Archived discussions: before 1 December 2005; before 1 June 2006.
If you want to leave a message, please do it at the bottom and start with an appropriate heading, for better formatting. You can just press the plus sign (+) on the top of this page to do that. Don't forget to sign it by typing four tildes, like this: ~~~~
To avoid fragmented discussions, if you leave a comment for me, I will most likely respond to it in here, on my talk page, in an effort to keep the entire conversation in one place. By the same token, if I leave a comment on your talk page, always feel free to respond to it there, on your talk page. Remember we can use our watch list to keep track and know when each other respond to each comment. Thank you!
RussBot Bug Report
In the Abraham Lincoln article, your bot wikified a date that was part of an image file name, thus breaking the image link. See: [1]
Russbot broke an image in the article about William Cohen in this edit. --tomf688 (talk - email) 00:26, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
- Well, I guess I won't be trying that experiment again for a while. --Russ Blau (talk) 13:10, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
Bricklin in Fast Company movie
I have owned a Bricklin for 23 years and I wrote an article a couple of years ago for the club magazine about movies in which a Bricklin appeared. Italic textFast CompanyItalic text isn't on my list. Did I miss one? Can you provide any details?
Thanks, Stuart4.165.66.118 03:42, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
- Huh? Sorry, but I have no idea what you are talking about. --Russ Blau (talk) 11:18, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm new at this Wikipedia stuff so I probably messed something up. On the article on the Bricklin Automobile it looks like you added Fast Company to the movie list on 23-May. If it wasn't you then how do I find out who added it? You can email me at sjzukrow@msn.com.
Thank you, Stuart4.165.33.18 22:50, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
- No, actually, that edit was made by 209.89.65.230 on May 30, a week after my bot edited the article. --Russ Blau (talk) 00:36, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
Great bot
Thought, after seeing your bot alter some of my watched pages, that I'd say what a useful tool it was- saved me a lot of work!
EvocativeIntrigue 16:18, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
Apologies for Joint Contracts Tribunal
Apologies, your bot had it right all along - I must have rolled it back in error - I'll fix it now.--Mcginnly 12:05, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
Portal:Law selections
Greetings, fellow WikiProject Law member! One of our tasks on this WikiProject is the upkeep of Portal:Law, where we have set up a four week cycle wherein each week one of four key features - the selected article, biography, case, or image - is rotated out. Previous selections can be found at Portal:Law/former selections. Please contribute your thoughts at Portal talk:Law as to likely candidates for future rotations in each of these categories. Cheers! BD2412 T 05:04, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
re: Catman Cohen NPOV issue
Hello, Mr. Blau:
Thank you for your vigilant efforts to maintain the impressive quality of Wikipedia. Your detailed presentation on Napoleon is especially compelling and erudite. No doubt it took a good deal of research to provide the material.
With respect to Catman Cohen, yes, you are correct in noting that the subject does not conform to standard Encyclopedia material. NO birthdate provided, NO birthplace, and a "metaphorical" biography....nothing that conforms to a typical Encyclopedia format. So your concern is understandable.
Yet, one of the most impressive virtures of Wikipedia is that it accesses information from independent sources and allows the reader to judge the merits of that information. Effectively, it empowers the reader to determine if something is BS or not. Wikipedia is the embodiment of the internet's potential, a medium that allows information to be accessed from every corner of the Universe. In doing so, Wikipedia has "liberated" information from strict control by the gatekeepers of the Establishment. To date, in support of that concept, two donations have been sent WIkipedia's way as a small token of support for the freedom of information it facilitates...and more will follow.
The entire concept of an anonymous artist in the form of Catman Cohen has riled the oligopolistic record industry Establishment. Today there are only THREE major record labels, following a period of consolidation. From their perspective, they prefer "commodity" artists who require no more than cookie cutter promotion. Even in the area of teenage rebellion, they have commoditized artists to meet that demand. As one record producer recently stated, the Catman Cohen concept is a far greater threat to the record industry today than "downloading" because it represents the individual artist wresting control of his image from the hands of that same industry. An artist whose primary aim is a socially activist agenda is a rare artist today. As Bob Dylan recently stated in an interview, if he were to arrive on the scene today, given the current state of the record industry, there would be ZERO chance of him succeeding.
To date, Catman Cohen has produced two genuine CD's that have been sold through most TOWER RECORDS in the USA....furthermore, the Catman Project has donated proceeds from store/internet sales to SEVEN social activist organizations to date, including NURSES FOR A HEALTHIER TOMORROW, CANADIAN NURSES FOUNDATION, BLUE PLANET PROJECT, WATER STEWARDS NETWORK, PACIFIC INSTITUTE, GESUNDHEIT INSTITUTE, and VOLUNTEERS WITHOUT BOUNDARIES. It is a real project with real people behind it and the positive endorsements Catman Cohen has received are genuine as well. Feel free to do whatever research necessary to corroborate all preceding assertions. If you google "Catman Cohen," you can find corroboration of much of these facts.
Someday, the Catman Cohen identity will be revealed, just not at this moment, and you will be one of the first to know. Catman Cohen stands for a change in priorities in society: the resurrection of neglected heroes in the face of a rapidly deteriorating infrastructure and a movement away from the current Cult of Celebrity which, for example, sees so many young girls aspiring to become strippers, Paris Hiltons, etc., as opposed to nurses, teacher, etc.
It is hard to imagine that allowing Catman Cohen to remain in WIkipedia is somehow invalidating the merits of the impressive Wikipedia encyclopedia. There are several other artists listed in Wikipedia with dubious bio data. Yet, if you really feel the Catman Cohen listing poses a threat, then please do the favor of removing the ENTIRE listing immediately from Wikipedia, rather than allowing it to remain with a blazing NPOV stamped across its face. At the moment, unfortunately, you are the one person undermining the goals of the project by suggesting (via the NPOV) that it is a specious, tendentious, effort unworthy of respect.
In conclusion, speaking of respect, you deserve respect for your desire to maintain the integrity of Wikipedia. I only hope that you will empathize with the perspective presented in this argument.
Thank you for your attention.
24.126.193.239 04:39, 10 June 2006 (UTC) On behalf of Keevay Music
- About the only statement in the above that I whole-heartedly agree with is that there are many other articles on Wikipedia about contemporary artists (and performers) that are just as biased, if not more so, than Catman Cohen. Also, the fact that he is anonymous is not at all the basis of my concern about the article. I don't see why we can't have an article that describes who this artist is and what he has done without veering into an endorsement of him.
- Since I would hate to be the one person undermining the goals of the project, I am soliciting the comments of others and will respect whatever consensus is reached. See Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Media, art and literature --Russ Blau (talk) 13:18, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
First let me state that I own both Catman CD's and am a big fan so I follow his career with much interest. That means my following comments are biased but at least I acknowledge the bias which is more than I can say for the bias I see in Blau's skimpy critique.
It's pretty obvious to me why his Wiki listing has been slapped with an NPOV and I think it's pure nonsense. Too bad, I would have expected more from Wikipedia.
God forbid any music artist today should be literate and make the kind of smart comments made by Catman Cohen. After all, the typical musician is supposed to have the limited educational background of a Michael Jackson and talk primarily about how LOVE will solve everything and rarely go much deeper than that.
God forbid any music artist today should speak intelligently about society. They're supposed to speak in the goofy catch-phrases they picked up from the last airhead "news" piece seen on MTV.
Take a look at these three quotes by Catman Cohen and it should be obvious this lawyer Blau is no more than an errand boy for the USA Establishment, sent to get rid of Cohen before he lights a fire and gets people thinking about issues they're not supposed to consider:
Catman Quote #1: I no longer pay much attention to the names of
politicians who allegedly govern us but I do know the names of our
secret
royalty, the respective chairmen and presidents of Goldman Sachs, JP
Morgan
Chase, Citigroup, Rothschild, and Warburg ~ on politics
(Ooops, you're not supposed to tell the Truth about who really runs the country, they don't like that)
Catman Quote #2: Some things just don't make sense anymore: if society pays a young songwriter royalties on a single creation until the day he dies, then why not pay a fireman equivalent royalties in perpetuity for his own "act of art," namely the extinguishment of a single, major fire in which many lives are saved? ~ on resurrecting neglected heroes
(Oooops, lawyers don't like anybody who questions the merits of intellectual property rights designed to entrench various elites and undermine those who have none)
Catman Quote #3: Cohen is a ³yellow star" name, one that immediately identifies me as a Jew to the world, and unlike so many other Jews whose Anglo-Saxonized identities blend in with the crowd, I do not have the luxury of taking a vacation from the enemies of my name ~ on being a Jew
(Ooops, there's nothing worse than an outspoken, articulate Jew who suggests anti-Semitism still poses a threat today. Why can't Catman just give people their Soma and blather on about "one world, one people" like most artists? )
I would have more respect for this NPOV if it were placed over another 100 music artist listings since 95% of this material on Wikipedia is single-sourced, commercially biased information which comes from labels or publicists.
Why not go after Courtney Love or Queens of the Stone Age, and so forth? Oh, I see, no need for Wikipedia to chase those types of artists, after all, they have nothing coherent to say anyway, so nobody cares.
Do you think Wikipedia would slap an NPOV upon any SONY MUSIC or WARNER MUSIC artists? I sure doubt it. But with an Indie artist like Catman Cohen, hell, anything goes. Crap all over them, after all, what financial or political leverage do they have?
As far as I can see, this NPOV is an obvious example of compromised ethics. Blau's not fooling anybody, at least anybody whose got an operating brain cell.
Frankly, I think the NPOV libels Catman and as an Indie artist he should remove the listing and file a formal discrimination complaint (seeking compensatory, punitive, and exemplary damages) and also file a formal complaint with an internet regulatory agency. That's what I would do but I'm a young entrepreneur who doesn't take crap from anybody.
David Goldberg 70.32.184.89 18:39, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Topic closed
If you have anything to say about the Catman Cohen article, post it on Talk:Catman Cohen, not here. I will not read and will not respond to any further postings on this topic. Mr. Goldberg, I admire you for not taking crap from anybody, but then why, Sir, should you expect me to take crap from YOU? You insult me by making unfounded assumptions about my opinions and then criticizing me for these opinions, which I have never expressed. The only opinion I have expressed is that the article in question is not presented in a neutral fashion. I have not expressed any opinion whatsoever about the substance of the article, nor frankly do I have any opinion about it, and I don't care to discuss it any further. --Russ Blau (talk) 14:11, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
Edit "rampage"
Could you please disambiguate articles in pages in chunks rather than all at once? It's clogging up my watchlist and making it bigger than necessary... --ApolloBoy 00:39, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Suffix
Sorry--I was trying to do a disambiguation repair. Didn't realize that would make such a mess. I do hope it makes more sense this was since nearly all the disambiguations of suffix and suffix (lingusitics) anyway. Olin 22:28, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- OK it's all sorted out now :-).--Commander Keane 22:52, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- Why have you replaced suffix ([[suffix]]) by suffix ([[Affix|suffix]]) on German phonology? The article suffix exists, so the remplacement made the link less accurate. ― j. 'mach' wust | ⚖ 23:18, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- I'm sorry then; I didn't look at the history of suffix. ― j. 'mach' wust | ⚖ 09:17, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
Stop smudging here and there
See also
- List of films ordered by uses of the word "broccoli" (excluding credits)
- List of films ordered by uses of the word "carcinoma"
- List of films ordered by uses of the word "the" (ascending)
- List of Wiki-lusers with an axe to grind
Remember this. Its was at a place where you are not supposed to show your personal opinions and resent. If you really understand what I am saying do don't do it again, which includes not replying back to me. Vivek 15:52, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- The above was posted on a Talk page. That is precisely the place where one is supposed to show personal opinions (and "resent," whatever that is supposed to mean). If I had posted something like that on an article, it would be vandalism and you would be entirely justified in criticizing me. But I didn't and you're not, and you don't get to tell me what I should and shouldn't reply to. --Russ Blau (talk) 14:13, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
Possible bug
Bot fixed a double-redirect here but removed the Redirect with possibilities template. It should probably not remove those. Peace, savidan(talk) (e@) 16:49, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for spotting that! The bot code looks for a {{redirect template}} on the same line as the redirect; however, recent changes to MediaWiki have made it possible for the template to appear on a different line. Guess I need to fix my bot. --Russ Blau (talk) 16:58, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
Broken Redirect (reply)
Oops! That was supposed to go to BlackGatomon. It's a Digimon article. Thanks for pointing that out. I'll fix it straight away! -TPIRFanSteve 01:41, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
Pages Needing Translation
Recently, you requested a page, Brink (onomastics) be translated into English. I have done so, but I am sorry to inform you that the English version is hardly better, and should you choose to clean it up, I wish you dear luck, as it is a mess. Anyway, happy to be of service, RyanGerbil10 (Drop on in!) 04:25, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
Broken redirect
Hello. Some days ago, you created a page Peter and I Went Down the Lane, the entire contents of which are "#REDIRECT [[Peter and I Went Down the Lane]]". (You'd be surprised how often this happens!) I haven't been able to figure out what page you were trying to link to, so I'm asking you to please fix this redirect if you can. --Russ Blau (talk) 14:06, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
- How strange; I distinctly remember making that mistake, so I wonder why I didn't correct it. Thank you for pointing that out. Roballyn 01:18, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
Classical music
Your bot converted a link from classical music to classical music (disambiguation), a page that redirects to classical music. Not a big deal but I thought I'd let you know.--Dcooper 19:52, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
- That is intentional; it signals other editors that the link to a disambiguation page is intentional and shouldn't be "corrected." --Russ Blau (talk) 21:19, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
Tomas Fernandez - double redirect
Hey, thanks for fixing that. I usually check but for some reason I didn't that time. \ Fnarf999 \ talk \ contribs \ 15:43, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
disambig link counts
Sorry about changing the link count for "composition..." I'd made quite a bit of progress on repairs and that seemed like the easiest way to let other Wikipedians know that it was being taken care of. I understand the logic behind keeping the link counts as are, but what's the best way to report that repairs are being made? SingCal 04:28, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
- The best way is just to add a note after the end of the entry saying what you've done or what you've found. Thanks for your contributions to this project! --Russ Blau (talk) 10:32, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
Conductor
I've edited all the pages that linked to conductor, except for user, talk, and see also pages. You can now remove it from the list. --Crabbyass 02:53, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Removal of Catman Cohen Image
Mr. Blau, received an email to the effect that the silhouette image of Catman Cohen (shot by cinematographer Oliver Theess under hire of Keevay Music) was removed recently by Wikipedia, on the basis that the image is "unsourced." Yet that image was provided to Wikipedia by Keevay Music (BMI), along with the requisite source document. The very same silhouette image appears in Catman Cohen's one and only live performance video (see iFILM or YouTube) and the very same silhouette image has been provided to countless websites. That silhouette image is the only official photo of the artist, as such it is de facto in the public domain, ergo the silhouette image has been placed back into the Catman Cohen Wikipedia entry.
Mr. Blau, if you remain enraged by the Catman Cohen entry in WIkipedia as appears to be the case, then please simply state as much rather than continue playing these games. You seem to have some kind of ongoing vendetta aimed at this particular artist for strange and unknown reasons. Somehow, as stated previously, I do not think the presence of this artist in Wikipedia is causing any substantive harm to the internet encyclopedia but if you feel that is the case, well, then remove the entire listing once and for all.
If you should opt to remove the artist in entirety, then please state reasons for removal in the form of a letter addressed to:
Keevay Music/Epic Century Artists
PO Box 9089
Marina Del Rey, CA 90295
24.126.193.239 04:25, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
- You didn't receive any email from me. I didn't remove any image from the page and I haven't edited that page in months. Quit harassing me! Russ Blau (talk) 11:11, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Discovered that a Wiki bot computer program was responsible for the photo removal, so you are owed an apology. Sorry about that.
Keevaymusic 16:42, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
America: USA vs. North America
Hello, your bot chagened the meaning of American here into the wrong direction. It might (don't know whether it is) be clever to exclude this particular phrase from video game related topics since "american something" (nearly) always refers to the North American market. --32X 20:56, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- OK. Maybe it's just me, but it seems to me that if you mean North America, you should say North America. --Russ Blau (talk) 00:57, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
Flag #17: Response to Wikipedia Autobiography Accusations
Thank you for confirming predictions in the preceding notes to the effect that sensitive, biased Wiki censors like yourself would retaliate against the Catman Cohen listing by adding additional negative aspersions against it. Now you are calling the listing "an autobiography" in your latest retaliatory response. That's nice, although I'm surprised you did not create yet a THIRD label to emblazon across the listing in order to undermine its encylopedic validity.
Let's see, do autobiograhies have endorsements by third party luminaries? Answer: NO. Feel free to check the validity of the endorsements provided to the Catman Cohen listing, not to mention the validity of the anecdotes in the TRIVIA section.
Do autobiographies list particulary negative criticisms aimed against the artist, as indicated in the CONTROVERSY section? Answer: NO.
Again, I suggest you make the rounds of Wikipedia music artists and note the huge number that fall within your definitions of "autobiography" or "advertisement." If your definitions are based primarily upon single source material, well, the only notable difference between a Label artist and Indie artist is that the source material for the Label artist arrives primarily through a stable of BIASED entities, including the label publicist, the agent, the manager, the A&R rep, the entertainment attorney, the Big Media entity contracted by the label for publicity purposes, or the actual artist -- whereas the Indie artist is likely to purvey material through a single source. Yet, the litmus test of impartiality is whether the pros and cons are presented vis a vis any particular artist -- and it seems the CONTROVERSY section now satisfies that litmus test, although you choose not to address that new addition to the Catman Wiki listing.
If you truly wish to make Wikipedia encyclopedic in the classical sense, as you so deceptively claim, pay close attention, young fellow, and I will explain the three most compelling requirements for doing so, as follows:
1. You do NOT solicit opinions from artist fans, because they tend to be biased, either strongly pro or strongly con. Ergo, you shut down third party input into the "encyclopedia" and appoint editors who must pass stringent academic qualification tests before they are allowed to provide encyclopedia information. For example, I have no idea what academic qualifications allow a telecommuncations attorney in Burke, Virginia to post "cheerleader" info about Napoleon within an encyclopedia. I could understand an accredited Harvard history professor doing so, I have no concept how a fellow who is a history "hobbyist" is qualified to write authoritatively about Napoleon.
2. You do NOT allow anybody to edit the encyclopedia without proving that they conform to basic minimum literacy and educational standards. Ergo, that automatically disqualifies the vast majority of populist edits created at Wikipedia, since most Encyclopedias require editors who have at least Masters or PhD degrees.
3. You do NOT allow a cabal of self-anointed encylopedia "editors" to target or libel a listing because of its unusual conception, unique composition, or incendiary ideas. Rather you simply excise the listing altogether, without any further discussion of the matter. In other words, the original listing never gets into the encyclopedia from square one, it never sees the light of day, because the encyclopedia "Guardians of the Gate" choose to pre-empt any discussion whatsoever of the listing.
Those are the three most imperative conditions for being in the "encyclopedia" biz -- and in that regard, Wikipedia fails the test abysmally. Wikipedia is NOT an encylopedia in any classical sense, and in the past, it seems that was its major virtue. Now, however, Wikipedia appears to be taking late measures to become the internet successor to the Encyclopedia Britannica; yet the Pandora's Box has long been opened and Wikipedia can only hope to shut it by taking drastic measures it has yet to enact, e.g, removing you from your current position and replacing you with an accredited editor who possesses a litany of outstanding academic accomplishments in a variety of scholarly fields.
As for where this message is posted, since you allow populist input without any qualifications, then it seems that choice should be left to the person posting. The choice to post at your personal discussion site is in order to ensure that this debate does not remain sequestered and insular within an Indie artists little Discussion Forum, as you might choose, but rather that the entire debate broadens to the widest populist audience that deserves to hear it. To that effect, this discussion is now being read by a New York journalist friend of The Catman Project in order to determine merits for an 0p-Ed piece on the topic of Wikipedia.
Ok, do you understand?
Keevaymusic 19:18, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
Why has the Laird Hamilton page been ruined? There is now absoultely no reference to his parentage or even his film career as a stuntman. why? An article is supposed to improve over time not become weaker. 81.102.25.233 21:59, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Dabbing "Anglo-Saxon"
Having been working on this for quite a while now, I propose redirecting "Anglo-Saxon" to "Anglo-Saxons", a real article, and moving the current dab page info to "Anglo-Saxon (disambiguation)". Most of the links would then be correct. A few items that ought to link to the "Anglo-Saxon language" article would be mis-linked, but the proportion is small. I have left this note on the dab project page too. Comments? --Pharillon 07:13, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
- It's always tempting to redirect a dab page, and often appropriate, but I'm not sure this is really a good candidate. There are a lot of different meanings for "Anglo-Saxon" and I have found many of them in frequent use in the articles I've worked on so far. --Russ Blau (talk) 09:54, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
Bad company
what do i need to do to get that banner off that saying 'this sound like a ad i not sure how i can word the facts of a band another way pls help because th banner looks like ..
Later i n time lol: ok i think i got it out take a look i also took off the banner — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.196.136.37 (talk • contribs) 22:36, August 14, 2006 (UTC)
Does this even make sense?
BA
Are you sure your BA disamb fixes are correct? You changed David Cousins to "Ba province" which I'm sure is wrong. And for the others, it wasn't clear to me if it should be Bachelor/Arts or British Army. If you're sure the others are correct, fine, but I wasn't, which is why I left messages on the talk pages, which is what we're supposed to do. Simon12 13:30, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
- Well, David Cousins was an error which I have fixed. When used in a post-nominal string, BA normally stands for Bachelor of Arts. If it means something else, your notes on the Talk pages should assure that someone will fix it. --Russ Blau (talk) 13:52, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
- OK, thanks. Simon12 16:44, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Thank you
It's often said that Wikipedia's best editors burn out because no one thanks them for their work. So I thought I'd say "thank you" for your continued good editing, especially on WP:DPL. No strings attached! Soo 22:25, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Russ Bot
Hi,
I'm not sure your bot is entirely fool proof. James Holden (engineer) has mini-sections on the trains he designed, along with {{main article}} links for each of them. Now some of these main articles hadn't been written yet, so they had deliberate temporary redirects back to the relevent section of James Holden (engineer). Furthermore, some trains have more than one name, so there were redirects from the secondary names to the primary ones. However, as some of these primary pages were just temporary redirects, your bot has come along and removed the double redirect, which means whoever gets round to actually writing the primary names article has to remember to change the secondary names redirect (which in all probability they won't). I'm also worried that your bot is going to come along and change all the {{main article}} links on James Holden (engineer), though it hasn't as yet.
Double redirects are sometimes deliberate... --cfp 11:47, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
- I couldn't agree with you more -- nothing is entirely fool proof. However, there is a workaround for this issue -- if you mark your train redirects (for the primary names that you intend later to create full articles for) with {{R with possibilities}}, the bot won't change any redirects that point to them. --Russ Blau (talk) 12:59, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
- Ahh great, hadn't heard of that template before. Thanks for the info. --cfp 17:59, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Fixed Redirect
Thanks for alerting me to my mistake on Asa di Vaar. It is fixed now. Open2universe 23:25, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Disambigs
Hi, please take a look at MediaWiki:Disambiguationspage -- the recent change to the mediawiki engine will help you with the disambig efforts. Thanks. --Yurik 04:17, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
Thank you
for fixing the disambiguation on the Scars article I had a large hand in creating. I really should've checked to see if "punk" was a disambiguation and where the style of music labeled "punk rock" would've been here. You're fab. (Krushsister 02:19, 30 August 2006 (UTC))
RE:Broken redirect
Well, thank you for informing me about this. I have just fixed this redirect to the correct page. Please inform me if you find any double redirects as well. --Siva1979Talk to me 17:42, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for your contribution to the improvement of the neurality level of the Article. I've substantially altered it's opening. Let me know--more specifically--if any weaknesses remain which are inconsistent with Wikipedia policy. Thank you. Yours truly, Ludvikus 20:50, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Disambiguation work
Hello Russ, I think you're the main guy working on disambiguation, and I've recently started working on it. I was actually looking pretty positively on the rate that the links to dab pages were being reduced on Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links/2006-07-17 dump, but then I saw the Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links/Current list page, and it seems like the problem is ever-growing. I don't think the technique of disambiguating links after the fact is something scalable, as we're losing the race. Have you thought of any different techniques that would help educate editors about not linking to dab pages? I've started sending notes to other editors (usually newer ones), but I'm one person, with a limited amount of pages to look after. Another option, that would require a technical change to Wikipedia, which I would doubt would ever be implemented, or want to implemented (as it would require much change could cause problems) is that links to dab pages would be alerted to the user when they saved the page, and options for choosing the right link could be picked. Anyways, thanks for all your hard work in reducing the number of dab links. -- Jeff3000 03:54, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
- Jeff, I've noticed your great contributions on disambiguation, and want to thank you for pitching in. Unfortunately, you're right that the problem seems to be ever-growing, and I also doubt that the developers would be interested in changing the software to make it harder to add new links to dab pages. Part of the problem is editors eagerly creating new dab pages with the slightest excuse, but a lot of these are legitimate and there's not much we can do about the fact that English has many terms that can mean more than one thing.
- One thing I've tried just yesterday is adding notes to pages like Template talk:Infobox Television to try to alert editors to common errors that create work for us. If you see other situations where a similar advisory might be helpful, please be bold and do it.
- Anyway, I don't have any great solution, but I encourage you to continue your efforts! --Russ Blau (talk) 13:44, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks RussBlau from Vishal1976
Thanks for Robot-assisted fixing links to disambiguation page at Maratha Clan System - Vishal1976 - -- Vishal Prakash Dudhane -- Pune city RussBlau
Hello: about Floyd Abrams
I agree with you in principle, but not with Floyd Abrams. You'll notice I did not put Evan Wolfson under the "See also". Why Abrams and not Wolfson? Because Abrams is inextricably linked to the First Amendment and our notions of it. He has appeared numerous times before the Supreme Court. I would like to include him in the "See also" because he and his life's work are relevant to that page, and because I am expanding his page so vastly that I think a user would benefit from clicking on it, if they are curious about how the Supreme Court works. Lastly, things like Case citation are totally irrelevant to the Supreme Court, and if we were to include every bit of legal jargon and usage then it would be unwieldy. I'm surprised you overlooked Case citation but instead took out a man whose entire life has become very relevant to the Court. I plan on putting him back in, but if you think you can make a better case for NOT including him, I'm willing to listen and be persuaded. --DavidShankBone 18:23, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
- You're right about case citation; I didn't even notice it. As for Floyd Abrams, I have tremendous respect for him; it's just that inserting this link starts us down the proverbial "slippery slope." If Floyd Abrams is a "see also" in this article, then why shouldn't there also be see also's to Daniel Webster, John W. Davis, Lawrence Tribe, Theodore Olsen, Kenneth Starr, Alan B. Morrison, and dozens of other prominent Supreme Court advocates over the past 220 years? Pretty soon, the list of references will be longer than the article. Plus, although Floyd Abrams is certainly noteworthy as a First Amendment advocate, he has not been involved in many other areas of jurisprudence that come before the Supreme Court. That would be like having an article on mathematics that says "see also: calculus" but doesn't mention algebra, geometry, etc. --Russ Blau (talk) 19:41, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
- I'm having trouble moving "Morning Post" to "The Morning Post."
- Can you help? --Ludvikus 05:20, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry, I can't. The Morning Post has some edit history of its own, so only an administrator can move it. Try advertising on WP:RM. --Russ Blau (talk) 12:43, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
Orkney and Shetland (UK Parliament constituency)
Hi Russ. Just been looking at your changes to this page. The actual change to the visual within the box adding '(Politician)' to Independent seems a little unnecessary given the context, rather like adding '(Politician)' after Liberal democrats, Labour etc. Would it not be far better to revert to the original visual while at the same time having it linked to 'Independent (politician)'. Cheers Galloglass 12:25, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
- Um, yes. That set of changes didn't go quite as I had intended. The problem is the inconsistent use by various editors of two different templates -- one displays the link the way you (and I) would prefer, the other doesn't display a link at all. --Russ Blau (talk) 12:50, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for sorting it Russ. Had I been more awake I'd have worked out the problem myself as the changes on Cathcart Wason were fine. Many thanks Galloglass 16:05, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
linking...
Hi RussBlau, thanks for your help, more if you like on my talk page. Ellywa 05:55, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
Links to Castile
Hello, RussBlau, I have noticed that you are fixing the links to Castile, and León to disambiguate them. Thank you for your efforts. I have to remark, nevertheless, that some of the links to Castile (historical region) are not properly well. The main problem is the asignation of this link Castile (historical region) where there should be Kingdom of Castile or Crown of Castile. The disctinction is somehow subtile in some contexts, but in others it is clear. If you read the article about the historical region, as it is by now, you can find that it speaks about an identity as a group, and with some discussions about the subject. It can be linked in contexts with no especifical reference to an historical moment political entity, or to a geographical clear identification to Castile-La Mancha or Castile and León. In diffuse contexts, where Castile is quotated as a rough simonyme of the Meseta, or in contraposition with other identities, it is well located. Note that the article Castile (historical region) is far away from being complete and with a consensus because there are nuances in what is considered this region depending on the point of view. It is more a sociological article than a historical or a geographic one. I would appreciate your revission of these links with your bot. I have tried to do some work on the stuff after your revision, but I would apreciate your help. Here you have some of the examples I have found of erroneous linked articles:
When a location of a monument is given, the modern province or Autonomous Community where it is located is a better link than the diffuse historical region.[2]
These are some of those I have found about historical moments, allusions to the political entities and regions of that time, not to castilian idiosincrasy: [3] [4] [5]
There must be more, but doing it one by one could be very long for me. I would apreciate very much your help with the bot of other similar links. Thank you very much for advance, --Garcilaso 13:51, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
- To be fair, the majority of the links I have seen from yout bot are well located, and only a few have this problem. Anyway, I think it is better to try to improve even well done works. Thank you again, --Garcilaso 13:57, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
question about robot
Hello, I am fairly new. I see a note on the article Joe Henderson (runner) that I don't understand. It says something about a robot, fix, and disambiguation. I do not understand what this means or how to fix it. Can you help? Thank you, KarateLadyKarateLady 13:49, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
- The "robot" is a computer program that assists in editing Wikipedia; see WP:BOT. The bot made this edit on Joe Henderson (runner). Please don't try to "fix" it; the change was intentional. If you don't understand why the change was made, please click on United States and American and note the difference between the two pages. --Russ Blau (talk) 13:53, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Napoleon & Religion
Napoleon's conciliatory approach to Islam is well documented. He is known to have admired the Propher Mohammed - he even learned off by heart several suras of the Koran. His relationship with Christianity being one of a practical statesman - religion was useful as long as it was comforting to society, but dangerous if it lead to fanaticism. And his frank disbelief in the Trinity caused him to adopt monotheistic attitude, obviously not a million miles from Islam.9
Napolean Bonaparte as Quoted in Christian Cherfils, 'Bonaparte et Islam,' Pedone Ed., Paris, France, 1914, pp. 105, 125.[10]
'Moses has revealed the existence of God to his nation. Jesus Christ to the Roman world, Muhammad to the old continent... 'Arabia was idolatrous when, six centuries after Jesus, Muhammad introduced the worship of the God of Abraham, of Ishmael, of Moses, and Jesus. The Ariyans and some other sects had disturbed the tranquility of the east by agitating the question of the nature of the Father, the son, and the Holy Ghost. Muhammad declared that there was none but one God who had no father, no son and that the trinity imported the idea of idolatry... 'I hope the time is not far off when I shall be able to unite all the wise and educated men of all the countries and establish a uniform regime based on the principles of Qur'an which alone are true and which alone can lead men to happiness.'
129.173.95.1 13:21, 20 September 2006 (UTC)AK, is his playing on both sides of the coin not worthy of a topic?
- First off, I reverted edits to this article that concerned Napoleon's supposed "interest in porn." If you edited the article after the vandalism occurred, sorry, but it's not worth trying to sort out the good from the bad in that situation. Second, Napoleon's attitude toward religion is at best a minor point relative to his overall biography (how much of his statements about Islam reflect his own beliefs as opposed to what he thought would be politically useful to him in Egypt? probably not much). Maybe a separate article on the topic would be more appropriate, if based on verifiable sources. --Russ Blau (talk) 13:52, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
Re: Robot fix of Double Redirect - Talk:Becky and Barnaby Bear > Talk: Becky and Barnaby Bear (TV series)
I am writing concerning a fix by User:RussBot regarding the above mentioned apparent double redirect. I checked for double redirects after moving the page from Becky and Barnaby Bear to Becky and Barnaby Bear (TV series) and the list of double redirects showed up absolutely nothing. Please explain how your bot can go and fix a double redirect that didn't exist in the first place? Thor Malmjursson 09:50, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
- It looks like you fixed all the redirects to the main article, but you overlooked Talk:Barnaby Bear (CBeebies) which was a double-redirect to the talk page. No big deal; redirects to talk pages are not that common to start with, and it's not something you would ordinarily be looking for, but the bot picked it up. --Russ Blau (talk) 10:16, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
User:Deb
User:Deb, after making pantomime into a non-dab page has been changing [[Pantomime (theatre)|pantomime]] to [[Pantomime]]. I told him that there's is real no benefit of doing so, as redirects are not hurtful, and in fact can be useful, if Pantomime becomes a disambiguation page again, since no disambiguation work will be needed. But he has said that he will not stop. As pantomime is one of the terms that is different between American and British English, I can easily see it becoming a dab page again, and his undoing of the links will lead to a lot of work. Can you send him a note as well. Regards, -- Jeff3000 13:12, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
- She's continued to change the links with no valid response. I've reverted some of the changes. -- Jeff3000 18:45, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
- I don't quite understand what is motivating User:Deb, either, but in my personal opinion it's not worth getting into a fight over. I'd advise dropping it and moving on (or maybe you already have). :) --Russ Blau (talk) 20:22, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
- Well if someone can so easily make disambiguating work harder for the people who do it, I don't know if it's even worth working on disambiguating. She's already reverted by reverts, and gone on making the changes. I think I'm done with disambiguating. -- Jeff3000 20:32, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
- I appreciate the words on my talk page. At the same time however the disambiguation work has been frustrating. In trying to make people more aware of disambiguation pages, and linking to the correct pages (so that there will be less future work) I have left notes on people's talk pages. While most people are very positive, and state that they will be more careful, there has been two cases that have bothered me quite a lot. The second was User:Deb who for no reason has made future dab work more difficult; this is quite different that people just passivly linking to dab pages, but she actively decided to make dab work more difficult. The first case, was a user who, after a dab on my part, started making personal attacks, even going as far as suggesting that he'd come and find me and insinuating anti-religious attacks. I may start working on the dab projects again, but I think I need a break. Regards. -- Jeff3000 01:19, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
- Well if someone can so easily make disambiguating work harder for the people who do it, I don't know if it's even worth working on disambiguating. She's already reverted by reverts, and gone on making the changes. I think I'm done with disambiguating. -- Jeff3000 20:32, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
- I don't quite understand what is motivating User:Deb, either, but in my personal opinion it's not worth getting into a fight over. I'd advise dropping it and moving on (or maybe you already have). :) --Russ Blau (talk) 20:22, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, sorry, Russ. I miskeyed when I was reverting the above user's superfluous reverts. I do think you could have assumed good faith, though. Deb 20:10, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
Henry Bush
Saw your deletion tag (which had been removed from the article) and reinstated it. Now it has been removed again by a person who thinks it should be discussed under articles for deletion. So I have done that. Thought you might want to add your two pence (since you were the first person to think it should be deleted.) All the bestMmoneypenny 15:45, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
Featured list candidate
I thought you'd like to know that List of United States federal legislation has been nominated to be a Featured List. It needs 4 votes by October 2 2006.
As I have labored hard on the article, I would appreciate your looking it over. You can find a discussion here: Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of United States federal legislation.
Thank you!
—Markles 23:11, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
Double Redirects
Could you fix the double rediurects here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Whatlinkshere&target=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Awards
Thanks!
--evrik 14:25, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
America
America (disambiguation) is just a redirect back to America. I figured it was just an error, am I missing something?--Cúchullain t/c 20:56, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Links to disambiguation pages not only explains it, but uses this very page as the example! --Russ Blau (talk) 21:17, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
- So I see. You're right, of course, but I'm still confused about it; "America" is the disambiguation page, not for a specific meaning. I'll take it up on the talk page at WP:Disambiguation.--Cúchullain t/c 21:29, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
- I changed it back to your version. Again, my apologies.--Cúchullain t/c 22:30, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
Blur
Hello. Your edits to Blur and Blur (disambigution) show bias, and the latter constitutes vandalism. Please note that "Blur" is a term and predates Blur (band). Please do not persist in this behavior as it will be viewed with far less good faith in thew future. ACS (Wikipedian); Talk to the Ace. See what I've edited. 22:37, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
- I can see that one might disagree with my edits, but I don't see how you could reasonably consider them vandalism. Throwing out accusations like that is inconsistent with your profession of good faith, and makes me less inclined than I otherwise would be to consider your point of view. --Russ Blau (talk) 23:48, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
- Ha. Ha. You don't have to be so sarcastic. I'm working on correcting the links. You could help, you know. ACS (Wikipedian); Talk to the Ace. See what I've edited. 19:33, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Disambiguation pages with links
Hi RussBlau, is it possible to set up a page like Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links on the Dutch wikipedia? I'm mostly interested in a list of the disambiguation pages and the number of links to them. I don't know how much work it is to estimate the progress or if it's automated, but if it's not much work that would be welcome too. I've got a bot that can count the links using a category and getting references to the pages in that category, but using databasedumps would be better. Could you perhaps set up a page and update it once in awhile? I'd be happy to help out in any way that I can. I assume you've got a script to count the links. Depending on the language I could perhaps run it myself if that's ok. If you don't want to give the code or set up a page it's ok too, no hard feelings. Regards, Erwin85 10:22, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
- It should indeed be possible. Of course, I don't speak Dutch, so someone else would have to write the text part of the page. However, the script I use is based on m:pywikipediabot, which is language-neutral. I haven't tested it with a Dutch dump, but I easily could do so. --Russ Blau (talk) 10:44, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
- I meant the programming language :). Can I just translate Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links and copy it to the Dutch wikipedia so you can test it? --Erwin85 11:15, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
- I'll try to run the script over the weekend (it takes hours), and post the output to a page on nl:; when it's done, I'll leave a message on your talk page. --Russ Blau (talk) 13:40, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
- I can't send you an e-mail using wikipedia, however you can use my e-mailaddress <myusername><at>wikipedia<dot>be. I'm also interested in the bad redirects script, so if you want, please send it. I'll copy your pages to nl: this weekend, so I'll send you a link when it's done. Thanks, Erwin85 10:48, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
- I'll try to run the script over the weekend (it takes hours), and post the output to a page on nl:; when it's done, I'll leave a message on your talk page. --Russ Blau (talk) 13:40, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
- I meant the programming language :). Can I just translate Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links and copy it to the Dutch wikipedia so you can test it? --Erwin85 11:15, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks!
Thanks for fixing the broken (self-directed) redirects I'd created at Gerald Teasdale Fowler and Marcus John Worsley The dangers of editing too fast :( --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:18, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi,
It's been a while since Wikipedia:WikiProject Disambiguation/Adopting disambiguation pages was discussed on the talk page of Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links. If you have time, I'd like to know your thoughts about the subproject.
I kinda suspect that its mere existence serves a useful purpose, simply as a comstant visual aid & reminder. I also kinda suspect that maybe people are looking at the page and fixing dab links of dab pages listed there, but not adding their names/editing the page in any way.
What are your thoughts about how it could be changed/improved?
What are your thoughts about automating some aspects of it, as you mentioned in passing on the WP:DPM talk page once? Pulling back a bit, should anything be automated, and if so, what?
Thanks for your time & trouble --Ling.Nut 22:17, 30 September 2006 (UTC)