User talk:Chris G/Archives/2012/February

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Chris G. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

This bot still sends me requests at User talk:OKelly. Could it please send it to User talk:Uhlan as I have changed my username. Cheers. Uhlan (talk) 06:25, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

fixed --Chris 06:46, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Uhlan (talk) 04:27, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

RFC bot is maintaining a red link as the following diffs should show. (diff1 diff2) Please correct this as soon as possible. – Allen4names 17:45, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

fixed --Chris 06:11, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

I added this RfC to the BIO page and the RfCbot supposedly fixed the link but then added it twice to the POL page instead. It looks correct in the following edit, but it is not listed on the BIO page. Not sure how to fix it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ACampaign_for_%22santorum%22_neologism&action=historysubmit&diff=474637924&oldid=474636046

Arzel (talk) 21:06, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Update, it actually does not appear to be listed anywhere and RfC Bot deletes it if you try to manually add it. Arzel (talk) 04:46, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

This seems to have been fixed, but thank you for bringing it too my attention. Feel free to poke me if it breaks again. --Chris 09:30, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Chris! Would it be difficult to modify the bot to generate noticeboard summaries (see WP:DASHBOARD) for talkpages here: {{Christianity-related talkpages}}? – Lionel ^(talk) 03:45, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

It would require some significant modification, but it is certainly doable. At the moment I do not quite have the time to work on it. Try placing a request for a new bot here. Sorry about the delay in replying. --Chris 09:29, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

I've just noted that on 4 Feb the bot removed my listed RfC from the Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Politics, government, and law and the Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Language and linguistics pages. It is my understanding that an RfC is to run for 30 days before bot removal. Has that changed or am I missing something here? Thanks. JakeInJoisey (talk) 13:28, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

You don't need to wikilink everything... my new messages bar keeps flaring up. The problem is almost fixed. --Chris 13:47, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

My apologies (and in advance for yet another "new message" flash). In the future, I'll try to be mindful of recipient online status before editing talk page comments. JakeInJoisey (talk) 13:52, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Well, really you had no idea of knowing if I was online or not, so don't feel like you have to apologise. Just in future, maybe just do it all in one edit instead of 3 ;) --Chris 13:55, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

(ec) Ok, thank you for drawing this to my attention. I'm not entirely sure what caused the problem, but resetting the rfc ids', seems to have fixed it. I'm hoping once I rewrite the bot to fail safer, and parse the pages better, errors like this will become much less of an occurrence. --Chris 13:55, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the courtesy of your timely response and fix. Now, as a bot magician, perhaps I'll plant a seed for some future demonstration of your legerdemain ;-) JakeInJoisey (talk) 14:02, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Dear Chris,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community HERE, were it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.

So a few things about the interviews:

• Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
• Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
• All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
• All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
• The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.

Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name HERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) 02:35, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Chris, a few days ago Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airports was added by RfC bot to the list of RfCs. I'm not sure why, although there was (much earlier) briefly a debate about raising an RfC for a discussion there. The entry in Wikipedia:Requests for comment/WikiProjects and collaborations is now causing confusion: please can you remove it? Thanks, --RFBailey (talk) 18:39, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Now that the Rfc template has been removed, it has removed it from the page. --Chris 04:12, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Please take a look at Wikipedia talk:Copyrights. Your bot removed an RfC tag from it as it was 30 days old. That particular discussion has had a long pause while we wait for legal input from the foundation so the RfC needs to remain open. Knowing that if I just reverted the bot, the bot would likely just remove it I instead re-added an RfC tag without a rfcid so that hopefully the bot would treat it as new. The bot did indeed add a new rfcid but then promptly removed the whole tag with its next edit. I'm assuming this is undesired behaviour from the bot. There should certainly be some way to keep RfCs listed beyond 30 days. Dpmuk (talk) 18:54, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

This, should fix it. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. --Chris 04:12, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Ahh, didn't think of that. Cheers. I know it's an odd situation which won't occur very often so as long as there is a work around it probably doesn't need anything more elegant. Dpmuk (talk) 07:06, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:Dead end. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 07:15, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Dear Chris G,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community HERE, where it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.

So a few things about the interviews:

• Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
• Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
• All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
• All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
• The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.

Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name HERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) 07:26, 12 February 2012 (UTC) Young June Sah --Yjune.sah (talk) 22:34, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Your orphaned image deletion bot deleted File:Quest Diagnostics.svg. Would you please restore that file, add it to article Quest Diagnostics, and tag it {{SVG-Res}}? Thanks!   — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 12:47, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

This appears to have been done already by User:Wehwalt. --Chris 17:17, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

What's with changing the GA nomination sub-categories to "computing and engineering" as you did here and here? According to the nominations page the topic is "Ehgineering and technology" and the subtopic can be "computing" or "engineering" so I don't see what was wrong with the template before you changed it. Your change has resulted in a redlinked error in the categories. SpinningSpark 19:30, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Under used categories have been merged, See WT:GAN#Merging sub-sections AIRcorn (talk) 21:16, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Ok, but my points are still valid. The instructions on the GAN page are still saying use the old categories, and the new categories are causing a category "GAN error". I have reverted them for now, but you can see the error if you follow the diff links I provided. SpinningSpark 21:26, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

It categorises it as GAN error on the talk page, but puts it in the right category on the WP:GAN page. Must be something else that needs updating. Got to go, but maybe Chris can fix it. Will check when I get back. AIRcorn (talk) 21:38, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 19:15, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Chris. Thanks for your recent changes. It has however inspired other changes and I was wondering if you could code your bot to run if the page was set up like User:Aircorn/GAN. It has basically moved a few sections around, which I beleive should not create any problems and merged a few of the underused ones together. The new headings (in italics) are Agriculture, food and drink (combnining "Farming and cultivation" and "Food and drink"), Language and literature (combining "Language and linguistics" and "Literature"), Computing and engineering (combining "Computing" and "Engineering), Philosophy and Religion (combining "Philosophy" and "Religion"), Earth sciences (combining "Geology, geophysics and mineralogy" and "Meteorology and atmospheric sciences") and Culture, sociology and psychology (combining "Culture and society", "Psychology" and "Sociology"). The Archaology section will be merged with the "World History" one (it will still be named World History). Feel free to play around in my sandbox.

Also a few minor bugs. GA Bot has been adding passed and failed articles to the queue under the Miscellaneous heading before removing them [1] [2]. As far as I can tell the articles are listed fine, they are reviewed and passed or failed and then the bot puts them under Miscellaneous before removing them properly the next round. It has not personally happened to me, but two seperate editors have commented on it at the talk page. Also if the note parameter is before the status parameter on the {{GAnominee}} template [3] it causes the status to be presented as a note [4].

Let me know if you have any questions, I am on UTC +11 hours and will be availible in about 9-10 hours (bed time now). AIRcorn (talk) 12:28, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. How does one put an article into the new categories? For example will putting "Agriculture, food and drink" in the GAN template (i.e. {{subst:GAN|subtopic=Agriculture, food and drink}}) put it in the correct category. I think it would be best if the bot followed the new headings. I can update {{GA/Subtopic}} so entering an individual title into the subtopic field will still put it in the right place (i.e entering food will still put it into the "Agriculture, food and drink" section AIRcorn (talk) 11:32, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Something like this maybe? [5]

And the changes in the template that should enable it. [6] AIRcorn (talk) 11:48, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Sorry about the delay. I seem to have gotten that working properly. I will start work on those other two bugs later. --Chris 17:16, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

No problem. While you are at it could you also change the bot so it recognises "Language and literature" instead of "Languages and literature". There is a small issue with headers (see Template talk:GA/Subtopic for an overview of the issue). AIRcorn (talk) 02:25, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Earth sciences isn't working like it should either [7] AIRcorn (talk) 06:39, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 02:15, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

		The da Vinci Barnstar
		I really appreciate the work you have put into GA bot. Thanks also for your quick responses and fixes. AIRcorn (talk) 21:10, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:Tone. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 03:15, 27 February 2012 (UTC)