Thank you to everyone who voted on my RFA, which succeeded with a final tally of 48-1-0. I don't want to spam everyone with a thank you message (and I would rather spend the time discovering the use of these new buttons which appeared on my screen..), so I'll just leave this message on my talk page and the RFA talk. Don't hesitate to ask me if I can be of any help ! Now, back to work... Schutz 05:25, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulations, your RfA was successful and you are now a sysop! Please add yourself to WP:LA. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask me. Good luck. --Deskana(banana) 21:21, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. Please have your bot create new TfD pages in the style used in this edit; single, "camel case" words such as "TemplateName" can be selected (in windows at least) with a double-click. Thank you. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 06:53, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Does not make any difference to me, so I am happy to make the change. It should use the new form starting from the next run, tomorrow morning. Tell me if there is any problem. Schutz 08:41, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Is it still you who looks after the shortpages tool, now that its on the toolserver? If so, it doesn't seem to recognise {{shipindex}} as a dab template.
Yes, it is still me. I've just added the tag and updated the page on the toolserver; tell me if there is any problem. Thanks for the congrats. Cheers, Schutz 11:19, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Schutz, I'd like to make a suggestion on the new shortpages. Could you add links to both (the static and dynamic) to allow navigation between the two please. Thanks. → AA(talk) — 22:35, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Good idea, done. Schutz 12:24, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! → AA(talk) — 12:33, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Another suggestion. Could you add a "last" link to get a diff between current and previous revision. It will save time when looking at what was blanked etc. Also, maybe worth setting up an improvement/bug report page for this very valuable tool (in a similar fashion to the Twinkle one. I also think it should go into WP space. → AA(talk) — 11:36, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
When you delete an article whose content is defamatory, it's not a good idea to leave the content in the edit summary - if you do, it can (and does) show up in deletion logs, which can affect websearches later on. Just replace it with "db-attack" or "attack article" or whatever. DS 13:31, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, saw that just seconds after the (two) deletions, when I checked my deletion log. ;-( Thanks for telling me about it — I'm going slowly to see what I have to learn in the process. Cheers, Schutz 13:35, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Something I installed a while back, and have had no regrets about, that is a very useful tool for handling CSD deletes. It adds a drop-down box to the right of the deletion reason box. Very nice time-saver, and makes your CSD deletion reasons nice and consistent, with links to the appropriate CSD reason in each case. - TexasAndroid 13:58, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This looks excellent ! I was wondering where I could find a cheatsheet with a list of all CSD, but this would be even better ! Thanks, Schutz 14:41, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Installed and tested — really nice ! Schutz 14:46, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A couple of things. there's one functionality that the old page allowed that the new one will not, simply because the new one is on the Tools server. It's something I stored a link for a while back, but have rarely ended up using, so it's not that great of a loss. Here is the link. It's basically a Recent Changes report based on Zorglbot's Short Pages listing. Lets you see what activity there has been on the current list of short pages. As I said, I've not really used it much, so I won't really miss it. But I thought I should still mention it.
Once you shut downt the updating of the Zorglbot report, IMHO you should also place a notice about the new report and parse tool at the top of this page. As for the Zorglbot report itself, I would think that you should replace the last report with just a notice of where to find the new report/parsing tool.
Beyond those thoughts, I have no objections to the Zorglbot page being shut down. - TexasAndroid 15:08, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ok for the notice on the talk page. I had the same idea about replacing the report with a notice linking to the new tool.
If you want to use the Recent Changes report, that would be relatively easy: the script on the toolserver could dump a list of all pages currently listed on a wiki page (without any table structure, nor any supplementary information), from which the report could be generated. It could be done systematically, or only if someone clicks on a special button on the toolserver. This would be relatively straightforward; tell me if you are interested (now or in the future). Schutz 15:25, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Migros logo new.gif. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 17:15, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Geez... the image was tagged 1 minute after the upload... seems a bit fast and does not leave much time for writing a fair use rationale, does it ? Schutz 17:22, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I didnt Black the article Tomas Alvarez, instead what i did was that i took the redirect off because theirs other important people with the use of that name...am so sorry for that mistake!EdwinCasadoBaez 04:36, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
excuse me why did you delete the bionicle makuta thing it has Disappeared and it has really annoyed me —Preceding unsigned comment added by Venomite (talk • contribs) 18:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Any chance of getting shortpages to mark/exclude pages which are short as they're under Wikipedia:Deletion review such as [1]? Cheers, Davidprior 13:11, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes; simply provide me for a list of strings to look for in the article (for example, {{deletion under review}} for the example you provided, but I am sure there must be a few others) and I can add these so that the script can recognise and mark them. Schutz 14:14, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Can't see anything else that should be checked for as a search string, other than the one that was in this one. Cheers, Davidprior 21:39, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Couple more suggestions:
Have a link to this talk page from the toolserver based page (both of them)
Have the option to highlight exclude articles containing "{{Copy to wiki" (should cover all the copy to ..... ones)
I cannot reach the toolsserver report. Is this something fixable by you, or is there a more general toolsserver problem going on? - TexasAndroid 18:19, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Er, coincidence I came across this by happenstance (was conversing with TexasAndroid) and noticed this. Not sure if it's of any help but I just tried looking at my edits with Wannabe Kate at [2] and it says it can not load the page. -WarthogDemon 18:24, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Seems to be the entire toolserver. Maybe I won't switch off the bot that updates User:Zorglbot/Shortpages too fast... Schutz 20:34, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well Wannabe Kate seems to be working again. -WarthogDemon 22:01, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That's what I thought — confusion because all the actions happened within a minute or so (I think you deleted it just a few seconds before I tried to do it). No problem ! Cheers, Schutz 12:45, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Credit suisse logo.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 21:06, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Again, warning added 1 minute after upload, while fair use rationale was being written... Schutz 07:19, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Both toolserver pages seem to be updating very slowly[edit]
Is there something wrong there? Both the broken redirects and shortpages...pages haven't updated properly in a couple of hours (e.g., Carbone's still listed even though I fixed it a couple of hours ago). I should probably just wait it out, but I thought I might as well check to see if anything's broken. --Closedmouth 07:11, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The answer is at the top of the shortpages static page: at the last update, the replication lag of the toolserver (compared to the main Wikipedia database) was 13953 seconds, or almost 4 hours, and currently increasing, unfortunately. This is the main problem with the toolserver, and there is not much more we can do about it, except hoping that it will be synchronised again soon. Sorry about that. Schutz 07:18, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As we discover these little quirks and hiccups of the Tools Server, might we want a FAQ page on the new bot? Hosted in your user space here on WP, linked to from the top of the Tools Server report, answering various questions about the bot, the report, and what can go wrong. Not everyone knows what replication lag is, or what it means, for instance. Another thing would be the hiccup a day or two back when the Tools Server itself was inaccessible for most of an afternoon. A FAQ page would allow for centralized collection of the answers to these and other questions about the report. - TexasAndroid 12:48, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that sounds like a good idea. For example, why I would be getting a 404 error for every page --Closedmouth 08:30, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm new here so not sure whether I'm supposed to reply to your post here or on my talk page, but I figure you're more likely to see this, so here it is.
I've found the following articles to back up the 'notability' of Ben Christophers, but not sure which count as 'reliable' sources
I plan to expand the biography and add some pictures etc and cite the above sources, but not sure how to proceed. Can you give me any pointers? It would be a shame for the article to be deleted but I'm at a bit of a loss as to what counts as 'notable'. He's released four albums to critical acclaim and I was quite surprised to see he's not on here, which is why I created the article, so I would have thought that would count. any suggestions?
And on Matt Patrick, the hndis template is not being recognized, likely because of the pipe for cotegorization order. - TexasAndroid 16:59, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strike it. It was just an "Unable to fetch text" situation. Nothing to see here. Move along. :) - TexasAndroid 17:02, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
{{geodis}} → AA(talk) — 13:00, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Appears to work on the next update. → AA(talk) — 13:04, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You've created this [3] image to show that pie charts are often not the best solution. I just found this [4] image, maybe you want to extend your pie chart? Thanks for your work anyway, --84.56.160.238 15:29, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent idea; see for the result ! Schutz 08:35, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
{{mountainindex}} isn't recognised as a dab template (e.g. Mount Ellen(noticed that this was reported a couple of section previously - Davidprior 10:05, 27 August 2007 (UTC)). Out of interest, have you ever thought about proposing a change to WP to have all dab templates end "dab" (I believe all stub templates end "stub") If you proposed this (and let me know) I'd definitely support it. Cheers, Davidprior 22:02, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Salut,
Notre rencontre genevoise du 22 septembre approche à grands pas et il sera bientôt temps de faire les réservations. Merci donc de nous indiquer dans les tous prochains jours si tu seras de la partie sur la page correspondante. Cordialement Moumou82 19:44, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sigh. The replication lag on the tools server is getting worse and worse, and the shortpages report there is getting almost useless. The lag is now almost a week, which means that any data gained from the tools server is just as old, and just as stale and worthless. Not sure what, if anything you could do about it, mostly just venting frustration. Mega-sigh. - TexasAndroid 13:27, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I am looking at the page and seing this lag increase. Well, there is only one thing I can do: restart the shortpage bot that directly updates pages on wikipedia. I'll look into it before tomorrow. I haven't had much time lately, but this should be relatively easy to setup again. Schutz 14:05, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
On other possibility, though I suspect this may be considered a Bad Idea, would be to have the report bot run against the live database instead of the tools-server one. The only reason I think this would have a chance to work would be that, with your code to only recheck things when they change, you check a minimal number of pages each run. But the idea of running it from the live WP defeats most of the reasons it was put on the tools server in the first place, and likely will not happen because of such issues. But it's still a possibility, even if it's a very unlikely possibility. - TexasAndroid 14:25, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It is clear that the bot would not be able to directly access the live database, for the same reason that the original short pages report was generated only every 4 days or so and cached (too busy). However, it gives me an idea: the script that runs on the toolserver could try to access the replicated database, and if it is too old, get the cached report from the Wikipedia site. This would allow the "backup plan" to run more or less transparently. I hope I find some time to implement this in the next few days ! Schutz 17:17, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The lag has started to decrease again — not very fast so far (about 40 seconds lower every minute, so it may take a few days to disappear !), but it means that new, interesting, pages will appear again in the list soon. Schutz 14:57, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, it's finally starting to catch up with itself, and we can finally start working on these pages properly again. Any idea what was/is causing the lag? --Closedmouth 14:23, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't seen any message in the toolserver mailing-list about this problem; often, it is a problem with a full disk. In the past, it happenend a lot because all the replicated databases were one one server, and the disks could not follow the replication speed, but the databases are now split among three computers. It's a difficult task (replicate all the wikis across the Atlantic, and hope that there won't be any lag !), so problems will probably appear again at some point. Schutz 15:13, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like it's hanging around the 170k seconds arena. Could you revive the old bot again? Or, if possible, run it once daily on the live server? → AA(talk) — 21:29, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
(ping) Replication lag now 21 days! → AA(talk) — 11:05, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'll get the bot active again ASAP... Schutz 11:40, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks. → AA(talk) — 11:43, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I see your bot does some pretty good work at WP:TFD. If everything continues to run normally, would you consider expanding its tasks to Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion?. Both projects operate similarly (organization of discussion subpages). - Mtmelendez(Talk|UB|Home) 14:52, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, some things have happened in the last few days, so you might want to check out the talk page (WT:RFD). But we're all still open for available alternatives, and your bot seems like a pretty good one. - Mtmelendez(Talk|UB|Home) 23:31, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Just wanted to let you know that Zorglbot seems to have stopped making new daily pages on WP:TFD and has also stopped archiving the old ones. Best, IronGargoyle 01:23, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, unexpected expiration of cookies. I will log it in again today to that it will be ready for tomorrow's run. Thanks ! Schutz 05:43, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wouah, that's great. I was quite happy yesterday when I saw at 25000 or so, I'm really (pleasantly) surprised that the lag has completely disappeared today... Schutz 11:19, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I kno u deleted a page about 2 days ago. It was the Gregory Rupert page. I am still working on that, interviewing him, getting info. Just put a little sign that says : Tis article is a stub blah blah blah. I do go to Westfiled High, and Im in the advanced stringsa orchestra. He is my teacher.
68.228.14.91 19:05, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Replied on your talk page. Schutz 19:46, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm, good point. D'oh, dothings in order. :) StarcraftBuff 00:52, 30 October 2007 (UTC) (thats my real account, I forgot to log in[reply]
It was a history only restore - to point out an edit I cited in a current RFA candidacy; when the RFA concludes, it'll be deleted again. That summary was in the logs:
00:08, 30 October 2007 Carlossuarez46 (Talk | contribs | block) protected Bittersweet Poetry (History only restore [edit=sysop:move=sysop]) (Change)
00:05, 30 October 2007 Carlossuarez46 (Talk | contribs | block) restored "Bittersweet Poetry" (24 revision(s) restored: history restore for RFA)
Cheers, Carlossuarez46 16:41, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I also do short page patrolling and knew it would come up; I thought about putting a long comment in it but I didn't want to belabor the issue since I brought it up in an RFA to oppose a candidate I didn't want it to seem I had any other motivation for keeping the article alive; I don't. Carlossuarez46 17:18, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Glad you asked rather than just deleting it. I asked the deleting admin whether there was a more efficient way of doing a history only restore but have yet to hear a reply. Do you have any insight on that? Carlossuarez46 18:54, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
User:Zorglbot is not keeping correct daylight saving time. Please review the Revision history of Templates for deletion and you'll see it's run time changed by one hour this week. I suggest updating the underlying system software. I can provide a Windows 2000 patch should you need one as Microsoft does not. If User:Zorglbot is Java based then please update the JVM. This problem will go away this Sunday and return in the opposite direction for 2 weeks next spring unless the platform is updated. Thank you. – Conrad T. Pino 06:45, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your help; The system (it's a Linux box) actually has the correct time, given the country where it is located (which is not the USA). However, local time is irrelevant since the update should be done at 0:00 UTC, and I should change the (local) time at which Zorglbot is run so that it corresponds to 0:00 UTC; this is straightforward (and it won't go away by itself this Sunday, unfortunately). Thanks for reminding me ! Schutz 07:24, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
October 29 is the end of Daylight Saving Time in many countries; before that date, Zorglbot would run at 2:00 local time, or 0:00 UTC, because the local timezone was UTC+2. Now, with daylight saving time gone, the local timezone is UTC+1, but Zorglbot was still running at 2:00 local time, that is, 1:00 UTC. I have corrected it. November 1 was an unrelated problem (loss of session data, cookies expired, I had to enter the password manually again). Hope this explains everything. All the best, Schutz 15:53, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you and I apologize as the hour was late. The responsibility is yours as the bot owner. I believe it's clear the bot uses a local time schedule in a non-U.S. time zone and the differences across political domains are showing here. I'm stopping here and thanks again. – Conrad T. Pino 17:51, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
00:00, November 3, 2007 Right on time to the second, thank you! – Conrad T. Pino 00:25, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would love if the broken redirects page on the Toolserver could list broken redirects in the other namespaces besides 0. Is that possible? --MZMcBride 03:08, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I should do this... the current situation was just a matter of convenience, but that is indeed missing. If you don't get back to you soon about this, can you remind me ? Thanks ! Schutz 06:30, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Nudge. : - ) --MZMcBride 19:53, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Any progress here? Also, it would be really nice to be able to only select the broken redirects using text highlight. Right now, I have to use a regex to link what I want to link. Cheers. ---- MZMcBride (talk) 21:12, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, friend. I want to thank you for being an administrator and for volunteering with the mop! I also want to ask you to check timestamps closely on vandalism reports. See, on this edit you indicated that the vandalism had stopped prior to the final warning. If you look at the user's talk page, you'll see that I issued a final warning here at 21:25 UTC. Thereafter, at 22:40 UTC, the user committed this act of vandalism for which, a few seconds later, User:CounterVandalismBot issued another final warning. It was after that second "final" warning that I reported the user at 22:45 UTC. In any case, your inclination appears to have been correct since there's been no further vandalism after that. Again, thanks for your help and attention. Cheers! — Dave (Talk | contribs) 23:19, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Dave, you are absolutely right, I did not see the first final warning. At least, I monitored the user's contributions for about 15 minutes after declining the block, to make sure that my decision was correct... Cheers, Schutz 23:25, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Some time ago I moved Daniel-Henri Druey to Henri Druey, the name usual used to identify Druey (see WP:NC(CN). I noticed you moved it back. Besides the bio at admin.ch, is there a specific reason why the article should be moved? -- User:Docu
Hi Docu, it was mainly the bio, but also the fact that the article did not mention that he was called by both name. Indeed, the DHS lists him under Henri Druey, so I am happy to have him listed under this name, but this should probably be mentioned in the article (it always look strange when an article title does not appear in the article itself...). Cheers, Schutz 09:42, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that the rule is somewhat odd, even if the bolded part of Tony Blair is partially predictable. Similarly to Bill Clinton, we could add Daniel-Henri "Henri" Druey to the article. -- User:Docu
Bonjour Schutz !
J'aurais besoin de tes connaissances en matière de copyright suisse. En effet, j'ai très récemment développé l'article ci-dessus qui reste peu illustré. Un certain nombre de photos sont disponibles en ligne mais aucune ne mentionne son auteur. Quelle licence devrait-on appliquer dans ce cas ? La date de prise de la photo + 70 ans (1932 + 70 = 2002) ? Et qu'en est-il pour les unes de journaux ? Doit-on prendre en considération chacun des auteurs dont l'article apparaît sur la page ? Merci pour tes lumières ! Moumou82 13:12, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:TUGlogo.jpg[edit]
Thanks for uploading Image:TUGlogo.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
Hi, for some reason today Zorglbot placed the next day of listings at Wikipedia:Copyright problems on the top of the list instead of the bottom as it's always done. And by the way, now that you're an admin when are you going to start helping us clear that backlog? :) --Spike Wilbury♫talk 04:06, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Geez, I have never seen him/it do that before... I'll try to have a look ASAP, but my time available to edit on Wikipedia is more limited that I would like at the moment (which answers your second question too, at least for now :-) Schutz (talk) 07:11, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This was due to the blank line between the section title and the first entry — because the bot did not find an entry first, it assumed there was none and added right there. I should tell him to ignore these. Thanks for pointing this out, Schutz (talk) 10:48, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Just wondering if you have any idea why the pages I've dealt with aren't being removed from shortpages, even though it seems to be adding new ones fine. It's kind of odd, and it's making the page almost unusably cluttered. I'm guessing it has something to do with the apparent downtime, but from what I saw that was supposed to be have been done on Tuesday. Bit confused. --Closedmouth (talk) 10:18, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have really no idea what is happening there at the moment, but, as you say, it is confusing. The script takes ages to run (18000 seconds, or 5 hours !), which can explain why you don't see your modifications: when the page is updated, it is in fact an update that was started 5 hours earlier ! In addition, it seems unable to fetch the text for any of the pages (it may be a problem with the text proxy on the toolserver). I'll see what happens, and try to ask around. Schutz (talk) 10:32, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, that is odd, especially since the reported replag is only 1 or 2 seconds. --Closedmouth 13:57, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, because this is the replag reported when the script begins to run, and it is correct. But by the time the script has parsed the 2000 entries (except for those that were cached and haven't changed in the past 15 minutes) and written the result file, 5 hours have passed. I'll try a manual run over the week-end, but I suspect that it is the "fetching page content" part that takes most of the time: it tries to get the content for a while, until it gives up and goes to the next entry. Rinse and repeat. Schutz 14:23, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, of course, that makes sense. --Closedmouth 15:13, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yay! What I meant about text highlighting... I batch open the links, however, if I'm not able to highlight only the broken redirects, I end up opening both the redirects and the deleted target page. It's no big deal if to regex the page, it would just make it a little more convenient. Thank you very much for extending the list past ns:0. (The note at the top of the page needs to be updated.) Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 22:12, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for the delay; I replied in my mind, but not actually on-wiki. : - ) The only way I can see is to have the links in two long columns of a table; however, the point seems to moot at the moment. As you've seen east718 is scraping the list and taking care of the double redirects using lightning speed, and if I need to generate a list, it's really easy for me to do so with two regexen. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 23:07, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Schutz! Yes, I scrape your tool every five minutes or so. I'll lay off for a few hours so you can work out whatever bugs there are. east.718at 22:20, December 23, 2007
Hi Schutz. Just letting you know that Zorglbot seems to have stopped working in the past few days. BuddingJournalist 14:37, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Just letting you know that Zorglbot isn't setting up the images and articles subpages correctly for the Copyvio page. BuddingJournalist 17:19, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, thanks for your notes. Following the first one, I noticed that the computer from which Zorglbot runs is down, but unfortunately, there is nothing I can do remotely at the moment. About the second one — is there any specific problem, or is the bot simply not doing anything (except when I run it manually) ? Cheers, Schutz (talk) 03:32, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think Budding means that Zorglbot isn't creating IfD subpages, so people are creating them manually, and they're doing so incorrectly. Any eta on getting Zorglbot back up? – Quadell(talk) (random) 17:48, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
At the moment, I run it manually, which means it is not run on time. I'll bite the bullet and install the bot on another server today. Cheers, Schutz (talk) 17:49, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
FYI, it still seems to be down. – Quadell(talk) (random) 00:17, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, the problem on the remote server means that I can not access it at all for now — I can not even run the scripts manually for now. It will be solved at the latest on Monday, sorry about this. Schutz (talk) 09:25, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Is this same problem what has haulted updates of the tools-server shortpages list? - TexasAndroid (talk) 15:43, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No; right now, the toolserver's database is broken. I hope it will be solved soon... Schutz (talk) 16:48, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The "1" was clickable, but was linking to 1 only... thanks for the new URL you added, it seems ok now. Schutz (talk) 20:30, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, and first let me express my appreciation for the work that you and your bot does to maintain the WP:TFD page. It seems a bit rude of me pressing this request, but it does seem to mesh rather incely with Zorglbot's existing tasks: I recently created the redirect at WP:TFD/T, which is supposed to stand for "Templates for deletion/today". As you can see from the history of that page, a couple of bots have tried updating the redirect at midnight to point to the following day's TFD page, but for one reason or another have ceased doing this. Would it be easily possible for you to add this little change to Zorglbot's regular functions at TfD to keep this page up to date? Many thanks if you can. Happy‑melon 21:41, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. Images transcluded from the commons and categorized in wikipedia are not a problem. Some people are confused by this. Most people like it. It gets people interested in looking for more images on the commons. It is good that you are moving images to the commons from English wikipedia. That way they can be seen and used on other-language wikipedias.
But adding a category link to a transcluded image is a good thing, not a bad thing. Our goal is to get people to those images on the commons, or to get the images to people here on wikipedia. Either way it gets more people familiar with the images, and interested in looking for more images, and interested in putting some of those images in wikipedia articles. There is no duplication of the images on servers since they are transcluded images. I have no desire or need to categorize here all the images on the commons. I only pick a few usually just to give people a taste. --Timeshifter (talk) 10:18, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I can see why you might think that. But I have categorized thousands of images on the commons and wikipedia. I have also created many categories, and cross-linked many categories on wikipedia and the commons. And in my opinion, all this has caused many, many more images from those categories to be used in wikipedia articles. --Timeshifter (talk) 10:33, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I noticed that you are credited with creating Anscombe.svg, which is an svg file, but was made in R. How did you do that? It looks like the device is .ps. Is there some sort of post processor? Thanks in advance for any help. Pdbailey (talk) 04:02, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, you'll find some information in the file description itself: The graph was exported in postscript format, converted to SVG using the pstoedit command, and the layout was slightly modified using Inkscape before upload. It is not straightforward; I have been bitten by a couple of bugs (in particular the clipping of straight lines), but it works. There is also an SVG device in R, but it did not work well enough for my needs. Don't hesitate to tell me if you need any help ! Schutz (talk) 07:40, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Since your tool provides the features that Shortpages promises, it would be great to use it in the other Wikipedia projects, too. How much effort would it take to integrate it into project of another language? --de:Benutzer:Phoinix 11:43, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Relatively easy. The most difficult work consists in listing templates of the project (in the form of regular expressions), and the categories they belong to (example: if the page contains the string {{copyvio}}, it should be labeled as a copyright violation in the list). A planned extension of the tool was to put this list of regular expression in a wiki page, so that editors could modify it themselves. If you can provide me with such a list (however short to start with), I'll be happy to start porting the tool to other languages. Schutz (talk) 12:39, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
German Wikipedia:
#REDIRECT
{{[Ll]öschen.*}}
Kategorie:Wikipedia:Schnelllöschen
{{Begriffsklärung}}
Kategorie:Begriffsklärung
{{Falschschreibung.*}}
Kategorie:Wikipedia:Falschschreibung
{{URV.*}}
Kategorie:Wikipedia:URV
These are in order redirects, CSD, disabiguation pages, redirects für incorrect spelled words, copyvio. A stub template does not exist there. The categories are automatically included, when using the templates. Some templates need options, but the wildcard at the end should do the trick. --de:Benutzer:Phoinix 14:06, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Yes, that's how I do it. As for the categories, I meant categories in the list of shortpages (the lines with different colours), so I should be able to do something with your translations. I won't be able to do anything before the end of the week, though — please ask me again if I forget about it afterwards. Schutz (talk) 14:17, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I guess we could keep your categories. Title -> Artikel; Length -> Länge; Comment -> Kommentar. Thanks for implementing it. --de:Benutzer:Phoinix 15:07, 20 February 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.176.254.51 (talk)
This award was given to Schutz by Sandstein (talk) on 09:02, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Lac de la Gruyère/Lake of La Gruyère/Greyerzersee/Greyzerlake[edit]
You may give us your input on the naming issue at Talk:Lake of Gruyère. -- User:Docu
Thank you for your thoughtful comments. Are there any specific arguments favoring the new "Lake of Gruyère", you think I should still address?
Somewhat odd is the page that was included from Switzerland Tourism about Etang de la Gruère and all related hits one may get for "Etang de la Gruyère". BTW we should keep Lake Neuchâtel at its current title. -- User:Docu
"clearly indicate the change": Very good idea. I added a statement. Thanks.
"I personally don't condone modifying someone's comments": 99.9% of the time I don't either. But in this case, I think some important points were made apart from the attack. I didn't want to post the words as my own, so I took out the attack and left the other. I think I faithfully retained everything except the attack without refactoring the non-attack comments. But I'm open to anyone's suggestion who thinks I changed the meaning in any way besides removing the attack.
Thanks for your message. Ward3001 (talk) 16:54, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for changing USD$ to something more appropriate... I can't believe I didn't notice that myself! :-) Nzseries1 (talk) 09:51, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, we are so used to both "USD" and the $ sign that it's easy to combine them by mistake :-) It's always good to have a second pair of eyes go through one's edits. Cheers, Schutz (talk) 10:08, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Schutz, Sandy indicated that Zorglbot hasn't run at WP:FA since March 3rd. Think you could take a look when you have a moment? Thanks ЭLСОВВОLДtalk 00:34, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulations on your recent successful WP:FL promotion. You may be interested in taking part in our experimental procedure for the selecting lists of the day and lists of the month at WP:LOTD.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 00:45, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Schutz; I noticed that user Merrymouse re-added the lengthy stuff you removed from the article Swiss People's Party as "too much detail, not directly connected to the party, and slightly POV". Well, it seems to contain information that is important regarding the current role of the SVP and their Federal Council members, but I agree with you that it was slightly POV and maybe misleading. I have now added information hopefully making the thing more accurate and neutral, using Swiss newspapers as a source (Merrymouse, who hasn't contributed anywhere else here, seems to rely only on the slightly distorted perception of English-language media). Maybe you could have a look, it certainly could be improved further... Gestumblindi (talk) 02:36, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have now also created a new "Impact of 2007 elections" section under "History" and moved the whole stuff there, I think it doesn't belong to the introduction. Gestumblindi (talk) 03:12, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for telling me about it. Yes, the too long introduction is one of the reasons why I removed this part of the text. I have changed it again; the beginning was highly misleading (the magic formula is still in use at the moment, despite what the article (or the SVP...) was saying). I have removed mentions of "historic significance" (we should probably wait for more than 3 months before claiming this); in particular, the last paragraph (and its "sea-change in the nature of Swiss parliamentary relations") seems to contain pure speculation and opinions which are not (yet) encyclopedic, I think. We should remember that politicians (such as the one who was cited) are not reliable sources on this topic because they are part of the controversy and have their own agenda. Cheers, Schutz (talk) 07:39, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you; I think that your changes are very reasonable and appropriate. :-) Gestumblindi (talk) 22:25, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Glad you agree ! Cheers, Schutz (talk) 23:00, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, Schutz, didn't see the bot at the WP:FA mainpage bolding today. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:28, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for telling me about it; Daylight saving time made it run at the wrong time today (same local time as usual, but wrong time in UTC) — so in practice, it ran twice yesterday... I've updated the time for the future, thanks for telling me about it. Schutz (talk) 06:39, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, Schutz, me again ... mainpage bolding busted ? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:21, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, Schutz, me again ... bolding bot is busted. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:49, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hum... can't see why this time. The log message I received by email was ok, I tried running it manually and it worked. We'll see what happens tomorrow and I'll investigate. Thanks for telling me about it ! Schutz (talk) 08:36, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Is it possible to modify the boilerplate of the TfD Daily Log creation code to allow for SineBot to monitor for unsigned comments? All that would need to be added is the following code to the boilerplate:
[[Category:Non-talk pages that are automatically signed|{{PAGENAME}}]]
TGV has been nominated for FA review. As I see you originally nominated the article for FA, I think you should be notified. Noble Story (talk) 02:23, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The bot hasn't made any contributions for 3 days, including to the TfD page. I don't mind adding pages manually but it's not being caught for 6 + hours after the time where they bot usually creates the new days and archives old days. Please take a look. --WoohookittyWoohoo! 05:35, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Cookies problem on the bot... I hope I have solved this problem for good (or, at least, for a long time). Thanks for telling me about it ! Schutz (talk) 22:14, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Is Zorglbot supposed to be adding PUI subpages to WP:PUI#Holding_cell after they are two weeks old? It doesn't seem to be doing so at the moment. Stifle (talk) 09:04, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The list of short pages doesn't seem to ignore redirects up for discussion anymore. It's a bit annoying. --Closedmouth (talk) 03:19, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It seems to work for me — I don't see any RFD in the list unless I tick the box. Can you provide me with any article name that is incorrectly listed ? Thanks ! Schutz (talk) 07:45, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
When I tick the box "Redirect" at the top, Foo (disambiguation) indeed appears, currently as #4. Do you get something different ? Or do you expect a different behaviour ? Schutz (talk) 08:59, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ugh, sorry, I didn't explain that well at all. It's showing redirects nominated for deletion when the redirects box is both checked and not checked. And now it seems to be slowly fixing itself. Bah, forget I said anything. --Closedmouth (talk) 13:22, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok; I have no idea what could have caused this, and I haven't seen anything, but I am glad it seems to work now. Schutz (talk) 14:35, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Computer reinstalled, but I forgot to reinstall the bot's crontab... thanks for telling me about it ! Schutz (talk) 07:57, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Schutz; it's still busted (am I being a pain in the neck? :-)) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 06:42, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Schutz; it's still busted. Would it be OK with you if I asked GimmeBot to take over the mainpage bolding? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:12, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
My bad, I forgot daylight savings when scheduling the bot (it was working of in the past few days, but would bold at 23:01 instead of 0:01). You're not a pain in the neck, I am one obviously... The computer on which the bot runs has had a couple of problems in the recent past, but it should be ok now -- and the bot should run ok from now on (to test tomorrow); of course, if you are tired on checking on its work, you are welcome to ask another bot to do the job, but I don't mind continuing to operate it and make sure it works ok. Schutz (talk) 15:31, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Schutz; busted again. Happy Fourth of July, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:15, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. :) Images have been removed from WP:CP and {{Imagevio}} deprecated. For a while, it was useful to have the image subpages created as ordinary, since Dumbbot was still automatically placing concerns there, and it helped us find some that had been improperly tagged. Dumbbot isn't doing that anymore, though, and I think at this point the subpage is creating more confusion than it's catching. I'd guess its possible to fix Zorglbot so that it only creates article subpages? (I'm not in the least bit tech. If you told me that, no, this was absolutely impossible, I'd take your word for it. :)) Conversation about this, such as it is, is at Wikipedia_talk:Copyright_problems#Remove_images_from_copyright_problems. --Moonriddengirl(talk) 13:21, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Since you're evidently busy elsewhere, having edited both here and at the French Wikipedia where I've also tried to contact you, I'm seeking assistance at village pump technical. Not sure if anybody else can help with this issue. For the most part, the bot is still doing it's great job at WP:CP, but the image pages are likely to cause confusion and do need to go. Hopefully somebody will be able to help me. If not, I imagine I'll be back to see if you're available again. --Moonriddengirl(talk) 11:30, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I've been advised at Village Pump in the English Wikipedia that if you aren't in position to maintain the bot, I should block it and request that a new bot be created to do its tasks. Since you have not responded to me, although you have edited at both projects, I'm not sure if you are no longer interested in working on Zorglbot. Your bot is doing great work, but this one task does need to be modified. Again, it isn't an emergency, so I will wait a few days before pursuing the matter further. I plan to duplicate this message at your other project to increase the likelihood that you'll see it. Thanks. --Moonriddengirl(talk) 12:44, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for the late answer; you were right to insist... I am quite busy off-Wikipedia at the moment, but still plans to maintain Zorglbot. It should not be difficult to remove the "images" subpage; what should I do with the article subpage ? Move it to the main page, I assume, and kill all subpages Schutz (talk) 09:06, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. :) It seemed likely to me that you were busy, since you hadn't done much in any either place. Eliminating all subpages seems to be the best way to handle it. I'm not sure if this is a complicated task or not (as I said, I'm not remotely tech), but I appreciate your taking the time. :) I really didn't want to disrupt Zorglbot for this one small change. It does its job so well! --Moonriddengirl(talk) 10:44, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Lots of newer disambig templates showing up on the project, and not getting properly flagged by the Tools Server Short Pages report. Starting a list here to track them as I see them, so you can handle them when you have the chance. I'll add names to the list, and you can strike them through if/when you have the time to add them to the bot's files. - TexasAndroid (talk) 20:04, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'll look into the mathdab template shortly; just wanted to note that my script has started to return many error messages, and it indeed looks like something is not working and the page is not updated — unfortunately, I am unable to look into that right now. Schutz (talk) 12:37, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, take your time. Wikipedia seems to be having problems all over the place at the moment. I should make a donation. --Closedmouth (talk) 12:56, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The next fundraising will start soon :-) Schutz (talk) 13:38, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The toolserver cache seems to work again, so that the script works again too. Schutz (talk) 09:49, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned non-free media (Image:Swiss Federal Council seal.gif)[edit]
Thanks for uploading Image:Swiss Federal Council seal.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:01, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Should work now ! Schutz (talk) 09:49, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The mainpage bot is busted again; Schutz, would there be an easier way to handle this, so I don't have to keep bugging you? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:26, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The main page bot did not run on October 26. –thedemonhogtalk • edits 00:32, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Of course, the computer on which the bot runs decided to crash just when I was going away for a few days... I haven't been able to restore it yet, but I have installed a second copy of the bot, running a few minutes later, on another machine, as a backup — it should work for October 28 onwards. Sorry about that; it should make the whole process more reliable. Schutz (talk) 21:54, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It did not run for ninety minutes, at which time I updated the page manually (before returning here and reading your above comment). –thedemonhogtalk • edits 01:31, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Everything should work from now on (the usual server, which was down due to a power outage, is back, and I have corrected an error (wrong time of execution) on the backup server. Schutz (talk) 08:40, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Can Zorglbot be modified so that Wikipedia:Copyright problems has dates that are linked to the proper subpages rather than WP articles about the particular date? For example, Zorglbot created Wikipedia:Copyright_problems/2008_October_15 with a date in the form of [[2008-10-15]]. Clicking on the date will take the user to either 2008 or October 15, depending on where the user clicks. This isn't helpful. The change I am requesting is that the date is instead a link to the subpage itself. That way, when the page gets transcluded into Wikipedia:Copyright problems, clicking on the date will open up the subpage. See the discussion here. Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 14:12, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done — see my comment on the talk page, and don't hesitate to tell me if there is any problem. Schutz (talk) 09:49, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a way you can use LilyPond to engrave the sheet music of the Cantique Suisse and match it to the Romansch language? That seems to be the only language that is missing, since I have found the Italian lyrics/music sheet online, and you done the German and French. TIA User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 07:20, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, no problem. I have also engraved the Italian lyrics, but may not have uploaded the result yet. Do you have a link to the Romansch lyrics ? Cheers, Schutz (talk) 07:56, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Here. I wasn't sure if there was a book or anything that has this kind of music, but I am glad you are willing to do it. User:Zscout370(Return Fire) 08:16, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it'll be nice to have music sheet with all languages at one place. I'll just need someone to proofread the results: since I don't speak Romansch, I can't be confident that the words will all be at the right place on the sheet music... Schutz (talk) 09:04, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! Your bot creates a page with a single digit date, but puts the link as a double digit, e.g. here. Could you correct this please? Thanks! MSGJ 18:22, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for letting me know; it was a side-effect of this modification, but it should work now. I have already created tomorrow's page as a test; let me know if there is any problem when it gets added to the list. Cheers, Schutz (talk) 19:34, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I noticed Zorlbot is creating the daily pages at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images. Would it be possible for the bot to move pages after 14 days to the holding cell since right now that has to be done by hand [5]. The bot doing that would be great. Garion96(talk) 20:16, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,
I noticed you deleted a sentence "Recently XL Airways France has been under criticism for frequent delays, even delays of 8 or 12 hours. The company is being criticized for refusing to pay compensation to the passengers under the rules of the Montreal Convention and is being sued in several big lawsuits." from the XL Airways France wiki page as being unsourced.
The sentence is completely true. The company is being criticized by all my family members, 1 of my friends and her family members in Switzerland, several of my friends in France and many other people who were on XL's flight from Dakar to Paris on April 4, 2008. It is also criticized by several other people who have filed complaints against the company relating other flights. At least one of the passengers, R. Valverde Bispo A., filed a compaint. She waited for 7 months and had to send several letters in order to receive the first answer. Another passenger, Juriij T., filed compaint and waited half a year for the answer. They both were refused to pay compensation under Monteral Convention. XL responded that it was printed on the back of the ticket that XL is not liable for the damages resulting from the delays. However, accoding to EU law and Montreal Convention, no airline in EU can exclude itself from the liability for the damages resulting from the delays. The quality of costumer service of XL France is really low. I am one of the lawyers in the international group of lawyers (two lawyers are in Slovenia, the other lawyers are in France) who will fill lawsuits. We will also inform French about it and invite all XL passengers to join lawsuit. Currently we are collecting the information on delays, gathering dissapointed passengers and gathering proof. It is an action to improve costumer service of airlines in Europe and a campaign to improvequality of services. If you wish, I can send you materials. However, they will all soon appear on one website in French and English. You may ask, why we chose to run the campaign exactly on XL. There is a simple reason: We examined complaints against about 10 different airlines and XL had the worst costumer service and was the only one which did not admit any liability.
Regards,
Jurij —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.58.29.220 (talk) 20:20, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your comment. Even though the sentence may be true, it requires a reliable source before being added to the article. Personal experience of friends and family is not a reliable source. If I understand well your comment, no lawsuit has been filed yet anyway. Please do not readd the text to the article unless it can be sourced. Schutz (talk) 21:03, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
diff I don't know the details, but you might want to reformat list of broken redirects so people don't ignore the ones they expect to be done automatically. --Closedmouth (talk) 07:32, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the information; I have updated the output, but have kept the split between "easy" and "harder" redirects to process. Schutz (talk) 20:32, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, update is done. I have tested the modifications by already creating the page for the next two days; I'll keep an eye on the bot to make sure it works as expected when ran automatically on 15th January onwards. Cheers, Schutz (talk) 22:11, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
After reflexion, I have deleted these test pages because the automatic filling of the header was incorrect (today's information was added for tomorrow's page). I also had to modify {{Ffd log}} to update the links. There may still be a few rough edges, but we'll see what the bot does tomorrow. Schutz (talk) 22:14, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Schutz, appears busted. Best regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:30, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It actually ran, but couldn't find the article: the page, as it was when the bot ran, was pointing to assassination of Robert F. Kennedy, which the bot did not manage to find in the list of featured articles, because it is a redirect. This was corrected a bit later (it now points to [[Robert F. Kennedy assassination|assassination of Robert F. Kennedy]]; with this syntax, the bot can find which article is today's FA). You can see that as a bug: if the page is a redirect, then the bot should look at the target. But I don't know if it is worth updating, since the current way of doing things has worked for about 3 years now... Let me know what you think. Schutz (talk) 08:27, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OK, not worth worrying about then :-) Today didn't run, though. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:18, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Looking into it right now. The bot actually ran, but was unable to find the name of Today's featured article. Schutz (talk) 00:21, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 21:12, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please see the link below. I think we shouldn't publish checking account numbers. What matters to the community anyway is the Donald Knuth name and signature.
Oops, sorry. Just read the comment stating the numbers were randomized. Restored it. Cheers, Vincent (talk) 07:23, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I randomized the numbers the first time I uploaded this image (under the name Knuth-Check). It was actually fun to do, because the very noisy background of the check makes it easy to swap the numbers without anyone realising it :-) I am ambivalent about this; is it better to make it clear that the numbers were changed (e.g. by removing or blanking them), or to make them very unlikely (for example all 0s -- but people may think it is a fake check), or to swap/modify them, so that the check looks as real as possible ? Not sure what is the best... Schutz (talk) 07:55, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, would you be interested in making your Shortpages tool work for other language wikipedias as well? I am personally interested in the Turkish wikipedia, I would like to filter out the disambiguation pages on the Short Pages list there. That means not displaying any page with the template {{anlam ayrım}}. --İnfoCan (talk) 15:32, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 03:08, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delivered at 05:01, 25 January 2009 (UTC) by §hepBot (Disable)
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 20:49, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 15:35, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.
Hello again. I just noticed that you are a member of Wikiproject Switzerland. I was wondering if you knew about the importance rating of John Calvin. I know this is largely based on individual opinions, but I thought the mid-importance rating was somewhat low given his impact on Geneva and the Protestant cantons of the Suisse romande (in a way he also influenced the Protestant Suisse alémanique via the Consensus Tigurinus). There are a lot of modern politicians in the high-importance category. There a very few non-politicians; I saw Euler and Rousseau, but Le Corbusier is not even part of the project! Could you ask the members of the project to possibly bring some balance to the high-importance category? Thanks. --RelHistBuff (talk) 08:35, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Just a note to say that I removed your additions to this page re: the checksum. While it makes for interesting trivia for we engineers and maths types, it really is beyond the scope of an encylopedia article on the topic. I started out by removing the example as "too much information", and then I realised that the TFN was introduced in '87 but and tried to remove the sentence referencing "the late 70's", and then the whole section seemed trivial and out of place. I'm sure you'll agree with the changes Ive made. Cheers. Metao (talk) 09:33, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, Ill start with the disagrees and move on to the agrees... first, I think that programmers/engineers (such as myself) who want information on a TFN would use official documentation. Wikipedia would not be the first port of call. I also think the comparison to ISBN or UPC's is invalid. These are "universal" identification standards assigned to products to allow standardised processing tools. a TFN is an identification number, yes, but it is valid only within Australia, used only for taxation, and there are laws restricting who can collect and use a TFN. It is more of a closed-purpose standard (even if the standard itself has been reverse engineered), and therefore I don't believe that the existence of a checksum scheme is worth more than a sentence or two, if anything at all. However, I absolutely agree that if there has been discussion regarding the scheme, it might be encyclopedic... however, based on the links provided, the concern seems to be limited to within ATO - a quick google of some basic terms on the topic doesn't reveal any kind of public interest on the subject. So, probably just a sentence, or two, rather than an extensive accounting. Obviously the rest of the updates you mention are needed, as well... Metao (talk) 01:57, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm more than happy for anyone to take a more detailed look at the article! However I would make a few points.... First, I don't believe internal discussions at the ATO are encyclopedic (there is a difference between "encyclopedic" and "publicly available due to the Freedom of Information Act"). Second, there are, of course, official sources for the checksum, which would be provided to the various developers and other people who "need to know". There must be, partly because bureaucrats love documentation, and partly because those developers need specifications. The checksum is not classified information, just not widely distributed (probably with an NDA). Just because they aren't publicised doesn't mean they aren't there. Finally, I would argue that, should someone want details on the checksum, google is quite capable of helping them find the information. The WP article mentions the existance of the checksum, which, I still believe, is about the limit of the encyclopedic information on the subject. (I could see a case for mentioning the checksum is a standard modulo-11 or somesuch, though, as long as it was two sentences or less). To me this is a due weight issue (although the WP policy on due weight seems to have been refocused towards fringe theories since I last read it). Metao (talk) 01:28, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Schutz ... the mainpage bolding bot didn't run today. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:14, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Daylight saving strikes again... the bot actually ran, but not at the right time and did not find the right article to bold :-). I'll update it for next time. Schutz (talk) 15:44, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. :) I don't know if a one day glitch is within normal operating parameters, but I wanted to give you a heads up that Zorglbot skipped Wikipedia:Copyright problems while on its rounds last night. I'll update you if it persists. Meanwhile, I'll go manage today's batch manually. --Moonriddengirl(talk) 12:29, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No idea what happenend... I will look into it if it happens again next time. Thanks for telling me about it ! Schutz (talk) 18:57, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's strange, because all other functions of the bot work well. I cannot login on the box it is running from right now, but should be able to look into it within the next 2-3 days. Schutz (talk) 20:16, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Presuming it continues to ignore us, I'll keep it up manually in the meantime. :) --Moonriddengirl(talk) 20:19, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yay! Blessings upon you, as my grandma would say. I am most grateful. :) --Moonriddengirl(talk) 00:04, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, then maybe I should not say that I still have no idea what happenend in the last few days... I did not find any bug, and the same script suddenly started working again... oh well... Schutz (talk) 08:17, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. Maybe my grandma's blessing was bestowed in advance? :) Either way I'm happy to see it back in business. --Moonriddengirl(talk) 11:24, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
←Zorglbot has gone wonky again. :/ It is creating new days and removing old days, as here, but for the last few days hasn't been listing the old ones here. Much as I would like not to have to address them, I know they're still out there. :D Any insight? --Moonriddengirl(talk) 18:11, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The bot and the pages haven't changed, but the computer the bot runs on has been updated. Not sure what is the problem, but that must be the reason. I have moved the bot to another computer and tested it, seems to work for now... Schutz (talk) 08:03, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! I noticed that Zorglbot creates the daily log pages for various discussion venues (Wikipedia:Copyright problems, Wikipedia:Files for deletion, Wikipedia:Templates for deletion), and I wondered whether you could add Wikipedia:Deletion review to the list. Would you be willing to add that to your bot's list of tasks? Thanks, –BLACK FALCON(TALK) 06:19, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please be advised that I have recently conducted a review of the Rorschach test(formerly Rorschach inkblot test) talk page and archives. At some point, you have commented on the issue of the display and/or placement of the Rorschach inkblot image. Based on my understanding of your comment(s), I have placed you into one of three categories. I am issuing this note so that you can review how I have placed you, and to signal if this is an appropriate placement and/or to make known your current thoughts on this matter. You may either participate in discussion at the article talk page or leave a note at my talk page; but to keep things in one place, you should also clarify at Talk:Rorschach test/2009 consensus review/addendum. Longer statements may be made here or quick clarifications/affirmations based on several pre-written statements can be made here. Best regards, –xenotalk 15:00, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The reason I moved it was because the article is a work in progress. Although it was indeed created by someone else, I have started completely rewriting it because of erroneous information. I think it should be moved to my space until it starts at least resembling an encyclopedia article. Hearfourmewesique (talk) 11:01, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Your amazing tool seems to be stuck. Is it just on my end, or is the tool clogged? Thanks ~ Amory (user • talk • contribs) 23:13, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is due to the toolserver on which the tool runs: the replicated Wikipedia database is corrupt (see [6]), and thus returns strange results. It's annoying, but there is not much I can do until it's corrected. Cheers, Schutz (talk) 07:14, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, I would have never thought that you were a level three english speaker. Hmmm... do you take a test to determine that or do you just try to guess, because I gave myself a level 1 in Latin and Level 0 in japanese and I have been thinking that I should bump both up one level....--RayqayzaDialgaWeird2210 23:02, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Just curious... would you have thought I was lower or higher than three ? In practice, people just try to guess. To me, three means "I can understand almost anything, and write good enough so that people understand what I mean, even though I make mistakes.". Schutz (talk) 06:59, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Nay, that is soooo level two. Level three is, like, "I can understand puns and use synonyms and/or complicated words to convey the same idea".
Bon plus sérieusement, je passais juste dire coucou, j'ai vu ton mot sur la page de MZMcBride - tu as le nez fin pour le coup des 0 et des 1! Popo le Chienthrow a bone 14:14, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Starting from this moment we have two parrallel possibilities on Tfd: deletion and merging. Please change the remark added automatically by the bot to new Tfd pages to
<!-- Add new listings at the top of the list with the following formats for deletion and merging respectively:
{{subst:Tfd2|TemplateName|text=Your rationale for nominating the template. ~~~~}}
{{subst:Tfm2|TemplateName|OtherTemplate|text=Your rationale for nominating the template. ~~~~}}-->
This formulation is now final, and contains elements used on {{Tfd2}}/{{Tfm2}} documentation pages and {{Tfd}}/{{Tfm}} templates > Instructions. Debresser (talk) 00:42, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I'll update this ASAP. Schutz (talk) 11:10, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Will that still be long? Debresser (talk) 00:24, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Templates for deletion -> Templates for discussion[edit]
Hello Schutz. Since you are operating a bot on the WP:TFD, you might want to watch for a potential page move from "Templates for deletion" to "Templates for discussion". The proposed page move is being debated at Wikipedia talk:Templates for deletion#Requested move, and so far everyone appears to be in favor of the move. Best regards and thanks for the bot. Plastikspork―Œ(talk) 01:49, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This has been done now. Debresser (talk) 02:34, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Are you around? It would be great if you could update your bot to use WP:Templates for discussion rather than WP:Templates for deletion. We have been moving the pages for the past few days. If you aren't around, I can get another bot to do it. Thanks! Plastikspork―Œ(talk) 02:10, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, it should work now. I'll try to have a look in the next few days to make sure that it works ok. Schutz (talk) 09:22, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Zorglbot: Expansion on the daily CP listings[edit]
Hi,
Coren was kind enough to modify his CorenSearchBot to now list suspected copyvios under their own daily pages, we're therefore looking at having those transcluded on WP:CP days.
Could you modify ZorglBot in order to have the daily CP pages now built as follows:
Transclusion of Wikipedia:Suspected copyright violations/YY-MM-DD
L5 header with Copyright Problems
followed by the rest of the current page
Thanks in advance. MLauba (talk) 10:14, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and actually, since Zorblbot does this kind of things anyway, would it be possible to add a task that every day at midnight, it transcludes the new SCV day at the bottom of WP:SCV? MLauba (talk) 10:16, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I was just coming by to request this myself. :) With the current system, we have a lot of redundant labor, as CP and SCV independently investigate the same articles. This would be a great help! --Moonriddengirl(talk) 12:13, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
After some more thought, and considering we might, at some time in the future, have a CSB II dealing with patrolled revisions generating its own reports, I created a basic template which Zorglbot would then only have to substitute. The template is currently still at User:MLauba/cppage (but would of course need moving to template space), and I opened a discussion on it at WT:COPYCLEAN#cp pageMLauba (talk) 14:42, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi everyone, I have busy for a few days but should be able to look into that very soon. Cheers, Schutz (talk) 20:05, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Have you had a chance to look into this? --Moonriddengirl(talk) 14:19, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not very familiar with the way bots do things, so I have no idea if this might be an issue, but I just wanted to say that if this task is too complex for your schedule, I'll be happy to ask for assistance from Wikipedia:Bot requests. I know you're busy elsewhere, and somebody there may have more spare time. :) If you'd prefer that, please just let me know. --Moonriddengirl(talk) 12:38, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Just noting here that since Tizio is evidently always away from his en-Wiki desk, I've contacted you at your French talk page. If we can get the code, we may not have to pester you with small matters. :) --Moonriddengirl(talk) 13:59, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I wanted to let you know that I'm exploring the possibility of getting a different bot at WP:CP, since you seem to be very busy these days, and I don't want to harass you with CP's issues. :) I'm checking at the bot owners' noticeboard. --Moonriddengirl(talk) 12:44, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Did Zorglbot miss a daylight savings time change?[edit]
I notice that Zorglbot has been creating its various subpages at 01:00 UTC rather than 00:00 UTC since October 26. If I had to guess, I'd guess the bot was set to run at whatever the local time equivalent of 00:00 UTC was, and then the system ended its daylight savings time on the last Sunday in October but the bot continued to run at the same local time. Anomie⚔ 16:39, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I was just coming to leave the same message. :) JPG-GR (talk) 00:45, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Good point; I have modified the time, let me know if there is any problem. Schutz (talk) 08:45, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Would you be willing to have your bot add the date navigation boxes on the top of each FfD daily page to the bottom as well? I've asked questions about this subject here and here. Noone responded to either one. Per WP:SILENCE (an essay), I'm assuming there is consensus to do this. If you are willing and able, I'm thinking that after your bot starts each new FfD daily page, it could add the navbox to the old one.--Rockfang (talk) 06:13, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It appears that your bot is taking a rather long nap. Time to give it a nudge? Thanks, Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 01:13, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Mainpage bot has been out for two days. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:14, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I'd like to make a suggestion for your shortpages tool: can you make {{LatinNameDisambig}} be recognized as a dab page. They're starting to fill up the parsed list (30+ at the moment). 152.3.249.60 (talk) 07:09, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hasn't been updating WP:FA. I see that it hasn't been editing at all in the past few days, so maybe there are larger problems I'm unaware of. Cheers, Dabomb87 (talk) 02:57, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Zorglbot suddenly found itself behind a badly configured firewall. This should be corrected now, we'll see what happens next time it runs. Thanks, Schutz (talk) 23:09, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Seems to be busted again. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:48, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A problem with daylight savings... should work now. Thanks, Schutz (talk) 06:37, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I don't know where your bot sources the daily TfD boilerplate, so please can you either action this request; or let me know where to find it (or both). Cheers. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 19:24, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I was wondering if I could add another task for Zorglbot, since it seems to be so good at regular page creation. I'd like to have it create the POTD main page versions a day ahead of time. It doesn't have to be at 0:00 UTC (since I know the bot is busy at that time with PUF, FFD, CP, etc), but it would load http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:POTD_protected/Y-m-d&preload=Template:POTD/Y-m-d&action=edit, replace the contents of the first line with {{subst:POTD row and save it. Ideally, this should be done about 24 hours in advance. For example, for the POTD that would appear on the Main Page at 2024-04-25 0:00, you'd want to create it at 2024-04-24 0:00. However, sometimes I'm late with making the POTD templates, so if Template:POTD/2024-04-25 doesn't exist yet, then the bot should do nothing. Does that make sense? If you don't have the time to do this, I'll add it to Wikipedia:Bot requests. Thanks! howcheng {chat} 23:59, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Another requirement should be that if the "protected" template hasn't been created at 23:55 (i.e., 5 minutes before it's supposed to go on the Main Page), then create it. Hopefully it's not too much effort for you. Thanks. howcheng {chat} 00:02, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I have to find a bit of time to dig into this, but it should be doable... Schutz (talk) 13:12, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there. I heard you've got a script to download the archives of page view data at http://dammit.lt/wikistats/. Is this data being moved to Toolserver? If so, is it being inserted into a database, or what form is the replicated data taking? Regards, Emw (talk) 01:02, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know (yet)... The most recent files are already available on the toolserver (in /mnt/user-store/stats, I think), as raw files, but there is not enough space to keep all the older files (which I keep on another computer). It'd be nice to have them in a database at some point, but I don't know if anything is being done in this direction. Let me know if I can be of further help. Cheers, Schutz (talk) 12:29, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
File:Comint-switzerland.jpg listed for deletion[edit]
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Comint-switzerland.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.
Question about page view archives: 13 June 2010[edit]
Dear Schutz, I just sent you an E-Mail with a few questions about archived site statistics. Just wanted to make sure you do not overlook it, if you may not check your provided E-Mail Adress regularly. Regards Hagim—Preceding undated comment added 11:47, 13 June 2010 (UTC).[reply]
It hasn't edited in a couple days. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:38, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It lost its credentials... it now has a brand new cookie that it'll be able to use for the next few months... Thanks for noticing it ! Schutz (talk) 22:15, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps you would be interested in having a look at the discussion here, which may concern the operation of Zorglbot. Regards, Waltham, The Duke of 12:31, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:47, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Would there be any chance you could move the FA mainpage bolding back to 0 UTC (it's currently running at 1:00 UTC, perhaps the change is due to Daylight Savings)? That made it much easier for me to doublecheck that the bot had run for the day, since it was the first thing on my watchlist when the day changed. Thanks for all you do ! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:21, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it is due to DST. Sorry about that; it is a pity the computer that hosts the bot does not run on UTC time... It *should* be corrected; let me know if it is not the case. Schutz (talk) 15:06, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Schutz, hope you're doing well. Zorglbot hasn't been editing recently; do you think you could take a look? Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 01:32, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have filed a request here to have my bot help yours at TFD, as a "backup bot". I would be happy to run a backup bot for other tasks as well. I hope you approve. Thank you! Plastikspork―Œ(talk) 22:32, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In any case, Zorglbot is back and running again. Cheers, Dabomb87 (talk) 04:39, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for letting me know about the problem. The machine Zorglbot is running on has died; I have reinstalled the scripts on another machine. As for the backup, I have nothing against it. Schutz (talk) 07:59, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Fred :)On behalf of WMF I would like to thank you for your cooperation during the last fundraiser and we look forward for more fruitful and successful fundraisers over the next years. Thanks again :)--Melamrawy (WMF) (talk) 13:03, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Zorglbot seems to believe that there is a date in 2011 called "February 29." Whatever glitch it has forced me to have to correct the labeling on the TfD discussion pages here and here to read "March 1" and "February 28," respectively. Zorglbot also made the same mistake last year, as evidenced here and here. It's not a big inconvenience to fix these links every three out of four years, but I just thought I'd point out these occurrences so that a fix can be made to the bot's programming if possible. --Sgt. R.K. Blue (talk) 11:51, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
See here, where a day was simply removed and the interwiki links were mangled, and here where two days were removed. Thanks! Plastikspork―Œ(talk) 03:20, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Same bot has been doing some odd things with characters the past few days on the featured articles page while bolding the day's featured article, thought you might want to look into that. Thanks.Hexagon70 (talk) 02:16, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If we don't hear from Schutz soon, should we look into shutting the bot down? I don't know how, where, or under what circumstances that is done-- for now, others are correcting WP:FA daily. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:02, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for the delay -- I haven't (entirely) disapperead. I will look into this ASAP. Schutz (talk) 15:18, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Schutz. For now, WP:FA has a nobots tag to diallow Zorglbot while it's not working properly. Feel free to remove the tag when you have fixed it. Cheers, Dabomb87 (talk) 05:00, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've blocked the bot for now, it was doing the same thing to other pages. Dcoetzee 13:43, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Schutz. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Hello, Schutz. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
I noticed on Commons that you have uploaded an image created with LilyPond. I would love to make these two images into .svg files, but I don't know LilyPond at all. Since you do (or seem to, lol)...is there any way you could engrave these chords and then upload them as .svg images? Either to here or Commons, whatever suits you. I'd be ridiculously grateful. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 08:56, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I know that you do not edit much any more, but next time you come around, I would like to chat a bit about the current status of the tools server short pages reports. They are seeing more and more little glitches, and I was hoping that I could either get you to make a pass at fixing some things, or to hand off the code for the toolsserver bot so that someone else (maybe me) could start to maintain/enhance it. - TexasAndroid (talk) 15:20, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
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 communityHERE, 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 nameHERE 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 ([[User talk:Jaobar|talk — Preceding unsigned comment added by 35.9.34.167 (talk) 21:29, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Would it be possible to extend the shortpages tool so that it works on Portuguese wikipedia as well? Best regards, Helder 19:30, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there. This bot(Zorglbot) is blocked and inactive, as a result its bot flag will soon be removed to try and tidy up our list of accounts with bot flags. If you have any problems get in touch with me on my talk page! ·Add§hore·Talk To Me! 10:49, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned non-free image File:University of Lausanne logo.png[edit]
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:University of Lausanne logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 01:24, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:TdG-logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 01:13, 19 March 2015 (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) 08:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Schutz. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.
Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.
In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:
Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you. This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:49, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins[edit]
Hello,
Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:32, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.
It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.
If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Schutz. 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.
Hello, Schutz. 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.
Ah!!!! Didn't see it!! Thanks a lot, Gianmaria. P.S: I hope this is the correct way to reply.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Glari (talk • contribs) 11:14, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it's the correct way to reply -- don't forget to sign your comments, though. Schutz (talk) 13:05, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Following an RfC, an activity requirement is now in place for bots and bot operators.
Technical news
When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.
JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.
Thanks for uploading File:Logo-Crypto AG.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:42, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Schutz. 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.
Thanks for uploading File:Le Matin-logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Hello, Schutz. 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.
Thanks for uploading File:Le Courrier-logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Recently, several Wikipedia admin accounts were compromised. The admin accounts were desysopped on an emergency basis. In the past, the Committee often resysopped admin accounts as a matter of course once the admin was back in control of their account. The committee has updated its guidelines. Admins may now be required to undergo a fresh Request for Adminship (RfA) after losing control of their account.
What do I need to do?
Only to follow the instructions in this message.
Check that your password is unique (not reused across sites).
Check that your password is strong (not simple or guessable).
Enable Two-factor authentication (2FA), if you can, to create a second hurdle for attackers.
How can I find out more about two-factor authentication (2FA)?
Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)[edit]
ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.
Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.
We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.
For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:04, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
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) 00:01, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.
When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.
Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.
We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.
Pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity[edit]
Established policy provides for the removal of the administrative permissions of users who have made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period. Your administrative permissions will be removed if you do not return to the required activity level before the beginning of January 2023.
Inactive administrators are encouraged to engage with the project in earnest rather than to make token edits to avoid loss of administrative permissions. Resources and support for re-engaging with the project are available at Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/administrators. If you do not intend to re-engage with the project in the foreseeable future, please consider voluntarily resigning your administrative permissions by making a request at the bureaucrats' noticeboard.
Thank you for your past contributions to the project. — JJMC89 bot 08:44, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Imminent suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity[edit]
Established policy provides for the removal of the administrative permissions of users who have made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period. Your administrative permissions will be removed if you do not return to the required activity level before the beginning of January 2023.
Inactive administrators are encouraged to engage with the project in earnest rather than to make token edits to avoid loss of administrative permissions. Resources and support for re-engaging with the project are available at Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/administrators. If you do not intend to re-engage with the project in the foreseeable future, please consider voluntarily resigning your administrative permissions by making a request at the bureaucrats' noticeboard.
Thank you for your past contributions to the project. — JJMC89 bot 00:57, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Schutz, its nice to see a DYK nomination on Switzerland yet you might be interested in the DYK guide. We sort of expect that most of the phrase are sourced to qualify for DYK. There is a lot of work to do still for your nomination. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 13:54, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I also suggest you establish an archive for your talk page. I guess it is better for the readership. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 13:56, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for creating Geneva official chestnut tree. I corrected your coordinates; in case you were wondering, the tree was marked on OpenStreetMap, an invaluable resource for finding coordinates of many an object. Abductive (reasoning) 01:43, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Abductive Thank you for updating the coordinates; I had copied them from FRWP, and did not check the precision. I have now updated the coordinates on FRWP, too (and I can confirm that the OSM coordinates are spot on, as I was there only 2 days ago, taking pictures of the new tree to add to the page ;). Best wishes, Schutz (talk) 15:24, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for creating the Geneva official chestnut tree article. I just wanted to make sure you were aware of this discussion today, on DYK Talk. In the end, we made a few fixes to the citations (to make sure that each fact stated could be linked to a source), and removed a couple of the specific dates that we couldn't easily find referenced anywhere. Ideally this all would have been discussed with you prior to the hook going live...and in hindsight I think you should have been alerted to the "live" discussion as well, instead of wondering where all these edits were coming from. (In any case, something to keep in mind for future DYK submissions.) Cielquiparle (talk) 01:03, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Dear @Cielquiparle, thank you for your note. No, I hadn't noticed the discussion — I had noticed the edits on my watchlist, but assumed that they stemmed from the increased exposure due to the article being on the main page. I must admit that I'm indeed disappointed of not having notified about any of this; there would have been plenty of time for me to correct anything, and to add sources for everything. At the end of the day, I'm glad that the article has been improved by your and other people's edits, but it wasted quite a bit of your time (especially going back and forth removing/readding content)... and it makes it hard for me to see what has been removed and which I should readd and source (I understand that "citation needed" tags would have not looked good on the day the article was on the main page, but it would help me a lot now...). All the best, Schutz (talk)
The things I noticed were that there were a few specific dates and date ranges that I wasn't able to easily verify in the sources. Maybe they actually were cited elsewhere, or maybe they were extrapolated from the sources (which is sometimes appropriate, but other times can lead to OR) – it wasn't easy to tell, so I removed them. I know that Paradise Chronicle had other concerns about the current state of the article, so am pinging them now. Maybe the discussion could be moved to the article Talk page. Cielquiparle (talk) 11:25, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, the talk page seems like a good place where the discussion could have taken place. I will also add a mention on Wikipedia talk:Did you know right now. I'll try to find out what you couldn't verifiy and have removed, but with all the back and forth in the edits, it is not trivial... Schutz (talk)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:20, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Administrative permissions and inactivity reminder[edit]
This is a reminder that established policy provides for removal of the administrative permissions of users who have made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period. You are receiving this annual reminder since you have averaged less than 50 edits per year over the last 5 years.
Inactive administrators are encouraged to reengage with the project in earnest rather than to make token edits to avoid loss of administrative permissions. Resources and support for reengaging with the project are available at Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/administrators. If you do not intend to be engaged with the project in the foreseeable future, please consider voluntarily resigning your administrative permissions by making a request at the bureaucrats' noticeboard.
Thank you for your past contributions to the project. — JJMC89 bot 00:20, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
for the result ! Schutz 08:35, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Swiss Federal Council seal.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
— 16 March 2009
: 23 March 2009[edit]
NinjaRobotPirate • Schwede66 • K6ka • Ealdgyth • Ferret • Cyberpower678 • Mz7 • Primefac • Dodger67
Briangotts • JeremyA • BU Rob13
![[3]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Piechart.svg){kind=link}
![[4]](http://www.enterprise-dashboard.com/img/piecharts-vs-linegraphs.gif){kind=link}
Guideline and policy news
Technical news
Obituaries
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. The thread is Racosch. Thank you. BlackcurrantTea (talk) 02:17, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
Established policy provides for the removal of the administrative permissions of users who have made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period. Your administrative permissions will be removed if you do not return to the required activity level before the beginning of January 2023.
