User talk:A930913/Archives/2015/Oct

Defconbot down for a while

Defconbot has been down for quite some time now. I'm not sure if you're on an extended wikibreak, retired or something in between. Could you shed some light on this? ~ NottNott talk|contrib 00:07, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

very sorrowed sir

Sir. Bracketbot i am very sorry fot this mistake to edit wrong thing on compound

haris khan wazir 05:15, 4 October 2015 (UTC)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Haris khan wazir6 (talk • contribs)  

Joel B. Lewis reverted your edit already. Huon (talk) 18:55, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

North Bay Revisions

Good morning. You can rest assured that I did not simply reinsert the text in the North Bay, Ontario Wikipedia article. I left an explanation with the person who deleted it as to why I reinserted the text, as follows:

"Hello. I have reinserted the text I added to the City of North Bay, Ontario,'s Wiki page, yesterday. I appreciate why you decided to delete the text. However the information about the 228th Battalion NHA hockey team was obtained during research this summer into Canadian Army units from North Bay that fought in the First World War, for the city's museum. When we--the group gathering information for the museum--learned of the team, I contacted the Hockey Hall of Fame, in Toronto--the national repository for documents, artifacts and photographs about hockey in North America--who supplied us with material about the team. That the 228th Battalion had a team in the National Hockey Association, forerunner of the National Hockey League, is an extraordinary event in the city's history. Imagine, say, if a United States Army battalion from Peoria or Manassas had supplied a winning team to baseball's National League, how significant that would be in the community's history.

That said, I shall edit the reference to make its source clearer, that this wasn't an arbitrary insertion of text."

I subsequently made the change to reference explanation, to elaborate where the information came from. When it comes to North American hockey there isn't a better source than the Hockey Hall of Fame. I appreciate that the initial removal of text was made in good faith, however a more tactful approach would have been to request more detailed information from me about the source rather than an outright deletion. I will--and have--happily amend my material and work with fellow Wikipedia contributors and editors, to ensure my contributions conform to everyone's satisfaction.

I offer this to you genuinely, also in good faith, and without sarcasm: I would like to reinsert the text with its elaborated reference into the article.

22WHERO (talk) 15:57, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Why did you leave this message for A930913? I don't see that the two of you have interacted before. In fact, A930913 seems to be on an extended wikibreak and hasn't edited for more than half a year. I assume you meant to notify someone else. Huon (talk) 18:55, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

haris khan – islam is true religion

--haris khan wazir 10:53, 7 October 2015 (UTC)i am from pakistan [[haris khan]]

Wikipedia is not the place to proselytize. We're here to write an encyclopedia based on reliable published sources, not to discuss personal opinions. Huon (talk) 15:29, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Any update on DefconBot's situation?

It's been down for quite some time now. As ClueBot NG seems to be working fine (and so are other tools that depend on it), I'm guessing DefconBot should be fine now, right? --I am k6ka ^{Talk to me!} _{See what I have done} 21:13, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Tax Credit article - (BracketBotted)

Hi - please consider this as feedback. BracketBot left a message on my Talk indicating a missing bracket in my edits to Tax Credit - excellent bot. Then it mentions three further "missing" brackets - but in a section I had not edited, (Renewable Energy/Investment Tax Credit). Why would BrackBot ascribe missing brackets to me where I have not edited? Perhaps it needs tweeking. So I corrected my own missing bracket and then searched for the three other missing brackets referred to, but those three brackets were already there. So I searched the history for any recent edit that includes the insertion of those brackets, just in case BracketBot had messaged another editor, who subsequently corrected their own edits, but nope. Why would BracketBot point up missing brackets that aren't missing? Perhaps the format is wrong for those three bracketed items, I am unable to tell. I clicked on the my operator's talk page link but it does not include a "comments" option. Perhaps, again, BracketBot needs tweeking. Might I suggest you amend the text of BracketBot's automated message, to include something like - If any other missing brackets are listed below, try fixing those also while you're there.

I hope the above is useful. Let me know in any case why BracketBot pointed up three missing brackets that aren't missing, and why me when I had not edited that section. Thanks Mark^Dask 13:08, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

@Markdask: When BracketBot notifies people about mismatched brackets, it always points out all mismatches. One reason for doing so is that it's much harder to tell which mismatch a specific edit caused than to tell that it caused one in the first place - that's also the reason why it doesn't try to distinguish between the mismatch you caused and the others. In this particular case the others were false positives; BracketBot keeps an eye on uses of "<" and ">" since they're used in HTML or <ref> tags where a mismatch can easily cause significant collateral damage, but using them for "less than" then causes the bot to think there's a mismatch. I'm sorry for the confusion. Huon (talk) 23:35, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

@Huon: So what you're saying Huon - in your first sentence - is that the bot will always and forever more cause the same confusion - as it caused me - by pointing out totally unascribable mismatches. Again, wouldn't it save a lot of future confusion if the BracketBot automated message stated your first sentence?

In this case the others were false positives, but how are future editors to know in advance of BracketBot's penchant for false positives? The "< more than" and the "> less than", are both context specific and I would therefore have assumed the bot could be tweaked to better accommodate context, but what do I know?

Rather than repeating what you just told me I think the bot should be improved.Mark^Dask 00:57, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Improving the bot is no easy task; I for one wouldn't have the skills to do so, and A930913 unfortunately is on an extended wikibreak. That said, the bot highlights the "brackets" it thinks are mismatched when it notifies a user; a look at that list would have shown that two were "(< 100 kW)" and "(< 50 MW)" - clearly two uses of "<" as "less than". That list is described as a "List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page"; the bot doesn't say you caused those unpaired brackets. Possibly adding an "all" to that description would help clarify the issue, but that again would require A930913 to get active. I don't think the possibility for confusion is large enough to justify disabling the bot over this issue. Huon (talk) 01:08, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up Huon. I wouldn't want to see BracketBot disabled either. Such a pity A930913 aint available - maybe someone should go around and wake him / her up :) Mark^Dask 01:47, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

You can opt-out individual pages with User:BracketBot#Entire_pages. --I am k6ka ^{Talk to me!} _{See what I have done} 20:28, 28 October 2015 (UTC)