User talk:Lemmey/Archives

Favorite Quotes

 * I can never tell if you're pro-American, anti-American, or anti-everything. -- Plasma Twa  2  03:36, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm southern, so each of those labels could apply. --Lemmey (talk) 03:44, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Good job
Thanks for taking the time to update Criticism of The New York Times, specifically changing the raw url sources to cite templates. That's one of my biggest pet peeves on Wikipedia, and I'm glad to see other editors taking the initiative as well. Bravo! /Blaxthos ( t / c ) 06:12, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

United States election night television coverage
I'm not sure I see how this is a "crappy article." True it needs work, but remember, Wikipedia doesn't have a deadline. How do you see the article as "crappy?" Basketball 110  00:10, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Chronic fatigue syndrome
Hi Lemmey, thanks for finding and naming the duplicate reference in the article. Just to let you know, there are duplicate references in the article at present because sections are being prepared by a number of editors to split them off into sub-articles that will need their own master references. I guess we could have prepared them in a sandbox somewhere but we didn't. I will put some more warning notices in the article concerning this. I am posting this on your talk so that you are not confused when duplicate references are being put into the article instead of fixing them. Thanking you in advance for your understanding. Ward20 (talk) 04:30, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for catching the multurefs in AHS Centaur and Attack on Sydney Harbour. Muchly appreciated! -- saberwyn 04:53, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * To be honest, I'm pretty indifferent as to where the complete ref goes. When I first put them in, I put them as the first reference, but if later expansions use that particular ref earlier in the article, I leave the complete ref where it is.

Cuckoo?
Can you please explain your recent edits of the Transhumanism article in relation to the Immortality Institute? --Loremaster (talk) 23:47, 7 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Obviously its a pov comment hidden in a refname. (Immortality Insitute = Cukoo) You can revert or change it if you like. --Lemmey (talk) 13:41, 8 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I understand that its a pov comment hidden in a refname. I've undone these edits. My question is why did you this since it is a form of vandalism. --Loremaster (talk) 14:00, 8 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Why does anyone do anything? You've fixed it. You've made Wpedia better. Just be happy with your accomplishment. --Lemmey (talk) 14:03, 8 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Please avoid indulging in your whims otherwise you will be reported to Wikipedia adminstrators. --Loremaster (talk) 14:07, 8 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Since this discussion is over, there is no need for you to continue watching over my talk page. --Loremaster (talk) 19:09, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Exceptional
haha, indeed we are for now, I suppose. Glad to be of assistance ;-) Badgerpatrol (talk) 15:59, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar
Since this converstation has nothing to do with the other one, there is no need to link the two. --Lemmey (talk) 19:12, 9 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Fine. Whatever. Just leave my page alone. --Loremaster (talk) 19:13, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

ITN
Hey Lemmey, I've noticed you've been making comments at WP:ITN/C using the "international rule" as reasoning. I think you're taking the suggested criteria a bit too far. For example, using this rule of thumb, the Oklahoma City bombing would not qualify for ITN. Even single-country events can qualify for ITN. Cheers, Spencer  T♦C 02:13, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks for clarifying. Cheers, Spencer  T♦C 02:16, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

About your user page
Is it appropriate to use your user page to host the content of a Wikipedia article? There are other ways of working on an article without interference... --Loremaster (talk) 19:45, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your intreset in my user page and its appropriate-ness-ity. You are correct. There are indeed other ways of working on an article without interfrence. However, that does not concern me at this point. I use the article on my user page as a testing ground for BATS (bot assisted tool sets) searching for broken and lost references. I hope to be able to create a tool that can search an article history and resotre any 'lost' named references. If so inclined please appropriatly refer and questions of appropriate-ness to appropriate appropriante-ness council for a review of appropriantnarity --Lemmey (talk) 19:56, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

ope and ourch
Lemmy: Your headline could read: "China's international security police extinguish the pope and put him back in the popemobile - just kidding". That would teach people to read carefully. It made me laugh, and it is an appropriate 'merge' of our headlines. Doug Youvan (talk) 18:49, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

New Section
Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, racially motivated edits are considered vandalism and immediately reverted. If you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the work of others. Kevin McE (talk) 10:17, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Your obviously confusing race and religion. The differences are so vast that they can be hardly covered in a thousand articles but to cut it down to a single statement; There is no such thing as a race of Islam. As such your allagation is not only completly unfounded but as the wording is so politcally charged it is borderline defamation. I hope that you would take care when throwing around such charges as racially motivated edits. --Lemmey (talk) 20:56, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Other contributors to the same thread and expressed shared my distaste at your remarks. WP:Civil prevents me giving my true opinions of your comments, but they are clearly not made from the point of view of somebody well informed and of neutral disposition on the matters on which you sought to pass comment.  This was the nearest to appropriate template available, and although I entirely agree that there is no necessary linkage between race and religion, your comments also referred to multiculturalism and Britishness, which brings the discussion into the realms of at least ethnic, if not racial, distinction.  Defamation can only occur when it undermines a previous good reputation, and your recent contribution on the page in question suggest that maintaining a good reputation is not a priority of yours.  Kevin McE (talk) 21:50, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Again Race and nationality have little to do with each other. There is no race of Britishness.


 * Furthermore multiculturalism is not some generic all-encomensing 'goodness'. As the world moves closer together it becomes more of a monoculture losing any sense of the distinctive qualities that diversity purportedly holds dear. Already the skylines of the worlds cities are shaped not by the local cultures, traditions, and values of what ever people live in the area but by only the particular decade in which the majority of the skyscrapers were built. There is no such thing as American architecture anymore, no such thing as German literature, French art, or British music. Its all one collective drab. I can travel to almost any country around the world and find a guy driving a Toyota from a suburban townhouse to an office complex where he will sit in a gray cubicle in front of a black IBM laptop sitting next to a beige office phone where he will use Outlook to read his email while drinking Starbucks coffee.
 * Additionally what the UK has shown us over the last few years is that while tolerance is good but over-tolerance can lead to consequences. Allowing extremist to preach their explicitly and violently intolerant messages will eventually lead to indoctrination and radicalization of any group that feels itself as being repressed and that will always lead to militanism and terrorism.
 * Finally If you can't find an appropriate template I encourage you to use a combination of keystrokes to explain what you are trying to say. --Lemmey  talk 00:54, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

You both have said things that you shouldn't have. Lemmey I know it is something of an MO for you to say controversial things, and as a fan of sarcasm I can certainly appreciate it. I think what you said on ITN/C was unfortuately over the line and came from a place of insensitivity. Kevin, who died and made you the PC police? I made my comments about Lemmey and Plasma in public, in hopes of diffusing the situation, but didn't see fit to warn them with good reason. They didn't say anything on the actual WP, just a project page, and these kinds of POV discussions are incouraged in order to make sure WP maintains NPOV. I also think your comments came from a place of insensitivity. Both of you should just drop it and seek to move on. --  Grant  .  Alpaugh  01:34, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Categories on your user page
FYI, the article that you put on your user page contains categories that do not apply to user pages. You should probably comment those out. Regards, ... disco spinster  talk  03:17, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

AfD
Articles for Deletion is a consensus not a vote. Just saying "delete" with no rationale has no weight at all. Please give a reason for your "delete"s and "keep"s. (Also, I don't think it's a good idea to have the "talk" part of your signature link to an article.) Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 04:45, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm going to say the same thing; not because I disagree with you, but because you're basically wasting your time. The closer of the debate won't take "Delete --Lemmey" into account at all. Without giving a reason for deletion, what you basically have here is JUSTAVOTE, which is something to be avoided in deletion discussions. Also, yeah, you should definitely fix your signature. General practice is to have part of it link to your user page and another part to link to your talk; not to random articles. Celarnor Talk to me 04:49, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Issue with signature
Hello. Your signature does not currently meet Wikipedia's WP:SIG guideline. Specifically, it must link to either your user or talk page. Please fix this. Thanks, --Kralizec! (talk) 04:57, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I appreciate your speedy fix!  --Kralizec! (talk) 05:28, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Re:Your user page
The relevant guidelines for using article-space categories are here and here.

Furthermore, if you are going to accuse me of falsifying barnstars, you had better have diffs to back it up. ... disco spinster   talk  15:58, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
 * That's not what I'm talking about. ...  disco spinster   talk  16:04, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Voter ID
Thanks for your note. A good choice until something better comes along. Kind regards. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:09, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Exceptional
Lemmy, as any fule knows, Mothering Sunday is on the 4th Sunday in Lent, i.e. the 2nd of March. So I hope your mum won't mind your gift being so late!

(Or is this an example of British exceptionalism??)

Cheers, Badgerpatrol (talk) 00:01, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:Holy Tech.jpg and AfD nomination of I-wear
I have no problem with the deletion of this image and article. I'm not accusing you of anything but, in light of the fact you seem to be trying to delete other articles I have created and images I have uploaded, I have to ask you if you are intentionally targeting them due to some issue you have with me. Yes or No? (edited 16:46, 2 May 2008) --Loremaster (talk) 11:54, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, I will have to interpret your prolonged silence as a Yes... --Loremaster (talk) 16:46, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Its all about you isn't it? Maybe you should read WP:OWN. --Lemmey talk 17:49, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't feel as if I own anything. I encourage everyone to bring up legitimate problems that might lead to major editing or even deletion of content. But when, after my conversation with an user, many of the articles I have created and pictures I have uploaded months if not years ago get suddenly selected by this same user for deletion almost all on the same day, one starts to wonder what's going on. Any reasonable person would including you if you are a reasonable... --Loremaster (talk) 20:25, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Just because you submitted improper content years ago doesn't make it right now. Here at wikipedia we have policies, I encourage you to read them. Furthermore reasonable people don't generally re-edit week old conversations changing their context from declarative to inquisitive with the intent of concocting evidence for otherwise baseless claims. If you can not refrain from making wild and inflammatory accusations please refrain from editing. Thank you...--Lemmey talk 20:49, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I never argued that just because I submitted what you believe to be improper content years ago that it makes it right now. As I explained above, I'm not accusing you of anything. I was asking you a polite question. However, looking at the type of crictisms your talk page attracts, perhaps I should have been more accusatory. As for re-editing a week-old *question* which I now realized may not have sounded inquisitive enough, my goal was not to “concoct evidence” but to force you to answer. And so you now have despite the emptyness of your replies. --Loremaster (talk) 21:04, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * If that is the conclusion of your one sided conversation I will be most pleased. --Lemmey talk 21:13, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Request for speedy deletion of Alph article
Although I couldn't care less if the Alph article (which I didn't create) was deleted, the fact you have targeted it for deletion when it is seriously doubtful that you would have stumbled on this obscure subject if it wasn't for my recent edit of it is evidence to me that you are on a campaign. I will therefore increasingly monitor your troubling behavior towards me (and others) and report you to Wikipedia administrators. --Loremaster (talk) 21:12, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Please refrain from making accusations, they're unbecoming. While I encourage discussion about wikipedia article content, your comments and word choice (a heavy emphasis on the word I and harsh language) suggests hostility or empowerment issues. Please feel free to report what you wish but do refrain from nonconstructive statements. --Lemmey talk 21:38, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I will. Your abusive behavior (as well your vandalism) has gone on long enough. And your attempt to look like your taking the high ground are transparent to everyone. --Loremaster (talk) 21:43, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Your attempt to have the Alph article speedily deleted failed. --Loremaster (talk) 21:22, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Why thank you for the notice, would you like to be my personal aide?--Lemmey talk 21:38, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * And now I see you voted oppose on a Featured article candidates/Priory of Sion I created. Do you realize how transparent you are? --Loremaster (talk) 21:33, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * again WP:OWN - regards --Lemmey talk 21:38, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * This is nothing to do with ownership issues and all to do with your un-Wikipedian behavior. --Loremaster (talk) 21:43, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I have asked you before and I'm asking you again please refrain from making accusations or refrain from editing this discussion page. Thank you. --Lemmey talk 21:48, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

RE: Naming Standards
Perhaps, but that isn't the issue here. Please, read the pages I linked there, and you can get things going. - Rjd0060 (talk) 04:57, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Smiley.svg|25px]] - Rjd0060 (talk) 05:01, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Your recent edits
(Somebody doesn't like colors or salad dressing apparently.)

Edits like this and this are inappropriate. Please stop being disruptive on the noticeboard. Nakon 23:02, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Apparently we disagree widely in our perceptions of what is disruptive. Would you mind if I asked you to stop being disruptive on wikipedia? --Lemmey talk 23:06, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
 * If you can provide examples, I can look into what you have problems with. Otherwise, stop being disruptive.   Nakon  23:08, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I didn't say anything about problems I was only inquiring about a possible communication. Now it appears you are trying to make overly-assertive commands. Regards--Lemmey talk 23:12, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Otelemur
Lemmey, you only see half of this: the POV of Otelemur. He reverted some of my questions on his talk page, which shows his rollback should be taken away because I was not vandalising. Just sse his talk page and my response to the ANI. Otelemur is just at fault as I am, if not more because he reverted discussion so as to look like I am harassing him. I assume this is because I had a block 4 months ago for this reason, even though I have completely reformed. Otelemur has decided to revert and not discuss, which therefore gives him an unneeded edge. Editorofthewikireview my edits here! 01:29, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Help
Can you please remove the message given by this user from my talk page?  Otolemur crassicaudatus  (talk) 01:41, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

LemmeyBOT
Has been blocked again, as it is not approved yet. You were asked to not use it until it was approved, so please do not. Jmlk 1  7  03:33, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Bot Policy does not require BAG approval for bots operating in semi mode. --Lemmey talk 06:08, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty sure it does... could you show me where you see that? Jmlk  1  7  06:14, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:Bot_policy and bottom of the page there, that looks familiar.--Lemmey  talk 06:25, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
 * It does look like I am wrong, but my understanding of the bot policy isn't that great. If you could do me a big favor and add an unblock request with those diffs on the bot's talkpage, I'd be appreciative. :)  Jmlk  1  7  06:30, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I would but there is no notice of the current block there. NM the template is smarter than me, its there now. --Lemmey talk 06:31, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

FAC pages
Perhaps you didn't see the message the first time. Per the WP:FAC instructions, "Please do not split FA candidate pages into subsections using header code (if necessary, use bolded headings)." Thank you, Sandy Georgia (Talk) 01:57, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Good work
This LemmeyBot of yours is really a good thing - I've tried to restore some of the broken references manually, and it's both non-trivial (for humans and bots alike, I suppose) and tedious. Hopefully Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting will be empty before long! GregorB (talk) 09:29, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

reflist
Is there any particular reason for removing references lists from talkpages? I find them convenient when discussing precise proposed wording and issues with sourcing. - Eldereft ~(s)talk~ 04:36, 11 May 2008 (UTC)


 * That the talk page reference list is independent of the article is part of the point, really. Some of the sources under discussion might not be present in the article, and using the citation template allows proposals to display exactly as they would appear in the article. Besides, the article references might change or reorder during a long discussion, rendering a bulleted list obsolete. Using the templates ensures that everyone is talking about the same source and provides a handy reminder link when many sources are being weighed. - Eldereft ~(s)talk~ 05:09, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Leonqardo da Vinci - scientist and inventor
Problem. There had been a vandalism, and the BOT restored info, but only a small part of what went missing. This is a problem because anyone watching the page may be misled into thinking that the vandalism had been corrected. Corrections by BOTs often miss whole sections, that can then not be noticed for months until an involved editor reads the entire article. Amandajm (talk) 13:09, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Boot
Your boot is making mistake. See article Operation Storm--Rjecina (talk) 17:36, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I have reverted. If you want to edit so that all references (deleted) are good you can do that. My thinking has been that editor which has made mistake will understand why his adding is deleted and will solve problem.--Rjecina (talk) 17:54, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Brilliant
Just wanted to join everyone else in praising your bot work. I always found fixing those missing refs to be the most tedious and annoying work ever conceived of by man or machine. I never even considered the idea of getting a bot to do it automatically.

Homophobia
Just because you are funny, doesn't mean you can make homophobic comments, please strike them and apologize for them on ITN/C. --  Grant  .  Alpaugh  04:24, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * This is seconded. Those comments are out-of-line, and further comments of the sort may result in a block. Wikipedia is neutral, and making one-sided comments does nothing to advance your case. ^demon[omg plz] 11:15, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Lemmey's MO, which I openly appreciate, is that he doesn't have a case. He's only trolling the ITN/C page to create controversy, which I don't have any problem with, but when he does so by insulting an group of people in a blanket manner, that crosses the line.  Lemmey, you should still apoligize for those comments and strike them.  --   Grant  .  Alpaugh  06:08, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't exactly call it trolling, since occasionally he does actually ahve something to say. He's schizophrenic or something. I don't really care about you're comments, Lemmey, but for the sake of the NPOV thing, just strike them so we can move on to your nest hilarious contribution. -- Plasma Twa  2  08:08, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Warning about Trolling
Okay, first of all WP is not a forum, so take the political discussion elsewhere. Nobody cares. , please refrain from making personal attacks like "you people" and the like. , stop trolling. You made an offensive comment, people called you on it, and so you freaking bolded it just to rile people up further. Everyone should be reminded of WP:CIVIL, and move on as this is not going up as is. --  Grant  .  Alpaugh  17:19, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Edit load
It seems like your bot a lot of edits, could you perhaps condense them into fewer edits? — Dispenser 00:17, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Jaguar
Your recent edits were on top of a highly vandalized version of the article. I reverted back to before the vandalism. Please take a look and see which of your edits might again apply. Thanks! - UtherSRG (talk) 10:20, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Warning about Trolling
Okay, first of all WP is not a forum, so take the political discussion elsewhere. Nobody cares. , please refrain from making personal attacks like "you people" and the like. , stop trolling. You made an offensive comment, people called you on it, and so you freaking bolded it just to rile people up further. Everyone should be reminded of WP:CIVIL, and move on as this is not going up as is. --  Grant  .  Alpaugh  17:19, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Edit load
It seems like your bot a lot of edits, could you perhaps condense them into fewer edits? — Dispenser 00:17, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Jaguar
Your recent edits were on top of a highly vandalized version of the article. I reverted back to before the vandalism. Please take a look and see which of your edits might again apply. Thanks! - UtherSRG (talk) 10:20, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Stop combining "identical" refs into one name
There are reasons why an article might choose not to do it intentionally. Gimmetrow 23:54, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok with the block but the 'account creation blocked' seemed excessive... --Lemmey talk 00:29, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * That's just a default setting. Will you stop doing the ref combining? Gimmetrow 00:36, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * It won't be run on a massive scale but it might still be run on an individual article or two, mainly those on the main page or ITN candidates. The problem with the account creation block is that it blocks the bot owners account if its on the same IP. --Lemmey talk 01:22, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry about the autoblock hitting you. Really not intended. Gimmetrow 22:02, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Warning about Trolling
Okay, first of all WP is not a forum, so take the political discussion elsewhere. Nobody cares. , please refrain from making personal attacks like "you people" and the like. , stop trolling. You made an offensive comment, people called you on it, and so you freaking bolded it just to rile people up further. Everyone should be reminded of WP:CIVIL, and move on as this is not going up as is. --  Grant  .  Alpaugh  17:19, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Edit load
It seems like your bot a lot of edits, could you perhaps condense them into fewer edits? — Dispenser 00:17, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Jaguar
Your recent edits were on top of a highly vandalized version of the article. I reverted back to before the vandalism. Please take a look and see which of your edits might again apply. Thanks! - UtherSRG (talk) 10:20, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Stop combining "identical" refs into one name
There are reasons why an article might choose not to do it intentionally. Gimmetrow 23:54, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok with the block but the 'account creation blocked' seemed excessive... --Lemmey talk 00:29, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * That's just a default setting. Will you stop doing the ref combining? Gimmetrow 00:36, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * It won't be run on a massive scale but it might still be run on an individual article or two, mainly those on the main page or ITN candidates. The problem with the account creation block is that it blocks the bot owners account if its on the same IP. --Lemmey talk 01:22, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry about the autoblock hitting you. Really not intended. Gimmetrow 22:02, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Warning about Trolling
Okay, first of all WP is not a forum, so take the political discussion elsewhere. Nobody cares. , please refrain from making personal attacks like "you people" and the like. , stop trolling. You made an offensive comment, people called you on it, and so you freaking bolded it just to rile people up further. Everyone should be reminded of WP:CIVIL, and move on as this is not going up as is. --  Grant  .  Alpaugh  17:19, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Edit load
It seems like your bot a lot of edits, could you perhaps condense them into fewer edits? — Dispenser 00:17, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I realy like that you take it apon yourself to edit and add to pages if there is somthing missing.user71.103.34.202

Jaguar
Your recent edits were on top of a highly vandalized version of the article. I reverted back to before the vandalism. Please take a look and see which of your edits might again apply. Thanks! - UtherSRG (talk) 10:20, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Stop combining "identical" refs into one name
There are reasons why an article might choose not to do it intentionally. Gimmetrow 23:54, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok with the block but the 'account creation blocked' seemed excessive... --Lemmey talk 00:29, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * That's just a default setting. Will you stop doing the ref combining? Gimmetrow 00:36, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * It won't be run on a massive scale but it might still be run on an individual article or two, mainly those on the main page or ITN candidates. The problem with the account creation block is that it blocks the bot owners account if its on the same IP. --Lemmey talk 01:22, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry about the autoblock hitting you. Really not intended. Gimmetrow 22:02, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Duplicate references
You need better code for generating those reference names. This is an improved code that I gave to User:NicDumZ. — Dispenser 00:57, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Using the longest word in the ref, that is brilliant. --Lemmey talk 01:06, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Warning about Trolling
Okay, first of all WP is not a forum, so take the political discussion elsewhere. Nobody cares. , please refrain from making personal attacks like "you people" and the like. , stop trolling. You made an offensive comment, people called you on it, and so you freaking bolded it just to rile people up further. Everyone should be reminded of WP:CIVIL, and move on as this is not going up as is. --  Grant  .  Alpaugh  17:19, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Edit load
It seems like your bot a lot of edits, could you perhaps condense them into fewer edits? — Dispenser 00:17, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I realy like that you take it apon yourself to edit and add to pages if there is somthing missing.user71.103.34.202

Jaguar
Your recent edits were on top of a highly vandalized version of the article. I reverted back to before the vandalism. Please take a look and see which of your edits might again apply. Thanks! - UtherSRG (talk) 10:20, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Stop combining "identical" refs into one name
There are reasons why an article might choose not to do it intentionally. Gimmetrow 23:54, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok with the block but the 'account creation blocked' seemed excessive... --Lemmey talk 00:29, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * That's just a default setting. Will you stop doing the ref combining? Gimmetrow 00:36, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * It won't be run on a massive scale but it might still be run on an individual article or two, mainly those on the main page or ITN candidates. The problem with the account creation block is that it blocks the bot owners account if its on the same IP. --Lemmey talk 01:22, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry about the autoblock hitting you. Really not intended. Gimmetrow 22:02, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Duplicate references
You need better code for generating those reference names. This is an improved code that I gave to User:NicDumZ. — Dispenser 00:57, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Using the longest word in the ref, that is brilliant. --Lemmey talk 01:06, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

ITN trial period
Please see Wikipedia talk:In the news 2.0 and Template talk:In the news. Thanks.--Pharos (talk) 16:22, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I must admit your analysis of the new ITN/C system is thoroughly entertaining. --   Grant  .  Alpaugh  01:57, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I was hoping you wouldn't miss it. --Lemmey talk 02:30, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

LemmeyBOT
Just a curious question...is the bot supposed to edit userspace? Spencer T♦C 19:54, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I was just wondering...Why would you hit me? Spencer  T♦C 19:58, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
 * ;D. Spencer  T♦C 20:00, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Sandbox
Is there any way to stop the bot from making edits to my sandbox? I lost a load of work due to bot restoring an old version of the page. My sandbox is NOT an article! Mjroots (talk) 04:43, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Cluster bombs
People would inevitably complain because a) It's a 60-year-old example, and b) it's a chemical weapon rather than explosive which is the focus of the current treaty. --Stephen 03:05, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Portal:Current events
Please be reminded not to copypaste headers of news articles straight onto Portal:Current events/2008 May 30. Such headers are covered by copyrights and cannot be copied by us. Also be reminded that Portal:Current events/2008 May 30 is for items that occurred on May 30, 2008. Some items you added occurred on other days. Aecis·(away) talk 20:17, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Simply being May 30 on any given part of the world is not enough. Can you prove the date was Friday May 30 on the location where the events occurred at the moment the events occurred? Some of the news articles you linked explicitly mention Thursday, some even Wednesday. Aecis·(away) talk 20:32, 30 May 2008 (UTC)


 * We should probably discuss this at Portal talk:Current events. Thanks.--Pharos (talk) 20:55, 30 May 2008 (UTC)


 * To what end? My edits are in line with all stated CE polices. --Lemmey talk 21:08, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Reversal of edits
Will you stop removing my links in the current events portal? You are running the risk of breaking the three revert rule. The wikilinks are added to the story for a reason. If you keep this up, you will be blocked. Capitalistroadster (talk) 21:22, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) your links are non-contextual
 * 2) read what you are trying to add back in, its the wrong story(http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Portal:Current_events/2008_May_30&action=history) Doubling the CPS story when you meant to add back the YFZ court ruling, which is on the wrong day anyways.
 * 3) don't whine when your wrong, the 3rr goes both ways Lemmey  talk 21:24, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Final Warning
You have broken the three revert rule but I will not block you for it given a conflict of interest. However, I would suggest that you read up more thoroughly on our rules before continuing your current editing practices. If you keep this up, I will bring your unconstructive behaviour to the attention of others and you could well be blocked. The links were appropriate to the story. Capitalistroadster (talk) 21:28, 30 May 2008 (UTC)


 * again don't whine when your wrong and don't threaten. You need to read the Current Events guidelines on context --Lemmey talk 21:30, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
 * camper, just waiting until I made an unrelated edit to launch a final warning --Lemmey talk 21:33, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Current Events - context of links
Think links you added to the current events portal are non-contextual Please review How_the_Current_events_page_works and the following paragraph on subject. The articles crane, and locations in New York are not specific to the event. --Lemmey talk 21:47, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Whatever. VolatileChemical (talk) 21:52, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

LemmyBot Task 2c: Bastards
My observation has been that Bastard refs are often created by an editor cutting a text snippet from one article and pasting it into another. The source article where the parent ref can bve found can often be identified from the context surrounding the bastard, found by text search for the ref name and/or other pasted-in text, or identified from clues left in the edit summary. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 23:18, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes I saw that. I modified the bot to copy identically named refs from the current version of another article. I also modified it to check each of the pages linked in the article. The bot had great success with articles such as The Wire Season 3 and Criticisms of Tony Blair, where it matched references in The Wire and Tony Blair. I had to run this manually due to the possibility of false positives (mostly on music album sources) but it was very quickly done. I estimate I fixed approximately 100 references in 75 articles this way. However this method has run its course and there are still many articles remaining (Any of the small towns in North Dakota) where its obvious there is no source, never has been a source, and can not find a source on any of the linked pages. At some point any editor would call bullshit and add a fact-needed tag, why should the bot be held to a higher standard when it has already gone so far beyond what the average editor would do? --Lemmey talk 01:55, 2 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Examples of copying from another page

, , , ,


 * Obviously its very easy to approve the change when its a very unique reference name (reuters010908) or the articles have similar names. --Lemmey talk 02:01, 2 June 2008 (UTC)


 * You check every linked article for a matching named ref? That seems like a reasonable solution to me. Gimmetrow 02:52, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Houston Chronicle is blacklisted?
How can a major metropolitan newspaper like the Houston Chronicle not be allowed as a reference source? It was removed from Ivan Dixon. Please explain. --69.22.254.108 (talk) 18:04, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Post chron was added to the wikimedia spamlist by another user, User:JzG/unreliable sources. Wikipedia won't let me restore a reference that includes a url in the spamlist, try it, the page simply will not save. I replaced the tag with a fact tag so that some other user may find an acceptable source for the statement. Goto the spam list page if you want the site to be removed from that list, I don't make the rules I just follow them. --Lemmey talk 02:42, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
 * The "Post Chronicle" is not a major newspaper in Houston or elsewhere. It is an online news/tabloid gossip site that has been deemed unacceptable as a source. FCYTravis (talk) 08:19, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll put this more clearly, I don't care about the source quality or statement it supports. LemmeyBOT only tries to restore 'lost' references, if the page can't save due to a 'Spam Blacklist' the ref gets replaced with a fact tag. I don't make the spamlist, I don't manage the spamlist, I don't even read the articles LemmeyBOT edits. I have absoulutly no opinion on the post and as there is absoulutlely nothing I can do, all issues regarding its inclusion should be handled elsewhere. --Lemmey talk 15:40, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
 * To be most clear: "Post Chronicle" != Houston Chronicle; the official site for the latter, chron.com, is not blacklisted (and, as you observe, its blacklisting or its being deemed inappropriate as a "reference source" would disquiet). Joe 07:15, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

(dedent) Either way
 * 1) Nothing I can do
 * 2) Just to be clear, LemmeyBOT is blocked and I'm not really interested in defending myself from the baseless and unproven accusations in some kind of policy shouting match I'd have to win just to get the approval to continue exactly what I've already been approved to do. --Lemmey  talk 12:51, 10 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the reply and all the input. My fault -- I confused postchronicle with Houston Chronicle (which had absorbed the Houston Post). Houston Chronicle a completely different thing from postchronicle. In words of Emily Litella, "Never mind!" :)  --69.22.254.108 (talk) 16:45, 10 June 2008 (UTC)