User talk:AllyUnion

I'm not bothering to keep an archive. If you like to see an archive of the page, please visit the History page. New comments to the end of the page. Otherwise, I will ignore and/or revert your edit. -- AllyUnion

Last deletion: 10:02, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Archive List:

WP:AN/3RR

Sure, hope I didn't step on any of your edits (thought you were done). Did you want to delete my "leave a message" kludge, which is sort of replaced by that pseudo-template thingy you added? Noel (talk) 08:59, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Well, I'm not sure I totally understand how it works. I mean, I do understand what the format is that you want to see in reports, and that looks really good. However, I'm not sure how the pseudo-template works to help people stay in that format. E.g. what's to stop people who get confused from simply editing your sample text, and gumming it it? (Although I suppose someone will quickly put it right, if that happens.) Also, the {{SERVER}}{{localurl:ARTICLE|action=history}} stuff may confuse less advanced users - heck, I don't completely understand how localurl works!

See WT:AN#Sections and Subsections. I don't really completely grok it myself; I just ripped it off from User:NickJ/Redirects, and tweaked on it a bit so it sort of did what I want. Still, it's not perfect (it still offers a field for a section header - not sure if that can be suppressed), but I don't know enough about how all that magic stuff works to make it do exactly what I'd like to do. Noel (talk) 09:18, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Bot

The bot has a class 'PageLink', which represents Wikipedia pages. The important methods here are get(), which gets the text of the page and put(), which saves a new version. In general, to have the bot edit a single page, you can use code such as the following:

thispage = wikipedia.PageLink('en','pagetitle')

text = thispage.get()

Some piece of Python code to change text to what you want it to be

thispage.put(text,"intended edit summary")

For further questions, you can reach me at email address andreengelsREMOVETHIS@gmail.com (with the obvious removal) - Andre Engels 09:34, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Oh! I'm such an idiot. Declare a PageLink object... duh. Thanks. -- AllyUnion (talk) 09:41, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

WikiGrammar

Hello AllyUnion, I'm responding to your comments on the grammar project on my talk page. It looks like a cool idea and I would definitely be interested in some sort of role. It seems you started this project and I'd be happy to help with setting things up so things run more smoothly (and of course help fix grammar!). I'll be somewhat busy till the weekend but leave me a message on my talk page and hopefully we can get things working. Telso 09:43, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

VFD pages

Thanks for the url hints - I've updated my page accordingly. sjorford:// 10:07, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)

GCOTW

I'm giving you this message because you have been active on Gaming Collaboration of the week in the past. The collaboration had a bit of a hiatus, but it's now active again. A new article will be chosen this Sunday. It would be greatly appreciated if you visited the page to vote and/or make new nominations and worked on next week's GCOTW. Thanks. --Slowking Man 08:19, Feb 4, 2005 (UTC)

re: VfD Old and bot work

On my talk page, you asked "It seems that all VfD pages are moved to the Old page by the seventh day. If this is indeed true, I would like to assist in automating the copying of text of the Template:Vfd top and Template:Vfd bottom to each subpage on each day when it is moved. What do you think?"

I could see it working but we'd have to completely rewrite the Wikipedia:Deletion process. Right now, we are using the header and footer templates to add a color-box around the discussion so that the people closing them can clearly see which ones have been processed and which ones still need to be closed.

Frankly, I'm not sure what value it would add. You will still need to edit the discussion page in order to record your decision. Using a bot to save typing 40 characters doesn't seem like enough of a savings to be worth it... I'm interested in your thoughts, though. Rossami (talk) 18:46, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

It would be a small luxury not to have to hand-enter the top and bottom statements (especially the bottom, since I have a tendency to leave that one out), but I agree with Rossami's point about the utility of the color-boxes. Also, if discussions are bot-closed as soon as they're moved to the /Old page, we'd have to make sure that everyone who takes part in the voting knows that articles nearing their "date of move" better get their votes in quick. As it is, there are usually a couple of days after the /Old move for people to get in last-minute statement before a close-down of the debate. Joyous 18:59, Feb 5, 2005 (UTC)

When you forget to add {{subst:vfd bottom}}, it's pretty noticable on /Old, and it isn't too hard for someone else to figure out which one didn't get closed and fix it. dbenbenn | talk 21:12, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I was thinking that a bot could tally the results... but there is a lot of text processing issues that I will need to resolve and many questions that I believe aren't possible. I won't include this feature until we've discussed it all out. -- AllyUnion (talk) 01:05, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

A bot to update WP:VFD and WP:VFD/Old would be great. I had thought vaguely about it myself, but I don't have any experience running bots. I commented at Wikipedia talk:Bots#Additional uses to bot (User:Allyunion). dbenbenn | talk 21:12, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I would be very uncomfortable relying on a bot to make the decision. It might work for very simple votes but I don't think it would be possible to program in the specific scenarios we need. For example:

How would the bot screen out the sockpuppet votes?
As I said before, very difficult to do, and an issue I raised myself. -- AllyUnion (talk) 07:00, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
How could the bot recognize when the circumstances have changed (for example, a string of deletes, an "I just rewrote it, keep" and then a string of keeps)?
Double votes could be understand based on time stamps, as well as strikeouts.-- AllyUnion (talk) 07:00, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
How could the bot decide if there is a logical argument or evidence presented which invalidates the prior votes?
It would not. Again, My question is to the extent of the grunt work it should do. -- AllyUnion (talk) 07:00, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The problem is that "Votes for Deletion" is not really about "voting" despite the name. It's about laying out evidence (one piece of evidence being community opinion) for the deciding admin. Rossami (talk) 04:49, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Thoughts, which I did express on your talk page: Also, there are questions about the weak and strong deletes, a question regarding anyone's vote who is delete but something else, a question regarding unsigned votes, anonymous votes, and sockpuppet votes. -- AllyUnion (talk) 06:57, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Another thought. You could use the bot to put the bottom template on the discussion thread when the discussion is moved over. A hanging /div command won't do anything but it would save a step which, as Joyous said, is easy to miss. Rossami (talk)

Once again, agreeing with Rossami. I'd be quite unhappy trusting a bot to work through the sometimes convoluted voting, re-voting, retracting votes, strikethroughs, sockpuppets, etc. Even with a solid string of "deletes," I'd be reluctant to turn it over to a bot, as article deletion can be such a charged issue. Joyous 05:28, Feb 6, 2005 (UTC)

Oh! I know. How about the bot still does the adding text portion, but instead, it merely uses an HTML comment to comment it out? -- AllyUnion (talk) 06:55, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Hi AllyUnion,

I waited until a few minutes after midnight, but the bot apparently didn't do its thing. It did create Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Log/2005 February 7, but it didn't edit VfD or /Old. So I went ahead and did the extension by hand.

dbenbenn | talk 00:08, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

IRC Alexa Bot

Personal note to self: Vague_Rant wants a bot to get stats from Alexa in IRC on Wikipedia. http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?q=&url=en.wikipedia.org; Hmm... maybe could use a Wikipedia bot for it too... dunno. -- AllyUnion (talk) 07:46, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

CheeseDreams

I couldn't find any recent discussion on the issue on the Administrators Noticeboard - it was covered a few days ago, though. In case there's any doubt, though - articles relating to Jesus are most certainly covered under the injunction. I'm not the only arbitrator who is a) not impressed, and b) thinks Dante might just be off his rocker, with this attempt at Wikilawyering. Common sense is a must. Ambi 08:51, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification. -- AllyUnion (talk) 09:03, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Arbitration (Robert the Bruce)

Hi Ally, I am hoping you will be prepared to discuss your sudden interest in circumcision related matters. This is not just a coincidence is it? - Robert the Bruce 09:56, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- I am only responding to requests made at WP:RFPP. I have no interest in it what so ever. -- AllyUnion (talk) 10:00, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Deletion of useless stub templates

You wrote: I have updated the page... I hope it is clear now.""

Much clearer (comprehensively so!). Thanks! Grutness|^hello?

12:00, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The ghost of gK

FYI: When I posted my goodbye at the stub sorting WikiProject I had every intention of kicking back for a couple of weeks and doing absolutely nothing on the Wikipedia. Then I would do one final edit to finish an article that I had been working on (that I had been distracted away from by the dispute at Charles Darwin). However, when I found that the Charles Darwin dispute had gone to arbitration (and I was one of the users that were named in the complaint), I decided that I had to follow through with what I had started there. Now that has been settled, my plan (again) is take a week or two off, and then to finish that one article. Then "gK" will be gone for good from the Wikipedia (for more details see the last two paragraphs in this section [1].

BTW: I was pleasantly surprised when I saw that you had added me to the list of Missing Wikipedians. I want to thank you for that. When I have really finished editing for good, I'll leave you note, if you want, so you can add me back in. gK ¿? 13:17, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC) [2]