Misplaced Pages

User talk:Betacommand: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 15:07, 26 October 2007 editMichael Bednarek (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users85,187 edits →Image:AnnaKarenina Leigh.jpeg: new section← Previous edit Revision as of 15:12, 26 October 2007 edit undoIrpen (talk | contribs)32,604 edits Your conduct: threats, rudeness, unsubstantiated accusationsNext edit →
Line 432: Line 432:


How is the first rationale at ] (''...is being used to illustrate the article on Anna Karenina (film)'') not sufficient in this regard? ] 15:07, 26 October 2007 (UTC) How is the first rationale at ] (''...is being used to illustrate the article on Anna Karenina (film)'') not sufficient in this regard? ] 15:07, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

==Your conduct: threats, rudeness, unsubstantiated accusations==
As per , please familiarize yourself with ] before ever accusing other editors in "deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Misplaced Pages". Unsubstantiated accusations of editors in vandalism is a serious personal attack (please review ] while at it), especially of editors who, unlike yourself, actually ''write'' this encyclopedia. Your rude threats have the effect exactly the opposite of constructive and, unless aggravation is your intention, they serve no good purpose and will be reverted on sight. Your further conduct along these lines will be promptly reported. ] saw already enough Betacommand threads where your conduct received the criticism it deserved and you should have taken it as a food for thought long time ago.

As for the image dispute, whenever the image whose fairuse compliance you dispute has already a rationale that you are going to question, you have to explain at talk what exactly the problem with the existing rational is, since unlike the images with no rationale provided (the problem is evident) other editors need to understand what exactly is the problem that you see. Happy edits, --] 15:12, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:12, 26 October 2007

−6137 days left

If you are here to register a complaint regarding my edits, before doing so please note:
  1. There is a very clear policy regarding the use of non-free images. This policy is located at Misplaced Pages:Non-free content criteria
  2. Read this talk page and its archives before registering your complaint. It is likely someone has already registered a similar complaint, and that complaint will have been given an answer.
  3. Read the policy
  4. Check and make sure the image has a valid source
  5. Make sure that the image has a valid Fair use Rationale (A guide can be found here)
  6. I will not add rationales for you as the uploader it is your responsibility NOT mine.
  7. I do not want to see images deleted
  8. All images must comply with policy
  9. A generic template tag is NOT a valid fair use rationale.
  10. If you're here to whine and complain that But <place image name here> is just like my image and isn't tagged for deletion I will tag that image too, I just haven't gotten around to it yet.



Images

Please stop deleting images on account of non-existant copyright laws.What is written in the green here is the kind of thing you and your bots are doing

PS. Do not delete what i wrote as vandalism as it is not i consider it a valid point on how these image deleting bots are ruining wikipedia. Thank you.

Rhodesia Currency images

Yuo know, I thought that my contributions for WIKIPEDIA were kosher, including the images, but comments like yours makes me want to say "why bother?" To be frank, I no longer care. You want to remove them, go right ahead! Expatkiwi 08:15 PDT, 6 September 2007


List of characters in Camp Lazlo‎

Hi. I was wondering: does this article violate the fair use policies. I think it's overloaded with unnecessary, crappy images. The Prince 15:23, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

The images have been readded. The Prince 14:30, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Again. The Prince 20:59, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

VP not letting me log in

You approved me for VP, but I get an error message indicating that "The username you are attempting to connect with has not been authorized for use with VandalProof." Is this a bug or something I am missing? I am running 1.36. --FastLizard4 (Talk•Links•Sign) 03:51, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Update: I am now running the latest version on Windows XP SP2 Home Edition in an Administrator account with the same result. Toubleshooting did not work. Did you add me to the approved list? You left a message saying that you had approved me. Just want to make sure. Thanks, FastLizard4 (Talk•Links•Sign) 17:41, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

VP is being stubborn I should have it fixed by late Saturday UTC. β 17:45, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

temporarily-orphaned images (again)

Continuing this thread I opened a few weeks ago, which seems to have been left out of the archives, (and I'll apologize here for not getting back to you earlier - I have watchlist trouble, and didn't know you had responded)…

I understand that non-free images are for mainspace only. That is exactly why I brought this up: it is a rare case of an image which is currently in userspace but which, assuming reinstatement of the deleted page, will soon be in mainspace. The thrust of my argument is that I think the purpose of having bots run by humans is that humans can provide case-by-case adjustments to the bot's behavior, and that I don't see BetacommandBot being subject to this sort of oversight.

Likewise with the idea of linking the fair use template in your warning template: Of course it is possible to find the fair use template, but editors who do not know it's out there to be found are not given any guidance by BetacommandBot. Speaking as someone who did a lot of searching before I found it, I think that providing a direct link would significantly cut down on the frustration BetacommandBot causes (as judged by this talk page and its archives).


Beyond that, I am alarmed to see your passive-agressive attack on my reading abilities, and am also alarmed to see "how about you try reading?"-type answers to other editors' posts. If this persists it will be reported; remember that we (or at least most of us) are annoyed with the bot, not you. — eitch 17:29, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, the issue is pages linger in userspace indefinitely. If at some point it is mainspace, just ask an admin to undelete. The reasons that I dont link to the template are simple, if users read our non-free policy WP:NFC which is linked, that gives all the detailed reasons that are needed. If I just link to a template people will not know why or how to properly fill in that template. I am not making attacks just pointing out that the information that you want is already available in the links that I provide. (if you had read the messages you would have seen that. it has nothing to do with your skills, just what you skim over versus read.) β 17:38, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
(Seriously? I happen to know that I did the reading.) I see where you're coming from now, but I still think that only good can come from saying something like "Please add a non-free use rationale template, as found ], so that you're in compliance with our ]." Currently the warned editor has to think "I bet I can find the template from the policy," read through several screens of link-dense policy, and think "I bet that this link in 10.c. to the 'non-free use rationale guideline' has a template that would help me," and I think it's clear from some of the angry messages people have left you that no one's going to happen upon that solution. — eitch 21:38, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

PD-100 IMAGES

Hello - I was wondering if you could plase give me a couple more days with which to proprly tag all of the PD-100 images.

--Mrlopez2681 03:55, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

that deadline was just there to get you motivated, Since I see your trying to address the issue dont worry about it. β 04:25, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Copyright Violation?

I noticed that you taken off all the images from the List of characters in Camp Lazlo article. I assume that most of them aren't violating any copyright since they have rationales and possibly sufficient information. They even have scources indicating where they came from. Please let them stay. 124.106.226.127 12:17, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Source and rationale dont mean that an image is not violating copyright. Its violating our WP:NFC policy, which is in turn a copyright violation. β 13:29, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use in sandboxes

Hi there, I've just received a message about invalid fair-use rationale for Image:Sabre wulf box.jpg due to it not having fair-use for every article it's used in. However, it is only used in one actual article, the other place it's currently used is my sandbox. Is a seperate fair-use rationale actually required for this? I can't find mention anywhere of fair-use images in sandboxes, and it seems a little silly if it is necessary. Can you shed some light on this for me? Cheers, Miremare 16:52, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Non-free images are not allowed in sandboxes, WP:NFCC#9 as for the article where its used that rationale is not valid either. β 16:54, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

User talk:Akradecki

I think that a little more patience in replying tho these things would help prevent situations from escalating. Yes, it's annoying when someone blocks the bot when it isn't actually malfunctioning. But the best way to prevent that from happening again is to be calm in explaining why the block was misguided. — Carl (CBM · talk) 17:01, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Here's a clear example of your bot malfunctioning...the image is clearly tagged with a free license, and yet the bot tagged it as non-free. Now, how many more such images did the bot just tag? Are you gonna shut it down and go check? Please respond right away, or I will block again. AKRadecki 17:07, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
it was a system lag. when BCBot found the image it was tagged as non-free. β 17:11, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
But you haven't fixed the error, and are you personally checking each of the other bot edits? AKRadecki 17:16, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
I have fixed that. its a very very rare error. That kind of error is not fixable and happens in less than 1 in every 100000 edits. β 17:20, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
It may be rare, but isn't it your responsibility to catch such errors? And for someone who got on my case for not saying "oops, I'm sorry", shouldn't you be doing that? And are you gonna revert the warning messages on the affected article pages? I have no problems with the presence of bots, but bots are like dogs...when they make a mess, it's the owner's responsibillity to clean up after them. AKRadecki 17:25, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Its been fixed. and that is not a mess. one error out of many thousands? lets see a human do better. β 17:32, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
I can't do better, but that's irrelevent. The lawn in front of my house may get pooped on by a dog only once every 100,000 days, but I still expect the dog owner to pick it up. I noticed that you didn't remove the warning notices on the article pages until after I asked you to. And have you gone through all the edits that your bot made to make sure there wasn't another problem? I fully expect you to do so. AKRadecki 17:40, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
I expect to be shown some respect, you dont do that. Im not going to look though BCBots edits. I know that problems, if on the extremely rare change that they happen they will be fixed by the users who find them or are brought to my attention. Im not going to spend countless ours reviewing BCBots 462,000 edits. β 17:45, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
You rant on my talk page in your very first communication with me and then ask for respect? You demand apologies from me when I err, but don't give them when your bot errs? Wow. If you want some respect, show some, and don't expect others to expend the time and effort to clean up the problems your bot has caused. Since you are stating that you won't review the bot's edits that have taken place after a malfunction, and that fixing the bot's errors are the responsiblity of others, there's absolutely no way I'm going to do as you've asked and talk first and block later if there's a suspected malfuction. That's the kind of uncaring, irresponsible attitude that leads me to block first and then see if there's a problem, because I can't count on you to be thorough and careful and review the recent edits to make sure no other similar problem has occurred. In such a situation, the sooner the bot's stopped, the less work that there will be for the others that have to clean up, since you're unwilling to do it yourself. AKRadecki 18:16, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
If there was an issue other than slight timing of the image discription page (it was changed from the first time the bot sees it to when it edits something like an edit conflict) that rarely happens less than .01% of all images. I would have stopped the bot and done futher investigaion. I do care about the bot and its operation. This issue has been brought up before, at that time I did a full investgation and found no other edits like that. If this was an unknow issue I would have done more. yeah I ranted because you blocked a bot that was operating without error and not understanding the policy that it is enforcing. β 18:29, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

VandalProof

I received a message from you that i had been approved and yet when i run the exe file, all i get is "No privileges found" in the privileges box. I click the verify authorization button but nothing happens. Any suggestions. thanks for your time. Woodym555 18:15, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Image question

Hi. :) Your bot placed a tag on an image I uploaded, and I can't quite figure out what's wrong with it. It might be obvious to someone experienced with images, but my image experience is limited to album covers for album articles. I'd be very grateful if you could find time to take a look at it here (it is the cover of the Duke Ellington album The Blanton–Webster Band) and tell me what I've done wrong. Since I've uploaded quite a few album covers by this point, I obviously want to be sure I haven't misunderstood something. :) I'll be watching your page for a reply in case you have opportunity and inclination to help me out. --Moonriddengirl 18:56, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

The name of the article has a real en dash "–" in it but the fair use rationale has the html entity &ndash;. Betacommand can us tell whether that is enough to make the bot not notice the article title. — Carl (CBM · talk) 19:02, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Oh, thank you! That article being created with an en dash has been a bit of a headache for me. :/ (It was still listed on missing articles, and I wrote the whole thing before realizing that it was already there, just not linked.) I'm a pretty straightforward typist and a bit clueless about formatting. If that is the issue, do you know if copying & pasting the title into the rationale would create a real en dash? Or is there some other way I could do that? --Moonriddengirl 19:08, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Copying and pasting should work to get a real en dash into the rationale template. The "keyboard" of special symbols below the edit box also has an en dash in it. — Carl (CBM · talk) 19:12, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Yeah BCBot doenst convert HTML. "&ndash;" is not the same as "-" . β 19:14, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Hopefully, I've fixed it using the en dash in the keyboard section. (I can't believe I never noticed that. All the time I've wasted typing it out in html!) Thanks for the help. :) --Moonriddengirl 19:18, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

The bot

Hi you rbot does a good task in looking to ensure all non free images have a rationale but I am kind of finding it frustrating having a message for images like Image:Sabse Bada Rupaiya1976.jpg. Now why does this not meet the criteria? PLease let me know which key words the bot is after to save it tagging images with afull rationale again. If you could kindly respond to this message thanks ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ 20:26, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Forgive me for butting in but isn't it simply a case of the fair use rationale having to have a wikilink directly to the article, not a disambiguation page etc. I think Sir Blofeld's final edit (to incorporate the year of the film in the wikilink so as not to point at a dab page) made the rationale correct. But please correct me if I'm wrong, I like to learn about these things!! The Rambling Man 20:32, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't know it seems odd to me. Everything seems right about it ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ 20:36, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for butting in, you are correct links to DAB pages are not valid, because your not using the image on the DAB page. β 20:37, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
(ec) Your final edit placed the "(1976)" etc in the wikilink - I'm guessing this is what the bot wants to see. Otherwise, strictly (bot-wise and litigation-wise) you're trying to justify fair use for the image for the disambiguation page only. That's my take on it... The Rambling Man 20:39, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah OK thanks I'll note this. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ 20:40, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

A little help...

Your bot helpfully pointed out that I hadn't done the fair use rationale thingamajig for http://en.wikipedia.org/Image:Prinzhorn_dance_school_cover.jpg. So I went back, reuploaded a lower resolution image and added a better rationale for it's use. Erm... what now? Does someone manually come look at it and remove the speedy deletion tags if it's okay, or what? Cheers for any help Plum743 21:41, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I removed it, But for future references if you fix the problem, feel free to remove the template. β 22:17, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:Sallah.jpg

Your bot has stated that Image:Sallah.jpg is non-free content. I had uploaded it from another Misplaced Pages several months ago and there has been no dispute over it until now. --PiMaster3 23:50, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

please see #5 in the template above. β 13:14, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

temp shutdown...bot tagging compliant non-free use images

Shutting down the bot...it's tagging images that clearly conform to policy.

wrong. the bot will not shut down. Its not tagging images that meet policy. β 16:08, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Problem resolved, unblocked. AKRadecki 16:12, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

a malfuction right here. Image is clearly tagged as free, yet it was hit by your bot. I posted to your page, you didn't respond, the bot made at least 50 more edits since I posted. This is why I block before talking...now I expect you to personally check each subsequent to make sure that they aren't victims as well. AKRadecki 17:14, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Can your bot please stop hitting for every damn image I posted.Ridernyc 20:30, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Fix you images, and you will not see BCBot. β 22:23, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Bot bug?

Have a look . Bot originally tagged the image yesterday, so I revised the fair use rationale to make it specific to the article the image appears in. But the bot retagged it again today. Am I doing something wrong? Nobody of consequence 20:31, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Ive fixed it, Super-TV is not the same as SuperTV. β 22:21, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
Okay thanks. Nobody of consequence 22:27, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

It tagged mine too, even though I included a fair use rationale with it. Perhaps you would like to recheck your bot in order to ensure that it's working properly and not hitting images that are clearly comforming to policy.

Thanks, Happyface162 22:19, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

That was a malformed Rationale, Rascal Flatts is not the same as Rascal Flatts (album) β 22:22, 24 October 2007 (UTC)


TAROM 70s logo

I don't understand. It's a logo. Following this logic means erasing all the other logos. Cristibur 00:02, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Nonsense?

Excuse me but did you say nonsense? I am not understanding what I am doing wrong when I clearly have shown a list of reasons for fair use. Do I have to use a template instead? Please clarify this. TrackFan 00:40, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm not seeing nonsense added myself, but, you two were revert warring over the CSD tag . While Betacommand was just replacing the CSD tag, as the problem was not fixed (although, it took me all of 12 seconds to correct the problem, which was that the rationale did not mention the article that it was for. It probably would have been easier to fix it, than to continuously revert the tag.), you hit about 4RR. Please be more careful in the future, TrackFan, and, mind our Three revert rule. SQL 00:51, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:TYTDUK.jpg

  • My impression is that the bot tagged my image because the summary didn't indicate where the picture was intended to be used, and I've done that. Is my impression correct? I don't want the article to be deleted without my knowledge because it's fairly important to the article Too Young to Die (Jamiroquai song). JuJube 08:38, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

User:Betacommand/Commons#current_request

If you can approve me here that would be great. Thanks, Timeshift 21:55, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Added to the software. β 22:48, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Buggy request

User_talk:David.Monniaux#Disputed_fair_use_rationale_for_Image:Windows_Live_Messenger_Window.png: I'm not the original uploader, I just edited the image in order to remove some unsavory text that appeared in it (and had apparently gone unnoticed).

When there are multiple uploaders under the same image name, which one should be warned? There is a rationale for warning the first one only, because in most cases subsequent uploads are mere cosmetic edits. But, in other occasions, people upload truly different images... I suspect that people should not reuse the same name for really different images. David.Monniaux 08:10, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

the bot plays it safe and notifies all users who have uploaded the image. β 13:18, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Bot malfunctioning

According to the "bot generated" comment at , "Rationales must be provided for each use of an image". A rational WAS provided on the image. I referred anyone who cares to my comments on the Talk page on the image. Now the image is deleted, the rational is deleted, and comments are deleted. So I guess using a bot for things that need discussion isn't such a good idea? (Or perhaps this is a real person and not a bot?) Please consider undeleting the relevant image, image page, image talk page, and deletion log. Thanks. - Libertas 22:29, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

That image had an invalid rationale, had you fixed the rationale it would not have been deleted. β 22:50, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

I took a look at the deleted revision, and, the bot clearly stated, that the image was in violation of WP:NFCC#10c. Did you click that link, and read what was wrong? The long and short of it, is that you must link to the article you're using the image in, in each fair use rationale. Yes, there was a rationale, and, no, it was not complete per the above.
Also, BC did not delete your image. It was deleted by User:Angr. Betacommand isn't an admin as well, and, can't restore your image. However, I am, and, I can, if you'd like. Provided, that you are willing to correct the fair use rationale. SQL 04:15, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Warhawk

Hello, I see that the warhawk box art is about to be deleted, my question is why isn't every other game article out there with their box design being deleted? For example Halo 3. If I have the wrong page to take this question up, I appologize and would you know where to ask this question? Thanks. -- Vdub49 23:59, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

it has no valid non-free rationale see WP:NFURG —Preceding unsigned comment added by Betacommand (talk • contribs) 00:01, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
I have read that and I have put the proper template under it so that it should be up to par. Thanks. -- Vdub49 01:40, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
Thank You for taking it off. -- Vdub49 01:50, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Album covers

I have spent many hours uploading lots of album covers for use in album articles in Misplaced Pages. As we all know, album covers can be used under fair use. For some reason, however, your bot continually posts endless image deletion warnings on my talk page in reference to these images. I have uploaded about 600 of these images. I do NOT have the time, OR the patience to provide a lengthy summary for each one. All the images I upload already specify the source and the fact that it is an album cover. I'm just letting you know that it will be a great loss to Misplaced Pages if you let this continue. Weatherman90 00:22, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Bot for WP birds like WP:DABS

Hi,

would it be possible to make a page like Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Birds/bird articles by size. Ask user:Betacommand nicely for a bot that will automatically add bird articles to the page, rank them by size, and add an icon to the articles that are GA or FA, just as you have done for WP:DABS....and do one for WP Fungi, substituting the word "fungi" for "bird". cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:18, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I need a list of categories that you want. β 01:20, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
Erm...OK, exactly like the one for WP Dinosaurs -WPDABS-, all the same - one for Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Birds and one for Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Fungi. Is that what you mean? Or do you mean all the subcats on the article page or teh cat on the talkpage. Both wikiprojects have templates on their corresponding talkpages. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:39, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Question about python...

Hey, Beta :) I know you're a programming whiz, and figured that you'd be the person to ask a small question to regarding Python programming. I'm designing a bot using the Pywiki framework that adds generic fair use rationales to images tagged with non-free templates, and then notifies the original author of the page. This is what I've come up with so far, and any tips would be appreciated (hopefully you can read my version of an elegant programming language =D).

  FURbot.py 
__version__ = '$Id: basic.py 3998 2007-08-07 20:28:27Z wikipedian $'
import wikipedia
import pagegenerators
import sys
import os,glob
# This is required for the text that is shown when you run this script
# with the parameter -help.
docuReplacements = {
    '&params;': pagegenerators.parameterHelp
}
class FURbot:
    mysite = wikipedia.getSite()
    if mysite.loggedInAs():
        wikipedia.output(u"You are logged in on %s as %s." % (repr(mysite), mysite.loggedInAs()))
    else:
        wikipedia.output(u"You are not logged in on %s." % repr(mysite))
    # Edit summary message that should be used.
    # NOTE: Put a good description here, and add translations, if possible!
    msg = {
        'en': u'Adding generic ] to image (BOT)',
    }
    def __init__(self, generator, debug):
        """
        Constructor. Parameters:
            * generator - The page generator that determines on which pages
                          to work on.
            * debug     - If True, doesn't do any real changes, but only shows
                          what would have been changed.
        """
        self.generator = generator
        self.debug = debug
    def run(self):
        # Set the edit summary message
        wikipedia.setAction(wikipedia.translate(wikipedia.getSite(), self.msg))
        for page in self.generator:
            self.treat(page)
    def imgsize (self, page):
        a=glob.glob('c:\\*')
        if a >= '25000 bytes':
            lres= Yes
        else:
            lres= No
    def treat (self, page):   
        """
        Loads the given page, does some changes, and saves it.
        """
        try:
            # Load the page
            text = page.get() 
        except wikipedia.NoPage:
            wikipedia.output(u"Page %s does not exist; skipping." % page.aslink())
            return
        except wikipedia.IsRedirectPage:
            wikipedia.output(u"Page %s is a redirect; skipping." % page.aslink())
            return
        except wikipedia.LockedPage:
            wikipedia.output(u"Page %s is locked; skipping." % page.aslink())
            return
        # If you find out that you do not want to edit this page, just return.
        # Adds generic rationale to image page
        text = '{{Fair use rationale|Article= |Description= text|Source= INSERT IMAGE SOURCE|Portion= All of the logo is used.|Low_resolution= lres|Purpose= To represent the organization/company in the article|Replaceability= No free equivalent}}'
        # only save if something was changed
        if text != page.get():
            # Show the title of the page we're working on.
            # Highlight the title in purple.
            wikipedia.output(u"\n\n>>> \03{lightpurple}%s\03{default} <<<" % page.title())
            # show what was changed
            wikipedia.showDiff(page.get(), text)
            if not self.debug:
                choice = wikipedia.inputChoice(u'Do you want to accept these changes?', , , 'N')
                if choice == 'y':
                    try:
                        # Save the page
                        page.put(text)
                    except wikipedia.EditConflict:
                        wikipedia.output(u'Skipping %s because of edit conflict' % (page.title()))
                    except wikipedia.SpamfilterError, error:
                        wikipedia.output(u'Cannot change %s because of spam blacklist entry %s' % (page.title(), error.url))
    def notify (self, page):
        """
        Notifies user on their user talk page about the addition
        of a fair use rationale to one of their images.
        """
        try:
            text= text + "page.get('Revision history of %s')"
        except wikipedia.LockedPage:
            wikipedia.output(u"Page %s is locked; skipping." % page.aslink())
            return
        msg= u'Notifying user about addition of partial ] rationale added to their image (BOT)'
        text = '{{User:FURbot/Notify}}'        
        # only save if something was changed
        if text != page.get():
            # Show the title of the page we're working on.
            # Highlight the title in purple.
            wikipedia.output(u"\n\n>>> \03{lightpurple}%s\03{default} <<<" % page.title())
            # show what was changed
            wikipedia.showDiff(page.get(), text)
            if not self.debug:
                choice = wikipedia.inputChoice(u'Do you want to accept these changes?', , , 'N')
                if choice == 'y':
                    try:
                        # Save the page
                        page.put(text)
                    except wikipedia.EditConflict:
                        wikipedia.output(u'Skipping %s because of edit conflict' % (page.title()))
                    except wikipedia.SpamfilterError, error:
                        wikipedia.output(u'Cannot change %s because of spam blacklist entry %s' % (page.title(), error.url))
def main():
    # This factory is responsible for processing command line arguments
    # that are also used by other scripts and that determine on which pages
    # to work on.
    genFactory = pagegenerators.GeneratorFactory()
    # The generator gives the pages that should be worked upon.
    gen = "linkedpages('Template:Non-free logo')"
    # This temporary array is used to read the page title if one single
    # page to work on is specified by the arguments.
    pageTitleParts = 
    # If debug is True, doesn't do any real changes, but only show
    # what would have been changed.
    debug = False
    # Parse command line arguments
    for arg in wikipedia.handleArgs():
        if arg.startswith("-debug"):
            debug = True
        else:
            # check if a standard argument like
            # -start:XYZ or -ref:Asdf was given.
            generator = genFactory.handleArg(arg)
            if generator:
                gen = generator
            else:
                pageTitleParts.append(arg)
        if arg.startswith("-pt"):
            pt= 15
        if arg.startswith("-transcludes"):
            page='Image: %s'
    if pageTitleParts != :
        # We will only work on a single page.
        pageTitle = ' '.join(pageTitleParts)
        page = wikipedia.Page(wikipedia.getSite(), pageTitle)
        gen = iter()
    if gen:
        # The preloading generator is responsible for downloading multiple
        # pages from the wiki simultaneously.
        gen = pagegenerators.PreloadingGenerator(gen)
        bot = FURbot(gen, debug)
        bot.run()
    else:
        wikipedia.showHelp()
if __name__ == "__main__":
    try:
        main()
    finally:
        wikipedia.stopme()

Cheers, ( arky ) 02:26, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

This bot will not run, our policy and BRFA will not allow it. Ive been working with NFCC and am planning something in January or so, when our NFCC proposal goes live. Please Please Please dont run something like this. β 02:36, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
Okay, no problem :) ( arky ) 03:29, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Album Covers/Movie Posters

Dear Betacommand,

I am confused in why I have images of album covers and posters continually tagged for unfair use when I try to use the same fair use rationale as articles that have been given “Featured articles” status by Misplaced Pages. Please explain what is I am not making clear in my “fair use” that warrants me to continually revisit these images and add more and more reasons. Like your own BetacommandBot comments state, I do use the templates and give vaild reasons, however I fail to see what I’m not making clear in my images that every other album cover and movie poster is. paulisdead 13:24 (UTC), 26 October 2007

Please see our non-free content policy and part 10c. β 03:27, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

You tagged me!

Betacommand, your bot just snagged an image I uploaded in Jan '07 for lack of article reference. I fixed it of course but does this mean you're extending the 1/1/07 cutoff? Are you lighting a fire under us to get the image thing done soon? Feel free to answer on my page or TALK:NONFREE if you don't want to discuss here. I promise, no confrontation this time. Just curious to know. Take care, Wikidemo 04:30, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

its still the same cut off images uploaded prior to 1/1/07 are ignored, for now. that was just near the date not before. β 10:40, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Incorrect tagging of non-orphan images again

This is the third time you tagged my non-orphan image. Each time I reported to you please fix your bot to check for non-orphan tag. Great, you apparently changed your bot to delete non-orphan tag too. So I changed the linking article to load a thumb instead of just the link. But I hate to think of how many other valid non-orphan images your dysfunctional bot is deleting. Please please please fix your dysfunctional bot to not delete non-orphan images! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ibjoe (talk • contribs) 05:23, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

The issue should be resolved for this particular image. The rationale for the bot's handling of {{not orphan}} is mostly laid out at Misplaced Pages:Bots/Requests for approval/BetacommandBot Task 4.
Betacommand, may I suggest writing up a summary of the bot's design at User:BetacommandBot? If it were easier to verify that its behavior is by design, you might get fewer complaints. Melchoir 06:24, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:RTBM-07-08-24.jpg - updated and bot errors

1. The FUR is now updated to include the article title, and original broadcast date

2. Instructions should be clearer in the bot's automatic User Talk page warning:

The text: and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use.
should be: and complete all required template fields per policy.

3. BetaCommandBot generated a MISLEADING DESCRIPTION of the problem in the Image page warning template:

The text: invalid rationale per WP:NFCC#10c.
Should be: incomplete rationale per WP:NFCC#10c.

--Lexein 13:07, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Ambrose University College

Sorry if this has already been addressed. I added an article to fair use rationale of the logo for Ambrose University College (thanks, and good point about the generic tag, which originally didn't include the article specification...), but it claims the article doesn't exist. Any explanation for this? I'm confused, obviously, because there is a working link and the article definitely does exist. Thanks for the heads-up on the rationale, BTW. Aepoutre 14:48, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, nevermind. I just realised it's because I made the article a wikilink. Aepoutre 14:50, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:AnnaKarenina Leigh.jpeg

On Talk:Anna Karenina (1948 film) you write:
...there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Misplaced Pages article constitutes fair use

How is the first rationale at Image:AnnaKarenina Leigh.jpeg (...is being used to illustrate the article on Anna Karenina (film)) not sufficient in this regard? Michael Bednarek 15:07, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Your conduct: threats, rudeness, unsubstantiated accusations

As per this, please familiarize yourself with WP:VAND before ever accusing other editors in "deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Misplaced Pages". Unsubstantiated accusations of editors in vandalism is a serious personal attack (please review WP:PA while at it), especially of editors who, unlike yourself, actually write this encyclopedia. Your rude threats have the effect exactly the opposite of constructive and, unless aggravation is your intention, they serve no good purpose and will be reverted on sight. Your further conduct along these lines will be promptly reported. WP:ANI saw already enough Betacommand threads where your conduct received the criticism it deserved and you should have taken it as a food for thought long time ago.

As for the image dispute, whenever the image whose fairuse compliance you dispute has already a rationale that you are going to question, you have to explain at talk what exactly the problem with the existing rational is, since unlike the images with no rationale provided (the problem is evident) other editors need to understand what exactly is the problem that you see. Happy edits, --Irpen 15:12, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

User talk:Betacommand: Difference between revisions Add topic