User talk:Android Mouse

Welcome!

Hello, Android Mouse, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 20:53, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

3RR warning on Talk:Digg

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Talk:Digg. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.209.214.5 (talk) 00:01, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The user who added this warning (after you removed his off-topic discussions) has since been blocked. Please disregard the above message. Keep up the good work and again, welcome to Wikipedia! Take care! --LEKI (talk) 18:52, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bot request

I have replied on the bot request page. Thanks in advance for your work! Timneu22 17:32, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Was the bot approved? Thanks again Timneu22 01:13, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note. Is it possible that you can send me the code you're using? I don't want to create a bot for Wikipedia, however I would like to make similar changes to the two wikis I set up at work. I'd like to see the bot code so I'll know what to do. Timneu22 21:59, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting off-topic comments

Thank you for your efforts at trying to keep the conversation Talk:Digg on topic. However, I would like to kindly remind you that deleting others' comments is still considered unacceptable, even if they are off-topic. Instead, you can gently but sternly remind people posting off-topic to follow our talk-page guidelines, perhaps on their talk pages. Thank you! Krimpet (talk) 00:31, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RFBOT

Your recent bot approvals request has been approved. Please see the request page for details. When the bot flag is set it will show up in Mouse Bot this log. ST47Talk 00:28, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Per the discussion below, I'm going to ask you to go through BRFA agian before running this task in future (so, the approval noted abive is effectively removed). Thanks, Martinp23 18:45, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your bot

Hello there. Your bot recently updated this article. It caused a tiny bug to occur: an indented part of the wikitext became broken, because the indent tag (:) needs to be at the start of a sentence. Maybe you could alter your bot to add a linebreak after the autogenerated template:infoboxneeded? Thanks! —msikma (user, talk) 06:45, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't these infobox needed templates be on the talk page in the first place? --W.marsh 19:08, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see there was a change now, but I'm not sure if consensus really backs that up. Personally I prefer only to put what I consider to be critical, yet easy to address, cleanup templates on the article. Adding an infobox is both a non-critical task and one that can take a lot of time to do. But when I posted the above comment I didn't realize the template instructions had changed, so you can obviously carry on if you want. --W.marsh 19:41, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bot parsing ampersand codes

It appears the bot incorrectly parses ampersand characters like {, taking the actual character < instead. In this edit it mistakenly subst'd the templates in the AfD notice box. –Pomte 18:27, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your bot

Hi, just a quick note, your bot is adding the infobox needed template to the article rather than the article's talkpage. We don't generally add tags such as these to articles, but rather to talkpages. I've therefore blocked your bot, when you're ready for an unblock, please don't hesitate to get back to me for an unblock. -- Nick^t 02:14, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The infobox needed tag is now supposed to be on the main articles. If it goes on the talk page: it says the tag is misplaced (last time I checked at least). RobJ1981 02:24, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No way in the hell does this nonsense belong on an article page. If someone edited the template to say though, they were mistaken. --Cyde Weys 02:56, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, the bot in question correctly removed "Infobox needed" banners from Talk:Ross County, Ohio and two other Ohio County talk pages (I had previously added the infoboxes to all 88 Ohio counties, but missed those three banners). Then User:AmiDaniel reverted and put the banners back - just curious as to what's going on? Ruhrfisch 03:02, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think as a result of a few impulse reactions, legitimate edits by other users will probably be lost. --Android Mouse 03:08, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And I think that by placing a controversial template like this onto an article you jeapordise the rest of us who run bots for maintenance tagging. Please think of others in future, and bear in mind that infoboxes are not universally supported. They have consensus, but it's fragile. Let's not tip the balance against them, please. --kingboyk 16:52, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't place the blame on me. I just wrote the bot per a request. I had no idea that this was a controversial topic. --Android Mouse 16:56, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Right, probably I should blame the person who approved it :) Sorry. --kingboyk 17:02, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, although I don't think the blame should be placed on any one person though. The bot request and the bot request for approval were up for several days with no one contesting. I only recieved a complaint when the bot was over half way through the task and even then it wasn't made clear the consensus against the task until now. --Android Mouse 17:29, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This may be a moot point now, but regardless of where (talk or article) the template should go, your bot tagged an article, Mirsad-1, which already had the correct infobox. Akradecki 03:33, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see, it got thrown off because it scans for *|infobox, which that article contains no occurances of, unlike most. But there's really no point in fixing the code now since it won't be running again. --Android Mouse 03:57, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re: Android Mouse Bot 2

I have concerns regarding this new bot. Please see: Wikipedia:Bot requests#Notify article creators of speedy-delete tags. As I believe this needs wider community input given the issues, I will also be placing a notice on WP:AN. Thanks. -- JLaTondre 18:10, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This warning doesn't seem to make sense - if it's a problem with the deletion tag itself, then fine, but if it's a bug in the bot, then I hope you can fix it. Thanks, Martinp23 18:56, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing this out. This is actually a problem with the template I created, Template:redundantimage-warn. I will get this fixed along with the other issues outlined above before the bot is run again. --Android Mouse 20:28, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OotP

I replaced the low-resolution poster to a high-resolution poster. Someone else added the same poster!

User talk: Hpfan1

Notability - cross posted from bot's talk page

How does a bot decide about Notability? I got a note from it about Visual Paradox, I don't really care about that article, I created it to clear a copyright violation as a newish editor, but a bit tagging articles for Notability is an awful idea. Is this a trial? RxS 04:19, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see....I didn't look at the history. As Emily Litella says, never mind! RxS 04:30, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

About Image:Möbius strip.jpg

Hello, bot and operator. I recieved the message, that Image:Möbius strip.jpg is nominated for speedily deletion, with the argument:

no reason to create this page just to add a category that isn't really needed

Yesterday I recieved a simulair message from User:Yonatan concerning the Image:Termite Cathedral DSC03570.jpg. On Yonatan's talk page I already explained the reason, why I tagged both images in the first place. I would like to invite you to read that discussion and possibly tell me what I'm thinking or doing wrong!?

To summarize: The reason I tagged that picture (and did a lot more) is that with the Wikipedia:WikiProject Systems I want to stimulate the further use of images in the articles about systems. - Mdd 18:47, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm not sure why Yonatan nominated Image:Möbius strip.jpg for deletion. According to him (from what I read on the talk page discussion) he thinks that categories should only be used for articles on wikipedia. While I'm no expert on categories, I don't think there are any guidelines prohibiting the use of images in categories, infact I think it would be nice if more categories had images. I also don't think the two images really fall under any speedy deletion criterea. If I were you, I'd place the {{hangon}} template on the images and explain what has happened on the images' talk pages in order for an admin to take a look. --Android Mouse 19:20, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry that I don't completely understand... I'm under tthe impression that:

User:Yonatan nominated the Image:Termite Cathedral DSC03570.jpg.
and ... User:Android Mouse Bot 2 nominated the Image:Möbius strip.jpg

... and the question I like to ask here is why User:Android Mouse Bot 2 nominated the Image:Möbius strip.jpg? Since you are the operator of the Android Mouse Bot 2, I suppose, you could give me an answer? Sorry I'm a bit confused here - Mdd 19:33, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the confusion, but my bot only notifies uploaders that their images, articles or categories have been nominated for speedy deletion. The actual nomination is done by an unrelated human. Looking at the page history of Image:Möbius strip.jpg, it appears that Yonatan was the one that nominated it: [1]. Sorry for the confusion, I'll try to reword the message the bot leaves to be more clear about this. --Android Mouse 19:38, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Now I understand and followed your advice to put a hangon template on the image pages... I'll wait and see. As to the message of your bot. As not-native speaker (and reader) I didn't read the message correctly. I experience that working with images still gives me a lot of stress and there is still a lot to find out. I'm glad I sorted this out. Best regards - Mdd 20:19, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Amusing bot notice

Your bot was kind enough to notify me that a speedy delete tag had been placed on a redirect page that I (accidentally) created. The notice is amusing because I placed that speedy delete tag myself! You might want to have the bot check that the original author and the last editor of the article are not the same. --Russ (talk) 20:48, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notice. I currently have it set to not send notifications for the templates db-author and a few others. The only way I could think of to solve this problem is to have the bot scan the latest revisions to see who added the tag, since it can't always rely on edit comments. Although this would add more bandwidth usage to the bot since the last edit isn't always going to be the one with the added speedy deletion nomination. --Android Mouse 20:54, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I was about to say the same thing, but since I didn't use {{db-author}}, I guess it's my bad. Happy botting! Katr67 21:30, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

by the way, did you a/receive an ok for the bot and b/discuss the wording at the WP:SPEEDY talk page. How do you tell who the author is if there is more than one edit to the page? Do you tell if the person who placed the speedy has already placed one of the regular notices? I myself think notifying people is great, and that it ought to be required, but I thought the consensus was otherwise. I also think there is no consensus about using a fixed wording each time. Many people, including myself often customize the notice. Let's centralizer the discussion here--I'll keep an eye out for your response. DGG 22:28, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The bot has been approved and has been discussed here (archived). It avoids repeat notices by scanning both the revision comments and the current revision for any occurance of the article name. If it finds any occurance it does not issue a warning. On the bot's talk page I have provided the list of templates it finds and the corresponding warning it issues for each. Feel free to reword any of the warning templates the bot uses. --Android Mouse 22:37, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Swingin' Thing

I did some work on the Swingin' Thing page. External links as references, etc. Gringo300 21:23, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great, and thanks for your contributions. Although incase you didn't know, neither I or my bot nominated the article, my bot only notified you of its nomination for speedy deletion. --Android Mouse 22:21, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]