User talk:Riley Huntley

(Redirected from User talk:RileyBot)


Welcome to my talk page, I hope I can be of assistance. Riley Huntley (talk) 09:53, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Contact bot opEdit

you said: "The only reason why the link was redlinked was because the category was a redirect needing to be deleted to allow for a move, it was shortly after created. "

Life would be a lot easier if the bot operator created the new category before moving a bunch of files to it. It takes about 30 seconds.

Now I know the correct procedure. I see from the rileybot talk page I wasn't the only one to catch your error.

Yours Roseohioresident (talk) 07:47, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

@Roseohioresident: You seem to still think it was an error, so let me explain once more. The new category, could not be created, because it already existed in the form of a category redirect. Therefore, the files were moved to it, and it was marked with {{Speedy}} - Delete to make way for category move. The administrators then deleted the category, per standard policy. It was at this point you, and other other user who commented noticed the page as non-existant (deletion log clearly stated the reason for why it was a redlink). As soon as I was notified the category was deleted, the bot moved the category, and it's history, to fill the red link. So no, it does not take about 30 seconds. In this case, it took about a day. There was no error. I hope you now understand, and I thank you for taking the time to respond. Enjoy the rest of your weekend :) Riley Huntley (talk) 07:53, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
I guess I don't understand, but I'll take your word for it. I'm changing the category to Category:Black and white portrait photographs of men of the United States anyhow. I accept you acted in good faith and competently. Roseohioresident (talk) 08:19, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

License review editsEdit

Hi. I see that on 02:01 February 5, you made a bunch of edits marking files with {{LicenseReview}}. [1][2][3][4] Unfortunately, that's not very useful if those files don't have links to where they appear on external web sites. As the template says. See, that's pretty much all that License review is - we reviewers follow those links to those sites, and say, "yup, that file was there all right, and marked with that license". (Or not, as the case may be. There are cases when the file is there, and marked, but we can tell that it was so marked inappropriately, that's useful too at times.) But if these files are, as these files you marked, uploaded by the user without being first downloaded from some external web site, there isn't anything we can verify. So if you think they need to be nominated for deletion, then do that. But please don't send them to LicenseReview, as we don't have anything to review. Thanks. --GRuban (talk) 19:14, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

@GRuban: Oops, my mistake, I was hitting my License Review tool (gadget i've made for easy tagging) thats right under the No Permission tool I was aiming for. It makes no sense for those to go your guys way, you already have a large enough backlog. Thanks for pointing out my mistake and reverting my edits! Riley Huntley (talk) 19:57, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
It would probably be (slightly) better to leave an edit comment such as 'requesting license review with script', just to be more clear. Revent (talk) 03:16, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
Will do. :) Riley Huntley (talk) 03:29, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
Heh! Just noticed your application, and acceptance to not only drop LicenseReview templates, but to respond to them. Welcome to the crew! --GRuban (talk) 14:13, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Congratulations, Dear license reviewerEdit

If you use the helper scripts, you will find the links next to the search box (vector) or as single tabs (monobook). They are named license+ and license-.

Hi Riley Huntley, thanks for your request for license reviewer status. The request has been closed as successful, and you've been added to the list of reviewers. You can now start reviewing files – please see Commons:License review and Commons:Flickr files if you haven't done so already. We also have a guide how to detect copyright violations. Potential backlogs include Flickr review, Picasa review, Panoramio review, and files from other sources. You can use one of the following scripts by adding one of the lines to your common.js:

importScript('User:ZooFari/licensereviewer.js'); // stable script for reviewing images from any kind of source OR
importScript('User:Rillke/LicenseReview.js'); // contains also user notification when review fails, auto blacklist-check and auto-thank you message for Flickr-reviews.

You can also add {{user license reviewer}} to your user page if you wish. Thank you for your contributions on Commons! Revent (talk) 11:53, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Done, and cheers! Riley Huntley (talk) 18:32, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Riley Huntley".