User talk:Tawker/Aug06

Meta icon
I've noticed a lot of bot-operators adding the bot gears as a meta icon; I ran across this image Image:Crystal Clear app kbattleship.png and thought it to priceless not to suggest a Tawkerbot2 meta icon.



Hope you like it. Essjay ( Talk )  04:12, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Block messages
The block message failed to say you blocked me for 31 hours. I had to go into the log for that. So yes, a note on my talk page is required. Goodbye. Ardenn 20:06, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Minor bug
User talk:75.23.152.234 got a message from Tawkerbot4. In that message, a category is referred to twice. In the first reference to the category, no leading colon is used, so the category name is not displayed and the User_talk page appears in that category. This seems to be to be a bug. Please fix code to use leading colons in both cat references. I have repaied the reference on the User_talk page (see history). -- 75.23.152.234 22:14, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Bot/mediawiki bug
Hi Tawker, I noticed something odd happening with one of the bots in the recent edit history of Bear. AntiVandalBot seems to have attempted to revert some vandalism almost an hour before it took place, which failed. Do you know what's going on? Oddly enough, the bot revision and the preceding one are identical, but the bot revision still appears in the edit history. Lupin|talk|popups 03:03, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks from Yanksox
yo--Conrad the 15 year old Devonshire 16:31, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Lol
Does your bot not like Barney? Well doing 30 be-zillion reverts per day occasionally you're gonna get one wrong :) - Gl e n 18:14, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Input requested
If you get a min, can you take a look at Bots/Requests_for_approvals and give any advice? Thanks, — xaosflux  Talk  03:16, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Bot 4
Tawkerbot 4 appears to be reverting vandalism without leaving any form of notice to the vandals. Can this be fixed? Kukini 04:13, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I see it is fixed. Thanks!!! Kukini 04:30, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

User:Stephencolbert
Good call; you took the words out of my mouth. If you get grief, let me know. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 05:01, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * http://digg.com/television/Wikipedia_Administrator_Blocks_Stephen_Colbert_For_Incitement_of_Vandalism Digg it! -- Tawker 05:15, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Why did u block The Stephen Colbert? The episode tonight was frickin hilarious. Don't you see that it's just a joke? --Sir Cornbread 06:45, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh, looks like the timing matches up eerily, though. --Sir Cornbread 06:53, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Sad that you ask to be on the show.. doesn't look good in my eyes when admins do that.--84.217.144.163 21:53, 1 August 2006 (UTC) Just saw on ur blog that you were just joking. Oh well.. --84.217.144.163 22:07, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree with 84.217.144.163 above.  I don't think it's appropriate for you to request to be on the show.  Why is that absolutely necessary in order to verify his identity?  Surely a phone call and/or email alone would be verification enough.  Furthermore, have you considered checking the IP address from which this user's modifications came to see if the address is based in the same area as The Colbert Report's studios (I wouldn't know if this is possible...I apologize for suggesting it if its not).  I do not mean to be disrespectful, but it seems as though you may just want to get mentioned on the show.  This really does seem like a bit of a draconian measure to me.  Oh and on a tangential note, how does Wikipedia deal with people who simply share a name with a famous person (for example, if my name were "Stephen Colbert")?  Thanks for your time.  --Armandoleon 09:03, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Bahnstah
(Unfortunately, there is no "Dude, you blocked Stephen Colbert" barnstar. Call it pending.) Luna Santin 14:10, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Looking here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&user=&page=User%3AStephencolbert&limit=100&offset=0

Are you really fit to be a moderator? You keep unblocking other people's blocks so you can spam your own. You even posted to digg about this - not the issue of Colbert "vandalizing" wikipedia, but that you are the one to block him. Even still, you keep saying you want to be on the show, and that kind of repetition doesn't seem like a joke; you're actually trying to leverage this somehow. Trying to become famous is fine, but I don't think you should be using wikipedia as a means to do that.

Tawkerclone
Hey tawker, how much CPU grunt does tawkerbot need anyway? ShaunES 21:53, 2 August 2006 (UTC).

Eh?
battle bots?--152.163.100.138 02:05, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Blocked IP address
Have you blocked IP address 205.188.116.13. ? I can not find it in the list of blocked IP addresses, however, I noticed that when that when I attempt to edit without logging in, it states that my IP address is blocked "by Tawker for vandalism". It really isn't a problem as I rarely edit without logging in first, however I would like to know exactly what I wrote that is considered vandalism.--Tmchk 03:09, 3 August 2006 (UTC) Thanks for the explanation, I should be switching soon anyway as AOL has other problems. --Tmchk 04:05, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
 * It's an autoblock, they happen when someone with the same IP as you get's blocked, then tries to edit, it happens a lot with AOL, if it tells you the specific username of the person, the autoblock can be removed--152.163.100.138 03:20, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
 * It's a softblock, logged in users can still edit :) -- Tawker 03:42, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Colbertisms

 * from Slashdot
 * and Newsvine
 * Should be an interesting time, hey? (I know you've seen these links, but I bet some of your visitors haven't!) ~Kylu ( u | t )  09:02, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

User talk:Stephencolbert
Howdy! Just a heads up, I posted a quick summary at WP:AN. Regards, C HAIRBOY (☎) 20:10, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

EdwinHJ unblocked User:Stephencolbert
Hi there! User:EdwinHJ has unblocked User:Stephencolbert, did you receive a confirmation of his identity? - C HAIRBOY (☎) 02:25, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Bobby Boulders
(Click the link for details about this vandal). Some users have wondered ( see WP talk:CVU) if you could modify you bots to automatically revert edits that match terms used by this vandal.-- The Count of Monte Cristo Parley  20:27, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

a question about your edit
What was your reason for removing this content from the talk page? --JWSchmidt 04:25, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
 * "It has become fairly obvious that this account was not created or owned by Stephen Colbert of the Colbert Report" <-- It is not at all obvious to me. Can you provide evidence to support your statement? --JWSchmidt 05:01, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
 * "Checkuser results are rather sensitive, but yes, it was a checkuser that made it pretty obvious" <-- Please provide a link to the checkuser request. "Comedy has totally disowned the account" <-- I assume you mean that there has been some form of contact between the network and Wikipedia. Can you explain? --JWSchmidt 05:19, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Checkuser request, well, I'm sure it's somewhere, I just type a quick one line into a text box and I get what I need to know (much easier on IRC than wiki (faster). As for the no contact, the Colbert switchboard totally disowns any claim to the account - I have phoned multiple times -- Tawker 05:46, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
 * In other words, you can provide no evidence to support your statement that it is obvious that the account is bogus? --JWSchmidt 06:11, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh come on, are we going to have a massive debate about a checkuser result. They can't be discussed for privacy reasons, I was only given the most basic information possible. As for the phone call, go call up Comedy yourself and ask them, I posted the phone number on my blog... that's about as much as it's possible to give -- Tawker 06:45, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia has a public system for keeping track of checkuser results. If there is evidence from checkuser that can be acted on, then it can be made public in the usual way. If the results from checkuser are not conclusive and cannot be made public, then how can anyone be using those results to justify a claim that something is "obvious"? Wikipedia should be run in an open way. Why should anyone accept claims about personal phone calls and blog posts as a basis for administrator actions on Wikipedia or as a way for a Wikipedia editor to avoid explaining their edits? --JWSchmidt 13:35, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't think CC wants credit for the edits, since there could be potentially bad press from true vandalism of Wikipedia as a corperate sponsored event. The timing supports the account being under Colbert's control, therefore it should be unblocked. Plus, I want to see if the guy does something else. --Wslack 16:46, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Timing indicates nothing, we don't unblock accounts just because it's a known celebrity, it would be a vandalblock unless they apologize.. -- Tawker 23:16, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I am not sure that this can be called vandalism. We are supposed to assume good faith. And this edit seems like it should be categorized as a a bad joke or and example of disruption to make a point. I do not think it is fair or productive to try to characterize User:Stephencolbert as a "vandalism only account". --JWSchmidt 23:37, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, given the context of the show I would count the latter edit to be vandalism simply based on the "if enough people believe it can become a fact argument that we saw presented, but then, it's just me -- Tawker 01:15, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

When you only know how to use a hammer the whole world looks like a nail. Wikipedia is in danger of creating problems for itself when unusual edits are viewed as vandalism without some attempt to think about other possibilities. There are some people who wish to harm Wikipedia, but that reality should not dominate Wikipedia culture. In my view, our actions should be thoughtful and welcoming...particularly when it comes to new editors. Colbert's "wikiality" is a modern equivalent of what was done in the classic "A Modest Proposal". Colbert was trying to make a point about how propaganda can be used for political gain and he invented a good pop-culture analogy that just happened to involve Wikipedia. The idea of adding "In conclusion, George Washington did not own slaves" to the end of George Washington was a satirical analogy to what the Bush administration did in manufacturing the "reality" of WMD in Iraq. Even if we insist on viewing this edit as vandalism, we should be able to recognize that in some cases the motive behind some vandalism can be creative rather than destructive. Every day, thousands of misguided Wikipedia edits are made and quietly reverted. After all the mindless drones are done with their elephant edits, thousands of more serious observers and editors will be watching how Wikipedia responds. I hope the Wikipedia community can show everyone who is watching that we deeply understand what Colbert did and that we are not only able to weather the drones but also big-hearted enough to not think of what Colbert did as ordinary vandalism. --JWSchmidt 02:44, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Elephant protections
Hi Takwker,

I just removed protection from a whole bunch of elephant-related articles, many of them done by you. If I can make a suggestion for the future, I think you went overboard. You protected some articles that had very little vandalism, despite policy's specific prohibition of preventative protection, and used full protection where semi-protection would have sufficed. I might misunderstand the situation, though, so I am more than happy to discuss.

I am watching all the pages in question in case there is vandalism after all. -- SCZenz 23:05, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Congrats
Congrats on blocking Steven Colbert :) &mdash; Deckill e r 04:32, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Question about your name
I have always been curious... Did you make your name Tawker beforehand with the intention of running a bot that reverts talking? Or did you change your name after you made it so you could be Tawker who runs bots that revert talk-vandalism? Or did the person who made the bot choose you to run it specifically because of your name? Anomo 05:31, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Robdurbar
My oppose still stands unless the both reasons stated there are proven incorrect. --Masssiveego 20:01, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

My RFA
What exactly did you find wrong with my responses? They're as complete as I see fit and summarise my feelings on the topics. I ask you to please reconsider your decision. The Wookieepedian 21:48, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

GHe's RfA


GHe's RfA


No wonder
No wonder you're taking a Wikibreak, seeing as you made national news. Ardenn 17:07, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Meh, I need to take that message down. Thanks for reminding me to do it :) -- Tawker 18:27, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Request
Hi Tawker,

You can find my real name on this link below.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Tawker/May06

Number 78. Initials JL.

Can you please delete this name in your archives since it links to my pseudonym and has popped up on all search engines.

Thanks very much,

Marlon Fire Thunder 00:29, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

What Doesn't Make Sense?
Responding to your message on my talk page.

1. All of the statements I used are true and illustrated the point that Mr./Mrs. Martin is not qualified as an expert in copyright issues as he/she thinks.

2. I was under the assumption that there was no civility on Wikipedia since Mr./Mrs. Martin seemed eager to ignore that rule by intimidating other users, so why is there this double standard?

Please let me know if I can help explain further; congratulations on your Colbert Show related notoriety. Attic Owl 01:41, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

What Doesn't Make Sense?
Responding to your message on my talk page.

1. All of the statements I used are true and illustrated the point that Mr./Mrs. Martin is not qualified as an expert in copyright issues as he/she thinks.

2. I was under the assumption that there was no civility on Wikipedia since Mr./Mrs. Martin seemed eager to ignore that rule by intimidating other users, so why is there this double standard?

Please let me know if I can help explain further; congratulations on your Colbert Show related notoriety. Attic Owl 01:41, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

PGP
See you've added a PGP public key, w00t. The link to your keyserver doesn't seem to work. You may want to try using pgp corporate's keyserver https://keyserver.pgp.com/. I've signed your pgp key as part of the pgp web of trst, here is the signed version in case you want to update:

-BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK- Version: PGP 8.0.2

mQGiBEQX0HIRBAC1pf+v24jHqkLuFQbP+OxqzXwbSnrklko+WW1WzI8zCEaCA+ad oytuvEsH+ToioVLKmmhIqSiI/2LDMGNpXnQXeWk+AwVX3ZmdT3aGQQz7wcP4gYqz nvJBDBMLJBNZBd0Mrjf+Lbaa3mrrgqYgLJ+dtpJh0ov+hAJi30buGAIUiwCgvi8+ z8G8EhrDGmCz8qmogDp/vosD/3guUBuLHwjxttgLybOIqF98hGZr5V8rPfosJ0bB iloP6sdCZG9IRukM4IbM2B8iUBVzIKJ1xOMbOAuVAY9j8ylRzT4mcsTjqjA5GxZy 3GhgL1ff4VzMVBtvzWsqH55ZRHcJyNlfJ2JJKKIaiSA5BBx54Sq8ZbLd4IOubVfS qna6A/9AoXIqUPtX+Taon28e67B7G+UMxvgXAIc66rwQgmfVHHQFcUrVyWGS960K SEJebGQ/hFJGZk9wIuQmnweF7wJowLp1RpvOp27dUOvCEwS2zZGb6/YUCdBZfF2y /6BGzxInW42DndP2PmiuowXs82iJZaKVIw2+RXbuiHW6W2TpRrQlQW5kcmV3IFdh bGx3b3JrIDxhd2FsbHdvcmtAZ21haWwuY29tPohgBBMRAgAgBQJEF9ByAhsDBgsJ CAcDAgQVAggDBBYCAwECHgECF4AACgkQBHVkF9yxeYVRtwCgkDuu11Vq5zM8FjCs zg3vgoXk60QAoKrPqRVHLt5XT/cA+LqPhZHArh1KiQBGBBARAgAGBQJElAMsAAoJ ENRQDZCQNK6YGQEAoPJwozF2qvdDK8PZdM/zLaLwicZXAKC81BlAzZO7+mg7Xn2S 7SyeTOR2ULkCDQREF9B3EAgAlSNHKmg49tdqIOWvsCqA++BLJpGr+EGYACv23ZTB BRsNAll14f3u0w5/AgNqFSARrtxc4b4hzSTRk5nyF3KI4aELSoMCvWm4pEY1ZSzA blpgTu2yHa0iv39c3nzRn9a67K+b/fgbsOgN/79zaof2HZ8ThkIekO1oSsHSoJwq LG1ouERORU+zvx79s64G0TbEQRCl22rPqM3CZezietRx98g8bnS+IqP48SudLS9i I4/o4jh5yiVuCgaV9yBlekolP8hRkQvnINvi7IeVYFihcC9MdSmJ1iR5yn4IrMpz che4RqrQJ5WzHNSwcdWwvoifInc1S9LDk8NgR5AFUqy8uwADBQf/VlfV/crrwSnX xUgX+Dr7hXpb5nxnweS78N6nTEod4FZdPfPwEZyc2l9L2AU7fZWAm+BlYDUmdu7U 447tl/9Tuy+nlkaBZKpmP6rNQGDpAUSr29YyalIYE0wiSC2c1Vig9XKu7uLXlZi3 EKT5ai4hkzTI0cGyKQrst+PgHSL7ZOqY9kkWSVGsj8yIbzB/TeVMoQk8A5BB0aXC 7NUdY77Ttr8HYBDXB3oBAeAtfp4SdGWqFcx6Y+i2T2TU56BJH+XpaKZbHyNAaIN0 n7j4rBUm/n3EZ613sPorlWbgfYb7RzBsHhd4UkZ22vEgrAuMLZVVj+HFg2Y28eoQ DEMaDlNAwIhJBBgRAgAJBQJEF9B3AhsMAAoJEAR1ZBfcsXmFwYQAoKAcmw5h5P+r HQ1njZAo7pIK7TF2AJ4oAM1byfAgWuznbgYrHP4dwIS0rw== =hjsN -END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-
 * — xaosflux  Talk  13:35, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

"Vietnam War" Edit
Sorry, it appears that I mistook your edit for someone else's. Please accept my apology. I'm fairly new to Wikipedia and am still working out the difference between the various parts of "diff - older version/current version/newer version - diff". starkt 10:44, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

You may wish to have a look at...
Operation Colorblind and Johnny Angel (wrestler). -- Antaeus Feldspar 19:55, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Formatting issue
Hello! I thought I should notify you about a problem with Tawkerbot's revert notification messages. When the bot reverts vandalism on a category, it sends a message that isnt formatted properly, thus resulting in the page being added to that particular category (Category:Carnatic music instruments in this case). The same thing happened to me by AntiVandalBot. I've notified too on this. Hope you guys can adjust the script to avoid this. Cheers!-- thunderboltza.k.a.D e epu Joseph07:22, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Formatting issue
Hello! I thought I should notify you about a problem with Tawkerbot's revert notification messages. When the bot reverts vandalism on a category, it sends a message that isnt formatted properly, thus resulting in the page being added to that particular category (Category:Carnatic music instruments in this case). The same thing happened to me by AntiVandalBot. I've notified too on this. Hope you guys can adjust the script to avoid this. Cheers!-- thunderboltza.k.a.D e epu Joseph07:22, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Formatting issue
Hello! I thought I should notify you about a problem with Tawkerbot's revert notification messages. When the bot reverts vandalism on a category, it sends a message that isnt formatted properly, thus resulting in the page being added to that particular category (Category:Carnatic music instruments in this case). The same thing happened to me by AntiVandalBot. I've notified too on this. Hope you guys can adjust the script to avoid this. Cheers!-- thunderboltza.k.a.D e epu Joseph07:22, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Question about your name
I have always been curious... Did you make your name Tawker beforehand with the intention of running a bot that reverts talking? Or did you change your name after you made it so you could be Tawker who runs bots that revert talk-vandalism? Or did the person who made the bot choose you to run it specifically because of your name? Anomo Hour twelve:fourty-two minutes, fourteenth of August, year two-thousand six (UTC)
 * Nope, there was no foresight whatsoever in the name, it just turned out that way (originally it didn't do talk page vandalisms) -- Tawker 14:25, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
 * That's like destiny. Well the bot is a talker-bot though because it always removes the type of vandalism that is in essence, talking. Anomo 14:29, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Wrongful deletion
I have restored Thomas May, which you deleted. The page had been vandalised, and was wrongly tagged for deletion. Charles Matthews 15:37, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Admin coaching update
You are receiving this message because you are currently listed as a coach in the 'Active' section of the coaching box.


 * If the coaching has finished please add your trainee to the archived requests section of the archive, and remove the entry from the coaching box.
 * If the coaching is ongoing please continue :) This might serve as a useful reminder to check with your trainee if they have any new questions!
 * If you are ready to be assigned a new trainee, or have any other questions, please let me know on my talk page.

Thank you for helping with admin coaching! Petros471 21:52, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Bot reverting to a vandalized version of an article
Hi, Tawker. I posted this on the talk page of the AntiVandalBot, since I was there about a mistake that it had made. Then I thought that it would be better to tell you about it here. The sugesstions are about the problem of Tawkerbot2, and its copies, reverting back to a vandalized version of an article, especially when it is done repeatedly. I have two ideas for a solution. First, perhaps the bot could be limited to the number of reverts it does to the same version in a certain time period. (with the potential vandal's edits and AntiVandalBot's edits, the situation may attract attention by then anyway). Second, perhaps the bot could have a list of trusted users, like a list of active admins and maybe veteran vandal fighters (those approved for VandalProof?), that it would not revert. Looking at the pie edit, perhaps not reverting other bots, especially vandalism reverting bots, might be a good idea, too. Even if the other bot is malfunctioning, it might not be a good idea to revert it automatically with another bot since it may hide the problem, although people watching recent changes may notice that the bot keeps reverting another bot. -- Kjkolb 12:57, 12 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi, Tawker. I do not know if you noticed my comment since you have gotten so many recently. I was curious about whether a list of trusted users and bots would work. Thanks, Kjkolb 12:58, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
 * They should not revert a list of active admins.... I need to take a look -- Tawker 14:40, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Oops...
Sorry I didn't read the link... prehaps I should edit the link title so it sounds more like a relevant link. Thanks for that!

BTW. Nice rhyming there!:)

--inky 08:28, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

The Archer
That's fine. :-) Iola k ana |T  19:56, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

FYI
The bots reverted two sysops to a vandalised version each time :( Do they usually revert admins or is the bot's admin list just out of date? :) --jam es (talk) 03:35, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Wangi/RFA
Thanks for your support on my RfA. Give me shout if I can be of help. Thanks/wangi 00:24, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

New patterns for Tawkerbot
Hi - Don't know if you noticed this thread, Village pump (miscellaneous). I assume Special:Contributions/202.156.6.54 are examples of the cousin's handiwork, which seem to be global searches and replaces over multiple articles (involving a small set of, presumably hand-picked, words). There seem to be a clear set of words being targeted, so although this style of vandalism might be reasonably difficult to autodetect in general, it seems this particular moron might not be too hard to spot automatically. Seems like it might be worth adding some new patterns. -- Rick Block (talk) 04:29, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Cardigan Mountain School
Hi, you deleted this article with the comment "how do you spell ad again, I'm susprised mywikibiz didn't write this". Neither of the versions I can see look like speedy candidates (google cache and answer.com ), although the one in the google cache looks like a PROD. Could you not simply have reverted to a more neutral version instead of deleting it? Kappa 13:25, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Template:TB2
While looking at Category:Articles with unsupported titles, I noticed a new template:. I could not figure out what it does or what it is for. Looking at its history, it says that you created it. Could you explain what it should do and why it was made? Thanks. -- kenb215 02:15, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Your bot did a weird thing
It reverted Tawking on an AFD by someone who did not read how to vote on an AFD. Anomo 04:57, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, the bot worked as designed - the edit was all CAPS and hence it reverted :) -- Tawker 05:07, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
 * ALL CAPS? Hmm...  I thought The Airport Vandal got all the AOL IPs blocked as mentioned above in the talk page.  Anomo 05:08, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Tawker bot failed to see this: Anomo 17:21, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Cynna Kydd
Hey are you able to look at the person who vandalised the Cynna Kydd page. Is it possible to block their Ip address due to vandalism? I was reading the article as they attacked it. Ozdaren 05:57, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Bot error on Alpha Kappa Rho
I tried to revert a glob of vandalism in Alpha Kappa Rho and the bot immediately restored it... Is there a way I could have fixed this without the bot intervening? Valrith 12:58, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Template:TB2
While looking at Category:Articles with unsupported titles, I noticed a new template:. I could not figure out what it does or what it is for. Looking at its history, it says that you created it. Could you explain what it should do and why it was made? Thanks. -- kenb215 02:15, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Your bot did a weird thing
It reverted Tawking on an AFD by someone who did not read how to vote on an AFD. Anomo 04:57, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, the bot worked as designed - the edit was all CAPS and hence it reverted :) -- Tawker 05:07, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
 * ALL CAPS? Hmm...  I thought The Airport Vandal got all the AOL IPs blocked as mentioned above in the talk page.  Anomo 05:08, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Tawker bot failed to see this: Anomo 17:21, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Cynna Kydd
Hey are you able to look at the person who vandalised the Cynna Kydd page. Is it possible to block their Ip address due to vandalism? I was reading the article as they attacked it. Ozdaren 05:57, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Bot error on Alpha Kappa Rho
I tried to revert a glob of vandalism in Alpha Kappa Rho and the bot immediately restored it... Is there a way I could have fixed this without the bot intervening? Valrith 12:58, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Block
Hi Tawker. If you checked my contribs you'd see I'm online, a message to me would have had the same affect :) Scratch the rest as I see you're dealing with it... do you mind if I unblock the bot account, or would you unblock it please, as I keep getting caught up in autoblocks. --kingboyk 21:28, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject on Open Proxies
How does one go about joining the WikiProject and become a verified user? I'm not an admin, but, I'm very interested in this. --Signed and Sealed, JJJJust (T C) 02:03, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Botflag for User:The Anomebot2
I'd like to change my mind and request a botflag for User:The Anomebot2. Please let me know if that's OK.

I would also like to increase my edit rate to 4 edits per minute, if that's OK with you: the bot seems pretty reliable and stable now, and about two thousand edits have now gone by without any significant incidents. Thanks, -- The Anome 00:57, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Not sure what to do
Hi. In the past you have come across to me as one of the best and most expirneced admins on wikipedia, so ive come to you with a question. Recently, a new user went on to the article: Tahoe Regional Planning Agency and started editing extensively. Some of his edits added information, but he deleted the criticism section and modified the text everywhere to make the TRPA sound great. Since this user's only edits have been adding POV information to the article, I think the user might be a memeber of the TRPA. I added a comment on the Page's talk page. However I myself in the real world am an activist agaisn't the TRPA and made that clear on the talk page. I am personaly offended by the article being so baised in favor of them. I didn't want to revert because good information was added, but the article can't be left as it is. What should I do? Tobyk777 01:32, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Eagle 101
WikiVoter is an extremely bad idea which contributes to the idea that AfD is a vote, and discourages valid participation in discussion. Anyone who creates such a tool should not be an admin. User:Zoe|(talk) 04:18, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

It has to do with the prospective admin's view of AfD, voting, discussion, and general view of consensus-building. User:Zoe|(talk) 04:33, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Your closure of Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Eagle 101/WikiVoter was inappropriate, and I have reverted you. User:Zoe|(talk) 04:49, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Your harrassment of me over my RfA vote is inappropriate. I have a right to my opinion, and I have expressed it. You seem to have a vested interest in this subject, care to reveal it? User:Zoe|(talk) 04:50, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

I have listed Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Eagle 101/WikiVoter on WP:DRV due to your inappropriate close and repeated edit warring over the close. User:Zoe|(talk) 04:58, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
 * 1 == repeated.... wow.... I think I need to to look up repeated -- Tawker 05:22, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
Dear Tawker, Thank you for arranging for me to have a bot bit. --Kingbotk 18:29, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

P!atD revert
Danke for looking out for that vandal, the 66.x.x.x guy was vandal too ;) Hackajar 01:32, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Car washing techniques
Sorry, I missed that prod. I would have objected to it. The article was rather harmless, informative and we have by far worse ones around. While mostly ue, as of that time, it managed to contain some encyclopedic material. Most importantly, it passed the AfD. I request it restored. TIA, --Irpen 01:19, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Taking a look at the AfD, I'm seeing a lot of "provisional keeps" on the condition that the article wasn't a "how to" type article - otherwise it was transwikied to WikiBooks (the project that handles that kind of thing) - the prod indicates that the transwiki took place. I've enclosed a copy of the article as I deleted FYRAC... let me know what you think -- Tawker 01:23, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks, it seemed to me I remembered there was some content there about the cwt being part of the culture, its effects and stuff. I don't see in in the version you pasted to my talk. Perhaps it was in history or my memories are wrong. In any case, this migh get developed at some time. While I see all the conserns about the article, it is on the other hand harmless and the marginally encyclopedic material may appear there at some point. Also, would be a pity to have the work of a well-meaning guy totally lost. Anyway, I do not insist and leave it up to you. Regards, --Irpen 01:28, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I just went thru them all and I don't see anything regarding it's effects on culture etc. Anyways, it's all in the WikiBooks entry so the content's not gone :) -- Tawker 03:21, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Tawkerbot2
Hi, Tawkerbot2 just un-reverted my edit to Nicole Richie(diff) and (diff). Where I reverted unnecessary censorship by an IP, can Tawkerbot2’s warning be removed from my talk page?--1568 04:42, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

PS. Is there any way I can get whitelisted? You can check my contributions if necessary.--1568 04:53, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
 * done -- 14:37, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

E-mail
Hi Tawker! I was wondering, when you have the time, please e-mail me at moe_epsilon@yahoo.com so I can ask you something.. 216.78.95.142 - Moe Epsilon 21:45, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

GIen's RfA: Thank you!
'''PS: YES YOU'RE RIGHT HARRY POTTER USES A BROOM! (BUT GOOD MOPS ARE HARD TO FIND!!)'''

Tawker Tawker Tawker. What the heck is there left to say to you but thank you (repeatedly, thousands upon thousands of times!!) Thanks for the support mate, look forward to cleaning this place up with ya :) - GI e n 05:55, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

MfD on WikiVoter
G'day Tawker,

I agree that the MfD on WikiVoter was quite silly, but there was clearly an ongoing discussion there. I think this edit was rather inappropriate, and reverting does you no credit at all. I am not a process wonk, and accept that there are times when an early close is called for. This is not one of those times; you need a better reason than "I don't like this". Closing early as you did without a good reason (a declaration that you've decided another admin must be acting in bad faith does not count as a good reason) is Bad, and I'd like very much if you could avoid doing anything like this again. Cheers, fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 15:46, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Spam blacklist
Thank you very much for requesting this edit. This will work very well. It's good to learn something new and this is a very powerful technique to slow down spammers. David D. (Talk) 16:15, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

WP:OP
So to become a verified user for WP:OP do I just add myself to this list? The part I am unsure about is "only a verified administrator can add users to this list". Either way I would like to be verified and since you are listed on the proxy check tool (Proxyscan by Tawker), I figured I should ask you. Prodego talk  03:06, 26 August 2006 (UTC)