User talk:Cyberpower678/Archive 26

Archive 20

←

Archive 24

Archive 25

Archive 26

Archive 27

Archive 28

→

Archive 30

Senior Editor II

programming for tools

• It's mostly PHP? I have never touched PHP. How advanced does one need to be to help? Etc. Tks. • Lingzhi♦(talk) 12:03, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

A working understanding of PHP is required otherwise you're unlikely to be of any help to us. Sorry if that sounded harsh, I couldn't find a better way to word it. That said, if you are a programmer, you should have no issues learning PHP.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 16:08, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Not harsh. And yes former programmer. Can start self-study of PHP, if it seems there is a need. Tks. ... hey I'm at codeacadamy.com and the pace is glacial. Can you point me to easy, intermediate and advanced examples (in tools) I can view? Tks • Lingzhi♦(talk) 01:46, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Article prefix/namespace bug

A MediaWiki bug (phabricator:T87645) resulted in a number of articles intended for other namespaces being created within namespace 0 on January 27th 2015. A number of these (listed below) were related to the activities of this account. All have now been superseded by entries in the correct namespace.

I intend to delete the misplaced articles of the next few days. I do not believe this action should interfere with (or even be noticed by) this bot, but please yell if you disagree.

Cheers. - TB (talk) 09:28, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Article	Wrong pageid	Timestamp	Right pageid	Timestamp
User:Cyberbot_I/Status	45227128	20150127081941	35149888	20150720000000
User:Cyberbot_I/adminrights-admins.js	45227195	20150127083419	34685147	20150712204912
User:Cyberbot_II/Status	45227123	20150127081909	35168868	20150720000000
User:Cyberbot_Trial_Bot/Status	45227124	20150127081911	38263118	20150720000000
User:Cyberpower678/RfX_Report	45227407	20150127091251	35159700	20150720080309
User:Cyberpower678/Tally	45227105	20150127081559	35159788	20150720055021

These have all been fixed now. - TB (talk) 08:37, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

WikiHistory seems to be working!!

I just tested it – https://tools.wmflabs.org/xtools/wikihistory/wh.php?page_title=List_of_metro_systems – and it's looking promising. However, Kudpung is correct that it only seems to be working in article space, so far. Just so you know! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:07, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

I tried some pages, including the one linked, and I never get anything other than "Error. Unknown article." Dustin (talk) 20:50, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

It was working about an hour ago – my guess is that it's down now while they try to get it to work with non-article space pages(?)... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 21:33, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Correct. I'm tinkering with it right now.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 22:08, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Minor note here Cyber: notice that the Wikihistory percentages in the edit count table are currently using "commas" (e.g. 7,95%) rather than "decimals" (e.g. 7.95%) as it should in English... Just in case you hadn't noticed! (And I dunno how "easy" it is to "fix" that, or if it's even fixable...) --IJBall (contribs • talk) 06:04, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Mistake

When you run for admin again, I swear I will defend to my own demise that this honest mistake is not indicative of horrible inadequacies as an admin. I promise! Be sure to ping me! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:41, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

LOL, thanks. I promise to ping you. I saw what looked like an IP, and then realized I reverted half of an IP. :-)—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 03:49, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Active Watchers tool no longer works

Hello, I have been experiencing a problem with the Active Watchers tool as is lead me to a page that says, "No redirect found." As I suspect this was caused by the Toolserver shutdown, is it possible to find, or re-create the source code of the tool? Racer-Ωmegα 20:19, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Can you provide me a link?—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 20:58, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

@Cyberpower678: You access the tool from the history of a certain page, such as a talk page, and it is one of Equazcion's scripts. However, here is the link to the tool, but the Toolserver has been shut down when the tool stopped working. Is it possible to merge or "recreate" the data to Labs? Racer-Ωmegα 13:19, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but the answer to that is no. Toolserver died years ago, and all data that wasn't moved to labs was lost. Unless there is a repo somewhere I cannot help you here.—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 19:55, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Page down

User:Cyberbot I/AfD's requiring attention has been down for two weeks, thought I'd mention in case you didn't see. Very useful tool—I appreciate your maintenance – czar 06:37, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

I'll look into it as soon as I can.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 20:58, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

 Fixed

semi vs full create protection

Hey - can you tweak Cyberbot so that RFPP requests for create protection are archived whether that create protection is full or semi? Personally, I don't semi-salt pages but some admins do, and I think the bot is only looking for the full enchilada and treating the semi-salting as unprotection. The request today was for Blue Ivy Carter. Thanks. :-) KrakatoaKatie 22:50, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

The bot should already do that. It just looks for the create protection flag, and doesn't bother looking at the level. Can you give me a link?—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 21:00, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Cyberbot I doesn't archive requests approved by non-bureaucrats

Cyberbot I's WP:CHU clerking code seems to be outdated, as it has left a massive backlog of unarchived requests which I had to manually archive. All of these unarchived requests were made by non-bureaucrats. The code for the bot should be updated to recognize requests handled by global renamers who are not local enwiki crats. Could that be changed accordingly? Thanks. --I am k6ka ^{Talk to me!} _{See what I have done} 04:48, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

• Cyberpower678 please try to make this fix as soon as you're able [I see you've marked yourself away]. I believe this was fixed prior to your taking on the task, but perhaps the public source code was not updated. You could try asking Legoktm for his latest branch if it would just be easier to merge the changes he made to update for global renamers. –xeno^talk 14:44, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Sorry I just noticed a message Cyberpower678 sent me a few days ago... to relay his message, I'm afraid he might be away for a bit. Surely on return he'll take care of this, but I can't say when that will be. I don't think we're looking at a really long wait, maybe a week or so, not sure! It's family-related, so it's best to leave him be. Sorry I could not myself be of any help! — MusikAnimal ^talk 00:34, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay. Unfortunately, I have already adapted the code to suit my bot and use my framework, and made several updates to the code in general as it was using deprecated code, so asking for the newer code from Legoktm won't do much. I'll go ahead and try and get a fix up in the next few hours.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 21:02, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Since bureaucrats don't have any renaming power anymore, I will be dropping bureaucrats from the trusted list. I will go ahead and add stewards and global renamers to the list, which shouldn't change much if the current bureaucrats now have the new right.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 21:17, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

 Done—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 21:28, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Bot request

Asking you because you recently had your bot working on archive.org and dead links.

Over at WT:NRHP, we're concerned: the National Register of Historic Places website has just moved a lot of their documentation from URLs with a long-used and simple naming convention to a new one that isn't systematic whatsoever. We've depended on the old format for a long time, and while the old URLs are still working as HTTP redirects for the moment, we don't know how long they'll last, and most aren't currently in archive.org. If I give you a list of URLs, would you mind writing and requesting permission for a relevant bot task?

Basically, since archive.org will suggest that you "Save this url in the Wayback Machine" when you request its copy of a never-archived-but-currently-active page (you probably know what I mean, but if not, go to [1]), it would be wonderful if your bot could take each entry from a long list, and every time that it got that message, it would request that archive.org save the URL. If this could be accomplished, it would be wonderfully helpful, but presumably it would take a good deal of time, since we're talking several tens of thousands of URLs.

Discussion of this topic is at WT:NRHP#NPS Focus has been updated, if you're curious. I'll answer any questions that you may have. Thanks! Nyttend (talk) 12:50, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Replied there.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 21:08, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Xtools

Hi! Spotted one error. Lets take this page and its section "Latest edit (global)". As you can see, links are wrong (double https part: https://https//www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q6688886). Would be nice to fix it. --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 11:19, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi. I would also like to report an error in the Page history tool (in fact, looks like other tools work similar, but I didn't check). When I select «be-tarask» language, the tool puts «be-tarask.wikipedia.org» to the wiki address field, but it should be «be-x-old.wikipedia.org». Next, even if I type the address manually and try to browse any article history, nothing is displayed.

Switching from «be-tarask» to other languages and back gives even more weird result (look at the url string in browser!) --Renessaince (talk) 16:31, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Another issue is that the namespace prefix is missing. The name begins with a colon. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 16:13, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

xTools is broken in many areas, on top of the source being convoluted beyond belief. We are working to rewrite the entire core and tool. In the process this should fix many of the problems borught up here, but it could take some time before it's ready.—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 19:57, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Blacklisted-links tagging

re: (Tagging page with {{Blacklisted-links}}. Blacklisted links found. (Peachy 2.0 (alpha 8)))

I noticed that the bot also leaves a message in the talk page. However there is a minor bug (or feature :-) if the talk page does not exist yet, the bot does not write into it (as it happened, e.g., for Home health care software (page history)). 18:24, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

The bot is set to edit only talk pages that exist. No sense in creating the talk page if editors haven't already done. Most likely case results in that the talk page gets ignored.

Contributers script?

RedRose suggested you might be the author of a tool that extracts the contributes from articles, the one that can be found here. I can never get tools to work, but I'm more interested in the logic than the implementation. Is this really your creation? Maury Markowitz (talk) 14:40, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

I ported this from a different tool that functions only on the German Wikipedia and made it run for the English Wikipedia. Why do you ask. It seems to work for me.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 14:55, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

By "RedRose", Maury Markowitz (talk · contribs) means me: I saw this discussion and recalled this one and also this one. The tool is intermittent: sometimes it starts and runs, sometimes it seems to hang and doesn't get as far as showing the "Loading History..." message. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:14, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

FYI, I find the toolsever to be barely operable in general - perhaps 50% of my attempts to use any tool fail with timeouts. YMMV. Maury Markowitz (talk) 17:28, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

To answer the question: In my experience there are a wide variety of common actions on the Wiki that are potentially destructive - PROD, AfD, etc. - but the people who are most interested and able to help are never informed that these events are taking place. A recent gloss over new AfDs noted that of the 15 most recent, only 3 informed anyone that their article was about to be deleted. This is very bad, IMHO.

So my goal is to find some sort of algo that can extract a useful short list of recent major contributors, so that tools like Twinkle can easily automate sending notifications to those users. More usefully, it might use the reply-to mechanism to post pointers onto the AfD page is is creating. This would be a great advance, I think. Maury Markowitz (talk) 17:32, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I have nothing to do with Twinkle. But the algorithm you're suggestion is a simple one. Get the last 500 edits made to the article which can easily be done via the API quickly by any editor, since the rate limit is 500, tally each edit made by a user, and track how much each user adds or subtracts from the article, and take an average. Set a baseline for the percentage for the added and subtracted numbers. Any avergae that exceeds that baseline is a major contributor. If none exceed, then use the top 5 contributors as calculated.—^cyberpower_Chat:Offline 04:21, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks C678. Do you know if this is the algo in the script? I still can't get it to run. (not your fault, toolserver's) Maury Markowitz (talk) 12:05, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

I have absolutely no clue. I didn't study the code that closely.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 15:02, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

wikiviewstats

Hey Cyberpower678, this page suggests you are one of the persons maintaining wikiviewstats. Is there any chance and/or any plans to bring this tool back? It seems to be down for months now... Cheers, Zwerg Nase (talk) 12:25, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Also, very sorry for you loss! :( Zwerg Nase (talk) 12:26, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Sorry for skipping this. Yes there are plans to bring back the tool.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 12:39, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Same but different

I'm back after a somewhat roundabout trip. Someone suggested this might be what I'm looking for. Unfortunately it doesn't seem to be working (although a number of others do). Your name is 1st on the list at the bottom... any way to check the status of this one? Where is the proper place to ask?> Maury Markowitz (talk) 19:40, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Here. That tool is seriously broken and will take some time before it becomes functional again. It does however provide great detail and is probably what you're looking for.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 21:42, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Blacklist needs whitelist

Note, the page Avaaz and Change.org use links to their sites, which are on the global blacklist to stop users adding links for profit.

The use of links to the blacklisted pages themselves are within WP:ELINKS for the articles, as they link in a non-abusive, non-spam building way.

This would have been justified by a whitelist discussion for additions triggering the edit filter on that page.

Can you please create a whitelist to prevent your script from running on a few pages, like articles on websites that are on the spam blacklist so the article doesn't get tagged time and time again?

Atomic 7 uses atomic7brandladiesshoes.com as their official page.

Can you please fix the script so it doesn't create two blacklist tags on one page? It pushes content too far down for small screens, and looks horrendously unprofessional on public facing pages (all of them).

-- Callinus (talk) 01:38, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry. I don't have access to the whitelist or the blacklist. You need to request whitelisting via the appropriate venues, outlined by the message left by the bot on the talk page, and the actual template. The bot also leaves instructions on how to hide the template to prevent the bot from re-adding the template. As for the duplicate template issues, it definitely should not be doing that.—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 03:16, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

@Cyberpower678: It would be good to get a fix for the way the bot re-adds identical tags, and if you could run that in your userspace to test that it works before double tagging 1,000 public facing pages. I'll re-add invisible tags. -- Callinus (talk) 05:54, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

There's no feasible way to test this in userspace. Sorry. I have disabled the bot for the time being.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 12:38, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Incredibly pedantic, but...

The message Cyberbot II leaves on talk pages contains the following sentence: "The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed." Like the title says, a period is needed after global. Sorry for disturbing you over something so minor in your time of loss. Origamite^ⓣⓒ 13:41, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Supercount without graphics?

...is it just disabled for some reasons, and will function again soon? or are there severe wmflab-problems again?? regards, --NBarchiv (talk) 10:33, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm getting loads of error messages while trying to load the CSS files. Something has gone awry in static most likely.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 12:46, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Your tool apparently can’t work when unexpected namespaces exist on the wiki. See what I wrote on #34 and #36. — Ltrlg (talk), 16:18, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Please check GitHub again.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 16:19, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Saw it just after save. Thank you! — Ltrlg (talk), 16:20, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry for your loss, C678. Thank you for fixing the issue. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 16:28, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

double tag

Your bot tagged John Rae (explorer) twice. Benjamin Trovato (talk) 02:05, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Please see a few sections up.—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 02:08, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Similar report on Talk:Rothwell, West Yorkshire initially on 11 August, repeated on 14 August, which I reverted & yet again on 18 August. Think the BOT needs stopping until this is sorted out and stops repeatedly tagging/reporting the same problem. Keith D (talk) 21:58, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

You're pointing out an entirely seperate issue, one that needs fixing though.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 00:30, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Blacklist

Hi. You tagged ths page twice for the same link. I've removed the horribly intrusive notices. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 07:05, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm here for the same reason, several pages were tagged by Cyberpower II about 24 hours a few days apart, with duplicate tags in article space, and duplicate comments in talk space. Edit: One example is on the page Pennsylvania Wing Civil Air Patrol. Etamni | ✉ | ✓  07:25, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

To clarify, this was done by my bot and not me. There's a new bug in Cyberbot. For some reason it's not seeing the existing tags. I'll have to look into this tonight.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 12:35, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes, it was understood that the bot did it. :) There just didn't seem to be any point in trying to tell the bot directly! Etamni | ✉ | ✓  20:31, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Maybe good to switch off the bot until the issue is solved. It is a bit annoying and I am afraid it will retag a third time....L.tak (talk) 20:48, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Oh I did that hours ago. :p—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 02:40, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

And it's doing it again! L.tak (talk) 15:45, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Where?—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 15:50, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

On the talk:Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, where I had already reverted the second time.... L.tak (talk) 16:58, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Ok, it is now the fourth time it placed a tag on talk:ACTA. Time to stop the tag until it is really resolved? L.tak (talk) 21:24, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm still trying to figure out why the bot is doing that. This is one of the case where leaving it on may help me more

Cyberbot II issue

Hello Cyberpower678, just wanted to note an issue that occurred with Cyberbot II in this edit: [2] In it, a vandal removed a lot of the article header, including the PC tag. Since the bot then edited the article thereafter to readd the tag, the change from the vandal went live with it and it had to be manually reverted since it could no longer be rejected by PC. Would it be possible to set the bot to hold off on adding a PC template if there's actually an unreviewed change pending? I didn't deactivate the task, it's something of an edge case, but probably not good if someone figured out they could put a change through that way. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 01:49, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

I think you got something mixed up there. The edit was never accepted. The bot never accepts an edit that is pending. It's only automatically accepted, regardless of protection, if there aren't previous edits that are pending.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 01:51, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

The bot didn't accept anything, correct, sorry if I was unclear. However, it edited the vandal's version to add the PC1 template, and the bot's edit was autoaccepted. Since the bot's edit was based from the vandal change, that is when the vandalism went live. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 02:07, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

It wasn't auto accepted either. That only happens when the previous edit is already accepted. The bot's edit is still flagged as a pending change.—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 02:19, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Interesting, I must've been getting something odd from the interface then. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 02:24, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Here. Have a trout just in case. :p

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

Enjoy. :D—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 02:28, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello this might be wrong place to ask you and if so please delete this, but on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Pilate_Stone#Blacklisted_Links_Found_on_Pilate_Stone your cyber bot keeps mentioning blacklisted links and I'm not sure why. Popish Plot (talk) 13:23, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

That's because the link in question is on the MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 13:34, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Ok I didn't know what that was. I guess the bot is going to keep sending that message to the talk page until someone takes that website out as a source? Popish Plot (talk) 17:47, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

No. The bot shouldn't be persistently spamming the page.—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 18:18, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

The xtools s inactive

Hi Cyberpower, good afternoon! the xtools is inactive, and the YuviPanda guided me per wikimedia labs IRC channel to contact you for solve this problem. Do you can solve this? Greetings!--Leon saudanha (talk) 16:20, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Should be okay now, and looking into re-enabling our autorestart script thing that apparently we aren't supposed to need anymore — MusikAnimal ^talk 17:32, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

@MusikAnimal: in fact. Greetings!--Leon saudanha (talk) 21:23, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Vandalism by aks.9955

This wikipedian is harming Wikipedia approved articles by tagging deletion on that which was approved by Wikipedia. Barred him asap Lupdelhi (talk) 22:03, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm not an admin sorry. And I have nothing to go on either.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 22:12, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

the butt

typo? ;-) Legoktm (talk) 05:06, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Lol. Too late to change it now, so I left a message on the talk page. :p XD. I wasn't aware so many people read my !vote. I got 3 thanks for that. :D—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 11:55, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Pokemon XY

Did we really need to go over this again? Come on man... At least show some proof that Viz is going to use KQ. You cant claim common name here. If we were using the common names, then Season 1 wouldn't be called Indigo League. —Kirt^Message 14:51, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Oh right. I forgot that we hashed through this already. Sorry. My mind was elsewhere when I did that.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 14:57, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Sorry if I sounded a bit off-putting there. Wikipedia is on the back-burner since I have other things going on at the moment. Anyway, I apologize. Hopefully this whole KQ thing will be settled in a month or two. —Kirt^Message 16:58, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Not a problem. :-)—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 19:10, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

RE: CSD

My apologies this was a deletion nom made on an assumption of a vandal adding porn. When I clicked through I saw the other templates describing the image being used legitimately. Was a mistaken nomination. ♥ Melody ♥ 02:59, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

The problem is I have nothing to do with that image. :s—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 03:01, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Unfortunately I think MediaWiki thinks you do; but I do not understand why; you merely added the bad image template to it; the file is hosted on wikimedia commons it looks like. I am not sure why it thought you were the originating editor. ♥ Melody ♥ 03:03, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

I added a template to that page?—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 03:09, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

May not have been you specifically; but Cyberbot I I think. I can't link the diff because Kudpung has deleted the file already per CSD nom. I Pinged him on his talk page to ensure I was correct in the CSD nomination; seeing that template gave me pause after I clicked through and saw the deletion discussion on wikimedia commons. I'm tagging @Kudpung: so he can see this discussion too and know what's going on ♥ Melody ♥ 03:13, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Bizarre Cyberbot II edit. Thank you. NeilN ^{talk to me} 02:33, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Responded there.—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 02:44, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Bizarre Cyberbot II edit

Please review this bizarre edit by Cyberbot II at Ferguson unrest. I fear the bot has been compromised. (This is the subject of the ANI discussion mentioned above.) General Ization ^Talk 02:34, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

The bot is fine. It uses a ridiculously long password separate from the ones I use. This looks like MW failed to catch an edit conflict. It could be because the bot and the editor before submitted edits exactly at the same time, as unlikely as that may be.—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 02:46, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

A relief that the bot is fine, and I understand your explanation, though I wonder if there might not be some way for the bot to detect this circumstance (since it intended to add 36 characters and ended up removing 6990)? Thanks for your quick reply. General Ization ^Talk 02:51, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

It already does what it can. It tries to pull the latest copy when it edits, adds a starttimestamp and a basetimestamp. What the bot doesn't catch, should get blocked by the software. But when the software passes the checks for edit conflicts, they will likely both go through. Hence, there's nothing that can really be done, to prevent it, when two editors make an edit on an article at the exact same time.—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 02:56, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks again. General Ization ^Talk 02:59, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Tools

Scottywong/Snottywong tools are escaping me. The only one I can find is the AfD vote counter which is linked to fron the RfA toolbox. I have been using all the others in his suite of tools until recentely but now I can't find them. They were the RfA vote counter, the NPP patroler analysis, and the search by ES. Could you please point me to where I can find them. We need them for research into some new proposals. Thanks. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:24, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

IIRC, the tools are dead at the moment. I have the source code, but it's written in Python, which I'm not really good at.—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 02:44, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Why have they gone dead suddenly? The AfD counter is still working. I was using them up to a couple of weeks ago. They had your name on them. What ae your suggestions for restarting them? --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:32, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Wait! What? My name is on them? Link?—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 03:33, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

I can't give you the link, can I. That's the problem. Are you also telling me that Labs does not support Python? --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:36, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

I may have been mistaken about your name, but your name is on so many tools that it's almost a logical conclusion. Here's a start: https://tools.wmflabs.org/afdstats/afdstats.py?name=Kudpung&max=500&startdate=&altname= Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:41, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

No. I'm saying I'm bad with Python. From what I'm aware of, it's SW's tools have been dying off one at a time, and that they are currently unmaintained. As for my name being everywhere, I'm not sure if I should be flattered or worried.—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 03:54, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Sotware does no 'die off'. The AfD counter is still working perfectly. The point is that someone ported these tools to Labs. Please use your access to locate these tools and their code and I will take care of it. The last thing I want to do is load you with even more work that you can't handle. Remember, we have essentially three kinds of collaborators on Wikipedia who hold the whole thing together: Content providers, Project & Policy makers, and Volunteer Technical Support. They are all as important as each other, like a symbiosis, but demand different skills - just a writing books about the complexities of language aquisition for impaired learners is as important as writing software code. So could we stop answering questions with questions and make a positive leap forward? Please.(writing from a hospital bed). Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:38, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

This is a complete list of Scott's tools. Just tell me where they are and how I can get copies of te code.:

• AfD Statistics - Generates statistics regarding how a user has !voted at AfD.
• AfD Admin Statistics - Generates statistics regarding how an admin has closed AfD's.
• PatrolGraph - A graph of how long the Special:Newpages queue has been for the last 30 days.
• PatrolReport - An analysis of the users who have patrolled new articles in the last few hours.
• User contribution search - Searches through a page's history for contributions by a particular user.
• Edit summary search - Searches through a user's edit summaries by keyword.
• RfA Vote Counter - Generates statistics regarding how a user has voted at RfA.
• Policy Search - Searches through a user's contributions to policy and guideline pages.
• Editor Interaction Analyzer - Searches through two users' contributions for potential interactions.
• Admin Score - Generates a score based on how suitable a user might be for adminship.
• Recent Changes Search - Allows arbitrary searches through the recent changes table.

Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:45, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

First and most importantly, get well soon. Secondly, tools don't die off in a static environment where nothing changes, but the tools are in anything but a static environment. The toollabs environment is constantly changing. You've seen it with articleinfo, that when labs 'upgraded' the environment, it broke, in many locations. My bots have recently suffered too. As a result of the API recently changing, some of my bots started to malfunction as it was no longer to process the API correctly. In short, tools in the toollabs environment, can and will, eventually die when left unmaintained.

Since you asked nicely, I have gone ahead and compiled what I found:

• AfD Statistics - Generates statistics regarding how a user has !voted at AfD.
• User contributions search - Searches through a page's history for contributions by a particular user.

Those 2 were ported to labs from what I'm aware of. I can't quite remember where the code was located for all the others, so you'll need to give me some time to remember.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 12:56, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

I think User:Σ has picked up maintaining at least some of these tools. For instance, the editor interaction utility can be found here. Also for the RfA vote counter, you cna use xtools — MusikAnimal ^talk 19:56, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Message cut off

Hey,

I've just noticed Talk:2007 Colorado YWAM and New Life shootings#External links modified, left by the dead link bot, and the last bit of the message does not appear. Not sure if you are aware of this issue, or if this is just a one off. Thanks, Mdann52 (talk) 08:27, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Tagged again

Hi again, as reported User_talk:Cyberpower678/Archive_26#double_tag the BOT has tagged again on 20th & 23rd for the same spam link on Talk:Rothwell, West Yorkshire. Keith D (talk) 18:55, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm working on fixes, but nothing seems to be working. I placed in another one, so we'll see if it fixes the problem. Also can you please not call it tagging. The bot is leaving a message. Tags are put on the articles.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 19:09, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Messaged again on 25th. Keith D (talk) 09:33, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Wayback template

Hi, when adding {{wayback}} to articles that use day first format for dates, such as this, you need to set |df=y to align the date formats with the rest of the article. Keith D (talk) 20:29, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry. The bot cannot tell which article uses the day first format.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 20:35, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Could check for the presence of a {{use dmy dates}} template. Keith D (talk) 22:54, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

I agree with this, as Kentucky was updated and {{use mdy dates}} wasn't respected. I'm glad archive links were found, but I had to do a date conversion on top of it. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 13:37, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

I wish you mentioned this at the BRFA. With the BRFA having been open for months now, this was not once mentioned. The bot isn't coded to easily recognize the tag in it's current code structure.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 13:47, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

I don't know what a BRFA is. If it has to do with this bot being reviewed, I had no cognizance of this process. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 13:51, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

WP:BRFA is a process to review and approve bot tasks. During mine, the bot made edits to about 500+ pages without a single mention about it.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 14:00, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

 Done—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 16:08, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Addition of archive URLs to Formula One

Hi Cyberpower678. Very sorry to hear of your loss. Cyberbot II added the following archive URLs (in among a bunch of others) to Formula One yesterday:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130927111319/http://www.bonneville400.com/launchingalan/challenge.aspx?challenge=4 to http://www.bonneville400.com/launchingalan/challenge.aspx?challenge=4
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130927050613/http://www.netcars.com/blogs/netcars-official-blog/how-much-does-it-cost-to-run-an-f1-car/394/ to http://www.netcars.com/blogs/netcars-official-blog/how-much-does-it-cost-to-run-an-f1-car/394/

I found these archive links to not work, so I reverted the changes and added the {{cbignore}} template per the instructions. However, the bot re-added the archive URLs today. Did I do something incorrectly? Thanks. DH85868993 (talk) 23:49, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

You're doing it correctly, but the bot is misbehaving. I'll have to look what happened there. Since it's only doing a single run at the moment, it won't come back another time. I'll have it fixed before fully deploying it.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 23:57, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

 Fixed It will be implemented on the next run since this is the first official run, and there are likely no other {{cbignore}} tags around. You can go ahead ad restore them.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 00:13, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Cool. Thanks for the speedy response. DH85868993 (talk) 00:35, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

I might have screwed something up

I think I accidentally clicked Run on Cyberbot II when I was reading through to figure out if it can be "requested", I don't know what I did but it took me to a tools page. Can you please take a look? cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 05:17, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

I just noticed that myself reviewing my bot's contributions. I was wondering who clicked the link. As soon as you click run, it makes a single run on Wikipedia.—^cyberpower_Chat:Offline 05:19, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

I was trying to see if I could request something on a specific article, but I think I have sticky fingers as I suddenly saw a tools page show instead giving me some data and then I looked at the bots contribs and figured I might have messed something up. Very sorry about this! —SpacemanSpiff

That's alright. It's an approved bot task after all.—^cyberpower_Chat:Offline 05:30, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

BRFA comments

Hi Cyberpower, this is a follow-up to your comments on BU Rob13's BRFA. I know you've now dropped the sockpuppet thing - thank you - but I thought this warranted comment from someone uninvolved. This is really not appropriate. I don't know why there's been so many unsubstantiated sock accusations flying around lately, but the effect is to publicly insult our most competent newer users at a time when Wikipedia really needs new blood. Even if a competent new user were a sock, so what? As long as they're doing good work, leave them alone unless you have compelling evidence of a real problem. IRC chatter isn't in that category. Please be more careful in the future, thanks. Opabinia regalis (talk) 16:25, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

I apologize. I will avoid the topic of socking completely in the future. Finding socks isn't really all my cup of tea anyways. I merely brought it up since a user mentioned it on IRC. If you would like I can remove the unintentional accusation since it's causing more issue than good.—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 16:27, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. I think leaving it hatted is fine; the matter is settled. Opabinia regalis (talk) 16:53, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

English Longbow

Thanks for the heads up that a link needed updating on this page. I've replaced the bot archive link for a live one though - the bot link wouldn't resolve through Wayback. Monstrelet (talk) 18:34, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Signature missing closing span tags?

I think your signature is missing two closing </span> tags. WP's syntax highlighter flips out and turns the rest of the page purple when it encounters your sig. I added the span closing tags on the Bot Requests page; remove them if you think they are breaking something. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:15, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

I omitted them to conserve sig size as the MW software automatically adds them in the final result.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 00:19, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Cyberbot II wayback links - should go to first, not last, archived version?

Hi, I wanted to ask about the Cyberbot II wayback links. It seems to me that these should probably by default go to the FIRST archived version found at Internet Archive, rather than the latest. The reason is, if the original URL doesn't work, the latest Wayback machine entry is probably a 404 or a redirect from the broken page, versus the original content we'd expect in the first or mid-range date versions. For pages which were not altered after creation (not unusual) the first version would be correct.

I say this as I've reviewed four such links that were done on pages I watch recently, and three of them had this problem. I fixed them by changing the archive date to the earliest one in each case, but it would be easier if the bot just went with that to start with...

Thanks. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 01:30, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

The bot pulls out a source that is closest to the accessdate, or when it was added to the article. That way it also ensures that the desired information is there.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 01:32, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Minor issue

Hi Cyberpower678! Minor issue here, but User:Cyberpower678/Archives needs to be updated, as it's out-of-date (i.e. missing entries). Just so you know! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 05:24, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

broken archive links

This edit didn't turn out the way one might have hoped (the second {{cite web}} template). The new archive-url value addresses a 404 page while the original archive-url value addresses the apparently correct page.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 18:24, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Also compare old to new.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 18:34, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

The bot does it's best to find a working archive, but it's not 100% reliable.—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 18:57, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Looks like a minor bug. The bot attempts to normalize citation templates, but it shouldn't alter the archive. The bot is doing a single run at the moment, so you are free to revert or fix the citation.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 19:43, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm also coming up with some similar errors, see [3][4]:Cyberbot II pulls an archive that is actually a 404. Sometimes that's because the bot chose a later archive when only the earlier archives captured the page before it went dead. Also some HTTP 302 crawl errors [5][6]. Can the bot be coded to select archives, if possible, that are dated to before the date of the dead link tag, and preferably as close to the date the original source was added to the wiki article? Altamel (talk) 00:07, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

The bot is already coded to do that. If there is no specified access date, it looks through the revision history to find the timestamp when it was added.—^cyberpower_Chat:Offline 05:55, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Also 302 isn't an error. It's a redirect code and the archive will automatically redirect to the correct location.—^cyberpower_Chat:Offline 05:56, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

What's the right way to deal with a attempt to redirect to archive which doesn't work? E.g., here, where the Nashua Telegraph (site being referenced) explicitly prohibited archiving with a robots.txt? In this case, I reverted to the "dead link" notification, there doesn't appear to be a way to get a usable pointer to an article any more. Is there a preferred better action? Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 21:43, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

I fixed the link – it wasn't really dead, just malformed (the trailing slash shouldn't have been there). But the validity of your question remains. Mojoworker (talk) 23:16, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

DeadLinksBot

Just saw that the BFRA was approved. Looking forward to seeing this bot in action. Cheers! Kaldari (talk) 00:25, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

The bot is running with limited speed at the moment. I'm waiting for the dedicated resources to let it run at full speed.—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 02:05, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Hey Max, see here and here. The bot was pretty awesome and did a great job, but there are some issues. First, with The Smashing Pumpkins, apparently the version that WayBack Machine archived was actually a redirect. It continues redirect a second time before landing on a working archive, so I think it's a matter of the bot checking for the 302 response code and following the redirect(s). Maybe the API works differently though (if there is an API), so not sure. The same thing happened with The Rolling Stones with this archive URL. Similarly, this archive URL redirects to this non-working archive. So again it's the WayBack Machine returning 302's or 404's, that the bot simply needs to check for and not assume they are a working version. Otherwise I think the bot is pretty f-ing awesome and will a great asset to the project. Hope this helps! — MusikAnimal ^talk 18:25, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Unfortunately what you are suggestion makes sense, but the bot is already attempting that. The bot is requesting the closest archive to the accessdate, that is either a 200, 203, 206, 301, 302, 307, or 308 as they all resemble a working page in some manner. The bot cannot automatically follow a redirect due to the limitations of the wayback API. Working with Ocaasi, on behalf of the WMF, I am hoping that the API's capabilities can be expanded. This is one feature I have not requested, so you should consider asking Ocaasi to ask IA to add that too.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 19:49, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Seems like a 200 would guarantee a working version, though, right? Or at least not a redirect or dead version. I figured there was some API limitation here. Anyway thanks for the hard work! — MusikAnimal ^talk 19:53, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

True, but I've discovered that not all pages that 302, ever had a 200. A source on Wikipedia could have been created and the site may have always 302ed and that's all there is in the archive when pulling a copy.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 20:25, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Cyberbot II false edit summary?

In this edit to Born again (Christianity), the bot seems to have added a {{wayback}} template and archived a reference, which is fine, but its edit summary reads "Rescuing 1 sources, flagging 0 as dead, and archiving 2 sources." That doesn't seem to be true. I'm not quite sure what the "rescuing" refers to, but it only archived 1 source, not 2. This edit has the same problem, while this edit uses an identical summary, but it's actually true there. This edit summary doesn't sound right, either ("archiving 0 sources"). Unless I'm misunderstanding the meaning of the summaries, they don't all seem to be accurate. And on a separate note, is the removal of "Emmer, Michele. Mathematics and Cinema in" in this edit intentional? — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 10:13, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes, you are misinterpreting the edit summary. The rescuing count are the sources that are getting changed. Rescuing meaning reviving sources. Archiving is a behind the scenes process you can't see. The bot is taking links that are not yet in the wayback machine, and archiving them. This will allow sources that die in the future to remain accessible.—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 15:08, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Ah, okay. Thanks for the explanation; that makes sense. Is there an FAQ page or anything for Cyberbot II's dead links task? — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 15:51, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Not yet. I haven't been asked the same question frequently enough yet. :p This is a brand new bot, one that probably has some bugs still needing to be worked out based on the above comments.—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 16:03, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

I came to ask something that would be partially resolved by a FAQ entry about the meanings of the various terms used. The edit-summary for this edit to Sucralose says "Rescuing 3 sources, flagging 0 as dead, and archiving 1" but the edit only added a Wayback link to one ref (a ref that was indeed 404 but had a viable Wayback copy). Based on your previous answer, it sounds instead like only 1 was rescued. The message posted to Talk:Sucralose#External links modified lists 3 entries as "Added archive", which is consisent with the edit-summary. DMacks (talk) 03:44, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

AdminStats question

Hi again, Cyberpower678! I have a question about AdminStats – AdminStats used to include in its output list all those Admins that had done zero Admin actions during the searched timeperiod. But I noticed today that it is no longer including Admins with zero Admin actions in the list, ending just with those that had done at least one Admin action during the searched timeperiod. Was that a deliberate change? If so, what was the reasoning behind that change? (Personally, I found the inclusion of the Admins with zero Admin actions in the list useful info...) Thanks in advance! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:05, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

If it changed it certainly wasn't deliberate, considering nobody has been making alterations to xTools for a while now.—^cyberpower_{Chat:Limited Access} 18:09, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

cyberbot I stuck or stalled

Wikipedia:RFXR is out of date, and hasn't been updated in over seven hours. Thanks, Wbm1058 (talk) 17:41, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes and WP:RFPP doesn't appeared to have been clerked since around the same time. However the bot has been making other edits since then, so not sure what's going on — MusikAnimal ^talk 18:19, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

The bot seems to have updated the page now: take a look at Special:Diff/678640812. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 18:20, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

The bot also updated RFPP at the same time: Special:Diff/678640814. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 18:22, 30 August 2015 (UTC)