| Revision as of 19:48, 15 January 2007 editSandyGeorgia (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, File movers, Mass message senders, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors278,958 edits another← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:51, 15 January 2007 edit undoSandyGeorgia (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, File movers, Mass message senders, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors278,958 edits →Pls check: found the problemNext edit → | ||
| Line 33: | Line 33: | ||
| ==Pls check== | ==Pls check== | ||
| Hey, Jmax - the FA count has been at 1221 for several cycles, but the main page and ] are still showing 1224. ] shows the correct number (320). ] (]) 19:48, 15 January 2007 (UTC) | Hey, Jmax - the FA count has been at 1221 for several cycles, but the main page and ] are still showing 1224. ] shows the correct number (320). ] (]) 19:48, 15 January 2007 (UTC) | ||
| :hmmm ... found the problem - someone changed it ... what do we do about this, and shouldn't it be protected? | |||
Revision as of 19:51, 15 January 2007
purging Main Page cache
Could the bot purge the cache of the Main Page after updating the FA number, so that the updated version appears immediately? Thanks, BanyanTree 17:22, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
- Certainly. It now does so. --Jmax- 22:54, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
Problem?
This page gets used in Template:TFAfooter, which gets used on the 'article of the day' pages, which get displayed on the Main page. Ergo, anything on this page gets displayed on the Main page. As such, I'd think that this page needs to be protected... but that would prevent the bot from updating it. Thoughts? --CBD 12:49, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- Jumping in here, user subpages ending in ".js" may be edited only by the user and by admins, so it is, in effect, protected. (Try looking at User:Jmax-bot/FACount.js while logged out.) This was a bit of a hack as several Wikipedians at the requests for approval page said that they would not support sysopping the bot so it could edit a protected template, which was the original proposal. If the .js subpage workaround didn't emerge as an option that would allow a non-sysop bot to get a counter on the Main Page, the bot would be putting the numbers in more intuitively named pages in the template space or not be working at all. - BanyanTree 13:21, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- Ah right, I'd forgotten about that aspect of .js pages. All ok then. --CBD 14:05, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
Bot granted
Your bot now has a flag! =Nichalp «Talk»= 17:29, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
Bot stopped
The bot has stopped working for the second time this week. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:21, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
- Raul, doublechecking the 1207 ? It was 1198 when the bot stopped on the 29th, after Marskell removed four, and you added 5 on the 30th, 5 on the 31st - is it 1208, or did I miss one? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:26, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, I made a mistake - 1208 is the correct count. Raul654 16:52, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
- Perhaps that Hoponpop69 removal was the confusion - that article (whose name I'm unable to type :-) was restated by Schutz as an invalid removal. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:00, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, I made a mistake - 1208 is the correct count. Raul654 16:52, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
Going again, looks good - thanks, Jmax. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:32, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
Bot error
Two FAs were FARC'd on January 7: Saxophone and First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Marskell didn't remove them from WP:FA: LuciferMorgan did. Although LuciferMorgan is not a whitelisted user, and no whitelisted user has yet edited, the count is showing a reduction of two (to 1203) since Lucifer's edit. Is the whitelist working? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:57, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry about that. I should've done it right away and then lost my access in the middle of archiving the FAR talk (the company pays, not me!).
- As for the whitelist, I'm not sure what the deal is. The debug report is suggesting that it's still using my revision from four days ago, but it's counting based on Lucifer's. Marskell 08:38, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
- I was glad you missed one, Marskell (a rare event); it gave us a chance to test the bot whitelist :-) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:04, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
Yes, there is an issue with the whitelist. I'll take a look at it shortly. -- Jmax- 21:10, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
Pls check
Hey, Jmax - the FA count has been at 1221 for several cycles, but the main page and WP:FA are still showing 1224. WP:FFA shows the correct number (320). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:48, 15 January 2007 (UTC)