User talk:A930913/Archives/2014/Jun

No edits by ReferenceBot since May 21?
It appears that ReferenceBot has not notified editors about broken refs since May 21? Is the bot ill? I hope not. It is a useful little helper. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:25, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Got logged out, seems to happen once in a while :/ 930913 &#123;&#123;ping&#125;&#125; 01:07, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

DefconBot Override
Hi, I was wondering if there's any way (say DefconBot malfunctions or doesn't notice some spike in vandalism) for an editor to manually override DefconBot's editing of the Vandalism Information template, and stop DefconBot from editing it. VoxelBot had that capability, and it was used a couple times. Thanks! Vaca tion  9  22:11, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Just edit the template. The bot doesn't actually edit there 930913 &#123;&#123;ping&#125;&#125; 01:07, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Oh cool. Didn't notice that. Vaca  tion  9  04:02, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Franky Van der Elst - Reply
Thank you for the tip, i think i have already fixed the jinx.

Happy editing and all of that --AL (talk) 17:16, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Aleksandr Vondra
Tried to add some recent info about the guy from the Czech newspapers. Reference added. Just translated from Czech, as the recent information says a lot about him and his political views (attacking political opponents without regards to the actuality). Bibka (Couldn't log in and didn't get any email with new password though.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.238.146.200 (talk) 15:10, 5 June 2014 (UTC)


 * That looks like a WP:BLP violation to me: Clearly non-neutral coverage of a minor incident, largely not based on what the reliable source reports. I'll revert that. Huon (talk) 17:34, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks...BracketBot
Thank you BracketBot. Seth Whales  talk    21:48, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

greetings
Hey, remember me from the IRC? well i got banned for repeating 3 lines from the entire freenode server. Thats right, the entire server. They won't even respond to my queries that i email to their appeal email.

and i'm apparently banned from the WP-en irc channel so this is fantastic.

so anyway, hi. --Coo coo pigeon (talk) 05:01, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

thank for for fixing the brackets
Thanks! Venustar84 (talk) 22:13, 8 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Sorry, what brackets are you referring to? BracketBot only notifies editors of potential problems, it does not on its own fix brackes. Huon (talk) 00:23, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Siege of Sloviansk
UserGogo212121 Hello A930913 preaching Ingushetia helps you separatists in Ukraine Ingushetia you play a role in the Ukrainian conflict --Gogo212121 (talk) 13:34, 9 June 2014 (UTC)


 * You would need a reliable source to make such a claim on Wikipedia. Huon (talk) 23:55, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Quick message
I like you and I find you a great asset to Wikipedia; you are helpful and kind and never judge anyone. Thank you. Musicfan2014 (talk) 14:12, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Wade Barrett Page
Hi there. What I believed was that the name above the picture is supposed to be current to the picture, and so Wade Barrett was going under the name of Bad News Barrett in April 2014 when the photo was taken. That is why I believed the name above the picture should be called Bad News Barrett. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ScottyMackenzey (talk • contribs) 20:51, 10 June 2014 (UTC)


 * I agree that it's not vandalism, but the article title should be the name he is most well-known as, not necessarily the most recent. Thus "Wade Barret" seems more appropriate. Huon (talk) 21:51, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Subject heading
Dear BracketBot, please can you change your subject headings on user talk pages so they are more descriptive (not just in the Month Year format)? How about "Possible bracket issue on Article name "? Thank you &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:47, 11 June 2014 (UTC)


 * That section heading format was chosen deliberately. For example, the bot will bundle multiple messages under the same heading, and it's not the only one to use those sections. The idea was not to flood talk pages with multiple sections when one will do just as well. Huon (talk) 19:14, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

DefconBot issues
DefconBot is down. Not updating Template:Defcon Can you fix ASAP? Thanks. --Coo coo pigeon (talk) 04:59, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

'Page:Society of Chemical Industry'
Hello, I've been asked to change the name of this page to SCI, following a decision by our Board of Directors, but I can't see how to do it. Does anyone have any suggestions? Would be much obliged. with thanks, Joanna Pegum --Joanna Webteam (talk) 13:56, 16 June 2014 (UTC), SCISociety_of_Chemical_Industry


 * Wikipedia should use the name most commonly used in reliable sources. The society has a history more than a century long, and for all I can tell for most of that time it was known by the full title, not the acronym. For example, the lone independent source, the Guardian, gives the full title. Thus the full title seems more appropriate even if the society recently changed its name. Huon (talk) 21:19, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I've been asked to do this by our Board. Is there a way of doing so? Many thanks in advance, Joanna Pegum --Joanna Webteam (talk) 14:42, 17 June 2014 (UTC)


 * SCI is a disambiguation page which lists multiple meanings of that acronym, including the Society of Chemical Industry. So at best we could move the article to something like "SCI (academic organization)". I don't think that would be an improvement, and I see no reason why the title on Wikipedia should differ from that used by reliable sources such as the Guardian. "Because the Board wants a change" is not a good reason when the Board's preferred name is not the one the organization is most commonly known by. Huon (talk) 23:31, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Missing Bracket Notification of E.W. Scripps
Dear Bracketbot,

I have received your notice about my editing of E.W. Scripps. I have located and fixed the problem. I just wanted to thank you for your attentiveness and say that the problem is fixed. Have a nice day. User talk:Mr. Yondris Ferguson 17:08, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Orto Botanico dell'Università di Sassari
thank you, I think ( I hope) now is ok. 62.10.247.244 (talk) 17:53, 18 June 2014 (UTC)


 * It is, thanks for fixing it! Huon (talk) 21:06, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

User:A930913/vada/plugin/ufd.js is showing up in CAT:SD
Might want to fix that before your page gets nuked. MER-C 12:41, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Jennifer Lopez has sold 80 million records Worldwide as of 2014 and i don't think it's right you keep changing it
Hi If You actually did your research and read the articles i posted you would know that since may of 2014 Jennifer Lopez has sold 80 million record worldwide i feel that it is not right that people keep reverting my changes when i have included up to date articles from 2014 which state that she has sold 80 million records worldwide as well as a film gross of 2 billion dollars what i want to know is why do you and others keep using articles from 2011 and not 2014 you say always cite reliable sources well i can give you 3 articles which state the same thing that Jennifer Lopez has sold 80 million records for example:1.www.latimes.com/entertainment/music/la-et-ms-jennifer-lopez-aka-20140615-story.html#page=1 article title:Jennifer Lopez on dating, her split with Marc Anthony and First Love. 2.www.forthone.com/music/news/jennifer-lopez-reveals-album-title-racy-artwork/ article title Jennifer Lopez Reveals Album title & Racy Artwork 3.www.rantlifestyle.com/20-hottest-female-musicians-in-the-world-today/ Article Title: 20 Hottest Female Musicians in The World Today (Tnays20 (talk) 18:32, 28 June 2014 (UTC)).


 * A couple of comments: Firstly, please do not remove others' comments when adding your own to a talk page, as you did here. Secondly, I don't quite understand why you raise the issue here, since A930913 hasn't edited those articles, for all I can tell. A930913 doesn't seem to be the only uninvolved editor you complained to. Thirdly, there's a discussion about the sources' reliability and the corresponding content at the article's talk page; that would be a good place to explain your rationale. Finally, the LA Times article looks like a better source to me than what's currently used; I'd suggest using that in place of the current sources. Huon (talk) 19:08, 28 June 2014 (UTC)


 * I support the position of, but then again I'm against bots in general.