User talk:Kumi-Taskbot

Due to a community decision to immediately stop the support, maintenance and expansion of WikiProject United States, February 2012, this bot is no longer operational.

For general comments or one-off, minor or historical problems, or plaudits please use User_talk:Kumioko.

If you think Kumi-Taskbot is currently making bad edits, leave a message here and it will stop.

If you are not sure, be on the safe side and stop it - I don't mind - honest!

Please mention an article that has been affected.

Replies will generally be on the user's own page, and copied to the archive if I find time.--Kumioko (talk) 20:11, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The taskbot is removing MILHIST Assessments. The bot seems to be removing the | marks separating categories. Here and here it altered talk pages incorrectly. --MOLEY (talk) 22:13, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits to some Irish articles is breaking the WikiProject Ireland banner like this edit. Please fix it or stop using it. Thanksww2censor (talk) 19:56, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed the problem with the code. I'll go back and fix the ones the bot broke. Please let me know if you see any more problems. --Kumioko (talk) 20:09, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Such as you did here. I've already asked once and explained why. Brad (talk) 06:03, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I do not see the Bot Approval for making edits that are effectively null Example. There is nothing wrong with template redirects. --Guerillero | My Talk 21:47, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that and thanks for letting me know. It should have only done that if a more significant edit was done. I think I have fixed it now. --Kumi-Taskbot (talk) 04:16, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The task bot has begun giving $2 instead of a | to pages within the scope of WP:MILHIST. Here and here it has reformatted the MILHIST boxes to where the articles are taken out of the scope of the project. I think it also did it to other articles but I fixed them manually. Much Ado, --MOLEY (talk) 20:00, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that it appears its do to the removal of some empty parameters. Ill get that fixed. Thanks for letting me know. --Kumioko (talk) 20:35, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The bot does not appear to be checking of the article is a redirect page. For example Talk:1918 Washington Huskies football team. --Traveler100 (talk) 18:05, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks I didn't account for redirects. Got that fixed now I think. --Kumi-Taskbot (talk) 21:00, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

Thanks for the conversion, but there are a couple details to be worked out. I'll use this[1] (the first I saw) as an example:

The space after the template has been elided, making it a run-on with the following transcription.

The word "pronounced" is dropped, and the default behavior of the new template not suppressed, so here[2], for example,

According to dictionaries it is pronounced /ˈdʒiɔɪd/

becomes,

According to dictionaries it is English pronunciation: /ˈdʒiɔɪd/

which can sometimes sound pretty bad.

I think the fixes are explained on the request page. Basically, the word "pronounced" should be added in front of the new template, and a pipe at the end of it; if the pron-en template already had a pipe, then it should be doubled.

Probably doesn't matter too much on talk pages, but it could mess up the presentation on portaled articles.

Thanks!

— kwami (talk) 05:09, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

PS. Looks like there were only 43 fixes before I stopped the bot.

Thanks for letting me know. I only did a few manual edits as a test to see if I had the logic right. Guess not. I'll adjust and see if I can get it right this time. Thanks for letting me know. --Kumioko (talk) 14:20, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

These should be protected from the bot's alterations—example here. In fact, shouldn't comments on all talk pages be put out of its reach?--Old Moonraker (talk) 08:09, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note. They can be, I usually don't mess with those but they just said in the request that the old template needed to be replaced. I'll drop a note on the request page and make sure these need to be changed too. --Kumioko (talk) 14:18, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the prompt reply. It's no biggie!--Old Moonraker (talk) 14:55, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your welcome. I left a note at the bot request page for clarification. For now I am going to limit the edits to the Portal paegs and go from there once thats done. --Kumioko (talk) 21:44, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Just to let you know that the GOCE "copyedited by" banner should not be put into the project shell template. GOCE has no "interest" in these articles, rather the GOCE banner is a record of a major copyedit (usually a request) similar to a review. Chaosdruid (talk) 12:27, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bot is adding WikiProject United States templates to articles not related to USA. I have already reverted this for Talk:United States of Mexico and Talk:United States of Belgium. I have stopped the bot. Please correct before initiating again. Thanks, SchreyP ^(messages) 17:42, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. I thought I removed all those. --Kumioko (talk) 17:43, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As said on my talk page I only found one more and already fixed it: Talk:United States of China. But I only checked the articles starting with "United States". I hope that the other articles updated are also fine. I didn't check those. Regards, SchreyP ^(messages) 19:39, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I notice that you are adding the project banner to bird articles that start with American. Please note that that may not always be appropriate. I've removed the tag from American green kingfisher. Three of the four species do not occur in the US, and the fourth only just reaches southernmost Texas. I don't think that justifies adding the project tag (If you think that, you might as well add it to bird, table, book or anything else ever recorded in the US)

I'm not clear what the point is of adding incriminated spammy tags to articles in which your project appears to have no active involvement. If other countries follow this thinking, we could have dozens of country tags before we even get to the WP:BIRDS project.

Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:16, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Likewise American sparrow, most don't occur in US Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:18, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

White-tipped Dove, highly peripheral Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:20, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

First I think I need to clarify. These were to separate tasks being run at the same time. One task was to convert the WikiProject Texas banner into WPUS/TX because Tx is now a supported project of WPUS. The second task was adding articles which start with United States, U.S. US and american to the list of articles under the scope of WPUS. I filtered out most of the false positives but I will go back through and remove the bird articles. Just to clarify, this is so that the project can help with articles relating to the US it hasn't in the past. Not to undercut other projects activities. --Kumioko (talk) 12:20, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've helped you with more false positive such as American Soldier (album), American Can Company‎, American Cruise Lines‎, American Iron Magazine, American Legion State Forest Trails, American Shakespeare Theatre... there are so many things named American that fall out of your project's scope that IMO this should have not been done by a bot. Your false positive rating is high. Thanks for giving me some extra work! </sarcasm> Best, Markvs88 (talk) 14:36, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Although I am sure that there are other false positives, not one of the articles you listed as examples fall into that category. American soldier falls under WikiProject American music which is a supported project of WPUS, the rest are in connecticut, which as far as I know, is a part of the US. --Kumioko (talk) 14:53, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This again? You're a national project, not a local one: "We are a project dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to the United States, with an emphasis on subjects with regional and national significance.". We've argued this out before, and I will continue to revert all WPUS tags that I see which are on local, state, or colonial articles, or pretty much any article that isn't a US issue. Good day. Best, Markvs88 (talk) 15:04, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You do know that everytime you leave a message here it stops the bot right? I am ok with stopping the bot if it needs to be stopped however for idle conversation such as this please do so on my talk page so we can discuss the matter rather than keeping the bot in a state of idle. --Kumioko (talk) 15:25, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I just found half a dozen false positives in 5 minutes, including Americano FC‎, a Brazilian soccer team. This disruptive, blind tagging must stop now. Best, Markvs88 (talk) 18:25, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

First I would like to point out that had you bothered to look at the edit history, which you clearly didn't. you would have seen that I have already stopped tagging those articles. As the edit history clearly shows this run was to assess the redirects, currently located in Category:Unassessed United States articles and not to "tag" additional articles. Second, we have very different definitions of false positives so I suspect several you found were probably fine. With that said I agree with that particular example and had that one on the list of articles that I have identified need to be removed. Of the 11, 000 I tagged about 150 need to be removed. Not too bad as far as I am concerned. I will be doing that later today once I finish scrubbing the list a bit more. --Kumioko (talk) 19:03, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If I can find half a dozen in five minutes (random scanning), I can only imagine how many more are incorrectly tagged. What's the point of tagging a redirect to an article outside of your wikiproject's scope? Answer: there is none. LOL! I'm sure we do -- I follow what your project says it is, you go by "if it has American in the name, if it happened anywhere in the US (no matter when), or if it's even the most minute local issue, it's a WPUS topic. Hubris. Best, Markvs88 (talk) 21:08, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Dumbass, the bot is already stopped so leaving a message here for no reason after I asked you to use my userpage unless the intent was to stop the bot for doing something wrong is just being childish. --Kumioko (talk) 21:12, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, insults! Charming. (PS: if you're going to reply to me here, what do you expect?) Best, Markvs88 (talk) 21:15, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty much what I expected from you at this point actually. --Kumioko (talk) 21:18, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What would that be? I'm a "dumbass", remember? (LOL!!) Best, Markvs88 (talk) 21:23, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well I hope your satisfied the bot tasks that I worked hard on to code and get approved got revoked thanks to you and your petty bickering. So now you can leave all the comments you want. Cause there is no Kumi-Taskbot to stop. --Kumioko (talk) 21:26, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, all I ever do is reply to you wherever you talk to me. Best, Markvs88 (talk) 22:03, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bot is making indiscriminate and inappropriate edits to bird articles. Pointless even where the species is genuinely US, disruptive for family/genus articles where most are not US, and for tropical species which have only a marginal presence in the US Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:24, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also see discussion here Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:45, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The bot had already finished the run anyway but see previous discussion above as to why the bot did what it did. --Kumioko (talk) 12:21, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]