User talk:Rich Farmbrough/Archive/2010 February

SmackBot & unnamed parameters
When SmackBot is fixing dates on templates, it would be nice if it could check if the unnamed parameter is a valid date, and if so use it instead of adding a new one:. Thanks! --Pascal666 08:28, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Can you help sanity to prevail?
Hello Rich. We interacted last year when I sought your help to remove a file that was redundant. The relevant segment is still on my talkpage. That particular problem was my own making, and you kindly assisted in correction of it.

The current problem is not originally my own making, but in the process of trying to correct the matter and have some semblance of sanity prevail again, I have contributed to it. The way I see it, the problems are readily fixable. It's just that I don't have the administrative ability to take a couple of the steps.

The problem is this: The article, Captain R.T. Claridge, which I created on 29 October 2009, and which has continued uncontroversially to date, was erroneously renamed by another editor. In the process of that renaming, a redirect page was created.

I took care of the erroneous article renaming, or so I thought. However, what I didn't realise, was that in the original (erroneous) renaming, a space was inserted between the R and the T of Captain R.T. Claridge. This meant, of course, that all of the links originally created to the Captain R.T. Claridge article 'needed' a redirect page, because links are format-sensitive, including for the presence of spaces between letters.

At first I thought little of this, thinking perhaps the redirect did serve a real function, as opposed to an illusory function created by its own existence. But I was wrong. A few very simple experiments with the Wikipedia search function, for say, C. D. Baker, or Captain E.G. Beaumont. The search brings up the same article (or in the case of Baker, the same disambiguation page), regardless of whether or not you use a space between the initials, for both names. So you take the space away from C. D., and the search works. Add a space to E.G., and it works.

What this means is that there is no need for a redirect page merely on the basis of a space between the initials. The initial redirect page took the links with no spaces to the article with the spaces. From the initial redirect page, a 'check of what links here' naturally listed all of the articles and archives that previously linked for the Captain R.T. Claridge article. This seemed to give the impression that the redirect page needed to exist to solve a real problem, rather than an illusory one.

When I realised all this, after much stuffing around I might add (because I refuse to let an idiotic situation prevail), I realised the only solution that makes sense.
 * 1) The Captain R. T. Claridge article needs to be renamed to remove the space between the R and T. That is, Captain R.T. Claridge. This will automatically make the existing links that previously worked, work again. Very simple. I'd go so far as to say extremely simple, conceptually.
 * 2) The redirect page needs to be deleted, as it serves no real function, and appears to be hindering any attempt to implement the above solution.

I can't imagine many things more conceptually simple than the above solution. Since I don't have deletion authority, I initially tried to simply rename the Captain R. T. Claridge article to Captain R.T. Claridge (without spaces). But a red error message said Captain R.T. Claridge already existed. On the off-chance this was a byproduct of the name with spaces causing the problem, I renamed to R. T. Claridge, then tried going from there to Captain R.T. Claridge (without spaces). I got the same error message, saying the article exists. However, it allowed me to move the article to Captain R. T. Claridge (with spaces). This tells me that the article itself is not the problem. It must be the existence of something else named Captain R.T. Claridge (with no spaces). As far as I can tell, this brings me back to the redirect page. So I tried a couple of moves to see if renaming there made a difference. All I did was create a couple more redirect pages, as far as I can tell. I have now flagged all of the redirect pages for speedy deletion.

I really am only seeking one outcome, and one outcome alone. To get the Captain R. T. Claridge article back to its original name (Captain R.T. Claridge, without spaces) so the links which worked up until yesterday, all work again. I can't think of many things more conceptually simple. But I can't believe the Alice-in-Wonderland surreality that has transpired. But that doesn't mean I, or anyone else, has to settle for it. I seek your assistance if possible, as you seem to have a good track record of recognising simple, no-nonsense solutions, and implementing them, which is really all that is needed. Wotnow (talk) 07:59, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Update: The issue has been resolved courtesy of Ϣere  Spiel  Chequers '', including some helpful feedback from WereSpielChequers and   Glenfarclas , and I am satisfied that all is well. Regards Wotnow (talk) 06:28, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Excellent, I would, of course, have been glad to help. Rich Farmbrough, 10:49, 31 January 2010 (UTC).
 * Cheers. one of the problems I have is that I've been around long enough, and had enough experiences of dealing with a range of human behaviour, both at the individual, social-systemic level, to spot oddities long before I know what to make of them. Specifically, I have a very good antenna for spotting potential trouble-makers, or at least behaviour that inexorably leads to trouble. But obviously I'm not always going to be right. This can create conundrums. On the one hand, one risks over-reacting to an innocuous phenomenon. On the other hand, one knows from sheer experience and research, the end result of some patterns of behaviour. So one has to weigh up the risk of being right against the risk of over-reacting. This of course is the ever-present false positive vs false negative phenomenon, with the relative risk in either direction depending entirely on what the phenomenon is. In relation to the issue above, I was intrigued to find an earlier history of similar concerns by others. And from the comments ("again?") that itself was not the first time. Regards Wotnow (talk) 00:15, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

RADIO ROW
Based on that picture, are they saying that that store is still there and open to this day? Bob.--76.224.113.196 (talk) 17:20, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

ping and pong
Richard, my attention has been drawn to your response that you've replied to my email. But I've not received it. Can you check the address? Tony  (talk)  22:14, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

pui and puf
Hi Rich, Can recurring task 4 be modified to include pui and Puf ? Here are 2 examples that should have had dates placed by the "tagger". Thanks. --After Midnight 0001 16:58, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 1 February 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 21:59, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Yo!
Hey Dude, Have you had a chance to consider my emailed request for advice? Ohconfucius ¡digame! 15:06, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Ecuador
Hi. I need your assistance. Can you rename all of those sub cats (Except Bolivar) in Category:Provinces of Ecuador which have an unneccessary .,Ecuador on the end to the simple naming. So instead of Category:Manabí Province, Ecuador it would become simply Category:Manabí Province. I and Ser Amantio have tackled a few already but all of the empty categories afterwards which have ,Ecuador on the end need deleting like Category:Azuay Province, Ecuador etc as that has alreayd been done. Once thats done, can you go through the province articles e.g Azuay Province and correct the canton links in the articles from (canton) to Canton. Admittedly I am uncertain as to whether or not they should be capitalized. In fact I think they should probably be ... (canton). If you agree, then leave those links and move all the articles to (canton) instead but be sure to correct the existing links and names in the articles and also the navigation template.

What naming looks right to you Nabón Canton or Nabón (canton). Peronsally I am thinking it would be best to move them to the latter one. Any thoughts?

Also the current naming for the Cantons of Costa Rica is capitalised and for Venezuelan municpalities is .... Municipality too. I think the naming would be better (municipality) for Venezuela too like the Mexican ones... I think Province and District is capitals looks right but not for canton and municipality, any thoughts on this too? ‡ Himalayan ‡ ΨMonastery 19:45, 2 February 2010 (UTC)  ‡ Himalayan ‡  ΨMonastery 19:10, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Is everything OK? ‡ Himalayan ‡ ΨMonastery 11:50, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes I agree (canton)... Rich Farmbrough, 18:01, 3 February 2010 (UTC).

Is it possible you could sort it out when you have time then? Its just its a lingering problem now as only some of them are done and we have some empty categories and inconsistency lying about.. ‡ Himalayan ‡ ΨMonastery 10:55, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

SmackBot & date stamps
Is SmackBot maintaining all these cases on regular basis? I need this information for handling a FR on AWB. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 14:59, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * OK all except Histinfo Blpdispute and Hoax. Rich Farmbrough, 18:09, 3 February 2010 (UTC).

Another potential use for SmackBot
Most people who create articles via the Article Wizard leave the example.com link intact. Smackbot should remove those, and remove the external links section altogether if no other external links were inserted either by the creator or or a subsequent editor. --  Blanchardb - Me•MyEars•MyMouth - timed 18:18, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Nicky Hilton
Hi, you might want to look at this page, appears to have some errors at the bottom of the page after you added the sources. Larry Dunn (talk) 19:18, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:Unreferenced stub
Template:Unreferenced stub has been nominated for merging with Template:Unreferenced. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Fram (talk) 10:15, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

SmackBot replacing char refs w/ matrices, etc.
I'm puzzled at SmackBot's replacing of spaceless & # 0145 ; through & # 0148 ; with numbered boxes. Neither form is popular for reading and I think the former form is usually correctly interpreted by browsers. It looks like the edit page lets us click to insert curved quotation marks, but that's usually too cumbersome; I compose offline and paste in and don't want to have to click for each character.

I'm planning to restore the former form in the article that SmackBot edited and which I originally wrote. I don't know if I want to block bots since I may create an article but I don't own it, given WP's premise.

Also, I tend to use singular section titles like Reference and External link if there's only one reference or external link under the section title.

Thanks. Nick Levinson (talk) 04:26, 2 February 2010 (UTC) (Then I corrected 1 stupid error of my very own (and added this). Nick Levinson (talk) 04:45, 2 February 2010 (UTC))
 * The numbered boxes are simply your browser's way of representing those characters. Just because they are changed from &amp;#0145; to the actual character, it doesn't mean you need to change how you write, either on or offline, it is simply perfective maintenance. However if your browser can't display &#0145; &#0146; &#0147; &#0148; then it may be better not to use them.
 * As far as plurals in headings go that is established MoS, the plural is used just the same as we would have "contents" in a book even if there was only one chapter.
 * Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 11:39, 5 February 2010 (UTC).


 * Thanks. My browser does display the curved quotation marks from elsewhere in WP but also displays the numbered boxes, so I'm technologically puzzled, but I found that the WP MoS prefers straight anyway, so I'm generally typing straight, which should solve that. As to the pluralization, I can accept that; I don't know of a single-chapter book, and I assume the chapter title in that case would become a book's subtitle instead, and, at any rate, it's a table of contents, not a table of chapters, giving semantic flexibility. Nick Levinson (talk) 22:36, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:DERM:CAT
Rich, I know you have helped to word the above guideline, and wanted to know if you would consider adding some additional text discussing the use of relevant redirect templates, which are found at: Template messages/Redirect pages (for an example, see ). I don't like to be the only one editing derm guideline pages. Regardless, thank you for your help in the past! ---kilbad (talk) 23:19, 3 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Ok, I added some text. What do you think? ---kilbad (talk) 23:32, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

picture(s) for Gordon Onslow Ford page
(This is my first time posting to one of these talk pages, so bear with me if I screw up.) I'm writing, Rich, about the Gordon Onslow Ford page that you edited. As a big fan of Onslow Ford, I'd like to see that his page has an image of at least one of his paintings, as do most of the other artist pages. But as a clueless newbie in Wiki-land, I don't know how to add such a pic or what the relevant rules might be. Would you be interested in adding it yourself? Or guiding me in the process? I can scan an appropriate pic or two with good resolution, etc.

Fiona-webster (talk) 00:51, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

WP:MOSNUM compliance issue of Template:Start date and age
Hi, Rich

There is an issue which you (and perhaps your bots) need to be aware of: For the sake of consistency of dates in software infoboxes, especially consistency between dates generated by Start date and Start date and age as well as dates generated by two {{Start date and age}}, I decided to rewrite the {{Start Date and Age}}.

In case you already don't know: The current Start date and age template outputs date through undefined parser, making it look different to users depending on user preferences. In addition, the output of ( = "August 1, 2009") is not consistent with  ( = "August 1, 2009"). Finally, another user in the template's discussion page has requested codes that causes the template to emit hCalendar microformat.

The new {{Start date and age}}, which is nearly finished (Template:Start date and age/sandbox), has a new df=yes parameter which makes it print dates in DMY format suitable for software articles. Perhaps you need to reconfigure your bots or we need to reach a different consensus. In any case, your feedback will of high value to me. So, please let me know what you think.

Fleet Command (talk) 11:36, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * By the way, you might like to check out Start date and age/testcases.
 * Fleet Command (talk) 11:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Quisque custodiet custodes
Dear Rich,

Should you like to discuss the point I raised, trewy@live.co.uk. It has been going three months now. Have you ever considered being a politician, because the line I put in the opening sentence you never answered: WAS IT YOU OR SMACKBOT.

I know you are a good editor but when you have a bot you have responsibilities

S.
 * ✅ Answered on user's talk page. Rich Farmbrough, 17:56, 04 February 2010 (UTC).

The Temptations template
Hi, Rich! As I know you're both an admin and an expert on templates, I'm hoping might you fix a template issue for me. If you click on The Temptations discography and scroll on down to the bottom of the screen, where the template is, click on "v", you'll notice that this "view" is not for this template. The same goes with its talk page. Possibly, might you fix this, please? Thanks! Best, --Discographer (talk) 08:54, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I knew you'd come through. The Temptations is correct, that's how it should be, the way you did it; and at the same time, Temptations should not even be! These are one of those groups like The Beatlles and The Supremes where The is actually part of the group name, though I suppose you already now that. Thanks my friend! Best, --Discographer (talk) 20:03, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Fixed. Should these templates be merged? Rich Farmbrough, 21:20, 8 February 2010 (UTC).
 * Well, the template that reads just Temptations doesn't really have any use,as the real template, The Temptations, is correctly finished. Personally, I don't know where Temptations template came from, but it's not really needed. If you merge them, I'll just use the cursor and take that info out so all that's left is The Temptations template proper. Thanks! Best, --Discographer (talk) 22:46, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 8 February 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 03:16, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Since you show up on my watchlist
a dozen times a day I thought I'd return the favor. Or something. I recently created a category called Category: Hal Blaine Strikes Again and have been posting it on articles about the records that Hal Blaine played on. The title of the category refers to a rubber stamp that Blaine used to stamp his charts with. I realize that neither the category nor its name is mainstream, but, does everything need to be? Anyway, the category is up for deletion and I'm hoping that editors who at least are knowledgeable and care about this sort of thing will vote [|there]. Vote any way that you wish, but do check it out. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 03:21, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced stub
FYI Templates for discussion/Log/2010 February 5 -- PBS (talk) 03:54, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

SmackBot
namen marega anti —Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.225.75.7 (talk) 04:39, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Re: Greg Abbott citation needed, Van Orden v. Perry section
Hi there! I noticed you were the one who put the original citation needed in that little section in Greg Abbott's Wikipedia entry about the Van Orden v. Perry case. In that case, thanks ever so for doing that! The original wording gave completely the wrong impression about the gifting of those Ten Commandments monuments and I pointed to a source that told the actual story of what occurred, after changing the wording in the article. If you hadn't called out the article's need for a citation on this, it might've escaped my attention to look more into the story of how the monument in question was donated. So thanks! Arcana07 (talk) 06:10, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Questions

 * I remember you once made a template to know the number of pages in a category. Could you remind me what it is called? Debresser (talk) 09:42, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I found "PAGESINCATEGORY". It is a magic word, rather than a template, if I understand correctly. Debresser (talk) 10:22, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * See List of monthly maintenance categories given month that I used it successfully. I think this is useful. If the number of pages in a category of this month is 0, then we won't create the corresponding category next month. If the number of pages in a category of the next month is not 0, then the articles have to be edited. You may want to improve the layout. Debresser (talk) 10:48, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Sounds reasonable.
 * I noticed in Category:Wikipedia maintenance categories with missing months that when a progress template is added, all categories transcluding it are also added. Can you fix that? Debresser (talk) 10:17, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Probably some fix to Template:Progress line 3, but I don't know how. Debresser (talk) 10:28, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * BTW, I created 2 new progress boxes for categories that didn't have them yet. No reason not to, right? Debresser (talk) 10:48, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

I looked at this... can't remember what happened. More progress boxes are good. Hm. Not sure. It does no harm, maybe mark as historical.
 * Do we want to delete List of missing monthly maintenance categories? I think we do. We have Category:Wikipedia maintenance categories with missing months already. Debresser (talk) 21:01, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
 * If it were an abandoned page yes, but since it is replaced by something better, I propose deletion. Debresser (talk) 17:35, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Turned it to historical for the mean time. Debresser (talk) 11:12, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Let me go and look again. Rich Farmbrough, 16:02, 8 February 2010 (UTC).
 * Do you agree with Wikipedia_talk:Categorization? If so, could you make the change. I could create the categories afterwards. Debresser (talk) 15:58, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Looked ok.. Rich Farmbrough, 17:58, 11 February 2010 (UTC).
 * Then perhaps you could make the edit to BLP sources? Debresser (talk) 11:12, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

SmackBot
Rich - I have made further edits to the entry for Penny Templeton to remove any questionable POV language. It appears that you marked this entry as advertising. Please remove that edit from the page. Thanks. JediMaraJade (talk) 02:20, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

I wanted you to know
that the list that you generated is the basis for this article, or list. List of recordings of songs Hal Blaine has played on Thanks. eek aka Carptrash (talk) 17:42, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Great. Rich Farmbrough, 14:45, 13 February 2010 (UTC).

Request
Could you please weigh in at Template_talk:Lead_too_short, or just do the moves if you agree. Debresser (talk) 11:05, 12 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I see you went straight against the two proposals at Template_talk:Lead_too_short. And you also ignored that we have two related templates that use the word "Intro", as you can see on the documentation of the template itself. Please have another look at that talk page. Debresser (talk) 17:28, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Ecuador
I've just had somebody ranting on at me because of those categories (interestingly it was Debresser above). If you couldn't do it why couldn't you say something like "I'm busy" or "I don't want to". That would have been fine and I could have done it myself. Thanks for all your help to date anyway, I won't ask again. ‡ Himalayan ‡ ΨMonastery 23:24, 13 February 2010 (UTC)


 * No really "ranting" though. The problem was two-fold. 1. Changes to categories should really be discussed on WP:CFD. The more so when you want to rework a whole set of categories. 2. The HowtoreqphotoinEcuador template uses the categories including the addition ", Ecuador". Debresser (talk) 01:42, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, perhaps it should be discussed at CFD. Personally I think a category should only have a, Ecuador on the end if there is a province of the same name in another country. We typically go for minimalism with categorization. Imagine somebody is searching the simple province name category would be easier... ‡ Himalayan ‡ ΨMonastery 01:47, 14 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree with you, completely. But that leaves the problem with the template unsolved. Actually, the solution is to remove  from that template, but that might have other repercussions. Debresser (talk) 02:22, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

SmackBot
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.152.25.99 (talk) 22:54, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 15 February 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 13:30, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Immanuel Lutheran Church (Hodgkins, Illinois) 17 February 2010
I am relatively new to Wikipedia and would like to get rid of the orphan tag. What is the proper way to do that? I introduced links to/from the article, do you have to remove the tag? Sorry for my ignorance. jdkscoop 19:38, 17 February 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Josephdklotz (talk • contribs)

Journal dabs
Could you run this one again? You will probably need to update User:Rich_Farmbrough/temp23, since we've created a lot of journal entries in the last few months. Headbomb {{{sup|ταλκ}}κοντριβς – WP Physics} 21:02, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Ping
you have email.
 * ty. Rich Farmbrough, 07:44, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

Can you do your magic?
I am looking to get the list of sections that make up Rook's Textbook of Dermatology (see ). Restated, if you look at the link I provided to the google book version, if you use the "content" link located on the top middle of the page, I am looking for that type of listing, only complete. I ask for this, because I would like to use the outline of Rook's as a guide for the cutaneous conditions article, which is currently a real mess. Can you help me with this? ---kilbad (talk) 02:51, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I can see no way to get this data, unfortunately. Rich Farmbrough, 06:39, 20 February 2010 (UTC).
 * UPDATE: So I actually found the content outline to Rook's Textbook of dermatology (see ) and have used/modified it to start a working outline for the cutaneous conditions article at Talk:Cutaneous_conditions. I intentionally tried to create an outline that does not mirror the list of cutaneous conditions structure because I think providing a different way to organize the information could be helpful.  With that being said, how does the outline look to you.  What changes do you think should be made, etc.  Thanks again for your feedback! ---kilbad (talk) 21:11, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Listify refs tool?
Hi Rich, I see your edit here and was wondering if this was done manually or (as I suspect) with a tool. If tool or script, mind sharing, since this is my favoured ref format? — Huntster (t @ c) 03:19, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
 * It is done with a script. I intend to botify the script, but I will look at u/l ing it when I have done some more work on it. Rich Farmbrough, 06:41, 20 February 2010 (UTC).

news
Template:Worcs Mar2010
 * Ty Rich Farmbrough, 07:45, 23 February 2010 (UTC).

What's the point?
Please do not interpret my question as negative, in any way. I'm just, well, fascinated by what I'm seeing. First of all, you completely deserve any accolades for your copious contributions to this project, and you also deserve whatever privacy you wish, as well. But how can this provide you with any "privacy"? (Is that even the aim?) It just seems to me that, if the person in the #1 place removes his or her name, that it just increases the interest in that person.

Anyway, I know you don't owe me an answer as to why you have done this. I was just curious. HuskyHuskie (talk) 06:38, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ Answered on user's talk page. Rich Farmbrough, 07:45, 23 February 2010 (UTC).
 * Thanks for the answer. I don't know what that person's problem was.  Who gives a rat's behind if that was what motivated you?  If it's good work for the encyclopedia, it's all good.  Happy editing! HuskyHuskie (talk) 07:56, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the answer. I don't know what that person's problem was.  Who gives a rat's behind if that was what motivated you?  If it's good work for the encyclopedia, it's all good.  Happy editing! HuskyHuskie (talk) 07:56, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 22 February 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 12:33, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Citation Needed
Hi Rich, Sorry this was added to the SmackBot page before I saw the comment on historical matters.

If I read things correctly you have entered [citation needed] against the statement 'Friction stir welding was introduced by The Welding Institute' on the page for The Welding Institute. But the term 'Friction Stir Welding' is a link to the Wiki page on that process where it states that The Welding Institute invented the process and holds several patents on it. I thought this was sufficient citation, is there anything more to be done?

Thanks Davemckeown 16:06, 24 February 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Davemckeown (talk • contribs)

SmackBot
Thank you smackbot for the good things you do.Adam in MO Talk 08:00, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Opportunity
Please see Wikipedia_talk:Deletion_discussions. I am sure you have something to say about this. Debresser (talk) 10:39, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Repeated call of attention to problem
Please see Category:Wikipedia maintenance categories with missing months that as soon as there is 1 article tagged with a non-existing month, all monthly categories show up there. Surely that can be fixed. Debresser (talk) 12:22, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not seeing that. Rich Farmbrough, 11:19, 26 February 2010 (UTC).
 * OK I found it, it was something Pascal put in progress line 3. I took it out, but I still need to re-read the rest of that change when I'm less tired. Rich Farmbrough, 11:34, 26 February 2010 (UTC).
 * Ok, rest well. There are still two pages in Category:Wikipedia maintenance categories with missing months that weren't there before, and I have no idea why. Debresser (talk) 12:52, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Problem
I saw Category:Articles with invalid date parameter in template with over 100 pages. I did all non-main article namespace ones. Are you having problems, and should I make an effort to help out? Debresser (talk) 13:14, 25 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Done. Except for the protected Whaling in Japan. Which needs "Feb." -> "February". Debresser (talk) 22:41, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes it got held up for some reason then I had a bunch to do - several thousand - of course runs that long usually stall a few times, plus comments left on the talk page stopping it. Once the run is complete, a new run will attack the invalid date category again - it is the first category tackled. Rich Farmbrough, 11:36, 26 February 2010 (UTC).

Scam of readers via wikipedia content
Please read and help Free Wikipedia articles are on sale as printed books for 50 dollars each in  Amazon.com with no prior warning Kasaalan (talk) 14:03, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Bot conversions to Start date
Are you intending to do any more of these date conversions, which you kindly started some time ago, but which seem to have stalled? Please let me know if not, and I'll ask elsewhere. Andy Mabbett (User: Pigsonthewing ); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 19:51, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Mississippi Goddam
Exactly what kind of references would be suitable for the removal of the tag on Mississippi Goddam? I just found out about that song for the first time, and the only one I can think of is a YouTube link, or perhaps some article from All-Music Guide if there is one(I'll try to find out if they have an article specifically on that song, although I can't imagine any reason for them not to. DanTD (talk) 23:36, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

SmackBot
Hi Rich, Can you remove all the   tags from, presumably, hundreds of pages in the "years in architecture" series? These pages are similar to lists on Wikipedia, and as such don't follow the same strict guidelines as articles. In addition, references for the facts in these pages are to be found within the articles themselves, and the duplication of the references would be impractical.

Example page: 1971 in architecture. Let me know if this works for you. Thanks, Dogears (talk) 04:24, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

SmackBot re WP:MOSUNLINKDATES on dab pages
I think SmackBot shouldn't remove date links that are the only links in a line on disambiguation pages. I'll undo it. If I'm mistaken or it's controversial, let me know. -Galatee (talk) 15:45, 28 February 2010 (UTC)