User:BD2412/Archive - Tools (third 50)

{| width="100%" style="border-spacing: 0px"
 * class="MainPageBG" style="border: 1px solid #003350; background-color: #cef2e0; vertical-align:top; text-align: left;"|

WikiProject Disambiguation Talk Request
This is a form message being sent to all WikiProject Disambiguation participants. I recently left a proposed banner idea on the WikiProject Disambiguation talk page and I would appreciate any input you could provide. Before it can be approved or denied, I would prefer a lot of feedback from multiple participants in the project. So if you have the time please join in the discussion to help improve the WikiProject. Keep up the good work in link repair and thanks for your time. Nehrams2020 22:40, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Enforce inclusion of categories
Hi, I just read these comments. Since you started this request I was hoping you have some info on the status. Cheers, Garion96 (talk) 13:57, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Champagne wines
Salutations BD2412! It appears that the Champagne pages have been relocated recently... Can&#39;t sleep, clown will eat me 10:13, 1 December 2006 (UTC)


 * This matter has been posted to Requested moves for consideration is now being discussed at Talk:Champagne if you're interested. Can&#39;t sleep, clown will eat me 05:52, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Don't worry about it, you are allowed to forget things. ;-) (I just came back from a pretty long wikibreak, and forgot things myself). Good to see you, and since you are one of the useful editors (i.e. actually writes things, unlike myself), I was wondering if you could take a look at the pages Cryogenic processor and CryoTech. They currently (to me at least) read like advertisements for 300 Below, but appear to be salvageable. Everything in Cryogenic processor needs to be verified, and it is generally a mess, while CryoTech needs a NPOV check. These pages (and Cryocooler, which could use an expansion) could probably be cleaned up to respectable articles, but I am not very experienced in this, being more of an administrative person. I am sure that you could do a much better job then me alone, and if you have the time could you  help me out with these? If you are busy however, just let me know, I can do it myself. Happy editing! Prodego talk  21:12, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm always busy - but I'll have a look. :-) bd2412  T 21:28, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Supreme Court of Georgia
After looking at the titles of the Supreme Court of Georgia (U.S. State) and the Supreme Court of Georgia (Country) I think "Supreme Court of Georgia" should link to a disambiguation page. The Georgia Supreme Court is not the common name for the Supreme Court of Georgia (U.S. State). The U.S. State of Georgia has double the population of the country of Georgia, and this is the English Wikipedia, making the Supreme Court of Georgia more commonly known for the court in the U.S. state of Georgia. I propose moving Supreme Court of Georgia to a disambiguation page with links directing people to either the Supreme Court of Georgia (U.S. State) or the Supreme Court of Georgia (Country). Please let me kow what you think. KnightLago 14:12, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

German (disambiguation)
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on German (disambiguation), by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because German (disambiguation) fits the criteria for speedy deletion for the following reason: '''No use for this page - nothings links here, and no one would type this into the search box. Work on disambigs have removed need for this page.''' To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting German (disambiguation), please affix the template  to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate German (disambiguation) itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 20:00, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Hittite (disambiguation)
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Hittite (disambiguation), by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Hittite (disambiguation) fits the criteria for speedy deletion for the following reason: '''The only purpose for this page is to avoid dabs in internal links. Since Wikiproject Disambiguation deals with this, this page no longer serves a purpose''' To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Hittite (disambiguation), please affix the template  to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Hittite (disambiguation) itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 06:15, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Veneziano
I think, if you read WP:D#Lists, that you will see that there is no need for such a disambig page. None of these (film, orchestra, plaster) is referred to as simply "Veneziano". "Veneziano" is not the natural article title for any of these, so there is no conflict over the article titles, so no need for a disambiguation page. It shoud be a redirect to Veneziano (surname). Happy editing! Chris the speller 02:29, 7 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Maybe a rdr to Venetian Plaster, then. But I don't think you need anything else from me. If there ever are questions, slap 'em on my talk page. Ciao! Chris the speller 02:37, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Re:Wikipedia:Templates with redlinks
Yes, I would like to reboot the above Project but I don't know how to because I am a Novice Editor. I am also a user at WikiChristian Christianity and Greenlivingpedia an Australian enviromental wiki that only went public in October this year. I am from Adelaide, South Australia. Kathleen.wright5 08:09, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: Red links dump of 2006 jan 25-0
I have finished sorting out the 2006 jan 25-0 red links dump including moving some to the 1-2 links section. Kathleen.wright5 04:40, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Nice. I'm still working on getting a new run done. Cheers! bd2412  T 08:52, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

I have also finished sorting out the September 2005 dump as above. Kathleen.wright5 13:13, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Well I was going to say not to bother with the older ones, but then I realized that any redlinks remaining from the Sept. '05 dump must be really old redlinks, so they are probably the most important to address. Thanks. bd2412  T 16:14, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

I hate to ask this
I would appreciate your input at WP:AN, if you feel you have anything of worth to add. Thanks for your time, Hiding T 23:25, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

DEFAULTSORT
Hi, I see you have been doing good work adding the defaultsort magic word to lots of articles.

However, please may I draw your attention to some issues regarding the indexing of peers? The peerage categories should be indexed by the title:
 * Hereditary peerages and categories relating to those peerages should be indexed as title, firstname surname, nth Earl of X
 * life peerages should be indexed solely by their title, e.g Jones of Borchester

It's also important to note that different categories need to be indexed differently. e.g. E. F. L. Wood, 1st Earl of Halifax had a notable career in the House of Commons before his ennoblement, and the categories relating to that period of his life should be indexed as Wood, E. F. L. (see this edit for an example)

Hope this helps. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:20, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know - I assumed that the differences were just inconsistency! Is is possible to have two different DEFAULTSORT templates on the page? bd2412  T 20:00, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Update - I tested that theory on my userpage, and everything went to the last defaultsort header I entered. bd2412  T 20:16, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

New templates with redlinks dump
User:RussBot/Templates with red links and its subpages have been updated from the 2008-01-03 database dump. --Russ (talk) 15:29, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks - I will take care of it this weekend this Thursday . Cheers! bd2412  T 15:48, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Airline code templates
Actually another user came up with the idea to use templates. The data is transcluded into two articles. One for the codes by first letter of the airline name and the other for a list of all codes. This was split up to reduce the load time for editing. Having the data in one article, as it was to start was very slow to edit and load. This was a solution to allow quicker editing and loading for most user who only want to look at the list by letter. Vegaswikian (talk) 01:17, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok, I see how that works - but is it necessary to have an article containing all of the codes (that is one huge article, after all)? Compare the division used for IATA airport codes. If there is no second holistic article, the template becomes unnecessary, and all can be on one page for each letter. bd2412  T 01:31, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Templates with red links
Those pages are ready for your review. --Russ (talk) 18:50, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedians who support Hezbollah
Hi. I don't know if you're going to be interested in this but you voice an interest in the First Amendment on your user page so I thought maybe. I've discovered a debate about whether wikipedians should be able to voice their political support for Hezbollah (I happen to be taking a terrorism and civil liberties class right now). The category was deleted 5 times for different reasons, once because of CSD, once because there were no users of the user box, and three times because it was a recreation of delete material. There was a debate that took place here when a user started creating the userboxes on his own userpage and admininstrators started deleting them. It seems that the result of the debate was that it is impermissible to voice support for Hezbollah on one's user page, although the results of the discussion were generally vague and inconclusive. It seems that certain administrators repeatedly deleted these user boxes until the debate was ended inconclusively. A user box was even created protesting the deletions. I was thinking of recreating the page because I don't think it explicitly violates wikipedia policy and deleting it without comprehensive debate seems to be a real violation of ideals of free speech, but then I thought I'd better see if an outside wikipedia admin could clarify the crucial points. The following user boxes were proposed:

I'd like to appeal these decisions but I have no idea of how and I could use some help with that. At the very least, I feel the topic should have a more comprehensive debate, as I really think it's debatable whether these user boxes give widespread offense. Although Hezbollah (or a part of it) has been designated as a terrorist organization by six countries, there are many notable exceptions, and many countries openly support Hezbollah. In any respect, it's clearly debatable and the last debate was inconclusive. I'm just unsure about how to revive the debate. Thanks.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 17:47, 27 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I should keep my nose out of this but I just happen to read it and thought I would point out WP:TALK, which explicitly states in bold "Article talk pages should not be used by editors as platforms for their personal views." While many ignore this this guideline, such a box would certainly push what wikipeidans are willing to accept.  I can't see anything constructive regarding improving wikipedia coming from such a tag.   Morphh   (talk) 18:16, 27 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm asking for advice on a specific topic and stating my reasons. I don't think this is a "personal view". It has general validity. Just like your statement: "I can't see anything constructive regarding improving wikipedia coming from such a tag." The discussion regarding the validity of the user boxes belongs on a debate page, not BD2412's talk page.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 18:36, 27 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I think you might have misunderstood me. I wasn't talking about you posting here or your personal view.  I was speaking about the topic of the userbox and the intent of the userbox as a platform to express a personal view.   Morphh   (talk) 18:40, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I see why... my mistake.. I was thinking about the User page but referred to the talk, which was probably confusing.. ok.. I'll just shut my mouth now.. :-) Morphh   (talk) 18:46, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I have started a debate on this subject at Deletion review/Log/2008 February 28.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 03:53, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll have a look. Cheers! bd2412  T 04:11, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

TEP userbox
FYI, I've created a userbox Template:User Tau Epsilon Phi, which you may want to include on your userpage. &mdash; Delmont43 Talk &mdash; 04:22, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

AWB for Joker...
You ran AWB to replace 'the Joker' with 'The Joker', often changing links to The Joker. Please consider re-running it to instead avoid the redirect by pointing references to the character to The Joker or just Joker, no definite article 'the'. Thanks! ThuranX (talk) 16:53, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

nevermind... I jsut re-read the edits, and you were doing just that. ThuranX (talk) 16:54, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Neverminding. Cheers! bd2412  T 17:33, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

"U.S. is an initialism, not an acronym"
True, but outside of the US, the authoritative consensus on the use of initials is to drop the punctuation - I picked up on this with a recent edit you made to 2006 in music where you changed US to U.S. The optional use of these variations seems to me to be supported by WP:MOS - Acronyms and abbreviations and MOS:ABBR. As an ongoing labour, it seems a gigantic task to Americanise edits made by non-US contributors... Alchemagenta (talk) 03:03, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * That occurred to me. I am for the time being limiting my continued changes to piped links, since there is no point in piping to a redirect. Cheers! bd2412  T 03:04, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The devil is in the detail. Good luck with it. Alchemagenta (talk) 03:15, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Deleting a page with too much history
This is what I get for watchlisting Taxman's talk page... heh. It is not currently possible to delete these pages, for performance reasons. (Modifying 5000 entries in both the revision table and the archive table = database lock.) It is closer to being a developer task than a bureaucrat task. Tito xd (?!? - cool stuff) 08:19, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, that's rather depressing. Guess I'll just have to live with it. Thanks anyway! bd2412  T 08:23, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Templates with red links
The next dump doesn't seem to be coming as quickly as I thought it would, so I might take a pass at the old dump instead. I think I can sort pages according to the categories you requested; going back in the archives, I see you had earlier asked for a breakout of "elections", "MLB" and "TV" and "radio" templates; are those still needed? FYI, the approach I am taking is that if any of the terms you identified ("Indiana", "Road" or "Roads", etc.) appears in the template title as a whole word, regardless of capitalization, that template will get sorted into a subject-area subpage. --Russ (talk) 13:49, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that is perfect! bd2412  T 15:24, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * So, do you still want Elections, MLB, TV/Radio, or not? --Russ (talk) 16:22, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Yep, I want 'em all. Ideally, I'd like to make a separate page for any term that is common to, say 50+ templates. bd2412  T 16:29, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

New Project
Myself and several other editors have been compiling a list of very active editors who would likely be available to help new editors in the event they have questions or concerns. As the list grew and the table became more detailed, it was determined that the best way to complete the table was to ask each potential candidate to fill in their own information, if they so desire. This list is sorted geographically in order to provide a better estimate as to whether the listed editor is likely to be active.

If you consider yourself a very active Wikipedian who is willing to help newcomers, please either complete your information in the table or add your entry. If you do not want to be on the list, either remove your name or just disregard this message and your entry will be removed within 48 hours. The table can be found at User:Useight/Highly Active, as it has yet to have been moved into the Wikipedia namespace. Thank you for your help. Useight (talk) 17:13, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikiproject Prisons Proposal
I would like to propose a new wikiproject regarding prisons, but I need some guidance on how to do so. I've noticed that while law, law enforcement, and human rights all have portals, none of these specifically address the creation of articles for individual prisons. I consider this to be a very important topic (a society is judged on its prisons after all) and there are other wikiprojects aimed at similar social institutions (schools has its own portal although I'm not quite sure what the difference is between a portal and a wikiproject). I'm not quite sure where to begin. Do I have to propose this in a specific place or can I just start working on it? Your help would be appreciated.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 15:20, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
 * You can just start it up. What you'll want to do is create a page at WikiProject Prisons, then create a project tag and throw it on the talk page of articles under the purview of the project. That will attract people interested in the subject to support your efforts. Cheers! bd2412  T 19:46, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I take that back - apparently, there is a committee that approves wikiprojects at WikiProject Council/Proposals. Follow the instructions for making a proposal on that page, and please list me as an interested party. bd2412  T 19:47, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Got it. I've started the discussion and listed your name here. Thanks for the help.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 01:42, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Templates with red links/2007
Is it okay for me to create a separate template with the December 2007 Templates with red links on it? -Basketball123456 (talk) 22:29, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Sure, but I don't know what the point would be. The January 2008 report capture most of the same data. bd2412  T 22:37, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: "Hidden template" help request on Wikiquote.
The show / hide feature always relies on JavaScript. As I'm not (at all) capable of writing JavaScript, the best place to ask would be WikiProject User scripts/Requests. There are plenty of helpful people who watch that page and should be able to offer some assistance. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 06:07, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

New templates with red links reports
Now available at the usual locations. However, after looking at the output, I think another sort step would be helpful, so I think I'll re-run it later today. --Russ (talk) 21:48, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll work on it when that's done! bd2412  T 21:49, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Painter disambig
You recently edited this page, removing a crucial qualification. If you can think of a way to shorten the distinction I was trying to make, then please do it. But it is necessary. Why? Because as you have left things, someone who paints murals would qualify as a "painter" under the second definition, just like a house painter. A disambiguation is inadequate if it doesn't clarify the distinction being made, and it's too bad if it takes more words than you'd like to see. If you don't restore that distinction, either in my original version or in a new version improved for brevity, than I will restore it myself. MdArtLover (talk) 14:43, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Done. Users should be able to get that distiction by visiting the individual articles, however. bd2412  T 14:48, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

1919 Bartlett's missing biographies
Since you began that page and have worked so long on it, I will leave you the honor of doing any final edits on that project page. Thanks for all your excellent work! Jokestress (talk) 23:21, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I think there's some template for a completed project - I'll look for it. bd2412  T 00:55, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Meav photo
Hey BD, regarding the Meav photo you uploaded, might it be a good idea to have the publicist submit one of these just so there's no question of legitimacy? Any reason to not move to Commons, for that matter? Thanks for doing the legwork in getting the photo in the first place. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 23:00, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I will ask them for it. Thanks. bd2412  T 01:57, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Fantastic, thank you :) I'll go ahead and move to Commons once OTRS is filed. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 02:03, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I've sent a request, I'll let you know once I have a response. Cheers! bd2412  T 03:06, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Accidental edit on Template:Overlay/doc?
Hi BD2412,

I refer to this edit. Thanks for fixing my speltypos by the way!

My question relates to the change to line 42, now line 39, and the loss of the #38; from the page. This seemed like a strange thing to happen. The ampersand has to be encoded to get it to display as an ampersand. Otherwise it is parsed by the browser. Is there a bug in AWB?

Cheers. Peet Ern (talk) 04:17, 15 December 2008 (UTC)


 * It may well be - I was only aiming to fix the typo, but I routinely fix other things that AWB picks up as errors as well, since AWB is usually right (at least, with stuff in article space). I'll avoid making changes to template coding in the future. Thanks for the notice! bd2412  T 04:30, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Deanery merge
It's fine to suggest merging two articles, as you've suggested at deanery and the dean article. However, if you want it to actually happen, you should give your reasons for the proposed merger on the talk page of at least one of the articles. Gentgeen (talk) 17:40, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Most wanted articles
Would you be able to make a new run for Most wanted articles? Cheers! bd2412 T 22:15, 14 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I've never done this before, but it doesn't look like it would be too difficult. If it's all right with you, I would propose just to dump a list of wanted titles with link counts, and leave it to you to do any formatting you want.
 * Now, I'm breaking my own rule about answering on my own talk page, because I also have a question for you. Would you be willing to nominate me for adminship?  I've been around here long enough (nearly four years) that I think I know the ropes :), but I've avoided asking for this before because I didn't want to get mired in wiki-politics.  However, it's gotten to the point where I am feeling guilty about creating work for other people because I can't do history merges or fix minor problems with protected pages, and so I think it's time to ask for the tools.  --Russ (talk) 16:05, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm surprised that you are not one, and would be pleased as punch to nominate you. I'll put it together this evening - in the meantime, you can put together your answers to the standard questions. Cheers! bd2412  T 17:37, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you kindly. I have accepted the nomination and it's ready to be posted.  (Also, User:RussBot/Wanted articles is created, but the first run had some huge problems, so it's re-running now and should be revised in a few hours.)  --Russ (talk) 21:59, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Good. bd2412  T 00:06, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

List of biologists
Yesterday, 19 January 2009, you made an alteration to this list by adding Henry Potter (naturalist), a Norwegian naturalist. You were right doing so, because Henry Potter, as such, referred to a disambiguation page. But now Henry Potter (naturalist) has become a red link, drawing my attention. Checking it out, I couldn't find a reliable Google link, except copies of this list of biologists. Checking out the Norwegian wikipedia, they even hadn't an article on him. Their article Henry Potter was a namesake and a golfer, not a biologist. Therefore I'll remove this addition to this list. As it is non-verifiable, it may be a hoax and should not be included. I hope you'll agree. JoJan (talk) 15:29, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I certainly agree - if the person can not be found (and I could find no such person through Google Books), he ought not be on the list. bd2412  T 16:05, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

White H(h)orse
Hi, Wiki MOS and searching prefers article titles to only capitalize the first word, not all words, so can you kindly do what needs to be done to make White horse the disambiguation page and "White Horse" a redirect? Thanks. Montanabw (talk) 07:03, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm sure the MOS prefers that White House be there rather than at "White house". Almost all of the sense discussed on the page are place names, for which White Horse is appropriate. In any event, I did not create the page or make it a disambig, I simply moved White Horse (disambiguation) to White Horse (which had previously redirected to the disambig page) and merged in a redundant disambig page at Whitehorse. Cheers! bd2412  T 07:09, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The problem is White horse is now a redirect to White Horse. And the lead sentence discusses the literal White (horse).  (grin)  If we are going to disambiguate everything, not just proper names, (even if by a majority of links, that's what most are)  it is better to use the wikipedia convention of only the first word capitalized, due to how wiki search protocols work (i.e. when you start the second word with a cap then you have to use caps in your search too, which is to me a dumb glitch in the software, but I also have no power to fix it (sigh)).  It really isn't something I want to make a federal case out of,  however, I just think that having the proper noun form for the disambig page is rather awkward.  I know there is this whole huge fight going on over at WikiProject disambiguation and I really would prefer to stay out of it, so just commenting about the nature of the current title.    Your call, but now you know where my concern is.  Montanabw (talk) 18:52, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * If you'd prefer White horse to redirect to White (horse), I have no objection to that. Cheers! bd2412  T 17:47, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

DKY problem
Hi. I was trying to get a SCOTUS case onto the DKY column at Template_talk:Did_you_know (it's Will v. Michigan Dept. of State Police) and I ran into some trouble finding a short enough hook while still adequately describing the case. Thought you might have some suggestions. Thanks.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 03:24, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Polbot was blocked
Polbot was blocked, pending further discussion. Perhaps you could comment at Wikipedia talk:Bots/Requests for approval? Thanks, – Quadell (talk) 14:02, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Question for you re: WikiProject United States courts and judges
Is this considered a daughter project/sub-project of WikiProject Law, or is it a separate entity unto itself? I ask mainly because I want to create a category for this WikiProject, and I want to know how to categorize it. -- Eastlaw  talk ⁄ contribs 21:14, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I'd say we are under that and WikiProject Biography, as most of our articles will be biographies. bd2412  T 21:57, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, and as it turns out, WikiProject United States Government. bd2412  T 23:56, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

CongBio and CongLinks
I support your position on why these should be included in articles. I think those opposed to their inclusion are in the minority, and I think there's be ample opposition among WikiProject Congress editors to their mass removal. You always run into this when one project has evolved a set of acceptable standards and others take a hard-line view that guidelines aren't open to amendment or interpretation. I don't know if an exemption is the right route to follow, but it appears from the conversation at WP:EL that some users do agree that these links are appropriate to a certain degree. I wouldn't lose too much sleep over it. If you take the argument to the extreme, that no links should be provided to content duplicated in the article, then any public domain source would not be linked, and you could run afoul of WP requirements for adequate citations. I watch many of the pages that use CongBio and CongLinks, and intend to revert attempts to delete them on a large scale without consensus, without edit warring or triggering WP:3R of course.DCmacnut &lt; &gt;  20:01, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * My basic problem is that I want to add the FJC Bio links (which are basically the same as CongBio links, but for federal judges) to existing articles on federal judges, and editors of those articles do not want them added, citing WP:EL. The rule is trite and really serves no point when applied to public domain databases maintained by government agencies. I'd like to see it changed in order to eliminate that point as a basis for preventing the federal judge articles from being made uniform with respect to the link. I have been told that articles featuring such external links can never be approved for GA or FA status, which is an equally pointless prohibition, if true. bd2412  T 20:10, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry for focusing too much on the CongBio side of things. Have you been able to get the template added to any articles? I would recommend maybe removing the "public domain" language from the template. People may be getting hung up on that, thinking it's meant as a reference. See Template:Bioguide. Is there a similar WikiProject for the judicial branch you could raise this with? I created a template for SD Legislators, Template:SD-legdb, and there's also one for Minnesota legislators, Template:MN-legdb, both which have been used without complaint. I don't see how they should be singling out just yours. If they kill one they'd have to kill all, and I believe they'd have a hard time winning that argument.DCmacnut &lt; &gt;  22:31, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * (Incidentally, I agree.) – Quadell (talk) 13:21, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikiproject Ford
I reposted the proposal of Wikiproject Ford  Here  Ford 21:27, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

"This user repairs links to disambi­guation pages."
Oh hey, I didn't know you did dab work too! That's my other main area of work on Wikipedia. I recently made a big batch of "Disambiguation may be needed" links at Suggestions for name disambiguation. You'd certainly be welcome there. All the best, – Quadell (talk) 13:23, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject United States courts and judges/judgestats
Okay, I've imported the 4 judges whose last names start with Q. Does this look good? Is this all the info you think would be useful when generating lists? If you have no objections, I'll run it for all judges. All the best, – Quadell (talk) 17:35, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Perfect. This project is getting off to such a good start, I could explode with happiness. I'd ask you to import the successor judges too, but FJC doesn't include them (and they'll be easy enough to find manually by going down the predecessor list). Thanks for everything - you've been like an engine driving this project forward! bd2412  T 17:58, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Abuse filter idea
Hi, Do you think it would be good to have a "white list" for the abuse filter these users would be exempt from it. To get onto the white list you would have to be a trusted user. This could include being a rollbacker, admin, having the AWB permission, having an account with over a 1000 edits or a very old account say older than 2005. --DFS454 (talk) 19:35, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm big on algorithms. Of course admins would be immune from the filter, and probably rollbackers. Once you get into people without those indicia of trustworthiness, I'd have to go with a combination of account age and edit count - either one by itself would not sway me much. bd2412  T 20:45, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok where do we go from here? Should we raise this at WP:VPR ?--DFS454 (talk) 21:18, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually I've raised it in the past and been shot down, but I keep coming up with new ways that it could be applied. Maybe one will stick. bd2412  T 21:33, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

We're famous
Hey, did you see? We're in The Signpost! – Quadell (talk) 20:34, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject United States courts and judges/judgestats
Hey, I saw you disambiguated a judge's name there. I'm trying to keep everything in that list in a consistent, bot-readable format. Could you list any disambiguations at WikiProject United States courts and judges/judgestats/problems, instead of changing the page directly? (The list there is of names that didn't have a judge-related category in the article.) That way I can make the changes consistently. All the best, – Quadell (talk) 01:58, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem, thank you for the notice. bd2412  T 02:09, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Featured list
FYI. – Quadell (talk) 14:09, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Templates with red links
There's a new dump in progress. Do you want an update of the TwRL reports? --R'n'B (call me Russ) 10:12, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I sure do! Might take me a while to get to parsing it, as I'm up to my ears in judges, but I will get it done. Can you have the list of templates (and the list of links within the templates) alphabetized? If not, I'll do so manually. Cheers! bd2412  T 14:16, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Do you mean alphabetized instead of being sorted by number of red links, or do you mean alphabetized within each group of templates having the same number of red links? --R'n'B (call me Russ) 19:48, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Within each number. bd2412  T 20:07, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

As you wish. Unfortunately, I didn't think through the numbering scheme for subpages as well as I should have, so they aren't sorted optimally, but the sorting within the pages should be as desired. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 20:12, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * You sir, are a WikiSaint. bd2412  T 23:51, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

wp:HSITES
WikiProject Historic Sites has opened up. I took the liberty of assuming your support for the wikiproject meant you wanted to join as a member, and I copied your signature to the Members list on the main page. Please visit and add to, or remove, your listing there. It would be great to hear about what you're interested in the Wikiproject becoming, in your member comment and/or at the Talk page, shortcut wt:HSITES. Thanks for your support! doncram (talk) 17:45, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

zero sum dab silliness
Hi, I noticed that you redirected Fixed sum game so that it points to a dab page, rather than to the page on the primary topic (which ought to be at zero sum, but is in fact at Zero-sum (game theory)). It really would be better (in fact, it seems what WP:PRIMARYTOPIC says ought to be done) to move the contents of Zero-sum (game theory) to zero sum and move the dab page currently at zero sum to Zero sum (disambiguation), since the meaning of the term "zero sum" derives from the game theory term. I'd just go and do it, but it requires admin action. Best regards, Pete.Hurd (talk) 21:06, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, whoever made the link in the first place made it point to the disambig page. I merely redirected it to the new location of the disambig page when it was moved. bd2412  T 21:20, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Aye, I see you are correct. Could I convince you to consider moving zero sum to Zero sum (disambiguation) and Zero-sum (game theory) to zero sum per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC?  I put in a request for this some time ago at WP:RM, but it seemed to fail for some trivial request formatting problem.  (see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Game_theory for discussion between the original dab page mover (User:Tennekis) and me and User:Cretog8 over the rationale...).  Best regards, Pete.Hurd (talk) 22:40, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I see. Discussion's at the wrong place. I'll bring it up at Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation. bd2412  T 00:47, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Pete.Hurd (talk) 03:09, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Help?
Excuse me, do you think you can use your administrative powers to merge Talk:Madara (disambiguation) to Talk:Madara? I am not able to move the page normally. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 17:58, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, would it be best if you did a history merge? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 18:00, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Done. Cheers! bd2412  T 18:09, 21 March 2009 (UTC)