User talk:Betacommand/20070401

(VP)

Userlist Corrupt! Can you fix it? Thanks, → p00rleno (lvl 85) ←ROCKS ^C_RS17:40, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The userlist is working perfectly for me. Snowolf ^(talk) _CON ^COI - 23:33, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Request for moderator assistance

Heya. I'm struggling to deal with some cases of accidental removal of users from the awaiting approval list because I don't seem to be able to add them again. I've tried with the first three but I'm never sure - mind taking a look? Thanks. —Xyrael / 19:46, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

VP: Strange usernames

Have you already noticed that in VP's recent approvals there are strange and not existent usernames which should been approved by you? Snowolf ^(talk) _CON ^COI - 23:34, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I added those to try and prevent a known bug from removing users from the list. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 23:49, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is fixed in the dev version BTW, along with a few other improvements. Not sure how much I can say though. :) Prodego ^talk 23:52, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

yeah I know its fixed in the next version but I dont have that version :( Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 23:53, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just have the code actually (not compiled), so neither do I. Ale jrb is using it though. Prodego ^talk 23:55, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Double hit

[1] looks like an odd edit --Henrygb 20:16, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you should also delete all the categories in this category Category:Wikipedians by politics. ^Klak_Sonn^{Keep it to yourself} 17:48, 2 April 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Arbitration case

I am trying to make sense of the arbitration case against you. If I have this figured out correctly, you used BCBot to compile lists of spam links, but deleted the links using your own account and a manually-assisted script. So the allegation is that you used poor judgement in hitting the save button without checking thoroughly; but not that you used a true bot on your account to make the edits. With respect to user name vios, BCBot made lists of bad user names, and you blocked from your account. Again, the allegation is not that you ran a fully automated admin bot, but that you used poor judgement in acting on the bot-generated lists. Is that about right? Thatcher131 23:36, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In regard to username blocks I had an IRC tool that reported usernames that fit certain patterns. I then choose whether or not to block. In regard to link removal, I was developing a simi-auto script but it had some issues and wasn't always prompting me, so at times it was an automatic script. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 23:59, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with article

Hello - sorry to bother you - I am really struggling to get this article correct and it keeps being deleted. It is similar to the ABTA article (they are similar associations) and I can't see why (I am a total novice) it isn't being accepted. I would be very grateful if you wouldn't mind having a look for me. I think many members (see Great Rail Journeys) would appreciate the link to the association in their own articles. Many thanks. '''AITO''' ('''The Association of Independent Tour Operators''') is a [[Industry trade group|trade organisation]] of over 150 independent and specialist [[Tour operator|Tour Operator]] companies. Each member of AITO must adhere to a strict code of conduct known as the Quality Charter. ([http://www.aito.co.uk/ Official Website]) {{Tourism-stub}} [[Category:Organisations based in England]] [[Category:Transport Associations]]

Its not being kept because the page reads like an ad for that group. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 19:51, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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 04:44, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent point

You just made an excellent point on Danny's RfA regarding early blocking of spammers/vandals in specific instances. Hear, hear! Katalaveno^T_C 13:42, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

VandalProof

Dear Betacommand,

I was approved to use User:AmiDaniel/VandalProof with my old User:Mustafa Akalp name. Recently my username changed (upon my reques) to User:Makalp. Now, I cant use this program. Solution?
Is any user, use this program (and userbox) without permission?. If somebody would use it what is the possible outcome for that user?
Where I can find approved users list?

Regards. Must.^T ^C 07:08, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

just go to WP:VPRF and reregister Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 11:34, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some bot ramblings

Betacommand, I appreciate your response to my bot request (Wforlines). I'd like to discuss further with you about how the bot will work (that is if you are interested in creating the bot). I am completely oblivious to how bots are used, so I'm not sure of what I'm requesting. I'll try and exsplain my idea a little further here: The basic objective of the bot is to automatically query Wikipedia search for specified text and log information onto a list. Once in the list, information would be prioritized according to importance (I'll get to this). List entries can be inspected by users and delt with accordingly (in a project's case, deciding if an article is relevant to the project or not). Once an article has been checked and given the y/n tag, it will no longer show up in search results. Now, you said you questioned the priority issue, and possibly because its simply not possible or probibly I didn't exsplain it well. I started a list of words the other night to better understand my idea, and well, here is an example. Lets take "lighting designer" together, they have will almost indefinately pertain to my project, WP:STAGE, but apart they may or may not. "Lighting" may be in a stage lighting related article, or it may be in a CGI article. "Designer" would reach an even broader scope of articles. Thus, "lighting designer" would reveive the highest priority, "lighting" the next, and "designer" the next. Maybe that is completely rediculous and illogical to you as the programmer, I don't know, my programming exsperience doesn't strech any further than basic text HTML. Let me know what you think (or if you want to go forward with this) on my talk page. Thanks a bundle! --Wforlines 06:43, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, thanks so much! It may be a little while until I can get you a list (a week or two), as I need to speak with my project members. Do you want just a simple list listing all of the words, including combinations of "s" "ing" "er", etc, or do you have a format you would like me to use (to make your job a little easier). Again, I really appreciate this! --Wforlines 18:50, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

VP Moderation

Hi,

I realise that there is a backlog on the VP approval list, and would be happy to help clear it, but I have been advised to ask you for a few 'pointers' on your criteria before approving anyone (or not, as the case may be) :P. I would appreciate it if you could let me know when you next have a spare moment. You can reply here, on my talk page, or feel free to email me.

Thanks, Ale_Jrb ^talk 16:16, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! :D Ale_Jrb ^talk 20:43, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

VP

Hi, you notified me a few hours ago that I was approved to use VP, but trying to actually use it. VP says I'm not authorized. Is there some delay involved before I can use it? Regards, Arwel (talk) 20:59, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly the same situation for me... robwingfield ^«T•C» 23:50, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Same here - when I click on Verify Authorization it says "The user list is corrupt. Please contact a moderator to have it repaired." ...adam... ^{(talk • contributions)} 12:07, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Russian Wikiproject Tagging

I am a participant of WikiProject Russia. I would be gratefull to you if you would tag the talk pages of articles within:

- Please, exclude talk pages that have any templates whatsoever. {{
- Please, tag the talk page articles with the following template: {{WikiProject Russia|class=Stub|importance=}}.

Your efforts will be greatly appreciated. --Parker007 03:01, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rangeblock of 69.21.0.0/16 lifted

due to autoblocking of User talk:Agriffis. Why are you hard blocking an ISPs DHCP pool for a whole month when a day or two probably would have been enough? Has it ever occurred to you to fire off an email to an ISP's abuse desk before taking such drastic action? I also have to worry about your block on 77.182.0.0/16 too. No wonder why you're at RFAr -- I'm getting a strong impression that you never think through your actions and their consequences fully before you act. -- Netsnipe ► 02:37, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I and some other admins have been fighting a IP jumping spambot. I have attempted single blocks but they are of little affect. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 03:51, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of selflinks

Please do NOT remove selflinks, and most certainly not by just removing the square brackets, as you did in 'Decametre' (I hope it was only there!). Wiki visualizes selflinks not by showing a link, nor does a selflink react on a mouseclick. Instead, Wiki shows the selflink in bold, precisely as if '''article name''' would have been written. Hence selflinking is a common and wanted technique, in particular in templates (substituted or not): it ensures that the relevant item of a list is automatically shown in bold. Many editors prefer selflinks above hardcoded bold. Kind regards. — SomeHuman 15:15, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Minor issue regarding your sig.

Your signature shows up on RFA Analysis tools as BetacommandBot. It's not a big deal, but you could fix it by changing the link in your sig from User:BetacommandBot to User:Betacommand/Bot (note the slash), then make that page a redirect to your bot's userpage. Not a big thing, but one of the bureaucrats was confused when it looked like your bot voted :) Ral315 » 01:23, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for April 9th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 15	9 April 2007	About the Signpost

Danny Wool regains adminship in controversial RFA	Leak last year likely to produce changes for handling next board election
Association of Members' Advocates' deletion debate yields no consensus	WikiWorld comic: "Fake shemp"
News and notes: Donation, Version 0.5, milestones	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

Special note to spamlist users: Apologies for the formatting issues in previous issues. This only recently became a problem due to a change in HTML Tidy; however, I am to blame on this issue. Sorry, and all messages from this one forward should be fine (I hope!) -Ral315

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 07:48, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Atlas Award

You probably don't do awards, but here is one anyway - just a way to say thanks for your help -- Quantockgoblin 22:21, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

	The Atlas Award
	I award you The Atlas Award for being a great supporter of Wikipedia. Thanks for all your help in making The Stub of the Day template -- Quantockgoblin 22:17, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

VP

user:AmiDaniel/VP/Approval Thanks! Wǐkǐɧérṃǐť(Talk) (Contributions) 00:06, 13 April 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Sandbox

Your sandbox seems to be having multiple edits per second. These seem like bot edits. This may be against the policy of bot edits per minute that wikipedia currently does not enforce, but suggests to follow. What is it exactly that you are doing. Please assume good faith, I don't mean to offend you. Thanks!! - Hairchrm 00:25, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is kinda like a bot. I am using a tool(simi-bot) to identify and flag pages that are listed on m:Spam and are not on WP:WHITELIST users have free rain to use there userspace, as long as the tool doesnt edit articles and doesnt edit anything else there is no need to go to WP:BRFA as it is only editing my personal user sandbox. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 00:29, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, thanks!! - Hairchrm 00:32, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It might be a good idea to improve the edit summary somewhat, but agree that provided you're not whacking the server your sandbox is a good place to run script tests or perform semi-automated list generation. --kingboyk 12:12, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/BetacommandBot

Hi Beta. I've proposed that this request be closed and archived. Then when you need new approvals for extra tasks you can start a new subpage. I think it would be good to get this matter behind us and have a fresh start, do you agree? --kingboyk 12:16, 13 April 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Opinion

What is your opinion on this? Thanks! Wǐkǐɧérṃǐť(Talk) (Contributions) 19:04, 14 April 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Making changes to Edwin McCain's page

I am not even sure if this is the correct place to address you, but it's the best I can do.

Interestingly, I read that you are against people "vandalizing" sites here. :) Can you please tell me why you are deleting links to legitimate and active fan sites that I've posted? There only 6 sites that are active fans sites; you keep deleting 3 of them... shown below.

I was going to just revert to the original text. But in keeping with the guidelines for this site, it said I should avoid doing that to keep from getting anyone angry with me. It said to INSTEAD, REWRITE the questionable material. I did that. I believe it was a very good Edit. And yet you came back the same day and changed it back to what you thought it should be. This is not Spam and it is important to those reading Wikipedia to be able to find fan sites associated with their favorite groups. Do you believe that adding the 3 links below is too much? Have you looked at a lot of the other band sites here? Please allow these to be added as done originally. They were listed in order of their appearance on the web, by the way.

MSN Edwin McCain Fans Site (Edwin McCain Fan site, discography,interviews. Message board-based with active membership)

Edwinfans.com (Active EMB fan site, forum-based with contests and prizes)

EdwinMcCainBand.net (Informative EMB site containing articles, news, and tour calendars)

Since you are so helpful, I'd like to tell you that I am going to attempt to add images to the Edwin McCain Discography section. I like the way Dave Matthews Band site has it listed. Are you up for helping me get that accomplished? I already have the correctly sized photos of the CD covers. That would be nice. I am going to try to do one now.

Thanks for listening...

Angie 66.20.92.251 06:40, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:NOT we should not be linking to fansites Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 15:36, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, BC.... I certainly don't want to fight with you. So thanks sooo much for the link! Although it doesn't state that NO links are allowed to fansites, I did not know that issue was addressed at all. I now know that you may have a link to the "official" site... and this is what was stated further about fansites: On articles about topics with many fansites, including a link to one major fansite may be appropriate, marking the link as such. ' There is, indeed a link to the official site, and then the others. I actually understand now why you deleted the links. Thankful, too that you left a couple of them up there. Here is why:

I know the premise on which Wikipedia operates, and the risk of using it for promotion. However, I also have been to literally hundreds of band sites on Wikipedia, and the lists of fansites are pretty long on most of them. Now, I don't believe it is acceptable to break the rules BECAUSE EVERYONE ELSE IS DOING IT. I don't. I DO believe there should be a limit, but perhaps it should be a definite limit of, for example, 5 or 6.

Check out Dan Fogelberg's site as an example. That's a good listing. Now, because I love his music, I went to that site to read more about him... to learn more... to gather more information. I WANTED to know the fan sites, so I could further read about him. However, I wanted to find out more than just what the official site gave me, i.e. DanFogelberg.com. Although official sites are important, I do like the more varied information you can get on non-official fansites. I think it is actually helpful, and should be seen as a valuable resource to everyone to allow a reasonable number of fansite links for all musicians... perhaps I should say, Entertainers. I think a fansite that goes beyond just the standard Message Board [which is more SOCIAL than INFORMATIONAL] ---one that concentrates on dispersing a lot of DIFFERENT TYPES of information about the performer--- those should be given the priority of listings.

Along these lines, I noted that under What Should Be Linked, it mentioned this: Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues, amount of detail (such as professional athlete statistics, movie or television credits, interview transcripts, or online textbooks) or other reasons. I agree, and have found several fansites that do offer that. It's very good information.

So, although I was pretty steamed with you about removing three of the fan site links, at least I understand the "legal" reason you did it. I still would just like for you to be a little less legalistic about the fansite link issue. As stated in the rules, it even mentions the value of having a link to a fansite. Those links are useful and I believe [for the most part] very informational. I believe that is the main purpose of Wikipedia... information. I'd also like to know to whom I can address my opinions concerning setting a guideline or rule as to having a specified number of links maximum to fansites and why. I don't want to break the rules, but would love to have a hand instead in changing them.

As I mentioned, I am now trying to learn how to set up the album "gallery" like the one on Dave Matthews site. I invite you to help me out if you are so moved.

Also, I have been trying to find the page of rules about when and how to insert a photograph or two within the text. I saw that done, again, on the Dave Matthews article here. It think it is done well, and would like to do something similar... within the boundaries set by Wikipedia, of course. Regards, 66.21.217.184 20:23, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

first fansites are not encyclopedic, and fansites should be completely removed as they are not good sources of info. In my opinion the limiting to one is one too many. but that is besides the point. we are not here to provide external links to our users. if a site has good content, add that to the article. In regard to images I cant help you but. WP:WPMUSIC or WP:WPALBUM might be able to.

First off, as I stated before, you have a conflict of interest. Please realize that we are an encyclopedia. Try improving the encyclopedia by using reliable sources and citations. Right now it is fairly clear that you want to keep a link to your site. Please keep in mind that you have a conflict of interest in the fact that you want to drive as much traffic to your site as possible, All webmasters want to do that. If you want to re-insert the link, bring it up on the talk page of the article, and other neutral editors can talk it over. Cheers! —— Eagle101 ^{Need help?} 20:59, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Questioning removal of www.pnoyandthecity.blogspot.com - Textbook about kulintang music.

Hi Betacommand. I recognized that you removed the external link www.pnoyandthecity.blogspot.com from numerous articles. I believe you should revert those revisions due to the following reasoning.

I read the Wikipedia:External links with the sentence 'Links to blogs and personal web pages, except those written by a recognized authority'.I understand that totally. However pnoyandthecity is not just a blog. It is an exception to that rule and therefore should be kept.

It has the online textbook enclosed within it, "Traditional Music of the Southern Philippines" by Philip Dominguez Mercurio. Mercurio has published information about kulintang music in both Philippine News and Manila Bulletin. The editor of this textbook is Master Danongan Sibay Kalanduyan, a legend in this field. He has also published numerous things in journal of "Asian Music" and he perhaps is one of the sole resources for kulintang music from the Philippines... almost all those who published information about kulintang music, either published or not, used him as their primarly source. Also all the pictures in these articles come from this source which they shared with wikipedia (not the other way around). They also let wikipedia borrow text from their book and included it incoporated into these articles. This source is in the process of being published into a book... later we will use that in a "FURTHER READING" section and the blog link could then be removed.

Regards. PhilipDM 07:01, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The reason that I removed the links was because they were top level domain links added to many pages. If the links were to relevant pages I wouldn't have an issue but the links covered many different pages all linking to the same page. instead of linking to the main blog page perhaps link to the correct subpage. (all the links i removed were all almost the exact same text, regardless of the page). Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 15:57, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I test out if the subpage works on Kulintang a Kayo. I'll change the link from http://www.pnoyandthecity.blogspot.com to http://www.pnoyandthecity.blogspot.com/#5b1, kulintang a kayo correct chapter link. PhilipDM 21:23, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I completed the test and it worked out fine on Kulintang a Kayo. The link reaches its subpage. I will proceed further with the others only after you've looked at it. Don't want to keep reverting back and forth here... PhilipDM 21:29, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

go for it. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 21:32, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

VisitEureka

I do not have a conflict of interest because I run VisitEureka.net. I am simply trying to provide the Wikipedia article with information about the show - I haven't posted a thing on Wikipedia that I haven't posted on my site have I? Therfore surely you can see that I want the wiki page to be as good as possible.

As for the link - I didn't originally put it there. I noticed it when I was looking to see if there were any competition sites I needed to worry about. Since I have been making sure that it stays up to date, and now that it stays on there.

Is all I'm gonna say. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by VisitEureka (talk • contribs) 07:12, 16 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Removing arbitrary web sites due to their domains

You have been told this by more than a few people, but I'll insist on saying it again: the domain where a web site is hosted does not inherently make its content unreliable. You have, yet again, removed a perfectly good link here, without an edit summary and marking the edit as "minor", so please take my friendly warnings:

Please remember to mark your edits as minor when (and only when) they genuinely are minor edits (see Wikipedia:Minor edit). Marking a major change as a minor one (and vice versa) is considered poor etiquette. The rule of thumb is that only an edit that consists solely of spelling corrections, formatting and minor rearranging of text should be flagged as a 'minor edit'. Thank you.

Hello. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary. Thank you. -- intgr 10:51, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Again

This is the third time you have removed a perfectly good and valuable link from Abraham Kuyper. As the previous commenter said, please don't strike websites just because of their domain but irrespective of their content. Note also that I previously brought this oversight to your attention. Cheers! --Flex (talk|contribs) 13:40, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Talk:Abraham_Kuyper#External_link. --Flex (talk|contribs) 15:31, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Complex systems

Thank you for your contribution to the complex system article in the past. Currently there is a Call for Deletion for the associated Category:Complex systems covering this interdisplinary scientific field. If you would like to contribute to the discussion, you would be very welcome. Please do this soon if possible since the discussion period is very short. Thank you for your interest if you can contribute. Regards, Jonathan Bowen 14:42, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Eureka 2

I NEVER ADDED THAT BLOODY LINK!!! SOMEBODY ELSE DID - I WAS JUST KEEPING IT UP TO DATE WHENEVER I CHANGED MY TITLE!!! SO YOU ARE DELETING THE LINK FOR NO REASON!!!

You appear to be annoying a lot of people by deleting perfectly good links. When I find a way to, I will be reporting you to WikiPedia admin for this because you are being a complete ass. You are deleting our links when you in fact do not understand the rules yourself. You have never had any interest in the Eureka page so what on Earth has sparked the sudden interest?

Can I also just express that the person who has been frequently updating that page has stated that one fansite is allowed on that page and that fansite is mine.

OPEN YOUR EYES - I'M NOT DOING ANYTHING WRONG, YOU ARE!!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by VisitEureka (talk • contribs) 16:54, 16 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

VisitEureka

Well if you never added the link then you should have no problem seeing it go :). Please read about ownership of articles, and our guidelines on conflicts of interest. Please remember the idea of wikipedia is not to redirect traffic off to your fansite, its to build and improve the encyclopedia. Thank you., —— Eagle101 ^{Need help?} 16:57, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I want this issue resolved peacefully. I just wanna edit the article and keep it as up to date as possible. I POSTED EXCLUSIVE NEWS OF THE CASTING OF OLIVIA D'ABO - I DID NOT HAVE TO POST THAT HERE AS IT WAS REVEALED TO ME EXCLUSIVELY BUT I DID FOR THE SAKE OF THIS ARTICLE - DOES THAT NOT BUY ME BROWNY POINTS???

Nope, all information needs to be verifiable by 3rd party sources. Please see our guidelines on reliable sources, and how to cite them. Also please take into consideration what I said above. Thank you. —— Eagle101 ^{Need help?} 17:59, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The information was given to me by the Supervising Producer of the show. That third-party enough for you? Plus - its not conflict of interest as I didn't add it there. I just believe it should be left there. Like I said, it is the leading site for the show. GateWorld is the leading site for Stargate - and its on the Stargate page. Whats so different about VE and GW? I don't wanna fight anymore - I wanna discuss this and solve it peacefully. The fact that BETA Command NEVER answered me when I posted something on his discussion page but still kept deleting the link really p'd me off.

Please read my comment on : User_talk:HalfShadow

Please read that.

Which sockpuppet were you using? I left a note on User talk:VisitEureka about WP:COI. I thought That was clear along with several other post. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 18:10, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for April 16th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 16	16 April 2007	About the Signpost

Encyclopædia Britannica promoted to featured article	Wikipedia continues to get mixed reactions in education
WikiWorld comic: "Hodag"	News and notes: Wikipedia television mention makes news, 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 05:40, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maryland Championship Wrestling

Why was this deleted? It is one of the more notable indy feds. Was a user named Burnstsauce in the edit history? He has had a history of blanking entire wrestling articles by saying that BLP allows it (even though BLP only says to remove contentious material). Could I get a copy of the version that was deleted, and maybe the last version that wasn't messed up? TJ Spyke 06:52, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Burnstsauce hasn't edited the page. The reason that I deleted it was because it contained just list and links. It wasn't an article only a linkfarm. feel free to write a informative article. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 13:38, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mutha Records

Trying to figure out why you removed the external link to the Earwax 'zine archive. Is there a policy on Wikipedia you could point me to that explains the reasoning behind it? If not, I'll be reposting the link as it provides a good amount of information, and seems largely unbiased (as does the parent article). TearJohnDown ^Talk ^• ^Contrib TearJohnDown 12:10, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:EL and WP:NOT we shouldnt be linking to fansites and unreliable sources. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 13:46, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

unvisible deletions

as of now only deletions of my page from 2006 are shown. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/delete&page=User:Tobias_Conradi

Tobias Conradi (Talk) 18:34, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No admin can do that, in Special:Undelete/User:Tobias Conradi the undelete log all the revisions are there. It must have been an error with MediaWiki (Im going to ask the devs now) that has been known to happen but admins cant do that. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 18:48, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank you for reverting the vandalism on my userpage. ~ thesublime514 • talk • sign 14:05, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Date and time stamps on talk pages

You had left a message on my talk page with respect to my using a "non-standard" signature. May I remind you that the user preferences are supposed to be reading specifically formated dates and showing them according to one's individual settings. It has far too long been a habit of not using such on talk pages, though the user preferences can and do correctly handle correctly formated dates on a talk page as well as in an article. It is the auto-signature four-tildes format which is non-standard, and as far as I'm concerned, ridiculous. The international ISO format is YYYY-MM-DDThh:mm:ss in which unofficially but most commonly the T as separator between date and time is replaced with a blank. And such is one of the formats one can set in user preferences. It happens to be the way I prefer to see my signature. And there was not any rule that forbode my style. Automated bots should be made flexible enough to read the ridiculous format that is created by the four-tildes and the time formats that are recommended to be used in order to allow user preferences. The latter cannot even handle the ridiculous so-called standard. So change the four-tildes 'standard' to one the user preferences can handle and let a bot run to modify the now existing 'standard' talk page 'hh:mm d Month yyyy (UTC)' stamps to the new (actually quite old in e.g. article space) and sensible standard. Time from large to small and then date from small to large period, and also first time, then date and only then "(UTC)" while the latter is relevant for time, not date, is in fact a totally non-standard and most illogical format. If others want to use that, so be it; not I. I don't want to see my signature near such an illogical format (but users see my date/time stamp according to their preferences), nor do I like the size of a digits-only string to remain at all-capitals height. — SomeHuman 13 Apr 2007 21:13 (UTC)

By the way, my date/time stamp is an automated one produced by three tildes, it cannot be difficult to let the current four-tildes produce the same; this is the (raw) wikicode:
— [[User:SomeHuman|SomeHuman]] <span style="font-size:.87em;">[[{{subst:CURRENTDAY}} {{subst:CURRENTMONTHABBREV}}]][[{{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}]] {{subst:CURRENTTIME}} (UTC)</span>
(The non-breaking space ensures (UTC) to be displayed on the same line as the time. The three-tildes produce here an emdash and normal username signature, followed with what the fourth tilde should produce: the coloured part.) Kind regards. — SomeHuman 14:05, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Hi. Please see my recent post to WP:BOTREQ. Thanks. --Dweller 14:05, 18 April 2007 (UTC) [reply]

User:BetacommandBot

What do you mean can be shut down by anyone? Only admins can do that. - Patricknoddy^{TALK (reply here)}^|^HISTORY 23:00, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Im sorry that is not true, any user can shut down BetacommandBot. all that you have to do is leave a message on its talkpage. I added a safety protocol to it so that it shuts down on new messages. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 23:03, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? Only admins can do that, by pressing a special button. - Patricknoddy^{TALK (reply here)}^|^HISTORY

Please dont insult me, I coded BetacommandBot. The way that I coded BetacommandBot that it would stop operating when it detects the orange bar of death (new message bar that is triggered on talk page messages). There is no special button everyone from an anon to Jimbo Wales can stop the bot by leaving a message on the bots talk page. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 19:59, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative explanation: When the bot sees the orange bar of death, then it sets a variable or exits or something, the net result being that it stops processing. There's no blocking involved, just a piece of code not executing anymore. Veinor ^{(talk to me)} 20:26, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:Pipe organ

Hi,

You have just deleted Portal:Pipe organ - did I prod it by accident? I was intending for a couple of subpages to be deleted, not the entire portal!

Could you undelete please??

Thanks,

–MDCollins (talk) 16:46, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done Must have been a transculsion error. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 16:49, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Red Hill Studios entry deleted

I entered an article about Red Hill Studios and you deleted it with the message CSD A7. To write this article I researched numerous Wikipedia entries about similar companies and I felt that this entry was comparable. I included numerous citations of important work by Red Hill Studios. I am not sure why the article doesn't meet Wikipedia standards and if it doesn't, can you suggest how I can improve it? Thanks in advance for your assistance.

the page that I deleted had no citations or links, and did not assert notability. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 17:34, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response. A colleague created a very short page earlier in the day but my article (which replaced the earlier one) was much more thorough. Should I post it again? BTW - I appreciate your responding to this so quickly.

quick question are you employed by or for Red Hill Studios. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 17:47, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I do work for the company but I think that our work is meaningful (we are an educational media company) and relevant within our industry.

VP

After being authorized to use VP [2] I couldn't log in due to the login problems with 1.35. I used 1.31 in the meantime and waited for 1.36, but right now none of them work for me (1.31 user list is corrupted and 1.36 doesn't recognize me). Should I reapply? Pax:Vobiscum 17:39, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 17:44, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ATL

[3] ROTFL! How in the world? -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 22:11, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lol, nice one! Shoulda used my plugin, it won't tag to that namespace ;) --kingboyk 22:51, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry bug identified and fixed. :) Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 03:07, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ferion

Does 350,000 users not constitute notability, then? I would've added...if I had the time to plug it in before the page got deleted. -- AgentFade2Black 00:17, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Bryan Neilbling

Why did you delete this page?? SpecialWindler 03:06, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No page by that name ever existed. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 03:08, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

spam bot block

Someone has posted to WP:AN asking the this block be lifted or changed to anon only. Is there a reason the block is non anon only? Natalie 20:29, 21 April 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Baltie entry deleted

Why did you deleted this page ?? 23:05, 21 April 2007 (CET)

can you explain what your talking about? Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 23:16, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

about deletion of this page Baltie 12:05, 22 April 2007 (CET)

quick question do you work for or with Baltie? Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 11:36, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

no, I am a school teacher in Poland ... 18:25, 22 April 2007 (CET) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.220.241.94 (talk) 16:20, 22 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Please see WP:N and WP:SPAM Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 03:02, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A very Californian RfA thanks from Luna Santin

Thanks for your support in my not-so-recent RfA, which succeeded with a final tally of (97/4/4)! I've never been able to accept compliments gracefully, and the heavy support from this outstanding community left me at a complete loss for words -- so, a very belated thank you for all of your kind words.

I have done and will continue to do the utmost to serve the community in this new capacity, wherever it may take me, and to set an example others might wish to follow in. With a little luck and a lot of advice, this may be enough. Maybe someday the enwiki admins of the future will look back and say, "Yeah, that guy was an admin." Hopefully then they don't start talking about the explosive ArbComm case I got tied into and oh what a drama that was, but we'll see, won't we?

Surely some of you have seen me in action by now; with that in mind, I openly invite and welcome any feedback here or here -- help me become the best editor and sysop I can be.

Again, thank you. –Luna Santin

Glad to see you're still active. :) I don't think we've quite always been on the greatest terms, but I definitely want to let you know that I appreciate (belatedly) your support of my candidacy, and all that you've done for the project as a whole. Thank you. – Luna Santin (talk) 01:10, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ITSAGOAL

Speedily deleted for no apparent reason. Please can i have an explanation? Deckchair 09:51, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

quite simple it had no external sources, did not assert notability, and read like an advertisement. see WP:RS WP:N WP:SPAM Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 14:19, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heritage USA article

Can I get a clarification as to why the Yahoo Groups link on this page keeps getting deleted? It's by far the best reference source on the web for the current state of the property that was HUSA. Thanks. Jdb1972 18:04, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

yahoo groups should not be used as sources. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 18:05, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The link in question wasn't a source for the article. The Yahoo Group site houses a number of photographs of the property, updates on current usage, and the like. Jdb1972 19:42, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

see WP:ELsuch groups should not be linked to. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 21:38, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bot mis-tagging

Your bot is tagging aviation projects with an El Salvador wikiproject tag...these are articles that have nothing to do with this country. (For instance, that country isn't named anywhere in List of unmanned aerial vehicles, so there's no reason that this project should be taggin it.) Me thinks your bot is a bit off-track. Akradecki 02:32, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Im looking into this, from what im seeing now im not sure how it got that page... Im going to dig deeper to see if I can find the cause. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 03:13, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's not just that page. I just spent the last hour carefully culling through the bot's contri list, and reverting 18 similar way-out-of-place edits, and I know at least one other Aircraft Project editor reverted some. Akradecki 03:26, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for April 23rd, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 17	23 April 2007	About the Signpost

Administrator goes rogue, is blocked	Wales unblocks Brandt, then reverses himself
Historian detained after his Wikipedia article is vandalized	Efforts to reform Requests for Adminship spark animated discussion
Canadian politician the subject of an edit war	Virginia Tech massacre articles rise to prominence
Wikipedia enters China one disc at a time	WikiWorld comic: "Buttered cat paradox"
News and notes: Unreferenced biographies, user studies, milestones	Wikipedia in the news
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 06:26, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for volunteering to do the succession boxes task.

The WPBiography newsletter is ready to be sent; if you could coordinate with ST47 as to who is going to send it out that would be wonderful. I'm not currently on BAG but it would be remiss of me not to point out that you don't currently have approval for delivering newsletters ;) I'm sure it can be speedied though.

If somebody could get them sent out today we'd really appreciate it. Thanks again. --kingboyk 15:46, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stub of the day ?

Hello BetaC,

I've had a wiki-holiday for about a year (quite long I know)!!

However, I was wondering what fate ever befell the "stub of the day" template that you and Gimmetrow had been working on? I still think it would be a useful tool, if customisable per area of interest/wiki-project of interest. I believe it used to be stored in your "sandbox|chem" page. However, if I put this template in my user page it give an error now (well actually it seems to generate a "naughty list" of users).

Thanks -- Quantockgoblin (talk) 00:03, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]