User talk:ClueBot Commons/Archives/2012/March

White tiger

Hello, bot. You reverted this, but left the one before intact. SlightSmile 00:04, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Claim of vandalism

Sir, you claimed that my post on the post Windows Vista was vandalism, but yet, it was actually a constructive edit about the minimum requirements. 206.180.101.2 (talk) 14:29, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

{{CB-FPWarn}}--5 albert square (talk) 07:44, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Cobb county Ga Logo

Do I have permission to copy that image onto my computer, save it, and make it transparent on GIMP? Just wondering. Quiet Andrew! The McCarvers are coming! (talk) 02:10, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

I suspect you've put this on the wrong page. This is the talk page for the Cluebot "Bots" (automated programs for things like fighting vandalism and archiving discussions). Allens (talk | contribs) 13:17, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	This is your second barnstar and shall last forever Kiko4564 (talk) 17:31, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

"archivebox" and "box-advert" talk page archiving options

What do the "archivebox" and "box-advert" options for ClueBot III do? They are mentioned but not explained. —danhash (talk) 17:49, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Figured out that archivebox adds an archive template to the current talk page, but what does box-advert do? —danhash (talk) 18:40, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Adds the "This page is archived by ClueBot III" to the bottom of the archive box. -- Cobi^(t|c|b) 20:16, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Oh ok cool, thanks. Should have noticed that. —danhash (talk) 20:48, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Improvement

This article is simply glorifying ClueBot NG into a Wikipedian God. With all do respect to it's acheivments, this entire page talks of glory, with a slim section on false positives. False positives are far more common than stated here. Much of vandalism is not with malice intent

It must be noted while the article is a talk page it does not resemble any other talk page on Wikipedia. It more so resembles a user page. I even have some doubts as to whether or not a bot needs a talk page, as bots are unable to respond.

I am not trying to put down the page, I am simply trying to help build upon human knowledge as are many users through this website. If anyone can build upon this, I strongly encourage it.--Questions99 (talk) 21:28, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

To defend the people that maintain this page. (Not that I know why since they didn't bother to reply to my suggestion a few days ago.) This is the main talkpage for everything ClueBot. And if you want more information on ClueBot then see User:ClueBot NG. ClueBot is a user created bot, not MediaWiki software so read up on bots before you attack their use of a profile page. Oh and if you are really a pacifist; why drop that bombshell above?   Starfleet Academy  Hail  ML  08:59, 5 Mar, 2012 UTC  

Archiving problem

ClueBot III archived my talk page, but it left several sections behind which should have been archived (i.e. they are more than 14 days old). What went wrong? —danhash (talk) 14:54, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

The other sections have changed in the last 14 days. The way it detects change is it opens the current revision, and then finds the latest revision that is old hours old, then it splits the sections out, and compares them for differences. If they are different, they are not archived. If they are the same, then they are archived. In this case, there were discussion tags added to several of the sections. -- Cobi^(t|c|b) 17:33, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!! I was assuming the bot operated simply on the basis of timestamps in signatures. I'll use {{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}} to archive those sections. —danhash (talk) 17:36, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Cluebot III archive format question

The following format string

{{<!-- to prevent ClueBot III from picking this up -Cobi -->User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis
|header={{Administrators' noticeboard navbox all}}
|archiveprefix=Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive
|format=%%i
|age=48
|index=no
|numberstart= 232
|minkeepthreads= 4
|maxarchsize= 700000
}}

produces "Wikipedia:Administrators noticeboard/Archive 232" To be compatible with existing archives, we'd like it to produce "Wikipedia:Administrators noticeboard/Archive232" (without the space). Is there a way to do that? Nobody Ent 12:16, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Try "|numberstart=232" ...but I'm not sure. Those spaces matter... atleast in the format and archiveprefix parameter. --lTopGunl (talk) 13:41, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, the bot does pick up spaces immediately after the equal signs. This is so that you can put meaningful spaces in in some way. -- Cobi^(t|c|b) 17:37, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Works! Thanks. Nobody Ent 12:28, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Need more help

Resolved

 – works! Thanks. Nobody Ent 03:49, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

{{<!-- Disabled to stop CB3 from picking this up -->User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis
|header={{Administrators' noticeboard navbox all}}
|archiveprefix=Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive
|format=%%i
|age=24
|index=no
|numberstart=741
|minkeepthreads= 4
|maxarchsize= 700000
}}

created Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents/Archives/741 instead of the desired Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive741. Some camel case thing? Can we fix? Nobody Ent 16:08, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

The bot, by default, requires that the archives be in a subpage of the original page. Mainly to stop people from clobbering other archives by copying the config and not changing the archive prefix.

This can, however, be overridden by a key. Below is the key you should add to that config to make ClueBot III like that archiveprefix. Note that the key is specific to that page and that archiveprefix, so if you need to change it, let me know, because the key won't work, and I'll need to get you a new one.

$ php -r 'include "cluebot3.config.php"; $page = "Wikipedia:Administrators'"'"' noticeboard/Incidents"; $archiveprefix = "Wikipedia:Administrators'"'"' noticeboard/IncidentArchive"; $ckey = trim(md5(trim($page).trim($archiveprefix).trim($pass))); echo "page=\"{$page}\"; archiveprefix=\"{$archiveprefix}\"; key=\"{$ckey}\";\n";'

page="Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents"; archiveprefix="Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive"; key="d85a96a0151d501b0ad3ba6060505c0c";

Add |key=d85a96a0151d501b0ad3ba6060505c0c to the config above. -- Cobi^(t|c|b) 17:46, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

I recently posted on http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/CyberConnect2#.hack.2F.2FGAME_PROJECT and my post was immediatly cancelled? I dont understand I am trying to make the site better the the blue bot seems to hate improvement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.173.221.24 (talk) 15:30, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Half Barnstar
	This is for catching over half of all vandalism. I love you! ChromaNebula (talk) 23:45, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

{{/censor}}

error

hi when i try to report an error for revert id 937409 it doesnt give me the correct one am i missing something im trying to report [1] Bouket (talk) 22:40, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

I don't think you're missing anything - it looks broken to me. No matter what ID number I enter, the dif that comes up is always the same. (For me it seems to be the 17:28, 26 January 2012 edit to the en.wikipedia Main_Page, which seems to be its latest version.) So it seems the report.cluebot.cluenet.org tool is broken at present. -R. S. Shaw (talk) 03:42, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Rich, looks like the bot is talking to a different database than the interface. Care to check it out? -- Cobi^(t|c|b) 07:18, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

I'll take a look, however reports have been working - 80.45.149.194 (talk) 18:44, 8 March 2012 (UTC) Rich(MTCD)^T|C|E-Mail 18:45, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Had the same problem on Analog stick. It reverted me, for no reason I can think of, then gave me the wrong article ID. Does the world really need such a badly-writted piece of shit like this software, reverting edits made by human beings? What are it's heuristics? No, wait, I don't care. Any idiot can press the "revert" button. Let's leave it to those human idiots, rather than the awful software they attempt to write. 92.40.254.209 (talk) 19:00, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

The report interface is talking to the same database - I'll have a look into it further after I've finished eating. - Damian Zaremba ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:21, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

I see what the issue is, for some reason the edit data is blank in the database - I'll look at figuring out why and back filling the database over the weekend. - Damian Zaremba ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:54, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

This could be the same issue a few days later. I tried to report a false positive at this diff: http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=National_Anthem_of_the_Republic_of_Dagestan&diff=481518116&oldid=481518107; when I copied the ID from CB's edit summary for the diff into this interface at http://report.cluebot.cluenet.org it came up with the wrong edit. When I submitted the form it I got "Notice: Undefined index: recaptcha_challenge_field in /mnt/public_html/damian/pages/View.page.php on line 22 Notice: Undefined index: recaptcha_response_field in /mnt/public_html/damian/pages/View.page.php on line 22".

On trying to create an account, having entered username, password and email address as requested I got "Notice: Undefined index: recaptcha_challenge_field in /mnt/public_html/damian/pages/CreateAccount.page.php on line 7 Notice: Undefined index: recaptcha_response_field in /mnt/public_html/damian/pages/CreateAccount.page.php on line 7" followed by "BAD CAPTCHA! GO AWAY!" err, there was no capcha, just those three text inputs and evidently no css.

Hope this helps pin down the problem. All the best -- Timberframe (talk) 14:57, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

False positive reports are being stored, however some edits are missing data such as the diff id which means the wrong diff is shown - the bot is adding the correct data into the database currently but I need to get some time to 'back-fill' the missing data. I'll audit the PHP errors later today :) - Damian Zaremba ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:00, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

This bot has completely mutilated the archives of my talk page

Nothing is in order, I have 35 archives that I routinely have to rename because the bot has its own naming scheme in mind, and stuff from my entire history on Wikipedia is interspersed into all 35 archives. On top of that, the bot has just decided to stop archiving my talk page for the past 6 months. This bot should not be archiving talk pages at this rate. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 17:41, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

As for stopping for the last 6 months, that would be because of this edit. As for this archival to Archive1, that's because it was set to start at %%i=1, and archive until the archive was >=30,000 bytes (and then increment), as can be seen here, where numberstart=1 and maxarchsize=30000; and because Archive1 is less than 30,000 bytes. I recommend dated archives, because they are simpler (sections, when archived, get put in a dated archive based on now - age hours), but the bot operates correctly as configured on both dated archives and numbered archives (and even hybrid archives). Most, if not all, of the perceived issues come from misconfiguration. -- Cobi^(t|c|b) 18:32, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Removing categories from redirect pages is not category blanking

Apparently Cluebot can't tell the difference and issues vandalism warnings. This would seem to be a very simple issue for a coder to fix. 174.99.123.164 (talk) 01:50, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Fixing links to archived sections

Is it possible for me to opt-in to ClueBot III's function for fixing links to archived sections on this page? —danhash (talk) 14:23, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

It always fixes backlinks anywhere it finds them when it archives a section. There is no opt-in/opt-out (except for {{nobots}}). -- Cobi^(t|c|b) 14:36, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Well it's not a talk page so there'd be no point it setting up archiving, but it did update a link in this edit, but this was the only time. Does it only fix backlinks to sections on pages that were archived by ClueBot III? I'd love to have the links to, for example, the various village pumps updated when they are archived, but they are archived by MiszaBot II. It'd be great if the useful section link fixing function could be opted in to the same way that archiving is. —danhash (talk) 19:47, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

It updates all of the section links to sections that it archives itself (as I said above). Updating arbitrary section links when they are changed would be very non-trivial (it would have to figure out when a section is moved -- when it archives it, it already knows this because it is the one doing the moving), and very resource-intensive (it would need to download every diff of every edit, and then would have to detect when a section was removed from one page and inserted into another verbatim), and it still wouldn't be perfect. This essentially boils down to detecting copy-paste moves, but on a section level; and this is part of the reason that there are no bots to detect/fix copy-paste moves, because it is very resource-intensive. Furthermore, actually searching for section backlinks is rather resource-intensive, too, because the bot has to grab every single page in the Special:WhatLinksHere page, and search that for the section links. Doing this for every single suspected copy-paste section move would be unfeasible. Because of this, such functionality is outside the scope of ClueBot III. -- Cobi^(t|c|b) 20:53, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for the explanation. I didn't realize it would be so complicated, and I see now why this functionality isn't currently available anywhere on Wikipedia. I'd love for a solution to the problem of linking to sections which are then archived, but that's a wiki-wide problem. Thanks again! —danhash (talk) 13:02, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Error report

I just submitted a Cluebot false positive report. I had several problems with the interface.

1. After submitting the first report, I noticed that the Cluebot edit in question was NOT the one shown above. The ID matches but the edit I was referring to was on Précis and is this diff. Apologies for not catching that sooner. I misunderstood how the interface worked.
2. I attempted to add a comment to the interface pointing to the correct page and got Captcha errors. This despite no Captcha option being displayed on the screen.
3. When attempting to create an account to get around the Captcha error, that took me to a different Captcha error - again, despite no captcha option being displayed on the create account screen.

Hope you're able to fix it soon. Rossami (talk) 15:53, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Some Question regarding Cluebot

hi, Cobi, thanks a lot for the cluebot, i have successfully set up archiving for my talk page, and it works. can you please have a quick look at my parameters for Cluebot, somehow the {resolved} are not getting archived,only the {done} tags are getting archived, did i miss something ? Please feel free to correct it. 2, is there a way to manually make the cluebot run over my talkpage or will i have to wait till the bot arrives on its own. -- ÐℬigXЯaɣ 20:53, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

I can answer 2. ClueBot will arrive on its own, there is no way to force it do archive a set page there and then. - Rich(MTCD)^T|C|E-Mail 01:33, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Silly stuff in Infoboxes

Can the bot be made to recognize this and this as vandalism? Thanks. Bus stop (talk) 22:11, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

The bot had made a revert that same day. It did not revert those two edits because it follows 1RR. →Στc. 22:57, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

OK. Thanks. Bus stop (talk) 01:56, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

CBNG Report Captcha

In light of recent reports that the reCaptcha on the report interface is not working, I will be looking to replace it. Hopefully this will make the report interface nicer to use :) - Rich(MTCD)^T|C|E-Mail 17:33, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Might want to consider only requiring captcha to add a comment to an existing report, but not to report a new report. The bots were only hitting the existing reports. -- Cobi^(t|c|b) 05:07, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

clue bot alive?

will clue bot ever be able to answer questions asked people or are you done updating him/her? because that would be awesome. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.83.109.173 (talk) 00:19, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

None of the ClueBots will ever answer questions because they are not human. They are Wikipedia robots, this particular one is a script to catch vandalism.--5 albert square (talk) 00:30, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

clue bot not working properly

There seems to be a fault with this bot- I just wrote on the Eamonn Holmes article that he is a talentless Irish bastard, and Clue Bot reverted it. However, it is well documented that he is a talentless Irish bastard, so I really can't see why Clue Bot changed it. Can someone fix this please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.32.58.70 (talk) 04:21, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

No. →Στc. 04:55, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Artificial intelligence?

Is this bot approaching artificial intelligence or what? Its pretty creepy how a computer is able to tell the difference between nonsense edits and senseful edits. Can someone explain this? Pass a Method talk 15:29, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

To put it simple, just like Genius in iTunes learns what songs you like and tries to make a genius playlist for you, ClueBot NG uses learning algorithms to revert vandalism always improving its databsee as it continues to run. The bot has no artificial intelligence, just a highly sophisticated script.—cyberpower ^Chat_{Limited Access} 13:38, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Machine learning is a branch of artificial intelligence, and artificial neural networks are a type of machine learning. So, yes, the bot is employing AI, though many people tend to see AI as a walking, talking, physical robot; which this is not. -- Cobi^(t|c|b) 20:26, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Actually I see artificial intelligence as a highly sophisticated program that is capable of interacting with human beings.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 21:01, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

{{/censor}}

Vincent's Surname

According to the Japanese novel of Silent Hill 3, Vincent's surname is Smith.--112.203.95.106 (talk) 12:39, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

{{CB-FPWarn}}--5 albert square (talk) 17:33, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

user talk section creation

On the spectrum of bot maintenance priorities, this is decidedly on the nuisance end of the range. However, I expect it to be simple to identify + fix and have no unintended consequences. I am pretty sure previous ClubBot implementations got it correct.

When ClueBot issued this warning, it added the section heading == March 2012 == despite it already being the current section heading. It did that a few days earlier too here, on the same page. Thanks for the good work on this bot. It makes being a Wikipedia editor 500% nicer! And being an admin all that much easier. —EncMstr (talk) 19:03, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

{{/censor}}

DNAU

Does ClueBot III respond to {{DNAU}}, or are there any other ways of not allowing ClueBot from archiving a thread? Whenaxis talk · contribs | DR goes to Wikimania! 15:30, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Allow me to second this request - {{DNAU}} support would be very useful for getting ClueBot III to work on the dispute resolution noticeboard. Or maybe there's another way of doing this? — Mr. Stradivarius ^♫ 10:04, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

I'll consider implementing it, but what are the use-cases for it? If DNAU is routinely being used somewhere, then I'd think that the archival age just needs to be bumped up, but perhaps I am missing a use-case? -- Cobi^(t|c|b) 12:50, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Well sometimes the thread needs to be retained longer than usual, like if you're on vacation, someone can place those tags on your pages for you.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 13:55, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I can't speak for other use-cases, but on the dispute resolution noticeboard we had the problem that the page was becoming too big so we needed to archive more quickly. However, when we changed the archive settings, some people's posts were archived unanswered, and their disputes left unresolved. We fixed this with a bit of a kludge - we used {{DNAU}} inside the template people use to post to the board ({{NewDRNsubmission}}), so threads are automatically kept for a month. When the noticeboard clerks close the threads, they remove the DNAU text, and the thread gets archived automatically after a couple of days. There might be a better way of doing this, but at the moment there is DNAU text in every single thread on the board. We tried using the "archivenow" parameter in ClueBot III to simulate this behaviour, but we lose the 2-day window if we do it that way. Ours might be the only case on Wikipedia of doing things like this, though, so it's up to you whether you want to go through with implementing it. Let me know if you have any more questions. — Mr. Stradivarius ^♫ 03:32, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Do you need something that has a time to archive, or just the opposite of ArchiveNow? Something like DoNotArchiveNow? A simple DoNotArchiveNow is not too hard to do, a configurable one would be more difficult. -- Cobi^(t|c|b) 09:48, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

The {{DNAU}} template is what you are describing for DoNotArchiveNow. It would be necessary to be configurable so it archives later in case it's forgotten to be removed. Something that would inhibit archiving until a certain date is reached and then normal rules apply once the date has been reached.—cyberpower ^Chat_{Limited Access} 12:02, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes, what Cyberpower said. It might be a moot point for DRN though, as MiszaBot II seems to have started working regularly again. (Although I do admit to being jealous of ClueBot's ability to fix old archive links.) Still, I think if this was implemented we would probably switch the archiving, and others may well end up using the feature. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ^♫ 02:37, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Rich, can you try this out? -- Cobi^(t|c|b) 05:19, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Updated the live code. - Damian Zaremba ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:54, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! If you let me know the syntax to use I will test it out on the noticeboard. — Mr. Stradivarius ^♫ 14:44, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Looking at the regex it's {{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|unixtimestamphere}} - Damian Zaremba ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:56, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Thomas Jefferson article

Did I set the bot correctly ? I wanted it to pick up with Archive 16 but CB created a new Archive16 instead. Also, 504 hours is 21 days but it didn't archive the top thread which is currently past 21 days. Thanks. Brad (talk) 14:40, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Cobi made an adjustment to the bot settings but can you explain what's going on? I also requested an archive now but nothing happened. Brad (talk) 18:55, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

ArchiveNow just tells the bot that that section is ready for archival, regardless of when it was last changed. The bot won't archive it until at least 2 threads need archival (because of the minarchthreads=2 setting). As for what I did, I added the space that you said was missing. -- Cobi^(t|c|b) 20:35, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Ok; thanks. Brad (talk) 22:39, 28 March 2012 (UTC)