Yes! -Platypus Man | Talk 03:43, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Hee! Awesome. Kimmykun 03:48, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Nice one --Padishar 03:57, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

This is really sad :-/ Cyde↔Weys 04:02, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

You got there before me. Nice work, brother. --Pink_Sock

Only thing, there is no record of any User:X ever being used and/or created, they don't seem to exist--152.163.100.132 02:29, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Replied on their talk. — xaosflux ^Talk 02:34, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Nice Move

You full protected Elephant just as I was posting the WP:RFPP. =D alphaChimp ^laudare 03:51, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

I'd suggest semi protecting Talk:Latchkey kid. Vandalism is getting pretty high there. alphaChimp ^laudare 03:58, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

You beat me! (elephant)

I looged on to pre-emptively protect the elephant article maybe two minutes after it was mentioned on the Colbert Report only to find that you had managed to beat me to it. Nice work! – ClockworkSoul 03:51, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for also working on this! — xaosflux ^Talk 03:53, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Please just use the default vandalism protection notice, this is a bad idea for the same reason that the article metadata templates about "This article has been slashdotted" is a bad idea. --Cyde Weys 03:59, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Xaos, you seem to be the only active member of the WP:B/AG right now, so I figure that I'll post this here. Sorry for hounding your talk.

I've got a couple of bot requests building up (from the Wikipedia:Bot requests page). They're all simple find/replaces and template additions spread out across wikipedia. One of them has been posted on WP:BRFA for almost a week without any response, and another has been languishing in the "trial" section.

I'm wondering if I'm doing something wrong in my requests. When you requested Fluxbot, you listed a lot of tasks, and were approved for them quickly. Back then, trial runs weren't limited, as you've been doing in edit count, but, rather, in time (see DumbBOT 4). Is there a more efficient way for me to list these so I get a quick response? Is there any way I can help with the backlog on WP:BRFA?

I'm really trying to help others with my bot, but the delays are getting frustrating. If you do have time, I'd really appreciate your response. I apologize if this is confusing to read (I was watching tv at the same time).

Regards, alphaChimp ^laudare 00:41, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

The rules for the long term deletion page say that only people who have already been blocked may be listed here - Wikipedia: AI/V doesn't exist. I'm trying to figure out where to list it WhisperToMe 02:34, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Regarding your question on the bot page,

MinunBot ican be used to deliver important messages related to any purpose, there will be an approval page where users may request to use bots for their WikiProject or something similiar. Thank you for your question, cheers —Minun ^{Spiderman • Review Me} 12:06, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I've placed the most recent BRFA request (Historybot) in the version we discussed on the talk page. Feel free to discuss (or just revert). I figured I'd tell you. alphaChimp ^laudare 16:20, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the nice comment. I hope I didn't seem too impatient. I really didn't mean to =). Regards, alphaChimp ^laudare 00:33, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I asked an admin to sprotect my user/talk pages. To me, they haven't been protected long enough.

I do assume good faith that you didn't know the situation before undoing the protection. Could you please review the history of vandalism at User:nathanrdotcom? In my opinion, it needs to be protected for longer. There's an important reason why I did ask for protection and why I prefer a couple of weeks. Considering the longish history of vandalism, I don't believe I'm asking for something that cannot be done. In my opinion - and not to cause trouble - I don't think anyone should really be undoing someone else's admin actions without knowing why the action was taken. There's a long (in my opinion) and quite prolific history of vandalism on my userpage to consider. Thank you. — Nathan ^(talk) _{/ 00:49, 9 August 2006 (UTC)}

Lenghty reply on your talk. — xaosflux ^Talk 01:21, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I am both of the aforementioned IP adresses. Thanks for the welcome, but I think that I will stay anonymous (I am hacker paranoid). - 03:59, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

P.S. Don't worry. I am not a vandal. - 04:07, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

By the way, the reason I would rather stay anonymous is the fact that to have a Userpage you need cookies. To the extent of my knowledge, what the program does is allow hackers to see your personal information. Really devoted hackers can do more than that. A comment and/or opinion would be appreciated. - 04:14, 9 August 2006 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.237.252.117 (talk • contribs) .

Well welcome aboard anyway :) As you may be on a dynamic IP, expect to get welcomed as you change to ip's that have never edited before. Logging in does set 4 cookies that I am aware of:

1. enwiki_session, a per session cookie with a session id string
2. enwikiUserID, month long containing your userid number
3. enwikiToken, month long tokenid, for cached passswords
4. enwikiUserName, month long, has your username in it

Most people don't mind these cookies, but obviously some do. We always welcome anonymous contributions though. — xaosflux ^Talk 04:25, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Me again. Someone added this (between the asterisks) to the Liger article & I would like to know if it is right or belongs in the article: Some male ligers grow sparse manes *and are known for their skills in magic*. Seems to me like any big cat can be used in magic shows.

P.S. I looked at his talk page and he seems to be a vandal.

While this is not a factual statement about actual Liger's, it is a sourced "popular culture" statement. Generally these are ok for inclusion, although some editors disagree. The statement certainly does not belong in the main article, and has since been removed. When editing, WP:V is a core principal, if a statement, especially an outrageous statement is not verifiable, and preferably properly cited, br bold and remove it! Thanks, — xaosflux ^Talk 23:09, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your notification. I'm going to reply. --.anaconda 01:59, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi Xaosflu, Would you mind checking Wikipedia talk:Userboxes/Colours to see if anything there is worth moving to User talk:Rfrisbie:Userboxes/Colours? If yes, would you just make the move? Thanks, Rfrisbie^talk 00:09, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, even though I misspelled the page name! I moved it again, to User talk:Rfrisbie/Userboxes/Colours. Rfrisbie^talk 01:21, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Rfrisbie^talk 01:28, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I was wondering if you could do the same thing with Wikipedia talk:Userboxes/Personality, moving to User talk:Rfrisbie/Userboxes/Personality. Thanks. —Mira 05:57, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Template:User Drug-free has over 700 incoming links. Any chance you could use your bot to migrate them to User:Xoloz/UBX/Template User Drug-free? —Mira 08:04, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for participating in my RfA! I withdrew at (2/7/2) because I realised that I made a misjudged action by accepting the nomination so soon after a couple of edits which I whole-heartedly regret. I invite you to take the opportunity to read an explanation I gave for those diffs. In no way am I defending my actions, as I now realise they were wrong, but I still feel that if you understand the reasons I have given both with my withdrawal statement, as well as my RfA talk page, we may be able to travel the path of understanding. Daniel.Bryant

Could you possibly take a look at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approvals#User:The_Anomebot2, and let me know what you think? Thanks, The Anome 12:13, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

(Image:JenniferConnelly TIME mag cover.PNG)

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:JenniferConnelly TIME mag cover.PNG. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image can be used under a fair use license. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Yamla 14:37, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

I deleted it as db-author, note when it was uploaded it DID have a fiar use assertion, but once removed from the article it of course no longer qualified, may also not have been an accurate image. — xaosflux ^Talk 15:45, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Would you like to do the honors for Wikipedia:Userboxes/Pets? Rfrisbie^talk 16:39, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Done and done. — xaosflux ^Talk 19:15, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

What happened with the pro-nuclear userbox? What was the deal with the "move for speedy deletion?--aceslead 02:25, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Category:User nuclear energy--aceslead 04:49, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

What was the reason for deleting and salting the original template? Was it anti-nuclear extremism? Or just didn’t think it should be on Wikipedia?--aceslead 19:14, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Saw you closing Pilcomayo Departmen. Maybe you can help. where is the place to contest the endorsements / to complain about policy violations by a whole group of admins? Tobias Conradi (Talk) 15:15, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

I've now completed the second round of testing User:The Anomebot2: I've described the results on WP:RFBOT, with a pointer to the revisions in question. -- The Anome 22:57, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

The word "airplane" in the VentureStar article was changed to "aeroplane." Yes this is probably a stupid thing to ask you. How ever it from a non Wiki member. Should I change it back to “airplane?”--aceslead 22:48, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Xaosflux, why is Template:User GUS UBX to still protected. As it stands now, a POV admin controls it. Rfrisbie^talk 14:35, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

The user user: Danscan used an accoutn called user:Darnamazon to vandalise my user page. Necrowarrio0

I've read MediaWiki talk:Linkshere. Short answer; request fulfilled, see http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki_talk%3ALinkshere&diff=70474092&oldid=69482400. 86.134.116.228 21:21, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

It's live now, so the change can be made as desired. 86.134.49.147 15:12, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the approval. BTW I want to be flagged 'cause there are many warnfiles/day and 3 edits/min may be lower.
(And... thanks for replying on it.wikipedia, on pl.wikipedia a bot operator must check his talk page at least 5 times/day...). --.anaconda 15:37, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Rich Farmbrough 18:59 19 August 2006 (GMT).

I need a little help creating a UBX for Coulrophobia. --aceslead 19:38, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

All right!!!! Thanx --aceslead 22:03, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi Xaosflux. I was wondering how long the "trial" period is for a bot. I have done testing, and User:MetsBot works perfectly now. Can I continue running to bot, or do I have to now wait until I get a bot flag? —Mets501 (talk) 22:27, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Normally bot trials are for a week, although the approver can specifiy explicit times or edit caps. If nothing was stated, it's pretty much open ended. Regarless of anythign else, without a bot flag being set you should never edit faster then 2-3edits/min, to prevent flooding of recent changes. Generaly you should not be editing large (1000's) ammounts of articles while in trials either. — xaosflux ^Talk 22:40, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. Since my bot is just doing little tiny things (like correcting diacritics) and substituting user warning templates I'll just keep it going throttled at 25 seconds between edits until the bot flag is assigned. —Mets501 (talk) 22:43, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

The new links seem to be working most of the time, but are failing for pages with spaces in their names, we fixed this elsewhere before, just cant remmeber where, any clues? — xaosflux ^Talk 16:08, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, of course. That makes sense. This might do it:

<span class="plainlinks"> [{{fullurl:$1|action=edit}} edit] · [{{fullurl:$1|action=history}} history] · [{{fullurl:$1|action=delete}} delete]</span>

I'll try that. —Mets501 (talk) 16:16, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Looks like fullurl is not pulling the value of $1 being sent to it, but using the absolute value, eg ilnking to the $1 article. — xaosflux ^Talk 16:18, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I see what you mean. Weird. I'll look at other messages with parameters and see what they do. —Mets501 (talk) 16:19, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I noticed you moved the page, but I request you vote. Wikipedia:Communities strawpoll Ericsaindon2 06:24, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

I've carried out the request. Thanks for letting me know. If Jan had linked the discussion in his original request, it would have been a smooth sail. In any case, it's done. Cheers, Redux 03:51, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi there, I understand you're a bit busy right now, but could you take a look at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approvals#DraiconeBot? Its been a week since I posted some sample diffs, nothing of great significant happened, one edit was bad but I rv'd it almost immediately and figured out how to avoid repetitions of it. Really the bot just needs approval and a guideline as to frequence of edits. Thanks! --Draicone ^(talk) 06:25, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Hello, Xaosflux. I see that you have listed yourself as a licensed Amateur radio operator. Please consider taking a look at a proposal to setup a WikiProject Amatateur radio. Thank you. --StuffOfInterest 18:37, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Could you take a look at this (User talk:Aeon1006#GUS moves) and decide how to proceed? Thanks. Rfrisbie^talk 23:11, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Hey, there. Ran into the fellow through RC patrol, I've been kinda lazily keeping an eye on it. Prior to your having deleted their userpage, they attempted to tag the one they copied it from for speedy (alleging that the original was a copy). And now they've recreated the page. I haven't run into anybody quite like this, before; if not for their having tagged the page for speedy twice [1] [2], I'd love to AGF and be done with it. Ideas? Luna Santin 02:51, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Do you mind If I move this to the template namespace.Geni 16:47, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Here’s the story. A “statement” was originally added to Anti-nuclear by Revengeofthynerd and was shortly after removed by 65.94.128.45. I reverted it back. Today that same “statement” was removed by 82.247.153.132 again. I added it back. I believe the “statement” to be relevant and neutral. Could you take a look-e-see.--aceslead 22:48, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

thanks! Crazynas ^t 01:27, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Bot is renamed, trial week is over, can it be flagged? JAn Dudík 07:02, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Xaosflux wrote:

Your bot request has been approved by User:Bluemoose. Your bot is not currently flagged, so edits should be restricted to less then 3/min, and marked as minor. If you require faster editing, please ping me or Bluemoose. — xaosflux ^Talk 02:25, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the confirmation. As far as the flagging issue is concerned, I could do with some advice, as you seem to be knowledgable of bot-related issues.

The purpose of this account is to fix spelling errors in articles. No machine can do this with perfect accuracy, so I have to do it myself, however I have written software to help me (similar to AutoWikiBrowser, but written specifically with spellchecking in mind, and hence with more advanced features for that purpose).

As I explained on the request itself (here), since these edits are not completely automated (at most, they are "assisted"), I didn't originally think a bot was necessary; I just edited from my main account. I submitted a bot request after I was told I needed one to edit at the speed I was editing (basically as fast as possible, anything from 2 to 15 edits per minute, depending on page loading time). On the request itself, Essjay hinted that the bot would need a flag, but Alai suggested that it should not. (I didn't specifically request the presence/absence of a flag, merely approval of the account).

Perhaps you can resolve this. Ideally, I really need to continue editing as fast as possible; there are hundreds of thousands of spelling errors in our articles that aren't going to fix themselves, and I have limited time to devote to fixing them. I check every change I make before I save it, and I have plenty of experience (~13,000 edits) with what I am doing, with only a handful of mistakes in that time. However, over the course of thousands of edits, a few errors due to misjudgement on my part will inevitably slip through at some point. Should the account be flagged, or not?

Thanks in advance – Gurch 16:38, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

I've approved your bot for a flag, we are currently awaiting a 'crat to set it. Once flagged you can edit fast, but you should still limit editing to prevent server hogging, especially during peak teims (m-f 04:00-17:00) to less than 5/6 edits a min, off-peak you can go around 10-12/min, faster than that though is still not good. Faster than that generally required multithreading your edits, and that can cause other odd issues, especially if you don't have a lot of sanity checking in place. Keep an eye on the bot page, or the bot log to see when you flag is set. — xaosflux ^Talk 20:45, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi again, I understand the need to prevent server hogging – I usually edit in off-peak times anyway (being in the UK helps, as obviously the biggest chunk of traffic comes from the US), and when the servers are busy, you're generally limited to 4 or 5 edits per minute even if you wanted to go faster. I considered multithreading at one point but decided it wasn't worth the hassle, so I don't use it. Since it takes some time for me to actually read what's loaded before I change and save it, I should never average more than about 6 to 8 per minute anyway (unless the servers are being particularly responsive) – too fast for an unflagged bot, but within your suggested limit. I'm just playing safe and making sure I have the approval to do that, then I don't have to worry about it.

Thanks again for your help – Gurch 22:02, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi, Xaosflux. I've set the flag for both JanDbot and GurchBot. Cheers, Redux 03:48, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

USer:Narakufanatic Vandalised the Tae Kwon Do techinque list, can you please revert it? User:necrowarrio0

Any chance? [[3]] alphaChimp ^laudare 03:26, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you very much. alphaChimp ^laudare 04:02, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Hello. I'm the owner of AsgardBot. I done the 150 edits. I would like to continue my work, but you wrote in the request for approvals page that i can make up to 150 edits in the trial week. What can i do now?? --bDaneE 09:23, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, and all your recent approval work .Rich Farmbrough 21:38 28 August 2006 (GMT).

On user talk:Littlebilly1221 A user called purerified used your signature to sign himself using your name. Necrowarrio0 22:37, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Is it possible for me to apply for a recent changes patroller, but not an admin as i have not contributed enough yet? Necrowarrio0 22:41, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, I think the discussion of each bot only needs to be on the main page if (a) the bot is awaiting approval, or b) somebody else has a problem with the bot that they are unable to resolve by talking to the operator. That would cut down on the pageload time (for sure), and perhaps help avoid situations where somebody blocks a bot just for the hell of it (speculation). —freak(talk) 09:11, Aug. 29, 2006 (UTC)

I am new to wikipedia and i would just like to
say hello my friend i am always ready to help Count Raznagul 00:46, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

I applied for a bot flag on the 11. of August. On the 20th you granted me a trial period and over the next three days, I made the up-to 250 edits that you suggested I'd do. I have not gotten any word from anyone since then. Please advise. --Swift 01:00, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

You beat me on the Hardcore dance revert! --WildKard84 04:24, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

CURSE YOUR BONES! --WildKard84 04:27, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

I just got this message on my talk page:

"Please do not remove content from Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. -- — xaosflux ^Talk 04:18, 30 August 2006 (UTC)"

Since you recently edited the same article, I'm guessing this about the hardcore dancing article. But I still don't understand. Where's the vandalism in any of my reverts? ⇒Bayerischermann ^- 04:35, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

hi Xaosflux, do you know the amount of edits a user need before applying for administrator? Necrowarrio0 10:08, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi Xausflux! There's a bit of a backlog on the bot approvals page, I was wondering if you had a bit of time to clear it up (specifically in the Bots in a trial period section, where several bots (including my bot) have been there for quite a bit of time with no response). Also, one user on the talk page of WP:BRFA is asking about how he/she can become part of the approvals group. Thanks in advance. —Mets501 (talk) 03:26, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Doesn't the template you put there belong on the template page (the links are red)? :-) Rfrisbie^talk 02:48, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

It's up to you, though the bot has already annoyed an RC patroller, see User_talk:Andypandy.UK/Archive_5#User:AP.BOT_request. So I don't mind.--Andeh 10:13, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I nearly always flag edits as minor, but usually let it edit quite fast. Up to you.--Andeh 19:00, 1 September 2006 (UTC)