User talk:Wuzur
WuBot
[edit]Any reason why your bot is removing interwiki's like this? +mt 17:54, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
- I dont't know the reason, the log says that the bot added an interwiki to sq:S, I think the code is buggy but I updated the code via svn at 16:43. --Wuzur (talk) 18:45, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
- Hmm, same behaviour on the same article. With timezones and all, I'm not sure if your bot revision predates the bot update update or not. Anyways, just letting you know. +mt 18:39, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
Interwiki to S.H.E filmography
[edit](by the way, there is no period after E)
The interwiki link was in numbers and letters like that cause I'm trying to get S.H.E filmography to link to the "演出經歷" section of the S.H.E article on Chinese Wikipedia. If you can find a workaround for it, that'd be great. Pandacomics (talk) 20:09, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
- I think this should be done now. I just created an redirect at the Chinese Wikipedia and set the interwiki to it. Please have a look that the interwiki is set to [[zh:S.H.E 演出經歷]] because some interwikibots may change it back (they don't understand the logic of this link) --Wuzur (talk) 06:30, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
- It works, thanks. Pandacomics (talk) 06:58, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
- No problem --Wuzur (talk) 06:59, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
Interwiki
[edit]Why the bot has removed the Interwiki link here? I have revert this change. — PsY.cHo, 11:31, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
- Becaus de:Schloss Einstein is a disambiguation ("Begriffsklärung") page which should not be interwikilinked with non-disambiguation pages. --Wuzur (talk) 11:42, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
Removal of es: links
[edit]Why the removals of es: in [1] and [2]? The links look right to me. It was right to remove sv: in the second case (the Swedish page was deleted). PrimeHunter (talk) 12:00, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
- I have restored the two es: links. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:39, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
Request not deleting interwiki links to dab pages
[edit]Hi; I'd like to request that interwiki links to disambiguation pages not be removed; preferably, they should be corrected, but certainly not merely removed.
What the correct edit here should be is to replace the interwiki link to point to the new correct name; not to delete the interwiki link. An interwiki link that points to a DAB page is still useful, because the reader can then navigate to the correct page. But if the link is deleted, the connection is completely lost.
Here's a case in point. English article Tears (Fayray single) formerly had an interwiki link to ja:tears. ja:tears is a dab page, one entry of which is to ja:tears (Fayray), the best target. But in this edit, the bot just deleted the link. (I have since fixed that).
That's a flaw I think; an interwiki to a dab page is not optimum, but as long as the dab page references the desired target, that interwiki is better than no interwiki at all.
Also, a lot of times (not in the case of the example just given), the target page was formerly the correct article; but as the target wikipedia grew and naming conflicts arose, the content was moved to a more specifically-named page, and the article name re-used for a DAB page.
It's probably not practical, but I'd suggest that when the target page is a dab page, the bot should correct the link, rather than delete it. That may not be possible. If it's not possible, I would suggest either just leaving the link alone, or adding a comment that this is a link to a dab page, and maybe someone will catch that and fix it; but in the meantime, at least the information is not lost.
In fact, maybe there should be a category: pages with interwikis to disambiguation pages; and gnomes who have interest can go in and fix them. Your bot could tag with that category. Ideally, the category should include the identification of the particular wiki that has the dab page at issue; for certain pages with multiple interwiki links, that will facilitate finding the correct interwiki link to fix.
TJRC (talk) 17:58, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
- I think the bot shouldn't remove disambig links anymore. Please inform me if it's so again. --Wuzur (talk) 17:41, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks. TJRC (talk) 00:44, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
has nothing to do with the German article you linked to: de:Stubbensprengung. 62.64.211.1 (talk) 11:24, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
- My Bot only changed it because of this edit. --Wuzur (talk) 15:12, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
Tavankut
[edit]Hi, Wuzur.
WuBot has removed the valid interwiki link [3]. Kamarad Walter (talk) 13:39, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, it's an interwiki from an disambig- to an non disambig-page. This link should be in the correct article --Wuzur (talk) 14:03, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
Scott Duncan
[edit]I was just looking through an edit that your bot did on Scott Duncan's article and it looks to me as if he made an error and almost destroyed all of the articles content. Can you look in to this. thanks. Bdog9121 (talk) 16:58, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
- lol actually disregard this. I was looking at the wrong user. Bdog9121 (talk) 17:02, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
Green Tea
[edit]Wikipedia is not a magazine and clearly doesn't need any ads. Perhaps you should try Google Ads. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Knowledge Incarnate (talk • contribs) 16:55, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- I reverted the removal of that part simple because I pressed the wrong key, I ]http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Green_tea&diff=prev&oldid=268937780 instantly reverted] my revert. btw: That's not my page/content as you can see in the version history. The user who made that edit originally is blocked. Wuzur (talk) 10:02, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Dean Moriarity
[edit]Are you sure? It's a redirect from misspelling and should probably go to the correct spelling rather than the article that the correct spelling used to redirect to. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.221.151.26 (talk) 10:40, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
- You're right of course, undid my revert Wuzur (talk) 10:43, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Help please?
[edit]Hi. Can you help me create a bot? I want one that reverts vandalism. Thank you! Carabera (talk) 21:26, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
- There is one: User:ClueBot. It is very hard to develop one's own and require a lot of knowledge in programming. I'm not sure if there is really need for a second automatic anti-vandalism bot. If you just want help with reverting vandalism you may want to take a look at the following tools: Huggle, Twinkle and Vandal Fighter. Wuzur (talk) 15:06, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:39, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:49, 24 November 2015 (UTC)