User talk:KingpinBot/Archive2010/March

WikiProject Children's Literature tagging
Could you please tag all the articles in the categories listed at User:Strdst grl/sandbox/categories with the template ? strdst_grl  (call me Stardust) 11:34, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure thing, I see you discussed this with the project :), you say there that you're working mainly on assessing articles, this will probably create a large number of unassessed articles. You may find assessing easier if you use AWB with plugin++ (I believe it has a manual assess option). Best, - Kingpin13 (talk) 11:51, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Please fix that list! Light novels should not automatically be thrown in the children's literature category. Most is NOT "children's" lit at all. -- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 15:34, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Bot's paused while this is sorted out, I can easily remove the tags from the articles if need be. - Kingpin13 (talk) 15:37, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Any that were add to anime/manga articles pretty much need to be removed (which includes all the light novel categories). Those are rarely aimed at "children" and none fall under the CL project scope at all. -- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 15:38, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * From Light novels: "A light novel is a novel primarily targeting teenagers and young adults." Considering this tagging is for WikiProject Children's and Young Adult Literature, I would say that falls under the scope. strdst_grl   (call me Stardust) 17:51, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * No, it does not. Light novels fall under anime/manga and "primarily" does not mean mostly nor all. -- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 18:19, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not saying they don't fall under Anime/Manga, I'm saying they fall under Young Adult Literature as well. I really do not see how they don't because in the Light novels article (which is the article which convinced me they were in this project) it is clearly a form of literature and specifically mentions a young adult audience - as far as I know, "primarily" does mean it is important enough to be considered part of the project. What's more, the article itself it categorised as belonging to Category:Young adult literature, so it would be tagged anyway. What reason do you have for excluding them from the project? strdst_grl   (call me Stardust) 18:37, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia articles are not reliable sources, and that article is almost entirely unsourced. There is no reliable source that claims light novels are primarily for any particular audience. They are like manga, focused on a large number of articles. This automatic project tag has thrown an incorrect project tag on dozens of articles that have absolutely nothing to do with CL at all. Nothing. No one in CL can do anything to assist those articles in the major editing scenes, and any peripheral association should not result in ridiculous, excessive tagging. -- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 18:59, 9 February 2010 (UTC)


 * You should consider doing auto-stub and inheritance with these tags... –xenotalk 15:41, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I've been meaning to get that approved, just rarely use this bot so haven't got around to it. I'll add that once I've finished with this :D. - Kingpin13 (talk) 15:58, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Bots/Requests for approval/KingpinBot looks broad enough that you would already have approval to do this - as long as the WikiProject wanted it. –xenotalk 16:10, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * It's probably also worthwhile to tag those without infoboxes with "need-infobox=yes" while you're there. –xenotalk 16:29, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * That's an interesting idea. Do you have any code for this? :D. Also, I'm slightly split on if another BRfA is needed, because I did intentionally leave the previous one fairly broad so that I wouldn't need a new one for everything, we'll see what happens :). @Collectonian I'm no expert on manga, but looking at the articles I'd say that it's aimed at teens...? This would be suitable for WP:CHL, since it also includes young-adult literature. - Kingpin13 (talk) 16:41, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Just put the article pages into Special:Export, then scan the resulting .xml in the database scanner looking for "infobox". Those without should be tagged with needs-infobox=yes which is easy enough. –xenotalk 20:21, 9 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Mo, it does not fit in with CHL. Almost all of the articles are not even about light novels primarily, but about the anime/manga series first which has nothing to do with Children's Lit. Blood: The Last Vampire is certainly not a child's novel, nor is the article about a light novel at all. Adding this templates is only cluttering the talk pages of a bunch of articles that you CL has absolutely nothing to do with at all. -- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 18:19, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see. Sorry I got confused - just to confirm, the problem here is that, while the Light Novels are mostly aimed at a teen market in general, the category contains mostly film adaptations (which do not fall under the project scope)? This sounds like the category might be being used wrongly, but I have come across quite a few of these problem categories, which I will be hand tagging to ensure only the relevant articles get tagged. Please remove this category from auto-tagging and I will deal with it instead. strdst_grl   (call me Stardust) 18:44, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The category is on many anime/manga articles because they have a light novel adaptation. This is appropriate use of the category and done per the guidelines of the anime/manga project. Few light novels are notable enough for their own standalone articles, but frequently have a short section in their articles. Further, many many many light novel adaptations are not children's novels/lit. Almost none of the light novels are in fact "children's lit". To me, the problem seems to be relying on an unsourced statement in a barely sourced Wikipedia article to make this determination, rather than asking about it. Meanwhile, I have removed that statement from the article. In my view, pretty much none of the light novel articles should be tagged with CL. Almost none are teen/young adult in the sense meant here, and even with the few that are, the articles do not fall under CL's scope at all. -- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 18:59, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks for clarifying this for me. I clearly misunderstood the term, and I will try to fix all the Light Novels categories. strdst_grl   (call me Stardust) 19:41, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

In accordance with the discussion above, could you please remove the following categories of light novel related articles strdst_grl   (call me Stardust) 19:52, 9 February 2010 (UTC): Okay, I've removed the tags from these pages, there weren't many, and some of them were already removed, so I just did it manually. I'll resume the tagging later today. - Kingpin13 (talk) 09:01, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Category:Dengeki Bunko
 * Category:Famitsu Bunko
 * Category:Fujimi Fantasia Bunko
 * Category:Gagaga Bunko
 * Category:Haruhi Suzumiya characters
 * Category:Haruhi Suzumiya images
 * Category:HJ Bunko
 * Category:Light novel labels
 * Category:Lists of light novels
 * Category:Super Dash Bunko

Not to be pushy, but are you still tagging for the project? There haven't been any new articles... strdst_grl  (call me Stardust) 20:02, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Urk, don't worry I need a bit of a push with this bot :). I'd be happy to get the rest of these done in the next day or two. But I haven' really explored the extra bits and bobs xeno mentions above yet. Are you bothered about having them for this task? If so I can have a look at doing them, or I might be able to get xeno to finish this off if you're concerned about the time :D. - Kingpin13 (talk) 20:06, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
 * No need to worry about that - the needs infobox got cancelled anyway and the rating isn't hard to do by hand - they will need checking for importance anyway. strdst_grl   (call me Stardust) 20:30, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The bot tagged Chibi Vampire, but I can't figure out why since all the light novel cats were removed. Any ideas? -- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 17:01, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The bot also added tehe template to D.Gray-man. I'm not too sure why, but I'm pretty sure the novel doesn't fall under the scope. Anyone feel free to correct me. ~ Itzjustdrama ?  C 17:49, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I removed the categories mentioned by Strdst grl above. I will also remove the Light novels category now, since it seems to still be causing problems. Sorry for the trouble, don't worry about cleaning up after the bot, I'll make sure I do :) - Kingpin13 (talk) 19:38, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, on second thoughts I'll wait for Strdst grl to comment. It's the choice of the project what they include in their scope. Just because we don't think of it as Children's Lit. doesn't mean that the project doesn't want it. I think Strdst grl will have a better idea. Also, it may still be possible to remove some of the pages in the category, but keep the okay ones. - Kingpin13 (talk) 19:47, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
 * She already agreed above that all of light novel cats should have been removed, and none of them are in her list on her page. They are not children's lit and do not fall under teh scope of that project at all. -- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 19:52, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
 * They need to be taken off the bot tagging. There is a project discussion about them at the moment, but they can be hand-tagged if we decide they need to be. strdst_grl   (call me Stardust) 10:16, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Where is this project discussion? I checked the Children's Literature talk page and didn't see one. I translated light novels for a while and can hopefully help clarify the matter. Doceirias (talk) 02:25, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
 * It's at the Project Discussion page. strdst_grl   (call me Stardust) 09:22, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Should all be ✅ Best, - Kingpin13 (talk) 13:39, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you! strdst_grl   (call me Stardust) 14:04, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Bug
It looks like KingpinBot may have a small bug regarding the edit summary when archiving account creator requests. (diff) (hist). . b Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Account creator‎; 14:45. . (-7,913) . . KingpinBot (talk | contribs) (Moving 3 rollback requests to archive; Chronologically reordering 1 open requests.) (bot edit) [rollback]. "Rollback" should be "account creator."  Nerdy Science Dude :)  (✉ click to talk • my edits • sign) 23:00, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Yup, that. Was because it's essentially the same code for archiving the rollback requests and acc/confirmed. Thanks, - Kingpin13 (talk)

Edit summary for CAT:UAA removal of blocked users
"(Removing 1 instance(s) of CAT:UAA from page of indefinitely blocked user) (bot edit (trial))" It appears that the bot is no longer on trial.  N ERDY S CIENCE D UDE  (✉ msg • changes) 22:58, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Correct, it was approved by The Earwig yesterday, see WP:Bots/Requests for approval/KingpinBot 3 for the approval request. Best, - Kingpin13 (talk) 05:27, 27 March 2010 (UTC)