User talk:Gimmetrow

minor orders

With respect, the Eastern Churches consider them part of the Sacrament of Holy Orders. I realise the Western Church doesn't. How do we work this one out? InfernoXV (talk) 05:09, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Geobox and World Heritage Sites

Hi, I've noticed you removed the World Heritage Icon from the {{Geobox}} page. I'm not sure I fully understand the reason for the removal. The icon doesn't get displayed unless it is transcluded in another page and as this template is used only in the main namespace thus the fair use icon is only used and diplayed the main namespace. – Caroig (talk) 14:30, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[Hope you don't mind reposting your answer here, I find it easier for anyone, me included, to keep the discussion on one place.] Hello. Image:UNESCO World Heritage Site - small logo.svg is marked as a logo used under fair use. If you use any fair use image in a template like {{geobox}}, you would have to have a fair use rationale for every page using the template. Also, it's generally understood that fair use images should only appear in the article space; the image currently appears in Template talk:Geobox/test. If you really want to use this logo, and you can't find a "free" version, then the safe solution is generally to put it in the template call in each article, like {{geobox | title=[[Image:logo.svg]] This place | otherstuff=otherdata }}. Still, maintaining the list of articles (for the fair use rationale) is usually too much fuss; a text note avoids this problem and allows for a link to WHS. Gimmetrow 16:44, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template talk:Geobox/test was a test case as is hopefully obvious from the page name. Removed. But I'm afraid I still don't understand. Especially what you mean by "you would have to have a fair use rationale for every page using the template". There are a few pages with Image:World_Heritage_logo.png and I don't see any "fair use" tag for the page. Just when you click on the picture you get the fair use text. As well as for any page using the Image:UNESCO World Heritage Site - small logo.svg. – Caroig (talk) 20:45, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An idea just popped up in my mind. I can't test it now the code's removed but did the "Whatlinkshere" for the small logo link to every page where the template was used regardless whether the icon was displayed or not? If that was the problem, it can easily be fixed. – Caroig (talk) 20:48, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Project templates

Gimmetrow, can you tell if the Philadelphia or Journalism WikiProject templates is causing the blank line at Talk:Mumia Abu-Jamal? Thanks, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:33, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's almost always the one before the space, and this one was visible even on the template page. Gimmetrow 18:24, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Gimmetrow; I did not know how to find it or how to fix it. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:50, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GameFAQs

Your bot just closed the discussion as a keep. It did not go through the FARC part, where people either ~~voted~~ discussed whether to keep or remove the article. May I ask why this happened? hbdragon88 (talk) 21:03, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The bot didn't close the discussion per se; it just added the tags. After reading the page, I would guess User:Joelr31 felt the main objection, based on WP:SELFPUB, wasn't very strong. Not all FA reviews go to the FARC part. If Joelr31 or Marskell consider the objections addressed, they can close it anytime. Gimmetrow 00:12, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there

I have a request—do you think GimmeBot could add {{ArticleHistory}} at Talk:Burger King? I was about to do it manually, but there's quite a bit of history (nominated for GA three or four times, a semi-auto peer review I'm unsure belongs in the template...) and I wouldn't want to screw it all up :) Best, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 21:56, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Fvasconcellos (t·c) 15:18, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Archival bot

Gimme, is the archival issue at Wikipedia talk:Goings-on the kind of thing you would be interested in (or maybe Dr pda)? There was a bot request, but no one picked it up. I suppose it can be done manually each week, which is not a big deal, but ugh. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:04, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are a bunch of archival bots, eg User:MiszaBot. Without looking at the particular situation in detail, I suspect one of them could do this. They have a lot of options. Gimmetrow 21:53, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Someone claims not, because it's not a talk page, and needs to be done weekly. Or some such thing. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:58, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MiszaBot handles WP space, and it does archives with dates in the pagename. I am confident that someone with a little time and creativity could figure out how to make it or one of the other archive bots handle the WP:GO page. It might involve a bit of redesign at WP:GO or some new feature in some bot. But I can't look into this for a while. Gimmetrow 22:02, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Gimme; I'll track down the Misza folk. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:06, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also check out User:HBC Archive Indexerbot, but I think that only does numbered archives. Gimmetrow 00:20, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GA newsletter

You might want to look at this, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:13, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Timing

Gimmetrow, are there better and worse days and times for you for promoting/archiving botification of FACs? Sundays are out, right? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:40, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No. What gave you that impression? Mondays circa 3:00 UTC is often good; I think that would probably be a Sunday evening for you. Gimmetrow 00:56, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I dunno; just observing over time when you ran the bot, but the memory doesn't work so well lately. Sunday night is probably good. I just wanted to make sure there's not any particular time/day I should avoid. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:00, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Double quotes in FA article names

Hi - I noticed this edit uses the HTML entity name (") rather than a literal double quote. At the moment, this makes the tool I use to update WP:WBFAN think it's a different article (it audits the by-year nomination tables against WP:FA and WP:FFA and prompts me about any discrepancies). I can fix this in my tool by normalizing HTML entity names to the corresponding literal characters, but I'm curious if you actually meant to use the HTML entity name.

Slightly different topic, but if you could have gimmebot update the by year nomination tables when FAs are renamed that'd be quite helpful to me. I currently respond to these manually. Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) 16:23, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The API seems to return article names with certain characters as html names. Usually I fix them by hand later because it often produces a redlink. This time it didn't. Will try to allow for Wikipedia:Featured articles nominated in 2007 and so forth with renames. Gimmetrow 02:52, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pywikipedia? I wouldn't expect this, but I suppose I've seen stranger things. Nearly everything I do is by retrieving article source with a shell command (like cURL or Wget), manipulating the source into what I want to submit using tools like awk, and then submitting the new text using a version of pywikipedia's replace.py I've hacked to accept an entire replacement file. Because of this I know very little about how pywikipedia behaves on the fetch side of the equation. -- Rick Block (talk) 03:41, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It does a lot of html scraping. What you noticed just hasn't been enough of an issue for me to care about fixing it. Gimmetrow 03:47, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"It" being gimmebot? I've recently done some stuff with api.php that seems to make at least some screen scraping unnecessary - for example, diffs between various versions of the same article. If you want to talk about anything like this (anytime), please let me know. -- Rick Block (talk) 04:20, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Implemented; test looks OK. This will only change names which the bot also changes on WP:FA, and I generally only do this when there are at least two renames and they appear somewhat stable. It won't catch renames when other editors update the names. Gimmetrow 18:11, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

yep

I read it too carelessly. See my talk page. thanks for catching it. But perhaps it is good for the balance of my general reputation if I too am found to over-delete from time to time :)DGG (talk) 05:43, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Typo redirect Lanceheads

Hi Gimmetrow! I was attempting to delete this redirect because it's a plural form of the term and wasn't being used. There was already a singular version in place. Also, I don't know of any better way to delete these kinds of minor redirects. (PS -- Please answer here, as I've temporarily added your talk page to my watchlist). --Jwinius (talk) 19:47, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't see it doing any harm, and it was made back on 13 August 2006, but if you think this cleanup is needed, that's fine. Gimmetrow 20:12, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. --Jwinius (talk) 20:33, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GimmeBot

Who decides when a FAR debate is closed? I have never paid attention to this process before. Is there a Director/Coordinator?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 21:58, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Marskell and Joelr31. 22:37, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Mozart songs

Oh, thanks a lot; aren't you subtle :-) Now I have to figure out if they are two songs or one, and if one is a fraud, and if my sources are referring to the wrong song, as well as figuring out the translation mess? And I have nothing better to do with my time these days !! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:06, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GA header

I've moved out the GA page header to a subpage. I don't think I've done anything which will disorient GimmeBot, but I'm letting you know just in case. Geometry guy 11:57, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Precedent?

Do you suppose this is a bad precedent, or does it cause any problems? Rossrs and I didn't realize the FAR had been moved to archive by Marskell, I requested it not be closed until I could finish the final tweaks so the oldid would be to a clean version, and I didn't realize he had already moved it to FAR. So, I updated the oldid to the final one just before you botified. Could that create issues? If so, I'll revert. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:05, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wish list

Total whim, ignore if a bad idea or too much work. Recently, there were three FAC noms that came back to FAC immediately after being archived. If GimmeBot, upon clearing the redirect and entering "previous FAC", also indicated the date the previous FAC was archived, I wouldn't have to check for noms submitted too soon; it would be automatic and apparent to everyone. Whatdyathink? If the code has the timedate stamp stored anyway, adding it wouldn't be hard? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:40, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Something has to fail to try it out. 18:05, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

OK, next time; gosh, that was fast. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:14, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It worked; I like it. Will see what others say. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:09, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gimme, can you help me with this techno-question? How do I make this diff display Dec 7 20:13 to Dec 8 1:39 ? I've seen others do it, but can't find an example right now. Thanks :-) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:07, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can't do it between two times, you can only choose the time of the first entry on the page. To get something more specific than the year/month available from the dropdown boxes you need to add &offset=time to the url where time is in the form yyyy-mm-dd-hh-mm-ss. E.g. for your case, 2007-12-08, 01:39:59 would be &offset=20071208013959. Dr pda (talk) 22:02, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you can "fake it" by setting &limit= to the number of contribs in the range. It's a pain, but accurate. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:46, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I guess all the brains hang out at Gimmetrow's talk page :-) Thanks! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:04, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gimmetrow, I archived a batch without promoting any (I find it easier to do promotes and archives separately, and to work in smaller batches than Raul does); I thought I should let you know since I'm not sure which page (FA, FAC, promotions, archives) you watch for the bot. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:45, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Halle Berry

Your edits are lauded. But its surprising that someone so experienced should consider fair use images unnecessary. That pic is relevant to the article. Vikrant Phadkay 16:03, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Portal:Heraldry

Nice work on automating the selected articles on the portal. After a bit of thought I think I understand the formula you are using, however I have two questions. First, won't the parameters in /Selector need to be updated every time a new article is added? Specifically if the second parameter of /Type (i.e. the modulus) is not changed then the new article will not be included in the cycle once its month has expired. This doesn't seem to be mentioned in the updating instructions, but my guess would be that you were going to do this yourself as it's slightly complicated to explain. Secondly the current numbers for the modulus for C and B articles seem to be transposed. From here there are currently two Bio articles and four CoA articles, but /Selector has 4 and 2 respectively for the modulus. Dr pda (talk) 22:02, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I switched 'em to test it. A new article shouldn't be in the rotation until it's past the initial featuring, or it may appear twice on the page, assuming we keep a daily and a monthly article. I was mildly surprised to find that only about half the FAs have appeared on the portal. 22:54, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

The Napa Valley Spamsters

I'm really hesitant to unblock this I.P. If you read the posts carefully, they don't really seem to grasp that by our standards, hiring an "independent journalist" to writer articles about their clients is a violation of the C.O.I. rules. They seem to think that if we just let them back on, they can rewrite and repost all the vanicruftisements. Am I being too harsh/cynical? --Orange Mike | Talk 04:55, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dead link toolbox

I'm a pest :-) Look at this great new tool, but I can't make it go. [1] It seems to identify a lot of issues on some FACs, but I can't find a link to post to a given FAC. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 06:47, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Change the page= parameter.[2] 17:06, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Did it: [3] Thanks, Gimmetrow. "They haven't yet invented the barnstar that covers all that you do for Wikipedia." SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:21, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Dan Koch

It was just a broken infobox. I was in the middle of writing the article but I wanted to save the page to see if the infobox worked but before I could go back and fix it I got a note saying the page was getting deleted. But that's fine I'm still looking for more references anyway. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajaxspray (talk • contribs) 18:52, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good work

Hi - I noticed this edit (and another one just like it) yesterday. Thanks for updating the bot to do this. It is helpful. -- Rick Block (talk) 15:07, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Move procedure

Thanks for the note. Seems complicated, but I'll have to try that some day. Thanks again. Lara❤Love 18:02, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FLs

I don't know, what exactly would it do? Is the bot fully automatic or do you have to do it? -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 18:32, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if it's totally necessary. Raul usually closes 2 dozen FAs at a time, but we normally close them daily and only do a few at a time (today I closed 5, my record for most closes at once is 7). I'll post it at WP:FLC though and see if anyone thinks it qwould help. Thanks for the offer. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 18:40, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So if I did use it, I'd still have to add the closure boxes, and move them to either the promoted or failed log, as well as update WP:FL, and the new featured content page, but the bot would do the rest? -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 18:46, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another question, the bot would only be able to run when you are online, right? So if I promoted anything when you aren't online, it could stay unupdated for a few hours? -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 18:48, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So I would just update the log, then and do the other things, and then the bot would take it from there? -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 18:50, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I guess it's worth a try. I wish I could test it right now, but I just closed a bunch of FLCs a few hours ago. There will be one that will be passable in a few hours. And as for the closure boxes, I'd prefer to keep the support/oppose numbers there and I think it would be better if I did it as soon as I promoted it, because I've noticed that with many FAs, Raul will promote them but won't add a closure box, so the contributors aren't always sure if the page passed or not.

And how exactly is it the bot knows what to promote? Would I just update the promotion/fail log (this page) or what? -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 18:57, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So I'm ready to close some FLCs. Would you be able to use the bot? -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 01:55, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ya. 02:46, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Done. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 03:12, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That worked out well enough. I assume you'll put the pages on watch so I wouldn't have to tell you every time I promoted stuff? -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 03:47, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I watch FLC for changes. Gimmetrow 04:02, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great, I have just done one. I came here to ask about the process, all questions answered now! Thanks. Woody (talk) 11:16, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cleaning up problems from recent WP issue

When the templates are redirects, like WP:1.0, it might be best to link them to {{WP1.0}} instead of adding the "Template" part. Just a thought... Ral315 (talk) 02:02, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

True, probably should have renamed those. This is going to take some retraining for certain projects like LoCE. Gimmetrow 02:09, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weird FA tag

See Talk:Thomas C. Hindman - where's the FAC nom in the article history? Raul654 (talk) 04:06, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Brenda Song

I dont understand what you mean here: compromise. I'll check imdb to see if its there. I remember awhile back there was a topic on imdb about how she didnt get $1.2mill bc she isnt a top tier Disney star. That even Raven nor Lindsay Lohan nor Hil Duff made that much so BS didnt make that much. 70.108.140.158 (talk) 01:26, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In response to this query: Another editor wanted to put this salary info in the lead section citing imdb. Some other editors and I objected that imdb is not reliable; we really should avoid citing imdb except for WGA credits (which are provided to imdb directly by the WGA and should be reliable), and for common facts as a convenience link. Nevertheless, rather than argue about imdb, the compromise was to have it in the table (not in the lead) and hope a decent non-imdb reference shows up.

Also, you made some other changes which go against the manual of style. On Wiki, section headings are in sentence case: only the first word and proper nouns are capitalized. A section is called "Personal life", not "Personal Life". Gimmetrow 03:08, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

O ok. As I stated I remember there was a discussion on imdb about the $1.2mill pay. I checked the boards, but its gone(imdb purges threads now so its gone). I'll repost the question 2 c if some 1 has the link that proved she didnt get the $1.2mill. Thx.

That is weird about Personal life vs Personal Life. 70.108.140.158 (talk) 06:13, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We'd like your comments

Your comments would be welcome at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#A way forward. Specifically, we are considering options for unifying and simplifying the way that dates are presented on Wikipedia, and bots or scripts are an option to consider. Since you have experience in this area, your opinion would be welcome. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 05:36, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Botification

I don't know if it's a list or an article, but Talk:List of works by William Monahan is going to be a botification challenge (little bit of everything there); maybe you want to work on it in advance? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:57, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Date Links

It does say, "Link to one of these pages only if it is likely to deepen readers' understanding of a topic." I have left dates of when people were in an office of power, etc. but having the date that somebody was born linked is unlikely to deepen the readers understanding of the topic. PookeyMaster (talk) 23:52, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FAR

Normally I archive prematurely nominated and removed FARs myself, but the nominator of this one is upset that I passed it, and reverted Joelito's removal, so I'll leave the archiving to you. Wikipedia:Featured article review/Meteorological history of Hurricane Ivan, archive and talk page template. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:28, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Does that work? Gimmetrow 02:11, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whenever I close one, I move them to the next N archive, and put the standard, previous FAR withdrawn in the redirect, and tag the old one closed. Didn't botify. Never added commentary, since, um, the nominator didn't read the instructions. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:16, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I guess that works as well because it doesn't occupy an archive, but it doesn't allow for tagging closed. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:18, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cleveland

Hello Gimmetrow. Cleveland is also in England! I am not from the United States. People living on the other parts of the World will be confused. Thus, the category should be Cleveland, Ohio. Do you have any problem with that? Regards, Masterpiece2000 (talk) 03:07, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bot? Well, I am still new. I don't know the role of the bot. Can we talk about it later? Regards, Masterpiece2000 (talk) 03:14, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the information. I have started the process..so I have to complete it. However, for other cities with similar problems, I will follow what you have said. Regards, Masterpiece2000 (talk) 03:22, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe there is a category yet for Category:People from Cleveland, England, but there is one for Category:People from Cleveland, Tennessee. Badagnani (talk) 06:29, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

brenda song page u completely redid

WOAH. U've completely changed the page. U seem 2 be dominating the page. The previous version has lots of good stuff. I'm reverting & adding stuff.70.108.140.158 (talk) 17:26, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What are you talking about? I think I removed some trivia another editor (not you) added, and moved some recently-added stuff in "personal life" to a more appropriate section on charity work. Gimmetrow 19:04, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FLRC

Hi there Gimmetrow. I have just closed Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/List of RahXephon media and made all the necessary adjustments everywhere. Now, I was thinking, in future could the bot deal with those as well. We tend to only have about 1 every couple of months. If so, how does it work? If it is removed, does the old FLC need to be moved to an archive? Thanks. Woody (talk) 23:38, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The bot handles FAR, but I have not written the code to handle FLR. When FAs are removed, yes the old successful FAC gets "archived" to make way for a future FAC, as does the FAR page. Presumably the same would be done with FLC and FLR. 03:13, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Thats what I thought, Thanks. No rush with the FLR code, as I say, there aren't that many. Regards Woody (talk) 11:38, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

{{Articlehistory}} deprecates other templates

I thought, given the pheomenal job you do maintaining {{Articlehistory}} you should be the first to see this. Your comments there would be very welcome. Happy‑melon 12:38, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Admin help needed

Gimmetrow, are you online? There's a big mess at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Yoshi's Story/archive1, and I think I need admin help in moving the article back to ... the article. I pinged EliotAndrew to try to determine what he's up to. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:11, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ugh. The article has to be moved back to the article, including the talk page, and the FAC nomination has to be moved from Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Featured article candidates/Yoshi's Story/archive1 to the FAC nom. I'm still trying to decipher it. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:17, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I left a note for the nominator, suggesting he reconsider the FAC nom. User talk:EliotAndrews#WP:FAC SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:28, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'm going to hold off on resubmitting it to FAC, since ... well. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:09, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help!

What do I remove?! I don't know what to remove! RuneWiki⁷⁷⁷ 23:38, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whew. Thanks. RuneWiki⁷⁷⁷ 23:51, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect page

Hey Hey. Someone redirected the Eliska Sursova page to the Eliska Amor page. It should be redirected the other way around, Eliska Amor directed to Eliska Sursova as 'Amor' is her middle name not surname. Initially IMDB (where I am from) entered her information wrong and other sites lifted this incorrect info for theirs. TV.com and FMD.com etc have all made the corrections however it will probably take a couple of days for the changes to go live in search results. Thanks. --MaestroMister (talk) 08:48, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize. Thankyou for alerting me to the mistake though, otherwise I wouldn't have known it wasn't okay to copy-paste information into other articles it's relevant to. Happy Holidays x --MaestroMister (talk) 01:32, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GimmeBot

I thought your bot added the {{featured list}} template to the bottom of FLs? If it does, it didn't do so in the last round of promotions. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 02:33, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. FA doesn't do that, so it's not written. Gimmetrow 02:37, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could you get your bot to do that? Because the last few FLs promoted likely don't have the star now. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 02:40, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How to restore a deleted page

Hello-you were nice enough to offer to talk about a page I created that got deleted (Alexandra Zapp). I now have lots references for the article and have wikified it more--how do I try it again? When I go to create the page it will not let me edit it.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stoneys (talk • contribs) 24 December 2007

Replied on user's talk. 17:38, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for helping me with my page (Alexandra Zapp). I have it up and it has not been automatically deleted yet so so far so good. For some reason though my references are not showing up in the article even though they are visible when I edit the article and I am following the format I have seen on other article pages. Would you mind giving it a look? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stoneys (talk • contribs) 16:25, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Internets

An article that you have been involved in editing, Internets, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Internets. Thank you. --BJBot (talk) 02:31, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

Hello Gimmetrow. Merry Christmas! And, thanks for informing me about bots. I studied the bot policy. Now, I know about it. Regards, Masterpiece2000 (talk) 14:21, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to hear it. I might be able to do the bot work next time you have one of these. Gimmetrow 01:55, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

West Rock Ridge

Thanks for your edits. Hey, I noticed that you used {{-}} to replace the multiple breaks I'd written into the article. It seems like a useful tool; can you tell me how it works?--Pgagnon999 (talk) 14:33, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

On 27 December, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Tom Collen, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Maxim_(talk) 14:37, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dead link tool

OK if the article-specific links get removed from Wikipedia:Featured article preload now? Gimmetrow 08:58, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't care what happens to them as long as they don't appear all in a group on a review page. People are then tempted to click them one after another despite the cached copy at the top of the page. The way it is done now is good as wikipedians are reminded to check their links before listing. The edit made today was more technical than anything else and allows them to see the full list. But I have been wrong with user interfaces, so if you think to the contrary tell me and why. —Dispenser (talk) 09:10, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ming Dynasty

I agree about the gallery; I had made one earlier simply to deposit images there so I could refer to them and move them back into the body later while constructing the article. The left-over images were so nice I became fretful about removing them, but with your comment and that of another wiki user I have decided to scrap the gallery. I hope you like the article now.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 20:34, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, that was not helpful

Many times if I interrupt an editing spree, if I have already made three edits in that 28 hours I have been warned or blocked for 3-RRR. So I was caught in a catch-22 in order not to get warned myself which is what happened last time. Last time, I got a 3-RRR warning because I interrupted a series of edits. It's a no win situation. Wikipedia is not a place for me, I could not interrupt her edits. I was scared stiff.

Wikipedia is clearly not a place to worry about doing the right thing or I would have interrupted her edits. I was stupid. But I probably would have been the one bashed anyway. Wikipedia is for the people that understand the tricky rules, not writers for me This is a nasty place, wikipedia. I am beginning to hate it.

After all the 3-RRR explanations that have been given to me, the one you gave me is the first time I ever heard that explanation. Oh well, I owe nothing to wikipedia. Rules are made up by the rulers! Fortunately, I have given up any need to help wikipedia and just write for myself now. That way life is pleasant instead of this uglyness. I can't report things because I don't know how, and even begging people, no one helps. I have over 35,000+, some from when I did a lot for others, copy editing for FAC etc. No more of that anymore. I own wikipedia nothing in good will. Regards, Mattisse 04:06, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I do not think you are right, unless the rules have been changed recently. As I said, I have gotten the 3-RRR just by putting in that fourth edit when the other editor is on a spree. Usually, we both get it. At least this time I did not. But I will not edit other articles any more. Mattisse 04:09, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it will not be me editing her articles. I have been told by too many people that it is not worth it - getting caught up in her paperwork morass. I will stick to the articles I write and not try to "improve" Wikipedia. Mattisse 04:19, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your offer -- I take you up on it -- thanks!

Zareaph has been retired since September, if you look back in the history of the user page. Indeed, User:LessHeard vanU did not take my original concerns seriously -- because her user page said "Retired in September". (Strange he did not question that.) Thanks for your offer. I will take you up on it! Regards, Mattisse 18:48, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]