Jump to content

User talk:Primefac/Archive 38

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 35Archive 36Archive 37Archive 38Archive 39Archive 40→Archive 45

Query

Hello, Primefac,

I'm not sure what to do about this page. The subject (who is not this author) has made several attempts to write an autobiography of himself in Draft space so far-fetched that the draft page is semi-protected from creation. And apparently, he is getting some friends to help him. His own efforts had little bio information but this page does. However the photos are unrelated to him, despite the captions, so I'm not sure how accurate any of the information is and whether it needs to be oversighted. I frequently see you handing instances of young editors so I thought I'd ask for your advice. Thanks. Liz Read! Talk! 03:07, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

It does, thanks. If you see things like this in the future, shoot me (or the OS team) and email so we can handle it. Primefac (talk) 07:23, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
If it is clear BLP-violating content, then I do email the Oversight team but in this case, I was less sure because some of the content was clearly false. But better to be overly cautious than the alternative. Thank you, Primefac. Liz Read! Talk! 00:33, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Bots Newsletter, January 2022

Bots Newsletter, January 2022
BRFA activity by month

Welcome to the ninth issue of the English Wikipedia's Bots Newsletter, your source for all things bot. Vicious bot-on-bot edit warring... superseded tasks... policy proposals... these stories, and more, are brought to you by Wikipedia's most distinguished newsletter about bots.

After a long hiatus between August 2019 and December 2021, there's quite a bit of ground to cover. Due to the vastness, I decided in December to split the coverage up into a few installments that covered six months each. Some people thought this was a good idea, since covering an entire year in a single issue would make it unmanageably large. Others thought this was stupid, since they were getting talk page messages about crap from almost three years ago. Ultimately, the question of whether each issue covers six months or a year is only relevant for a couple more of them, and then the problem will be behind us forever.

Of course, you can also look on the bright side – we are making progress, and this issue will only be about crap from almost two years ago. Today we will pick up where we left off in December, and go through the first half of 2020.

Overall
In the first half of 2020, there were 71 BRFAs. Of these, Green checkmarkY 59 were approved, and 12 were unsuccessful (with Dark red X symbolN2 8 denied, Blue question mark? 2 withdrawn, and Expired 2 expired).

January 2020

A python
A python
A python
0.4 pythons
Yeah, you're not gonna be able to get away with this anymore.

February 2020

Speaking of WikiProject Molecular Biology, Listeria went wild in February

March 2020

April 2020

Listeria being examined

Issues and enquiries are typically expected to be handled on the English Wikipedia. Pages reachable via unified login, like a talk page at Commons or at Italian Wikipedia could also be acceptable [...] External sites like Phabricator or GitHub (which require separate registration or do not allow for IP comments) and email (which can compromise anonymity) can supplement on-wiki communication, but do not replace it.

May 2020

We heard you like bots, so we made a bot that reports the status of your bots, so now you can use bots while you use bots

June 2020

A partial block averted at the eleventh hour for the robot that makes Legos

Conclusion

  • What's next for our intrepid band of coders, maintainers and approvers?
  • Will Citation bot ever be set free to roam the project?
  • What's the deal with all those book links that InternetArchiveBot is adding to articles?
  • Should we keep using Gerrit for MediaWiki?
  • What if we had a day for bots to make cosmetic edits?

These questions will be answered — and new questions raised — by the February 2022 Bots Newsletter. Tune in, or miss out!

Signing off... jp×g 23:22, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

(You can subscribe or unsubscribe from future newsletters by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Meta Wiki

Hi, I was wondering what this MetaWiki is all about. I was reading about stewards, but I was redirected to MetaWiki. I have seen users say that they are an administrator at MetaWiki. So, what on Earth is this place? ItcouldbepossibleTalk 13:39, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Itcouldbepossible: Please go through meta:Stewards, I hope it will clear everything. 2402:3A80:6B4:9C3A:559B:3D18:22A5:93E7 (talk) 14:12, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
@2402:3A80 I was reading that only. That is why I wanted to know what all this meta is about. ItcouldbepossibleTalk 15:33, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) @Itcouldbepossible:. The English Wikipedia is one of hundreds of projects hosted by the Wikimedia Foundation. Other projects include encyclopedias in other languages, dictionaries, media repositories, and other projects. The "Meta-Wiki" is a project about the other projects, providing a central location to coordinate cross-project activities, and to open or close other projects. See meta:Meta:Inclusion_policy for more. — xaosflux Talk 14:16, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
@Xaosflux Am I allowed to edit there? Or is it for advanced users, or specifically administrators. ItcouldbepossibleTalk 15:34, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
@Itcouldbepossible: yes, though note meta-wiki is not a "content" project - so there isn't really much traditional editing going on there, most "edits" are about making or replying to various requests and proposals. An example of that is the annual technical community wishlist survey, take a look at: meta:Community_Wishlist_Survey_2022 and feel free to "vote" for any proposals you think would be helpful. — xaosflux Talk 16:11, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
@Xaosflux Then how does people become an administrator of the meta wiki? If there is nothing to do, then what is the need of an admin? ItcouldbepossibleTalk 05:38, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
Administrators are just contributors like everyone else, that can do a few extra janitorial tasks. Most tasks don't require this access. Once you are a contributor for a while and doing things that could benefit from extra flags, more experienced users will normally nominate you. They are labeled so that when people run in to a situation that needs such a janitor you can find them easily. — xaosflux Talk 11:09, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2022).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The user group oversight will be renamed suppress in around 3 weeks. This will not affect the name shown to users and is simply a change in the technical name of the user group. The change is being made for technical reasons. You can comment in Phabricator if you have objections.
  • The Reply Tool feature, which is a part of Discussion Tools, will be opt-out for everyone logged in or logged out starting 7 February 2022. Editors wishing to comment on this can do so in the relevant Village Pump discussion.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:02, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Heartbreak High episodes

I contest the deletion of List of Heartbreak High episodes, I would like specific examples of "unambiguous copyright infringement" because I definitely wrote the descriptions in my own words as much as I could. even if in instances when they are too similar, they should have been removed with a warning so I could rework them, not the ENTIRE page deleted. I worked really hard on this page, please reinstate the page with the specific examples removed so I can address and rewrite them.Pinchofhope (talk) 21:57, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

I've reinstated the page from an older edit, everything on there is original, but still need the page history so I can reinstate more and isolate the parts that infringe the copyright so I can remove it, are there any archives or has everything been removed entirely? Pinchofhope (talk) 22:10, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
I'm glad to hear you've sorted things out. I looked at the deleted revisions, and as near as I can tell you have restored all of the relevant non-text content (tables, templates, etc), so unless I'm missing something (or you want something specific that's not in the current version) I don't know if there's anything for me to do. Let me know if you do find something missing, though. Primefac (talk) 14:48, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello

Hi, Prime, my mental health is now ok and now I can work on AfC and NPR projects efficiently. TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 04:01, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

 Done. Primefac (talk) 14:49, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Another request

Is it possible to have a link in the infobox to the said games for template:infobox country at games? For ex. having the 2022 Winter Olympics linked? Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 00:53, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

I see little point in it, given that the Games are almost guaranteed to be linked in the first sentence of the lead. Where (and why) are you seeing a need for this extra link? Primefac (talk) 08:47, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
To avoid MOS:BOLDTITLE. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 09:04, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
Ah, yes, I've been to your userpage now and see the concern. I don't think I've ever seen a page where the Games are bold, allowing them to be linked. I think removing the bold is easier than finding somewhere else to place the link. Primefac (talk) 09:13, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Template(s?) removed from article without TFD, as far as I can tell

Here's an odd one. PrimeBOT removed {{Victoria Azarenka start boxes}} from that person's article, but I do not see a TFD that is linked from that page, or any evidence that it was marked with a TFD template. I am not an admin, so maybe there is something I cannot see. I have restored it for now, but if this was an error, is it possible that other templates were removed in this manner? No rest for the diligent bot operator.... – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:30, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Update: I'm also seeing {{Yevgeny Kafelnikov start boxes}}, {{Iga Świątek start boxes}}, {{Kim Clijsters start boxes}}, and {{Martina Navratilova start boxes}} on Wikipedia:Database reports/Unused templates/1, presumably for the same reason. I'm signing off for a while, but maybe you will see a pattern. Not a super-urgent issue, as nothing has been deleted yet. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:33, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
There was a group of tennis-player navboxes that were deleted a few weeks ago, I orphaned them all and it's possible that those got caught in my regex. I'll see about restoring them where appropriate. Primefac (talk) 07:16, 7 February 2022 (UTC) Restored all uses. Primefac (talk) 08:50, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Linter error offer

Re this edit, first, thank you, and second, if you ever come across a page that is so broken by Linter errors that you can't or don't want to fix it, drop me a line. I enjoy puzzling them out. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:40, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Will do. Primefac (talk) 18:45, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

c sharp

Hi. I got the code ported from java to C# (well my friend did the porting), but there are still a few dents. I think there is only one issue with the code now. It is very stupid/embarrassing though. May I email you the source code? —usernamekiran • sign the guestbook • (talk) 21:03, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

No guarantees, but if I can help I'll try. Primefac (talk) 21:32, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
thanks a lot. mail senteded. —usernamekiran • sign the guestbook • (talk) 22:26, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

Regarding PrimeBOT's recent edits.

Hi, I recently noticed some of PrimeBOT's recent edits, for example this. It appears that it added the words "Party" or "Party (US)" to the party cells, but I'm afraid it missed quite a few. Those of the format {{Party cell|Lorem ipsum||top/bottom}} & {{Party cell|Lorem ipsum|right/left}} aren't updated as they should've been, and thus don't give the intended output. See for example the cell areas beside William R. King's name in United States congressional delegations from Alabama § United States Senate, where {{Party cell|Jacksonian||top}} isn't updated to {{Party cell|Jacksonian Party||top}}. This issue appears in other congressional delegation articles too, and probably across other articles also. I hope you can fix it. Thanks! ---CX Zoom(he/him) (let's talk|contribs) 16:23, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Whoops! Should be fixed in a bit. Primefac (talk) 17:49, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
Thank you very much, but I'm afraid it did not fix the whole issue. There are still a lot of Party cell templates that did not yield appropriate results. See, for example, United States congressional delegations from Alabama § Key & the Class II Senators list at United States congressional delegations from Alabama § United States Senate. ---CX Zoom(he/him) (let's talk|contribs) 21:00, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
Well, there's your issue - those aren't {{party cell}} invocations, they're {{party cell key}} calls. Technically the latter never calls the former, so I didn't realise it needed fixing. The latter was an edge case I overlooked, and the regex wasn't happy. Should be fixed now. Primefac (talk) 21:30, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
Perfect, as it now appears. Thank you very much. ---CX Zoom(he/him) (let's talk|contribs) 22:40, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
Any time, thanks for the patience whilst I cocked things up! I know it shouldn't have taken three runs to deal with it, and am somewhat annoyed by that; I had something like 200 replacement statements and I clearly I was not as judicious as I should have been in making sure all of the regex got copy/pasted correctly. Primefac (talk) 07:23, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

I can't login to AWB

Hi, please update my new username on the AWB tool approved users check page because I can't login or use the tool. I renamed my username from M-Mustapha to Em-mustapha. Thanks User:Em-mustapha talk 00:05, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

 Done. Primefac (talk) 08:29, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Where has the Revision Delete been discussed before?

I searched extensively and found no mention of talk:Manchester High School (Virginia) anywhere. 27.33.119.160 (talk) 15:45, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Has nothing to do with the article itself, but the subject matter that was being discussed. Primefac (talk) 15:49, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
So the issue I brought up, being not about whether to mention someone on Wikipedia but that revisions had unjustifiably been deleted, has not been addressed at all? 27.33.119.160 (talk) 23:00, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
There are times when revisions are deleted or hidden that have absolutely nothing to do with the edit that caused the original content to be removed, but because they were present in the diffs where the offending content was present, they must also be hidden. There's nothing we can really do about that (i.e. we cannot revdel specific section). Primefac (talk) 08:38, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
Understood. Please try to be clearer with your justifications; your first two comments were alluding to an issue which I have zero interest in that presumably lead to what I was mistakenly complaining about, hence why I asked for clarification twice. 27.33.119.160 (talk) 13:51, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
Fair enough, and apologies, though I genuinely thought you were more concerned about the CWC stuff and not the revdel issue itself. Primefac (talk) 22:02, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

User talk pages

Hi. I hope you're doing well. I noticed some of your edits such as this one: <https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:2620:101:F000:700:0:2570:E7FD:6FBE&diff=1071295873&oldid=1071281703>. I'm not really sure what you're talking about, we delete user talk pages all the time. Based on a quick look, in 2022 so far, we've deleted 1,589 user talk pages. If you exclude subpages, we've deleted 589 user talk pages. Some examples are User_talk:Ferdymotow or User talk:PiratesAreReal or User talk:2.197.244.24. --MZMcBride (talk) 02:33, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Having a number of deleted pages tells us nothing other than the number of deleted pages. In your three examples, the first was a very clear G11 that was an article in the user talk; it could have been blanked, but I'd say there's some discretion allowed there. The latter two examples are mass-deletions from blocked users, which means someone went to Special:Nuke, input the name, and then deleted everything there; the fact that there were some user talk pages in there is immaterial. 99% of the time there is no reason to delete a user talk page, even if the only content is silly non-harmful vandalism; blank it and move on. Primefac (talk) 08:29, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
I was responding directly to your comment "we don't delete user talk pages" with hundreds of examples of when we've done exactly that just this year. That doesn't "tell us nothing" as you suggest unless we choose to deliberately ignore hard evidence disproving the claim. --MZMcBride (talk) 00:37, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
Seriously? Of the 9 declines I made, I left out "generally" from one of them. I honestly don't remember why that one didn't have it, but I'm guessing late-at-night me realised that pedantry would get the better of me and we do occasionally delete pages for reasons other than "someone created this page but it's useless" (which I still maintain is not a valid CSD reason). Primefac (talk) 10:16, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Insults, but nothing new

Hello, as per AE report for the whole Balkan area and per decisions of multiple admins on March 20th 2021 [[1]] per indefinite ban of 2 editors, it was also decided that a strict rules are going to be applied against any editors who are misusing rules of Wikipedia. This editor [[2]] has been indefinitely banned 2 times already for using multiple accounts see here, please [[3]], [[4]], also they were indef blocked as discovered to be Joycewood [[5]] this 2 are is still blocked, also the block log of both MF/Crovata is pretty huge MF being blocked 7 times [[6]] for edit warring, 3RR rule violation and personal attacks, the same thing as Crovata who has been blocked 9 times (?) [[7]] and what is interesting Crovata was already under 1RR rule which they could not follow. What I do not understand how is this editor even allowed to edit anymore on Wikipedia, and yet they reappeared again few days ago doing the same thing (personal attacks, pinging other editors[[8]]per WP:TAGTEAM disruptive editing as you can see only on Serb related pages - i.e this one [[9]] where linguist Czerwinski deals with linguistic consistency and inconsistency of Dubrovnik area [[10]] and he definitely does not make conclusions provided by editor, it is way complicated then that (abstract is in english, last page). I am pretty sure that this last edit was against me on TP [[11]] which was not a first time [[12]] even though I did not remove the text but only over excessive quote that can be traced as illegal copy edit [[13]], on this page [[14]] I posted reliable sources of international scholars but the editor decided on talk page to tag team again the editors with whom they cooperated in the past [[15]], one of them already indefinitely blocked [[16]], the other one defended them on Sock investigation [[17]] and today another editor with whom they hope they are going to go on their side [[18]] another example of WP:TAGTEAM it is obvious that the behaviour of the editor has not changed, exampling the same behaviour of insults, cherrypicking of sources, tag teaming etc. Therefore I ask that this editor should be indefinitely block again, for the 3rd time. Thank you. Theonewithreason (talk) 12:16, 13.February 2022 (UTC)

Also it would be note checking that during indefinite block time this editor was probably editing under different IP [[19]], this one use the same behaviour pattern like the MF edits the same pages like them [[20]] and uses the same "language" like they do, [[21]] and here is example in same editing ip [[[[22]] and [[23]] Theonewithreason (talk) 14:34, 13.February 2022 (UTC)
I've attempted to parse this out a few times now, and I have no idea what you're asking me to do. You state this editor should be indefinetly block again but you've linked to a half-dozen editors. Primefac (talk) 16:11, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
@Primefac: No I have reported the fact that the editor this one [[24]] has been previously indefinitely blocked as you can see on their block log page [[25]] and I have noted that they have been previously blocked indefinitely several times per spi check [[[[26]] and that they have during block time also edited [[27]] all in all it is the same person using multiple accounts for which they have been indefinitely blocked already. Theonewithreason (talk) 16:24, 13.February 2022 (UTC)
I'm not seeing anything blatant enough to feel comfortable dropping a unilateral block; if you think this matter needs attention I would encourage you to copy it over to WP:ANI or similar. Primefac (talk) 16:59, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Citation Barnstar
Thank you for your help at Bix Biederbecke 7&6=thirteen (☎) 17:50, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
Thanks! Primefac (talk) 17:51, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Why?

Is there a reason why you moved Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Koppie foam grasshopper nymph (2) to Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Koppie foam grasshopper nymph? They were two separate nominations, with more than two years between them. Regards, Armbrust The Homunculus 20:29, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Saw the month and not the year. I'll fix in a min. Primefac (talk) 20:30, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Help

Hi @Primefac:, Can I use two Wifi networks for editing Wikipedia? Vary from place to place. Fade258 (talk) 16:01, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Huh? I genuinely don't understand the question. Primefac (talk) 16:08, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
I mean, I generally use two Wifi networks for editing Wikipedia. Can I do that? Fade258 (talk) 02:05, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) @Fade258 that's generally considered fine. 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him | talk) 03:50, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
Thank you both of you. Fade258 (talk) 05:52, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

PrimeBOT task for UTM parameters

Hi Primefac, PrimeBOT's user page currently lists the UTM parameters task as "stalled". Is it still active? I'm planning to run a version of Theo's code, but wanted to ask you in case your task is still running. 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him | talk) 05:17, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Go for it. Never really liked that regex anyway; kept finding more exceptions than rules. Primefac (talk) 07:08, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Shipping company

Hi Primefac. You undid my edition in Shipping company to decline G6. I guess I edited the page wrongly. What I am trying to do is ask for deletion of that page in order to move Shipping line there. It's more adecuate as it is the main article of Category:Shipping companies. Can you help me ?. Thanks.--Banderas (talk) 08:35, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Given that there was an RFD on the matter a little under two years ago, I think an WP:RM would be more appropriate than a unilateral move. Primefac (talk) 08:40, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Why’d you remove the criminal section from Joshua Boyles biography?

It seems like people with prior connections to Wikipedia tend to get preferential treatment. I think his page should be detailed with the current information we have access to. It’s Wikipedia, but the admins and moderators biases are becoming obvious and almost embarrassing for a “community” oriented website. You should think about why your protecting some individuals while also disparaging others. 2603:3015:E1A:600:2177:97E2:559:9D (talk) 17:48, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

It's not Boyles' biography, it's an article about his kidnapping. While some biographical information is necessary, we do not need to give an entire recount of his life before and after the incident. Primefac (talk) 19:39, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

A question.

This is just out of curiosity. While editing some pages, I came across the user User:Walrus_Ji. The user is blocked but there is no thread about it anywhere. The block log states just blocked without any link. Is there any link? Why was the user blocked? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akshaypatill (talk • contribs) 18:51, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

When a user has been blocked via {{ArbCom block}}, it means that it was because there was private or otherwise off-wiki evidence that was used to determine some sort of behaviour or activity that required a block, but since this evidence is private it cannot be linked and thus the templated block reason is given. If we declared the specific reasons(s) for an ArbCom block it would largely defeat the purpose of blocking under that rationale. Primefac (talk) 18:58, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Unblocking of Fairy Bliss

Dear administrator, thank you for the quick review of my unblocking request. Was my request accepted or do I have to create a new unblocking appeal? Thank you for your answer and precious support. Fairy Bliss (talk) 15:08, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

No worries, and apologies for the mistype on my part; the unblock requests pre-load a decline message and I forgot to remove it before accepting your request. Primefac (talk) 15:22, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

WP:AFC Helper News

Hello! I wanted to drop a quick note for all of our AFC participants; nothing huge and fancy like a newsletter, but a few points of interest.

  • AFCH will now show live previews of the comment to be left on a decline.
  • The template {{db-afc-move}} has been created - this template is similar to {{db-move}} when there is a redirect in the way of an acceptance, but specifically tells the patrolling admin to let you (the draft reviewer) take care of the actual move.

Short and sweet, but there's always more to discuss at WT:AFC. Stop on by, maybe review a draft on the way? Whether you're one of our top reviewers, or haven't reviewed in a while, I want to thank you for helping out in the past and in the future. Cheers, Primefac, via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:00, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Want a user right.

Hi I want to edit on Wikipedia from my account when I'm connected to VPN so I read all the policies and found that I need to contact a checkuser. ... २ तकरपेप्सी talk 22:15, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

That's a few steps down the way; initial requests are described here. Primefac (talk) 22:17, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Revdel at American College of Surgeons

Hi! I see that you've removed almost all of the content at American College of Surgeons and revdelled the history of the last 10 years. I can see that different parts of the text have been contributed at different times by several different editors. Was really all of it copyright violations? I had a look at the article in a Wikipedia mirror and I tried googling a few different sentences from it, but the only results I got was other Wikipedia mirrors. What am I missing here? Thanks! – Uanfala (talk) 00:18, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

100% copyvio? Of course not. However, if one paragraph in an article is a copyvio, the entire revision containing that paragraph needs to be hidden; at this point in time there is no way to selectively revdel sections of an article. Primefac (talk) 09:08, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
I thought in that case the procedure was to remove only the text that violates copyright and not everything else as well. I'm not querying so much the RD (from the last AN thread it's clear that admins are happy with such large-scale revdelling of intervening edits), as the removal of the text from the article. – Uanfala (talk) 13:38, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
Apologies, I see what you mean and I think I misinterpreted your statement. The content that was removed was not a 100% copyvio, but probably somewhere up near 80%, with almost every paragraph having at least half of its content copied from the ACS website or similar locations. In this case leaving the non-infringing content would have been awkward at best, with no context to provide the details of said statements, and the rest close enough paraphrasing to merit removal anyway (I am guessing that any not-copied content were later additions attempting to shoehorn in more content). I was trying to find redeeming content to save, but there just wasn't enough to keep, and so I had to revert back to the older version of the page. Primefac (talk) 18:34, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Have a question about a PrimeBOT notice...

PrimeBOT posted a Wiki Education Foundation Notice several months after the coursework (by the way, no coursework edits were ever made by the assigned editor but anyway...). Anyway, could you tell me why PrimeBOT placed this notice on Talk:Aunt Jemima so long after the fact? Just wondering... Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 01:19, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

All it did was move a banner notice from the top section to its own - you'll notice that it never actually changed the content and still states the original times of the course. Primefac (talk) 07:16, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Can you help me

Please check my talk page an IP continously disturbing me trying to act oversmart. Mainly wants me to get blocked from editing and has something with Ayan (an actor whose draft I'm creating) ... २ तकरपेप्सी talk 21:25, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Looks like this got dealt with, sorry I couldn't be of more assistance at the time. Primefac (talk) 07:18, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Tennis cleanup BRFA could use you

Are you up for this one? See Wikipedia:Bot requests#Case cleanup task for nearly 17000 tennis articles and the associated BRFA at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/DoggoBot 5. ProcrastinatingReader says he's too busy to take it on. Dicklyon (talk) 23:46, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

I am hoping to be able to dedicate some time tomorrow (Sunday) to going through BRFAs, but no guarantees. Primefac (talk) 08:30, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
I'm having a relaxing weekend in Maui. I don't mean to eat into your weekend. Thanks for all you do. WP can be a lower priority, really! Dicklyon (talk) 03:37, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
Now, another weekend in Maui. Not so relaxing as I have to fly home today. I hope you can get back to looking at this bot approval. I provided a bunch more examples with some comments. Dicklyon (talk) 17:42, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
You have helped me several times with your user rights. Thank you. I dream of horses (Contribs) (Talk) 23:31, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
Thanks! Primefac (talk) 08:42, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Question

Hi @Primefac:, Can you tell me from which IP address that I created my username (Fade258)? Fade258 (talk) 13:00, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

No. It's been too long. Primefac (talk) 13:07, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
No worries. Please explain in short about IP Block Exempt. Fade258 (talk) 13:13, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
Well, to quote verbatim from WP:IPBE:
Primefac (talk) 13:17, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
In fact, I didn't use any VPN service. Mainly I used this IP address (103.104.30.144) whose ISP is First link communication but this IP address always changes where as I already requested here and they granted me a GIPBE and I use my mobile data when I am not in my home or traveling somewhere. Fade258 (talk) 13:58, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Two Olympic favours / gauging opinion

Hi I have two favours to ask for:

  • 1) On the Saudi Arabia at the 2022 Winter Olympics, all Winter Olympics minus 2022 are shown in red "Winter Olympics appearances", shouldn't these all be greyed out from when Saudi Arabia started competing at the Olympics? I believe the same issue exists for Timor-Leste.
  • 2) Not sure how to proceed here, gauging your opinion. For closing ceremony flagbearers is it necessary to have a second article? If so, I think the opening should be moved to 2022 Winter Olympics opening ceremony national flag bearers (and similar name for closing). Otherwise, we can have two sections on the current article 2022 Winter Olympics Parade of Nations. If the latter, the opening ceremony link needs to be redirected. Let me know what you think! Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 16:38, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
First one is done (not sure what you mean about TLS though, they started in 2014). If the closing flagbearers can fit reasonably well in the primary article, then I don't see a need to have a separate page. I think it will likely come down to size, though. Primefac (talk) 16:58, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
Sorry for TLS, I should have clarified I meant this template [28]. We will double the size essentially of the parade article if we add in closing ceremony flag bearers. If you think the size will be okay still, then I agree, we should leave it as is. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 17:01, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
Ah, yes, sorted. Primefac (talk) 17:03, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
Thanks, and your final thought on the flagbearers? Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 17:48, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
Not really, size discussions sound like something that should be dealt with when someone complains; if you start with one article it's a lot easier to split than the reverse. Primefac (talk) 17:55, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
Great, only thing left then is having the opening/closing ceremony link in the infobox to link to the parade of nations article. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 18:18, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
Looks like there was a separate article in 2018 [29]. Will follow that format. Have you had a chance to take a look to the links ? Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 15:09, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
Makes sense. Not sure which links you're referring to, but the templates should all be up-to-date. Primefac (talk) 17:33, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
The link in the infobox where it says Flag bearer (opening) should go to the parade article, while for closing it should go to closing ceremony flagbearers. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 18:42, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
There doesn't seem to be any regularity with the naming conventions; some are named after the flag bearers and some are after the Parade of Nations. Standardise first, then we can sort out where the links should point. Primefac (talk) 14:35, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Question about holding cell entry removal

Hey, why did you remove the sclass- templates from the holding cell? Gonnym (talk) 15:15, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Because the close result was to merge, and the nominated templates had been redirected to the target templates. Generally that means that the merge has been completed. Primefac (talk) 18:25, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
The close was very clear in how it should be done, as it said Along the lines of Trappist and Gonnym, which reading TTP and my comments was to replace x- templates with the normal one and delete these redirects as they were always meant to be temporarily. This wasn't a normal "merge and redirect" result. Gonnym (talk) 09:13, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
I have no issue orphaning the redirects but it wasn't super-clear that was the requirement. Also, coming right out and stating "this shouldn't have been removed because they're supposed to be orphaned" is a lot less likely to annoy me than playing coy. Primefac (talk) 09:24, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
Also, coming right out and stating "this shouldn't have been removed because they're supposed to be orphaned" is a lot less likely to annoy me than playing coy ... but that was exactly was I wrote here, which you removed with the comment -2. Seeing as how you saw my comment and removed it anyways, I came to ask why. Gonnym (talk) 09:41, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
Well, now I feel like an idiot, and have nothing to explain my actions. My apologies. Primefac (talk) 09:47, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
No worries, nothing personal :) Gonnym (talk) 09:48, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
Indeed. In case it wasn't obvious, I'm in the process of replacing all of those redirs. Primefac (talk) 09:54, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Question about SAG template TfD

Hi, I saw the changes made to the SAG award templates and saw you did some merging with the edit reason "TfD", but didn't link a TfD and I can't see one at the talk page - do you know where it is, I would just like to see the reasons for one of the changes (very bizarrely removing actors' names - it is an award given by actors to actors, they're pretty important). Kingsif (talk) 09:07, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

There were two discussions regarding a merge of the subtemplates to the main; since it wasn't directly listed it did not receive an {{old TFD}} notice. Primefac (talk) 09:10, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Primebot come-hither signal

I occasionally find irregular WikiEd assignment templates that are not converted, on a page where Primebot has been by to convert other templates. Recent example: at Talk:Interpersonal communication, where I added an {{unsig}} template to a stray template (it's also above the ToC). Would it be useful to add a flag of some sort to it, either just a ping to Primebot, if that's enough, or a flag of some sort to "come look at this one and convert it" (perhaps something like, {{ping|Primebot<!--user=Foo&ts=TIME-->}}). I don't want to belabor your Talk page with this each time it comes up. Or is it just not worth bothering with? Mathglot (talk) 19:48, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Genuinely out of curiosity, but have you not seen Wikipedia:Education_noticeboard#Results? The template is no longer subst-only, and Sage is working on converting the WikiEd tools to properly add the template for new uses. Other than implementing anything on a technical side, I no longer have anything to do with the dashboard template. Primefac (talk) 20:00, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

👍

The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
For all the work you do behind the scenes making the English language Wikipedia a decent place for the ordinary hobbyist editor FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 18:02, 25 February 2022 (UTC) 
FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 18:02, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
Thanks! Primefac (talk) 18:02, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi. Can you look at the history of this page? The copyright vio detector has detected a lot of similar results as well. Thank you. --Victor Trevor (talk) 19:42, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

The problem with a page like that is that it has been around since 2009, so even if there is a bit of copying to Wikipedia, there is almost guaranteed to be a ton of copying from Wikipedia, which will mess with the copyvio check. In other words, I can't on a quick look make any sort of determination about its status, so you'll have to either file a copyright investigation or determine which parts of the page were copied (and from where). Primefac (talk) 19:50, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Live from Here

The show is canceled. I changed the description from 'Live from Here is', to was. You changed it back. How come? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cuchulain9 (talk • contribs) 04:12, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Live from Here

Disregard my prior. I see that seems to be a convention, so ok. Cuchulain9 (talk) 04:14, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Comparison of hiding tools

The table is a "Comparison of hiding tools" as self described, therefore all hiding tools shouuld be on it. Plus, the initial list is also a non-OS thing. Naleksuh (talk) 21:45, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

You're welcome to discuss the matter on WT:OS, but I do not see deletion as a "hiding tool" (as we do not actually have a tool to do that). Primefac (talk) 21:49, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Wilfrid Oswald Jose copyvio

The draft was a word-for-word copy of an essay by the submitter; we talked about it some more on my talk page. When I tried to decline it again with that link in the URL field it didn't show it on the decline template for some reason, so I've left it as a comment. I probably just didn't look carefully to confirm the decline went through correctly the first time. Rusalkii (talk) 21:59, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Apologies, if you attempted to add the URL and it didn't put it in the template, that's an issue with AFCH. Thank you for the followup and sorry for the hassle. Primefac (talk) 22:02, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

You had missed out Index of Singapore-related articles when doing mass rollback on the pages. I have removed it as part of my weekly update, but am not sure if you had missed out on other pages. Cheers! – robertsky (talk) 23:52, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

I probably did, I was pretty sure I missed some. Got distracted and forgot to go back and check. Primefac (talk) 07:33, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Hide diff

Hi, could you also delete the edit summary of this bot edit? Thanks, Nehme1499 07:41, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

This one as well (by a previous IP he used). Nehme1499 07:53, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
 Done. I'm about at the point where we set up an edit filter for this asshat. Primefac (talk) 08:24, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Protection level anomalies

  1. You reduced the protection level of Module:Find sources to ECP in November 2021 per Special:PermaLink/1055869020#User:Wikmoz, however the sole edit to the page since was by a Template Editor. This suggests to me that the page should be restored to template protection.
  2. In 2018, you template-protected Template:Storm colour. That template was converted to use Module:Storm categories in December 2021. I requested the module be protected to match the template, which was declined by Bbb23, implying that they did not think that template-protection was warranted. In that case, the protection level of Template:Storm colour should be reduced to ECP.

* Pppery * it has begun... 01:30, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Genuinely out of curiosity, because I can't remember when this was discussed or where to find it, but is there a huge issue if there is a mismatch between the protection of a very-stable template that is calling a dynamic module? Primefac (talk) 13:09, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
A template calling a module with a lower protection level renders the protection level on the template effectively security theater and therefore pointless. The original context for these is User talk:Primefac/Archive 17#More bad protections * Pppery * it has begun... 18:04, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
Okay, so no technical reason. I fixed your link and #2, but am still (genuinely) mulling over #1, because I don't want to raise the protection level only to have them return from whatever area they've hidden themselves in and suddenly realised they need to edit this template again (i.e. I don't want to protect-war with myself). I will give it a good think, though. Primefac (talk) 18:30, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
Dependencies should always have a higher or equivalent protection, as they will always have more or equal transclusions. Izno (talk) 22:09, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
Good point. Primefac (talk) 06:56, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
So, are you going to do something about #1? * Pppery * it has begun... 19:07, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
Stable but on 1.5mil pages... up it goes. Primefac (talk) 13:33, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
The exact same calculus applies to Module:Find sources/templates/Find general sources and Module:Find sources/templates/Find sources mainspace, both of which should likewise be raised to template protection. * Pppery * it has begun... 03:32, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
 Done. Forgot to check the subpages. Primefac (talk) 07:34, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2022).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:46, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Template:Stephanie Mills

Hey Primefac, an editor has been vandalizing Template:Stephanie Mills and Stephanie Mills discography. Apparently this editor has multiple accounts, three of which can be traced to the previous links. They are User:KixsNas, User:Naas08, and User:Vicspixydust, all being the same, i.e. WP:SOCK. Can you do something about this editor, so I can restore Template:Stephanie Mills to where it should be, which I temporarily moved to Template:Discographer? Thanks. Best, --Discographer (talk) 21:48, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

I have blocked KixsNas from being able to edit Stephanie Mills' page and her discography, but if you believe there is socking happening you should file a report at WP:SPI. I'll add the pages to my watchlist for a bit to keep an eye out for shenanigans.
Also, unrelated to the above, but please don't make unexplained and invalid page moves in what I assume you intended as some form of anti-vandal fighting; pages get protection through WP:RFPP or asking an admin, not attempting to hide them in some other location. Primefac (talk) 21:55, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
Thank you. Best, --Discographer (talk) 22:11, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

Need to delete revisions

Hi, I bungled a bit when submitting a draft from the sandbox. At Draft:Rin Nakai, revisions before the 15:05, 4 March 2022‎ edit contain sensitive information from old sandbox edits and I wish these to be removed as soon as possible. That is, Draft:Rin Nakai, edits from 15:04, 4 March 2022‎ to 16:02, 6 December 2020‎. -- TrickShotFinn (talk) 06:35, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

I have split all previous versions of the page back to User:TrickShotFinn/sandbox and deleted it per WP:U1. You are of course welcome to request undeletion should you need these revisions in the future. Primefac (talk) 07:27, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
Thanks! :) -- TrickShotFinn (talk) 07:32, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

COVID medical charts

Please restore all the COVID medical chart information you deleted to my sandbox. Trackinfo (talk) 01:44, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

Just to check, these are the templates from this and that discussion? Primefac (talk) 07:40, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
"That" discussion. I was unaware of "This" discussion and uninvolved. I was also unaware you had responded so I had to come looking. Trackinfo (talk) 06:21, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

?

Hey, it has been over a year now since my topic ban, where can I appeal? You can reply here. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 20:49, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

WP:ARCA. Primefac (talk) 10:28, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

removal of EC template

Sir, what do you mean by Legitimate edits? Bharatiya Sanatani (talk) 00:40, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

Legitimate edits means useful contributions; it doesn't mean making 187 pointless edits to your userpage or almost 200 edits to a single article to add in wikilinks. If you need to make multiple changes to a page, use the Preview option to see the in-progress work so that you can do all you need in as few edits as possible. Primefac (talk) 10:32, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

You beat me to it!

I’m referring to your ECP removal. It seemed pretty obvious what he was doing. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 21:19, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

and yet... Primefac (talk) 10:29, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
I was on my way to do it also. Bishonen | tålk 10:45, 7 March 2022 (UTC).

Updating episodes before being broadcasted on television

Hey Primefac! I want you to have a look at a user's contributions who mostly updates episode numbers on different Indian television soap operas. The person is now disruptively making edits for the episodes which have not been aired on television yet. Just on the basis of OTT platforms where episode(s) premiere before being broadcasted on TV and that to for premium subscribers, the editor is making the particular edits and recently, the user made edits for before the respective date/future event. ManaliJain (talk) 10:19, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

If it's an ongoing issue, I would recommend bringing the matter before WP:ANI. Primefac (talk) 10:33, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
Thanks, dispute resolved at Talk:Anupamaa/Archive 1#Updates_based_on_OTT. ManaliJain (talk) 17:30, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Non Emergency Medical Transportation Accreditation Commission

Please see my decline of this where I have tried to add the offending url to the decline template. I must be being a bit thick, because I can't see how to follow your instructions FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 08:56, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, put in the wrong param, it should be |details= or |details2= (in this case the latter). Thanks. Primefac (talk) 08:58, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
Thanks. I thought I was going insane
To be fair, I knew that anyway, been insane for years! FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 09:19, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
Hah! Sorry for the scare ;-) Primefac (talk) 09:21, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Unblocking for file uploading

Hello. So I read WP:REFB and practiced a bit of it on my sandbox and for the most part, I think I'm doing ok. And as for forcing high quality files, that's taken care of. So maybe you can contact an admin to unblock me. I'd really appreciate it. ChallengeCick (talk) 08:16, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Done, though I will note that this is not a guarantee or a Get Out of Jail Free card for future instances of disruption. Primefac (talk) 08:27, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
First off, nice monopoly reference and second, what do you mean by that this is not a guarantee? ChallengeCick (talk) 08:36, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
I just mean that if you start repeating the behaviours that led to the block in the first place, you can't say "but I got unblocked, so it's okay!" In other words, it's more of a "second chance" than a "do-over". Primefac (talk) 08:37, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
I came here from the link in the unblock summary @ChallengeCick: Would you mind telling me what you mean by "And as for forcing high quality files, that's taken care of"? I'm not an admin so I can't re-partial block you, however I would like to know what you mean by this since you had previously uploaded high quality version of files that were already an acceptable quality for NFF (non-free files). ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 14:31, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
So you probably weren't aware, but one of the reasons why I was blocked for file uploading was because for non-copyrighted images, if they didn't look good, I would upload a higher quality so it would look much nicer in the article's infobox. Examples include Sonic the Hedgehog 2 (film) and Bowser's Fury. But thankfully, that phase is done now and I'm gonna to that kind of stuff again when it comes to uploading files. So there's your clarification. ChallengeCick (talk) 07:34, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
@ChallengeCick: Oh I know why you were blocked from uploading files. I cleaned up your mess after you uploaded higher-quality versions on NFFs. But thank you for clarifying. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 13:59, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

Well, that was bizarre fun

What surprises me is that, except for you, and you started it, I can't really see anyone picked it up and ran with it except me. I suppose cv and revdel is an awkward area, and scares folk off, but I also see almost NO cv declines with deletion of the ordure and a cv-revdel request in the normal scheme of things. And I never knew cv-cleaned was a parameter. Nor, I think, do the revdel folks FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 14:53, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, I certainly wasn't the one that created the system, but it makes sense, and I finally got tired of seeing the "169" in the category count for the revdels. I suppose if there's a system that isn't used, it should be thrown away, eh? BUT, I think there are likely quite a few cv-declined-but-not-deleted drafts that eventually get accepted, and we really shouldn't have their old cvs in the history.
So thanks a ton for the help, I was definitely hitting a wall with those last 30. Assuming the script gets fixed some time of this century, it should make maintaining the category easier (even if I'm the only one doing it), since "1 or 2 a day" is pretty manageable. Primefac (talk) 14:57, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
I can see why you hit the wall. I did too, as you have seen. Like you I'm a persistent person.
We also identified a bit of UPE in the middle and that editor has now made full multiple declarations. FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 18:12, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
Nice. Primefac (talk) 18:13, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
Oh great. It happens here too. I should have known. of course. My view is that this makes the cure more important, but youi may be able to prevent this from happening in a user talk page.
No good deed goes unpunished. FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 22:42, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
Honestly, now that the backlog is down in that cat, I might revert; new declines will be fresher in the reviewer's mind and they should be able to remember where it came from (and it will also be more likely to show up in a cv search anyway). I'll see about getting that script upgrade moving too...
Also, since that message is subst, I'll likely have to go through and remove them all myself... only seven instances though, so that's good. Primefac (talk) 07:12, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
Or ignore it? FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 15:31, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
Giant error messages on notes to new users who probably don't even understand is generally not a good idea ;-) Primefac (talk) 15:50, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

The "What we should be doing with copyvios" action list

If you recall the list of stuff I posted on Slywriter's talk age, I have encapsulated it into User:Timtrent/cv in case it is of future use. Please feel free to edit anything in it that you disagree with or would like to improve and make whatever use you wish of it.

I have set it up to work for the time after the script is repaired. FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 15:45, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

Nice. Will keep it in mind. Primefac (talk) 15:50, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

Removal of template

Hi, in this edit, your bot removed {{Chris Evert start boxes}} among others from Chris Evert with the edit summary "Task 24: template removal following a TFD". Problem is, that template hadn't been listed for deletion, and wasn't in the "to orphan" list that your bot was working from at the time. The then-to-delete-but-since-restored {{Chris Evert}} was, however, which leads me to think that this was a regex problem where your removal script searches for something like \{\{Chris Evert.*\}\}, and can therefore accidentally remove templates that start with the name of a template to be deleted. Letcord (talk) 18:11, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Yes? Primefac (talk) 18:22, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
I thought you would want to know about an issue with your bot/script that either you weren't aware of or forgot to account for in this case, and which has led to the wrongfully-removed template being listed for deletion as "unused". User talk:PrimeBOT redirects here, so I assume this is the place for that kind of feedback. Letcord (talk) 18:38, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
Ah, yes, I seem to have missed one. Thanks. Primefac (talk) 18:43, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Oversight at ANI

Hi, I'm assuming the redacted template was because of doxing concerns... if my edit is inappropriate, please remove... Catfish Jim and the soapdish 17:10, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

I think that's okay; thanks for checking. Primefac (talk) 18:09, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Transport for Wales

I am puzzled why you declined to move this article back to its status quo following a controversial move. Please can you move things back to the point where we can initiate a sensible article move discussion? 10mmsocket (talk) 10:51, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

You star, thank you. 10mmsocket (talk) 10:53, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
Apologies, I don't know why I didn't see the move was recent. Move undone (noting that this is now the second time it's been moved out-of-process to that name). Primefac (talk) 10:54, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
Again, thanks. I will watch for the move request if it happens. Out of interest, the same editor User: Leadelape changed links to the new name in a whole bunch of articles. Should I revert those one-by-one, or can you do a mass-revert, or do I just let sleeping dogs lie for now? 10mmsocket (talk) 10:57, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
On the one hand, redirects are cheap, but on the other hand if the name never really was with the dab tags then it probably makes sense to revert. I'll do a quick skim of their contribs and see if it makes sense. Primefac (talk) 11:00, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
Meh, six or two threes, I don't think they made a huge contribution to the almost 200 links to the redirect. I'll leave it up to you to revert their recent edits, but I do note that some of their edits contained other useful changes. Primefac (talk) 11:03, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
Noted. Thanks. 10mmsocket (talk) 11:10, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
Any chance you can fix the Wikidata entry corresponding to this article? It's currently setup for a disambig page here. 10mmsocket (talk) 11:23, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Wearing whichever hat you feel appropriate

Please look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/IconEditorMaster where I am seeing a very odd pattern of editing, enough to say SPI, but not enough to know which master to suggest FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 21:35, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Not sure what I'm looking at here, seems to be an editor replacing png logos with svgs. Primefac (talk) 10:55, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
I'm not totally sure either. But "something" is making my antennae twitch. If I could place it with certainty I'd be less obscure! The behaviour is very "Wiki-mature" for a new editor. FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 18:41, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

BareRefBot

Hi Primefac, I hope you are having a good day. Just thought we would let you know BareRefBot is ready for another trial. There is no rush; Wikipedia is a volunteer effort. Whenever you are ready, its there. I also placed the BAG assistance needed template so someone else could potentially look at it as well. Rlink2 (talk) 00:13, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

I will when I can; I was away this weekend so didn't do my usual Sunday-BRFA-check. Will attempt to take a look at some point this week. Primefac (talk) 21:11, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
The bot is still flagged as being in a trial - did someone approve another trial before I saw this or is it still in the previous trial? Primefac (talk) 10:47, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
The were two trials so far, both of which are complete and have been discussed. The 3rd trial has not been approved yet (see comment above header "BareRefBot as a secondary tool"). Rlink2 (talk) 14:32, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
Ah, it never got marked as {{BotTrialComplete}}, so it's been in the "in trial" section, which I don't ever check. Primefac (talk) 14:47, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Your block of DRMlES1

You should revoke access to their talk page as well. –Skywatcher68 (talk) 19:41, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Already on it. Primefac (talk) 19:43, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Misclick?

Reverted part of your change here. I assumed that part was unintentional. If not let me know. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 19:44, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Yes, and I have no idea how I could have done that... likely a tab-enter error or some such. Thank you for fixing that. Primefac (talk) 19:46, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

A brownie for you!

Thanks for adding the AWB for me. I appreciate it. ♥Th78blue (talk)♥ 20:18, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
Not a problem :-) Primefac (talk) 20:19, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

What is Your Problem?!

Why did you delete Chris (Christopher G.) Hollins? That was purely revenge and is entirely unprofessional. ChristaJwl (talk) 23:54, 22 March 2022 (UTC)ChristaJwl

I deleted Chris (Christopher G.) Hollins because it was an exact copy of Christopher G. Hollins, which is both unnecessary and not allowed. It was not "revenge", it was holding to our community-set guidelines. Primefac (talk) 12:22, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussion

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. ChristaJwl (talk) 00:07, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

"Absolutely Inappropriate Question"

Hello! I do not see an issue with the question you have deleted, can you please clarify what is wrong with said question so I do not make the same mistake in the future? (I have autism, some "Obvious" things arent quite obvious to me) PerryPerryD Talk To Me 14:39, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Because how someone identifies on an anonymous website is irrelevant to their candidacy for adminship, or anything else. It's an invasive, disgusting question. CUPIDICAE💕 14:43, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
I see, thank you for letting me know about this to prevent me from making this mistake in the long-run. I apriciate it. PerryPerryD Talk To Me 14:46, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Hard (indoor)

Hi, i saw you made this edit (long time ago), and i would like to know if you can make of use a bot to change all the different version of indoor hard court to be just like the one you made there, which is still the actual better one by far. I think there are more than a thousand links interested, going back in time to past atp, wta, itf tournaments' pages. --82.49.125.173 (talk) 17:40, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

I'm honestly not sure what you're asking of me; {{Infobox ATP Challenger Tournament}} is a redirect to {{Infobox tennis tournament}}, and there are only a very small number of alternate parameter names; anything else would show up in this tracking category. In other words, could you please expand/clarify what you'd like me to do? Maybe give an example edit? Primefac (talk) 21:11, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
I think i upped the wrong link, sorry. I meant to cite a long past edit of yours. Anyway, i'm referring to something like this for every case in the atp wta and challenger tournaments history, by which i mean for the 2022, 2021, 2020, etc.. tournaments' editions.
The bot should make this kind of change. I need to remark that there are many different variants, in fact we have the above one but also this and this and the no-comma case. Also with capital and non capital variant included. These are the most common cases i saw.
Also this case, and this one, you see how many variant of the same entry?! Everyone took the matter into their own hands and they all went their own way with it. Oh yeah, this one too almost slipped through, and someone got creative inverting the words or the space between words or even skipping the wikilink.
I don't know if that's feasible or not, in any case, i'd like for the change to be made over the examples i posted above, expecially the common ones which covers at least 60% of data. And to exclude the only case " Hard (i) " (no wikilink, yeah, just that) since it is fine where it's used ( on the yearly summary of tournaments, i.e. the atp, wta and the challenger one), even if it's occasionally used in the tournaments, but i prefer not to touch it if the summaries cannot be excluded from the wording change.
I want also to stretch the fact i have already done this change manually and for this year (2022) and the previous. and i have checked samples from long past editions to see if there were any big variant (it's not). So, i have checked i think 90% of possible cases. Sorry for the lenghty explanation but i deemed useful to detail the problem at hand. 82.49.125.173 (talk) 17:21, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
I haven't dug into every diff you've posted, but this seems like a serious CONTEXTBOT issue. Primefac (talk) 15:02, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
Thank you for your help. I was perplexed. And having that formatting error on the wiki schools' projects was like having someone key the paint on your new Cadillac. And seeing what you fixed makes my participation a Duh or D'oh! moment. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 19:54, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
Thanks! Always happy to help. Primefac (talk) 19:59, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Karen rojo deletion

The reasons why he gave him fast deleted to the Karen Rojo article are not justified, is not an attack and is strongly based on evidence (she is an international fugitive, and she was condemned by Chilean justice fraud to the treasury), and there are Copyright no violation. Please undone the deletion.Fitmoos (talk) 17:06, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

Please write the article in your own words, don't just translate it. Other language wikis have different rules and guidelines than English Wikipedia, and the way the page was written it was poorly sourced, negatively-worded, and otherwise a BLP violation that needed serious work to be even close to acceptable. You are welcome to start a new version of the page, but I will not be restoring the deleted version. Primefac (talk) 17:08, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
but i was working in the article when you deleted! And is very heavy sourced! Fitmoos (talk) 17:10, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
If you would like me to provide the sources for you, please let me know. Primefac (talk) 17:11, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
please undone the delete, this article is very important, is about a real time events. And i don't find a copy of the translated article ='( Fitmoos (talk) 17:20, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Kristian Lum

I was looking at this page, which I previously commented on using AFCH and was intending to review, and it seems you did something to the history. I don't really understand the state of the page or your edit comment, so in case something went wrong, could you have a look at it and maybe add an explainer?

Thanks! — Charles Stewart (talk) 16:16, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

There were copyright violations (cv) which were removed, hidden via WP:RD1, and the draft was marked as "cleaned". Primefac (talk) 16:36, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
Ah, OK, so all previous versions have copyvios. To be clear, the current version seems to be free of the issues that led Rusalkii to decline the previous AfC submission? — Charles Stewart (talk) 17:51, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
Yes on both counts. Primefac (talk) 17:55, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Primefac/Archive_38&oldid=1101166807"