User talk:Rich Farmbrough/Archive/2012 June

Cricket
Rich - still trying to create separate page for ODI and T20I cricket. Don't know how this is done but won't give up yet as important reference. Hambantota hosted first T20I today and Compton made another ton (and 1,000 runs a day too late). Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PatriciaSR (talk • contribs) 20:08, 1 June 2012 (UTC) Rich Farmbrough, 21:48, 1 June 2012 (UTC).
 * ✅ Answered on user's talk page. Rich Farmbrough, 21:48, 1 June 2012 (UTC).
 * ✅ Answered on user's talk page. Rich Farmbrough, 21:48, 1 June 2012 (UTC).

Category:Smile Records albums
Category:Smile Records albums, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:07, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

List of Twenty20 International cricket grounds
Did you create List of Twenty20 International cricket grounds deliberately or was it a mistake, as there are no content other than a restate of the article title? -- KTC (talk) 10:05, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
 * It was created for User talk:PatriciaSR, who being a none auto-confirmed new could not create a new page herself . Regards, SunCreator (talk) 11:24, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Uncategorized articles
Just a reminder that the monthly maintenance categories for uncategorized articles are titled in the format, not — so if you want to get ahead of the bots by creating it before they do, you'd probably be better off creating the version that's actually going to have articles placed in it by the uncat template. Thanks. Bearcat (talk) 16:38, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks - I was just filling in the (apparent) gaps. It's a shame that that anomaly survived, but there were people (usually just one) opposing everything  I did by the time it was on the schedule for tidying. Rich Farmbrough, 16:45, 2 June 2012 (UTC).

Some tasks for Perl
Do you have any thoughts or comments on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Birds? Snowman (talk) 18:55, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Replied there. Rich Farmbrough, 19:10, 1 June 2012 (UTC).


 * Thank you. Can you tell me a bit more about BRFA and where to find it? Snowman (talk) 11:32, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
 * WP:BRFA Basically you fill in a form, and unless dramah ensues, you simply show consensus for your request, and get the go-ahead to trial it.  After successful trials you get authorisation. What could possibly go wrong? Rich Farmbrough, 16:48, 2 June 2012 (UTC).

Apologies
It appears that I inadvertently made two spelling corrections using AWB. While the majority of the corrections identified with AWB were made using a standard browser, these two edits are, nonetheless, in breach of the Arbcom ruling, therefore it is inevitable that I shall be banned from the project.

I apologise to ArbCom for that, and more particularly to those who have supported me over the last two months, for blowing it through such a stupid error. Rich Farmbrough, 01:43, 1 June 2012 (UTC).


 * Very sweet swansong, going down for two spelling mistakes at the hands of those who elevate the letter of the law to a deity. +1


 * WP:DAR Deify all rules. Penyulap  ☏  01:46, 1 Jun 2012 (UTC)


 * If they do ban you for that, it will be proof of the absurdity of it all. Kinda like blocking someone who is vandalizing their own userpage. --Hammersoft (talk) 02:35, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
 * As I just stated on the Arbcom page it was only a matter of time before they found a reason to block you, this just presented the opportunity for them to do what they have been trying, and unable to do, since the case opened. I am a little curious about how AWB even allowed you to edit since your not on the AWB checkwiki page and why the Arbs felt it necessary to check your edits with the checkwiki tool unless they had some reason to do so other than sheer curiousity. That seems like a blatant abuse of the tool to me unless they had some evidence to suspect you were socking or violating your ban before they did so and from you edit history I can't see anything that would clearly indicate that. Kumioko (talk) 02:40, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
 * It is trivial to mod AWB, this was something that I tested before stating it at the ArbCase. Courcelles was querying a cut-and-paste error - asking me what tools I was using, so AGK decided to do a check. I both agree and disagree that this is abuse of the tool. Right now it is perfectly legitimate, but the way I see it a case should have to be made - that is not the current situation though. And of course I have nothing to hide, so I'm not concerned. AGK sent me the line from the log, so I have clarity about that at least, though there are several matters which still confuse me. I would share the line form the log here, but it says nothing I have not already covered, and could impact on the efficacy of checkuser in the future. Rich Farmbrough, 03:01, 1 June 2012 (UTC).


 * (Per /Editnotice) Is my following/understanding correct?  (a) that the trigger edits in question are  +  and that (b) in addition (you are concerned about) exposing the inner working of CheckUser?   —Sladen (talk) 21:46, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Although archiving Elen's talk page for her was mentioned somewhere, I thought I was doing her a favour, and she hasn't said otherwise. As to AGK not getting round to answering all his candidacy questions, that has not been mentioned.  I only brought it up in an attempt to show that we all have time constraints.  The two content edits you mention have not been drawn to my attention, the ones that I assume are at fault (one I have been told about the other I am extrapolating) are the only ones marked "minor" in the last 15 days that are not moves or adding a link. Rich Farmbrough, 21:58, 1 June 2012 (UTC).


 * So 2x 'Verterbrate'→'Vertebrate' in &  (one definite, one inferred)?  —Sladen (talk) 00:18, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Yep. Rich Farmbrough, 00:31, 2 June 2012 (UTC).


 * I said before after this case closed, Rich would have to be perfect. All too prophetic. So his AWB somehow was able to make two edits, edits which should have been impossible. He made a mistake that he didn't think it was even possible to make because it should have been impossible. Kumioko, you raise an excellent point. Someone, most likely one of the arbs, went on a fishing expedition to see if Rich was doing something nefarious. This appears to be blatant abuse of the checkuser right. CHECKUSER. Rich, I think it's time you approached the Foundation about this. ArbCom is on a witch hunt. --Hammersoft (talk) 02:50, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
 * No, I did think it was possible, I just thought I was being careful enough not to do it. See above for why it was only half a fishing expedition. I have no objection to being check-usered in this scenario. In fact I virtually asked to be checkusered when Courcelles raised his issues. In other cases I have been, at least basically, at least in principle, right. But in this case I am not, and I hold myself to higher standards than that. Rich Farmbrough, 03:01, 1 June 2012 (UTC).


 * Rich, if one or more arbcom members were using checkuser on fishing expeditions in an attempt to find evidence with which to hang you, that is a serious breach of trust on their part, and a serious breach of privacy. The issue of whether or not you were using automation has never been sorted out, and is an absolute pale shadow to the checkuser abuse that may have occurred. If they used checkuser prior to having any evidence with which to suspect you were using automation (however the heck they define it, and they never have), their breach of the community's trust is immense. I am impressed that you want to hold yourself to a higher standard. But, your case is about you. It's not about the entire community. If they abused checkuser, it is extremely serious and effects the entire community. --Hammersoft (talk) 03:07, 1 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi Rich, came here because of your post on my talkpage. Do I gather AGK has now directed you to whatever he picked up? I'm not going to say you're an idjit - I think you've figured this out already. Making these edits seems to have become compulsive. Basically, any editing that looked automated was going to be looked at some more - I've looked at your edits and you're still resolutely fannying with whitespace and capitalisations and doing it at some speed. I think that was bound to cause problems, without finding out that you're running some hacked form of AWB by the back door. Given the concerns about enforcement, and that you put your word on the line over this, I hope you escape a ban (because I don't think you do this stuff mendaciously), but ....  I don't know what to suggest here. Elen of the Roads (talk) 09:55, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
 * No he hasn't. He has identified one edit, and made lots of implications.  I am a little more satisfied having had time to think things through.  I will email you. Rich Farmbrough, 11:32, 1 June 2012 (UTC).


 * Responded. Elen of the Roads (talk) 11:55, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Complaint to the Audit Subcommittee
Per the wording of the motion, it appears ArbCom may have been using checkuser to observe Rich's editing behaviors over "recent days", whereas the two edits they are concerned about apparently happened today. I believe one or more members of ArbCom has exceeded their remit in the use of the checkuser tool. I think it's time for the Audit Subcommittee to be contacted, specifically to ask when checkuser has been used in regards to Rich's account, and who performed the checkuser. Instructions are located at Arbitration_Committee/Audit_Subcommittee. --Hammersoft (talk) 02:56, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I already enquired of the AUSC, whether I had been checkusered, as much to see how the system worked as anything. AGK replied on their behalf that I had never been checkusered. (Basically I trust AGK in this respect - but here is an example of why separation of functions would be good.) So I don't think there is an issue here. Rich Farmbrough, 03:03, 1 June 2012 (UTC).


 * I have seen the checkuser logs and the tool is far from perfect and not very easy to read or use. With that said I think all of us know that it was only a matter of time anyway. There are still a lot of aspects about the case that agitate and worry me but some are already being addressed in Arbcom motions. I hope you consider working in commons or other areas besides Enwiki where the Arbcom ban/decision does not have authority. Kumioko (talk) 03:07, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I advised AGK that there are obvious improvements needed to the tool, which I won't mention here. I have some WMF projects lined up that have been put on hold due partly to en:WP work and partly to the drama.  They might get attended to. And a lot of off-Wiki stuff too.  Rich Farmbrough, 03:14, 1 June 2012 (UTC).


 * Ah right, the watchers watch the watchers. I would submit a new request to someone who is not currently sitting on ArbCom. --Hammersoft (talk) 03:08, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

breadcrumbs are such an important ingredient in some recipes. Penyulap  ☏  03:41, 1 Jun 2012 (UTC)
 * Interesting how far removed from the origin the fix has travelled and so fast. A gazillion edits, and if one percent were erroneous, yeah, 10,000 problems right there. So wiping out the gazillion, to silence the complaints isn't enough, it's the edit that cannot be seen in public, the edit that is secret and can't be found, the one hidden in the forbidden place, THAT is the edit that in the end becomes the crux, better to crush out the last beat of the cyborg's heart to protect the eyes of the innocent, like on that edit.
 * I shall turn off the light, close the window, bar the door, retreat to my closet, cover myself in a blanket, turn around and then and only then shall I make a gesture with my hand in the general direction of this authority, that shall be the measure of my defiance today. Penyulap  ☏  08:59, 1 Jun 2012 (UTC)
 * That is a piece of nonsense, you do realise that. Rich is rather in the situation of the person topic banned from - say the Israel/Palestine topic - who is found to be back making edits to Six-day War. At that point it doesn't matter that his edits were only minor tweaking. He's banned from editing that article. Rich had the whole of the encyclopaedia to edit in - why on earth was he continuing to fiddle with whitespace and capitalisation, things that were bound to draw attention to him, and why on earth did he use that hacked AWB installation. It surely hasn't become sentient and turned itself on. Elen of the Roads (talk) 10:23, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Because there was an error "Verterbrate" instead of "Vertebrate" in a bunch of turtle articles and AWB is the efficient way to find them. Rich Farmbrough, 11:25, 1 June 2012 (UTC).


 * Using the search function of Wikipedia works quite well, I just tested it and rapidly corrected four instances of "verterbrate" without any automation at all, neither to find them nor to correct them. AWB doeesn't yield any other results in this case. Fram (talk) 11:34, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Nonsense is trying to explain the innocent prisoner's dilemma or anything else in a system where mob mentality is the epitome of government. Penyulap  ☏  11:39, 1 Jun 2012 (UTC)
 * Anyone wanting to search for "Verterbrate" now will get the same four hits. Given that I did not want to edit all the articles I had already fixed, that would have not been a good choice of tools.  Using AWB properly will avoid that problem.  Rich Farmbrough, 12:10, 1 June 2012 (UTC).


 * Elen, the cyborg is Rich, not the bot. the path that he took has changed him in a manner you can't appreciate because you have to experience it to understand, the reflexes, the computational power, the extension of one's consciousness into the code, don't you see wikipedia when you blink or sleep ? can you switch it out of your consciousness any more than you can stop yourself from picturing a pink elephant right now ? That sucker just pops right in there and you can't help it, it's the manner of the mind. Wrapped into the editing is not something you can just stop seeing when you blink, not when he sits at that same familiar computer. You figure he should just walk off to cure the problem of the last 0.001 %, leave the computer at someone else's house. That is the only way you know, I know, he knows, but the problem is not the wrong sentence, the problem is not the automated ban rather than a full block, the problem is everyone failing to accept that last 0.0001 %, to overlook and accept it and just move on to some more important task. Who is obsessed here, and who doesn't recognise their obsessive behaviour and the detriment it has to the project ? (I'm not having a go, I'm asking everyone to question themselves and ask is this the best we can do to exert self-control ? relax for the good of the project and relax for our own good)


 * In the long term, is applying the full efforts of those involved going to have any positive impact on the project, or is such a narrow focus and misapplication of resource going to put everyone at the mercy of the real trends. The problems hinted at in those graphs on this page's archives, wikipedia is changing, turning, and it's not going in a good direction. If we all do our part and uphold the letter of the law, if we all keep doing our best as we have done in the past, as surely as the sun rises wikipedia will set. When things are so clearly heading down the wrong path, as wikipedia is, then clearly continuing in the same direction is fundamentally the wrong direction.


 * Anyhow, just shake off this idea that anything is amiss and return to the job you were doing before, we all have to uphold the letter of the law, otherwise the future won't unfold as it is destined to do. Penyulap  ☏  12:21, 1 Jun 2012 (UTC)


 * Except that someone banned from those areas for disruption has probably caused harm to Wikipedia. Other than that, the analogy holds. ErikHaugen (talk &#124; contribs) 16:12, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
 * False analogy. Shoplifting is a crime, and murder is a crime. Other than the fact that a law has been broken, they don't equate. --  Ohconfucius  ¡digame! 16:58, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
 * That and the punishment for breaking said crime is not the same. A notion which seems to be lost on Arbcom these days. One punishment fits all. Kumioko (talk) 17:06, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I'd like to hear one arbcom member tell how Wikipedia is going to be better without Rich. Something tells me we're in for a long wait....William 13:40, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
 * pour encourager les autres maybe... Rich Farmbrough, 16:58, 2 June 2012 (UTC).


 * William, I think it's the smell. You know like sharks and a drop of blood 50 miles away or whatever it is. The smell of automation you see, even if you can't see it, they can. I should work on smells, at the moment there is only the smell of doom that I could spread to mask the smell of automation, I need to make something else, something almost socially acceptable. Can't think of anything right now. Penyulap  ☏  20:34, 2 Jun 2012 (UTC)
 * Do you think that one day disruption could be qualified like this "disruption is something that regular editors are able to detect" Penyulap  ☏  22:29, 2 Jun 2012 (UTC)

Follow on
Greetings Rich Farmbrough, I noticed your comment where you expressed a possible interest in improving Wikipedia coverage of articles related to record production. It would be great having your collaborative input on how best to achieve this goal. Review links associated with WP:RECP and P:RECP, and know that you are considerably welcome to help forge the path forward. My76Strat (talk) 09:21, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
 * It is a distinct pleasure to welcome you to this project. I agree wholeheartedly with your stated motivations and stand ready to collaborate unto this needed end. Be bold with your ideas, for I am keen. Best regards - My76Strat (talk) 18:02, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Another e-mail
Hi Rich. You have another e-mail. I understand you don't often use your Wikipedia mail account, which is why I'm leaving another courtesy note, but if you don't require one in future I will of course comply. AGK [•] 23:48, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I missed the word "mail" there "I understand you don't often use your Wikipedia account" ... My WP mail account is my mail account. You will get me faster on my talk page than by email generally. Rich Farmbrough, 23:52, 2 June 2012 (UTC).

A Barnstar I made for you (with help from my bot)

 * That is rather amazing.
 * As far as I know I don't dream WP, I don't see it when I close my eyes.  That latter has happened when I have done something intensively for 48 hours.
 * The integration is simply a matter of experience. Of course, my typing skills are beginning to fail, and my reactions slowing, but most things I have already seen and done many times.
 * Everything normal does disappear, just the same as reading a book, watching a film, or doing a hard problem. Someone I know called it "all interrupts disabled".
 * Thanks for the barnstar.

Rich Farmbrough, 22:54, 2 June 2012 (UTC).


 * Thank you, you're welcome, oh, and don't forget Jaguar, I just posted to his page. Penyulap  ☏  23:34, 2 Jun 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅ Rich Farmbrough, 12:26, 3 June 2012 (UTC).

The way forward ...
Hi Rich: I know AGK has been conversing with you via email. We're trying to fashion terms for something short of a long term site ban. While this is not (yet) a formal offer, we need to know if this type of thing would be acceptable to you, obviously, if not, then we're back where we started. This is the outline of what several members of the Committee were discussing:


 * A) 30 day block from Wikipedia for violating the restriction on automated editing


 * B) The ban on using automation will be maintained. (and we strongly suggest you rip out your monobook.js to prevent inadvertent violations of this restriction)


 * C) Just to make things clear: this ban explicitly includes preparing edits using anything similar to AWB and copying them into a normal browser. Anything more than what someone new to Wikipedia would get when they hit the edit button and type in the changes in the window that popped up (ie, COMPLETELY manual) will be considered automation. I'd suggest since most AWB-style scripts or the like do Capitalization/spelling/white space automatically, that you refrain from this kind of edit (so as to not give your edits the appearance of automatic editing.


 * D) The Committee will have checkusers regularly checking up on you via the use of the Checkuser tool to ensure that you are complying with these terms. if they find you have violated these terms they will report so to us publicly (without revealing details publicly that would violate the privacy policy)


 * E) If you violate this restriction again, you will likely be banned indefinitely with no right of appeal for one year after the commencement of the ban.


 * F) The restriction on automation will remain until lifted by the Committee.. since six months puts us RIGHT in the election period, and the transition that any election brings, let's say the first appeal on loosening the restriction on automation will be 15 January, 2013.

If the Committee can come to a consensus to extend you this kind of offer in lieu of a full site ban, would you accept this? SirFozzie (talk) 00:59, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, indeed I had already said as much. Please note I have blanked my monobook.js page some time since. Rich Farmbrough, 01:02, 3 June 2012 (UTC).


 * Ok, good. I'll report to the Committee, and you should be hearing from us, one way or the other. SirFozzie (talk) 01:04, 3 June 2012 (UTC)


 * For the confirmation of others that Rich has done this, the blanking edit to  is .  —Sladen (talk) 14:44, 4 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I have re-voted to oppose the site-ban motions, in light of your agreement to move away from any type of contributions that are even reminiscent of automated editing. I would re-emphasise point C) of Fozzie's e-mail, which I interpret to mean "If it looks like automation, it will be treated as automation—and therefore as a breach". I also consider this to be the last lap, and if this working agreement is not successful I must emphasise that I will consider everything else to have failed and there to be no recourse but a site-ban. AGK  [•] 15:11, 4 June 2012 (UTC)


 * This is a great idea. Now a lot of work won't get done so others will have a chance to help out, too. ErikHaugen (talk &#124; contribs) 19:35, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

hacked script
Is this accurate? It was my understanding you were using AWB in read mode and pooched up 2x. Nobody Ent 23:45, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Yep, the two statements are the same. (Although I am still looking for other explanations than a layer 8 error, it is by far the most likely.) Some of the committee ascribe more or less malfeasance, and for those who ascribe more I really don't feel like putting a massive amount of energy into trying to change their minds, as it is unlikely to be successful, and they have already removed 99% of my ability to contribute, plus made the second most damning indictment possible. Rich Farmbrough, 00:46, 5 June 2012 (UTC).

Help another wiki?
Hi Rich. I occasionally edit at another wiki. It was set up by a person who was tired of all the BS here. They're running a relatively recent version of MediaWiki. I've tried to help them with some template stuff over the last year, but haven't been very sucessful. I was wondering if you might be willing to help over there. I know you've given a lot of your life to this project and might be loyal to it, so if the answer is "no", that's fine. I figured it wouldn't hurt to ask. Best regards. 64.40.57.10 (talk) 01:13, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
 * This isn't the only wiki where I have a million edits![Citation needed] And sure I'd help with some templating as long as it's not something against my principles. Rich Farmbrough, 01:46, 5 June 2012 (UTC).


 * Thank you very kindly, Rich. You truly are a courteous and generous individual and I'm very thankful for your help. The problems I'm having are over at en.wikialpha.org where I'm registered as Web. Ive left the details at my talk page over there. I didn't link to the site because the guys there got dinged at AN/I for spamming their site here last summer Thank you so much. 64.40.57.10 (talk) 02:22, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
 * 64.40.57.10 (talk) 03:09, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 June 2012

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 09:59, 5 June 2012 (UTC)


 * You might want to do as I did and avoid getting this distributed each week. At first, I transcluded it. Now I just have a link to Wikipedia Signpost on my talk page and check it on Tuesday or Wednesday. If you are going to be banned or blocked for a while, it might be better not to keep subscribing because you might have trouble archiving or removing it. JRSpriggs (talk) 14:42, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. If it's a month I should only get 4 delivered, and generally talk page access is not disabled. Rich Farmbrough, 14:46, 5 June 2012 (UTC).

Nomination for deletion of Template:Subatomic particle/link
Template:Subatomic particle/link has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Kumioko (talk) 14:48, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Subatomic particle/symbol
Template:Subatomic particle/symbol has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Kumioko (talk) 14:54, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Amazing award

 * Thanks! It would be quicker but I have one hand and both feet immobilised. Rich Farmbrough, 22:01, 1 June 2012 (UTC).


 * Could you please go round all the pages which mix turtles and tortoises up and correct them? If you're not busy, that is :-) DavidFarmbrough (talk) 21:04, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I will also correct the pages that say penguins are fish and not biscuits, and that tadpoles turn into butterflies, when they are not insects, as they have eight legs. Rich Farmbrough, 21:09, 3 June 2012 (UTC).


 * Rich, sorry to bother you. Is missing this synonym a human error or is there some logic to why this might not be added. It's on the original Fritz 2007 pdf, page 303, right at the bottom. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 12:33, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Yep, there are a bunch of things I need to go over and fix, of which that is one. In terms of pages most of the main job is done, but I think the end has more sp. per page. Rich Farmbrough, 14:28, 5 June 2012 (UTC).


 * Thanks for what you have done, it's a HUGE improvement! Regards, SunCreator (talk) 15:42, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Incidentally Three-striped roofed turtle has synonyms listed for 1889 and 1879. I suspect 1879 is a transcription error in Fritz, maybe someone could check. Rich Farmbrough, 14:42, 5 June 2012 (UTC).


 * The Kachuga dhongoka Fritz entry that is out of year sequence does look strange. I have not been able to track down Anderson, Zool. Res. Yunnan, 1878: 732. For now I will assume it's correct information but out of sequence. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 15:42, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Nomenclature
Hi, I have put a section on Sun's page to explain how synonymies work a bit, please ask if you need more help. Cheers, Faendalimas  talk 23:38, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Articles with invalid ISBNs
Hi Rich; please see Category talk:Articles with invalid ISBNs where I'm stuck for a reply to GoingBatty. -- Red rose64 (talk) 15:34, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅ Rich Farmbrough, 15:54, 6 June 2012 (UTC).

Nomenclature and dashes
I see you have been making additions to the nomenclature of turtles on Wikipedia. A number of your additions have included dashes between the binomina and the authorities. While this is acceptable (although Wikipedia style is for an en-dash, not an em-dash), the dashes carry meaning, and they should not be added or removed. (It's a zoological tradition to indicate that the author after the dash was the first to make that combination of an existing name, whereas without the dash, the author erected the name. Getting it wrong is therefore quite a serious error.) For example, at Mesoclemmys nasuta, which I have just cleaned up, nine of the names shouldn't have a dash, and weren't given one in the source you were using. Please be careful about this in future, and it would be very helpful if you could fix some of the articles affected; there are quite a lot, I fear. --Stemonitis (talk) 18:13, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Hm, I had noticed the disparity, and foolishly put it down to two people creating the list. I shall certainly avoid this issue,and see what can be done about  the ones I have already added.  Thanks for letting me know. Rich Farmbrough, 19:14, 6 June 2012 (UTC).


 * Make technical articles understandable. Discussion may continue on WikiProject Turtles. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 10:25, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Scanning
Hi, I am wondering about scanning parts of the Wiki (without doing any editing while scanning) to make some data files. I have been using a Perl script with AWB. Do you have any experience of scanning the Wiki using a internet module with Perl without AWB? Snowman (talk)
 * Yes, some. You can use LWP quite effectively, but you have to set the User Agent String to anything (almost) other than LWP. Alternatively you can use MediaWiki::API, which is also available from CPAN, and I think Anomie has something available. Rich Farmbrough, 01:03, 9 June 2012 (UTC).

Use of talk page
fyi Nobody Ent 22:29, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Rich Farmbrough, 01:04, 9 June 2012 (UTC).

AWB
Rich do you know a good link or could you show me how to use AWB to search for and correct occurrences of some defined parameter across a large group of articles? My76Strat (talk) 06:38, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Something like
 * ({{[_ \n]*(?: | |...)[_ \n]*(?:\|(?:[^{]*|{{[^{]*}}))*)(?:\|[_ \n]* [_ \n]*=[_ \n]*))

will match upto the value where



so "Infobox cat tray" => 2[Ii]nfobox[ _]+cat[ _]+tray"

and the same applies to redirects.

This is not a perfect regex, matching only one level of sub-templates, but it will do for most things,and can be modified. It's also off the top of my head so may contain errors, but the principle is sound. Rich Farmbrough, 14:30, 9 June 2012 (UTC).


 * Recommend googling "online regex tester" for the language of your choice -- assume AWB would use C# syntax? {{tps}} Nobody Ent 14:34, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes there seems to be a .NET Microsoft slightly screwed version, but not so as you'd usually notice. There's a regex tester built into AWB. Rich Farmbrough, 14:53, 9 June 2012 (UTC).

a rather full proof improvement I would think. My76Strat (talk) 15:06, 9 June 2012 (UTC) , enable regex. Should be good to go. Regards, SunCreator {{sup|(talk)}} 15:59, 9 June 2012 (UTC) (n) using AWB" when the (n) will be the number of replacements. You may like to add a reason to edit summary found on the start tab, whatever you put goes at the front of the edit summary. Maybe something like "HTML cleanup", so an edit summary would then read "HTML cleanup, replaced:  → (n) using AWB". Regards, SunCreator {{sup|(talk)}} 16:20, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I do appreciate the feedback, yet realize it appears to exceed my technical ability by far. I don't suppose I'll be doing much automated editing any time soon. My76Strat (talk) 15:02, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
 * BTW I was going to search for  and replace it with
 * Are you new to AWB? On the options tab is a "Find and replace" section, enable it, click "Normal setting" set find  and replace with
 * Hey thanks SunCreator, I think I can do that. I've had AWB a while, just couldn't really figure out how to use it. Will it be clear how to set up the edit summary I want left behind? My76Strat (talk) 16:10, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
 * The edit summary will say "replaced:  →

I would recommend if replacing  → that you only do so when you are making a more significant change. Although I agree we should do this (although I prefer it without the space of  some other editors feel this change isn't worth doing alone because it will work either way. If your looking for parameter help could you give another example of what you are trying to do? Kumioko (talk) 16:24, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict)Whatever is agreed wants to be build into the general fixes. Manually checking to see if it is the only change and then skipping seems rather tiresome. Regards, SunCreator {{sup|(talk)}} 16:34, 9 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you Kumioko, I just used the wrong word apparently. It was the find and replace option I would have asked about had I known what I was talking about in the first place. My76Strat (talk) 16:32, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

The space is good XHTML I think which is one of the things we try to be compliant with.

For the parameter replacement you can adopt something much simpler, but it risks false positives and even rare negatives

Suppose we want to change "surname = Smith" to "surname = Psmtith"

s/(\bsurname *= *)Smith *(\n|\|)/$1Psmith$2/

The false positives will mainly occur where there is another template with "surname" as parameter, or something like "previous surname = " and the negatives with stuff like

surname = Smith

The benefit of AWB is that you can watch for this kind of stuff.

Rich Farmbrough, 17:55, 9 June 2012 (UTC).

Your barnstar
I lament that you've earned this "Black barnstar of institutional shame" aside from seeing your strength of character, the only good thing about this award is that so very few are entitled to display it. Highlight the award as if to copy and the massage becomes clear. My76Strat (talk) 16:53, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Rich Farmbrough, 18:01, 9 June 2012 (UTC).


 * It comes with a massage? Cool. Nobody Ent 18:06, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Nice barnstar Thank you! Rich Farmbrough, 21:43, 9 June 2012 (UTC).

Motion on Rich Farmbrough enforcement
The following was resolved by motion:

It is not in dispute that, despite being indefinitely prohibited from doing so, Rich Farmbrough made automated edits in breach of the sanction on 31 May 2012.Accordingly, Rich Farmbrough is blocked for thirty days from the date of enactment of this motion.To avoid future breaches of whatever nature, Rich Farmbrough is directed: to blank userspace js pages associated with his account/s;to avoid making automated edits to pages offline for the purpose of pasting them into a normal browser for posting;to make only completely manual edits (ie by selecting the [EDIT] button and typing changes into the editing window);to refrain from edits adjusting capitalisation of templates (where the current capitalisation is functional) or whitespace and similar as these can create the appearance of automation.Further, Rich Farmbrough is advised that: The prohibition on using automation will remain in place and in full force until modified or removed by the Committee;The earliest date on which Rich Farmbrough may request that the Committee reconsider the automation prohibition is 15 January 2013;The Checkuser tool will be used to verify Rich Farmbrough's future compliance with the prohibition;If Rich Farmbrough breaches the automation prohibition again, notwithstanding the standard enforcement provisions, he will likely be site-banned indefinitely with at least twelve months elapsing from the date of the site-ban before he may request the Committee reconsider. By adopting this motion, the Committee is extending considerable good faith to Rich Farmbrough, despite the aggravating factors, and notes he has unconditionally accepted provisions to this effect.

For the Arbitration Committee,

Lord Roem (talk) 22:05, 6 June 2012 (UTC)


 * I have enacted the 30 day block. Alexandr Dmitri (talk) 22:31, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Well someone had to. Rich Farmbrough, 22:36, 6 June 2012 (UTC).


 * See you in a month Rich....I hope. Kumioko (talk) 22:41, 6 June 2012 (UTC
 * This is an absolute disgrace. Anyone out there good at making userboxes or something so we support Rich can put it on our user pages....William 23:33, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Rich. I just stopped by to say hello and see how you're doing. Wishing you the best. 64.40.57.127 (talk) 05:55, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Best wishes from myself, Rich. Hope to see you back in thirty days - don't feel disheartened. Get involved in some chapter stuff, perhaps? The Cavalry (Message me) 10:52, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, at least you now are clearer that semi-automation was included in the "any" automation prohibition. In your defense, I would have argued that any of the 1,000+ admins could have blocked you but chose not to. On the other hand, Arbcom reaching down and grabbing your case AND acting acting where no individual admin chose to act shows the seriousness of the sitiation. Personally, I think you could be hooked on the automation juice and these 30 days might help you get back to your editing roots. 'member this edit? Your first on Wikipedia and you didn't need automation to make it. Perhaps use this time to look over your 2004 edits and remember what it was like for you to contribute to Wikipedia back then. Take care. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 11:25, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Why would any admin have blocked him? I wouldn't ever block someone for fixing spelling mistakes. I gotta say I admire Rich's ability to stay cool when people keep writing stuff like "I think you could be hooked on the automation juice and these 30 days might help you". ErikHaugen (talk &#124; contribs) 18:34, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Someone would have done it eventually and I have no hard feelings against Alex for doing it but personally I would have let Arbcom do it themselves. Of course my critcism of Arbcom is common knowledge these days so that will likely come as no surprise. Kumioko (talk) 18:50, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Kumioko, in blocking, I did so in my role as one of the Arbitration Committee clerks. --Alexandr Dmitri (talk) 22:25, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
 * II had forgotten you were a clerk sorry. Kumioko (talk) 22:40, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
 * It did strike me that it would be amusing if no-one did implement the block. But having timescales is important, else the block could be implemented at any time. As to the manual edits, most of what I do, well by definition, all of what I do is manual. Automation is like a lever, it magnifies the effect.  The fact that some people work the system to their ends, and to the detriment of the common good is nothing new - in fact you will see it going on everywhere.  The mills of truth grind slow, however they grind exceeding small. Rich Farmbrough, 02:08, 9 June 2012 (UTC).

Notice
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Personal attacks after being warned by User:Mishae. Thank you. Ryan Vesey Review me!  05:12, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your note, unfortunately I am currently blocked or I would be able to do more to attempt to calm this situation. Rich Farmbrough, 14:30, 10 June 2012 (UTC).


 * @My76Strat Mishae refusing to promise is very wise. It is better to ask him to do his best to avoid the behaviour, rather than expecting him to give an undertaking, which most people would blithely do, then break. Rich Farmbrough, 22:11, 10 June 2012 (UTC).


 * I'm glad that Dennis Brown's cool head prevailed. Mishae is editing productively and things should be fine if he seeks mentorship from Koavf. Ryan Vesey  Review me!  22:16, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I have seen Dennis around a fair bit, recently. Sound fellow, by the looks. Rich Farmbrough, 18:06, 11 June 2012 (UTC).

The Signpost: 11 June 2012
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 22:41, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

The Tea Leaf - Issue Four
Hi! Welcome to the fourth issue of The Tea Leaf, the official newsletter for the Teahouse!


 * Teahouse pilot wraps up after 13 weeks After being piloted on English Wikipedia starting in February, the Teahouse wrapped up its pilot period on May 27, 2012. We expect this is just the beginning for the Teahouse and hope the project will continue to grow in the months to come!

Thank you and congratulations to all of the community members who participated - and continue to participate!


 * What you've all been waiting for: Teahouse Pilot Report is released! We look forward to your feedback on the methodology and outcomes of this pilot project.
 * ....and if a pilot report wasn't enough, the Teahouse Pilot Metrics Report is out too! Dive into the numbers and survey results to learn about the impact the Teahouse has made on English Wikipedia.
 * Teahouse shows positive impact on new editor retention and engagement
 * 409 new editors participated during the entire pilot period, with about 40 new editors participating in the Teahouse per week.
 * Two weeks after participating, 33% of Teahouse guests are still active on Wikipedia, as opposed to 11% of a similar control group.
 * New editors who participated in the Teahouse edit 10x the number of articles, make 7x more global edits, and 2x as much of their content survives on Wikipedia compared to the control group.


 * Women participate in the Teahouse 28% of Teahouse participants were women, up from 9% of editors on Wikipedia in general, good news for this project which aimed to have impact on the gender gap too - but still lots to be done here!
 * New opportunities await for the Teahouse in phase two as the Teahouse team and Wikipedia community examine ways to improve, scale, and sustain the project. Opportunities for future work include:
 * Automating or semi-automating systems such as invites, metrics and archiving
 * Experimenting with more ways for new editors to discover the Teahouse
 * Building out the social and peer-to-peer aspects further, including exploring ways to make answering questions easier, creating more ways for new editors to help each other and for all participants to acknowledge each other's efforts
 * Growing volunteer capacity, continuing to transfer Teahouse administration tasks to volunteers whenever possible, and looking for new ways to make maintenance and participation easier for everyone.

You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here. Sarah (talk) 17:05, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Want to know how you can lend a hand at the Teahouse? Become a host! Learn more about what makes the Teahouse different than other help spaces on Wikipedia and see how you can help new editors by visiting here.
 * Say hello to the new guests at the Teahouse. Take the time to welcome and get to know the latest guests at the Teahouse. Drop off some wikilove to these editors today, as being welcomed by experienced editors is really encouraging to new Wikipedians.

!vote
What did you mean to convey with your comment in response to my !vote at Articles_for_deletion/Innocent_prisoner%27s_dilemma? causa sui (talk) 18:21, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
 * (stalker) To me, his comment meant that you, causa sui, intended to say 'keep, there is no more to be said' but that's my impression alone. I am only mentioning it as I figure you may be curious about what was conveyed as well. Penyulap  ☏  02:32, 14 Jun 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Deleted template
Template:Deleted template has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Axem Titanium (talk) 13:42, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Wikimania 2012 scholarship
Hi Richard, As per the emails I have sent you, would you be able to contact me urgently re: your scholarship? I would be very keen to assist you so that you can attend, but if you don't reply by the end of today I am afraid we will have to let your scholarship go. You can also call me till 5pm today, the number should be included in my emails. Thanks. Daria Cybulska (talk) 14:26, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

writing backwards
It does make it hard to read, it's not backwards, but it is so very strange for it to be out of place, like, even when the lyrics of one song are sung to the melody of another song it's more pleasing. But I expect that will pass in time. One moral, which is my favourite, would be that careless curiosity is destroying all the best ideas, because there is no top shelf to put things on. That's my favourite moral, and the bane of my existence.

My own moral is that maths is not all it's cracked up to be, because so many good things don't fit inside mathematics. What's needed is a place to put all those good things, and there are a LOT of good things, so the best place to put things is inside big fat heads, take mine for example, it's basically empty, and lots of real estate, of course we need extra big fat heads, because good things keep getting produced, you know, like stupid ideas, good ideas are endless. Right now, good things and people go to the same place. Penyulap  ☏  09:43, 12 Jun 2012 (UTC)
 * Interesting reading. Rich Farmbrough, 22:28, 18 June 2012 (UTC).

The Signpost: 18 June 2012
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 03:17, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Astrobots
Can we talk about the astrobot situation? I don't know where to go from here. Chrisrus (talk) 13:45, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I uploaded the settings to WP:AWB/scripts, it includes the article list, so anyone with AWB access should be able to run it. Rich Farmbrough, 13:50, 4 June 2012 (UTC).


 * Yep, that's the one... Rich Farmbrough, 14:38, 4 June 2012 (UTC).


 * Thanks! So, should I put in another botreq?  How should it be worded?  What's the best thing to do with the orbitboxes for those that have orbitboxes?  How many on the list even have orbitboxes, anyway? How can I identify someone with "WP:AWB access"? Chrisrus (talk) 18:46, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Al admins, me and everyone on the list at AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage can technically use AWB. Anyone else can request access. Rich Farmbrough, 19:04, 4 June 2012 (UTC).


 * Ok! So where should I put in the request, what should it say, and what in your opinion is the best way to save the orbitbox data, if, in your opinion, should it be saved? Chrisrus (talk) 19:23, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Ask at WP:AWB/tasks and/or bot requests. I wouldn't worry about the orbitbox data, it's all available from JPL etc., and if it is wanted it would be better to re-generate it en-bloc.
 * If you would, please follow Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(astronomical_objects) and comment as you would. Chrisrus (talk) 20:57, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
 * If you would, please follow Bot_requests. I'm confused. Are you allowed to comment there?  Please advise, I'm trying to figure out what to do next. Chrisrus (talk) 05:57, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Bots
Hi Rich. Have you considered that your bots may have developed a superior form of artificial intelligence and caused your demise on purpose? It won't have been the first time. benzband  ( talk ) 12:50, 18 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Sorry for that stupid comment. I just noticed your "quote of the day" displayed at the top of this page. So i thought, maybe you would be interested in Wikipedia's Motto of the day project, which provides a new quote every day? benzband  ( talk ) 09:21, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 June 2012
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">
 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 07:13, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Vendor-created ISBNs
Do you have any suggestions for the treatment of what appear to be ad hoc ISBNs created by booksellers (Amazon, perhaps?) for publications issued without an ISBN, as in this case? These numbers are useful for users who wish to find the book, but should a bot (yours or someone else's--I know yours are blocked for the forseeable future) that vets for hyphenation rules ever run again, these purpose-made ISBNs will get re-tagged. Is the template Listed Invalid ISBN appropriate for these cases, even though there is no problem with the math? Any other ideas? Thanks-- Shelf Skewed  Talk  05:35, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, this is unlikely to be created by the bookseller. Amazon use an ASIN for un-numbered publications. The number should  probably have one less "9" and start 978-0- or 978-1- . I have emailed the ADL for more information.  Note that there is a system for numbering books after publication, which may be what happened in this case, or it may be a second impression got an ISBN, even if the first was un-numbered.  As for the error tag being removed, next time around the block I will have to simply create a list and fix them all myself. Rich Farmbrough, 09:06, 26 June 2012 (UTC).


 * So in the meantime I should go ahead and remove the check-isbn tag if the number is useful for finding the book? I'd be happy to keep track of these as I run across them, if that would be worthwhile. Best,-- Shelf Skewed  Talk  15:00, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
 * No, you can make the tag invisible, by changing isbn = 012345679 to id = ISBN 0123456789. We should still keep track of invalid ISBNs. Rich Farmbrough, 22:11, 26 June 2012 (UTC).


 * Will do.-- Shelf Skewed  Talk  03:51, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Mail
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mugginsx (talk • contribs) 14:44 28 June 2012