User talk:D6
|
|
D6 is a bot operated by User:Docu running pywikipediabot.
Section headers have been added by User:Docu to the talk below. Please use User talk:Docu for discussions not directly related to the bot's operation.
TLAs
Wouldn't it make sense to put Category:TLAs into Template:TLA? Marnanel 17:05, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- It sure would, but that template isn't really used much, so I added it directly to the pages. -- User:Docu
Years
What on earth do we need year categories for? Would this mean World War II would get categories 1939, 1940, 1941, 1942, 1943, 1944, and 1945? I don't get it. Everyking 19:35, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Oh, I see, it's for things like such in such year in sports, science, etc? Well, I suggest that not be extended infinitely into years for which we have no such articles to categorize. Everyking 19:36, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- It's been suggested and discussed at Category talk:Years. The categories should be for events specific to a year (see Template:Yearcat). -- User:Docu
Wanted to thank you for adding the "riot" articles to the year categories. I never knew such things existed. --Duemellon 01:56, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)
And more thanks. I've been trying to get some of the pages I've worked on into categories, so more folks may see them - and here you are, doing such a nice job on this! Wonderful job! --avnative 04:38, Sep 24, 2004 (UTC)
Year of birth/death categories
Categories
Chinese surnames appear before given names. The surname of Soong May-ling is Soong. Please take this into account when inserting categories. --Jiang 20:45, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- I spotted some of those and fixed them manually. A few Spanish names are sorted inconsistently as well.
- I plan to compare the sort key generated by the bot with the ones set for other categories in the same article. I can't do this before the next download is available though. -- User:Docu
- See now: Wikipedia:People_by_year#Checking_sort_keys -- User:Docu
exagerated categories
Why not make a "Male" and "Female" category btw.... User:Cyprus2k1
- As in Category:Male ? -- User:Docu
- i think that its exagerated... - --Cyprus2k1 12:43, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Yup, adding two more categories to each and every biographical article sounds a bit... bizarre. In many cases there are already three or even more categories. After adding another two (births and deaths) the whole categories line becomes too crowded. I'm afraid that your concept might only lead to greater mess. [[User:Halibutt|Halibutt]] 00:00, Sep 23, 2004 (UTC)
- Lyndon B. Johnson had nine categories before .. I doubt the two additions really make it worse. Many biographies don't have any categories at all.
- I won't add Category:Male BTW -- User:Docu
How about Category:April 1 Births. Honestly, can you hold off running this bot until consensus is developed? I think there's enough controversy on these categories that you ought to. Cool Hand Luke 18:34, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I would like to point out that these categories violate both of the criteria on whether a category should be created at Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and series boxes. Snowspinner 20:10, Sep 26, 2004 (UTC)
checking for disambig pages
You might want to have the bot check if a page is a disambiguation page before adding a category to it. For example Bob Carr. [[User:Bkonrad|]] 12:51, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- They will show up in a subsequent update of Wikipedia:People_by_year/Reports/Sortkeytest (I had spotted Bob Carr BTW. -- User:Docu
Before adding more useless year categories, you may at least want to determine if they are correct, for example in the case of Kim Deal. Such verification might slow you down a bit too, so I wouldn't have hundreds of edits to wade through on my watchlist. Everyking 13:06, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- I will run a variation of Wikipedia:People_by_year#With_categories to check the plausibility of the information by Wikipedia. -- User:Docu
Birth/death categories
You might want to check that the birth/death categories you're inserting aren't already present in an article, and that you're assigning it to the right year for the right name. Dwight D. Eisenhower already had the relevant categories, and Harman and Ising assigned one person's years of birth and death to both of the subjects of the article. (I've fixed both.) -Sean Curtin 06:31, Sep 23, 2004 (UTC)
- Agreed. It looks like there is a bug in this bot. See for example [1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Niki_de_Saint_Phalle&curid=351248&diff=0&oldid=0) where two death categories have automatically been added using different lists and giving conflicting sorting. -- Solipsist 18:46, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- It's a known problem. If the sort key is different, the bot adds another category. It will be fairly easy to find them once an updated dump of categories is available (i.e. tomorrow, or the day afterwards). -- User:Docu
Approval
I was just wondering if you can give me a link to where this bot got approval to run, and for what, exactly. Snowspinner 20:04, Sep 26, 2004 (UTC)
Accuracy
I don't particularly care for these categories, but they're even worse if incorrect. John F. Burns was just marked as having a died in 2003. He had a byline yesterday, and he's very much alive. He's not listed in Deaths in 2003. What is the source of this bot's information?--Jkiang 20:21, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- It's my manual input that was incorrect. Thank you for pointing it out (and fixing it). - User:Docu
Suspended
I've suspended this bot. The category addition is clearly controversial, and, though the bot was approved, the original request said nothing about category addition. I've opened up discussion at Wikipedia talk:Bots. Please go explain what you intend to use this bot for, and get it reapproved, and I'll lift the block. Snowspinner 20:40, Sep 26, 2004 (UTC)
- It was approved for running pywikipediabot (which includes the category.py package). The year categories have been discussed and kept. Thus, please unblock the bot. -- User:Docu
- Although the pywikipediabot contains the categories package, it also contains other things, and not all pybots are used for all purposes. I think the categories are a terrible idea, obviously, and that, regardless of the deletion debate, they violate policy. That said, my real concern here is that the bot was given approval purely because there were no objections, and there was no particular discussion of what the bot is going to do, and now it's generating controversy. I'd like to at least wait a week and see what kinds of objections arise to a request for bot status that specifies exactly what you intend to do with the bot. I promise not to object myself, and if there's no one else but me and Netoholic that minds, I'll unblock it. Snowspinner 21:46, Sep 26, 2004 (UTC)
- It mostly used for adding categories, but it was never used for adding categories we didn't want at all. Obviously, few cared about Category:ATC codes being added, but it got them off Special:Uncategorizedpages anyways. -- User:Docu
- I'm unblocking it, because I'm leaving the project for a while. Snowspinner 00:58, Sep 27, 2004 (UTC)
Resuspended
I'm re-blocking it (when in doubt, you're supposed to block the bot... I'm in doubt). There seems to be some evidence of significant objections to its current procedure. - Fennec (はさばくのきつね) 05:54, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- For the discussion of the scheme see Wikipedia talk:People by year/Delete. I think I adressed all the concerns in regards to the way the bot implements the scheme. -- User:Docu
IRC: <Netoholic> like I said, I don't know what "authorized" really means anymore,
but he knows there are strong objections to the category scheme,
and the fact that the bot is making mistakes with the categories
- Objections to both the category scheme, and the bot's accuracy have been noted many times on this talk page, Docu's, Wikipedia talk:People by year, and Wikipedia talk:Bots. -- Netoholic @ 05:58, 2004 Oct 6 (UTC)
the births/deaths (automatic?) categorization is broken
...because it doesn't check whether the article is already there! Please check your recent edits and correct where necessary. BACbKA 10:45, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Would you give me a sample, I'm not quite sure what you mean. The upload is automatic, not the categorization as such. It's based on manual input. -- User:Docu
- Please have a look at Lev Semenovich Pontryagin for an example. Both births and deaths categorization is duplicated. I am the one who has (manually) added the births/deaths in that article, ahead of the bot. BACbKA 13:19, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- It's mentionned on Wikipedia:People_by_year#Bot_problems. It happens in the few cases when a year of birth/death category was added since last available download of the database (currrently 2 Oct 2004) and when there is a difference in sort keys (see pywikipediabot bug report (http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=996946&group_id=93107&atid=603138)). The filtering before upload should be limiting cases where this happens. It's possible that the article shows up on the sort key report with categories to be fixed, but not necessarily, as Category:1988_deaths (and the database available for download) include only one (here that with the explicit sort key). -- User:Docu
- Should we be bold and clean it manually when it happens, or will that result, likewise, in a double remove of the category (once by the human and once by a corrections bot)? BACbKA 18:31, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- If there is a difference in sort keys in the download (http://download.wikimedia.org/archives/en/?M=D), these categories show up on the sortkey report, otherwise they don't. In both cases they need to be fixed manually. -- User:Docu
- In case you didn't notice, today I see another such problem at Mikhail Gromov, and it happened after my last post here yesterday (about Lev Semenovich Pontryagin, which I have just corrected manually). Can you please stop the run and correct the bot to analyze the article *text* of any article modified to check if the category is there? BACbKA 18:55, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- In this case, the category was added with the sort key of Category:Mathematicians. As you omitted the sortkey when adding Category:1943 births, the category was added a 2nd time. It wouldn't have happened if the sort keys were identical or if the manual categories were added before the last download (http://download.wikimedia.org/archives/en/?M=D). The categories on both articles needed to be fixed anyways, as the sort keys were missing. -- User:Docu
Better sorting for year categories
Over the past few days I've been going through Category:2004, Category:2003, etc., changing category references in the subcategories and constituent articles whose titles begin with the year, to make them sort better on the (parent) Category page.
Examples: On 2003 in film, I've changed "[[Category:2003]]" to "[[Category:2003|Film]]" so the entry 2003 in film will appear not under the header 2 but under F. In addition, on January 2003, I've changed the category reference to "[[Category:2003|*2003-01]]" so January 2003 will be sorted chronologically with the other months in the first section (labeled *) on the category page. Finally, the article 2003 contains simply "[[Category:2003|*]]" (See Category:2003 for the effect of these changes.)
I suggest that you change your bot to attempt to do this automatically. That is (for example), if the subcategory or article name (PAGENAME) begins with the same year the parent category name does (followed optionally by the word in), include a pipe followed by the next word rest of the subcat/article name, forced to be capitalized. Similar changes for the month-year and year-only page names. This might not always work properly, but it would significantly reduce the effort required to "fix" the categorization "manually", as I have been doing.
- dcljr 04:56, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC) [text deleted, inserted by dcljr 23:29, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)]
- Personally, I think Category:2003 is more difficulte to read than before, the article titles normal sorting separates categories like "2003 in .." and "2003 (xyz)" from others. Obviously, if someone choses A-Z sorting over the other, I wouldn't added more in the other sorting.
- For the months, my choice would be to add them to a subcategory of their own. -- User:Docu
- One of the reasons I prefer sorting by the first "significant" word is that — to take but one example — there's no logical reason to sort Grammy Awards of 2003 under G, but 2003 Pulitzer Prize under 2; they're both 2003-related pages (as are all the pages listed in the category), so it makes more sense to consistently sort them under the topic of the page (Grammy and Pulitzer). Now, if you want to treat "2003 in..." pages differently and sort those under 2, that's fine with me, but certainly the other "2003..." pages should be sorted "alphabetically" by topic, right? - dcljr 22:59, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- I've asked for other people's opinions on this matter at Category talk:Years#RFC on my activities in year categories. - dcljr 23:24, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- FYI, I also asked for opinions at the Village pump policy section (two favorable responses — discussion now moved to Category talk:Years). Friday I placed a short, informal proposal at Wikipedia talk:Categorization. - dcljr 19:55, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Year of birth/death categories (cont.)
Duplicate cats
The bot is adding duplicate birth/death cats to various pages that have them already, e.g. William T. Sampson, Webb Hayes. It looks like a bunch I added them to in creating "Category:Spanish-American War people" were duplicated. Ave! PedanticallySpeaking 16:53, Oct 8, 2004 (UTC)
- It does happen in the cases mentionned above, but they are fairly rare. Anyways, as the bot is now blocked I suppose it wont happen again. -- User:Docu
- There is now a fix for this, check: Wikipedia:People by year#Bot problems. -- User:Docu
- I don't speak code, but I assume the bottom line of this is "If I unblock the bot, it won't do this again?" Snowspinner 16:32, Oct 9, 2004 (UTC)
- More like "The number of cases where it happens is limited and User:Docu will fix them afterwards". Later today, once the new download (http://download.wikimedia.org/archives/en/?M=D) is available, I will be able to tell precisely how many times it happened in the past and wasn't corrected. -- User:Docu
- What's the timeframe on that download? Snowspinner 17:20, Oct 9, 2004 (UTC)
- The report is available now (Wikipedia:People_by_year/Reports/Multiple_cats). I will go through it later today. There are about 50 of the 28600 articles categorized that need to be fixed. It can be updated once per week, i.e. when the download version is updated. -- User:Docu
- Bot is blocked again due to its malfunctioning. Snowspinner 17:57, Oct 8, 2004 (UTC)
- Bot is unblocked in any case. Snowspinner 15:34, Oct 10, 2004 (UTC)
- Thanks. -- User:Docu
Incorrect date of death
It appears that the bot incorrectly added Zviad Gamsakhurd ia's death year incorrectly. Just giving a heads up in case its happening on other pages. -- User:ElBenevolente
- It shouldn't. Thanks for pointing it out. -- User:Docu
- It shouldn't, but it did. It appears to have done the same for Felix Rodriguez, which I have fixed. As near as I can tell the only reason it picked 1988 as the year of his demise is because that was the most recent year mentioned in the article. An article (http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/8/29/113445.shtml) in August this year quotes Rodriguez in relation to the recent elections in America and his prior conflict with John Kerry. So he's clearly still around. --BenM 07:11, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Not sure, how I could let this one splip through. Thank you for fixing it. -- User:Docu
The article William Turner contained the dates for the painter, not the botanist. Burschik 12:21, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Approximate Years
I deleted the 1927 birth category from John W. Griffin because I don't have an exact date of birth for him. When I composed the article, the newspaper sources I used gave an age. I subtracted and wrote it as "born circa 1927" because I was not certain. Now if it's been agreed that we will include approximates in these categories, I'll apologize for the deletion but I think it ought to be used only when we have a confirmed date. Ave atque vale! PedanticallySpeaking 14:56, Oct 12, 2004 (UTC)
- According to Wikipedia:People_by_year#Which_category_to_use I'm using those as they allow to locate a person's lifespan on the timeline. -- User:Docu
- I was not aware of this and have therefore restored the category tag. Thanks for your reply. PedanticallySpeaking 18:04, Oct 12, 2004 (UTC)
Birth/Death categories (talk moved by Netoholic)
Moved conversation from bot talk page to Wikipedia talk:People by year for visibility. -- Netoholic @ 16:27, 2004 Oct 24 (UTC)
Birth Death categories added to articles that are not about one person
Birth and death years have been added inappropriately to some articles that are about groups of people, rather than a single person, for example Andrews Sisters and Gilbert and Sullivan. -- Infrogmation 20:49, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Generally a bad idea indeed. One most was selected as it was in a category including mainly biographies, the other as the name starts with a title similar to other biographies. I try to filter them, but must have missed those. I will check past additions with "and" in the title. -- User:Docu
- I probably should give the question further thought. It may be usefull to include, e.g. Leopold and Loeb in one way or the other into the categories. -- User:Docu
Disambiguation Page Birth/Death Year
Marshall Hall had a Birth/Death categorization added, which is innapropriate. The years added are correct for Marshall Hall (physiologist) and should be moved there. There are other Marshall Halls, many are not people at all. Merenta 02:59, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- It happened as the article was moved away since the last available (generally weekly updated) download version. A report is run on the download version to fix these cases Wikipedia:People_by_year/Reports/Disambig_pages. Thank you for fixing this one. -- User:Docu
Jimmy Nicol
I don't know where D6 gets its information, but it recently altered Jimmy Nicol by adding it to the category of 1964 births. Jimmy Nicol joined the Beatles on tour in 1964. I assure you he was not born in the same year. - Vague Rant 08:29, Nov 8, 2004 (UTC)
- It starts out with the first year in the article (if the article is reasonably formatted it's the year of birth). I then screen the list and should correct/throw out all wrong ones .. I'm sure he was re-born that year ;-) .. Thank you for fixing it. -- User:Docu
Birth/Deaths at beginning of category lists
Hi,
It seems like the birth/death dates are pretty reasonable things to add to articles, but would it be possible to have them added at the end of the existing category lists? Seeing "Categories: 1916 births | 2001 deaths | Prize in Economics winners | Turing Award Laureate | Carnegie Mellon professors" at the end of the Herbert Simon article was more than a little surprising. I've rearranged a few articles manually, to put the categories in importance order. But in just about any article, those are going to be the least important pieces of information. If you could move them to the ends of the lists, I think that would be a big improvement, but I'd be open to discussion. -- Creidieki 03:51, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Initially the bot added the categories and sorted all of them alphabetically (pywikipediabot standard). Following (a series of complaints, I stopped adding the categories to articles with more than three other categories.
- The bot can now also add them at the end of the list. Recently, I started using the later mode, especially with articles with more than 3 other categories (baseball players, e.g.). Note that other bots may still add/sort their additions differently, e.g. at Herbert Simon. -- User:Docu
Main article in category
Military slang category
This category has only one article, which is itself "Military slang." I don't see the point. Maurreen 17:18, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- If Category:military slang exists, Military slang needs to be in there. As I didn't create it, I don't mind if you have it deleted. -- User:Docu
Categories
Please stop indiscriminatory adding categories that match article name. Mikkalai 18:22, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Would you explain which articles are incorrectly categorised (see User_talk:Mikkalai#Unexplained_reversals), rather than indiscriminately reversing other people's contributions? -- User:Docu
- Now I am not at all sure that these contributions are of "people", unless you are a cyborg. As for undiscriminately, you are right. Sorry. I will revert only some of them. Mikkalai 18:49, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- The initial input was compiled by myself (trying to avoid matching e.g. Roses with Category:Roses). A few miscategorizations may have remained, such as placing Bridge into Category:Bridge, or using categories deleted since the last database dump (e.g. for Ceramics). In the meantime, I think I fixed all of them. Amazing that several of these articles were uncategorized before! -- User:Docu
Categories and languages
I have removed the addition of Category:Gbe languages to the article Gbe languages and similarly for Kwa languages. I believe that in in the case of languages, Categories and Subcategories can be best used to reflect the language family hierarchy. To achieve that, one should not include the co-ordinating article in the Category, but only the articles of individual languages (e.g. only articles like Ewe language and Fon language should be member of the Category:Gbe languages. Gbe languages on the other hand should be member of Category:Kwa languages.) ¶ Mark Dingemanse (talk) 19:43, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Removing the "coordinating article" from its own category makes it more difficulte to locate the category for those starting out with the article. This is one of the reason why it's generally placed in the category (1:article that defines a category), even if it's then in its parent as well. It looks like elsewhere in the language family hierarchy, this is handled in a similar fashion (2).
- The sortkey "*" may be used to indicate that Gbe languages is the "coordinating article" (3, 4).
- Personally, I'd readd the category, but I understand your reasons. I will try to skip the categories in case of a future update. -- User:Docu
Reading your explanation, I think I acted too fast. Some months ago, there was a similar problem when I tried to categorize some language articles myself. I got lost in all the conventions about categories and the only solution I could find at that time was just to exclude the parent from its category. I was not aware of the use of the asterisk as sortkey. Thank you for providing me with links to the relevant passages and for your kind reply. I'm sorry for my impatient attitude. You convinced me; you can happily readd the category. You can check (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Special:Contributions&target=Mark+Dingemanse) my last contributions to see the six language family articles I was aware of where I deleted your addition (see edit summaries). ¶ Mark Dingemanse (talk) 23:51, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- In case I'll do another series, I will readd the categories. BTW it's convincible that one day it will be done the other way again .. -- User:Docu
Category:Madhyamaka
When you apply a category to a page, you should remove higher-level categories of which that category is a subcategory; i.e., I removed the "Branches of Buddhism" category tag on the Madhyamaka page. -- कुक्कुरोवाच|Talk‽
- As this is a case where it's acceptable to add (keep) the parent category as well (1: Ohio sample), I don't think the bot should make such a change. -- User:Docu
Category:Columbus Township, St. Clair County, Michigan
Is there are reason why the bot added this category? It is completely nonstandard. older≠wiser 02:20, Nov 17, 2004 (UTC)
- It was added because it exists. It was created by another bot. Personally I think it should be deleted. -- User:Docu
- Sorry, I just saw that D6 had added Columbus Township, St. Clair County, Michigan to the category and assumed it had also created it since there was nothing else in it. older≠wiser 03:30, Nov 17, 2004 (UTC)
Fijian people
Hi Docu. I'm curious about why you keep on adding the [[Category:Fijian People]] to the Fijian people article. The Fijian people article is about the Fijian ethnic group; it is NOT a list of Fijians, which your category is. Your category, BTW, includes Fijian citizens who are not ethnic Fijians - and rightly so, but I wonder whether it's suitable to link it to an article that focuses exclusively on ethnic Fijians. Please let me know what you think. David Cannon 09:54, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- It's mainly because it matches the title and I didn't see earlier that it was reverted (in the unlikely case of another run, I think I should crosscheck the list against previous uploads). In this particular case, I think the inclusion is defendable, even if it only covers the topic partially. At least, I didn't throw it out at a quick glance after the first addition. BTW I added {{catmore1|[[List of Fijians]]}} to the category, which would exclude the future addition of the category to the article with the same name. -- User:Docu
- Thanks for explaining:-) David Cannon 21:36, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Year of birth/death categories (cont 3)
James Kelly
Why did D6 add Category:2003 deaths to James Kelly? —Lowellian (talk)[[]] 10:14, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)
- Good question. Finally I found it. Deaths in 2003 lists (listed) James Kelly as dying on July 16, 2003. Category:2003 deaths was added to all people listed there.
- Maybe I should make James Kelly into a disambiguation page as there are at least four people (including a 19th century representative) of that name in Wikipedia and (currently) only 3 of 9 direct links from other articles are about James A. Kelly. -- User:Docu
- I went through creating a disambiguation page for the name. -- User:Docu
Double birth/death categories
This bot is still producing double categories, see Albert I of Germany. Martg76 22:17, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- I'm aware of that and fixing them once the download version is updated (Wikipedia:People_by_year/Reports/Multiple_cats). --- User:Docu
Ogg files
Hi there! Is there any chance to use the bot to add the Category:ogg files to all .ogg files from the upload logs? I tried to do it myself by hand until I realised that there is actually a lot of ogg files out there and it would take years to complete this.
I believe that such category is needed since there is no list of ogg files so far and the files are listed only by their license categories, not by their type. This can often be misleading, since the ogg file can hardly be called an image... [[User:Halibutt|[[User:Halibutt|]]]] 05:52, Dec 13, 2004 (UTC)
Year of birth/death categories (cont 4)
Adding birth and death cat to (articles with Template:Lived)
Moved <from User talk:Docu>:
I noticed your bot adding cats for birth and death to lots of bios, which is fine. But it seems to add the cats also when they aren't needed. i.e. when there allready is a Template:Lived in the article. See for instance the Anders Lange article. Thanks. Shanes 06:56, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- The problem is similar to the problem mentioned at Wikipedia:People_by_year#Bot_problems and User_talk:D6#Double_birth.2Fdeath_categories. I will fix it in the next download in the same way. It's less a problem now though, as MediaWiki no longer displays them twice on the article. For easy maintenance, we may want convert Template:Lived into category links by bot and possibly add a check to the bot when running. -- User:Docu
- Ok, thanks, I see. But wouldn't it be better to have a bot doing it the other way? To convert the birth/died cat lines into template lived, instead? Templates are nice, in this case it's shorter, and there are stuff you can more conveniently do with templates. Say we someday want to add images for death or birth, or do other stuff with their appearance, then changing one template is really easy and convenient. But converting to the template is of course a rather big change, and I guess this isn't the place to discuss it. Shanes 06:19, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- In general, I tend to agree with you, though for now, there aren't that many tools to maintain and use template-based information, especially compared to categories. Besides, given the number of uses I had to fix, Template:Lived isn't as easy as Template:Lifetime (in my version). -- User:Docu
</from User talk:Docu>
Disambiguating
Hi! Good work disambiguating "Georgia", but please watch out that you're selecting the correct meaning (you picked the wrong one for Boris Hagelin). Cheers! — Matt Crypto 14:00, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks. Guess who noticed first! -- User:Docu
I've reverted your disambiguation of Georgia User:Thryduulf/Geonamesongs as the links to disambiguation pages are deliberate and necessary - the note at the top of the page that starts "Please do not disambiguate the links on this page" explains why. If you know which particular Georgia a song in the Generic or Unknown section (the one that links to the Disambig page) refers to, please move it to the correct section. Thryduulf 09:52, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Please excuse, I generally don't disambiguate pages outside article namespace. I exceptionally do, if the section looks like one of a ready-made article. In your case, the updated link was made through a deliberate Georgia (disambiguation) redirect, which whould be ideal (at least for those viewing Special:Whatlinkshere/Georgia later). -- User:Docu
- South beach disambiguation. Thanks for correcting that, I just assumed the template would be "disambiguation" and "disambig" redirected to it. Guess I should have actually checked :) <>Who?¿? 05:37, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Template:Coor additions
Embedded template causing problem with coordinate conversion
It would appear that it is not possible to use a template within a parameter of another. This edit (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Democratic_Republic_of_the_Congo&diff=11193930&oldid=11160940) demonstrates the problem. Are you using a bot? Can your changes be quickly checked and rolled back if necessary? --Phil | Talk 08:38, Mar 16, 2005 (UTC)
- I'm aware of the problem and I thought I had reverted all of those cases already (Infobox Country and Infobox Swiss town are a problem). Thank you for fixing this one. -- User:Docu
Perhaps a similar problem with Belgrade. --A D Monroe III 19:36, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Yes, thank you for spotting it. I didn't come across it on the log yet. I added Infobox Serbia to the bot's exclusion list (and the WikiProject's list). -- User:Docu
Protected areas, National parks
- Please stop these edits - you have now messed up all the templates for national parks. Not to mention the fact that you didn't discuss this change on the WikiProject:Protected Areas and that is is printing a unreadable chararcter for minutes instead of just using '.
On the Protected area template you have replaced
- Longitude: xx° xx' N
- Latitude: xx ° xx' W
with
- Longitude: xx ° xx′ N xx° xx′ W
Please revert these changes. Rmhermen 23:04, Mar 18, 2005 (UTC)
- I was checking the different changes, e.g. Capitol Reef National Park and the main change needed it appears to be a change of "Longitude" to "coordinates". Alternatively, "Longitude<br>Latitude" could go in the same cell. The coordinates formatted according to the manual of style display correctly.
- When updating the National Parks of Australia, I hadn't found a template or a centeral point for those. The few that did indeed have a infobox, it appears now that it's the one I missed, i.e. the template for protected areas. -- User:Docu
- Detailed proposal, see: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Protected_areas#Reformatting_coordinates
Johnston Atoll
Moved from: User talk:Docu
FYI, the User:D6 appears to format degrees decimal incorrectly. If the lat/lon is 97.123 N,120.234 W, D6 uses coor dm|97|.123|N|120|.234|W|). It should use coor d|97.123|N|120.234|W| -- Check out Johnston Atoll for an example.
- Thanks. I came across that one, just to find that it was fixed (still need to amend the regex though). -- User:Docu
/Moved from User talk:Docu
Bot damage (coordinates template)
Hi, it looks like your bot was a bit careless: [2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Extreme_points_of_Russia&diff=11264687&oldid=11263745). I've reverted this, and I'll check the other Extreme points of the world articles, but you may want to change your bot a bit. Eugene van der Pijll 23:06, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I've reverted Extreme points of Australia for much the same reason. --ScottDavis 23:14, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- I was going through the log and was about to revert them. Thank you for checking them. -- User:Docu
More unlinked coordinates
I found an article with geographic coordinates that aren't linked to template:coor or anything else yet: New Brunswick, New Jersey. It looks like there might be quite a few articles with coordinates formatted the same way, so it's probably a job for D6. I checked three other random articles from Category:Middlesex County, New Jersey and they all had coordinates that looked the same format. --ScottDavis 05:32, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- New Brunswick, New Jersey is one of 25'000 rambot entries. I had excluded those from the conversion as most of them already have a mapit or geolinks template at the end of the page. Those already link back to the map sources. At Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Geographical coordinates#Rambot_entries, I'm trying to find an agreement with Rambot/Ram-Man about the format to be used for the coordinates in the text as I'm planning to convert the few (200-400) rambot entries that don't have a mapit or geolink template. For the remaining ones, it might be easier if Rambot would do it during one of his occasional updates, once the definite format for coordinates is chosen. Maybe we could change the template to make it clear that it includes those links. -- User:Docu
Fair enough. I just noticed the coordinates at the top of the article weren't linked, and never thought to also look at the bottom. Thanks. --ScottDavis 11:16, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Well as there are quite a few of them, it's preferable that the conversion is included in another update (the bot would easily be busy for 3 days). -- User:Docu
More grist for your bot
List of volcanoes seems ripe for conversion to coor. -- hike395 06:15, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Mountain dms coordinates break into two lines
They break into two lines, even with only 0.1″ accuracy. For example, see Mount Terror (Washington). Not sure how to fix. -- hike395 17:28, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
John Taylor
Just noticed that your bot is moving the disambiguation wikilink from John Taylor to John Taylor (disambiguation) which then redirects to John Taylor. Is there something I don't know that this is the correct link? If not can you restore them? User:Trödel/sig 16:40, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- It makes it easier to figure out which links to Special:Whatlinkshere/John_Taylor. All the links you added had made it really difficulte. Wikipedia:Redirect suggests using it (see also Template:R_to_disambiguation_page). -- User:Docu
- Thanks - I just noticed that all these John Taylors don't have a reference back to the disambiguation page so I added them manually. I'll do it the other way from now on. User:Trödel/sig 16:50, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Some sort of a template would be great for this, e.g. Template:Otherpersons (it might need improvement). -- User:Docu
Events by year BC
Would it be possible for D6 to create articles redirecting to the relevant decade for all the the years 1500 BC - 500 BC? Currently this have been done somewhat sporadically. Fornadan 19:40, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Yes. I checked there are already 613 such redirects (on April 6) and all decade articles have already been created. -- User:Docu
- Thanks Fornadan 14:53, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
Mistake in selecting date of birth?
Please check the edit [3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Howard_Barker&diff=10967540&oldid=10919561) to the page Howard Barker. Your bot added Category:1571 births to this playwright born in 1946. This may indicate a bug in the code, because the date 1571 appears in the text as a date connected to one of his plays. Please check your code before the next run. Gdr 12:29, 2005 May 18 (UTC)
- Prior to upload, a list is compiled from the years in articles. The list is reviewed (by me) and then uploaded. Occasionally a year such as the sample above escapes my attention. It should be found by reports such the "oldest" etc. I should indeed work on that lists, fixing errors such as that and finding missing years (even more so, but they aren't necessarily in the articles already). -- User:Docu
Disambig
It's not at all important, but I'm very curious as to why you took the time to edit Bale and change {{disambiguation}} to {{disambig}}. ---Isaac R 21:38, 20 May 2005 (UTC)
- There were a series of disambiguation pages that came up as uncategorized (mainly because they haven't been edited since Category:Disambiguation was added to Template:Disambig). To have them categorized, one needed to do a null edit on them (this is now done, less then twenty are left). As there remained a few uncategorized pages using the 5 or 6 redirects pointing to template:disambig, I figured it was easier to add the template w/o the redirect to the page directly. -- User:Docu
- I just found that it isn't really needed from this point of view as most, if not all pages with template:Disambiguation are in fact categorized in Category:Disambiguation. -- User:Docu
- The pages are now all categorized and use the default template. -- User:Docu
Year categories revisited
I see that last year you added year categories to the various years in science pages. It would be great if you could change these to say, for example, [[Category:1983|Science]] so they'll be sorted under "S" in the respective year categories instead of under "1". The last link there is to a category where you can see what other large series of "year in" articles need sortkeys added to them (namely South Africa, architecture, aviation, film, and gay rights — also note that the various "year in sports" pages haven't been categorized into the individual years but instead only appear in separate "year in sports" categories). Anyway, since you run a bot, it would be great if you could make these changes. - dcljr (talk) 22:48, 24 May 2005 (UTC)