User talk:Cactus26

What was the symbolism of the crystal palace??? 74.78.232.31 (talk) 17:44, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure why you ask me this.--Cactus26 (talk) 11:12, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your Bot has amended several Allmusic references I recently made using the Cite / Template / Cite Web drop-down.
Am I entering the information into the Cite Web template incorrectly? or can't the Cite Web template cope with this new format?
Are there other sites I need to alter my references for, or is this just Allmusic
Arjayay (talk) 15:18, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You haven't made anything wrong, all ist specific to allmusic. The goal of bot action ist to encapsulate all external links to allmusic site. This leads to template in template construction when link is coded using {{Cite web}}. This ist somewhat uncommon but you can code external links in the same way the bot does if you want. You can also think of using {{Allmusic}} directly (w/o {{Cite web}}) using the parameters label and accessdate and omit parameter pure_url in this case.--Cactus26 (talk) 17:08, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, while it's nice that CactusBot is converting old Allmusic URLs into the template form, it is unnecessary because a bare URL will suffice. Additionally, I had recently updated the URLs for some articles, but the bot replaced the links with the template anyway. WesleyDodds (talk) 13:03, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We deicieded to convert all Allmusic urls to template form. Using a template offers more flexibility concerning future changes at allmusic site. Also it's easier to analyse existing links to allmusic if template is used in any case.--Cactus26 (talk) 13:29, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Who decided, if I may ask? Additionally, Allmusic isn't the only website that has updated URLs in its existence--it would seem more useful to update defunct Allmusic URLs to current ones and leave it at that, allowing editors on individual pages to decide whether or not to use templates (especially in the case of inline citations, where many editors do no use templates at all). WesleyDodds (talk) 13:47, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We discussed at disc. of template Allmusic. I think it's disadvantageous not to encapsulate external links, the common use of {{cite web}} without actually encapsulating the url is no good pratice. I compare this with dewiki where it is more common to encapsulate external links. This leads to greater flexibility avoiding to many defect external links.--Cactus26 (talk) 14:04, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This overlooks the fact that retrieval dates are not altered when the links are changed. Editors will need to view the links themselves in order to verify information, and the bot subverts every time it changes the link. WesleyDodds (talk) 02:24, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was worried about this concern too. But besides it would be rather complicated to change the retrival date of an embedding {{cite web}} updating the date would be the bigger subversion. Actually the bot doesn't change the link it was redirected to the exactly the same url before the bot edited the page. The link possibly changed it's meaning due to the reorganisation at allmusic, not beacause of the bot edit.--Cactus26 (talk) 07:26, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Cactus26. You have new messages at MSGJ's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

		The Rock music Barnstar
		I hereby award you this barnstar for your outstanding work on the migration of the Allmusic URL syntax to the new format and the related works on the {{Allmusic}} template. – IbLeo(talk) 18:30, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

		The Template Barnstar
		And I second the Rock music Barnstar and hereby thank you very much and award you one more barnstar for your work and cooperativeness in adopting {{Allmusic}} to the new URL syntax! BNutzer (talk) 19:52, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the nice barnstars! Almost more than I ever got in dewiki, where I have spent much more of my time :-)--Cactus26 (talk) 12:06, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What is the dashed line supposed to represent? I do not understand this graphic at all. --TimL (talk) 00:24, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The dashed line ist the axis of the shadow cone. Hope this helps.--Cactus26 (talk) 05:31, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Does CactusBot take requests? Could you use it to replace links to the defunct ourbrisbane.com with an archive copy at Wayback? - Shiftchange (talk) 22:03, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I did not discover your question until now. Sorry again, I'm busy this time. If your concern is not solved and if you want I will come back to you when I'm unengaged. Regards --Cactus26 (talk) 12:29, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Cactus26. You have new messages at HopsonRoad's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

See my further reply! User:HopsonRoad 14:17, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Eislinse aus Kammeis geht gut--es ist idiomatisch! I have replied a little further, as well. User:HopsonRoad 00:23, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article Fiescherhorn (disambiguation)‎ has been proposed for deletion. The proposed deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Thanks! ZachG (Talk) 12:27, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:41, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Cactus26. 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. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:AllMusic/PagesManually has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 01:46, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating Breccia Peak, Cactus26!

Wikipedia editor Boleyn just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Are you about to create the other two? At the moment, this is an invalid disambiguation page because 2 entries don't meet MOS:DABRL.

To reply, leave a comment on Boleyn's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Boleyn (talk) 08:23, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Boleyn: No. But the other two exist. And it's not ovious which one is the most imported. It would be missleading to leave the disambig page out. In dewiki we would never do so. But do what you want.--Cactus26 (talk) 08:29, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Cactus26. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Cactus26. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. 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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:09, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, per WP:BOTINACTIVE your bot has not met the activity requirements and will be de-flagged unless we hear from you before 10 January 2024. If you wish to continue operating your bot please indicate so; the discussion is at Wikipedia:Bots/Noticeboard § Inactive bots. Primefac (talk) 13:29, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]