Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 14:33, 18 May 2006

• Part 1
• Part 2
• Part 3
• Part 4

I thought you said you'd stop. Quote: "Sorry, won't happen again". It is obvious you're editing blindfolded (metaphorically speaking), because otherwise you would recognize when a piece of text is in another language and doesn't need "correcting". I'm talking about Romanian nouns, where I had to revert your copyediting twice in the exact same spot. — AdiJapan ☎ 15:02, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Gah. My mistake. MOD 16:09, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Lake Victoria

You've twice now "copyedited" Lake Victoria's first image, Image:Lake Victoria composite satelite photo.JPG to correct for the spelling of satellite. It is quite clear that you did not review your edits in either instance, since the nett effect was to break the image link. Please stop doing that; until MediaWiki allows renaming of images, the name will stay that way. dewet|✉ 17:42, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Re-uploading the image is your perogative, however you have posted its copyright information incorrectly - it is not under the GFDL. Please make be careful to properly attribute copyrighted works to their respective owners. Furthermore, its an image from the commons which you've now duplicated on en.wp; its completely unnecessary, and only doubles up space. Can't you live with the misspelled image name? dewet|✉ 17:52, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

Going through your other changes, you are seriously bordering on vandalism. It is very clear your are "flying blind" as it were, since your "copyedits" are simply spell-checking and often replacing incorrectly according to the context:

• This should be "fo" and not "of".
• You cannot wikify the name of an image!
• The correct word is "for", not "of".

I urge you to immediately start being more careful, or I will be force to report you for vandalism (since you haven't replied to my original objection at Lake Victoria above either). You simply cannot search-and-replace in a robot-like fashion — otherwise this would've been done in MediaWiki software long ago. dewet|✉ 18:05, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

vandalism

Your edit to genocide hid the previous vandalism. Not intentional was it? Meggar 18:45, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Rapcore

Traitor, Judas. To give rapcore rock-people. Rapcore is rap + elements rock/metal. They (rock-people) to have Nu-metal: rock/metal + elements rap/hip-hop. LUCPOL 13:02, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

PS. I'm hip-hop fans. I'm like hip-hop/rap/rapcore. I dont like Nu-metal/metal/rock. I'm listen to Cypress Hills, Limp Bizkit, Kottonmouth Kings etc. I know - Rapcore is rap + elements rock/metal. True good! LUCPOL 13:07, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Lucpol, it's the first time I've heard about one which likes Limp Bizkit and dislikes Korn (I and others have been always used to the opposite). But anyways, please don't revert genre order on the article about rapcore. OK, Cypress Hill is one of the very few exceptions, but Kottonmouth Kings, Dog Eat Dog, Molotov, Puya, Pillar, Project Wyze, P.O.D., Limp Bizkit, Linkin Park, etc., feel themselves to be more rock bands, and they often try to reduce/discard rap vocals (e.g. Limp Bizkit's "Results May Vary", P.O.D.'s eponymous album and Linkin Park songs such as "Breaking The Habit", "Numb" and "Crawling"). Egr, 9/5/2006

Haha, me, traitor? Listen, if I wanted to betray some abstract concept, the least I would do is have integrity about it. And betraying the brand new rebirth of rap-rock for rap is pointless. Rapcore is rock instrumentals with hip-hop lyrics. That's the way it's been and don't try to go around claiming it isn't. Besides, I don't even like rock. For me to betray rap in favor of rock is pointless, as is your entire tirade. MOD 13:30, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes, both of us like hip hop. What we don't want to betray is something called accuracy.--Urthogie 16:08, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

{{stub}} on user pages

I'm sorry to bother you, but please do not put the {{stub}} tag on any of your user pages. It does not belong there. You can look at WP:STUB if you have any questions. I've already removed it ones and I don't want to get in an edit war about it. Please keep it off your user pages. Thanks. Amalas =^_^= 13:55, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Gresham College

You have made a "copyediting" correction to the above article twice now, and I have reverted twice. It is an exact quotation from the cited source. -- ALoan (Talk) 17:19, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Please read the cited text at which is:

The geometrician is to read as followeth ...

Why have you changed the quoted word "geometrician" to "geometer" three times? Is the reference incorrect? Do you have a better reference? -- ALoan (Talk) 17:40, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Warning: You have now exceeded the three revert on the article Gresham College. If you have a reason to make a single word change in contravention of documented sources, you need to explain it on the talk page of the article. If you revert again in 24 hours, you will be temporarily blocked. Please reason with the other editors and do not attempt to own or control an article against consensus. Geogre 18:00, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

I have blocked you

You seem to be running a spell-checking bot. It is causing problems; see the above section. What's going on? —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 18:32, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

• Update: I see this isn't anything new. Misplaced Pages:Bots/Requests for approvals#Modulatumbot made it quite clear this bot was not to be run. Am I missing something? —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 18:45, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

• ...And in case my response to your email bounced or something, let me make sure you know you can still edit this talk page while blocked. I'm keeping an eye on it, but if I'm not around, you can also attract the attention of other admins with by putting the {{unblock}} template onto this page. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 21:16, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

• Summary for any other admins: I got one a very brief email from Modulatum, with no real information in it. Please unblock him if he says he'll stop running the spell-check bot. (Do not unblock if he says he has a fix for this or that bug in his bot; WP:BOT and logic both make it clear that no unassisted spell-checking bot is ever going to be safe.) —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:28, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Um. My primary purpose as of recently has been to mass-copyedit a lot of pages. Scripting assists in this. I make mistakes. With a fix, usually most future mistakes are averted. If I were to stop, the progress I've done so far, the rate of it anyway, would be extremely impeded. However, if it means getting unblocked and getting anything done at all, so be it. I don't want the misfortune of being limited to do what I like to do on Misplaced Pages. I acknowledge that my spell-checking bot made a few ethical, not criminal mistakes, as it has corrected a few words I did not pay attention to and made changes to spellings of filenames (which in all seriousness should be correct in the first place). Like I said, if disabling it would get me back on Misplaced Pages, I have no choice, but to comply. That's all. MOD 03:46, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Given that we don't accept spell checking bots and as indicated above it was made quite clear that the bot was not to be used, why were you using it at all? I may take your word that you won't run it again, but I'll only be willing to shorten the block, not lift it. --pgk 07:19, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

I didn't really think the miniscule problems it caused, which could easily be fixed, were that important, so I kept running it. It's not really through defiance or rebellion, more through trying to get things done. If you shorten the block, that's fine. MOD 10:18, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Confirm clearly that you will not run the bot in the future and I will unblock immediately. A brief note as to the sort of damage the bot was causing: look at the above section in talk. It was edit warring, "correcting" a "misspelling" in a direct quote. Nodody has the time to go through all its contributions and see how many other things like that it did. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 14:46, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

To clarify, it's not edit warring. The bot automatically combs through recent pages to establish a network of other pages it navigates. The bot is not operational and will not be live on Misplaced Pages anymore. MOD 15:35, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

OK, you are now unblocked. Given that you've been told not to run a spell-bot before this latest incident, consider yourself on probation now: if you are found to be running a bot like this again in the future, expect a long-term block on this account. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 15:40, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Understood. MOD 15:49, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

edit summaries

TheJabberwʘck 00:54, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

See Misplaced Pages:WikiProject User Scripts for a tool that forces edit summaries. Makes it easy.--Urthogie 09:26, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

There is now a user preference that does the same thing. -- ALoan (Talk) 14:33, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Copy edit??

This edit is sumarized as "copy edit" but appears to be wrong. I have reverted. If this was correct, please explain. - Jmabel | Talk 14:22, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

This is another instance of the reasons why unsupervised spelling bots are a Bad Thing - see above. -- ALoan (Talk) 14:32, 18 May 2006 (UTC)