Please post new messages at the bottom of my talk page. Please use headlines when starting new talk topics. Thank you.
| User talk:HighInBC/Header |
Helperbot Task 3
Task 3 for the helperbots has been approved, and I've posted the code. Could you full-protect WP:AIV/I (if you think that's appropriate - I certainly think it is) and add an appropriate note similar to the one you've placed on the Special IPs page? There hasn't been any commentary or editing of it, so I guess everyone's happy with what I came up with. Let me know if you have any problems with the new code. —Krellis (Talk) 04:14, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- Kick ass, keep up the good work. I protected the page and left a note. I will update the source before I go to bed. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 04:18, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Bah, unneeded redirects are fun! (Okay, so I was lazy ;)) Now I just have to pass an RFA if I want to edit those instructions ever again! :) —Krellis (Talk) 04:27, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- You can use the talk page and the {{editprotected}} template. Once you have a few more thousand edits under your belt I am sure you will make a fine admin. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 04:49, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I know, I was just joking. I don't think that's something I want to put myself through (plus I don't think I'd have the time, I already spend far too much time here) - I have no desire to deal with things like XfD, etc, and I've seen what happens to candidates who try to RFA just to fight vandalism (which is just about all I actually do on wiki, when I'm not hacking on bots). —Krellis (Talk) 04:53, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Nice
Good stuff. me too :) Deiz talk 07:00, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
The HBC AIV Helperbot
Thanks for creating this bot. It's made my WP:AIV work so much easier. - Richardcavell 07:08, 2 March 2007 (UTC) (admin)
- No problem, it was fun to make. User:Krellis has made wonderful improvements to it recently. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 07:34, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Referenced Veiled pictures of Muhammad
[1] and [2] I have found few other pictures of Muhammad with very good citation of Museum Topkapi Museum. This could be a replacement of the un-velied image in case arbitration decides so. --- ALM 10:52, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- Another in Los Angeles County Museum of Art at [3]. --- ALM 10:56, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
At least now no-body should say that veiled images are less cited as compared to the image they are pushing at the TOP of article. Can we agree on this fair point that there are veiled image with good citation available as replacement? Please? --- ALM 10:58, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- I have already agreed that the lead image can be veiled, but not as a method of removing the existing picture altogether, it can be moved if replaced. Of course I am but one person, you should seek further consensus before making such a change. I appreciate that you have found these images that can be used to expand the article. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 14:38, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Pardon?
Something doesn't quite parse in your comment on AN/I: [4]. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 15:56, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- I did make a small typo, one instead of on, I fixed it. Does it pass the parser now? HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 15:58, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- Lol, I found the other typo, an important one, able instead of unable. Thanks for pointing it out. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 15:59, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Essjay's apologies
Hi, I've read at the Community noticeboard, written by you, that Essjay has already provided an apology. Can you please link me it?
Thanks and Happy Editing by Snowolf(talk)CONCOI on 16:06, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- Certainly, it is his most recent edit: [5]. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 16:07, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
HELP!
I accidently removed the " List begins BELOW this line -->" line from AIV now your bot has gone crazy--VectorPotentialTalk 16:07, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- Wow, that is a new one. Looks like Krellis has stopped the craziness, thanks for the quick notification. We will work on a bug fix. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 16:09, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- And I just reverted 1.3 megabytes' worth of garbage added by the bot. Somehow it doubled the number of reports each time. Perhaps a sanity check to stop editing if the number of reports exceeds 1000? (and start again if it drops below, to prevent vandals screwing it up). At least then we'd be spared almost having our browsers crash trying to revert it :) – Qxz 16:11, 2 March 2007 (UTC)