Jump to content

User talk:XLinkBot/Archive 10

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5←Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12

Not understanding edit

Wikimedia received a query at OTRS (ticket:2017050110004721 ) Relating to a reversion of an external link by XLinkBot. I believe this bot reverts links in the MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist. I did not find the URL in the list and furthermore see the URL here: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Spam/LinkReports/socrethics.com With the specific comment "Link is not on the blacklist."

The obvious question is why was this edit reverted? edit--S Philbrick(Talk) 18:02, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

@Sphilbrick:XLinkBot reverts links on its RevertLists. This was spammed by IPs, and an admin put it on one of the lists to revert it. I'll refresh the report to get more insight. --Dirk Beetstra T C
@Billinghurst: you added this, can you have a look at this. My observation is that the involved IPs have, since 2014, mainly engaged in additions to external links sections the current IP since that time, two oter IPs mainly this domain back in 2014. --Dirk Beetstra T C 20:44, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
Probably worth updating the existing local and xwiki link reports, however it looks like a typical CoI of external link building a directory-style listing. I will try to generate that later, when I have access to tools.
@Sphilbrick: Re the reports, if you look at either Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam/LinkReports/socrethics.com or m:User:COIBot/LinkReports/socrethics.com the line to look for is "revertlisted"; blacklisted will reflect listing in either m:spam blacklist and/or Mediawiki:Spam-blacklist — billinghurst sDrewth 05:08, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Ah, which I see that Beetstra has kicked. @Beetstra: is it worthwhile kicking the domain report set to regenerate once something is revertlisted? As an interim measure I will try to remember to kick the extra reports when I do add domains. — billinghurst sDrewth 05:12, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: the stuff is linked when you know where to look (the 'tracked' link in the {{LinkSummary}} leads you to the log for the revertlist which leads you to your name). I indeed poked it. I guess that it is now up to @Sphilbrick: and the original requester to take this forward. I do see from the reports a rather strong insistence by the involved 3 IPs to add external links only, and the link is not used by 'regulars', which is quite a red flag (the only other addition is in a tracking link to a userpage by User:Helpsome - it appears that Helpsome noticed the behaviour of the IPs as well). However, the other links 'spammed' by these 3 IPs are of a recognised publishing house. --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:10, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
@Beetstra: I was more thinking about the report updating so that the priority lines of "revertlisted" would show at about the time of the addition. Sphilbrick checked the report and it was mute on the revertlisting, though it had happened; and I much prefer overt listing, which then leads to a user following the tracking link. — billinghurst sDrewth 07:13, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
I'll see if I can add that code, it shouldn't be much of a problem. I only wonder if the lists are updated soon enough (COIBot creates off-wiki copies of the on-wiki lists for speed of processing, that means that the lists may have lag time), I'd have to check that. --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:21, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

What's wrong with this link?

I added this to the Billy Mills (poet) page as it's my most recent book and should be added to the publications list there.

https://hesterglockpress.wordpress.com/billy-mills-the-city-itself/

Why was it removed? BMills (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:20, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

@BMills: It is basically a blog, which we discourage linking to, see our external links guideline. I also think the linking here is superfluous, I have removed the links. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:16, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. BMills (talk) 12:34, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Using bots and the destruction of the premise of human editors creating Wikipedia

Is Wikipedia edited by people any more or just a bleak bot-warfare ground? Seems now the case is leaning quickly toward the latter.

Seriously, this bot and it's activity is a perfect example of people using machine learning to prevent human activity, the very same activity Wikipedia depends upon to create and edit articles. You made a bot to destroy human creativity, automatically, and remove authentic and positive human effort from the site, and you thought that was a GOOD idea? And then released it into the wild to run without human reviewers? Someone please explain how this will end well.

Policies regarding using bots against humans on Wikipedia need to be put into place, because as it stands, this activity by this bot directly undermines human interest in participation in this project. Those policies, if implement correctly, would make the activity of this bot forbidden. 216.252.162.16 (talk) 13:40, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello. I added a link into the Mach Loop article, about event which is obvious that happened and suddenly the BOT reverted my edit. But what's the most interesting about it is that people already posted several YouTube links into the article, also from random YouTube channels, and those links weren't reverted. Can you investigate it and make some explanation, please? Thanks. BlackFlanker (talk) 15:16, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

@BlackNker: that linkfarm was inappropriate per our inclusion standards. Cleaned up more in the article that fails the same. Thanks for bringing this to our attention. --Dirk Beetstra T C 15:36, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi, My External Link was reverted. However, the link was added because I also saw the same on other pages and so added it. Was that wrong? Can I add these links?

External links

AprennurAprennur (talk) 12:12, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

@Aprennur: if there is no 'real' official site, only the facebook my be appropriate, per WP:ELMINOFFICIAL. --Dirk Beetstra T C 15:39, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Straddle carrier

I have reverted XLinkBot's reversion in straddle carrier. The bot could at least explain itself in its edit summaries (e.g. "links to YouTube are not allowed") instead of blatting some malformed link. --pmj (talk) 01:44, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

The bot explained that on the talkpage, with the possible follow-up options. You chose one of them. --Dirk Beetstra T C 04:44, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
OK, that does seem to cover it. Thanks! --pmj (talk) 05:47, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Aggressive behaviour towards good faith users

I run regular Wikipedia sessions with a GLAM partner. Some of the participants are new users. One of the activities was adding some video links. The links were to YouTube but the material involved was not a copyright violation (having been created by the GLM partner as part of an official program a few years ago). Our session ran from noon to 3pm. However, later that night, some of the users received a series of esclating warnings with threats to block from this bot, e.g.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Aquamarine2017&action=history

from the bot. To anyone reading the user's talk page, it would seem that the user was warned, persisted, was warned again, persisted etc. But that was not the case. All the edits had occurred some hours prior to the bot's first action. There was no persistent behaviour by the user after the first warning. (And in any case, the additions were not contrary to policy).

The bot should NOT escalate the warning level UNLESS there is actually problematic user behaviour continuing AFTER the previous warning. That is, the bot should be comparing the date of the edit being reverted against its last warning date.

The other thing is that the bot is being indiscriminate in its behaviour to new users. As someone who is a registered course instructor, why are course instructors NOT being told about this bot as anything that affects new user accounts impacts (usually adversely) on training. The first I knew of this bot is when it started biting some of my group members. Is it possible to whitelist accounts in structured programs as a way around the problem? Kerry (talk) 01:51, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

@Kerry Raymond: The timing is unfortunate, it seems that the bot is/was lagging. It warned on every edit it reverted, and does so increasingly.
I have now looked at 2 of the edits, which I both re-reverted. They blatantly fail our inclusion standards. Both I reverted are completely indirect, in both cases sideways related to the subject, but very much in violation of the standards that this bot defends.
I will check the rest of it, but if it is the same, then this is yet another example why I believe that GLAM editors also should know what our inclusion standards are, and understand them before we start editing. There is somewhere out there a great blog post where my concerns are voiced regarding this. There is no 'it is GLAM, so it is fine'. Expect more reverts. --Dirk Beetstra T C 04:01, 8 June 2017 (UTC) @Kerry Raymond: --Dirk Beetstra T C 04:06, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
Adding: yes, it is possible to whitelist editors, but they are not exempt from following our inclusion standards. If you are mentoring them, you should be fully aware of these standards, and make them aware of it. I don't believe this is the case here. --Dirk Beetstra T C 04:06, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
I have reverted the rest as well. In most cases I have troubles understanding how the content of the video linked to is relevant to the content of our page (I understand that it is related). For some of the links there may be places where they are more relevant.
Note, this person has a conflict of interest, and has not disclosed that clearly, and is hence editing in violation of Wikipedia's terms of use. This editor is badly informed about the policies and guidelines applicable here. --Dirk Beetstra T C 04:17, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
I will make a note that I have to teach XLinkBot to not to escalate when the last warning from the bot was issued after the actual edit reverted (just only revert it). --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:40, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

I was adding sources to a horribly sourced article.

I was adding sources, images, and additional information about the Traditional Chinese characters on the coins, I'm not sure how that counts as vandalism, but this bot didn't even give a reason as to why it not only reverted my recent additions, but ALL OF MY ADDITIONS to that page including adding Chinese characters where needed (for illustrative purposes), and an image from Wikimedia Commons, either this bot is defective or ill-programmed. --58.187.168.230 (talk) 05:42, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

The article in question is Ming dynasty coinage, adding 2 external links isn't excessive, and I have no connection to any of the references I was using. --58.187.168.230 (talk) 05:43, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
Oh, een Fries heeft de bot gemaakt, dat verklaard het. 😒 --58.187.168.230 (talk) 05:46, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
As explained below, you mix reference styles, and duplicate.
FYI, I am operating it, and run an upgraded version of a bot that was written by someone else. No need for the personal attacks. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:53, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

In case someone would like to bring up the "copyright" © strike on my profile.

I've been plagued by bad bots for a while now, I've been editing Wikipedia for over 10 years and never had anything like what happened in merely 2 weeks, on my profile/talk page there's also a supposed "copyright © strike" where I allegedly copied content from here but if you take part of the deleted text you wouldn't see it come back, maybe because I used this reference twice in Ming dynasty coinage it triggered a false positive. --58.187.168.230 (talk) 06:05, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

An excerpt from the text that can't now be displayed anymore.
All characters on both sides of the ‘’Sangpyeong Tongbo’’ coins are written in Regular script with the notable exception of the coin produced by the Military Office of Bukhanseong which bears the character ‘’Kyong’’ (經) in Semi-cursive script. Another differentiating feature of ‘’Sangpyeong Tongbo’’ coins compared to their predecessors is that they exclusively use the phrase ‘’Tongbo’’ (通寶) for all denominations which is based on a Chinese naming taboo of the Ming dynasty with which Joseon maintained close relations that dictated that ‘’Jungbo’’ (元寶) may not be used because it was a part of Hongwu’s name, the founding emperor of the Ming Dynasty."
Nothing comparable to this can be found on the site, it's been completely re-worded. I think that bots are just over-programmed for false positives at us IP users.
--58.187.168.230 (talk) 06:09, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
This does not concern the bot. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:50, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

I see that a link that triggered it was one for a website that named Southern Ming dynasty coins, the only reason I even used that link was because all of the content was unsourced, but this bot REVERTED EVERY EDIT I MADE ON THAT PAGE, regardless of their individual merits, even if I was simply linking Chinese characters to the Wiktionary, or adding images from Wikimedia Commons, at least try to teach the bot to be more discriminative, it just unsourced the page, literally all sources except for one before my edits were from coin auction sites, and half of them are now defunct, did it remove any of those? Nope, but it did remove my link from Yale University. "spam" everyone. --58.187.168.230 (talk) 06:13, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

In this revid there is a link to tripod, which tripped the bot. That gets replaced in this version with a text "Hartill, David (2005). Cast Chinese Coins. Trafford, United Kingdom.", which is a duplicate of something that is already used as a source. As such, that source is superfluous. I have therefore removed it. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:50, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

At "External links" at Ming dynasty coinage I only added 2 links, both of which give detailed looks at the monetary history of the Ming, what "triggered" it was a source I added, not even an external link, and I explained that I didn't make it a reference because it concerned 3 or 4 different sections in the text, if it only reverted that edit, or just where I added liks, sure, but the reason I'm upset is because it removed all of the content I added indiscriminately, a message to the maker of this bot, kindly programme it to differentiate between edits, it just saw my IP and reverted everything, look at my edits at Ming dynasty coinage and see that I was mostly adding references to ill-referenced text or adding the correct Chinese characters. At least let it only revert my "bad edit". 😒 --58.187.168.230 (talk) 06:21, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

The bot reverts all, for various reasons. There is no problem to cite different parts of one text in different references, following the style of referencing that is already used in the document. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:50, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Lawsuits, and Troubles

On June 12, 2017 The Hollywood Reporter reported that Joseph George Karmo, who holds a 2012 copyright for a script called "Tupac; Shining Serpent", has claimed that Steven Bagatourian and Morgan Creek Productions stole his script to make "All Eyes on Me". He has sued Morgan Creek Productions for $40 Million in punitive damages. The case is currently looming as the June 15, 2017 release date nears.[1] Morgan Creek obtains "likely stolen" script from Steven Bagratorian On October 28, 2015, The Hollywood Reporter reported that Emmett/Furla/Oasis had sued Morgan Creek over $10 million for breaking the companies co-production agreement signed in September 2013.[2] In the agreement, terms were not to exceed the production budget above $30 million, mutual approval for the lead actor's selection, filming schedule, and distribution and sales agreements.[2] Randall Emmett and George Furla also claimed that they all first signed a distribution deal with Open Road, which Morgan Creek rejected, and then Morgan Creek inked a new deal with Open Road without mutual approval.[2] --Joseph George Karmo (talk) 09:27, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Joseph_George_Karmo/sandbox
  2. ^ a b c Siegemund-Broka, Austin (October 28, 2015). "Tupac Biopic Producer Brings $10M Lawsuit Over Secret Star Casting". The Hollywood Reporter. Retrieved January 3, 2016.
@Joseph George Karmo: .. wonderful, and what does this have to do with this bot? --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:24, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

RE: Michael Persinger Edits

I made a very extensive change to Michael Persinger's page, adding over 70 references. XLinkBot removed the entire edit. The provided reason for removal of the edit indicated that one of the external links was not reliable. Please re-instate the edits which are not related to that link. The edited text was extensive with thorough referencing and represents hours of work which has now been removed by a bot. The remaining edits should be posted. All claims are made in reference to a particular individual. The references are from peer-reviewed sources. The edits include previous work which discussed controversies.

A warning was labeled on the page which demanded editing to "include all viewpoints". The edits I made incorporated all of the previous viewpoints while expanding the article. Please re-instate what was written. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PyramidalCell (talk • contribs) 05:47, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

@PyramidalCell: I've reverted the bot, can you please check the reference that tripped the bot - it is on its revertlist for a reason (in case of references, generally meaning major unreliability). --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:39, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

@Dirk Beetstra - Of course. The changes have been applied as per the cited reason. Will the XLinkBot revert it again or should the applied changes remain unless edited with referenced rationale? PyramidalCell (talk) 07:57, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

@PyramidalCell: I have already reverted the bot, it does not revert me (only new users and IPs). It also does not re-revert the same editor (i.e. if you revert the edit of XLinkBot it will not revert again, see remarks on your talkpage; it may however revert you again on a 'new' edit).
You don't necessarily have to remove all the scirp.org edits, it sometimes depends on the context of how the source is used/the context of the source whether it is unreliable (you could e.g. cite 'wrong' information in making the point that it is wrong; sometimes sites are generally correct, but not known for fact-checking and hence one would have to determine whether the right information is actually right, which defies the use of that specific information as a source; sometimes you cite a statement made by a subject regardless whether it is right or wrong). --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:46, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
@Dirk Beetstra: Many thanks for the assistance and advice. PyramidalCell (talk) 17:09, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Bimbo's Initiation source was rejected

Hello!

I changed the link for the video of Bimbo's Initiation to one that was publicly accessible, and for some reason, it was rejected. I understand if I was violating the terms of service, but I don't believe I was, because I was providing a good source to watch the short film created in the 1930's.

I'm just wondering what made it rejected. Thank you!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bimbo%27s_Initiation

205.209.87.221 (talk) 16:16, 18 June 2017 (UTC)Lunatone www.soundcloud.com/lunatonetunes

@205.209.87.221:?I have reverted the bot, as per suggestion on your talkpage. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:17, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Engblom v. Carey

The bot reverted my edit here where I replaced this broken link to the full text of a legal decision with this one from justia.com.

I have no particular reason for using justia.com, I just found it via Google. If there is some standard source which should be used for this kind of stuff on Wikipedia it would be nice if someone replaced it, the broken link doesn't help anyone.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.5.203.4 (talk • contribs)

@81.5.203.4: we had some heavy abuse in the past, but I think it is time that this rule goes. I'll handle this. I'll also revert the bot. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:22, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi,

I added some links in the text pointing to the UN Organizations mentioned in the text. For the external links, I added also a few Youtube links to interviews and events where Eric Falt was speaking. I'm geting now the following message "A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject" and I'm not getting how to have it removed. Best,— Preceding unsigned comment added by Chakirp (talk • contribs)

@Chakirp: I have re-removed the youtubes. Even before your edits there were way too many links on the page, it is basically a linkfarm. However, many may be useful as references. I have tagged the article with {{linkfarm}} to state that.
I have also re-instated the {{coi}} tag, that should be removed by someone experienced that has evaluated the situation. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:32, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

I am sure that The E-Manik Channel is Youtube channel of Bareilly

I am a Bareilly Citizen and I am having a Youtube Channel,The E-Manik Channel. You can't delete My edit, You can check it on YouTube. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emanikchannel10 (talk • contribs) 22:00, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

@Emanikchannel10: Oh, I have no doubt. However, the subject has an official website, making all other official websites (barring some exceptions) superfluous. See WP:ELMINOFFICIAL for more info. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:16, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
Reping: @Emanikchannel10: --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:33, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Snooker season 2017/2018

@185.59.158.22: true, though I doubt that the link is needed there in the first place, and it has been spammed in the past. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:08, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Eum ...

Hey ^^ SO all this is about a copyright link ? Then just erase it, don't undo all my changes .. i took hours to update the profile of play the siren ... and why undo all my work if only one thing is not good? Just cancel that thing and let everything else as before ... now i have to redo all ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Similardi (talk • contribs) 14:04, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Arf xD Sorry, i'm new on Wikipedia. i've read again your message and now i understand, but don't worry, the link is not copyrighted, and thanks for telling it to me, i'm going to undo your undo and sorry for being so aggressive before, keep up the good job !! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Similardi (talk • contribs) 14:44, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

@Similardi: Thanks for the understanding. Please note that YouTube does get reverted for more than only possible copyright problems, they tick more boxes in our external links guideline. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:55, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

spam message

Is this spam? Why am I getting messages from you? I have no idea what you are talikng about, I did not even know there is a page called the Shooting of Amadou Diallo and did not edit it, please stop sending me these messages — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.249.118 (talk) 23:42, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

@86.42.249.11: Please see the message at the bottom of the message, which reads 'If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.'. (Though I think that this will not arrive at the person who actually wrote this, seeing it is a shared IP). --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:57, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

I am a resident in Hebron City and wanted to add more References Concerning Hebron Glass

Hello Wikipedia Team,

I am a resident in Hebron City and wanted to add more References Concerning Hebron Glass; a type of Stained Glass Art that only Artisans in Hebron city are practicing and which is not mentioned nor referenced to that type though I have a whole website that proves their Ancient art's validity to this day plus two other sites found in that Blog.

O am new to editing and adding content to Wikipedia and have mixed up between where to add the number and how to add the link as a reference without it being in the body of the text. Not on purpose I apologize. You should accept the link I referred to as one of the best links to display the Rare Stained Glass art of Hebron Glass in Hebron city to this day.

Best Regards, Authentic Self — Preceding unsigned comment added by Authentic Self (talk • contribs) 01:54, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

@Authentic Self: The problem is that we do not need to link to the best link to display rare stained glass art of Hebron glass in Hebron, we need reliable sources. This very much looks like spamming. --Dirk Beetstra T C 04:02, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

911 ASAP

Hello my name is Shauna, I wanted to know if you could PLEASE email me so I can get this wiki Page up and running asap. My Instagram handle is TheShaunaBrooks from that point the email contact info is in my bio. If you could help a$$ist me please reach out [1]

Guamgrl (talk) 03:12, 6 July 2017 (UTC) Shauna Brooks

References

  1. ^ http://www.instagram.com/TheShaunaBrooks
@Guamgrl: Please see Wikipedia:Article for Creation. You may be able to find people there that can help you to write an article, and an easy way to start an article yourself. Hope this helps. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:25, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

United States Marine Band, The United States Army Field Band, etc.

You are reverting links to public domain content in an absurd way:

My edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=789702688&oldid=788530821

The issue: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mxrh1CrMmTY

Seriously, your bot is harming wikipedia. It's a good thing I happened to have the same IP, notice an obscure message, and respond.

The music is 100% in the public domain. That includes the score, the performance, the recording, and everything else. This is an official work by a US government employee, officially performed by US government employees, officially recorded by US government employees... and the original is even old enough that copyright would have expired if it had existed, not that it did exist.

The music is the subject of the article.

The music was written by the director of the United States Marine Band, long ago, and that is in fact the band playing it.

That particular band is highly regarded as the USA's premiere military band. They perform for the president.

The music is a military march. One would expect that the best example of a military march performance would be by a military band, especially the one for which the music was originally written.

If you won't give up on the harmful bot, at least whitelist youtube. Music is not all copyright. YouTube content is not all copyright. There are lots of valuable videos by United States Marine Band, The United States Army Field Band, etc.

Really, if I wanted to be degrade the video quality (lossy recompression) and put more load on wikimedia, this stuff could be uploaded to wikimedia commons. I could add an awful guitar part and tack on my own copyright; you can too.

This kind of thing makes wikipedia mostly not worth editing. I used to be a regular editor, with a user account that I bothered with. Now I seldom bother to fix anything because of horrible abusive stuff like this. So, with rare exceptions like today, I don't even try to help anymore. The issue isn't just Wikipedia:BITE -- one doesn't need to be a newcomer to get hit. You aren't just going after clueless and evil users. You are going after everybody. This is why people get fed up with helping. Why bother? I'm not sure why I did bother; perhaps I won't next time.

97.104.88.146 (talk) 02:52, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

@97.104.88.146: WP:EL, or the bot warning, is not only about copyright. These links are superfluous (and not only the youtube, also the others). --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:34, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
So look at WP:EL and notice the WP:ELOFFICIAL section. (the USMC band qualifies) 97.104.88.146 (talk) 05:59, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
@97.104.88.146: .. believe me, as one of the maintainers of this bot I know WP:EL and the governing policies by heart. There is no need to include the YouTube per WP:EL, it doesn't add anything. --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:30, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

EuroNews

The link was dead, so I had to change it, sorry!! This Is the second problem I had with Wikipedia! The link is dead, xLinkBot Kennycarr2016 (talk) 09:45, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

@Kennycarr2016: I have implemented a more permanent solution.
1) if the youtube is the official life streaming of the website, it will be (prominently) linked from their official site, or accessible from there (embedded even?). Hence, fails WP:EL. This pretty much sums up why we don't use YuoTube too often.
2) the Quotes link is on the same server as the official site, and their quotes are not the subject of the page where they are linked form. Fails WP:EL.
I've removed both completely. My apologies for the inconvenience. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:07, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

The bot is wrong

I suppose the bot is wrong as my external link is OK: https://juniperpublishers.com/jgwh/pdf/JGWH.MS.ID.555636.pdf The bot reverted two my editions in DRAKON July 10 2017. I ask your help 91.218.41.193 (talk) 10:51, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

@91.218.41.193 and JzG: That is a typically unreliable source (predatory journal), see here. That makes the reference questionable, are you sure there is not a better source available for the material? --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:08, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
Thank you, Dirk Beetstra. Sorry, but I have not another source. What is your advice? 91.218.41.193 (talk) 13:50, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
@91.218.41.193: I guess that you could have a look at WP:V/WP:RS, and assess whether this source is good enough for the information that is added. If so, you can revert the bot, if not, I guess it is better left out. If in doubt, you could start a discussion on talk:DRAKON, and maybe also on WP:RS/N. --Dirk Beetstra T C 14:22, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. I am very obliged to you. I'll try to implement your recomendation.91.218.41.193 (talk) 05:43, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Alistair Munro

I don't understand why you have reverted all the changes I have made to my Wikipedia profile. Please advise and return the changes to the final saved version. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Munroalistair (talk • contribs) 06:48, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

@Munroalistair: I was about to revert the bot and update the page, but I saw you already continued. The facebook is in any form inappropriate, and I see you removed it.
But, please, please read our conflict of interest guideline, and keep the page formatting in line with what is Wikipedia standard. I will tag the article accordingly. --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:10, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

I was not aware Facebook was a conflict. Your assistance is appreciated but the format of the page has changed and a header of Sporting Acheivements has been removed. Can you assist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Munroalistair (talk • contribs) 07:14, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

@Munroalistair: facebooks are generally not necessary, see WP:ELMINOFFICIAL. We try to minimize external links in general, not only facebook.
Yes, I removed the headers before the lede. Maybe it can be introduced somewhere else in the article as a separate section. --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:27, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

I believe I have now complied with all the requirements indicated in your mails. Can you remove the notes at the top of the page. I will create other pages for Waterboys Rugby, IPWI and PROJECX and update the references accordingly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Munroalistair (talk • contribs) 06:55, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

@Munroalistair: No, you have not complied with that, you are still a major contributor to the page and have a conflict of interest, so the page needs to be checked independently (have you actually read our conflict of interest guideline). And there is still not a proper style of referencing (actually, there is none). The tags stay in place.
Note that the conflict of interest does also apply to all other pages you suggest to write / are writing. --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:22, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
I actually deleted PROJECX, as per the tagging that was done by someone else. Inappropriate style and apparently a copy-paste job from external. Remember, we are NOT here to promote your projects/person/companies/whatever. --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:24, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Yes I have read the COI but as this page was about me and was created by others all I am doing is updating it. The other pages are expansions on links in the primary page. If you are not allowing me to update the profile page then you should not have allowed it to be created without my permission as it is about me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Munroalistair (talk • contribs) 09:53, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

@Munroalistair: No, it does not work that way .. we write about subjects when they are notable. It should be a compliment to you that someone else thinks you are notable and wrote a page about you! However, we do not edit about subjects too close to ourselves, that is to be avoided (and when things become too promotional, even against our m:Terms of use). And IF you write about yourself, or subjects really close to yourself, be very, very neutral. And no, we do NOT need your permission to write about you. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:02, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

The profile is a one of event not a profile and I have updated it so that is the end of the matter. You should respect my updating of the profile as any other approach is not acceptable. Someone has created my profile all I am doing is updating and expanding it for correctness. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Munroalistair (talk • contribs) 10:20, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

@Munroalistair: No, that is not necessarily the end of the matter. It needs now to be checked by another, uninvolved editor, and it is still utterly unreferenced (though maybe some of the external links may be suitable for external links somewhere). Moreover, there may be information in there that we do not generally represent about subjects. Related to your edits, we only have your word for you being you. Anyone can make this profile, so anything that is unreferenced in that article may just need to go. You may very well be who you say you are, you may be someone else, so I am not taking your word for the correctness of the page. Please find independent references (that is, references written by people about you, not by you (or someone who represents you) about yourself) for the statements in the page.
The other approaches are perfectly acceptable: you have agreed to obbey the foundations' m:Terms of Use, and you have, irrevocably, agreed to release your contribution under the applicable licenses - and they can be, mercilessly, edited by anybody else. You do not own your page, or even parts of it. --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:38, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

hello

the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TWFhWGXHd6k&t=2s it dosent have copyright because i already talk to the author and he agree by put this link in wikipedia so the bot made a mistake — Preceding unsigned comment added by NICOCRAFTYT (talk • contribs) 16:38, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

@NICOCRAFTYT: Copyright is not the only concern. I think indeed that that is an inappropriate link in this way - the material is properly referenced and described. --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:10, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Promis_(musician)

User D lankow has made changes to Promis_(musician) which have been deleted as the reviews found are references from blog articles. There are no sources of higher quality. Please take back the deletion of those links. The reviews of the albums are a true, secure source and have been on the Internet since the release of the albums. Further, I cannot understand why information from the music label page (artist's biography) would not be accepted as a true source. Please remove the deletions. D lankow (talk) 07:43, 25 July 2017 (UTC) D lankow

I'll have a look. --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:58, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
@D lankow: I have reverted the bot - this indeed looks genuine. --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:59, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
@Beestra: Thank you very much D lankow (talk) 08:35, 25 July 2017 (UTC)D lankow

Cleator Moor

Thank you. I have amended my entry and excluded external links. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Malole72 (talk • contribs) 14:42, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:25, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Formula 1 removals

I believe my edits on the 1991 Spanish Grand Prix and 1998 Belgian Grand Prix comply with all three rules on What can normally be linked and do not break copyright law as they are produced by Formula 1 itself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.175.96.234 (talk) 12:02, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Question

Can you please take a look at the link I added? I cannot see, why this should'nt be in the article. The artist herself is talking about one of her most important performances and it seems to come from a reliable institute. Greetings --188.107.12.190 (talk) 14:34, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

@188.107.12.190: This indeed seems to be an exception, I have reverted the bot as per the bot's suggestion. --Dirk Beetstra T C 15:05, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
Thank You! --188.107.12.190 (talk) 15:41, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

If you undid my edit you show allow it as it talks about political systems or you should remove all YouTube links — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ana667777 (talk • contribs) 18:03, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Do you mind to review the Revert done by the Bot.

Do you mind to go through the edit? i think it should be complying with the policies and guidelines, because i follows the table's existed code style, and it's a linked with official web links just as the other(Contents existed in the table). this

Thanks in advance. Riley.oka (talk) 06:31, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

@Riley.oka: this table does have notes here ... youtube videos are not notes. --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:39, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
@Beetstra: Wondering what is the different between this & this. I'm not trying to argue anything. I like to make some contribution by updating the content. Really interested about what I have done wrong and what I should do in the future.

Thanks in advance. Riley.oka (talk) 11:04, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Ah, you are more alluding to YouTube in general. The inclusion of external links is rather limited, as described in WP:EL. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:33, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
Sorry, but I can't see what is the difference from this person's "Edits" currently. Find it hard to understand. Anyways, I'll dig much deeper into the guidelines, and figures out my problems. Thanks for your reply. Riley.oka (talk) 14:45, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

I'm sorry to bother you. The name Georgia Jones is also an American actress and model. She was born on 4 April, 1988, in Alma, Arkansas, USA. Georgia Jones is a model and actress in adult films. Born in Fort Smith, AR, on April 4, 1988, she started modeling in her teens and continued into nude modeling after turning 18. Her adult-film career began in 2007 when she was just 18 and she is (as of 2016) still active in the adult industry; however, her work consists solely of glamour, fashion and nude modeling, as well as lesbian sex films and a few independent shorts. She has been the centerfold and on the cover of over 30 magazines internationally. She was the Penthouse Pet of the Month and Cover Girl for August 2011. She is also a 2x Hustler Honey and Cover Girl for the months of August 2007 and October 2016. Georgia has also been in a few commercials - most notably, for Fiat Automobiles. Birth Date: 4 April, 1988. Birth Place: Alma, Arkansas, USA Birth Name: Alison Michelle Thompson Nickname: Jonesy Height: 5' 7" (1.7 m)

Georgia Jones is an American actress and model, according to the IMDB website! Check it out for proof at: www.imdb.com/name/nm2646338/. She was once dating another American actress Faye Reagan, according to IMDB: www.imdb.com/name/nm2745099/?ref_=nv_sr_1. Faye Reagan and Georgia Jones have been married since 2007. Please, can you put them on Wikipedia. I'm not lying! I'm telling the truth. They are actual celebrities, they should be on Wikipedia; but unfortunately, they are... only on different languages! They are American. I have evidence here: check out the links and please put them on Wikipedia! Thanks!

I reverted you

I just reverted this edit by the bot. Obviously it was a link in an article which isn't allowed but it was also obvious (to a human) that it was a good faith attempt to add a reference. I therefore reverted the bot and subsequently edited the link to convert it to a ref.

Not sure if it can be taught to understand this but thought it worth feeding back. Lineslarge (talk) 19:40, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

I have also undone this edit which looked perfectly fine. I'm assuming in this case the fact a student newspaper was setup on a blog site triggered the bot. Perhaps an exclusion could be added for the newspaper parm in school info boxes? Lineslarge (talk) 20:26, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
@Lineslarge: Regarding the first one, that should really be formatted as a references as you did later. The inline links like that are inappropriate as they do not distinguish between 'reference' or 'link to subject'. It has a small number of false-positives like this one, but repair is needed anyway (per bot instructions).
The second one is inappropriate in any form. That external link is failing our inclusion standards per WP:EL. That should link to the Wikipedia page of the newspaper, not the external link. --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:46, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Golmaal Again (2017) Movie: Trailer, Release Date, Cast and Songs

Rohit Shetty's person's name conjure up the image of classy cars blowing up middle air but the manager said he has try to stay gone from his autograph style in 'Golmaal Again'. The 43-year-old filmmaker thought he was weary of the media and reviewer for bash his movies for 'just having a lot of car sequence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vanshu.121 (talk • contribs) 14:52, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

But that is not info suitable for Wikipedia. --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:02, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Y sumana secondary school

Y sumana secondary school extranal links deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.21.166.52 (talk) 17:55, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

@103.21.166.52: yes. See WP:EL. --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:04, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Liz Goldwyn

I keep trying to update a link on Liz Goldwyn's page to include her latest short but I keep getting a message that it is being undone. I am her assistant and authorized to add it to the page so I'm not sure why I keep getting an error? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.82.206.21 (talk) 17:49, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

@75.82.206.21: maybe it does not belong on Wikipedia. Please see WP:EL, and maybe also WP:COI. Thanks. --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:04, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Ahmed gurrey

I literally added sources backing up my claims and yet you revert it? Why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Khysion (talk • contribs) 14:00, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello, 

Apologies for my newbyism,.. Tolpuddle6 had changed the original link to access the booklet's pdf.  However, there is also an addenda on the web page https://symbolsofperspiration.wordpress.com/the-martyrs-of-tolpuddle-settlers-in-canada/ that then gets missed.

Londonont (talk) 14:04, 11 September 2017 (UTC) Any help appreciated. thank you Geoff Anderson [email protected]

Guy McPherson page

I have been trying to edit Guy McPherson's page with legitimate links critiquing his work in great detail. The essay at that link is written by a well-regarded scientist it is very important, where apocalyptic claims are made, that a valid critique is also presented. Please restore my edit. Tassica (talk) 21:03, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Help for a new page.

Sir, I am looking to create a page on a old drama serial.Can you help me in my article. Alberk3 (talk) 18:51, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 27 October 2017

Can you change the bot so it is malfunctioning? It is impossible that all of my posts are supposed to be inapropriated. Guatimozin (talk) 07:57, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

@Guatimozin: I have reverted the bot, as it suggested on your talkpage. --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:02, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

I have removed the vimeo and youtube links from my edit of the Pauline Amos page. Could you let me know if any more changes need to be made or if I need to remove anything else from the profile.

Thanks!

Disable request on List of most retweeted tweets

On the page List of most retweeted tweets this bot has made unconstructive edits such as special:diff/803963349. Could you please disable this? --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 20:30, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

@Emir of Wikipedia: I haven't used the feature in years, but I added this. I hope it works. --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:11, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

About classical music

This is a prime example of why guidelines are flexible and shouldn't be blindly followed. Can you whitelist me since I doubt that such a situation could occur again? Thanks, 135.23.202.24 (talk) 01:04, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

@135.23.202.24: A blog .. as a ref .. for that info. Nah. --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:59, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

The external links seems to be the same as the Wikipedia in Portuguese. Why are you trying to delete it? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Guatimozin

@Guatimozin: Because we here follow the rules for the English Wikipedia, see WP:EL. --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:00, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

what i do to clear this message from this page

--Gysopoorvika 05:49, 18 November 2017 (UTC) This article is being considered for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy. Please share your thoughts on the matter at this article's entry on the Articles for deletion page. Feel free to edit the article, but the article must not be blanked, and this notice must not be removed, until the discussion is closed. For more information, particularly on merging or moving the article during the discussion, read the guide to deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gysopoorvika (talk • contribs) 05:49, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

@Gysopoorvika: That is not an error, that is a discussion about the article. Please follow the links in the message to understand the process. --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:29, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

how to correct my mistake to avoid this warning messages in my artical

I understand your policies and i ask apology for this happenings.

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Poorvika has been reverted. Your edit here to Poorvika was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (https://www.facebook.com/poorvikamobile) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 12:51, 17 November 2017 (UTC) 

Welcome to Wikipedia. Constructive contributions are appreciated, but, in this edit to Talk:Poorvika, you removed Articles for deletion notices from articles or removed other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates. This makes it difficult to establish consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. Thank you. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 05:41, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Information icon Hello, I'm XLinkBot. I wanted to let you know that one or more external links you added to Poorvika have been removed because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Your edit here to Poorvika was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (https://www.facebook.com/poorvikamobile) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 05:55, 18 November 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gysopoorvika (talk • contribs)

@Gysopoorvika: Have you read the messages left at you? They explain quite well, and link to the policies and guidelines. I don't understand now what you exactly ask. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:39, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Chris Packham

I've undone this https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chris_Packham&diff=810951370&oldid=810951155 Seemed to be the reverting of reasonable editing, and the edit summary did not reflect what was being done. Mcewan (talk) 19:04, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

I see the youtube link in the midst of what the bot reverted. On balance, I still think it was legitimate content. Mcewan (talk) 19:26, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

F-Script (programming language)

I have been trying to replace the existing link to a YouTube video with another link to the same YouTube video but with a higher resolution and this bot keeps reverting my changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Santana~enwiki (talk • contribs) 04:53, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Because at the end of a hard days work, everyone deserves a cute kittie. Even you trusty bot! Keep strong and dont give up on your dreams!

Andre Pereira (talk) 06:59, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Error

Congratulations, BOT, you have successfully reinstated the malformed markup here so the article does not display properly again. I have fixed it a second time, but no doubt some officious automated mechanism will revert my helpful edit again before very long. What a waste of time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.205.198.217 (talk) 16:58, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

@213.205.198.217: no, it will not. Thanks. —Dirk Beetstra T C 17:52, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Instructions

Thank you for all your introductions. --Kromosoom1 (talk) 10:40, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

@Kromosoom1: You're welcome! --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:04, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

guaravads.tk

Sorry I will not include www.gauravads.tk from now. Thank for your kind support. --BudhanilkanthaNepal (talk) 3:46, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

@BudhnilkanthaNepal: Can you show me where you wanted to include it? --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:04, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

But I dont want take name of that website. But Actually I will make Wikipedia Better by the special Imformation.— Preceding unsigned comment added by BudhnilkanthaNepal (talk • contribs)

@BudhnilkanthaNepal: The external link is not needed, the name suffices. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:22, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Regarding Sarbjit's edit

Bollywood Life may not be relevant source to you but Aishwarya has won that award. You can see it on official video of the award for double check. - http://www.ozee.com/videos/big-zee-entertainment-awards-2017/big-zee-entertainment-awards-episode-1-august-19-2017-full-episode.html I suggest, according to your format, make that entry into award list component of Sarbjit's page. Thank you.

Timeless Love

I think that the casts of the film should be mention like the other films on Wikipedia as it is very unfair to the film Timeless Love.

Thanks for reverting my entry... I won't bother again.

Thanks for reverting my entry... I won't bother again.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.170.134.188 (talk • contribs)

@86.170.134.188: I've undone the bot's edit, and removed the YouTube. Thanks! --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:09, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Tutorial

I added youtubve Tuorial but you removed it so can you tell me a website you allow that i can post the video on it is a good guide to wordpress — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pc3352 (talk • contribs) 12:13, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

@PC3352: We are not here to provide manuals on how to use, we write about a subject. I don't think this link is suitable. If you want to know how wordpress works, then you have to look on their website for a howto, or use other sites for that information. It is not in our scope. --Dirk Beetstra T C 15:27, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Translation

Hello,

I wonder how I can translate an English, or any other, language article into Croatian? How to add up Croatian (Hrvatski) language into the list of available languages on the left side list of languages?

Thanks a lot! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Darrad2009 (talk • contribs) 14:34, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

@Darrad2009: That is data that needs to be added on WikiData, there should be a link in the left menu somewhere that brings you to the WikiData item, where you will have to add the other language links. --Dirk Beetstra T C 15:28, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

These links are relevant. I am a Public Relations Officer and Recruiter for the Tennessee State Guard. CW2 Louis DeMarco

https://www.facebook.com/tnsgrecruiting/?ref=bookmarks

I am the Page Administrator for the TNSG Recruiting page. _____________________________________________________________________________________________

https://www.tn.gov/military/who-we-are/state-guard.html

This is the link for the State of Tennessee's Military Department. My name is listed as one of the Public relation's officers.

________________________________________________________________________________________________

Please re instate the links.

Also I made a comment on the change if uniforms. The TNSG no longer wears the Woodlands Cammo. We now wear the Universal Camouflage Pattern. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ldemarco (talk • contribs) 17:42, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

@Ldemarco: please see the external links guideline - those links are inappropriate on Wikipedia, we are not writing a linkfarm or an internet directory. --Dirk Beetstra T C 15:30, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Dazed Digital

Why was this link to Dazed Digital reverted? Random86 (talk) 21:09, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

@Random86: The revertrule was likely added because it was deemed to be useless for most cases, or there was significant refspamming to this site. There will however be cases where it is useful and where the bot can be reverted. --Dirk Beetstra T C 15:33, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Sybil Shearer, The Morrison-Shearer Foundation

Hello, I'm XLinkBot. I wanted to let you know that one or more external links you added to Sybil Shearer have been removed because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page,
Except for a link to an official page of the article's subject, one should generally avoid providing external links to:Social networking sites (such as Myspace, Facebook, LinkedIn, and Instagram), chat or discussion forums/groups (such as Yahoo! Groups), Twitter feeds, Usenet newsgroups or email lists.
An official link is a link to a website or other Internet service that meets both of the following criteria:

The linked content is controlled by the subject (organization or individual person) of the Wikipedia article. The linked content primarily covers the area for which the subject of the article is notable. w_w_w dot facebook dot com/morrisonshearer/ 50.254.21.213 (talk) 15:45, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

contains time line history etc. 50.254.21.213 (talk) 15:52, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
{{rto|50.254.21.213|| You are editing Sybil Shearer, the person. Then there is the Morrison-Shearer Foundation, which is the foundation that is honoring the two people Morrison and Shearer. Neither the domain that you put on the page of Sybil, nor the facebook are of Sybil, they are of the foundation. Neither have hence a place on Sybil Shearer, as they are both indirect to the subject.
In case you start the page about the foundation, then there the official link would be a suitable link, the facebook still fails, per WP:ELMINOFFICIAL - it is an official site of the subject there, but we generally list only one, with very rare exceptions to that rule. I hope this explains. --Dirk Beetstra T C 18:11, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

they are the same thing 50.254.21.213 (talk) 20:51, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

@50.254.21.213: A foundation named after two people is the same one of the two people (and one who is deceased ..). Maybe there just is n official website of the subject. That does not make the page worse anywa. —Dirk Beetstra T C 20:53, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
The biography of an elected official might link to both an official government website and the official's political party or campaign website
A person who is notable for more than one thing might maintain separate websites for each notable activity, (e.g., one website for music and another website for writing).
it is the bot that started this and they are both dead and the foundation was hers.

50.254.21.213 (talk) 20:58, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

they the foundation and the person are the same entity.50.254.21.213 (talk) 21:03, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
we are catering to the reader not you and me 50.254.21.213 (talk) 21:05, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
@50.254.21.213: ‘the foundation was hers’ .. I own a bike, does that make me a bike. You say yourself they are two different things. If you want to serve reader, then you provide thewith correct info, and a page about the foundation. The link is not appropriate, nor the facebook that the bot removed. I clean several pages a day of such myself. —Dirk Beetstra T C 21:14, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

MØ

External link that you removed complies with Wikipedia policy, as indicated at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Video_links

The link is properly formatted as indicated at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:YouTube

Thank you. GainesvilleFlorida (talk) 02:34, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

@GainesvilleFlorida: That was not the point of the XLinkBot revert, which you could describe as false-positive in this case (though if you want to go into deeper technicalities, I would even say it is correct). Anyway, I have also reverted your edit as you decided to restart the edit war in exactly the same way as earlier. (you can respond at the talkpage of MØ, that is where the discussion should be). --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:50, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Hello, My link was removed from Hungama TV Wikipedia page I think was the wrong decision because it was the link of Hungama TV official Facebook page I hope you will Understand Please do reply as soon as possible Thank you AS LIVE (talk) 09:11, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

@AS LIVE: thank you for your remark. No, that is a correct decision. We only list only one official website per WP:ELMINOFFICIAL, except for some very rare cases. As social networking sites are discouraged (see WP:ELNO), they are a worse choice of official websites than the official domain (hungamatv.com in this case), and they are not chosen. There is hence a good reason for the bot to revert your edits. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:54, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Undoing more than one edit

Hi, I see you've already had this IP raise the issue above, but I have a question. Here, the IP made 12 edits, the last of which was to add a Facebook link. The bot quite correctly undid that, but it also undid the previous 11 edits as well (which didn't have that issue as far as I can see). Is that what it is meant to do? Obviously, it's easy to fix (by reverting back to the version before the Facebook addition), but I suspect that a lot of new editors won't know that - like this one obviously hasn't. Cheers, Black Kite (talk) 23:20, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

@Black Kite: hi, yes, this is by choice as it is generally the option that leaves less damage. It is explained in the FAQ: User:XLinkBot/FAQ#REVERTALL (mentioned in a box at the top of this page). It is also worded in the message that the bot leaves to the editor: “However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link”. I hope this explains. —Dirk Beetstra T C 04:18, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Tannhauser

I made additions to two Wikipedia entries regarding Tannhauser. Note, in both cases, I linked them to my own website, which was professionally constructed, and the links are relevant to the Wikipedia entry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr. Jeff D (talk • contribs) 04:12, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

@Dr. Jeff D: And in both cases the removal by the bot was correct, these links fail our inclusion standards. Please read our external links guideline. Thanks. --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:11, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Are u kidding me?

Who gave you authority to do "all removed the contents" this?

Hey guy, i didn't modified history outline.

i just add it 6 sentences and add it reference with article!

I wonder why it was deleted.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Dkflfkd (talk • contribs)

I think you were warned sufficiently - copyvio is not allowed. --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:45, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Hello

I've made a couple of edits to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CeX_(company) and added a new service they're offering (because I thought that it was relevant) and a link to the notice on their website about the service, but you've removed it. Which is fine, but it's the same format as the link about their acceptance of bitcoin so I am confused. Is this more to do with the link's location on the page?

Thanks

JimWoodhead (talk) 11:49, 23 January 2018 (UTC)Jim Woodhead

@JimWoodhead: you are talking about this edit of you, where you used a blogpost as a reference (it is actually on http://www.blogger.com). The bot reverts that as blogposts are very rarely suitable as a reference, they are not reliable sources for any information that needs a secondary source, and have only very limited use as a primary source. In this case, I would say that you need a secondary source, not a blogpost (even if it is by the company itself). --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:13, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

@Beetstra: Yes, I am and I understand what you're saying, but why does the bot allow citation 11 on the same post when it links to the same blog in the same way? That's where I am particularly confused.— Preceding unsigned comment added by JimWoodhead (talk • contribs)

@JimWoodhead: that was probably put by an experienced editor, or it was re-entered. The bot does not remove other links, only additions, leaving a remark/warning. Question may be whether that reference is fine, and it may also be that for your statement your reference is fine. --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:47, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Your contributed article, Na /K -ATPase

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Na /K -ATPase. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Na+/K+-ATPase. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Na+/K+-ATPase. If you have new information to add, you might want to discuss it at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Naraht (talk) 16:40, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion speedy, but wanted to comment here as well. Looks like the bot tried to do an edit, but somehow lost the '+' signs, might be bug in Bot.Naraht (talk) 16:42, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

@Narath: Thanks, indeed, I think the plusses get lost in translation. Rare bug, will see where I can catch this (but impossible to test). —Dirk Beetstra T C 18:14, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Gargoyles Edit

Excuse me, but why was my edit reverted? Did you look at the edit made and the link I put in as a reference source before you reverted the edit? The Gargoyles cinestory comics have been cancelled, and all I did was added that information to the article, cited with a source from the official publishing company's Twitter account, as a reference.--68.11.91.158 (talk) 22:53, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

@68.11.91.158: twitter is being reverted as it is generally a not wanted external link. In the edit you made (cited by the bot) you added the twitter post as an external link, which you then converted into a ref in the subsequent edit. The bot was likely parsing on the first an did not detect that you turned it later into a ref (the bot does check the ‘final result’ to see if the added link was in a ref, the bot was likely faster than your subsequent edit). Again, apologies, and I saw that you already reverted the bot. Thanks! —Dirk Beetstra T C 04:06, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

I want to update PŠC Pezinok page

Hi,

I would like to update the wiki page of Slovak football club PŠC Pezinok. As a official member of club board, I was delegated to do it. Now, I am able only to read the page and see "History of edits". Please help me and allow me to update information about the club, what is very important for us.

Thank you.

Sincerely Marek Farkaš — Preceding unsigned comment added by Destinator88 (talk • contribs) 20:49, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

@Destinator88: You are the specialist, so you're probably a better editor to update it (though do keep this guideline in mind). I see the bot reverted your edits, as you added inappropriate external links. The rest of the edit you could probably add. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:42, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Why?

I understand why you've changed the external links in The Society Of the Gods but why did you change all my changes? Their name in English is Nordic Asa-community and NOT The society of the gods, the Swedish name is Nordiska Asa-samfundet, Nordiska = Nordic Asa-samfundet = Asa-community. And they were founded in 2014 and not 2013 as I corrected. They aren't folkish or universal.

So why did you edit my changes? No the info is incorrect again! 

FrankOttosson80 (talk) 20:41, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
@FrankOttosson80: The bot reverts to the last edit before your edits as the option that has the smallest chance of leaving damage. You can revert the bot, but removing the 'offending' links. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:43, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

itamar biran and isrswissnews

Hello! I write to you about next page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Itamar_Biran The information described by the user "Isrswissnews" is authentic and is confirmed by a copy of the application to the Israeli police. A link to this document is also provided below: https://plus.google.com/photos/photo/117035260016769592615/6522657326549421986 Please place this information as a matter of principle for all victims of fascism! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Luisalmowar (talk • contribs) 16:44, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

This is not the place for your battle. —Dirk Beetstra T C 17:13, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Edits got reversed on Social Centres page again

This is about the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_centres_in_the_United_Kingdom page. This is the second time that a bot has reversed the changes (that is an update of the network) to this page. Can it please be reversed so that it is an accurate update please. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.109.96.89 (talk) 15:54, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

~Soclib (just resent password finally) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soclib (talk • contribs) 16:00, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

@Soclib: done. Per the instructions on the talkpage you can do that yourself, but please provide a meaningful edit summary. Thanks. —Dirk Beetstra T C 16:34, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Thusithaj hi

pls adv, Why my external link deleted ?, is there any way you can help to add this external link — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thusithaj (talk • contribs) 11:10, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

@Thusithaj: it was deleted because it was spam, and no, I will not help you to reinstate it. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:48, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Overly-long edit summaries

I noticed this edit by the bot:[2] Which had a long edit summary because the edit it was reverting had a long edit summary. What happens if the bot's edit summary goes over the character limit? --Guy Macon (talk)

@Guy Macon: honestly, I have no clue. I guess that it just truncates. But I understood that the limit is now 1000 characters .. that will take an effort. —Dirk Beetstra T C 04:09, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Photo of Anneline Kriel Page

To whom It may concern.

I am struggling to up load an photo for this page, which I manage.

Here is proof that I have ask the photographers permission to use it.


The two photos were taken by Bernard Jordaan (of anneline as a 19-olds) and by his daughter Misha Jordaan (of anneline on 62).

https://www.facebook.com/AnnelineKrielBacon/?ref=bookmarks

I still can not up load it, please help :-)

Leonard Arendt — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leonard Arendt (talk • contribs) 14:17, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

@Leonard Arendt: That is not something for this page. If you want to upload an image you will have to go to Wikipedia:File_Upload_Wizard. That also states what you need to do with permissions, a statement here is not sufficient. --Dirk Beetstra T C 14:32, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 7 March 2018

why did u remove my post text & images? Vkavin10 (talk) 14:50, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

@Vkavin10: that is thoroughly explained on your talkpage, please follow the links provided. Those links are inappropriate for an encyclopedia. --Dirk Beetstra T C 18:38, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Request

Hello. More sources for the article Maureen Wroblewitz. Thanks a lot.116.109.98.197 (talk) 09:47, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Wrong place. Ask at Talk:Maureen Wroblewitz, please. --Guy Macon (talk) 14:07, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
FYI, this is Haiyenslna. — JJMC89 (T·C) 18:25, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

I added the twitter link to the article Maureen Wroblewitz but the bot left back. Looking forward to explaining.171.232.39.35 (talk) 00:45, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

@171.232.39.35: See the message that is left over and over to you. Pleas read our external links guideline. —Dirk Beetstra T C 02:58, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
​FYI, this is Haiyenslna. — JJMC89 (T·C) 18:25, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

Help With Editing

Hi. I am having problems with the following:

1. Updating the current list of current MLB Broadcasters. I need help getting a change of boxes for the following;

First: Under flagship station for the Chicago White Sox; it is WGN-AM, and under network affiliates, it should be 17, unless they changed it.

2. I added a new section to the 1968 MLB All Star Game in Houston, with the list of umpires in the game.

I don't know if I did it correctly. Please help me with that.

Thank you. WilliamDunphy (talk) 01:23, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

@WilliamDunphy: that is something that you have to discuss on the talkpages of the respective pages you want to edit, or through a WikiProject or your own talkpage. --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:19, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Page creation

Hello I have recently created a page so fo i get more Features while editing than other editors who didn't create this page. What additional features fo I get by creating pages that other editors who didn't create pages. Vishnu223310 (talk) 06:48, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

@Vishnu223310: You don't get any additional features, just the possibility to edit the page like anyone else. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:53, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Editing the List Of Current MLB Broadcasters

I am having trouble, and maybe you can help me.

I am editing the current "List of Current MLB Broadcasters" for the 2018 season, and I am having a bit of a problem.

With the new season, there are some changes, like for example, I am trying to do updates for the new outlets, for this season, and here is what I am getting:

Some of this by the way, are from websites of the teams, and whatever I can get.

Could you see what I have put in so far?

For example, in my edit for the Chicago White Sox, the flagship station, WGN-AM & the list of network affilates, are in the wrong place.

Some teams are on both AM & FM outlets, for example: Colorado is on KOA-AM & FM.Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page). Milwaukee is on WTMJ & FM.Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).

And there is a troll who has put in the name broadcasters as a joke.

Please help me with that.

I will also try edit anything that I see fit.

Thank you.WilliamDunphy (talk) 23:54, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

@WilliamDunphy: just as above, you'll have to either edit it yourself (be WP:BOLD) or discuss on the respective talkpages. This talkpage is for issues regarding to the bot that is running from this account. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:54, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

"Tamiya-ryū (Kuroda)" page

Hi, I've tried to update a previous external link that is no more effective but XlinkBot has rejected the new link. I understand your guidelines and I can't understand where is the problem. No violation of any copyrights here, and if an external link was used on this page for many years I can imagine that you had allowed it so ? I'm going to attempt an undo but it's my first time so I don't know if it will be source of problem. Hope not... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shinbukan european students (talk • contribs) 05:35, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

@Shinbukan european students: If the link is appropriate then you can just revert the bot - it will not revert you again on the same edit (barring some exceptions). It may however be that the link is not supposed to be there in the first place, even if it was there for years. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:55, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Request

You have removed our link from Hungama TV which was www.facebook.com/HungamaTVIndia the link comply with Hungama TV Wiki page policy I request you to do undo this let the link be in page as it is related to official page of Hungama TV— Preceding unsigned comment added by MD Ronnie Screwvala (talk • contribs)

@MD Ronnie Screwvala: Please read WP:EL and WP:COI. And no, that link is not appropriate. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:51, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

heres a kitten

CorbinMartin (talk) 20:53, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

@CorbinMartin: Purr (that was the only sound I could translate from the bot - I guess it means thank you). --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:28, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

I need help regarding page protection

Hello there,

I would like to know how can I semi protect a page on living person? The available guidelines seem confusing to me, need a clear instruction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emonkhan (talk • contribs) 21:44, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

@Emonkhan: you have to be at WP:RFPP, but that page does not need it, no significant vandalism. —Dirk Beetstra T C 03:46, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

I'm unable to update a logo on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benenden_Health

Hi there,

I'm trying to update the logo shown for Benenden Health on the following page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benenden_Health infobox template.

They've recently updated their logo but when I try to use the update logo form, I don't have the required access as I'm neither Administrator, autoconfirmed or confirmed user status.

Can I ask how this can be done please?

--Newben1905 (talk) 14:22, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

@Newben1905: Please ask at WP:HELPDESK or WP:TEAHOUSE. This page (User talk:XLinkBot) is for discussion of what XLinkBot does. Johnuniq (talk) 00:28, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Bot reverted a huge amount of good editing

I added about ten references to Kwame Brathwaite, and made the mistake of adding one bad one (anothermag). The bot reverted ALL of my contributions. This is a heads up that I am going to revert the bot, less anothermag.104.163.147.121 (talk) 23:18, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

I just counted, and the bot removed 9 good references. That's not good. My addition was also clearly not spam, as it was in a reference tag. Almost all of the removed references had been run through REFILL, so they were expanded refs and not bare links. Several were from Cite Books templates for Google books. I'm a bit peeved to be wasting time fighting with a bot, expecially since the algorithm here has said "IP user, oh let's revert everything they added." That's an error. 104.163.147.121 (talk) 23:23, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
@104.163.147.121: Thank you for your remark, and again my apologies for the inconvenience caused. No, it is not an error, it is a choice. We revert completely with the choice to re-revert. Partial reverts have shown to often leave broken pages, residual problems, etc.
Note that XLinkBot does not only revert on spam, it also reverts on material that should not be linked for failing other policies or guidelines. That includes for some material also the reverting of material that is used in references.
I hope you reverted the bot (I will check), and checked the reference that the bot was actually reverting for - it may be that it needs to be replaced. Regards. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:10, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
I have to say, bad programming. 104.163.147.121 (talk) 04:39, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
@104.163.147.121: It is a choice, a setting. This one is the least damaging. --Dirk Beetstra T C 04:43, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
  • of course, all programming is a choice. But this is bad programming. You have allowed your bot to remove nine instances of "cite web" or "cite Book" with good references. And the sources you allowed it to remove were sources like the New Yorker, The New York Post, Vogue and other very reputable sources. You could have easily tested the nine removed sources to see if they matched anything on a spam list. It's not a choice, it's bad programming. If a user went in and removed nine good references like that, people would be pissed.104.163.147.121 (talk) 04:51, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

I found it odd that XLinkBot decided to revert my page due to a link to a Facebook page - when I had simply replaced an extremely out-of-date MySpace page link. What would the actual difference be between an artist's MySpace page and an artist's FB Music page?RexStrother (talk) 02:23, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Bot reverted edit during RC Patrol

I was editing here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Game_Grumps&diff=next&oldid=843174480

At this point, I had just reverted some subtle vandalism, as can be seen by the bot's addition to the article (addition by revert). The link was part of the article, and did not violate Wikipedia's "External Links" policy, as it was relevant to the actual article. I also did not add the link, it was simply the product of a revert.

Just wanted to put that out there.

Thanks. EggRoll97 (talk) 11:52, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

@EggRoll97: hmm, OK, this must have been a glitch of the bot because you seem to have enough edits. I will need to go over that at some point. Technically you added a YouTube link, and youtube links added by new users are so often inappropriate that we err on the side of cleaning up. No worries further, the bot will now ignore you, my apologies. —Dirk Beetstra T C 16:02, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

New Battle of Leyte Gulf Book and Documentary

I've been adding references to the new book "The Defenders of Taffy 3" by Byron Como and associated documentary "Johnston: The Defenders of Taffy 3"

This book is listed on worldcat.org: http://www.worldcat.org/title/defenders-of-taffy-3/oclc/995848579&referer=brief_results. Also, I can tell you people not only from the U.S., but Japan, Germany and the UK have also purchased copies.

Also by request, copies of the video "Johnston: The Defenders of Taffy 3" have been placed in the collections of The Ella Sharp Museum, Jackson, MI, and The Carnegie Library, MI. Also copies, again by request, have been donated to the Johnston/Hoel Association (contact [email protected]).

The US Naval Historical Foundation is scheduled to publish a review of the Book NLT June 30, 2018.

The book and video represent serious scholarship and skill in multiple disciplines and deserve to be included in the associated wikipedia.org articles.

Additional References:
Tim Nessmith, USS Kidd Museum Ship Manager, [email protected]
Warren Stirling, Johnston/Hoel Assoc., [email protected]
Dave Winkler, US Naval Historical Foundation, [email protected]
Robert Lundgren, NavWeaps.com contributor and author, [email protected]
Garrett Lynch, US Navy Destroyer Veteran (ret.), [email protected]


Sincerely,
Byron Como
B.S. LSU
USS Kidd Volunteer — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.64.17.141 (talk) 16:26, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Inappropriate. —Dirk Beetstra T C 16:09, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi there, I've just added to the External Links section of a few articles and received a series of spam warnings. The links were to original episodes from a Canadian history series (educational/documentary) — the subjects of which were directly related to the content of the articles on Wikipedia. The videos are not in violation of copyright. Is there another reason they were flagged? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whimsbarrow (talk • contribs) 18:41, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

@Whimsbarrow: I checked your last. Yet another external link on a very long page with numerous references and already a linkfarm of links before your edit. I doubt that most of the external links add anything over what is already there ... I think this is one of the reasons the bot is reverting youtube. —Dirk Beetstra T C 19:19, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
@Beetstra: Thank you for your response. A couple of the other links were added to shorter articles with less or no external resources. The videos I've linked to actually delve into much greater detail about at least one aspect of the subject matter, and in a format that might be interesting to the readers of those pages. I don't want to risk a ban from Wikipedia over this (I received a warning because the links were added close together before I noticed the messages), just wanted to check to see if what I'm doing is wrong or if the bot is flagging unnecessarily. Could I be banned if I attempted to undo the reverts? Thanks again.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Whimsbarrow (talk • contribs)
@Whimsbarrow: our goal is to write an encyclopedia, not link elsewhere as a first solution. What I see from your contributions is a general trend - the youtube videos you link to fail our inclusion standards. Please read the policies and guidelines linked in the messages the bot sent you. --Dirk Beetstra T C 04:23, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I am not sure why all my youtube links were removed from reference. There are many other youtube video links in the same page and I made an edit to add mine. Is that not okay? If mine violates the copyright laws then, all the video links of vidoes should be removed from those pages. 106.51.28.146 (talk) 14:24, 24 June 2018 (UTC)HDN

@106.51.28.146: copyright is the gravest, but not the only reason why we generally don’t link there. Here, they certainly were not used as references. —Dirk Beetstra T C 15:54, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi Beetstra, Yes, they were indeed all references only. The topic on the wiki page relates to the video posted. Except I admit, I posted my channel details there in one edit just because there was another user who had posted his channel details as well. Could you please check. Please let me know if you need any information. Thanks 106.51.28.146 (talk) 16:45, 24 June 2018 (UTC)HDN

@106.51.28.146: No, they were external links, not references. And '[relating] to the video posted' is not a reason for inclusion, please do not add the links again. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:14, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Could an admin please disambiguate the media links produced by this bot? Tayste (edits) 22:24, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

@Tayste: for now I have removed all links .. those need to be rethought, they are unclear. --Dirk Beetstra T C 04:25, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for looking into it. Tayste (edits) 04:35, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

Direct report to AIV by XLinkBot without any warnings

On Firoza Begum (singer), 106.202.66.197 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) made an edit to the article here and added a link that XLinkBot reverted. Instead of welcoming the IP and leaving a notice about reverting the link, XLinkBot immediately reported it to AIV even though the IP had not received any warnings. Is there a reason why it did that? — MRD2014 Talk 19:24, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

@MRD2014: Basically, because I told him so. The editor added 'mylnk.is/MhEgAgc8', a redirect site to peoplesbiography.in. The latter site is globally blacklisted, and 106.202.66.197 is the umptieth IP who is finding a redirect site to be able to spam that site. For more info, see m:Talk:Spam blacklist#shortingking.com and clc.to and bitly.fi.
I do that as a last measure, when basically warning is utterly of no use anymore, the only thing that helps is blocking the IP immediately (they would ignore the warnings anyway, they did not get the message at the first blacklisting) and blacklisting the domain at the earliest (XLinkBot throws on-IRC warnings that it does this which watchers there pick up). I'll add something to User:XLinkBot#A Note for Admins. --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:16, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
@Beetstra: Thanks for the clarification. — MRD2014 Talk 13:41, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

Someone is hacking my wikipedia

Hi someone keeps hacking my Wikipedia. Can you help? Dave Bjorkman (talk) 02:20, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

@Dave Bjorkman: This is already explained on your talkpage. Please be careful editing material where you have a real life relation with. --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:25, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

XLinkBot, thanks for including the BLP violating link in the talk page message and in the damn edit summary, doubling the revdeletion load. Drmies (talk) 00:52, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

@Drmies: I guess I owe you a beer ... if it gets abused more, you can add a rule to hide it in the settings (search for 'hiderules', define a new section and add the regexes). (the links are generally displayed so patrollers can see what the bot is reverting on, and possibly block on sight; links are displayed on talkpages so that spammers can be found later - now you could search for the offending links on talkpages to see if there are others who added it). --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:12, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
  • I will take that beer, haha, as long as it's not Bavaria. Didn't know you ran the bot--I appreciate all the good work it's doing but yeah, I understand why it does what it does, and I suppose it's somewhat rare that it adds to a problem. But it's solved, a few more clicks. Thanks Dirk! Drmies (talk) 16:46, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
I only have alcohol free beer here in absolute awful flavours (pomegranate beer ... absurd), I hope that is OK :-D --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:54, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Don't See My Changes to For Your Ears Only (radio program)

Don't See My Changes to For Your Ears Only (radio program), which I hosted for 32+ years. And have received no notice those changes were "reverted." What do I do now? EarsOnlyHost EarsOnlyHost (talk) 23:25, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

@EarsOnlyHost: because the bot reverted the edit. wikipedia is not the place for selfpromotion. --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:04, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

@Dirk Beetstra: Too old for any advantage in self-promotion; just trying to expand entry as requested by Wikipedia, now with fewer problematic links. Cheers. EarsOnlyHost EarsOnlyHost (talk) 15:34, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

EarsOnlyHost EarsOnlyHost (talk) 15:36, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

@EarsOnlyHost: In any case, you may want to read our conflict of interest guideline and the m:Terms of use. Whether you benefit from it or not, the text you added was too promotional, and your way of inline linking is not how articles are formatted, nor a target that we want to achieve (see 'What wikipedia is not'. --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:02, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Will study but changes now shown will do so think I'm through. Glad for the opportunity. All Best. EarsOnlyHost EarsOnlyHost (talk) 16:17, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Malfunction?

I updated the YouTube URL on Max and Harvey (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_and_Harvey) as the YouTube URL is invalid and the bot reverted back to the false URL. Their official YouTube is https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJR6A06hCDNcnJdZXwc2BEg

No/yes. The idea is to make people think about the link. In this case, it should not be there in the first place. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:59, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Slavenka Drakulić page

Hello XLinkBot!

Thank you for your help in changing the data for Slavenka Drakulić! I am her personal assistant and I would like to correct her data. I appreciate that you moved the links that are not accepted on wikipedia, such as the vimeo link. But I have made some changes to Slavenka's biography and I wonder why are new books not visible? And why are other changes that I inserted about an hour ago deleted? Also, please, there is one sentence in the article that is wrong "Drakulić temporarily left Croatia for Sweden in the early 1990s for political reasons". It has been taken from one article but that is simply not true. Could you please delete this? It is true that she was attacked in the newspapers by Slaven Letica, but she never left Croatia because of that.

Thank you very much in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ingeborg10 (talk • contribs) 10:09, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

@Ingeborg10: The bot reverted all of your additions. May I direct you to m:Terms of use and WP:COI first before suggesting you to revert the bot but remove anything that does not comply with our inclusion standards? Thank you. --Dirk Beetstra T C 04:01, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Dear XlinkBot, I think, my new weblink to the first very serious filmbiographie (duration almost two hours) concerning the tenor Rudolf Schock is a right decision. With one click on the button, people will be able to learn a lot about the singer and to hear, why millions in Europe admired him and still admire. The film has not a single commercial intention or background. People, who saw the film in the Netherlanda and Germany, heard "a new Rudolf Schock". My modest opinion is: This new weblink is very logical and fully in accordance with the time in which we communicate. NB: I believe, the English subtitles in the biography, supervised by a native speaker of your country, are much better than my English on this page! I apologize for that!

Krijn de Lege Krijn de Lege 11:14, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

@Krijn de Lege: we are not writing a replacement for google or a soapbox. It may be in line with this time, it is not necessarily what Wikipedia is. --Dirk Beetstra T C 04:04, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

My name is John Goodsall and i tried to add some current info to the Wiki page about me. I followed the 'ADD LINK' instructions but this is what displayed James Bracken 1 and Brand X 2. 2 should read [[Brand X] and link to a Wikipedia page of my music group Brand X <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brand_X> 1 should read James Bracken and link to <https://www.facebook.com/jamesbrackenmusic/>. Help correcting this edit may be rewarded with concert tickets. Thanx - John — Preceding unsigned comment added by John Goodsall (talk • contribs) 13:34, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

We're not here to promote Brand x. --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:39, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Geoffrey Hayes

Please stop your disruptive editing as you did to Geoffrey Hayes. If you continue, you'll be blocked from editing Wikipedia. DannyGurr (talk) 13:26, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

@DannyGurr: that is unlikely, especially when seeing your reverts. --Dirk Beetstra T C 17:37, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
Sock blocked.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:06, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

tcl.tk domain blocked

Edits containing links for the domain tcl.tk are inappropriately being reverted. That is a legitimate (although soon to be deprecated) domain for the language Tcl. It is mutually recognized that *.tk domains tend to be spammy/malicious, however tcl.tk has a well-established reputation for many years of use. -- Bovineone (talk) 21:30, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

@Bovineone: I have whitelisted the domain on XLinkBot (pleae keep an eye if it does respect that). --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:56, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

Huh?

I don't understand this. The bot removed my warning, and that of another editor? Drmies (talk) 16:19, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Make that a double huh ... something wrong in fetching the last revid? --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:41, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
It looks like he started from an empty page, maybe due to an encoding issue in the username not loading the user's talkpage? --Dirk Beetstra T C 16:43, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Tony Streather

You've undone all my edits on Tony Streather when you took the Youtube video out. Please revert the other changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.160.141.51 (talk) 15:37, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Same for YouTube Rewind. --46.39.231.8 (talk) 18:49, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Keeps deleting my update

I want to edit Financial Astrology and it keeps deleting my entry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.148.174.23 (talk) 17:57, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Maybe you should read the remarks left for you. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:52, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

White-tailed Eagle

I posted a link to an important video posted on YouTube for public access, respecting all copyrights. In the video, an interesting behavior of a White-tailed Eagle, taken with an autonomous camera. Please return the link, it is important and interesting for understanding the biology of the bird. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKxH1qmVhoE Studenok 22:18, 17 December 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Studenok (talk • contribs)

@Studenok: have you read the rest of WP:EL? We are not writing a linkdfarm here, we only include links under rather limited conditions. What you describe is either a) something that should be in the prose, with a reliable reference, or not worth mentioning at all. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:55, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Statue of Equality (Ramanuja)

I have uploaded the genuine information may I know I have you deleted my edit. Ravi.maturi (talk) 15:03, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

@Ravi.maturi: Because you linked to a facebook account. Please convert it to a wikilink like the other name you linked. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:10, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 11 January 2019

Re ARDSHIR ZAHEDI article: This BOT is malfunctioning! NOTE: This BOT falsly reverts sensible corrections! Somebody please ascertain that these are preserved and not manipulated by automated editing 2003:CF:B3DC:9D62:A41D:4388:9EF6:DD90 (talk) 11:25, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Bot seems to be functioning properly. Per WP:ELNO links to social media sites (i.e. Facebook) are not allowed in articles. The bot's edit summary was descriptive. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:43, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Donald Hall and Jason Reynolds

Dear friend, I recently created external links to a YouTube page I curate for the nonprofit I work for, The Howard County Poetry and Literature Society, with more than 90 half-hour talk shows featuring authors. I'd like to link to Wikipedia for these authors' pages, since scholars and readers are enthusiastic about the worth of these episodes, and many of the authors have died. The literary society owns the copyrights to these television programs, and we've run the YouTube channel for ten years. www.youtube.com/hocopolitso I started creating the links on Jason Reynolds and Donald Hall. These shows are copyrighted by us, and do not have inappropriate content (although some don't care for poetry, it's not inappropriate!). Please advise, and thank you, Susan Thornton Hobby executive producer of The Writing Life — Preceding unsigned comment added by Susanthobby (talk • contribs) 13:10, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

@Susanthobby: can you please review m:Terms of use and our conflict of interest policy. The links that you were adding are inappropriate, we are not writing a linkfarm, and Wikipedia is not your webhost. --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:46, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

St Peter's Seminary, Cardross

Your bot is out of control these are very pertinent links (the only video of St Peters in actual use) your bot has removed them simply because they are on YouTube. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.106.60.76 (talk) 03:33, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

@88.106.60.76: No, they are not, and yes, most of the material on YouTube does not need to be included. --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:48, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

TwinsofSedona

I am ONE twin. My twin sister (Jennie 1949-2008) died 10 years ago. I am totally solo and have never shared my TwinsofSedona with anyone . If you would like me to change my name to singular, TwinofSedona, I will happily do so. Please advise. Thank you Terrie — Preceding unsigned comment added by TwinsofSedona (talk • contribs) 11:27, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

@TwinsofSedona: this is not an issue for the bot. To me, your explanation is sufficient. --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:49, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Spider-Woman (Ultimate Marvel character)

@188.68.111.170: This bot is concerned about link additions, not about images (unless it are links to images .. ). Can you please elaborate? --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:51, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Oneida Indian Nation January 2019 edit

The reversion is an error. The link to casinocitytimes.com is to an article that independently supports the information in the main article. Originally, two UticaOD articles were linked to verify the information. Since that time, the links were removed and the articles are not archived online anywhere. The casinocitytimes article is the only article that I could find that verifies and supports the information about the Vernon Downs racino closing in 2008 due to high tax burdens.168.215.97.5 (talk) 20:17, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

@168.215.97.5: I guess that the site is deemed unreliable (since it is on the revertlist for references). You may be right that it attributes, but if it actually is unreliable then that does not help a lot. --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:55, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Zephyr Teachout baby

Zephyr was supposed to deliver sometime in October. Any information on the birth? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:196:17F:C7B7:0:0:0:D5C1 (talk) 23:41, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

@2601:196:17F:C7B7:0:0:0:D5C1: XLinkBot is not a gynecologist, nor an oracle. Please check reliable sources .. --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:56, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

blogspot

I just added a space to that external link because it was not able to access. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Indianbeauty (talk • contribs) 14:45, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

@Indianbeauty: 5 warnings on adding blogspot links? You may want to read the warning instead of trying to work around. --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:57, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Reverted link reposted to South Algonquin page

Dear XLinkBot. Thank you for flagging your concern over the external link I posted to the South Algonquin page. Please note that the link connects to footage of a 1964 episode of The Forest Rangers. Because this is a CBC television production, crown copyright extends 50 years from the date of creation. The copyright for this television show expired in 2014 and it is now in the public domain.— Preceding unsigned comment added by IdeaTourist (talk • contribs)

@IdeaTourist: and that type of linking is inappropriate and not needed. I have therefore reverted the addition again. I have also fact-tagged the section, as there are many claims without references there. --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:08, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Protected edit request

On the line:

\bonlinejobswithoutinvestmentfromhome\b.org\b # resolve 66.147.244.206 - take care, contains other sites as well (which may be spammy by themselves)\breviewedforu\.com\b # resolve 67.20.94.188

I'm fairly sure this was meant to be 2 different lines, or otherwise the second regex is commented out, so instead it should be

\bonlinejobswithoutinvestmentfromhome\b.org\b # resolve 66.147.244.206 - take care, contains other sites as well (which may be spammy by themselves)

\breviewedforu\.com\b # resolve 67.20.94.188

Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 19:49, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

 Done — xaosflux Talk 00:20, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 27 January 2019

i just want to add a external link of you youtube channel that is related to the topic - panun kashmir . this is the link - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fb_godgonI&t=7s Deepakaroraraju1 (talk) 19:34, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: this is the talk page for communicating with the user XLinkBot (talk · contribs). Please make your request at the talk page for the article concerned. — JJMC89 (T·C) 19:41, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
@Deepakaroraraju1: You state that you want to add a link that is related to the subject. Please read the policies and guidelines mentioned in the warning on your talkpage - being related is not enough for inclusion, we are not writing a linkfarm. --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:04, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

IP address whitelisting

I am requesting that my IP address be white-listed that is probably due to many false positives this bot will create in the future.. I tried to remove copyrighted content and requested revision deletion, to which the bot reverted (as it is a blogspot) upon sight.. Thanks for the consideration as am not going to create a account, never.. 182.58.231.246 (talk) 05:38, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

@182.58.231.246: What happened to you was something else, the bot should not revert certain templates. I have solved thát in the settings by doing this. Let's see if you get more warnings (there are more static IPs who edit continuously, and most of those never or hardly get warnings from XLinkBot as they do not happen to add any external links that are questionable). Moreover, your tenure on this IP is IMHO too short to show that this IP is static to you. I'll await a handful of false-positives over a reasonable amount of time (then I will whitelist you, I have done that). Sorry for any inconvenience. --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:38, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Removing copyvio templates :)

Stop icon Please do not remove the {{Copyvio-revdel}} template from articles, as you did with Special:Diff/881060418. Your action has been reverted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept non-free text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted, and removing copyright notices will not help your case. You can properly contest the deletion at Wikipedia:Copyright problems. If you are the owner of the material, you may release the material under the Creative Commons and GFDL licenses, as detailed at WP:IOWN. Alternatively, you are welcome to create a draft in your own words at Special:Diff/881060418. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators and/or removers of the copyright notice templates may be blocked from editing.

~ ToBeFree (talk) 05:36, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

@ToBeFree: .. XLinkBot is prepared for that .. except that no-one ever told XLinkBot. This does it. --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:32, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
Hey Beetstra, that's a cool feature. Thanks! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 11:58, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
@ToBeFree: You were not the first to come with this complaint, thoughit is a rare issue with IPs / new users - most see the other side of a copyvio template. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:34, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Joel Sherman

You removed a link to the Twitter account of Joel Sherman, who is a baseball reporter for both the New York Post and the MLB Network, and considered a trustable and authoritative source in the baseball community, in an edit added Jerry Blevins' new contract to his professional career section. Easy question: Why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.168.11.194 (talk) 11:38, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

@31.168.11.194: Basically, because it was first added as an external link (broken ref in diff). That action triggered the bot, and the bot reverted (twitter external links are generally bad (often twitter feeds in excess of our inclusion standards), twitter refs are generally fine (often specific tweets as self-published / primary sources)). The edit should have been undone immediately (as per suggestion left by the bot), I have done that now manually since it is not possible due to conflicting edits. --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:44, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

Cool, an explanation and everything. Thanks!31.168.11.194 (talk) 11:21, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Is there something wrong with core.ac.uk?

Judging by the comment on this revert, XLinkBot has some objection, but I'm puzzled as to what it is. It's a publicly archived copy of a paper (Boosted static multipole particles as sources of impulsive gravitational waves). It's an official University archive, so presumably not a WP:LINKVIO. But what else could the objection be? 209.209.238.189 (talk) 10:08, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

@209.209.238.189: See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam/2008_Archive_Oct_1#MTC_Media_round_2:_mtcmedia.co.uk. Now that is really old (though SEO spam is timeless .. it pays their bills). Maybe time for a revisit on that one. Ping USer:MER-C to have a look at that first before I remove it. --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:46, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
@Beetstra: Thank you, although the linked complaint is so abbreviated I'm not even sure what it's saying. (My best guess is that SEO spammer was adding links to core.ac.uk to WP, so the presumption is that the site was paying for the service, and was filtered for that reason.) It doesn't seem to invalidate a genuinely useful link, so I just undid the bot's undo. (There were other edits I want to preserve, and not splitting them is less work for me.) 209.209.238.189 (talk) 10:37, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
@209.209.238.189: Those reports tend indeed to be very concise - basically it says that a confirmed SEO spammer was adding a lot of domains, and that that included material on core.ac.uk. The real spam has been blacklisted, the sometimes suitable information has been revertlisted (as to deter the spammer). Hence my suggestion to remove this link from the list (leave the rest), but as our experience learns, generally they do not stop. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:10, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

IP address "too old" to be reverted

Via IRC, #wikipedia-spam-t:

02:49:44 <•XLinkBot> ERROR (4684): Failed to revert https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=886245304&oldid=885966671 on Assassination of James A. Garfield (\btwitter\.com\b): User:2605:6000:151A:D0CF:95E8:B587:855B:2BC5 is 2257 days, 13:47:42 hours old (limit is 4 days, 00:00:00 hours; age autoconfirmed), error in retrieving editcount, assuming editcount autoconfirmed).

~ ToBeFree (talk) 01:54, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

@ToBeFree: oh, crap, XLinkBot has not been adapted to IPv6 ... --Dirk Beetstra T C 04:03, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

disorder

I am the singer and bass player in disorder. I noticed some incorrect information and I am trying to correct it. A lot of the story and discography etc is incorrect. I am the man with all the knowledge to correct it as it is about me. Other peoples things are compiled from a lot of wrong information, gossip and rumours. I know the real story so allow me please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Disordertaf (talk • contribs) 02:01, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Disordertaf, you are allowed, but that does not mean that the information you add should not follow our standards. And you should be carefully following our conflict of interesst guideline. —Dirk Beetstra T C 22:48, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

AIV report syntax

Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Accessibility#Lists, the bot should not add a blank line before its reports to AIV. * Pppery * has returned 23:39, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

@Pppery: I will have a look, though I don't see this as priority (not mainspace, formatting is hardly an issue, the bot that removes the reports, and the mediawiki software itself will take care of the rest. --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:21, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

Uncyclopedia

Who are you, and why did you just revert me for making a link to Uncyclopedia in an article about Uncyclopedia?

@anon: please read the message on your talkpage and all your questions are answered. --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:09, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

Summer in the City (event)

This bot should be stopped, fixed, and tested again: "Obviously"—for human users, not for a bot—links to the official site and its YouTube channel for Summer in the City (event) are not vandalism. Arguably the bot could detect that the official URL was already used on the page, in the infobox and as part of various primary sources. Found a longer explanation on User talk:84.46.53.249:
That URL makes no sense as "spam", {{YouTube|user=sitc}} is the SitC channel, I used it without problems on d:Q19605770. Maybe after the bot detected it, but bots checking WikiData to judge the quality of external links are anyway Science Fiction (and presumably a bad idea.) –84.46.53.163 (talk) 00:59, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

@84.46.53.163 and 84.46.53.249: and the bot was completely right in removing the link, and therefore I have removed it again. First, if something is on WikiData then that does not mean that we also need to include it here. The goal of WikiData is completely different from our goals (WikiData is a repository of ALL data, we are trying to write an encyclopedia here). Secondly, youtube external links are, in the far majority of cases, not suitable as external links. Barring some exceptions, links to video's do not add anything to the page (the far majority of videos of birthday parties on YouTube are not suitable as an external link on Birthday, again, we are writing an encyclopedia here ..). Note that most of such material that is worth linking should actually be linked through a landing page on official sites (e.g. bbc, cnn, etc.), and for those, we should take care that it is not a copyvio (which has a higher chance of it being when it might be worth using, e.g. illegal uploads of music videos of artists or long pieces of movies).
As for official channels on subject's pages (a similar reasoning can be given for twitters, facebooks, etc.): most of our subjects, if they are notable, have an official homepage (as in this case, https://www.sitc-event.co.uk/). As per our guidelines (as pointed out in the warning: '... remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline') we normally link "only one official link", with exceptions only in a "very few limited circumstances" (original bolding). So any social networking site (twitter, facebook, instagram, youtube, etc.) do not need to be linked if the official website is already there (and here more so, since the listed official website already has the social networking sites prominently listed).
That overall results in only a few youtube links to be suitable in the first place. Adding to that that unfortunately there is copyvio material on youtube that should not be linked, and knowing that spammers actually spam youtube videos/channels to Wikipedia, we find it better to revert and properly warn editors considering to add such material.
And no, it is not vandalism, and that is not what the bot has accused you of. It left you a good faith message encouraging you to read our inclusion standards and reconsider your edit. --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:25, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
SitC is one of several YouTube events with an enwiki page, same idea as various BLPs for notable YouTubers. The "home-page" of a blogger is their blog, the home page of a YouTuber is their channel, and once we decided that a YouTube event or person is notable (using WP:42 or similar criteria) their channel is relevant, there is even an entry for it in {{infobox YouTube personality}}.
If SitC fans tried to link the u=sitc channel on other pages, it could result in some ad hoc entry on a private black list of this bot, but still makes no sense on the SitC page itself.
Nothing against your general ideas such as "we don't want stolen fan videos" and "we don't want excessive ELs", but as we don't disagree about this and I know the relevant guidelines and actually supported to get rid of the infobox template discussing it here won't help on the SitC page, I noted the fact on Talk:Summer in the City (event)#YouTube channel. –84.46.53.40 (talk) 02:51, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
All irrelevant, the official website is there, no need for more. The bot was correct in removing, and even if it were not that would be one edit out of many where the bot was correct. --Dirk Beetstra T C 03:41, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

virtual information on other sites

is youtube ALWAYs an forbidden link?? there are PLENTY faithfull and free links on youtube, even while its a to big company who does NOT own all contence. so what link to youtube will be seen as 'legal wiki link'85.149.83.125 (talk) 23:34, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

If youtube was forbidden, it would be blacklisted. --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:15, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 23 September 2019

Automatically removed the external links from article Haelyn Shastri Globetrottle 12 (talk) 14:06, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

 Not done it is not clear what edit you are requesting here. — xaosflux Talk 14:41, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Make this bot smarter

The external link(s) you added or changed (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrUvQ3W3nV4) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. - Nonsense--178.223.86.173 (talk) 12:01, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

In addition to the already-noted hamfisted behavior (my own example here), it's method of correction is not to merely remove references, but to wholesale revert the editor's submission. I hold this unacceptable, since a single reference is an often small percentage of the body of changed material. --2601:444:380:3A90:3897:8DFD:38B:7DA (talk) 01:29, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

re: YouTube - yet another new movie. We are not writing a linkfarm here.

re: wholesale revert - see FAQ. You prefer that it leaves the material but only removes a questionable reference? Or that it removes only the spammy link but leaves the spammy material that was added also. You need to follow up anywayif it is worthy of inclusion, and if your link was blacklisted you would not even be able to save the material nor the reference. Suggestions similar to this have been tested, it doesn't work, it leaves crap in too many occassions. --Dirk Beetstra T C 04:12, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

bot removal

Thank you for the edits. New to a more nuanced use to Wikipedia. Because of the removal I need help reinstating the linked video and the uploaded image. Who do I need or in which forms do I need to include the criteria that makes the contributions necessary in the pages edited. Therefore, {{helpme}}

1. The rationale for the liked site in miracast is that the advertised technology was discontinued and is no longer pushed by MS in their products, but has an historical value to recount different iterations of the technology. How can I reinstate the link?

2. The uploaded image is a screenshot meant to replace the one in the entry "en cuerpo ajeno" which does not correspond to the show described by the article. Instead the one uploaded belongs to the show in question and falls under fair use though it has not been used before by Wikipedia. How can I replace the image of the entry? Lordtree2 (talk) 17:25, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Lordtree2, point 1: basically your edit looks fine, but that inline link to youtube has to go. Both sections you added need proper reliable sources, not some product link. Other articles that talk about Continuum do that properly.
Point 2 is not for here, you’ll have to take that up with the deleting admin. —Dirk Beetstra T C 17:44, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Changing letters with diacritics

There's an edit here [3] which removed letters with diacritics and turned them illegible. Celia Homeford (talk) 15:11, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Celia Homeford, that bug again, I will look again at it somewhere next week. Thanks for pointing it out to me. Dirk Beetstra T C 17:45, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
It happened again, unfortunately, Beetstra. Here's the diff: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bitter_Daisies&diff=923998758&oldid=923998549 Infoman99 (talk) 05:42, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
Infoman99, Ok, more debugging. Problem is that I do not have a way to test, I just have to wait. —Dirk Beetstra T C 06:39, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
Also here, on 16 September. Thanks,  Mr.choppers | ✎  01:15, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
Also here on 'Acoustic bass guitar' on 6 November 2019 (fixed). User5910 (talk) 16:48, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

@Celia Homeford, Infoman99, Mr.choppers, Andy Dingley, Versageek, and ST47: I have made a change to the the line of code which is hopefully the reason for the bug. It is however nearly impossible to test so I turned it back on. If it keeps repeating to do this, ask any admin to go to the settings (link at top of userpage), and turn reverting off (change reverting_on=1 to reverting_on=0; XLinkBot reads that page before every revert and will hence immediately stop reverting). thanks. --Dirk Beetstra T C 14:09, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks! ST47 (talk) 18:01, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads up. Best,  Mr.choppers | ✎  02:12, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Blue falcon

The revisions accurately reflect the controversy surrounding Sen. Brian Birdwell's sponsorship of Texas S.B. 1735. It is irrefutable from the objectively verifiable source that Birdwell authored S.B. 1735. It is irrefutable from objectively verifiable sources that Sen. Birdwell compared himself to soldiers storming Normandy in authoring S.B. 1735, and it is irrefutable that Sen. Brian Birdwell blocked veterans who criticized his authorship of S.B. 1735 from his Facebook page. It is also objectively verifiable that Sen. Brian Birdwell has been described by Texas veterans as a "blue falcon" --a term analogous to a "buddy fucker" which is used to describe a service member who betrays another service member.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:6c56:4a08:2fe:5004:4f2d:f4ca:f81a (talk • contribs)

2600:6c56:4a08:2fe:5004:4f2d:f4ca:f81a, a user generated facebook (attack) page as a source on a BLP, are you seriously suggesting that is right? That type of material should be outright blacklisted, the page protected from editing and offending editors should be blocked. Wikipedia is NOT the place for this fight, even if you are right. —Dirk Beetstra T C 06:40, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Link provided was for an official/verified facebook page, which according to external link guidelines, is allowed (Except for a link to an official page of the article's subject)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Inthetunnel (talk • contribs)

@Inthetunnel: hi, thank you for your question. Yes, it is the official facebook, but that is not the only reason to include a link. Social networking sites are generally already discouraged (they are unstable, they do not necessarily provide 'encyclopedic' information about the subject. That is why we have 'Links to avoid' in our guidelines. Moreover, we have WP:ELOFFICIAL with the sub-section WP:ELMINOFFICIAL. We rather exclusively link to only one official website of the subject, with very few exceptions. Generally, subjects here have a main official website (like the subject here: http://www.dariandurant.com/). Also generally, those websites link already to all other social networking and other relevant sites of the subject (and if they don't, then they don't seem to find it important enough to be mentioned, so why should we?). Each next official site of the subject will contain less (encyclopedic) information than the previous official site, making all those sites less useful than the 'main outlet' of the subject. Those links are out of scope, and all but their main official outlet should be removed. That results in many facebooks, twitters, instagrams, etc. to be superfluous and as new editors and IPs generally do not know of that behaviour we decided to revert and inform the editor. As here, XLinkBot tends to be correct. I have further cleaned up Darian Durant. --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:23, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Channa ara

Hello Sir, Channa ara is a valid species can you please update channa list — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seriousgeeth (talk • contribs) 04:30, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Seriousgeeth, yes, it is a valid species, but that link to facebook is totally inappropriate. Please discuss it on the talkpage of Channa ara and get consensus there before attempting to re-insert the link. Dirk Beetstra T C 05:13, 8 March 2020 (UTC

it's scientifically describe as a new species from channa marulius group, i can provide you the valid link from https://www.researchgate.net/— Preceding unsigned comment added by Seriousgeeth (talk • contribs)

Seriousgeeth That is the reference that you should have provided in the first place, and you should have used it as a reference, not as an external link. The Facebook is and remains an unsuitable external link. --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:43, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

https://www.facebook.com/Lord-Alfred-Milner-109792770489900/?modal=admin_todo_tour

Hi, I just received your message that the above link may be deleted from the "Lord Alfred Milner" wikipedia website. I would like to ask that this does not happen, because i am in the middle of solving a major crime. Lord Alfred Milner is a distant relative of mine, and I was set up in a crime orchestrated by the English and American Governments. The above website proves that Lord Milner 1) won World War I, 2) had a hand in creating the state of Israel, and 3) was responsible for firing the heads of the English Army and Navy. This is only half of the equation. On this link (Quora), I have the incriminating evidence from my life:

https://www.quora.com/How-did-President-Trump-delete-this-tweet

If I am violating a wikipedia rule on external links, I hope that it can be forgiven.

Sincerely,

John Milner — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.5.237.153 (talk) 00:12, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Simply, it does not belong, and what you want to use Wikipedia for is not within its goals. Please desist or you are likely to be blocked on your next edit. Dirk Beetstra T C 03:42, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Do not delete !!!!

Hi sir!! You just deleted my edit—We Are the Champions,It's existing,I reminds again, Do not delete the efforts of others !!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.109.85.25 (talk) 01:42, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

I am sorry, this was likely a false positive. You can revert the edit of the bot (which I think was already done. Dirk Beetstra T C 05:52, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Child_Protective_Services&diff=946711701&oldid=946711514

I had reverted the addition of a spam link, but this bot re-reverted it. -drt1245 (talk) 23:06, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Drt1245, that is curious. That looks like a strange type of edit-conflict, where you reverted while the bot was parsing what was happening (you removed 2 minutes after the addition, which is within the time that XLinkBot generally takes to check and recheck, also taking into account the time that the linkwatchers sometimes take to parse the edits). The warning went to the right place (User talk:2605:E000:1218:8321:A0DD:3E5A:A1FE:676E) and it names the correct editor in the revert. Thanks for alerting me, I will see if I can understand the error in the code, and apologies for the inconvenience. Dirk Beetstra T C 08:33, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Melvins&oldid=949159603#Early_years_(1983%E2%80%931987)

I replaced a needed citation about the recording date and modalities of an album with the source of the information. The info is printed on the back cover of said album and I linked to a discogs page for said album, which shows a picture of the back cover with said information. Yet the link was removed. Suedkiez (talk) 00:21, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Suedkiez, yes, discogs is an unreliable source. If it is printed on the back cover, then discogs is not the place to link it to, then use the actual source for that. Dirk Beetstra T C 05:56, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Dirk Beetstra Thanks, OK, but what is a better source? The original label website does not list it anymore (I suppose legal reasons), the fact that I own the record and can see it with my own two eyes is original research ;) and just saying so seems worse than a link to at least a photo of the cover on discogs. Suedkiez (talk) 09:00, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Suedkiez, your reference is the back cover .. it does not have to be online to be a reference. It is preferable to be online, but there is no need for it to be online. Dirk Beetstra T C 10:38, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Dirk Beetstra Thanks a lot, got it Suedkiez (talk) 12:12, 5 April 2020 (UTC)


Hi, Can you explain me why you keep deleting my contributes to this page? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jayo_Felony_discography Links I Put (AllMusic and Discogs) are in all the page and don't infringe any copyright. Can you restore the last version? Thanks

Edit: I just created an account and restored my last version with just some of the previous links. Please let me know if it's ok. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Plurimack89 (talk • contribs) 20:36, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Plurimack89, thank you for your question. Sorry, but there is some wrong logic there. That discogs is there all over the page does not mean it should be, and links are not good if only they do not infringe copyright.
Discogs is an unreliable source by the very definition of it: it is a crowdsourced database not much dissimilar to Wikipedia itself. That article is, in my opinion, depending waaay to heavy on discogs references (more than half of the references are to discogs). They should all be replaced, and where not replaceable be questioned as to whether the info they support should actually be there. I hope this explains. Dirk Beetstra T C 04:18, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Wrong deletion

The material you blocked are perfectly legitimate. There simply an update of this cv— Preceding unsigned comment added by Steve Mavro (talk • contribs)

@Steve Mavro: See this, and again what the bot pointed you to: Wikipedia:External links. We are not, as you claim in your edit, a place to write someone's CV. --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:24, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Reverting edits

Hi! My recent edit in Allec Joshua Ibay was reverted. His birth name Josh Androma is unconfirmed. Saw his Facebook account and his real name showed up Allec only. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.105.35.95 (talk) 05:35, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

@124.105.35.95: and you think that is a proper source for that? Dirk Beetstra T C 07:15, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Reversion of Facebook to Facebook

Is this reversion intentional to prevent anonymous IPs from changing existing social media, or just a side effect? There were already social media links, which had become stale, in the article; the anonymous IP changed only the usernames in the links; XLinkBot reverted, restoring the old social media usernames, even though the reversion is theoretically also on the blacklist. --Closeapple (talk) 02:35, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Closeapple, that should not have been there in the first place. I have removed the whole social media section, and other social media links that were in excess of the already listed official website. WP:ELOFFICIAL is what we go by for that. Thanks for the heads up. Dirk Beetstra T C 07:18, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Links to US Department of Education College Navigator should not be removed as improper. Please look into this and let me know what I'm missing. Thanks! ElKevbo (talk) 05:51, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

ElKevbo, that is a strange edit by XLinkBot. It complains about a blog being added, but there are none there. It looks like a glitch in mediawiki (but with 2 checks after the detection that sounds strange. I’ll have another look at it when I get to have console access. And if it reoccurs, we should turn off reverting until we figure it out. Dirk Beetstra T C 06:52, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for looking into it. I was puzzled by it, too, and I'll let you know if I see any other similar edits. ElKevbo (talk) 10:33, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
ElKevbo, my logs show that the editor added two links: a link to http://grahamarader.blogspot.com/2011/07/college-view-of-day-richmond-college.htm, and a couple of instances of https://nces.ed.gov/collegenavigator/?q=University+of+Richmond&s=all&id=233374. It is however completely unclear how my parsers see that, because the blogspot is not touched and available in both revids. I am going to assume this has been some Wikipedia glitch in their parsers (my bots load the parsed content of the two revids and see which external links are there now and not in the previous version). Dirk Beetstra T C 07:39, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

I've recently added a few links to non-problematic recordings of hymns so as to improve articles on said hymns, as adding quality audio versions of music pieces is generally not a bad idea when there is no better equivalent on WP or Commons itself (for example, music from the official channel of King's College Choir; or from topic-channels which are put there in agreement with rights management agencies). Would it pose problem to add me to the whitelist? Of course, I don't tend to do this too much but it is a topic I do plan on editing again and the bot is quite the annoyance. Thanks, 107.190.33.254 (talk) 00:37, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Well, I am going to argue that here the youtube links are superfluous as audio examples are already in the text. Dirk Beetstra T C 03:43, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
I'd argue that the examples in the text (solo singer with uncertain voice and pitch) are vastly inferior to those from two very strong ensembles singing in four-part harmony with organ accompaniment, and the point of audio examples is not just to provide a bare-bones idea of how it sounds (otherwise, why bother, just put some silly MIDI file)... 107.190.33.254 (talk) 04:13, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Well, as long as we disagree ... WP:EL is rather clear on this. Dirk Beetstra T C 04:51, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
What WP:EL does tell is that "there are several things that should be considered when adding an external link"; including whether the content is proper (i.e. of sufficient quality and accurate). Furthermore, it also tells me that "an article about a book, a musical score, or some other media should link to a site hosting a legally distributed copy of the work"; so in the spirit of improving the articles that's exactly what I did. Thanks, 107.190.33.254 (talk) 14:05, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
As far as I can see this has not been dealt with. Any help on that? Or should I just go ahead and add it myself at User:XLinkBot/UserWhitelist? 107.190.33.254 (talk) 23:20, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
No, I am not going to put you on that list. We are here even disputing whether these youtube links need to be linked, where I do argue that these links are not in line with what our guidelines suggest. Dirk Beetstra T C 06:28, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

I've brought the general point of the youtube links to Wikipedia:External_links/Noticeboard#Youtube_links_to_hymns_etc.. (which is independent from your request here to be whitelisted). --Dirk Beetstra T C 06:55, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Informed that an edit I never made was reverted?

Hello, I recently was visiting Wikipedia, and got a message that an edit I have never made was reverted. What does this mean? I am quite certain that I never made the edit, as it included a link to Twitter, which I hardly use, and also was badly made, which is something I would also never do. If I've been punished for this, can it please be reverted? I truly do not know how this has happened. Best Regards, 76.126.49.79 (talk) 17:15, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

"Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users." I believe this is the situation you are in (since the mentioned edit was made nearly a year ago). The message you got was merely a warning from this bot whose purpose is to prevent abuse and spamming (notably by removing links to social media websites, which are only rarely acceptable). No action is required in this case. Cheers, 107.190.33.254 (talk) 02:15, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
As replied by the IP above: indeed, IP addresses can be shared, so likely someone else who made that edit was using the same IP. It also leaves the message at the end of its remark ‘If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice’ for that reason.
Don’t worry, the bot that left that message has a programmer induced short term memory on IP warnings, it has long forgotten that that IP was warned (better, it left a message, it is not even a formal warning), and people who follow up on the bot are aware of that. I will blank the warning. Dirk Beetstra T C 04:34, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Reverting changes to Annmarie O'Riordan

To whom it may concern,

I have undone the revision to the wikipedia page about me (Annmarie O'Riordan) performed by XLinkBot on 15:22, 1 May 2020‎. I trust that this has been done in good faith to ensure the validity of the information contained within. However I have revised and updated this as this is an account of myself. Therefore it is primary source information provided about me by me.

Keep up your fantastic work.

Annmarie O'Riordan— Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.148.109 (talk • contribs)

@86.42.148.109: Yes, the bot removed the linkfarm of social networking rightfully. Please see WP:ELMINOFFICIAL. Also please see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest which you here declare that you have. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:55, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

I object to this bot.

A bot cannot tell the difference between a citation using its content as a source of fact, or a citation using it's existence as a source of fact -- the latter of which is exempted from RS. (For example, if I want to say "The National Enquirer said X", linking to the National Enquirer as evidence of them saying X is exempt from RS. If I were to cite something simply as evidence of such sources saying certain things, that would also apply.).

This is human's work. Bots shouldn't be making judgement calls. Certainly not rigid, blanket, absolute ones.

A bot that tagged for a cleanup category, sure. But not one doing reverts on its own initiative. (Yes, even for edits of people who didn't feel like logging in. WP:HUMAN.)

- 64.187.160.52 (talk) 21:52, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

@64.187.160.52: the way you used that reference is plain WP:OR. I have removed it again. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:52, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
Nonsense. Summary is not synthesis. WP:SYNTHNOT. And WP:RS states that using primary sources as evidence of that source's opinion does not violate RS. Besides, for the WP citation, WP is itself a secondary source, it's not synth to say that WP redirects are the result of common misnaming -- it's literally explicitly stated in WP:POFR. - 64.187.160.52 (talk) 22:01, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
What? ‘WP redirects are the result of common misnaming’? Yes, the way you reference it, calling it common because you find 2 or 3 examples, is OR. Find an independent, secondary source that says it is ‘common’. Dirk Beetstra T C 04:06, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello I am a new member of Wikipedia and to be honest I still have to learn a lot, but I still don't understand what was my mistake? can you help me? my last edit was done for external and inline citations. In the article references are not done correctly so I thought I would use External links which were used in the article to make references. Also I make inline citations about popular topics. Can anyone tell me what was my mistake and why it was deleted not to make same mistake again? Waiting for your answer Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neli Shvangiradze (talk • contribs) 11:17, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Neli Shvangiradze, I have reverted the bot on this one, and please accept my apologies. Please continue to edit as usual. Dirk Beetstra T C 06:31, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

It's very kind of you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neli Shvangiradze (talk • contribs) 07:18, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

I didn't include ANY links in the Sam Seder Article

Not sure what you are referencing, but it wasn't me. Plus, how could you POSSIBLY defend the article before I was kind enough to clean it up. That section was nothing more than an ad hominem ATTACK on Mike Cernovich who isn't even the SUBJECT! lol 2601:401:180:1630:80F5:B6CA:31D2:F8AE (talk)

I am afraid the bot detected this edit (which results in a broken page) as an addition of a link. I have reverted the bot. --Dirk Beetstra T C 14:27, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The No Spam Barnstar
Great job on the spam work!!! --Stay safe, ◊PRAHLADbalaji (M•T•A•C) This message was left at 22:27, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
Keep on the work! Maxim S Müller (talk) 20:29, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

My edit is here. Replaced a dead link to Youtube video with working one. Original was there for years. WP policies do not explicitly ban YT links. Please review & restore if within policy. Regards. – ░▒▓ №∶72.234.220.38 (talk) 13:04, 5 June 2020 (UTC) ▓▒░

Used Template:YouTube to fix the bad link and avoid XLinkBot. – ░▒▓ №∶72.234.220.38 (talk) 22:39, 5 June 2020 (UTC) ▓▒░

Adding external link to Marvin Hamlisch article

Hello, I added an external link to a public domain tribute performance to Marvin Hamlisch at the Library of Congress that contains information that may be of interest to scholars and those researching Hamlisch. The bot rejected this link. May that decision be reversed, please? Thank you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jane Cross (talk • contribs)

@Jane Cross: Thanks for contacting me. I will comment on this, as I have several problems with this. First of all, you link to the library of congress through their website, not through their Wikipedia link. Second of all, the video is on YouTube. It is better to link to the original: https://www.loc.gov/item/webcast-5929/ as embedded in the Library of Congress page. Thirdly, we are not necessarily linking to everything that 'may be of interest'. Burt Bacharach, e.g., is a 7.5 page (on a wide screen) document, with 71 references. Is that external link really necessary. Does it really expand so much beyond what is already mentioned in that 7.5 pages? Moreover, if there is information there that is of interest, why not expand the document itself and use it as a reference.
Seeing your edits (all link additions to LoC), are you affiliated with LoC? --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:45, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
@Jane Cross: this edit gets closer, but should be formatted as changed in these 4 edits. Thanks. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:54, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Bot reverted repair of malformed URL

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Douglas_Crockford&diff=next&oldid=961839431

2603:6000:AA4A:2D62:B4E1:C37:4FEC:4A79 (talk) 17:58, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

That happens, unfortunately not something that is easy to catch. Anyway, those links were not about the subject but about something by the subject. --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:48, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Shangguan Yunzhu edits

Added links are to free English-subtitled versions of her films on YouTube, which are relevant to the topic and useful to readers. Please restore my edit and whitelist my IP. I am a professor of Chinese cinema and subject matter expert.

Added links are to free English-subtitled versions of Zheng Junli's films on YouTube, which are relevant to the topic and useful to readers. Please restore my edit and whitelist my IP. I am a professor of Chinese cinema and subject matter expert. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.102.87.75 (talk) 23:16, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

No. It is not appropriate, especially not in those numbers. Dirk Beetstra T C 03:07, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Bot reverted repair of band official website on Facebook

Just cleaning up an article page on a band. One of the fixes was changing "Website [1]" in the infobox to the more normal "Website Official website" (using the {official website=} template). It is the band's only official website.

The edit

XLinkBot flagged it as my adding a disruptive edit "Please stop your disruptive editing." Is it truly impossible to add links to social media pages such as Facebook?

Assuming I'm being flagged due to editing from an IP rather than an account? Seems so based on the FAQ. So, since my edits of pages with Youtube & discogs.com links, also have been reverted, I now get the warning "Also, If you continue to add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia...". So, I am requesting this IP be whitelisted and the IP's "record" cleaned. There certainly won't be any spamming from me. In fact you can see my past edits removing spam, vandalism, puffery, POV et. al. Regards. – ░▒▓ №∶72.234.220.38 (talk) 08:24, 14 June 2020 (UTC) ▓▒░

@72.234.220.38: I agree that the bot's reaction was strong, and I do see your previous edits.
However, marking the facebook page as 'official' while it has not been posted on since 2017 as far as I can see is a bit over the top. I have reverted the bot, but removed both the myspace (myspace does not exist anymore), and the facebook (which seems inactive for 3 years). Moreover, you changed 'were' into 'is' .. without providing a reliable source as to that fact. As far as I can see, this is an inactive band with an inactive facebook. And if anything is official, it is 'backstabbersinc.com' (which likely should be linked to the last available version on archive.com. --Dirk Beetstra T C 09:04, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the fast reply Dirk,
First off, awesome bot you have here. 👍 It's like the The Terminator for WP link badness!
You may judge what time period makes a page "official" or not. I see nothing in any MoS or policy to give guidance so I don't touch. In this case, I was just fixing the link, not doing deep researched.
Do you feel archive.ORG links should actually be used in the {official website=} template? I can't say I've ever seen that. Have examples or MoS? Also, it's even older than the Facebook page right?
Ah, I see. I changed were to is as there was an article sentence saying the band was working on a new album. But then on second reading I saw it was un-cited and four years stale so removed it. Forgot to change it back to "were".
ps. 💚 Regards. – ░▒▓ №∶72.234.220.38 (talk) 09:52, 14 June 2020 (UTC) ▓▒░
I guess it doesn’t really matter. There currently is no band, so it does not have an official website. I do agree it is a false positive on the bot. I’ll have a look later. —Dirk Beetstra T C 11:22, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Dirk, it happened yet again. Could you please do one or more of these:

  1. Clear the "doing bad links" counter for this IP so I'm not banned in the future as the bot is threatening to do.
  2. Whitelist this IP as the XLinkBot page states can be done.
  3. Look into solving this issue as many "notable" bands (unfortunately) have their official websites on social media.

Thank you in advance. – ░▒▓ №∶72.234.220.38 (talk) 23:37, 18 June 2020 (UTC) ▓▒░

Or option 4: you make an account.
Anyway, I whitelisted your IP, please let me know if there are issues. —Dirk Beetstra T C 05:59, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Double welcome heading

See example here where XLinkBot added {{welcome}} and a June 2020 note. The template adds its own heading so now there are two which might be worth fixing. Johnuniq (talk) 07:44, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Johnuniq, sigh .. who thought of that idea? Dirk Beetstra T C 08:26, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
Johnuniq, anyway, fixed (I hope). Dirk Beetstra T C 08:29, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
Strike that, it needed different settings, the two used templates behave differently (and I have a bug in my bot :-) ). --Dirk Beetstra T C 08:34, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
My sympathy. I've been wondering if computers are worth the trouble... Johnuniq (talk) 09:04, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
Johnuniq, we could do away with humans. First welcome was without header, then I had to put a header in front of the template, now the template suddenly starts to put a header (which no-one expects). As long as you have enough monkeys hammering on a keyboard there will be a constant mess throughout Wikipedia. Dirk Beetstra T C 09:08, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Durrington Walls

I have reverted yor change to Durrington Walls. This is a major discovery at an important site. My citations include the BBC, CBS News, Internet Archaeology, The University of Bradford, and European Association of Archaeologists (on twitter). I created so many citations as they will serve as a source for an anticipated new section in the Durrington Walls article covering what is now Britain's largest prehistoric monument.86.128.69.126 (talk) 23:56, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I am fine with the revert, but the twitter 'reference' in the external links seems inappropriate. It is not a dumping ground for all related material. That material must be available from a more authoritive place and can then be used as a reference. Dirk Beetstra T C 05:12, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Shahram Qadir

Hello, The page Shahram Qadir has been considered for deletion. I wanted to contribute some info to prevent it from being deleted, but it seems to be impossible and all my contributions were deleted.

Best regards--Garciamilano (talk) 17:10, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Garciamilano, you’ll have to make your case at the AfD. Dirk Beetstra T C 11:31, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User talk:Rafael Lorino

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on User talk:Rafael Lorino requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of RL's Diary episodes. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Howard the Duck (talk) 08:39, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

Howard the Duck, no, usertalkpages created by this bot should not be deleted (well, in general, they should not be deleted). Dirk Beetstra T C 11:12, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
Sorry. This was an automated message when I CSDed the user talk page. Howard the Duck (talk) 11:57, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

July 2020

This would be an excellent place to discuss the change that was made to User_talk:ZappoMan#July_2020 -- RobLa (talk) 19:54, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

RobLa, I don’t understand your comment here.
Anyway, you re-inserted a reference to a crowdsourced database. Discogs should not be used as a reference. Dirk Beetstra T C 05:45, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
User:Beetstra, thanks for your prompt reply! I'm still a little confused why you're pinging me instead of the original person that User:XLinkBot reverted. Could you address your comment to User:ZappoMan? Your bot automatically created a multi-paragraph comment at User_talk:ZappoMan#July 2020. The reasons for Discogs not being used as a reference might be unclear to that editor. I think I understand why, but I'm almost positive that ZappoMan won't. -- RobLa (talk) 05:57, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
RobLa, “ Your edit here to The Supersuckers was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links in references which are discouraged per our reliable sources guideline. The reference(s) you added or changed (https://www.discogs.com/Black-Supersuckers-Sub-Pop-Demos/release/14385535) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia.” The bot is leaving a long and clear message.
You commented here that this was the right place to discuss, but I did not understand what you meant. Dirk Beetstra T C 06:14, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
I've changed the reference from Discogs to the band's official website. Is that more appropriate? Thanks for understanding User:Beetstra, I'm still learning how to contribute to Wikipedia. Thanks User:RobLa for helping me out on this. -- ZappoMan (talk) 21:47, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
ZappoMan, thanks! Yes, the primary source is certainly more reliable, and this is a use of primary sources which is fine. Use of primary sources can be problematic elsewhere, though. Dirk Beetstra T C 03:37, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Reverting too far

It appears that this bot is using the default rollback functionality, whereby it will revert all consecutive edits by a user when it performs a revert. This is problematic as it means it may on occasion revert edits that do not fall within its config, or indeed in its approvals. See this example - a user has made 3 good edits, and then added a YouTube link. XLinkBot has correctly identified the YouTube link but has then rolled back all 4 edits. The rollback behaviour needs to be modified so that it will only target the edit it has triggered on. Best, Darren-M talk 01:29, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Darren-M, it is a principle of least damage. It is a bot setting where we first tried to just revert up to the edit which introduced the link. Problem is that that regularly leaves broken pages as new editors sometimes need a couple of edits to get it right. Moreover, spammers do sometimes multiple edits where first they add spammy parts before adding actual links. It is a deliberate choice, as also described in the FAQ, and this specific point is mentioned above as well. Dirk Beetstra T C 04:34, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

comment on TP

Saw your comment on my talk page and wanted to say thank you. Happy to learn! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zincopated (talk • contribs) 14:58, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Zincopated, you’re welcome! Thanks for your understanding. Dirk Beetstra T C 05:19, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

How to make a page here for unknown but very excellent person?

If wiki needs all sources from best news channel's article for making a slab here then how it is possible if we try to make page for a person who have worked very hard in literature but went unknown. What to do? Khak007 (talk) 22:25, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Khak007, I would make the page in draft space and then ask for help in an appropriate Wikipedia:WikiProjects. Dirk Beetstra T C 05:20, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Ref - Discogs

Thanks for the heads up on the Discog link. I've removed all the links to Discogs now, I think/hope. Thank you for making yourself available to me if I've got any queries. Wordleys (talk) 16:09, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi.

You have sent me several messages in regard to referrals to the site discogs. Following your first message I removed all the links. However you seem to have reviewed some of the sights with the links still these. For instance I removed the reference in Rosco Gordon at 14:11 but you responded at 17:34 saying you had removed the links. Can you please help explain why my amendments didn't take effect by 17:34? Thanks. Wordleys (talk) 19:17, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Wordleys, hi, I have to look into that at the bot console. That is both an unusual lag, and seems to have missed a cross-check. My apologies, please feel free to revert those edits of the bot. Dirk Beetstra T C 19:32, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello Editing Division:

I went to External Links to figure out how I can remove a link to YouTube for the edit I provided yesterday (July 23) to the article "Non-apology apology". I could not find a topic heading (e.g. Deleting External Links) simply instructing me how to delete the YouTube link I made which was the reason for the "revert".

Please give me a simple one or two sentence instruction for how to delete the link from my contribution, which I can't find on our site either, even though I click on my Diana Y. Paul file and history. [I am not "technical" but have two personal websites via Wordpress which I administer.]

I apologize for being such a newb. This is my first time trying to contribute to Wikipedia. As a writer and former academic who adores what you all are doing, I'd like to start contributing during this pandemic when I have a bit more time.

Thank you for your patience and assistance!

Diana Y. Paul

PS I did receive a volunteer's email message but it was a reference to my history tab, which did not help me with my problem unfortunately. I truly appreciated the fast response, however, to my question.

Diana.y.paul (talk) 21:27, 24 July 2020 (UTC)Diana.y.paul

nro

Hello. Please fix your bot. When you update old Youtube link now with /user/ in it, it reverts everything. This is the second time already. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Reconnaissance_Office and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_diplomatic_cables_leak 2A00:1370:812C:DE1A:15E2:FAB5:7B92:CA9C (talk) 18:25, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Link removed, it did not belong there in the first place. Section needs more pruning. —Dirk Beetstra T C 18:42, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
This is rather strange, again: when you already have a youtube link, it should not revert it, when you update it to get rid of the redirect, for example, or change to https or get rid of m. subdomain https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=National_Reconnaissance_Office&diff=964394794&oldid=964394339. I mean??? Who is writing such a 💩 code? And BTW, youtube as a source (cite) is bad but as a link?? Why it is considered bad in ALL cases? 2A00:1370:812C:DE1A:15E2:FAB5:7B92:CA9C (talk) 19:50, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

My Video about Bernadette Soubirous

Hello,

My link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNieSdjLa2s was removed from the listing for St Bernadette. I am the composer and performer of the material, and own the COPYRIGHT for this song.

Please advise why this was removed from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernadette_Soubirous'

Orv Pibbs — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orvpibbs (talk • contribs) 19:12, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Orvpibbs, copyright is just one of the reasons we revert youtube. Have youread our external links guideline?
Note, please read our conflict of interest guideline as well, as well as m:Terms of use. Thanks. Dirk Beetstra T C 19:30, 4 August 2020 (UTC)


Total garbage for an explanation !!!

Orv Pibbs — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orvpibbs (talk • contribs) 20:28, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Indeed, I think he talks about that "If there is reason to believe that a website has a copy of a work in violation of its copyright, do not link to it. Linking to a page that illegally distributes someone else's work casts a bad light on Wikipedia and its editors. This is particularly relevant when linking to sites such as Scribd, WikiLeaks, or YouTube, where due care should be taken to avoid linking to material that violates copyright." But everything on Youtube is copyrighted and it does not apply here if it is his account on Youtube that waves the copyright. 2A00:1370:812C:79E7:D910:D087:37AB:99E6 (talk) 05:04, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
Yes, thát does here not apply. But the repeated warning states “... that linking to such files may be subject to Wikipedia's copyright policy, as well as other parts of our external links guideline (my bolding). The blatant selfpromotion, spamming is the problem, as well as that youtube should be used with care and consideration. That something is not prohibited does not mean to go wild and add them wherever possible. Dirk Beetstra T C 11:45, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

KEEPS Reverting Twitter Link and Eliminating Whole Entry

Please advise as to why the link to Alexandra Petri's twitter account is being removed, and why her whole entry in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_satirists_and_satires is subsequently removed.— Preceding unsigned comment added by LaLa75075 (talk • contribs)

@LaLa75075: Yes, and I have cleared it out again. Have you read the rest of that list and how it is formatted, and have you read the document that XLinkBot is referring you to: Wikipedia:External links? The names of the persons are formatted as wikilinks, and 'what they do' is not linked anywhere. If I do that on your additions, the wikilinks turn into redlinks, which means that, for Wikipedia, they are not notable (or no-one wrote an article for them yet; see WP:WTAF). That means that they do not belong (yet) in that list. Wikipedia is not here to advertise their vlogs, podcasts, columns, etc. etc. We report on them (if they are worth mentioning). Please do not try to add the links again. --Dirk Beetstra T C 05:38, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Some suggestions for improving the documentation, from an editor who got caught for the first time

I got caught by the bot, but was able to resubmit my edit without the bad link. I read the information available on what's going on and how to fix it, but I had a couple of doubts while doing that.

Uncertainty 1: I added two links in the same edit and the bot objected to one of the links in its "I've reverted you" message on my talk page I now understand why one of the links was bad, and I knew I couldn't resubmit that link. But I wasn't sure if the bot had checked both links, or if it just reverts based on the first undesired link (or possibly on any undesired link) that it finds. If it only checked the first link, then my attempt to resubmit the second link would also have been reverted by the bot. (In other words, does it short-circuit when it sees the first bad link, or does it check everything?) I ended up resubmitting the second link and the bot doesn't seem to have objected to it, so I'm guessing that it checks all the links, and mentions all the ones it doesn't like in its "I've reverted you" message.

Suggestion 1: Add some words to the FAQ text that explain that only the links named in the "I've reverted you" message are objectionable, and that resubmitting other links that may have been in the same edit is probably OK. (The "I've reverted you" message does currently say that you can resubmit your other changes to the article, but doesn't specifically mention other links that may have been among those changes.)

Uncertainty 2: The current FAQ entry starting "Q: I am editing as an IP, and I don't intend to create an account..." led me to believe that all of my subsequent edit attempts - either on that one particular article, or from my IP address at any point in the future - would get reverted, even if I didn't include any links in the edits. I resubmitted my edit without the objectionable link, and it doesn't seem to have been reverted for 25+ minutes now, so I assume that I am not totally banned just for being an IP user.

Suggestion 2: Possibly reword or expand that entry in the FAQ to explain the circumstances under which all edits from an IP user will be reverted going forward. (On the other hand, given the bot's purpose, the vagueness in that entry may be deliberate.)

There is also an argument that since I figured it out and submitted my other changes without difficulty, the documentation changes suggested above are not necessary.

Thanks for your consideration! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.3.58.200 (talk) 04:42, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Lincoln College, Oxford

Hi, you have just reverted an edit to Lincoln College, Oxford by an IP account. The original edit was an update to external links to the college site and its junior common room and middle common room sites. The edit summary suggested that the issue might be weebly, but Wikipedia:External links does not mention weebly. TSventon (talk) 13:54, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

The MCR website is a standard link for an Oxford college, although a weebly site, so I have reverrted your edit, please let me know if you disagree. I have searched the archive for this talk page and am still unsure why weebly sites are generally unsuitable, but I see that there are exceptions. TSventon (talk) 20:47, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
TSventon, weebly is a free webhost, it has been long on the list, free webhosts are generally not hosting official stuff (some exceptions exist), rather personal websites, and are sometimes even used for hosting copyvio material.
Looking at the page where XLinkBot reverted: the external links to the common rooms are indirect (WP:ELNO, WP:ELOFFICIAL) and should not be there in the first place. People who want to know find Lincoln College’s common rooms (or their chapel, newspaper, ... ) can all go through the website already linked (here: https://lincoln.ox.ac.uk/student-life/common-rooms). Dirk Beetstra T C 04:20, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for explaining about weebly and confirming where to look in WP:EL. Links to common rooms are standard for Oxford colleges (I have just checked Balliol College, Oxford and Worcester College, Oxford) so I don't think Lincoln's links should be changed without a wider discussion. I don't know whether this is based on WP:ELOFFICIAL or WP:IGNORE. TSventon (talk) 08:41, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
TSventon, I would bluntly clean them per WP:ELOFFICIAL. There is no encyclopedic reason why we have to single out the common rooms in the external links. We do not list chapels, alumni organisations, or newspapers either (and we had a discussion about the latter). I think a wider discussion would be needed if it were on colleges worldwide. This may just have been someone including it in one, and others were added 'because they were elsewhere). Dirk Beetstra T C 09:06, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
I think JCR and MCR links are useful so I am not going to remove them, or start a discussion on removing them. 29 of 30 undergraduate colleges (all except St Catherine's) have JCR and MCR links, so there appears to be a consensus. The Cambridge colleges I have checked also have JCR and MCR links and Template:Infobox residential college supports JCR and MCR links. By the way, would you be happy for me to copy this discussion to Lincoln College, Oxford talk when it is concluded? TSventon (talk) 09:37, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
TSventon, I am going to take the bait: why are they useful? For who are they useful?
It is fine to copy as long as you tell where the original discussion was. Dirk Beetstra T C 10:25, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
TSventon, I am bringing this to WP:ELN. Feel free to solicit opinions from an appropriate wikiproject. Dirk Beetstra T C 10:39, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:External_links/Noticeboard#Common_rooms_in_colleges. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:00, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
Firstly, I queried XLinkBot's edit because I thought that the IP users edit looked legitimate and as the edit was a one-off the user would be unlikely to see the message on their talk page. I also felt that the message didn't clearly explain what the problem was, which is always likely to be the case for at least a proportion of automated messages.
I don't specialise in external links, but I think that links to JCR and MCR websites are useful to the reader as they give a different point of view and selection of information. I will post links to the discussion you have started on the Oxford Higher education and Cambridge University wikiprojects. TSventon (talk) 11:34, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Barry Blue

Hi, you reverted my edit to Barry Blue, claiming that I had added additional links. If you kindly manually review my edit, you will see that I did NOT add any additional links. All I actually did was amend existing citation links to 'https' SSL secure URLs, along with formatting to comply with British English encylopaedic grammar, etc. I therefore consider your edit unconstructive, and have thus reverted it. Kind regards. 78.32.143.113 (talk) 21:48, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

My apologies, that is a strange case. You replaced all links to discogs.com to Discogs.com, which to the bot seems like you removed discogs.com and added Discogs.com. This is the first time I see this happening. You did the right thing, just revert the bot, it is programmed not to re-revert. Dirk Beetstra T C 05:46, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

I am making systematic improvements to Wiki sites on Chinese film history, not spamming

The Wiki bot has detected that I have added external links to multiple pages related to early Chinese films. I request that the bot stop reverting these edits, which improve the pages. These improvements are the result of recently-published academic research and translations that are directly related to these films, including English-subtitled translations of the films themselves. External links are necessary for this purpose. It is not helpful to Wiki readers if the Wiki bot prevents them from linking to freely accessible translated copies of the films, or related media and articles. A reply would be appreciated, so that this ongoing work is not interrupted again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.102.87.75 (talk) 18:03, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

No, this linkfarming and sending people to youtube channels is not improving the page. We are not writing an internet directory. Please stop adding inline external links, and linkfarms of youtube links. Dirk Beetstra T C 05:44, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

2016 World Series

Hi, I made an edit to the 2016/2019 MLB World Series Pages Aswell As The 2016 Chicago Cubs Page And Possibly The 2019 Washington Nationals Page Placing A Link To Show The Investigation Of Them Cheating And Was Considered Inappropriate This Link Is A Proof Link To This Story Involving These Teams Please Fix And Place Back On Pages Thank You. Alexlazaro (talk) 04:09, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Alexlazaro, Yes, no need for twitter references, they are here just a redirect. Please fix your edits. Dirk Beetstra T C 05:09, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

The Edit Summary is garbled when username contains Simplified Chinese characters

See Special:Diff/978528393. The revert itself is correct. ネイ (talk) 13:56, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

ネイ, yeah, the bot still has issues here and there with 'special' characters. I will try and have a look again one of these days. Thanks! Dirk Beetstra T C 05:10, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Henry Price III

Hello! I have no idea what I'm doing and wanted to add information to my uncle's Wikipedia page (Henry Price III, tenor). How do I do that without it getting immediately deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by JenWheel08 (talk • contribs) 19:31, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

JenWheel08, thanks for your remark. We don’t link to youtube like that, we are not a directory for youtube. Dirk Beetstra T C 17:18, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Sad times

We've literally reached the era where Wikipedia is literally patrolled by deletionist bots, mindlessly removing content and data with zero functional awareness.

This bot and all the other deletion bots should not exist.

- 64.187.160.52 (talk) 19:01, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

... reached the era ...? This bot (in different incarnations), and its antivandalism counterparts, have been here for most of the existence of Wikipedia (14 out of 19 years for spam reverting).
So, now more objectively, what did the bot do that you disagree with? Your addition of a ‘reference’ that is not being used in the article on a blogspot. I have rolled that back again, that is mere linkfarming. Dirk Beetstra T C 04:06, 29 September 2020 (UTC)


Taylor Swift

Oh, i understood your message. Speak now sold more than 6, 7 million copies worldwide and i think that people should know it. So if you could find a link with those informations you can feel free to add them! Greetings Boxing Day 29 (talk) 14:47, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Boxing Day 29, please use a reliable source and then you can readd the information. Dirk Beetstra T C 04:07, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

UConn Marching Band

Hi, I edited the UConn Marching Band's Wikipedia page to reflect some links that have changed (namely their website and YouTube channel which were both outdated) and they were reverted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.209.12.166 (talk) 19:58, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

You are right in the bot reverting to an incorrect version. However, I have cleared out the external links per WP:ELMINOFFICIAL and other parts of WP:EL as they were mostly superfluous. Dirk Beetstra T C 20:30, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Incorrect reversion

Hello. In this edit, XLinkBot reverted lots of subsequent edits, but did not revert the edit which added the url it is complaining about. There is a tag saying "manual edit", not sure what the implications of that are, but the bot should check in any case that it is:

  • removing the url it is complaining about
  • not reverting any other edits

I have reverted this change. --Mirokado (talk) 21:55, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Mirokado, I have to check the logs on this one. The bot checks (twice) whether the last editor is the one to be reverted, it looks here like it got it all wrong. Thanks for checking! Dirk Beetstra T C 05:31, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

I'm really amused by the irony of a bot going around adding a tag saying "manual edit." How is that manual? Egad. - 64.187.160.52 (talk) 19:01, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Where does it claim ‘manual edit’? Dirk Beetstra T C 14:45, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
You can see the tag "manual revert" in the linked diff listing at the end of the edit summary (at any rate I can, I suppose that may be a preference). --Mirokado (talk) 23:32, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

maybe just an edit conflict?

I was puzzled by this edit, maybe just an edit conflict? —valereee (talk) 10:49, 3 October 2020 (UTC)


In this edit, the bot reverted two edits correctly, but also several subsequent edits. --Mirokado (talk) 23:30, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

@Mirokado and Valereee:, both on the same page, something there is confusing the bot. I’ll try to have a look in the logs. Please keep me posted if this also happens elsewhere, otherwise we’ll have to turn off the bot to fix it. Dirk Beetstra T C 18:25, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Thanks, I'll change my reference citation right-away! :) Fedderlloyds (talk) 17:53, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Cluebot NG

Why do we need this bot when we already have Cluebot NG? Firestar464 (talk) 11:02, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Firestar464, cluebot is not reverting spam/avoided links Dirk Beetstra T C 17:51, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

No bot tag on edits

Hi, So I noticed that your edits don't show up with a b next to them and they aren't filtered out when I look for human only edits in Recent Changes. Are you really a robot? What gives? Paul ❬talk❭ 16:53, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Paul Carpenter, see the /FAQ Dirk Beetstra T C 17:52, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Rich Mullins Revisions

Hi,

I apologize for all the questions. Could you possibly explain why recent reversions were made to Rich Mullins? The sources seemed valid, so I’d like to learn why they were not. Almaniacopedia (talk) 01:49, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Almaniacopedia, sorry, but that source is to a lyrics site (which we should be careful with due to copyright status - even in references) and it is on WP:RSP as unreliable (the reference here assumes that the song is truthfully biographic). Then there are 3 inline external links being added (one to a facebook), which is not appropriate (and which was the reason the bot reverted). I would see this as a questionable edit. Dirk Beetstra T C 07:05, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Ok, I understand! Thanks for explaining! I’m still trying to learn about source citing in particular, so this is very helpful. Almaniacopedia (talk) 16:31, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:XLinkBot/Archive_10&oldid=989467748"