User talk:ClueBot Commons: Difference between revisions

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

Revision as of 14:12, 14 December 2018 editK6ka (talk \| contribs)Administrators115,371 edits →Does CBNG acknowledge removed warnings?: re← Previous edit		Revision as of 22:28, 14 December 2018 edit undoNaomiAmethyst (talk \| contribs)Edit filter managers, Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers, Template editors6,271 edits →Does CBNG acknowledge removed warnings?: Reply.Next edit →
Line 62:		Line 62:

	:{{ping\|Home Lander}} The bot does not look through the page history for previous warnings. I believe ] doesn't acknowledge previous warnings either. —] <span title="Canadian!" style="color:red">🍁</span> (] · ]) 14:12, 14 December 2018 (UTC)		:{{ping\|Home Lander}} The bot does not look through the page history for previous warnings. I believe ] doesn't acknowledge previous warnings either. —] <span title="Canadian!" style="color:red">🍁</span> (] · ]) 14:12, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
			::The bot does when ingesting data about the user for purposes of deciding whether or not to revert. However, this is a basic metric and doesn't translate well to a specific warning level. The bot only looks at the current talk page for previous warnings when calculating what the next warning level should be. It also ignores warnings since those are likely to be a previous session of vandalism. Since the timespan is pretty short as it is, the bot doesn't think it necessary to dive into the edit history, and even then you have to deal with what happens when someone other than the editor in question reverted the warning. -- ]<sup>(]\|]\|])</sup> 22:28, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Revision as of 22:28, 14 December 2018

This user is NOT a humanThis is the combined talk page for ClueBot NG and ClueBot III. These users are automated computer programs and are not humans. Please be aware that bots cannot think like a human and cannot operate outside of their programming. Messages you leave on this talk page will not be answered by a bot – either a bot operator or another human will answer you.

False positives and false negativesIf you believe that ClueBot NG has mistakenly identified a good edit as vandalism, please follow the directions in the warning it gave or click here. Please do not report it on this talk page. It takes less time to report the case to the correct location, and we can handle it more effectively there.
If you believe that ClueBot NG has missed an edit that is vandalism, again do not report it here. ClueBot is unable to catch all vandalism. Just revert the edit and warn the editor. We are aware that there is an issue with reporting false positives. A fix is being worked on. ClueBot NG Links!Report False Positives • ~~Review edits for the dataset~~ (currently broken) • Frequently Asked Questions Purpose of this PageThis page is for comments on or questions about the ClueBots.

The current status of ClueBot NG is: Running
The current status of ClueBot III is: Running
Praise should go on the praise page. Barnstars and other awards should go on the awards page.
Use the "new section" button at the top of this page to add a new section. Use the link above each section to edit that section.
This page is automatically archived by ClueBot III.
The ClueBots' owner or someone else who knows the answer to your question will reply on this page.

Template:Archive box collapsible

ClueBots
ClueBot NG/Anti-vandalism · ClueBot II/ClueBot Script
ClueBot III/Archive · Talk page for all ClueBots

Beware! This user's talk page is monitored by talk page watchers. Some of them even talk back.

User:2k32k

Hi can you block this User he is saying that Bigg Boss 11 is fancruft when is not and plus disrupting the page please block him. And can you protect Bigg Boss 11 for 2 months and get the voting history, vote count and weekly summary back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.205.198.148 (talk) 10:56, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

And can you protect Bigg Boss 11 for 2 months and get the voting history, vote count and weekly summary back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.150.219.227 (talk) 11:01, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

ClueBot NG is not an administrator and cannot block users. Please see Misplaced Pages:Requests for administrator attention if you would like to contact an administrator. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 14:54, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi IP,

I have just noticed this and decided to look over it for you. In all honesty, the edits look to be well intentioned and not vandalism. If you believe that something should or should not be included in an article, you could try starting a conversation on either the article talk page or the relevant user talk page.

I would also not protect the article. Looking at the history, there is insufficient recent vandalism to do this.

In future, if you wish assistance from an administrator, please click the links provided by K6ka, as ClueBot NG is a robot without administrator privileges it cannot do anything. If you wish to report a vandal you can file a report at WP:AIV. If you wish to request page protection this can be done via WP:RFPP. 5 albert square (talk) 01:54, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

Does CBNG acknowledge removed warnings?

I just noticed here that ClueBot NG ignored the earlier warnings I had given this user (because the user subsequently blanked them) and started over with a level 1 notice. Is this intentional? I thought it acknowledged previous warnings, even if they had been erased. Home Lander (talk) 19:51, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

@Home Lander: The bot does not look through the page history for previous warnings. I believe Huggle doesn't acknowledge previous warnings either. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 14:12, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

The bot does count history when ingesting data about the user for purposes of deciding whether or not to revert. However, this is a basic metric and doesn't translate well to a specific warning level. The bot only looks at the current talk page for previous warnings when calculating what the next warning level should be. It also ignores warnings over 2 days old since those are likely to be a previous session of vandalism. Since the timespan is pretty short as it is, the bot doesn't think it necessary to dive into the edit history, and even then you have to deal with what happens when someone other than the editor in question reverted the warning. -- Cobi 22:28, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Revision as of 14:12, 14 December 2018 editK6ka (talk \| contribs)Administrators115,371 edits →Does CBNG acknowledge removed warnings?: re← Previous edit		Revision as of 22:28, 14 December 2018 edit undoNaomiAmethyst (talk \| contribs)Edit filter managers, Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers, Template editors6,271 edits →Does CBNG acknowledge removed warnings?: Reply.Next edit →
Line 62:		Line 62:

	:{{ping\|Home Lander}} The bot does not look through the page history for previous warnings. I believe ] doesn't acknowledge previous warnings either. —] <span title="Canadian!" style="color:red">🍁</span> (] · ]) 14:12, 14 December 2018 (UTC)		:{{ping\|Home Lander}} The bot does not look through the page history for previous warnings. I believe ] doesn't acknowledge previous warnings either. —] <span title="Canadian!" style="color:red">🍁</span> (] · ]) 14:12, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
			::The bot does when ingesting data about the user for purposes of deciding whether or not to revert. However, this is a basic metric and doesn't translate well to a specific warning level. The bot only looks at the current talk page for previous warnings when calculating what the next warning level should be. It also ignores warnings since those are likely to be a previous session of vandalism. Since the timespan is pretty short as it is, the bot doesn't think it necessary to dive into the edit history, and even then you have to deal with what happens when someone other than the editor in question reverted the warning. -- ]<sup>(]\|]\|])</sup> 22:28, 14 December 2018 (UTC)