User talk:Geewunling

Yo, could you maybe mark your additions of the delete template to articles as "minor changes"? Because theyre frickin' drowning the recent changes page lately, and a way to not have to see them would be nice. - Chris McFeely 12:54, 7 April 2009 (EDT)

...well, once I get to 'em, all you have to do is click "hide patrolled edits."--Rosicrucian^Talk 13:55, 7 April 2009 (EDT)

Oh, yeah, I know that, I just mean before they get deleted (I could delete them myself, of course, but... here we are!). --Chris McFeely 13:58, 7 April 2009 (EDT)

...I will however request that you be a bit less zealous in your flagging of "outdated" talkpages. If it's a talkpage for an article that exists, it ought not get deleted.--Rosicrucian^Talk 14:42, 7 April 2009 (EDT)

To clarify, lest there be a misunderstanding, I am absolutely cool with 99.95% of the ones you are nominating. Talkpage redirects? Boffo. Talkpages for articles that no longer exist? With you entirely. I only object to deleting talkpages for existing articles.--Rosicrucian^Talk 15:09, 7 April 2009 (EDT)

...are you actually fixing all those links BY HAND when a page moves? -Derik 06:26, 21 November 2009 (EST)

Hm, yes. I am aware of the bot, but there's two reasons why I (sometimes) prefer to do things by hand:

1. Some moves require attention a bot can't give. I assume the bot changed all Timelines links to Timelines (fiction), even when that clearly is the wrong link. For franchise names, I prefer to see things sorted, which only can happen manually. This also is/was the case for finally disamb'd stuff like Lithone, Junkion, Black Friday, Transmutate, etc. which in a few cases would link to the wrong place if done by bot.
2. In some cases, I'm just not in the mood to see organization be put aside until a bot can attend to it. And doing it manually also gives me a reason to just as well quickly check out the entire pages' coding. Geewunling 06:49, 21 November 2009 (EST)

3) The 'bot has been broken since June?

4) Derik hasn't been around to fix or, or queue up changes even if it was working?

(It's fixed now.) -Derik 07:08, 21 November 2009 (EST)