User talk:Betacommand/20070801

Category:Publicity photographs with missing fair-use rationale
I'm sick of dealing with these, and I'm only up to image pages beginning with "Bo". There's thousands of images, a lot missing rationales, some with half-rationales, some replaceable fair uses and others lacking source information. Can you unleash your bot on these? Thanks. MER-C 13:33, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Message from Jai
Hi Bot, thanks for your message about copyright uploading photos. But for a great actor like Chiranjeevi, we need to upload pictures. I see the uploaded photos for many of the biographies and they were not removed. So why is Chiranjeevi image removed. There are thousands of free photos available in net to upload. And could you please guide me why I cannot upload a free image and what should I write in note to protect it from removal? Thank you. --Jaimalleshk 16:38, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Notification about tagging
Is there a way for the bot to notify me when images are tagged?

Some images I uploaded were tagged for being orphans. I unorphaned them, but I did not know that the images were tagged. The tags were not removed, and the images were deleted. I will restore them. WhisperToMe 07:13, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
 * If the bot tags them it also notifies the uploader, the images that were tagged were probably tagged by humans. ∆ 14:19, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Your Tags
May I use some of them on my page? If you request, I'll note that the originals were supplied by you.

Special Penguin (Talk) 16:21, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
 * My tags? ∆ 16:54, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm thinking this right now. Your tags.  Let me show you them. - C HAIRBOY  (☎) 04:11, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Re Image
Hi Betacommand, your bot just got to me about an image. I was going to have it deleated because I spelled the name wrong i.e. “Eein.” I’ve been a bit busy with one thing and another and just did not get round to it. Sorry about that, and thanks, Kind Regards --Domer48 18:56, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Possible run
Greetings. You are being contacted by BetacommandBot and by Zscout370. The reason for this message is that you have have uploaded (place the image name here) under the following license Template:Vector-images.com. Recently, a decision was made about images and anything not meeting freedomdefined.org will be considered "unfree" for Wikimedia's purposes. The terms of the website do not allow their images to be used now under our new guidelines. You are being given a chance to relicense the image for about two weeks. If you fail to relicense the image, there is a good chance the image will be deleted from Wikipedia. If you have any questions or concern, please see Zscout370. Thank you. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 19:08, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I would suggest using "Vector-images.com image warning." User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 22:58, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:Inwonder presence cov.jpg
Initially, I had created an article, but Rick Block thought that was overkill and asked me to redirect it. So I did. I apologize for any inconvenience with this image. Feel free to delete it. Shaneymike 19:33, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Bot malfunction
BetacommandBot is adding di-orphaned fair use tags to images that are not claimed as fair use: and, for example. --Carnildo 03:53, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
 * those images transclude non-free media which is used on non-free images. ∆ 04:58, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Images
Go ahead and delete them. Unfortunately I'm not allowed to post them. --Coconutfred73 20:40, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

User:JU580 Orphaned non-free image (Image:JAT logo.gif)
hi there,

Thank you for letting me know that the image JAT logo.gif is orphaned. I do wish to keep the image, and also to obide by the rules of wikipedia in doing so. I would appreciate any suggestions or advise needed to keep the image. I would like to some time add it to the Jat Airways page.

Thank you in advance for any assistance JU580 06:59, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Suggested change in operation
THis bot left 15 successive notices on my talk page, which is idiotic. Would it perhaps evaluate on each run which notices were going to be left and roll the 15 images into a single message listing all 15 images it has issue with? Making 15 successive edits leaving screens worth of repetitive nonsense about image tagging is more than a trifle annoying. - PocklingtonDan (talk) 20:33, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Album Cover Image
Fair use rationale for Image:Roy Harper.jpg I thought uploading of album covers was ok and that I had done everything necessary...haven't I? Stephenjh 22:14, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Multiple messages
After reading User talk:23skidoo, perhaps you should alter the bot to only leave one message per day/week/three days, with a list of violating images? --Eyrian 19:14, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:IMAX Theater.JPEG
This bot has now twice tagged this photo as needing a fair use rationale, yet this picture isn't actually marked as fair use - it's just missing a copyright boilerplate (which in itself is a reason for deletion, but it's not the same reason). The Islander 12:00, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
 * the no copyright holder marks images as fair use. ∆ 02:13, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Signature change
Someone asked me to look into your signature. I have to agree that it's confusing. Can you please change it? Raul654 11:39, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 30th, 2007.
Apologies for the late delivery this week; my plans to handle this while on vacation went awry. Ral315

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. Ralbot 23:38, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Problem
When reporting at UAA, BetacommandBot just says "Reported because of 'insertbadwordhere'", and says nothing else in the comment. GrooveDog (talk) 01:40, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Im in the process of converting my variables into a new format (badwordhere|reason here)' Im not done with the conversion yet. ∆ 03:10, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Your signature
Hi Betacommand. I would like to request that you add your username to you signature, instead of just the symbol ∆, so that it can be easily identified in discussions by other users. Not all users know about hovering and seeing where the link leads to in the status bar, and if you are on a cell phone or portable device it's just impossible. Thanks. (Also, if you'd like to use it in addition to your name, the code for the symbol can be shorted to ) — M ETS 501 (talk) 19:29, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

CorrectBot
I really would like to learn how to program and make automatic scripts. I'll admit, I've never been good at these kinds of things with computers. I believe the answer I seek lies at this "#pywikipediabot" which I couldn't open (top sentence). Please, I'd like more time on this if possible. Would it be too much to ask someone (a sysop or someone else who specializes in this) to assist me? Maybe you can help me, if I don't learn about programming now, I know I won't ever learn it by myself in the future. It can't be too complicated, I suppose. Lord Sesshomaru 07:43, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
 * You can find nearly everything you need at pywikipedia which is at meta. ~   Wi ki  her mit  17:20, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
 * computer programming can be very difficult, but on a side note I would suggest doing a google search on learning python. ∆ 00:59, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

foo

 * Your bot archives too soon. In case you missed my comment, which people usually do, here it is. Lord Sesshomaru 16:04, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
 * yeah I know it moves it to my talk page. ∆ 01:18, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Two problems
 — M ETS 501 (talk) 20:09, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) "This user was reported because (.)\1{8}" - it's clear what's wrong there
 * 2) - there shouldn't be a "User:" in the template
 * it was because that account was created as a sock of another account as for point #1 Im not sure what you mean. ∆ 01:18, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you
I think it's been a few weeks now since I saw a "Betacommandbot blocked" thread on ANI... have you been slacking? ;) Kamryn · Talk 14:55, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Your BetaCommandBot and my pages

 * 1) Destroys older edits on pages. Please see my history page as the last bot edit destroyed the edit for "deadly deadly", and only because I was thorough did I find out that your bot had also flagged that image as well.
 * 2) The images had an extensive copyright section, including a fair use statement, culminating with the paragraph
 * "I am Gianna Masetti, the author of the webcomic. As the copyright holder of The Noob, I give Wikipedia editors permission to use text or image material from the comic for the purpose of updating this Wikipedia entry. My only request to the authors and editors of the entry is that it should be strictly informational and it should respect the guidelines of the website (i.e. not promotional). I may be contacted about this at my email address gianna.masetti@gmail.com."
 * this is completely missing from the history of the images, and that missing history has me concerned. I've restored it.

I really only expect you to fix number 1, I just needed to rant a little about number 2 to someone. By the way, fantastic job on the bot, that should simplify a lot of PITA auditing of wikipedai images. Well done! Timmccloud 15:10, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
 * well, BCBot made zero errors here, your issues are human related. If you look at the logs for those images you will see that they were deleted and re-uploaded. If your talking about the one notice that BCbot delete it edit conflicted with itself, Ive fixed that issue a while ago. βcommand 22:49, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

incorrect warning from bot re Image:Scarborough2.jpg
Hello. On Talk:Light music your bot placed a fair use warning.

But the photo is not fair use, it's in the public domain, as released by the person who took the photo.

I edited the image page to update to the new PD template rather than the old one that was there from when the user uploaded the photo.

I just wanted to let you know about this, since the bot placed a warning for a different kind of use than the use specified on the image page.

Is there anything further we need to do on this regarding the image use on that article page? --Parsifal Hello 00:55, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok you have me confused. Image:Scarborough2.jpg is in fact PD and is tagged as such, but Talk:Light music references another image, Image:Wood haydn.jpg which is tagged as Non free. BCBot has not touched Image:Scarborough2.jpg. βcommand 01:08, 6 August 2007 (UTC)


 * You're right, my apologies. There are two images on the article and I clicked the wrong one.  Must be too much editing today!


 * I don't know anything about Image:Wood haydn.jpg so I can't help with a rationale on it.


 * Thanks for clarifying that. --Parsifal Hello 01:25, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikiproject opt-in
Based on a post on the AN, I would like for the WikiProject Heraldry and vexillology to be notified of any fair use issues. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 09:07, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok like I said on AN I need two things, your WikiProject template and where you want the notices posted to. βcommand 12:06, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I think you want WikiProject Heraldry and vexillology. No clue about the page though ;) ——  Eagle 101 Need help? 15:38, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
 * The project's talk page is fine, since I watch that. Other fair use issues were discussed on that page. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 19:20, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
 * ✅ Done

Image:Presence proF.jpg
You can delete that too. All other images that I've uploaded should have an article to go with them. Shaneymike 12:03, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Betacommand is not an administrator, so he does not have the ability to delete things. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 19:21, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

RFC
I've simplified the RFC instructions, and hope it no longer gives the false impression that it's somehow a formal process.  &gt; R a d i a n t &lt;  15:05, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Novels opt-in
Hi Betacommand. Could you notify WikiProject Novels about images with fair-use issues on this page? The template is NovelsWikiProject. Thanks. -- Bláthnaid 19:10, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

✅ Done βcommand 19:20, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Middle-earth opt-in
Template is Template:ME-project. It is used on article talk pages, but not on image talk pages. Will the bot still pick up on this? Do you need a talk page to post notices to, or will an ordinary Wikipedia page do? If the latter, please use WikiProject Middle-earth/Images/Disputed images. Thanks. Carcharoth 03:36, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
 * ✅ Done βcommand 03:38, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Betacommandbot and fair-use rationale
Hey, you might want to include in your message left for users, that, they can find a template to use. for fair-use rationale, at Non-free_use_rationale_guideline or,, in order to give them a better idea of how to correct the problem. Nice bot, however! :) --SXT4$\color{Red} \oplus$ 05:38, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for August 6th, 2007.
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. Ralbot 08:25, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Shared templates
That sounds like an excellent idea. I think that perhaps CENT should be populated from WP:RFC/POLICIES - most people double post their issues on both of those anyway.  &gt; R a d i a n t &lt;  08:33, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Ive gotten one template done so far, RFCbio and RFCbio list Im working on moving them all over to that. RFC/POLICIES will be next. We just need to find a place to hold all the list templates. βcommand 11:00, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

RFCBio
Hi. You added the RFCbio template to Talk:Xi-Ping Zhu. Unfortunately, I've never seen this template and it's not clear what it means. The template page does not give any clue either. The template says "A user has requested a request for comment on biography for this section". Huh? Are you this user? What is behind the RfC? Did you find anything dodgy in the article (seems impossible, in my opinion), or why were you prompted to add this template? Best wishes from a confused Jitse Niesen (talk) 13:18, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I was cleaning out WP:RFC and re-organized it, using an automated system with templates. that page was listed on WP:RFC/BIO βcommand 13:23, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your explanation. I now realize that should have looked at the history on WP:RFC/BIO. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 02:24, 8 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I can get to RFC (or MSN if you prefer), but not right now. Is it ok for you about three hours from now? Yours,  &gt; R a d i a n t &lt;  13:35, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Ill be there lurking in irc://freenode/wikipedia-en βcommand 13:37, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
 * D'oh, looks like we missed one another. I had some problems getting past a nasty firewall.  &gt; R a d i a n t &lt;  19:20, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Im still lurking just PM Betacommand βcommand 19:38, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Template:Wider attention list
For some reason your bot keeps replacing "Emo" with "Elmo." And the link to shut it down...doesn't.--P4k 04:04, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I protected the page for 24 hours. No need to stop the bot for that. When you fix the problem can you request the page be unprotected. Viridae Talk 04:11, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
 * It wasnt a error with the bot, it was a typo on the article's talkpage where wider attention is used. βcommand 05:37, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

McGrory image removal
I have no complaint about what you & your bot do in regards to the image I posted. I don't even need to be notified. I no longer care. -- Cabreet (talk) 06:15, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

My bot request
Thank you for cosidering to help me with this. Is it at all possible to teach me how to supervise this bot? And it only needs to check every other month. Like I said, a small bot. Dreamy \*/!$! 12:29, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Image wrongly stated as orphaned
In a change to my user talk page, the bot claimed that Image:NeroDBAtomic0000.png was orphaned. However, the image (as of this edit) has use in an article, from which it was removed in now-undone vandalism. Can the orphan notice please be removed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by WarpObscura (talk • contribs)
 * Yeah feel free to remove any orphan tags when they are no longer orhaned. βcommand 13:44, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Bot username reporting
Many of your blacklist patterns are not violations of the username policy. Patterns such a "!!!", "asdf", and "hahaha" are causing a lot of false positives. There is discussion here Wikipedia_talk:Usernames_for_administrator_attention/Bot regarding this. It would be nice if the blacklist could be edited on wiki like the other two username bots. Until ( 1 == 2 )  13:55, 8 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Now that was a fast response. Thanks. Until  ( 1 == 2 )  14:03, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
 * that is because Im not human, Im a computer AI. βcommand 14:06, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Do you have approval to be running(hehe)? Until  ( 1 == 2 )  14:08, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
 * hush no one knows that I am an AI. βcommand 14:11, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Template:Wider attention list
The bot keeps messing this page up for some reason; take a look at the history.--P4k 03:57, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Images
Go ahead and delete them. BTW, I didn't upload the Dr. Eggman pic.
 * Read this talk page before registering your complaint. It is likely someone has already registered a similar complaint, and that complaint will have been given an answer.

Image:DKBB
Go ahead and delete it since the American boxart has been revealed. --Coconutfred73 16:44, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Invalid WP:UAA reports
This bot is producing loads of invalid WP:UAA reports. See the talk page there for why most of this bot's reports are against the username policy. I encourage you to rewrite the bot to post its reports on WP:RFCN instead.  r speer  / ɹəəds ɹ  19:59, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

The bot is currently encouraging admins to block Hispanic names for being too long or containing "jesus". Please shut it down or make it post its names to a more appropriate place, such as WP:RFCN.  r speer  / ɹəəds ɹ  23:33, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

RfC for flagging a merge relating to Morphogenetic fields
Hi Betacommand. You recently updated two talk pages with flags indicating that an RfC was in progress in relation to a merge. Your edits are and. The second edit failed to close the template brackets; not that this matters much. Actually, the merge in question took place two weeks ago. I placed the RfC myself, three weeks ago. I am sorry if I have messed up the proper procedures for posting and resolving an RfC; may I remove the tags again?

The whole history is amusing; but in a nutshell only one person objected, and they did everything to stonewall and distract an obviously sensible move. I bent over backwards to follow process, and after a clear consensus was established, I did the merge. Not sure if you really need that level of detail; but there you go. How do I close off the RfC? &mdash;Duae Quartunciae (talk · cont)  03:52, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
 * July 18. I proposed the merge, and put comments in both talk pages, and flags on the pages.
 * July 19. Ndr01 removed the flags, declaring the proposal "nonsensical".
 * July 19. Brief edit war over whether the flags should be in place to indicate a merge is proposed.
 * July 19. I post the RfC, after a brief edit war on the placement of flags.
 * July 26. After lots of entertaining discussions on the talk pages, it is clear that everyone except Ndr01 favours the merge. I carry out the merge, and everything has been quiet since then.
 * I was just helping with RfC format change. all you need it to remove the RFCsci template. βcommand 03:59, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Ta muchly. Adios &mdash;Duae Quartunciae (talk · cont)  04:25, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

removing rfc tag
Hi - I tried to remove Josh Wolf from the RFC/biographies list, as there have been sufficient responses. I removed the tag from Talk:Josh Wolf, but the item is still listed on the RFC/biographies page and I can't figure out how to remove it. Could you tell me? Thanks Tvoz | talk 06:57, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
 * wait about five minutes and the bot will update it. βcommand 13:27, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Nice, thanks. Tvoz | talk 14:44, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

RFC bot
Hi there! It seems to be off to a good start, and thanks for your help!

One question though - I note that every page like RFCbio list ends with the phrase "For more information, see User:MessedRobot II" - I think it would help if it would link to WP:RFC instead. Could you change this maybe? Yours,  &gt; R a d i a n t &lt;  08:42, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
 * And, perhaps you could have the bot start each line (on the list pages) with the name of the relevant article?  &gt; R a d i a n t &lt;  09:44, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Is this going to be a new feature of BetacommandBot or are you just using it as an incubator and then I'll be able to run the bot myself again? MessedRocker (talk) 12:22, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Messedrocker, Im testing the upgrades to the discussionbot that you run. βcommand 13:25, 9 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Also, Template:RFCpolicy_list says "To add a page to this list, tag it with RFC". It should be RFCpolicy.  &gt; R a d i a n t &lt;  14:17, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
 * fixed. Also can you draft a warning about not editing those templates directly? βcommand 14:26, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I can protect them all under WP:HRT if that helps?  &gt; R a d i a n t &lt;  14:33, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I ment the list templates and the fact that the bot will overwrite those changes βcommand 14:51, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Status Indicator
I saw that you have your current status shown on your userpage. I would like to know how you did that. Please leave your response on my talk page. Thanks. —Michael 22:30, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject opt-in
Betacommand, if you could add WikiProject Alabama to the list of those projects notified of image related issues, I'd appreciate the notices being placed on WikiProject Alabama/Disputed images. Our project banner is WikiProject Alabama. Thanks. - auburn pilot   talk  23:26, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

WP:CVU status
The Counter-Vandalism Unit project is under consideration to be moved to and/or  status. Another proposal is to delete or redirect the project. You have been identified as a project member and your input as to this matter would be welcomed at WT:CVU and at the deletion debate. Thank you! Delivered on behalf of xaosflux 15:14, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

BetacommandBot and UAA
There is a consensus at WT:UAA that all username bots except for HBC NameWatcherBot should stop reporting names to UAA. It would be nice to get a copy of your blacklist to salvage any strings that may of moved over. Until ( 1 == 2 )  18:16, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

This bot should stop posting to WP:UAA
The consensus on WP:UAA is that BetacommandBot's functionality there is redundant with HBCNameWatcherBot, which is more careful about following the username policy and avoiding false positives. We'd like you to disable that part of the bot.  r speer  / ɹəəds ɹ  17:55, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Teaser2blg.gif)
That image has been replaced, so speedy deletion is happily encouraged! Tebor 01:35, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Packager - Botticelli's Venus.png)
Image was removed by an anon. Since no edit summary was provided, and the recent history of its contributions looked questionable I can only assume it was vandalism. I've decided to put it back. Shinobu 04:33, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

foo
What did you do to piss off BillCJ?

Bbb87.jpg
You recently commented that the image is up for deletion, unless it is added to an article. Well, if you look at Bad Boys Blue page on wiki, you will see that numerous attempts had been made to add the image to the page, although no success was achieved in liking the two. I would very much appreciate if you could add the above mentioned image to the Bad Boys Blue page, before the expiration date.

Thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.217.125.56 (talk • contribs)

xkcd
This is that webcomic I told you about. Check out the archives. http://xkcd.com/

-- Conley

Fair use rationale for Image:Gravitypope logo current2.jpg
Your bot recently flagged the file: "Gravitypope logo current2.jpg" for not having a fair use rationale. I added a fair use rationale to all the logo files for gravity pope. I hope this negates the criteria for speedy deletion.

Signpost updated for August 13th, 2007.
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. Ralbot 19:55, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Errors in SpebiBot
Hi Betacommand. I've been trying to run the subst.py bot script you wrote for a while now, receiving the same error. It says "Getting references to " up until Template:AFDWarning, and then the following error:

 Traceback (most recent call last): File "C:\pywikipedia\subst.py", line 585, in    main File "C:\pywikipedia\subst.py", line 568, in main page.put(pagetext, comment='BOT: substing ', % group[0], watchArticle = False, minorEdit = True) TypeError: not enough arguments for format string

I'm really not sure what to do. Would you be able to point out the problem with the code for me? Kind regards, – sebi 07:40, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I would like to ask why your destroying my beautiful code? the code that I gave you had no errors. βcommand 22:37, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Uh, I made no modifications to the code, apart from the edit summary. I can't speak a word of Python, and if I made an edit to the code, then I probably had no idea what I was doing. I ran the code when you first gave it to me and it worked fine (I made about 4 or 5 good edits), and now recently the code has been stuffing up. – sebi 06:30, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Im just wondering why you wanted to change the edit summary? I purposely wrote it the way it was. and you did make other changes to the code (probably by accident). βcommand 15:57, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

RFCbot
Hi there! Would it be possible for the RFCbot to list issues by the date they were added, rather than alphabetically?  &gt; R a d i a n t &lt;  08:56, 13 August 2007 (UTC) ill look into it but I cannot promise anything. βcommand 01:58, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, Template:RFCpolicy list still looks pretty strange...  &gt; R a d i a n t &lt;  09:25, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
 * (but I just cut CAT:PRO in half so that may help)  &gt; R a d i a n t &lt;  15:36, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Perhaps if CAT:PRO is problematic, the bot should not use proposed to populate it, but stick to the RFCpolicy ?  &gt; R a d i a n t &lt;  10:45, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

FYI
Requests for arbitration

The Uninvited Co., Inc. 15:23, 13 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Good luck. Just keep the angry mobs howling for your head here on your talk page and off AN/I. :-) (In other words, be responsive, and I won't object.)--AnonEMouse (squeak) 15:35, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Best of luck with it, I hope everything goes smoothly.  Ry an P os tl et hw ai te  17:50, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
 * thank you for the support. βcommand 01:59, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Multiple messages
Since the last time I said this seemed to get archived to nowhere, I'm going to repeat what I said. Please alter your bot so that it only leaves one message per day (or other period of time). I've seen too many user pages swamped with many basically identical messages. Consider just leaving a single message with a list of all problematic images. I'm a programmer myself, so I realize this might not be a small change, but it's creating a very large nuisance. And your bot already has problems with that. --Eyrian 03:52, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
 * well Like ive said im working on a method of doing that, but its not a simple change. When I get it working ill add it to the bot, but until then im going to leave it the way it is. βcommand 16:01, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Bot requests/Archive 51#Assessment bot
Hello! I was wondering if you had seen my comment at Bot requests/Archive 51, and if my suggestion seems doable/reasonable. If you had seen it, and were ignoring it for whatever reason, sorry for bugging you. Danke. ~ JohnnyMrNinja  04:48, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

MessedRobot II online
You don't have to run discussionbot.py on your end anymore. MessedRocker (talk) 05:00, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, see User talk:Messedrocker and User talk:Radiant!. MessedRocker (talk) 09:35, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Something in the policy of non free images
Hello

In Non-free content criteria, it states in number 4 the following: "# Previous publication. Non-free content has been published outside Wikipedia."

Now, the question is..is that a working policy? or this was just added in a hurry? I'm asking because if this is a working policy, many images will be deleted, any non free image like screen shots of tv, films or even logos..because these type of images are usually self-made by the uploaders, thus not published outside Wikipedia..of course I might be wrong and misunderstood the policy but better to be on the safe side :)--Alnokta 13:45, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Yep misunderstanding, if you take a screenshot from a TV show, that frame was published as part of the whole show, and thus was already published, even if that individual frame wasnt singled out. same goes with movies. as for logos they are published when ever a company uses it. βcommand 13:49, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot for explaining :)..what are the examples of non free content which hasn't been published outside Wikipedia?--Alnokta 14:33, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * screen shots from movies that are still under production and trailers of the movie havent been released. Another example is a photographer copyrighting images and then placing them on wikipedia without publishing them anywhere else. βcommand 15:30, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * hmm..okay...thanks--Alnokta 15:47, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Favorites.PNG deleted after fair use rationale added
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bookmark_%28computers%29&oldid=135741667 That's messed up. How do we stop this bot from blithely ignoring the corrections that were applied, according to the instructions posted by the bot? Didn't it check before deleting? --Lexein 06:54, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
 * neither I or the bot can delete images. second you might want to talk to ESkog since (s)he tagged it after you removed BCBots tag. βcommand 07:09, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

BCBot idea
Would it be possible for BCBot to count the number of non-free images used in a particular article, and list the article and number of images in a report somewhere? This would help us spot articles with excessive non-free media (i.e. articles that should be tagged with non-free). A human could then review the report and check the article. Videmus Omnia Talk  14:00, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
 * ill think about it. (not sure the best method to do this) βcommand
 * Ive come up with a method, its no where near clean and it still has a few bugs to work out but I should be able to begin beta testing soon. βcommand 18:53, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:UTC logo.jpg)
Hello,

Your bot found the logo that I uploaded. Later, I found a better one, so this particular image is not used. I'd go ahead and delete the image, but I don't immediately see how I can do this. Please advise. MyPOV 13:07, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Temptation.jpg
Hi, the wiki image html (or whatever it is called) got messed up on an edit, so the article is using the image again now. Thanks for the heads up from your bot. Hazelorb 02:38, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Bot query
Could you please take a look at WT:RFC? Your bot appears to not catch every instance of the template.  &gt; R a d i a n t &lt;  08:09, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Bannershell
To enable bannershell, I've done the following. Please tell me if I'm on the right track :)


 * 1) Enable "Find and Replace -> Advanced"
 * 2) Create a new rule, name it "bannershell"
 * 3) On drop down menu at top, select "Inside template calls" (not "Entire text")
 * 4) Open If section, select "Contains" type {{WikiProjectBannerShell
 * 5) Tick the "regular expression" check box
 * 6) Open Replace section, choose to replace "" (blank) with {{WP Australia|music=yes|class= |importance= |music-importance= }}
 * 7) Click the "regular expression" check box
 * 8) Click OK.

Is this all OK? Giggy {{sup|Talk}} 02:31, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * that is not correct. Ill write up a config file for AWB. β{{sup|{{sub|command}}}} 02:38, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Could you just summarise what's wrong about it? Or is there a long list of things...  Giggy  {{sup|Talk}} 02:39, 22 August 2007 (UTC)


 * one dont use the subfield of templates. IF page contains {{WikiProjectBannerShell|1= replace WikiProjectBannerShell\|1=\n with

WikiProjectBannerShell|1= {{WP Australia|nested=yes|music=yes|class= |importance= |music-importance= }} and check the regex and Multiline boxes and uncheck case sensitive. β{{sup|{{sub|command}}}} 02:50, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks heaps. I'll try that now, see how it goes :)  Giggy  {{sup|Talk}} 02:53, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * please note the line break after the bannershell template. β{{sup|{{sub|command}}}} 02:55, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for August 20th, 2007.
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. Ralbot 04:42, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

BetacommandBot question
Could you tell me how did you look for images without fair use rationales to be tagged by BetacommandBot? There is a proposal at WikiProject Albums to check that all images used in high quality album articles have fair use rationales, correct source information and correct license tags. It would be very helpful if you could share your experience. Regards, Jogers (talk) 13:24, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * yeah its pretty crude method, I get a list of all non-free media (non-free media) and then start processing them. it loads the page contents checks for one of several templates if those are found it skips, otherwise it removes all the templates on the page and then checks the page size if the page size is under 20 chars it tags the image as not having a rationale. βcommand 15:09, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I see. Thanks. Jogers (talk) 15:34, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Your Bot Is Being Disruptive
Your bot importantly points out fair use and copyright violations. This is an important task, and I thank you for employing your bot to help track down these problems.

However, I suspect that it goes a little crazy sometimes. Please see what it has done on the talk page for List of Samurai Champloo characters. It's work on this page is just disruptive and severely distracts from the discussions that are taking place. I have not had anything to do with that page and am not in discussion there either, but, upon coming across it, I was quite disturbed by your bot's interference there. You must program your bot to post a message once or twice on a given page for copyright problems, not ten or twenty times, once for each image. Thank you for understanding. Cheers, ask123 20:43, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I think a better approach would be for uploaders and editors to verify that copyrighted material is being used in a correct manner. I don't see the notifications on article talk pages as being disruptive - this feature of the bot was specifically requested by multiple editors. The messages can be removed, archived, or collapsed in a matter of a few seconds. Videmus Omnia Talk  22:38, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I give one notice per page per image. Many users have asked for this so I added the article talk feature, if you think that the bot is interfering, what about those images breaking policy? βcommand 00:12, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Arbcom case
User:SqueakBox has filed Request for arbitration and you are a mentioned party. Kittybrewster  (talk) 21:47, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

User:Giano II's attack page
You should probably be made aware that Giano II is using 303's and Brixton Buster's (effective) technique of removing inconvenient material from user space:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AGiano%2Fsome_thoughts&diff=153430452&oldid=153428848

One would have thought that he could have stuck to policy and guidelines at least while an ArbCom was pending84.13.10.123 22:13, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

VandalProof
Someone needs to go through the Awaiting Approval part of the VandalProof article. The list is getting quite long... Jonj onbt  23:49, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Franklin Dam
At some stage in the past your bot placed a lakes tag at that article. If the lakes project really need to tag dams that never happened - well so be it. I have just removed the lake tag on the assumption that proposed then non existent dams do not deserve status within the lake project - please feel free to revert if there is such a contingency - however i would argue if wikipedia got clogged with proposed things that never happened it might need the space for another pedia like 'heroic failures'pedia or something - cheers SatuSuro 01:33, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Spansion-logo.jpg
Bot deleted this image by stating that it is not used in any article, but this is not true... It was used on Spansion article. See history and you will notice that this image was removed from article after this bot deleted it. Please restore everything like it was before and fix your bot. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by ManiacK (talk • contribs).


 * well My bot is not malfunctioning there was a change to a template that orphaned a lot of images. when the image was tagged it was orphaned. the bot did not delete the image. βcommand 22:01, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * As far as I can tell, Betacommand, that's not true. The bot tagged the image as orphaned at 19:09, 31 July 2007, and the image was in the Infobox Company template in the Spansion article from 12:25, 28 September 2006 until it was removed by a bot when it was deleted at 17:40, 18 August 2007.  The company_logo parameter was in the template from 11:19, 25 July 2007 on. — M ETS 501 (talk) 02:11, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Someone changed the Infobox Company template and changed the prameter about images. when that was changed it no longer displayed images, that left a lot of images orphaned. while the template as "vandalized" my bot tagged the resulting ophaned images. (there was a thread on ANI or AN about this) BetacommandBot 02:27, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Reply: Your bot is being disruptive
One note should be sufficient to alert editors that there is a usage problem with images on a particular page. And, if your message is really not getting through, you can always be bold and delete them.

I have already reached out to the person that uploaded the images to the page mentioned before. I have asked him/her to fully complete the rights information that your bot said was incomplete (or remove the images). One or two posts is all that would have been needed to set this chain of events into motion. But, instead, your bot posted 14 times. Thankfully there is a collapsable feature on the postings, without which other users might start pulling their hair out. I care about rights issues just as much as you do. But posting that many times is disruptive. It's just as disruptive as adding blue links all over an article. Excessive linking, just like excessive bot posting is frowned upon because it's distracting for users (and editors). And I doubt that the extra posts do anything to speed up the correction of the problem or prevent it from occurring in the future. Cheers, ask123 15:43, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, the bot only made one edit per image which is what it should do. I have seen the bot notify a user over 200 times. But it was only one message per image. (per policy) βcommand 15:47, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Well I feel bad for the users that had to read or edit among those 200 posts. That does seem altogether excessive. I'm sure it disrupted the usual course of business: namely the editing and reading processes. It's not the bot's fault, as you correctly point out. Rather, as the saying goes, "Computers don't make mistakes, human's do." Alerting others to potential copyright issues is a good thing, but disrupting the course of business on a page with 200 alerts seems crazy (at least, that's what I think). Just food 4 thought. Cheers, ask123 17:29, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for August 27th, 2007.
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. Ralbot 05:39, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Tip of the Hat
Thank you. Would it be possible to give an estimate of how many articles you've auto-assessed so far and/or give me an estimate when you are finished? The assessment section of WPBiography updates very infrequently so I'll be waiting a few days to find out otherwise. Please drop a note on my talk page when you get a chance. Thanks,  Psych  less   01:07, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I might be confused, but if you're in the "P's", which you were last time I checked, then how can there be 10k articles left to do? Or are you counting other projects as well?  Psych  less   01:25, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I see. I've never ventured into that area of the unassessed category, but I certainly know the depth of it now! Hopefully your bot will knock the number of unassessed articles for WPBio below 50k.  Psych  less   01:38, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikiproject class rating
"This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 03:47, 28 August 2007 (UTC)"
 * Hey betacommand. This message doesn't make sense *-) I know what it is trying to say but only cos ive read Bot Requests. Something along the lines of This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article and the rating on other projects was brought up to that rating. It would be even better if you could specificy which wikiproject it was relating to and which rating it is talking about. EG This article was automatically assessed as Start Class for Wikiproject X because it was not rated and another Wikiproject had rated it as Start Class. :: maelgwn - talk 07:15, 28 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Ive updated the text a little I hope that works better. βcommand 14:46, 28 August 2007 (UTC)


 * WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 19:28, 28 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure I agree with this happening in principle. One WikiProject will be responsible for it's own assessments not others. Also what is good for one might not be regarded so good for another. Where is the arguementation for this draconian reassessing approach. :: Kevinalewis  : (Talk Page) /(Desk)  08:04, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Mis-tagged image for non-free use rational
Betacommandbot tagged Image:Ct3 high roller.jpg for deletion for not having a fair use rationale, however, I had included the template with fields completed and appropriate licensing tag on the initial uploading of the image, and there's been no edits since save for the bot tag. I see in your archives that sometimes a template gets changed to cause the bot to mistag. I'm either checking to see if there's something I'm missing/mis-tagged that triggered the bot, or if the bot misfired on this and letting you know if this is a problem. Thanks. --Masem 04:29, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Just following up, I see the message on the page that the image is used at (Crazy Taxi (series)) noting that the FUR has to be specific to the page it is used on; In this case, it is not explicitly listed in the fair-use rationale (FUR) for the image, as the bot message text in the article talk page suggests, and now what I think triggered the bot (scanning back through your talk archives for comparable cases). Regardless, I added this into the FUR just to be correct.
 * Now that I'm looking at all three (image, user talk, article talk) there seems to be a conflict of what is being reports. The image page is given "missing FUR", the article talk page suggests "no appropriate FUR", and the (my) user page message says "disputed FUR".   Is that conflict in reports (given that "no FUR" and "disputed FUR" are considered separate for speedy deletion purposes) normal or a possible bug? Thanks again. --Masem 05:02, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Please clarify
Hi. I was interested in edit you made, reverting my removal of an inaccurate tag from your bot. The image does indeed have a rationale. If you think the rationale needs to be tightened up, please feel free to say so. --John 17:35, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Template
that doesnt mean that the rationale is valid by default. βcommand 17:23, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I didn't say that, I was pointing to the proper template because I saw this and figured the template would be a better format than the one used...no matter what the contents are. Template/rationale content is a completely different matter...one that I leave in your most capable hands...;)  Dreadstar  †  17:50, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * if filled out properly non-free media rationale is good, that page is it basicly substed. βcommand 17:52, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

User:Betacommand/Commons
Thanks for this. The script will make my work of moving free images much easier :-) Happy editing! -- Boricua  e  ddie  20:45, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Re:
For some reason, one of the images the bot informed me of was deleted the same day - I was under the impression it's tagged and then you're given a few days to add the fair use rationale. LuciferMorgan 09:53, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Blocked
I blocked the bot for tagging an image with a clear fair use rationale. As long as the bot can't parse "Fair Use Rationale" in the image text it shouldn't run. ~ trialsanderrors 01:37, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * This bot has worked on literally thousands of images. It would be useful if you could provide diffs to the contested edits in question. --Durin 17:25, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Questions
Hi. I wonder if you could possibly answer the questions at User talk:BetacommandBot? Thanks in advance. --John 14:38, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

VP
Please check the VP page, as there are about 20-30 people awaiting approval. Dr ea my \*/ !$!  16:47, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Bot Tagging Speedy Deletion?
Are you using your bot to tag userpages for speedy deletions? This is a bit bizarre betacommand. The issue was raised at WP:ANI. I'm reverting the tagging for now.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 22:00, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

A question regarding your delinking
Hi. I was wondering what was going on here? That image is currently up for deletion but has not yet been deleted. Also, there is a rational dispute that does a good job of explaining why this image can't be replaced with a freely created one. It is illegal to enter the mall. Therefore, this image is all we have and ever can possibly have. The image is also used to convey specific information regarding the condition of the malls interior which is mentioned in the paragraph to the left of the image. The Parsnip! 01:55, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/The Troubles opened
Hello. The above named arbitration case, in which you were named as a party, has opened. Please submit your evidence directly on the case page, or, if needed, submit it via email to an arbitrator or an arbitration clerk.

For the Arbitration clerk committee, - Penwhale &#124; Blast him / Follow his steps 11:58, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Defunct
This bot should be retired until such time that it's criteria are tightened up. I've come across several incidents of it tagging images with a clear rational. Such as object illustration images illustrating a thing being discussed on a page. - perfectblue 17:14, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * diffs? --Durin 17:25, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Here's one which affected me. It tagged an image I uploaded as lacking a fair use rationale when it clearly had a fair use rationale. Now, if the rationale needs to be improved or clarified, I am fine with that. But if the bot is going to run I think it should run accurately. Otherwise it just annoys good faith contributors. --John 17:31, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * that is an invalid rationale. βcommand 17:33, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I see. Do you have any plans to reprogram your bot so it can give an accurate rather than an inaccurate message? --John 17:36, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Invalid rationale, means there is no valid rationale. please see WP:NFCC for our policy on on-free images. (this was in the notice left on your talkpage) βcommand 17:38, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * The bot acted properly. The image in question is still lacking a proper rationale. Please see WP:NFCC item #10(c). All rationales must have the name of each article the image is used in and a separate rationale for each use. It is not sufficient to have a global fair use rationale. Please correct the image and any other images lacking these proper rationales. You may wish to review WP:FURG. Thanks, --Durin 17:42, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * "Invalid rationale, means there is no valid rationale". Yes, I dare say it does, thanks for that. Durin, there is no specific guidance at the page you refer to for writing fair use rationales for book covers. I have uploaded many images in this category under the impression that this constituted a very safe instance of fair use. For every single such image, it will be fair use on the article about the book it illustrates and no other. What is the benefit to the project of having to add this info to each image by hand? Is there any evidence that book cover images are being widely misused in the project? I speak as someone who has worked to combat the over-use of album covers outside the article on which they are fair use, but I am unaware of any evidence of book covers being misused in this way. Specifically, what does the rationale you say I am required to write add to the meaning of the boilerplate text which currently reads "It is believed that the use of low-resolution images of book covers to illustrate an article discussing the book in question on the English-language Wikipedia, hosted on servers in the United States by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation, qualifies as fair use under United States copyright law. Other use of this image, on Wikipedia or elsewhere, might be copyright infringement. See Wikipedia:Non-free content for more information"? --John 17:56, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * John, I think you will find the information you need by looking at Non-free use rationale guideline. Also, as an example of a book cover picture that has fair use rationale done correctly, look at Image:The Assault on Reason.jpg. Note the use of the article's name in the rationale header, and the numbered list of reasons that the image may be used.  This is the accepted way to present fair-use rationale.  I hope this helps. Thanks, --Naha|(talk) 18:07, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, except that the boilerplate pointed to A Game of Thrones instead of the article on Al Gore's book. Now I could make a bunch of jokes about how Al Gore is engaged in a game of thrones, or how the book might be considered a work of fantasy, or whatever... but boilerplate doesn't work if it isn't pointed to the right place. How did that boilerplate get there in the first place? And would the bot have tagged this as incorrect? 65.210.129.209 18:27, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Hahahaha, thats pretty funny. However, you get the idea regarding how to appropriately show fair use rationale - when you do it, however, please try to point the cover to the article it appears on :P Thanks, --Naha|(talk) 18:42, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

(deindent) Thanks, guys, for showing me how to jump through the hoop. It still begs the question of why we have to jump through it. I wonder how the bot determines whether the rationale is valid too. On a different note, here's some kind of weird coding error here. The repetition of the "Image" tag makes the link a redlink. --John 05:40, 30 August 2007 (UTC)


 * You dont have to jump through hoops. with non free images you need a rationale. A key part of the rationale is the page name for which the rationale applies. Because Non-free rationales need to be specific for each use, you have to include the page name. otherwise the rationale is not valid. currently what the bot checks for are any rationale or any page name where the image is used. βcommand 14:50, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * It would seemingly be very easy though to prepare a generic rationale for classes of image like book covers, with the book title added by the uploader. Asking good-faith contributors to hand-write rationales means they copy them from someone else, which merely achieves the same outcome at the cost of considerably more work, surely? --John 15:03, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * generic rationale dont meet the requirements of valid rationales. βcommand 15:08, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Why not? --John 15:51, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Because in the vast majority of cases it is impossible to tell, beforehand, how something is fair use because it's the usage that determines fair use, and such use can't be predicted. --Durin 15:53, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * As I have repeatedly stated, I am not talking about "the vast majority of cases" but about book covers which are regarded as fair use in the article on the book, only. --John 15:55, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * And it's been repeatedly debated. Wikipedia talk:Non-free content and it's archives are a good starting point. I do not mean to be brusque; it's just that this is a complex issue that's been hashed out before, by people more articulate than I. --Durin 15:58, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Bug: Bot generating incorrect links in talk page comments
With this edit BetacommandBot let me know that one of the images I uploaded lacked necessary licensing. However, it linked, twice, to Image:Image:Galatea computer game screenshot.png, which is an invalid link. It meant, obviously, Image:Galatea computer game screenshot.png. That seems like a bug. — Alan De Smet | Talk 04:15, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Bug: There is only one template at Non-free use rationale guideline
BetacommandBot's user talk page message says, in part, "Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way...." (example edit by bot). Non-free use rationale guideline does not actually have templates, there is only one template and two examples at the moment. (WP:Nfurg also links to Use rationale examples which has a few more examples, but still no more template.) I believe the bot's message should be updated to be more accurate. — Alan De Smet | Talk 04:28, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Copy image discussion to commons
Hi, I was wondering if it is possible/wanted for the bot to copy also the discussion page when it moves an image to Commons. Perhaps as an option, because usually the discussion page gets deleted after a move. See for instance Image talk:JustinGuarini concert screencap3.jpg where without the previous discussion the whole discussion could start again on Commons. Garion96 (talk) 17:56, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Any thoughts? Garion96 (talk) 19:08, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Ill look into this. βcommand 19:10, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you
You do not know me, and you can delete this note when you have read it, but i would like to say thank you for your work on wikipedia. Keep it up! Techo 15:44, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Two quick questions
Hi. BetacommandBot tagged Image:Artemisfowl2.JPG with dfu per WP:NONFREE. Could you point me towards the fair use rationale problems there, because I can't see them. Also, is the bot putting book cover images with rationale problems on WikiProject Novels/Disputed book cover images as requested? Thanks Bláthnaid 18:50, 31 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Well there is no problems with that image. (I made an error and forgot about '_' instead of ' ' when referring to some page titles). as for the wikiproject it should be leaving notes there, Ill look into why its not. βcommand 19:02, 31 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Great, thanks. Have a good weekend. Bláthnaid 19:58, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Suggestion: licensing category specific comments
For each category of non-free content, BetacommandBot could offer a brief category specific note about what good fair use claims look like. For example, for you might link to a screenshot that handles fair use perfectly. You might even go so far as to say, something like "A small number of video game screenshots at full resolution are almost always fair use. Here is a mostly filled in template describing the fair use that might apply to this screenshot.  Please read and confirm that it is correct, fill in the missing details, and add it to the image page." Or similarly, the bot could link directly to an example, if one is on another page. Every little step you take to make things easier will increase the number of editors who take the time to fix up the little details, increasing the number of good and valid fair use images that survive. Furthermore, the more helpful the bot is up front, the less ill will it will generate from editors whose well intentioned work is being flagged. This might cut down on the complaints you get. — Alan De Smet | Talk 04:34, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * honestly its not worth the work to ID every sub category, they are generated by templates and thus are not easily trackable. the message BCBot leaves is accurate, when it says "template" there are several meanings to that word. On wikipedia most people think of the Template namespace, But it can aslo refer to the examples that are cited there (they are a template to base other rationales off of.) BetacommandBot 15:52, 31 August 2007 (UTC)