User talk:The Anome/archive 10

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Gang Stalking[edit]

I just left this on the Stalking discussion site, but I see that you were the deleter there and that you seemed interested, and so I post it here for your perusal, enjoyment or dismissal. Cheers!

"Yes, I just came here because a friend sent me a Youtube video wherein some woman thought that every car or person on a bike that went by was part of a grand network of people who were watching / stalking her. Then I saw that there were a bunch of YouTube videos like this -- to me, it just looked like every day random traffic with paranoid narration. These (gang-stalked) people claim that there are hundreds of people involved in their surveillance. It strikes me that maybe this is a type of mental illness like Reduplicative paramnesia, Syndrome of subjective doubles, or Capgras delusion. So is this a real thing? Or are these people mentally ill? Should the subject be mentioned in the article? (It seems like it should be at least mentioned with the caveat that it might be a misperception caused by a mental illness.) I am always fascinated by stuff like this (See: Morgellons Disease) and appreciate it when Wiki tells me what's up." Saudade7 04:08, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

With around 33,000 Google hits, there's no doubt that "gang stalking" is an active Internet meme, with multiple websites dedicated to the subject. At the time of the article's deletion, the problem with the article was that there didn't appear to be any references to the term from mainstream sources, and so it failed the WP:V test: see the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gang stalking. The only other works I can find on the subject are also self-published, so they can't be used either. The article has been repeatedly recreated and re-deleted; it is currently salted to prevent it from being recreated yet again.
Very recently, a New York Times article ("Sharing their demons on the web". New York Times. November 12, 2008. ) has been published, which discusses it as an Internet phenomenon, mostly from the viewpoint of health professionals discussing it as an example of a delusional system. It would be interesting to see if the research described in the article has been published in mainstream sources (Vaughn Bell, cited in the article, is a visiting research fellow at the IoP [1] and a contributor to WikiProject Psychopathology): if so, I think this would provide enough notability to un-salt the gang stalking article.
If the article does get recreated, expect major flamewars to ensue. -- The Anome (talk) 12:35, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Geodata for stations[edit]

Ah! If you've got the coordinates, that would be much better than my hacked-up conversions. If you have either the easting/northing data (in any format) or latitude/longitude data (in any format), just put it up as a plaintext file, let me know about it on my talk page, and I can generate accurate geotags from that data. -- The Anome (talk) 17:32, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Not quite that easy. For example, look at Crawford railway station. I added,620,1 (well actually I had copied the code from Auchencastle railway station and not changed the URL - just corrected). I then went into the map and highlight the station symbol which gave me the latitude and longitude. A quick paste and copy got the coordinates into the infobox. So taking your list and a bit of manual work will get reasonably accurate coords into the infoboxes of disused stations. --Stewart (talk | edits) 19:41, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Excellent bot work, Anome, as usual. Thanks. We'll slowly get on & give you coords for the rest of the stations. It would be great to get the UK coord backlog below 10k.
btw, I'm still coming across articles which don't have coord missing ... are you still planning more coord missing bot runs? --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:30, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Yes, but it will need a new database dump before I can do it, unless I really want to load the servers down by querying them in real time. -- The Anome (talk) 21:15, 25 November 2008 (UTC)


Would you mind updating User:The Anome/Coord missing scorecard? Perhaps you could do it once a week (or 2 weeks), but I was interested in seeing what it looks like now. SpencerT♦C 00:37, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Done. -- The Anome (talk) 15:56, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Thank you very much. Also notice that Nepal went from 181 to 515 on the two days, so that offset the overall number a bit. SpencerT♦C 21:56, 19 November 2008 (UTC)


Something for you here. Efficacy is minded to find coords for the stations, and I wonder if you'd consider extending your bot to put in the external link to NPEMAP as well as {{coord}}? thanks --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:14, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

FYI #2[edit]

Wikipedia:Bot requests - Sub-categorise 30,000 articles.... --Tagishsimon (talk) 03:01, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi there, as you see from the link above I volunteered to change the templates. Since I noticed your bot recently started to do the same thing, I was wondering if I should pull by BRFA? I don't want to make the work any harder for you to complete. Let me know, thanks. §hep¡Talk to me! 21:07, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
Yes, please. I'm working systematically through the list: I should have > 70% of U.S. missing-coordinate articles re-coded by the end of the week. I'll then need to do a case analysis of the ones that have not been caught by the current pass, in order to create new rules for recognizing those, and do extra passes to catch those. Once that's done, I would expect a hard core of only a few hundred articles would remain to be done by hand to complete the process.
The next step after that is to recode the UK articles.-- The Anome (talk) 21:14, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
Will do. §hep¡Talk to me! 02:28, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Just FYI...[edit]

The block of Shippoopy may have been unjustified... see Shipoopi. —Ceran (talk) 15:01, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Not sure about that but if you look at his first unblock request you think otherwise. I was just coming here to let Anome know that he has request a new name. JodyB talk 15:18, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Based on their comments, I can't say I can see much prospect of their being unblocked. -- The Anome (talk) 19:39, 22 November 2008 (UTC)


Hi, you removed the PROD notice on the article. The editor which reinstated it removed contrary to WP:PROD, so I removed it again and left a note on his talk page. WP:AfD might be his next course of action. — BillC talk 12:32, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Disused stations[edit]

I noticed, whilst we're on stations, that we don't have all of them listed in the Nov 2008 page - I've just come across Hipperholme railway station, for instance. No {{coord missing}} on it, but equally no {{coord}}. Not sure if you fancy fishing for these ... not sure, either, where you're up to with looking for candidates for {{coord missing}}.

I do appreciate there's only one of you, so this is just a FYI not a nag. But you might want to consider whether we might ask Shep, to share some of the bot load? --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:42, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Happy Thanksgiving![edit]

Happy Thanksgiving!

I just wanted to wish those Wikipedians who have been nice enough to give me a barnstar or smile at me, supportive enough to agree with me, etc., a Happy Thanksgiving! Sincerely, --Happy Thanksgiving! Sincerely, A NobodyMy talk 02:45, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! -- The Anome (talk) 18:29, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
You're welcome! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 21:20, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

<geo> markup[edit]

Can you give me any more information or ideas about how that might work. I'm not after details, i'm just curious. --smadge1 (talk) 03:47, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

I imagine that adding things like coordinate and format conversions (I already have suitable code) could easily be slotted into that framework. -- The Anome (talk) 03:50, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, will be some good reading for me over the weekend :D --smadge1 (talk) 03:52, 28 November 2008 (UTC)


Hello! I have set up Wikipedia:Editor review/A Nobody should you wish to comment. Please note that I am notifying a handful of experienced editors who are familiar with me as I am particularly interested in anything they have to add. If you do not wish to comment, that is fine too. All the best! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 21:20, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

When modifying[edit]

I noticed this when I did the Ohio articles by hand, and I think I found an issue. For instance take Sandy and Beaver Canal, that canal is in both Ohio and Pennsylvania; yet it was only tagged with {{coord missing|Ohio}} (which was already there) and not with {{coord missing|Pennsylvania}}. I also noticed this problem with roads that cross between states over rivers, rivers, canals, and metropolitan areas. In these cases, since Ohio was the only state broken out, I added coord missing|Ohio and left the United States tag. It seems the US tag was modified to Ohio and there's an extra Ohio tag. Wouldn't it be best to add both states instead of one for articles such as these? I think a pretty simple modification to coord missing would makes this type of action easier by allowing a second parameter (or third or fourth) to be able to be passed within the template. Thoughts? §hep¡Talk to me! 01:30, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Currently, my automatic categorization code only finds a single state per place, because of limitations in the shortest-path first-match approach I used. Based on the U.S. experience, I've rewritten the code for the UK subcategorization to fix this, by performing an exhaustive search: this appears to catch these cases properly. I need to do more QA before I let it loose on these cases, however, so I'm only going to tag unambiguous cases for now. If this works properly, I can go back later and fix all these special cases in the U.S. dataset. It's probably easier to use two {{coord missing}} templates in these cases, rather than modifying the template. -- The Anome (talk) 01:38, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
Awesome, figured it was better to make sure you knew of the issue than let it go. Thanks for all the hardwork. §hep¡Talk to me! 02:20, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
You're welcome. Thanks for the heads-up. -- The Anome (talk) 02:33, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Coordinates for Chitose Dam[edit]

The Anomebot2 recently added coordinates to Chitose Dam: (Adding geodata: coord|35|40|16.54|N|139|45|59.30|E|region:JP-13_type:landmark_source:dewiki|display=title). This data is way off. The dam in question is located in Hokkaido. The coordinates are from Tokyo. Source is listed as dewiki. Is that the German Wikipedia? I find no article there relating to the Chitose Dam. What went wrong?--imars (talk) 21:57, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

It was a mistake in the de:Ōji_Seishi article in the German Wikipedia, introduced by de:Benutzer:Alexbot, and corrected there a month later, but still present in the most recent dumpfile (see article history). Hopefully this is a rare case: please let me know if you see any other similar errors, and I'll perform a more detailed investigation to see if I can find and fix that class of errors. -- The Anome (talk) 02:08, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


That doesn't really make sense. If it clearly meets any of the criteria for speedy deletion, why not just tag it? I've had many other admins tell me that afd and speedy can overlap. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshellsOtter chirpsHELP) 18:33, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Because if a significant reasoned argument can be made on the AfD for keeping it, it's no longer a clear cut A7. On the other hand, where there's clear consensus for deletion, and the speedy criteria are still met, the article can be deleted and the AfD speedy-closed at the same time: which is what I just did.
That's what's meant by speedy-deletion and AfD being possible at the same time. Why tag, when you can delete and close there and then? And if you can't delete and close there and then, why tag? (If you're not an admin, you still don't need to tag: requesting speedy deletion on AfD will have the desired effect: a clear delete/speedy delete consensus in AfD will result in an admin speedy-closing the AfD soon anyway.) -- The Anome (talk) 18:38, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Disused stations #2[edit]

Looking at the stations ticked off in this run it occurs to me to ask, is there any point in bot-based addition of {{coord}} to them, such that we get coordinates consistently in the top right? IMO it's not ideal that some articles use a gridref as the primary locator, others use lat & long in coord. Equally, two coordinate sources on a single page also not good. Your thoughts? (Great Anomebot2 work, btw. Lots of lovely French & German coords going down very nicely. Thank you for them all.) --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:59, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

An {{oscoor}} --> {{coord}} run should follow within the next day or so, so there's no need to add coord tags to them yourself. -- The Anome (talk) 00:48, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 Done -- The Anome (talk) 13:31, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
An update of User:The Anome/Coord missing scorecard would be handy, if you'd be so kind. thanks --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:06, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
Sometime in the next couple of days: I need to re-jig it to handle the subcategories properly. -- The Anome (talk) 00:48, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

watchlist question[edit]

i have Template:Recent changes article requests on my watchlist, but changes like this never come up on my watchlist. any ideas why? Kingturtle (talk) 22:34, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

That's strange: it appears in mine. Do you have "namespaces = all" set up in the menu options at the top of that page? -- The Anome (talk) 22:37, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
Fixed it. Thanks. Kingturtle (talk) 22:40, 8 December 2008 (UTC)


You're wonderful!!! Perhaps when you apply them you can code the bot to add the coordinates within the infoboxes and add "Nepal" in the pushpin map= so it also produces the infobox map pin too? ANyway I've only a few more districts to do see Village Development Committee The Bald One White cat 13:24, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

VDCS. Nope, you're including the municipalities as well. There are over 100 municipalities or urban areas in Nepal which aren't VDCs. Look at the municipal headquarters or towns in most districts and they aren't VDCs. There might be 4000 and something "cities, towns and villages" for in terms of Nepalese government administration not all of them are classed as VDCs. Really the VDC page shoudn't include the municipalities but they are there to cover each district The Bald One White cat 09:32, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Ah. That would explain it. Could you fix the last six duplicate/disambiguation cases, please? I think that should be all that's needed for me to proceed. -- The Anome (talk) 09:37, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

There was only one error that was only a double linkage. The rest should be correct but I still have the remaining districts to complete. All of the doubles or linkage errors should have been sorted anyway when I dabbed them before starting The Bald One White cat 09:48, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

For example, the VDC page links twice to Sitalpati: in order to make things easier for the matching process, those should be disambiguated to point to Sitalpati, Janakpur and Sitalpati, Kosi. And similarly for the other examples.-- The Anome (talk) 09:53, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Well I've placed hat notes at the top of Tribhuwan Nagar so there shouldn't be a problem with telling which is which The Bald One White cat 12:21, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

I've now edited the page to distinguish between those two cases, and also dab'd the references to Rangsi, which should hopefully now make every one of the VDC/municipality links on that page point to a unique page name. I will now use this as an index to perform a 1:1 mapping between district/name pairs and article names. -- The Anome (talk) 12:37, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

You know if using that page is problematic why not just use the categories by district. See Category:Cities, towns and villages in Nepal and see them categorised by district of each zone The Bald One White cat 13:54, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

What were you thinking?[edit]

You split out List of identity card policies by country on 7 July 2006 but failed to police Identity document and the new article for consistency. Now we have two rapidly diverging messes. Great. Just great. And no one has the time to fix this. This is why I generally oppose splits and merges unless they are fully thought through in terms of the long-term maintenance costs. --Coolcaesar (talk) 18:31, 12 December 2008 (UTC)