User:PocKleanBot/Archive

Blocks

 * If you really don't want the bot blocked right now, you might mention that you're testing it right now on the bot's userpage, and say that you are watching its edits carefully during such-and-such period of time. Since the bot runs until it's done or it's stopped, and its edits aren't checked by humans, I assumed it was going to continue to give people multiple messages, which as you can see annoys them and hurts the bot's reputation. Mak (talk)  19:32, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your suggestions, I shall do that. The bot now scans the page and won't write the template to a page where the template already exists in any case. It has been bemoaned by bot operators numerous times that they are often treated like hardened criminals rather than people volunteering their own time to try and help out. Its ironic that if I didnt log in and replaced the contents of several articles with a four-letter expletive I would probably be treated less harshly that in implementing a bot. Yes, it has teething difficulties, no its not intentional, and people shoudn't take it personally! - PocklingtonDan 19:37, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I blocked you :(
Hey, I noticed that your bot is duplicating the work it's just been doing, see here where it is adding a second notice to the same user's page for the same article. If you have any problem with unblocking or anything, let me know. Mak (talk)  18:00, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you, responded on your tal page - PocklingtonDan 18:19, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I blocked it again: I got the same message three times, last time a couple of minutes ago! I also think that spamming people about the cleanup tags is a bad idea. bogdan 18:53, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Yep, I'm still working on the code. "Spamming" means untargeted. The bot profiles those who it feels are best placed to perform the cleanup based on rules, it does not message everyody on wikipedia, not even everyone who has contributed to the article. - PocklingtonDan 18:59, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
 * As a side note, it is very irritating to develope the bot when the block's are flashing on and off, it maes it hard to separate real wikipedia server reponses from normal service. I'd have the bugs fixed by now if it wasn't for the blocks :-) - PocklingtonDan 19:00, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Then do it on a test wiki! Why do you have to annoy people with this bot? bogdan 19:03, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
 * It is impossible to do all testing in a test environment, all testing must be in a live environment at some point. I'm sorry you feel it annoying to have a duplicate message on your talk page, this is a very minor issue that willa ffect a small number of people until the bot is perfected - PocklingtonDan 19:05, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
 * You know, there is an amazing concept in Wikipedia called "watchlists". People who want to monitor an article, can put it in their watchlists and when they no longer care about it, they can take it out. Why should we have this bot, too, which brings unwanted notifications ? bogdan 19:08, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't feel its necessary for you to be so agressive and sarcastic. As you mention, there is a system of watchlists. However, it is not applicable tot he current problem of 18,000 articles requiring cleanup. No-one monitors every article they edit or else they would never get anything done. The bot calculates based on past edits who is most likely to clean up the article if prompted. If you feel that having two messages on your tlak page is worse for wikipedia than 18,000 unfit articles, that's your call - PocklingtonDan 19:25, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't remember asking to be notified
I don't remember asking to be notified when an article I have touched needs cleanup. Since I have touched about 10,000 Wikipedia articles, this does not, on the whole, seem like a good thing. If it were a small, simple note that I received once a day, I might not object. But receiving three copies, , of a largish template telling me that an article where my only edits were copy edits, and where the most recent of these was to fix someone's spelling in April 2006 seems utterly out of line. Also, nowhere in that large template is the one thing I would think it should most contain: something to click to opt out. - Jmabel | Talk 19:16, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
 * The bot is in development, so the data printed to pages so far is not typical.
 * You would not receive more than one post from the bot in the final version, this was a bug
 * You would receive notification of cleanup for maximum of 1 article you had worked on
 * The bot calculates which users to leave a message for based on an algorithm. I will look at your pattern of edits on that article and alster the algorithm.
 * An opt-out feature has already been suggested and will be built in.
 * I hope this covers your comments - PocklingtonDan 19:23, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I like the idea of this bot but its got to be quicker when notices are out up (perhaps combined with Smackbot which autodates new cleanup notices. If clean-up has already started and is being discussed a new thumping great notice doesn't help. A smaller discrete message on user pages is also much less likely to irritate people. But keep with the idea, it has merit--BozMo talk 20:03, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for your messahe. This bot only started running today so at present it is dealing with a backlog. Once the backlog is cleared in a day or two, it will be taking action maximum of 24 hours after the article has been flagged as needing cleanup so these concerns should be alleviated. Could you advise what sort of notice you would prefer to see on the user talk pages? This is just a template so can be easily changed. Tanks - PocklingtonDan 20:36, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Yao Ziyuan
Hi, you've left a message for User:Yao Ziyuan but an admin seems to have blocked this user indefinitely for running an interwiki bot. If you'd like to give input about this block, please write to the blocking admin so we can get this resolved. Badagnani 19:41, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

A suggestion
Instead of a generic template for the article talk page, why not vary the template based on which clean-up tag was applied to the article? For example see the template PocKleanBot put on Talk:Bash. It says that "the article needs formatting, proofreading, or rephrasing in comprehensible English. the article has multiple overlapping problems. the article is very short and might need expanding, removal or merging with a broader article" However, the clean-up tag on the article is for removal of excess external links, which the bot says nothing about. So perhaps the bot could read which clean-up tag the article is tagged with and adjust its talk page message accordingly? ~  ONUnicorn (Talk 19:26, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Good idea, I shall implement this shortly - PocklingtonDan 19:28, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Suggestion
Generally, bots that make unsolicited edits to talk pages come with some sort of flag so users who simply don't want to be bothered or who don't like what it is doing can opt-out, since PocKleanBot doesn't seem to be an opt-in sort of thing. --Gwern (contribs) 19:24 12 December 2006 (GMT)


 * Hi. I don't personally feel that opt-out is necessary in this case because if the bot has written to your talk page, it will not do so again in future. However, others have suggested as you have, so this is in discussion. Many thanks - PocklingtonDan 19:29, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I have also modified the text on the bot's user page to make its actions clearer. Thanks! - PocklingtonDan 19:30, 12 December 2006 (UTC)


 * So it will only ever nag you once? If so, that should probably be mentioned as well. --Gwern (contribs) 19:34 12 December 2006 (GMT) 19:34, 12 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, it will not post a notice if that user has already received a notice. Where would you like to see this noticed? I don't want to put too much meta-data (ie about the bot) into the template, would prefer the tempalte was 100% about the article involved, to avoid distraction- PocklingtonDan 19:37, 12 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Putting it on the user page would make most sense: I thinki its functionality isn't being fully described if it doesn't mention that it will only nag a user once - as it is written, the number of nags is open-ended. --Gwern (contribs) 19:39 12 December 2006 (GMT)
 * Hi, the template for user pages is at Template:PockKleanBotCleanup2. By all means feel free to edit it to improve witht he text you would like to see, so long as it is reasonable. Thanks - PocklingtonDan 19:41, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

STOP!
Please stop spamming multiple users. User:Zoe|(talk) 19:45, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Replied on your talk page - PocklingtonDan 19:52, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Angelica Vale
I will more than happy to assist clean up this article. Thanks alfiboy 02:22, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I got three
Whcih I don't mind. But others might? Also are you avoiding bots? If so, remember tawkerbot2 is an unflagged bot. Rich Farmbrough, 19:41 12 December 2006 (GMT).
 * Looks like a bug, it shouldn't

Dammit, a bug. Please feel free to block until I can fix this. - PocklingtonDan 19:44, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Billings
Actually, other than needing references, it looks pretty good. Rlevse 19:48, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

No hurry for this
You might like to consider replacing: "You should use this section to discuss possible resolution of the problem and achieve consensus for action. Only when there is a consensus that the article is now cleaned up should you then de-list it by deleting the cleanup tag from the article, this causes the article to drop off the monthly cleanup-needed list page." with: "You can use this section to discuss possible resolution of the problem and achieve consensus for action. When there is a consensus that the article is cleaned up please remove the cleanup tag from the article."

Main reason, asking and offering instead of instructing, some wpians are very sensitive... Also no need to explain what the tag does, they probably either understand in a broad way, or don't care about the details. Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 20:01 12 December 2006 (GMT).
 * THanks, done now - PocklingtonDan 20:19, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Comments after withdrawal

 * Well, I think we knew that would happen. Nobody likes a nag! :)  Listen, I think there is still a need for this bot if you go with my original idea concerning WikiProjects.  Instead of leaving messages on user talk pages, you could update WikiProject categories, tables, and discussion pages.  Certain users could sign up with you to get detailed reports, and if necessary use the information to contact editors on a human to human basis.  We need this bot, but we just need to put people on the frontline, not automated messages.  I have to run right now, but when I return I will try and go into more detail. &mdash;Viriditas | Talk 22:35, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but no thanks, I've withdrawn the bot and I'm going to move on, too many people had too many colourful ocncerns about this bot. It's too much hard work this way trying to get a bot through approval etc. I'm going to just volunteer my services at "bot requests" from now on and develop any bots people want making on the proviso that they get the bot approval and I'll do the coding for them. - PocklingtonDan 22:53, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I got a message when all I did was unprotect the page. —Centrx→talk &bull; 22:56, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Bohm interpretation
I read through Bohm interpretation and was unable to determine what it thinks is wrong. It would be helpful if a detailed note could be left on the talk page, indicating what the problem is. For now, I am removing the cleanup notice. linas 04:54, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I did not add the cleanup notice, I notified users of its existence. It is the duty of the person adding the cleanup notice to put a note ont he talk page saying why If they failed to do so, thats nothing to do with me. - PocklingtonDan 08:08, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

User:Daniel575


Your bot "notified" User:Daniel575 of an article issue. Daniel575 has been indefblocked. - Che Nuevara  00:40, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you for "notifying" me of this. - PocklingtonDan 08:10, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Block
I put a three-hour block on your bot; do you have a script running to restart it periodically? It doesn't seem to be turned off. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 23:07, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * TenofAllTrades, there is no script starting the bot periodically. It should stop running whenever it detects a block (it always has in the past). It did sotp once you implemented your three-hour block. It is possible that someone else set it running after the first block (the bot can be set running by anybody). The bot is now withdrawn and will nt be runn again. Thank you for your patience. - PocklingtonDan 08:15, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah. I would appreciate not getting such nasty boxes on my talk page for having done some minor technical edits on an article. I wonder how this bot got ever approved. --Ligulem 23:39, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Ligulem, if you view a simple notification on your talk page that an article that you worked on needs cleanup as "nasty", that says more about you than it does abuot the actions of the bot. You seem a disagreeable individual, please do not post to my talk page or my bots talk page again in future. This is an explicit request. Any violation of this will be considered harasment and reported to an admin. - PocklingtonDan 08:15, 13 December 2006 (UTC)