User talk:Harej/Archive14

It was there at 04:16 9 MAR 2011 Wikipedia:Requested_moves/Current_discussions_(alt)&oldid=417903003 but is gone at Wikipedia:Requested_moves/Current_discussions_(alt)&oldid=417910625. It looks like RM Bot was down for the 05:00 run.

It looks like it was restored, but added to the FRONT of the work queue. We've been waiting for a month for the request to clear the backlog, now because the BOT failed, we get sent to the back of the line. Ajh1492 (talk) 16:31, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

• The
  Podlachian Voivodeship (1513–1795) move is now in Wikipedia:Requested moves#March 9, 2011. Anthony Appleyard (talk
  ) 20:13, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

• But is was originally submitted on 7 February 2011 but was deleted by the RM Bot this morning without any action being taken. So now we get to sit in the backlog for ANOTHER 30 days. Ajh1492 (talk) 20:55, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

It was moved up to 9 March 2011 because of Orlady's relisting; Orlady gave the move request a new timestamp and the first timestamp after the tag is what the bot goes by. This is a deliberate measure to bump discussions up higher on the list if they've been stagnant and need more attention. harej 03:08, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

But this one has had recent discussion and we were at a majority consensus. Thus ready for the RM to happen. Ajh1492 (talk) 03:54, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Then take it up with the dude who relisted it. harej 04:57, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

If we don't want the GA review transcluded on the talk page (hence the existence of subpages, and not posting the review on the talk page), the bot shouldn't come back and revert the removal of the transcluded GA review. Thank you. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 18:51, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

While it's effectively a reversion, I'd like to point out the bot is genuinely naive and thinks the review was not posted before. I'll see if I can fix this. harej 03:36, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Hey there Harej, thank you for your contributions. I am a

• See a log of files removed today here.

• Shut off the bot here.

• Report errors here.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 05:09, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Following a comment

Read the instructions. You have to request through the talk page of the article. harej 00:54, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

please look this:

Talk:Marconi_Museum#move page and create disambiguation I can not do this operation :( can you help me? --Pava (talk

) 00:57, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

now it's ok? Wikipedia_talk:Requested_moves#Move_page_.22marconi_museum.22_to_.22Marconi_national_historic_site_of_canada.22_.28_marconi_museum_disambiguation_becomes.29 ??? sorry for the inconvenience--Pava (talk) 01:11, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

aaaah ok ok now i understand, thank you :) --Pava (talk) 01:14, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I have Bicycle helmet laws under review at Talk:Bicycle helmet laws/GA1 but the bot doesn't seem to be picking this up.[1] Jezhotwells (talk) 00:19, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

I moved the GAN template to the top of the talk page and it seems to have fixed it! I belie that the {{WAP assignment}} template was causing the problem. Jezhotwells (talk) 00:40, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I noticed that you have the ability to move the protected Mandingo (pornographic actor) article. Could you please move it to Mandingo (person)? Given the fact that he also directs and is the only person with this name, I think it would be appropriate. I've been doing this move with several pornographic actor articles because its somewhat more humanizing as well. Thank you. Asarelah (talk) 19:26, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

I've never really seen (person) used as a disambiguator. Would (actor) work? While it doesn't entirely encapsulate what he does, it is more humanizing as you would say. harej 23:59, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm more in favor of (person) as a disambig, especially since Mandingo isn't merely an actor but a director as well, so (person) is more encompassing. Furthermore, I've also already used the (person) disambig on other pornographic actors whenever possible, such as in the cases of

Viper (person), so there's already a great deal of precedence to change the disambig to (person). Asarelah (talk

) 00:16, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

 Done harej 00:23, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! Asarelah (talk) 00:24, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

The bot appears to be down again. Also you may want to look at the extra entries from Kraft Dinner caused by the RFC tag. Vegaswikian (talk) 07:40, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

I've removed the RFC tag. My bots don't seem to be down, however. harej 07:54, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Since you took part in this before, you might like to know that there is a revived proposal under discussion at Talk:St Pancras railway station#Requested move. -- Alarics (talk) 20:26, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

		The Real Life Barnstar
		Congratulations on leading the successful DC bid for Wikimania 2012! You've really done an amazing job so far, and I'm delighted and excited to see what we can put together for next year. Now the real work starts! ragesoss (talk) 14:55, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Woohoo! harej 15:17, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I noticed that the bot reported Timothy Everest as failed,[2] when it was actually passed? This happened yesterday with Gunfight at the O.K. Corral as well.[3] Jezhotwells (talk) 18:41, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

I think there is a misunderstanding.

The rfc was not expired, the discussion was started in January. An rfc was never filed.

Could your revert your last edit?Curb Chain (talk) 11:27, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

RFCs are based on the timestamp of the first comment in the discussion. If you want to start an RFC on an existing discussion, I suggest creating a subsection of that discussion called "RFC" or something similar so that there's a clear difference between before you asked for outside opinions and after. harej 17:31, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Right now the bot always lists nominations under the date header of when they were originally posted, but when it is relisted, shouldn't it be listed under the relist date? I tried manually moving the nomination, but of course the bot just undid the change. I'm just asking because if the way it is currently was previously discussed, or makes more sense for whatever reason, then there are references on the MfD page that should be changed. Thanks, MrKIA11 (talk) 16:42, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

How did you relist? Did you sign "Relisted ~~~~" above the nomination statement? harej 17:18, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

I didn't actually relist it, but yesterday I tried moving

WikiProject Modular Articles to April 13, but both were moved back by the bot. MrKIA11 (talk

) 17:25, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Right, I can see the problem. The bot decides on where to list the page by the first timestamp in the MFD; i.e., the timestamp on the nomination. Unless you put something like "Relisted ~~~~" before the nomination statement, it's going to stay in the same section. harej 17:29, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Is there a way it could look for the relisted statement, or are you saying the instructions should be modified to tell people to add a relisted time stamp at the top? MrKIA11 (talk) 17:47, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm surprised the instructions haven't been updated to reflect the best practice. Yes, I think the instructions should be modified there. harej 17:55, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I'll take care of it sometime. I've never seen a template or guideline for putting a relist date at the top of a discussion for any XfD, so I'll probably start a discussion at

WT:MFD to see what others think. Thanks, MrKIA11 (talk

) 18:04, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Apparently some editors already know to put the relist date at the top. It was just a coincidence the day that I tried moving them. MrKIA11 (talk) 23:03, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Just curious: how does the GA bot know all the nominators' signatures? Does it have access behind the scenes to everyone's signature on Special:Preferences? --Deryck C. 21:54, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

That'd be frightening if it did. If you go to the talk page of each nominated article, you'll see in the good article nomination template is the nominator's signature. harej 05:19, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Oh that's where it comes from! Thanks. And well done having a "This is not an edit notice." paradox on your page. --Deryck C. 08:30, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

The next DC Wikimedia meetup is scheduled for Saturday, May 7, 3:30-5:30 pm at the Tenleytown Library (adjacent to the Tenleytown Metro Station, Red Line), followed by dinner & socializing at some nearby place.

This is the first official meeting of our proposed Wikimedia DC chapter, with discussion of bylaws and next steps. Other agenda items include, update everyone on our successful Wikimania bid and next steps in the planning process, discuss upcoming activities that we want to do over the summer and fall, and more.

Please RSVP here and see a list of additional tentatively planned meetups & activities for late May & June on the Wikipedia:Meetup/DC page.

Note: You can unsubscribe from DC meetup notices by removing your name at Wikipedia:Meetup/DC/Invite/List. -- Message delivered by AudeBot, on behalf of User:Aude

Why, this sounds like an intriguing initiative! I suppose I could take part. harej 01:34, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

RM Bot did not recognize this after 7 hours or this after 20 minutes. (Yes, I know the move is ill-advised, and it is not the best way anyway for the desired move. But I don’t see why the bot should not recognize it. It's not my move request: I am responding to a post at the Help desk.

Follow up: As of 06:01, 29 April 2011 (UTC) it works. —

t c

21:07, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

this edit was bad an effectively blanked a talk page that had nothing to do with an RfC. Probably a bug? --LauraHale (talk) 21:01, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Same problem (twice) at Talk:Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Cresix (talk) 21:13, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Recent blankings by the bot are the result of a test of a new version gone wrong. I have made sure to keep a close watch on the bot contributions during these tests. harej 02:00, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

If you look at how

Recently, someone changed the dash in the requested move template from an emdash to an endash. I guess it's more grammatically correct or something. Anyways, there were never conflicts while the emdash was used because emdashes aren't used in titles. Now that there is an endash, there appears to be conflicts with page titles. Let's see if I can find a way for the bot to better read move requests. harej 07:37, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Please take a look at Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Economy,_trade,_and_companies. There is a missing --> tag that is causing the rest of the list to be blanked out on display. I fixed it directly, but the bot reverted it.

See diff here I tried to fix: - [4]

Your assistance would be appreciated as its preventing an RfC from being noticed. Thank you. Leef5 (talk) 15:42, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

I fixed it with something less hacky and something that I forgot existed until a week or two ago. A rule of thumb: you fix the entries on the individual pages themselves; the RFC lists are just a consequence of the individual entries harej 17:46, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your prompt action - Kudos! Leef5 (talk) 17:56, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

RM bot is continually adding move discussion notices for archived discussions on

The bot was functioning and doing its job perfectly. Some jackass forgot to remove the requested move template from the discussion after closing it. I have removed the template. harej 22:44, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi! Could it be preferable to add an optional |rfcid= field or similar to the {{

An RFC ID parameter within {{

rfctag}} is something I could look into. Also, once the RFC tag is gone, there's no need for the RFC ID to remain. harej

09:34, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

For reasons unclear to me, GA bot is not picking up the GA nomination of Taxonomy of lemurs. Could you perhaps find the problem? Ucucha 20:48, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

I listed Brothersoft.com on a different RfC page after I got an underwhelming response on the RfC_Media page and the bot removed my new tag. Is this expected behaviour? Colincbn (talk) 05:55, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

It did it again. Umm... Colincbn (talk) 06:17, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

RFC expiration dates are calculated as being thirty days after the first timestamp. Thus if you just stick an RFC tag on a discussion from a few months ago, the bot is going to correctly ascertain that the discussion started well over 30 days ago and deem it expired. I recommend starting a new section or a subsection and putting the RFC tag there, to separate pre-RFC conversation from RFC conversation (so outsiders can see what had already been discussed before diving in). harej 04:32, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

The bot went kinda wacko with edit summaries: [5] Starstriker7^(Talk) 15:45, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

I checked the history of the page, there doesn't seem to be any indication as to why it happened...it looks like a nominator hit the enter button once too many times, and the bot tried to compensate, but the edit summaries continue to occur even though nothing changes. :/ --Starstriker7^(Talk) 15:51, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

This happened once before! Let me see what the deal is. harej 20:03, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

I removed the awkwardly added manual entry. That might fix things. We'll see, come next edit. harej 20:31, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

That appears to have fixed it. harej 01:36, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Cool. Thank you. :D --Starstriker7^(Talk) 05:43, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

On talk-page "

Weird that that happened, but so long as the RFC ID sticks around I think the bot won't screw up on that page any longer. If a pattern of this emerges I'll see what I can do about the bot. harej 02:28, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

GA bot hasn't realised that

I listed this for a requested move using the template over an hour ago. Yet the bot does not appear to have added it to the list on the requested moves page. Could you please verify that the bot is operating normally? Thanks! Barts1a | Talk to me | Yell at me 12:36, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

The bot is working fine and dandy. You, however, substituted the template when that goes against everything the bot does. Don't do that. harej 16:54, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Did you notice that the template was not substituted for over an hour after it was initially added? I thought the bot was not adding the request because the template needed substituting. I only substituted the template after over an hour had passed since I initially put it in, at least 5 times longer than the advertised 15 minutes. This is why I thought the bot was malfunctioning, apologies for any inconvenience. Barts1a | Talk to me | Yell at me 22:44, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

I seem to be having the same problem with

The bot runs every 15 minutes, since it is scheduled to do so. The bot also appears to still be running. I'll see if anything is wrong with your request (or with my bot's code). harej 02:50, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

For the life of me I couldn't figure out what the problem was, and they seemed like uncontroversial enough recommendations, so I just went ahead and moved the pages for you. (If anyone complains, I will take responsibility.) Cheers! harej 03:37, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi Harej, this RfC is for some reason not showing up on the RfC pages. A link to the talk page is showing, but not the RfC question. Can you help? SlimVirgin ^{TALK|CONTRIBS} 07:24, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi again, can you help with this, or advise? I can't get the RfC to show up on the pages I listed it at. SlimVirgin ^{TALK|CONTRIBS} 06:45, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

The bot did include it here, but you removed it again. Was that a mistake, or is there some other issue with it? SlimVirgin ^{TALK|CONTRIBS} 07:44, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

That was a mistake — as a troubleshooting move, I manually ran the bot. Except I ran an old version of the bot. Which means the old bot is better at picking up descriptions than the new version is, apparently. harej 07:46, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Should I reverted on the other pages, or what? The RfC is still not listed. SlimVirgin ^{TALK|CONTRIBS} 08:58, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Reverting on the other pages won't be necessary. And it's still not listed because I haven't fixed it yet. I apologize for this weirdness. harej 09:05, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I'm sorry to keep asking. I'm just panicking a bit because the RfC's been posted for a while, and I didn't notice at first that it hadn't appeared on the pages. So now I'm worried about a lack of input. SlimVirgin ^{TALK|CONTRIBS} 09:12, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps you'd be interested in helping to review an educational GA again, like you did a while back? See here. Thanks! --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 18:21, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi! This edit of the RFC Bot has changed the layout of the statement in the 'Summary table' section of the Talk:Mass (liturgy) page. Help? Thanks. Tjpob (talk) 08:12, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

I've fixed it. Out of curiosity, why did you place the rfctag in the middle of a paragraph? Such a location seems illogical. harej 08:23, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

This edit at 13:31, 6 June 2011 by

The bot stops listing the description of an RFC at the timestamp, which is then used for sorting. That explains why the description is cut off. But why do people on that talk page not want the discussion to be archived until 2021? harej 21:48, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I do recall reading someting about a timestamp now. As for 2021, I'm sorry but I've no idea. I guess I'll perhaps just list it again some time and see what happens. --Trevj (talk) 05:17, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

HI! I left a message on your page at the Wikimania 2012 site. Can you read it and get back to me? Thanks.Thelmadatter (talk) 18:30, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

I saw. I've referred your note to the Wikimania team. We should have a letter ready for you shortly. harej 18:34, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Wonderful! You have no idea how much this helps!!!!Thelmadatter (talk) 14:55, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you here but Ive sent a number of emails to you and Jeremy to remind you of the letter that Jeremy promised for last Monday. Id be more patient but I doubt that the embassy is... Thelmadatter (talk) 13:47, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

is sort of out of date. /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 18:51, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. harej 18:54, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

I updated the protection reason on the page in case it receives significant media attention. :P Cheers =) --slakr^\ talk / 04:01, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

I stand by my words. harej 04:04, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Love the bot. It just saved me from having to do lots of edits, which means I have time to come and moan to you about a feature suggestion. ;-)

Glad to hear you're a fan. There's actually no reason why talk pages of redirects shouldn't be notified as far as I can tell from the code. It has nothing to do with the talk pages not existing because RM bot has created talk pages on many occasions. hare j 09:19, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

This message is being sent to inform you of a Wikipedia picnic that is being held in your area next Saturday, June 25. From 1 to 8 PM or any time in between, join your fellow volunteers for a get together at Norman's Landscape (directions) in Manhattan's Central Park.

Take along your friends (

If you can, share what you're bringing at the discussion page.

Also, please remember that this is the picnic that anyone can edit so bring enough food to share!

To subscribe to future events, follow the mailing list or add your username to the

Over 200 miles away. Sorry. hare j 09:14, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

The discussions still aren't showing up in the list. Can you take a look at the problem I identify at

Meanwhile, the page listed above has reappeared in both lists [6], [7]. (Apologies if this is not a related issue.) --Trevj (talk) 04:33, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Unrelated issues, as far as I know. As for WhatamIdoing's reported issue, I am corresponding on

WT:RFC. hare

 j 11:40, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. --Trevj (talk) 12:01, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Hiya! I'm planning to write an article on former

Page contents emailed. hare j 01:11, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks much, Harej! duff 02:50, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for allowing me to edit Wikipedia! i made changes to

No problem! hare j 18:51, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

	Balls of Steele Award
	♥♥♥ WikiLove ♥♥♥ Fran Rogers (talk) 03:34, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Like hare j 03:35, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi Harej,

Listen, when you get a chance, could you add Category:Request for comment to the Wikipedia:Requests for comment sub-pages that RFC bot updates? Thanks. :)
— V = IR (Talk • Contribs) 09:39, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

PS.: Can I also suggest changing the text on

 Done. For the RFC listing categorization, I have achieved this by updating {{RFC list footer}} so that any page that transcludes that template will be categorized. Also, the template itself is categorized. hare j 12:55, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Just noticed it emptied all the RfC summary pages. See also

15:29, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Smithsonian Archives of American Art Backstage Pass

Archives of American Art Backstage Pass! - You are invited!
	The SarahStierch (talk ) 14:15, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Feedback Request Service

		The da Vinci Barnstar
		For your stellar efforts in making the Feedback Request Service a reality. Thank you! Rd232 talk 15:53, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the support! It definitely took a lot of effort and creative thinking, and even once it started working I had to accommodate glitches and the inundation of messages that came as a result of 67 RFCs never having gone through a round of requests before. To the bot it was equivalent of 67 new RFCs being filed in the thirty minutes between runs. And because of how the bot discriminates, once you're cleared you could receive as many as possible. So people signed up to only receive a couple were receiving... far more than that. And this caused a small backlash which bothered me a little. But everything is running smoothly now, and I have a fan as well! Thank you for the barnstar; it means a lot to me. hare j 16:37, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Can you explain why the above article received a failure? Many thanks Cassianto (talk) 22:05, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

What exactly do you mean? hare j 00:38, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

The first ever

21:27, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

The WikiProject National Archives Newsletter July 2011 News Featured article contest This week, our first Constitution, or Bill of Rights to featured or good status in English and other languages. Prizes for winners will be a gift package from the National Archives including a book of your choice or a tote bag, and other swag, plus, of course, a special barnstar. August 6 backstage pass Plans are in the works for a WP:NARA , a tour of the building by NARA staff, and then time for a scanathon and editathon in the research rooms and library until the building closes at 5 pm. Keep your schedules open! From our recent uploads: ...see more. Special requests: This section includes special requests from the NARA staff: Archival Recovery Team The National Archives' Archival Recovery Team (ART) is a team of law enforcement agents and archivists who investigate NARA's lost and stolen documents. They have received media attention ([8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15]) and would like to request an article be written for the team, if Wikipedians deem it notable. It is hoped that making more information about the group available on Wikipedia will increase public awareness of the documents they are seeking to recover. Ongoing Today's Document challenge The ""Did You Know...?" the same day that the National Archives features the document. Alternatively, other appropriate articles related to National Archives holdings not already selected will be used for new documents of the day by NARA staff and posted to their tumblr. Wikisource WP:NARA has a sister WikiProject on Wikisource, WS:NARA. On Wikisource, editors transcribe, proofread, and arrange documents. This helps to make little-known documents more discoverable, or well-known documents more searchable, and improves accessibility. See the files being worked on . If you are new to Wikisource and would like to participate, there are experienced Wikisourcerors willing to be mentors. New contributions A list of some recent contributions to the project: Wikipedia District of Columbia Compensated Emancipation Act (Fetchcomms) Court of the Patriarchs (CutOffTies) Opposition to the overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom (Fetchcomms) Wikisource1 Memorial of Queen Liliuokalani in relation to the Crown lands of Hawaii Petition from women of Brookline Resolutions of the Joint Committee on the Washington Monument H. R. 4982 A Petition For Universal Suffrage Susan B. Anthony petition for remission of fine Alexander Hamilton's commission to take rank as Colonel 1Credit goes to Prosody, Theornamentalist, Inductiveload, Digipoke, George Orwell III, Kathleen.wright5, BirgitteSB, and Zhaladshar Tools Archives.gov grabber (Slakr) Future plans Major image contribution The National Archives has hundreds of thousands of digitized documents in its holdings. We are working on a bulk upload to Commons of one particular cache of about 123,000 TIFF master files in the next few days! Once uploaded, these will require a massive community effort to help categorize the files on Commons and add them to articles on Wikipedia or transcribe them on Wikisource. Inclusion in the online catalog We are currently working on a system for including links to pages on Wikimedia projects in the National Archives online catalog. The Wikimedia projects are hosting an increasing number of transcriptions of National Archives documents and high-quality image and video files that are not available through NARA's own site. Links to these Wikimedia pages in the documents' actual catalog records will benefit the end user by providing them access to further resources about the documents, and they will also demonstrate the National Archives commitment to supporting Wikimedians' efforts. To stop receiving this newsletter, please remove your name from the list .

I'M SO PROUD OF YOU!!!! hare j 05:11, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

You should be. :) Rd232 ^talk 14:12, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

RM bot problem

Was this warning needed? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 01:21, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

The first thing on a requested move has to be that page. For instance, if you were going to do a multi-move request on Talk:George W. Bush, current1 must be George W. Bush. I'll flip the two on that talk page to fix it. hare j 01:24, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

There seems to be a snag in the bot. Could you hava a look what it did with my multi-move "Volleyball at the 2008 Summer Olympics – xxx xxx tournament" proposals. Thanks. HandsomeFella (talk) 18:47, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

I don't see anything amiss. hare j 18:51, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

There is a superfluous bit after "(Discuss)", starting with "Men's tournament]] ". HandsomeFella (talk) 19:02, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

I think it has to do with the dash in the title, unfortunately. Sorry about that. hare j 19:11, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Okie dokie. I can live with it. Thanks for your time. HandsomeFella (talk) 19:15, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Fixing it manually didn't help; it was rolled back by the bot. :-) HandsomeFella (talk) 20:20, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Village pump dashboard

Related to RFC bot and the

village pump (idea lab) should be added to the village pump dashboard? Thanks again for all your great work. - Hydroxonium (T•C•V

) 23:56, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

It's an official village pump, so sure. I'll add it to the bot's routine. hare j 02:09, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you - Hydroxonium (T•C•V) 00:38, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

DC Meetup, July 29

DC Meetup 21 - Who should come? You should. Really.
	DC MEETUP 21 is July 29! This meet up will involve Wikipedians from the area as well as Wiki-loving SarahStierch (talk ) 16:32, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

GA bot possibly down?

It's possible that your GA bot is down, it hasn't updated the GA page for 4 hours and there are lots of articles passed and held and changed the status that the bot isn't reporting. Can you possibly fix the bot if it's down?  JoeGazz  ♂  01:48, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

I don't think the bot is down. For one, the Toolserver is operational. And just to be sure, I ran GA bot manually just now, and it ran through its operation with no problems. What exactly is being held up? hare j 02:13, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

I withdraw that. By happenstance I'm looking at my databases now and the GAN part appears to be flooded with records, indicating some kind of buffer overflow. I will investigate further. hare j 02:32, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

GLAM (industry sector)

;] --MZMcBride (talk) 04:24, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

I still reject that it's a term of art. hare j 15:21, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

DC-area Meetup, Saturday, August 6

National Archives Backstage Pass - Who should come? You should. Really.
	On Saturday, August 6, the National Archives is hosting a Wikipedia meetup, backstage pass tour, and edit-a-thon in College Park, Maryland. Meet staff and fellow Wikipedians, go behind the scenes at the National Archives, help digitize documents, and edit together! Dominic·t 21:24, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Comment requested about requests for comment

Hi, Harej. I'd appreciate it if you could look at

User:RFC bot. Thanks. --RL0919 (talk

) 22:15, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Chester Arthur GA

This bot keeps listing that Chester A. Arthur is being reviewed. It is not. It was, but then we deleted the review because the editor who started it had been very involved in writing the article. How can I get the bot to stop? --Coemgenus (talk) 00:55, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

When the bot transcluded the review, it also marked the nomination as "onreview". I have reversed that. hare j 02:44, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks very much. --Coemgenus (talk) 11:59, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Just spreading Wikilove...

....like an STD!!!

Theo10011 (talk) 20:42, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

user page

What happened to your userpage?Thelmadatter (talk) 14:08, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

I edited it. hare j 20:04, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

RM bot

Hi harej. Just saw this edit by RM bot, where it blanked the entire page of Wikipedia:Requested moves/Current discussions. Do you know what's up? Also, will it continue to blank the page? Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 21:11, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Occasionally, Wikipedia won't deliver the necessary data for RM bot to run and the bot runs anyway. There is a fix to this, but I've only implemented it in some of my bots. The problem always solves itself come next run. hare j 21:27, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Ah, ok then. Thanks for the quick reply. Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 21:29, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Technical Barnstar
	Your User:GA bot is just chugging along with a hitch, and you may have forgotten, recently, to pat yourself on the back for how terrific this bot is. Thank you so much for making it. All the best, – Quadell (talk ) 18:30, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Failure to list

I put a tag on the talk page to

Replication (metallography) and the bot has listed later pages, but not this page at [16]. Did I miss something? --68.127.234.159 (talk

) 21:36, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Just as an FYI, the bot has now listed it. Jenks24 (talk) 00:22, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Move header

Qwertyus

06:57, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

RFCbot miscat

Hey Harej,

I'm sorry to bother you - I wonder if you're still busy with the conference? But... there's a query on helpdesk re. an RFC apparently being mis-categorized; [17]

Wikipedia:HD#Should_I_close_the_RFC.3F

.

Someone may have already fixed it before you see this, as it's on helpdesk. But if not / if you could take a look? Thanks,  Chzz  ►  18:16, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

P.S. Hope you don't mind, but I'm going to steal your user-page comment a bit. It's a good message/reminder to spread.  Chzz  ►  18:17, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

This should fix it; it was never assigned a category but it was assigned an RFC ID. That it was subsequently sorted into policy is a bug, I guess. Thank you for spreading the message of our user unfriendly culture! It was actually the subject of Jimbo's speech on the last day. He used my own RM bot as an example. I feel so honored. hare j 18:41, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Cheers!  Chzz  ►  18:59, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Just so you know...

NickDupree said on IRC that the RFC Bot was on a rampage of sabatoge. Figured I'd let you know. Though now TheSigma on IRC said that he fixed it by restoring an old revision of the page NickDupree was trying to fix, because, as he said, "RFC Bot exploded". So yeah.

P.S.

[22:35] <NickDupree> it's becoming sentient

That was just because I found it so funny. LikeLakers2 (talk) 02:54, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

This is all that needs to be said. --Σ _{^talkcontribs} 03:47, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

RFC bot does not honor nobots templates because it only edits pages it has been invited to edit. I can't tell what's going on but it seems rather stupid. hare j 06:50, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for the terse response earlier, but I've addressed the cause of the problem. The bot is sadly not too good with interpreting HTML comment tags. hare j 15:03, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Huge thanks for fixing the problem. Very much appreciated. NickDupree (talk) 17:29, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Adultism

Hi there,

The "Adultism" page is up for deletion or merge (I saw you previously took an interest in it (way back lol) ).

And yes, it is still the closed-page of editor "Freechild" - with no "adultist" rebuttals allowed.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adultism

Thank you, Bhrundle (talk) 17:33, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

It's funny. It was so long ago that I actually am an adult now (in the eyes of the law, anyway). hare j 17:50, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Ha, and, you're probably being all "adultist" now! Going to vote, flaunting your discriminatory adult powers in front of all those 8 year olds who should be voting too - but are denied!! Bhrundle (talk) 18:03, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

If an 8-year-old is capable of clearing voter registration (assuming you are an American) and motivated enough to vote, I would say let him. To support someone who wants to ban corporal punishment, perhaps? EIFY (talk) 00:45, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser

Responding to RFCs

Remember that RFCs are part of

Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding

.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the

not a vote

. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

You have received this notice because your name is on

talk

) 02:05, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

RfC Placement on Media/Arts/Architecture by RFCbot

Hi--the RfC bot seems to have incorrectly placed my new RfC ([18]) at the bottom of the list, without its accompanying text. Do you know how I should fix this? Is there anything I can do to change the RfC template in the Ping'An talk sextion? Merechriolus (talk) 18:15, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

I don't see anything wrong with the listing. hare j 18:20, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Looking at the edit history, you didn't add a timestamp until after RFC bot visited the page. With the timestamp now in place, I ran the bot again and everything works as it should. hare j 18:24, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Ah, thank you. It looks like I messed up the formatting. Thanks! Merechriolus (talk) 18:48, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

RM bot

problem with requested moves

Hello! At

Talk:NHL Hitz 20-02 I correctly followed the procedure for creating a (bundled) requested move. However, the bot appears to have a (conflicting) issue with listing requested moves that involve titles with en-dashes. If you look at WP:RM#August 15, 2011 (oldid revision) you'll see that the part coming after the en-dash (02) appears to be interpreted by the bot as part of my reason for the request. However, as the bot did not have any issues with the second title, I assume the issue only affects the first request (in bundled move requests). The issue is understandable, as en-dashes are what is being used before the reason text comes in. See also WP:RM#August 16, 2011 (the Mexicali–Calexico request) for another request with the same issue. For my move request I tried to change – to &ndash; - that solved the issue. It's not that easy to explain the issue. Could you take a look at your bot to see what the problem is? Thanks in advance, HeyMid (contribs

) 15:51, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

I've noticed this is a recurring issue so, as soon as possible, I'll try to fix it so that the bot is tolerant of endashes. hare j 16:59, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for looking into it. HeyMid (contribs) 20:07, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

RM bot not running

Looks like the bot stopped updating Wikipedia:Requested moves/Current discussions a couple of hours ago. Don't know if it's a coincidence, but it happened at the same time a user edited the file manually. I tried to undo his edit, but that didn't seem to help. Favonian (talk) 20:12, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Human edits of that page are inconsequential. hare j 20:17, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

The bot has now continued, so it probably was a coincidence. Also, I don't think that two hours of inactivity for a bot is considered a long time. HeyMid (contribs) 20:50, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

I got an email from the Toolserver saying it was down for 80 minutes. So yes, all my bots were down. hare j 21:19, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

RFC bot removes templates on all RFCs on page when only an earlier one is expired

See [19]. –xeno^talk 15:39, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, thought I squished that bug. Thank you! hare j 20:39, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

My username is incorrect

Somehow the GA bot writes my username as Jaime1=070996 instead of Jaime070996 in

WP:GAN#SPORT. Jaime070996

21:59, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

This is a known glitch having to do with the numerals in your name. I apologize. hare j 22:06, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Alright. It's OK. Jaime070996 04:08, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

RM current list

Take a look at the 13:16 and earlier listings today for a formatting bug. Vegaswikian (talk) 21:34, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Pending changes

Responding to RFCs

Remember that RFCs are part of

Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding

.

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the

not a vote

. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

You have received this notice because your name is on

talk

) 19:05, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

RMbot and time zones

I think the bot has an issue with (CEST) as the timezone instead of (UTC). You can look at today's nominations for some examples that did not list correctly. Vegaswikian (talk) 21:36, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

User:GA bot

syntax

Since [[User:GA bot|GA bot]] and {{u|GA bot}} both yield

WP:FOUR

) 11:28, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

I don't believe templates work in edit summaries (I'll check with this edit summary). Jenks24 (talk) 11:45, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

And through Jenks' test edit, his statement is affirmed. (Still, it was a neat idea!) hare j 16:04, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Another suggestion to reduce broken edit summaries would be to switch to [[User:GA bot]], which would produce longer edit summaries that use less code and can include more information.--

WP:FOUR

) 12:48, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

One bot

I notice that One bot doesn't use the bot flag... Is there a reason for this?

books

} 00:01, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:I am the reviewer

Template:I am the reviewer has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ucucha (talk) 15:18, 2 September 2011 (UTC)