am not up for policing Wikipedia. You might take a look to see if anything should be done. Thanks for your past and future help. - - Deer*lake (talk) 20:21, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi Deer*lake - Hope you like the edits I made on the Severn Records article. I also agree that Derek's House of Pain looked out of place, so I removed it from the Crownsville article. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 02:56, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your very quick response. I am glad to see that so few changes were needed. I considered the term "fitted out" carefully. It usually has a distinctly nautical connotation, but is often used to describe the furnishing of a specialized facility, which is the applicable use here. Your word "outfitting" can also be used in this context, but its usual connotation involves equipping a person for a specialized job. Nevertheless, I am leaving it in the article, along with all your other changes. I have moved the draft to article space, added categories and linked it to other articles that mention Severn Records. Thanks again for your help. -- Deer*lake (talk) 19:07, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

I have no problem if you want to go back to using "fitted out". Congratulations on your new article! GoingBatty (talk) 21:25, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Good work!

Thanks for all the good work you've been doing on many of my recent documents. Your name seems to be on my log nearly every day. It's good to know that someone will take care of those stupid typos sooner or later. Thanks to people like you, Wikipedia's standards continue to improve. If you hadn't already been awarded the Typo Star, you would have received one from me. - Ipigott (talk) 10:39, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the note - you made my day! GoingBatty (talk) 18:33, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Harold Graziano

I believe this page may be fake, given the user's outright vandalism of the Peter Goldring page. Suggest deleting the page, seeing if the user challenges same and then calling him or her on it.

Dreadarthur (talk) 05:12, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

The article does have four external links to verify much of the information in the article, so it doesn't seem appropriate to delete it based on vandalism on another page. GoingBatty (talk) 15:03, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

New AWB snapshot available

Better download this http://toolserver.org/~awb/snapshots/AutoWikiBrowser5201_rev7660.zip Much faster and less buggy. -- Magioladitis (talk) 01:32, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

 Done - thanks for the heads up! GoingBatty (talk) 01:50, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Please take a look at The Skunks

Dear Going Batty, I have written another article: User:Deer*lake/The Skunks (ska band). If you get a chance to take a look at, I would appreciate seeing your comments. One point about which I really need your input: I have included external links to Facebook pages. I know than people have to be signed on to Facebook, but think there is a large population that will have no problem accessing the information. Is there a Wiki rule against this? What do you think? I have included no categories, but will add them when the article goes public. Thanks in advance for your help Deer*lake (talk) 21:23, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Hello again, Deer*lake! I've made a few changes to your article. For the wiki rule on Facebook links, see WP:FACEBOOK. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 00:17, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your input. I have moved The Skunks (ska band) to Article space, added categories, and corrected some existing links that were intended to refer to the ska band. I liked your use of the "For" template, and to guide people looking for the ska Skunks to the right page, introduced a very similar one into the existing Austin Skunks article. I noticed that you removed my red link to Eastern Standard Time. I think this band deserves its own article, and to encourage someone to write one, made the link red by piping an invalid link to EST. Without this hack, the link would be blue, because it refers to the ordinary meaning of these words. Is this OK? If so, is there a better way to do the same thing? After reading WP:Facebook, I have removed the two external links to Facebook pages. However, in the future, I intend to use Eric Morgan's Facebook album Skunks Flyers as a reference. It shows 33 flyers which document many Skunks performances mentioned in the article. From my reading of the rule, this would be frowned upon, but acceptable. Thanks again for your help. Deer*lake (talk) 22:17, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Your original link for Eastern Standard Time was going to xxxyyy, which I deleted. If someone creates an article for the band, it would probably be called Eastern Standard Time (band), so I just added a group for that. I also added one more category. Congratulations on another article! GoingBatty (talk) 23:42, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Candian War

Good going on nixing that Typo rule. I hit a few of those the other day, and got around it by putting "Candian War" in the skip field, so I don't know how many there (I cleared the logs). I have added "Candian" to my own offline list of misspellings to check from time to time, with a note to be careful. Maybe we should have a list of tricky misspellings for AWB users who want to carefully try to fix them with Find & Replace. Happy editing! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chris the speller (talk • contribs) 20:02, April 2, 2011

Thanks Chris. I added the bad rule - sorry it caused you a problem, and that it took so long for me to realize it needed to be reverted. GoingBatty (talk) 00:17, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

No, no, no. It caused me no problem, as I saw what was happening right away. I didn't have to revert any of my own changes, and didn't have to answer any flames from other editors. The rule fixed many actual misspellings, and a heads-up AWB user would probably not damage any articles. Maybe I should have backed out the change, or at least brought it up on the talk page. We won't make progress without trying. Feel happy! Chris the speller ^yack 01:16, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

List of Alpha Phi Omega (Philippines) chapters and alumni associations

Thank you for the fixes to the article. However Alpha Phi Omega in the Phillippines uses the Tagalog term for Hong Kong: Hongkong. See tl:Hongkong. While it may not be appropriate in English, the names themselves of the Alumni Associations are determined by Alpha Phi Omega of the Philippines National Office. I will change them back to Hongkong and put a note to this effect as a <!-- --> note.Naraht (talk) 15:03, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for the problem, and thanks for adding the notes for future editors. GoingBatty (talk) 15:24, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

NP, and glad someone other than me took a look at the page. I'm amazed that *little* needed to be corrected.Naraht (talk) 16:12, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

April 2011

In a recent edit to the page Microsoft Expression Media, you changed one or more words from one international variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, or New Zealand, use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the original author used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. Thank you. Fleet Command (talk) 08:15, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, Fleet Command. In this edit from March, it appears you changed from the article from British to US English, including one instance of "catalogue" → "cataloge" [sic], which is not correct in either variety of English. I should have been more careful and changed it to "catalog" instead of "catalogue". After you changed it back to "cataloge", another user changed it to "catalog". Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 16:17, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Oh, I did notice that. I intended to delete "ue" but pressed DELETE once instead of twice. But it was not a conversion from British to American as you claim: The article was already (and is) in American English. Please note the use of "-ize" suffix instead of "-ise" (as in "organize" and "categorize") and use of seamless compounds (e.g. "metadata" instead of "meta-data", "slideshow" instead of "slide show", etc.) Now, checking World English Dictionary "Cataloging" is a correct form. (Well, Mozilla Firefox spellchecker also seems okay with it.) Fleet Command (talk) 17:14, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I should have said "you changed some words" (not "you changed the article"). GoingBatty (talk) 17:19, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Refreshment Pavilion

I have reverted you a second time here. The National Register misspells the word as "Pavillion", therefore, it must be shown in the NRHP infobox and in

"It was built in 1920 and added to the National Register of Historic Places as Refreshment Pavillion..."

as it is spelled there, without correction. Thanks, . . Jim - Jameslwoodward (talk to me • contribs) 15:02, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know about the problem. I've added some hidden {{sic}} templates so they won't get corrected again. Should the article be consistent and use "Pavillion" (two ells) everywhere? GoingBatty (talk) 16:07, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

If I remember correctly, we had that discussion some time ago on the NRHP project talk page and decided "no" -- as a general rule NRHP site articles are titled with their official or best known name, and the rule followed above is used only for the infobox and in sentences like the one I quoted. The problem arises a lot with lighthouses, on which I have done a lot of work in the past.

There is a redirect from Refreshment Pavillion. . Jim - Jameslwoodward (talk to me • contribs) 16:28, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

A technique to simulate multiple Skip fields in AWB

Greetings. I am using my 100,001st edit to congratulate you for being a wild man with AWB (that's meant in the best possible way). BTW, I was also in Order of the Arrow. If you would be so kind as to look over my subpage User:Chris the speller/SkipTrick and tell me what you think. The example shown is for fixing "infact", and its basic improvement could also be done using RegEx "negative lookbehind", but it illustrates the concept of temporary changes to false-positive matches. Since I did that, I created a set of 12 RegEx rules to handle "infront", and it cut through a list of 60 articles like a hot knife through butter. Do you think this technique is worth mentioning in the "Tips and tricks: section of the AWB home page? Chris the speller ^yack 16:57, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Hello Chris! Good to hear from another Arrowman, especially one who has reached a great editing milestone!

Your SkipTrick seems pretty cool, but I'm wondering if you could come up with a better example. "infact" → "in fact" could be handled by adding a rule to Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Typos, which would ignore the URLs. You could also ignore the URLs with: <Find>\s(I|i)nfact\b</Find> → <Replace> $1n fact</Replace>

I can't think of a better example right now, but I'll try to keep it in mind while editing. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 17:47, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

The subpage now has a real-life example for fixing "infront". I put "superbike" in the real Skip field, so this is like having another 11 Skip fields. If you have an XML editor (such as the foxe editor from firstobject.com), you can get the XML code from an invisible comment on that subpage and splice it into your own settings file. Set AWB to build a list based on a Wiki search on "infront" (with the double quotes). Filtering for content pages gives 61 pages. With these rules (and no "Ignore" boxes checked), it only stops on "AFL Players Association". I could have tuned that one out as well, but it's nice to see it stop so you can tell it's actually working. I fixed all real cases if "infront" this morning, so you won't get to make a real change, at least until the index gets updated. Chris the speller ^yack 19:48, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Wildlife Conservation

Hi, my name is Sam. I am an undergraduate student at Syracuse University taking a class on Transnational Non-Government Organizations and US public policy. Our class is working with the Wikipedia Ambassador Program to help improve certain articles on Wikipedia that pertain to TNGOs and US public policy. I created a section in the Wildlife Conservation article that I see you are very active with. I know it is unsubstantial, however over the next few weeks I plan to add a significant amount of information that will benefit the community interested in wildlife conservation. I now ask for your help and cooperation with my project. Thank you for your time and consideration. Smfunk7 (talk) 17:02, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi Sam - I look forward to seeing your much-needed improvements to this article. Good luck! GoingBatty (talk) 17:06, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Recent edits

Your recent edits regarding "cleanup"/"fixes" to Wikipedia:Albums articles involve wikilinking Billboard to Billboard (magazine). To let you know, the correct internal link for Billboard and some chart is Billboard charts, not the article on the magazine, Billboard (magazine). Dan56 (talk) 03:59, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi Dan - I appreciate the feedback. I see your point, and will have to be more careful when correcting the remaining 200+ incorrect wikilinks to Billboard (the outdoor advertising). Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 04:14, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm stopping my edits for now. If you'd like to do some and share some examples on how you would change Billboard → Billboard charts or Billboard (magazine) (especially in the {{cite web}} template), your assistance would be appreciated. Thanks again! GoingBatty (talk) 04:25, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Would you like to check my ten most recent AWB edits? For some edits, I took your suggestion to use Billboard charts, while others I changed to Billboard (magazine). Thanks! 02:21, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

All good. Nice work. Dan56 (talk) 03:10, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Oops

Sorry about "fixing" the spelling of biographee. At any rate, at least no one else is bound to make that same mistake now with "person". --Baekken (talk) 03:01, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

No problem - even if "biographee" is a real word, it's not common enough to use in this context. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:03, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi Batty, just wanted to say that I've run into your name in the edit logs on dozens of different pages, and wanted to say thanks for being one helluvan awesome wikignome. Cheers, Sloggerbum (talk) 01:57, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi Sloggerbum (cool username!) - thanks for taking the time to make my day! Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 02:00, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

User:Beeeflsgoood

I have written to you previously in relation to what courses of action are available with respect to a supposed contributor who vandalizes the page of a Member of Parliament (Peter Goldring). He has now vandalized my own editor profile, which I choose to remain unparticularized. I still believe his only contribution to Wikipedia, on a certain Harold Graziano, will turn out to be bogus, with the third party references being similarly so found.

I believe this person should be banned from further Wikipedia contributions and don't know how to go about effecting this. I have no interest in continuing here if I constantly have to watch to see who is doing some slice and dice on my own profile.

Suggestions or action appreciatied. I am contacting you because you were the editor on this person's alleged Graziano profile.

Nobody should have to put up with small trash like this. Sorry to be so emotive.

Dreadarthur (talk) 03:34, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Plus, if you go to Harold Graziano, you will see that there is another questionable editor, User:Dawnsimpson, whose only supposed contribution is Harold Graziano and whose presence conveniently prevents speedy deletion of the article, based on more than one alleged contributor. I suggest checking out this contributor, in addition to any relationship to Beeeflsgoood. It is garbage like this that drives people away from contributing to Wikipedia. This is supposed to be a serious attempt to collectively contribute to knowledge.

Dreadarthur (talk) 03:43, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi Dreadarthur - sorry you're having another problem with BeeefIsGoood. The only edits this person has made is creating the Harold Graziano page and the two other edits you mentioned. I suggest you read Wikipedia:Cleaning up vandalism, and follow the link to the dispute resolution page. One act of vandalism doesn't get a person banned. (The edit to your user page may have been a poor attempt to repsond to the first message you left on their talk page - they might not know the difference between a talk page and a user page.) Hopefully this editor won't bother you again.

The funny thing about the Harold Graziano page is that BeeefIsGoood not only created the page but also requested it be deleted! It's possible that BeeefIsGoood and Dawnsimpson are the same person, since their only real edits are to the Graziano page, but it's possible that they're two different people. If you want to pursue the deletion of the Graziano page, I suggest you read Wikipedia:Notability (people) and the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion process.

Good luck, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 04:13, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks for your calmer comments than my own.

Dreadarthur (talk) 00:52, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

List of train songs

Hi, GoingBatty! Thanks for disambigging the artists I recently added to the train song list. I'm fairly meticulous about such things, but apparently was trying to do too much in too short a time. The path I'm on is to 1) assess the notability of entries, 2) consolidate the listings so that each song only appears one time, 3) add more artists per song and 4) provide citations for all listings. I realize that's ambitious, but I recently did this with the List of artists who have covered Bob Dylan songs, which is of similar length, had citations for a quarter or so of its entries and now is almost completely referenced. Nevertheless, as you noted, the list does need a lot of help. Do you have any specific suggestions regarding that? I'd appreciate any feedback you can give that would help in improving the article. I'll be watching for a reply. Thanks. Allreet (talk) 15:16, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi Allreet - sorry my edit summary wasn't clear. If you look at my edit, you'll see that I was not able to disambiguate the link for Norman Blake, so I added a {{dn}} next to it. Hope you'll be able to fix this wikilink. Good luck with the article! GoingBatty (talk) 23:33, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Adventure Colossal Cave

You are listed as one of the editors of this page. I have a color map of the cave I made in the 1970s. Ken Thompson told me I was a hero in his house because his son had gotten very frustrated. If you want to see it let me know how to send a jpg. Nils-Peter Nelson 69.19.14.28 (talk) 20:47, 20 May 2011 (UTC)