User talk:Cyde/Archive036

Cyde's talk page        Leave a new message

Archives
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 A B C D E F G
H I J K L M N O
P Q R S T U V W
X Y Z 10 11 12

The Signpost: 23 October 2017

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:36, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Restoring category contents

Hello, Cyde. Is there any way Cydebot could reverse its actions for these c. 1,870 articles? After the categories were deleted, they were restored at DRV and subsequently kept at this discussion. One of the categories has been largely repopulated (manually), but the other two are still empty. Thanks, -- Black Falcon (talk) 02:53, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The only way I know is to use mass rollback. See WP:ADMINGUIDE/R. – Fayenatic London 11:38, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I hesitate to use mass rollback, but thanks for highlighting that the option exists. -- Black Falcon (talk) 05:34, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:English-language television programs

Excuse me, can you help me find shows from United States, Canada, United Kingdom, and Australia from the page Category:English-language television programs and move it to Category:English-language American television programs, Category:English-language Canadian television programs, Category:English-language British television programs, and Category:English-language Australian television programs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:36d5:8230:ad3e:6af0:f00:8209 (talk) 20:23, 24 October 2017‎ (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated these categories for possible merging here. -- Black Falcon (talk) 05:47, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 24 November 2017

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:39, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Cyde. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 18 December 2017

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:28, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

December 0

Apparently, some bug caused the deletion log reasons for deletions by this bot to link to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 December 0 when they should instead link to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 January 6 or earlier. This might have previously happened before as well. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 15:31, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cyde, could it have been due to the spacing between categories listed at WP:CFD/W? -- Black Falcon (talk) 21:15, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category auto-redirection

Hi Cyde,

I need to ask that you disable Cydebot's default setting of retaining a category redirect when renaming a category to a new title, for two reasons:

  1. There is a lack of definite consensus about when a category redirect should be retained (see Wikipedia talk:Categories for discussion#Should the old name of a category be kept as a redirect after a "rename" or "merge" closure?). While that means a lot is left to individual editorial judgment, a bot should not be the one to exercise that judgment.
  2. Automatically retaining the category redirect creates risk for miscategorization—and when it's on the scale to which Cydebot creates redirects, it's a risk that can't be ignored. Here's an example I came across just today: Category:French radio was renamed to Category:Radio in France, and a redirect was kept. However, French radio could just as easily refer to French-language radio (e.g. in Quebec or French-speaking Africa), and so that category redirect has a relatively high potential of resulting in miscategorization. Since category redirects actually lead to content being recategorized, the standard for one is higher than a regular redirect.

I acknowledge there is and can continue to be a debate about when category redirects are appropriate or inappropriate, but in cases where there is uncertainty or ambiguity, a bot's default setting should be the one that is least likely to result in errors—in this case, that would be to not auto-redirect a category that is renamed.

Thanks, -- Black Falcon (talk) 21:56, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 16 January 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:27, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rogue Tomato listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Rogue Tomato. Since you had some involvement with the Rogue Tomato redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 09:58, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 5 February 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:12, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 20 February 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:12, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost issue 4 – 29 March 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:49, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 26 April 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:51, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Undid revision by Cydebot of ROCS

I undid that revision because it messed up the page somehow... Please review. Oliver Gramberg (talk) 12:38, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Oliver Gramberg: all that you did was to reinstate membership of a category that had been deleted. What kind of mess-up do you see on the page ROCS? It looks OK to me. – Fayenatic London 18:39, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi; the bot's version had text of some other page appended at the end which was not present in the version before that. I had hoped that you'd see that, but that effect is gone now, and I did not keep any copy to prove it. So, thanks for undoing my undoing. Oliver Gramberg (talk) 16:37, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 24 May 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:18, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tim Spears (rugby)/Cydebot listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Tim Spears (rugby)/Cydebot. Since you had some involvement with the Tim Spears (rugby)/Cydebot redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Thryduulf (talk) 23:38, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 June 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:29, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Allowing a false statement to become fact on Wikipedia

I'm just curious why when I changed a fact on Lance Armstrong's page regarding the 1993 World Championship my edit was removed and I was blocked from editing any further.... I made an edit based on all relevant facts and sources all of which claim that Lance Armstrong won the 1993 world championship fairly because if he had cheated his name would have been removed from the record books..... Yet the person who undid my edit and blocked me changed the page to state that Armstrong cheated even though he did not cite any references at all, nor did he or she offer any proof to back up his or her claim..... I was trying to edit the page, in good faith as I always do, based on factual information and my edit was deleted and a seemingly false statement was put back up..... It seems as though the person responsible for this is acting with malice and is spiteful and angry and is making up facts because they want those facts to exist.... Even though according to all sources the legitimate winner of the 1993 uci road race world championship is Lance Armstrong..... More so I don't even like Lance Armstrong after the way he lied about Greg Lemond but facts are facts and just because someone is bitter and angry at someone else shouldnt mean they're allowed to change/lie about history just because it's what this particular bitter, angry person wants it to be. It sets a dangerous precedent to allow someone to do something like this.... Even against someone who later in his career became guilty like Lance Armstrong. Also I'm new to Wikipedia so I'm not certain if this is the proper area to state a grievance so I apologize if this is not the right place to ask this question.Raleigh80Z90Faema69 (talk) 02:26, 10 July 2018 (UTC)Raleigh80z90faema69[reply]

The Signpost: 31 July 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:51, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Geofront

Notice

The article Geofront has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsourced since 2007, possible WP:OR, certainly fails WP:N

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Sandstein 19:03, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 30 August 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:03, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 1 October 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:44, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cydebot incorrect CFD date

Hi - re [1] and similar edits: the CFD date linked in the edit summary is incorrect - the CFD was on October 13 (see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 October 13). Is this a problem with your bot, or the information supplied to it to carry out the work? O Still Small Voice of Clam (formerly Optimist on the run) 04:35, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Car categories

Hi, could you stop that bot renaming automobile categories until the discussion is over about naming scheme? thanks -->Typ932 T·C 09:03, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Better source request for File:Great Falls on the Potomac River.jpg

Thanks for your upload to Wikipedia:

You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the copyright status of the image because the source is incomplete. Please consider clarifying the exact source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact Web page where you found the image, rather than only giving the source domain, search engine, pinboard, aggregator, or the URL of the image file itself. Please update the image description with a URL that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page or me at my talk page. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:40, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 October 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:09, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Cyde. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Cyde. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request to move a large number of move-protected categories

Per this RFC from May 2016, you had your Cydebot move the categories from Esports/esports to eSports. However, we recently had a successful RFC to move the main esports article away from eSports, meaning all of these move-protected categories should reflect that as well. Would there be any issue with this? ~ Dissident93 (talk) 23:35, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 1 December 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:46, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cydebot question

Hello Cyde. Do you know why your bot deletes some categories after speedy moves and not others? Cheers, Number 57 22:38, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

CYDEBOT changing pro-life activists to anti-abortion activists (category)

I want to dispute the actions of CYDEBOT in changing some articles from American pro-life activists to American anti-abortion activists. Specifically, I am referring to Destiny Herndon-De La Rosa who clearly is pro-life, not simply anti-abortion. I base this on the belief that to be pro-life goes well beyond simply wanting legislation to outlaw abortion; instead, you should review the Wikipedia articles on Joseph Bernardin and Consistent Life Ethic to see how forcing all these people into the "anti-abortion" category would result in a deceptive oversimplification that damages Wikiepedia's mission.

Is there a way for use to openly discuss this, or do I have to continue to revert the actions of your BOT every day?

William J. 'Bill' McCalpin (talk) 15:45, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Mccalpin: This nomination [2] was unopposed and accepted by Ymblanter after two days ([3]). Cydebot merely processed the contents as programmed by Ymblanter.
Note that the IP address of the anonymous nominator has since been blocked for a month. – Fayenatic London 21:40, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 Fayenatic london: In the end, it may not matter. User @Walter Görlitz: added a new category "Category:American consistent life ethics activists" which describes the category without the sometime politically charged term "pro-life"...beside Cardinal Joseph Bernardin described the "Consistent Ethic of Life" more than 30 years ago, so it has survived the test of time.
I have started switching over to the new category...
William J. 'Bill' McCalpin (talk) 21:51, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Mccalpin:, the best way to propose a move of a category is WP:CFD.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:53, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 24 December 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:35, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Angie Windhauser GOP 2020 Woman Candidate highly preferred to Trump Presidency

"Republican Candidate Angela Marie Walls-Windhauser, if she runs as a write-in or in any capacity she will cause a problem for Trump in 2020." 107.77.253.12 (talk) 15:25, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

List of all three letter acronyms listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect List of all three letter acronyms. Since you had some involvement with the List of all three letter acronyms redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. UnitedStatesian (talk) 13:57, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Articles created via the Article Wizard

You deleted this but the AfC tool still puts the category in new drafts. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:39, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for Creation anomaly

Could you please look at the discussion at the Articles for Creation talk page about the recent actions of your bot, User:Cydebot? The bot edited approximately 20 abandoned AFC submissions in user space on 13 January 2019 or 14 January 2019, which tagged the submissions as pending review. This also caused the bot to be identified as the creator/submitter, so that when I reviewed and declined the submissions, the script tried to put notice on the bot's talk page. This resulted in an error message because the bot's talk page is create-protected, presumably precisely because you don't want to monitor the talk page for stupid stuff like decline notices from AFC.

My questions for you are, first, as to design and code, whether the bot was working as designed, and, second, as to requirements, whether the design satisfied a reasonable set of requirements. What caused the bot to edit approximately 20 abandoned submissions? Did something else change the draft pages, or did the rules change, or what? Robert McClenon (talk) 17:47, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Basis for renaming American "pro-life" pages to "anti-abortion"

I noticed the robot change of categories at

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alliance_Defending_Freedom&curid=1401587&diff=878674252&oldid=877481333

It cites CFDS, but the only thing I could find was a 2016 discussion that specifically excluded American pages due to at least a couple of reasons. First, "pro-life" is more commonly used. Second, "anti-abortion" does not include anti-euthanasia the way "pro-life" does. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2016_August_17#%22Pro-life%22_categories

Is there a more recent CFDS that I am not aware of? Michaelmalak (talk) 17:24, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 January 2019

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:49, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 February 2019

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:15, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bot

How can I also run bot for my convinience? Jay prakash bais (talk) 12:37, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 March 2019

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:02, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Would you object to a new CfD bot?

Hi Cyde, I see that you're no longer as active as you used to be (7 edits in 2017 and 1 edit in 2018). Would you mind if I asked at WP:BOTREQ whether anyone would be interested in either replacing Cydebot's CfD functions, or taking it over if you've released the code publicly? I don't mean this as a criticism at all, and Cydebot has been and continues to be invaluable, but this might allow us to get a couple of enhancements and bugfixes. Thanks, -- Black Falcon (talk) 18:25, 9 August 2018‎ (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/JJMC89 bot III, where I am requesting to take over this task at Black Falcon's request. — JJMC89 (T·C) 07:30, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The replacement is now approved. — JJMC89 (T·C) 22:24, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 30 April 2019

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:36, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 special circular

Icon of a white exclamation mark within a black triangle
 Administrators must secure their accounts

The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised.

View additional information

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:51, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:03, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]