Rambot problem

Rambot is going through added map references to city articles, but it is not checking to see whether or not checking for singular/pluralness of the header title (External link[s]) and it's adding a header incorrectly if the header is singular. See Garland, Texas history for what I mean. RADICALBENDER★ 22:55, Dec 23, 2004 (UTC)

• I noticed this as well in the Florida articles. To date I've been manually editing them. --Monstrocity 00:12, Dec 25, 2004 (UTC)

CDPs that get annexed / Naming conflict between a city and a CDP

A naming conflict has arisen between a Florida CDP and a city that incorporated in 2003 with the same name. It's Miami Gardens, Florida. They're both in separate counties, and the CDP was recently annexed. I moved the CDP to Miami Gardens (Broward), Florida to try to disambiguate it from the City of Miami Gardens, so that problably means that rambot will need to associate the CDP data with the Broward page so that it doesn't update the wrong one. Thanks...

Also, what usually gets done with CDP articles after they get annexed into an incorporated area? --Monstrocity 00:12, Dec 25, 2004 (UTC)

This is the first instance that I know of where this has occurred, that is, you are the first to let me know about this. So I don't know the exact answer to your question. Thanks for the update though. 01:54, Dec 25, 2004 (UTC)

your request for multi-licensing

I'm happy to make my contributions free of restriction. I will be using the following banner at this time: I'm sorry it took so long for me to respond; I was a little befuddled by the pages explaining the pros, cons, and minutiae of multi- or dual-licensing, and put off consideration of the subject for a good while. Ground 17:42, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Well, if you haven't noticed -- i haven't made any serious attempt to edit anything in about a year. And of yesterday, I have my own wiki now -- so I'm sure I won't return to the wikipedia. Lirath Q. Pynnor

Hi, I'm a little overwhelmed by the huge upswell of different licensing options that have appeared, and all the problems/incompatibilities they've created. Probably wouldn't have noticed but for your request to multi-license, so thanks for bringing this stuff to my attention. Do you think it will settle down or is this simply going to be a fact of life from now on? Waveguy 20:33, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Rambot

Why does rambot move interlanguage links from the bottom of the article to before the external links section? [1] According to Wikipedia:Interlanguage links, interlanguage links should placed "at the bottom of the page, after external links, see also's, and categories". Merry Christmas, Gehirn 02:19, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Updated template for maps

Hi, Ram-Man. Chinasaur has made new, updated templates for the maps, including links to Tiger census maps (for surrounding areas) and current weather satellite images. I must say, it is quite neat. You can check it out the new templates at Template talk:Geolinks-US-streetscale.

One sad thing to note is that Template:Mapit-US-cityscale is broken: Maveric149, Chinasaur, nor I can edit it --- it always returns a wikipedia error. Sadly, that template does not conform to the rest of the Mapit templates. You may wish to convert cities over to the Geolinks templates for that reason (unless you have some special powers to fix the database?).

Thanks for all of the Ram-Bot work: I really appreciate it. -- hike395 08:06, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Multi-licensing

I am happy to multi-license my contributions. See User:Anárion/Copyrights for details: after some deliberation I have decided upon using MultiLicenseWithCC-BySA-Any, except for article talk pages, wikipedia namespace, and my user pages. 09:37, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. Great idea. I have added a copyright statement to my user page using the DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual template. Lyndafis 17:12, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Multi-licensing

I think I'll stick with the GFDL, thanks anyways. -Frazzydee|✍ 02:17, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Licesnsing - public domain

Basically - what Ground said! ;)

Apologies for my lateness, but yeah I'm fine wiht having my edits public domain-ed. This is about sharing knowledge, not hoarding my text for no apparant reason.

Though I do have one question - if I put something up in my personal userspace, that is copywrited and I state it is copywrited, does the banner about Public domain-ing affect that as well? -Erolos 17:53, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Yeah, I'll multi-license. CMC 01:11, Dec 30, 2004 (UTC)

Attica, New York

Hi, there is a question about some articles that may have been done very early on and have some naming irregularities. See Talk:Attica (village), New York for my take on what is going on. Thanks. older≠wiser 18:29, Dec 31, 2004 (UTC)

Another question about New York places: any idea what happened to the census data for Geneseo (village), New York? It currently duplicates the data for Geneseo (town), New York. older≠wiser 18:58, Dec 31, 2004 (UTC)

Thank you for your infomation about multi licencing, and sorry for the delay, I have left the wiki community alone since someone implied my work tedious. How can you licence original work if its changed the next day? The whole concept of gnu fails to account for the fact that the original work ceases to exist as soon as a single change has been made to it by another user. As far as I understand the law my items in their original context will allways be my copyright, but I allow such changes to be made under gnu terms...What difference then does it make to have multi licencing? I have found numerous websites copying my work from wikipedia, this angers me and pleases me at the same time, because I am please to share my knowledge, but at the same time feel I should be granted some acknowledgment for the effort..Tell me more and I may return to the fold, all the best. Faedra

Licensing

Sorry for taking so long in responding to your message - I've been tied up with other things and didn't have the time really to look at licenses and decide for ages. I have realised now that I don't really care what happens to my contributions beyond the pedia and don't desire attribution just "for the sake of having your name on a site". So, I've gone for the simplest option and PDed all my contribs. Cheers, and good look with your drive. JOHN COLLISON (An Liúdramán) 23:12, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for your message. As I said on my user page I don't edit here any more - but was looking up something and I saw your note. I will happily dual license all my contributions and have added the tag to my ex-user page. I hope this helps. Secretlondon.

UN/LOCODE , progress, coordinates, wikitravel

how long might it take to insert redirects for US data? I mean, when can I look for missing entries? Is there any order in the way you insert redirects?

Coordinats, FIPS: Can you create merged FIPS / UN/LOCODE csv-file including both coordinates. are there conflicts? maybe we can help UN/LOCODE to get more coordinates.

I already asked Evan from wikitravel what he thinks about adding the codes on wikitravel as well. Would be great, maybe we can have much shorter links there, like wikitravel.org/USLAX

regards --Tobias Conradi 07:27, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)

When I cease to be on WikiVacation I can work on this some more. I am done with most of the U.S. city UN/LOCODE entries, but I imagine that a few are missing. I have not done any of the shorter ones though, such as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USLAX, but I will probably be able to. Let me know what Evan says about the locodes, because the rambot can just as easily add the codes there too if required. — Ram-Man ^{(comment) (talk)} 20:42, Jan 4, 2005 (UTC)

missing e.g.: USSFO, USUIZ, USSTL, USSEA, USARB . Would be nice if you could add info on citypages. Why not doing tables for all places like for German cities in de: All base data could be put there and we would have a place for the LOCODES. WikiProject_Cities also has tables, are the going to be implemented?. Otherwise a note in section Geography could be made: UN/LOCODE for Xyztown is US XYZ Tobias Conradi 08:06, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)

the redirect info (R from UN/LOCODE) is not shown anymore on the redirect page. may MediaWiki1.4 bug Tobias Conradi 22:11, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I made the redirects for USARB, USDET, USHVN, USSEA, USSFO, USSTL, USTWD, USUIZ, USWHF Tobias Conradi (Talk) 13:28, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Evan likes the idea and suggested to set up namespace Locode: for it. But currently I worry about http://www.unece.org/etrades/uncopyright.htm and wrote them an email. If it turns out bad, I will maybe go to create public domain geocodes. Tobias Conradi 08:31, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

External Links

Ram-Man, thanks for the articles on different cities. I think the content is great for Wikipedia. I look up information on different cities regularly and this information has been helpful. I wanted to share with you a site that I found that has more information. http://www.city-data.com . Perhaps the rambot could be configured to include external links to each of the City-Data pages. Sorry to request work from you, it is far beyond my capacity. I do appreciate your work to communicate more about the the places we live in. PoolGuy 06:05, Jan 5, 2005 (UTC)

Data mining is always possible, and I will check it out to see if it is feasible. Of course I have many things that I work on and not an infinite amount of time, so it may be a fair amount of time before I even have a chance to evaluate it, but I will do my best. — Ram-Man ^{(comment) (talk)} 13:12, Jan 5, 2005 (UTC)

Thats where UN/LOCODEs could step in. if city-data.com is worth linking, it should maybe be done via an easy URL. Tobias Conradi 08:01, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Article Licensing

Thank you for bringing up this point. I feel a bit ashamed of the fact you let me know that I am among the 1000 Wikipedians with most edits although I should use my time to finally get my diploma. As for the licenses I see the point for images because each image has its own page and can easily get attached its own information concerning the license. For text I do not think it makes any sense to have different users with different licenses. I do not believe in public domain for wikipedia as I have already gotten several advertisements for apparently commercial online encyclopedia that seemed to steel most of their content from wikipedia. Get-back-world-respect 19:28, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

rambot spamming & multi licensing

Hi, thanks for replying to my talk page about the spamming issue. I have seen some comments left by you in others talk pages about to multi-license, and you had mentioned that 90% of people asked agreed. Is there any effort underway to add it as a checkbox when editing - it seems like something that would save a lot of people time. --Paraphelion 03:55, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

MultiLicensing

I agree to MiltiLicense my contributions! It's a good idea. I`ve put a tag on my page. --Ce garcon 06:29, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Multi Licensing

I am happy for my text contributions to be in the public domain. I wish to retain some copyleft over my graphics (photographs, maps etc.). I am willing to multilicence them. Although I have been active recently, I have not made a contribution now for a couple of months. When I return to activity I will follow this up. --CloudSurfer 02:14, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Multi-licensing

I don't remember making significant contributions to U.S. state/county/city articles.

I agree to double licence my contributions under GFDL and CC-BY-SA.

Taw 16:17, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Ditto for me also.

I agree to double license my contributions to US state/county/city articles and any others that you feel, under GFDL and cc-by-sa. --Numerousfalx 07:33, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Ok, I've agreed to double license all my geographic articles (not just US ones) on my user page. The Steve 05:03, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)

I agree to double license my contributions to US state/country/city articles under GFDL and CC-BY-SA, although I don't quite frequently edit these articles in the English Wikipedia. (Or does that include all Wikipedias too?)--Formulax 03:24, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I would like to multi-license my contributions as well. It's sad that all the open-content places can't all share our information. I don't think I've contributed much to the US geography. moink 22:31, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Sorry for not getting back to you earlier. I agree to multi-license all my contributions to any U.S. state, county, or city article on Wikipedia under the GFDL and CC-BY-SA 1.0. I am reluctant to license all my contributions under that license, because of the warranty clause that was removed in version 2.0. Wmahan. 19:27, 2005 Feb 8 (UTC)

I've decided to place my edits into the public domain. I would've gotten back to you sooner, but I was busy at the time and it completely slipped my mind afterwards. --Xanzzibar 11:39, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Wikimedia Liscensing banners

As of this notice, my banner {{WikimediaAllLiscensing}} still includes 'Note: This banner is under construction, and is subject to major changes pending discussions.' Since there have been no discussions thus far, perhaps its time that we considere the banner satisfactory and delete that line? →Iñgōlemo← ^talk donate 06:41, 2005 Feb 10 (UTC)

Sticking with GFDL

I like what is being done with the CC licenses, and I didn't like all the petty inconsistencies that happended in free software with GPL incompatibilities with other free licenses, so I'm very sympathetic with the motives of the dual-license drive, but...

...but, I just plain don't like dual licensing. I half feel like saying sorry, but there you are. ---- Charles Stewart 21:54, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Sorry about the really late reply. I've decided to keep using the GFDL and just monitor the progress of this multi-licensing effort. Sorry and good luck! SoLando 21:12, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

New Mathematics Wikiportal

I noticed you've done some work on Mathematics articles. I wanted to point out to you the new Mathematics Wikiportal- more specifically, to the Mathematics Collaboration of the Week page. I'm looking for any math-related stubs or non-existant articles that you would like to see on Wikipedia. Additionally, I wondered if you'd be willing to help out on some of the Collaboration of the Week pages.

I encourage you to vote on the current Collaboration of the Week, because I'm very interested in which articles you think need to be written or added to, and because I understand that I cannot do the enormous amount of work required on some of the Math stubs alone. I'm asking for your help, and also your critiques on the way the portal is set up.

Please direct all comments to my user-talk page, the Math Wikiportal talk page , or the Math Collaboration of the Week talk page. Thanks a lot for your support! ral315 02:54, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC)

Sorry for not replying earlier as I was performing Haji. However, here is it:- I agree to multi-license all my contributions to any U.S. state, county, or city article as described below: Yosri 13:08, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Dual-licensing on U.S. dot-maps

Hi Ram-man,

Go ahead and use your Rambot to dual-license my dot-maps using {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}. I've done dot-maps for Washington, Nevada, Delaware, Oregon, Wisconsin, and Northern California. Thanks! Bumm13 10:23, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Geographical coordinates

I did a little demo in Charleston, West Virginia, using the new coor template for geographical coordinates from Wikipedia:WikiProject Geographical coordinates. The point of the exercise is that the coordinate pair becomes a link to a special page that offers many different map resources. I guess it would be a potential job for Rambot. -- Egil 18:30, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Drive

How can I find the drive? User:Patricknoddy 16:55 February 14, 2005 (EDT)

Article Licensing

I don't mind the dual-licensing if it will help the project in any way. I only do this for my own enjoyment. user:Jsc1973

wrong licensing tag added to my user page

You added the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Dual License category tag to my user page[2]. That's incorrect. I've only made a blanket license grant of a multitude of other licenses for "encyclopedia articles". That deliberatey excludes talk pages, all other non-encyclopedia namespaces and multimedia files. No current plans to change that because I'm doing it to limit the potential for some conduct I don't want to accept (not yours though) and that will require a GFDL license. Good project though! Jamesday 07:33, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The tag is not incompatible with this! There are a number of examples (including the one on my user page) where the terms of the banner are specifically refined to only include certain namespaces. This is fine because the banner itself states "unless otherwise stated". — Ram-Man ^{(comment) (talk)} 13:36, Mar 7, 2005 (UTC)