Difference between revisions of "Talk:2009-01-31 55 12"
From Geohashing
imported>Jiml m (Explain why I'm tagging it.) |
imported>Benjw (→Parsing Issue: fixed, maybe?) |
||
Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
would solve the problem, but I want to leave it alone so we can fix APBot. [[User:Jiml|Jiml]] 17:16, 13 July 2010 (UTC) | would solve the problem, but I want to leave it alone so we can fix APBot. [[User:Jiml|Jiml]] 17:16, 13 July 2010 (UTC) | ||
[[Category:Needs attention]] | [[Category:Needs attention]] | ||
+ | :There ''is'' a "Participants" section, but it's worded so that AprBot can't understand it. I've rephrased it in a way that preserves the original but will hopefully allow the bot to cope. I don't think we can reprogram the bot to be able to cope with every possible variation. Will leave the Needs attention category here until I'm sure it's now fixed. -- [[User:Benjw|Benjw]] 21:02, 16 August 2010 (UTC) |
Revision as of 21:02, 16 August 2010
That's a brilliant first expedition! It's a brilliant any expedition. Also I thought your pinecones were sausages, at first. -Robyn 17:12, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Haha - I thought they were sausages too! --CJ 04:01, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- What's up with you guys and sausages? That's just silly. These aren't the sausages you're looking for. They're pine cones, I tell you. PINE CONES! (Actually, we were afraid the cones would look like dog poo, but sausages didn't really cross our minds...) --Pennywise 09:01, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
- I read your expedition before I had breakfast. I was ready to eat kielbasa off the ground. Or carrots. But not dog poo. And probably not pinecones, unless they were fried with bacon and maybe some garlic. -Robyn 09:12, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
I like Yatzy, I like deer, and I like your expedition. --Ilpadre 17:35, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Love the pictures! We're assuming reindeer? And we thought the pinecones were carrots - you know, reindeer eat carrots... Thanks for sharing! -- NCBears 18:30, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Parsing Issue
APBot is having trouble parsing your report, so I'm going to tag it for future attention. A "Participants" section would solve the problem, but I want to leave it alone so we can fix APBot. Jiml 17:16, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
- There is a "Participants" section, but it's worded so that AprBot can't understand it. I've rephrased it in a way that preserves the original but will hopefully allow the bot to cope. I don't think we can reprogram the bot to be able to cope with every possible variation. Will leave the Needs attention category here until I'm sure it's now fixed. -- Benjw 21:02, 16 August 2010 (UTC)