::::Stop with your threats. I've asked you 5 times now not to write here. NEVER WRITE HERE AGAIN!!!! [[User:Bgwhite|Bgwhite]] ([[User talk:Bgwhite#top|talk]]) 08:08, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
::::Stop with your threats. I've asked you 5 times now not to write here. NEVER WRITE HERE AGAIN!!!! [[User:Bgwhite|Bgwhite]] ([[User talk:Bgwhite#top|talk]]) 08:08, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
Bgwhite: the first edit above was polite, civil and to the point. Yet your first response was "get lost". This is not how a bot operator should respond to queries about their bot's edits. Please don't let yourself get wound up by Lugnuts.
{{ul|Lugnuts}}: please stay off this page for at least a week because your continual comments are being perceived as harassment (even if they are not intended so). If there are serious errors, please draw them to attention of myself or WP:AN.
Thanks both for your cooperation — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 09:17, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
Revision as of 09:17, 4 February 2016
I believe most editors use Incorrect English, the second most common is American English, followed by Indian English and British English. -- Arnd Bergmann
Welcome to my talk page
I make plenty of errors - if you are here to complain about a tag or a warning, please assume good faith.
If I have erred, don't hesitate to tell me, but being rude will get you nowhere.
I will not tolerate anyprofanity or extreme rudeness. If used in any way, it will be erased and your message not read.
Archives
Bot archives discussions after 30 days of inactivity into the latest archive
Hi! A while ago you deleted Non-aeronautical revenue as a G12. We now have OTRS permission for the content at this page. What is supposed to be done here? Does the article get undeleted, or do I just need to ask you to annotate the talk page with the OTRS ticket number (which is 2015120310017686)? Thanks, regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:44, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Justlettersandnumbers I can undelete it. However, us lowly non-OTRS people can't see the OTRS ticket. Is there a place I could see the discussion or can you have who you talked to to leave a message here. Hmmm, Fluffernutter is an OTRS person and can undelete the article, maybe they can help. Bgwhite (talk) 07:42, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Justlettersandnumbers, I just looked at the OTRS ticket, and the article. I agree that it checks out, so I have undeleted the article. Having said that it will really need a rewrite, to the point that having the text licenced under CC will probably not matter in the long run... --kelapstick(bainuu) 20:20, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks to all. I simply had no idea what needed to be done in this situation, a new one to me. That is one bad article! Live and learn! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:29, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Enhancing SSNP wiki page
Dear Sir
Why you are reverting my edit? it is very important for wiki credibilty to put needed clarifying information along with references, as well as omitting non objective , biased material. Could you please stop reverting my edit. Dr. Nabila Ghosn (talk) 05:55, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nabila Ghosn As I said in the edit summary, do not copy from SSNP's website. This is a copyright violation. The same edit was reverted before by somebody else for the same reason. Also, if you are copying SSNP's material, that is biased, non-objective material. Bgwhite (talk) 05:59, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I won't put the selected paragraph from "ssnp website", I'll just correct the typewritting mistakes along with other new data regarding the execution of Antun Saadeh. I 'll put the reference some time today.
How can I edit a mistake I have done, which is deletting the Footnote title? Footnotes now are enlisted under references. I'm trying to correct it but I cann't. It hapened when I was deleting a reference from footnote that I put before mistakenly. Dr. Nabila Ghosn (talk) 08:55, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
In this edit, BG19bot removed |language=English from several cs1 templates. At one time, Module:Citation/CS1 added such templates to Category:CS1 maint: Unrecognized language so that |language=English could be easily discovered and removed. I have an AWB script that did that. But, the module no longer adds |language=English to the category. Instead, the it accepts the parameter but does not render the language portion of the citation. This was done to aid the translation project at WP:MED for whom the parameter has value. You might want to consider modifying that portion of BG19bot.
Trappist the monk The best course of action would be to file an AWB bug report. That way, it would be fixed for all AWBs. If I had to guess why WP:MED did this, it would be DocJames thinking every WP:MED article will be translated into every language. Bgwhite (talk) 23:41, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Trappist the monk Did I have the reason right? If so, maybe fixing this in Content Translator (CX) would be a better solution? For example, if an English article is being translated in French, CX would add "langue=Anglais" to the French cite template. Bgwhite (talk) 00:57, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know, that isn't my area of expertise. I just know that some editors have noted that keeping |language=en does no harm, and apparently is desirable at the WP:MED translation project. I don't think I want to speculate on particular editor's motivations. Doesn't CX first need to know that the template refers to an English source before it/they can choose the correct parameter/value pair for the target language? If AWB strips the parameter from the template, somehow that information needs to be recovered at CX, right? It would seem to me that by leaving |language=en in the template, that task is made easier. I'm speaking from ignorance here, so feel free to ignore it all.
Varna International Ballet Competition/Reverted to previous version
Hi, Bgwhite,
I saw that today you reverted the content of the "Varna International Ballet Competition" to its previous version, on grounds of Copyright violation. The thing is, that me and Ikamberov(who made the changes on the page), are authorized to use and share the text and the attached photos by the President of the "International Ballet Competition" foundation Dimitar Dimitrov. We want to contribute to the expansion of the article given that it currently constitutes 2 sentences.
As we both are new to Wikipedia and do not know the proper steps to take, could you please tell me what should we do next.
Аредел You will need to submit the information to get it approved. The information on how and where to submit the info is at WP:CONSENT. Bgwhite (talk) 02:11, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
User: NihartouJason
Hi
I would like to draw your attention to the user contributions - NihartouJasonyu. I think he's one of the side of previous wars in article Frederick Achom. he sent the same messages to 14 users to discussion page. I worry about that, because I'm a little upgrated Achom's page, and it's was deleted. by the way, page was nominated for the deletion today (19.01).
it's like vandalism: contributions only about Frederick and deletion section in AppyParking:
[1]
thanks--27century (talk) 08:42, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
27century I'm not familiar with the article. The ones to ask is Jeff G. and Jimfbleak. They are already monitoring the page and giving suggestions. I'm not familiar with Jeff G., but Jimfbleak is an excellent editor and admin. Jimfbleak would be a better help than I could be. Bgwhite (talk) 23:29, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'll try. Thanks a lot for the response!--27century (talk) 23:38, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Amazing user page
I am amazed by how your user page (and talk page) is organized. I didn't think one could use html to do things on WP. Did you use an application to make this happen? I have access to Dreamweaver and I'd like to see how you did this. Thanks, Morgan Phoenix (talk) 01:31, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Morgan Phoenix Wish I could say thank you, but I found it on somebody else's page. I did some modifications, but nothing major. It The code for the talk page is at User talk:Bgwhite/Header and the user page code is already in the user page. It's a mashup of wiki templates and html, so Dreamweaver can't handle it. Bgwhite (talk) 18:23, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Plagiarism is the highest form of flattery. LOL It looks great, anyway… I've been trying to figure out a way to better organize all of my userboxes (I use a lot of them). Thanks! Morgan Phoenix (talk) 19:50, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Liz Fraser
Hi Bgwhite, Thanks for your note on the Liz Fraser article, I didn't create the page, but thought I'd a add a few citations. I feel it could do with a good photo of her in the info box, but I can't find any public domain to use, I wonder if you can find anything and add one?
One more question, when citations are added as requested, who clears the original Wiki notice?
Best Regards Alfshire (talk) 11:23, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Alfshire Anyone is free to remove Wiki notices if they feel it is warranted. In both Google and Bing, one can search an image by license type. I searched, but didn't see any photos. Bgwhite (talk) 18:43, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your helpful adviceAlfshire (talk) 21:07, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Discordianism
is this how i use wikipedias talk?
also, i was wondering why you undid my edits to the discordianism page? in the subject line you wrote, "No references. DO NOT SHOUT". what do you mean by that?
i noticed the discordianism page was obliterated from when i last saw it. eventually i learned how to use wikipedia a lil more and came to understand that for years wikipedia has been asking revisors to cite what they wrote on the page, but no one seemed to understand or had the will to make said citations, but i did. so i was wondering why you undid my changes?
Yes, this how to use a talk page. Among the concerns are:
"DO NOT SHOUT" means you used all capital letters. For example, "The ORIGINAL SNUB" doesn't need to be in all caps.
maximus: ok, i edited the page base on your input. i understand why you erased everything :) i would have too. but i think i did a much better job this time, although, not perfect i imagine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maximuswood (talk • contribs) 17:46, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You've got mail!
Hello, Bgwhite. Please check your email; you've got mail! Message added 23:31, 24 January 2016 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Hi Dear Bgwhite. I see that you can solve this type of typos. Is source code available? Thanks :)--ԱշոտՏՆՂ (talk) 12:38, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
ԱշոտՏՆՂ Yes and sortof. The program is WP:AWB. It is opensource. It should run on any different language Wikipedia and non Wikipedia wikis. Bgwhite (talk) 18:52, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Do you use a regex? I don't find something like that in options--ԱշոտՏՆՂ (talk) 11:28, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
ԱշոտՏՆՂ It's part of AWB's WP:GENFIXES, so the regex is inside the code. GENFIXES accounts for most of AWB's "fixes". The code is open source, so you can look at it. Magioladitis would know where the punctuation code is at. Bgwhite (talk) 19:08, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
There was no template there. AWB failed to read the plain text. Th problem now has been resolved. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:51, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Reference errors on 27 January
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can .
Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:19, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I made an accurate archeological research investigation in many old books I own about its history, I visited museums and contacted the direct sources, interview leading persons and scholars about the Lebanon immigration and the Mokarzels that lead to its independence. Please make a google search and tell me if you find anything about the Mokarzel in Spanish. I being researching for years about this. This message he sends to me in respond of the information, links about facts he reverted about Mokarzel.
I will get to it. I'm reviewing the links you sent. With some luck we can start a very nice article for Mr. Mokarzel ~ Elias Z. (talkallam) 19:00, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
Naoum's biography is gonna be awesome! he had a really interesting life. I am working on his article in my sandbox and I'm really hopeful. It will take some time before i post it to main space cos i want to be well researched and very well sourced. :D ~ Elias Z. (talkallam) 09:45, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
Contributions with historical facts are being reverted. I only wanted to contribute.
I blanked the Mokarzel articles I made. Problem solved. --Trinity Abbey (talk) 14:06, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Help with internal links
I see you (or rather WP:AWB) just removed two short sections I added yesterday, to Oliver Reed and Helena Kennedy. You characterised this as being "general fixes", perhaps because the internal links were not added in the correct format (although they work fine on my computer).
In both cases I was seeking to add a useful internal link to provide more context for what might otherwise be thought of as rather tendentious summaries of a not entirely well understood incident. Therefore I believe the links could usefully be included but wish to do so correctly before reverting.
Here is the link as I had it: might you be so kind as to let me know how best to add this to an article?
[[After Dark (TV series)#Oliver Reed and Kate Millett: "Do Men Have To Be Violent?"|Here]]
Two, there is already a wikilink to the TV series in the sentence before. Two right in a row is redundant.
Three, links are not usually done as "this programme and its aftermath are discussed further here". Just a general wikilink is all one needs. Bgwhite (talk) 10:03, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you both very much. I will try and catch up with all this as soon as possible. AnOpenMedium (talk) 09:35, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
AnOpenMedium Don't worry... there are a million little rules and they keep changing. Keep up the good work. Bgwhite (talk) 09:45, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Can you have a look?
User:Only seems to be the suckpuppet of User:GiantSnowman which seems to be a Wikipedia master eraser: Max Merkel, Alex Notman, Slaven Bilić and many others articles, he has a really long edits history, this user needs special watching ! Also User:Only acuse people for vandalism and deleting referenced text, User:GiantSnowman prefers to deletes around instead of doing the job properly, they have a mini band and act like superior users which is meatpupetry, is like mafie of wikipedia in my opinion !--176.221.34.226 (talk) 22:43, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
176.221.34.226, GiantSnowman is an admin, been around here a long time and is the person I goto for football advice. Only is also an admin and has been around here for a long time. Neither one are sockpuppets. They are reverting your edits because there are no references. You need to add refs. I would revert too. Please add references. Bgwhite (talk) 22:49, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
see [9] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.1.149.90 (talk) 22:59, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
GiantSnowman deletes massive content of Wikipedia and expect other people to do the work, even if you go on other language wikipedia you can probably find reference! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.1.149.90 (talk) 23:01, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I am worried for ENGLISH WIKIPEDIA PROJECT ! English wikipedia articles will be "white" blacked with no information because of this attitude !--103.1.149.90 (talk) 23:03, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
People are to busy to block sockpuppets instead of helping the quality and quantity of articles !! ANd because of this people will not edit anymore !! or will get block !! is a major problem in my opinion !! (I want the best in a bright future for Wikipedia !)--103.1.149.90 (talk) 23:04, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Some of those are not reliable refs. You can't write a huge amount of text with some refs at the end. The references go inside the article, not the end. Look at Messi for an example. One of key tenants of Wikipedia is everything must be verifiable. Football articles are notorious for people adding false information, by fans of the person and fans for other teams. Unless you add references in atleast every paragraph, things will be reverted. Their are rules around here, you need to abide by them. GiantSnowman is following the rules. Bgwhite (talk) 23:11, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
He is covered by the rules by the problem is that he expects other people to do it, to add inline cites and everything, he and other admins deletes and other users can cope with this because is fast to delete and hard to improve! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.1.149.90 (talk) 23:14, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
ANd many many articles are uncited and unreferenced if everyone will delete and expects others to add refs 50% will wikipedia english will be erase !! I constant watch some users and I see what they do !--103.1.149.90 (talk) 23:16, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Anyone can delete and wait for other people to do the hard job ! but the problem is because of this attitude many user will retire ! Is a global problem, this are not the only admins and users who deletes around wikipedia!--103.1.149.90 (talk) 23:18, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Look Max Merkel in English and look at the same article in german, spanish, or dutch ! English wikipedia article is blank ! and this is only one example ! from many many others !--103.1.149.90 (talk) 23:20, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
And now imagine that you wrote that article like a beginner on wikipeida. without knowing to add refs or inline citation ! I do not say that 100% is correct, but if you read you can realise if is partial correct at least, and if an editor blank the page, no other beginners will check the history ! and no improving in time ! AND THE BEGINNER EDITOR WILL NOT WANT TO EDIT ANYMORE WHEN HE SEES OVER TIME THE PAGE BLACKED ! THE MENTALITY IS THE PROBLEM ! IS ABOUT THE FUTURE OF WIKIPEDIA !--103.1.149.90 (talk) 23:25, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It is the responsibility of the person adding the material to add references. It is your job to do that, not anybody else. I suggest you only write a paragraph at a time, with a reference. Another way is to work on the article in your sandbox. You can take your time and then copy things over when you are ready.
We can't look at every article and every edit. Football articles are more scrutinized than other articles. You can complain all you want, but you did not add refs to a giant addition. By rule, this is wrong and will be reverted. I was a beginner once and I was reverted. I learned from my mistakes. You can either complain all you want or you can add refs to Merkel's page and you will be fine. Bgwhite (talk) 23:30, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page watcher) You might also start with posting small suggestions on the article talk page (e.g. Talk:Max Merkel) with your references. I hope that collaborating with other editors to agree on how to add your information to the articles will be more successful for you. GoingBatty (talk) 00:05, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Reference errors on 29 January
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can .
Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:24, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I've just rolled you back as you appeared to restore unconstructive edits back into the article - I realised after I did that it's a bit more complex than this so I should have left a message - sorry! Mdann52 (talk) 11:36, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Mdann52 No need to apologize. I should have reverted even further back in the first place. Bgwhite (talk) 19:37, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Reference errors on 30 January
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can .
Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:17, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, your bot has fixed doubled http:// prefixes to URLs here [10] — but it didn't notice one of URLs had a triple protocol prefix (the one in <ref name="pmid=25049139">). The link is already fixed. --CiaPan (talk) 10:16, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Tech News: 2016-05
21:02, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
AWB
Hi. Your bot is making pointless AWB edits, such as this one. Please see the rules of use, rule #4. Thanks. LugnutsDick Laurent is dead 08:08, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Lugnuts So nice that you come to accuse me. If you have nothing better to do than accuse people without knowing the background, then get lost. Also, I do know what #4 is, you don't have to judge me guilty right off the bat. If you don't have anything constructive, stay the hell away. Bgwhite (talk) 08:19, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, calm down. I "accuse" you, as the evidence is clear cut - your bot made a pointless edit that goes against the rules of AWB. I thought you'd like to know so you can fix your problems. LugnutsDick Laurent is dead 08:21, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Lugnuts Once again you judge me guilty, because you think the "evidence is clear cut". Thank you for being judge and jury. As you have yet to ask what I was doing... stay the hell away. Bgwhite (talk) 08:25, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Here's the evidence again. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt to explain here why this was made. Thanks. LugnutsDick Laurent is dead 08:27, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Lugnuts Again, stay the hell away. You never asked why, just accused. If you can't be considerate, then don't write. Bgwhite (talk) 08:30, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Fine - but your edits are now being monitored. Look forward to seeing you at ANI when you fuck up again. LugnutsDick Laurent is dead 08:32, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Lugnuts My gosh. You just can't help it. Thank you for the threat and the language. You never did ask why. Bgwhite (talk) 08:35, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a threat - a warning if you continue to abuse the rules of use. Happy editing! LugnutsDick Laurent is dead 08:40, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Lugnuts Nice threat. I haven't been accused of trivial editing in 8-12 months. You think something is a trivial edit and you go on the warpath. I see you reverted my edits on your talk page as a troll. You broke WP:OWN with this edit. There was no reason to revert. You break the rules and it is ok. You revert the talk message. You can accuse me, make threats, I'm a troll, break rules, using "FUCKING AWB" and waiting to take me to ANI. Do as I say, not as I do? Bgwhite (talk) 09:03, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Again, you seem to have difficulty in basic reading skills. I wont explain it again. LugnutsDick Laurent is dead 09:09, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Can't help continuing the insults can you? Bgwhite (talk) 09:13, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Don't waste your breath trying to reason with Lugnuts. These are well-established editing and behaviour patterns of his, going back years. Curly Turkey🍁¡gobble! 09:25, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Curly Turkey Thank you. I've gotten six thank yous for my edit on his talk page and here. That has to be a record for me. It does appear he is not well liked. Bgwhite (talk) 09:40, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Bgwhite, ignoring all the back-and-forth for the moment, it certainly looks as if [25] did nothing useful, substantial, only added two empty lines which don't change the rendering of the page in any way. Can you please explain why this change was made? The edit summary is at first glance not really helpful. Fram (talk) 09:20, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Fram for asking. The edit summary is exactly why the bot was there on that article. AWB is running on this list. There are 773 articles on the list. It usually is much lower, ~350-400 range a day. I did not do any editing over the weekend and Magioladitis is blocked, thus the list got very large. There was indeed punctuation after a <ref> that Lugnuts reverted in this edit (</ref>. He was vicegovernor). Therefore, the article being on the list was valid. Bgwhite (talk) 09:40, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. The problem with using such somewhat older lists with a bot is that sometimes too many pages no longer need fixing, and get edited by the bot anyway. Edits like this,[26],[27][28][29][30], ... all do nothing but clean up the underlying code, they don't change the page, categories, maintenance categories, performance, ... (assuming I haven't missed anything). It seems as if a few of your fixes (like #64) have a lot more of these edits than other ones (like the "fix defaultsort", which seems to run flawlessly), so perhaps going through these and making sure that less of these valueless edits happen is a possibility? Fram (talk) 09:57, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Fram Of the six edits you said that were valueless, five were valid edits that did what the edit summary stated. There is a lot less valueless edits than you think there are. As I said, I usually do it daily, but got behind this weekend. I usually finish most with ~9 hours of the list starting to be generated. It takes 3-6 hours for the list to generate, depending on how slow/fast queue machine I'm on. I'm open for suggestions on how to do this differently, but I can't go faster and I can't do it everyday... even though I usually do it 6 out 7 days a week. Bgwhite (talk) 10:13, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
"Doing what the edit summary says" is not a valid argument, obviously. This is the kind of "error" that should only be fixed in conjunction with a more fundamental problem, not on its own. Fram (talk) 10:44, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Fram "Doing what the edit summary says" when I have bot approval for it, is a valid argument. Others have bot approval for doing the same thing, even non-AWB bots. I have labeled why the bot arrived and it did what it said. I have followed the rules. If I haven't followed/breaking any rules, please tell me. To the original question, do you have any suggestions? Do you see any way of overcoming doing edits on the list that have already happened... which why Lugnuts feels I'm misusing AWB and will be hauled off to ANI. I feel like I'm getting raked over the coals despite getting prior permission and doing the best I can to run the list as soon as I can. Bgwhite (talk) 11:04, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Probably semantics, but no, "doing what the edit summary says" (while obviously much better than doing something else ;-) )is not a valid argument, "doing something approved in task X or BRFA Y" is a valid argument. One can discuss whether a request for approval overrules other policies or guidelines, or whether this should have been approved or not, but the fact that you have approval for these (correcting unnecessary piped links) means that it wouldn't be fair to continue complaining or arguing about those on your talk page. With those out of the way, it does look as if your percentage of inconsequential edits (like only adding whitespace lines before categories or so) is minimal, from what I have seen, and in that case there is no problem. Lots of such edits (in absolute numbers or in percentage) are a problem, but someone else will have to show that this is happening here before it is worth continuing this discussion. Thanks for the explanations. Fram (talk) 13:01, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
right way to disambiguate ?
quick question, my friend: I want to start a BLP on a Chinese businessman named Ren Jianxin. There is already a page on a 90 year old with the same (pin yin) name.
Do you think Ren Jianxin (businessman) is the right way to disambiguate ?
Thanks as always. sorry you are dragged into the fluffy AWB debate- Ive never found your edits unpleasant....! I am if youve ever looked at my talkpage more into the meaty / real conflicts, unfortunately...
cheers, --Wuerzele (talk) 19:24, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Shit, you got me with busines. I am trying to figure out the joke, but am useless at it... Help ? wait is this a typo maybe ? you meant businessperson! all right...--Wuerzele (talk) 21:49, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Wuerzele I didn't even see busines. One of the good things with dyslexia is I don't see spelling errors as easily. Of course that means I can't spell. Bgwhite (talk) 21:54, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I didnt plan to elongate this post but have a look at that, who is 'correcter' , ;-), Zanhe or you ? --Wuerzele (talk) 23:41, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Wuerzele Well, I'm not exactly sure, which is why I said, "I think". I can't find anything in MOS that says what to do, but I might just be missing it. I can find MOS guidelines that say to use gender neutral language and non-gender neutral, but this relates to the body of the article, not title. I don't know. Bgwhite (talk) 00:11, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
There's no need to go PC when the gender of the person is undisputed. The convention is to use "businessman" (or -woman), and "businessperson" is almost never used to disambiguate. See Category:American businesspeople, for examples. -Zanhe (talk) 00:35, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Con Funk Shun
Thanks so much for whatever you did to make my late husband's band's page look better. I made some corrections but I'm still learning how to be an effective editor. Someone made some major incorrect additions to this page recently which I removed, while correcting typos and adding new events in this band's history. Thanks so much for your help! R&BDiva (talk) 01:40, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Bot goof: interpretting technical terminology as lay language
[31] inserted whitespace in a systematic name, making it not completely correct. It's not an English-writing comma-separated list. Worse, it broke a [[File:]] transclusion. I could live with the visible display having a whitespace (it's been debated whether it's actually good because it might enable better line-wrapping in some contexts). But the bot really shouldn't be messing with wiki-markup like filenames. DMacks (talk) 06:53, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
DMacks It inserted no white space. It didn't insert any characters. What it did was remove invisible Unicode characters. Invisible charachters raises problems. For example, try typing or copy/pasting File:8,10-octadecadiynoic acid.png|thumb|8,10-Octadecadiynoic acid into the searchbox. You will see that the file is not found. Most likely, you originally copied/pasted the name from another source into Commons. I have requested on Commons that the file be moved to a name that doesn't include the invisible Unicode characters... the exact same name you currently have, but without the invisible characters. Bgwhite (talk) 07:08, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Ahah, yes, that's it (both cause and effect). Thanks for tracking it down! I renamed the file on commons. DMacks (talk) 07:14, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I draw your attention to the rules of use (again) - "Do not make controversial edits with it. Seek consensus for changes that could be controversial at the appropriate venue" Thanks. LugnutsDick Laurent is dead 07:58, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Get lost. Don't write here anymore. I don't want to see or hear of your bullying. Go pick on somebody else. Read the edit summary for a change. Fram understood with what I am doing. Yet another example of do as I say and not as I do. Bgwhite (talk) 07:59, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Two bot edits on different days because the same problem shows up on the lists and two manual edits by me isn't 3RR. What do you not understand about not writing on my talk page. Get lost!!!! Bgwhite (talk) 08:04, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You need to remain WP:CIVIL. I'm bringing issues of your edits/bot to your attention, so you can fix them. Obviously, ANI is the next stop if you continue. LugnutsDick Laurent is dead 08:05, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Stop with your threats. I've asked you 5 times now not to write here. NEVER WRITE HERE AGAIN!!!! Bgwhite (talk) 08:08, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Bgwhite: the first edit above was polite, civil and to the point. Yet your first response was "get lost". This is not how a bot operator should respond to queries about their bot's edits. Please don't let yourself get wound up by Lugnuts.
Lugnuts: please stay off this page for at least a week because your continual comments are being perceived as harassment (even if they are not intended so). If there are serious errors, please draw them to attention of myself or WP:AN.
Thanks both for your cooperation — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:17, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]