User talk:XXN

/Archive /Archive 2

16:02, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

17:12, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

18:04, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

22:09, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

18:07, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

21:30, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

20:30, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Can you point me to the Redirects for discussion page for this? Deb (talk) 11:36, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Deb: Sure, Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 October 9#[List] Spaces and parentheses. --XXN, 13:25, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'll fix the link then. Deb (talk) 15:26, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

16:42, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

I have deleted all, or just about all, of the userpages which you tagged as being created by banned or blocked users. The pages all justified deletion as being inappropriate use of userpages (CSD:U5), but it is worth pointing out to you that a page created by a blocked user before his block is not deletable under the criterion you have been using. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 18:24, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, U5 is a more appropriate criterion for most of them. --XXN, 18:29, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Can I add that G5 is not applicable if the blocked user hasn't edited their user page either - User:HENRY APPLEGATE for example contains useful information about the block and the LTA page for that user. U5 wouldn't be applicable either tagging inappropriate pages is an important job so thank you but please make sure that they are inappropriate within the speedy deletion criteria before tagging them. Nthep (talk) 18:41, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for that inappropriate tag. --XXN, 12:16, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly I would not delete User:HENRY APPLEGATE because, as you say, of the useful information there. But for the record the user has edited his page, but his edits have been removed. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 23:17, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going through the userpages of inactive, few edits only users you've tagged for speedy deletion and - because that's my job - deleting them. I must admit I don't really see why you are tagging them for deletion. It's not like they taking up server resources: the deleted pages are still there, and the tags and deletion records add more to them.

Looks to me like busy work instead of actually improving encyclopedia content.

If that's what floats your boat. I don't have any issue with it. Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 09:48, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

When a page is deleted, all its old revisions move from the revision table of DB to the archive table. Thus we are keeping it clean, and perhaps somehow safe:) At least those pages tagged in last session were enormous (several hundreds of thousands of bytes each) and absolutelly useless. There are a lot of other similar pages to check and delete. They may contain inacceptable material. But, I should, probably, provide directly the full list of pages to you, instead of taggind them one by one. --XXN, 12:17, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And here's a list > User:XXN/userpages to check (user pages with more than 10k bytes, where user has made less than 31 edits). --XXN, 12:32, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I recognize that in one sense deletion here is pointless, as the pages remain filed in the server. Most (not quite all) of the pages are useless and all are incorrectly edited as being userpages. I just have a slightly obsessive urge to clean up as much as possible. However, going through several thousand pages is a daunting prospect. I will look at a reasonable selection of random samples and decide if a Twinkle deletion is reasonable; it is certainly possible. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 22:42, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Anthony Bradbury: Here is one shorter list with candidates for U2 - userpages of nonexistent users. Unfortunately I can't recommend batch deletion, because there are some false positives. But, with the help of Anomie's useridentifier.js script and enabled "popups" gadget, it may be easier to check them. --XXN, 23:52, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I tend to feel that it is not, because the two categories have different parameters and serve different purposes. To wit: a person may have served in Parliament in the 20th century, but may also have been a politician in another capacity in the 21st century, or vice-versa. That's not the case now, to be sure, as I only just created the categories. But they can certainly stand more refinement. Also, I tend to feel like the "politicians-by-century" categories and the "politicians-by-parliament" categories tend to relate people via categories in different ways, which is useful. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 21:58, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You nominated ANGPEREIRA27 for deletion on the basis that there is no such user. I agree, but there is a user Angpereira27, so I moved the page. Do you disagree? My assumption is that the brand-new user tried to create a user page and did not know that usernames are case-sensitive. They haven't been around for a while so it may be moot but I still think it's best to move rather than delete.--S Philbrick(Talk) 22:06, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You nominated User:Gabor:My Promised Land for deletion on the basis that there is no such user. I agree, but there is a user Gabor~enwiki so I moved the page. Do you disagree?--S Philbrick(Talk) 22:20, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

But I agree it qualifies as U5 so I deleted it under the basis--S Philbrick(Talk) 22:20, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not send inappropriate userpages to Miscellaneous for Deletion. Certainly there are a great number of userpages created here which qualify for deletion, as indeed do the ones you have flagged. But they all qualify for speedy deletion, either as CSD U5 (not webhost or inappropriate content) or as CSD G11 (promotion or advertising). It is helpful, and saves wasting admin and other users' time, if these pages are flagged correctly. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 13:01, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not all of them are obvious cases for speedy deletion. At least those old article copies/drafts are not covered by speedy criteria, AFAIK. I already suspended my activity on this area (at least for some time) - there are too many pages to check and tag. XXN, 20:27, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello XXN. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of User:Yappers1000, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The reason given is not a valid speedy deletion criterion. Thank you. Primefac (talk) 16:55, 20 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Primefac: are you sure that the given reason is not valid? Is it ok to have comments of some other users in a user page? This is not the purpose of user pages, but of user talk pages;) XXN, 17:00, 20 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Just because the page was created by someone else does not make it automatically eligible for deletion. I've blanked out the chatroom comments. Primefac (talk) 17:04, 20 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Osmanlıspor FK logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:47, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi XXN, I noticed you are tagging a lot of files for transfer to Commons. Have you considered transferring them yourself? -FASTILY 01:24, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm working on this (reviewing/transferring) currently, selectively; half of files I transfer, other part I just tag as eligible for transfer, and other goes to FFD. XXN, 01:45, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure I understand. If you tag a file as eligible for transfer, then why not transfer it yourself? That would go a long way towards helping reduce the backlog at Category:Copy to Wikimedia Commons :) -FASTILY 01:56, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Fastily: I have a page tagger script installed, and for some files it's just a one-click job for me to mark them as eligible for transfer to Commons, instead of spending up to few more minutes to do the transfer myself :) When I'll have some more free time I'll transfer some of them to Commons, but many of these text logos should be converted to SVG first... XXN, 14:49, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited to join the discussion at WT:NFCC#Possible NFCC exception. Marchjuly (talk) 00:33, 2 March 2017 (UTC) -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:33, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing out the permission problem with the photograph of myself on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:RDG110951.jpg

The photograph was taken by my wife, and given to me for use on internet web pages etc. I cropped it and uploaded it for use on the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_D._Gill which I avoid editing (or even reading) as much as possible.

I have sent the standard email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org stating that I own the copyright and agree to publish ... I added the information: {{OTRS pending}}, volunteer response team Ticket#: 2017031410017777

Hope it can now stay where it is.

Please could you check these additions are correct Richard Gill (talk) 16:16, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Gill110951: Thank you! There is some backlog currently on OTRS permissions-en queue, and we'll have to wait until some OTRS agent will process this ticket and will confirm it. XXN, 16:28, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Andrei Guțu, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Romanian. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:44, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I notice that you're sending lots of unused personal files to FFD - just a note that PROD has been extended to files, and it's live in Twinkle now. Please use it for these cases to avoid cluttering FFD. – Train2104 (t • c) 14:52, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Train2104: have you tested PROD on files? For me it's not working yet. Only for me? --XXN, 16:48, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote the template, so I know that works. Just tested with Twinkle and it looks fine. You may have to clear your cache? – Train2104 (t • c) 17:00, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Train2104: hmm... This is what I see. Those two options are grayed out and clicking the "Propose deletion" has no effect. Maybe it's not enabled for all users? --XXN, 17:17, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming you can PROD articles with no problem, I'm not sure what's going on there. If it were disabled for you you wouldn't even be able to get to that window at all. Pinging @MusikAnimal:... – Train2104 (t • c) 17:33, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@XXN: What browser / operating system are you using? It seems for you the issue is the main form ("work area") is not loading. The "PROD type" options are greyed out because only normal PROD applies to files. Could you also see if the PROD module properly loads on articles? — MusikAnimal ^talk 17:58, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@MusikAnimal: Windows 7, Firefox. Disabled/re-enabled Twinkle in prefs, disabled all user scripts (to be sure there are no conflicts); didn't helped. In articles I never had problems with PROD; just found an article on which I can 'test' it, edit done[39].

This is what the browser console shows me when I press on "Propose deletion" on file pages:[40]

TypeError: form.notify is undefined[Learn More] load.php:385:905
	twinkleprodCallbackEvaluate https://en.wikipedia.org/w/load.php:385:905
	Morebits.simpleWindow.prototype.addContent/</< https://en.wikipedia.org/w/load.php:367:37

The TypeError this_recipeManager not always appeared. --XXN, 18:24, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it was a bug specific to Firefox. I've now made it hide the PROD options entirely when viewing a File, since as you know only normal PROD applies there. This in turn should fix the Firefox issue. Let me know if it is working for you now – keeping in mind it may take 5-10 minutes for the ResourceLoader cache to catch up. Sorry for not giving Firefox some love before deploying :) The errors you are seeing in the console, "this_recipeManager", etc., are apparently unrelated to Twinkle. Nonetheless thank you very much for checking that, as usually that's what pinpoints the issue! :) — MusikAnimal ^talk 18:44, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@MusikAnimal: Now it works for me too (successfull edit). Thanks for fixing it! XXN, 19:00, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:XXN, It's too early to add deletion tag in Vega Schools. I have added some more detail and references. Request to remove this tag and give some time to add more information in this page. GKCH (talk)

@Gokulchandola: Sorry but I will not remove my tag. I don't think the subject of this article is notable. The article can stay up to seven days with that tag. From my part, what can I do is to convert the PROD tag with a regular AFD discussion. --XXN, 20:04, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please add a rationale to the PROD tag, if you don't convert it to AFD. – Train2104 (t • c) 21:14, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --XXN, 21:23, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ilan Shor, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jasmin. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:56, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your message. At present it has a non-free license and ends up in Category:All non-free media, hence the reduce tag. I agree, it should survive as free (even on commons - where I am an admin as well) - commons has the similar c:template:PD-textlogo for such images. I'll leave it with you - your choices are...

1. Leave as non-free, but reduce to 318 x 313
2. Edit it to free image on Wikipedia (remove "Non-free use rationale 2" and replace with {{Information}}
3. Move it to commons -or do the above and add {{copy to commons}}, and someone else will move it.

Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 20:13, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Moved to Commons. --XXN, 20:51, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Ion Sula requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Adem20^talk 13:09, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thank you for you work, but for the future, please remember to affix Template:Translated page to the talk page of articles you have translated from a foreign Wikipedia. Thank you :) Winner 42 Talk to me! 14:22, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

For a stub of one phrase? Nah. FYI, I've contributed to the original article with more content than to the newly created stub here. --XXN, 14:37, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not restore unsource or poorly sourced (primary source in this case) content on a BLP. Also, the website link in the external links section is redundant with the website link in the infobox. Thank you! Waggie (talk) 18:32, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Waggie: just letting you know, I've restored removed content (and added few more), citing independent reliable sources. Thank you for your vigilance. You may want to check the article in its current state; but unfortunately all references are in Romanian, I hope this is not an inconvenience for you. Regarding that personal website link, you probably know about WP:INFOBOXPURPOSE - the purpose of an infobox is to summarize (and not supplant) the content that appears in the article (some users can prefer to hide any infoboxes in their own browsers). --XXN, 19:35, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi XXN! Thanks for improving the article! I took a quick look over your changes, and did some cursory review of the sources. The article is most definitely improved now. Best wishes and thanks for collaborating! Waggie (talk) 19:56, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating Irina Bulmaga, XXN!

Wikipedia editor Elliot321 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thank you for creating this useful article!

To reply, leave a comment on Elliot321's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Elliot321 (talk) 17:56, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bots Newsletter, July 2017

Greetings! Here is the 4th issue of the Bots Newsletter (formerly the BAG Newletter). You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future newsletters by adding/removing your name from this list. Highlights for this newsletter include: BAG BU Rob13 and Cyberpower678 are now members of the BAG (see RfBAG/BU Rob13 and RfBAG/Cyberpower678 3). BU Rob13 and Cyberpower678 are both administrators; the former operates BU RoBOT which does a plethora of tasks, while the latter operates Cyberbot I (which replaces old bots), Cyberbot II (which does many different things), and InternetArchiveBot which combats link rot. Welcome to the BAG! BRFAs We currently have 12 open bot requests at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval, and could use your help processing! Discussions Efforts at WP:CHECKWIKI to identify cosmetic fixes are still ongoing. The RFC on COSMETICBOT has concluded with "a clear consensus exists to adopt the proposed language". The new wording is now live. The venue for bot appeals and reexaminations has been changed from WP:BRFA to WP:BOTN (see discussion) The Wikipedia:Bot owner's noticeboard is now the Wikipedia:Bots/Noticeboard (see discussion). New things A historical correction was made to WP:BOTPOL (see discussion). WP:HIDEBOTS now mentions how to hide all bots from your watchlist, not only specific bots. The phabricator ticket T162685 is now closed, and we now have "#Bots-Framework" tag, so issues related to bot frameworks can be tracked. Wikibits.js has been removed (see discussion). 21 inactive bots have been deflagged (see discussion). WP:BOTISSUE has been updated to mention that BAG members can act as neutral mediators in bot-related disputes. WP:INTERWIKIBOT has been updated to reflect the post-February 2013 practice of putting interwiki links on Wikidata, rather than on Wikipedia (see discussion). Upcoming HTML Tidy will be phased out in June 2018, or possibly earlier. This may affect some bots (see FAQ). Wikimania Wikimania 2017 is happening in Montreal, during 9–13 August. If you plan to attend, or give a talk, let us know! Thank you! edited by: Headbomb 17:12, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply] (You can subscribe or unsubscribe from future newsletters by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Thanks for creating this; can you please add a source? Boleyn (talk) 05:05, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --XXN, 10:31, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, can you help me to improve the page of T S Nandakumar.What needs to be edited and removed in order to delete the template with an example or useful links so that i can start with that work. Thanks for your time. RichardIsler (talk) 03:01, 27 July 2017 (UTC)RichardIsler[reply]

@RichardIsler: There must be added more references from reliable sources which confirms the information from that article. Currently some sections are absolutely unreferenced, and other large text passages also are unreferenced, but almost every distinct statement should be referenced, with inline citations, preferably. XXN, 10:13, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@XXN, Hi, I have edited and improved the page of T S Nandakumar with references and have removed the template so can you please review and let me know in case of any other changes to be done. And thanks for your prompt response and excuse me in case i have done anything wrong in the page. Thanks for your time RichardIsler (talk) 05:17, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@RichardIsler: the entries from the section "Titles, awards and honours" must be referenced as well. XXN, 10:48, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@XXN, Hi, I have referenced the the section of the entries from the section "Titles, awards and honours" and have removed the template so can you please review and let me know in case of any other changes to be done. And thanks for your prompt response and excuse me in case i have done anything wrong in the page. Thanks for your time RichardIsler (talk) 12:55, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I see that File:Elsa Cladera de Bravo has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Your main argumentation says "not anything which was published for official use is in the public domain". This photography of Elsa Cladera de Bravo was published in many newspapers (for almost 57 years ago) when Elsa Cladera de Bravo was a labour leader for the teachers in Bolivia and she was well known. The same image has been used as ilustration for the cover of her biography. I hope you take into consideration my explanation and do not delete this file on Elsa Cladera de Bravo. Yours sincerely Isadora 19:15, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

@Nadezhda Bravo Cladera: the file in question already was deleted. There is a process for undeleting deleted material upon request with valid arguments (WP:UND), but this is not the case. As I stated in the nomination for deletion There is no evidence that this photography really is in the public domain or free (under any other license). Licensing details are important on Wikipedia and related sites. The fact that image was widely used in newspapers or even on web it's not a valid argument if the license under which that file is available is not known. By default, all photographies are considered copyrighted if there is no evidence of contrary.

A solution for this case: as Elsa Cladera de Bravo isn't alive anymore, you can upload an image for her article under fair use. XXN, 19:45, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Please see WP:BLPREMOVE - basically EVERYTHING needs to be sourced for a WP:BLP. Feel free to re-add this, if you provide reliable sources to verify everything that has been added. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 09:49, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Re-added some content with sources (imported from the origin wiki). --XXN, 13:03, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Would you please explain what "No FOP in UA" means here and here? I figure that UA means Ukraine, but FOP is utterly uninformative. (I took those photos myself in 2008.) --Taivo (talk) 14:16, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@TaivoLinguist: see c:COM:FOP; there is no "freedom of panorama" in Ukraine, that's why I tagged these images so, to prevent their transfer to Commons where is a high probability that they will be deleted sooner or later - in such cases usually the files are kept locally on Wikipedia. It's true that I should be using full terms instead of acronyms, there exists even a specific template - {{FoP-USonly}} which gives all the needed explanations, but at that moment I didn't had too much free time to spend for each file to do perfect actions, while reviewing them:) XXN, 15:53, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Some people are proud of their personal photos and happy to share them on Wikipedia. Always providing the full template might smooth many a ruffled feather. --Taivo (talk) 19:29, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Xenia Deli, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gagauz (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:10, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Delia Matache (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Antena 1

Democratic Party of Moldova (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Lobby

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:45, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm Iulian2000! I don't understand what mistake did I make. Please let me know, as I corrected the outdated ortography of the Romanian language and replaced "Moldovans" with "Romanians" because it is scientifically proven that they are the same ethnic group. And also I saw that the Moldovan language is in fact the standard Romanian language, but written with the Cyrillic alphabet, so I changed the name for the article to be more accurate! I'm glad we can discuss and I'm waiting for your reply. Iulian2000 (talk) 16:53, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Iulian2000: Hi. That's not an outdated ortography of Romanian, it's a valid ortography, the one which currently is used Moldova officially. There are no reasons to change it in articles related to Moldova.

"... it is scientifically proven that they are the same ethnic group ..." - no, it isn't. It's something debatable and controversial. Please refrain making in future such changes.

Moldovan is formally an official language of Transnistria. Let it be written so, instead of attributing some Cyrillic text to Romanian (a Latin-script language).

And remember that the content and changes to articles must be based only on sources, not on personal opinions and conclusions. XXN, 17:31, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well I found official sources from Moldova about the ortography change made by The Moldovan Education Ministry in the schools across the country. The letter "î" is used at the beginning of the word, while the letter "â" is used inside the word (exeption making the words obtained by derivation). These changes were made in 2016. Also, the newest official documents used in the Parliament and in the public institutions respect those rules. Now, the ortography used Romania and Republic of Moldova is identical. You can verify that. This is one of the sources: http://www.jc.md/scolile-din-r-moldova-vor-scrie-obligatoriu-cu-a-si-sunt-ce-prevad-regulile-sextil-puscariu-si-de-ce-le-au-anulat-sovieticii/. Iulian2000 (talk) 18:15, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Other institutions still use the old style ortography. The rule of Ministry of Education is not mandatory for all institutions in the country and the transition process will be long. Doing such individual changes in some articles it's not recommended without a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Moldova. XXN, 19:03, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@XNN: I definetly agree with you, because even in Romania the old ortography is sometimes used by mistake. The transition is still happening for both countries. Another justification that I wanted to make is that the subject of the heritage of Romanians and Moldovans is debatable and controversial only in political context. By a making a simple comparison between the two we find that the language, culture and historic heritage are all Romanian. People of Moldova always tought that they are the same ethnic group with people of Wallachia, a reason for the unification between the two countries in the middle of XIX century, forming Romania. Unfortunately for them, East Moldova was already annexed by Russia from the year 1812, so the Romanians of this region were left behind with a process of russification starting. Even the first printed book in Moldova in XVII century is locally entitled "Carte românească de învățătură" and means "Romanian teaching book". The name "Moldovan" simply doesn't refer to a separate nation but to a person who is native to the Romanian province of Moldova. By a simple analogy, we cannot say that "Texans" are another nation, they're just Americans who were born in Texas. Even some pro-Russian and communist politicians from Republic of Moldova recognized that the nationality of this country's people is Romanian. For more details about what I mean, I got some sources: http://adevarul.ro/international/europa/jirinovski-moldovenii-romani-noi-rusii-le-am-dat-numele-moldoveni-romani-1_5561d986cfbe376e358a1f16/index.html, https://www.historia.ro/sectiune/general/articol/sunt-moldovenii-romani-sau-nu-despre-teoria-moldovenismului, http://www.timpul.md/articol/de-ce-basarabenii-nu-(se-mandresc-ca)-sunt-romani-18270.html, http://www.ziarulnatiunea.ro/2011/12/06/de-ce-moldovenii-sunt-romani/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iulian2000 (talk • contribs)

Please note that we are not doing original research on Wikipedia; instead we are just resuming the widely accepted conclusions, studies, and ideas. This is an official policy of Wikipedia. And until there is an ongoing Controversy over ethnic identity in Moldova we can't push only one point of view. XXN, 10:13, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:FC Zaria Bălți.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:33, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bots Newsletter, March 2018

Greetings! Here is the 5th issue of the Bots Newsletter (formerly the BAG Newletter). You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future newsletters by adding/removing your name from this list. Highlights for this newsletter include: ARBCOM Magioladitis 2 happened, leading to further restrictions on Magioladitis (decision, summary). Betacommand 3 was proposed to be amended to lift the indefinite ban on Δ, but was unsuccessful (decision). A motion concerning Crosswiki issues (mostly concerning Wikidata) was passed (see discussion). BAG Hersfold was removed from the BAG due to long term inactivity. BRFAs We currently have 6 open bot requests at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval, and could use your help processing! Discussions While there were no large-scale bot-related discussion in the past few months, you can check WP:BOTN and WT:BOTPOL (and their corresponding archives) for smaller issues that came up. New things WP:BOTDICT, a dictionary of common bot-related terms (see discussion). 6 inactive bots have been deflagged (see discussion). The 2017 Community Wishlist Survey happened. Two bot-related proposal passed, #6 deploy Article Alerts to other languages and #10 Commons deletion notification bot, although other entries may affect bots as well. Category:Wikipedia bots and its subcategories has had some cleanup. Bot-related pages that were historically important but are no longer of interests can be found in Category:Wikipedia bots (historical) The edit summary limit has been increased to 1000 characters (see T6715). If a bot you operate relied on the old truncation limit (255 characters), please review/update your code, as overly long summaries can be disruptive/annoying. If you want to use extra characters to have more information in your edit summary, please do so intelligently. You will soon be able to ping users from the edit summary (see T188469). If you wish to use this feature in your bot, please do so intelligently. Upcoming HTML Tidy will be phased out in June 2018, or possibly earlier. This may affect some bots (see FAQ). Thank you! edited by: Headbomb 03:12, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply] (You can subscribe or unsubscribe from future newsletters by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Thank you for uploading File:Official FC Zimbru logo.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:03, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bots Newsletter, August 2018

Greetings! Here is the 6th issue of the Bots Newsletter. You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future newsletters by adding/removing your name from this list. Highlights for this newsletter include: ARBCOM Nothing particular important happened. Those who care already know, those who don't know wouldn't care. The curious can dig ARBCOM archives themselves. BAG There were no changes in BAG membership since the last Bots Newsletter. Headbomb went from semi-active to active. In the last 3 months, only 3 BAG members have closed requests - help is needed with the backlog. BOTREQs and BRFAs As of writing, we have... 24 active BOTREQs, please help if you can! 5 open BRFAs and 3 BRFAs in need of BAG attention (see live status). 54 approved bot tasks since the start of 2018. Of note, Community Tech bot 5 (the #10 Wish on the 2017 Community Survey) was approved to notify users concerning problematic images and files from Wikimedia Commons. Also If you're a bot operator that can help with Tidy/Linter error cleanup (see discussion, discussion), please file a BRFA! 8 inactive bots have been deflagged (see discussion, discussion, discussion). Discussions These are some of the discussions that happened / are still happening since the last Bots Newsletter. Many are stale, but some are still active. Use of tags by bots – Exploring the use of a new 'bot' tag. Mass page moves – Bot policy question/clarification about mass moves. Creation of redirects – Bot policy question/clarification about the creation of redirects. Guidance on disruptive use of semi–automated tools? – Related to meatbots (see also MOS discussion, which resulted in small addition to MOS:VAR). Discussion concerning WP:BOTFLAG/WP:RC – A reminder that bots should use the bot flag when it makes sense to use it (see also VPT discussion and CREATEBOT update). Out of curiosity... (to all bot operators) – BotPasswords vs OAuth usage amongst bot operators. Introducing Toolhub – Toolhub is looking for feedback. New things {{Automated tools}}, a new template linking to user-activated tools and scripts has been created. It can be used in articles previews, and can be placed on any non-mainspace page/template (e.g. {{Draft article}}) to provide convenient links to editors. AWB 5.10.0.0 is out, after nearly 20 months without updates. If you run an old version, you will be prompted to install the new version automatically. See the changelog for what's new. Note that the next version will require .NET Framework 4.5. Many thanks to Reedy and the AWB team. BotWatch, "a listing of editors that have made >2 edits per minute [without] a bot flag", is being developed by SQL (see discussion). Massive updates and improvements have been made to Citation bot in the past few months (see discussions, discussions, discussions). You can activate the bot here, amongst other methods. HTML Tidy has been phased out (see Tech News #28). {{Newbot}} has been reorganized a bit (diff). In particular, it links to previously approved BRFAs (see discussion). Wikipedia:Bots#See also has been reorganized a bit (diff). The bot dictionary has two new entries, context bot and context-sensitive edit. The bot request header has been updated to include better guidance (see discussion). The subcategories of Category:Wikipedia bot requests for approval have been sorted in a consistent manner to make past BRFAs easier to find. Thank you! edited by: Headbomb 15:04, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply] (You can subscribe or unsubscribe from future newsletters by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Thanks for uploading File:Flightradar.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:27, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:New FK Šiauliai logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:38, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bots Newsletter, August 2019

Greetings! Here is the 7th issue of the Bots Newsletter, a lot happened since last year's newsletter! You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future newsletters by adding/removing your name from this list. Highlights for this newsletter include: ARBCOM Nothing of note happened. Just like we like it. BAG Several (1 + 12 = 13) users have been retired/resigned from the BAG due to inactivity, per our new activity requirements (discussion). BAG members are expected to be active on Wikipedia to have their finger on the pulse of the community. After two years without any bot-related activity (such as posting on bot-related pages, posting on a bot's talk page, or operating a bot), BAG members will be retired from BAG following a one-week notice. Retired members can re-apply for BAG membership as normal if they wish to rejoin the BAG. Two BAG members retired Madman (talk · contribs) retired. BU Rob13 (talk · contribs) vanished and retired. Three new BAG members have been voted in, welcome to the BAG! Primefac (talk · contribs) joined on 2018-12-12 (RfBAG). Primefac operates PrimeBOT (talk · contribs) which does a plethora of tasks. TheSandDoctor (talk · contribs) joined on 2019-01-21 (RfBAG). TheSandDoctor operates several bots including DeprecatedFixerBot (talk · contribs). Enterprisey (talk · contribs) joined on 2019-08-07 (RfBAG). Enterprisey operates EnterpriseyBot (talk · contribs), which does a plethora of tasks, RemindMeBot (talk · contribs) which posts reminders, and codes several scripts. We thank former members for their service and wish Madman a happy retirement. We note that Madman and BU Rob13 were not inactive and could resume their BAG positions if they so wished, should their retirements happens to be temporary. BOTDICT Two new entries feature in the bots dictionary Editor-hostile wikitext – describes wikitext structuring that is editor hostile, even if it renders correctly Spectrum of usefulness – describes how tasks are deemed useful or not BOTPOL Activity requirements: BAG members now have an activity requirement. The requirements are very light, one only needs to be involved in a bot-related area at some point within the last two years. For purpose of meeting these requirements, discussing a bot-related matter anywhere on Wikipedia counts, as does operating a bot (RFC). Copyvio flag: Bot accounts may be additionally marked by a bureaucrat upon BAG request as being in the "copyviobot" user group on Wikipedia. This flag allows using the API to add metadata to edits for use in the New pages feed (discussion). There is currently 1 bot using this functionality. Mass creation: The restriction on mass-creation (semi-automated or automated) was extended from articles, to all content-pages. There are subtleties, but content here broadly means whatever a reader could land on when browsing the mainspace in normal circumstances (e.g. Mainspace, Books, most Categories, Portals, ...). There is also a warning that WP:MEATBOT still applies in other areas (e.g. Redirects, Wikipedia namespace, Help, maintenance categories, ...) not explicitely covered by WP:MASSCREATION. BOTREQs and BRFAs As of writing, we have... 20 active BOTREQs, please help if you can! 14 open BRFAs and 1 BRFA in need of BAG attention (see live status). In 2018, 96 bot task were approved. An AWB search shows approximately 29 were withdrawn/expired, and 6 were denied. Since the start of 2019, 97 bot task were approved. Logs show 15 were withdrawn/expired, and 15 were denied. 10 inactive bots have been deflagged (see discussion). 5 other bots have been deflagged per operator requests or similar (see discussion). New things All bot-related discussion pages now have a centralized and searchable archive box (see discussion). Discussions are searchable per noticeboard, or globally. {{Bot}} now supports |status=expired (see discussion). This led to the deletion of Category:Indefinitely blocked Wikipedia bots as useless (see discussion). WP:BOTREQ now mentions WP:SCRIPTREQ and WP:AWBTASKS as alternatives to bot requests. The bot creation guide now mentions bot flags, and two new languages Awk and MATLAB. Other minor tweaks have been made. AAlertBot has received major code updates. In particular, WP:AALERTS will now report splits, mergers, and AFC submissions. Citation bot has received several updates (User talk:Citation bot/Archive 10/11/12/13/14/15/16/17). In particular, the bot stopped the automated removal of |publisher= from {{cite journal}}, and stopped the automated addition of CiteSeerX links, and now uses OAuth to authenticate those who make requests of the bot. Other discussions These are some of the discussions that happened / are still happening since the last Bots Newsletter. Many are stale, but some are still active. Wikipedia:Bots/Noticeboard/Archive 12#Adminbots requests page Wikipedia:Bots/Noticeboard/Archive 12#Double-redirect tagging (2019) Wikipedia:Bots/Noticeboard/Archive 12#Long and Winding Road to Parsoid Wikipedia:Bots/Noticeboard/Archive 13#Bot-like user scripts Wikipedia:Bots/Noticeboard/Archive 13#WP:URLREQ Wikipedia:Bots/Noticeboard/Archive 13#Wikipedia:Bots/Status Wikipedia talk:Bot Approvals Group#Minimum edits Wikipedia talk:Bot policy#Minor update to WP:BOTISSUE Wikipedia talk:Bot policy#Semi-automated Portal creation Wikipedia talk:Bot policy#Clarification on "Bots operated by multiple users" Wikipedia talk:Bot policy#Bots triggered by multiple users Wikipedia talk:Bots#How to use Special:ApiFeatureUsage See also the latest discussions at the bot noticeboard. Thank you! edited by: Headbomb 17:24, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply] (You can subscribe or unsubscribe from future newsletters by adding or removing your name from this list.)

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Category:Media in Chişinău. Since you had some involvement with the Category:Media in Chişinău redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 18:48, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Category:Media in Constanţa. Since you had some involvement with the Category:Media in Constanţa redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 18:48, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Category:Media in Iaşi. Since you had some involvement with the Category:Media in Iaşi redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 19:02, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Transfermarkt.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:56, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Spumante Cricova.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:49, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Spumante Cricova.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:39, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Fly Project, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Darubrub (talk) 18:38, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Roton.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:42, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I saee that you added a Do not move to Commons template but did not provide a rationale. Is there a reason why you want it kept locally? Sennecaster (Chat) 13:34, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bots Newsletter, December 2021

Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. Updates on reimplementing the Graph extension, which will be known as the Chart extension, can be found on Phabricator and on MediaWiki.org. BRFA activity by month Welcome to the eighth issue of the English Wikipedia's Bots Newsletter, your source for all things bot. Maintainers disappeared to parts unknown... bots awakening from the slumber of æons... hundreds of thousands of short descriptions... these stories, and more, are brought to you by Wikipedia's most distinguished newsletter about bots. Our last issue was in August 2019, so there's quite a bit of catching up to do. Due to the vast quantity of things that have happened, the next few issues will only cover a few months at a time. This month, we'll go from September 2019 through the end of the year. I won't bore you with further introductions — instead, I'll bore you with a newsletter about bots. Overall Between September and December 2019, there were 33 BRFAs. Of these, Y 25 were approved, and 8 were unsuccessful (N2 3 denied, ? 3 withdrawn, and 2 expired). September 2019 Y Monkbot 16, DannyS712 bot 60, Ahechtbot 6, PearBOT 3, Qbugbot 3 · N2 DannyS712 bot 5, PkbwcgsBot 24 · ? DannyS712 bot 61, TheSandBot 4 TParis goes away, UTRSBot goes kaput: Beeblebrox noted that the bot for maintaining on-wiki records of UTRS appeals stopped working a while ago. TParis, the semi-retired user who had previously run it, said they were "unlikely to return to actively editing Wikipedia", and the bot had been vanquished by trolls submitting bogus UTRS requests on behalf of real blocked users. While OAuth was a potential fix, neither maintainer had time to implement it. TParis offered to access to the UTRS WMFLabs account to any admin identified with the WMF: "I miss you guys a whole lot [...] but I've also moved on with my life. Good luck, let me know how I can help". Ultimately, SQL ended up in charge. Some progress was made, and the bot continued to work another couple months — but as of press time, UTRSBot has not edited since November 2019. Article-measuring contest resumed: The list of Wikipedians by article count, which had lain dead for several years, was triumphantly resurrected by GreenC following a bot request. October 2019 Y OAbot 3, DannyS712 bot 47, Pathbot 2, PearBOT 2, DannyS712 bot 59, DannyS712 bot 62, HasteurBot 14, PearBOT 4, WOSlinkerBot 4, MilHistBot 5 Curb Safe Charmer adopts reFill: TAnthony pointed out that reFill 2's bug reports were going unanswered; creator Zhaofeng Li had retired from Wikipedia, and a maintainer was needed. As of June 2021, Curb Safe Charmer had taken up the mantle, saying: "Not that I have all the skills needed but better me than nobody! 'Maintainer' might be too strong a term though. Volunteers welcome!" November 2019 Y BHGbot 4, YiFeiBot 2, DannyS712 bot III 64 · ? PearBOT Old bots do new tricks: DannyS712 bot III 64 prowled redirects, YiFeiBot 2 archived GoCE requests, and BHGbot 4 removed links to portals deleted at MfD (until its authorization was revoked in January at operator BrownHairedGirl's request). December 2019 Y DemonDays64 Bot, DannyS712 bot III 66, Bot1058 6, Monkbot 15, MilHistBot 6, PearBOT 5, DannyS712 bot IV 65 · N2 SportsStatsBot · Xinbenlv bot, SteveBot 8 Redirects to be autopatrolled: A RfC took place at WP:NPP, closing with unanimous consensus that new redirects should be automatically marked as patrolled by bot. DannyS712 wasted no time, and submitted DannyS712 bot III 66 the next day; it passed two days after that. 200,000 bios get short descs: Along a similar vein, Bot1058 6 was approved to remove disambiguation pages from Category:Monitored short pages and a new bot (DemonDays64 Bot) changed lots of http links to https using JavaScript Wiki Browser. One particularly neat task, PearBOT 5, automatically generated short descriptions for more than 200,000 biographies. In the next issue of Bots Newsletter: What's next for our intrepid band of coders, maintainers and approvers? What happens when two bots want to clerk the same page? What happens when an adminbot goes hog wild? Will reFill ever get fixed? What's up with ListeriaBot, anyway? Python 3.4 deprecation? In my PyWikiBot? (It's more likely than you think!) These questions will be answered — and new questions raised — by the January 2022 Bots Newsletter. Tune in, or miss out! Signing off... jp×g 04:29, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply] (You can subscribe or unsubscribe from future newsletters by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Bots Newsletter, January 2022

Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. Updates on reimplementing the Graph extension, which will be known as the Chart extension, can be found on Phabricator and on MediaWiki.org. BRFA activity by month Welcome to the ninth issue of the English Wikipedia's Bots Newsletter, your source for all things bot. Vicious bot-on-bot edit warring... superseded tasks... policy proposals... these stories, and more, are brought to you by Wikipedia's most distinguished newsletter about bots. After a long hiatus between August 2019 and December 2021, there's quite a bit of ground to cover. Due to the vastness, I decided in December to split the coverage up into a few installments that covered six months each. Some people thought this was a good idea, since covering an entire year in a single issue would make it unmanageably large. Others thought this was stupid, since they were getting talk page messages about crap from almost three years ago. Ultimately, the question of whether each issue covers six months or a year is only relevant for a couple more of them, and then the problem will be behind us forever. Of course, you can also look on the bright side – we are making progress, and this issue will only be about crap from almost two years ago. Today we will pick up where we left off in December, and go through the first half of 2020. Overall In the first half of 2020, there were 71 BRFAs. Of these, Y 59 were approved, and 12 were unsuccessful (with N2 8 denied, ? 2 withdrawn, and 2 expired). January 2020 Yeah, you're not gonna be able to get away with this anymore. Y ST47Bot, Seppi333Bot, Qbugbot 4 · N2 PkbwcgsBot 25, PkbwcgsBot 26 A new Pywikibot release dropped support for Python 3.4, and it was expected that support for Python 2.7 would be removed in coming updates. Toolforge itself planned to drop Python 2 support in 2022. Two new bots dropped in January 2020: ST47Bot, the successor to STBot, and Seppi333Bot, whose task was to perform a weekly update of four "massive" wikitables for WikiProject Molecular Biology. Cydebot, an adminbot operated by Cyde since 2006, was blocked after going berserk on categories that hadn't yet been CfD'd. February 2020 Y AnomieBOT 78, Cewbot 2, DannyS712 bot 67, DannyS712 bot III 63, PearBOT 6, DemonDays64 Bot 2 · N2 PearBOT On February 1, some concerns were raised about ListeriaBot performing "nonsense" edits. Semi-active operator Magnus Manske (who originally coded the Phase II software|precursor of MediaWiki) was pinged. Meanwhile, the bot was temporarily blocked for several hours until the issue was diagnosed and resolved. On February 18, ST47Bot got into a tussle with Amalthea (bot), and had to be partially-blocked from Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Cases/Overview. March 2020 Y MajavahBot, SDZeroBot, TheSandBot 6, TheSandBot 7, Bitbotje, FACBot 6, TheSandBot 8, Qbugbot 5, Cewbot 3, SDZeroBot 2, PrimeBOT 31, WikiCleanerBot 12 · AntiCompositeBot In March, a long discussion was started at Wikipedia talk:Bot policy by Skdb about the troubling trend of bots "expiring" without explanation after their owners became inactive. This can happen for a variety of reasons -- API changes break code, hosting providers' software updates break code, hosting accounts lapse, software changes make bots' edits unnecessary, and policy changes make bots' edits unwanted. The most promising solution seemed to be Toolforge hosting (although it has some problems of its own, like the occasional necessity of refactoring code). Some of the twelve bot tasks approved this month were TheSandBot 6 (removing blocked users from Category:Wikipedia usernames with possible policy issues), and TheSandBot 7 (removing unblocked users from Category:Wikipedians who are indefinitely blocked for promotional user names). SDZeroBot 2 was approved to refine geographic stub tags. New bots approved this month were MajavahBot (to patrol WP:EFFPR), SDZeroBot (to merge stub tags), and Bitbotje (fixing DISPLAYTITLE modifications, DEFAULTSORT errors and broken behavior switches in draftspace). April 2020 Y TheSandBot 9, BHGbot 5, DannyS712 bot 69, SDZeroBot 3, ST47ProxyBot, WugBot 4, SDZeroBot 4, DatBot 10, WikiCleanerBot 11, WikiCleanerBot 13, WikiCleanerBot 14, AntiCompositeBot 2, Cewbot 4 · N2 DaedanBot 1 · Creffbot A discussion on the bot noticeboard, "Re-examination of ListeriaBot", was started by Barkeep49, who pointed out repeated operation outside the scope of its BRFA (i.e. editing pages in mainspace, and adding non-free images to others). Some said it was doing good work, and others said it was operating beyond its remit. It was blocked on April 10; the next day it was unblocked, reblocked from article space, reblocked "for specified non-editing actions", unblocked, and indeffed. The next week, several safeguards were implemented in its code by Magnus; the bot was allowed to roam free once more on April 18. ST47ProxyBot joined the stable in April, after a BRFA started in December was finally completed. As an adminbot, it was authorized to block IP addresses belonging to open proxies, public VPN services, and web hosts. New tasks approved for existing bots included BHGbot 5 (diffusing categories), TheSandBot 9 (taking over some tasks from the inactive RonBot), and WugBot 4 (updating data at {{Interactive COVID-19 maps}}). Also, DatBot 10 was approved to scale down non-free SVGs — I didn't even know that was a thing. A discussion at Wikipedia talk:Bot policy was started by Thryduulf about whether WP:BOTCOMM should explicitly specify that bot operators must be responsive to concerns raised on English Wikipedia specifically (as opposed to Phabricator, SourceForge, Toolforge, et cetera). Eventually, the policy was amended to its current form: Issues and enquiries are typically expected to be handled on the English Wikipedia. Pages reachable via unified login, like a talk page at Commons or at Italian Wikipedia could also be acceptable [...] External sites like Phabricator or GitHub (which require separate registration or do not allow for IP comments) and email (which can compromise anonymity) can supplement on-wiki communication, but do not replace it. May 2020 Y MajavahBot 3, DannyS712 bot 70, CitationCleanerBot 5, Dreamy Jazz Bot 4, QEDKbot, William Avery Bot 2, DannyS712 bot 68, PrimeBOT 32, TheSandBot 10, Bot1058 7, BHGbot 6, EaglesBot 2, Cewbot 5, WikiCleanerBot 17 · N2 MDanielsBot, PhuzBot 3, Gedimon · ? PearBOT 7 MajavahBot 3, an impressively meta bot task, was approved this month for maintaining a list of bots running on the English Wikipedia. The page, located at User:MajavahBot/Bot status report, is updated every 24 hours; it contains a list of all accounts with the bot flag, as well as their operator, edit count, last activity date, last edit date, last logged action date, user groups and block status. Other approvals for this month were William Avery Bot 2 (processing redirects in {{R from scientific name}}), DannyS712 bot 68 (allowing users to schedule bot reminders for themselves), TheSandBot 10 (removing blocked/locked users from Category:User talk pages with conflict of interest notices), Bot1058 7 (updating Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests/Permalink), Dreamy Jazz Bot 4 (adding {{WikiProject Biography|living=no}} to talk pages where their associated article is in a year of death category), and QEDKbot (deleting and nominating empty categories). General syntax fixing tasks were approved for DannyS712 bot 70, CitationCleanerBot 5, PrimeBOT 32, BHGbot 6, Cewbot 5, and EaglesBot 2, as well as WikiCleanerBot 15, 16, and 17. Seven bots who fell below activity requirements (with neither the bots nor their operators having any edits or logged actions in two years) had their bot flags removed. They were NekoBot, Robert SkyBot, DASHBotAV, VoxelBot, JackieBot, ReferenceBot, and CensusBot. On May 12, EmausBot was blocked. June 2020 Y QEDKbot 2, AnomieBOT 79, WOSlinkerBot 6, Yapperbot 2, Yapperbot, AnomieBOT 80, Dreamy Jazz Bot 5, WikiCleanerBot 18, HasteurBot 15, MusikBot II 4, NoSandboxesHere · N2 RedWarn · ? Seppi333Bot 2 In July 2017, Headbomb made a proposal that a section of the Wikipedia:Dashboard be devoted to bots and technical issues. In November 2019, Lua code was written superseding Legobot's tasks on that page, and operator Legoktm was asked to stop them so that the new code could be deployed. After no response to pings, a partial-block of Legobot for the dashboard was proposed. Some months later, on June 16, Headbomb said: "A full block serves nothing. A partial block solves all current issues [...] Just fucking do it. It's been 3 years now." The next day, however, Legoktm disabled the task, and the dashboard was successfully refactored. On June 7, RexxS blocked Citation bot for disruptive editing, saying it was "still removing links after request to stop". A couple weeks later, a discussion on the bots noticeboard was opened, saying "it is a widely-used and useful bot, but it has one of the longest block logs for any recently-operating bot on Wikipedia". While its last BRFA approval was in 2011, its code and functionality had changed dramatically since then, and AntiCompositeNumber requested that BAG require a new BRFA. Maintainer AManWithNoPlan responded that most blocks were from years ago (when it lacked a proper test suite), and problems since then had mostly been one-off errors (like a June 2019 incident in which a LTA had "weaponized" the bot to harass editors). David Tornheim opened a discussion about whether bots based on closed-source code should be permitted, and proposed that they not. He cited a recent case in which a maintainer had said "I can only suppose that the code that is available on GitHub is not the actual code that was running on [the bot]". Some disagreed: Naypta said that "I like free software as much as the next person, and I strongly believe that bot operators should make their bot code public, but I don't think it should be that they must do so". Two new bots had their first BRFAs approved: Yapperbot, to replace Legobot for handling the Feedback Request Service, and NoSandboxesHere, to remove {{user sandbox}} from articles in draftspace using Category:Non-userspace pages using User sandbox. Conclusion What's next for our intrepid band of coders, maintainers and approvers? Will Citation bot ever be set free to roam the project? What's the deal with all those book links that InternetArchiveBot is adding to articles? Should we keep using Gerrit for MediaWiki? What if we had a day for bots to make cosmetic edits? These questions will be answered — and new questions raised — by the February 2022 Bots Newsletter. Tune in, or miss out! Signing off... jp×g 23:22, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply] (You can subscribe or unsubscribe from future newsletters by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Hello, XXN,

Thank you for creating Michele Bon.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

This article needs more references in order to provide significant coverage for this article. See WP:SIGCOV
References that have scores, lists, order of merit and video do not pass as reliable sources for WP:NSPORT. (There have been changes to the notability guide for sports - you may wish to read WP:NSPORT ) To meet notability requirements, one more reference with significant coverage will suffice. Thank you.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Whiteguru}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Whiteguru (talk) 16:27, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Petrocub Sărata-Galbenă.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:28, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Tagged for months without improvement, fails GNG.

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. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:24, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

List of renamed populated places in Moldova

added links pointing to Drăgușeni, Codreni, Frumușica, Dolna and Alexanderfeld

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:FC Petrocub.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:13, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Nu hiu faimos ama hiu Armân.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 09:00, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Template:CS Femina-Sport Chișinău sections has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 16:38, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:FC Petrocub.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:17, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Osmanlıspor FK logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:34, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]