Wikipedia:Bots/Noticeboard
Bots noticeboard |
---|
Here we coordinate and discuss Wikipedia issues related to bots and other programs interacting with the MediaWiki software. Bot operators are the main users of this noticeboard, but even if you are not one, your comments will be welcome. Just make sure you are aware about our bot policy and know where to post your issue. Do not post here if you came to
|
Bot-related archives (v·t·e) |
---|
ARBCOM on Wikidata
See Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests#Crosswiki issues: Motion (November 2017). This will be relevant both to WP:BAG members and Wikidata-related bot operators. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 00:37, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
- How will that affect me. I’m a little confused here?—CYBERPOWER (Around) 01:56, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
- Looks like the immediate impact would be to BAG, from (C) - task approvals for any large tasks involving wikidata integration will need an enhanced level of community support and wider advertisement for input. — xaosflux Talk 02:32, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
- Given how controversial Wikidata integration has historically been, I'd say ArbCom's motion shouldn't make much difference there since we should already have been demanding strong consensus. Anomie⚔ 21:13, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
- I would recommend placing all Wikidata-related bot requests on hold if filed after the time of the motion. Until we have a larger RfC result, these changes are extremely controversial and wide-scale changes explicitly discouraged by the motion. ~ Rob13Talk 14:29, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
Bot causing multi colon escape lint error
There are now 8,218 lint errors of type Multi colon escape, and all but 7 of these are caused by WP 1.0 bot. This bug was reported at Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Index#Bot adding double colons 9 October 2017. Perhaps some bot experts who don't typically wander in those parts can apply their skills to the problem. Please continue the discussion there, not here. —Anomalocaris (talk) 06:14, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
- Didn't Nihlus already deal with all of these? Primefac (talk) 13:08, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
- NilhusBOT 5 is a monthly task to fix the problems with the 1.0 bot until such time as the 1.0 bot is fixed. --Izno (talk) 14:16, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
- Correct. I've been traveling lately, so I wasn't able to run it. I am running it now and will let you know when it is done. Nihlus 14:33, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
- NilhusBOT 5 is a monthly task to fix the problems with the 1.0 bot until such time as the 1.0 bot is fixed. --Izno (talk) 14:16, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
- Please see User talk:Nihlus#1.0 log. The problem is that to fix this properly afterward will be more difficult, unless the 1.0 bot, or another task, is done to retroactively rewrite the log page (not only update new entries but correct old ones). —PaleoNeonate – 15:50, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
- Basically, I don't have the time but would need to myself properly fix the log today. It's simpler to just revert and fix it properly when I can. —PaleoNeonate – 15:51, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
- @PaleoNeonate: Why are you having this discussion in two separate places? I addressed the issue on my talk page. Nihlus 15:55, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
I thought that this may be a more appropriate place considering that it's about 1.0 bot and Nihlusbot, so will resume it here. Your answer did not address the problem. Do you understand that:
- Before October 5, 2017, category links were fine, but then later were broken, resulting in the same kind of bogus double-colon links as for drafts (these were not mainspace links, but Category: space links)
- It's possible that draft links were always broken, resulting in the same kind of broken double-colon links
- Nihlusbot causes both broken category and draft space links to become mainspace links (not Draft: or Category: ones as it should)
- As a result, the "fix" does not improve the situation, the links are still broken (mainspace red links instead of category and draft links).
- If keeping these changes and wanting to fix them later, it's more difficult to detect what links were not supposed to be to main space. In any case, to fix it properly, a more fancy script is needed which checks the class of the page...
Thanks, —PaleoNeonate – 23:31, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
- Do I understand? Yes, yes, this time it did due to a small extra bit in the code, disagree as stated already, this is something I am working on. Thanks! Nihlus 00:27, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
- So, there are issues with almost every single namespace outside of articlespace, so WP 1.0 bot is making a lot of errors and should probably be prevented from continuing. However, until that time, I am limiting the corrections I am making to those that are explicitly assessed as Category/Template/Book/Draft/File-class. If they are classed incorrectly, then they will not get fixed. Nihlus 01:52, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
- A few hours ago, there were just 6 Multi colon escape lint errors. Now we have 125, all but 4 caused by WP 1.0 bot. This may be known to those working on the problem. —Anomalocaris (talk) 06:02, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
- @Nihlus: thanks for improving the situation. I see that Category links have been fixed (at least the ones I noticed). Unfortunately links to drafts remain to mainspace. —PaleoNeonate – 19:54, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
- @PaleoNeonate: As stated above:
I am limiting the corrections I am making to those that are explicitly assessed as Category/Template/Book/Draft/File-class. If they are classed incorrectly, then they will not get fixed.
Nihlus 19:55, 29 November 2017 (UTC)- Yes I have read it, but unfortunately contest the value of such hackish edits in 1.0 logs. Perhaps at least don't just convert those to non-working mainspace links when the class is unavailable, marking them so they are known not to be in mainspace (those double-colon items never were in mainspace)? A marker, or even a non-linked title would be a good choice to keep the distinction... —PaleoNeonate – 20:48, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
- Again, I repeat:
I am limiting the corrections I am making to those that are explicitly assessed as Category/Template/Book/Draft/File-class. If they are classed incorrectly, then they will not get fixed.
That means those are the only fixes I am making with the bot going forward as I have no intention of supervising each edit made to discern whether something is a draft/project page or not. Nihlus 20:56, 29 November 2017 (UTC)I am limiting the corrections I am making to those that are explicitly assessed as Category/Template/Book/Draft/File-class. If they are classed incorrectly, then they will not get fixed.
We appear to talk past eachother. That is not what technically happened. This diff (which you reverted) was made because links to mainspace were introduced for pages not in mainspace. If your script doesn't touch such links in the future when it cannot determine their class, that's an improvement. You say that you don't correct them, but so far they were still "fixed" (converted to erroneous mainspace links). The "loss of information" from my first complaint was about that those bogus links were previously unambiguously recognizable as non-mainspace (those that are now confusing, broken mainspace links when the class is not in the text). —PaleoNeonate – 05:27, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
- Again, I repeat:
- Yes I have read it, but unfortunately contest the value of such hackish edits in 1.0 logs. Perhaps at least don't just convert those to non-working mainspace links when the class is unavailable, marking them so they are known not to be in mainspace (those double-colon items never were in mainspace)? A marker, or even a non-linked title would be a good choice to keep the distinction... —PaleoNeonate – 20:48, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
- @PaleoNeonate: As stated above:
- Has the bot operator been contacted or responded to this issue?—CYBERPOWER (Merry Christmas) 02:18, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
- @Cyberpower678: From what I understand, there have been multiple attempts at making contact with them. To be thorough, I have emailed Kelson, Theopolisme, and Wolfgang42 in an attempt to get a response and solution. Nihlus 04:36, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
- I have blocked the bot until these issues are resolved.—CYBERPOWER (Merry Christmas) 05:09, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks. I will hold off on any task 5 edits with my bot. Nihlus 05:39, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
- You should note that per this post Wolfgang42 cannot do anything for us and I recall that Theopolisme is currently unable to devote time to this, so Kelson seems to be the only one who can assist right now. As I've mentioned a number of times in the last 2 years we really need to find someone with the skills to maintain this. ww2censor (talk) 12:14, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks. I will hold off on any task 5 edits with my bot. Nihlus 05:39, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
- I have blocked the bot until these issues are resolved.—CYBERPOWER (Merry Christmas) 05:09, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
- @Cyberpower678: From what I understand, there have been multiple attempts at making contact with them. To be thorough, I have emailed Kelson, Theopolisme, and Wolfgang42 in an attempt to get a response and solution. Nihlus 04:36, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
They are voting on the future of AWB (a program used for powering bots)
Since AWB has a bot flag, that turns it into a bot engine, I thought you might want to know about a vote going on that will affect the nature of that program:
The Transhumanist 00:25, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
Inactive bots - December 2017
Per the bot policy activity requirements, the following bots will be deauthorized and deflagged in one week. These bots have not made an edit in 2 or more years, nor have their operator made an edit in 2 or more years.
bot_user_name | oper_user_name | oper_Last_edit | bot_user_editcount | bot_user_registration | bot_Last_edit | Notes |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
User:YpnBot | User:Ypnypn | 20151217 | 9805 | 20130611204919 | 20140305161942 | |
User:MessengerBot~enwiki | N/A |
N/A | 4 | 20131119192607 | 20131119194253 | Was migrated to User:MediaWiki message delivery |
User:Wikinews Importer Bot | User:Misza13 | 20150219 | 86016 | 20080103221728 | 20150617110050 | |
User:NoomBot | User:Noommos | 20151021 | 131906 | 20110205163858 | 20130421172631 | |
User:Project Messenger Bot | User:Noommos | 20151021 | 78 | 20110403163155 | 20110714195036 | |
User:WolfBot | User:Wolfgang42 | 20151125 | 3497 | 20121014025415 | 20131227014716 |
Should an operator wish to maintain their bot's status, please place "keep" and your signature in the notes column above for your bot. Deauthorized bots will need to file a new BRFA should they wish to become reactivated in the future. Thank you, — xaosflux Talk 00:00, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
- Discuss
Done All 6 accounts have be de-botted. — xaosflux Talk 12:33, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
KolbertBot block note
This is just an FYI since it was briefly mentioned at ANI, but I blocked User:KolbertBot today at Jon Kolbert's request via IRC because there was an issue with HTTP to HTTPS involving the New York Times, which was causing issues loading the external links. I have no idea what the bot policy is on unblocking as bot policy is not exactly an area of interest to me. So, I'm just posting here to note that I have no objection to any admin member of the BAG lifting the block in line with whatever the policy is if/when the time comes, and would actually much prefer that to doing it myself. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:02, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
- If JK asked for a block, I don't see the issue of unblocking upon JK's request from any admin. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 03:14, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
- Cool. I didn't know if there was a need for a BAG to comment, just thought it best to check here first. If that's the case, I can handle it (or someone else can if I'm not around). TonyBallioni (talk) 03:40, 21 December 2017 (UTC)