This is an archive of past discussions about User:Kingboyk. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Hi Kingboyk. Why was a bio flag put on the talk page Talk:Chris Hawkins of Chris Hawkins article by your bot ? It is perfectly factual, and Hawkins is a well-known and important figure in England, especially being an Ambassador for the Prince's Trust, &c. Thanks and Bests. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc21:44, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
I wouldn't worry about it too much. The bot was not saying the article is not any of the above which you claimed, but rather helping out the tagging and accounting for articles of living persons. As such, the same was done for an article I was working on, Brandon Thomas(musician). I wanted to say thank you, it helped to remind me to make some improvements to the page. --vi23:56, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, Kingboyk. It is really great to have such a community of erudite and caring people. Thanks very much. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc16:37, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
I want to second what Bob had to say, 99.99% of my experience on here has been peaceful and considerate. It's users like yourselves that have helped make that possible. --vi20:14, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
Congrats on yet another Barnstar. You deserve it, as I saw another article of mine get tagged as well. --vi20:16, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
Racing Cars
A little help, or advice would be appreciated. I created a new page for the one hit wonders, band, 'Racing Cars' (which I have deliberately not wikilinked, for reasons that will become clear in a moment) on 30 July.
However, if one now inputs 'Racing Cars' in the search box thingy, you end up being redirected to Auto racing. This needs disambigugating (an Americanism or possibly Riggwelterism), I think. But I am too old / daft / senile / hapless / hopeless to know what to do.
Well, if you enter One-hit wonders in the UK in the search box, then scroll down to the 1970s section, alphabetically listed is "They Shoot Horses Don't They" by Racing Cars. Click on the band name and there you are. What with a group, and film called 'They Shoot Horses etc', plus 'Racing Cars' in the mix, it is a veritable recipe for confusion.
Plus your page (according to the Firefox / Google demi-gods) is getting too long. Ain't life a bastard ?! My advice is to tell them to shove their pixels and chipboards up their arse.
I maybe getting too old for all this ! Regards, old buddy.
Hi, Kingboyk. Thanks for your post at the above. I expanded the DM article. The only reason I can think of as to your post is the "not quite original" line therein. Those words are DM's in the preface to the book. Would you suggest that the p. # be referenced to remove abiguity? For the record, I'm an admirer of DM & hope his article is expanded, accurately of course. BW, Thomasmeeks13:20, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Don't worry, it's a standard warning which is going on to all living persons articles :) I'm sure your article is fine. --kingboyk13:23, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
According to whom? Tupac Shakur is one of the 200 or so most important figures in world history is he? Of course he isn't! He's not even the most important figure in hip-hop! High is quite enough. OK, enough sarcasm: Top is for people listed at Wikipedia:Core_biographies, which he isn't nor I suspect will he be. --kingboyk09:39, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
I see they've been blocked multiple times, so let's give the new block-anons-only feature a try. They won't be able to edit for 1 month but users with existing Wikipedia accounts won't be affected. Just the job for unruly school IPs. --kingboyk10:08, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Your Bot
Hey, I've been noticing your bot a lot recently marking talk pages for articles. I have a job I wanted to get done that requires a bot that can label talk pages of articles within the architecture category. Any chance you'd be able to help? I'll give you more full details is you're interested. Thanks, alphaChimplaudare11:35, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
The bot is still in the trial period pre-approval so it's best that I keep a low profile and don't accept any jobs from other people until it's got the bot bit set and is fully legal. That said, I'd be happy to do it if it's not a massive run. How many articles roughly and which template are you wanting to affix? With parameters or without? --kingboyk11:39, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Very easily done with AWB, even easier if you could use AWB to build the article list including the articles in the sub-sub categories and provide it to me. So, yes, I'd be quite happy to do it but you'll have to wait until I'm authorised. --kingboyk11:47, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
How do you do it using AWB? I can build the list of articles, but I can't prepend the message to the talk pages. Am I missing some obvious option? alphaChimplaudare20:28, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Build the list of articles. Right click in file list and sort alphabetically. Select the subcats, right click, get the articles in the subcats (repeat if necessary). Right click in file list again, and select Convert to talk pages. You now have a list of the talk pages you want tagging. On the Set Options tab tell AWB to skip any page which already contains the name of the template. On the More Options tab under Messaging select "append message", select "prepend", and enter the text to prepend. --kingboyk20:32, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
I noticed that Kingbotk recently tagged the article I created on James E. Edmondson with Wikipedia's Biographies of living persons policy, and I was wondering if I could get an opinion relating to the policy. I have initiated a discussion on the article's Talk page regarding the possible inclusion of information relating to his daughter, Sarah Edmondson. See Talk:James E. Edmondson for details, and add any thoughts you have on the matter on that Talk page. --TommyBoy14:37, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Would you mind taking it to the WikiProject Biography talk? You'll probably get a faster answer there, as I'm very busy with WikiProject The Beatles work. Cheers. --kingboyk14:39, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
I was wondering if you'd be able to comment on a proposal I've just started on. It's obviously quite inchoate at this point, but I'd at least like for someone to tell me whether I'm totally insane for even suggesting it ;-) Kirill Lokshin19:21, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Hmm... aren't you, I and a few others doing pretty much this already? Is there any need to formalise it? Certainly not an insane idea, no, so let me think about it :) --kingboyk19:22, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
As things get bigger, a certain level of formalization is useful, in my experience; individual people don't scale too well ;-) But I eagerly await any comments you might have! Kirill Lokshin19:42, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
I've reverted Watching Rainbows to the article instead of a redirect to a tenuously related article (Let It Be (film)). It does need some work, but it's a legitimate subject for an encyclopedia article. --Daniel1101:52, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
Fine. Bold, revert, discuss, that's the name of the game. I feel that an unverifiable, poorly written article on an unreleased song is neither enyclopedic nor a good advertisement for our WikiProject, but I accept that you disagree and won't revert. Cheers. --kingboyk11:15, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
Tech barnstar
The Technology Barnstar
In recognition of your work via Kingbotk in tagging large numbers of biography talk pages. It's inflated the output on my watchlist from my 100+ bio articles, which were previously dormant. :) .Blnguyen | rant-line02:44, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
hi, i just started trying to clean up an NPOV-filled sketchy article on Kyan Douglas on august 3rd, and today your bot has tagged it -- although i understand its purpose, it seems prejudicial that an article that is rapidly taking shape (or trying to) should get slapped with a {{WPBiography}} tag for WP1.0 assessments/Living persons bio. now i feel like i have a deadline to make! must i revert it to a much more primitive state and work offline to avoid deletion? what are my options? help. -- Denstat05:22, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
Hi. Thanks for the message. I think I must add a FAQ about this, because lots of people are asking me pretty much the same thing :) The living persons bio warning is now Wikipedia policy, and all biography articles are getting tagged with it. If you're taking the time and trouble to clean up a biased article please do carry on as you were; you're doing a valuable job and have nothing to fear. There's no deadline as such. Hope that helps. If you need any advice on improving the article please ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography. --kingboyk11:19, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
well that's a relief! i thought the tag meant it was on a conveyor belt toward deletion. thanks for the quick response, and yes i do intend to consult the WikiProject Biography. cheers! -- Denstat15:22, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
Thank you Steve! Much appreciated. and oh by the way, not sure when you crossed 15000, but congrats on that by the way. (I'm still under 10K but closing) Let's IM sometime because I looked at the WPBeatles template and it looked good to me, wasn't sure what stuff you thought needed tweaking. ++Lar: t/c15:56, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
Have a look at Template talk:WPBeatles. There's no big issues, I'll get round to them sometimes if you don't - but if you want to do it that would be great as I'm currently spending all my time assessing Beatles articles (a very dull job :( ). --kingboyk15:58, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
Tell me more about your bot sometime, mate (or gimme a pointer to the sources?) I'm wondering if there is ever any hope of migrating the rest of the evaluation comments... I did a few but man is it a dull job. Maybe it could be botified. Because I sure don't want to move any more by hand! ++Lar: t/c19:40, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know. The list was compiled some long time ago - it's a might trawl through Category:Living people you see so these issues will arise (I'm waiting for someone to tell me I tagged as living a recently deceased person :)). I've deleted the offending talk page. Thanks again. --kingboyk19:32, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
Hello sir! Would you be willing to help me put a picture of Carole King within her article. My email is LiamMcConville@msn.com. I would do this myself but I am not fluent in Wiki's lingo on editing pages.
It would be nice if they explained what the hell they're talking about in plain English, wouldn't it?! :) I doubt it will affect us though, I can't see our template using 1MB of anything.
Let's run a quick test here, we can remove this live instance later today but in the meantime this will be fun :) -
It is Project policy that (with possible exceptions depending on context) all article references to the band's name should be in title case ("The Beatles" and not "the Beatles")
This article is also within the scope of WikiProject Biography's Arts and Entertainment work group, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to people on Wikipedia. This article is also within the scope of Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful musical resource on recordings from a variety of genres. This article is also within the scope of WikiProject Songs, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to songs on Wikipedia. This article has been marked as needing immediate attention. A Song Infobox has been requested for this article. Please format it according to the guidelines.
Article Grading:
The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.
Other :Project: Add {{WikiProject The Beatles}} to the talk pages of all Beatles-related articles. Send a newsletter to members, canvas for new members and coordinate tasks. Enter articles assessed as stubs onto this list, also list articles needing cleanup and other work here.
If you complete one of these tasks, please remove it from the list and add your achievement to the project log.
This article lacks an infobox, which is part of the standard display of album information developed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums. You can help by copying the source code into the attached article, and filling in the information yourself, or by providing the following information here on the Talk page so that someone else can construct the box:
I like the look of that, so now I've tested it I'm gonna subst it and remove the categories. --kingboyk 13:12, 16 August 2006 (UTC) Introduced a stray bracket somehow; that's in the subst'd version only. --kingboyk13:27, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for checking that out, mate. I agree, when I read it I got a lot of Huh? and not a lot of "and this affects you how" ... PS that is one fine template now dude... ++Lar: t/c17:24, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
I've just this minute updated the instructions if you want to have a look. I've also left a note about remaining jobs on the talk page. Thanks by the way, and I agree - it's a lovely bit of code. All worked pretty much first time too. It's just a shame I can't get paid for doing this stuff :( --kingboyk17:27, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Removing song headers in favor of Beatles header
Hi. I tend to think that for songs which are famous seperate from their association with the Beatles, the "songs" header is not necessarily redundant to the Beatles header. See my comment Talk:When the Saints Go Marching In. If you think I should bring this point up for discussion somewhere else as well, let me know. Cheers, -- Infrogmation16:45, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the message. Technically it's redundant, because I've programmed {{WPBeatles}} to replicate the WikiProject Songs template, with the aim of reducing talk page clutter. You'll see that the Beatles template says the song is in the scope of that Project, and the article is in all the correct categories. That said, if it's important to you you can remove the song=yes template from the Beatles template to turn that behaviour off and put the WPSongs template back. --kingboyk16:48, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia is in sore need of a policy on for musician pages, and you have been active in this area before. Therefore, please provide your comments and opinions on the policies there. Thanks in advance!
As you surmised, Paul or somebody close to him has hijacked the page, trying to use wikipedia to spread the fictions that (1) Paul is some kind of great businessperson, and (2) a great patriot, and (3) that he was not a criminal. They use about five accounts, but it's clear the same person (the accounts sometimes sign each others' names by accident).
The article probably ought to be about one paragraph long, but until the Franklyn2/Cyerbtrend/Scuzzler/etc. account is stopped, it will be impossible to improve. Probably the closest it ever came to being an OK page was back in May, when Paul (or whoever) went on vacation or something, and the page reached this stage in his absence: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Peter_F._Paul&oldid=52721288
Even that version is much too long, but it's not a total travesty.
The nature of Wikipedia seems to make it impossible to solve this problem; I welcome any suggestions and help. Uucp17:33, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
I can quite honestly and humbly say I have absolutely no idea, sorry. I'd recommend asking for help at WP:BIOGRAPHY or with one of the admins who tend to get more involved with such issues than I do. --kingboyk20:01, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
Hello Kingboyk. Thank you for your advice about {{BLP}} and the suggestion to use {{WPBiography|living=yes}} instead. I agree with your suggestion and will use the WPBiography template instead. Thanks! --HResearcher03:17, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
For bringing assessment to the people...
The Barnstar of Diligence
This one goes out on the eve of your implementation of the 1.0 article assessment system for WikiProject Albums. The sheer magnitude and consistency of your work has and continues to astonish me, but this was the event whereupon I realized that the time had come to recognize it formally. Unint03:50, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
I noticed that you added the tag (Tag with {{WPBiography}} for WP1.0 assessments/Living persons bio) to some of the pages that I have edited, and I was just wondering:
Is the intention to tag all biographies of people?
Is there (or should there be) any mechanism to remove the tag when the person dies?
With regard to the assessment, is the standard supposed to vary depending on the degree of notability of the person? For example, in the biographies of presidents of the United States, we generally include information about the person's family, where he went to school, etc. which is generally not included for someone like Raymond J. Donovan (secretary of labor during part of the Reagan administration). I would think it would be appropriate for an encyclopedia to have a few paragraphs o Donovan, and many pages on other people. Morris13:57, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for the message.
Yes
That's down to the editors of the article in question. An article usually gets extra traffic when the subject dies, somebody visiting should remove the living=yes parameter or change it to living=no, and move the article from Category:Living people to Category:2006 deaths (or whatever year).
I'm not sure in regards to this point. Perhaps ask the Wikipedia 1.0 people?
Hey Steve - long time no speaketh! I was hoping to get your help on this bot thing again. I've not been particularly active here for the last wee while, but I noticed one editor had the idea that a few of us should collaborate on articles relating to Belfast. So, of course, I suggested a project.
I thought that maybe starting a completely new project would help me understand the usage of the bot, and I wonder if you could give me a couple of useful page links (is there an easy-to-follow guide?).
Hiya mate! Yes there is a help page now, at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Using the bot. There's plenty of WikiProjects and templates to nick ideas off too, it's all pretty simple now really but, as always, if you get stuck give me a shout. I'd recommend setting your new project up as a child project of your NI project by the way, assuming that's still going. --kingboyk17:31, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Well it still exists anyway! lol About setting the Belfast one up as a child project of the NI one.. can I do that even though the NI one doesn't use the bot? Or would there be any difficulties?
And thanks Steve - as always, ever helpful mate. (PS .. where are my star awards for all my contributions? :P lol) --Mal18:49, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Being a child project is just an organisational thing, doesn't matter if one uses the bot and one doesn't. In fact I've even got the bot making lists for Beatles subtopics :) (although a few people have moaned about it). Yer award's in the post! :P --kingboyk18:54, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
lol Cheers. OK then - I'll try to get something started for Belfast. As the whole Belfast thing was a request from another editor, then hopefully this project will garner much more support than the NI one!
Hi Steve. I got quite a lot done, and learned some stuff. I noticed you've been helping out (cos something I was working on disappeared when I pressed F5 lol!). I have a couple of questions..
Firstly, the Belfast Project page is based on (copied from) two other city projects: London and Adelaide. I was wondering if the Article Assesment part on the project page could be shown by the use of a link, as with the log you added on the /Assessment page itself.
Secondly, I had created the WP Belfast notice template (the main code for the bot?), which you have changed to WPBelfast. I think these are identical, and I assume the changes you've made are now consistant throughout the project pages and on the talk pages of the sample articles I chose to assess the bot..?
I have to go and do stuff which will take me a few hours, so this is just a short note really, and again - thanks. :) --Mal15:25, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
You mean you want the article assessment page to be in a show/hide section on the main page?
All I did was move the template and leave a redirect behind. I've also replaced all occurences I could find of the old name with the new. Either name will work but the newer one is more like the standard and easier to remember :) --kingboyk15:28, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
That's what I thought. I wish other people who create projects would stick to standard naming conventions for 'variables' etc lol! (I say that cos I copied the 'code' of course.. as all good programmers do! ;) ).
As for the /Assessment showing/hiding on the project page - yeah.. I'd like that I think. --Mal15:35, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Yup - lazy programmers! Cheers for that.. I'll take a look at the code for that then. I would have learned it myself, only I thought I'd to start this other thing I have to do. I'm putting it off for another few minutes! --Mal16:06, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
OK - I wanted to include the Belfast categories in the project.. without having to create a sub-project. I was wondering if you could take a look at a test replacement for WPBelfast I've created in my user space, and let me know if it'll work once I've created the relevant category pages. --Mal08:54, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Just noticed that your bot tagged Graham Reid (writer) with the Living persons bio template. I was wondering what the procedure would be with this considering I'm about to tag the article with the WPBelfast template. --Mal21:18, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Another problem I've found. The WPBelfast tag has a couple of links to it which point to some gaming project page. I looked at the code and couldn't find a single mention. Any ideas? --Mal00:49, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
Queen WikiProject
Hello, I am resurrecting the Queen WikiProject and I have seen the great work you've done with the Beatles WikiProject (another great band). I could really use some help. Would you be interested in helping me do this?--Miketm00:22, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Hi. Yes, I'm willing to give you a few pointers and some assistance. Unfortunately I didn't get round to it today, maybe tommorow? --kingboyk20:40, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, I think the project has allot of potential. I don't have allot of experience with WikiProjects, but I'm leaning allot.--Miketm21:46, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
The template says "within the scope of", it doesn't claim ownership or try to take credit for your work. If you have any suggestions for how the template can be made better to ease your concerns please come to Template talk:WPBiography or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography, I'm sure your concerns will be listened to. We have no desire to take credit for other people's work. --kingboyk10:05, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Yes, that's great, thank you. A few false positives have slipped into the list because the songs categories are a bit of a mess. Thanks again and sorry for any inconvenience. --kingboyk20:25, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Gosh. It would be one hell of a job, and I suspect some are notable and some probably not. Do you fancy reading each one and deciding on notability? :P --kingboyk12:50, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Obviously some are notable. Few in the stub cat though. There's a parent cat, if you recall. First step to AfD all those that are carbon copies of each other with no sources other than the standard two. - CrazyRussiantalk/email13:42, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Actually on second thought-- it makes sense to me, as it's definitely part of military history-- they wouldn't be there if it wasn't for the war... plange17:31, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Single Stubs?
Hey there; bet you don't want to hear from me again ;) I have a question regarding the stubclass template that you have a bot adding. The template was added to the song One Week (as one example) that isn't a stub (it was destubbed a few days ago apparently). Should the stubclass template only be used for stubs? [edit as I look at this]: apparently the stub is gone from the article, but the wikiproject talk-page box still has class=stub. This feels like a redundant classification that might not (and in this case, did not) get changed when the stub tag was removed. Anyhoo, I have no idea what do with this, as I have no idea what classes are possible in that template other than stub. Thanks TheHYPO17:49, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
No problem in hearing from you again! :)
OK, I tagged all song stubs with class=Stub. Only some time later did the idea for {{stubclass}} come to me, so I had the bot go back to all the talk pages which had been tagged with class=Stub. Of course it was always possible that in the meantime a few articles would have been destubbed, and it seems you've found one!
The whole point of the new {{stubclass}} template is to alert editors to the possible presence of a stale/redundant rating, in the hope that they'll give the article a fresh assessment. This is supposed to be clear in the instructions, so I guess you're telling me the instructions need improving! I'll look into it, {{WikiProjectSongs}} isn't my work but maybe one or both of these templates need improved instructions?
Anyway... how to deal with these cases is remove {{stubclass}}, and change the class= parameter to one of Start, B, A, GA or FA. A-class articles are rare, FA and GA is indicated by a template on the talk page. So, for a recently-former stub you're probably looking at a Start-class, maybe a B. The official meanings of these grades are at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment. --kingboyk17:56, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
For WikiProject songs, do you want to include song genres or not? For instance, your bot has tagged Chanson and Gregorian chant, which are both genres which include solely songs. Are these within the bounds of the wikiproject, or should I remove the template? Thanks, Mak(talk)19:41, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Since every national anthem article is being tagged with the Wikiproject Song template, I am going to keep this tag at Kimigayo since that song has been declared as the Japanese anthem since 1999. User:Zscout370(Return Fire)01:13, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
I had a look at it, yes, but I generally trust JzG to be well informed on these matters. Also, I do read AN so I don't need to be alerted here too :) Thanks anyway and apologies if my slightly frivolous comment offended you in any way. --kingboyk12:57, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
indeed i do not mind! ha, i didn't notice that WP, i will have to check it out... yeh, it was 'Fuck the Millennium' that alerted me to yr edits in the first place. *visits 'discography'* W guice14:14, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
No, I just replaced the needsinfobox template with the needs-infobox parameter (as a way of advertising to folks that the album template has got smarter). If the article in fact no longer needs an infobox, just remove the parameter! Cheers. --kingboyk22:36, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
I took a brief look at Crazy Russian's recent contribution list. I saw that you were under the misconception that there are duplicates among some of the outwardly similar looking articles.
That is actually not true. All those articles should be unique. Any duplicates would be a carryover of theinability of the intelligence analysts to spell their names consistently.
All the stub articles, that haven't yet been expanded, differ in their references. The DoD released 6,000 pages of dccuments, that did not contain the detainees names on March 32006. Those officially released transcripts were only identified by a detainee ID number. The DoD was required, by court order, to release their identities. But they missed the deadline for compliance by about 2 months.
Later, on April 202006 and May 152006, they released two -- inconsistent -- official lists of Guantanamo detainees. Those official lists contained the detainee's ID numbers, making it possible for detainee's transcripts to be identified. But only with a terrific amount of work, per transcript. Basically it would have required scanning through all 6,000 pages of documents. As the they weren't in any recognizable order.
I spent a considerable amount of time recording the name of the file, and the page number, where different transcripts began. I then transcribed the names, nationalities and detainee IDs from those official lists. I wrote some Python programs to correlate the transcripts with the names. And I had those programs generate outwardly similar looking, but actually significantly different articles. They differ in that each one states the name, detainee ID, nationality, and most importantly, the file name and page number where the detainees transcripts start. It represented a considerable effort. And there is no other public place on the internet where people interested in detainee's transcripts can look them up. I think this is a valuable resource.
It could be argued that this resource I regard as valuable I implemented in totally the wrong way. But, please, don't say that the articles are identical, OK?
May I make a suggestion? Did it not occur to you that you might have considered discussing your concerns with the authors of the articles that you felt were problematic? There is no point being at loggerheads with another wikipedian if they are willing to listen to concerns and approach a compromise in a spirit of cooperation. -- Geo Swan23:05, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
Hi. Thanks for the message. I actually tagged all of the stubs with Category:Living people, so I've at least glanced at every single one of them. I honestly appreciate and understand that you've gone to a great deal of trouble to make these articles (so, if they are deleted, my recommendation would be to have them userfied, that is moved to subpages of your user page). I don't believe I've said anywhere that they're all the same, although they're clearly based on a boilerplate text and most of them contain the same paragraph about the tribunal. Remove the boilerplate text and merge the rest into a list article and you'd have the same info and I wouldn't recommend deletion of that either.
Ultimately though, now it's on AfD it's not my decision. Make your case there and see if other editors agree with you. That's how Wikipedia works. Hope that helps. --kingboyk16:02, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for the message. It's not really possible with AWB - which the bot uses - to do that at the present time. I build the list from Category:Living people, convert the list from articles to talk pages, and then cross-check it against already-tagged articles. I then have the bot tag those talk pages; there's no way in AWB I can check the article before tagging the talk page. Now, the article in question must either have been in that category when I built my list or there is a redirect to that page which is in the category. I'd like in future to build a more intelligent bot which tags the talk page based on the categories and templates in the article, but I don't have that ability at the moment. We just have to accept that the positive of being able to tag over 115,000 talk pages automatically brings with it the slight negative of the occasional incorrect tag :) Hope that helps and thanks again for the message. --kingboyk23:28, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
For helping make the internet not suck, I, ReverendG award the Banner of Unsuckiness to User:Kingboyk.
Thanks for making such a useful bot. Here's a non-barnstar award.
Thank you. Two quite contrary opinions today, but c'est la vie. Do I make the internet suck or not suck? :) All comments welcome! --kingboyk10:02, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Why did you tag this article. What is breaking the "rules"? Bots such as yours are making Wp SUCK big time. If you think something needs to be fixed, fix it. Don't mindlessly tag it IMNSHO Albatross214708:41, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
And perhaps you should read my FAQ where I state that all articles are getting this tag and it doesn't reflect on the status of any particular article. If you think the wording should be changed - and I agree with you as it happens, I've already suggested it - comment at Template talk:Blp. As for fixing articles myself, how can I possibly fix 115,000 articles? I already have 15,000 edits, adminship, 1 FA and 12 GAs - I think I do quite enough already, don't you? :) --kingboyk10:01, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for voting in my RfA. I would especially like to thank those 18 people that supported me. But I'd also like to thank those that may have not voted for me, but gave me advice to make me a better wikipedian. Once again, I thank you all. Unfortunately, the final result was 18 supporters, 32 opposers, 9 nuetrals, therefore I wasn't promoted to sysop. I hope to see you vote in my next RfA in late 2006, early 2007. Hopefully you'll support me. íslenskahurikein#12;(samtal)13:08, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
producer credits
hello sir,
i've been working on a few hip-hop album articles recently and i noticed you being pretty active in WP:ALBUM. i was wondering you knew if there was already a consensus on how to do producer credits, or if not where's the best place to take it to the album project (i don't know my way around there that well). i've been going:
a la the way we do verses. other people put "Produced by xxx". just wondering if there was a style guideline so we can standardise 'em all. wordW guice14:51, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
High. Just to let you know I removed the Album project banner that you placed on Home of the Brave (1986 film) as it should have gone on Home of the Brave (soundtrack) (the two articles were split a couple of days ago). I was originally going to cut-and-paste the tag, complete with assessment, to the album page, however I feel the album page should be assessed on its own merits, so you might want to check it out if you wish to reassess. Cheers. 23skidoo15:56, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Is it ok if I ask something regarding album assessments? If an album has just a one sentence intro, track listing and an infobox, then what rating would they be on the assessment scale - stub or start? LuciferMorgan21:39, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Hmm... Maiden is in Category:Upcoming albums (rolls eyes). John Barry, not entirely sure but it will be something like that. Sorry for the inconvenience - I check my subcategories carefully and using grep get a list of any which don't include the word "albums", so Barry shouldn't have crept in probably. Maiden is simply incorrectly categorised. HTH. --kingboyk05:25, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Got it. Those last 2 are in James Bond Music, which is a subcat of Category:Film soundtracks, which - the blurb says - is a category for albums. It's a small category so it's no bother, I'll remove those from my list manually and delete any erroneous tags. --kingboyk05:27, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
OK, I've fixed it by splitting Bond into 3 subcategories - albums, songs and composers. Thanks for the headsup, that's a great improvement. --kingboyk06:32, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
