User talk:Rlink2/Archive 6

Help with a page
Hi -

I noticed that you recently edited Dan Doctoroff's page. I suggested some additional edits to the page recently and I am looking for an editor to review them. Thank you in advance if you have time to take a look!

Dan Levitan (talk) 18:40, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Help and a kind Request
Hello and I am not sure if this is the right place to ask but can I use your bot "User:Rlink2 Bot"? Or have the source code to let me run it myself? I have a lot of YT videos and clicking the bookmarklet is tiring me with almost every request having an Hcaptcha i.e. kind of not working anymore against robot confirmation. Also, if I may add, can I request an auto-archive for my personal Youtube bookmarks which are outside of Wikipedia into Ghostarchive? I have bookmarked and saved a lot of them ranging from Computer AI and educational videos relating to various topics which are all educational and clean. Some of these are to-be used in Wikipedia in the future.

Another request for wikipages autoarchive: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melomics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/0music (playlist) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iamus_(computer)

I hope I did not disturb you for these requests. And pardon me for this. :) Thank you and happy Easter! --Likhasik (talk) 15:31, 17 April 2022 (UTC)


 * @Likhasik
 * clicking the bookmarklet is tiring me with almost every request having an Hcaptcha I think the best way to leave feedback is to use the Google form or email. I just submitted a request to lessen the captchas, as I have been experiencing them as well. I am sure they appreciate feedback on stuff like feature requests and issues to fix. For example, the video limit has increased slightly (or maybe I'm just seeing stuff).
 * Personally, I started archiving more after google deleted some of my favorite videos off youtube. It would be nice if more people archived. The thing about the archive sites is that it allows others to also find the archived content, so its like editing wikipedia in the way other people benefit from your work.
 * Or have the source code to let me run it myself archiving a large amount of youtube links is easy, if you can get the URLS of all the videos you want in one file. Then use something to send the request for archival for each url. The bot task just takes care of some link formatting on enwiki, it doesn't actually archive pages.
 * Also, if I may add, can I request an auto-archive for my personal Youtube bookmarks which are outside of Wikipedia into Ghostarchive Sure, did you want me to submit them for you? You can also save them offline as well.
 * Another request for wikipages autoarchive will do. Rlink2 (talk) 16:43, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the reply.
 * Well for context/background, I started bookmarking a lot of websites since the start of the pandemic which also includes Youtube videos. I only discovered about archiving (archive.today and wayback) after one of my sites returned a 404 error when I rechecked some last July 2020. I, unfortunately, knew about Ghostarchive.org this March 2022, about 7-8 months late from its first launch (Note: I mingled a bit with the site and found out that the first YT archive was August 2021. Its first video is "I want it that way" by BackstreetBoys, although not in a video form, more like a screenshot. Please correct me if I am wrong about the date and info.).
 * Anyway, let me ask again if it is okay to let you archive about 10k or more YT bookmarks? Pretty big and a lot in terms of quantity but rest assured that most are educational whether in the form of blog or documentaries or seminars or songs. Do you need something (prerequisites) before I send the URLs to you? And if I may ask, how will you archive them (process)?
 * Sorry for the long story. Still learning to archive efficiently here :) Thank you --Likhasik (talk) 17:28, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
 * @Likhasik
 * Sorry for the long story. Still learning to archive efficiently here :) Here's an important tip: it is good practice to archive at all 3 of the sites. That way, if one has to remove content for legal reasons, has hard drive failure, etc, the content is still there. It is rare but it has happened and could happen again. Remember webcite? I have a script that for certain websites will automatically archive certain websites at all 3 archive sites without me having to use a bookmark. Very convienent.
 * Anyway, let me ask again if it is okay to let you archive about 10k or more YT bookmarks? Yes. You can post the links in a google doc or pastebin or whatever and I can take it from there. I have a script that will autosubmit the videos. Rlink2 (talk) 19:54, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
 * @Rlink2 Hello. Sorry for the wait. Here is the first batch which is around 1400 URLs. PW is 12345.
 * paste-bin.xyz/51889
 * There are more URLs but here is the preliminary queue. I think that is enough to not clog your bot/script :)
 * Additionally, please note to archive them in both Wayback and Ghostarchive because some are longer than an hour which Ghostarchive cannot handle. Some URLs are YT channels and playlists with videos. If you can, please archive the corresponding videos of them all.
 * Please send me a confirmation if you have already archived them then I can send the rest. Good luck and thank you for the help.
 * --Likhasik (talk) 16:46, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
 * @Rlink2 Hello. Is it already done? If not, I can resend the links. And also, can you also please send me the script or bot to archive them in Ghost? Thank you and good luck. :) --Likhasik (talk) 08:15, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
 * @Likhasik
 * Hello. Is it already done? not yet
 * And also, can you also please send me the script or bot to archive them in Ghost
 * Do you use Windows? The script is windows-specific as that is what i use. Rlink2 (talk) 23:05, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
 * @Rlink2 Yes sir. I do use Windows 10. Please send me the script or bot so that I can also auto-archive my other links. It has been tedious to keep on clicking the bookmarklet. Thank you :) --Likhasik (talk) 01:28, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
 * @Likhasik
 * paste-bin.xyz/54817
 * password is 1234567 Rlink2 (talk) 15:27, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
 * @Rlink2 Thank you!
 * Just a few question and inquiries.
 * Can you make a quick rundown on how to use it specifically? I am not a coder but I am trying to understand. I see that it is Powershell but I don't know what to do next...
 * Also, do you have another script for archive.today? Seems neat and simple...
 * Thank you for this gift. --Likhasik (talk) 19:25, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

Care with archiving
Kudos for all the effort putting into finding archives for dead refs, but, if I may, I'd urge you to take some extra time confirming the process, particularly on time-specific articles. Take, for example, this diff, where your AWB auto-added an archive from 2008 for claims from 2014. Archive.org may have more time-appropriate revisions available in the history, which do support the article's claims, as was the case here. If there's no appropriate archive, then the tag should remain, to encourage editors to find sources to replace it. To quote WP:Link rot, "View the archive to verify that it contains valid page information." Doing it without checking means we risk failing to meet WP:V. And since these edits remove maintenance tags, it's now near-impossible to find any articles where dead sources have been replaced with inaccurate archives. Cheers! Buttons to Push Buttons (talk | contribs) 15:40, 18 April 2022 (UTC)


 * @Buttons to Push Buttons
 * You raise an intresting point. From the way i see it, the link is already dead, so if the only archive is from 2008 it seems better than no link at all.
 * If there's no appropriate archive, then the tag should remain, to encourage editors to find sources to replace it. Wayback has the time banner at the top so if the date is inaccurate, but Wayback has an archive from a later date, then a reader can just click on the top to get the information. Providing a link to the Wayback machine is an important first step. Rlink2 (talk) 15:50, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
 * An archive that creates the false illusion of verification, removing the maintenance tags that bring attention to the possible issue in the process, is an invariably worse end result for us, imo. Let's say the Wayback Machine doesn't contain any copy that works for the article (for example, here's one I've found where the latest working archive only covers half the data), then all we've done is obfuscate the underlying issue, and made it a more difficult process to meet WP:V. The process calls for a a finer toothed comb, to ensure that we're still abiding by our processes and policies, imo. A marathon, not a sprint, etc. Buttons to Push Buttons (talk | contribs) 15:59, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
 * latest working archive only covers half the data These links are already dead, and are so old that only Wayback is likely to have any copy of the data. So even if the archive contains half the data it is still better than no data. The only other alternative is to find a live link, but I couldn't find any live equivelent for this link. A maintnence tag brings attention to a problem, and this is currently the best way to solve the problem. I don't see any other alternative to what you are saying other than to just leave the maint tag forever. If live versions existed, then it would make a little bit more sense to leave the maint tags.
 * obfuscate the underlying issue If you find a live version for links with broken archives we can always replace archived copies with the live ones, we must not let perfect be enemy of the good. Rlink2 (talk) 16:10, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

AFD you participated in restarted less than an hour after being closed
I am contacting everyone who participated who didn't know already that the AFD was restarted by someone unhappy that the administrator closed it as "no consensus". Articles for deletion/Don't Leave (Simba Tagz song) (2nd nomination)  D r e a m Focus  23:31, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Help needed! (Kind request)
Hi this is the owner of the page anam Tanveer, I just needed few things to be added in my page.

Awards and nominations section is missing

New Telefilm section is also missing

Magazine covers are missing

I am also a writer which isn’t being established by wiki page as of yet 175.107.218.46 (talk) 21:59, 28 April 2022 (UTC)


 * If you think something is deserving of wikipedia, add it Rlink2 (talk) 23:05, 28 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Add it only if it's backed up with reliable sources, of course. —C.Fred (talk) 01:30, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Question regarding flag icons
Hi, I'm just curious to which part of WP:MOSICON you were referring when removing the flag icons from Disney+. Best Regards, CanePlayz (Jacob) (talk) 11:35, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I really liked them as they gave a very useful visualization for a quick overview, but if anything in the MoS says something against it, I will accept it of course. CanePlayz (Jacob) (talk) 12:03, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
 * @CanePlayz (Jacob) I didn't remove the icons, you probably clicked on the wrong person in the edit history. Rlink2 (talk) 14:06, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
 * @Rlink2 Oh I'm sorry, my bad. CanePlayz (Jacob) (talk) 08:44, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Maintenance Job using AWB
Hi, Rlink2. How are you doing? I am up here to know what maintenance jobs other that the type of thing that I am doing, can be done using AWB. Wanted to know from you since you are experienced in this area. Any idea? In what other way can I help out in maintenance using AWB? ItcouldbepossibleTalk 04:44, 1 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Well, theres what I do, but that isn't a "maintenance job" per the official definition.
 * You can always try fixing typos, AutoWikiBrowser/Typos. Is that good enough for you? Rlink2 (talk) 00:17, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
 * @Itcouldbepossible forgot to ping Rlink2 (talk) 00:45, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
 * No, something else except for fixing typos and general formatting. How about bare ref fixing like you do? Can I do it, or is it too tough for me? ItcouldbepossibleTalk 06:00, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
 * @Itcouldbepossible Now that there is a bot about to be approved I dont really fill in bare refs by myself. I did recently for cases where the bot is exlcuded from doing (like Facebook).
 * You could always work on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:CS1_maint:_url-status this category, or add archives for certain sites (like what I am doing now) Rlink2 (talk) 13:27, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
 * How can I use AWB to do this, like you do. ItcouldbepossibleTalk 02:04, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Adding archive links to independent.co.uk pages
Hello. Noticed you doing this, and was wondering why you're marking the original urls as subscription? I have no subscription, paid or otherwise, to that website, and all the original urls you've marked as subscription required in this edit are freely available to me. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 22:20, 1 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Hello @Struway2
 * I checked, and you do need to sign up in order to read some of the articles. Maybe the dialouge doesn't show up for older articles.
 * Regardless maybe "limited" is a better option for this one. Rlink2 (talk) 22:26, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Now I'm more awake... it appears that signing up for free registration allows access to all non-Premium content – which is most of the site – and limited access to Premium content. I'd done that on my laptop, but had forgotten about doing so, but haven't registered on my phone, so I'm seeing the signup dialogue on there. So in general, marking everything on that site as paid subscription required is definitely misleading. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 08:13, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Per Struway2, "So in general, marking everything on that site as paid subscription required is definitely misleading". In addition, may I ask why are you adding archive links for these non-dead urls? Egeymi (talk) 04:34, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
 * @Egeymi
 * So in general, marking everything on that site as paid subscription required is definitely misleading I forgot to change it sorry. The difference is purely cosmetic anyway, the "url-access" parameter doesn't actually mean anything. I think "subscription" and "limited" are even the same icon. There is nothing to lead so it can not be misleading. Which leads to your next question:
 * In addition, may I ask why are you adding archive links for these non-dead urls?
 * See WP:CEFC and WP:LINKROT. The important thing is that "url-status=live" is being added which makes sure the readers still click on the original thingwhich is being done. Rlink2 (talk) 12:40, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Just to clarify... you're mistaken when you say the "url-access" parameter doesn't actually mean anything. The CS1 documentation says As a courtesy to readers and other editors, editors should signal restrictions on access to material provided via the external links included in a citation, and offers url-access as the means to do that.

If an individual url requires a paid subscription, then we use subscription. That generates an icon that looks like a closed lock, and hovering over it the user will see the words "Paid subscription required". The icons for limited and registration look the same as each other, like a partially open lock, and hovering gives "Free access subject to limited trial, subscription normally required" and "Free registration required" respectively. Apart from their Premium content, all urls on independent.co.uk are "Free registration required"; they neither require nor "normally require" a subscription.

There is nothing to lead so it can not be misleading. If a reader wishes to access a cited source, to verify content or just to read the source, they'll see a closed lock against all the independent.co.uk urls archived by your bot. The function of the closed lock is to tell users that those urls are paywalled, so if they don't want to spend their own money, the only way to see that source is via your archive of choice. That's generally not the case. I'm not suggesting you're doing this to drive traffic to that archive site; I assume it's because the bot's programmed to assume everything on independent.co.uk is paywalled because it's too difficult to tell the difference between subscription and non-subscription content. But it certainly does mislead. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 08:10, 27 May 2022 (UTC)


 * @Struway2
 * The icons for limited and registration look the same as each other, like a partially open lock, That's what I meant to say in the beginning, sorry.
 * and hovering gives "Free access subject to limited trial, subscription normally required" and "Free registration required" respectively. When I am going to click on a link, i just click on it. I wouldn't hover over it if I didn't know it was going have a message. A huge chunk of Wikipedia readers also read on mobile where you can't hover over something. Most people reading Wikipedia know nothing about CS1 templates or how they work.
 * The function of the closed lock is to tell users that those urls are paywalled Either way, the only functional difference between "subscription" and "limited" is a grey lock vs a red lock. 99.9999% of readers won't know the difference between the two. To the untrained eye, the red lock might be easier to notice. Regardless, they would still click on the main link first and not the archive.
 * This is just food for thought as I already agreed to change it to "limited" but just forgot. You make many good points so I think "limited" might be a better option. Rlink2 (talk) 13:44, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

ghostarchive
Hello, there appears to be a problem with using ghostarchive as it looses information such as the place/time of the original and just seems to archive the basic text. When you look at the archive version you expect to find something like the original giving the originator/publication date etc. Keith D (talk) 19:47, 2 May 2022 (UTC)


 * @Keith D When you look at the archive version you expect to find something like the original giving the originator/publication date etc I personally see all that information. They seem to be doing some upgrades, as the interface has changed recently. Maybe its a bug or something. I copy and pasted your comment in to the Google form they have Rlink2 (talk) 00:13, 3 May 2022 (UTC)


 * @Keith D Ghostarchive works fine. They did an interface change a few days ago, notably the font and background. Can you give an example or the URL of the 'broken' Ghostarchive copy so that I can check it? It shows here the archived date and the snapshot. --Likhasik (talk) 22:54, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Looking at this page on ghost archive here there is no indication of where the original page is located, or what time it was published. It also looses all of the images that are in the text of the page. Keith D (talk) 23:44, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
 * @Keith D where the original page is located, the url is on the top of the page
 * It also looses all of the images that are in the text of the page and what time it was published. could possibly be bugs due to the interface change. i will copy and paste this info to the google form. Rlink2 (talk) 00:17, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
 * @Keith D Here I have archived it again. https://ghostarchive.org/archive/LMuPk I think you have done something incorrectly. Can you tell me how did you 'specifically' archive this webpage step-by-step? Did you add something else or... ? --Likhasik (talk) 01:51, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I archived this page too and it worked.
 * if we are seeing different things, it could be a form of A/B testing, where different people might see different things when testing a feature. Facebook and Instagram do it all the time. Both versions seem acceptable to me, but I like the first one because it loads faster. Who knows Rlink2 (talk) 02:05, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
 * List of available archives. All but the first have graphics. I agree in this case plain text is good, though it's not good for web archives to change the page too much, as you never know what is missing, thus Ghost's use of web recorder technology is commendable as it is a faithful recorder, which makes the first capture spooky.. -- Green  C  04:19, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I did not do the archive of the page it was done by Rlink2. The archive you made is viewable OK eventually, but takes an inordinate time to actually load. Keith D (talk) 08:42, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I placed the archive, someone might have archived it before me.
 * If there is missing information, then it should be added. For some sites, the text form is much much better especially if you are on a mobile device Rlink2 (talk) 12:42, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Diff. Please disable the addition of when adding ghostarchive, as discussed. -- Green  C  03:04, 8 May 2022 (UTC)


 * @GreenC done Rlink2 (talk) 03:06, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks. -- Green  C  03:09, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Thor: Ragnarok
At User talk:Citation bot, Trappist the monk wrote
 * Thor: Ragnarok has 190 cs1|2 templates that have https://www.webcitation.org/ ... parameters. Archived snapshots at webcitation.org are no longer available.  Those who care about Thor: Ragnarok might want to start revising those cs1|2 templates so that the original sources are not permanently lost when they go 404 due to link rot.}}

It occurs to me that you may have a solution to hand? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 18:41, 8 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Yes, many of those links are at archive.org and archive.today. Maybe i can convert them later. @John Maynard Friedman Rlink2 (talk) 19:16, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Zenica
Please check this diff /arch., [https://archive.is/c5Koo alt. arch.]/ (maybe compare with other revisions after edit wars) before speedily reverting seemingly weird contrib. Thanks. --5.43.77.122 (talk) 00:01, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Your notice on this page
Apparently your notice on this page doesn't work fine for getting user names. This is what I got:

''Welcome,. Thank you for coming here, but please note...''

As you can see, my name is missing after the comma. Thought I'd tell you. - Klein Muçi (talk) 04:18, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Your email
Hi Rlink2. Do you have access to your email, or has your email changed? I emailed you quite a few days back, but didn't get a reply. Is there some kind of problem from my side? Hope that you are well. Sincerely, Itcouldbepossible Talk 15:06, 2 June 2022 (UTC)


 * I have been busy, I will respond when I get the chance.
 * @Itcouldbepossible Rlink2 (talk) 16:13, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Ok, no problem. Just wanted to know if I had used the correct email address. Thanks for your reply. Itcouldbepossible Talk 17:23, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I have replied to your email. Please check it once. Regards, Itcouldbepossible Talk 06:03, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

You have mail
Sorry it is a bit late. Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:39, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

ghostarchive.org
Is the site down or what? I am not able to archive posts anymore as everytime it reads 'nginx error!". Kailash29792 (talk)  06:23, 12 July 2022 (UTC)


 * @Kailash29792 It was/is working for me, albeit a little slow yesterday Rlink2 (talk) 09:28, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Working once again for me. Maybe the technical glitch(es) got fixed. Kailash29792 (talk)  09:34, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

Bare ref fixing and “ShieldSquare captcha”
Hello! While searching for “ShieldSquare”, I noticed many occurrences of in various articles. Out of curiosity, I looked at one of them, which was added by you earlier this year. Going out on a precarious limb, I’m guessing that you were using a software tool to automate the retrieval of the title of the cited web page, and add it to what was a bare URL in the citation; that the tool that you used was recognised as a bot by ShieldSquare, which is presumably used by the web site in question (in this case, “songfacts.com”) to protect itself from scraping; and that, instead of the desired page, ShieldSquare then returned a challenge page (captcha), whose title was then inserted in the article’s citation. At first glance, there are now over 130 occurrences of this problem in the encyclopedia (likely made by many editors using the same or a similar tool). Many (probably most, but not all) are references to “songfacts.com”. Often, the original URL was thankfully preserved. However, there are over 40 cases where the original URL was completely changed to “validate.perfdrive.com” (“perfdrive.com” is the domain name used by ShieldSquare), and therefore lost. For example, see this line 49-50 of (look for “perdrive.com” in the search results for more). Since you are an active editor, and are also involved with this issue (i.e., you likely know the tool involved), I figured that you might want to look into this and discuss it with the authors of the bot and its other users. Ideally, the tool should be modified to detect invalid pages returned by anti-scraping systems like ShieldSquare; and citations that were damaged should be corrected (even a bare URL is better than “ShieldSquare Captcha” as a title!). Thank you for your time! ---Wlgrin 01:36, 3 August 2022 (UTC)


 * @Wlgrin Hello there.
 * This was from the earlier days of bare ref filling, the scripts and systems have improved now and it should catch cases like those. Thanks for letting me know. Rlink2 (talk) 08:11, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Additions to the Dahua Technology article
Hi Rlink2, I am working on adding more content to improve the Dahua Technology article. As you have previously done some maintenance on the page and have expressed interest in improving articles when possible, I was hoping you may be interested in reviewing my edit request at Talk:Dahua Technology and helping to implement the additions. I am not editing directly due to my COI. Thank you, Caitlyn23 (talk) 20:46, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Thames River Image Update
Hello Rlink2,

I just wanted to inform you that I will be updating the map image on the Thames River Wikipedia page ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thames_River_(Ontario) ) to a more up-to-date and detailed map of the river. If you have any concerns or objections, please let me know.

Kind regards,

UW Geospatial Center Lib-UW-Geo-Wiki (talk) 13:55, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Welcome back!
Hi Rlink2! I've been seeing your name pop up again after a bit of a break. Hope you're doing well, and thanks for all the archiving! Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 12:40, 17 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Thank you @Firefangledfeathers. I had to take a break for personal reasons but now I am back in the game. Rlink2 (talk) 12:52, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Archive.today
Adding dots and dashes to archive.today is non-standard and will setup a situation where there are bot wars with other bots that remove the dots and dashes. -- Green  C  14:17, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Your running at a very high rate. There is no consensus. It needs consensus due to how other tools will undo these changes. What the documentation says. And it's purely cosmetic. --  Green  C  14:25, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
 * @GreenC
 * Adding dots and dashes to archive.today is non-standard and And it's purely cosmetic. If you go to archive.today and click on the share button the date shows up as the dots in it. So I am assuming the old date format will be decrepcated for the new one. Hence it is not just cosmetic because if the new transition is completed the old ones will no longer work. But if I am wrong then I am welcome to be corrected.
 * It needs consensus due to how other tools will undo these changes. I didn't know of these other tools, thanks for letting me know, I will stop for now. Rlink2 (talk) 15:45, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
 * They have used dot-dash as default on their website since forever. We at Wikipedia have always used plain 14-digit for all archive providers. The dot-dash format at archive,today is optional they are not deprecating the plain format, it's just how they chose to default display, it works either way. We need to all agree on how it will be on Wikipedia to avoid bot wars and since every other provider uses plain it makes sense to be consistent. -- Green  C  17:09, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
 * @GreenC
 * The dot-dash format at archive,today is optional they are not deprecating the plain format, it's just how they chose to default display, it works either way. Ok, good to know. The old format will continue to work.
 * We need to all agree on how it will be on Wikipedia to avoid bot wars and since every other provider uses plain it makes sense to be consistent. I agree. Rlink2 (talk) 17:13, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Recent DYK prep set issues
Rlink2, it's great that you're willing to step up and build occasional DYK prep sets. It's not an easy process, and it can take a while to learn all the ins and outs. For now, please be more careful when you build sets: in your most recent set on 14 August, you neglected to approve/close two of the eight nominations you added to Prep 6, and one of those, Template:Did you know nominations/Christy Martin vs. Deirdre Gogarty, had an earlier tick superseded by a and then a, so it was clearly not ready for promotion when you added it to Prep 6. (Not everything on the Approved page is ready to go; it's important to read the full nomination to see if any issues are outstanding, and if the lowest icon is not a tick, it definitely isn't ready. You also need to check the article to be sure the hook facts are there and supported by reliable sources.)

The other unclosed nomination was Template:Did you know nominations/Margono Djojohadikusumo; while it did have a tick, the review was pretty minimal and was unsigned, which is at least worth querying prior to promotion. Since the hook is now in Queue 3 and I don't see any obvious issues with the nomination, I have today closed the nom, and in the immediately following edit backdated the closure to the promotion time of the prep set and replaced my username with yours as the promoter.

Other things to remember about set building: bios should not be placed one after the other, and hooks about a single country should also not be in sequential slots—these were both additional issues in your creation of Prep 6. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:04, 17 August 2022 (UTC)


 * @BlueMoonset
 * I am coming back from a break and thus it will take me some time go get into the swing of things, so I will make sure to not make those mistakes again.
 * ... if the lowest icon is not a tick, it definitely isn't ready. I didn't know that, thanks for letting me know. Usually if the conversation doesn't have any serious problems I assume its ready to go.
 * You also need to check the article to be sure the hook facts are there and supported by reliable sources Isn't this the job of the reviewer? I will be double checking though, but I don't think it was a problem here.
 * The reviewer is supposed to get it right, but sometimes they get it wrong or are new and don't check everything they should. The promoters to prep are the second line of checking. As is clear from the DYK talk page, errors slip through; fortunately, many of them are caught by people building preps. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:02, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
 * hooks about a single country should also not be in sequential slots I also didn't know that. I know there was a rule relating to the US specifically but not any country in general.
 * It's more expansive than that. You don't want to have similar hooks next to each other, or too many of one kind in a single set. Generally, one or two at the most (of one country, one subject like sports, or music, or politics, etc.); the exceptions are bios and US hooks, which can be up to half a set, and US bios counting in both categories. See WP:DYKSG for a good set of overall guidelines. Building a prep set can be like assembling a jigsaw puzzle: complex to satisfy all the competing guidelines. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:02, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Rlink2 (talk) 15:52, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Dahua Technology
Hi Rlink2. This is a gentle nudge to ask if you can kindly have a look at my latest edit request at Talk:Dahua_Technology. I thank you again for the work you did in the past on this page, and hope you will be able to also implement my more recent edit request. Caitlyn23 (talk) 23:11, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Dead link fixing
Hi, I know you spend a lot of effort fixing URLs. You might be interested in User:FABLEBot/New URLs for permanently dead external links.<span id="Qwerfjkl:1661859789009:User_talkFTTCLNRlink2" class="FTTCmt"> — Qwerfjkl  talk  11:43, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Furlong Flynn DYK
Hello, Rlink2. I wanted to know why the image in Template:Did you know nominations/Furlong Flynn was not added to the DYK queue where the hook was promoted. Was there something wrong with the image (the DYK reviewer approved it)? Thanks. BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:33, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
 * The promoter makes the final decision no matter what on which images are used. There are limited slots. SL93 (talk) 23:52, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
 * SL93 (talk) 23:52, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks. BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:53, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Prep 2
There are two sets of two US hooks by each other in prep 2. They need to alternate. SL93 (talk) 23:51, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Ghost and Instagram
The command to expand Instagram to long-form URLs is now at Help:Archiving_a_source. He said this will be the last of the specials so only web, video and Instagram. -- Green  C  20:56, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Thomas Nast page
During the last year, you have made suggestions to improve the Wikipedia entry on Thomas Nast. Accordingly, I want to call your attention to ThomasNast.com, a domain I have owned for 25 years and recently refreshed.

The site will give you a good overview of Nast in general and my biography in particular, America’s Most Influential Journalist: The Life, Times and Legacy of Thomas Nast. You can look at 160 Nast cartoons, each with its characters identified and its content and context explained. Categories include Christmas, Civil War, Lincoln, Tweed, Presidential Election Losers, Symbols, Shakespeare, and Inflation. The site’s purpose is to educate people about Nast and his work, as well as to preview my book.

The only previous substantive biography of Nast was published by Albert Bigelow Paine in 1902, and is frequently cited in Wikipedia. Although Paine was a good storyteller, his book has many significant errors and omissions because Nast misinformed him (eg., Nast never went to the front during the Civil War) or didn’t tell him about important events (Nast spent a year, beginning in May 1867, on his Grand Caricaturama (33 9 by 12 foot pictures in a traveling panorama which failed), Paine gave it two sentences).

There were also facts about his life that neither he nor Paine knew. Eg., Nast thought he was born on September 27, 1840, but his Landau birth certificate, issued under the auspices of the King of Bavaria, shows it was September 26. Understandable, every prior mention of his birth date is incorrect. I have made the correction to his Wikipedia entry along with a a copy of his birth certificate.

My 830-page biography contains 1,000 Nast cartoons, illustrations, sketches and paintings — 800 from Harper’s Weekly and 200 from other sources. The manually-created Index is predicated solely on Nast’s output. It includes Nast’s Life and Work; Topics/Issues and People/Characters. You can view the entire Index on ThomasNast.com. Harpweek (talk) 17:23, 2 October 2022 (UTC)