User talk:Hercule

Please contact me on my page at french wikipedia: fr:Discussion Utilisateur:Hercule

interwikis
Your bot removed several good interlanguage links at this site, it does not appear you checked whether it was correct. cygnis insignis 03:44, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I only see Elephantidae, one page is not several... The interwikis you restored are incorrects. They are to pages that dont have distinct page for Elephantidae and Elephant. I check all removal because I don't use -force option.
 * regards
 * --Hercule (talk) 06:34, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I think Hercule is right in this case, it looks like the interwikis removed were from our page about the family which elephants are in, to pages actually about elephants (although some were redirects). HerculeBot seems to be with-in what it's approved for, and if it's not, it doesn't matter hugely, since it appears that the edit was only semi-automated anyway (i.e. it was checked with human eyes before being submitted). @Hercule, cygnis insignis didn't say that it was several pages, s/he said it was several interlanguage links :). Also, if you have the time, do you think you could make it clear what the bot tasks are on the bot's userpage? Best, - Kingpin13 (talk) 07:22, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅ --Hercule (talk) 07:42, 6 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I think not. The link es:Elephantidae, for example, links to en:Elephantidae, a taxonomic family that includes living and extinct genera (eg. mammoths). These both have a taxobox "Elephantidae". Notice that the names are exactly the same, it the universal name, not a spanish translation. Elephant is a common name that means whatever you like, no-one can disagree. It does not have a taxobox. Both es: and en: have an exact correspondence, they are identical in scope. This is provable by reliable sources. The user removed the es: link based on what they reckon and translated. This is not a reliable source. Reverting me was inappropriate, and impolite, based on reliable sources and community standards. This is beyond the scope of the bot, and perhaps the user's capability in discerning the huge difference in the scope of the articles. cygnis insignis 11:25, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * If you link es:Elephantidae to Elephantidae, then no maintenance by bot will be possible. The spanish article quite only speak about the elephants. So they decided not to have a specific article like Elephantidae. A reader of Elephantidae won't be interrested to read Elephantidae, but will be interrested by Elephant. The infobox is the same, but not the content.
 * Anyway, if you want to change the current interwikis you should ask a bot to do it. Because You must correct 2 articles interwikis. That is what I did with my bot, asking it to ignore the spanish article (after verifying that there was no acceptable one to interlink) when updating interwikis.
 * The bot is just a tool, I am able to identify which article must be interwikied because I understand english and spanish. I'm not only making deduction of infoboxes, but also look the content of the articles.
 * --Hercule (talk) 12:25, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * This is an odd case, because while the articles do have the same title, the actual content on the es Wikipedia appears to be only about Elephants. Although it's hard to understand with google translate. So one solution would be to move the es page to the correct title for the content, or to expand the content to include the full scope of the title. But I do see where cygnis is coming from; because regardless of the content of the es page which used to be interwikied, the title & infobox implies that it's meant to be about Elephantidae, regardless of what it actually is about... The biggest problem here for me is that it's very difficult to actually understand the es page due to poor translation. - Kingpin13 (talk) 13:49, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The decision on the spanish wikipedia is to make a unique article, so it can be considered as a mix of the articles that exist on english Wikipedia. But the content is more similar to Elephant than Elephantidae. If a split might be done it should come from spanish contributors, not decided by english contributors for interwikis resolution ;)
 * Adding es:Elephantidae is not really an error, but this has no benefits and make the automatic maintenance of interwikis impossible (the bots parse en:Elephantidae and en:Elephantidae, and are unable to automaticly decide which article is correct. Enven with human decision the risk to make mistake is high) . We could also add en:Elephantidae and en:Elephant to es:Elephantidae. It's neither really a mistake, but a bad pratice
 * --Hercule (talk) 14:04, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * PS : I hope my english level is enough to make my explanations clear :p
 * The links are placed for the benefit of readers, not your convenience. cygnis insignis 19:10, 9 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Try to insult me all you like, I think it is laughable, but telling Dr. Clark what he knows and should be doing is extremely arrogant. I suggest you apologise to him. cygnis insignis 19:10, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I see you still don't understand the problem, even with my explanations... I hope Curtis Clark will understand --Hercule (talk) 20:07, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * How you 'know' all that, with absolute certainty, is a mystery. Perhaps your omniscience can provide the answer to this question. What is an 'elephant'? cygnis insignis 20:28, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know Hercule :-) I am humbled by the view of the third opinion and can safely assume there will be an eventual resolution for the concordant articles. Your grasp of english makes my own comprehension of - what I have assumed to be - your language look pitiable. My comprehension of that other language is non-existent, but can you give me a link to decipher. Best regards, cygnis insignis 20:13, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Hey, I understand swedish talk pages :D Thanks, cygnis insignis 21:19, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

More on Elephant/Elephantidae
I noticed that you removed the an:Elephantidae iw from Elephant because it was already on Elephantidae. This is somewhat inconsistent, because, as in es: and it:, in Aragonese elefant redirects to Elephantidae. I think this is a good criteria across all Wikipediae: if there are separate articles for "elephant" in the local language and the taxonomic family Elephantidae, the English articles should iw respectively. If there is but a single article (either the local word for "elephant" redirects to Elephantidae or vice versa), the iw should always be from en:Elephant. My reasoning is this: Equating the two is in effect the decision to place the elephant article at its scientific name (or its common name, if it goes the other direction). Separating the two indicates (and I believe this is true of en:) that editors feel the need for a scientific article about the family in addition to a general article focusing primarily on the extant species. The most useful article to place the iw on is Elephant—A general reader in en: will enter "elephant" and get the article; a general reader in Aragonese will enter "elefant" and be redirected to the article.

Does this make sense?--Curtis Clark (talk) 17:56, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I also think it's better to link languages with only one article on the same article. But it's hard to choose which one to elect. Before the intervention of all single interwikis were to Elephant. Since these changes, I have talked with Nordelch of the Swedish Wikipedia, and he requested the move of some other languages to Elephantidae because these articles were describing Elephantidae (but there is no separate article for Elephant).
 * So we could base the decision on the fact that the article describe Elephantidae. But then many stubs will stay on Elephant :-/
 * I don't have enough knowledge on biology to determine what would be the best decision to do for these links. If you think you are able to select which interwiki must go to Elephantidae and which on must go to Elephant I can do the transfert with my bot. But it's a complex decision.
 * --Hercule (talk) 18:57, 11 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Another approach for wikipedias that have both articles (such as en:) would be to see which of the two articles a given wikipedia chooses, and link that one back to the other language.


 * The issue is not entirely of biology. In many languages, a single noun (e.g., in English, "elephant") refers to animals of two different genera, Elephas and Loxodonta. Other common names can often be equated to a species or genus, and, depending on the naming conventions of different wikipedias, the article might be at the scientific name or the common name, but there will be but one article. In the case of elephants, the next commonly used rank above genus is family, which is why so many other wikipedias have one redirecting to the other. But, at least in English (and perhaps in other European languages, from what I have read), the Elephantidae also contain animals not usually called elephants, such as the mammoth. For that reason, and because of disagreements in en: about whether to prefer scientific or common names, two articles are maintained.


 * It is indeed complex.--Curtis Clark (talk) 21:30, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
Laurent (talk) 09:42, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Kalmyk WP
Thank you for your contribution! Huuchin (talk) 14:01, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Category:Roman Catholic Church
Hi, this reversion caught my eye. Can you explain to me why you thought the edit was inappropriate? Thx. --Richard S (talk) 02:36, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Hello,
 * tr:Kategori:Katoliklik is a category about Catholicism, not especially Category:Roman Catholic Church. Since Category:Catholicism is a redirect to Category:Roman Catholic Church there is no english category to link with tr:Kategori:Katoliklik
 * I have found this mistake with my bot, when resolving interwikis.
 * Regards
 * --Hercule (talk) 12:38, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

HerculeBot
Your request to leave messages on your French talk page is noted, but since I don't speak French it would be inappropriate for me to leave an English message on that page. Could you please instruct HerculeBot to stop making formatting changes to the Category:Days of the year articles as it has done here? Thanks. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 23:35, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Hello,
 * I have been told many times today that my bot shouldn't use cosmetic_changes of Pywikipedia. For that reason I have now desactivated it, and it won't do it anymore. And I apologize for having activated it, I thinked it was not a problem.
 * Could you explain me what is the problem, for you, with the conversion of HTML tag to corresponding caracter ?
 * Regards
 * --Hercule (talk) 23:50, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I think it was about a year ago that someone went through and changed all of the - and – to &amp;ndash;. At first I was skeptical, but it turned out to be a good idea for the date pages.  The main reason is that casual editors don't know the difference between - and – and they often got mixed up.  In order to keep the date pages consistent, the &amp;ndash; was made the standard for the date pages.  It does two things:  it makes it easy for editors to accurately format the entries and it makes it easy for reviewers to see errors in the format.  -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 00:51, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I understand. Thanks for the explaination. --Hercule (talk) 07:50, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Photo request
Hi! Is Morlaix Airport convenient to your location?

I have a photo request for the Brit Air head office, which is on the property of the airport

If you want, would you mind taking a photo of the building for Wikipedia?

Thank you, WhisperToMe (talk) 06:25, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Chinese characters in French
I don’t really speak French, Chinese or Japanese, but I think your bot has wrongly changed the link at Massive from Massif to 大, in ; similarly at the other language wikis involved including the reciprocal link in fr:大 revision 67298589. Vadmium (talk) 01:46, 10 July 2011 (UTC).
 * I fixed it --Hercule (talk) 12:27, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Another incorrect interwiki removal
This edit seems to have removed the link to a perfectly good Russian page. I've reverted it on the en.Wikipedia, but perhaps you should check what it did in other language Wikipedias. Astronaut (talk) 13:28, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
 * The russian page is a disambiguation page. It must be linked to Ground zero (disambiguation).
 * Regards
 * --Hercule (talk) 12:36, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Why in the world did HerculeBot remove this link?
? Seems like there's no reason whatsoever to remove it?
 * Hello,
 * Français canadien was a disambiguation page, not an article. That's why the script is removing it.
 * As it seem the page Français canadien is already more than a disambiguation page, and that it's possible to make a real article on it, I'll transform it to an article.
 * Regards
 * --Hercule (talk) 12:19, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Only remove the other languages ​​of kung fu films
Kung Fu is one of the martial arts, kung fu films and martial arts films are different. Kung-fu movie only link was removed because of other languages​​, martial arts film left on the link.--豹子頭 (talk) 15:40, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Hello,
 * Thanks for all these messages :-)
 * I'll try to find where is the error that my bot exported.
 * Regards
 * --Hercule (talk) 08:06, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Incorrect interwiki addition
Last year I've removed all interwikies in other wikies referring to Reportage (album) instead of reportage to stop bots from adding incorrect interwikies and now for some reason Hercule (and another bot) does it all over again? I don't see where this is coming from this time but don't feel like revisiting all of those other wikies to undo the damage this time. Please clarify what's going on here. The Seventh Taylor (talk) 09:36, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Hello,
 * I removed this link back, but I don't understand where the error came from. --Hercule (talk) 09:56, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Domain .VC keeps getting a bogus registrar added by Herculebot
On the domain page for the .VC domain, Herculebot keeps adding NIC.VC, despite this just being affiliate advertising and not being the NIC of the country (affilias is) 76.77.75.72 (talk) 23:28, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
 * It's not my bot that added it. --Hercule (talk) 11:25, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

French Wikipedia
Are you active there? Best, Jona yo!  Selena 4 ever  04:30, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, I'm back. --Hercule (talk) 11:26, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

pt:Ambulância INEM
Why do you keep adding pt:Ambulância INEM to Emergency medical services‎? It is incorrect. --Biker Biker (talk) 10:09, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Are you sure that this message is for me ? --Hercule (talk) 00:26, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I should have been more clear, it is Herculebot that keeps adding the incorrect interwiki link. --Biker Biker (talk) 08:50, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Reporting user Raj Singh on pawiki
Hello sir! I checked you're a global sysop (tell me if I'm wrong). I wanna report Raj Singh on pa.wiki. He is working against native Punjabis and adding Hindi words in Punjabi that we never even heard. He was doing the same on translatewiki but is blocked as for now. He don't listen to Punjabis there and if asked he starts fighting and filling their talk pages with rude comments. You can check the pages history and his fight with user Babanwalia there. (I can give you links). There is no local admin so please you do something. And plz reply here on your talk page as I'm watching it. Thanks in advance. -- itar buttar  [talk]  15:20, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:41, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:50, 24 November 2015 (UTC)