Exactly what I said in the section heading. :-). See my comments that I will post soon at Wikipedia talk:Bots/Requests for approval#Concerns about Jogersbot. —Mets501 (talk) 22:40, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ya i aggree. this bot needs to be shut down. it somehow follows all the pages i edited and adds useless junk to them... -HDS

Please take a few moments and fill in the data for your bot on Wikipedia:Bots/Status Thank you Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 19:36, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As a result of discussion on the village pump and mailing list, bots are now allowed to edit up to 15 times per minute. The following is the new text regarding bot edit rates from Wikipedia:Bot Policy:

Until new bots are accepted they should wait 30-60 seconds between edits, so as to not clog the recent changes list and user watchlists. After being accepted and a bureaucrat has marked them as a bot, they can edit at a much faster pace. Bots doing non-urgent tasks should edit approximately once every ten seconds, while bots who would benefit from faster editing may edit approximately once every every four seconds.

Also, to eliminate the need to spam the bot talk pages, please add Wikipedia:Bot owners' noticeboard to your watchlist. Future messages which affect bot owners will be posted there. Thank you. --Mets501 03:08, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I noticed Jogersbot here and here tagged these articles as needing infoboxes, when in fact they have them (albeit very short ones). I have removed those tags, and I hope you can make that minor fix to the bot without too much trouble. Cheers, Dar-Ape 03:59, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This happened because you substituted the {{Album}} template. I will let the plugin developer know but please do not substitute the {{album}} tag in the future. Thank you. Jogers (talk) 11:08, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well done with the album template bot-tagging. Do you wonder, as I, how many articles need tagging since you did your last round of tagging on March 22? With the results of the new article bot, it seems there are many each day. If you could run that bot a little each day it would save us time as we get new album articles up to speed. Thoughts? --Fisherjs 14:13, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will do another pass soon. I don't do this on continual basis because making lists for the bot to work on is a bit time consuming. I'm afraid that I won't be able to run the bot a little bit each day as you suggested for this reason. Perhaps I'll try to run it more often though. Does it really hurt if an article isn't tagged straight away? The bot will tag every properly categorized article eventually so I think that there should be no need to manually place the tags as long as I'm around. Jogers (talk) 19:22, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, there's no big deal about tagging articles straight away (I didn't know about the time needed to set it up), but how does it work exactly? I know on one pass you are looking for album stubs, but what of the other cases? Going on presence of infoboxes or album categories? This article was created on March 25, but wasn't tagged on your recent pass - just wondering how the bot does it magic. --Fisherjs 11:53, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First come the articles categorized as albums stubs so they can be automatically assessed. Next, the articles categorized as albums by year. After that the bot should tag articles containing the album infobox but I forgot about this in the most recent pass. It's the reason why Miss Black America isn't tagged yet. Thanks for pointing this out. I'll fix it up in a minute. Jogers (talk) 13:25, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Out of curiosity, what about looking at sub-cats of Category:Albums by artist?--Fisherjs 14:01, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In order to catch articles such as this (w/ no infobox or by-year cat)--Fisherjs 14:07, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I will do that. I didn't bother because I thought that articles about albums are more likely to be categorized by year than by artist. It seems that it is not necessarily true. Jogers (talk) 19:34, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it may not be that simple. See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums#Tagging subcategories of albums by artist. Jogers (talk) 07:57, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While you're at it, is there a reason you don't look for the presence of an infobox and if it's not there, add that needsinfobox=yes parameter to the album template on the talk page? I was just looking at Shiawase Tambourine. --Fisherjs 22:48, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't we discuss it here? Basically, there is no plugin functionality that would allow me to do so. Secondly, I think that it may be reasonable to clear this list first. Jogers (talk) 08:27, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about a band. It doesn't seem to contain a suitable category or infobox. Do you know why Jogersbot keeps adding to its talk page putting it in WikiProject albums? (If it matters, there is also Hawkwind (album), properly tagged). Notinasnaid 12:28, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This happened because the talk page of the Hawklords article (which contains an infobox) redirected to Talk:Hawkwind. I removed the redirect so it shouldn't happen again. Thanks for letting me know. Jogers (talk) 12:39, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Notinasnaid 14:26, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

like your additions on New York State of Mind - album Millm0w 13:12, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with MOST of the changes suggested here, but this particular one I don't as in some cases there are multiple track listings, such as for muliple CDs or multiple albums places on the one page, it's grammatically correct to note it as "track listings." One in particular that I've worked on is As/Is by John Mayer. Otherwise converting track list and changing from tracklisting is fine by me. My other suggestion is to simply change anything from track lists or tracklistings to Track listings, in accordance with the reason I've already mentioned. --linca^linca 11:17, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I should have thought of this. I'm not going to change anything like "Tracklists", "Tracklistings" etc. to "Track listings" because the plural form is very often used inappropriately. I'd prefer to leave plurals altogether for manual inspection instead. Thank you for your suggestions. Jogers (talk) 11:41, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Any idea why this edit was made on the talk page of Sucker Punch (Album) at 13:18 when I moved that page to Sucker Punch (album) at 12:34? This is how we end up needing this list, which maybe we should do a refresh on.--Fisherjs 12:28, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's because I made the list of pages to work on few hours before you moved the page. I'm afraid that there isn't much I can do to avoid this kind of errors in the future. We may only ask Alai to refresh the list from time to time. Jogers (talk) 12:38, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I figured. It ain't no big deal. There are a number of lists (yours and Alai's) that need refreshing, but what's really needed are more people to work on reducing the size of the lists. C'est la vie. --Fisherjs 12:44, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, can i translate your page The Devil Knows My Name for wikipedia france? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.169.168.213 (talk • contribs).

The Devil Knows My Name is not my page. I've only tagged its talk page with {{Album}} template. Yes, I believe you can translate it for French Wikipedia. Jogers (talk) 19:25, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would you be interested in setting up your bot to take care of WT:ALBUM#Unorthodox extra chronologies? Here's a regexp if so:

\{\{Extra chronology 2\s*\|\s*Artist\s*=\s*\[\[SST Records\]\][^}]+\}\}

(Thanks for fixing my typo BTW.) --PEJL 21:39, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind. Someone already reverted these. --PEJL 12:13, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the confusion, my brain confused this with another mass-change that was reverted. This issue still exists. It would be great if you have your bot fix this, when you have time. --PEJL 14:32, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps your bot could tweak the formatting of genres in album infoboxes. I mean convert "\s*(<[Bb][Rr][ /\\]*>|/|[\r\n]+)\s*" to ", " and lowercase most genres. We'd need a list of genres to capitalize, which could probably be constructed from List of music genres, for example "African .+|Afro-.*|Alb-.+|..." and so on. What do you think? I could help construct a list of genres to capitalize if you're interested. BTW, is there a problem with the bot, it doesn't seem to be running? --PEJL 13:36, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm interested. The problem is not with the bot but its owner who has been quite busy lately :-) I'll try to run another pass of album articles tagging soon but I've got stuck with implementing the general fixes you suggested so the whole thing will have to wait a while. Tweaking the formatting of genres sounds like a good idea. Jogers (talk) 18:07, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

At WP:ALBUM#Template:Extra album cover 2 it now says that the upper caption should be "Alternate cover" for alternate covers. Perhaps you could have your bot replace "(Upper caption\s*=\s*)Alternat(iv)?e [Cc]over" with "\1Alternate cover"? (That should also handle plurals like "Alternate covers" and other variants like "Alternate cover #2" correctly.) --PEJL 09:47, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, another good idea. I'll look into this together with other general fixes to album articles soon. Jogers (talk) 11:36, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No rush, whenever you get around to it is fine. I just like to jot down little things like this somewhere when I think of them. :-) --PEJL 12:09, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• ((?:^|\|) *Next album *=) *(?:\. \. \.|\.\.\.) *([\r\n|}]) → \1 \2
• (^\{\{Infobox Album[^\r\n<]*)([\r\n]) → \1 <!-- See Wikipedia:WikiProject_Albums -->\2

--PEJL 04:17, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'll try them out. Jogers (talk) 09:25, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If it's all the same to you, can you alphabetize the regex in User:Jogers/List5? It would make it quicker to lookup a word to see if it is listed (for those of us who have not committed the list to memory).--Fisherjs 11:58, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I did it 2 minutes before you posted :-) Jogers (talk) 12:01, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great minds think alike.--Fisherjs 12:03, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you add a section header for Numbers and special characters to List3? I would do it manually, but I thought maybe you need to have the bot do it. Great job on all the lists and AWB work! --Fisherjs 19:00, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, absolutely. Whatever is more convenient for you :-) I didn't tell my bot to do it this way because I thought that it makes the table of contents too wide. Jogers (talk) 19:07, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it makes editing that section easier. Besides, I have a 24 inch monitor so there's plenty of space for the TOC! :) --Fisherjs 19:13, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if Jogersbot has time or interest but let me float this idea by you. I was looking at the list of Top Priority articles here thinking that we should have all of the Top articles assessed. It led me to Talk:Tommy_(rock_opera) which has a missing class on the album template but a "B" in another template. I don't know how many similar cases there are among the 33000 unassessed, but maybe it's possible to look into and automate the assessment. --Fisherjs 11:37, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Automating the assessment this way would require changes in the Kingbotk plugin. There may also be a problem with pages that are rated differently by two different templates. I might be able to create another maintenance list, though. Would that be satisfactory? Jogers (talk) 12:55, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not currently active much, but any feature requests can still go to User:Reedy Boy (and might end up on my desk as we talk on MSN). --kingboyk 15:34, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, let's try it and see how many cases we're talking about. If you can, it might be good to sort by number of existing assessments.--Fisherjs 14:08, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK but it has to wait a while because I'm going on vacation tomorrow. Jogers (talk) 15:32, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If it's not too much trouble, could you sort User:Jogers/Album articles without infobox by the date the article was created. There's no real advantage to having it sorted alphabetically (as far as I can tell), but sorted by date we can see which article have been around longest (and therefore have had ample opportunity for deletion). Makes sense to keep the larger split of Album articles / With Infobox Single. Probably makes sense to sort User:Jogers/Long album stubs the same way. Thoughts? ---- Fisherjs (talk) 22:09, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is no easy way to do this in the DotNetWikiBot framework as far as I know. Besides, loading revision history for several thousands pages would probably cause excessive server load. Jogers (talk) 11:31, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I need help renaming about 200 articles. Doing this by hand would take me all day.

Can your bot rename articles, or be adapted to do so?

If so, please contact me.

Thank you.

The Transhumanist 22:43, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Talk:The Knee Plays, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Talk:The Knee Plays is very short providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Talk:The Knee Plays, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 00:41, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:35, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]