User talk:Kingpin13/archive/2012

WikiAlerter
Hey KP, could you add me to the WikiAlerter list please :) Thanks - Rich (MTCD) T&#124;C&#124;E-Mail 21:20, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Request for Interview Regarding Wikipedia Bots
Greetings-

My name is Randall Livingstone, and I am a graduate student at the University of Oregon, currently collecting data for my dissertation on Wikipedia editors who create and use bots and assisted editing tools, as well as editors involved in the initial and/or ongoing creation of bot policies on Wikipedia. As a member of BAG and an active member of the bot community, I would very much like to interview you for the project at a time and in a method that is most convenient for you (Gchat, another IM client, Skype, email, telephone, etc.). I am completely flexible and can work with your schedule. The interview will take approximately 30-45 minutes.

My dissertation project has been approved both by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at the University of Oregon, and by the Research Committee at the Wikimedia Foundation. You can find more information on the project on my meta page.

Please let me know if you have any questions, and I look forward to hearing from you to set up a time to chat. Thank you very much.

Randall Livingstone, School of Journalism & Communication, University of Oregon

UOJComm (talk) 00:15, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

WikiAlerter
Hi Kingpin. I was wondering if you could add me to the WikiAlerter approved list, please? If you need anything from me, just let me know. Thanks. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 20:31, 21 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi Kingpin, i would like to help out with the beta testing of WikiAlerter. Could you add me to the .css page please? Cheers, benzband  ( talk ) 19:25, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

SDPatrolBot test results
Hey! I just wanted to drop you a note to say that our summary of A/B test results is up here. Maryana and I are definitely interested to hear what you think. As a next step, we're going to talk to the few editors who got both kinds of warnings to hear what they think. Thanks again for letting us test, Steven Walling (WMF) &bull; talk   00:32, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Prophet (company) article
Dear Kingpin13,

I posted this article in the mainspace earlier this month and would greatly appreciate it if you could possibly review it when you have a chance. So far, no new page patrollers have reviewed it. Thank you!Braedon Farr (talk) 12:11, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Concern about SDPatrolBot
Hello, Kingpin13! While I like the idea of the SDPatrolBot, I would like to ask why SDPatrolBot gives a warning after he has reported the person that removed SD templates after he gave a final warning. I don't really see why this should happen, knowing that ClueBot NG and most bots and people don't do this. Could you please let me know why SDPatrolBot does this, or fix the bot to not send an un-needed final message after he reported the user which continued to remove speedy deletion templates after a final warning? Thank you for listening. EpicWikipedian (talk) 12:55, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, and just before I go, the message was this: "Hi Nochkano, this is a notice to let you know that I have reported your removal of speedy deletion templates at First cambodia to administrators. An administrator should assess the report in a short while, and they will take any appropriate actions. Please wait for an administrator before taking any further actions yourself." EpicWikipedian (talk) 13:02, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
 * This behaviour can already be controlled by administrators using User:SDPatrolBot/configuration. I don't really see any need to change it though, it's nice to keep the user in the loop about what is going on, and if they have been removing the speedy deletion notice repeatedly because they don't think the article meets the CSD, then it's reassuring for them to know that the case is actually going to be looked at by a human being. - Kingpin13 (talk) 14:06, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Betacommand
As one of the admins who blocked Betacommand/Delta in the 12 month period leading up to the present ArbCom case, it would be helpful if you could look over the questions here and see how much information you can recall.  SilkTork  ✔Tea time  00:41, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Heh, I think I was outside of the 12 month bracket by four days actually ;). I have no desire to participate in the case anyhow. - Kingpin13 (talk) 17:13, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

admin act
I did the thing you asked me to do as soon as you asked. Any other edits I make here are what I do on the fly when I am reading the encyclopedia. Or am I not allowed to do that?Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:38, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

A minor issue with SDPatrolBot at Amar Kanwal
Hi,

I am down as the "creator" of the above article because I moved the third incarnation of the article to Wikipedia talk:Articles for Creation/Amar Kanwal. This is the fourth incarnation of the article and I need to remove the CSD tag because notability is now established, albeit not backed up by reliable sources. All the same the latter issue is a different tag, and I should be able to remove the CSD tag without the system automatically replacing it. --  role player 00:44, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Roleplayer. Sorry for taking so long to get back to you. I've made so that, on pages which are created as a result of a move, the bot will not assume that the "creator" actually created the article. Thanks for letting me know about the issue. - Kingpin13 (talk) 17:13, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

UTRS Account Request
I confirm that I have requested an account on the UTRS tool. Kingpin13 (talk) 23:48, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Wiki Alerter
I may I have access to wiki alerter please? Thetechexpert (talk) 07:06, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Thetechexpert, thanks for your interest in WikiAlerter. At this time, I still think you need a better understanding of CSD and some more practice. Please feel free to request again when you have some more experience, and read through the criteria for speedy deletion thoroughly and take care when tagging articles that you use the right criterion and they actually meet CSD. Thanks again, and good luck with your patrolling in the future. Best, - Kingpin13 (talk) 18:15, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

GrashoofdBot
Quite happy for you to move it if you want; as it you say, it hardly makes much difference. I just felt as though the normal AWB user section should be governed by the AWB-specific approval process, whilst we get to regulate only the bots section. I can see your logic though :) - Jarry1250 [Deliberation needed] 18:58, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

My comments
I just wanted to let you know that my rather irate comments were not directed towards you but to the situation and some of the other editors who are just being a nuisance to the process of trying to improve the pedia. Just to give you a very quite and very undetailed rundown on my plan. I hope this helps to explain what I am doing, why and what I will be doing in the future. --Kumioko (talk) 20:16, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) First I recreated the WPUS project, built up the infrastructure, got things running and editors watching. ✅
 * 2) Develop some procedures for automating some of the tasks, maintaining the articles and establish scope. ✅
 * 3) Determine which US related projects are active, which ones are not, which ones want/need help or to build a closer collaboration and which ones do not. ✅
 * 4) Next I need to identify the content (that's were I am now) not already tagged and tag it. If we can't measure it we can't manage it.
 * 5) Once we identify completely what we have, we determine what needs to be kept, what needs to be eliminated and what we need to add.
 * 6) Continue to refine the above topics, recruit users, tag articles as they are developed, etc.
 * As I said at WT:BRFA, the standard way of figuring out which pages are within the scope of a project is by using categories. Would you be happy to switch to this method? And I'll check that Sarek is okay with it too. Also, if possible, could you send me the list of articles which you loaded into AWB? Thanks. - Kingpin13 (talk) 20:21, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I will be using that method as well. I have already tagged all the articles starting with America I intend too. Frankly, the BRFA was open for 2 months, Sarek and others had the opportunity to comment and they did not. If they don't like the BRFA process, or its result, IMO, they can get involved. So I frankly have little sympathy to him finding a few articles he thinks shouldn't be tagged. Some where correct but most, for several reasons, were tagged appropriately. --Kumioko (talk) 20:38, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

My Departure
I've decided to not leave but I will be slowing down with editing though.— cyberpower ( Chat )( WP Edits: 520,488,115 ) 21:37, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Your bot is overly aggressive and turns off occasional users of wikipedia.
I recently tried to add a legitimate article on Wikipedia. Instead of being able to easily add a new article useful for people interested in the Sespe Wilderness in Sourthern California, I found that Wikipedia is a frustrating and annoying experience. In particular, this was due to your poorly programmed bot. There is no reason to automatically schedule a legitimate article for deletion. I contributed to Wikipedia during the last donation drive because I believe it can be a powerful tool for dissemination of legitimate information. However, after this experience, I am not sure if I will continue to do so in the future. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nudeturtle (talk • contribs) 06:27, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I believe that Nudeturtle is under the impression that there are no humans in the loop. Is there any way to modify the messages to make it clearer that a) the bot is merely replacing the notice a human put there (and here's who they are/how to find them); and b) the bot will not delete anything, only a human?  Also, possibly c) the bot is an infernal inhuman unyielding unresting notice-replacing machine that cannot be reasoned with, so best just do what it says and nobody gets hurt?  Try to keep it under ten words.  Josh Parris 09:32, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Josh. Actually, the warning message used by SDPatrolBot is currently going through a bit of a change (although the one received by Nudeturtle was the new warning). You can see the progress we are making in improving the error message at WikiProject user warnings/Testing/SDPatrolBot. I'll try and get around to discussing/implementing a few changes to make it more clears which users in the process are human and which are bots. - Kingpin13 (talk) 19:10, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Cutoffs
I left the following message on the SDPatrolBot page, but it was archived before you had a chance to respond.

Recently, the bot left a template warning on the talk page of an editor who has more than 6,000 edits, because the editor removed a CSD tag from a page they had created. In general, the bot should really give more deference to these editors, because they have earned some respect. If they contest a deletion, the page really should go to AFD, rather than being deleted without discussion. As it stands, the bot setup means that they have to scramble to find someone who happens to be online, just to ask that person to remove the tag.

This incident makes me fear: if I remove a CSD template from a page that I happened to create, would the bot leave a template warning for me? I have no idea which pages I might have created, and in general I never check before removing a CSD tag that I dislike. Is there any cutoff beyond which the bot will leave people alone? &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 12:37, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Carl, sorry for not getting back to you at SDPatrolBot's talkpage. The only difference that the edit count of a user makes is in the warning message which the bot leaves on their talkpage. In the case of users with more than 500 edits, the bot will leave a message which assumes the editor knows the basics. Other than that, the bot will still replace the deletion tags as normal.
 * I don't personally see the problem with this, and I don't think it forces the user to "scramble to find someone". All it requires is for them to wait for someone else to come along and review the deletion (which they will do of their own accord). Having said that, I will of course modify the bot to run within policy, however, policy at the moment does not seem to suggest that creators with an inflated edit count should be treated any differently. Please do feel free to propose a change at WT:CSD, and I will recode the bot to work within any policy changes made.
 * I can see where you are coming from on the issue of the remover not actually realising that they were the page creator. I can't recall this ever having happened, although it may well have. Perhaps a better way of preventing the bot replacing those kinds of notices would be to look at the time since the page's creation, instead of the edit count of the creator? - Kingpin13 (talk) 19:03, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Armaggeddon
Since when was having bots edit warring with humans considered a good idea? Why is it that your bot is authorised go into battle mode with anyone who removes a CSD tag from their own creations? When reviewing your bot's proposed task, did the thought not enter anybody's head that people who tag articles for CSD often don't know what they're doing? Did they never stop and think that a single unopposed removal by the creator, while not strictly procedurally correct, might be the fastest and most logical next step in cases where an article has been clearly mistagged? (And anyway, even if the human is in the wrong, who decided that user education and guidance was now a bot's job?)

Why was the bot authorised to jump in after just one removal? A single revert and a single polite and unassuming notice somewhere is, while annoying, probably understandable given how other bots work. But unleashing it to edit war and threaten people as if it were baout to block them without warning (spare me the technicalities, that's how most n00bs will see it), giving it the right to assume it has more understanding of the situation than a human, any human, that's just an insane and totally over the top escalation.

No bot should ever be seen as anything other than a dumb tool to be used to do mundane and completely unremarkable things, certainly not edit warring with humans that's for sure. Your one has clearly gone way past that point, into quite scary territory. If people have decided this is all fine and dandy, then I think we might have found the answer as to why the number of editors who make it past 10 edits has been falling. Encarnorm (talk) 00:02, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I have posted a note about this at User talk:Encarnorm. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:29, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Request for Non-deletion
My page content is not promotional as it neither promotes any specific entity nor does it provide any link for any sort of business activity. please consider it is just a knowledge base for people to know about the Largest Snow World indoor park in India. Please consider my request for non-deletion of the content.--Vidyutsinghbhadauria (talk) 05:10, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

I am requesting a non- deletion of my page now that I have made adjustments to comply with Wiki regulations http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loveit — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brdrkitty (talk • contribs) 19:34, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Portal. Your bot. Help!
Hello Kingpin13, I have been working on the Portal:Serer for few months now but your bot has put a speedy deletion tag on it. The portal is still under construction and I've been working on it in extensively in the past few days. Is there anything that can be done? Thank you. Best regards. Tamsier (talk) 03:10, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

WP:PERM/C
Can you please have KPB run through WP:PERM/C ? Thanx,  Mlpearc  ( powwow ) 21:41, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you   Mlpearc  ( powwow ) 22:59, 23 March 2012 (UTC)


 * No worries. By the way, it was still running, was just hiccuping on that page because of a malformed request. You can see the reports at User:KingpinBot/report which will say if anything needs to be fixed. - Kingpin13 (talk) 23:16, 23 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you I'll add the to my check list :P  Mlpearc  ( powwow ) 01:27, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

article on Sky Phoenix Manager of the Late River Phoenix
I am collaborating with friends to make a page article on Sky Phoenix Manager of the Late River Phoenix refs: http://www.skyphoenix.com/riverandsky2.htm http://www.aleka.org/phoenix/zines/phoeni50.html read half way down Produced Yoko ono video : http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=a6aVm5IZhOM On River Phoenix's official death certificate : See section 20 of : http://www.findadeath.com/Deceased/p/River%20Phoenix/dc1.jpg

these will all be linked to the wiki page for this person thanks George S as SkyPhoenix6Sky 02:17, 24 March 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skyphoenix6 (talk • contribs)

Wild-Touch
Hi. About that, please see my comment in the history before your bot's contribution + the talk page of the article. I know I should not remove speedy deletion templates like that but the context made me think it was pertinent for this particular case ! Thanks. --TwoWingsCorp (talk) 17:38, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Invitation to events: bot, template, and Gadget makers wanted
I thought you might want to know about some upcoming events where you can learn more about MediaWiki customization and development, extending functionality with JavaScript, the future of ResourceLoader and Gadgets, the new Lua templating system, how to best use the web API for bots, and various upcoming features and changes. We'd love to have power users, bot maintainers and writers, and template makers at these events so we can all learn from each other and chat about what needs doing.

Check out the the Berlin hackathon in June, the developers' days preceding Wikimania in July in Washington, DC, and our other events.

You can register now for the Berlin event and if you need financial help or visa help, just mention that in the registration form.

Best wishes! - Sumana Harihareswara, Wikimedia Foundation's Volunteer Development Coordinator. Please reply on my talk page, here or at mediawiki.org. Sumana Harihareswara, Wikimedia Foundation Volunteer Development Coordinator 13:34, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Please Delete Page
Hello,

You tagged my page for a speedy deletion (UWG Online). Could you please go ahead and delete the page? I used the wrong Wikipedia login when creating the page, so I need it deleted so I can create it on my other login.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uwgdistance (talk • contribs) 13:56, 6 April 2012‎
 * ✅ - Kingpin13 (talk) 14:27, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi Kingpin
I left a reply on my talkpage, again, should be the last time I hassle you about it too. Penyulap  ☏  16:49, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

SDPatrolBot
If I report your Bot for violating 3RR, do you get blocked? Me-123567-Me (talk) 20:30, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
 * No. But the bot has been programmed specifically to not violate 3RR anyway. - Kingpin13 (talk) 21:24, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
I thought I sent a TB. Guess not. — cyberpower Chat Online  21:01, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Abuse Filter on the Article Feedback Tool
Hey there :). You're being contacted because you're an edit filter manager, At the moment, we're developing Version 5 of the Article Feedback Tool, which you may or may not have heard about. If you haven't; for the first time, this will involve a free-text box where readers can submit comments :). Obviously, there's going to be junk, and we want to minimise that junk. To do so, we're working the Abuse Filter into the tool.

For this to work, we need people to write and maintain filters. I'd be very grateful if you could take a look at the discussion here and the attached docs, and comment and contribute! Thanks :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 18:20, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

My RfB
I can't blame you for coming to the conclusion about me and BAG—I was and still am a useless BAG member. :p As I recall, someone in IRC suggested I run... then the request passed and I ended up in an area where my previous involvement was peripheral at best. I'm glad you think I'm more use as a 'crat. Cheers,  Maxim (talk)  02:09, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
When you get a moment. Danger High voltage! 03:02, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

I think I'll let you take this one...
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ABwilkins&diff=488622853&oldid=488503296 ... for obvious reasons] ( talk→  BWilkins   ←track ) 09:22, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
 * What reasons are those? Since the edit war has stopped and Walter did start to discussing, I don't really see that there's anything needing to be done at this point. Of course, Walter does have a long history of edit warring, and that's a problem that does need resolving, but I don't really see what else needs to be done for this specific case. The anon's behaviour isn't exactly a shining example either, looking at his first edit's summary,, and then the way in which he stalked Walter's edits, reverting needlessly. However, he has been warned, and doesn't appear to be continuing either. - Kingpin13 (talk) 10:19, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I took a look at this situation and he didn't stalk Walter's edits, it was the other way around. Walter stalked the IP's edits and reverted the IP address endlessly as he does with many users. Also keep in mind him not getting blocked for edit warring is not civil or justice at all. I was blocked each and every time that I had to go through even the smallest of edit wars (one was even for two reverts). Bwilkins seems to agree as well that letting a user go off for something he made many offenses for is not right either. • GunMetal Angel  11:49, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry, my mistake, it was Walter stalking the I.P. address. The same thing applies that way around though: he doesn't appear to be continuing. I'm not going to block someone for an edit war that ended nearly 24 hours ago, where they have since stopped edit warring and started discussing, and the issue is now resolved. Regardless of what BWilkins thinks. However, I did not say Walter should be let off, and I do acknowledge that his persistent edit warring is an issue - it's something I've taken administrative action over in the past - but a block for this specific instance is simply not appropriate at this time. I can talk to him about it, if you want. - Kingpin13 (talk) 12:37, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
 * You misread my comment: for "obvious reasons", I was not going to act/block. This is more than a discussion you need to have, it's a behavioural norm that needs to be dealt with; period.  He already believes he has a friendly admin who allows his edit-warring.  By the way, I have not returned to WG's talkpage to see if you have redacted some of your very harsh (and as you now know, incorrect) commentary from last time as you promised you would.  I do, however, appreciate the eyes on my own talkpage ( talk→   BWilkins   ←track ) 09:51, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Bwilkins, I was quite happy to walk away from our last dispute, but you bringing it up here, complaining about me to other editors on your talk page, and attacking me at AN is not helping. I've not tried to smear your name over the rest of Wikipedia, and I would appreciate it if you would show me the same courtesy.
 * Thank you for clarifying "obvious reasons", however, my intention was not to indicate I thought you were going to act/block, my comment about not blocking was separate from my question about what you meant by "obvious reasons".
 * I do not think Walter sees me as a friendly admin who allows his edit warring. In fact, I would think he is perfectly aware that I take edit warring seriously and am willing to take administrative action against him (considering I have done so in the past). As I said before, in the last incident, if either of us were encouraging edit warring, I would think it was you. Additionally, if any of us is making "harsh" comments against the other, it would again have to be you, in my eyes. I'm happy to provide evidence for why I think these two things, and I'm happy to hear your reasons why you think the opposite. As I mentioned, I am also perfectly happy to just let bygones be bygones, and I would hope that my actions after you archived the previous thread indicate as much. - Kingpin13 (talk) 10:22, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, and by the way, I agree completely that Walter's edit warring is something to be dealt with. However, I do not think it is my fault that he is edit warring, or in any way my responsibility to deal with it. Although, as mentioned, I am happy to try and help deal with it. - Kingpin13 (talk) 10:24, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Our last dispute isn't over yet - I'm still awaiting for you to fulfill your promise and redact/amend, based on what can only be a better understanding of the incident. Until that point, it's fair game.  You made a promise: stick to it.  Once you have fixed your giagantic screwup, this will definitely be a bygone - however, because it's taken weeks for you to actually act, I will find it more difficult to trust you in the future - but that too can be fixed over time. ( talk→   BWilkins   ←track ) 11:23, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

When you archived the previous discussion (after having put in a rather rude last word yourself), placing the text "The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it." at the start and end of the thread, and stating "Reality is, I'm closing this", and that you would be able to better "ignore the disgusting statements", I took that to mean that it was over, and I should not continue the discussion or modify my comments. You are now saying that you do want me to modify my comments, that you do want to continue, and your actions since the archival seem to indicate you are not able to ignore the comments I made. This is all rather contradictory, but no matter. My "promise" was not to redact/amend, it was that I would "try to clarify or redact" (this is something that I've already had to point out to you). You started complaining after my unblock, saying that my unblock message was... I will post my unblock message below, just to make it easier to see exactly what you took issue to.
 * disgusting [in] tone,
 * un-fucking-believably inappropriate,
 * and an absolutley fucktarded comment

Before we move on with the discussion, I just want to establish some facts. So I've highlighted the specific part of the message which I understand you took issue with. If it was some other part, please feel free to correct me. Now, judging from our previous discussion, I take it that you think that the highlighted part of my message was so inappropriate, because you were not edit warring, were not involved in the content dispute, and did not use the block tool as a weapon (this is mostly going on your previous statement, Oh for fuck sake, I was not trying to keep any "preferred" version, therefore I was not edit-warring, therefore I sure as fuck CANNOT be using any defence for edit-warring.). Is that all correct? Again, if there was some other reason you took issue, please do feel free to correct me. - Kingpin13 (talk) 12:00, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, I asked you weeks ago to fix that, based on what I had said. Both the highlighted phrase, AND the accusation of using my tools to my advantage.  A perfunctory reading of my talkpage clarification of the incident would show that you thought the incident was different than it was.  Although I still don't think you 100% get it, I'm attibuting that to the possibility that I always assumed English was not your first language ( talk→   BWilkins   ←track ) 12:30, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, I know it has all already been said, as I'm just trying to reiterate. I take it from the above comment that you agree with the facts I was trying to establish above. Now I think one of the first things we need to deal with, is the question of if you were edit warring or not. I think you were, you clearly think you were not. The reason you gave for thinking you were not edit warring appears to be that you did not have any preferred version of the article (I was not trying to keep any "preferred" version, therefore I was not edit-warring). Is there anything else you would like to add to your justification of why what you did was not edit warring, before I respond with why I think you were edit warring? Or are you happy with your previous comment that the only reason what you did was not edit warring was that you "have no preferred version"? - Kingpin13 (talk) 13:00, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Wow. You really didn't read or understand any of our original discussion.  Here's the better idea: since you theoretically a) know the parts of your comments pissed me off, b) know better after our last discussion, why not draft a better unblock acceptance message that uses phrases you've already used in those discussions such as "...could give the appearance of..." as opposed to the one where you directly attribute significant malice and intent that were clearly not there in the situation. ( talk→   BWilkins   ←track ) 13:16, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay, I've put some thought into your request, and decided I would be happy to edit my unblock reason to use more neutral language. My previous comment may have come across as being slightly subjective, as a result of it being me expressing my own opinions. I've edited the comment to make a clear distinction between the facts of the case, and my own conclusions/views. I've posted a draft here, so you can review it before I replace the original message. Please let me know if it reads all right to you, or if you still have any problems with it. - Kingpin13 (talk) 14:10, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * We seem to have both edited the message a couple of times, let me know if you're still happy with it and I'll replace the original unblock comment. - Kingpin13 (talk) 19:27, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * "Happy" is relative :-) Please remember in the future that WP:AGF applies to your fellow admins as well.  I have no history of edit-warring in 6 years of editing Wikipedia, and I'm not suddenly going to start over the word "bizarre" being added to an article about a sport that isn't soccer ;-).  Clearly you're not convinced as to the whole situation - and I cannot say any more to resolve that.  I would normally ask why you never fixed this before now: you asked if I wanted it fixed, and I said yes.  Why did it take this to finally do it?  Just like WG asked similar on my page (but still has not done) ... you don't ASK, you DO without being asked. ( talk→   BWilkins   ←track ) 20:13, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * You're right that I am not convinced. However, what has changed, is that before I got the impression that you were asking for me to change my views (i.e. for me to say that what I thought was wrong). Because I stand by what I said, I was not willing to change that. However, what you asked above was for me to make a clearer distinction between the facts, and my own conclusions that I reached based on those. As I appreciate that different people will have different views on things - even when presented the same information, they can still form different opinions - and it is bad form to state my own opinions as if they were fact, I was okay with making that distinction clearer. - Kingpin13 (talk) 19:47, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Namaste ( talk→  BWilkins   ←track ) 20:01, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

HighBeam Redux
Hi Kingpin. Thanks for your guidance. Round 2 is ready to go as described here: User_talk:EdwardsBot/Access_list. Please let me know if you need any other info. Cheers, Ocaasit &#124; c 19:16, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Replied there. - Kingpin13 (talk) 20:16, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

File:Admin Graphs 01-2010.png listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Admin Graphs 01-2010.png, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Cloudbound (talk) 21:30, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

WP:PERM
Hey, Kingpin I thought I fixed all the errors on one of the last bot report but Requests for permissions/Confirmed is Really Long - Just a poke, Thanks. Mlpearc ( powwow ) 18:45, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, looks like it didn't run on that page because one of the requests was undated. Should be fine now that Skier has commented, so I'll run the bot over it again. Thanks for fixing the other errors - Kingpin13 (talk) 19:08, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay, I've had to make so that the bot no longer considers not done + autoconfirmed to be a case of "User has right but request marked as not done", instead it should only consider not done + confirmed to be that. Other than that, everything should now be back to normal. - Kingpin13 (talk) 19:45, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you.   Mlpearc  ( powwow ) 20:09, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
 * What about one on there that I had marked as already done - autconfirmed, and 42 minutes later the bot did the same thing? ( talk→  BWilkins   ←track ) 17:33, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Your new template was subst'ing the done templates and whatnot. But I already spotted that and the bot is now looking out for the images as well as the templates. - Kingpin13 (talk) 18:42, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

User talk:Tom.green32
Aha, yes I was just about to block him too. When I saw the edit he made at WP:AIV I thought it was just a newbie making a mistake and getting AIV and RFPP confused but no, found one vandalism and I was about to block him for personally attacking me but you beat me to it lol!--5 albert square (talk) 22:14, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I got a little confused there for a second too, when I saw your warning before realising that he was actually a trouble user himself. Ah well. I'll keep an eye on the article too, I've blocked all the vandals for now, but the page may require protection if they're persistent. - Kingpin13 (talk) 22:16, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see you have now protected it. Probably for the best. (I note it also came under vandalism just over a week ago.) - Kingpin13 (talk) 22:19, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I've protected the article to be on the safe side and I'm about to go through it's edit history with a fine toothcomb as looking at some IP edits I think they will need to be rev del'd, may even require further supression. I also suspect now that Tom is a sock of the IP page he edited on--5 albert square (talk) 22:21, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay. I've deleted the most obviously revdeletable materiel from that latest bout, but wouldn't be surprised if there's more (or if you feel it needs oversight, please do contact them, I haven't emailed anything to them myself). - Kingpin13 (talk) 22:23, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the help, I think I just made some oversighters day by emailing them some 15 diffs to supress! :p--5 albert square (talk) 22:47, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Bot issue
Nyttend (talk) 16:34, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks
Hi Kingpin13, just a quick note to say "thanks" for helping me with my upload clearance - it's really appreciated. Best, DDD, DaisyDylanDoyle (talk) 12:34, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

AWB Requests
Hi! Currently the AWB Requests page is backlogged with requests for permission to use AWB. Would you mind patrolling the page? Thank You! -- Tow Trucker  talk  17:36, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 14:19, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Another poke
Hey Kingpin13, WP:PERM/C is like 75 requests long :P. Thanx. Mlpearc ( powwow ) 17:48, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Yup, various problems with parsing that page. Should be sorted (for now!). - Kingpin13 (talk) 18:38, 11 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you    Mlpearc  ( powwow ) 21:09, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

KingpinBot and category move
Hi, please note that KingpinBot's source code and talk page will need updating following the move of Category:Wikipedian usernames editors have expressed concern over to Category:Wikipedia usernames with possible policy issues. – Fayenatic  L ondon 11:51, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads up :) - Kingpin13 (talk) 11:01, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Non- deletion of LoveIt
Hey Kingpin13, I've made edits to my page and so ask that the deletion tag be removed. I think in one edit I accidentally removed it myself (apologies!). Is it possible to give the ole OK to the page? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loveit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Brdrkitty — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brdrkitty (talk • contribs) 19:37, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
 Rcsprinter  (constabulary)  11:26, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you for the advice you left on my talk page. I really don't feel obliged to offer any sort of apology for the comments I've made, particularly not to an anonymous IP who miraculously turned up on Wikipedia to have a go at me. I've been using Wikipedia for many years. During that time, I've used occasional profanity that has never been aimed at an individual. Clearly this guy was not at all bothered by my profanity, but rather with my contributions. He used my swearing as a tool, nothing more. I believe my response to that was appropriate. That being said, I appreciate that you took the time out to drop me a note. -- Scjessey (talk) 12:49, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

I love your talk page.
Probably the best I have seen. Makes me wonder if you had input on the possibility of adding similar appropriate headings to the main page and project pages, etc, but in a fashion that does not take much room or internet bandwidth. An example was a picture of stars for astronomy page and desert for an article about a desert. I remember a web artist or something bringing this up somewhere and it was long ago buried and forgotten, and might not be easy to find. I will try to find it and edit here if I do. If I recall correctly, it was at either Portal talk:Contents or Portal talk:Featured content. I will save this for another day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.79.93.26 (talk) 06:55, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
--   Luke      (Talk)   02:21, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Armbrust, B.Ed. WrestleMania XXVIII The Undertaker 20–0  12:13, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Adventure: Request for feedback on Community Fellowship proposal
Hi! I'm contacting you because you have participated or discussed The Wikipedia Adventure learning tutorial/game idea. I think you should know about a current Community Fellowship proposal to create the game with some Wikimedia Foundation support. Your feedback on the proposal would be very much appreciated. I should note that the feedback is for the proposal, not the proposer, and even if the Fellowship goes forward it might be undertaken by presently not-mentioned editors. Thanks again for your consideration.

Proposal: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Fellowships/Project_Ideas/The_Wikipedia_Adventure

Cheers, User:Ocaasi 16:41, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

deletion of my page by your adminstator
you keep deleting my page why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tracyhinds30 (talk • contribs) 08:58, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the reverts
Hey, thanks for keeping my talk page free of vandalism. I know it's from 2 years ago, but I just noticed now after a period of inactivity. Nice catch! -Bgmur (talk) 07:38, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

The Olive Branch: A Dispute Resolution Newsletter (Issue #1)
Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page. In this issue: Read the entire first edition of The Olive Branch -->
 * Background: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem.
 * Research: The most recent DR data
 * Survey results: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey
 * Activity analysis: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums
 * DR Noticeboard comparison: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August
 * Discussion update: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate
 * Proposal: It's time to close the Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts noticeboard. Agree or disagree?

--The Olive Branch 19:12, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Albert Nico
Message| Hi, i am very new with Wikipedia, pardon my lack of knowledge and understanding. I am facing quite a number of difficulties. Including not even knowing how to leave a message correctly here on the Talk page. I seek your help desperately as i am writing an article now for my boss. My username is nicoeditor, my article is for the wiki page Albert Nico. I am facing the 'Speedy deletion' button and i cannot remove. I can't afford to remove the page Albert Nico too. Please help. thank you so much. Nicoeditor (talk) 06:24, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Already replied on user's talkpage. Feel free to remove this section. Yunshui 雲&zwj;水 07:52, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks...
...for your contribution to the article Coyote attacks on humans! Chrisrus (talk) 20:51, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Reply requested
Hi. Some comments for you at User talk:KingpinBot. Take care. NTox · talk 21:59, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

advice/help
plz i have a band and we want to get known and i don't know why wikipedia keep deleting my artical can you help me write one ???? — Preceding unsigned comment added by NessieSmiley (talk • contribs) 01:56, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Be known then you will be known. Simple. Nasnema   Chat  01:59, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 19:25, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for suggestion...
I've been looking for what is the reason of this message area comes always in front of page. I stopped removing it from page! Thank you for comment — Preceding unsigned comment added by Subhasom (talk • contribs) 19:53, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Requesting a new task for SDPatrolBot
Could you write and request permission to run a new task for SDPatrolBot? Occasionally we see users removing XFD tags from pages that are currently being discussed (example), and it might help to have the bot revert those just as it does speedy tags. I'm guessing that it would be a comparatively simple task, since it would only need to check to find a non-closed deletion discussion instead of figuring out whether the user removing the tag were also the creator of the page. Thanks for running this bot! Nyttend (talk) 00:32, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Nyttend, sorry for taking so long to get back to you. I'm not sure this is such an issues as CSD template removals, as there remains a record of the AfD nomination in the form of the unclosed deletion discussion, as you mentioned. This means there is no real risk of a deletion nomination being forgotten about if the AfD template is removed, at least not in the same way that there is when a CSD template is removed. But it would probably be quite simple to code, since the bot would just need to get a list of all pages with the template, and a list of all discussion pages, and then investigate and discrepancies between the two, so perhaps it would be worth it. I'm not quite sure what users should be reverted (e.g. it might be a bad idea to revert administrators, as they might be closing the discussion, the same goes for other editors performing NACs), any ideas on that? - Kingpin13 (talk) 12:11, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you could make it revert anyone who removes the template when the discussion is open, and the warning message for user talk pages could say "If you're in the middle of closing this XFD, please close it and then remove the template"? I doubt someone's going to go to the trouble of closing an XFD maliciously just to get the tag removed, and if they do, it will be so rare that we won't need to worry about it.  However, I do agree with your idea of exempting administrators; the admin who disruptively removes a tag has worse problems than a simple anti-removal bot can fix.  No other ideas.  Nyttend (talk) 13:45, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Ah, no, it's not at all a big deal. I don't want you to spend the time to implement an entirely new system if you're busy (surely it would take you a bit of time to implement code someone else had written?), so I'll just wait happily.  Nyttend (talk) 15:44, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much! I've offered some comments at the bot request, which I hope will be helpful.  Nyttend (talk) 02:13, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

AWB
Can I please have the approval to use it? Conker the Squirrel (talk) 18:11, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:16, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Election bot
Voting goes live in 1.5 hours at Special:SecurePoll/vote/259. Any chance you can crash prep your bot?  MBisanz  talk 22:31, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Looks like DeltaQuad is on top of this - Kingpin13 (talk) 15:39, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Yep, thanks!  MBisanz  talk 06:31, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

WikiAlerter Beta testing
I would like to volunteer to Beta test the non-admin features of the latest version of the program. Andrew (talk) 21:57, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay, ✅ - Kingpin13 (talk) 16:33, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

I would also like to do that. —  Jeff G. ツ (talk)   15:58, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Kevin12xd (talk) (contribs) 17:43, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

New error report for SDPatrolBot
Yaris678 (talk) 09:13, 24 December 2012 (UTC)