User talk:ST47

ST47's talk, sign your posts

Wednesday

22

May
2024

11:29 UTC

Archives

0x00

0|1|2|3|4|5|6|7

8|9|A|B|C|D|E|F

0x10

0|1|2|3|4

My Talk Page

My Contributions

ST47's talk page

Please sign your comments. To make a new section, click here, or just add a section to the bottom of the page. Remember to use a meaningful header. You may also want to read this subpage for explanations of things I may have done that may help you out.

This is a Wikipedia user talk page. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated, and that the user this page belongs to may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original page is located at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:ST47.

Wikimedia Foundation

Contents Edit summary Please use an edit summary when removing specific information from articles. That would be useful. I don't see why you removed this edit, for example, although I can guess that it's because that article contains non-noteworthy things. (However, there are many more links just like it on that page, provided mostly as a reference, so I still don't really see why this one in particular was removed.) —msikma (user, talk) 07:00, 21 March 2007 (UTC) It's a link to a forum. Sorry about the summary, I usually use one, not sure how that slipped through. As for the other links, we were only cleaning up invisionfree, we will keep our eyes open for other spammed sites though :D ST47Talk 10:40, 21 March 2007 (UTC) I Spy Hi ST47. You removed an external link in the I Spy article citing Wikipedia:External links as a reason. Tatia Loring posted a {{helpme}} template on her talk page (which is how I came across it) requesting help to restore the external link. Would you please provide some detail of your actions on the I Spy talk page for the benefit of Tatia Loring. I have directed her to discuss the matter on that talk page as well. Thanks. -- Jreferee 07:05, 21 March 2007 (UTC) Sure! ST47Talk 10:45, 21 March 2007 (UTC) ````` I hope this is the correct place to respond .... Thanks for your response ST47, but please re-read the following. Our I SPY FORUM is NOT a casual message board. We are the main source for all current news about this 60s show. We have been around for 8 years, and have served as consultants on the new I SPY Book and on the I SPY CD. We are in touch with many of the production staff of the program. AND we HAVE BEEN linked to this Wikipedia page (and the one for ROBERT CULP) since 2005!! IFWikipedia's purpose is to help disseminate infomation about a topic, then our site should definitely be included for current and relevant information on "I SPY" .... Thank you and your help is appreciated!! Tatia Loring ...... Original message ... Please help us ... Our website has been listed as an "external link" on Wikipedia since I believe 2005 for both the "I SPY" (TV Show category) and on the "ROBERT CULP" pages. I SPY Forum - http://www.network54.com/Forum/172251/ (I Spy Forum - TV (Robert Culp, Bill Cosby) Our Forum is the premiere site for all relevant and current news and discussion topics relating to the subject of the 60s TV Show "I SPY." Our site has been active daily for the past 8 years. We have been consultants on the new "I SPY" Book and on the "I SPY" CD and a particpant in SPYFEST. We are NOT a typical message board, but the active participant in keeping the spirit of "I SPY" alive. We are in touch with production staff, writers, etc. from the show. Our site (as an "external link" was deleted the other day on both pages - I thought this was done in error and re-added our site, to find that it is gone again today. PLEASE check our site!!! Please do not dismiss the valuable and relevant content we offer because the word FORUM is in our title. We should be included on Wikipedia, as we are the most current and actively contributing site for information on "I SPY" available out there - and it's a disservice to your readers, if we are not included on these two pages. We've been a part of these Wikipedia pages for so long, please help us get re-instated. Thank you, Tatia Loring Tatia Loring 04:03, 21 March 2007 (UTC) It's a discussion site, where people talk to other people about stuff. It had been spammed, so it's automatically removed now, and it's against policy, so all the links were removed. You should discuss the link with other editors, and then add it, if there is a consensus to do so. ST47Talk 19:04, 21 March 2007 (UTC) Hi ST47, I set up a proposal to added the I Spy Forum link to the I Spy article here. -- Jreferee 21:40, 21 March 2007 (UTC) Signpost updated for March 20th, 2007. The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery Volume 3, Issue 12 20 March 2007 About the Signpost WikiWorld comic: "Wilhelm Scream" News and notes: Bad sin, milestones Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:28, 21 March 2007 (UTC) Link Removed on Bad Girls link section? Why was the link to the Helen & Nikki message board removed from the Bad Girls link section? I re-read the Wikipedia external link guidelines, and none of the categories of prohibited links pertains in this case. I'm not the person who added that link in the first place, but it does happen to be one of the 3 or so message boards which actually have substantive discussion of the television program. The Bad Girls links section still contains links to other message boards with less substantive discussions (including a link to a message board which isn't even about the show!), and other sites which are specific to a single character. So what makes this link different such that it had to be deleted? Jtattenbaum 14:05, 21 March 2007 (UTC) It is a link to a message board. "Substantive discussion" doesn't contribute anything to the wiki, and WP:EL is policy, current practice is not. Go right ahead and remove the rest of the links to forums if you want to. ST47Talk 18:57, 21 March 2007 (UTC) Thanks very much for the clarification. I deleted all the other links to message boards/forums. Jtattenbaum 19:17, 21 March 2007 (UTC) User:ST47/BAG Hi, Dont know if you know but on User:ST47/BAG, its not correctly creating the hyperlinks [ http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/Spelian&diff=prev&oldid=116839870 WikipedianProlific] Its adding an extra space!! Reedy Boy 21:17, 21 March 2007 (UTC) OK, I think I fixed it. Thanks! ST47Talk 10:21, 22 March 2007 (UTC) Wikipedia:Abuse_reports/202.182.131.21 This user continues to vandalize; just thought I'd let you know since you're listed as the contact there. It seems an administrator has blocked the IP for six months. -- Cielomobile talk / contribs 01:45, 22 March 2007 (UTC) Ok, thanks, I will try to contact the admin again, but I don't think I ever got a reply. ST47Talk 10:20, 22 March 2007 (UTC) User:202.182.131.21 I have blocked this school for 6 months. →AzaToth 01:50, 22 March 2007 (UTC) OK, thanks! ST47Talk 10:20, 22 March 2007 (UTC) Kurtis Stryker Me and this other user got into an edit war, and he finally provided proof for his statement. But the bot keeps reverting the photobucket picture I tried to post. Ryu Ematsu That's because it's vandalism. Read WP:EL and WP:SPAM. ST47Talk 18:56, 23 March 2007 (UTC) How exactly is it vandilism? Ryu Ematsu That's because it's vandalism. Read WP:EL and WP:SPAM. — ST47Talk, emphasis added, User talk:ST47 on 18:56, 23 March 2007 (UTC) Note that images should be uploaded if possible. ST47Talk 19:00, 23 March 2007 (UTC) How do you upload images? Ryu Ematsu Sign your posts properly please, using a timestamp, and also indent them so I don't have to. WP:IMAGE has information on images. ST47Talk 19:03, 23 March 2007 (UTC) VandalSniper You've been approved to use VandalSniper. Please let me know if you have any problems getting it working. --Chris (talk) 01:03, 25 March 2007 (UTC) BAGBot Hi - when you've got a minute, could you add me to the list of BAG-ers used by the bot? It's a great too - thanks for creating it :) Martinp23 14:32, 25 March 2007 (UTC) No problem, it's been fixed - and thanks! ST47Talk 14:38, 25 March 2007 (UTC) Let me know if you have any recommendations for improvement ST47Talk 14:39, 25 March 2007 (UTC) Thanks for the lightning fast response :). Does the bot currently recognise {{BotTrial}} and {{botTrial}}? If not, it would be nice to introduce case insensitivity. Martinp23 19:31, 25 March 2007 (UTC) I think so, let me check to make sure. ST47Talk 20:40, 25 March 2007 (UTC) I've made the appropriate changes. ST47Talk 20:52, 25 March 2007 (UTC) Are you a Wikipediholic Test Hi ST47, I saw you proclaiming yourself as 3rd in the Wikipediholic Test. I checked over your contributions, and you seem to be a positive contributor, and from this, your score seemed believeable. However, I found out that the highest possible score is about 1038670, which is significantly lower than what you had posted. Although I can't say this for sure, but I suspect cheating, which your score will be reverted. Please discuss this matter at the project's talkpage, or on my talk page.  Smcafirst | Chit-Chat | SIGN  posted at 19:08, 24 March 2007 (UTC) P.S. You will get the elephants! That is, if the score you posted are fake. Replied on project talk page. ST47Talk 19:23, 25 March 2007 (UTC) Okay, I'll let your score stand per the talk page. And you won't get the elephants. But the other two fake scorers will. Check the current revision of WP:TEST. Thank you!  Smcafirst | Chit-Chat | SIGN  posted at 19:36, 25 March 2007 (UTC) Oh, would you like to be pals, if you do, please tell me so.  Smcafirst | Chit-Chat | SIGN  posted at 19:36, 25 March 2007 (UTC) Uh-oh, not the elephants ;) Yeah sure, if you need/want anything, just let me know. (I wonder how patrick got 50 million?) ST47Talk 20:42, 25 March 2007 (UTC) Forgot to congratulate you, you are the third person to top DarknessLord, the all-time Wikipediholic champion. AndonicO was the first person to top him, and then it was me who topped him. Now it's your turn.  Smcafirst | Chit-Chat | SIGN  posted at 20:16, 31 March 2007 (UTC) RE:Robot No. Why do you ask? - PatricknoddyTALK (reply here)|HISTORY 18:31, 26 March 2007 (UTC) Wikipedia:Request an account I've significantly updated the text of Wikipedia:Request an account/preload. The new template, if used properly, should make it a hell of a lot easier for your bot to archive the requests. I'm changing some of the new requests to the preloaded format, and I'd be interested in your comment. Thanks for your help! alphachimp 23:09, 26 March 2007 (UTC) If it's used properly and consistently, it would be great! I'm going to look for the archiving system if there is one. ST47Talk I'll be honest, the last two users completely borked it. We'll keep playing with it and see if we can get a better template name than Template:LEAVE THIS TEXT UNCHANGED. alphachimp 23:37, 26 March 2007 (UTC) OK, easy enough. What are the criteria for archiving? (perhaps we can use a template such as {{done}} to signify completion?) For the template, how about "PUT YOUR USERNAME AND EMAIL HERE"? ST47Talk 23:41, 26 March 2007 (UTC) Would it be possible to check whether the account was created by an existing user? I tried changing it to Template:Enter username and email on the right. alphachimp 23:43, 26 March 2007 (UTC) Mabye. I'll look into it. ST47Talk 23:46, 26 March 2007 (UTC) I'm going to try that, be back in 5 minutes. ST47Talk 23:56, 26 March 2007 (UTC) I posted the request, let me know if I misinterpreted anything. Also, consider if you would like to run it, so you can run it when you need to instead of on a strict schedule. ST47Talk 10:50, 27 March 2007 (UTC) Scheduled sounds fine to me, but I'd be more than willing to host it if you ever want. It looks like most users are following the new format, so that should be of some help. alphachimp 14:29, 27 March 2007 (UTC) Thanks for creating this bot! Can you not remove requests that are similar to existing accounts, please? They can be created but only by an admin. Tra (Talk) 20:46, 27 March 2007 (UTC) In fact, it would be even better if you could get the bot to add a comment to the request, stating what the account is similar to, if that's possible. Tra (Talk) 20:50, 27 March 2007 (UTC) Impossible - the bot was only archiving requests that an editor said was too close, not actually determining this itself. ST47Talk 20:53, 27 March 2007 (UTC) Signpost updated for March 26th, 2007. The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery Volume 3, Issue 13 26 March 2007 About the Signpost From the editor: Tardiness, volunteers, RSS Patrick and Wool resign in office shakeup WikiWorld comic: "Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo" News and notes: Board resolutions, milestones Features and admins The Report on Lengthy Litigation Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 14:22, 27 March 2007 (UTC) WP:RFBOT Your recent bot approvals request has been approved for trial. Please see the request page for details. -- RM 14:27, 27 March 2007 (UTC) OK, thanks! ST47Talk 20:11, 27 March 2007 (UTC) AccReqBot On Wikipedia:Request an account, AccReqBot is removing requests that are "too close" to existing user names. There is a discussion on the talk page of not denying those requests outright, but having administrators review them to determine if the existing account is that of an active user. Could you have the bot stop removing "too close" requests for now? Thanks, jwillburtalk 20:46, 27 March 2007 (UTC) OK, code deleted. How do administrators register that the name is "Too Close"? ST47Talk 20:47, 27 March 2007 (UTC) Apparently it is an administrator privledge to be able to create accounts that regular users are not allowed to create (i.e. usernames that are too similar to existing usernames). I'm not an administrator, but that's how I understand it. jwillburtalk 21:26, 27 March 2007 (UTC) No, I mean to say, how do they record it - is a template used that the bot can archive? ST47Talk 22:51, 27 March 2007 (UTC) As far as I'm aware, the only way to find out if a username is similar to another account is to attempt to create an account under that name. Unfortunately, you are only told about the similarity if you fill in the captcha, which would hinder the bot being able to do this. On WP:ACC, no standardised template is used for similar accounts; instead a statement of what it's similar to and a brief summary of that account is placed underneath the request. These requests won't need to be archived since they can be handled as normal, but only by an administrator, so they can just sit around on the page for a bit longer. Tra (Talk) 23:01, 27 March 2007 (UTC) When the bot removes a name as "already exists", does that meanit was recently created or was created anytime? I'm asking because users that request a name that already exists may not know and simply removing their request doesn't seem like the best way to deal with this. John Reaves (talk) 19:55, 29 March 2007 (UTC) It means that it's been created, but not by a user. If the IP (or a ~~~~) were added to the template, I could post to the IP. ST47Talk 23:42, 29 March 2007 (UTC) Is it possible for the bot to send e-mails? If so, it could e-mail the requester to tell them that the username has been taken by using the address they specify. Tra (Talk) 00:12, 30 March 2007 (UTC) Excellent idea! I'll go look for a SMTP module on CPAN. ST47Talk 10:14, 30 March 2007 (UTC) SMTP tested and implemented, I'm on the CC for now just to make sure it's working. ST47Talk 20:03, 30 March 2007 (UTC) That's great! Do you think it would be possible to get the bot to ignore requests to register the account 'USERNAME' as that usually indicates that the form hasn't been filled in properly, and those requests would need to be dealt with by hand. Also, completed requests are archived by month, e.g. Wikipedia:Request an account/April 2007 for the current month, rather than /Log. Thanks, and keep up the good work! Tra (Talk) 16:51, 1 April 2007 (UTC) Whoops - archiving fixed. Also, if the username is "USERNAME", it will skip. ST47Talk 17:13, 1 April 2007 (UTC) Thanks; can you make it add the name to the correct day and above the {{Wikipedia:Request an account/Footer|April|2007}} bit as well (but skip it entirely if the name is already on the list)? Sorry to keep on bothering you! :-) Tra (Talk) 19:33, 1 April 2007 (UTC) They're still not going in under the right day. Could you take another look, please? Thanks very much. Tra (Talk) 12:46, 2 April 2007 (UTC) Is there any way the bot could add a welcome template to new user's talk pages? John Reaves (talk) 05:21, 4 April 2007 (UTC) It surely could, if there was consensus to, however a welcoming bot has been rejected before - this is a smaller group however. Mabye post on WP:ACC? ST47Talk 10:08, 4 April 2007 (UTC) Wrong Interwikilinks Hi bot, Ahrem "is a little village in Germany", so don't put an interwikilink to the german writer de:Regine Ahrem. She is not a village. --Kolja21 12:49, 2 April 2007 (UTC) I am not a bot. Avoid personal attacks. That was 4 months ago. Provide a diff. And why don't you revert it? ST47Talk 17:56, 2 April 2007 (UTC) WikiProject MMO Newsletter The WikiProject MMO Newsletter is ready to be posted. It is available here. Post something like: ==WikiProject MMO Newsletter - April 2007== {{subst:Wikipedia:WikiProject Massively multiplayer online games/Outreach/Newsletter/April 2007}} on the talk page of everyone listed as a member. Thanks! Greeves (talk • contribs) 00:14, 3 April 2007 (UTC) I'll start the bot! ST47Talk 01:18, 3 April 2007 (UTC) Tag Wikiproject France Hello, I have realized right now (and a little late) that STBot has placed a "Wikiproject France" on this discussion page (Talk:Walloon_language) which seems a little weird to me since Walloon is spoken mainly in Belgium and in a very small area of the French Ardennes. Therefore I wonder whether Walloon actually needs to be included in the Wikiproject France or whether this article has met some criterions that made it available for this project. --Lebob-BE 23:48, 3 April 2007 (UTC) Signpost updated for April 2nd, 2007. The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery Volume 3, Issue 14 2 April 2007 About the Signpost Poll finds people think Wikipedia "somewhat reliable" Wikipedia biographical errors attract more attention Association of Members' Advocates nominated for deletion Reference desk work leads to New York Times correction WikiWorld comic: "Charles Lane" News and notes: Alexa, Version 0.5, attribution poll Wikipedia in the news Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:16, 4 April 2007 (UTC) Why? Why did you remove my User:Trampton/Gag?And my "This user loves you"? Trampton 02:34, 5 April 2007 (UTC). The second bit violates the guideline I linked to in the edit summary. I restored the first bit. ST47Talk 10:16, 5 April 2007 (UTC) WP:UP Hi! I wanted to give you a friendly reminder of a newer addition to policy. Due to the reversion on your userpage, I'm sure that you weren't aware of it, it's a rather new addition. The new section states that The Wikipedia community generally frowns upon simulating the MediaWiki interface, and it should be avoided. As a guideline, it is not set in stone, however it is generally accepted among editors and is considered a standard that all users should follow and should be treated with common sense and the occasional exception, which links to Ignore all rules. IAR requires that the rules prevent you from improving the wiki, however some slack is given to this wording as long as your edits either reflect consensus or improve the wiki. Please make the necessary edits to your userpage so it abides with community consensus! Thanks, ST47Talk 23:14, 4 April 2007 (UTC) Yes, I'm aware of the extremely silly dispute. I'm also aware that the section is not new, and that you are not the first person to go around editing other user's user pages based on it. I am also aware that the last person to do so was reprimanded. It is "frowned upon", not forbidden, and doesn't give you the right to remove it from my user page. Do all the "frowning" you like on my talk page (might I suggest that you use an emoticon for the purpose?), but please do not edit my user page again. The rule says that it is to be "avoided", not removed. Please follow the rule and avoid looking at my user page and it will cease to bother you. Have a nice day! :-) IPSOS (talk) 12:31, 5 April 2007 (UTC) Syntax change on WP:ACC Hi, there's discussions about changing the template used on WP:ACC at Wikipedia_talk:Request_an_account#Updated_Preload_Text. Would it be possible for your bot to be modified to accept these changes? Thanks. Tra (Talk) 14:43, 5 April 2007 (UTC) Barnstar The Original Barnstar Thank you so much for helping rid Wikipedia of the hellishly annoying fake "you have messages" boxes. For an active editor like myself, who regularly does have new messages, these fake boxes are extremely irritating and a waste of my time. A thank you isn't enough AFAIC, so please accept this barnstar! :) --kingboyk 19:22, 5 April 2007 (UTC)