I'm semi-inactive. There are more important things in life. If you're an admin looking to ask about a block or delete I made, feel free to reverse it. If we would grant each other the presumption that we are acting in good faith, we could dispense with some of the drama and long ANI threads. Please don't use the{{talkback}} template - if you have something to say, say it. If you are asking me to review a situation, please provide links to articles and diffs to the edits in question — I cannot read your mind to figure out what you are talking about.

Archives

1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10

This page has archives. Sections older than120 days may be auto-archived byLowercase sigmabot III if there are more than 10.

Merry Christmas B


Hi B, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year,
May next year be prosperous and joyful.
   –Scopecreep^{Merry Xmas /Happy New Year} 10.43, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

WikiProject Scouting|May 2024 Notes for May: Looking for something to work on? Try looking at,Category:Scouting articles needing attention. Some important articles that need help:The Scout Association,NAYLE,Philmont Training Center,BSA Leadership Training,COPE We are working to develop a featured portal,look here if you want to help. Looking for a new project? perhaps authoring an article onAids to Scoutmastership Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage|Help us plan future events Become a member|Opt-out of notifications|watch

--evrik ^(talk) May 22, 2024

2023-03-01

Happy First Edit Day! Hi B! On behalf of theBirthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of the day you madeyour first edit and became a Wikipedian!Worgisbor(congregate)20:20, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello B. Followinga request for comment in May 2025, the community has decided to implement an activity requirement for theautopatrolled permission. Because your account has not edited in the last three years, the autopatrolled permission has been removed from your account. This action is purely procedural and does not affect your ability to create articles; if you return to actively creating articles, you may request that the permission be restored throughthe normal process. When returning, please consider taking some time to re-familiarize yourself with common practices and how they may have changed over the past few years if you wish to request the permission back. Thank you for all of your contributions to Wikipedia, and we hope to see you again soon.MediaWiki message delivery (talk)06:19, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ten years ago,you were found precious. That's what you are, always. --Gerda Arendt (talk)06:29, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just a suggestion that it might be a good idea to revise B-bot to not tag users who are currently blocke (or perhaps just indef block only). For example seediff and its rollback by an admin atdiff. Beyond their in ability to participate, as a blocked user, it might actually encourage disruptive users to circumvent their block by inappropraite means. It is better tonot poke the bear.TiggerJay (talk)19:30, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Tiggerjay: The easiest way to block a bot from a page is to add the{{Nobots}} template to it. You can also do{{bots|deny=B-bot}} to block B-bot in particular. (I will also skip pages with{{Deceased Wikipedian}}.) --B (talk)20:14, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just curious, from a procedural / best-practice standpoint: should adding that template be done proactively or reactively to a talk page? It seems to me that it should be automatically applied (or always check by bots) to all blocked users to avoid provoking a user to consider block-avoidance behavior. But perhaps there is a reason/perspective I'm not considering?TiggerJay (talk)20:33, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking about the difficulty in programmatically ascertaining, "is this user banned and never coming back, no way, no how", are they "banned, but allowed to appeal after six months", or are they "blocked for right now, but if they ask really nicely to come back and promise to behave, they will be given a second chance". I think that yes, it would definitely make sense to add{{nobots}} as a matter of course for users who are "banned and never coming back, no way, no how" (or just protect their talk pages). For anyone else? If someone has a really strong opinion about denying this person notifications, they can add{{nobots}} to their talk page. And, of course, this is just my opinion - if the community decides atWP:BAG or after a discussion (maybe atWP:VPT) that bots should always skip over indefinitely blocked users, then we can certainly do that. --B (talk)21:39, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, I can see the difficulty in a bot discerning what the nature of the block is and the risk of them receiving notifications. Just trying to be helpful, and thank you for the work and efforts of your bot! This is situation has probably only occurred a handful of times (to me) in the last 18 years for me, so I don't think it's a big problems, but enough to make me ask the question. Thanks again.TiggerJay (talk)04:17, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi B. Can you think of a reason whythis IP is altering the dates of{{ornfud}} templates added to non-free files by B-bot? Is there an issue with B-bot? That's all the IP did for about ten minutes after editing for the first time earlier today. --Marchjuly (talk)11:11, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning@Marchjuly:, that is not my IP address. An IP lookup says it is from the Philippines. I am in the United States. The edits are all tagged as mobile edits, so I assume it's a human doing it manually for some reason. I couldn't even begin to guess why.B (talk)13:34, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for takng a look. At first, I thought it might be a test edit, but the same edit was made to so may files over such a short period of time that a "test edit" seems unlikely. If it was a registered account, the edits could've been an attempt to reachWP:AUTOC, but that wouldn't matter to an IP. I can't think of any reason for the change from a policy standpoint, but it only adds a date to theWP:F5 countdown that started when B-bot tagged the files; so, I guess it's not a huge deal. If the IP account comes and does something similar or looks like they're trying to game dates, I'll bring it up for discussion at AN. Thanks again for taking a look. --Marchjuly (talk)06:08, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I got a notice from B-bot about an orphaned file up for deletion. However, I did not upload it.[1]Aurictalk18:06, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. There is a ton of history in that image and from eyeballing it, you have roughly the 100th oldest edit. I'm guessing/assuming that has something to do with it? I will take a look and see if I can fix it, but my guess is it's very much an edge case if there is a gigantic history to the image.B (talk)13:58, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi B – I have a question for you regarding anon-free image that B-bot has marked for deletion. I'm wondering if it would be possible to make an exception for this particular image.

Here's the situation: I have a COI for the article this image pertains to, and have submitted a COI edit request to make a number of updates – including adding the logo for the organization that is the subject of the article. I uploaded the image to ensure it was available for whomsoever ultimately makes the requested updates but, because I cannot add the image to the article myself, it will remain orphaned until those updates are implemented.

Would this situation qualify as a "reasonable exception" underSection F5 of speedy deletion?

Thanks for your help!TMM Jonathan (talk)19:43, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@TMM Jonathan I have restored the deleted image and added it to the articleAuguste Escoffier School of Culinary Arts. The COI guideline shouldn't prevent someone from making a completely non-controversial cleanup change (like adding a logo), but I completely understand wanting to make absolutely sure that you don't - even when well intentioned - run afoul of anyone's idea of what might constitute "controversial". --B (talk)00:53, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for addressing this so swiftly – I appreciate your help!TMM Jonathan (talk)14:01, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, for some reason the mute isn't working for your bot. Can you stop B bot from spamming my talk page with messages in future, thanks. ♦Dr. Blofeld17:48, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

{{bots|optout=all}} is not a syntax, AFAIK, that existed when I created the bot. I just looked atmy code and I will obey {{bots|optout=orfud}},{{nobots}}, {{bots|deny=BBot}}, or a few other things. I have added{{nobots}} to your user talk page, which I think is what you want, but if you prefer one of the other syntaxes, that will work too. --B (talk)15:05, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Noindexed pages