This is an archive of past discussions with User:Cyberpower678. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Hiya, wanted to follow-up on T177457 since it was marked as done in February but appears to not be deployed? Really looking forward to it. czar19:12, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
Czar, sorry for the late response. There's a big update coupled with 2.0.1, and it's a lot of code changes that need to be tested. It might be a while still.—CYBERPOWER(Happy 2020)23:40, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
IABot batch jobs stalled since 2019-12-27 18:21:32
I reported this last week, but have had no response. I also asked on Discord and IRC. It seems that batch jobs are stalled. I went through the queues and the last successful one was 4976 and 4977 and later have had zero progress since last decade. Can you feed the hamsters so that the queues resume? Thanks. --Nessie (talk) 19:47, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
I noticed this problem earlier, and I gave it a kick. Very likely related to constant system failures currently going over at the CloudVPS.—CYBERPOWER(Happy 2020)23:46, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
Your bot, InternetArchiveBot sometimes archives the FishBase site. This site and the following: WoRMS, Plants of the World Online and IUCN are changing ones; they update their informations when it's necessary. So when the bot archives an older version of this sites, the informations in them remain unchanged. I don't know how a bot works, but if you can than please do something about this matter. Regards. DenesFeri (talk) 09:30, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
I'm from the Hungarian Wikipedia. In the Hungarian Wikipedia InternetArchiveBot sometimes archived the older versions of the FishBase site - site that I use as primary refrence to articles about fishes. FishBase renew/reedit their informations if there are new dicoveries or reclassificasions. If InternetArchiveBot archive the FishBase page, I can't find out if there's something new on that page, I see only the older version. DenesFeri (talk) 08:38, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
IABot oddities for resolver.kb.nl
Hi,
I am not sure if you had already been notified, but we turned off InternetArchiveBot on the Dutch Wikipedia yesterday, because it appears to be marking a lot (if not all) of urls under the resolver.kb.nl domain as "dead". (there are currently 22.7k of those urls mentioned on 4.5k articles) It is unclear to me why it does that, because the domain exists and seems to be redirecting to the correct url just fine. I don't think the redirection is particularly recent either (at least, I am not able to find any news item about it, and the redirect domain, delpher.nl, is > 5 years old). The domain itself is currently marked as a "subscription site", even tho there are no subscriptions I am aware of. The "How to" page mentioned in the description of the "Modify Domain Data" page seems to be gone too, so I can't look up what it does either.
The weird thing is that it seems to handle urls almost randomly. this url is marked as alive, while this url in the same broader repository is marked as dead. An url as this is marked as dying, but something in the same broader repository is marked as alive.
Sumurai8, you could also contact the operators of resolver.kb.nl to check whether they have rate limits which could be throttling IAbot, in which case it would be easiest for them to relax the limits and/or add an exception. Nemo07:21, 5 January 2020 (UTC)
Daw5423, You will need to define a couple of archive templates. Enwiki uses {{Webarchive}}. If you gave me the syntax of your templates, I'll turn it into syntax you need to give the bot to define it.—CYBERPOWER(Chat)17:48, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
Hello Cyberpower678! I am quite new here, so I have a question regarding wikipage on Sejla Kameric - since you were the last to confirm changes. I work with the artist herself and we are trying to edit the page, we made quite some changes, however, they dont appear to the public just yet, they need to be confirmed. Could you be so kind and help me with this to be public as soon as possible? Do you need anything else from me for this purpose? Many thanks and I wish you a lovely day! Best, Ziva — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zivazava (talk • contribs) 14:24, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
With steward confirmations coming up, it would be great to have Quentinv57's steward counter working. Is there a possibility of this? I don't know how long it has been out of action (known issue?). Global sysop stats would also be helpful for steward elections. ~riley(talk)20:50, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
The only item in 5020 is March 12, and if I try to runbotsingle it, it says "Analysis error: The article you are trying to analyze may be too large for this tool. Please submit a bot job instead." I assume this is what @Wham2001: did. --Nessie (📥) 17:42, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
@NessieVL: precisely so; I did wonder how long it was likely to take to start running. I've killed the job, which will hopefully unstick the queue, though it would be nice to have the sources in the page archived somehow. Best, Wham2001 (talk) 20:00, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
@Wham2001 and Pancho507: next up is 5021 which is just 2019–20 Hong Kong protests which is again too big to run singly. I imagine it should still be able to process these, but maybe the hamsters need to be fed. If you want to archive each source by itself, you can add this bookmarket:
@Cyberpower678:, I have verified and found the revised configuration to be working well for Telugu Wikipedia, without any check date errors. Please go ahead and deploy. Thanks for all your support. --Arjunaraoc (talk) 22:26, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
Hi, Cyberpower678. I have installed citation modules and templates from English Wikipedia. Everything works the same with enwiki. Is this possible to activate the bot for Azerbaijani Wikipedia? What is required and which steps should we take? Cheers! --Toghrul Rahimli (talk) 06:52, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
Hello! At the time that I'm writing this, for some reason, Cyberbot is flagging Wugapodes's RfA as having a duplicate !vote. As far as I can tell, there isn't one, and the only thing that I can think of that might've caused the false positive might have been it misreading J947's comment in the oppose section as a !vote in addition to their support earlier, which would be odd if that's the case, considering that RfA comments aren't usually counted. Either way, I thought I'd give you a heads up on this really odd false positive. OhKayeSierra (talk) 06:31, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
Hi. IABot seems to be ignoring the local "accessdate" alias on bs.wiki ("pristupdatum"), which in turn causes it to add another date under a new "accessdate" parameter instead of replacing the existing value in "pristupdatum" – see this diff. That, then, fills up the "Pages with citations having redundant parameters" CS1 maintenance category. I noticed last night that it has done this to every page in thesetwo categories. I'm in the process of at least partially fixing that by doing a regex search and replace, but I won't be able to keep doing that in the future. Can you please fix this ASAP? – Srdjan m (talk) 13:38, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
Currently, duplicates are reported in the tally but it is not possible to see who cast it. Since the bot is aware of the editors casting a vote between every update, is it possible to list the duplicated votes somewhere for readability? If there are a lot of the votes, dupes are quickly lost. --qedk (t桜c)13:47, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
Template query
Hey Cyber, long time no type :p {I'm formally Mlpearc from ACC) I would like to customize your template User:Cyberpower678/RfX Report here User:FlightTime/RfX Report. My question is will the bot update my version ? or (if it's not a bother or complicated) can you add my version so that the bot will update it. I see your notice about Xtools above so if this question/request is in that area just let me know and I'll just forget about it. Cheers and thanx, - FlightTime (open channel)17:28, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
You know what, nevermind (got a little ahead of myself). I'm not able to customize it the way I wanted to anyway. Sorry for the bother. Take care, - FlightTime (open channel)17:34, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
@FlightTime: I did not know that! I remember seeing a prolific editor called Mlpearc in my early wikidays, nice to see you around still. --qedk (t桜c)13:48, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
Hello C. I want to thank you for getting Refill 2 working again! It seems to be running more smoothly than it did just before it went down last week. Whenever Refill 2 or Reflinks are down it feels like having one arm tied behind my back when fixing bare urls. Thanks again and best regards. MarnetteD|Talk16:43, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
InteractiveArchiveBot wrong and harmful edits
hi.
please see he:Special:Diff/27120508. the bot changed a good link (please try it) into a link to internet archive. admittedly, the archive link actually works, but the original one works much better (didn't actually measure, but it feels about 10x faster. luckily, this is a plain .pdf file, so no degradation of the content itself). it may be a one-off, but if this points to some systemic issue in the logic governing the bot's operation, you may want to look at it and figure out why did the bot made this mistake.
this is mainly an "fyi". if you want to discuss further, please ping me - i am not watching this page, and i am not normally on this wiki anyway.
Hi Cyberpower678, about the question I asked here, sorry I didn't see your reply before it got archived:
Hi Cyberpower678, I have a question about the InternetArchiveBot: why does it make two links to the same place? For example in this edit: [2], in both citations it makes the page number into a blue link pointing to the same url as the title. It seems redundant, what is the point? And why does it add external-link urls to page numbers like that anyway? It seems like non-standard usage of the cite template. Was there a discussion about this somewhere that I could read? Thanks... --IamNotU (talk) 03:13, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
Yes there was and it received almost unanimous support. The bot is approved to function in this manner.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 17:50, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
Those instructions were followed before removing the delete message from the main page (an effective reversion back to the redirect link in question). The citation was placed on the talk page, with documentation. After that step, the delete notice on the main page was removed.
All directions and instructions were followed, unless there is something ambiguous about the series of events which must take place. (IMO: Sounds like this is automated? But, inconsistently? I should have waited for, what indeterminate period of time before undefined next or further steps? So a user gets a warning where more articulate links or instructions are unavailable?)
Hi. I understand you have recently taken over maintainance of reFill. Firstly thank you for for that, and also thank you for restoring it recently after it went down.
I don't know if this is the appropriate place, so apologies if not, but I'd like to ask for a couple of changes to the tool. Firstly, in edits such as these by Jmertel23[1], [2], [3], [4], [5], reFill is introducing "deadurl=y", which is no longer supported by cite templates and has been replaced by "url-status=dead". I should imagine this should have a fairly simple fix. Probably more complex to resolve: in all the above examples a bare url from https://archive.li/ is being filled. "archive-url" is being filled but not "archive-date" giving an "|archive-url= requires |archive-date=" error.
If my memory serves me right, earlier versions of reFill had a warning along the lines of "editors are responsible for all edits they make, please check results". Is it possible to reinstate the warning? Thanks --John B123 (talk) 23:39, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
@John B123: - thank you for tagging me in this - I completely missed seeing these errors! I will certainly make sure not to let them slip through in the future. Jmertel23 (talk) 14:09, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
Following a request for comment, partial blocks are now enabled on the English Wikipedia. This functionality allows administrators to block users from editing specific pages or namespaces rather than the entire site. A draft policy is being workshopped at Wikipedia:Partial blocks.
The request for comment seeking the community's sentiment for a binding desysop procedure closed with wide-spread support for an alternative desysoping procedure based on community input. No proposed process received consensus.
Technical news
Twinkle now supports partial blocking. There is a small checkbox that toggles the "partial" status for both blocks and templating. There is currently one template: {{uw-pblock}}.
When trying to move a page, if the target title already exists then a warning message is shown. The warning message will now include a link to the target title. [7]
Arbitration
Following a recent arbitration case, the Arbitration Committee reminded administrators that checkuser and oversight blocks must not be reversed or modified without prior consultation with the checkuser or oversighter who placed the block, the respective functionary team, or the Arbitration Committee.
The language icon templates are being deleted and even were they not, the rendered wiki text of the icon templates is unrecognizable as a language name or as a language code to Module:Citation/CS1:
When adding |language= to a cs1|2 template, the best choice is to use the language codes that MediaWiki supports; this allows cs1|2 templates to be exported to other-language wikis without the need for editors there to do language-name translation.
Hello cyberpower, I saw that InternetArchiveBot has been approved recently in the Turkish Wikipedia but it has only 31 edits so far. Isn't it supposed to make automated changes regularly?
And also, When I visit this page, I see this error :
"Sorry but access to the bot queue for this wiki is disabled. It may be because the bot isn't approved for use on this wiki. Please use the Single Page Analysis tool instead."
I noticed that InternetArchive bot has been replacing links to stable sources, such as Google Books, that also already have archived links to Internet Archive, with just links to Internet Archive. I don't object to this at the moment, but have to wonder why. Can you explain the rationale of this and whether there was a consensus reached regarding this? Ergo Sum20:24, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
Ergo Sum, I asked a similar question, as have others, you can find them in the archives of this page. I found where a change had been approved: Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 159#Expanding InternetArchiveBot to handle book references. My question was about having two redundant/duplicate links in the same citation. This seems to have gained consensus in that discussion, but I'm not sure how aware people were that this has traditionally been avoided. As for your question, I don't see anywhere where there was a consensus to replace working Google Books URLs with Archive.org ones. I think there should be more discussion about these issues, but I'm not sure where the best place is. I was planning to bring up my question on the talk page for the "cite book" template, as it's about a non-standard usage of that template. Not sure if the question about replacing links should be in the same place or not. --IamNotU (talk) 21:55, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
@IamNotU: Thanks for the background. Yes, this seems to be a major wiki-wide change that should have been discussed before being implemented. Ergo Sum22:03, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
Hi, the bot keeps tagging http://cassi.cas.org/search.jsp as being dead, which is not correct. This has been reported before quite some time ago and the tool does not accept another report, so I came here, hope you don't mind. It would be great if you could have a look at this. Thanks. --Randykitty (talk) 10:47, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
I confess to my ignorance here. I don't really understand what you did, or how, although it looks like you set the status of the URL from "dead" to "live", so I assume that the bot will not tag this URL as dead any more. If that's correct, then the problem should be fixed. Many thanks! --Randykitty (talk) 18:07, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
IA Bot down?
I am currently unable to access IA Bot either through the "fix links" link on an article history page, the link on its userpage or the link on the wmflabs list of tools - the page claims to be loading, but never gets as far as displaying anything or timing out. This state has lasted about 30 minutes at least, but it was working a few hours ago. Thryduulf (talk) 01:02, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
It often tends to replace any link from archive.today with one from Wayback Machine. The problem is, Wayback Machine doesn't always perfectly archive links, and when archive.today does, using IABot on the article causes the properly formed archive.today link to be replaced with the malformed/improperly archived Wayback Machine link. Have you previously gotten any complaint regarding this? If yes, is anything being done about it? --Kailash29792(talk)03:40, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
How do I download/install IABot so I can use it? When I read this ("You can use this bot yourself by browsing the history of any page, and clicking on the "Fix dead links" link in the "External tools" section at the top of the page."), I don't recognize it. There is no "External tools" section visible. Will I see that after I download/install the bot? -- BullRangifer (talk) 15:29, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
@BullRangifer: you don't need to download/install IABot. The links are near the top of the history page, right under the "Filter revisions" box and above the horizontal line and compare revisions button. See the screenshot I've just taken. Thryduulf (talk) 23:08, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
Do you think changing the wording to "You can use this bot yourself by browsing theviewing the revision history of any page, and clicking on the "Fix dead links" link in the "External tools" section at the top of the page.")" would be clearer? Thryduulf (talk) 09:51, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
Thryduulf, That is a very good proposal, that I support. There was a time in past where I had wondered why does IABot uses this cryptic language, but I did not pursue that thought thinking that the devs must have some reason. DBigXrayᗙ09:58, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
Thanks. That is a bit clearer. Even clearer would be "To use the bot, open the 'history' tab and then use the 'Fix dead links' tab that appears in the horizontal row of 'External tools'." -- BullRangifer (talk) 15:47, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
InternetArchiveBot's handling of "bare" dead urls
(Example) My initial concern was that the longer url stretches the infobox horizontally, but then I had deeper thoughts:
Generally speaking, a "piped" url <ref>[http://web.archive.org/web/SOMETIMESTAMP/http://original.url/somepage.html http://original.url/somepage.html]</ref> would be a visually superior replacement when something like <ref>http://original.url/somepage.html</ref> has gone dead. But only because fetching the page title and/or converting to {{cite web}} or whatever is probably way beyond the scope of this bot.
However urls in the |website= parameter of an infobox (or anything marked as {{official website}} in the external links section) are kind of a special case, because here (unlike the ref example above) the url does not point to key information—it is the key information. We don't care about this website's content, as we aren't using it to support any particular statement. The only statement being made is what this person/corporation/band/etc.'s current web address is. When those go dead, it would be reasonable to conclude that:
A. The subject of an article no longer has a website, or:
B. His/her/its/their website has moved to some address.
In either case a dead url becomes factually inaccurate in this context, and showing what it looked like several years ago would be useless. I think it would be preferable for the bot to delete these outright, rather than worrying about how to format their archive.org urls. ―cobaltcigs09:46, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
Book talk missing title and missing end tag for italics, small, bold errors
Un-archived discussion with new comment:
Cyberpower678: You deleted the following discussion without taking action. The last time, you ultimately did solve the problem, and I'm confident you will solve this one also. Please do not remove this discussion from your talk page without at least acknowledging. I don't want to go through a long cycle of dredging it up from the page history over and over, like last time. (I have edited my previous comment slightly, mainly inserting several missing right parentheses.) —Anomalocaris (talk) 05:14, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
You are messing up italics and titles in Book talk articles.
{{book report|Tak to chodí|''Tak to chodí'']] <small>by [[Michal Horáček (lyricist)|Start|chapter=Compilations|problems=|non-free=* [[:File:Tak to chodi front.jpg]]
causing a missing end tag for <small>; should be (and I fixed it and you reverted)
{{book report|Tak to chodí|''Tak to chodí'']] <small>by [[Michal Horáček (lyricist)</small>|Start|chapter=Compilations|problems=|non-free=* [[:File:Tak to chodi front.jpg]]
And similar errors that I haven't fixed at Lint errors: Missing end tag in the Book talk namespace. Please deal with these errors, or at least point how to generate the list of "source code" pages and how to edit them to make the problem go away. —Anomalocaris (talk) 23:32, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
Hello there! Sorry to bother you, I just want to ask your kind attention in connection with phab:T242241. The site is going to die on 1st of March. I would be very thankful for your help. Regards, Bencemac (talk) 09:57, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
I tried counting and enwiki Special link search returned 60,000 then stopped working. The number links is very large. Unfortunately, IABot can only easily fix when entire domains are dead. In this case https://www.sports-reference.com/olympics/* is dead but https://www.sports-reference.com/ is still live so it is a mix. The olympics URLs will need to be set to global live state = "dead" on a per-URL basis (in the IABot database). I have a program that can do this. Then we tell IABot to run on all articles with the domain and it should add the archives for those with live state dead. @Bencemac:, ca you copy this thread to WP:URLREQ so there is a record of the request and I will pick it up from there. -- GreenC19:01, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
I've seen many edits similar to this one, in which links to Google books are replaced with links to the same texts on Archive.org. This edit has an edit summary stating "Bluelink 4 books for verifiability. [goog])". Why are these edits necessary? Aren't the links to Google books verifiable as they are? Alansohn (talk) 15:04, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
I came here with a similar question, witnessing this edit. I have the feeling this is a clear case If it ain't broke, don't fix it. In the edit I linked to, the Google Books edition is easier to browse and read, from my desktop device at least, because one can scroll the book, unlike the Archive.org version. If I want a scroll version on Archive.org, I have to download a pdf, which often takes ages. And in this case the Archive.org edition is the same book, scanned by Google, and while they represent it in color, which is nice, I have an uneasy feeling about these botmoves, especially since it is based on an essay only. I suggest you don't replace Google-links, but add the archive link between brackets, or something like that. This doesn't seem right, please reconsider. Greetings. Eissink (talk) 16:14, 20 February 2020 (UTC).
Following an RfC, the blocking policy was changed to state that sysops must not undo or alter CheckUser or Oversight blocks, rather than should not.
A request for comment confirmed that sandboxes of established but inactive editors may not be blanked due solely to inactivity.
Technical news
Following a discussion, Twinkle's default CSD behavior will soon change, most likely this week. After the change, Twinkle will default to "tagging mode" if there is no CSD tag present, and default to "deletion mode" if there is a CSD tag present. You will be able to always default to "deletion mode" (the current behavior) using your Twinkle preferences.
Hi. I am trying to use IABot Management Interface to add archive links to all references to the page Second Amendment sanctuary. However when I try to run it on that page, and I enable the "Add archives to all non-dead references (Optional)" option, I get an error telling me the page is too big and to submit a bot job instead. I did that, however there was no option to add archives to all non-dead references and the bot did not do that, it only added archives to dead links and did not add archives to non-dead links. How can I accomplish this task in the bot job interface? Thanks!Terrorist96 (talk) 18:36, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
IABot Management Interface question
Hi. I am trying to use IABot Management Interface to add archive links to all references to the page Second Amendment sanctuary. However when I try to run it on that page, and I enable the "Add archives to all non-dead references (Optional)" option, I get an error telling me the page is too big and to submit a bot job instead. I did that, however there was no option to add archives to all non-dead references and the bot did not do that, it only added archives to dead links and did not add archives to non-dead links. How can I accomplish this task in the bot job interface? Thanks!Terrorist96 (talk) 18:36, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
IABot in trwiki
Hello cyberpower, I can't use the bot queue in the Turkish Wikipedia. The bot already got bot status a month ago but it still seems to be disabled in the management console. Please enable the bot for trwiki. Thanks--Yagizhan49 (talk) 17:17, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
IABot in trwiki
Hello cyberpower, I can't use the bot queue in the Turkish Wikipedia. The bot already got bot status a month ago but it still seems to be disabled in the management console. Please enable the bot for trwiki. Thanks--Yagizhan49 (talk) 17:17, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
The bot seems to be making errors. On a number of refs I've added to articles, it keeps linking page numbers to sources. These refs all already linked in the URL field. Look at my edit history for this morning for examples. I started to use the bug report for this but apparently I need to create an account before I can do so. TiBchat10:11, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
This is intentional not a bug. When clicking on the page number if opens directly to that page. There are a couple ways to go about it but this is the way it does it. I suggest maintaining the page number link as the most important. In the future there may be a feature where you hover over the page number and the full image of the book page pops up, but it would only work if there was a page number URL. -- GreenC21:24, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
Changing links to Google Books to links to Internet Archive
Just asking: Why are you changing working links to Google Books to links to the Internet Archive? (For example, [9]) Is there something wrong with links to Google Books? The links to Google Books seem to work fine, yet for some reason you changed them. I do not find the edit summary "Bluelink 4 books for verifiability" adequate explanation for the edits. --Robert.Allen (talk) 22:16, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
I created a page WP:GBWP to help educate on the problems with Google Books, and thus why we are trying to move to more reliable sources, when possible. It is only a fraction of the Google Books links that are converted, less than 10%. -- GreenC00:10, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
--qedk (t 桜 c) 13:48, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
Guideline and policy news
Technical news
Arbitration
Miscellaneous
