User talk:Mets501: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 02:54, 22 March 2007 editBetacommand (talk \| contribs)86,927 edits →Betacommandbot 3 ← Previous edit		Revision as of 02:55, 22 March 2007 edit undoNixeagle (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users32,737 edits →Betacommandbot 3: gah!Next edit →
Line 395:		Line 395:
	:Kyra's bot is just a clone because I have internet connection issues (my default connection is 26.4kbs) and hosting a bot on that connection is not a easy task. in regard to what the origional request was as doing linksearches of identified possible spam tracking those linksearch results on a subpage and maintaining that data. that is what is currently operational. I left the exact stats from the task as I was/am hoping to develope other stats also and wanted to be able to incorperate the stats in ] subpages also without having to file more BRFA's BCbot's task is limited to data collection and recording. Kyra's bot is the exact same but hosted on a better internet connection ] <sup>(] • ] • ])</sup> 02:45, 22 March 2007 (UTC)		:Kyra's bot is just a clone because I have internet connection issues (my default connection is 26.4kbs) and hosting a bot on that connection is not a easy task. in regard to what the origional request was as doing linksearches of identified possible spam tracking those linksearch results on a subpage and maintaining that data. that is what is currently operational. I left the exact stats from the task as I was/am hoping to develope other stats also and wanted to be able to incorperate the stats in ] subpages also without having to file more BRFA's BCbot's task is limited to data collection and recording. Kyra's bot is the exact same but hosted on a better internet connection ] <sup>(] • ] • ])</sup> 02:45, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
	::So if I'm understanding correctly, the new bot request was just to add more data to the spam recording page? What kind of data would that be? —<span style="color: red;">] (])</span> 02:47, 22 March 2007 (UTC)		::So if I'm understanding correctly, the new bot request was just to add more data to the spam recording page? What kind of data would that be? —<span style="color: red;">] (])</span> 02:47, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
	:Actually BCbot has no approval for any of the spam pages. I have been running the bot while awaiting approval. I am asking for that approval. the only other data that might be used it already gets would be just tracking the reports better and figuring out what the data it has means. but as that hasn't been coded Ill settle for getting the current code up. and file a new BRFA for new stats when they arise. ] <sup>(] • ] • ])</sup> 02:54, 22 March 2007 (UTC)		:::Actually BCbot has no approval for any of the spam pages. I have been running the bot while awaiting approval. I am asking for that approval. the only other data that might be used it already gets would be just tracking the reports better and figuring out what the data it has means. but as that hasn't been coded Ill settle for getting the current code up. and file a new BRFA for new stats when they arise. ] <sup>(] • ] • ])</sup> 02:54, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
			:::As far as I understand the tasking, it is the whole idea of the statistics to start with. He has just been running the bot in test mode for quite a while with no complaints. —— ] </font><sup>]</sup> 02:55, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 02:55, 22 March 2007

Userpage • Talk page • Contributions • MetsBot • Admin logs

You should use English on this page.

Usted puede utilizar español en esta página, pero solamente si es necesario, porque no soy fluido en español y ésta es la Misplaced Pages inglés.

Archives

The Complete Archives
Archive Index by Topic

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26

Aviation Newsletter delivery

The March 2007 issue of the Aviation WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) 16:21, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Template replacement

Hello, thank you for your offer. {{AircraftProject}} and {{AirportProject}} need replacing. I don't know if it is possible, but the pages tagged AircraftProject could also have the parameter |Aircraft-project=yes added, and the ones tagged with AirportProject could use |Airports-project=yes. Thanks, Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) 19:03, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

AWB

The latest commit doesn't build.

It gets the errors

The name 'temp' does not exist in the current context
ReplaceSpecial.cs
Line 719
Column 17
WikiFunctions

and

The type or namespace name 'IAWBMainForm' could not be found (are you missing a using directive or an assembly reference?)
Main.cs
Line 48
Column 43
AutoWikiBrowser

No idea why.

Also, what do you think about integrating wikidiff2 into AWB? (See ) It's the code that generates the diffs. The only problem is that it's written in c++, not c#. Can we "translate" it with that site you told me about to translate the custom module code? That would allow us to generate the diffs locally, saving time for users when using AWB and saving resources. Then we can even eliminate the quick save option from the bots list. —METS501 (talk) 01:02, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

The ReplaceSpecial.cs error is my fault. I simplified some code i did, but didnt check it compiled. Commited so it compiles now!!. The 2nd error, im not sure... I usually just delete files like that and reupdate if i get errors like that....

That program will do a version of C++, so we could. What does MaxSem have to say? Reedy Boy 01:09, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Snowbot

Hi,

I would like to request a edit rate change for my bot, Snowbot. Can you please tell me what it the procedure for such a thing?

Thanks and happy editing,

Snowolf _CON - 00:59, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Something like 7-10, I don't know how much exactly. Simply the currently rate of 5/min is slow, since CFD/W is really long many times. And even UCFD, sometimes. You're more expert than me, and you surely know better than me what is the rate that Snowbot need, I think ;-) Snowolf _CON - 10:54, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

User page

So, you're still affiliated with Esperanza? :-) - Anas 11:56, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

STTWbot

Hi Mets501! There seems to be some mistake perhaps from my side) as I wanted to request a 2nd task for my already existing bot, STTWbot and not a new bot (STTWbot 2). Which is shown in Misplaced Pages:Bots/Requests_for_approval#Bots_in_a_trial_period. Could you please correct it? STTW (talk) 18:01, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

B5 Wikiproject box

Hi Mets. The wikiprojects don't have to userfy their ubxes, according to the migration page. Cheers, Fang Aili 01:03, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Groovy, thanks. --Fang Aili 01:16, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

AWB / NW557Bot

Hello Mets501. My bot, NW557Bot, was recently approved for user talk template substitution using AWB. I've noticed a little problem while running the bot which doesn't cause any harm but does result in some unnecessary changes. The vandalism templates {{uw-vandalism1}}, etc. have  commented at the end so it can be identified which template was used when substituted. When AWB goes to substitute templates on a user page, it doesn't ignore commented out templates, so it ends up changing  to  if there are any substituted templates on the page which are listed in the list of templates to be substituted. Because they're commented out, it doesn't really make any difference, but it is an unnecessary change. Perhaps a feature could be built into an upcoming version of AWB that would add an option to ignore commented out templates when performing template substitution (or if one already exists, please let me know). Thanks for your time. --Nick—/_Contribs 04:51, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

MetsBot userbox replacement mistake

I'd like to thank you for having your bot fix links to migrated userboxes; I can recall several instances in which it helped on my userpage. However, I noticed one mistake it made on User:SPKx in this edit, where it incorrectly replaced {{user age|24}} with {{user age|:UBX/24}}, certainly not a valid change. Just thought you should know. — Tuvok 05:51, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I forgot to mention: If you respond, please either respond here or copy this section to my talk page. I like to keep conversations together. Thanks! — Tuvok 05:55, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. I've fixed in for the next bot run :-) —METS501 (talk) 05:59, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

No problem! As useful as bots are, I like to catch them when they make mistakes. ;-) — Tuvok 00:41, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Bot edits to archive

Hi, Mets501. I reverted a few edits that your bot made while migrating userboxes: specifically, its edits to archive pages here, here and here. Since those pages are a record of discussions about the creation of the userboxes, it's not appropriate to change them to the UBX version. For talk page archives, it's usually better to have a redlink than to change someone else's comment.

I didn't check to see whether your bot had made changes to other talk page archives, but you might want to. It's not a huge deal, but it'd be better if your bot didn't edit archive pages like that. Thanks! —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 07:58, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, I kind of disagree, the reason being that if you checked a user's contributions, they would be to the User:UBX/... page, not the Template:User ... page, as the histories were moved. It's also helpful to be able to actually see where the user's edits are, something that you can't find if you're not an admin who can view deleted revisions. What do you think? —METS501 (talk) 16:56, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, you can still see the user's contribution history. I can see your argument, but I tend to think of archive pages as a historical record that shouldn't be changed. I'll ask at Misplaced Pages talk:How to archive a talk page to see what the general sentiment there is. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 17:18, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Blanking edits on talk page

Hi Mets501, when you have a chance, could you comment on (Editing talk pages). I've left a recommendation on the talk of Trentino-South Tyrol, but I'm guessing the User PhJ responds better to Admin advice. Taalo 16:49, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, didn't realize your were on vacation. I've left the message on another Admin's talk page. Taalo 16:57, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Bot keeps changing the same link

Mets, would you please take a look at the page history on WP:HAM. MetsBot has changed a template link three times now. This page lists both the old and new locations for the template in question and the bot keeps messing up the listing. The bot really shouldn't try and update the same page multiple times for the same edit. Thanks. --StuffOfInterest 17:56, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. That will help. Didn't mind the change on my user page, but it was really confusing the directory. --StuffOfInterest 19:02, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 12th, 2007.

The Misplaced Pages Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 11	12 March 2007	About the Signpost

Report of diploma mill offering pay for edits	Essay tries to clarify misconceptions about Misplaced Pages
Blog aggregator launched for Wikimedia-related posts	WikiWorld comic: "Cartoon Physics"
News and notes: Wikimania 2007, milestones	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:33, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Migrate my archive?

Hi there,

I noticed what you did with Rfrisbie's userbox archive, and was wondering if you could do the same to mine (if it's not too much work) at User:MiraLuka/Userboxes (a full list is at User:MiraLuka/Userboxes/Alphabetical). I've been out of the userbox "business" for a while now, and I recently asked for a name change, so I thought this would be the ideal time to move them all out. Please let me know if you're willing to do this. —Mira 08:17, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

No work for me, just my bot. I'll start the work in a couple of days. —METS501 (talk) 17:22, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! —Mira 21:25, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Bot Malfunction

This user modified my User page incorrectly.

{{User Monty Python|Monty Python| is a fan of Monty Python}}

was changed to

{{User:UBX/Monty Python|:UBX/Monty Python| is a fan of Monty Python}}

As you can see, the link in the user box was corrupted by the bot. There was a page for "Monty Python", but there is no page for ":UBX/Monty Python".

Same here: --bitterMan.lha 02:51, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Seeing as your bot did this to several hundred pages (at least) I have sent my bot to fix all instances of it that I could find.--Dycedarg ж 03:35, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

User PhJ

Hey Mets, can someone stop PhJ from blanking edits, and doing his line by line censuring? He reported me now for reverting his blanks. o_O Before he reported me for vandalism because I reverted his edits. o_O I don't know what is his agenda.. Taalo 19:41, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

my main page

Some bots went to my main page and made the boxes (firefox user, etc) work better. Thanks bot person owner! Cocopopz2005 04:16, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

South Tyrol

Hi Mets501, on South Tyrol could you maybe help steer us to a solution as well? The polling, to me, is just showing a complete split of opinion. Dare I say there appears to be quite a strong German interest in a page for South Tyrol. I see many people suggest (and I agree as well) to do a split of the article. One article for the province of BZ, and another for the history of the region AA/ST. Anyway, I would rather have an objective interpretation of the talk-page results; so when you have a chance, please take a look over. Really appreciate it! Taalo 01:13, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Userbox stuff

Okay, I've read it, but if it's not policy, then it doesn't stand against someone's good-faith opposition, right? Hey, be bold... but don't be reckless! ;) Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 06:01, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

I would think that when it's come under protest, yes, it is mildly reckless. Just mildly (heck, it's userboxes =P)... but still. Do redirects hurt? Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 06:06, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

I hear you, but I'm fairly sure (could be wrong!) that "redirects are cheap" is part of some policy or guideline or something.

That's all. I think this is just a priorities thing--I think it's kind of important for people to type in {{user 1337-4}} which, to me, seems the most natural name for the template. That's just me, though. I get what you're saying, but I've never seen the harm in userboxes in template space, let alone redirects out of template space. Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 06:14, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Geo microformat

Please will you help to implement the Geo microformat in the Coor d template? Thank you. Andy Mabbett 17:19, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Please stop your bot from editing my page

I choose to keep deleted templates on my page. Please stop changing them. Jooler 19:32, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Nobots

I had Jooler's userpage on my watchlist for an unrelated reason, and I noticed that you added the nobots tag to prevent your bot from editing his userpage. He already had {{bots|deny=DyceBot,MetsBot}} on his userpage before the last edit by MetsBot, which your bot ignored. If your bot is configured to comply with the bots template in the first place (which is the only case under which the nobots tag would work anyway) than this should have stopped your bot from editing his page. I think you should reexamine your bot's exemption code if it's really supposed to be compliant with the tags. If it's running Pywikipedia there's a patch that works perfectly, that's how I got it to work for my bot. On another note, if your bot is fully compliant with the tags I would recommend you put its userpage in Category:Exclusion compliant bots so people know.--Dycedarg ж 20:10, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

motion to close mediation

hello there,

there was a mediation offer quite a while ago concerning the issue of Trentino-South Tyrol. I am happy to announce that the issue has been discussed, voted upon and settled. However the mediation offer still needs to be officially closed. Please take a minute to visit the page Misplaced Pages:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-10-20 Trentino-South Tyrol and put your signature at the bottom if you agree with the decision, thank you. sincerely Gryffindor 20:31, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

A very important note. This mediation offer concerned the greater overall naming convention to use in this region, not just the name of the region itself. We came up with a very good compromise for the regional name itself. I for one am still looking forward for Lar to help us out. Taalo 21:29, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

what is he up to now?

Assuming good faith of course. Gryffindor is trying to terminate the overall mediation offer by Lar (please see Lar's talk page for his own confusion). Gryffindor just unilaterally moved Bolzano to Bolzano-Bozen. While I agree with this edit, it goes completely against the move request that was just recently closed. This kind of brings some bad memories to what this fellow did on Trentino-Alto Adige back in 2005. Lastly, and I don't know if it is sour grapes, but he keeps deleting the Trentin-Adesc Aut, which is one of the Ladin names for the region. I'll find Markussep's citations and add them to the page. Yup, assuming good faith! :) Anyway, again really happy to have a neutral admin such as yourself watching things. Taalo 22:01, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the citation, I'm doing that right now. Quite disappointed at this behavior. : \ Taalo 22:22, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the move. Well, the poll for Bozen-Bolzano to Bozen was actually 9 support, 2 oppose. It wasn't perfect consensus, but it was pretty darn close. I actually prefer Bolzano-Bozen above all, because that is what I usually see on signs in the province. However, Gryffindor simply moving the page out of the blue like this just seems pretty flat out wrong. Taalo 22:32, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

AWB Updater

Hey, Get your AWB SVN Version updated and have a look :P

Reedy Boy 23:43, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Just commited a version that works. Currently setup to download from my local webserver, with the file link and the filename manually entered

But tested working from the SF Servers, just a bit slower than a local http server ;)

Just need a way to pass it the parameters of the filename and the filepath!!

Reedy Boy 00:37, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing typo's on Ravenloft (D&D module)

Just wanted to say thanks. These are exactly the type of errors that I particularly have problems seeing on something I have worked so long on. They are things easy to spot on somethign you are reading for the first time, but not somethign you have already read dozens of times. Appreciate the imput. -Waza 22:08, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

My Bot

Hey! I made a bot request here. I know that you'r e good at AWB, so would you find checking it out? I'm pretty sure this request would be useful because as of this moment, there are over 8,000 unsubsted user warnings! Thanks! --TeckWiz Contribs_@ 00:12, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the approval. However, could you also approve me on the AWB page, as I'm not an admin. --TeckWiz Contribs_@ 00:23, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

As I've never had a bot before, how many edits should a trial be? (Please reply here). --TeckWiz Contribs_@ 00:27, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

About 100 should be fine. —METS501 (talk) 00:28, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I also saw another user whose bot's talkpage said the bot will stop if you post here. He was using AWB. Is that automatic, or do I have to enable it somehow? Thanks! --TeckWiz Contribs_@ 00:30, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

If you're using AWB, the bot will stop automatically when the bot's talk page is edited. —METS501 (talk) 00:31, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't know if you're still in. But if you are, can you check the bots contributions. It would be nice to get it approved now so I could keep it running all night. Thanks for all your help. --TeckWiz Contribs_@ 02:00, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

OK, looks good. Keep an eye out for the next version of AWB. When you download it, then you can just run general fixes on the talk pages and the templates will automatically be substituted :-). Just keep running the bot overnight, and I'll formally approve it tomorrow morning. —METS501 (talk) 02:03, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Since right now, it's not flagged and will appear in recent changes, at what rate should I set it to for the night? --TeckWiz Contribs_@ 02:29, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I've filed a request for a flag. You should have it in soon (or maybe a few hours). You might as well run it at about 4 edits/min for now until flagged. —METS501 (talk) 02:35, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Hairy Pom (cocktail)

I noticed you deleted my Hairy Pom (cocktail) page that I added because you didnt find me to be a notable expert on the subject of alcoholic beverages. How does a new drink get added to the list of cocktails if they are simply deleted when some admin decides the drink is not credible? Do you know of another name for a Pomegranate and Vodka cocktail?

I just want to clarify: it was not that I didn't consider you notable, but I didn't consider the cocktail notable. If you can find references for the article based on multiple, non-trivial sources, the article can definitely stay. See Misplaced Pages:Attribution for more information. Thanks. —METS501 (talk) 01:06, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

ok, I think I've really had my fill... :(

Taalo 23:37, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

thanks, i replied on my talk page. Taalo 01:45, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Migrate my archive? (again)

Hi, I know you said you'd have your bot work on my request, and I don't mean to pester you. I just wanted to be sure you didn't forget, that's all. Thanks again. —Mira 01:25, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Nope, don't worry; I didn't forget :-) —METS501 (talk) 01:29, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Heh, don't mind me, I'm a little forgetful myself, so I just worry that everyone else is like me. :) —Mira 01:43, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

All userboxes moved to User:UBX's space, now the bot is updating transclusions. —METS501 (talk) 02:23, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Great. I noticed when I was cleaning all those boxes out of my watchlist that there's at least one odd one: {{User:UBX/DEUTSCH}} (moved to User:UBX/DEUTSCH) is actually just a redirect to Misplaced Pages:Userbox migration/Userbox. So transclusions should probably be pointed there. I'll let you know if I find another odd one. —Mira 02:27, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh, OK. The bot run is fully automatic, so for now I'll have it migrate it to User:UBX/DEUTSCH and maybe afterwards I'll bypass the redirect. —METS501 (talk) 02:29, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry about that. I suppose I should have checked first. —Mira 02:32, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Just to fill you in, the bot says that the estimated finish time is around 3/20/2007 3:27:23 EST, which would be 3/20/2007 07:27:23 UTC. —METS501 (talk) 02:40, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Neat that it tells you when it'll be done. Thanks for telling me. I did find one other odd one, though. User:UBX/knight redirects to User:Nouly/Userboxes/User knight. And do you think you could migrate User:MiraLuka/Userboxes/Nav as well? —Mira 02:57, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, it looks like your bot has stopped. I'm not sure if it finished, though, because my name change seems to have gone through around the same time. One thing I do know is that all the userbox pages got moved to my new namespace, so now there are twice as many pages to delete. :( —Mira 06:49, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, it was done migrating as far as it knew, but unfortunately the name change really screwed everything up :-) I'm going to school now, I'll be home later today and will try and fix the rest. —METS501 (talk) 11:06, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to make you do work :-). Do you mind going through the templates listed at Special:Prefixindex/User:MiraLuka/Userboxes/ and marking all of them with no more transclusions for deletion? Thanks. It should be most of them, and at that point it will be much easier for me to see what work I have left. If you could also do the same for Special:Prefixindex/User:Mira/Userboxes/, that would be great. Thanks! (you should do the first ones first because they redirect to the second ones) —METS501 (talk) 21:58, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Certainly. I was just going to ask you what I could do to help. It might take a little while for me to get to them, though, I'm just about to call home. —Mira 22:04, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Barnstars

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		is awarded to MetsBot for constantly substituting templates and many other countless things. Bushcarrot (Talk·Guestbook) 02:03, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

		The da Vinci Barnstar
		is awarded to Mets501 for creating such a useful bot! Thanks (even though I prefer the Orioles)! Bushcarrot (Talk·Guestbook) 02:03, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

No problem. You earned it. Bushcarrot (Talk·Guestbook) 02:13, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thank you for replacing my userboxes to the correct userbox! Thank you, very appreciated.

User:Factual80man

MetsBot making a bad conversion

MetsBot keeps changing Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/User:MiraLuka/Userboxes/User onemanonewoman. The thing is, this page only contains a link to the user box page, so it shouldn't be replacing it with transclusion even if it wasn't the MfD. Since it is the MfD, it's doubly problematic. I reverted the bot twice, but I suspect this isn't the only MfD page it's changed. —Doug Bell 16:35, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Is it possible to automaticaly mark all MfD pages as bot-denied? Newyorkbrad 17:13, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry about that. I already have my bot ignore all TfD pages; I forgot about MfD pages. My apologizes. —METS501 (talk) 18:25, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Related userboxen?

It would make sense to move a few or all of my boxes to go along with Mira's archive, as they are related. Could you set your bot to do this? - ∅ (∅), 21:15, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! - ∅ (∅), 00:36, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 20th, 2007.

The Misplaced Pages Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 12	20 March 2007	About the Signpost

WikiWorld comic: "Wilhelm Scream"	News and notes: Bad sin, milestones
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

Betacommand

All hell has broken loose at User talk:Betacommand and WP:AN or WP:ANI (I forget which), and it seems to be about the link removal task he's just been approved for. He was removing Google links, despite my pointing out to him that Google is an official interwiki link. The result was that citations to newsgroup postings were being zapped (hardly the most reliable source, but that's not the point). Also, he was doing it under his own account not the bot's, which was presumably a mistake.

I thought that the approval came a bit quick as he hadn't adequately answered my question about how he was deciding what was spam or not. Either way, I think we should withdraw task approval or risk having egg on our collective faces; he can always reapply when the process has been streamlined and has community approval.

In Beta's defence he did clean up the mess; this isn't about censure but about recognising that we've got a bot approval wrong. Agree or not? --kingboyk 22:30, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Spelian

Would you mind having a look at Misplaced Pages:Bots/Requests for approval/Spelian? --kingboyk 00:46, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I declined the application, having just realised he's a newbie I gave a conditional approval to, added to your comment that the spell checking isn't ready for automated use. Is that OK? --kingboyk 01:14, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Sounds good. —METS501 (talk) 01:14, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Betacommandbot 3

Um, I don't see where the request was withdrawn by betacommand. From what I see Tawker approved it. Can you explain the reasoning behind denying it? Thanks. (please reply on my talk page) —— Eagle101 00:49, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Due to the huge controversy surrounding Betacommand's removal of external links, I have withdrawn the approval for his bot. I've edited the request to make it clear that I am withdrawing the approval; he is not withdrawing the request. —METS501 (talk) 00:54, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Errm, I don't think this bot is the same thing. I don't understand how the two are related. Why the backlash (as in removing approval for unrelated task)? As far as I understand this bot only edits under WP:WPSPAM space ('WP:WPSPAM/Something'), and is totally unrelated to removal of links. —— Eagle101 00:57, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, clearly he was doing it an automated fashion, and it leaves us looking incompetent if we allow it to continue. Let the dust settle and he can reapply. He should consider himself lucky that's the only consequence, really. --kingboyk 01:06, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I see what you're saying. For me, I have serious issues understanding Betacommand when he writes, and it looks like that task is open ended, almost to the point of "can I do whatever I want with regards to spam?". I don't think it's a good idea to have him be able to do whatever he wants with regards to spam as of now with the whole controversy. If he wants to do any more specific tasks, he can request them again, hopefully trying to write clearer. —METS501 (talk) 01:08, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Seconded. The point is that WP:BAG needs to appear decisive and on top of the game; whether or not this approval was specifically about what Beta was doing doesn't really matter. It's all part of the same process, a process which the community isn't happy about. As I said, let the dust settle and it can be revisited. For now it's game over. --kingboyk 01:12, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Kingboyk, yeah I remember the old way we did this, before bag, and I don't recall any serious issues with that way myself. ;). —— Eagle101 01:29, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Ok, there is a clone bot named Vulpinebot, that is running the same task. The task is simply keeping track of links that are checked by anti-spam members. The bot only edits under WP:SPAM space. Misplaced Pages:Bots/Requests for approval/VixDaemon 4 is the clone. If the bot operator is not betacommand, is the bot idea acceptable. (it seems to have been determined as that on the original BRFA). —— Eagle101 01:11, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Heh. Mets, it's your talk page :) --kingboyk 01:12, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

The original idea was acceptable, but what was the new request for? —METS501 (talk) 01:15, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Bots/Requests for approval/VixDaemon 4 is to do the original idea, all edits restrained to WP:WPSPAM space. Only difference is the bot operator. I re-iterate the bot does not edit out of WP:WPSPAM space, and its task does not expand beyond that. —— Eagle101 01:18, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I have dropped a message to that bot operator about this thread. —— Eagle101 01:20, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Have I explained the tasking well enough? It was already approved once :) —— Eagle101 01:27, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I wrote a long reply here, but I'm gonna summarise: come back tommorow or when the dust has settled. --kingboyk 01:39, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Thats fine, but I still think this action is a little err... punitive? Regardless its not my bot, so I'm sure betacommand will figure it out :) Though I'm going to be bluntly honest, I fail to see the relevance between what betacommand did today, and this bot request. The bot in the request never did remove any links. In either case I am going to go work on cppwiki (C++ wiki framework), so we can make some C++ bots! —— Eagle101 01:42, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry. We're technology fans or we wouldn't be on BAG. Tommorow's a new day and we can start again; for now, beta overstepped the mark, his proposal shouldn't have been approved so quickly in the first place; and we have a duty to listen to the community. Punitive? Perhaps, but it wasn't meant to be. Damage limitation was more like it. See you tommorow :) --kingboyk 01:55, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I got an edit conflict. Probably there's no connection at all between what beta did today and the other bot requests. It is however evening or night in the northern hemisphere and I'm off to bed, so let's sort it out tommorow :) Good luck with the programming. --kingboyk 01:55, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Why is BAG involved in this? BCbot's third task is purely a statical and record keeping task. BCbot had no part in link removal and wont until a BRFA goes up for that. I left the exact details of the stats out because we are still figuring out what we need as far as stats. as I said before it only edits sub pages. if you want i can give you the code. I think this action was made in bad faith as it has no relation to my personal actions. you should reconsider your choice as that task has been operational for several weeks and there have been ZERO issues. Betacommand 02:22, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

You can certainly disagree with the merits of Mets501's decision if you wish (I don't have a view one way or the other), but to say it was made "in bad faith" is uncivil and not appropriate. Newyorkbrad 02:39, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

OK, but what exactly was that request for? That is, what new was being requested in that task? I will reverse my withdrawal if you can let me know. To respond to your other question about the involvement of the BAG, the bot approvals group is generally responsible for the bots that are currently running on Misplaced Pages. They do more than approvals, so the name is really misleading. If there are serious bot problems, the blame partly goes to the person who approved the bot. —METS501 (talk) 02:27, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Right, but there are no serious bot problems with that particular tasking. As beta said, there have been 0 complaints. (I'm back as winsock is annoying me :), can't wait to be back on linux. ) —— Eagle101 02:46, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Kyra's bot is just a clone because I have internet connection issues (my default connection is 26.4kbs) and hosting a bot on that connection is not a easy task. in regard to what the origional request was as doing linksearches of identified possible spam tracking those linksearch results on a subpage and maintaining that data. that is what is currently operational. I left the exact stats from the task as I was/am hoping to develope other stats also and wanted to be able to incorperate the stats in WP:WPSPAM subpages also without having to file more BRFA's BCbot's task is limited to data collection and recording. Kyra's bot is the exact same but hosted on a better internet connection Betacommand 02:45, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

So if I'm understanding correctly, the new bot request was just to add more data to the spam recording page? What kind of data would that be? —METS501 (talk) 02:47, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually BCbot has no approval for any of the spam pages. I have been running the bot while awaiting approval. I am asking for that approval. the only other data that might be used it already gets would be just tracking the reports better and figuring out what the data it has means. but as that hasn't been coded Ill settle for getting the current code up. and file a new BRFA for new stats when they arise. Betacommand 02:54, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

As far as I understand the tasking, it is the whole idea of the statistics to start with. He has just been running the bot in test mode for quite a while with no complaints. —— Eagle101 02:55, 22 March 2007 (UTC)