Jump to content

User talk:Bender235/2016 archive

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

January 2016

Hello, I'm Allthefoxes. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Amarillo Venom  with this edit, without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. --allthefoxes (Talk) 02:52, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

(a) Don't template the regulars, (b) there was an edit summary. --bender235 (talk) 08:32, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Greg Little

I saw you moved Greg Little (American football) to Greg Little (wide receiver), but I'm not sure why you did so at this point. There's only one American football player with this name with an article right now. I know there's a recruit with this name, but I did a quick google search and it doesn't appear he would pass WP:GNG at this point.--Yankees10 18:27, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Maybe not at this point, but certainly a year or two from now. Plus, Greg Little (wide receiver) is only more precise, so no damage IMHO. --bender235 (talk) 21:59, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
Then we should wait the year or two to move it. There's no guarantee this other Little will be notable. It's crystal balling right now. I'm gonna move it back for now. If you still feel it should stay at WR then i'm certainly fine with a WP:NFL discussion for others opinions.--Yankees10 05:20, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
Alright, if you insist. --bender235 (talk) 06:07, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited USA Today All-USA high school football team, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Westfield High School. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Your suspected sockpuppetry on Atlantis talk

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Bender235Black Murray (talk) 21:28, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

ESPN RISE football navboxes

Bender235, I have nominated four navboxes related to the ESPN RISE awards, three of which you created, for deletion. Please see the discussion here. Thanks, Jweiss11 (talk) 01:35, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

(+) Excuse me idk who to tell but someone needs to fix the date Jesus died cause he is still alive today, he resurrected you need to put that in there he's still alive, that's like the biggest part of my faith as a christian — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.203.217.137 (talk) 03:32, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Invitation to an online editathon on Black Women's History

Invitation

Black Women's History online edit-a-thon

--Ipigott (talk) 10:31, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Evolution of cephalopods, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Moose Creek. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:17, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Listing of high schools in NFL player infoboxes

Hey, Bender. I believe you were one of the strong proponents of using the format "Fort Wayne (IN) Bishop Luer" to list players' high schools in Infobox NFL player. I'm in the process of replacing the last 150 or so instances of Infobox NFL coach with Infobox NFL biography (the new Infobox NFL player, improved to accommodate certain additional coaching parameters), and it is apparent to me that the AP Style Book format of listing high schools (i.e. the one above) is too darn long, and more often than not results in line-wrapping whenever the name of the high school does not match the name of the town where it is located (e.g., "Fort Wayne (IN)" for Fort Wayne High School).

I would ask that you put your thinking cap on, and see if we cannot come up with a shorter manner of listing the players' and coaches' high schools, perhaps by simply omitting the name of the town where the high school is located in the infobox. We don't list the location of colleges and universities in the infobox, and we can certainly add the high school location to the main body text if it isn't present in the text already. Please give this some serious thought -- I'd like to contemplate a universal change for all NFL bios in the next two or three months. Thanks. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 14:46, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

I appreciate that you ask me about this. Actually I encountered this issue with too long high school names in the past. Usually I would abbreviate the name. For instance, St. Thomas Aquinas High School (Fort Lauderdale, Florida) became "Ft. Lauderdale (FL) Aquinas". With the school you mentioned, one could write "Ft. Wayne (IN) Luers" for short. But in general I'd prefer if we stick to the established style. I know we don't list locations for colleges, but that's because there's only one "Duke" or "Notre Dame". But if we're talking about "Central High School" or "Cook County High School," things would get confusing if we left out the location. --bender235 (talk) 22:58, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
So, have we reached a decision on this matter? I noticed you reverted the change on Leonard Fournette. Lizard (talk) 17:10, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
Yes, not only because I felt your change premature, but also because "St. Augustine (LA)" is confusing, because it implies the existence of a town "St. Augustine, Louisiana" like St. Augustine, Florida. --bender235 (talk) 20:15, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
So basically, put the town name in front of the school name in instances where the school and town are different names? Lizard (talk) 20:48, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
Exactly. So Manuel Dominguez High School in Compton becomes "Compton (CA) Dominguez" for instance. --bender235 (talk) 21:32, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 1 February

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:28, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 3 February

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:24, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

List of highest grossing films

With this edit, why did you change every instance of ".co.uk" to ".com" in the refs? It doesn't seem to have anything to do with the RfC you mentioned in your edit summary. - theWOLFchild 00:31, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

That is a minor style fix that is done additionally. Just like AWB would also fix "word , word" to "word, word". The point is that we should sent visitors of the English Wikipedia to the generic books.google.com website, which then redirects to the country specific version. Not everyone reading List of highest grossing films is from the UK. --bender235 (talk) 14:24, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
First off, this is not comparable to a minor punctuation correction. Second, this wasn't covered in the RfC you cited, so you should've edited those separately and also explained them in your edit summary. Lastly, once Betty Logan reverted you, you should've gone to the talk page to discuss the issue, not revert her. - theWOLFchild 14:34, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
No, it was not in the RfC. And why would it? It's a mere technical change. --bender235 (talk) 15:05, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
According to you. But not everyone agrees with you. That's why you should discuss it on the article talk page. - theWOLFchild 15:07, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but I'm too busy to get into an argument over this with people who do not understand the technical issue. I leave the UK-domain for Google Books in this article if it makes you happy. --bender235 (talk) 15:10, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
Apology accepted. - theWOLFchild 15:17, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

February 2016

Information icon Please do not attack other editors, as you did at List of highest-grossing films with this edit summary. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. - theWOLFchild 15:13, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for templating a 12-yr Wikipedia veteran. Also, I will call a spade a spade. Both of you were reverting for no objective reason, but just irrational misunderstanding of the technical issue. --bender235 (talk) 15:14, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
Then you should know better. But anyways, you're welcome - theWOLFchild 15:16, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
btw - you should really give WP:NPA a read. Just because people disagree with you is no reason to insult them. Hope your day gets better. Cheers. - theWOLFchild 22:23, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
You see, there are things one can disagree about, and others that one cannot. We could, for instance, disagree about whether in that list of highest-grossing films gross revenue should be included in real or nominal terms. That's an issue that merits a debate. On the other hand, whether or not we should link to general websites rather than country-specific ones is nothing any sane person would argue about. --bender235 (talk) 22:58, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
And one could even agree with you about those general vs specific links and at the same time disagree with how you went about changing them. Once you were reverted, you chose to revert again, then manually edit with an insulting edit summary attached. Wouldn't it have been simpler, and less time-consuming, to just post on the talk page the reason for the edit? It's possible Betty would have self-reverted, saving you the trouble of the manual edits and all the grief that followed after. That's all I was I getting at. - theWOLFchild 01:07, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Lemon battery

Hi Bender235. On 8 January 2016 you did some good work to Lemon battery to convert http to https. Unfortunately there was some extensive vandalism inflicted on the article on 13 December 2015 that was not rectified. I rectified the vandalism yesterday by reverting the entire article to the version existing at 6 December. This means your http conversions were lost. Would you be so kind to revisit Lemon battery and use AWB to redo the http conversions? Many thanks. Dolphin (t) 04:58, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Done. --bender235 (talk) 15:28, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for all that! Dolphin (t) 22:28, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Rayville High School listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Rayville High School. Since you had some involvement with the Rayville High School redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Dudemanfellabra (talk) 09:07, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 23 February

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:25, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!

please help translate this message into the local language
The Cure Award
In 2015 you were one of the top 300 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you from Wiki Project Med Foundation for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date health information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do! Wiki Project Med Foundation is a user group whose mission is to improve our health content. Consider joining here, there are no associated costs, and we would love to collaborate further.

Thanks again :) -- Doc James along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 03:59, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Wikiproject United States Coast Guard Auxiliary

As a current or past contributor to a USCG article, I thought I'd let you know about WikiProject United States Coast Guard Auxiliary, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the United States Coast Guard Auxiliary. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks and related articles. Thanks!

COASTIE I am (talk) 01:27, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

I appreciate, but I won't have time to join. --bender235 (talk) 03:46, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Mailing is accommondo Adejumo saheed (talk) 18:25, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 13 March

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:20, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Schizoaffective disorder, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page NIMH. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:56, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Merrick Garland

The addition of a second RS that still refers to unnamed sources (White House or congressional) doesn't mean the conditional wording can be definitively removed, but I won't quibble over that too much. I'll try rewording it to reflect that. The most important thing is to make sure the line doesn't keep getting deleted, which is what we're seeing with another editor (ie. Bmclaughlin9) -- Fuzheado | Talk 14:50, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Google

Google released a report on how much of their traffic is encrypted.

When I come across a Google link, I make sure it is pointed to google.com. If it is google.fr, that means I go to the French site. If it is google.com, it goes to the appropriate site where I'm located. AWB regex examples:

https?://books.google\.[a-z][a-z]/books -> https://books.google.com/books
https?://books\.google\.com?\.[a-z][a-z]/books -> https://books.google.com/books

Bgwhite (talk) 18:29, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Alright, was that a question? Because I do the same. Also, as for that Regex: keep in mind there are also Google domains like books.google.co.uk, or books.google.com.ar. --bender235 (talk) 18:35, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Wasn't a question, more of a FYI. Just know you like to change Google links to https, so thought you would be interested in their report. The 2nd regex handles the two domains you listed. Both convert http -> https. Bgwhite (talk) 20:49, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Alright, thanks. --bender235 (talk) 22:18, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gerhart Husserl, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Halle. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:16, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

David Trone Article Risen from the Dead

I note the David Trone article has been resurrected... by yet another SPA. I have to admit I'm not familiar with the deletion submission process, and would request that you consider resubmitting it. Thanks. John2510 (talk) 18:20, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

I nominated it for speedy deletion. --bender235 (talk) 20:42, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 25 March

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:29, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Morton Kamien

Hello! Your submission of Morton Kamien at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 02:14, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Bender235, it has been twelve days since the above was posted, and there has been no action to address the issues raised. We need to hear from you right away. If there is no further action on the nomination and its article in the next two days, and you have been editing on Wikipedia in the interim, then the nomination will be marked for closure. I very much hope we hear from you before then. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:26, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Gleiss Lutz

Full name is more than just Gleiss Lutz, so I have undone your revision, see the legal notice on the website which has the firm's full name: http://www.gleisslutz.com/en/legal-notice/

It's also on the bottom of their lawyers' emails.

Jack Conklin

I know he hasn't been signed yet, but WHY DID YOU DELETE MY TEMPLATES INDICATING HIM AS A DRAFT PICK? Even if he never signs, he still got picked...why did you erase that? Tom Danson (talk) 01:17, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

It was a wholesale vandalism revert. Sorry if a legit edit got wiped. --bender235 (talk) 01:18, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Bender235, I noticed you used AutoWikiBrowser to change some links to https. I would like to do the same thing to a bunch of external links I've added so our Google Analytics at the BYU library can tell what sub-page a Wikipedia referrer comes from. Is there a bot that does this already? Is this something AWB is good at doing? I'd be grateful for your advice before I launch into editing. Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 18:06, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

AWB is for semi-automatic editing, which is what I do (when converting Google Books links, I like to also remove link clutter manually). But your problem seems to be plain link conversion, so I suggest to file a bot request. --bender235 (talk) 18:15, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 7 May

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:28, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. That seems to be an AWB bug. I filed it here. --bender235 (talk) 17:19, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Something for you :)

In appreciation for your efforts on Wikipedia and to brighten up your day, I am pleased to bestow you a Random Smiley Award! Please feel free to display it, add it to your barnstar count, or pass it on to someone else. All the best, SeaBeeDee. SeaBeeDee 18:44, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

For your contributions to Wikipedia and humanity in general, you are hereby granted the coveted Random Smiley Award
(Explanation and Disclaimer)

SeaBeeDee 18:44, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Changing DOB

Derrick Henry's dobson is not July 17thave. NFL.Combine has it wrong. He is my first cousin and his birth_date is January 4, 1994. I change it and you all keep changing it back. TC(Shocka) (talk) 02:29, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

We do not include private information on Wikipedia. --bender235 (talk) 17:50, 17 May 2016 (UTC)


Jared Goff

Hi Bender. You clearly do a lot for Wikipedia. That's awesome. But you know the rules. You can't just delete valid information without first going to talk, and then seeking consensus. Please go through the process.99.53.222.40 (talk) 19:52, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Please get familiar with WP:RS. --bender235 (talk) 19:55, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
You need to provide a reason for deleting material. Even if you are justified, you need to tell people why you are deleting information. I am not the first to point this out to you. Please consider tagging or going to the talk page in the future. Be constructive. 99.53.222.40 (talk) 20:10, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
That's where you are wrong. Not the deletion but the inclusion needs to be justified. Wikipedia admits only verifiable facts. Again, please familiarize yourself with our rules. --bender235 (talk) 20:22, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
That isn't true. That is why there is a comment section on the recent edits page. I am familiar with the rules. And I am not the first to point this out to you. If you would just say "needs a citation," then people would know that you aren't a vandal. It only takes a second to tell people why you are deleting something. It is called being a good citizen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.153.215.87 (talk) 01:25, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

web.archive.org

Hi Bender235, are we supposed to change the archive URLs to use https:// or just //? I thought it was the latter. Robman94 (talk) 23:12, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Make it https://. Since Wikipedia is HTTPS-only now, protocol-relative links are pretty much vacuous. --bender235 (talk) 23:14, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Change name

Hey i want to know if you can change an article name. It's called "Love Is All You Need? (2016 film)" i just want to know if you can delete "(2016 film)". If you can just put "Love Is All You Need?" Thank you so much;) Jonabeltb (talk) 04:13, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

It certainly is technically possible to move a page in general, but it is not possible here because Love Is All You Need? refers to a different movie. --bender235 (talk) 20:10, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Image request

Your request has been completed. If satisfied please place a resolve tag on your request entry here, so we may close it. - FOX 52 (talk) 02:58, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey

The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:48, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Rendang

Could you watch this page? Strange new accounts are making subtle changes to it. Not sure if they're inappropriate though. 68.100.225.166 (talk) 19:05, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you expect me to do. If there is content disputes, please address it at WP:DR if needed. --bender235 (talk) 20:15, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Lifespan of C. carcharias

Hi, just saw your revision of a sentence on the white shark article. The aim of that sentence is not really to create suspense, rather to compare different studies and scientifically accepted facts/estimations. Most sources still use the old figures, since more data and time is needed for the new figures to be accepted by the scientific community, therefore we need to put it there somehow. If you don't like the sentence structure please feel free to help construct a better one. Berkserker (talk) 01:50, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Well, if the purpose was to mention (or compare) two studies, than two studies should've been cited. However, there is only one reference there. --bender235 (talk) 02:30, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
The second one is not a study. It is the general figure accepted by ichthyology for decades. The recent study is challenging this status quo. Berkserker (talk) 03:48, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
That may very well be, but it needs to be sourced. Ichthyologist's common knowledge is not the Wikipedia reader's common knowledge. --bender235 (talk) 12:06, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
It was sourced in the related section, therefore it wasn't necessary to include it in the introduction paragraph, however if you have seen the new version I proposed, it is sourced. Also the wording is different. Berkserker (talk) 13:20, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
Fair enough. --bender235 (talk) 22:47, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Omar Mateen

I believe you should discuss it further on talk page. BrxBrx (talk) 04:12, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

You should stop reverting on nonsubstantial claims. There is no source indicating Islamic motive. --bender235 (talk) 04:17, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
[1] - pledged allegiance to ISIS. [2] Long held islamic extremist viewpoints. BrxBrx (talk) 04:19, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Besides, there is no consensus supporting your claim.BrxBrx (talk) 04:21, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
ISIS allegiance is moronic. "Islamic viewpoints" are precisely the homophobic viewpoints. His father is the source, cited in plenty of media outlets. --bender235 (talk) 04:36, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
I presume the views of the fbi dont count? Although to be fair there is a significant intersection between Islamic extremism and homophobia - perhaps that's the angle that best reflects the sources. BrxBrx (talk) 04:38, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
The FBI does not claim an Islamic motive in this case. It is not a coordinated attack like in Paris. It's a single homophobic shooter who happens to be Muslim, but could just as well have any (or no) religion. --bender235 (talk) 04:41, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

3RR

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Information icon Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Jujutsuan (Please notify with {{re}} | talk | contribs) 05:28, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Three years ago ...
"Wikipedia does not have
any space limitations"
... you were recipient
no. 518 of Precious,
a prize of QAI!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:32, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Ways to improve Beecher High School

Hi, I'm JudeccaXIII. Bender235, thanks for creating Beecher High School!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. This article in general needs to be greatly expanded. I don't know if it meets WP:N, but I recommend finding more sources and add a Wikiproject.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. JudeccaXIII (talk) 19:58, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Galileo Ferraris & Optics

I can't understand this paragraph at all. It seems to be full of grammatical errors and a word ("denned") which makes no sense in this context.

"In the second main sections, the results obtained are applied to optical instruments. This was dealt with in great detail the magnification, field of view, and the brightness of the instrument. The field denned as the author of that cone opening angle, the tip of the first main points of the lens, and its base formed by the parts of the object in view, will possess the same brightness. The eye is not treated."

76.254.24.27 (talk) 04:22, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

I don't remember writing any of this. --bender235 (talk) 15:05, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Source is needed

This edit added Nate Robinson (American football) as a notable alumnus of Irvington High School (New Jersey). Please add the required source. Alansohn (talk) 21:38, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 12 July

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:25, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Main vs Main article

Hi. I see that you've been changing the tag from "Main" to "Main article". I curious: what is the difference? Thanks for any info. -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:52, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

AWB did that automatically to avoid a template reroute. Apparently the template name changed, see {{main article}}. --bender235 (talk) 21:28, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

https

Would it be worth getting a bot to do this? --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 15:30, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Yes, and I know of at least one that is approved to run. However, we are talking about millions of articles here, so it doesn't hurt if two or more people do it simultaneously. --bender235 (talk) 15:33, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
Fair enough. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 20:20, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
The abovementioned bot only converts Internet Archive links, though. I'd prefer if there also was on converting links to the Google realm, but ever since my bot request in 2015 nothing happened. --bender235 (talk) 20:30, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

HTTPS 2

Hi, Bender235. I have seen an update you performed on one of the citations (converting it to https from http.) I have no quarrel with the change having read the documentation link on your user page; however you've only changed one out of about twenty. The other nineteen still start with http. Is this changeover limited to just a few sites and how should I go about making sure any citations I enter are compliant in the future. I read the Rfc about it and to be frank, I just didn't get it. Regards.The joy of all things (talk) 18:52, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

@The joy of all things: Could you please tell me which article you are referring to? --bender235 (talk) 20:17, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
A650 Road in West Yorkshire, England. Like I say, not a criticism. I am keen to help out, I just need help in understanding.
This was the edit - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=A650_road&curid=48444895&diff=730697371&oldid=694279679
Regards. The joy of all things (talk) 20:22, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
Ah, I see. Well, the HTTP→HTTPS conversion only works for particular websites. For instance, all Google services (including Google Cache) allow for HTTPS connections. Those, and Internet Archive links, are the ones I am currently converting. --bender235 (talk) 20:28, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Misleading edit summary

The edit summary of this edit was misleading, because you didn't just add an infobox, you also removed part of the information from the lead sentence. Please don't do that the next time: or indicate it in the edit summary, or make it a separate edit. Debresser (talk) 17:00, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Well, in fact no information was deleted. It just moved down a line, that's why it is marked red in the changes preview. The only thing actually removed (or rather re-located to the infobox) was birth place and death place, which is in accordance with MOS:BIRTHPLACE. --bender235 (talk) 17:05, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
I wasn't aware of that guideline. Thanks. Debresser (talk) 17:20, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
You're welcome. Will you revert your edit to Jacob Berab now? --bender235 (talk) 17:24, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
I don't think so. In this specific case. The reason being that reaching consensus was very hard, especially on the place of death. I remember that well. I also noticed that the guideline says that sometimes the place can be kept. Perhaps this is such a case. Debresser (talk) 00:02, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
In my eyes MOS:BIRTHPLACE is pretty clear. Could you point me to the discussion that introduced the loophole you mentioned? --bender235 (talk) 00:17, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
I don't understand the question. Debresser (talk) 00:27, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
The guideline says: Birth and death places, if known, should be mentioned in the body of the article, and can be in the lead if relevant to the person's notability, but they should not be mentioned in the opening brackets of the lead sentence alongside the birth and death dates. Where do you see the loophole that allows for a special treatment "in this specific case." (what, may I ask, makes this particular article so special by the way?) --bender235 (talk) 00:31, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
I re-read the whole paragraph again, and you're right. Thanks again for your patience with me. Debresser (talk) 13:14, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
Fair enough. Will you revert it now? --bender235 (talk) 13:15, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
Done. Debresser (talk) 14:20, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

July 2016

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Cgroups. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

  1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
  2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Codename Lisa (talk) 07:10, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

  1. WP:DTR
  2. MOS:WEBADDR has absolutely nothing to do with this. There is widespread consensus to enable HTTPS external links whereever possible. --bender235 (talk) 13:09, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello.
So you finally decided to say a word! Good.
  1. I template the regulars only. Only newcomers need the personal touch. Sue me.
  2. Read the MOS:WEBADDR carefully. If your browser has a Find function, look for "Choosing between HTTP and HTTPS". Unlike you who do not provide an evidence of Wiki-wide consensus, MOS:WEBADDR provides one.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 13:18, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
That paragraph to MOS:WEBADDR was added by a single person, reflecting an outdated view on this issue. Plus, if anything, it would've told you to use protocol-relative link scheme instead of reverting all my edits to HTTP again. Explain to me, why are you vandalizing just to make a point? --bender235 (talk) 13:26, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
This RFC (January 2014) is not the work of one person. And yes, only one person at a time can edit any given page. There is no single edit made by 12 persons!
"why are you vandalizing just to make a point?" Most people who disagree with you on content are not vandals. But of course, please feel free to report me as a vandal.
—Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 13:33, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
Alright, let me rephrase my question: why did you undo my edits to HTTP when the MOS you cited told you to use HTTPS or PRURL, if anything? --bender235 (talk) 13:35, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
Because until recently, lwn.net was served only over HTTP, and HTTPS was redirected to HTTP. Hence per January 2014 RFC, I used "http://" for HTTP. All this changed recently. Now lwn.net works over HTTPS too. So, I have deployed PURL.
But more importantly, all I was doing was reverting a change that had an incorrect rationale, i.e. an RFC was cited that never sanctioned such a change. Hence, exit the change.
Now, your turn: People revert each other per Wikipedia:Editing policy § Talking and editing. That's natural in Wikipedia and most of the times very friendly. Why didn't you come to me or the article talk page, to solve the problem?
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 13:45, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
Because I did not see your reverts at all. I only became aware of your issue after you left a message on my talk page.
Anyhow, I believe we should leave the lwm.net links as HTTPS. I don't see it doing any damage. Why do you oppose this, if I may ask? --bender235 (talk) 13:49, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
You did not see my reverts at all and countered it four times? I did not see that coming!
Oh, personally I love HTTPS. But there is the January 2014 RFC to consider. We're supposed to put our personal preferences aside in favor of the community's consensus. —Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 14:00, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
Well, a lot happened ever since January 2014. Wikipedia went HTTPS-only in June 2015, for instance. And a lot of websites at least offer both HTTPS and HTTP now, if not HTTPS only. We already had some websites coming forward and asking Wikipedians to convert external links to HTTPS, because otherwise they do not get referral information. It's time to update our policies. --bender235 (talk) 14:09, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
P.S.: Please feel free to weigh in here.
A change in the consensus is something that I can and will support. Also, as a compromise, as long as you don't change HTTP-only links to HTTPS, I can ignore whatever other changes you make without having endorsed it either.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 13:32, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
I would never change HTTP-only links to HTTPS. I change websites that offer and actively encourage HTTPS incoming links to HTTPS, like archive.org, newspapers.com, or any Google domain. --bender235 (talk) 13:36, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
As comming from another wiki and not beeing familiar with enwiki rules: What would be the issue with such a change on enwiki? Imo MOS:WEBADDR states this (or more precisely: protocol relative links, which since 2015-06-12 always leads to the same result) as recommended. --nenntmichruhigip (Diskussion) 17:49, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
Oh, you meant changing to HTTPS where the server doesn't supports it? That's obivious then :-) --nenntmichruhigip (Diskussion) 17:53, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
There you go. --bender235 (talk) 17:55, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Main article

Since main has the same effect as main article, is it really necessary to amend the old style links? Regards Keith-264 (talk) 08:38, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

That is one of AutoWikiBrowser's automatic fixes. --bender235 (talk) 13:06, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
Ah, thanks. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 16:26, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

Shefali Razdan

You're a wizard Harry! :) -- Y not? 17:06, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

I'm a what? ;) --bender235 (talk) 17:07, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Thank you!

The Wikignome Award The Wikignome Award
I would just like to say that I have noticed and appreciate your efforts to change the http to https in my articles. I write a lot and have clearly made tons of work for you. It takes a village. I sincerely thank you. SusunW (talk) 20:35, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
Thank you. It's well appreciated. --bender235 (talk) 20:41, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 26 July

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:25, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 28 July

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:23, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Deletion review

I am notifying everyone who took part in the AFD discussion on Daniel Romanovsky. Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2016 August 3 Thoughtmonkey (talk) 18:51, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thank you for clearing up my edits. :) AWOW (A Wikipedian on Wikipedia) (talk) 23:13, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
You're welcome. --bender235 (talk) 23:15, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Please take care when using AWB to move stub templates.

Hi, Bender235. I ask you to be cautious when using AWB to move stub templates. Many stub templates produce categories, & the change you made took it out of alphanumeric order. Presumably because you were using AWB, you missed this comment in João Manuel (bishop of Guarda):

<!--Please keep category-producing stub template in category order; otherwise categories will no longer be in alphanumeric order.-->

Peaceray (talk) 15:44, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Why do categories have to be "in alphanumeric order"? --bender235 (talk) 15:45, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
Although WP:CATDEF states that "The order in which categories are placed on a page is not governed by any single rule (for example, it does not need to be alphabetical, although partially alphabetical ordering can sometimes be helpful). Normally the most essential, significant categories appear first," I have a slightly different take. I have exposure to cognitive psychology & user interface design (besides the classes for my Library & Information Studies MS degree, I have worked in IT for 25+ years & am also a former university reference librarian). I find that Chunking (psychology) is very useful to organizing information. One of the simplest forms of chunking is alphanumeric order. Only when a category equals or closely resembles the name of the article, then I will make or keep it the leading category. Otherwise, the lack of any order is chaotic & is difficult for a reader to follow, & alphanumeric order is a simple & effective solution to this problem. Peaceray (talk) 16:16, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
You should maybe bring that up here: Wikipedia talk:Categorization. --bender235 (talk) 16:20, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
Done!

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:Categorization#Proposing a change to the WP:CATDEF wording

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Categorization#Proposing a change to the WP:CATDEF wording. Peaceray (talk) 16:58, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

AWB https

Hi Bender. I've noticed you've been changing http --> https in quite a few links using AWB. Thanks for helping with those changes, but some editors have raised concerns that your rate of editing is abnormally high, and I have to agree. I've counted as high as 34 edits/minute, and I've been told by another editor that they've seen you hit 40 edits/minute. It's impossible to fully review the sorts of edits being made when operating at speeds that high. This seems to violate WP:BOTASSIST, a section of our bot policy, which states "In general, processes that are operated at higher speeds, with a high volume of edits, or are more automated, may be more likely to be treated as bots for these purposes."

I do value the changes you're making. Do your edits converting http to https require review? If not, are you aware that you're able to run a bot task using AWB which simply runs AWB without requiring you to hit Save? It's very simple, and it's how I run BU RoBOT. Would you consider seeking bot approval for this task using the fully-automated bot mode on AWB? ~ Rob13Talk 20:46, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Actually that sounds like a good idea. I've been wondering if what I do already made me a "bot" by Wikipedia standards. I'll look into it. Do I need to create a new account first? --bender235 (talk) 20:53, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
You can file for approval at WP:BRFA. If you do that, create a bot account with "Bot" somewhere in the username immediately before doing so, yes. I'd also ask that you refrain from making these edits at a rate of >10 edits/minute while seeking approval. ~ Rob13Talk 21:21, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
Filed a bot request. Let me know if there's anything else I need to do. --bender235 (talk) 22:20, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Congrats on the successful bot request. I just wanted to make sure to note that you can only use the bot request for the approved purpose (meaning only archive.org links, etc.) with the limitations discussed in the approval unless you file for another approval. Let me know if you have any questions while running the bot, and thanks for being very reasonable and understanding about moving this task over to a bot. Hopefully, this will save you quite a bit of "clicking" time as well. ~ Rob13Talk 22:14, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the guidance through this process. It really does save a lot of time not having to click myself. And don't worry, I'm aware of the strict bot operating rules. I will finish the Internet Archive task (which will take quite some time even if I did not underestimate the number of articles affected), and then file a new request for approval for Wayback Machine links. --bender235 (talk) 22:26, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
@BU Rob13:: turns out I overestimated the Internet Archive task, after little more than 25k edits it is done. If I want to extend the range of my bot now to Wayback Machine (http://web.archive.org/web/), how do I proceed? Do I file a new BRFA or re-open the old one? --bender235 (talk) 19:14, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
Hmm. In this situation, I'd probably file a new WP:BRFA, but it's very possible this might be speedily approved (meaning with no trial). Technically speaking, the task is virtually identical to the previous task. It's just a matter of expanding the scope. How did you arrive at the previous estimates and are you sure AWB didn't just cap the amount of pages it found in a search at 25,000? It often does that unless you pull from a database dump. ~ Rob13Talk 19:25, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
My estimates were a wild guess. In fact, there are about 40-45k pages with external links to Internet Archive, but in about 20k of them the link was embedded in a template. If you do a Special:LinkSearch for http://www.archive.org and http://archive.org you'll see there's only non-Article name space links left. --bender235 (talk) 19:34, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
Filed request for approval. --bender235 (talk) 19:48, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
What about Bug Powder Dust, for instance? ~ Rob13Talk 20:05, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
That is one of the about 50-60 articles left in which something like at [http://www.archive.org Internet Archive] should be converted to at [[Internet Archive]]. In that particular case actually at [http://www.archive.org archive.org] to at [[Wayback Machine]]. These links don't follow a pattern (see for example [3]) so I will fix them by hand. --bender235 (talk) 20:16, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia email re Newspapers.com signup

Hello, Bender235. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

HazelAB (talk) 12:02, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. --bender235 (talk) 00:48, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Salomon James de Rothschild, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Patis. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Infoboxes

Thank you for your cogent defense of infoboxes. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 19:34, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

You're welcome. I honestly find them useful, especially for biographies. And like I explained at Talk:Hannah Primrose, Countess of Rosebery, in most cases (when there is a prominent portrait image of the subject) an infobox not only does not affect the articles layout but in fact makes good use of the blank space right of the table of contents. Too bad that some people seem to be in general opposition of the idea. --bender235 (talk) 19:51, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
I am sure it is being argued somewhere now that looking at her image distracts from the reading experience. Wikipedia clickthroughs from Google have been dropping because people get what they are looking for from the Google Knowledge Graph, their version of the infobox. 90% of the time I just want to know the age of the person, and whether the person is dead or alive. Sometimes I just want to see a picture of the person, to match them to someone in a movie I am watching. We deleted all fair-use images of living people, so Google fills the void. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 20:17, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
@Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ): I figure we could discuss this with a broader audience. --bender235 (talk) 01:38, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
IADIS International , Volume: 2010 (2010). "Languages and Wikipedia: Cultural evolution increases structure (PDF Download Available)". Retrieved August 16, 2016.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)--Moxy (talk) 01:26, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Edit warring

You are at WP:3RR. If you revert again I will file a report in the appropriate forum. The appropriate place for a thread about something on the Rosebery article is on the talk page of that article, not elsewhere. – SchroCat (talk) 03:40, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

@SchroCat: I'm not sure if you are doing this to deliberately piss me off, but I've explained three times now that we do not need clunky text messages when we have edit notices. As I wrote multiple times in the edit descriptions already, the message you kept re-adding has been moved to Template:Editnotices/Page/Hannah Primrose, Countess of Rosebery so that it displays on top of the editing window rather than hidden in the source code. Instead just backing off and thinking for a few minutes, you threaten me with a 3RR report over this? How ridiculous is this? --bender235 (talk) 13:15, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
No, I have not done anything to deliberately piss you off: the same question could be asked of your edit warring. As you might put it, 'How ridiculous is that'? You've heard of BRD I presume - and of WP:3RR? They apply to you as much as anyone else. (And did it cross your mind that I may have 'backed off and thought for a few minutes' before editing? I rarely undertake knee-jerk edits without thought - you should possibly add WP:AGF to your reading list too). And no, I did not "threaten" you: I posted a warning, as per our guidelines on edit warring. If you remove the message again I will not hesitate to file a report in the appropriate forum. Again, that isn't a threat, that is a warning as per our guidelines on edit warring.
I would avoid using the template. Firstly it makes the situation appear much more official than a small, polite request to use the talk page. Secondly there is a great chance the notice will not be seen (most people ignore the ephemera surrounding the edit box when editing. Thirdly people are able to remove the small polite notice if they wish to add an IB (much as you did here - bringing into question the statement it will 'frighten off' editors). - SchroCat (talk) 13:28, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Information icon Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. SchroCat (talk) 13:41, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Bravo. --bender235 (talk) 13:47, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

3RR

Copied from User talk:SchroCat#3RR since SchroCat kept removing my reply there.

See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Bender235 reported by User:SchroCat (Result: ). Whichever admin closes this case will be tempted to block both you and User:Bender235 for edit warring. This is your chance to agree not to touch the hidden text again without a prior talk page consensus. If one of you agrees and not the other, then only one person may be blocked. If both of you agree then no blocks should be needed, in my opinion. EdJohnston (talk) 22:17, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

EdJohnston, my last edit of any type on that page was 20 hours ago. It was a second revert. At that age followed the guidelines as lain down and reported bender's subsequent revert of my edit. I did not revert him, nor did I revert clpo's revert of an hour ago. I think any right-minded admin will see that I stopped at 2RR and discussed aspects of the talk page notice at the village pump discussion (why bender thought to open a thread there, rather than the talk page I don't know). As I have followed all the relevant policies and guidelines and not edited the page in any way for 20 hours, I would be at a loss as to how any admin could justify a block. SchroCat (talk) 22:43, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
@EdJohnston: Well, I don't have to touch the article again since Clpo13 (talk · contribs) was sane enough already to remove this redundant message. Why something as trivial as this supposedly "needs consensus" first is still beyond me. --bender235 (talk) 22:34, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
welcome to the infoboxes disputes where seemingly trivial things get massive, - in case you didn't notice: you are a member of the cabal of the outcasts (or Gerda's flash mob) by what you do ;) - We do not edit war, trivial or not, period. life is too short. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:16, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
@Gerda Arendt: learned my lesson. I hope the hidden message they re-add will prevent the next poor sucker from stumbling into this hornets nest. What's left now is to determine whether WP:INVISIBLE is a guideline or just an essay. --bender235 (talk) 13:30, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
You made a good timeline, thank you. What I learned is patience. The infobox wars began in 2005 (years before I started editing), - imagine you had fought for something (or rather against it) all this time, would you easily let go? I archived the whole stuff end of 2015 and thought 2016 would be the year of the reader and of peace. First blow was that a friend who had blocked himself over Laurence Olivier (which he had protected when an edit war about the hidden message happened) died. See "life is too short". - There's nothing wrong with inserting infoboxes where you think they are missing, just let go perhaps even without arguing when reverted, - many more are missing. You can avoid disappointment by looking at the main authors, and I probably don't have to provide a list of names, - just compare Gustave Holst. Guess why I would hope for a year of the reader, - they are typically not asked if they want an infobox ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:39, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Bot flag

Shouldn't edits by your bot, User:Bender the Bot, appear with a bot flag in watchlists? -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 13:37, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

I guess they should. I'm not sure what causes them not to. --bender235 (talk) 13:41, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
@Bender235 and Michael Bednarek: A bureaucrat needs to flag the bot. Mind holding off on edits for a few hours while I seek one out? ~ Rob13Talk 20:51, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
(edit conflict) @BU Rob13: Alright, stopped the bot. Let me know when I can continue. --bender235 (talk) 20:53, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
Wait, it's already flagged. Investigating. ~ Rob13Talk 20:52, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
@Michael Bednarek: Which page brought you here? ~ Rob13Talk 20:54, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
Peer Gynt (Grieg) & Piano Sonata No. 8 (Beethoven); since then, Revue et gazette musicale de Paris was missing the bot-flag, but Arts Centre Melbourne, Comédie-Italienne and others had it. OTOH, none of the 500 changes up to 06:52 on 18 August show it, although the account had been marked as a bot all along. Mystified, Michael Bednarek (talk) 04:10, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
I think it's ok to restart the bot. I'm bewildered by this as well. Try restarting AWB, maybe, if you haven't already? That shouldn't have any impact, though. The bot is properly flagged, so if there's any issue, it's probably an issue with the MediaWiki software and should be reported as such. ~ Rob13Talk 04:46, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
Alright. --bender235 (talk) 04:55, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Editnotices/Page/Hannah Primrose, Countess of Rosebery

Template:Editnotices/Page/Hannah Primrose, Countess of Rosebery has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Pppery (talk) 19:10, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 23 August

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:22, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Your Newspapers.com account

You should have access to Newspapers.com now. Please note that our Wikipedia Library subscriptions do not include access to Publisher Extra content. HazelAB (talk) 13:21, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Alright, thank you. --bender235 (talk) 13:42, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Records succession boxes

I agree that they usually offer unique information, but at the moment they're highly inconsistent. Jerry Rice's page had only his single-season receiving yards record (which he no longer holds) and nothing else. And I've seen some exotic ones, like "most rushing yards in a game by a rookie." If our inclusion criteria is this lenient, players like Don Hutson or Dan Marino could have mountains of succession boxes. I started a discussion last week on WT:NFL that (unsurprisingly) didn't get any replies, so maybe you and I can come up with something. Lizard (talk) 16:13, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

I don't think having a bunch, in exceptional cases even 10 or more of these boxes is necessarily bad. Usain Bolt has a whole bunch of them, and I don't think they should be removed. --bender235 (talk) 16:23, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Islam Karimov

On 3 September 2016, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Islam Karimov, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. SpencerT♦C 08:58, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

edit pages

how do you edit this Page? Cheekaboo101 (talk) 21:39, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

What page? My talk page? --bender235 (talk) 00:29, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Template:Wayback

This template has 11 alias redirects. Would you have any interest in converting all the instances to {{wayback}}? Nothing but the name of the template. There are probably a few hundred articles total. A good exercise in regex :) -- GreenC 03:39, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Sure, let me see what I can do. --bender235 (talk) 12:58, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
I think I fixed them all now. In hindsight, though, I wonder if this violated AWB rules since it was basically non-consequential edits. --bender235 (talk) 15:35, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Bot task 2

Hi Bender235, your task#2 has been approved for run, with an initial enforced staggered period - please see the details in Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Bender the Bot 2. I trust you will be responsive to any issues so don't feel a need to keep this under "extended trial" for this part. Please let me know if you have any concerns. — xaosflux Talk 01:22, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Sure. --bender235 (talk) 12:14, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi, your bot is driving me daft today. It seems to be hitting practically every article in my 3000+ watchlist. How is it selecting? By category? - Sitush (talk) 12:58, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
I did a Link Search for particular HTTP versions of Google Books and Google News links. So far it's all articles containing non-".com" links. --bender235 (talk) 19:54, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
I see, thanks. It is making my watchlist virtually unusable - some discussion here. I had a similar problem when it was doing https stuff for Wayback. - Sitush (talk) 09:15, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
@Sitush: my understanding is that you can hide bot edits in your watchlist. @Xaosflux: could it be that my bot account hasn't been properly flagged as bot? @Green Cardamom: since our bots doing related tasks, I wonder if you have a suggestion on this issue raised by Sitush and others. --bender235 (talk) 11:43, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Your bot appears to be using the bot flag for these edits properly:

There is a checkbox on the watch list to hide or unhide bot edits. — xaosflux Talk 12:20, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
@Xaosflux: even if the checkbox on the watchlist worked (which it never has done for me), it wouldn't fix the problem being discussed in the linked talk page thread above. - Sitush (talk) 13:09, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
The bot request did reference a completed rfc Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)/Archive_127#RfC:_Should_we_convert_existing_Google_and_Internet_Archive_links_to_HTTPS.3F - If you would like to revist that on Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals) (something like "stop converting existing....links") I think suspending the bot task during discussion may be prudent. — xaosflux Talk 14:30, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Bot mangling citations

see around "A Flock of Seagulls". Frietjes (talk) 21:14, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I'll have a look what caused this. That happened because the links were broken in the first place. For instance, the /books in http://books.google.com/books?id=92IEAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA16&dq=%22synth+pop%22 was missing. Fixed the Regex of the bot. --bender235 (talk) 00:25, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
I reverted your changes, since you basically remangled it the same way the bot mangled it. Frietjes (talk) 18:42, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
Damn, I must've edited the wrong version of the article. --bender235 (talk) 21:27, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

BOT loosing parts of article

Hi, there appears to be a problem with the BOT loosing parts of article such as this edit. Regards Keith D (talk) 11:40, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Oh, shoot. I didn't expect to run into empty Google Books links. I'll fix it manually. --bender235 (talk) 12:09, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Reverted Bot's large-scale deletion

I have just reverted a large-scale, unexplained deletion by Bender the Bot. See my diff. Dolphin (t) 11:26, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Second warning. A similar deletion to that reported by Dolphin51 is here. I expect a response to this before the bot makes any further edits. Any edit by the bot after the timestamp of this edit would be sufficient reason to seek a block of the bot. Jc3s5h (talk) 12:33, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
You're right. I'm sorry about that. I'll check the rest of the edits. --bender235 (talk) 12:34, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
I found about three dozen more of those malfunctions. I know exactly what is the problem (incomplete or empty Google Books links in references), but I don't know how to fix it yet. I'll stop the bot indefinitely until I figured it out. --bender235 (talk) 13:21, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
here as well. Frietjes (talk) 22:48, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
@Frietjes and Jc3s5h: Thank you for helping out here. Much appreciated. I never expected so many broken Google Books links on Wikipedia. It baffles me how those links came into Wikipedia in the first place. It seems as if people actually added them without the ? between .../books and id=.... Either those links worked in 2014 and earlier, or something went wrong in the copy-pasting. --bender235 (talk) 22:57, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

The problem

Unfortunately there are some erroneous Google Books links in Wikipedia, which caused my bot to malfunction. Initially the regular expression was http[s]?:\/\/books\.google\.[^\/]+, which caused havoc in List of synthpop artists, because the link http://books.google.com?id=92IEAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA16&dq=%22synth+pop%22 did not contain the closing / behind the URL (should have been http://books.google.com/books?id=92IEAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA16&dq=%22synth+pop%22). In reaction, I modified the Regex to http[s]?:\/\/books\.google\.[^\?]+ to correctly fix the above mentioned case and others.

That modification did good work, and even (correctly) fixed other cases I hadn't thought about at that point, like [4] http://books.google.com/books/about/Germany_puts_the_clock_back.html?id=AF-tp_Ln2LoC to https://books.google.com/books?id=AF-tp_Ln2LoC

However, now the bot ran into problems with corrupt links (which, if yesterdays bot run is taken as a valid sample, are about 1% of Google Books links [40 cases in about 4,500 articles], which in 100k+ articles is a lot), i.e. when Google Books links are empty (meaning they only pointed to the Google Books homepage), broken, or just in a weird format. For instance, in Dum Diversas, the link http://books.google.com/books?id=okDypjibS0wC&pg=PA25 did not contain the red question mark which on one hand broke the link, and "broke" the bot on the other hand (since it was looking for the closing ?).

I'll stop the bot operation for now until I figured out how to code the Regex to deal with these issues (and possibly others that are still out there). @Joel Amos and Xaosflux: I'd be glad if you had any suggestions. Basically I need the bot to figure out that deleting up to say 50 characters is okay, but 3,000 is not. --bender235 (talk) 14:53, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

P.S. The second-best option I thought about is pre-scanning each batch manually for those erroneous links.

Thank you for being responsive to other editors and suspending your task pending repairs, that is why we asked for a staggered roll up in edits. The task approval for the task still stands, however the step wise ramp up of edits should be reset once your corrections are made (and reset should other errors be presented):
  1. 100 edits, 24 hour pause
  2. 300 edits, 24 hour pause
  3. 1000 edits, 24 hour pause
  4. 3000 edits, 24 hour pause
  5. 3000 edits, 24 hour pause
  6. 3000 edits, 24 hour pause
  7. 4000 edits, 24 hour pause
  8. 5000 edits, 24 hour pause
  9. 10000 edits, 24 hour pause
  10. 50000 edits, 24 hour pause
  11. Rest of run. — xaosflux Talk 15:29, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
I have two solutions: I could either reduce the Regex to http[s]?:\/\/books\.google\. so it will only switch the protocol and leave the rest untouched. That will cause zero false positives, but will at the same time "fix" links that are actually broken or empty (see examples above). Or option 2: I pre-scan every batch for broken links, empty links, other anomalies, and then run the original regex over it. I'm doing the pre-scan right now, and I continue to find erroneous links in about 1% of the batch. I think this way is more laborious, but it is worth it. I wouldn't want several hundreds of broken Google Books links hidden in Wikipedia. --bender235 (talk) 21:05, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
@Xaosflux: pre-scan complete (found and manually fixed about 60 issues in ~22k articles). Gonna run the bot for 100 edits now. Actually, instead of running the bot, I'm going to scan Wikipedia for those malfunctioning links and fix them manually. That will reduce the error rate on the next bot run. --bender235 (talk) 23:00, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
Found and fixed almost 200 Google Books links in which the ? between .../books and id=... was missing (some of them had {{dead link}} tags from as early as 2010 on them). My bot should run much smoother now. --bender235 (talk) 23:46, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

bot problem

I'm not sure if this related to any of the above, but I've been seeing this or similar 2-3 times a day. In this case it was blanking out 1/2 the external links. Other cases it's deleting paragraphs or sections. I've been reverting and adding https to the Google refs. I've got an extra bed in my loony bin room if you need it. I'll just be talking to myself while I wait for you. Bgwhite (talk) 07:56, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Yes, it is related. Damn, yet another issue with this thing. I'm starting to get the sense it would've been more efficient to run this whole task manually in the first place. --bender235 (talk) 12:54, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
Ok, no more repairing links automatically (I will do that manually). Back to the original Regex: http[s]?:\/\/books\.google\.[^\/]+. --bender235 (talk) 13:51, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
Please observe, and reset after fixing bugs - the ramp up schedule above. — xaosflux Talk 22:30, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
I know. --bender235 (talk) 22:47, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
Ran the bot for 100 articles, stopped after 15 because the old Regex http[s]?:\/\/books\.google\.[^\/]+ ran into the old issue (crippling the improper but working link http://books.google.com?id=1NlEAAAAcAAJ&pg=PP7 because there is no / after the domain). I'm starting to think I should run this whole task manually instead. It will take much longer, but that is the only way of making sure nothing bad happens. --bender235 (talk) 22:58, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
@Xaosflux: gave it some though, here's what I'm going to do. I will run the "non-Regex" replacement http://books.google. → https://books.google. on results from a "books.google.com" Link Search only. And I will fix all other TLDs semi-automatically (there aren't that many left anyways). --bender235 (talk) 23:06, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

zeek Wikipedia age

Hi Bender235, I have been following your edits as of late as a token of excellence I would to ask for your assistance improving Zeek Wikipedia article. I will be honest and come forward that I have a stated COI with the company but I feel the information presented in the article is notable. Any input from you regarding this matter would be amazing. Thanks, Eddard 'Ned' Stark (talk) 20:38, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Well, I don't see anything wrong with that article. --bender235 (talk) 18:58, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

http vs https

I've seen discussions go both ways, and I'm unaware of any general consensus on the matter. Granted, I was unaware of the two you mentioned, but of course the one with the vastly larger participation doesn't support it in general. That's the consensus that I've seen and been apart of. The second discussion appears to have flown under the radar of the many editors that have participated in all the larger discussions. That said, is there a policy or guideline that now incorporates it? --Ronz (talk) 14:53, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

As that second discussion was started by you, I think you need to make some effort to track down at least some of other discussions and notify editors that you are trying to generalize the solution. Ideally, find an existing policy/guideline to add it to. --Ronz (talk) 15:18, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

You're right, there is no policy regarding this issue as of today. And I don't want to edit-war over this issue either. So why did you revert the Stack Overflow link in the first place? Do you see any downside of using HTTPS there? --bender235 (talk) 16:32, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
I was just sticking to the consensus that I'm aware of, that only certain domains should be changed to https.
I'd wish you'd go through with your efforts to get larger consensus. It seems to be the right thing to do in the long run. My only qualm is that, as far as I know, some common tools don't account for it and need to be updated in order to do so. However, I don't recall the details of the discussions on the matter. --Ronz (talk) 17:17, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
Well, while there is no consensus for changing Stack Overflow and other links to HTTPS, there technically is no consensus to leave those as HTTP either. There is no policy that says "all links have to be HTTP unless there is consensus for special case to do otherwise." --bender235 (talk) 17:19, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
The discussions to allow wider use of https indicate a strong consensus for http instead.
Can you please just work on getting the larger consensus? --Ronz (talk) 18:01, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
Well, I had a Village Pump Proposal just this month. How much more am I supposed to do? --bender235 (talk) 18:14, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
I've never made a proposal with such a wide impact, so I'm not sure. Certainly, your village pump proposal needed corresponding notices to gather attention. Proposing it be added to a policy or guideline would get the necessary attention, and others would likely make notices for overlooked venues. Perhaps start by seeking help on what policy/guideline it would fit in best? --Ronz (talk) 20:24, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Palindrome

Notifying all named accounts who have edited this article this year. There is a discussion of whether this article should contain foreign language palindromes. If you would like to comment the thread is Talk:Palindrome#Non-English_palindromes_2 Meters (talk) 21:17, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Mistaken Identity: Bruckner/brukner

I just noticed that two years ago, in

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Military_production_during_World_War_II&oldid=prev&diff=617615381

...Bender235 refers to "insane" comments by me (Bruckner). I believe he means user "brukner". We are not related; nor have I commented on or edited the page in question.

Hope you can straighten this out. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bruckner (talk • contribs) 12:18, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

If it's really that important to you... --bender235 (talk) 13:01, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
Actually, it is already changed. What you're referring to is an article/talk page version image, which cannot be changed. --bender235 (talk) 13:03, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. It's not nice to be called "insane" in a public forum, especially when it's a case of mistaken identity. --Bruckner —Preceding undated comment added 23:16, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

http to https in Google Books

Hi, I recently reformatted a big batch of references using AWB and used the format url=http://books.google.com... in them. Your bot has come along and cleaned up some of what I did (example). I hate making a mess for other people to clean up. In the future, I will use https for Google Books. Am I safe also consistently changing url=http://books.google.com to url=https://books.google.com? I'm not really literate in regex and would rather keep it simple like that. Thanks for your advice.  SchreiberBike | ⌨  16:21, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

P.S. I like the notice that comes up when I open this page to edit, i.e. "Attention I prefer to keep discussions unfragmented. If ...". Can you point me to instructions on how to add something similar to that on my talk page. Thanks.  SchreiberBike | ⌨  16:24, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
As for your main question: yes, you could change these Google Books links in this fashion, but how do you want to do that? By hand? I already have a bot running that does it automatically, so you can safe yourself some effort.
And for the edit notice: it's in User talk:Bender235/Editnotice. You have that, too, in User talk:SchreiberBike/Editnotice. You can copy my text, or enter any other text if you like. --bender235 (talk) 18:34, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for both of your answers. I am using AWB, so as I continue my project to format the group of references, I will make that change. I was completely unaware of User talk:SchreiberBike/Editnotice; I'll play with making that look right. Keep up the good work.  SchreiberBike | ⌨  18:55, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
You're welcome. --bender235 (talk) 19:06, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

consumption smoothing page

I find rather strange that the page on consumption smoothing devotes a large space to an obscure criticism by an unknown author which published a paper in a close-to-zero impact factor journal very recently. I think the section about Wu criticism - probably edited by the author of the journal article itself - should be removed from the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.167.88.31 (talk) 10:08, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing me at this, I'll look into it. --bender235 (talk) 14:32, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
Hall (1978)/Flavin (1981) supplied one of the most celebrated results in consumption theory for rational expectations. Hall, a former president of American Economic Assn, and Flavin published their articles in the Journal of Political Economy (Lucas - a Nobel Prize Winner - was the editor). Against these background of famous economists, Wu (2016) has written this subject for about 18 years and only recently was accepted by a 3 peer reviewed economics journal. The "large space" is actually a "simple" mathematical proof that Flavin was using the incorrect mathematical structural formula. Keep in mind, you have an unsigned person arguing that a) article is too long and b) published in a "close to zero impact factor" journal and c) an obscure criticism and d) bad English [my comment]. Why would anyone ask you to remove such obscure criticism? This unsigned person is not arguing about the content or its results. Instead of joining the article by making meaningful arguments or pointing out mistakes, he/she is using your position to delete what is mathematically confirmed to be correct by a peer reviewed journal. Further, Wu's results can explain, in theory and practice, the economic theories from Adam Smith to Keynes and expand on modern economists, such as Franco Modigliani. Among Wu's achievements, back in the 1990s and early 2000s, many economists were criticizing low US persona saving rate. Wu (1996) explained why targeting saving rate is irrelevant. Today the issue is NOT mentioned anymore! Just google it! Still, does the average person knows why? Wikipedia is about sharing information that is actual and meaningful. Economic theories, such as rational expectations, are just theories, if you delete the criticism section what else is left? Cwucnspt (talk) 00:25, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
First of all, on the internet we're all anonymous, so it doesn't matter that OP was unregistered user. Second, he has a point. The Wu (1994/1997/2016) paper has been ignored by the economics profession (there are zero citations according to Google Scholar). That means devoting more than half of the article on consumption smoothing to the discussion of and results from this paper are WP:UNDUE. Finally, you should realize that Wikipedia is not the place to disseminate original research (I assume it is your paper, because who else would have a motive to push it). But if you insist, we can take this discussion to Wikipedia:WikiProject Economics. --bender235 (talk) 02:48, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
I can see your point. Anyone searching google scholar for consumption martingale will be overwhelmed by thousands of nonsensical articles. Why? Because they can't explain historical data and forecast future events. How can a non-economist figure out that a math identity can provide 2 different structural equations with opposite results? I would be shocked if these authors would suddenly embrace my math proof w/o screaming and yelling! Can 99.9% of economists be wrong since 1978? Absolutely, see Galileu. Also, I was told recently that economics is one of the few fields where journals and economists don't have to retract their work! Seriously, NO SHAME NO GAIN!! Guess what, back in mid 1990s, I spoke to one of the original modern founders of consumption theory, Franco Modigliani (Nobel '86), and he told me on phone he was looking for my result since 1954. Anyway, I thank for your explanation. I learned from you and I'll move forward.Cwucnspt (talk) 12:58, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Edits to Alan Senauke page

Dear Bender, Are you an actual person? I'd like to know how to update or have updated my wiki page--Alan Senauke--with factual material which can be sourced. Admittedly I know nothing about the ways of Wiki. Am I allowed to edit my own page?

1. There are two published books and two CDs of music I'd like to see added to the ALAN SENAUKE page. These are all listed on Amazon, and the books have proper ISBN's

The Bodhisattva's Embrace: Dispatches from Engaged Buddhism's Front Lines ISBN-10: 0982784406 Heirs To Ambedkar: The Rebirth of Engaged Buddhism in India ISBN-10: 0982784422 Everything Is Broken: Songs About Things As They Are Wooden Man: Old Songs from the Southern School

2. Numerous articles in published books. Citations could be added.

3. Current work mentions Burma/Myanmar, but not work with the Ambedkarite movement in India. [5]

4. I'd like to add mention of teaching on the faculty of Upaya Zen Center's chaplaincy training program. [6]

Thanks, Alan Senauke 45.30.89.131 (talk) 21:09, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I am an actual person. In general, you are allowed to edit the article about yourself, but please have a look at WP:AUTO#IFEXIST first. --bender235 (talk) 23:48, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Bot edit request

Moved from Talk:Mass killings under Communist regimes § Protected edit request on 23 October 2016
 – Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:35, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
Yes, but as you can see this page is currently admin-only. --bender235 (talk) 16:03, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
@Bender235: Sometimes I wonder if we need to make it a general advice that if bots run into a protected page, they ought to post an edit request on the talk page. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:11, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
Sounds like a good idea. Tricky to implement, though. --bender235 (talk) 16:23, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
I presume that so far, your bot simply skips over protected pages and maybe puts an entry into a log on your side? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:35, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
Exactly. It's AWB. No fancy coding on my part. --bender235 (talk) 19:36, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 26 October

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:26, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 27 October

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that some edits performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. They are as follows:

Please check these pages and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:20, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Fixed all of them. --bender235 (talk) 13:53, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

http v https

you are wasting resource (as am I) in editing links from http to https
the links will work equally as well if left alone and you are not changing a thing (WP:NOTBROKEN) Dave Rave (talk) 22:10, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

If you are referring to Google Books links, then the answer is yes and no. The HTTP links are indeed NOTBROKEN, but as I have explained at WP:VPR recently, they are slower (since Google eventually redirects to HTTPS; but this redirect can be skipped if we link to HTTPS directly) and they break the HTTP referrer. --bender235 (talk) 23:19, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
To add a few reasons: The redirect mentioned is propably (can't check because HTTPS is forced on my side already) a HTTP 301, meaning the link is outdated and should be updated. Also for security: To not unnecessarily expose users to possible attacks, which are a lot easier with HTTP requests (and it doesn't matter it's "just a redirect": depending on what the attacker wants (i.e. wanting to know what exactly you're reading) this may be totally sufficient, and an active attacker can just as easily make it a not-redirect as injecting anything else). Btw WP:NOTBROKEN is quite clearly about internal links. --nenntmichruhigip (Diskussion) 18:44, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
That's a valid point. In general, with the amount of readers Wikipedia has, the least we can do is to ensure reader's privacy with these little-to-no-effort changes. --bender235 (talk) 18:53, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Fractional Reserve Banking

Hi,

I saw that you made edits to Fractional Reserve Banking recently. I wonder if you would like to vote or pass comment on this rather important proposed change to the page => Time to change which theory gets prominence? - BTW, yes I know that this has been discussed before, but I think that there are good reasons why this issue should periodically be reviewed. Cheers Reissgo (talk) 08:19, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Blocked by Jimbo

Congrats on being blocked by Jimbo. I just knew there was something nefarious about you. :) We know about the Google conspiracy ring that secretly adds an s to http. S stands for spying. Even though Jimbo's account was hacked, you can always say it with pride that you were blocked by Jimbo. Bgwhite (talk) 01:29, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

I think I should print the block log and have Jimbo sign it at the next Wikimania. --bender235 (talk) 01:57, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

blacklist hits

Bender, your bot is regularly hitting the spam blacklist .. can you tell me what the bot is supposed to do on those links? Some of them look like plain intended blacklist evasion (using the google translator to translate from English to English with an encoded source urls, so the domain is not blocked by the blacklist. Thoughts? --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:50, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Oh wait, I see. It converts to https where needed, not the link itself. I thought we were discussing the direct links to translations somewhere, recently. Wonder what the current status of that is. --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:58, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
I can't access that spam blacklist because I'm not an administrator. Anyhow, the purpose of the bot is to convert HTTP→HTTPS for all Google websites, Google Translate obviously being one of them. If you insist I could skip those for now. --bender235 (talk) 13:58, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
I will not insist :-) (what the bot does is obviously helpful, most of these bot-hits are inadvertently, as the links were already there but now blacklisted). Maybe the specific links should be handled manually so they don't re-occur (obviously, at some point the bot will come back to the same page and try again). As there is blacklisting involved, we could question whether the links should be there in the first place .. though maybe they should be 'blanket whitelisted' .. On talkpage I could simply disable the link (one can copy-paste; I will proceed in doing this), in mainspace the problem is bigger. (I'll email you a sample of the blacklist-log, so you can see what happens and when, maybe you can consider a catch for the bot to be written when it hits the blacklist). --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:36, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Your feedback requested re major changes to Cannabis in the United States

Please see: Talk:Cannabis_in_the_United_States#Proposing_bold_changes_at_Cannabis_in_the_United_States

Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 21:42, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Why is my feedback requested? I don't remember ever contributing to this article, and quite frankly I'm not an expert on the topic anyways. --bender235 (talk) 23:28, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Bender the Bot 3

Your bot request for task 3 has been approved for trial. — xaosflux Talk 12:27, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

dot com changes

Whilst I appreciate that refs using https are preferred over those using http, I don't understand why Bender the Bot has made changes to Cheetham Hill Gang. There are only two changes in the article, both to a url; in each case the url was already https and the only change made was from "https://books.google.co.uk" to "https://books.google.com". Both links lead to the same point in the referenced text on "Google Books". Is there some reason that "dot com" addresses should be used in preference to "dot co dot uk" addresses?

Generally speaking, I think a reference to a UK website (if there is one) is better when dealing with a UK topic (as this article is), although clearly this doesn't matter as much when dealing with something like Google Books; the book comes from the UK regardless of where the server on which it's stored is located. That being the case, though, I don't see there was any more need to change the "dot co dot uk"s to "dot com"s than to use "dot co dot uk"s in the first place! Is there some technical "thing" here about which I know not?Misha An interested observer of this and that 12:54, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

The regular expression I ran basically looked for any Google Books link and replaced it with the generic https://books.google.com (the idea was to clean Wikipedia from TLDs that are sensitive in some areas of the world, like .co.il in Arab countries or .com.tw in China). If a page in my batch already had some https links, this rule basically converted all http and https links to the generic .com link. This conversion was unintended, but also not harmful. In any case, the Google Books conversion is complete. --bender235 (talk) 14:51, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Bender235. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

refs

Hello. I'm just wondering if you know about this tool: https://tools.wmflabs.org/refill/index.php. I saw you like to clean up citations. This takes care of the bare references. --Jennica✿ talk / contribs 19:52, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, but I think I used this at some point already. It's a nice tool indeed. --bender235 (talk) 23:59, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Bender the Bot 3

Your bot task request, Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Bender the Bot 3 has been approved. Please see the closing notes. — xaosflux Talk 16:01, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Bender the Bot 4

Your bot task request, Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Bender the Bot 4, has been approved. Happy editing, — xaosflux Talk 01:52, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Cool, thanks. Should finish the task over the next 12 hrs actually, and then I'll file the next one. ;) --bender235 (talk) 01:59, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

http same as https?

I recall somewhere it was mentioned that the content of a http page could be different from a https page. They are indeed different URLs and could have different content. It's something that could be checked fairly easily, which would then make switching any domain to https possible .. if a step verified the two matched. -- GreenC 02:23, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Could you be more specific? Do you mean EFF, HRW, or one of the others? But in general, so far I haven't come across a website that delivers different content over HTTPS rather HTTP for an otherwise identical URL. --bender235 (talk) 02:45, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
Ahh I'm confused, it's the robots.txt that can change between http and https, sorry. You're right while it's theoretically possible the http / https content could differ in practice not the case. Though bigger picture, would it be possible to check every link in every article to see if there's an https version available .. by verifying the content returned by a https request matches the http request. Or, that they both return header status 200. If so convert to https. -- GreenC 03:34, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, that would be really great :-) But the script should also check if both have similiar content size, because stuff like the Apache default page (which by some servers with broken config is delivered for HTTPS requests) would still result in HTTP-200. On the other hand checking for exact equalness wouldn’t work good beacause of stupid stuff like "how many times has this article been read" counters. Sorry for my bad english :-) --nenntmichruhigip (Diskussion) 13:30, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
Yes understood. Agree it should similar size (10%?) but not exact due to dynamic HTML content. -- GreenC 17:41, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
So if I understand you correctly you want to run a bot that autonomously decides which TLDs to convert by probing whether HTTPS is available and is identical to HTTP content? Hmm, if you can code something like this we could think about it, see how it works. --bender235 (talk) 15:01, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
It seems like it would be doable but a large amount of network I/O with timeouts. It would have to be run in parallel to collapse wait times.. doing it sequentially link by link would take years for the 20+ million external links, but multiple workers in parallel that keep a database of finds. Then another process keys from the database to update Wikipedia at its leisure using whatever preferred method(s) such as AWB or Pywikibot. I've already written some code for WaybackMedic that does some of it, so I'll try to write a version and run it through a couple hundred articles and see what it discovers, if it's viable. Might be days/weeks but will start on it. If it works, it would require significant network and CPU resources to generate the database for the whole site. -- GreenC 17:41, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
Speaking of "database of finds," remember there's an entire rule set available from HTTPS Everywhere. --bender235 (talk) 19:46, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
Interesting, that would save the I/O work and make it much easier and quicker. Looks like the whole database can be downloaded from GitHub. The question becomes, does it make sense to convert everything (that intersects with Wikipedia) to https, because what if a site stops supporting https in the future (their license is not renewed for financial reasons etc)? Or are we looking at a perpetual bot constantly checking for upgrade to https or downgrade to http whenever the EFF database changes (once a week or so).. then how to handle user reported exceptions (false positives and false negatives), Wikis in other languages, etc.. starts to look like a big project. -- GreenC 21:13, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

BTW on a different topic, I wrote a unix command-line tool that is useful generating lists of articles for importing into AWB. Wikiget. So for example, list all articles that contain the domain name books.google would be wikiget -a "books.google" > article-list -- GreenC 17:47, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. Although as of today, the Google Books conversion is finished. ;) --bender235 (talk) 19:46, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
Oh good timing then, congrats. BB has been making a daily appearance on my watchlist. -- GreenC 21:13, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Infobox NFL biography

Although there's no real difference, remember Infobox NFL player is deprecated in favor of Template:Infobox NFL biography. Lizard (talk) 03:03, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Alright, thanks for telling me. --bender235 (talk) 04:32, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Your BRFA

Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Bender the Bot 5 has been approved. — xaosflux Talk 14:00, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. --bender235 (talk) 14:15, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

De Zuid-Afrikaan

Hello Bender,

Am not a regular contributor to Wikipedia, and not that familiar with editing etc. My apology.

Saw your contributies regarding De Zuid-Afrikaan.

Do you know if editing are available at archives? Like to search these regarding the Dutch lithographer Poortermans.

84.106.110.158 (talk) 19:13, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure what you mean. Are you asking whether one can edit Wikipedia from an archive? --bender235 (talk) 19:20, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Technical Barnstar
Your bot changing http links to https 1Veertje (talk) 22:22, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
Thank you. --bender235 (talk) 22:45, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

John A. List cleanup

Hey, thanks a lot for the cleanup on the John A. List article! My only bit of advice would be to be be careful of namespaces when handing out template notices. Happy editing! Avicennasis @ 11:32, 19 Kislev 5777 / 11:32, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean. --bender235 (talk) 19:40, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
Sorry if I wasn't clear. The COI templates you left on the user page of those linked above, not the user talk page. I had to move them over to the correct namespace. Avicennasis @ 19:55, 19 Kislev 5777 / 19:55, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
Oh, I see. I didn't even notice. Sorry about that. And thanks for cleaning up my mess. --bender235 (talk) 21:05, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

My Way

What exactly is the genre for Calvin Harris song My Way? The only one listed on the page is tropical house, but was wondering if it would come under trap, reggae fushion, dancehall or EDM as well? --2A02:C7D:892B:3D00:95E:A4B5:226C:3A89 (talk) 14:44, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

How would I know? --bender235 (talk) 20:12, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry, merry!

From the icy Canajian north; to you and yours! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 22:06, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bender235/2016_archive&oldid=1145984272"