Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Chacor (talk | contribs) at 16:16, 13 January 2007 (Revert to revision 100450527 dated 2007-01-13 15:31:13 by Werdnabot using popups). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Tawker is taking a short wikibreak and will be back on Misplaced Pages soon.

Ok, the bot takes care of almost everything I do, I'm swamped with work right now. I'm outta here. If you need anything urgent, email me. -- Tawker 01:03, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Archives (by month) @ User talk:Tawker/Archives

A request for assistance

Would you support the concept of moving the Earhart "myths" to a separate page or article? The reason for my suggesting this is that the main article should be an accurate and scholarly work while the speculation and conspiracy theories surrounding the disappearance of Amelia Earhart are interesting, they belong in a unique section. Most researchers, as you know, discount the many theories and speculation that has arisen in the years following her last flight. Go onto the Earhart discussion page and register your vote/comments...and a Happy New Year to you as well. Bzuk 05:02 3 January 2007 (UTC).

My Request for Adminship

Thank you for your support in my my RfA, which passed with a tally of 117/0/1. I hope that my conduct as an admin lives up to the somewhat flattering confidence the community has shown in me. Please don't hesitate to leave a message on my talk page should you need anything or want to discuss something; though I suspect my commons bit will be of more use for you. By the way you owe Cyde an "apology" for an edit conflict ;).--Nilfanion (talk) 22:54, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

More vandalism from User talk:204.13.204.98 on 8 January

It was on the Houston Grand Opera page at the bottom. Please do something about this idiot. Vivaverdi 23:44, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Logo for your AntiVandalBot

Hi! Out of enthusiasm about your AntiVandalBot, I made a logo for it. I posted it in AntiVandalBot's user talk page. Could you take a look? Thanks. If you want, you could modify it in any ways you like & maybe take out the "AntiVandalBot" phrase so that it could be applied to all bots in Misplaced Pages. (Wikimachine 01:59, 10 January 2007 (UTC))

re: escalating warnings left by AntiVandalBot

Good evening. Thanks for the quick response. On the second issue, I'm more than happy to stick with the standard Test1-4 series. That's all I normally use regardless. My question is more one of theoretical possibility. Most of the warning templates have a standardized hidden reference to the template they came from - always in the format <!-- Template:Test1 (first level warning) -->. I don't know whether it's possible for the bot to read the page's source code to look for that pattern or not. I wouldn't even consider trying to do that myself but I've seen you code things that I would have said were impossible so I figured that it couldn't hurt to ask.

Is there some other way that we could add a standardized tag to the most common warning templates so that the bot could recognize them and recommend escalation? Could we switch the template reference from a commented-out line to a line printed in the same color as the background or something? Or, thinking about it more, for this scenario we don't really care about the source template - maybe we only white-text the (first level warning) and ask the bot to search for that specific text in the last 5 lines of the user's page before appending the warning...

Again, this would be useful but is not essential. The tool is doing a lot of good work already. I'm just feeling greedy... Balance my greed against the evils of feature-creep. Thanks again. Rossami (talk) 00:29, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Peninsular Northern Railroad

AntiVandalBot reverted my edit to Peninsular Northern Railroad (diff) as vandalism, and left me a message to that effect. In actuality, I was attempting to redirect the page per the result of its AfD discussion, but accidentally left out the hash mark. When I went to fix it a few seconds after the initial edit, I hit an edit conflict with AntiVandalBot, which was reverting my edit. Perhaps you could consider adding a slight time delay, maybe 30-45 seconds, to avoid these sorts of situations. Thanks, — Swpb 02:15, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

That makes sense. — Swpb 07:38, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

A very Californian RfA thanks from Luna Santin

Thanks for your support in my not-so-recent RfA, which succeeded with a final tally of (97/4/4)! I've never been able to accept compliments gracefully, and the heavy support from this outstanding community left me at a complete loss for words -- so, a very belated thank you for all of your kind words. I have done and will continue to do the utmost to serve the community in this new capacity, wherever it may take me, and to set an example others might wish to follow in. With a little luck and a lot of advice, this may be enough. Maybe someday the enwiki admins of the future will look back and say, "Yeah, that guy was an admin." Hopefully then they don't start talking about the explosive ArbComm case I got tied into and oh what a drama that was, but we'll see, won't we? Surely some of you have seen me in action by now; with that in mind, I openly invite and welcome any feedback here or here -- help me become the best editor and sysop I can be. Again, thank you. –Luna Santin

Ah, where would we be without Tawker? Count me in as a fan, both for AVB and WikipediaWeekly. Glad to have you around. Thanks for your trust. Luna Santin 13:06, 13 January 2007 (UTC)