User talk:R'n'B/Archive 18

Reverted edit.
Hi, I made a minor edit on Supreme Court of the United States. I added death in, because it's a fact. If they pass away while on the bench a replacement is chosen. Not sure, why it was reverted?
 * Hi. Thanks for your message.  The sentence already said that the justices have "life tenure", and it's pretty obvious that a dead person could not serve on the Court, so I thought the addition was unnecessary.  --R'n'B (call me Russ) 12:37, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

So Wikipedia is not in fact open to the public if Moderators consistantly step on contributors toes.
 * Well, that's certainly an extreme version of the glass being half empty. You had one edit reverted, therefore the "big bad moderators" won't let you edit anything?  For your information, the fact that I am an administrator (there is no such thing as a "moderator" on Wikipedia) has nothing to do with my edit of Supreme Court of the United States.  With a few exceptions, any editor can change any other editor's contributions to Wikipedia.  Your whole idea of some mysterious group of elitist users who go around reverting new users' contributions is ridiculous.
 * If you're serious about contributing to Wikipedia, and I hope you are, I encourage you to visit the Teahouse and read some of the new user help information there, ask questions, and learn more about how this community operates, instead of jumping to conclusions. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 23:53, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Range of Motion Project
Just wondering why you tagged Range of Motion Project as a hoax. It seems to exist, but I'm not sure it passes notability. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 22:26, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Same thing with Buriram United F.C.. It seems tagging the CP dab somehow made a hoax tag appear. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 22:28, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Um, well, that's embarrassing -- I didn't do it intentionally, and I usually pay closer attention to my edits than that. Sorry.  I'll go back over my edits from that day and see if there were any other errors.  --R'n'B (call me Russ) 22:29, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Automatic pistol (disambiguation)


A tag has been placed on Automatic pistol (disambiguation), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

Because the Automatic pistol article that you redirect to Automatic pistol (disambiguation) then i clear all of the text and i redirect the Automatic pistol to Machine pistol that is better

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.205.221.224 (talk) 17:35, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Akanland ???
Dear RussBot,

Are you sure you want Akanland mentioned in Wikipedia as a "country bordering the Atlantic Ocean"? It is not a country but a product of the fantasy of Ghanaians who want to promote their tribe at the expense of other Ghanaian tribes. Accepting Akanland as a country makes Wikipedia a vehicle of interethnic conflict. DrMennoWolters (talk) 20:01, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
 * That's an interesting comment. What gives you the idea that RussBot, which is an automated program, has any particular point of view on this question at all?  --R'n'B (call me Russ) 20:16, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Template:Hyderabad topics
Apologies. Didn't mean to step on your toes. :)—Ketil Trout (&lt;&gt;&lt;!) 23:17, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Adjectivals and demonyms for countries and nations
As a contributor to the article, you may wish to comment at Articles for deletion/Adjectivals and demonyms for countries and nations (2nd nomination).

—Wavelength (talk) 02:06, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Bonnie Jill Laflin
Dear Mr. Russ Bott - It would appear that you undid virtually all of the updates I had performed to this article "Bonnie Jill Laflin" in December 2012. Such undo was effected without having any talk with me, which would of course violate the spirit of ' if not in in violation of Wikipedia policies. You deleted 95% of my contribution without creating a talk page. That is not appreciated.

I respectfully request you explain to / discuss with me the reasons for doing so.

Please do not force me to revert to the article as it was on December 29, 2012. You have added several new items which can be of use to the article, most of which can be weaved in with ease,, however, in doing so you have removed all previous citations and the article is now devoid of ANY citations. The article should have citations. ChristopherDBoyle (talk) 08:53, 6 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Dear ChristopherDBoyle: I have no idea what you are talking about.  The only edit that User:RussBot made to the article Bonnie Jill Laflin was this one: changing the link   to  .  That's all.  It didn't remove anything at all from the article.  Whatever gave you the idea that it did???
 * By the way, do you see how useful it is to include links in talk page messages, as I did in the previous paragraph? --R'n'B (call me Russ) 11:52, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

My apologies, it is the edit next to yours. While you were kind enough to respond he or she (only an IP address is shown) has not. In your opinion, how long should I wait for a response before reverting the Article to its former status? ChristopherDBoyle (talk) 03:38, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Under the circumstances - an unexplained edit by an IP address with virtually no prior editing history - I should say you have waited long enough already. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 11:39, 7 January 2013 (UTC)\

Hey
I haven't hit you up for help in awhile. :) Could you look at Air Traffic Management (Disambiguation). I'm always a little fuzzy on this, so I'm asking you. That doesn't need the "(Disambiguation)", right? It's about 3 similar concepts not a title. In fact, I'm not entirely sure it's a disam page anyway. --User:Woohookitty Disamming fool! 06:04, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, I cleaned up the most obvious problems, but I'm not sure how all these different aspects of air traffic control are related to each other; it really needs attention from someone who is more familiar with the subject. Maybe WikiProject Aviation. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 11:58, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Ramone
I intended to but I'm not very efficient. Thanks for helping.

Dr.warhol (talk) 03:04, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Swartz / Swarz
Thank you for your courtesy notice. The purpose I created Black-surname is to untangle the mess with different derivations of the surname "Schwarz". Please notice, these are not different spellings; these are historically different surnames, produced via different mutlilanguage transliterations and corruptions. In particular, Swartz and Swarz are different. Unfortunately there are no sufficiently notable peolple with the lattter name on wikipedia. But this may change. Anyway, I am open to discuss other reasons. - Altenmann >t 03:19, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

IPO
I have initiated an RfD discussion on the appropriate target of IPO. I have also made all the current links point directly to Initial Public Offering, so incoming links will not factor into the discussion. Cheers! bd2412 T 23:26, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

User:JaGa
Do you have any idea what has become of User:JaGa? He hasn't edited since November. bd2412 T 21:04, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Nope. I hope everything's OK. Have you tried contacting him by email?  --R'n'B (call me Russ) 21:42, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * No, will do. Cheers! bd2412  T 21:50, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

im
I'm trying to find a template I'm going to set everything bk to normal sorry about that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clairlove619 (talk • contribs) 20:01, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Euthyneura
Hi Russ (Is this how to contact you as you kindly suggested?) I was looking through a rather local biological journal (Ir Nat. J.) adding notes as I thought proper. I came upon: "Euthyneura myrtilli" Macquart. a fly (Diptera). When I started to enter it I found that "Euthyneura" already exsisted in Wikipedia, but as a slug no less. Now I don't think two different animals should be labelled under the same name, it's against the rules of nomenclature (I think). So I tried to note this. Now until I have sorted things out (there is a fault somewhere probably!) I think it best to delete Euthyneura myrtitti in the ''Ir Nat. J.'' completely! Can you do this for me please. I will research the matter and see what to do. Until then Euthyneura myrtilli best be deleted!!! Will be grateful for your help.Osborne 17:57, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
 * We don't have an article called Euthyneura myrtilli, so there is nothing to delete. We do have an article Euthyneura about the clade of slugs, and Euthyneura (insect) about the insect genus, which mentions Euthyneura myrtilli as one of six species.  This arrangement assumes that the slug grouping is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC; that is, if a reader is searching for "Euthyneura", it is "much more likely" that they are going to be looking for slugs than for dance flies.  Frankly, I have no idea whether this assumption is correct or not.  If it is, then the current set-up would be fine as it is.  --R'n'B (call me Russ) 18:54, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

RSBots
Is User:RussBot connected to RSBot on talk:Matas (drug store) which I looked at recently? Jodosma (talk) 18:39, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
 * No, I have no idea what "RSBots" means. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 18:46, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

February page size.
I see that Disambiguation pages with links/February 2013 has been created by RussBot, and it only has 500 links (including one on the January list that has already been finished). Can this be expanded to 1,000?
 * It needs JaGa to decide whether he is going to expand the monthly list on the Toolserver, since that's where the actual contest takes place. Presumably that can't happen until March, at the earliest, now.  --R'n'B (call me Russ) 20:57, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Sad face. Well, 500 it is, and the show goes on. Cheers! bd2412  T 21:13, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

U+2055
[] substantiation? Incnis Mrsi (talk) 07:55, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
 * ⁕ is not remotely appropriate for a disambiguation page. No one who is searching for information about either flowers or the Red Hot Chili Peppers could be expected to use this as a search term; and if someone did, they should not reasonably be surprised if the search fails to bring them to that topic.  In fact, nothing in the Red Hot Chili Peppers article even hints at any relationship this symbol might have to the band; is that based on WP:OR?
 * When you created the disambiguation page, your edit summary referred to WP:Articles for deletion/Flower punctuation mark; I read that discussion, and I did not see anything that even remotely suggested that a disambiguation page was either necessary or appropriate. In fact, the discussion strongly suggested to me that the only appropriate topic for the "⁕" symbol would be Star (glyph).  So, what's your substantiation?  --R'n'B (call me Russ) 17:21, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
 * My solution is vulnerable to a critic, but there is no guideline about titles which are “not remotely appropriate for a disambiguation page”. There is a guideline about redirects to inappropriate targets (pp. 2 and 5), though. ⁕ looks similar to a star glyph, but it is not hyponymous/synonymous to a star glyph, just like ж and 卅 look similar to ∗ but all three are semantically unrelated. BTW, Unicode Code Charts recommend to approximate U+2055 with, which has a smooth, rounded shape – not a star glyph. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 19:21, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I think your statement that "there is no guideline about titles which are 'not remotely appropriate for a disambiguation page'" is mistaken -- there are comprehensive guidelines on disambiguation at WP:Disambiguation. The introduction of this page explains, "Disambiguation is required whenever, for a given word or phrase on which a reader might search, there is more than one existing Wikipedia article to which that word or phrase might be expected to lead."  [Emphasis mine.]  My interpretation is that no one could reasonably expect the title "⁕" to lead to an article about flowers, or to an article about the Red Hot Chili Peppers; therefore, disambiguation is not required.  (Also, note the section of the guidelines on what not to include on disambiguation pages.)  --R'n'B (call me Russ) 20:19, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Problem solved. I moved the disambiguation page to ⁕ (disambiguation), on the off chance that someone does search for it in order to find a meaning attributed to it, restored the redirect to Star (glyph) as the primary topic of the symbol, and dropped a hatnote on that page. Cheers! bd2412 T 20:31, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
 * A peace-keeper who does not get arguments… Star (glyph) as the primary topic of the symbol – who did say him such thing?! Will anybody of two users present any argument for that? Incnis Mrsi (talk) 21:24, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Compare the letters of the alphabet (A, B, C, etc.), punctuation marks (?, !, @), and other symbols. They lead to articles about the symbol itself, not its meanings or associations. 卐 is associated with Nazism, but redirects to Swastika, not Nazism. This is clearly a broadly based understanding in the encyclopedia. bd2412  T 21:41, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Yet another list request.
Hatnote dab links are a bitch. Can you generate a list of pages with (unintentional) disambig links occurring within, say, the first 100 characters of text? bd2412 T 04:28, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll have to give this some thought. As I've mentioned before, trying to figure out where in the text a link appears is much more complex than just determining whether a link is present or not.  --R'n'B (call me Russ) 15:57, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
 * How about links appearing within x number of characters (say, 20 or 50) of the phrase, "other uses" (and "other people", "other places", maybe "see also")? bd2412  T 16:09, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, I finally got around to whipping up a script to generate this list (your first version, with links appearing within the first 100 characters of text). The script wasn't too hard, but I suspect it will take many hours to complete.  We shall see, when User:RussBot/Possible hatnote disambiguation links/001 turns blue.  --R'n'B (call me Russ) 21:05, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Still red as of this post. bd2412  T 17:30, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Yep. Many hours.  :-) --R'n'B (call me Russ) 17:32, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
 * How big a list could it possibly be? bd2412  T 20:10, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, as of yesterday when I started the script, there were 351,394 articles containing links to disambiguation pages. Even if only 1% of those fall within the first 100 characters, it's a considerable list.  However, as I've mentioned before, it's not the size of the list that is the issue so much as the processing time involved in loading and checking the text of each individual page to see where the disambiguation links are.  If the bot can retrieve one page per second, that's four days to retrieve 351,394 pages.  And, as you probably have experienced yourself, Wikipedia doesn't always load a page within one second of a request.  --R'n'B (call me Russ) 20:52, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Of course, now that I've written the above, it occurs to me that I probably didn't use the most efficient way of loading the page text, so maybe I can cut down the time significantly, although that would mean redoing all the work done so far. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 20:57, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Turns out to be about 6,200. Not all are in hatnotes (in fact it seems fairly few are), but so far they seem to be easy fixes. bd2412  T 18:27, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

I need admin to move misspelled file
The article on Charles M. Schulz has a redlink to File:Charles M. Schulz Highland Arena.JPG. It's red because the file was actually uploaded as File:Charles M. Schultz Highland Arena.JPG (with extraneous "t"). I am not adequately trusted to fix such errors. Please move the file, or tell me where to go...for tasks like this.  Randall Bart    Talk   17:26, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Done. Cheers! bd2412  T 17:44, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Category:1760s in the United States
Hello R'n'B. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Category:1760s in the United States, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Category is not empty. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 04:28, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Unnecessary-disambiguation redirects
Hi, you recently deleted Bath salts (dismbiguation) which redirected to Bath salts. Redirects from unnecessary disambiguation are legitimate and have their own tag. I believe that is a reasonable first guess to reach the page about the narcotics and that Wikipedia should have a definite destination for that query. re/greg/ex ;{ mbox &#124; history } 15:14, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
 * You probably meant Bath salts (disambiguation). I'm not sure how it helps to have a redirect with "disambiguation" in the title that doesn't take the reader to a disambiguation page, but I suppose it doesn't do any harm, so I'll defer to your views. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 15:41, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Categories for years in French sport(s)
Hi R'n'B: re the (empty) categories for years on French sport from 1997 to 2010, I have put them up for full discussion See eg Category:2000 in French sports. Hugo999 (talk) 09:04, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

re Circular Letter (religion)
I've fixed this redirect as indicated in the discussion. Mangoe (talk) 12:54, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Odd dab fix
This change, was not really correct. Don't know if a bot should be changing links to be directed to a dab page. What I believe the correct link to be is totally different. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:43, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
 * The link was pointing to a dab page before the bot edited it; and in almost all cases, links to dab pages in a hatnote like this are intentional, so per WP:D the bot's edit would be correct. However, in this case, I think you're right that the link was wrong in the first place.  --R'n'B (call me Russ) 18:58, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Surprising HotCat Change
Via your RussBot you undid this change:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anita_Lasker-Wallfisch&diff=prev&oldid=546085761

Can you point to any discussion that justifies your change ?

If not, then please undo your change and allow the category to reflect the cited sources. Thanks. Lklundin (talk) 08:52, 22 March 2013 (UTC)


 * The reason for the edit is that Category:People from Breslau is a category redirect. Did you look at the category page before complaining?  The bot did not make it a redirect; in fact, it has been a redirect ever since it was first created in 2007.  The bot simply follows the redirect instructions.  --R'n'B (call me Russ) 10:08, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
 * OK, I see now that you are simply implementing an existing policy. Could you help me with directions on where I can suggest a change of this policy? Thanks. Lklundin (talk) 12:52, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
 * If you are just concerned with this particular category, you could propose to split it, using the template and following the instructions on WP:Categories for discussion.  If you are looking for a broader change in categorization practice, I'd suggest discussing it on Wikipedia talk:Category names.  --R'n'B (call me Russ) 18:01, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I have tried to follow the instructions and am now proposing a split. Lklundin (talk) 07:15, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

The Daily Disambig
Greetings, my friend. What's the prospectus on the Daily Disambig? It's been out for over a week now. Cheers! bd2412 T 12:33, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
 * The Toolserver is going through one of its periodic fits. :-(  There's no ETA on when things may get back to normal.  It could be today, or it could be another week or two.  Unfortunately, it is entirely out of my control (or anyone else's, as far as I can tell).  --R'n'B (call me Russ) 12:41, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Sounds like everything is "normal" then. I don't suppose there's any way to generate those figures without going through the toolserver, is there? Cheers again! bd2412  T 12:50, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Probably not in any practical sense. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 13:39, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I worry immensely about the possibility that one day the toolserver will swallow itself up altogether. bd2412  T 14:15, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
 * LOL...
 * By the way, I have made my first run through User:RussBot/Templates with links to disambiguation pages, skipping al templates about taxonomy (that give me problems) and some technical templates. Is an update possible? The Banner talk 12:58, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes. It will take around 4 hours to finish, and I won't be around at the end, so I won't be able to delete the known false positives as I have done the last couple of times.  --R'n'B (call me Russ) 13:06, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Tomorrow is good enough, we are not in a panic. The Banner talk 13:54, 29 March 2013 (UTC) But still I hope they have the Toolserver fixed before Christmas.

E.J. Wells
I think the E.J. Wells page should be removed or turned in to a redirect. The name is wrong per WP:INITS, and with only two people we don't really need a disambig page, the hatnote at E. J. Wells is sufficient. I would just do it but I'm not familiar with these things and I see you've been in there before. Please discuss at Talk:E.J. Wells.Kendall-K1 (talk) 17:33, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

DAB
What does DAB mean, stand for, or indicate? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Taram (talk • contribs) 01:02, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
 * "DAB" is short for "disambiguation". Disambiguation is the process of resolving the ambiguity that arises from article titles that might refer to more than one topic in the encyclopedia.  For example, "Mercury" might be a planet, a god, a car, or a metal, among other things.  --R'n'B (call me Russ) 09:39, 5 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you and thank you for being so kind about this answer. This was one of the questions I asked on my page, but you forgot to answer. "DAB" as acronym for "disambiguation" must be specific to Wikipedia and the special administrators at this particular site. That is, it is currently not listed in the first two pages that come up in a Google Chrome search. Thank you, again, RnB call me Russ.Taram 5 April 2013

WikiProject U2 invitation
Hello! This message is to inform you that WikiProject U2 needs your input! Please, join this discussion on this talk page!

You may add yourself to our member list below by clicking here!

 Miss Bono   (zootalk)  18:38, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Question about Vandalism
RnB, call me Russ: I have one more question about a different page and set of pages that I hoped you could answer, especially as a decorated editor and administrator. At three other pages that I know of (one in which I was once quite involved), a user named who refers to herself/himself has spend time removing practically everything on the pages (including references) and then making outlandish claims about that which is left. In the last week s/he has gone to the pages frequently and after removing vast amounts of information from the page s/he then posts in correct and /or inaccurate statements describing the individual. Another person came along and re-edited the page that the so-called Wikipedia editor had ravaged. So, the page had accurate, bare-bone facts in the biography. This editor who is a concern came back almost immediately and removed all of that information and proceeded to say that there was nothing to say the individual is notable. The latest edit this so-called Wikipedia guru did was to remove a reference to a statement and remove the statement saying that it was not substantiated. When somebody returns information this character immediately returns to empty the page again. This so-called editor ravaged a page and then nominated the page for deletion after ravaging it. Another page had its contents deleted, but s/he has not gone so far as to recommend the page for deletion creating a talk page.

It seems to me that this so-called editor is acting inappropriately by constantly removing information (including citations) with the comment that there are no sources. It seems inappropriate to remove information and only then nominate the page for deletion because there is nothing there. It feels a little like stalking, but I doubt that is really happening.

What can I do about this knowledge rape by this so-called editor? Is there a way to protect a page so this person is prevented from constantly deleting information from it? Was it wrong to delete all the information and only then nominate a page for deletion? (Would returning the information to the page and then nominating it for deletion protect the page while it is discussed?)

Thank you, RnB, call me Russ TaramTaram (talk) 15:07, 6 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Taram, this is all very abstract, and without knowing which articles are involved it is impossible for me to form any opinion. In terms of process, if you think an article has been nominated for deletion inappropriately, you should raise your concerns on the Articles for Deletion page about that article.  If you think that a particular editor is engaged in inappropriate actions on multiple pages, you should certainly raise that issue on WP:ANI.  --R'n'B (call me Russ) 13:57, 7 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you, R'n'B. I will check WP:ANI. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Taram (talk • contribs) 15:07, 7 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Pardon my intrusion, but I think it is no coincidence that you started Andrew Helm and Roberta Brown, and they both got the same treatment. I am not saying there has been WP:stalking, as I have no proof of intent. WP: duck. Whether this behavior was untoward I leave to those in authority, of which I have none. 7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 17:26, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Double Redirects
I work on the TF2 wiki, and we were trying to set up a bot to deal with double-redirects. The bot is written in python, and I would greatly appreciate either the double-redirect code, or some pointers as to how to right said code. Thanks! Jbzdarkid (talk) 18:55, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi, Jbzdarkid. The bot you linked to uses a framework called "wikitools," which I'm not familiar with.  The double-redirect bots that I know here on Wikipedia use the Pywikipediabot framework, and a script called redirect.py.  It should be possible to configure this to work on your wiki, if you want to make the effort.  (Anyway, there are only two double-redirects on the wiki at the moment; I'm not sure it's worth all the trouble to set up a bot to fix them....)  Or, you could use the source code to figure out how to adapt your existing bot to do this.  --R'n'B (call me Russ) 18:43, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * There are only two because I patrol that special page, quite heavily. (Also, we don't move pages much.) I'll see if I can adapt it. 96.237.240.118 (talk) 20:20, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Westin Casuarina (disambiguation) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Westin Casuarina (disambiguation) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Westin Casuarina (disambiguation) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. TheGoofyGolfer (talk) 19:18, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Limerick
Ten points for fixing the links. I'm AWBing stuff now for the 1700-ish links, but mainly I want to thank you for fixing links like Limerick, Ireland. You are a pro and have my highest commendation. Red Slash 16:47, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks much
Thank you for your disambiguation help at the quality improvement page I'm working on, Fuck (film), much appreciated, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:06, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Parenthesis (disambiguation) listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Parenthesis (disambiguation). Since you had some involvement with the Parenthesis (disambiguation) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Pam D  13:30, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

German Army (1935-1945)
Do not operate the many changes that have made adding German Army (1935-1945) in heer (the link is incorrect).

Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zumalabe (talk • contribs) 20:59, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


 * I don't understand. Which article(s) are incorrect?  I frankly think the decision to split Heer into a disambiguation page was ill-advised, but that was the consensus.  --R'n'B (call me Russ) 21:22, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


 * The disambiguation in this case is not correct. In general if it is, but something went wrong. Why do not you look at the latest articles you've edited? The link to heer is dead. I subsequently corrected, for example, Martin Gareis, and is now OK. The problem seems to be the hyphen between the dates.


 * Regards--Zumalabe (talk) 15:41, 2 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Ahh, sorry, today is correct. Yesterday, the link was broken. I do not understand, if you look at Martin Gareis, required I changed the dash between the dates so that was correct. You can see it's different. Glad it is fixed (you have made ​​many changes). :)


 * Regards--Zumalabe (talk) 15:57, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, once I figured out what you meant, I created a redirect from German Army (1935-1945) to German Army (1935–1945). It was a simple solution.  --R'n'B (call me Russ) 16:02, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Template:Deleted page listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Template:Deleted page. Since you had some involvement with the Template:Deleted page redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Thryduulf (talk) 16:21, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Asia Minor
Me and a couple of other editors went through this recently; the discussion is at User talk:RHaworth if you want to comment on it.-- Laun  chba  ller  11:30, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, I checked Talk:Asia Minor (disambiguation) before editing and didn't see any relevant discussion there; hiding it away on a user's talk page is not really very friendly to the rest of us. Anyway, reading the discussion on RHaworth's page does not change my mind as to Anatolia being the primary topic.  I don't have any quarrel with the existence of the disambiguation page as such, which seems to be what you were discussing.  However, Asia Minor Slavs and Asia Minor ground squirrel are both partial title matches that don't really belong.  No one who is looking for one of these two topics could reasonably expect to find them on a page titled simply "Asia Minor". --R'n'B (call me Russ) 14:05, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

RussBot on Commons
RussBot on Commons stalled ? --Foroa (talk) 14:38, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, I've put in a bug report but won't be in a position to fix anything myself for several more days. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 14:43, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

June 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=561420031 your edit] to Combined Cadet Force may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry, just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:40, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
 * A few other schools make CCF attendance voluntary like Stamford School, (largest voluntary CCF contingent in the UK), which tends to reduce

Speedy deletion nomination of Ancestral home (disambiguation)


A tag has been placed on Ancestral home (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G6 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an orphaned disambiguation page which either
 * disambiguates two or fewer extant Wikipedia pages and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic); or
 * disambiguates no (zero) extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Widefox ; talk 13:02, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and deleted because the target (Ancestral home) is no longer a disambiguation page. Cheers! bd2412  T 13:36, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Yet another list request.
It's been a while since I've asked you to make a list of something, so this will make up for lost time. I have been finding a lot of "Foo of Bar" or "Foo in Bar" pages categorized as disambiguation pages that are either dabconcepts or should be primary topic pages. For example, Military of China should not be a disambig because China is a primary topic, and the military of China is the People's Liberation Army. Can you make me a list of all disambiguation pages with titles containing the words "of" or "in" (of course, excluding those titled "Foo of Bar (disambiguation)")? Cheers! bd2412 T 22:25, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
 * See User:RussBot/Foo of Bar dab pages/001 and the pages linked from there.  At first glance, this doesn't look like it will be terribly helpful to you. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 17:42, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks. For the time being, I will say: hmmm. bd2412  T 20:17, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Boxing Article
Hello. On the boxing article you recently have edit over and over again about Michael Hunter Jr. I wil liketo tell you that there is no disambiguation. We have always done boxing pages like that, that first we mention the city the boxing place is in and then the state it is located in.

Ex Phoenix, Arizona. Please do not edit. Tahnk you

David-golota (talk) 12:08, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Phoenix is not an article about a city. Please do not tell me not to fix a link that is plainly wrong. Thank you. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 13:42, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Nickelodeon
Can you link the flag and anthem the Nickelodeon articles of Denmark, Montenegro, Serbia, Kazakhstan, Russia & Turkmenistan 174.91.69.179 (talk) 22:20, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry, that's not something I have a lot of time for at the moment. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 00:59, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Why?174.91.69.179 (talk) 06:14, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:VOLUNTEER. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 10:11, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I think it needs links174.89.26.164 (talk) 18:15, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Daily Disambig request
Would it be possible to denote with an asterisk (or in some other way) pages that are new to the Daily Disambig because they are entirely new disambiguation pages? Cheers! bd2412 T 12:38, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Off the top of my head, I can't think of how to do this. The Daily Disambig is derived from the Toolserver list of disambiguation pages with links.  If a page is on that list today and wasn't on it yesterday, then it is a "new" page.  That can be either because the page didn't exist yesterday; because it did exist but it wasn't a disambiguation page; or because the page didn't have any incoming links yesterday and today it has some.  The data available to me don't tell me which of these three cases it is.  --R'n'B (call me Russ) 13:37, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
 * This may be a pain, but is it possible, once the list of "new" pages is generated, for the generating mechanism to look at the page histories and see if they were created within the last day, or made into a disambiguation page in the last day? I ask because the question has come up in this discussion. Cheers again! bd2412  T 13:53, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

A few thousand blank saves?
Every once in a while I notice a page topping the list of most linked-to disambiguation pages for which virtually all of the incoming links are from a template that has already been fixed. Sometimes I load those links up in AWB and do blank saves of the pages to wean out the false positives. I suspect that if we did the same thing with the top thousand disambiguation pages with links (or the top ten thousand, or twenty thousand), we would sweep away a great deal of bad hits. Can Russbot do this? bd2412 T 02:32, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
 * You do know that there is a job queue that automatically cleans out these links after a template is edited, right? It can take three to seven days, but these links generally go away on their own, so I don't think that the "sweep" you have in mind would really do very much.  --R'n'B (call me Russ) 09:58, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I occasionally seem to run across older bunches than that, but maybe that's just large groups of actual fixes needed remaining from a larger set that included template fixes. Sorry to throw unnecessary work at you! bd2412  T 11:22, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

new Sandbox
I'm working on my sandbox and trying to have more references. I keep getting errors though... Can you help me fix this? Joancdocyogen 00:01, 6 August 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joancdocyogen (talk • contribs)

Public (disambiguation )
Hey, trying to create a page by the above title HERE, your name popped up. Wondering if you can fill me in, as the page seems to have been deleted in the past. On my end, I was seeking to disambiguate as follows:

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% % Public - as in non private (Ex: IPO, public company) % Public - pertaining to government (Ex: public policy, public health) % Public - as in a group of people (Ex: fans, tribal, community) %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

What I envisioned was somewhat the counterpart of private.

But, I wouldn't want to reinvent the wheel if the community has decided against such page....

Thanks,

My name is Mercy11, and I approve this message. 01:33, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Mercy11 (talk) 07:39, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
 * All of those seem to me to be subsenses of the larger sense of "public" embodied in the article, public. Why not just expand that article with sections on "public" as it pertains to business, to government, and to groups of people? bd2412  T 13:57, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi, Mercy11. I tend to agree with BD2412 on this.  Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a dictionary. A disambiguation page is supposed to direct readers to specific encyclopedia articles about topics, not just list definitions and/or related terms.  In fact, the first two of the three groups you listed are uses of "public" as an adjective, not a noun, but encyclopedia articles are almost always about a topic that is a person, place, thing, or concept, so their titles are almost always nouns.  And the third grouping is already covered by the existing article, Public.  --R'n'B (call me Russ) 15:11, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

What the f-bomb?
The number of disambiguation pages with links seems to have dropped by about 7,500 overnight (although this is not reflected in the list of pages leaving the count). Any idea what is going on here? bd2412 T 14:51, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Bot glitch. I'm trying to clean it up.  Although, frankly, I don't understand it because when I tried the same script a second time, it didn't make the same errors.  --R'n'B (call me Russ) 15:05, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the update. Too bad that didn't actually happen. I've been complaining in various forums about the upward trend in disambiguation links since July 4. bd2412  T 15:11, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Where should Siam redirect?
Where should the Siam page redirect? Please discuss at Talk:Siam. —  AjaxSmack  03:02, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Champagne
Hello R'n'B: RussBot seems to be doing something weird. It feels compelled to amend "champagne" to "champagne". This is quite needless, as the article about the wine is called "Champagne" without a qualifier. RussBot did this at the Bad Münster am Stein-Ebernburg article, but I have undone it. Kelisi (talk) 14:45, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Up until May, 2012, "Champagne" was a disambiguation page. This is probably a relic of that time. bd2412  T 14:47, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Correct. Thanks for letting me know.  --R'n'B (call me Russ) 17:22, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Requesting your opinion on Rick Rescorla
Hi. An editorial dispute has arisen on the Rick Rescorla article. Can you offer your opinion here? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 23:25, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

unprotect a category?
Could you please unprotect Category:X2? You had protected it years ago but that doesn't seem necessary anymore. It is for testing like Category:X1 but is redirecting to the latter while being used as a hard-to-find category itself. Since a single test may simultaneously use two or more categories, both or more are needed as categories and they should be in a parent category that would make finding more easier (I've just created Category:Xn for that purpose). I therefore propose making Category:X2 a category like Category:X1 and not a redirect. If you unprotect it, I can edit accordingly. Nick Levinson (talk) 18:12, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Category:X2 was intentionally set up as a redirect for the specific purpose of testing the functionality (or lack thereof) of category redirects. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 19:06, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay. In that case:
 * Could you please write a lead on the Category:X2 page redirect stating its purpose so we'll know? I don't know if there's a nontalk page that says what you've said (I didn't find one). If there is, a link to that page might mostly suffice. Otherwise, at least a link to Wikipedia talk:Categorization/Archive 10 might help.
 * Also, would you consider adding Category:Xn as a parent? Depending on X2's purpose, having X1 as its parent is valid, but Xn also seems relevant.
 * I've recreated Category:X3 to serve the same purpose as Category:X1, since I'll simultaneously need at least two categories for testing a template I'm developing. X1's and X3's leads state a purpose and since X2 is different, it should say so.
 * Nick Levinson (talk) 18:22, 4 August 2013 (UTC) (Corrected which page: 18:29, 4 August 2013 (UTC))
 * That seems reasonable, and I've done it. Although, since the category is a redirect and is protected, the only people who will be able to read the notice are admins who seek to edit the page.  Also, I guess anyone will be able to read it if they look at the page history and generate a diff.  --R'n'B (call me Russ) 10:11, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks; the new category shows up. It seems odd that the notice doesn't appear, except in the diff, which even admins are unlikely to open and read. Does the notice need to be moved to above the #REDIRECT line or won't that make a difference? I just think, since the X2 category is already populated, the notice should be readable. I suppose I could ask at the help desk or the village pump if visibility can be solved within the circumstances. Nick Levinson (talk) 15:14, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * If you move the notice above the #REDIRECT directive, you would break the redirect. This is an inherent issue with all redirect pages; any text below the redirect directive is generally unviewable except with special efforts.  --R'n'B (call me Russ) 16:13, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I've asked a question about it at VPT. If it can't be solved, so be it, but it's worth a try. Nick Levinson (talk) 17:31, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Ran across the VPT thread, and I have to say that this edit summary is one of the funniest I've seen in a long time :-) Nyttend (talk) 21:25, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

May I suggest adding (edit the text as you see fit) as a solution to placing text on the category hard-redirect page? I proposed the concept at VPT about a week ago and no one replied, so I guess no one found a problem and it should be okay to do. Nick Levinson (talk) 16:24, 15 August 2013 (UTC) (Corrected link & template name: 16:32, 15 August 2013 (UTC)) (Recorrected link: 16:36, 15 August 2013 (UTC)) (Again: 16:40, 15 August 2013 (UTC))
 * I can do that, but it won't be any more visible that way. Your message on VPT specifically referred to a "soft-redirected category"; but X2 is hard-redirected.  I think renaming might be the better solution.
 * Would moving Category:X2 to Category:Software test of category redirects solve the problem? (Apparently, I can't do the move, but I can propose it, if you wish.) If the new cat title or another is okay, that could still leave a need to refer people with questions to you; to that end, perhaps you could create in your userspace a subpage titled something like /Questions about category redirect software testing (if you edit the new cat title edit the subpage title too), write a small blurb on that subpage, and categorize your new subpage into the new category, so that people who think of deleting the category as unnecessary would at least see an intriguing page title (User:R'n'B/Questions about category redirect software testing) and, hopefully, follow the link. I don't think there's much risk the subpage will be deleted unless you opt for that yourself. Category:X2 should be left as a redirect (and unprotected) although it can redirect to the new category for now; if it's needed as a simultaneous test parallel to X1 and X3, it'll be easier to edit the redirect (and to add a hatnote about where the old X2 moved to) than to recreate cat X2 if deleted, and I might be the one who needs it soon. Nick Levinson (talk) 15:54, 16 August 2013 (UTC) (Edited generally: 16:03, 16 August 2013 (UTC)) (Added on unprotection: 16:07, 16 August 2013 (UTC))
 * No one can move a category page. (I really don't know why, that's just the way the software is.)  I'll create a new Category:Test for category redirects and use that instead, and you can just edit X2 when/if you need to do so.  --R'n'B (call me Russ) 16:13, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Done. I also notified the other user of the old X2 category, in case that editor wished to recategorize their userspace subpage (it wound up not mattering), updated a help page on template design, and dealt with a possible attempt to reprotect the page by discussing it and deleting the bot-added blank line. Thanks. Nick Levinson (talk) 16:59, 26 August 2013 (UTC) (Corrected misspelling: 17:05, 26 August 2013 (UTC))

WikiProject Disambiguation/Incomplete disambiguations
Greetings! Can you replenish WikiProject Disambiguation/Incomplete disambiguations? The page is almost empty, but I'm confident that we have a new horde of these to tackle. Cheers! bd2412 T 02:16, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
 * There is a new list at User:RussBot/Possible incomplete disambiguations. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 20:59, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Perfect, thanks! At least it's shorter than the last one. bd2412  T 21:16, 27 August 2013 (UTC)