You do not have permission to edit this page, for the following reasons:

This IP address has been blocked from editing Wikipedia.
This does not affect your ability to read Wikipedia pages.
Most people who see this message have done nothing wrong. Some kinds of blocks restrict editing from specific service providers or telecom companies in response to recent abuse or vandalism, and can sometimes affect other users who are unrelated to that abuse. Review the information below for assistance if you do not believe that you have done anything wrong.

The IP address or range 18.208.0.0/16 has been blocked (disabled) by ‪ST47‬ for the following reason(s):

The IP address that you are currently using has been blocked because it is believed to be a web host provider. To prevent abuse, web hosts may be blocked from editing Wikipedia.
You will not be able to edit Wikipedia using a web host provider because it hides your IP address, much like a proxy or VPN.
We recommend that you attempt to use another connection to edit. For example, if you use a proxy or VPN to connect to the internet, turn it off when editing Wikipedia. If you edit using a mobile connection, try using a Wi-Fi connection, and vice versa. If you are using a corporate internet connection, switch to a different Wi-Fi network. If you have a Wikipedia account, please log in.
If you do not have any other way to edit Wikipedia, you will need to request an IP block exemption.

How to appeal if you are confident that your connection does not use a web host's IP address:
If you are confident that you are not using a web host, you may appeal this block by adding the following text on your talk page: ((unblock|reason=Caught by a web host block but this host or IP is not a web host. My IP address is _______. Place any further information here. ~~~~)). You must fill in the blank with your IP address for this block to be investigated. Your IP address can be determined here. Alternatively, if you wish to keep your IP address private you can use the unblock ticket request system. There are several reasons you might be editing using the IP address of a web host (such as if you are using VPN software or a business network); please use this method of appeal only if you think your IP address is in fact not a web host.

Administrators: The IP block exemption user right should only be applied to allow users to edit using web host in exceptional circumstances, and they should usually be directed to the functionaries team via email. If you intend to give the IPBE user right, a CheckUser needs to take a look at the account. This can be requested most easily at SPI Quick Checkuser Requests. Unblocking an IP or IP range with this template is highly discouraged without at least contacting the blocking administrator.

This block will expire on 01:01, 24 April 2026.

Even when blocked, you will usually still be able to edit your user talk page, as well as email administrators and other editors.

For information on how to proceed, please read the FAQ for blocked users and the guideline on block appeals. The guide to appealing blocks may also be helpful.

Other useful links: Blocking policy · Help:I have been blocked
Your IP address is in a range that has been blocked on all Wikimedia Foundation wikis. The block was made by ‪AntiCompositeNumber‬. The reason given is Open proxy/Webhost: See the help page if you are affected .
- Start of block: 15:08, 30 August 2023
- Expiry of block: 15:08, 30 August 2025
Your current IP address is 18.208.109.86. The blocked range is 18.208.0.0/16. Please include all above details in any queries you make. If you believe you were blocked by mistake, you can find additional information and instructions in the No open proxies global policy. Otherwise, to discuss the block please post a request for review on Meta-Wiki. You could also send an email to the stewards VRT queue at stewards@wikimedia.org including all above details.

You can view and copy the source of this page:

<noinclude><br />
[[Category:Withdrawn Wikipedia bot requests for approval|AmeliorationBot 2]]
<div class="boilerplate metadata" style="background-color: 
#dedaca; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">

== [[User:AmeliorationBot|AmeliorationBot 2]] ==
((Newbot|AmeliorationBot|2)) 

'''Operator:''' <span style="font-size:80%;font-family:tahoma;">'''~ Ameliorate!''' <sub>[[User:Ameliorate!|U]] [[User talk:Ameliorate!|T]] [[Special:Contributions/Ameliorate!|C]]</sub> '''@'''</span>

<!--Automatic: Specify whether supervised or unsupervised -->
<!--Manually Assisted: User must manually confirm every change -->
'''Automatic or Manually Assisted:''' Automatic but edits are manually confirmed in bulk

<!--Programming Language: The computer language that this bot will be written in. E.g. Python, Java, C, VB, AutoWikiBrowser. NOT English etc -->
'''[[Programming Language]](s):''' C# ([[User:Ameliorate!/TINA|TINA]])

<!--Please keep Function Summary SHORT-->
'''Function Summary:''' Remove [[:Image:Replace this image female.svg]] and [[:Image:Replace this image male.svg]] from articles.

'''Edit period(s)''' ''(e.g. Continuous, daily, one time run)''''':''' one time run

<!--For existing bots only-->
'''Already has a bot flag''' ''(Y/N)''''':''' Y

<!--List full function details here-->
'''Function Details:''' Remove [[:Image:Replace this image female.svg]] and [[:Image:Replace this image male.svg]] from articles per the request [[Wikipedia:Bot_requests#Replace_this_image|here]] and the consensus to deprecate these images [[Wikipedia:Centralized discussion/Image placeholders|here]].

=== Discussion ===
<!-- This is not a vote.  It is a discussion -->
Is there really consensus for this action? IMO, the discussion you linked to shows a distinct ''lack'' of consensus for removing these images. [[User:Anomie|Anomie]][[User talk:Anomie|⚔]] 21:35, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

:From the conclusion at the top:
:<blockquote>''From 11 April to 23 April 2008, a centralized discussion considered the appropriateness of using "from-owner" image placeholders on biographies of living persons. A carefully structured discussion clarified the objections to this practice as well as its benefits.''</blockquote>

:<blockquote>''There was significant opposition to the use of images such as Replace this image female and Replace this image male and '''these should no longer be used on article pages'''.''</blockquote> <span style="font-size:80%;font-family:tahoma;">'''~ Ameliorate!''' <sub>[[User:Ameliorate!|U]] [[User talk:Ameliorate!|T]] [[Special:Contributions/Ameliorate!|C]]</sub> '''@'''</span> 06:34, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

:: I looked at the poll in the second section of that page (with comments dated April 30–May 11) and saw 13 or 14 people in favor and 14 opposed, and a few more somewhat in the middle. It looks like the attempt at getting a wider consensus failed after the April 11–April 23 discussion; looking into that earlier discussion, I see a fairly weak consensus there too. [[User:Anomie|Anomie]][[User talk:Anomie|⚔]] 13:42, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

::: To be honest I only looked at the conclusion above the archived discussions, which generally reflects the consensus. However, looking through the revisions indicates that there may be a bit more to this. I've left messages for the user's who added (and edited) that conclusion. Obviously I will withdraw this request if there isn't actually a consensus to do this (I have no opinion for or against the images), but if that is the case (there is no consensus) then the archiving and conclusion on that centralised discussion is very confusing, if not, misleading. <span style="font-family:tahoma;font-size:80%;font-weight:bold;">~ [[User:Ameliorate!|<span style="color:black;">User:Ameliorate!</span>]]</span> <sup>(with the !) ([[User talk:Ameliorate!|talk]])</sup> 16:14, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

'''Background first''': The discussion on placeholders was a surprisingly contentious issue mostly, I believe, because of the personalities of a couple of key people on both sides of the debate which crossed the lines of Wikiquette and AGF several times. It became clear, however, that the images for the placeholders were disliked by a significant number of editors and suspending use of them seemed to gain a consensus view. The idea, however, of permitting a quick and simple way to add a free-use photo to bios of living people was seen as positive and discussion of how to replace the images with better means was well-underway and seemed near conclusion. The majority view seemed to be to not mass-add or remove the images but rather replace them with a better system. An editor, however, continuously attempted to stop that discussion and battle-fatigue set in. It is very difficult and time-consuming for anyone to get a clear idea of the concluding discussions since a key editor refused to use the talk page and requires examining differences through the history of the page as well as the [[Wikipedia:Centralized discussion/Image placeholders/Archive 3|discussion on replacement]]. 

'''On this bot task''': It is certainly not easy to use the debate to argue that there is consensus to remove these images. The consensus, in my opinion, was to replace them with another system. However, since replacement discussion, though nearly completed, has been suspended for several months and it was consensus that the images were undesirable, I do not now object to having the images removed en-masse. [[User:DoubleBlue|<span style="color:darkblue;">'''Double'''</span><span style="color:blue;">Blue</span>]] ([[User talk:DoubleBlue|Talk)]] 21:10, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

:: Like DoubleBlue, I was an active participant in that discussion. Though we diagreed on many particulars, I came to have a great deal of respect for DB's general approach to the issue. I personally agree with DB's view that it would be good to simply remove all the images (and am a little surprised to see that DB now supports it), but I also agree with the assessment that nothing close to a consensus was reached on that matter through the discussion. I think in order to establish a basis for this bot action, it would be necessary to seek a new consensus. It's possible that some of the emotion has died down, and that might not be as difficult a task as it was the first time around. I don't know. -[[User:Peteforsyth|Pete]] ([[User talk:Peteforsyth|talk]]) 21:58, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
:::Just a clarification that I do feel the placeholder idea is a good one and I saw nothing in particular wrong with the images. However, I recognise a significant number of editors disliked the images and I respect that. My views haven't changed on those elements. My opinion on mass-removal has changed because a replacement system has not been established in a reasonable time. Though I do believe one was developed, it did not reach the final stages of implementation due to fatigue and its being placed in a subpage erroneously called an archive. Now that several months have passed, I don't see it being easy to continue discussion and am still a little tired of the drama from the initial rounds to start again. [[User:DoubleBlue|<span style="color:darkblue;">'''Double'''</span><span style="color:blue;">Blue</span>]] ([[User talk:DoubleBlue|Talk)]] 22:58, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
:: I'm in favour of the removal of the image placeholders, although (like others above) I'd agree that the centralized discussion [[Wikipedia:Process is important|process]] failed to reach a clear-cut conclusion. (Equally, I don't see a lot of continuing support for their use. . . .) --''[[User:Kleinzach|<span style="color:#FF4500;letter-spacing:2px;">Klein</span>]][[User talk:Kleinzach|<span style="padding:0px 0px 1px 2px;color:white; background-color:#ACE1AF;letter-spacing:2px;">zach</span>]]'' 23:43, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

:::That is because people seek out ways to object to them but not ways to support them. In any case I could technicaly build a system that would fix most of the objections within a couple of days but I would need admin acess and I would need the existing images left in place intialy (for about 24 hours).[[User:Geni|Geni]] 20:09, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
::::Of course people seek out ways to object to them - [[Wikipedia:Centralized_discussion/Image_placeholders/Archive_2#Proposal_2:_If_placeholder_images_are_retained.2C_they_should_be_modified_in_appearance|there's so much that is objectionable]].  That's why they should be removed.&nbsp;–&nbsp;[[User talk:Jaksmata|<span style="color:black; background:#FFFFDD"><span style="color:red;">'''j'''</span>ak<span style="color:red;">'''s'''</span>mata</span>]] 22:11, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
* Many of these placeholders were originally added by scripts without going through a bot request. Aside from the consensus issue, that meant many errors in the coding went undiscovered. Some infoboxes now have two "image=" fields because an existing, empty field wasn't checked for. Some infoboxes use the field "image=" and others use "img=", so scripts designed for one style of infobox added false fields to the other style. Some edits added extra pipes and varying html-comment text. Technically, the edits vary enough that merely cleaning them up would be difficult. Before any automatic script tries to fix these, I want to see a detailed description, including regexes, of what it's going to do. It's not enough to just say "Remove [[:Image:Replace this image female.svg]] and [[:Image:Replace this image male.svg]] from articles." [[User talk:Gimmetrow|''Gimmetrow'']] 22:28, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
** I know very little about bot scripts so that may be why I don't understand why one could not just remove those. It does no harm to leave the editorial comment that only free-content images are allowed. I have never seen any instances of the false fields being added but presumably if they still exist it would do no harm to remove the image call from those either. [[User:DoubleBlue|<span style="color:darkblue;">'''Double'''</span><span style="color:blue;">Blue</span>]] ([[User talk:DoubleBlue|Talk)]] 23:04, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
*** This involves about 50,000 articles, I'm estimating. For a task that size, I would like to see other stuff done than just a simple removal of some match text; it should also try to fix most of the other quirks introduced in articles, and perhaps some other general cleanup. [[User talk:Gimmetrow|''Gimmetrow'']] 19:29, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

* From an outside view; if there is a consensus to not use the images, wouldn't also requiring a consensus to remove them be needless [[Wikipedia:NOTBUREAUCRACY|bureaucracy]]? <span style="font-family:tahoma;font-size:80%;font-weight:bold;">~ [[User:Ameliorate!|<span style="color:black;">User:Ameliorate!</span>]]</span> <sup>(with the !) ([[User talk:Ameliorate!|talk]])</sup> 01:06, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
** I suppose I should confess, I really have no idea what kind of consensus was or wasn't reached. I didn't really understand the way the discussion was concluded. I think an outsider's view of the consensus is likely to be clearer than mine -- but, it should take into account the extensive discussion, and it's important to note that many people with strong views seem to opt out of the discussion before the conclusion was written up. -[[User:Peteforsyth|Pete]] ([[User talk:Peteforsyth|talk]]) 01:52, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
*** The discussion didn't really have a conclusion, it just sorta petered out (pardon the expression).  Consensus was only conclusively demonstrated on one point: that the placeholder images should not remain as-is (paraphrased from [[Wikipedia:Centralized_discussion/Image_placeholders/Archive_2#Proposal_2:_If_placeholder_images_are_retained.2C_they_should_be_modified_in_appearance|here]]). From that, it's a short jump to the conclusion that [[:Image:Replace this image female.svg]] and [[:Image:Replace this image male.svg]] (specifically) should not be used. The non-consensus-reaching part of the discussion was about how those images should be replaced. Consensus was not reached on eliminating ''all'' image placeholders, just these two. Therefore, in my opinion, it is ok to remove those two images per demonstrated consensus even though consensus was never reached on their replacement, if any.&nbsp;–&nbsp;[[User talk:Jaksmata|<span style="color:black; background:#FFFFDD"><span style="color:red;">'''j'''</span>ak<span style="color:red;">'''s'''</span>mata</span>]] 16:27, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
::::There was such a wide range of opinion over what change them meant (such as sat makeing the image lighter) that cannot reasonably be considered a consensus to remove them.[[User:Geni|Geni]] 19:24, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
::::: Geni, could you give a diff on that? I don't remembering anything so trivial as lightening the image being proposed, or used as a meaning for "change the system." -[[User:Peteforsyth|Pete]] ([[User talk:Peteforsyth|talk]]) 19:36, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
::::::You didn't pay attention to the graphics lab request then. Aside from that there are multipe suggestions floating around on the page that would best be implemented by uploading over the existing images (actualy that isn't quite tr. The remaining tended to come from people who clearly failed to grasp how the system worked.[[User:Geni|Geni]] 20:06, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
::::::: Geni, I would be happy to pay attention to the graphics lab request, if you would be so kind as to provide a link. As to the failure to grasp how the system worked -- I remember you repeatedly asserting that people didn't understand, but that doesn't make it true. -[[User:Peteforsyth|Pete]] ([[User talk:Peteforsyth|talk]]) 20:18, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
::::::::Ah no correction the comment would be at [[File talk:Replace_this_image_male.svg#Why_does_the_background_shading_look_dramatically_different_on_different_computers.3F]]. Suggestions to turn the image into a stub notice suggest either a lack of understanding of the image or a lack of understanding of the problems that face new users.[[User:Geni|Geni]] 20:36, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
::::::::: If a new system were developed that editors widely accepted, there would probably be little objection to changing the template code to automatically use that new system whenever the image field was blank. Therefore, I'm not convinced that keeping the currently-existing placeholder links would facilitate any future system. There may be other reasons not to remove the links, however. [[User talk:Gimmetrow|''Gimmetrow'']] 21:02, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
::::::::::You are forgetting about how the final stage of the system works.[[User:Geni|Geni]] 22:20, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
:::::::::::How does it work? [[User talk:Gimmetrow|''Gimmetrow'']] 02:02, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
::::::::::::Step 4. Add your image to the article.

::::::::::::Once you have uploaded your image, go to the article you want to put it in. Click the "edit" tab and replace "Replace this image.svg", "Replace this image male.svg" or "Replace this image female.svg" with the name of your image. 
::::::::::::[[User:Geni|Geni]] 03:46, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

::::::::::: Why does this mean the links should stay? Couldn't someone just change the instructions to say "Click the edit tab and replace the space after image= or img= with the name of your image"? [[User talk:Gimmetrow|''Gimmetrow'']] 04:01, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

:I'd want to see a precedent of people removing these images ''manually'' for a while and not encountering objections. Bots should not be used for controversial tasks, because they act in ways that would be quite inappropriate for a human -- they don't discuss their edits, they don't listen to objections, and if you revert them they just revert you back. [[User:Rspeer|'''<span style="color: #63f;">r</span><span style="color: #555;">speer</span>''']] / [[User talk:Rspeer|<span style="color: #555;">ɹəəds</span><span style="color: #63f;">ɹ </span>]] 07:43, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

::Fair enough. ((BotWithdrawn)) I'll reopen this if there is, in future, a distinct consensus to do it. <span style="font-family:tahoma;font-size:80%;font-weight:bold;">~ [[User:Ameliorate!|<span style="color:black;">User:Ameliorate!</span>]]</span> <sup>(with the !) ([[User talk:Ameliorate!|talk]])</sup> 13:29, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.''<!-- from Template:Bot Bottom --></div> 
</noinclude>

Pages transcluded onto the current version of this page (help):

Template:BotWithdrawn (view source) (semi-protected)
Template:Edit count link (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Endflatlist (view source) (protected)
Template:Flatlist (view source) (protected)
Template:Hlist/styles.css (view source) (protected)
Template:Newbot (view source) (template editor protected)

Return to Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/AmeliorationBot 2.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/AmeliorationBot_2"