User talk:Beetstra

Welcome to my talk page. Please leave me a note by starting a new subject here and please don't forget to sign your post You may want to have a look at the subjects in the header of this talkpage before starting a new subject. The question you may have may already have been answered there Dirk Beetstra

Wikipedia ads file info – show another – #32

I am the main operator of User:COIBot. If you feel that your name is wrongly on the COI reports list because of an unfortunate overlap between your username and a certain link or text, please ask for whitelisting by starting a new subject on my talkpage. For a better answer please include some specific 'diffs' of your edits (you can copy the link from the report page). If you want a quicker response, make your case at WT:WPSPAM or WP:COIN. COIBot - Talk to COIBot - listings - Link reports - User reports - Page reports

Responding I will respond to talk messages where they started, trying to keep discussions in one place (you may want to watch this page for some time after adding a question). Otherwise I will clearly state where the discussion will be moved/copied to. Though, with the large number of pages I am watching, it may be wise to contact me here as well if you need a swift response. If I forget to answer, poke me. I preserve the right not to answer to non-civil remarks, or subjects which are covered in this talk-header. ON EXTERNAL LINK REMOVAL There are several discussions about my link removal here, and in my archives. If you want to contact me about my view of this policy, please read and understand WP:NOT, WP:EL, WP:SPAM and WP:A, and read the discussions on my talkpage or in my archives first. My view in a nutshell: External links are not meant to tunnel people away from the wikipedia. Hence, I will remove external links on pages where I think they do not add to the page (per WP:NOT#REPOSITORY and WP:EL), or when they are added in a way that wikipedia defines as spam (understand that wikipedia defines spam as: '... wide-scale external link spamming ...', even if the link is appropriate; also read this). This may mean that I remove links, while similar links are already there or which are there already for a long time. Still, the question is not whether your link should be there, the question may be whether those other links should be there (again, see the wording of the policies and guidelines). Please consider the alternatives before re-adding the link: If the link contains information, use the information to add content to the article, and use the link as a reference (content is not 'see here for more information'). Add an appropriate linkfarm (you can consider to remove other links covered there). Incorporate the information into one of the sister projects. Add the link to other mediawiki projects aimed at advertiseing (see e.g. this) If the linkspam of a certain link perseveres, I will not hesitate to report it to the wikiproject spam for blacklisting (even if the link would be appropriate for wikipedia). It may be wise to consider the alternatives before things get to that point. The answer in a nutshell Please consider if the link you want to add complies with the policies and guidelines. If you have other questions, or still have questions on my view of the external link policy, disagree with me, or think I made a mistake in removing a link you added, please poke me by starting a new subject on my talk-page. If you absolutely want an answer, you can try to poke the people at WT:EL or WT:WPSPAM on your specific case. Also, regarding link, I can be contacted on IRC, channel [1]. Reliable sources I convert inline URL's into references and convert referencing styles to a consistent format. My preferred style is the style provided by cite.php (<ref> and <references/>). When other mechanisms are mainly (but not consistently) used (e.g. {{ref}}/{{note}}/{{cite}}-templates) I will assess whether referencing would benefit from the cite.php-style. Feel free to revert these edits when I am wrong. Converting inline URLs in references may result in data being retrieved from unreliable sources. In these cases, the link may have been removed, and replaced by a {{cn}}. If you feel that the page should be used as a reference (complying with wp:rs!!), please discuss that on the talkpage of the page, or poke me by starting a new subject on my talk-page Note: I am working with some other developers on mediawiki to expand the possibilities of cite.php, our attempts can be followed here and here. If you like these features and want them enabled, please vote for these bugs. Stub/Importance/Notability/Expand/Expert I am in general against deletion, except when the page really gives misinformation, is clear spam or copyvio. Otherwise, these pages may need to be expanded or rewritten. For very short articles there are the different {{stub}} marks, which clearly state that the article is to be expanded. For articles that do not state why they are notable, I will add either {{importance}} or {{notability}}. In my view there is a distinct difference between these two templates, while articles carrying one of these templates may not be notable, the first template does say the article is probably notable enough, but the contents does not state that (yet). The latter provides a clear concern that the article is not notable, and should probably be {{prod}}ed or {{AfD}}ed. Removing importance-tags does not take away the backlog, it only hides from attention, deleting pages does not make the database smaller. If you contest the notability/importance of an article, please consider adding an {{expert-subject}} tag, or raise the subject on an appropriate wikiproject. Remember, there are many, many pages on the wikipedia, many need attention, so maybe we have to live with a backlog. Having said this, I generally delete the {{expand}}-template on sight. The template is in most cases superfluous, expansion is intrinsic to the wikipedia (for stubs, expansion is already mentioned in that template).

Warning to Vandals: This user is armed with VandalProof. Warning to Spammers: This user is armed with Spamda This user knows where IRC hides the cookies, and knows how to feed them to AntiSpamBot. Archives This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot III. Timestamped threads older than 7 days are automatically archived to the current archive Talk started 20/3/2006 1 - 7/9/2006 2 - 29/11/2006 3 - 05/02/2007 4 - 05/03/2007 5 - 15/03/2007 6 - 29/07/2007 7 - 06/11/2007 8 - 31/03/2008 9 - 22/09/2008 10 - 03/02/2009 11 - 17/05/2009 12 - 13/11/2009 13 - 27/5/2010 14 - 13/12/2010 15 - 5/7/2011 16 - 17 - 18 - 19 - 20 - 21 - 22 - current 23 - 24 - 25 -

Deletion of the Image of Colonel Green

Hi Beestra, after all the back and forth between us a bot went ahead and deleted the image online here since 2005, and resolved again of late, even you gave it a stamp of aproval after all the issues on it were resolved as imciably, what the heck happened????? (talk) 12:55, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

It looks like another admin was not satisfied with the rationale as it was on the image description. I guess you will have to ask him. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 16:36, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi Beestra, I will be putting it back up and use the same valid and legal rational as before, sorry im not signed in, rather in a hurry to-day!...God speed, and best regards!, Cathytreks (talk) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.63.41.9 (talk) 04:53, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, the rationale got it deleted, please have a look at the non fair use rationale guideline, I guess you have to do it a bit more official way. Hope this helps. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 10:02, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi BEESTRA, i DO NOT KNOW what to do, how can i put the nessisary photo screen-grab back up so that it is pleasing to you administrators, yet it is so crucial to that page. Thanks Cathy ((cathytreks)) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cathytreks (talk • contribs) 18:56, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of User:Werdnabot page

Would you mind if I redirected this to User:Shadowbot3, since this is now running the tasks? Tim Vickers (talk) 04:04, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Or is supposed to be, reading that bot's page. Hmm. Tim Vickers (talk) 04:16, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Heh, no, I would not. I deleted the page on Werdna's request, the User:Shadow1's bots are also down now, Shadow has resigned. The only reasonable redirect would be to Misza's bot .. Also that would be fine with me. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 10:06, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Regarding editing on "Cantonese cuisine" page?

Before you make any edit on the page "Cantonese cuisine", could you please first discuss with subject expert and other major contributors, such as User:Benjwong? Also, please specify the reason/summary as a courtesy as for why you are making such changes? This will be very helpful to other fellow wp users. 63.166.226.83 (talk) 22:12, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

The reason I have reverted your edits is the inclusion of the link to a wiki on chinatravelguide.com (on which you are an active editor), in combination with e.g. this edit, in which you introduce two 'facts' (which don't have a reference to a reliable source), and the link, where the link is to a page on which you personally add data. Please review the conflict of interest guideline, the external link guideline, the spam guideline, the what wikipedia is not policy, the original research guidelines, the reliable sources guideline, and maybe other policies and guidelines as well. Another edit by you that I reverted is this edit. I am sorry, but the sentence "The best time to visit is summer. Remember to watch the spectacular views of the sunset on the desert. When visiting, you should bring the glasses and a first-aid kits for sand storms." is far from encyclopedic, and again, it includes the link (the wikipage on the link contains the same sentences, but it does not attribute it .. at all).

We are writing an encyclopedia here, not a linkfarm to chinatravelguide. For your information, chinatravelguide.com has now been placed on a revertlist, it is clear from the reports, that it is only used by IP editors, and most of the edits are reverted by experienced editors. That leads to the conclusion that it should not be used as a source or an external link. It feels strongly like spamming. Thanks. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 22:26, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

I see you already met the bot that operates on the revertlist. You may also be interested in Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam/LinkReports/chinatravelguide.com. Note that there are only IP editors, and one account which has a clear confict of interest. Also, on Cantonese cuisine you have now been reverted by 3 different editors. Though you are discussing on the talkpage, I do not see consensus for the use of this link (as an external link, nor as a reference), and I don't see references for the statement, e.g. to the proceedings of a language institute, or something similar. The link to Discovery Channel may be useful, though a bit more research should be performed, it is still unclear where the saying actually comes from, originally. It still may be a western slur. Hope to hear more. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 22:33, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm very confused, and don't quite know what you were referring to for all the pages. Maybe I should log in, but this IP is shared by over 50,000 users. But in any case, it's better to specify the reason (spam, non-encyclopedia, or whatever). 63.166.226.83 (talk) 22:49, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Maybe you should indeed log-in, that might things clearer. In this case there were several concerns after reviewing your latest edits, which prompted me to use the administrators rollback tool. Hope this explains. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 23:03, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

I just spent some time on your earlier posts, trying to understand what you were talking about.

Disclosure: I'm a relatively new avid reader of both wp and ChinaTravelGuide (I think it's a commercial-free, non-profit wiki like wp), but I rarely write (wrote only in several occassions on either sites, and I am new to wiki).

Honestly I appreicate your time to wp, but your sword-wielding at the wp gate is quite intimidating, and let me feel I was trying to get into your private residence :)

I'm curious about how many spam links ChinaTravelGuide has on wp. Do other travel wiki sites have links on wp, and how many? Can you let me know how I can find it (I'm a newbie on wiki), or can you use your tool to find it? For the one I edited Cantonese cuisine, I truely believe the external link [2] is appropriate (please verify the two articles). I consider myself as a semi subject expert on this topic, and I used this particular external link as the reference for the editing on wp. I'm not clear about what you (your bot?) did. And don't understand why you need a bot (wp is for human, and policed by human, right?) And I feel I'm very sorry if you (your bot) has caused damage to the ChinaTravelGuide community because of my one link.

As a newbie's observation (pls pardon my ignorance), wouldn't it be easy for a malicious user to use you to remove all the specific links? 63.166.226.83 (talk) 17:00, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

The thing is, you edit on both, which gives you an air of having a conflict of interest. Then there is the problem that the wiki you link to is not a reliable source, it can be a resource for more info. Thirdly, some of your edits include information which is certainly not encyclopedic (as I quoted earlier, "The best time to visit is summer. Remember to watch the spectacular views of the sunset on the desert. When visiting, you should bring the glasses and a first-aid kits for sand storms.", that is an opinion and an advert, not suitable for this wikipedia). Wikis, especially relatively new ones, are also discouraged by Wikipedia:External links (guideline). All in all, I advice you to discuss on the appropriate talkpages, or find an appropriate wikiproject (china, chinese cuisine .. see Wikipedia:WikiProjects). That is also what I adviced the maintainer of the site (who also has an account here) to do. Don't revert when established editors have concerns, then discuss until clear consensus.

I don't have direct access to statistics, you can have a look at Special:Linksearch and see what other sites are linked (though be careful, those statistics don't say everything).

This wiki is so huge, that humans only can't check it all, it needs the help of bots (which are still controlled by humans) to help.

For the record, I did not write the one you quoted ("The best time to visit ..."). As I said, I consider myself as semi subject expert, and I verified and believe the particular external link on Cantonese cuisine is reliable (again you can ask other subject expert, and be the judge). Thx for the explanation of the bot, which I now think makse sense, but maybe we should also humanly verify after the bot results. In this case, I'm not sure if we've accidentally punished the good guys. 63.166.226.83 (talk) 18:38, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

No, not on that wiki, but one this end it gets added. It may very well be OK on chinatravelguide.com (I don't know the policies and guidelines there), I am only concerned with this side, where these edits, and probably the links to that wiki, are not suitable. For that part of the statistics, for as far as I have monitored (for this link my first record is on December 28, 2007), all except one edit were by IP accounts (none of which I think are 'established editors' I believe), and one account (User:ChinaTravelGuide), see Wikipedia:WikiProject_Spam/LinkReports/chinatravelguide.com. I guess all these should be pointed to our policies and guidelines, and that is exactly what User:XLinkBot is doing. Once established editors start using the site, or it gets acknowledged as a good site by an appropriate wikiproject we can rediscuss this (and consider removing it from an autorevert list). Hope this explains! --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 18:56, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

This side? You mean wikipedia? That's what I meant. I did not edit the one you quoted ("The best time to visit ...") on wp, and also other ones, like "Discovery channel" (?)... Out of curiosity, I used Special:Linksearch (thx for letting me know), and tried *.chinatravelguide.com, which returned 11 links; *.wikihow.com looks like returned over 300 links, and also *.wikitravel.org, which returned over 1000 links. I don't think these links are spam, but they do not appears to be more relevant (or encyclopediac) than the one I added (Cantonese cuisine). I suddenly have a 2nd thought about your bot's fairness and impartialness. I appreciate your time. 63.166.226.83 (talk) 19:50, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

this edit is performed by your IP on this wikipedia in the same time as you were performing your edits to other pages where the same link was added. Wikihow and wikitravel both are of concern, though at the moment these links are not only added by IP's whose only edits (or who have bursts of edits) concerning the same link. That is the difference, and I already said that what other links do is not a reason to insert this one. Hope this explains. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 19:58, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Again thanks for the time. I respect you, and did not think your bot intentionally show the bias. I think I will quit after this one, as this will be endless. Here are my last points: it's not my IP. I think this IP and many others are shared by over 50,000 users (used to be 60k). As I said, I'm a semi Chinese cuisine expert, and I edited several Cuisine pages, and I believe they are all relevant references. But I did not edit the one Crescent_Lake as you quoted. You may want to double check [3] if they were done at the same time as my cuisine edits. Also pls understand that many people don't have the luxury of posting under an account during work time. 209.159.64.4 (talk) 22:14, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Hi

Two One Six Five Five ^τ _ʃ has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Am I really? Hmmmmm...that's WP:HUG for you, I suppose! =D Two One Six Five Five ^τ _ʃ 14:06, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Gamma Phi

ok any suggestion on Gamma phi ? RealOldSchool (talk) 10:36, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I tossed some stuff into references (you can have a look how I did that), for the rest, I am not a specialist, I am only warning that without proper references and a proper explanation why it is notable, the article runs a good chance to be deleted in the end (I have no clue if it is notable enough, that would need another editor). Are there any newspaper items that tell something about the subject that you can use? Or are there any members of gamma phi that now have a wikipage (that would it make it almost automatically notable I think). Hope this helps. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 10:45, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Request for whitelisting

I'm in the report Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam/LinkReports/everything2.com because of this diff. I see that I'm in many others because of my reverts of blanking. I'd like to be withelisted. Thanks, Cenarium (talk) 22:08, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Condider  Done (wow, 3800 edits in 3 months .. you have been quite active!). Thanks for the friendly notice, what do you think about everything2.com, what kind of site is this, should we be monitoring it? --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 14:35, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Your edit count is much more impressive, more than 4000 contribs in February 2007 ! For the site, I see that it has an article on Wikipedia, Everything2 and a positive media coverage. But it's probably not a reliable source though it's in many references. I don't know, what do you mean with monitoring it ? Cenarium (talk) 16:46, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Monitoring means that we need to follow how and by who it gets used (due to conflict of interest, spam, or just 'it is generally rubbish' reasons). I see now that it was caught due to a 'mistake' by my bot (accidental overlap), and it is used widely (seen the number of link-additons). I am removing it from the lists. Thanks, happy editing, see you around! --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 16:58, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Erased again

Dear Beetstra: you erased my mention as an ufologist for chile and also someone erased "south america". In wikipedia we find so many people erasing content without reading and corroborating first. Why do you eliminate the help of others, including me as a UFO researcher? I can not understand how do you expect we could be of help for wikipedia? Best regards, Miguel Jordan (Michel), wikipedia user esiomajb1 (english) and esiomajb (spanish) Note that Iam logged in in the spanish wikipedia version but when you swicht to the english version I appear only with my IP number and not with my "Alias". It is not made intentionally! See my wikilink http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Esiomajb1 and http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Esiomajb 134.2.102.192 (talk) 18:36, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, your entries are inappropriate on this wikipedia, and maybe also on other wikipedia. To point you to some of our policies and guidelines: conflict of interest, external links guideline, we are not a linkfarm nor directory. You are linking to your own blogspot, and are not providing references to reliable sources (see also the citation guideline and the footnotes guideline. Consider to discuss, and get consensus on talkpages or on an appropriate wikiproject first. Thanks. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 18:51, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Beetstra

what is wrong with our links? they directly relate to our purpose & function. Engineer4life (talk) 22:22, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

They do not tell more about the subject, they only show a bot driving around. We are writing an encyclopedia here, build on reliable sources (I hope), and information. We are not writing a linkfarm, an internet directory, whatever. Moreover, the article is about the team, not about these robots, if the robot was notable, then it should have an own article, and there it could serve a purpose.

As an addition, you just persist in adding the links, while you have been warned a couple of times. WP:CONSENSUS then suggest that it is better to discuss. Apparently there are concerns, maybe it is time that established editors who are familiar with the subject have a look. Hope this explains. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 22:27, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

By the way, it appears that you are connected to the subject, if that is true, could you then also review our conflict of interest guideline. Thanks. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 22:28, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

I didn't know I was warned. The bot user info said I could revert the changes if felt they were in error. I didn't know you were a real person and was making necessary corrections to errors. The videos demonstrate what we do; we are not a large organization with a multitude of responsibilities. We make robots, and if we didn't, there would be no organization. How is it against the "rules" to not show the robots that a robot team makes? And an autonomous one at that? No one is trying to throw a bunch of links on the page. They are sources for people who might want to know 1) more about the school we (presently) attend, and 2) more about the (main) competitions we compete in as these are very close connections to the organization. You then proceed to vandalize our school's wikipedia page with your "rules". You also mark our article as unreferenced though we have two very reliable references. Why are you so offended? Engineer4life (talk) 00:29, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I am not offended, those rules are based on consensus by a large number of wikipedia editors. I am not vandalising, these rules are there to write an encyclopedia, and I am making those pages follow those rules. I am sorry you are offended by that. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 09:50, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

What is the problem?

Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam/LinkReports/candyfavorites.com ...

Hi!

I am the owner of candyFavorites,com and new to Wikipedia but it appears as if if someone is deliberately spamming wikipedia so as to get us on the Spam Blacklist.

We have been added to a few listings appropriately, ironically not be us which made the inclusion even more flaterring, but it seems as if someone has taken a similar username bcandyfavorites and is abusing the system

Please advise as to how we can correct this and also I would suggest that the user bcandyfavorites be removed as they are not, in any way, affiliated with our company

In advance, and as a loyal user and believer in wikipedia, would appreciate any help that can be provided

Regards, jon H.Prince —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonhprince (talk • contribs) 12:59, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I have removed the report and whitelisted the link, pending further investigation. Thanks. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 13:11, 17 March 2008 (UTC)