User talk:Qtaa

A belated welcome![edit]

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Robotxlabs. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! Miniapolis 22:38, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

June 2019 blitz bling![edit]

		The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to Robotxlabs for copy edits totaling over 4,000 words (including rollover words) during the GOCE June 2019 Copy Editing Blitz. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Reidgreg (talk) 00:10, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a barnstar to go with the cookies! Thanks for taking part in the blitz, and for voting in the elections! – Reidgreg (talk) 00:10, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

July 2019 GOCE drive bling[edit]

		The Modest Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to Robotxlabs for copy edits totaling over 4,000 words (including bonus and rollover words) during the GOCE July 2019 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Reidgreg (talk) 23:49, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The drive had the highest editor participation since May 2015, and brought the copy editing backlog to a record low of 585 articles! Much thanks for taking part! – Reidgreg (talk) 23:49, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

September 2019 GOCE drive bling[edit]

		The Minor Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to Robotxlabs for copy edits totaling between 1 and 3,999 words (including bonus and rollover words) during the GOCE September 2019 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Reidgreg (talk) 17:56, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Strange entry in my watch list[edit]

This ~~bot's~~ proper revert to Dolly Parton of some puffery listed in weird way on my watchlist. Is there a bug?

			14:48		Dolly Parton‎‎ 2 changes history −10‎ [Qtaa‎; Imheree‎]
			D m		14:48 Q180453 (diff \| hist) . . Imheree (talk \| contribs) (Language link added: itwikiquote:Dolly Parton)
					06:05 (cur \| prev) −10‎ Qtaa talk contribs Reverting edit(s) by 2600:1700:CE00:1DC0:6093:8E64:563E:878B (talk) to rev. 994746712 by ClueBot NG: per WP:NPOV (RW 16) rollback Tags: Undo RedWarn

			14:45

The above is just a copy and paste from my browser. The part that is odd is the "Imheree". I clicked on it and it creates a new page. I'm not sure what it is for. --David Tornheim (talk) 15:45, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I guess you are a user rather than a bot. I'm still confused about why it lists the way it does on my watch list. Is it the vandalism reversion program you are using. Is it like WP:Huggle? --David Tornheim (talk) 15:53, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@David Tornheim: To me, that looks like someone adding something to the Wikidata entry for Dolly Parton (see diff). On the enwiki change history page for the article, the Wikidata entry doesn't show up for me. Not sure why it shows up for you but not me, but regardless that's what it sounds like. (On an unrelated note, the reversion program I use is RedWarn, and it's somewhat similar to Huggle. It runs on JavaScript inside the Wikipedia website though, not as a desktop app.) Qtaa (talk) 16:02, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I just moved the question over to here:
Wikipedia_talk:RedWarn#Bug?_Strange_entry_in_my_watch_list

~~I think you are right about the Wikidata thing. That came up at one point.~~

~~--David Tornheim (talk) 16:04, 20 December 2020 (UTC)~~[reply]

I see what it is. The user's name is "Imheree". The watchlist combined two entries, one from you and one from "Imheree". The Imhere didn't show up at Dolly Parton because it was Wikidata.

I had thought the "Imheree" was some commentary on your edit, or the program that did the edit. All makes sense now. Sorry for the confusion. --David Tornheim (talk) 16:09, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Aha. Makes sense. Glad you got it sorted out :) Qtaa (talk) 16:10, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Do you like RedWarn better than Huggle? Huggle has been giving me more and more trouble, and I think I am using it in some Legacy mode that they want to get rid of, because it's not that secure. So looks like I'll have to switch regardless. --David Tornheim (talk) 16:15, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty new to recent changes patrol, but I've been pretty happy with RedWarn in my time using it. Thinking of applying for rollbacker once I have a bit more experience reverting vandalism, both because I want to try Huggle and because Redwarn has a setting where it can take advantage of rollbacker rights. Just want to explore my options.

The only issue I've had with RW so far is the "patrol" feature—it's good in theory: you select your filters on the recent changes page and open an attached tab, then just hover your mouse over a button to load new changes. The issue is that occasionally it doesn't load the latest changes, including some cases where it loads old changes. Not sure what's going on there; I've been meaning to look into it a little further.

For now, I open up the recent changes feed with my filters, then open the diffs in new tabs and revert if applicable. It's not the speediest method, but it gets the job done. Qtaa (talk) 16:22, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You'll need rollbacker for Huggle as well. You can try and apply--they might give it to you, although they might want a little more experience first. Doesn't look like you have gotten into any trouble, so that's a good sign. I'd make sure you have at least 1-3 months of some clear evidence of reverting vandalism to attest to before applying--I haven't looked in your edit history, so I don't know if you do.

Thanks for the feedback on RedWarn. I might try it. Huggle has some of the same problems--that's why I was curious if RedWarn is any better. Probably has something to do with the delay in sending information between the two systems/databases that's difficult to avoid. My biggest challenge with Huggle is that I would try to perform one the actions and it just wouldn't do it and wouldn't give an error. I'd end up doing the revert manually. Quite annoying. It's a key reason why I haven't been doing as much vandalism reversion as I used to. But I'll eventually figure it out. --David Tornheim (talk) 06:41, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. 1 to 3 months is what I've heard. I've only been doing it for about a week though and have made somewhere in the neighborhood of 75 reverts thus far. I had an idea of what to do since I had seen vandalism reversion patrol before so I caught on fairly quickly, but still a while to go before I can show a reliable track record. To address your concerns though, RedWarn handles errors pretty well—other than the data lag, I haven't seen anything. It also handles edit conflicts well: when someone else has already reverted an edit, it just redirects you to the latest diff and doesn't attempt to revert anything. The UI is great... customizable and there are lots of options for one-click reverts. It's certainly worth giving a try and seeing whether you like it. Qtaa (talk) 17:55, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I probably will. Huggle is also good with addressing reverts that have already been handled: It makes no attempt to do the revert, and it refreshes the edit history it has, so that's never been a problem. --David Tornheim (talk) 09:26, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I slipped![edit]

I didn't mean to roll back your rollback on Size. Cheers! BD2412 T 17:05, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@BD2412: No problem :) Qtaa (talk) 17:45, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:46, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]