User talk:ListasBot

Archives

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be auto-archived by .

Marguerite de Angeli

Reverted ListasBot for second time: Marguerite de Angeli is almost always listed by libraries, whether Library of Congress or Dewey Decimal system, as ** De Angeli, Marguerite ** and NOT as ** Angeli, Marguerite de **. This was apparently the author's own preference. Thank you. EdK (talk) 21:44, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see you ignored the edit notice on this page. Mikaey, Devil's advocate 06:53, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was impressed at the difference between the humility of the edit comment ("Did I get it wrong?") & the language of this talk page ("Stop . . . In almost all instances, it is another user's edits which need to be fixed"), besides the difference between the promise of the talk page ("Comments . . . will be speedily ignored") & your own speedy comment or reply. In any case, the defaultlist tag, previously edited by another, has been corrected.EdK (talk) 22:06, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You should use the bot owner's page for comments like that. Comments in here result in bot's halt. -- Magioladitis (talk) 00:18, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And that's exactly why the bot's edit notice says that messages such as this will be speedily ignored -- because it stops the bot to notify me of something that wasn't the bot's fault in the first place. I'm not trying to be facetious, but comments such as yours were very common in ListasBot's early days, from people who didn't take the time to do the proper research and understand where the bot was pulling its information from, and the result was that I would have to take the time to write out the same explanation to everyone, that simply recapped what was already on the bot's user page. It got annoying after about the first 3 or 4 times -- hence, that's why I have the edit notice there. Mikaey, Devil's advocate 01:47, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey I hit the button for S.A G. BARNES Samuel Agustus Gordon Barnes

Was Rachel Notley's political family history put as in low importance.

I am the GREAT GREAT GRANDDAUGHTER and I might want to update the level of importance. CONSIDERING the people voted him in! How many years dedicated to ensure high level of standards were a priority for his legacy and not the Mason Hall Nooner! His wife was in the first Alumni U of A and was the first Lady Principal and the first BC University New Westminster. 38.145.110.74 (talk) 15:29, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Removing task force priority parameter

I know that the general priority parameter for {{WPBiography}} is deprecated, but the task force priority parameters are still in use, are they not; see [1]? I would appreciate your clarification. Thanks, -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 01:51, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is, but in this instance, it was removed because no value was assigned to it. Mikaey, Devil's advocate 05:21, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is it not useful to include the empty parameter to indicate that a value is desired (if, indeed, the military work group of WPBiography desires the use of priority values)? -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 16:44, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure that it makes a difference whether or not it's there. The people that know what priorities are will add it in if it's not there. I think that if you looked at the statistics of who saw the blank priority parameter there and added one in (versus who would have added one in even if the blank one wasn't there), the difference would be pretty insignificant. Mikaey, Devil's advocate 22:44, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The blank parameter is not only there as a prompt to fill it in, but also as a convenience to those actually doing the filling - not having to type out the lengthy parameter name when filling in the value. –xeno^talk 22:46, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

True, but you could say the same thing for any of {{WPBiography}}'s other parameters. And while they're not being used, they're just adding unnecessary bulk to the page. Mikaey, Devil's advocate 23:05, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But your bot is making a very insignificant edit (bypassing a redirect, removing an empty parameter) that will inconvenience future editors. In fact, some users have specifically requested I provision blank tf priority parameters in their requests to my bot. So yours coming along and removing it later is particularly unhelpful. –xeno^talk 23:09, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Skiptotoc/Talkheader vs. living=yes biography banner

Re [2] / [3] and similar, AWB currently moves skiptotoc and talkheader to the top; your bot on the other hand is moving them below the Biography banner (when living=yes is present). WP:TPL claims that skiptotoc should be first, it isn't as clear about a Biography banner with living=yes (but does mention {{blpo}} over talkheader). Thoughts? –xeno^talk 17:14, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can update the WP:TPL if needed. The order should be: Skip to talk, talk header, blp/blpo. -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:30, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yea, that's what I figured... Looked kinda dated to me. –xeno^talk 17:34, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Google translations policy

I noticed you do a lot of editing on the talk page for Werner Cabrera. I just have a quick question for you. If you don't mind helping me out here a little, I was just wondering about the policy for using Google Translations as citations for an article. For obvious reasons, most of the facts on Werner Cabrera are from Spanish-language articles in newspapers and government publications. I was just wondering if there were a policy on whether I should use the Google Translations in my citations or just link to the actual websites themselves directly. Thank you for your time! DeeRD (talk) 16:52, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Nick Tatham

The article Nick Tatham has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Notability tag up for over twelve years.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jw93d59 (talk) 12:56, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]