User talk:Derek R Bullamore/Archive 18

Rio do Rasto Formation
If you are able to fix the references for Rio do Rasto Formation, please explain to me how it is done.--DThomsen8 (talk) 17:09, 10 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Yes. The problem was that the "bare URLs" also included a language parameter "(in Portuguese)", which stops the reflinks bot operating normally.  I manually removed the language bit first, and ran the edited article through reflinks.  Bingo !


 * Derek R Bullamore (talk) 17:19, 10 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Helpful answer. Suppose I have a reference which is not fixed by either of the reference fixing tools. If I strip the reference down to just the URL with, of course, would that work without problems? I will try it.--DThomsen8 (talk) 17:29, 12 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Yeah, it should work - whether there are problems or not, I'll leave you to discover ! Cheers,


 * Derek R Bullamore (talk) 17:35, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Dead URLs
STOP removing titles on dead links, leaving the URL. You've done that on two different references in Tea Party movement. Some of the "Reflinks"-generated edits are OK, but changing from a raw (but valid) reference to a cite news or cite web requires consensus. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 20:54, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Filling in references using reflinks
Hi! This is SWASTIK 25. Thanks for your edits in List of international cricket centuries by Kane Williamson. I would like you to fill in the references with citations using reflinks on the articles List of international cricket centuries by Steve Smith & List of international cricket centuries by David Warner respectively. Swastik 07:00, 12 November 2015 (UTC)


 * To show willing I have completed both tasks. However, given that it took me about four minutes to do both articles, is there any reason why you, or anyone else for that matter, could not use the reflinks facility to effect such relatively simple edits ?


 * Derek R Bullamore (talk) 14:19, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Well aren't you just wonderful?
Thank you for the recent spiff-up job on the Freedom Fry article. I see why you've been peppered with barnstars over the years.  petrarchan47  คุ  ก   00:01, 22 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Thank you too... I think... - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 00:06, 22 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Heh. I was actually being sincere; it's rare in my world to see an editor pop in and do helpful edits. (I must be hanging around the wrong articles.)   petrarchan47  คุ  ก   02:55, 22 November 2015 (UTC)


 * It is not always easy to spot sincerity from sarcasm in the printed word. However, thank you again - much appreciated.


 * Derek R Bullamore (talk) 12:45, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Say a Word for the Poor Hussar
Thank you so much!!!

Ulugbeck1 (talk) 12:42, 23 November 2015 (UTC)


 * You're welcome - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 12:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:37, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

E.C. Scott
According to my usual sources, Ecrettia Jacobs was aged 26 when she married James Scott in January 1978 - which gives a birth year of probably 1951. She'd been married previously, in Nevada in 1974. This gives her current age as 63, which matches. But, probably not sufficiently reliable... Ghmyrtle (talk) 18:13, 24 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Mmmmm... quite a bit older than I surmised from reading the sources. I initially thought her being in the 'class of 1970' was maybe when she joined high school; presumably it was when she graduated at the age of 19 (ish). I'm pretty sure she was married three times from something I read (can't remember where now).  Quite where that leaves me, given the encyclopaedia source out trumps a white pages entry, I'm not sure.  Many thanks for your efforts though.  Maybe some fellow editor will unearth something more concrete and reliable in due course.  Cheers,


 * Derek R Bullamore (talk) 18:50, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

How margin of error works — Statewide opinion polling, Democratic Party primaries, 2016
User All4peace (talk) has initiated a discussion, on the article talk page on English Wikipedia about how we present MOE.

I would very‐much appreciate your participation ! Info por favor (talk) 23:31, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

RefLinks
I know how to use Refill. You tag the page with twinkle as Linkrot, then click Refill. But Using Reflink? -- The   Aven gers  16:31, 26 November 2015 (UTC)


 * I am sorry but I do not understand your message. For example, I do not use Twinkle. - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 16:38, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I mean how can i use the tool Reflinks to fill bare references. --  The   Aven gers  16:47, 26 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Go to the page and type in the article's name in the box near the top, and then press 'fix bare references'. - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 16:55, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

May I remove tag?
Greetings, Derek. May I remove a BLP ref improve tag you placed (May 2014) on the following article: Palmolive (musician)? I'm cleaning up some pages, and have added five citations (2 books, 2 web, 1 journal) to this article's references. Thank you. Netherzone (talk) 23:24, 27 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Hello. Three things.  Firstly you have done a great job finding references for the article and this has clearly improved the situation.  Well done.  Secondly, there remains a number of sentences which are unreferenced, which ideally need sources adding.  Thirdly you do not need my 'permission' to remove the tag, although I appreciate your respect in asking me.  Happy editing,


 * Derek R Bullamore (talk) 14:14, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

You turn link rot into low quality citations
Hi.

You use Reflinks indiscriminately, the way a blind robot does, and thus turn link rot into low quality citations. In effect, you just cut out more work for us. I do not mind how Reflinks operates or whether you use it or the better alternative, reFill. The fact is, you are solely responsible for your edits and those are awful edits.

Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 19:46, 29 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Best regards, eh. You rubbish my work, act as an overbearing know-it-all, and criticise me for using a perfectly legitimate tool that Wikipedia seemingly endorses, and recommends its sub-editors to utilise.  I do hundreds of bare URLs per week, undertaking work that very few others seem to want to attempt.  If the tool is so bad, then may I suggest you do something about improving it or having it improved.  As far as reFill being a better alternative, on whose authority, or with what support and consensus, do you make that judgement ?  To call another editor's work "low quality" and producing "awful edits" is certainly not acting in good faith, and I deeply resent being accused of "doing something silly".  Who exactly are the "us" you are referring to – I see little evidence of others trying to keep the number of bare URL article numbers down to a minimum, or is it some kind of cabal who go around delighting in demeaning other's efforts ?


 * I presume you will work to improve the referencing on the article in question. Making judgement on one of my edits, out of almost 150,000 in a period of just short of 10 years, is pathetic.


 * Derek R Bullamore (talk) 20:22, 29 November 2015 (UTC)


 * To call another editor's work "low quality" and producing "awful edits" is certainly not acting in good faith
 * In Wikipedia, everyone except vandals are acting in good faith. Also, trouts are only given to those who act in good faith. (I posted a trout above.)


 * Who exactly are the "us" you are referring to [...]
 * Scroll above and read your own talk page. This isn't the first time you receive complaint about the quality of your work. It is not me alone.


 * I do hundreds of bare URLs per week, undertaking work that very few others seem to want to attempt.
 * That only makes me all the more concerned. I understand how hard it is to accept that what you have been doing for so long was all for naught. Getting all defensive like this is a natural response.


 * How about I tell you and you judge yourself? "28 Oct 2013" is a date, not an author's name. It should not go in author. Website names must go to website, not publisher. When there is a ".com" in the name, it is a sign that it is a website name. Examples of website names without ".com": Engadget, BBC News Online, GameSpot, Ars Technica, PC World, Windows IT Pro, The Verge. Corresponding publishers for each: Aol, BBC, CBS Interactive, Condé Nast, IDG, Penton, Vox Media.
 * Best regards,
 * Codename Lisa (talk) 20:34, 29 November 2015 (UTC)


 * As the person who added the linkrot to that article, I was shocked to see the strength of sentiment expressed in the edit summary. Codename Lisa even if you feel that you are right, that strength of conviction deserves reasoning as to the differences of the two tools so Derek can be persuaded rationally. In order to do that, I suggest you apologise first to clear the impression of bad faith. Widefox ; talk 11:20, 30 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Sounds great to me.


 * Derek, I apologize for the strength of conviction.


 * Although as I said earlier, I don't mind which tool. Both tools are inadequate; reFill is less so. Please note that upon activating a tool or gadget for the first time, you are prompted with this message:


 * "Information_icon4.svg advised that you take full responsibility for any action performed using these features. For more information see our policies and guidelines."


 * Best regards,
 * Codename Lisa (talk) 16:57, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for listing. { I saw your edit log today and I am seeing clear improvements. However, consider this case: rev. 693129408 "Stars and Stripes FC" should be in work while publisher should have "Vox Media".

Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 17:38, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Fantastique (pop duo)
Was great to read your information on the group Fantastique. I bought their cd and wanted to know more about them. Cheers aussiefarmery1@yahoo.co.uk


 * It is hardly my article; just one of many on Wikipedia which does not have any references to support the text. I merely added a tag to that effect.  However, I am pleased you are satisfied with the information.  Regards,


 * Derek R Bullamore (talk) 17:23, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Links on Donvale FC article
Derek, appreciate your work - but you destroyed the links to the EFL website in the last three cites. Your changes mean they no longer work. I mentioned this problem on the talk page of the article and I asked for a fix. We need to find one. Footy Freak7 (talk) 10:39, 18 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Sorry about that. I am not technically gifted enough to know how/why the links are not operating correctly on Donvale Football Club, although it probably is the 'square bracket' that's the the root of the problem. To be fair, they seemingly did not work properly even prior to my edit. Not sure how to fix this to be honest.


 * Derek R Bullamore (talk) 11:34, 18 December 2015 (UTC)


 * I think if you just copy and paste the link into the URL bar (including the square brackets) they'll work. Footy Freak7 (talk) 12:34, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Fix the bare references on List of One Day International cricket matches
Hi Derek R Bullamore! Nice to see you! I have some work for you...Kindly fix the bare references on Template:ODI cricket matches by year all article by using http://dispenser.homenet.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/webreflinks.py ...This will help us ..Thanks a bundle..See you around! GreenCricket (talk) 06:58, 23 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Hello. I have done work on all the lists, up to and including List of One Day International matches played between 1995-99. This took me over a hour to transact, although it was more tedious and time consuming than difficult.  Can I suggest that you and the rest of 'us' try attempting the rest of the fixtures/results.  It is extremely easy to do, and now you have "some work" to undertake, rather than me.  It is not the remit of Wikipedia to try to create work for other editors to undertake - not that anyone would necessarily grasp that, given my experience in over ten years here.


 * Derek R Bullamore (talk) 13:46, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

A message of Thanks
Hello Derek R Bullamire! I have seen your work and you can see my work on some article like from 1970-79, 2005-09 and on 2015-19... I can feel that it's time consuming...Well, I appreciate your work for articles and want to say thanks... Yes, I will do remaining work GreenCricket (talk) 07:37, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Alexei Navalny
Thanks for filling in the incomplete references, this is very valuable. Please note however that there are some encoding problems, and some of the titles you picked up look like trash.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:14, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I do not know whether this can be easily fixed automatically. If not, we can just do it slowly manually.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:15, 27 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Yes, I think that, in part, Wikipedia's reflist struggles to 'transcribe' foreign languages, particularly those using different alphabets. I have done as much as I reasonably can on the article, given that the Russian language is a complete mystery to me.  Over to you. - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 16:18, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
 * No problem, I will correct it. Thanks again.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:30, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Salena Jones
Has she crossed your radar at all? I'm having an interesting discussion with myself on the talk page. Anything you can add?? Ghmyrtle (talk) 17:19, 29 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Not really is the straight answer. Anyhow I've added my comments on the talk page and smartened up the referencing etc., in the article itself.  Will that do ? - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 19:05, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Excellent, thank you. At some point I shall tart up the text a little as well.  happy New Year!   Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:38, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

Pushpay
Thanks for your help with improving the Pushpay page! VCandPEInvestor (talk) 22:02, 31 December 2015 (UTC)


 * You're welcome. - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 22:02, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Thomas & Friends
Hi, there! May i ask why you are removing correct links to the characters of said show to redirect pages? --ACase0000 (talk) 19:30, 1 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Just a by-product of using Wikipedia:Reflinks I think. Not too sure exactly how that side of things works, when I am primarily interested in removing link rot.  Which I have now done again, but left the 'correct links' to the characters themselves - I hope !


 * Derek R Bullamore (talk) 20:03, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Oh, okay, I understand. I just didn't know. Sorry for any trouble or bother. Have a great day and a great New Year! :) --ACase0000 (talk) 20:13, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Marion James
One for you? Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:26, 1 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Yup - I'll give it a go. Cheers,


 * Derek R Bullamore (talk) 16:54, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Driftwood
Do you have any information about an apparently British pop band called Driftwood, who, according to this site, had a UK #51 hit in 1972 with "Come Into the Warm"? I don't think they're likely to be the same as the Dutch combo who had hits under that name in the 2000s. My reason for asking is that my print source, Betts' Complete UK Hit Singles, doesn't mention the 1972 record, and I've never known it to be significantly wrong before. Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:00, 3 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Nope - never heard of them and
 * gives no such entry. For certain, I would believe Betts and Roberts books. I am a bit puzzled how Shocksteady seems to largely refer to the Dutch outfit called 'Driftwood', who did have the minor UK hit mentioned in the article (as per Roberts).  In fact it was my January 2009 edit that introduced that reference !


 * As an aside, I notice that "Come Into the Warm" was apparently written by Roger Cook and Roger Greenaway. They did not have many duffers back in the day, but the alphabetical index at the back of the Roberts book confirms that no song of that name was a UK hit.


 * Derek R Bullamore (talk) 13:54, 3 January 2016 (UTC)


 * OK, thanks. Looks like MusicVF is wrong - it's usually pretty accurate, but does have errors.  For example, it has Lee Hazlewood down as co-writing this, when it's actually a rewrite of this, which was co-written by Mike Hazlewood.  I'm doing some work on Greenaway and Cook - crap songs, generally, but prolific.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:04, 3 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Yes I agree, crap songs generally, and my reference to duffers was more alluding to the fact that the twosome seemed to have plenty of hits, rather than many misses (duffers). I did like "Long Cool Woman...", probably more to do with the arrangement, The Hollies musicianship and general production work, rather than the song itself.  On a completely different track, there are some rum names for people - just done a little bit of work on Dale Bumpers !  I half expected him to have invented the dodgems. Hee hee.


 * Derek R Bullamore (talk) 14:20, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Help our task
Hello Derek R Bullamore again! We are doing some serious work to enlist test cricket matches which are about 3000+..Its took us 2 weeks hard work and still its incomplete...There are many bare references again and we really need your help now..if you fix some bare references of Template:Test cricket matches by year..if? GreenCricket (talk) 17:17, 6 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Hello GreenCricket. I think I have done all of the Test Match fixtures/results that have been edited in so far.  I trust that will suffice for the time being !  Regards,


 * Derek R Bullamore (talk) 20:56, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

All I can say is...
Happy New Year, and …and if I make it to Yorkshire, I'm buying. Cheers. Le P Leprof 7272 (talk) 20:18, 9 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Very best wishes to you too. I don't mind you buying at all, as long as it is not a Bud (yuck). One of these will do nicely though !  Regards,


 * Derek R Bullamore (talk) 20:29, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

PDF Linkrot URLs
Why do PDF linkrot URLs fail to get fixed with the two tools? How can I do them? See http://www.ntsb.gov/safety/safety-recs/recletters/P76_16.pdf in List of pipeline accidents in the United States 1975 to 1999 as an example.--DThomsen8 (talk) 13:55, 18 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I am wrong, at least in that example, "Filling in 21 references using Reflinks" is the reply to Reflinks. --DThomsen8 (talk) 14:06, 18 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Usually both tools fail to fix PDF based citations. I am not technical enough to know why this should be the case, although I think the wording on at least one of the tools does state it can not cope with those.  I normally fix them manually - a rather time consuming exercise if there are plenty in the article !


 * Derek R Bullamore (talk) 14:10, 18 January 2016 (UTC)


 * PS. And there are definitely way too many to tackle on this one - List of pipeline accidents in the United States in the 21st century !! - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 21:34, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Open Media
Thank you for your assistance with Open Media, much appreciated. I am only an occaisonal editor and it seems that the referencing standards I picked up when I started some nine years ago don't apply any more.

Might I request just a bit more help? As you will have gathered I don't understand how to use the current referencing tools (but promise to try and find time to learn). I have improved three references in the article (2, 9 and 16): two were dead links, which I have replaced with live ones, and the other was strictly speaking missing a more detailed page reference (although in fact the index of the book has our programme in it so anyone wanting to find the reference would have no trouble doing so).

As a result these three references probably need you to work your magic. Any chance? Many thanks. AnOpenMedium (talk) 14:17, 18 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Yes, I'll have a go. Just give me a bit of time, as I am rather busy elsewhere at the moment.  Regards,


 * Derek R Bullamore (talk) 14:22, 18 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Of course! No urgency. Many thanks. AnOpenMedium (talk) 14:31, 18 January 2016 (UTC)


 * ✅ - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 17:54, 18 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Much appreciated, thank you! In the meantime I have received a private email from another editor with some suggestions on how to get to grips with referencing (incidentally this editor does not recommend using reFill, which is a relief as I found it rather daunting at first sight). As and when you care to look over the references in other articles I have added material to, that would be welcome as well. But in any case, your help is gratefully acknowledged! AnOpenMedium (talk) 14:24, 19 January 2016 (UTC)


 * No problem - happy editing; whatever your methodology. - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 14:26, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

A Dobos torte for you!

 * Thank you - I presume these are good for my waistline ! - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 16:11, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Reffill use
plse add dates to refs please. reffill doesnt do it. its sloppy not to do so.--Wuerzele (talk) 21:25, 19 January 2016 (UTC)


 * It is also sloppy not stating which edit you are referring to. It also sloppy to say that Reflinks does not pick up on dates - maybe not all the time, but it definitely does. Also there are many cases where a date is not given.  Plus the fact it is hardly the most pressing matter or important aspect here.  If your real gripe is with the bot, why do you not challenged its maker/regulator ?  You are not the first to negatively criticise me, when I am using a perfectly legitimate tool - one Wikipedia recommends to use.  I am not perfect, but I am trying to improve matters with bare URLs all the time.  Maybe if you spent more time doing so, and less time criticising other editors, the whole place would improve.  As might your English.


 * Derek R Bullamore (talk) 21:49, 19 January 2016 (UTC)lag !
 * hey Derek, i did not mean any harm, accept my apology. youre right i should have posted teh diff.
 * but whats funny is that the date is still not there.
 * I have taken it up with the makers. They all say its up to the reffill users ( nuts!), so maybe thats why i posted here. I wont do it again. BTW i am an active contributor to that site (check user contribs plus quality of edits ...) so your hint of criticism doesnt touch me, neither your remark on my english. thanks for responding so promptly to the bare url flag !--Wuerzele (talk) 22:13, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

List of museums in Greece references removed
Several dead or supposedly obsolete references were removed from the List of museums in Greece article. Can references be removed in such a case?--DThomsen8 (talk) 00:02, 24 January 2016 (UTC)


 * There are several issues here. I think generally the other editor has done a good job in removing internal links to dead articles, replacing dead reference links with live ones, and in tidying up the whole article in those aspects.  However, WP:LR does specifically state "do not delete a URL solely because the URL does not work any longer". In that specific perhaps the other editor has not acted correctly, although I have not investigated how 'dead'/'untraceable'/'never really viable to start with' those so-called reference links actually were.  I think if you have real concerns then your best option is to ask the other editor, who I have no doubt has been acting in good faith, and see what the reply is before acting further.  Best wishes - oh, and thanks for your continuing work on dead links - unfortunately we are a very small band !


 * Derek R Bullamore (talk) 13:52, 24 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Yes, we are a very small band of Linkrot fixers (you and I may be the only consistent ones), but because I add linkrot tags to articles where I cannot do the fixes, I feel I should do my share on the easier ones.--DThomsen8 (talk) 15:01, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Some stroopwafels for you!

 * Oooo... thank you. Stroopwafels and dobos torte - I can feel myself getting thinner by the hour !  Cheers - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 17:02, 24 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Wikimania 2014 in London introduced me to Stroopwafels, and now Starbucks has them in the U.S.--DThomsen8 (talk) 12:54, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Two backlog articles
The backlog articles List of Internet exchange points and List of pipeline accidents in the United States in the 21st century are very difficult if not impossible to correct, because the two tools seem to be incapable of performing on these articles. Perhaps some linkrot URLs might be done by hand. As the most experienced editor, what do you suggest? --DThomsen8 (talk) 20:42, 24 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I feel your description of "very difficult if not impossible to correct" is about right. They both would take hours of long-winded manual intervention.  At the moment, I feel my efforts are better directed elsewhere. - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 20:46, 24 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I agree with you. If we took the linkrot tags off, would someone take the heading literally and delete the category? If not, let's remove the tags.--DThomsen8 (talk) 21:09, 24 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Probably, they would. But, not quite the done thing, old boy. Definitely not cricket, as we quaint old English gentlemen say.  In a more serious vein, I feel it would not achieve a great deal, apart from in the short term, and then only to mask the reality.


 * Derek R Bullamore (talk) 21:24, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Template:Refexpand
Tell me about Template:refexpand and, for example, the Trans-Siberian Orchestra. What is expected by this tag, and how is it done? Please specify some particular inline reference, and what is requested, and if it is even possible. The TSO is in Category:Articles needing link rot cleanup from November 2015. --DThomsen8 (talk) 12:32, 26 January 2016 (UTC)


 * is a result of running Citation bot, but I do not see what the problem is, if anything. Perhaps subsequent changes since November 2015 (accessdate=19 January 2016 in this instance) have corrected the problem, and the tag can be removed.--DThomsen8 (talk) 12:49, 26 January 2016 (UTC)


 * It is not a template that you see a lot. Basically it means that, although there is a reference in place, some vital information is missing from that citation.  I do not see any problem with the one you quoted above at all, but reference numbers 7, 16, 22 29, 30, 34, 35, 36, 40, 44, 46 and 47, are seemingly all lacking full reference source details. I think that those are the issues that need addressing, before the 'Refexpand' tag can be removed. That might be easier said than done in some instances.  Particularly because of the lack of information currently therein, it may make expansion difficult. Cheers,


 * Derek R Bullamore (talk) 13:14, 26 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I agree with you that our time is better spent elsewhere. I was curious, but now I won't do anything about it.--DThomsen8 (talk) 02:40, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Holy See–Turkey relations
Holy See–Turkey relations is on the linkrot lists, but there are no linkrots. However, I cannot find the reason for the tag.--DThomsen8 (talk) 03:20, 30 January 2016 (UTC)


 * The problem is that while Relinks will not find a problem, the reality is that most of the references are showing only the reference's title. There is no website/publisher, no accessdate, author, etc.; which means that what is showing is about as useful as a bare url.  What I normally do in those circumstances is strip those back to the simple url, and let reflinks work its magic to produce a full reference.  However, as you found the article, I'll leave it to you to correct.  OK ?


 * Derek R Bullamore (talk) 13:29, 30 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Derek, I will try that technique. As usual, you know what to do.--DThomsen8 (talk) 17:52, 30 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I found after reference 11. I did the last three references with Reflinks, which did the fixes. Now I will look for  and just do that reference back to bare URL and just do Reflinks on only one reference.--DThomsen8 (talk) 18:13, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uechi-ryū Fixing Links
Sorry to bother, but I believe you recognized some dead links. I have some suggestions to fix that. The only reason I have not done it myself is because I was recently involved in an "Edit War" with another individual. That was ruled on and is over, but so as to not appear "edit happy" I will list the suggestions. I am HAPPY to do the work and fix them if they are acceptable.

For: Uechi-Ryū Butokukai — headed by Buzz Durkin [24]

There is a www.uechiryubutokukai.com/ page but the head of the organization--and he is the head!--Buzz Durkin has a page: http://www.buzzdurkin.com You may prefer the former link since it lists affiliated schools of the organization.

For: Ji Teki Jyuku Association — headed by Ken Nakamatsu[23]

There is: http://uechikarate.org which is the website of Mr. Nakamatsu's main American student and has links to the American dojos. I do not believe Mr. Nakamatsu has his own webpage I can find. The Okinawans are old-fashioned in that way!

For: Kanei Uechi.[5]

This is not controversial. However, you can use the same book reference for [4] or use his other standard book: Mattson, George E. Uechi-Ryu Karate Dō (Classical Chinese Okinawan Self Defense). Brockton: Peabody Publishing Company, 1998, p. 13.

You will notice he does not get the ū of ryū correct in that title :)

Thanks!98.227.140.14 (talk) 07:36, 3 February 2016 (UTC)


 * You are obviously more knowledgeable in the subject matter than I! I am more than happy for you to effect the necessary edits.  Regards,


 * Derek R Bullamore (talk) 11:38, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

List of Internet exchange points
Please look at Talk:List of Internet exchange points and comment on my suggestion to split the list by continent.


 * I did take a look, but to be honest the subject matter does not really interest me. I suspect it will interest others though, and I would await their comments before proceeding.  ?My gut feeling is that a potential reduction in bare URLs will not excite many - as we have seen elsewhere.


 * Derek R Bullamore (talk) 13:11, 4 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Splitting by continet into my sandbox is working for me to fix references. Learning how, but not expecting much linkrot progress.--DThomsen8 (talk) 13:58, 5 February 2016 (UTC)


 * OK. In the meantime, I have penned a note to User:Long Ben Every to ask if he could revisit his referencing (October 2011 vintage) on the Harache family article. If he can assist, that could help to get that one off the listings too. - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 15:32, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Good idea. Perhaps he can help us.

Occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge
"Colwidth" parameter in template:reflist is deprecated and should not be inserted into articles. MB298 (talk) 06:08, 5 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Thank you - I was totally unaware of that situation. I also note that {Reflist|2} and {Reflist|3} are similarly deprecated. Thank you,


 * Derek R Bullamore (talk) 11:52, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

You've got mail
Destiny Leo (talk) 06:16, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Harache family
I made some improvements to Harache family and two inline citations. Any advice on fixing other inline citations?--DThomsen8 (talk) 19:58, 14 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Not really, without more information being available. However, as I mentioned above under the section headed 'List of Internet exchange points', I have contacted an earlier contributor, who may yet come to the rescue.


 * Derek R Bullamore (talk) 20:09, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

One for you?
A start...   Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:17, 15 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that - I will probably have a bash at it. - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 11:38, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

And another -. I assume that by "half a decade" they actually mean "half a century"!! I've read on Facebook that he died on February 13, but haven't seen a published obit yet. May be worth starting? Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:59, 17 February 2016 (UTC)


 * I had a trawl around for Bobby "Top Hat" Davis - I do not think he is really that notable. There seems to be more about the death of his non-notable son (shot in 2013) than Davis senior.  Is the fact that no obit has been published an indication of this lack of noteworthyness, or merely that usual American indifference towards black blues musicians ?  Either way, I'll need more to warrant further work on him.  Regards,


 * Derek R Bullamore (talk) 17:06, 18 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Fair enough. He's mentioned here, but he's certainly marginal.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:20, 25 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Yes, I have that potential reference in my section 'Reds or blues' on my user page. Apart from that, and a couple of others, I really struggled to find anything significant.  He appeared to be a street musician - albeit of long standing, but I do not think that that alone is notable. - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 14:29, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Andy Ford (comedian) has no linkrot
Andy Ford (comedian) has no linkrot, but another editor insists on the linkrot tag. I removed the tag once, and it is back. Please help me out with this situation.--DThomsen8 (talk) 12:57, 15 February 2016 (UTC)


 * The problem was that, although Reflinks would not flag it up as such, there were three bare URLs in the references section. I have edited accordingly and removed the linkrot tag.  Not sure the article's subject is that notable though.  Regards,


 * Derek R Bullamore (talk) 13:15, 15 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Good work. I should have thought of that. Maybe not notable, but we will let others deal with that.--DThomsen8 (talk) 13:22, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

A tribble for you!

 * Thank you - although at my age, going forth and doing the necessary in prodigious numbers, may be a little optimistic. Thanks again - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 13:05, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Sandbox
Are you having problems in adding external links into your sandbox articles, or is it just me? It's very annoying that something goes wrong every time I try to do it at the moment. Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:17, 25 February 2016 (UTC)


 * I have not noticed anything untoward - are these perhaps 'blacklisted' sites that you are finding ? Otherwise I do not know what the problem could be. - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 14:29, 25 February 2016 (UTC)


 * I have just remembered that I did occasionally get an incredibly annoying "Aw snap" message, when I tried to copy and paste various text/wording into articles (not particularly the sandbox as such). I found it kept on repeating this on the same page. The only solution I found was to close the article altogether, and go away and do something else for a while.  Then, when I came back, it did not seem to occur  again.  Until the next time - on a completely unaffiliated article/page.  These events did seem rather random in nature, but I have not suffered from it for a few days now - but that's torn it.   Anyhow, I'll give those Yankee Microsoft bastards "Aw snap".  What is the matter with "Sorry old bean, there has been a slight malfunction" ?  (Minor rant over).


 * Is that similar to what you have been suffering ? Those useless Microsoft twats even offer a referral service for such occurrences.  As if they give a frigging toss.  (As above)


 * Derek R Bullamore (talk) 19:11, 25 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Yes, it is the "Aw snap" thing. So far I've managed to work around it, but it's annoying.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:09, 25 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Yup, it's mega annoying. "Aw snap" was probably introduced with one of their updates that Microsoft seemingly can not resist foisting upon us. If I ever use one of their 'help' pages, I always tick the box "this did not help me at all" - just for the hell of it.  And I would add "you blithering idiots" if only I could, for good measure. - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 20:52, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * . Hi and DRB. I believe "aw snap" is an error notification specific to Google Chrome. If it happens 3 times in a row you will be presented with a chance to fill out a feedback form to report it. One editor switched to Firefox after she could not make "aw snap" crashes go away in Chrome. Cheers!   23:21, 25 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much for the explanation. I may have dissed (I think that's the right term) Microsoft when Google are to blame. Either way, I have been using Google Chrome for some while now, and this "Aw snap" crap seems to be a recent error notice for such a procedure.  Having said that, the imagery with it looks like 1980s Microsoft basic (Windows 3.1 vintage).  I'm out of my depth on the technical stuff, and am not sure what difference using Firefox would make to me. Mind you, if Firefox does not proffer "aw snap", "have a nice day" or "would you like large fries with that", I might be tempted. Plus, if I discovered Firefox was Noosha Fox's sister I'd be totally sold.  Sleep well everyone. - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 23:55, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Need your help
Hello! I need your help. Please help us in refilling following articles: Much Thanks.  Green Cricket   TALK  16:55, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Test cricket matches results (2000–04)
 * Test cricket matches results (2005–09)
 * Test cricket matches results (2010–14)


 * ✅. How's that for service ?! - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 20:54, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Hahaha! You are great man. I'm really impressed.  Green Cricket   TALK  05:58, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Archiving dead links
Hi DRB. I was wondering why in [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bill_Walton&diff=prev&oldid=706822961 this] edit you did not find archived versions for the dead links. Ping me back. Cheers! 23:17, 25 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Not sure what 'ping me back' means. Us English old-timers are not always up to date on the modern parley. Anyhoo, as Father Simpson says (I'm not quite decrepit, you see), my work on bare URL cases involves trying to flesh out the references if possible, but I normally accept when the bot states that the link is dead.  I do not have the time, nor inclination, to pursue those that may have archived versions available.  Let's say I leave that to other editors to follow up.  There are so many hours in the day, as it were.  No offence intended, but I do what I can.  Regards,


 * Derek R Bullamore (talk) 23:37, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Philadelphia City Paper
Please look at Talk:Philadelphia City Paper and tell me what is expected by the 'bot. --DThomsen8 (talk) 02:22, 29 February 2016 (UTC)


 * I assume you are referring to the section headed "External links modified". In that case, the newer (archived) reference links need checking as to their viability ie. do they actually work, and are they providing a correct link to an archived version of the older dead link.  If that is the case, and it probably will be in my limited experience in that field, then the whole section needs editing.  Simply replacing {sourcecheck|checked=false} with {sourcecheck|checked=true} will suffice.  Is that clear ?


 * Derek R Bullamore (talk) 13:39, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Please fix
Please fix the references on Meetup/Philadelphia/ArtAndFeminism 2016/Temple University.--DThomsen8 (talk) 22:56, 3 March 2016 (UTC)


 * ✅ - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 23:04, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Hello, and thank you for lending your time to help improve Wikipedia! If you are interested in editing more often, I suggest you create an account to gain additional privileges. Happy editing! --DThomsen8 (talk) 01:41, 4 March 2016 (UTC)