User talk:Xeno/Archive 26

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive 25 Archive 26 Archive 27

Xenobot V

Hi Xeno, I was wondering if the bot can tag a list of articles as opposed to a category. Lionel (talk) 00:19, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes, but I'm not sure when I will have time to do bot work again. –xenotalk 21:32, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Copyvio by Y.bata

Y.bata (talk · contribs) created a some of pages in March 2007 and then became inactive. Examining the pages I discovered that: Connection Admission Control, UPC and NPC, Network Parameter Control, Network Resource Management and Priority control were all copied from various sources. I bet (almost) all of their edits are copied from another source. Most of the pages were linked to each other and in fact isolated by the rest Wikipedia. I don't know what action should be done further. Delete their revisions, oversight, investigate further? -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:25, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Simple deletion is probably enough, I think. I took a quick glance at the pages and they looked out-of-scope as well. Cheers, –xenotalk 12:30, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q1 2011


The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter
Volume 4, No. 1 — 1st Quarter, 2011
Fairytale left.png Previous issue | Next issue Fairytale right.png

Project At a Glance
As of Q1 2011, the project has:


To receive future editions of this newsletter, click here to sign up on the distribution list.

MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 03:20, 6 April 2011 (UTC)


Instead of playing devil's advocate it would be appreciated if you responded to the request for clarification. If you are not interested in clarifying such cases then you should not be involved on that board. SO I know it is drama (you asked for it by even looking at the page) but yes or no? It isn;t much to ask that clarification is given instead of a block. Cptnono (talk) 05:46, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

It quite obviously was a violation. –xenotalk 12:44, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Rename user

Hello Xeno! I am a user of ptwiki and recently I rename my account. I'm trying to rename my account on enwiki but I can't find the page where I can make the request, in order that the format of requests page from the two projects are different. Could you direct me to the correct page or manually rename my account?

I've already done the SUL search for the user name and I'm the only one who uses it.

The change would be from Willy oath to Willy Weazley.


Willy oath 15:12, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

This is Yes check.svg Done; you can use special:MergeAccount now. FYI, you could have followed the interwiki link to find the local project page =). –xenotalk 15:16, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
  • Face-smile.svg Thank you!

I followed the interwiki, but the pages are different. Everything is different between the enwiki and ptwiki. Not that I want to speak ill, but I think the Lusophone design is less complicated than the enwiki.

One of these days take a look at the project and see for yourself, then tell me what you think. But if portuguese it's trouble, change the language on the "Preferences".


Willy WeasleyAvada Kedavra! 18:53, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

No problem. Will definitely took a look to see if we can crib anything from our sister project =) –xenotalk 18:56, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Q about botlike edits

Xeno, do you think its worthwhile to warn Crosstemplejay (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) about his multiple welcome templates a minute to new users? I only bring it up because I keep seeing him pop up in recent changes today because of all the edits. Thanks. Syrthiss (talk) 13:06, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

At the very least you should let him know that we typically don't send a welcome note to users who have not edited yet. –xenotalk 13:08, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
Ok, thanks. Syrthiss (talk) 13:12, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
Hmm, still concerned. I left him notes yesterday and I kind of took away from his reply that he would try to slow down / not welcome users who hadn't posted yet...but he's apparently still doing it today. He's also editing User:Crosstemplejay with his milestones of edits, showing that he has gone from 500 edits to 1000 over the past couple days. All those edits are welcome templates to new accounts. Any advice? Syrthiss (talk) 17:16, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
Maybe direct him to Wikipedia:Welcoming committee#Users without any edits? The thing is, there isn't really any kind of policy/guideline prohibiting what he is doing. It does seem like he has come down with a case of editcountitis, though. –xenotalk 17:23, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
Heheh I know, thats why I'm looking for guidance. That was my feeling on the matter, that there's nothing prohibiting it. Maybe I'll give it a few more days and see if he slows down, and if not I can point that out to him. I don't want to bug him or make him feel I'm stalking. I seriously wouldn't have noticed it, except he keeps popping up in recent changes and I went to warn a new user for vandalism and found one of his welcomes already there. ;) Syrthiss (talk) 17:29, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
Perhaps you might point out that the community has perennially rejected the idea of using a bot to welcome new users, and his actions are not far off from what a bot would do. Also, turning a redlinked talk page into a bluelink for a user who has not edited means that the new users' first (potentially vandalistic) edits will not attract as much scrutiny as would someone with both of their userlinks still being red. –xenotalk 17:36, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
I would actually strongly urge him to stop! High-speed mass-edits need consensus, and if he's welcoming accounts without any edits en-masse he's actually editing outside established consensus. We had situations like this before, and it's somewhat codified in WP:MEATBOT. Explicit consensus is certainly required once his type of edits are challenged. Amalthea 18:23, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
Yes! That works... Try that =] –xenotalk 18:32, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I left him another note pointing him at Xeno's link for the welcoming committee guideline, and hopefully it doesn't come off as bitey. I didn't link MEATBOT yet, because I'm not sure the 'sacrificing quality for quantity' applies in this case. He has only misclicked a couple times and placed welcomes on people's userpages instead of user talks, tho one could certainly interpret the editing against the established consensus as sacrificing quality. In any case, thanks to both of you for your advice. Syrthiss (talk) 18:40, 13 April 2011 (UTC)


There is an adminship nomination that is over and should be closed. Just wondering if you could close it. mauchoeagle 14:33, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Hmm- no, because I was a participant in the RfA. But don't worry, another bureaucrat will get to it shortly. –xenotalk 14:42, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
Crats who participate in RfAs cannot close them. Well you learn something new everyday. mauchoeagle 14:43, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
Yes - any time an editor participates in any discussion, they should not be the one closing the same discussion. This applies to RfAs, AfDs, RfCs, and so forth. –xenotalk 14:47, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
Are there anymore 'crats who are editing and can close the RfA that you know. mauchoeagle 16:09, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
The general rule of thumb is to allow 12 hours to elapse from the scheduled end time before trying to actively hunt down a closer. In any case, it looks like TRM is getting to it as we speak. –xenotalk 16:19, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

archiving problem

Hi Xeno, I've got one talk page that isn't archiving, Talk:Mexican-American War. Miszabot should have worked by now but hasn't. I haven't been able to figure this one out. There is only one subpage and that is Archive 1. I'm not sure if the herky-jerky fighting on that page over the dash vs. hyphen and page moves has done this or not. Could you check this one? Thank you,
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 01:33, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm (so far) stumped on that one. No blacklisted links in source or target. At first I thought maybe the source and target had mismatched dashes, but that doesn't appear to be the case either. –xenotalk 12:51, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
Should I post at VPT? Also, I'm not sure when I did this, if something else needs to happen to kickstart the bot to return. Does the bot cache pages that it shouldn't index? Thank you for looking, btw.
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 16:52, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Quarterly run for WP:CHICAGO

If I recall last quarter you passed this along to another user, but I am going to request the quarterly WP:CHICAGO tagging run from you again and let you pass it on if you wish. I apologize for waking the sleeping barnstar.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:59, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

No problem. I'm currently seeking a replacement operator. –xenotalk 13:11, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Bot flag to Yobot B

Hi. Can you please give bot status to the approved bot User:Yobot B. Here's the link. -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:11, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Looks like this is still in discussion. –xenotalk 13:29, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
Yes. Ignore my request. Discussion is now on IRC. Thanks. -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:51, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

SAFE Port Act/Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006

You may want to weigh in on what to do on Talk:SAFE Port Act#Merger with Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006?, as there is not yet a consensus on the fate of the articles. OCNative (talk) 03:02, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the note; I have commented there. –xenotalk 15:55, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Quarterly run for WP:CHICAGO

What is going on?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:18, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Songs

Hi, about 12 months ago you helped out considerably by adding and assessing song articles with the use of the bot. Is there any chance you could spend some of your valuable time running the bot again within the terms agreed last time? Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 07:49, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

I'll be inactive for a while. Not sure how long. I am looking for a replacement to pick up Xenobot Mk V's tasks. –xenotalk 02:21, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
Check with User:Anomie. Her bot has a ton of tasks already, a couple more couldn't hurt. I wish you well and good luck in your offline endeavors and hope to see you around Wikipedia again soon. Take Care, Dude. :) - NeutralhomerTalk • 04:18, 24 April 2011 (UTC)


This seems rather sudden :p Any reasons why you're suddenly becoming inactive for an indeterminate amount of time that you'd be willing to share with the general public, or is it personal? demize (t · c) 04:03, 24 April 2011 (UTC)


I noticed you had gone inactive - hope all is well with you and as you are looking for another bot to take on MkV tasks I am going to assume this is a long term absence.

As a sideline please remember that you will be much missed, as will your common-sense attitude and more than welcoming personal behaviour.

If there was anyway for me to help you I would, however I fear that we will not see you for some time so best wishes and try not to forget about us - the normal distribution curve is starting to flatline without people like you m8, those who keep the two polar extremes from bickering endlessly are always the most needed :¬) Chaosdruid (talk) 19:17, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar

Barnstar of Reversion2.png The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
I, Mikhailov Kusserow, hereby award Xeno with The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar for outstanding achievement in countering vandalism. — Mikhailov Kusserow (talk) 09:28, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Awarded Barnstar

Tireless Contributor Barnstar.gif The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
For all your contributions and hard work on the encyclopedia, I am pleased to present Xeno with this Tireless Contributor Barnstar. — Mikhailov Kusserow (talk) 07:04, 5 May 2011 (UTC)


Hi. mebbe you could perk-up? ;) Barong 03:18, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Xeno will be back eventually, just give him a chance. demize (t · c) 14:26, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Kingbotk AWB Plugin * Added File-Class support

Kingbotk AWB Plugin

Non-existent WP:USURP pages

Please forgive me for posting this message here but whatever I did, I could not get a response from usurpation talk pages. My problem is that I can't find the WP:USURP pages for these Wikipedias. Do you have any ideas? Thanks in advance! — Ekin(talk·@) 12:25, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

You can ask at ms:Perbincangan Pengguna:Aurora. That's a bureaucrat's talk page; speaks English. (talk) 12:50, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks a lot. Any help on the rest? — Ekin(talk·@) 13:05, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
try here and here; or wait for xeno; iz his job, i'm just an ip. see also: sulutil:Ekin. (talk) 13:21, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks again. Seems like you are not just an IP! — Ekin(talk·@) 14:09, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
( now has a bs:WP:USURP shortcut) If the project doesn't have an interwiki link at WP:USURP, then just visit the interwiki page linked at WP:CHUS because it probably means they deal with them all in a single location. If no interwiki link there, check m:SR/UC to see if it is a wiki handled by Stewards at meta. –xenotalk 14:15, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks a lot for your help. I'll try to find my way through. By the way, I hope you and Mr. IP resolve issues. Have a nice day! — Ekin(talk·@) 14:27, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Welcome back

Glad to see you're back and editing again. On that note, I'm back too. Congrats on being elected an arb while I've been gone. Steven Zhang The clock is ticking.... 14:44, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, and welcome back to you as well =) –xenotalk 14:46, 2 June 2011 (UTC)


not the bar owner, but all of the other three. (talk) 14:01, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

cryptic message is cryptic! –xenotalk 14:03, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
You know what the term for a group of vultures is? a committee. (talk) 14:12, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
Oh! I get it now. The complete lack of surprise... –xenotalk 14:15, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
I've not been surprised since February. (talk) 14:23, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
In a certain sense, you are fortifying the walls from within. –xenotalk 14:32, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
I had a bit of trouble parsing your comment, last night. Understand that from my perspective, I've been under siege for years, and in that context it's useful to fortify the walls from within. You're of course referring to the gaol walls, but that presumes that the sentence was just. I got a bum-rap. Sure, I socked and evaded restrictions, but my core intent has always been the protection of the project from bias and poor editing. See monitor[ing] Coolcat: with the view to bringing problems he caused to the attention of the community. That's a *good* thing; we're supposed to find collaborative solutions. But I get maligned as a stalker, and little shits are free to clearly state that they consider me a stalker in the real-world criminal sense of the word. The AC, by allowing such toxic terminology to be freely used in reference to myself, has done a lot to feed the toxic elements of this benighted site. When it comes to Merridew, there are no fuckin' rules and any idiot gets a free pass to attack me. Most of the arbs, indeed most editors, were not here for the genesis of this; some may have read some of the old case pages, but that's no substitute for actual knowledge of what really happened. It is part of the nature of a wiki that whoever harps on a message loud enough and long enough will convince a fair number of people that there's some truth to their shite. I have not stalked or harassed anyone. What I have done is opposed a bigot who was disruptive and opposed his enablers, and I've also opposed other disruptive users and their enablers. Where's my defender of the wiki barnstar (nb: wc ran rickk off for whom that barnstar is named).
The fact is that this six-year long story has been a fuck-up all along. I have apologized for going outside the socking lines, and for evading the ancient restrictions. I have hewn to good advice and AC restrictions for three years and have done more good here than most participants. I was offered a road back, and thought that it would be a good precedent to set; that users can return to grace and put a past behind them. But I no longer believe that the wiki is capable of such things.
Ever hear of a Pecking Party?cite
"a pecking party, where a group of hens, seeing a spot of blood on one of their number, will peck that hen to death."
see also: a typical thread at ani...
This place becomes less an encyclopedia and more an experiment in pure power-building everyday. What's the AC defending? Their power. What's the core rationale for keeping me restricted? My defying that power after three years of demonstrating that I can abide and do good. The argument that I need to be restricted to one account is absurd; I've a distinctive approach to the wiki and have made no effort to hide the various IPs and accounts I've used. I've let someone know about them, every time. The likes of Risker are not seeking to avoid future issues with multiple accounts, they're seeking to avoid setting the precident of ever fulling rehabilitating a banned user (and in her case, getting back at me for calling her on shite and to aid those at my heels). (talk) 10:11, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
I've been quite clear that I will not abide by restrictions that should have been lifted ages ago. If the committee wants to unleash the thugs to beat a few IPs to a bloody pulp over a joke account, and have a fair number of reasonable editors be appalled by it, I'm happy to oblige. 'Jack' was always a mirror to the community, anyway. Gotta go, (talk) 14:45, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
I think this whole thing took a sharp downhill with this edit. Still don't understand that one. –xenotalk 15:01, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
You have to see it in the light of the chronologically previous comment [1]: "I'm certainly not going to support lifting a restriction that is being flaunted repeatedly", and the utter hubris of "Frankly, if not for the defiance in creating these additional accounts, I'd have seriously considered lifting all of the remaining sanctions" in the comment above that one.
You are right though, that those two edits mark the sharp downturn in events, quite contrary to Jack's very reasonable expectations. There he was, like a prisoner tantalised with a promise of freedom, when the gates were slammed shut in his face. I'm not surprised by his response in the circumstances, and you really shouldn't be either. --RexxS (talk) 23:45, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
My personal favourite: "worthy of a smackdown". Epic. What do we have to do to be worthy of a smackdown? At what point is Coren going to smack me down? Does he have the right? Does anyone? The sheer pomposity of it leaves me speechless. Jack scuttled his accounts with one hour of this post. Coincidence? I think not --Diannaa (Talk) 03:32, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
++First they came… (talk) 14:23, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
Calling a disruptive user a "little shit" will do it; that's where I labeled a Jimbo:action a "Royal Smackdown". He then called her a "toxic personality" (but quickly backpeddled to decrying "toxic behavior"). And then he agreed to get out of the blocking business and the founder-bit was neutered, too. (doesn't anyone appreciate the multiple meanings of wikt:founder?). Broadly speaking, he was right about "our having been too tolerant, for too long, of toxic personalities." We all really know who they really are; the strident little shits that infest ani and afd (and elsewhere, always moar shite going on somewhere). (talk) 14:08, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Things went south with Coren's comments, but it really started with Risker's comment. She previously voted to "commend [me] for a clean return" and the bit (2.) re my "transitioning from a formal mentorship to unrestricted editing" (my bold;). Now she's after permanent restriction. As I said, I see Risker as involved, and her continued participation makes the entire process illegitimate. Want me to go into detail in public? I can say some of it. Somewhere it says to bring recusal requests up on an arb's talk page, but hers was semi'd and I was on only an IP at the time. She's just un-semi'd it, but I see that as bait to reply to Doc9871's continued dogging of me.

Also, technically I didn't create en:user:Merridew; you (xeno) did when you usurped it for me. That was an entirely legitimate request for anti-impersonation reasons and because Gimmetoo was rudely referring to me simply as "Merridew". He's another that's been dogging me for a year, and Risker waded in there, too. The net effect of these years of restriction is that anything goes when it comes to me; truth is I've received a hundred times as much as harassment and bad faith as I've ever been accused of. And it's all due to the various ACs having failed to ever resolve anything; they just prolong things. This failure, repeated in many cases, is *why* this project has gone toxic. The committee is craven before the mob of anyones and feeds their taste for blood.

Motion 5 is all fucked-up. Multiple arbs are saying they prefer sink-or-swim, but have not voted for it. My take-away is that unexpressed, back-room shite is driving that. The fix is in; Jack will be fucked forever. So, I'm left with the option of illustrating this. I've not been doing so in a disruptive manner, just in a really embarrassing manner (and constructive re articles). (talk) 06:59, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

You can keep illustrating it (adding bricks to the wall); or make an account, edit with it (and it alone) for three to six months, and then seek to have the restrictions lifted again. And do what I suggested to you back in January: give a detailed account of all the good, constructive work you've done with the request. During the request, don't post in the sections you're not supposed to or reply in anger/sarcasm. And, of course, don't withdraw the request at the first sign of trouble. –xenotalk 14:11, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
Well, at this point, I've clearly said I'll not continue under restriction, and I'm not going to back-off from that. If I create a new account it will be blocked, or I'll be tied to it. There's no doubt that I've done a lot of good work, either; many have seen it and have attested to it. People post outside of their sections all the time; mostly I was doing so in response to Coren's comment about staying within the lines. I withdrew that prior request because that's where I realized that the fix was in; I have no faith whatsoever that the committee will get their foot off my throat in three months, six months, or three more years. The project is seriously into failure now, and I only expect it to get worse. (talk) 14:23, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
Well, not sure what more I can suggest. That is my advice on navigating yourself into the position you desire - you must admit that your methods aren't working. –xenotalk 14:36, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
The advice is appreciated, although I think we've a misunderstanding of what I still expect out of this project. You see, I'm fine with where this seems to be going. Terima kasih, (talk) 07:14, 3 June 2011 (UTC)


Welcome back Xeno :) I'm looking to hide a few of those horrid editnotices myself, but what exactly are each of the notices you've hidden? I can deduce from the CSS ID of some of them what they are but others are... harder to tell. If you could tell me that'd be appreciated. Thanks in advance. —James (TalkContribs)8:23pm 10:23, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm hiding the central notice, the site notice, the watchlist messages (MediaWiki:Watchlist-details), changing username editnotes, various AN/ANI editnotices, village pump editnotices, a couple of the sidebars, a bunch of the copyright and other warning and help text at the bottom of the editing display... that probably about sums it up. –xenotalk 14:22, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
Ah, thanks for that Xeno. —James (TalkContribs)10:36am 00:36, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Welcome back

Sort of missed the earlier thread, sorry :p Been busy with school, learning Japanese, and generally being lazy and not doing anything other than listen to music, but school ends in less than a month so I'll be around more. How'd RL go? demize (t · c) 02:38, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

No worries... RL is an ongoing saga... but it's stabilized, somewhat. Good luck with the school stuff =) –xenotalk 13:10, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. Shouldn't have to worry too much on my part though, this semester is good :p demize (t · c) 20:54, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

BOFH is fictional, threatening is Cyberbullying

Hiya, I'm very sad to say that a Wikipedian Bureaucrat has cyberbullied me. If you think I'm going too far, I'm just really sensitive. Please stop it, because I don't like it and if you did it for fun, a simple "Done" for the renaming process would've been good. If you continue to do this to me I will go find the page where I can complain about a sysop going too far. Thank you for your time. --Jeffwang (Talk) (Contributions) 21:23, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

That is indeed really sensitive; nevertheless, I've removed the text in question from the page as it seems to bother you. I'm not sure why you were so dead set on having the request processed outside the given timeframes: you should keep in mind that volunteer bureaucrats don't like being bullied into fulfilling requests out-of-process either. In any case, it's done now. Cheers, –xenotalk 21:34, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Mk V

Hi Xeno! Just wondering if you'll be taking the Mk V out for a spin soon? Lionel (talk) 22:59, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Hmm - I was worried that someone was wondering about that! ;> I have been trying hard to find a replacement operator ever since EdoDodo (talk) went AWOL but maybe I'll just have to roll up my sleeves and do it myself... =) –xenotalk 23:02, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
Edo should realize good jobs like this are hard to come by in this economy! Lionel (talk) 02:41, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
What's required for a mere mortal to run the bot? I was a CS major in college... Lionel (talk) 02:43, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
Have you ever worked with WP:AWB? If you were a computer science major, it shouldn't be too hard to run AWB with my settings files to complete the task(s). Send me an email and I'll email you back the settings files and some instructions. –xenotalk 14:35, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Username change

Could you please change my username; I'd like it changed to mcan. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by McCann51 (talkcontribs) 23:12, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

"Mcan" exists; you'll need to follow the instructions at WP:USURP. –xenotalk 23:23, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for your kind words in closing my unsuccessful RfA. A personal comment was not required, but completely appreciated. Thanks, and I hope that next time you can share better news! Sincerely, jsfouche ☽☾Talk 02:38, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

No problem =) –xenotalk 14:35, 7 June 2011 (UTC)


Please see here As your post was a while ago, I do not know if you are still monitoring my talk. Please respond there and let me know if I can get past this AWB mess. —Justin (koavf)TCM☯ 23:54, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Have replied there. –xenotalk 12:14, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
See also here In case you don't watch that page. —Justin (koavf)TCM☯ 23:56, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for the note. –xenotalk 12:14, 8 June 2011 (UTC)


2011, I assume? :p sonia 01:03, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes! Thanks for the catch =) –xenotalk 12:14, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Flood flag

Please assist According to m:Meta:Flood flag, I can have Special:UserRights amended to keep any of my AWB runs out of Special:RecentChanges. Do you think that's advisable and can you help me with this? Also, I took a look at the e-mail you sent me and I'm no regular expressions whiz (my edits with AWB are usually simple find-and-replaces, edits to redlinks, or done by hand--as I have been with the {{WikiProject Seattle}} replacements.) What do you want to accomplish with these files? —Justin (koavf)TCM☯ 02:16, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

It has to be done on meta; admins can't change permission levels of flooder, stewards, founders, etc.—a steward must do it. GFOLEY FOUR— 02:35, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
Ah To meta I go. Thanks. (I'm unwatching this page now.) —Justin (koavf)TCM☯ 04:50, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
FWIW, I don't think 'flooder' is something that we assign to enwp users, even via Steward. –xenotalk 12:46, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
Replied re: tagging here. –xenotalk 12:46, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

WP Tagging

Hi Xeno, WP Essex has just merged with WP East Anglia. I was wondering whether it would be possible for your bot to place a tag on all of the pages that is tagged with the WikiProject Essex Banner with the WikiProject East Anglia Banner automatically enable the Essex Task force part and add the current page ratings to the WP East Anglia Banner. Thanks, -- Thomas888b (Say Hi) 19:48, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

I actually haven't been able to run my bot much at all these days. Koavf (talk · contribs) may be able to help. –xenotalk 12:55, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Account Rename

Hi Xeno, I just wanted to let you know I appreciated you taking the time to renaming my account. Thank you ever so much! Have a nice day (or night, wherever you're located). :-) Kiranerys-Talk 20:17, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Happy to help =) –xenotalk 12:55, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

A simple inquiry

I am new to Wiki.

Do Wiki administrators preside over particular subjects or areas of interest? If so, how do I know who that administrator is, in case I want to contact them on that subject? Ol'Campy (talk) 20:22, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, not as such. Certain editors (who may be administrators) will usually tend to the subejcts that interest them, but there's nothing 'official' about this. If you have questions/concerns about a particular subject, it's probably best to post to the talk page of that subject. If it's something that's of a more sensitive/private nature, you could contact the OTRS Volunteer response team at Wikipedia:Contact us. –xenotalk 12:55, 11 June 2011 (UTC)


Hi Xeno. Just wondering if you intended to remain inactive on Racepacket. NW (Talk) 19:43, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I haven't been following it and I don't want to mess up the majorities. Thanks, –xenotalk 20:27, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
Sounds good. NW (Talk) 22:15, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Russavia-Biophys amendment

Thank you for your comments! I commented here. It seems there is a consensus to at least remove the topic ban. Is any particular reason to wait? I know about an AE request related to Russavia, but it is not related to amendment, and I am not going to comment there. Frankly, this is none of my business. Biophys (talk) 14:32, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

I think we're waiting on a formal motion to be proposed. –xenotalk 14:35, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
It was placed by Coren. Thank you for voting! Biophys (talk) 17:12, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

name change

Hi Xeno, Thanx for considering my name change request. [ ] Yes, I have read and am completely aware of using real world names. I am completely comfortable with it. I would be really happy if you accepted my name change request. Please do so. Thank you. :) Msrafiq (talk) 15:02, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done, you're all set. Cheers, –xenotalk 15:05, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you Xeno, I have successfully logged into my new (or rather old ;) ) account. Thank you. Dr Pukhtunyar Afghan (talk) 15:20, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm grateful for your help renaming the username. Blessings. Euclides (talk) 17:23, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

No worries, both =) –xenotalk 17:30, 15 June 2011 (UTC)


I typed "bev perdue" into the search box earlier today and got nothing, and created Bev perdue to redirect. But I thought this was not I losing it?  Frank  |  talk  17:12, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Having read Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(capitalization)#Software_characteristics, I guess the previous situation I was thinking of involved a wikilink rather than a search in the search box. I dunno. But I guess that redirect I created above is appropriate.  Frank  |  talk  17:20, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Indeed- it shouldn't be necessary as the search box is case-insensitive. I just typed rick santorum (small case) and got to the relevant page, despite there being no Rick santorum redirect. So, yes, maybe you are losing it? =] (Did you misspell it maybe?) –xenotalk 17:28, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
Dunno. I was pretty sure I had it right, but now I've deleted the redirect I created and all is well. (After I restored Bev Perdue, which I mistakenly deleted before deleting the redirect page. Doh!) Maybe I had typed "bev purdue" instead. IDK. Thanks.  Frank  |  talk  19:15, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
No prob. (Create that one maybe? =) –xenotalk 19:16, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Changes to script

Hi Xeno. I've made some changed to DodoBot's script to add some more options and improve the way ratings are inherited. The main changes are:

  • There is a new option to untag a project while doing the tagging run. This will be used for the WP:SEATTLE request.
  • Disambig, List, FL, GA, and FA class ratings will now always be inherited, regardless of whether the project has opted in to inheriting, since there really isn't a reason why these shouldn't be inherited.
  • Inherited ratings for those classes will not be marked with |auto=inherit since these don't need checking by a human.
  • There is now an option to choose which classes should be inherited from the remaining five (stub, start, C, B and A).

Are all the changes alright with you or do you think some of them will cause problems? I haven't started using the new script yet, although I've committed the changes to the SVN repository so let me know if you have any issues with the changes. - EdoDodo talk 11:26, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Hm... As long as those requesting runs are fine with the changes, they're fine with me. The untag option sounds particularly useful. Though - one reason to still mark GA FA FL with "auto=inherit" is so that the requesting user can easily see which new high quality articles were added to the project in a tagging run (by way of the sortkeys used in the automatically assessed category) - I think Tony might use this method. Also, what if a tag had been marked "FA" or "GA" by someone but the page isn't actually so? If a project doesn't want ratings inherited at all, they should stil be allowed to opt-out. I am thinking of a project that is somewhat small in scope where the requesting user or the project wants to go over the tagged articles one-by-one for a deeper look and uses the unassessed category to guide them to the newly tagged articles. These are all probably edge cases, but in general I'd say that the finer grain control for the botop is available, the better. –xenotalk 12:32, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
Alright. How about these options for inheritance:
  • Yes: The bot op is then asked questions about assessment style (liberal, default, or conservative) and which classes should be inherited from (stub, start, C, B and A). The other classes (Disambig, List, FL, GA, and FA) are always inherited, but the bot op is asked whether these should be marked with |auto=inherit or not.
  • No: Nothing is inherited.
  • Obvious only: Only (Disambig, List, FL, GA, and FA) are inherited, and in conservative mode. The bot op can decide whether these should be marked with |auto=inherit or not.
That would give the bot op more control. What do you think? - EdoDodo talk 13:56, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
Yea, that would be perfect. –xenotalk 13:59, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Okay, changes made to the script. Because of all the extra options added, old config files will no longer work. I'll finish the more straight forward requests with the old script. When I move on to the more complex ones where I'll need the new options (WP:SEATTLE and WP:WMNHIST), I'll switch over to the new script and do some testing with it. - EdoDodo talk 14:10, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

By the way, would you mind if I created a requests page for DodoBot similar to yours, with some tweaks so that it matches the settings I need to supply to the bot more accurately? - EdoDodo talk 16:34, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
Not at all. And in fact, I'd like to redirect my page there once all the current requests are fulfilled ;> –xenotalk 16:55, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
Alright. I'll keep working through the requests and work on a requests page tomorrow. - EdoDodo talk 20:13, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Since Disambig, List, FL, GA, and FA are always inherited I see no reason to add |auto=. Especially for Disambig! Let's keep things simple. This could also be part of AWB's general fixes for talk pages. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:28, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

I mentioned two reasons above; ultimately I'd say it should be up to the requesting user to decide. Not so sure about adding autoassessment of any form to genfix matrix. –xenotalk —Preceding undated comment added 21:47, 16 June 2011 (UTC).
What about the Disambig class? -- Magioladitis (talk) 00:34, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Like I said, some requesting users may want to know all the pages that were assessed automatically. Should be their call. –xenotalk 01:08, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I've created a requests page for DodoBot. Could you try it out and tell me if you can think of any improvements for it? I'm still working through Xenobot's requests: have three more to go; should be done by the end of the week. - EdoDodo talk 11:11, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Looks good to me. You might consider transcluding it to User talk:DodoBot because most people, when wanting to complain about a bot, will go to the bot's talk page. Would be good for them to see the request in question in that case. But that's up to you because I think you have DodoBot doing other tasks too. –xenotalk 13:26, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Hmm... How about redirecting the bot's talk page to the requests page? I don't have DodoBot doing any other tasks at the moment, so should be alright. - EdoDodo talk 13:36, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
That works too. I think the reason I was using transclusion is because people could edit User talk:Xenobot Mk V to stop the bot; not sure if your bot has the same functionality. –xenotalk 13:42, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Nope, DodoBot doesn't stop on talk page edits since unfortunately that's not built into pywikipedia. So, I guess it makes sense to simply redirect the page. - EdoDodo talk 13:58, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for changing my Username


Thanks for changing my user name an moving over all my pages to the new account.


--EditMonkey (talk) 15:34, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

No prob. Cheers, –xenotalk 15:42, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Usurpation Request

Hi Xeno, I noticed you commented on my usurp request from a few days ago. You said to contact the dewiki (home wiki) about it, however it seems that they will not accept usurp requests if the target user has any sort of edits. Does this appear to be the case for you? RyanBecker (talk) 04:56, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I saw that. I don't know how strictly it's enforced. –xenotalk 21:13, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Bot edit summary

Hi Xeno. Would be nice if you could comment on DodoBot's edit summary on my talk page. - EdoDodo talk 11:13, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

I think this is mostly an issue because the work is requested on my bot's talk page. If it was at your bot's talk, people would find it immediately. Now that your request page is set up, and you've cleared Mk V's backlog (for which I am eternally grateful!), the edit summary you were using should be fine. –xenotalk 14:28, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
Yes, I agree. The last request is almost done... It got held up because the bot stopped abruptly due to an issue with login tokens (looks to be a problem with pywikipedia, not my script), but is now running again and should be done later today. - EdoDodo talk 07:47, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
Alright, the WP:SEATTLE request is finished, so the backlog is cleared Face-smile.svg - if you want to redirect it to DodoBot's request page now is the chance. Maybe you could clear the page and place a notice explaining to users that Xenobot Mk V is no longer active and to visit User talk:DodoBot/Requests to submit requests to DodoBot which has the same functionality, instead of an actual redirect, to avoid confusing users. - EdoDodo talk 12:02, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
Yep - that's what I had planned to do. –xenotalk 12:39, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
Done. Thanks again, –xenotalk 15:25, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Emailin checkuser

I went to the page WP:Checkuser, where under "hints and tips" it gives what looks like an email link to checkuser-l@... So I clicked on that. It isn't actually an email link, but takes you to this page, which says "To post a message to all the list members, send email to" so I did. DuncanHill (talk) 16:06, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I think that section is directed at checkusers (the section you wanted was Wikipedia:Checkuser#Contacting a checkuser) -I will add a clarifying note there later. –xenotalk 18:21, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
Done. –xenotalk 14:07, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

"Moved to talk page"

Are you sure this is a good idea? This almost always kills further discussion and hides a lot of valid points from others. --Tothwolf (talk) 03:31, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Why would it kill discussion? What makes you say the talk page is "hidden"? In any case, no one has wrote in that part for 6 days. The page is getting pretty long as it is, I thought moving discussion to the talk page made sense. Feel free to revert if you disagree. –xenotalk 03:45, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, it was getting pretty long. Experience has shown that people don't bother to look at the talk page in cases such as this, even moreso the longer the rest of the discussion gets. I don't think I'll revert it though because it looks like people haven't been reading the points which were brought up anyway. False sense of security...sigh. --Tothwolf (talk) 11:25, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Ever since it got subpaged there hasn't been much activity at all - but I think that may be more a factor of 'everyone who cared already weighed in', and there is just some latecomers trickling in now. My thoughts are that if it had started on a subpage, then the "discussion" would have occurred at the talk page in the first place (it was only on the project page because it was transplanted from the pump). –xenotalk 12:23, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
"Ever since it got subpaged there hasn't been much activity at all" Well, that seems to be the norm for discussions moved to a subpage. I still think such a proposal is going to need wider discussion than VPP can offer before a formal implementation can be adopted. --Tothwolf (talk) 12:29, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Request for help

Hello Xeno. I´ve requested a username change for an user from bswiki as his en is 0. But as I saw after that, the requested name already exist. So he has request a usurpation. The target name has only deleted edits, and the user who is requesting the usurpation is SUL owner. Even if the bot has complains, I can´t see a problem with usurpation. Is there possibility to rename him? If you have a question, just ping me on meta. Thanks in advance. --WizardOfOz (talk) 08:32, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Sure, I will process that soon. Cheers, –xenotalk 19:32, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Do you know if he wants the current account renamed? –xenotalk 19:41, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
He needs usurpation as Hattab is not his account on I didn´t saw that there is Hattab already as i requested renaming. --WizardOfOz (talk) 19:49, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Does he want me to rename Dino hattab (talk · contribs) to Hattab or does he want a fresh Hattab with no contribs? –xenotalk 20:36, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
To rename it. --WizardOfOz (talk) 20:37, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done; All set. –xenotalk 20:46, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks! --WizardOfOz (talk) 20:48, 26 June 2011 (UTC)


I don't speak "anchors": I'm sure you're swamped, but if one of your TPS has a moment, could someone explain to me what this does? Does it mean that thread is referenced elsewhere? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:35, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

I was simply trying to trim the number of headers used there (i.e. the number of sections displayed in the table of contents). Since your subsection only contained one comment, it didn't seem necessary to have its own header. The anchor allows your comment to still be linked: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee#SG followup. –xenotalk 13:38, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Ah, ha. Thanks for taking the time to respond :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:40, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

request for reply

I would be still be interested on your response to this[2].--Cube lurker (talk) 23:05, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

As your statement consisted strictly of your opinion on how we should have handled the case, followed by unfounded speculation about our motives for handling it how we did, I had intended to simply let it stand - conceding to you the last word. But if I had to respond, it would probably go something like this: Thank you for your comments, they have been noted and will be considered if similar situations arise in the future. I look forward to reviewing your candidacy in the upcoming Arbitration Committee Elections later this year.xenotalk 01:06, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
About what I expected. You all never disappoint.--Cube lurker (talk) 01:08, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
I shouldn't leave it like that. Yes, that was my strong oppinion of how the case should have been handled. And I posted here because I sincerely wanted your thoughts on why that was the wrong way to go. But snark I guess is better.--Cube lurker (talk) 01:15, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Xeno knows as well as you do that the chances of a non-administrator ever being elected to ArbCom are zero, so his "snark" was unworthy, although sadly typical of what we're seeing too much of these days. Malleus Fatuorum 01:21, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
I'm not sure about that. A non-administrator enjoyed 40% support in WP:ACE2010 (and probably would have seen a higher percentage had they not indicated their steadfast unwillingness to identify to the Foundation). –xenotalk 01:33, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
But it didn't happen, did it, and it will never happen until there are some serious changes made. Which there is clearly no will to make, and hence the project's obvious downward spiral. Malleus Fatuorum 01:51, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
I'm sure this time last year you would've similarly contended that a non-administrator would never be appointed to the Audit Subcommittee and given checkuser and oversight tools, but one was (though he went and picked up a mop shortly thereafter). See also: Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Archive 86#Should passing WP:RFA be a prerequisite for being granted CU or OS rights ? If Giano was willing to identify to the Foundation, I think he would have a fighting chance of actually being elected. I would say the same about you. –xenotalk 02:08, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
You may assume whatever you like, but what you ought not to do is assume that you are right. The thought of Giano or me being on ArbCom made me laugh for the first time today. I think that Giano would have been a great arbitrator, but others clearly thought differently. Malleus Fatuorum 02:53, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Yes, please excuse the snark - it's been a bit of a stressful week.
But if you re-read the way you phrased your comment, perhaps you will see that you really did not provide a meaningful avenue for further discussion.
To answer your question: it was my belief that the ideal outcome to the case request was some kind of conclusive finality - even though either route (desysop vs. do not desysop) would result in critical comments from one side or the other. Yes, we could have sent it for RFC/U or reconfirmation RFA but that's just another month or week of acrimonious discussion - and to what end? Consensus may have been firmly established, or it may have just generated a lot of heat - leaving some poor sap to try and sort out the result. It was brought to the committee, and we provided a ruling rather than passing the buck (see also [3]).
Nabla is now happily toiling away (nearly 500 edits since the decision was handed down). He's logged a couple of uncontroversial administrative actions. He really was quite a dedicated and productive administrator in 2009 and prior. If we had desysoped, or sent it back to the community, the likely result would have been the failure to realize the return of a positive contributor. Editor and administrator retention (and re-acquisition, after absence) is a real and present concern. Come back to me in a month or three, and let me know if you still think Nabla should have been defrocked. –xenotalk 01:31, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
No. The only thing you're concerned about is retaining your precious administrators. Regular editors are just cannon fodder. Malleus Fatuorum 01:54, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
It's disheartening that you think I'm not concerned about "regular editors", especially given my efforts this year in modifying the behaviour of several administrators who fell short of the mark in their observance of the Education and warnings section of the blocking policy (and the related guideline). –xenotalk 02:08, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
I could give you master classes in disheartening here on Wikipedia, but you'd have to open your eyes first. Malleus Fatuorum 02:50, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

WPUS Tagging list

I just wanted to ask you here rather than splinter the discussion at the ANI. If I provided a listing of the articles I intend to tag as WPUS, would that suffice? --Kumioko (talk) 02:24, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

You mean for your project-mates to vet? Yes, that seems appropriate. I'd recommend posting the list somewhere, posting a note about it to WT:WPUSA and giving it a week or two for discussion. –xenotalk 02:29, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
To be frank my project mates never had a problem with it. Its always editors outside the project that have a problem with it. --Kumioko (talk) 02:39, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Gotcha. –xenotalk 02:44, 29 June 2011 (UTC)


for the bot approval link for bcb! replying here since my comment was kind of peripheral to the discussion on delta's page anyhow, so delta doesn't need a 'new changes' banner. you can have it instead! :) Syrthiss (talk) 15:09, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

No problem. –xenotalk 15:11, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Some help

First, sorry it took me a couple days to get back to you, Im back up in Juneau and took a job working for a friend on her gillnetting boat, so I'm out on the water without internet for 3 or 4 days a week. I took your advice to claim the SUL from both commons and meta. Logging in on those works fine, but when I go to 'manage global account' from preferences on either of those, it asks me for my password again, which I give, and then tells me that it doesn't match the password on 'my home wiki' of sk. Im not entirely sure why it thinks i have a home wiki as it still shows no global account under that name. I might just be full on stupid, so any help would be appreciated. Thanks much. -- ۩ Mask 23:05, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

In order to claim the SUL, you will need more edits than any other 'Mask'. –xenotalk 23:20, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
Sounds like I'm about to become more active on commons then... Thanks much. -- ۩ Mask 23:47, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Archive 25 Archive 26 Archive 27