User talk:Razorflame/Archive 19

Your bot on the Irish language Wikipedia

Hiyya Razorflame. My name's Alison - we already met enough times I think :) - anyways, as well as being on enwiki, I'm also a sysop on the Irish Language WIkipedia. Recently, you started up your bot on there but right now, it's flooding recentchanges, as it doesn't currently have a bot bit. As it's not globally approved yet, can I ask you to please stop your bot for the moment and apply for a bot bit at ga:Vicipéid:Róbónna? I'll look after the rest and see that it comes to the 'crat's notice (we've only one!). I can handle the language issues, too, but it should be a copy/paste job.

If you need localization for ga.wikipedia, just let me know and I can help there, too. I already run a bot on that wiki (the welcomebot is mine :) )

Thanks! - Alison ^❤ 07:06, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Cool! Looks like it's done now. Thanks ;) - Alison ^❤ 07:22, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Have stopped it and thanks for the information :). Cheers, Razorflame 16:36, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Ro.wp bot

Darkicebot has received the bot flag on the Romanian language Wikipedia.Andrei Stroe (talk) 15:01, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the information! Cheers, Razorflame 16:36, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

AWB

Think I'll ask for permission to use AWB; just completed over 250 manual changes from "External links" to "Other websites". :) fr33kman ^{t - c} 22:39, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Ask on the admin's noticeboard; I am sure that an administrator will give you access to the AWB program here. Cheers, Razorflame 22:42, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Done, cheers! (Should have waited and asked you to do them, fingers no cramped ;) fr33kman ^{t - c} 22:54, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Eh, I'm currently busy elsewhere, so I can't do that at the moment, but I definitely would've said yes last night :). Cheers, Razorflame 23:07, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

RFA 10.5

I can't believe you just did that, lol :) I was going to ask you last night if I could nom you in the first week of April (feel you could use the mop, but wanted to respect the views of others). Good luck fr33kman ^{t - c} 02:47, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment. I am amazed that you were going to nominate me. Cheers, Razorflame 02:50, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome fr33kman ^{t - c} 02:54, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

If you'd accept a small pointer, wait until the beginning of May (now), continue the work that you are doing, and I'd be very happy to be your nom or co-nom. fr33kman ^{t - c} 03:18, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Your recent edit

Hello, I would like to discuss a recent edit you have made. Technically, Gwib (talk · contribs) is still an administrator, he has just retired, so I believe it's unnecessary to move him to "former" if he is still, indeed, an admin. Being placed in "inactive" seems appropriate to me, but feel free to disagree. — RyanCross (talk) 07:25, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

 Done. I've undone my edit as you are definitely right about this. He is still an administrator. Cheers, Razorflame 07:32, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. :-) See you around. — RyanCross (talk) 07:40, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Yep. No problems :). Cheers, Razorflame 13:55, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

Hello Razorflame! Thanks for correct the grammar and spelling of my changes in Ernst Röhm. My grammar is very bad today. Regards, Barras (talk) 14:40, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

No problems :). Cheers, Razorflame 14:42, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: *Poke*

 Done –Juliancolton (talk) 16:03, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. That really lifted my spirits ;). Cheers, Razorflame 16:08, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

*Poke*

Please? :P --Dylan620 _{(Sign this plz)} 17:03, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Muchas gracias, señor! On a side note, you may find this funny. :-) --Dylan620 _{(Sign this plz)} 18:24, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

bot activity in bn wikipedia

please don't run the bot before you got the bot-flag for that wiki. Thank you.--Bellayet (talk) 04:04, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

No worries :). I have already stopped running it in bn.wikipedia :). I just wanted to make a few test edits first so that you could see if it worked or not. Thanks, Razorflame 04:06, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: Thanks

Hey, if it increases your edit count, who's complaining? ;) –Juliancolton (talk) 18:03, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Lol, yeah. Cheers, Razorflame 18:04, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Bot

Hello,

Please, can you give me the program of your bot ? this is my email : rado_du_92@hotmail.fr. Thanks in advance. Jagwar (talk) 20:47, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

You can easily get the bot program from m:Using the Python wikipediabot :). Cheers, Razorflame 20:49, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Discussion on ST

Regarding this; sorry, but I did not (and do not) see where you made this statement. Sorry if I offended fr33kman ^{t - c} 02:05, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry; you didn't. No offense taken. I can always use the critism :). Cheers, Razorflame 02:07, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

Hello Razorflame, thank you for welcoming me. LovesMacs (talk) 19:45, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

No problems. Cheers, Razorflame 19:46, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

ga.wikipedia bot

Bot status granted at ga.wikipedia. Thanks for your cooperation. --Kwekubo (talk) 21:49, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

No problems! Thanks for letting me know :). Cheers, Razorflame 22:37, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: OMG!!!

I have just been taking a small break from the digital world entirely for a while and have decided to occasionally drop by the Simple Wiki. It is good to be back after a very long break. --Thamusemeantfan (talk) 05:40, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Your bot at th wiki

Your bot was grant a bot flag at th wiki. Enjoy editing. --Lerdsuwa (talk) 16:12, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the information. Believe it or not, I've actually known about this for a couple of days now, but thanks for the information, nonetheless :). Cheers, Razorflame 16:24, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Problems with bot in da-wiki

Hi Razorblade. Your bot does not seem to work correctly in all cases. This morning I have encountered two cases in da-wiki, where the bot incorrectly removed existing iw-links. The cases were tr:MB and fi:Tanskankielinen Wikipedia. I do not have any clue, so I think you should make some manual checks. Regards, Amjaabc (talk) 09:04, 19 February 2009 (UTC) (talk page in da-wiki)

Yes, sorry about that. I often do manual checks to make sure that things like this don't happen, however, it seems that I missed these two :). Thanks for catching them. Cheers, Razorflame 14:28, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

My theory is that the first was removed because it linked to a non-disambiguation page from a disambiguation page. (Or rather the page was not marked properly at the Turkish Wikipedia: see here). And that the second was removed because it referenced a page in another namespace. I any case I suggest that you take more care, and maybe don't run the bot automatically until you get some experience. Thank you, Byrial (talk) 11:24, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Removing redlinks and Vucova River

Okay, so let me explain why I removed the hyperlink. I'll leave the article as per your reversion. But, "city" is a common word on our combined wordlist: Wikipedia:Basic_English_combined_wordlist#C. It seemed an excessive use of hyperlinks. But I'm new here. You're not. You say to hyperlink words on the list, cool. Have a nice day. Terryeo (talk) 16:50, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

No problems. If that is why you removed the hyperlink, then by all means, go ahead and remove it :). Be warned, however, because if you do it for that article, you'll have to do it for all of the articles, which might take you a while XD. Cheers, Razorflame 16:52, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

I've being a discussion on this idea of hyperlinking common words, and why they should or shouldn't be hyperlinked, here. I agree, it would be a lot of work to removed all such links. But good policy produces good Wiki and some attention is better than none. Terryeo (talk) 15:48, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Bot status

Have You requested bot status in lv wiki? If not, You should take it ASAP! --Kikos (talk) 09:32, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Interwiki bot and templates

Please stop editing templates. Pywikipedia doesn't handle noinclude-tags correctly, see example. --Erwin (talk) 09:06, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Your bot is malfunctioning when editing templates on the English Wikipedia. The edit to template:Air force added an interwiki link from every English Wikipedia article which used the template (there are lots of such articles) to the template:Air force on the Simple Wikipedia. As I am sure you can see, this has a widespread and undesirable effect. I would ask you to consider stopping editing templates. Greenshed (talk) 09:50, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Please stop editing in the template-namespace on nl-wiki, or your bot will be blocked. Editing there gives too much problems. Thank you! Romaine (talk) 10:14, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

I have had to block your bot on wiki-nl for a day now. Please solve the problem now. MoiraMoira (talk) 11:13, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Same problems at ptwiki (example). Blocked 1 day.--Gunnex (talk) 11:58, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

I am sorry about this! I had it running overnight. I will definitely go back and fix all of the problems that it has caused. Please tell me exactly which Wikipedias need fixing, and I will go back and fix them. Sorry for the trouble! Razorflame 19:42, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Pretty much any wiki your bot is set to edit. About 90% of the edits were incorrect. I think you have been completely reverted on en. I reverted you on simple up to 04:45 you will have to go back farther from there. I will continue to help but I have to go to work in a bit so I stopped. -Djsasso (talk) 19:44, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Crap. Sorry about this! I will go to work on fixing this issue now. I hope that my bot hasn't been blocked indefinitely on the English Wikipedia! Razorflame 19:45, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

re: DarkIceBot and wikipedia template =)

DarkIceBot made an edit on wikipedia template =) here which caused some transclusion issues. I'm not sure what the bot was trying to do so I just removed the link, but I thought you'd want to know. --Ludwigs2 (talk) 09:57, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

The bot isn't properly placing the interwiki links on either 1) the "noinclude" section or 2) the document subpage. Please address as soon as possible. –xeno (talk) 14:10, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Yeah I was just coming to tell you that you are going to have to go back and fix all the templates on all the wikis you changed. You shouldn't change templates with this script as it doesn't put the tags in the noinclude section or document subpage. -Djsasso (talk) 15:17, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

And you are editing too fast, your bot should do no more than 6 edits per minute. (and that is not per wiki. that includes all wikis) -Djsasso (talk) 15:53, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

I have cleaned up simple going as far back as 04:45. I will continue tonight if you don't get to it before me. But with 30+ wikipedias to clean up you will be pretty busy. -Djsasso (talk) 16:53, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

I am so sorry about this! I will never run my bot with templates again! So sorry for all the consternation it has caused! I will try to fix all of the mistakes it has made! Please direct me towards the Wikipedias that need fixing and I will fix them! Thanks, Razorflame 19:43, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

I recommend getting an admin to give you the flood flag for a bit. Unfortunately you got blocked on a few wiki's as well so you will have to go figure out where you were blocked to get them to unblock you once you have cleaned it all up. -Djsasso (talk) 19:46, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Flood flags cannot be given to anyone else other than administrators. I could always request temporary adminship just for the sake of the flood flag, but that, most likely, won't be necessary. Cheers, Razorflame 19:54, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Right I forgot. -Djsasso (talk) 19:58, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

And it just dawned on me you are in a different time zone than me so the time means nothing to you...I went as far back as Template:Bcdb. -Djsasso (talk) 19:59, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

(outdent) I've just noticed this discussion, having just fixed the interwikis for {{0expr}}. One less for you to fix! --NSH001 (talk) 23:59, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Welcome to the Sater Frisian Wikipedia!

Hello Razorflame, welcome to the seelter Wikipedia. I have the opinion that it is possible to explain the most complicated subjects well to people of an elementary school level. As an example please see our article stq:Autonavigation

In between I translated it into “English” and just put it at simple:Car_navigation with still nothing linked to it. If you think it’s valuable, someone of you might want to translate it into Simple English.

Greetings, --Pyt (talk) 13:07, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I don't speak Sater Frisian...I just joined there to make sure that people had a place to make comments about my bot there. Sorry, Razorflame 19:44, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

I did not expect that, but I expect my already "English" article simple:Car_navigation needs to be rewritten in Simple English. And that is which I am unable to. --Pyt (talk) 10:24, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Oh, sure. I'll be able to look at it. Just give me some time :). Cheers, Razorflame 21:09, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

"Furry" Edit Conflicts

If you are going to revert my changes because they are "not simple", could you at least make the article simple instead of merely replacing it with a redirect to fur? You seem to be reverting my changes without even reading the article...Lastres0rt (talk)

Oh, but I did, and they weren't simple, so instead of continuing challenging the redirect, make a note on the talk page of said article to get some input on the situation, before making such controversial changes as the ones you are making. Razorflame 18:01, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

I have made comments on the talk pages of both Furry and Fur. I wish you would actually explain what was controversial or "not simple" about the article; I provided a disambiguation back to Fur, explained the concept of Furry art in very simple terms, and even included Maus as a notable example. I honestly do not see why pages on manga and cartoons are acceptable and yet a similar page for Furry art is somehow controversial. Lastres0rt (talk) 18:15, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for the misunderstanding. Cheers, Razorflame 00:12, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Reverting

Try not to revert everything. Some edits are good edits. We need to capitalize on the potential new editors not scare them away. -Djsasso (talk) 18:08, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry, I wasn't reverting everything, just the things that I thought needed reverting. Razorflame 20:03, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Just a note to say thanks, Razorflame, for your comments and vote in my RFB which closed as successful with 25 supports and no opposes. It is my second unanimous request, which I find astounding. In my previous thanks (from where I stole the code for this one) I promised you I would do my best as an admin. I promise I will continue to do my best as an editor, admin and 'crat, and I won't let you down! Thanks again, Kennedy (talk) 20:57, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Also extra thanks for co-nominating! Kennedy ^(talk) 21:00, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

The comic

As you have seen yourself "activity" has increased a lot; I would not be surprised if we had like between 10 and 20 new "high-volume" (named) editors by the end of next week. So far, I think the level of true vandalism we have seen is actually quite low. --Eptalon (talk) 14:50, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I would agree, but the amount of edits that need clean up has increased. I would definitely agree with you that we might get some more high-volume editors out of this :). Cheers, Razorflame 14:51, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Saint Peter's Basilica

Hi. You voted weak oppose here and as I did what was asked, you could maybe reconsider. Thanks, Yotcmdr ^{=talk to the commander=} 23:03, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

 Done. Cheers, Razorflame 14:05, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Darkicebot in lv wiki

Please request bot status here. --Papuass (talk) 10:04, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

 Done Cheers, Razorflame 14:24, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Your bot flag request in Korean wikipedia

Korean Wikipedia allows Global bots. Thanks. :) Asta (talk) 14:23, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

XD. No problems :). Thanks for the help! Cheers, Razorflame 14:24, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

SNOW

You know, instead of WP:SNOW we should have a WP:CRACK as in, got to be on crack! :) fr33kman ^{t - c} 03:35, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Rofl...that would be nice....maybe you should draft it? ;). Razorflame 06:38, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

I just might; don't tempt me! :) fr33kman ^{t - c} 06:39, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

:) Razorflame 06:42, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Problems with your robot on ro.wp

Hi,

Your robot recently added some interwiki links on ro:Format:AUS and ro:Format:ARG. Unfortunately, it ignored the "noinclude" tag, which led to some unfortunate side-effects on the pages including those formats. Please take into account the noinclude tag or ignore the Template namespace completely. Thank you.--Strainu (talk) 09:57, 27 February 2009 (UTC

P.S. If you wish to respond to this message, please do it at ro:Discuţie Utilizator:Strainu.--Strainu (talk) 09:57, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Replied. Cheers, Razorflame 19:31, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately, this is not the case. Check out these modifications in the Template namespace. At least a third of those were wrong. Please be more careful in the future. The Template namespace on the Romanian Wikipedia is Format.--Strainu (talk) 22:26, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Those were made before I stopped editing the template namespace. I stopped editing on the template namespace on the 23rd of February. There shouldn't be anymore edits to the template namespace since the 23rd of February. Razorflame 22:28, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Mass cat addings

I really wish you would request the flood flag when you are gonna do mass edits like those on the Recent changes page.-- † CM16 ^{t _c r} 07:38, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

I had the bot flag earlier...but Chenzw took it off because he thought I was done XD. Cheers, Razorflame 07:39, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Please make sure you have it cause it makes it hard to patrol.-- † CM16 ^{t _c r} 07:40, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Me knows :). Cheers, Razorflame 07:41, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

This is starting to be like enWP! :P Versus22 _talk 07:51, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Darkicebot on hr wiki

Is blocked for next 6 hours, enough time to submit request for bot status. I saw that you are admin here, but would be nice to ask for status before starting with work somehere, I presume you agree. SpeedyGonsales (talk) 13:16, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

 Done. Cheers, Razorflame 19:31, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Bot status on hr:wiki granted. --Roberta F. (talk) 23:06, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know :). Cheers, Razorflame 23:26, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

My RfA

Razorflame, Thank you for taking part in my request for adminship, which closed as successful with 23 supports, 1 oppose and 0 neutral. I will do my best for the project!
fr33kman ^talk 02:04, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks! Can't believe I put that warning on his user page rather than user talk. Duh! :) At least I can now clean up mistakes ;) fr33kman ^talk 04:59, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Yep, no problems...I was wondering why you didn't warn him on his talk page XD. Cheers, Razorflame 04:59, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Darkicebot@cs.wiki

Hello, I am watching yours bot contributions,but there are still some problems. Please, don't remove fi articles in namespace Wikipedia in articles about wikipedias. Unfortunatelly, this removing was big part of your recent contributions. It's not good to run bot -autonomous with -force. I had bad experience wit it too about year ago. So run bot for now without flag, I'll watch it some more days. JAn Dudík (talk) 06:59, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Sure thing. Thanks for the advice! Cheers, Razorflame 14:27, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

And next mistake: [1] JAn Dudík (talk) 06:49, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

It really isn't a mistake. It finds the page on the fi.wikipedia to be linked to a page in the Wikipedia namespace, which it finds shouldn't be linked to the article namespace, so it probably thought that the link shouldn't be there. Anyhows, the mistakes the bot is making are far fewer than all of the correct edits that my bot has made...Razorflame 09:30, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Problem is, taht finnish wikipedia (and germain in one or two case too) have articles about Wikipedias in namespace Wikipedia instead of main namespace; but these interwiki links are corrrect. Is better not to combine parameters -force and -autonomous while doing interwiki of main namespace. This is possible while doing specific category, where aren't these special cases. I had the same problems with my bot too, so now i know some thing are not good to do. JAn Dudík (talk) 06:41, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

In response, the mistakes that it is making are far fewer than the correct edits it makes, so I really don't see the problem. Furthermore, articles are not supposed to be linked cross-namespace because that is just the way that it is supposed to be done. Cheers, Razorflame 19:35, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Actually he is correct, the cross namespace links are ok in the case of some wikis. Which is why you are not supposed to use the -force parameter at the same time as -autonomous. -Djsasso (talk) 14:30, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Kyle Broflovski

Hello. Can you help me with this article? --§ Snake311 _{(I'm Not Okay!)} 22:58, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

 Done. Copyedited most of the article for you :). Cheers, Razorflame 23:25, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I like the way how you helped improve the article. However, do you think it may have a chance for GA? Like any suggestions or ideas? That's what I'm trying to do here. Thanx anyways:) --§ Snake311 _{(I'm Not Okay!)} 22:49, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Expand it. It needs to be longer in order to have a chance of passing the GA process. It also needs to be fairly simple as well. Hope this helps :). Cheers, Razorflame 01:59, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thank you for the barnstar, Razorflame. Thank you for letting me kow about the RFA socks issue. =)-- Tdxiang 03:50, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Yeppers! No problems! Cheers, Razorflame 04:00, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Cookies

Fr33kman has given you some cookies! Now enjoy them!

Cause you always give them, but rarely get them :) fr33kman ^talk 03:52, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

*XD* Yay! Eats the cookies, and accidentally eats part of Fr33kman's hand...D'oh! The same thing happened with J.Delanoy earlier today XD Razorflame 03:56, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Oww, my pinkie! You brute :D fr33kman ^talk 04:00, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

import, temp bot flag

A suggestion: When you import dozens of pages in a minute, request the bot flag for that time so as not to flood New Changes. You probably already realized that, but just in case you didn't. :) Toliar (talk) 04:28, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Can't request for a bot flag when importing articles...not allowed to hide pages being imported. This is so that people know that pages are being imported. Otherwise, I would have requested for a bot flag. Cheers, Razorflame 04:31, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I didn't know that. Good reason for me to try Better new changes in settings, which collapses multiple actions like that nicely. Toliar (talk) 05:36, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

:) Cheers, Razorflame 05:37, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Machete

That's why I tagged it rather than just deleting it. I wanted a second opinion. I wasn't willing to work on it myself, but thought it might not be a test page. The it hurts bit was a bit QD-ish for me. Cheers :) fr33kman ^talk 05:04, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Nah, the page in itself was deletable...I was just making it so that it wasn't deletable. Cheers, Razorflame 05:05, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Good for you! I really believe in that; after all we are trying to grow a project rather than delete one :) fr33kman ^talk 05:08, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

:) Cheers, Razorflame 05:38, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

bot activity in ta wikipedia

Hello, I have noticed that your recent bot activity in Tamil wikipedia in the following page: ta:மொஹெஞ்சதாரோ. This page is only redirected page. There shouldn't be any interwiki links to this page. I have deleted your edits. Thanks.--Kanags (talk) 03:06, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Hello again, you have deleted some legitimate interwiki links from some of the pages. Example: en:Winter Palace as well as in Tamil page. You have deleted the russian link. Why? Please rectify the problem asap.--Kanags (talk) 03:18, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

It is a problem that the bot has with disambiguation pages. There is currently no fix for the problem, but I have brought it to the attention of the pywikipediabot people. I do not know when the fix will be implemented, but until then, blocking is not the best solution. Just let it run its' course, and another interwiki bot will be around sooner or later to fix the problem. Cheers, Razorflame 04:35, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi, it is not the problem with disambiguation page. Зимний дворец is not a disambiguation page. You have deleted the russian wiki link in English (as well as in Tamil).--Kanags (talk) 05:15, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Actually, it is...the page on the Russian Wikipedia is a disambiguation page (it has the disambiguation template on it). Furthermore, if an article is a redirect, my bot has specific instructions to not edit those. If a few got through, then it is a programming problem (which I just fixed, mind you). Hope this helps :). Razorflame 05:19, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Hello again, Зимний дворец is not a disambiguation page. Please correct your bot scripts. Thanks.--Kanags (talk) 03:01, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

They are correct. I have taken your Wikipedia off the list, so you needn't worry about it editing your Wikipedia again. Razorflame 03:02, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

If you think that you're correct, then go ahead. I do not want to argue with you. But, a simple question: What is the equvalent article for en:Winter Palace in Russian Wiki? You have deleted the Russian link in English, but did not delete the enlish link in hte Russian article. By the way, you have been blocked only for 1 day in ta wiki. You should be able to log in now. Thanks.--Kanags (talk) 12:02, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar!

Congratulations: You have been given a Barnstar! For all your work here at the wiki, all the articles you write etc - keep up the good work! :D Goblin 12:18, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Yay. Cheers, Razorflame 19:35, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Bot

If you are using the -force parameter I suggest you turn it off, I found out the other day that it currently doesn't work properly and removes interwiki links on a bunch of page type incorrectly. Want to stop you from ending up at an Admin noticeboard on another wiki like I did at en. LOL. Apparently its a known issue, and you should only remove iw's when in manual mode. -Djsasso (talk) 14:24, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip. Will do so. Cheers, Razorflame 19:34, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Simple News Issue Three

Simple News
Issue 4 - 2th March 2009 50,066 editors, 55,989 articles, 130,886 pages.
Announcements	♥	Administrators
Happy Birthday to Shapiros10 who celebrates his birthday today! Party at his place later! The Simple English Wikipedia now has: 55,000 articles with the creation of 9782 Edo by Razorflame. 1,421,733 changes have been made since the Simple English Wikipedia started. This comes to 11.15 'changes per page' in the project. User Articles Kennedy - Article 4 Another article from Kennedy including writing about Simple News, P(V)GA's and some blatant spam! Bluegoblin7 - Article 4 This month Bluegoblin7 revisits the current situation at the DYK process. Yotcmdr - Article 4 A piece this month from Yotcmdr about a simplification project. Razorflame - Article 1 In his debut article for Simple News, Razorflame writes about the recent increase in Vandalism Shapiros10 - Article 1 Shapiros10 writes about Simple's recent turmoil for his debut article.	[Subscribe] [Dates] [Discussion] [The Team]	January NonvocalScream applied to be an administrator, but withdrew. Razorflame applied to be an administrator, but withdrew. Tharnton345 applied to be an administrator, but was not promoted. Bluegoblin7 applied to be an administrator, but was not promoted. Congratulations Peterdownunder! - For passing a request for adminship! Congratulations Juliancolton! - For passing a request for adminship! February Congratulations Majorly! - For passing a request for checkusership! Yotcmdr has resigned after a failed reconfirmation. Kennedy applied to be a checkuser, but was not promoted. Congratulations Chenzw! - For passing a request for bureaucratship! Vector applied to be a checkuser, but was not promoted. Congratulations PeterSymonds! - For passing a request for adminship! American Eagle applied to be a bureaucrat, but was not promoted. Razorflame applied to be an administrator, but withdrew. Congratulations Kennedy! - For passing a request for bureaucratship! Congratulations Fr33kman! - For passing a request for adminship! QandA The QandA. Every month, Kennedy interviews one of the Simple English Wikipedia's editors, asking them about themselves, and their opinions on Wikipedia. It is an exciting insight behind the anonymous face of an online username. This weeks interviews are with Bluegoblin7 and Kennedy! Yotcmdr and BG7 took the interviews. Click for Bluegoblin7's interview! Click for Kennedy's interview! The Commander's Choice The Commanders's Choice. For every edition, Yotcmdr will be chosing articles that need creating, expanding or being attended to. Here is this edition's list: Bastide (charta) - needs simplifying Plane Stupid - needs creating McFly - needs expanding Chicken - needs expanding Dofus - needs creating

--GoblinBot3 (talk) 22:13, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

bs

hey, thanks for barnstars, best regards ;o) --Dalibor Bosits ^© 23:51, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

No problems. Cheers, Razorflame 00:15, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

User talk:MyspaceMan12‎‎

Should I stop them from editing talkpage? fr33kman ^talk 02:03, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

No, because they haven't edited their talk page since I changed it. Only use talk page protection for users who are already blocked and are still being disruptive through their talk page. Cheers, Razorflame 02:05, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Kinda what I was thinking too

fr33kman has given you some cookies! Now enjoy them!

removes hand quickly this time! :) fr33kman ^talk 02:08, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the cookies :). *eats cookies and snaps at Fr33kman XD.* Razorflame 02:29, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the barnstars! :) FrancesO (talk) 08:19, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

No problems! Cheers, Razorflame 16:59, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Bot status at wo.wiki

Hello, i checked the status of your bot on other wikis and its contributions on wo.wiki -> wo:Jëfandikukat:Darkicebot has been granted with the status of Bot (verify). Guérin Nicolas ^{(Xëtu waxtaanukaay)} 3 Maars 2009 à 15:55 (UTC)

Thanks for the update! It was very helpful! Cheers, Razorflame 16:58, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

References and other issues with Romania

Hi Razorflame. Could you let me know if you intend to fix the problems with the Romania article soon. If not I will list it for demotion. I have provided many examples on the talk page of examples of the numerous uncited claims which need your attention. Cheers. The Rambling Man on tour (talk) 20:22, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

I am sorry, but I cannot do anything about references because I do not know how to look for them. That is something that I do not like doing and do not want to do. I would be ever so grateful if you would be willing to look for some sources, because otherwise, I cannot do anything about it, because I know that I suck at finding references. Cheers, Razorflame 21:31, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, I don't have the time at the moment because I'm travelling. I would recommend you use Google and add reliable sites such as the BBC or published newspapers to help in the search criteria. There are other editors that have worked on the article with you who may be able to help further. The Rambling Man on tour (talk) 21:36, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do. Thanks for the input. Cheers, Razorflame 22:42, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For all your hard work creating articles, fighting vandalism, tagging pages for QD, and for being kind to other users, I, Fairfield, hereby award you the Tireless Contributor Barnstar. Fairfield Deleted? 01:26, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Let's crack open the champagne now, ok? Cheers, Razorflame 01:27, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Pikmin Wii

Hi, sorry, but I've declined the QD of the page. WP:QD states that WP:CRYSTAL is not to be used for a QD reason. Cheers :) fr33kman ^talk 18:24, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Very sorry about that! I am usually very good when it comes to the quick deletion rules, but I guess a lapse in memory happened. Mistakes happen, though, so I will now list it on Requests for deletion. Cheers, Razorflame 19:05, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Pikmin Wii

Could you have at least tried to fix the problems in this article before qding and then afding it? A MSN search turns up hits. There are many future games that are shown on en, WP:CRYSTAL is really not a reason. Simon^KSK 21:14, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Actually, yes, it is a reason for deletion. It is about a future game, which in my books, is an automatic qualification for regular deletion. Cheers, Razorflame 21:15, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

This, this, and this are future games on en. Do you want to delete those too? Simon^KSK 21:18, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Those examples are different because A) They have references that proves that it is official and that the game really is under development, and B) because the article is very well written. WP:CRYSTAL does not apply to those particular examples that you've provided here, but it does apply to Pikmin Wii, because there is nothing that establishes its' notability or the fact that it is officially under development. Cheers, Razorflame 21:20, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

As I stated when I started the topic, you could have added refs yourself, and you could have fixed the writing too. Just because an article is poorly written, and does not have sources, doesn't mean that it's WP:CRYSTAL. Simon^KSK 21:23, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Could you read WP:CRYSTAL first before shoving it in my face? You will see that it deals with future events. If the future event is not notable or is not in official development, then it is deletable using WP:CRYSTAL. Cheers, Razorflame 22:05, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

(outdent for sanity) Here. It has been confirmed, and it is in production. What else do you need? Simon^KSK 01:18, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

The first link that you gave me was a link to the English Wikipedia, which has Pikmin 3 listed in the Pikmin (series) article and it does not have its' own article yet. Furthermore, the part that the English Wikipedia has written about it does not, in fact, hold concrete evidence that a Pikmin 3 is going to be released, much less the fact that they have it in development at this time. Lastly, why did you put references on my talk page? You could have just posted the links (the full links), as they would show up like the websites do in the external links section. Anyways, there is not enough substantiated evidence at this point in time to support the claim that Pikmin 3 is currently in development. Hope this helps you understand my stance better. Cheers, Razorflame 01:30, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Unsung

Congratulations: You have been given a Barnstar! For being an unsung hero; you do good work! fr33kman talk

Thanks for the barnstar :). Cheers, Razorflame 22:12, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Bot status

See my user talk page en:wikt:User talk:Robert Ullmann Robert Ullmann (talk) 13:01, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Replied on en.wikt. Cheers, Razorflame 17:27, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

About ta wiki bot

The bot was only temporaraily blocked. It is not blocked now. Sorry for not responding earlier. --Natkeeran 18:02, 6 மார்ச் 2009 (UTC)

No problems! Thanks for letting me know, Razorflame 18:05, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Darkicebot

It's not identified as bot on hr.wikipedia.org. Clicking hide bot changes doesn't hide its stuff. See if you can change the account type or perhaps create another one. Dunno. Just thought you'd wish to know. --Paxcoder (talk) 18:21, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

It should be identified as a bot there. Hold on a second, I'll see what I can do. Thanks for letting me know, Razorflame 18:32, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't know man, all I know is that I don't see the "b" in my watchlist there, and accordingly, when hiding bot changes, the change from your bot is still visible. You can see this: here (no "b"). Perhaps you should contact the admin that approved its status, I'm not familiar with wiki bots. --Paxcoder (talk) 18:11, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't think that it shows the "b" in the history of articles, but I do know that it shows the "b" when you click the show bot edits button. Cheers, Razorflame 18:34, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh, sorry. Yeah, it doesn't show in history of the article for any bot it seems. However, in watchlist, only your bot is not marked "b". However, in recent history your bot does have "b", so I really don't know what's going on. Never mind then, there's probably nothing you can do anyway. Bye bye. --Paxcoder (talk) 12:34, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Join the Tyop Typo team.

This is an offer to join the Typo Team. --The New Mikemoral (talk) 00:20, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations: You have been given a Barnstar! Thanks for joining the Typo Team. You are the thrid member to join. --The New Mikemoral (talk) 01:39, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar. Cheers, Razorflame 04:19, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. Best regards, The New Mikemoral (talk) 02:50, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Rollback usage

Razorflame, please remember to only use the rollback for blatant vandalism. This should have been manually reverted or undone instead of rollbacked. Did the comment belong there? Obviously not. But to use the rollback there might have been a little bite-y rather than providing an explanation of why it was reverted in the edit summary. Thanks, Either way (talk) 22:58, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I realized that immediately after I used the rollback tool. Thanks for reminding me, but I realized my own mistake right after I used rollback there. Thanks for the help, Razorflame 23:03, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Good faith test edits

Hey Razorflame, I was just about to revert an edit, but you got to it first. Usually, when I see these type of edits (clicking random buttons on the editing toolbar), I assume these are good faith test edits, and I just revert using the undo button without warranting a warning. I see you warned the user, so I just wanted to suggest what I do, but of course, you don't have to go with it. — RyanCross (talk) 23:40, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm...that is an interesting approach to this. I would be willing to try it if I see any more of these kinds of edits, but they still warrant vandalism, so I will still use the rollback tool for them, because they are vandalism. Cheers, Razorflame 23:41, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

As WP:VAND states, "Test edits are usually not vandalism," and I believe in this case, it is not vandalism as it probably wasn't done purposely, but simply for testing what the toolbar does. — RyanCross (talk) 23:45, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Still kind of destructive XD. Anyways, I do not believe that it is inappropriate to rollback changes like those. I'll not warn them, though. Cheers, Razorflame 23:47, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I have no opinion on whether to use rollback or not, but I think the test "warning" was okay. It was a test that should be in the sandbox, which is what {{test1}} politely informs the user. Future tests get {{test2}} etc but some users might communicate and ask questions. Toliar (talk) 23:54, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Happy Razorflame's Day!

Razorflame has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, and therefore, I've officially declared today as Razorflame's day! For being such a great wikipedian and kind person, enjoy being the Star of the day, dear Razorflame! Cheers, Fairfield Deleted? 00:00, 7 March 2009 (UTC) A record of your Day will always be kept here.

:D !_! :) XD That should sum up my feelings right now :). Razorflame 00:03, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

DYK

Wow! My first three DYK noms (anywhere) made it! Cool! :P fr33kman ^talk 03:03, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

:). Congrats! My first 5 DYK noms anywhere here made it as well :). Cheers, Razorflame 03:04, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Re:Note

Okay, I will remember that. Thanks. --The New Mikemoral (talk) 03:41, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Yep, no problems. Cheers, Razorflame 03:42, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Numbers

Can you quickly check RC and confirm that I'm moving the numbers correctly. I do now understand that if I find a XX (number) that is redirects to the word-number I delete it and move xx (number) back over the deletion. (Will be a couple of minutes, have to see a patient coming into the ambulance office for a prescription) Cheers fr33kman ^talk 03:53, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, your work has been good so far. Cheers, Razorflame 03:54, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Cheers, back now. (We don't have 24hr pharmacies in the UK so if a patient needs drugs at night they have to come to an emergency doctor. What do you expect from a country that still does house-calls) ;) Right, back to numbers ... fr33kman ^talk 04:11, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

We have met in the middle, where now? fr33kman ^talk 04:19, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Whichever ones haven't been moved yet. Cheers, Razorflame 04:20, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Redirect

Done. I didn't realise I could do that with an existing article (silly notion, I know). Apologies for the unnecessary request :) FrancesO (talk) 20:29, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

It wasn't an unnecessary request. You didn't know, so you asked the community for help. I decided to help you. Cheers, Razorflame 20:49, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

AWB problems

Hi, I can't get AWB to run on my computer. I have downloaded it from sourceforge and installed it with default settings. When I run it I get "This application has failed to start because the application is incorrect. Reinstalling the application may correct this problem." Any thoughts? (I'm running XP) Cheers fr33kman ^talk 01:39, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Do you have the .net framework on your computer (is your computer Vista)? If not, I would suggest installing it onto your computer because AWB needs it in order to run. Hope this helps :). Cheers, Razorflame 02:54, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Alerting you

:) Shapiros10 13:44, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I've nominated myself. Cheers, Razorflame 19:18, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Bot request on Breton wiki

Transcript from Breton site:

Hi there. Could you please put through my bot's bot flag request please? You will find that it has made the specified number of test edits. Thanks, Razorflame 15 C'hwe 2009 da 22:00 (UTC)

Hi there. Could you please respond to my request? Thanks, Razorflame 8 Meu 2009 da 03:49 (UTC)

{{Graet}} Some people are soooo impatient. It just so happens that there's only one fully operative admin on the Breton wikipedia at the moment and he has other things to do. Neal ^(Kaozeal) 8 Meu 2009 da 08:35 (UTC)

I think waiting for 3 weeks for a reply is not being impatient. Thanks, Razorflame 8 Meu 2009 da 20:02 (UTC)

Well I happen to think it is when (as I said before) there is only one fully active admin available to attend to everything, including your own request which may or may not be topo of his list... Neal ^(Kaozeal) 8 Meu 2009 da 20:13 (UTC)

If you think you are overworked, you can always look to your local community of active administrators and see which ones you think would be best suited for the bureaucrat position, and then ask them if they want to be bureaucrats. Cheers, Razorflame 20:17, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

HEY

I undid your version to the last edited edited version that is not pasted from EN WIKI.Richard Relucio (talk) 07:33, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

I've already read your 'revision' and it is almost word for word from the English Wikipedia. Therefore, I was correct in undoing your change. Just be glad I didn't rollback you. Cheers, Razorflame 07:35, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

There are only two paragraphs for the said article at the English Wikipedia.Richard Relucio (talk) 07:37, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

vandalism

Hi is there no way that we can stop this IP creating articles because there are no admins around at the moment. I can request temp sysop on meta to deal with it if it doesnt stop. Corruptcopper (talk) 15:02, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

They won't do it when we have a local community. Just mark the pages that he makes with the {{qd}} tag and an admin will come around eventually :). Cheers, Razorflame 15:03, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Ok I will stick around for a bit and mark them as they are created. Corruptcopper (talk) 15:04, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

 :). Cheers, Razorflame 15:05, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry about the headers and that I have the vandal warner installed and it doesn't understand when you only want to warn a user and not add the title. Corruptcopper (talk) 15:07, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

No need to apologize :). You are still learning how to work this site :). Cheers, Razorflame 15:09, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

 Done All gone. :) Kennedy ^(talk) 15:15, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Like I said, wait, and an administrator will take care of the vandalism for you :). Cheers, Razorflame 18:00, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

The Undertaker

Your bot keeps adding wrong interwiki links to the articles of the wrestler The Undertaker Mark Calaway. I already reverted them but now he added those links again. Please correct that. Thanks, 88.73.143.134 (talk) 03:17, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Without a home wiki to and/or a link to the edit in which you are referring to, I am afraid that there isn't much that I can do. Thanks, Razorflame 03:40, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

I was watching RC when this came up and I also thought, "how can he know what wiki?" since it was done by an anon!? :) fr33kman ^talk 03:43, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

I am Myotis on de-Wikipedia and Valerius Myotis on en-Wikipedia. Darkicebot added [[et:Surnumatja (film)]] to the following interwikis: [[ar:الأندرتيكر]] [[ast:Mark Calaway]] [[bg:Гробаря]] [[ca:Mark Calaway]] [[cs:Undertaker]] [[da:The Undertaker]] [[de:Mark Calaway]] [[en:The Undertaker]] [[es:Mark Calaway]] [[fr:Mark Calaway]] [[gl:Mark Calaway]] [[it:Mark Calaway]] [[he:מארק קאלאווי]] [[lt:Mark Calaway]] [[ml:ദി അണ്ടര്‍റ്റേക്കര്‍]] [[nl:Mark Calaway]] [[ja:ジ・アンダーテイカー]] [[no:Mark Calaway]] [[pl:Mark William Calaway]] [[pt:The Undertaker]] [[ro:The Undertaker]] [[ru:Гробовщик (рестлер)]] [[scn:Mark William Calaway - The Undertaker]] [[simple:The Undertaker]] [[sv:Mark Calaway]] [[vi:The Undertaker]] [[tr:The Undertaker]] [[zh:送葬者 (摔角手)]] [[bar:Mark Calaway]]

Please tell your bot that this is a mistake. 88.73.143.134 (talk) 03:48, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, this is a problem that I am currently trying to fix. The reason for this is because that et.wikipedia page was a redirect to the Undertaker page, so therefore, it added the interwiki of the redirect page to the page that it redirected to. It will take me a couple of days to figure out what went wrong, another couple of days to figure out how to fix it and a few more days to fix it. It should be fixed within the next week and a half. Thanks for letting me know! Cheers, Razorflame 03:52, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Your Bot @ bar

Hi, I granted flag for your bot on bar --Birnkammer fabian (talk) 14:02, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much for letting me know! Cheers, Razorflame 14:03, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

VIP report

Hi, regarding this. The user actually stopped 16 minutes before you reported it to VIP. I'm not saying it was a bad report however, just that they didn't stop after you reported them fr33kman ^talk 16:15, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

I wasn't saying that you said it was a bad report :). Thanks for the clarification. Cheers, Razorflame 16:22, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh, sorry; I wasn't saying that you did say that. I know you wouldn't. :) I was just pointing out that they stopped before rather than after you reported. I've noticed this happens sometimes. I often think that they are watching RC themselves and see a report go onto VIP about them and don't continue their behaviour. I think that for some of these vandals VIP is like a uw-test5 warning :) In this case I think they just had had enough and so stopped. (wish they all did!) ;) fr33kman ^talk 18:03, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

I know that you would never say that I would say that. Anyways, sorry for kind of rooting for the vandals, but without the vandals, I probably wouldn't be editing here. Things would just get too dull too quickly. Anyways, :). Cheers, Razorflame 18:43, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Chin up old chap!

Hey, don't let anything get you down buddy! You're a great asset to this project and proably a hell of a human being in real-life too! :) fr33kman ^talk 19:46, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Nah, not in a bad mood anymore. Was in a bad mood earlier today, but not anymore. Cheers, Razorflame 19:47, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Glad to here it!! btw: I relied to your concerns about the "joke" warnings :) See ya fr33kman ^talk 19:49, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Already replied to that. And I wasn't in a bad mood because of anything that happened here. It was on a different wiki...Razorflame 19:50, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, just saw you replied. Wikis will be the end of us all! I've recently started dreaming about blocking vandals (oh dear!) ;) fr33kman ^talk 19:52, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Darkicebot

Please stop adding interwikis to nn:Halten and no:Halten (island in Norway), it ha nothing to do with simple:Halten (municipality in Switzerland). Banangraut (talk) 13:20, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

It already added them a while ago. Thanks for the note, I'll see if our article here is named incorrectly! Thanks for the help, Razorflame 17:10, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Bastide

I´ve responded to your comment. Please read the whole section carefully before accusing me of simply making other reviewers look foolish. It´s not my fault the supporters clearly haven´t read the article or perhaps they simply don´t understand the principles of Simple English. Or maybe they have no idea over the Manual Of Style. Who knows? Either way, if Bastide gets promoted in its current state, I will finally have concrete evidence that this Wikipedia is broken. The Rambling Man on tour (talk) 17:37, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I would appreciate your comments to my concerns as well, since you support the promotion of this article. Do you feel the phrases and words I´ve pointed out are non-complex? Are you happy with the MOS breaches? The Rambling Man on tour (talk) 17:58, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I would prefer not to respond to them at this time. I am not very happy with the way that you have been doing things lately, so I am going to take a bit of a breather and let other people talk about it. Thanks, Razorflame 17:59, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Well I would prefer you didn´t "tell me off" on the GA page before actually reading what I had written. I am not very happy with the way that people vote for article´s which clearly are NOT ready yet. I thought we were here to build an excellent encyclopedia whose good and very good articles were examples of our best work, not to simply breeze over an article, and vote in moments. With so many people happy to support poorly formatted, poorly referenced articles, I´m beginning to feel like I´m the only person here who actually reviews these articles in any detail... The Rambling Man on tour (talk) 18:04, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Firstly, I did read what you wrote, so don't assume that I didn't read what you wrote when I wrote what I said. Secondly, you've been treating everyone as if they were some child that is in need of guidance, and I have just about had enough of it. If you clearly see that many problems with an article, fix them. {{sofixit}}. And you are not the only one who reviews the articles completely before voting. I looked at and read Bastide before I even thought about voting, and other than the reference problem, which has now been fixed, I found nothing wrong with the article. MoS is not a policy here, it is a guideline. It doesn't have to be followed completely down to the t because frankly, there are some things there that obviously should not be there. If you are going to complain about every little fault of the article, then fine, but know this: Your continuous griping will not affect the way that I vote for my GA and VGA candidates, and I will most likely ignore any griping because I find it to be very unhelpful. I am clearly here to build an encyclopedia, which you obviously, are not. Instead of griping about things like this on my talk page, why not actually create articles? I've built over 10% of this Wikipedia using my own time, so don't think for a second that I'm not here to build an encyclopedia. If you don't have anything else productive to say, then leave me alone, because I'm trying to build an encyclopedia right now. Thanks, Razorflame 18:12, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I´m not griping, I´m pointing out the flaws. Perhaps it´s best if I don´t and let you and your fellow supporters keep promoting poor articles. As for creating articles, I´ve done my fair share of VGAs (just five of them to date) - sorry, I´m not interested in creating river and asteroid stubs. Quality over quantity I´m afraid. And by the way, MOS isn´t a policy on en.wiki either, it´s a guideline, but good and very good articles should do their best to comply with it. And if you read my comments then why did you tell me to oppose? I already had. Plus I offered a heap of suggestions as to what needed fixing, unlike most other reviewers. You may note the discussion I´m having with BG7 on the Crich Railway Museum talk page. Bastide is not fit to be a GA. I can´t believe five editors here think it is, including an experienced one like yourself. The Rambling Man on tour (talk) 18:16, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

You don't own the process, so therefore, you cannot disallow a user from promoting articles that there is a clear consensus to promote. And finally, there is such a thing as quality with quantity :P. And yes, you are griping. If leaving this many messages on my talk page isn't griping, I don't know what is. Razorflame 18:19, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Well that´s good to know. I´m afraid thousands of asteroid and river stubs do not make a good encyclopedia. A few dozen complete, comprehensive, illustrated, referenced, reviewed, stylish articles gets us partway there, so perhaps you should focus on that instead. Bastide is not a good article, it is full of complexity and poor formatting. Simple. Maybe instead of promoting rubbish, we all ought to axe this process and just stick to stubs. And finally, as for owning the process, never. All I´ve ever wanted to do is make the process work. I hope you are aware of WP:IAR as that´s what´ll be invoked if nothing is done about the article and it "passes"... The Rambling Man on tour (talk) 18:24, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Making stubs lays down the foundation to a complete and comprehensive encyclopedia. If you don't like that there are users who excel at making stubs, then don't make personal attacks like you just made above. Any further reply from you on my talk page under this section will be removed without warning. And finally, if you utilize IAR in this situation, that will look very bad for you, because you will be promoting disconsensus, which is very unwiki. Razorflame 18:26, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Dispute solving

Link. I have added my name as a helper to the page. I have read the background. Please can you both put forward a statement on how you would like this to be solved. ie, what you see as the resolution to this issue, and we can work it out from there. Thanks, Kennedy ^(talk) 09:14, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I notice you put a wikibreak banner on your page. What is the point of that, if you wish to resolve a dispute? Kennedy 09:35, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

That was done before I posted that dispute resolution. I have now removed it, as I am back and am fully willing to help resolve this dispute between us. Thanks for the help, Razorflame 13:13, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Tempo

I don't know... I've always seen on simple.wiki and never on it.wiki or meta, where I'm mainly active. Ciao, M7 (talk) 23:44, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the information. Cheers, Razorflame 23:45, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

hey

Did you see what Kennedy, Djsasso, and Juliancolton said about out little "celebration" yesterday?-- † CM16 ^{t _c} 18:43, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Guys, some levity is good but at a time where this Wikipedia is losing good editors, it's primary processes are failing and it's very existence under heavy universal scrutiny, perhaps more time make great articles is better than treating the Simple Talk like a Facebook wall. The Rambling Man on tour (talk) 20:07, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

We're not treating it like a facebook wall. We were just having fun which is aloud, If you can show me where it something like "Thou shalt not have fun" I won't do it again, but geez this place is supposed to be fun one way or another.-- † CM16 ^{t _c} 20:51, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Fun is fine if we all improve the Wikipedia at the same time. It's just not happening though. The Rambling Man on tour (talk) 20:57, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

We're working on it, and to use an American idiom, Don't get your panties in a knot.-- † CM16 ^{t _c} 21:06, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Once we get above 20 or so VGAs out of 55,000 stubs I'll relax a little. No wonder this Wikipedia was considered for closure. We need to learn from that and build an excellent encylopedia with some decent comprehensive and professional looking articles. To use a British idiom, we should get on with it. The Rambling Man on tour (talk) 21:48, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

We don't have 55,000 stubs. We have more likely 40-45,000 stubs :P. Anyways, we already have a decent (not great, but getting there) amount of GAs and an ok amount of VGAs, but both could use some more articles in there. I was very happy to get an article for GA status (Romania), and ecstatic now that Romania is on the front page :P. In short, yes, there are probably more things that we can do here, and there are articles that I do plan on getting to GA and possibly to VGA status in the future. Cheers, Razorflame 04:03, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Darkicebot

Hello Razorflame, Darkicebot has now also botstatus on fy. Enjoy. Theun

Thank you very much for letting me know and for granting him botstatus! Thanks, Razorflame 18:12, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

I tried to simplify that article, but I guess it wasn't simple enough.  :) I'll fix it ASAP.--PMDrive1061 (talk) 19:54, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

No problems. I'm just glad I could help :). Cheers, Razorflame 01:32, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

User:Æåm Fætsøn

Razor, it may not be a good idea to offer to nominate this user for adminship here. They have a very chequered past on EN. Examples: trolling, censorship, trolling, censorship, biting newbies and lacking civility, bad tagging, incivility and biting. I could go on, but I think there are enough examples there! Thanks Soup Dish (talk) 02:17, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Excuse me? Those were very long ago, and I don't edit at en anymore. I don't actually want to be reminder of my past, and what I do here now is very different. Please think before you speak, cause I'm very hurt now. :( - Æåm Fætsøn ^{/ˈaɪæm ˈfætsən/} 02:41, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't check other people's behavior on other Wikipedias, because that has no bearing on a user's RfA here. Razorflame 02:18, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Import rights

Razorflame, I was wondering why do you have the import rights. Techman224^Talk 21:23, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Because the community granted them to me a couple of months ago. Nonvocalscream also has import rights. Cheers, Razorflame 01:47, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

interwiki links deleted at de:Verteidigung

Hi Razorflame -- in this edit, Darkicebot removed the interwiki link from de:Verteidigung to en:Defense but not the other way around. Is there a reason for this, or is it a bug? 88.72.207.5 (talk) 11:56, 16 March 2009 (UTC) (en:User:joriki)

It's a bug that has been fixed already. Thanks for pointing this out to me :P. Thanks, Razorflame 17:30, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Simple News Issue Five

Simple News
Issue 5 - 16th March 2009 52,806 editors, 56,607 articles, 133,001 pages.
Announcements	♥	Administrators
Wikipedia has 56,000 articles - Synergy created the Carl Zimmer article. User Articles DefenseSupportParty - Article 1 In his debut article, DefenseSupportParty talks about the spoken articles project and what it means to them Razorflame - Article 2 In his second article, Razorflame explores the big world of article writing. Yotcmdr - Article 5 For his fifth article, Yotcmdr also speaks about the Spoken articles project... and you can even listen to this one!	[Subscribe] [Archives] [Discussion] [The Team]	Congratulations Either way! - For passing a request for adminship! Techman224 applied to be an administrator, but withdrew. QandA The QandA. Every month, Kennedy interviews one of the Simple English Wikipedia's editors, asking them about themselves, and their opinions on Wikipedia. It is an exciting insight behind the anonymous face of an online username. This weeks interview is with Eptalon Click for Eptalon's interview! The Commander's Choice The Commanders's Choice. For every edition, Yotcmdr will be chosing articles that need creating, expanding or being attended to. Here is this edition's list: Bomb Credit card Postage stamp Lion Sony

--GoblinBot3 (talk) 12:47, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Chris_G's userpage

It seems that's already semiprotected from editing and protected from page move... Any ideas? --M7 (talk) 19:12, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Nope, but if it's already protected, then it doesn't need it :P. Cheers, Razorflame 21:47, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Xqbots interwiki maintainance

For maintain interwiki links I use the standard iw bot of the pywikipedia framework. It is running in autonomous mode and indeed with the -new:-option which works on a given number of new pages. --Xqt (talk) 19:43, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the information. It was very helpful. Cheers, Razorflame 23:42, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

You have new messages!

I have responded to your message at my talk page. Hope to hear from you soon, –obentomusubi 06:08, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Your Bot

Hey Razor! Your bot don't work correct. [2] The iw which the bot added is on deWP a band. And your bot added this iw on all wikis. Regards, Barras (talk) 19:24, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, already removed the link to de.wp from all wikis it added it to. By the way, I would recommend you move the page from Verdict to Verdict (band) or something like that so that other bots don't make the same mistake. Cheers, Razorflame 19:26, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

I moved the deWP page. So the bot's can't make the same mistake. Barras (talk) 19:43, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Ok, cheers :P. I'll test it right now to see if it does the same thing. Razorflame 19:49, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

And a de admin has an other opinion. He moved the page back. Regards, Barras (talk) 19:50, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

I've noticed. Hmmm....I would suggest leaving a message on his talk page. Razorflame 19:51, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Is done. Barras (talk) 19:53, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

My bot.

:Response of this.

Oops, sorry. I was about to revert that when I saw that you've already reverted it. That was fast! I thought my bot was invisible in RecentChanges. I did the same mistage at enwp, but I have reverted that now. :-) --MagnusA (talk) 20:03, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

IRC recent changes feed helps :P. Anyways, thanks for your fast response :P. Cheers, Razorflame 20:04, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

At least I try to be a responsible bot owner. :-) --MagnusA (talk) 20:07, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

I do as well. My bot has been having some problems with false positives for pages. See its' recent contributions here for more information about the pages that are having problems with. Razorflame 20:09, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

please fix the bot for interwiki links

Your bot has twice added ro:Reconstruction Capital 2 to all the RC2 articles. This is wrong, these articles have nothing to do with each other. I carefully fixed all of your bot's mistakes last time to make sure that none of the RC2 articles in any languages still had a reference to this unrelated Romanian article. Please fix this bot's mistakes and stop doing this. 71.61.192.49 (talk) 23:08, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

It does this because the Romanian page doesn't have any interwikis, and because RC2 was a disambiguation page on the German Wikipedia. I have reverted my bots' changes to the ro.wikipedia. Thanks for letting me know about this, Razorflame 23:13, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your quick response. One thing I noticed is that you did not remove all the links from all the languages. For example, de:RC2 (Verschlüsselungsverfahren) still links to ro:Reconstruction Capital 2. Are you sure that other bots won't go through these and assume that the other languages need to have these links re-added? 71.61.192.49 (talk) 01:38, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I am pretty sure that the other bots won't relink them. If they do, give me a holler, and I'll remove the links from all the languages that it added them to. Cheers, Razorflame 06:50, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi! Uh, another bot came a long and linked everything in, I'm almost certain because other languages still had this incorrect inter-wiki link. Could you take a look at it? Thanks. 71.61.192.49 (talk) 18:09, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Which bot? If I know the name of the bot, I can tell its' bot operator about this problem. Thanks, Razorflame 20:25, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

(outdent) looks like your bot linked it in again. Dunno why, but it did. 71.61.192.49 (talk) 00:31, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

It's a problem with the interwikis on some of the other sites. It only linked it to four other languages. To tell you the truth, if you just let them stay, the problem would be solved, but I guess that that really isn't a solution, now is it? The interwikis have to be wrong on one of the sites that my bot edits, otherwise, it wouldn't have done this. Maybe the article in question should be moved to a more appropriate name? Otherwise, I don't know why it does this. Cheers, Razorflame 00:34, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

en:RC2‎ and ro:Reconstruction Capital 2

Hi, your bot keeps adding ro:Reconstruction Capital 2 to en:RC2‎. I've reverted it once, and removed the en:RC2‎ link from ro:Reconstruction Capital 2 but it keeps coming back. It looks like the Romanian article is the one with incorrect interwiki links. Also, do you think you could get your bot to notice when it makes the same change multiple times, which is a sign of being reverted? Replies on en:User talk:TRS-80 thanks. TRS-80 (talk) 02:32, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm not an admin, so don't worry about blocking. How do I fix the problem - remove all the incorrect interwiki links at once? TRS-80 (talk) 02:42, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

I believe that you'll have to go through every single Wikipedia that it has links on and remove the interwiki links that are incorrect. That should hopefully solve the problem. Cheers, Razorflame 02:43, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Saint-Georges-en-Auge

Hello there !

Greetings from across the English French Channel (just a frog's leap away) ! This is just to let you know that I'm currently adding a lot of data on the French version of Saint-Georges-en-Auge, and that I'm a bit too busy to translate it. Anyone interested ?

All the best, --Dominique Fournier (talk) 15:25, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

I currently don't speak very much French, so I probably won't be able to translate it, but if you were to let User:Yotcmdr or User:Eptalon know, as they speak much more French than I do, they would probably be better able to help you. Cheers, Razorflame 19:31, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

What is vandalism

You might find this definition helpful. From WP:VANDALISM: "Vandalism is adding, removing or changing content from Wikipedia to make it bad or incorrect". 75.119.239.174 (talk) 19:57, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

And I suggest that you read WP:VANDALISM more carefully. Anyone adding nonsense to pages and anyone that is being disruptive as also just as much vandalizing as a vandal. Razorflame 19:58, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

But I'm not a vandal, and, as I tried to point out on my talk page, I wasn't adding nonsense. 75.119.239.174 (talk) 20:03, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, you were posting nosense. Razorflame 20:04, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I'll play. No, I wasn't. Your turn. 75.119.239.174 (talk) 20:05, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Are you going to address my question on the admin notice board? 75.119.239.174 (talk) 20:07, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

I had further questions. I'm not trying to annoy you, I'm just looking for a little more detail here. 76.10.171.27 (talk) 20:36, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

*applause*

Way to get the job done, Razor. Good job.--  † CM₁₆  07:01, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

There were no local sysops online at the time, so I've learned to get a steward in that instance. Cheers, Razorflame 07:03, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Darkicebot flag in lad.wiki

Hello, today I approved the bot flag in lad.wiki. Thanks. --Taichi (talk) 07:23, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

It actually doesn't need it because it is already a global bot, but if you've already flagged it, then that is fine as well. Cheers, Razorflame 08:15, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Proxy 89.45.51.141

Hi, I've blocked the IP you reported. I've done it for a month because I want to check with a more experienced admin about procedures and I also want to setup a proxy checking Perl script on my PC. As such, I've taken the cue from Chenzw's most recent block. Thanks for reporting! Cheers fr33kman ^talk 15:22, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

I already have an open proxy checking program installed on my laptop, and it stated that this IP is open on port 80. Port 80 seems to be the one that is open the most, I've found. Cheers, Razorflame 15:24, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Not doubting your accuracy dude, just want to learn more about the whole subject of spambots/malbots and open proxies myself. Which program do you use? fr33kman ^talk 15:32, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

It doesn't really have a name...it is a program that I got off the internet, and it is very well done. They are still trying to come up with a name for it. It is a beta production program, but even as a beta, it is still a very reliable and good program. All I do is type in the IP address and it gives me a list of all the ports it is open on. Most of them only have one or two open ports, I've rarely seen an IP with more than 2 ports open. Cheers, Razorflame 15:34, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Icons

Just a reminder that you need to undo the changes to {{icon}} if you are undoing the changes to the rest of the templates else they will bjork ;).

Cheers,

Goblin 15:44, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

 Done I've changed the images everywhere. I believe that these images are more professional looking and will give us a better and more professional image. That was a lot of work, lol. Cheers, Razorflame 16:06, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Looks good :). Goblin 16:26, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

I think that it was a good compromise between what TOM wanted to do and what the dissenters wanted to do. Cheers, Razorflame 16:39, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Crat/CU

Hey RF. Sounds good to me. I'm back full time now, and at last have my home internet connection sorted. I'll expect at least one oppose from CM16 in each case as that seems to be the norm, but yeah, I can offer more to this project so by all means go for it. Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:21, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

I've accepted the 'crat nom. Perhaps running for CU simultaneously isn't necessarily a good thing? Not sure. I'll think about it. What do you think? The Rambling Man (talk) 17:43, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Do you think people would oppose you just because I decided to nominate you for both flags at the same time? I think you'll use them both appropriately and I believe that you are great choices for both. It's up to you on whether or not you want to accept the CU nomination as well. Cheers, Razorflame 17:45, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Majorly and Kennedy both ran simulataneously this year I think. All passed except Kennedy's CU due to lack of !votes. BTW: Can I add a co-nom to one or both? Goblin 17:47, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

I happily accept all positivity! The Rambling Man (talk) 17:48, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

No problems. Cheers, Razorflame 17:52, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, you can. You don't need to ask :P. WP:BOLD and do it :P. Razorflame 17:48, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Firstly I will say I think he would do fine with both. But I know a number of people will vote negative if both are put up. Because a number of people have clearly expressed that they believe the flags should be seperated to different people and not all on a few. -Djsasso (talk) 17:54, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm sure this is true and wise Djsasso. I'll see what happens. All I want is to serve Wikipedia as best I can. All the best, The Rambling Man (talk) 17:55, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

e/c  Done on both ;). RV me if you don't like it, I won't be offended. I felt it would be a courtesy to ask first too ;). Good luck TRM and yes, my statements are weak at the moment but I am expanding them! Goblin 17:57, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

This highlights the need to always AGF, TRM! :) Good luck! fr33kman ^talk 18:02, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

lol except he now changed it to oppose. So TRM was actually right. -Djsasso (talk) 18:04, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

I read both the support and the oppose with a smile, but I also wrote the above with a wry grin, so hopefully we can all just love each other! Cheers! The Rambling Man (talk) 18:05, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Hehe! :) Nothing like trying to offer an editor a bit of support only to be shot in the foot :) fr33kman ^talk 18:07, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Stumped?

Not really no, I am working offline on Architecture at the moment. Plus I'm watching the telly (Buffy the Vampire Slayer) :) whilst watching RC. If you've something you need doing, I'm always up for helping. fr33kman ^talk 17:56, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

It is Kirby, and he gave you a cookie :P. Razorflame 18:22, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Got that it was Kirby, missed the cookie. I must be showing my age again, sonny ;) fr33kman ^talk 18:29, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

:P. No problems lol. Razorflame 18:31, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Travelcard

How was it complex? I wouldn't call it a stub either. I'll grant you the uncat tag, I've fixed that one. Whats the issue with me? Literally seconds after I create a page you jump on it and add tags? NotGiven 19:40, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't have an issue with you. I was just trying to help. There are several complex words and the sentence structures could be shortened and made more fluid, so yes, I would say it was complex. I do that for lots of new pages. I usually just add the tags if the author forgot to add something. I don't have an issue with you. Cheers, Razorflame 19:42, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

@NotGiven, please AGF. Many editors here hover around Special:RecentChanges because we're a small wiki; Razor probably saw you doing stuff and wanted to help. I know him to be a nice guy, so let's all try and get along okay?! Thanks :) fr33kman ^talk 19:51, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Sure thing. I was just curious as to how he first thinks I am hiding something, then undos my edits. I'll back off if he backs off too. I don't want things to start like this here. :) NotGiven 19:54, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Eh...I didn't say that you were hiding something, I just said that it makes me wonder if you were hiding something. I retract that statement if it offended you. If you need any further help, please let me know on this page. Thanks, Razorflame 19:59, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Okay, let's wipe the slate clean and start again! Cheers :) fr33kman ^talk 20:01, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Edit Warring

Hello, Razorflame, It looks like there was a content dispute over what icons to use for good/very good articles/article candidates; the respective templates have now been protected so only sysops can edit them. I suggest we talk about what icons to use on Simple Talk, and only change them when the community has come to a conclusion. I also want to remind you that edit warring may be grounds for blocking, please note that this is the only message I write to you.

Thank you for your understanding. --Eptalon (talk) 20:14, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

I understand. Thank you for the note. Razorflame 20:15, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Rollback

I have removed your use of Rollback as you have been edit warring with ObentoMusubi and NotGiven. Regards, Kennedy ^(talk) 20:13, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I did edit war with TOM, but I am very sure that I never used rollback against NotGiven. Thanks, Razorflame 20:14, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

You are correct, however still edit warring. Kennedy ^(talk) 20:16, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh..you mean on Travelcard...kk. I think it might be a good idea to take a break from this site...getting in too far into my head....Cheers, Razorflame 20:18, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

I'd recommend you don't use it here for now, even though you are a global rollbacker. Kennedy ^(talk) 20:29, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

In fact, I insist you don't. PeterSymonds (talk) 20:30, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I realized that after I did it. I'm used to using it now, so it's made a habit. I'll not use it here. Cheers, Razorflame 20:31, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Global rollback

I understand that it is hard and it is a habit, but you can not use global rollback again here. Sorry, but more of this would have to lead to a (regretful) block fr33kman ^talk 02:45, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm currently working on adding a special extension to my monobook.css that should prevent that. Also, I don't think that a block is necessary as I was using it to revert vandalism. Nonetheless, you have my word that I won't be using that here anymore. Cheers, Razorflame 02:47, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

The reason is irrelevant. It'd only be a temp block if it did happen; it's that or plodding off to a steward to yank global rollback and I (and you) don't want that. Please, PLEASE be careful! :) fr33kman ^talk 02:50, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks.

Thank you for the warm wiki welcome. :] Papercutbiology♫ (talk)) 10:22, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

No problem. Cheers, Razorflame 19:10, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Hermann Göring vote for GA

Hey Razor. Have a look there. I think I and others corrected all thing which Either way mentioned. Please consider changing your vote. Thanks, Barras (talk) 15:53, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Will change my vote. Cheers, Razorflame 19:11, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

PuntuLLI

Hello Razorflame. I've being working on PuntuLLI article, because I projected to develope a new Category for new TLD projects. I'm a member of the Category Project in the Simple Wikipedia, and this was my new scope. I started by PuntuLLI because I like minoritary languages, specially Leonese language, and this is the project I know better. There are no articles in the Simple Wikipedia talking about new TLDs. I wanted to do a good article. I could have done "puntuLLI: Proposal for new TLD" but I wanted a good article. I have changed a lot of things for not to be G11 and I've joined more information, but actually I don't want to do because I believe it's absolutely informative, there are no opinions, just information. I hope that will be enough or if not, please tell me how can I change it. Thank you for your help.--Auslli (talk) 16:08, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Re:

Well, how would I do that? D:? Kind of confused here. Papercutbiology♫ (talk)) 00:28, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Create the article, or leave it. Redlinks are fine at seWP fr33kman ^talk 00:29, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, answer might have seemed harsh, it wasn't intended to be. Redlinks encourage creation of articles by others. :) fr33kman ^talk 00:33, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Look for the article on the English Wikipedia. If the article exists there, then you can copy it over here and simplify it for use here. Please make sure to attribute those articles correctly, though. Cheers, Razorflame 00:30, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I see. Alright. I guess I'd better go back and revert everything I took out. :] Thanks for letting me know. Papercutbiology♫ (talk)) 00:31, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Yep, no problems. Cheers, Razorflame 00:31, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

XKCD: Simple

Have you seen this? Robert Ullmann (talk) 07:45, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh yes. That generated quite a few new editors and many, many edits. That made us our most active that I have ever seen Simple at. Cheers, Razorflame 19:18, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Rivers

No question with the Romania stub. However, I don't understand your second request. In most cases (except if I missed one or two) they have the interwiki link to en:wiki. Is what you are indicating not redundant? Afil (talk) 20:58, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Nah, it's just for satisfying the GFDL requirements :). Cheers, Razorflame 21:12, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Stuff based on en wiki

Hi RF. I've started a discussion on this at Simple Talk. Out of interest, you told me to use the template on the talk page of articles I create. For Blois you simply used an edit summary pointing at en:Blois, no talk page template. Are you satisfied this is the right level of attribution? Perhaps you'd be interested in joining the discussion over at ST? Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:19, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I believe that this is the right amount of attribution as that is what I have been using for the past couple of months. Cheers, Razorflame 21:12, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

It's not what our current guideline says though, is it? You need a URL to the instance of the article you based your work on... The Rambling Man (talk) 21:14, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

It is a URL to the instance of the article that I took it from, though. It is basically an interwiki link that will take you directly to the article and how it currently is at the moment. Therefore, it does give attribution. Cheers, Razorflame 21:18, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Well of course it is. Silly me. But people who just write "from en wiki" aren't attributing adequately, right? The Rambling Man (talk) 21:19, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, they have to include either an interwiki link like I do, or they have to include the full URL. Otherwise, it is not attributing adequately. Razorflame 21:20, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Actually your link doesn't show the version of the article you used to base your article on. The guideline says you need a URL of a permanent link to the version you used. Your URL merely points at the current instance of the page, not the version you based your transwiki on. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:22, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

-.- But what if the current instance is the same as the page that I based it on? Then it shouldn't matter, right?  :). Cheers, Razorflame 21:23, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Therein lies the danger. The current version of en wiki's page could say anything. It could be completely re-written. The guideline says you need the permanent link. Hence some of my initial concerns at the various ways people think this should be implemented. I don't think anyone is really getting it spot on. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:25, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

In my opinion, using a Wikilink to show that you took the article from the English Wikipedia's version is good enough attribution for me and I believe that it satisfies the GFDL requirements more so than just saying from en.wikipedia. Althought it does not satisfy it as much as a permanent link to the version of the article that you took it from, it satisfies it enough so that it cannot be deleted as a copyright violation as it does give attribution from where you took it from. I would prefer not to talk about this topic anymore, lest I stop making articles all together. Razorflame 21:48, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm not trying to stop you doing anything but you told me to use the enwp based template, but you don't do it yourself. The "guideline" says you need the link to the version you based your Simple article on. That's all I'm saying. I would appreciate your input in the discussion on Simple Talk because this is obviously a huge problem. Synergy and Either way, with their current interpretation of G12, will need to delete about 20 to 30% of this Wikipedia. We need to work on this somehow, and help new users from falling foul of perceived GFDL issues. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:51, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I was telling you to use the enwp based template for just the articles that you created without attribution (the ones Synergy was deleting). {{enwp based}} is kind of the template that helps provide attribution when you either forget to provide the attribution to an article, or when it just simply wasn't added. That was what I meant :P. Cheers, Razorflame 21:53, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Ok, understood. But I still think this needs to have a community-based resolution. I would very much appreciate your input on Simple Talk. Synergy is too busy to help out which is incredibly unfortunate. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:57, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Reverting

Hey Razorflame,I notice that you undid the same edit on Wikipedia talk:Community Portal nine times. While most people would consider the edit to be vandalism and worthy of removal, it doesn't look good when you get into a potential edit war over something that doesn't visibly damage the project. It would probably have been better to leave the statement there and gotten someone to block that user after 3-4 reverts rather than 9. Just a piece of friendly advice. EhJJ^TALK 13:57, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I will remember to do this in the future. Thanks, Razorflame 19:13, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Bot

You realize your bot doesn't have approval to make cosmetic changes right? Only add interwikis? -Djsasso (talk) 12:31, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

It only does it to this Wikipedia. And seeing as it doesn't hurt anything, it shouldn't be that bad of a thing. However, if you require me to get approval for it, then I will ask on Wikipedia talk:Bots. Thanks, Razorflame 19:13, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Yeah I personally think its doing an ok job, just thought I would mention it incase a hardliner comes along and complains. Can't hurt to take two seconds to request it. -Djsasso (talk) 19:19, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I'll go ahead and make the request, then :). Cheers, Razorflame 19:36, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Interwiki

Hi. Your bot has added interwiki in Now to pl:Now and fi:Now, but they were incorrect – Polish and Finnish articles have the same title but describe something completely different. --Filemon (talk) 22:08, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I'll add it to the list of articles to revert when it makes changes to them in the future. Thanks again, Razorflame 03:30, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Checkout ....

CheapGrub I've got a professional on the job :) fr33kman ^talk 05:53, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Heh.  :). Good work, lol :). Cheers, Razorflame 05:59, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

TOM does good work! Certainly knows .js .css and wikicode :) fr33kman ^talk 06:34, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Yep, he does :). Cheers, Razorflame 06:43, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

My RFB

Hey, thanks for your support in my RFB which was closed (early) yesterday successfully, 16/5. I hope I can live up to your expectations and provide Simple English Wikipedia with a reliable and effective service. All the best. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:24, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

And, RF, thanks for the nomination! The Rambling Man (talk) 09:24, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

No problems. Cheers, Razorflame 06:39, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Rollback

You have been regranted rollback. Please review the rules of its use by reading WP:ROLLBACK. Please do not abuse its use again. Further abuse would result in a longer removal. Good luck! fr33kman ^talk 00:16, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

You have my word that I won't. Cheers, Razorflame 06:40, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

One question, why does he need local rollback if he has global rollback?--  † CM₁₆  07:00, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Wisconsin

Hi Razorflame, just wondering if you were going to try to get Wisconsin up to GA following your nomination. A few comments are sitting at WP:PGA, but you're on a prolonged wikibreak right now, so in a couple of days, I'll archive the nomination if I don't hear otherwise from you. All the best. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:51, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Remove it, because I am not sure if I am going to come back. I am in a state of bliss right now (drama free zone), so I am not sure if I want to come back here. Cheers, Razorflame 06:40, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Okeydokey. Take it easy. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:54, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

I've decided to come around here and edit every day once again. I won't be making nearly as many changes as I have been in the past, but I am going to couple my activity on here with my activity on Yahoo Answers and on Maple Story :D. Thanks for the concern, Razorflame 06:56, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

monobook.css deleted as requested. All the best. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:02, 8 April 2009 (UTC)