User talk:BernsteinBot/Archive 1

Summary on report for pages containing an unusually high number of non-free files
I have a minor gripe that the summary on Database reports/Pages containing an unusually high number of non-free files is flawed; the report seems to be created for pages with more than 6 files, but the description is saying 10 or more. —Ost (talk) 21:26, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Featured articles by length
The bot malfunctioned in the WP:Featured articles/By length page, where it deleted most of the content. Can this be fixed? — Legolas ( talk 2 me ) 16:36, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Bot schedule?
Just noticed that Database reports/Articles containing links to the user space hasn't been updated for a month (used to be weekly). hydnjo (talk) 18:49, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Bot on holiday?
BernsteinBot missed a beat on List of Wikipedians by number of edits/9001–10000 while I am waiting to see my name show up on that page... Night of the Big Wind talk  07:25, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Me too. Not that I've got editcountitis or anything. --Wtshymanski (talk) 13:19, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
 * What is the new schedule on this one? How often? When?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:09, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Next update?
I'm due to appear in the list List of Wikipedians by article count and usually the list is updated once per week. It's 9 days now since the last update. So plz update. Thank you! SpeakFree (talk)(contribs) 21:42, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Shouldn't WP:EDITS updated? Armbrust Talk to me about my editsreview  12:14, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Database reports/Long pages
Hi, merry Christmas ;) Is it possible that I/the bot can add another (one or two) table columns for noting that the pages were either already handled and/or shouldn't changed since they are archives/historical pages, etc.? (The first should be cleared every run, the latter shouldn't simply touched) Regards, mabdul 15:46, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Database reports/Cross-namespace redirects
Can you reduce the number of entries per page, to, say, 400, to avoid Category:Pages with too many expensive parser function calls. Thanks. Rich Farmbrough, 15:22, 17 January 2012 (UTC).

Database reports/Orphaned talk pages not running
Database reports/Orphaned talk pages hasn't been updated in several weeks and has gone off schedule. Can you check into it? -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 07:49, 17 October 2011 (UTC)


 * The report has not been updated in over a month. Can you check into it again?  Thanks. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 22:44, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Still not updated. It's probably extremely massive now, could someone look into it? &mdash; Train2104 (talk • contribs) 00:12, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Purpose
What does the bot do? What is its purpose? Could you put that on the bot's page? Allen (talk) 00:39, 10 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Did you look at Special:Contributions/BernsteinBot? --MZMcBride (talk) 02:40, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Database reports/Unbelievable life spans
Hi mister robot. Database reports/Unbelievable life spans is nice but it's sort of polluted by people who actually had an unbelievable life span. There's a big chunk of entries (say the 116 to 130 range) that are about people who reportedly did live for that long. Would it be possible to eliminate from the report or at least separately list all articles that belong in the categorization subtree Category:Supercentenarians? I think this would make the report more useful for cleanup. Thanks, Pichpich (talk) 18:00, 23 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:MZMcBride&diff=488924465&oldid=488922415 (and the previous replies) may interest you. --MZMcBride (talk) 02:40, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Issue fix
Hey, is there any way the bot could be corrected so that it helps prevent this issue? Thanks! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:13, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Article count?
Hey there, I was wondering when the next article count for Wikipedians would be run?Coal town guy (talk) 13:13, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Essays/Assessment/Links
It seems this page is no longer updated. Why? Keφr (talk) 16:57, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

List of Wikipedians by number of edits
The list is not correct. It was noticeable last week; my total was about 170 lower than it should have been, and there had been persistent delays with the database updates. This week, there are no delays listed by X!'s program, but my total has only increased from 10,832 to 10,851 edits according to the list (moving me down from 4969th to 4971st). In fact, I've made approximately 425 edits over the past week, not 19, and My Preferences gives my total at 11,427, a discrepancy of over 570 edits from the official List. Something's not right here.

Thanks for anything you can do to track this down before it gets any worse. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:22, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I have been noticing undercounting of edits for about 5 or 6 weeks in a row now.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:30, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
 * It's getting worse, too (again this week). I think it's due to the server BernsteinBot uses. One of the servers, thyme, is currently approaching 1.4 million transactions lag, as bad as the one earlier in the year, and it seems very likely it's the one the bot gets its data from. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:37, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Toolserver has been having replication issues since July 2. It is causing problems with alot of scripts.  Replication lag is now at 372 hrs and climbing.  Alot of scripts that people use are dead and the list of Wikipedians by numbers of edits is one of the least important ones.  Until toolserver is back, there is nothing to be done.  Bgwhite (talk) 06:06, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Well if it is counting edits from over 2 weeks ago, there may be no problem other than the lag.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 07:05, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

White list for Unbelievable life spans
Hello BernsteinBot. Can I call you Bernstein? Thanks. Can you add Lokenath Brahmachari and Karni Mata to a whitelist so they don't show up in Database reports/Unbelievable life spans. The articles makes claims to long lifespans. Cheers. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 00:28, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Namechange
Can somebody explain to this robot that I have changed my username a few weeks ago? Although the BernsteinBot sees my edits under the new name, it does not see my new articles. So, somebody get a screwdriver and hammer and hammer it into this machine that the correct username is The Banner, instead of Night of the Big Wind (a storm disaster in Ireland, btw). Thanks. The Banner talk 19:55, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Printers are not always people
Regarding, Database reports/Potential biographies of living people (4)—IBM 370 printer, Apple Scribe Printer and Personal Printer Data Stream are not (potentially living) people. Take care with your algorithm to screeen out professions that may have become automated. Thanks, Wbm1058 (talk) 21:21, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

List of Wikipedians by article count updates.
BernsteinBot generally updates the list every week, and sometimes every fortnight, on Wednesdays. It's last update, however, was on October 3rd. Something's amiss. Like my singing? Ha-la-la-la-la-la-LA-LAAA!!! (talk) 00:43, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanx for the maintenance of Database reports/Polluted categories
Thank you for the daily generation of Database reports/Polluted categories. Given that a run a month of so ago had the first 1000 stop somewhere in the 'E's and the most recent stop in the 'R's, I'd say real progress was being made!Naraht (talk) 17:04, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Database reports/Orphaned talk pages
The database that the bot uses to determine the orphan talk pages is out of sync again. It is picking up a lot of non-orphaned talk pages. Can you check into it? Thanks.-- Gogo Dodo (talk) 07:09, 2 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Has there been any progress on getting the database reloaded with an updated copy? The list is still full of already deleted talk pages or non-orphan ones. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:43, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Essays/Assessment/Links
This bot used to update WikiProject Essays/Assessment/Links every month, but hasn't done so for the last year. Can it run this task again? WhatamIdoing (talk) 03:42, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Database reports/Polluted categories
Please regenerate Database reports/Polluted categories. Thank you.Naraht (talk) 11:34, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Database reports/Empty categories
The bot hasn't updated Database reports/Empty categories in 15 days. Any chance to get the bot to do so? — ξ xplicit  01:33, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Now 24 days. This report is supposed to update every day.  --R'n'B (call me Russ) 16:15, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Article count and edit count
Hi. I see you update the counts on articles created and edits. Would it be possible to make a third list of users who've created the most categories? Thanks.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 12:56, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Irregular runs?
Looking at the history of Database reports/Categories categorized in red-linked categories, it looks like it skips the run that should happen on the third Sunday of the month - is there any particular reason for that and can it be fixed? I've had a bit of a go at blue-linking that lot, I think it should be down to 2 pages now. I also had a bit of a look at the polluted categories - it seems a lot of them aren't?? You might want to take a look when you've a moment. Thanks again for the bot though. Le Deluge (talk) 13:06, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Database reports/Red-linked categories with incoming links
Can we have the sockpuppet account omitted from this report? They clutter it up and they are not important. Makes it harder to see the important stuff. Cheers. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 20:15, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Not important to you mebbe, but it's important to other people. If it's that important to you you could always take a copy and filter out the things you're not interested in. As an aside - a couple of the cat and template reports seem to have got "stuck", any chance of them getting run again? Database_reports/Uncategorized_categories should be looking rather shorter than it was - it's meant to be on a weekly run but not happened for three weeks. TIA Le Deluge (talk) 13:57, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Cheers. FYI that last run included cats such as which has been catted since October. I don't know what happened, whether that's general db screwiness or a specific bug in your code, but I figured you ought to know. There's also a bunch of cats in there that I definitely put cats on but where my edits apparently didn't "stick", sigh..... Le Deluge (talk) 22:41, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Couple more that seem to be "stuck" when they've had cats for some time are and several in the format  Le Deluge (talk) 14:33, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
 * OK, I think that between me and User:Pichpich, we've cleared that report - the remaining "stuck" ones are easily visible if you sort by edit date, they're from February and July last year, namely Category:Manhattan_Jaspers_basketball_seasons, Category:Montana_Grizzlies_basketball_seasons, Category:Referendums_in_the_Republic_of_Maryland, Category:1935_in_Croatia, Category:1926_in_Croatia, Category:1971_in_Croatia, Category:1957_in_Croatia, Category:Wikipedia_pages_needing_cleanup_from_November_2011 Le Deluge (talk) 06:43, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Just as an example of why not to sweep these things under the carpet - I took a look at what was needed, realised that it was trivial to do it by AWB or a bot, and BattyBot has now filed a BRFA to do this automatically. So that will be ~200 cats removed from this report at a stroke. User:Pichpich and I have been having a bit of an attack on this report - do you have any idea of roughly how many categories are actually involved, as opposed to the report's cut-off at 1000?? What's the criterion for the cut-off - is it number of incoming links and then alphabetical or what? Le Deluge (talk) 12:35, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Having done an attack on Rlcwil last week, one can do some stats, by my reckoning it looks like there's about 60,000 cats outstanding (see talkpage ). Given that, perhaps the bot ought to sort by number of incoming links as that might add most value? Le Deluge (talk) 16:51, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Database reports/Deleted red-linked categories again
Can the bot do a Database reports/Deleted red-linked categories that only lists deleted categories that have article namespace pages in them? There is far too much clutter in the current dump making it difficult to find the important stuff (ie articles). -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 07:42, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Database reports/Red-linked categories with incoming links needs a kick
Database reports/Red-linked categories with incoming links hasn't updated since 20 Feb. Whilst we're on the subject, an idea - I don't know what the selection criteria are for choosing the 1000 on that page, but how about the 1000 with the most incoming links are selected? That might be more meaningful, and get rid of eg almost all the sockpuppet cats which people have complained about. Le Deluge (talk) 13:10, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

List of Wikipedians by number of edits/1–1000 update
The bot seems to have missed both the May 8 and May 15 updates of List of Wikipedians by number of edits/1–1000.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 06:05, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
 * It did update List of bots by number of edits/1–1000 on May 8 & 15, but missed May 1 for that page. GoingBatty (talk) 04:02, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
 * That is a different page. It did not update the page that I am pointing to.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:32, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
 * You're absolutely right. Just providing more information about a similar activity for the same bot in case it's helpful for troubleshooting the issue.  GoingBatty (talk) 16:58, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * The Toolserver is dying. I imagine this is a symptom. --MZMcBride (talk) 18:15, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Both pages were successfully updated this morning. GoingBatty (talk) 16:40, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I noticed.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:51, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Database reports/Untagged biographies of living people
Hi. Your bot stopped updating this page since May 1st. Could you fix this, please? --Meno25 (talk) 18:34, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Database reports/Unused non-free files
This report hasn't been updated since late June. Could you take a look at it? --Stefan2 (talk) 15:46, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
If you could please provide guidance on this issue, it would be much appreciated. Jackson Peebles (talk) 03:30, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub type sizes broken.
The data for page WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub type sizes has not updated the last two months. Please investigate. Dawynn (talk) 11:46, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Missed a task this week
The bot failed to update Wikipedians by edit count this week. Just thought you oughta know. VanIsaacWS Vexcontribs 23:03, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Lame. --MZMcBride (talk) 01:19, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Not that I was waiting for it or anything... VanIsaacWS Vexcontribs 05:23, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Database reports/Unused non-free files
Today (21 December), the bot updated the report, now telling which files were orphaned a month and a half ago (3 November). Something seems to be wrong. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:11, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Probably Toolserver stupidity. Sigh. --MZMcBride (talk) 14:27, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Database reports/File description pages without an associated file
Could you take a look at this database report? It now contains lots of DYK images, featured images and similar. The idea is that such images should have a local file information page on Wikipedia, and that one should only be deleted if the file ends up being deleted on Commons. Having lots of those in the report makes it harder to find out which pages to nominate for deletion per F2 or G8. --Stefan2 (talk) 17:13, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Database reports/Unprotected templates with many transclusions
Hey there ... Apparently, BernsteinBot doesn't recognize the new WP:PINKLOCK protection level as is evidenced in Database reports/Unprotected templates with many transclusions/1. Thanks for your attention. Technical 13 (talk) 21:13, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
 * The source is at Database reports/Unprotected templates with many transclusions/Configuration. It's also on GitHub at . Patches welcome. :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 05:56, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Database reports/Templates transcluded on the most pages
No update during December 2013 for Database reports/Templates transcluded on the most pages. Could you make one? Androoox (talk) 14:08, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Database reports/Broken section anchors was last updated more than 10 months ago
Database reports/Broken section anchors hasn't been updated since February 2013, so the report is outdated now. In the future, will this database report be automatically updated more frequently (weekly or monthly, perhaps?)? Jarble (talk) 16:36, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

List_of_Wikipedians_by_article_count/Data
The history shows that this is being updated approximately weekly, but the table with the data isn't changing. Also, there's no telling how old it is. Lou Sander (talk) 20:24, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Still a problem: I've created 187 new articles and the bot still says 185. Montanabw (talk) 23:39, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

long page list update schedule
What's the schedule? Looking at the history, the end-of-month run should have happened by now, but it hasn't. --Joy &#91;shallot&#93; (talk) 12:36, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
 * It appears that the page was updated several hours after you posted this. &mdash; Makyen (talk) 22:34, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Self-categorized categories: cat name truncated
Hi, please see item 3 of of Database reports/Self-categorized categories. The link is to  - it has been truncated before the parenthesis. -- Red rose64 (talk) 11:22, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Redrose64: Yes, I imagine pipe trick silliness. Some (older) reports use the pipe trick when posting a report's output to a wiki page. --MZMcBride (talk) 17:33, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Database reports/Unused non-free files
Something is wrong here. The report is supposed to be updated everyday, but this isn't happening. There was one update on 19 February and then nothing until 23 February. Also, the report suggests that there currently aren't any unused non-free files, which seems strange. On average, Wikipedia seems to get around 50 unused non-free files per day, so as the first report in four days, I would expect the report to contain approximately 200 files and certainly not zero files. --Stefan2 (talk) 14:26, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Why is this happening? The report hasn't been updated this month and the latest update is empty. --Stefan2 (talk) 00:52, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Stefan2: I'm not sure what's going on with this report. I suspect the intermittent issues are related to the Toolserver slowly dying. For now, seems to be updating regularly-ish, though I have no idea if the report's contents are accurate or useful. --MZMcBride (talk) 17:35, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Another page not being updated: Wikipedia:Database_reports/Long_pages
BernsteinBot hasn't updated Database_reports/Long_pages for a month (history). —WWoods (talk) 18:34, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Wwoods: seems to be updating now. I'm not sure what broke or how it fixed itself. I suspect Toolserver wonkiness. --MZMcBride (talk) 17:37, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Page again not being updated: Wikipedia:Database_reports/Long_pages
BernsteinBot hasn't updated Database_reports/Long_pages for a month and 14 days. (history). Makyen (talk) 12:30, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Lame. --MZMcBride (talk) 03:21, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Makyen: seems to be updating now. I'm not sure what broke or how it fixed itself. I suspect Toolserver wonkiness. --MZMcBride (talk) 17:38, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

wrong long page list entry
The long pages report includes Talk:Pavle Đurišić with the length of 283659. However, that page has been much shorter ever since 29 October 2012‎. What gives? --Joy &#91;shallot&#93; (talk) 12:54, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
 * There are several in the list, at least in the last couple of versions of this report, which are similar (much lower actual size for a considerable time prior to the report being generated). I don't have any actual information about why, only what I have seen by going to a good number of the longer pages.  I also did not track which ones.  After the first couple, it was just another one where the page was not that long.  Using this report would be easier if there was a link to the history of the reported page in addition to normal and raw links. &mdash; Makyen (talk) 13:52, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Joy and Makyen: Without digging into this issue too deeply, I imagine the problem here is that the Toolserver is slowly dying and many database reports still query the Toolserver's replicated databases. If/when these reports get migrated to Wikimedia Labs, odd glitches such as this should disappear. --MZMcBride (talk) 17:31, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking a look at it. Unless it becomes that these are a larger percentage of the pages reported, I would consider it a non-critical issue. The report still contains a good amount of useful information. At least for my use, this specific issue is not one that needs a short term fix, as merely manually ignoring the entry is easy. It does, however, imply that there might be other issues which would be consistent with database problems. Unless some other issue which crops up I am fine with just dealing with existence of the problem. Again, thanks. &mdash; Makyen (talk) 20:52, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Database reports/Deleted red-linked categories not updated
Hi. This report Database reports/Deleted red-linked categories hasn't been run since April. Could it be restarted? Thanks! Tassedethe (talk) 21:40, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Database reports/Old IP talk pages
Database reports/Old IP talk pages shouldn't be limited to the first thousand. The first thousand is entirely meaningless, and the IPs don't even reach 102.xxxx. This report needs to list all of them, on multiple pages if necessary. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 05:31, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub type sizes
WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub type sizes has not updated in over 4 months. Please investigate. Dawynn (talk) 11:33, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I have updated the stub stats. --Bamyers99 (talk) 01:24, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

log actions on Commons
Hi MZMcBride, BernsteinBot does no longer update the page c:Commons:Database reports/Users by log action. The last update was on June 30, 2014. Any chance to revive it? Thanks. --Túrelio (talk) 09:14, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Database reports/Redirects containing red links
Database reports/Redirects containing red links hasn't been updated since the end of June. I don't know whether it is still needed, or how much effort would be needed to revive it. Just noting that I noticed it because it was a member of Category:Pages with too many expensive parser function calls. I fixed that by restoring an older version of Template:Plnr that didn't use the expensive #ifexist function. Wbm1058 (talk) 16:40, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by article count
Hi, the List of Wikipedians by article count hasn't been updated since June 25, can it be updated? LADY LOTUS • TALK 11:33, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
 * please see Wikipedia talk:List of Wikipedians by number of edits, User talk:MZMcBride, Village pump (technical)/Archive 128. -- Red rose64 (talk) 12:53, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Ah! Thank you Redrose64! LADY LOTUS • <span style="text-shadow:4px 4px 15px #F80,-4px -4px 15px #F08;">TALK 13:03, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
 * , you listed links to number of edits, what about article count? --evrik (talk) 06:40, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Many of these reports are failing for the same reason. -- Red rose64 (talk) 11:31, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I looked into this. I don't know how to get someone else to take this up. --evrik (talk) 04:17, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Bot run
Would it be possible to update this page, this page in order to help with some data that I would like to do? I ran this article in the Signpost last year, and would like to update the information again, since it would be nice to be able to see where we have gone in the intervening years. Thanks for any help ahead of time, as it is greatly appreciated! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 01:09, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I just realized you might not see that at first, so have a ping. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 01:17, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
 * My focus is elsewhere. :-( --MZMcBride (talk) 04:53, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Ah, okay. Is there anyone else who could run the script for you, or is it something that someone could easily learn how to do? Kevin Rutherford (talk) 02:15, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Underscores in database reports
I find it annoyning to read pages like Database reports/Articles containing links to the user space with underscores instead of spaces in wikilinks. I have seen other tools do it and it's not a huge deal when it's pages aimed at editors and not readers but it does slow down my reading and comprehension speed. Is there a reason for the underscores apart from not bothering to convert them to spaces? I know underscores may sometimes work better if a pagename is copy-pasted to a url but I guess that rarely happens, and lots of other characters need url encoding although space is the most common. PrimeHunter (talk) 08:32, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Database reports/Templates containing links to disambiguation pages
Hi BernsteinBot. I notice that Database reports/Templates containing links to disambiguation pages only lists templates which start with a number or the letters A to C (and appears to have done since at least February 2014 - I didn't bother to check back any further). Is this an indication that there might be hundreds of other templates out there containing links to disambiguation pages (i.e. templates starting with the letter D-Z) which aren't being picked up in the report? Thanks. DH85868993 (talk) 00:13, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Database reports/Biographies of living people possibly eligible for deletion
Looks like Database reports/Biographies of living people possibly eligible for deletion has not been updated yet-granted it would of been last night if on schedule (which I did notice then), was just wondering if this is not working or if it is being delayed or something? (well either way hope its back soon!) Wgolf (talk) 16:45, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Database reports/Unused stub templates
Database reports/Unused stub templates has not run for nearly a year. Please fix. Dawynn (talk) 14:05, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

WP:List of Wikipedians by number of edits
Hi! I broke up the large 1-1000 sections in the WP:List of Wikipedians by number of edits into 1-500 and 501-1000 (so on so forth). However, when the bot updates the page, the bot simply reunites the list into five, long, 1000 editor categories. Please do something about this. Gug01 (talk) 21:25, 21 January 2015 (UTC) Gug 01
 * Yes; when a report is bot-updated, the bot ignores what is there already and overwrites it with a freshly-generated version. This is actually a useful anti-vandal feature. -- Red rose64 (talk) 21:39, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
 * The bot no longer updates daily. It would be great to have it update daily once more. Johnny Au  (talk/contributions) 02:06, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Database reports/Most-watched pages by namespace
This page hasn't been updated since April 2014 and I'd be interested in seeing a newer version, if that is possible in the near future. Thanks! Liz <sup style="font-family:Times New Roman;"><b style="color:#006400;">Read!</b> <b style="color:#006400;">Talk!</b> 10:26, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

List of Wikipedians by number of edits/1–1000
List of Wikipedians by number of edits/1–1000, which had been updating daily, has not updated this month.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:27, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
 * When I checked List of Wikipedians by number of edits, it had been updated today. Liz  <sup style="font-family:Times New Roman;"><b style="color:#006400;">Read!</b> <b style="color:#006400;">Talk!</b> 10:33, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * yes, see Wikipedia talk:List of Wikipedians by number of edits -- Red rose64 (talk) 20:51, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the link, Redrose64. I just saw that the query hadn't been responded to so I did. Liz  <sup style="font-family:Times New Roman;"><b style="color:#006400;">Read!</b> <b style="color:#006400;">Talk!</b> 22:10, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Database reports/Blank single-author pages
Could the links to File and Category be prefixed with a : so that the images and categories are just links on that page? -- WOSlinker (talk) 20:35, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedia files for deletion
A category that this bot involves itself, Category:Wikipedia files for deletion, has been proposed to be renamed Category:Wikipedia files for discussion. This notice has been placed as a courtesy in the event that the category is renamed per a note on the category. Steel1943 (talk) 21:15, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Corrupt data in Uncategorized categories report
Hi, the four pages reported here were deleted three months ago. Hope you can pin down what's wrong there. – Fayenatic  L ondon 16:40, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
 * It's not the bot's fault - there's a slight glitch in the fabric of the database which means the odd deleted category still shows up in low-level database queries. I even recreated them to see if that would help but it didn't. I mentioned it here but it seems to be part of a wider problem with databases not quite syncing properly all the time or something, as discussed a few months back on Talk:DBR. Le Deluge (talk) 21:13, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Missing brackets
Just a minor point, Database reports/Categories categorized in red-linked categories/1 can "see" the brackets in categories in the first column, but chops them off in the second column - eg becomes  and  becomes. Not a biggy - the most significant impact is that it stops categories that have been created showing up as blue links - but if it's an easy fix then it would be nice to have. Le Deluge (talk) 13:55, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Beg pardon, the link is right so blue/red works, it's just the visible text that chops off the brackets. Which is still a bit annoying, as sometimes I copy it to extract subsets for working on. Le Deluge (talk) 04:54, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi Le Deluge. This is almost certainly pipe trick funkiness. --MZMcBride (talk) 23:55, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Database reports/Untagged stubs
Would there be a convenient way to exclude pages tagged for RfD from this listing? Since an RfD tag makes the page recognized as an "article" rather than a redirect, it seems that every page with an RfD tag ends up on that list. --BDD (talk) 16:08, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi BDD. This is probably possible, but I'm not sure I have much interest in doing it. These are edge cases that sort themselves out after a week or two, presumably. Is this a feature you really want? Or put another way: if you were granted a database reports wish, would this be what you would use it on? --MZMcBride (talk) 23:59, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
 * It's alright. I don't remember my exact concern now. I think it was just related to always checking the WLH when I delete a redirect and seeing that page listed, but I think I've learned to just mentally tune them out. (That said, I don't really use database reports much, so yes, I might use one wish for this! :P ) --BDD (talk) 14:57, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

No updates for last two days for Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits
There seems to be no updates to the List of Wikipedians by number of edits for the last two days. As of the posting of this comment, the date on List of Wikipedians by number of edits/Age is. Peaceray (talk) 15:26, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
 * , are you the editor to contact about this? Peaceray (talk) 15:27, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi Peaceray. labs-l/2016-November/004766.html might be somewhat related. We're intermittently getting an error about the page being semiprotected, but that shouldn't be relevant if we're successfully logging in. Maybe the user session is getting dropped for some reason? I've tweaked the script and we'll see if that makes a difference. I've pasted the most recent error below for reference. --MZMcBride (talk) 23:54, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

tools.mzmcbride@tools-bastion-03:~/logs$ cat tools.mzmcbride-0.e534431 Traceback (most recent call last): File "/data/project/mzmcbride/scripts/enwiki/editcount.py", line 177, in    report.edit(report_text, summary=settings.editsumm, bot=1) File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/wikitools/page.py", line 538, in edit result = req.query File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/wikitools/api.py", line 143, in query raise APIError(data['error']['code'], data['error']['info']) wikitools.api.APIError: (u'protectedpage', u'The "editsemiprotected" right is required to edit this page')


 * Ah, yes, it seems that a disruptive maintenance for tools might be the culprit. Hopefully, we'll be back to BAU on the morrow. Thanks for updating me on the situation! Peaceray (talk) 00:13, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
 * List of Wikipedians by number of edits/1–1000 and friends seem to have updated. Thank you for pinging me about the missed updates. Feel free to ping me again if you notice the report stop updating in the future. I don't keep a very close eye on the error logs and I can't promise I can do anything to make the report update more quickly in some/most cases (database replication problems and hard drive issues aren't uncommon on Tool Labs), but I can usually at least poke a bit. --MZMcBride (talk) 05:11, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks! All seems to be in order now. Peaceray (talk) 16:02, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
 * It looks like we're stuck again. Latest run time was  & it is now 21:00, 22 November 2016 (UTC). Peaceray (talk) 21:00, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

This discussion is continuing at <https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:List_of_Wikipedians_by_number_of_edits&oldid=751074854#Bot_to_update_did_not_run_for_22_November_2016_yet> I guess. --MZMcBride (talk) 06:18, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Request rerun of Database reports/Polluted categories
Thank you for all you do with the bot!, I've worked my way through a *large* number of the 1000 generated entries in Database reports/Polluted categories, can you either rerun it in place before Dec 2nd, or to a page under User:Naraht (generate either the first 1000 or all of them). Also, if possible, can either a separate list for pages polluted from the Draft space (preferred) or have the draft space added to this one? Thank You.Naraht (talk) 18:55, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi Naraht. Sure, done. --MZMcBride (talk) 07:19, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much. Didn't get quite as far as I'd hoped, but I figure I can have this functionally clean by the new year. Where is the appropriate place to discuss what categories should get the Template:Polluted Category? Also, any suggestions for users who revert cleanups in this regard?Naraht (talk) 14:50, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi Naraht. I missed the second part of your initial request regarding the Draft namespace. I only manually re-ran the existing script, I didn't modify it.
 * I'm not sure which place is most appropriate to discuss Template:Polluted category. I guess Template talk:Polluted category would be a decent starting place. I'm not sure what kind of suggestions you're looking for regarding revert cleanups. When I look at most of these polluted categories, it seems like it's user sandbox subpages that are the biggest culprit. --MZMcBride (talk) 19:21, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
 * That's fine, I'm unlikely to get done the ones that I want to do much faster than a week. I'm avoiding the things like category 1932 deaths, since I don't want to go looking through 6,000 entries. (The tool that the page uses for the right two columns is broken). I figure that the 1932 deaths will eventually show up in something like category Indonesian Booksellers which will be much smaller.
 * I'll ask at Template talk:Polluted category when I get done emptying everything else :). For now, I'm deliberately treating any category with "Article" in the name where it refers to a Wikipedia article as a category that is probably OK to get polluted.
 * What I meant for suggestions is that I have *one* sandbox where I did the changes and the user reverted it and says that I have no right to edit his sandbox. I think I may have made him less likely to stay around wikipedia. :( BTW, my standard edit summary is WP:USERNOCAT (restore when it goes the mainspace), if you have any suggestions on improving it, let me know. I actually think I'd rather see Draft as a separate listing, that way I don't have to search for two different words when I go to a category)Naraht (talk) 21:30, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Naraht, I was wondering who it was that was helping me deal with polluted categories, since I knew my work alone wasn't responsible for the big strides this report has been making between updates. Cheers! As for warning users, I've already had to do this once, I suggest a similar approach as it's generally based off of a misunderstanding. If they ignore and revert/challenge you on it, I would suggest making a post on WP:AN/I for more pairs of eyes on the situation. VegaDark (talk) 08:42, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Unfortunately with this work, you end up stepping on your own work unless you remember what categories you've removed from other articles, so I'm not sure there is a way for us not to duplicate each other's work (might help a little if one of us worked from #1000 up, and the other from 'A' down. My rule of thumb is to avoid the #### Births and Deaths since they are huge and to leave the categories which are *about* articles in wikipedia (Articles with BLP issues) alone since they are about the Article, not the subject of the Article. As for the user who protested, unfortunately, I think he reacted badly since he thought his sandbox was private. :( How do you feel about a similar category for Draft?Naraht (talk) 10:54, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Mainspace categories should never be on draft articles, but if user have their drafts in their userspace I don't see a major issue with allowing those pages in categories intended for articles in the draft namespace (although possibly technically improper, I don't see any real harm to the encyclopedia by allowing this). How about in the next update I'll work from the top top and you work bottom up? (I'll skip most of the big ones as well). Also, I've run into a problem (and see you have too) where templates are on userspace pages, adding the category through the template.  I'm almost certain there's a way to edit templates to make it so they only add categories to a particular namespace, but I'm not certain how.  Still researching that at the moment. VegaDark (talk) 18:10, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Agreed on Draft (and theoretically draft talk), same rules should apply (but better to be a separate list.). Sure, I'll work from the bottom up next time. (and concentrate from the bottom for the next couple of days) My guess is that since the bottom was around H last time it will be somewhere around J. Good luck on the template problem, let me know.Naraht (talk) 15:29, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Found it! main other is the template, as used how I did here. VegaDark (talk) 06:56, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Cool. I'll use that when I have to. In other news, it was regenerated, and the list goes down to L. I'll start at L and go up...Naraht (talk) 13:44, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Database reports/Uncategorized categories didn't run
FYI Database reports/Uncategorized categories didn't run at the weekend, not a biggy though. Whilst on the subject, can be permanently ignored by that report? As the top of the entire category hierarchy, it should always be uncategorised.Le Deluge (talk) 15:55, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
 * While a bit off topic, I wonder if Category:Contents might be a good candidate for a rename to Category:Wikipedia contents. It's not very intuitive that it's not a category intended for mainspace content. VegaDark (talk) 18:52, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I have no idea why the report failed to update. I manually re-ran it a few hours ago. Removing "Category:Contents" is possible, but meh. --MZMcBride (talk) 06:12, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
 * The report is only worth doing for people to clean it out, and I suspect your users are rather more OCD than the average population... <g> It's a bit dispiriting to know that the report can never be emptied, whether because of Contents or because of those four zombie categories that are still stuck in there.Le Deluge (talk) 15:42, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Database reports/Empty categories
Any idea why this report, which updates daily, is listing stuff like Category:Writers who have returned the Sahitya Akademi Award, a non-existing category most recently deleted in July? That applies to most of the redlinks currently up in the report - For some reason it's including several old, long-deleted categories in the report for no particular reason. VegaDark (talk) 03:30, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
 * It's the same underlying database issue mentioned above in "Corrupt data in Uncategorized categories report" - not the bot's fault but a database glitch that means things come up in queries when they shouldn't. It works the other way too - for instance there's a bunch of cats that show up in WP:Database reports/Categories categorized in red-linked categories when they are now blue links (it's more obvious when the report has just been run). It seems to have been a one-off thing at the beginning of this year, but those categories seem permanently corrupted even if (as with the cat you mention) it gets recreated and deleted again. The bots could choose to ignore them, but - meh.Le Deluge (talk) 10:50, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Hmm, well, that's annoying. But it seems we have to live with it unless someone with the skills and inclination wants to investigate a fix. Ah well. VegaDark (talk) 00:59, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Database reports/Polluted categories main and user links
The main and user links on the report point to yanker on toolserver which no longer works.

Could those be updated to use petscan? Probably only a user link is really needed though.

BEFORE: https://toolserver.org/~mzmcbride/yanker/?db=enwiki_p&list=pages&namespace=0&limit=5000&category=XXXXXXXXX AFTER: https://petscan.wmflabs.org/?language=en&project=wikipedia&categories=XXXXXXXXX&ns%5B2%5D=1&ns%5B3%5D=1&interface_language=en&doit=

thanks. -- WOSlinker (talk) 09:15, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi WOSlinker. T136924 has now been resolved, so the yanker links should be working again. --MZMcBride (talk) 13:25, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I've just been clearing a couple of these (a one-off go that's as far as the G's now) and it strikes me that for end-users it would be more the report would be more helpful if it listed pollutants rather than polluted categories. One article typically pollutes 3-4 categories, but very few categories have more than one pollutant so it would make the report smaller and save people having to search the category for pollutants, which as has been mentioned above can involve looking for one article in 6000. Would it be possible for the bot to use the polluted categories list as a starting point to pull out User: articles in those categories? Might also be worth having a manual run of that report, I suspect it should look rather different now... Le Deluge (talk) 15:40, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Agreed that pollutants is probably more useful. I started from the bottom and have made it up to the E's seeing only a few once I got past G and those could have been new additions. I'd prefer a manual run ASAP because we are *really* starting to reduce this. At this point I wouldn't be *that* surprised if the generated list didn't hit the 1000 category max!Naraht (talk) 17:24, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Looks like we *just* missed. #1000 starts with "Women", which probably means the entire list is less than 1200. I'm starting at the bottom!Naraht (talk) 22:40, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

On reflection, the problem with going for pollutants is that there's a couple of maintenance categories in there like G13_eligible_AfC_submissions that would swamp things. They're fairly easy to filter out either by blocking categories or doing a prescan with AWB, but it's an issue. I'll have to leave you to it for now, too much to do before Christmas! Le Deluge (talk) 13:40, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
 * GoingBatty is has kindly done a BattyBot run which should knock all the "easy" ones on the head. It looks like it's nearly finished, might be worth doing a final one-off manual run of the report to allow to track down the last few categories hiding in templates etc? Le Deluge (talk) 23:20, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Database reports/Categories categorized in red-linked categories
Database reports/Categories categorized in red-linked categories has not updated since November 1st. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 23:17, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi Ricky81682. Looking at <https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Database_reports/Categories_categorized_in_red-linked_categories/1&action=history>, I guess we're all good now. :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 23:56, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
 * In a similar vein, Database_reports/Deleted_red-linked_categories has not updated since 2014. (Also, how have you been? Been a while!) VegaDark (talk) 22:47, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
 * VegaDark: Whoa, hey! You're back? Same old around here. :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 06:21, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I am back! At least for now, we shall see how active I stay. User categories have taken a fall in quality since I became less active, that's for sure...would like to get things back on track in that regard. VegaDark (talk) 08:01, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Also, thanks for updating this report. However, only 51 members?  Is this accurate or did something go wrong? When the report was ongoing last there were 500+ (report looks to have been limited to 500). Makes me very skeptical this report is functioning as intended (although it would be good news if so, means far less work to do). VegaDark (talk) 08:35, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
 * There's definitely a bug with this report. There's a similar listing at User:Tim.landscheidt/Sandbox/Deleted red-linked categories/1 from 2013 that still has numerous populated, previously deleted redlinks that aren't on the most recent version of this report.  Any chance of looking in to this?  It's very useful for redlink cleanup.  Thanks, VegaDark (talk) 23:04, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Logged out bot
BernsteinBot is currently editing from. ☺ ·  Salvidrim!   ·  &#9993;  18:02, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi Salvidrim!. Yes, this keeps happening intermittently. This issue is related to 324215. If/when these IP address ranges get soft-blocked, the edits will stop happening. I have little interest in adding assertion code to the bots, particularly as I'm somewhat convinced this isn't the fault of my scripts. In the meantime, I personally continue to think that it's better to have the edits, even if they're "unattributed," than not. I understand and accept that others may disagree. --MZMcBride (talk) 03:19, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

On frwiki
Hello, we wondered about how to get this list Database reports/Most-watched pages on frwiki. Would you agree to run it on this wiki or else give us the code that we can adapt ? Thanks ! Framawiki (please notify) (talk) 21:03, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi Framawiki. Unfortunately, we're waiting on T59617 to be fixed. The script is mostly at Database reports/Most-watched pages/Configuration, but the script will not currently work on frwiki_p until the linked Phabricator task is fixed. --MZMcBride (talk) 03:13, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi Framawiki. Following activity on T59617, Special:Permalink/761938232 has a one-time run of this report for the French Wikipedia. --MZMcBride (talk) 18:41, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks ! Is it possible to run it for example at fr:WP:Rapports/Pages_les_plus_suivies ? FYI this request is following a bot request by Simon Villeneuve. --Framawiki (please notify) (talk) 18:42, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi Framawiki. Sure, done: w:fr:Wikipédia:Rapports/Pages les plus suivies. The script I used is pasted below. --MZMcBride (talk) 03:42, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
 * That's brilliant ! Would you like me to run the script periodically with my bot ? or want to do it ? I translated the code bellow. --Framawiki (please notify) (talk) 12:53, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi Framawiki. If you could run the script, that would be great. I already have too many reports to keep updated. :-) Please let me know if you need any help. There is a "dbreps" shared Tool Labs account if you're interested in joining and using that. --MZMcBride (talk) 04:13, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello MZMcBride ! I've added your query in the code used by and my bot. Thanks for your help ! --Framawiki (please notify) (talk) 19:43, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Framawiki: Ahh, neat. I didn't know about <https://github.com/Niharika29/database-reports> and <https://github.com/framawiki/database-reports>. Very interesting. My notes about improving database reports are here, if you're interested: Database reports/Redesign. There are also tasks in Phabricator Maniphest such as T137058. --MZMcBride (talk) 01:43, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks MZMcBride for the links.
 * I agree to say that put reports in on-wiki pages is not the best way to use it : it's difficult for user to get raw title list, export this to others tools such petscan... What do you think about create a simple web tool on labs like Quarry but with fixed requests and that is run periodically ? So we could add extras features like filters (only pages with contain keyword in title, ...), export options, notifications if it trigs a filter... So a more flexible tool... --Framawiki (please notify) (talk) 17:09, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi Framawiki. What you're describing sounds like <https://tools.wmflabs.org/tsreports/>. I think there are still advantages to using wiki pages (watchlist support, page histories, etc.), but which implementation is chosen is really the decision of whoever commits to setting up and maintaining the new system. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:46, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the link.
 * (I assume that you are the tool owner : please change the home page text : database text to enter is <tt>enwiki</tt>, not <tt>en.wikipedia.org</tt>, that give me an error.)
 * It's a very good tool, I'll look it ! Thanks ! --Framawiki (please notify) (talk) 17:17, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Train2104 not shown as extended confirmed
On List of Wikipedians by number of edits/1001–2000 and previously List of Wikipedians by number of edits/2001–3000, Train2104 continues to not show "ECo" next to it even though that user is actually extended confirmed. That user should show "ECo, F, N, Rv, Ro, TE" next to it, not "F, N, Rv, Ro, TE". GeoffreyT2000 ( talk,  contribs ) 01:14, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Hmm...I wonder why my account is any different than anyone else with the same rights... &mdash; Train2104 (t • c) 03:33, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi GeoffreyT2000 and Train2104. This is a legitimate bug. It's seemingly another data integrity issue in Wikimedia Labs' database replicas. I've filed T159493 to track it. --MZMcBride (talk) 23:11, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Now fixed: <https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:List_of_Wikipedians_by_number_of_edits/1001%E2%80%932000&oldid=768473239>. --MZMcBride (talk) 00:42, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Database reports/Empty categories‎
The daily page Database reports/Empty categories‎ hasn't been updated in three days, but the bot appears to still be operating. , can you take a look? ℯ xplicit  02:27, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
 * The bot isn't updating any of the DBRs apart from non-free files and Wikipedians by edit count, and hasn't since ~20 September. I'd guess it's something to do with the Labs server upgrades, but at least we now have a clean Labs database that no longer has the zombie entries that it used to.Le Deluge (talk) 11:14, 3 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi Explicit. This issue should be fixed now. --MZMcBride (talk) 13:49, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Database reports/Range blocks
Are you OK? You haven't updated Wikipedia:Database reports/Range blocks in ~ a fortnight. Ds77 (talk) 14:04, 20 March 2017 (UTC) Ds77 (talk) 14:04, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi Ds77. This issue appears to be resolved. --MZMcBride (talk) 13:50, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Request for Database reports/Unused templates
Would it be possible to re-run Database reports/Unused templates but filter out any pages that are redirects? Redirects like 2000-01 NHL Eastern Conference standings are showing up in the report even though the template they redirect to has transclusions. ~ Rob 13 <sup style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">Talk 09:22, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Also omitting all templates which transclude Subst only, if possible. That template is typically transcluded via the documentation subpage. ~ Rob 13 <sup style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">Talk 09:39, 1 December 2016 (UTC)


 * I don't think unused template (redirects) such as should really exist. Looking at the history of this redirect, I guess a bot went through and created many convenience redirects like this. Hmmm. --MZMcBride (talk) 03:18, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Perhaps, but that's a much bigger discussion and I don't know that it's worth having at this time. Too many other more important discussions on the immediate horizon. In the short run, we need to be able to find the actual unused templates to at least clean those up. ~ Rob 13 <sup style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">Talk 10:02, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I filtered out the redirects. the bot-created redirects are all for titles that include an "ndash" since most people don't have an ndash key on the keyboard. Frietjes (talk) 16:55, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
 * MZMcBride, if you have a chance, it would be great if you could re-run this one. Thank you. Frietjes (talk) 13:20, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi Frietjes. Sure, done. --MZMcBride (talk) 13:30, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
 * MZMcBride, it's been another couple months and a few hundred more templates have been deleted. if you have a chance, could you re-run this one?  thank you. Frietjes (talk) 22:57, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
 * MZMcBride, it's been another couple months and a few hundred more templates have been deleted. if you have a chance, could you re-run this one?  thank you. Frietjes (talk) 18:26, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
 * MZMcBride, it's been another couple months and a few hundred more templates have been deleted. if you have a chance, could you re-run this one?  thank you.  Frietjes (talk) 16:06, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi Frietjes. Here's what I'd like to do with Database reports/Unused templates: Does this sound reasonable? Are there any other features or functionality you want from this report? (cc: BU Rob13) --MZMcBride (talk) 19:44, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * set the report to update weekly instead of being updated manually;
 * sort the template titles so that all non-redirects come first and then all redirects come after; and
 * add two columns, one for first edit and one for latest edit.
 * Could you sort all stub templates to the end as well? Those are treated a bit differently. ~ Rob 13 <sup style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">Talk 19:51, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * sorting the stubs (and redirects) to the end would be helpful. updating weekly is great if we have the last edit date (to avoid messing with templates which were recently created). Frietjes (talk) 13:41, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
 * These changes are mostly implemented now. Previously we were excluding most redirects. Now the report lists non-stub non-redirects, non-stub redirects, stub non-redirects, and stub redirects. I changed the results per page from 2000 to 5000, but this can be adjusted if you all want. I was mostly trying to avoid a 30-page-plus report. --MZMcBride (talk) 23:49, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Database reports/Blank single-author pages
Could the bot be adjusted to place a colon at the start of links, either always or at least when linking categories? At the moment, line 1018 is seemingly blank, and if you scroll down or edit the page you'll see that it's accidentally placing the page into Category:People educated at Havering sixth form college rather than providing a link to it. Nyttend (talk) 13:01, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Nyttend. I made this edit, which seems to have resolved the issue. Thanks for letting me know. --MZMcBride (talk) 16:40, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Ah, yes, that's better than what I suggested. You're welcome, and thanks for responding.  Nyttend (talk) 19:57, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Database reports/Templates transcluded on the most pages
Hi, could the bot update Database reports/Templates transcluded on the most pages? It hasn't been updated since September 2016. Thanks, Jc86035 (talk) 11:58, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Jc86035. Sure, done. --MZMcBride (talk) 17:12, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Database reports/Transclusions of deleted templates
MZMcBride, it looks like the bot didn't update the report this week. thank you. Frietjes (talk) 16:07, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
 * It sure didn't. Let's see if it misses another week before investigating. The lack of an update was probably a fluke? --MZMcBride (talk) 19:41, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * MZMcBride, it looks like the bot didn't update the report this week or last week. thank you.  Frietjes (talk) 18:20, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Frietjes. I see an update on February 8, 2018: <https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Database_reports/Transclusions_of_deleted_templates/1&dir=prev&offset=20180125195929&limit=1&action=history>. --MZMcBride (talk) 17:21, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Not updated for five days: List of Wikipedians by article count, 9k - 10k
Hello,

This page is usually updated daily, by this bot but has not been so for five days.

Is there plans to reinstate the updates ?

Thanks. Lklundin (talk) 18:14, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi Lklundin. Thanks for the note. The report broke due to the breaking change mentioned here: phame/post/view/70/new wiki replica servers ready for use/. As you can see in List of Wikipedians by article count/Configuration, we're doing a database join between  and  . These types of joins are no longer supported, so the scripts will need to be rewritten and updated. Do you have any interest in doing that? How valuable is this report to you and others? --MZMcBride (talk) 23:42, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi MZMcBride. I am glad this report does not come as a surprise to you. I couldn't say how many users look at this 10k-entry list, only that there is about a dozen uses of it via a userbox (that I happen to have on my user page). So I guess the repair is not that important... I am somewhat flattered by your suggestion that I should try and fix it - since this implies to me that it is not entirely trivial to fix. I am afraid that any IT-skills I may possess are too specialized into other areas for me to be of any assistance here. Sorry - and all the best. Lklundin (talk) 19:35, 19 October 2017 (UTC)


 * I've also dropped a note at VPT to see if anyone has the time/skills to fix it. Thanks.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 10:51, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I would like to see it fixed. It is a useful tool to gauge editor participation beyond the mere number of edits. Also, I like watching my numbers go up. bd2412  T 15:14, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I also like seeing my numbers go up. I have no idea how to fix the script, however List of Wikipedians by number of edits/Configuration is a similar sort of list. --Frmorrison (talk) 16:33, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Lklundin for the precision I want to show you that users who link the list in their home are 427 not dozen ;) --Kasper2006 (talk) 07:20, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
 * This template use count is perhaps a slightly better metric. About 200 users.
 * I'm familiar with List of Wikipedians by number of edits/Configuration. ;-) I left a note on T173511 related to this report. There's also T44135, but that task may be a bit hopeless. --MZMcBride (talk) 00:44, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
 * (I would also love to see it fixed.) Paintspot Infez (talk) 03:26, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Me too -- it apparently broke right afore Asian Month, and I've doubled my non-redirct count since then. Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 04:19, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Me too. I really want to see my name on that list! :D --Arbraxan (talk) 20:44, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Database reports/Unused templates
Can you please do something for your bot so that at Database reports/Unused templates, it doesn't select template redirects. Most of the time, template redirects are unused so there is no need for them to be hanging around at Database reports/Unused templates and the majority of the selected templates in this database report are template redirects. Thanks. Pkbwcgs (talk) 13:04, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits
List of Wikipedians by number of edits says "A user name in black (unlinked) has not been used for editing in the last 30 days."

However, the user ranked just above me at #404 is blue-linked even though they are BLOCKED and made their last edit on 2011-03-16. I note though that they are active on other projects, including Wikidata. – wbm1058 (talk) 12:01, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi wbm1058. Is this issue still occurring? If so, can you please provide the name of the user you're referring to? I'm not really interested in writing a database query or digging through the page history to figure out which user it is based off of the clues you've provided. :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 05:37, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
 * (last edit on 2011-03-16) is blue-linked on List of Wikipedians by number of edits/1–1000. They've now fallen to #429 on the list. The editor is still active on Wikimedia commons. – wbm1058 (talk) 11:28, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
 * You guessed correctly: it's this user's activity on Wikidata that's counting as recent activity for the purposes of this report. You can see the matching database records at <https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:MZMcBride/Sandbox&oldid=889657061>. We could potentially filter out these entries when considering recent activity, but I'm not sure it's worth the effort. I have only the vaguest memory of why we're even checking recent edit activity to determine whether to link the user's name. Maybe we should just link all users instead. --MZMcBride (talk) 03:13, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Pollute categories
Hi. Is there any way to have Database reports/Polluted categories update more frequently? One of my bot's tasks is to remove user-space drafts from mainspace categories every time the page is updated, and if it were updated more frequently the bot would be more useful. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 01:42, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi DannyS712. Sure, I set that report to update daily instead. If you have any interest, you're welcome to contribute to the database reports project. The code lives here: <https://github.com/mzmcbride/database-reports>. You could also get an SSH account on Toolforge if you don't have one already, allowing you to run these SQL database queries or Python scripts yourself. --MZMcBride (talk) 03:35, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I have an account on toolforge, but have been struggling to get it to work. Any chance you can help? I want my bot to run User:DannyS712 test/DNC bot.js on a regular schedule. I have a tool (I think?) at https://toolsadmin.wikimedia.org/tools/id/draft-uncategorize-script, but have no idea how to continue - I'm no good at command line git functions, and there isn't a web interface as far as I can tell. --DannyS712 (talk) 03:40, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Looking a bit more closely at this database report, updating daily may be overkill.
 * How are you running "DNC bot.js" currently? From your local machine? What command do you run or what actions do you take? --MZMcBride (talk) 06:21, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I log in as the bot, and click "DNC bot" in the toolbar - I have no idea how to seriously do bots, so all of my tasks are either AWB or user scripts that edit automatically. In this case, the bot just automatically runs a modified version of User:DannyS712/Draft no cat.js, which is a user script to convert categories into links on user pages. Basically, if the bot account (me) is looking at the category of AfC submissions with categories, then I just run the script, and it edits all of them. --DannyS712 (talk) 06:25, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Empty Categories
I wanted to just mention that BernsteinBot hasn't updated this Database Reports tonight but since there are messages here from October 2018 that haven't been responded to, I guess this message won't have much of an impact. Liz <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Read! Talk! 01:58, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Liz. Thank you for the note. I guess you're talking about the database report? According to MediaWiki, that page has over 2700 edits, 30 of which are within the past 30 days. The most recent edit was from March 24, 2019 and the report itself is over ten years old. It's in this context that I'm sighing a bit at your tone here. --MZMcBride (talk) 05:33, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Oh, hello, MZMcBride. I wasn't expecting such a speedy response! The page I'm talking about is Database reports/Empty categories and it usually updates at 0:00 UTC (9 pm ET/6 pm PT U.S.) but the list hasn't updated since Sunday. The new report is produced like clockwork daily so it's a surprise that it hasn't updated in a couple days. I usually take care of tagging and/or deleting these categories on a daily basis so that's what prompted my message. As for Database reports/Empty categories/Configuration, I wish I understood this coding but I don't! I've found these database reports really helpful for taking care of maintenance tasks so thank you for any work you've done towards producing them. Liz <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Read! Talk! 01:39, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
 * My apologies for any "tone", MZMcBride. When I looked at the comments on this page, I didn't see many responses to them. Hence, my dismay in my comment. I didn't think I would get a reply but you proved me wrong! Liz <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Read! Talk! 03:47, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
 * No worries. I appreciate all the work that you and others do to keep this place maintained. I'll try to get at least the report fixed this week. --MZMcBride (talk) 15:48, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks, MZMcBride. I had no idea when I posted my message last week about all of the technical changes at WMF and the necessity for rewriting code and what a lot of work this involved. I took the database reports for granted. They are incredibly useful and I guess I assumed the "system" just generated them for us to use. Thank you for your help. Liz <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Read! Talk! 16:40, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Or should we just assume that instead of daily reports of empty categories we will get them once a week or (oh no!) monthly? Like the list of stale drafts, it is easier to handle this workload on a daily basis rather than less frequently with a higher volume. Thank you, in advance for any help you can provide. Liz <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Read! Talk! 01:30, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Yeah! BernsteinBot is back! Thank you, MZMcBride. It's much appreciated! Liz <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Read! Talk! 02:44, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Just wanted to thank you again, MZMcBride, for the regular updating of Empty Cats. Bots make our work so much easier! Liz <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Read! Talk! 01:05, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm glad the reports can be of service. :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 00:50, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Database reports/Uncategorized and unreferenced biographies of living people
Hi, MZMcBride. Could you, please, have a look at the Uncategorized and unreferenced biographies of living people report? It hasn't updated for a while now. Also, if you have more free time, please also look at the Autoconfirmed users in the confirmed user group report. (I believe the second report to be less important.) Thank you. --Meno25 (talk) 17:01, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Meno25. It's odd that stopped updating. I wonder if other reports stopped updating around that time as well. I'll investigate that a bit. For  I had to look up what was going on here. This report caused a fairly substantial performance problem at some point on the Labs database replica and consequently was disabled. It needs to be rewritten. It's not very much work. I don't suppose you have any interest in doing that? :-)  --MZMcBride (talk) 00:54, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I think <https://github.com/mzmcbride/database-reports/commit/f0fedf46a5bc349c44cc68dad846531fd51a09af> is related. We're using "?"-type string interpolation when we need to go back(?) to using "%s"-type string interpolation. Or at least that's my suspicion. It'd be good if Legoktm could weigh in. A diff of what I did for is below. --MZMcBride (talk) 01:30, 2 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Ugh, yeah. pymysql uses %s for variable interpolation (docs). Legoktm (talk) 03:07, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi! I think pymssql is a different package. I looked at <https://pymysql.readthedocs.io/en/latest/user/examples.html> before replying here, but I wasn't sure if there were multiple supported formats. --MZMcBride (talk) 04:17, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Database reports/Potentially untagged misspellings
, It's been nearly a year since the last update to Database reports/Potentially untagged misspellings. Can you set it up to run again? And maybe limit it to 1,000? I like to sort for the most links, and such a long page (4,000 entries) is slow to load and sort. And maybe exclude any with zero links, to make it easier to prioritize the most-linked redirects. Thanks, wbm1058 (talk) 23:39, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi wbm1058. It's funny, I was just thinking about this report as well. And I was like "hey, I'll just go update it" and every time I try to do the initial query, it runs for like two hours and then gets killed. :-( I'll paste the query below in case you want to try to debug it or come up with an alternate approach. --MZMcBride (talk) 01:01, 2 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi wbm1058. is updated now and I added some section headings. I doubt this report will receive frequent updates as it wasn't a particularly enjoyable report to regenerate, but who knows. --MZMcBride (talk) 06:52, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Database reports/Indefinitely blocked IPs
I just noticed that the ever-helpful Bernstein Bot made an edit removing 1,757,420‎ bytes of content from this page today. Is this accurate? Except for an edit on November 12, 2018, where it added a similar amount of content, it usually doesn't make these dramatic types of edits.

I realize that there had been a discussion about the status of indefinitely blocked IPs but this was still a little startling to see. I thought I'd check in to make sure it wasn't some accident. Thanks! Liz <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Read! Talk! 01:07, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
 * The related discussion is at User:AnomieBOT/req/OldIPUnblocker. The report had not been updated since March 2019 and it looks like the unblocks happened in May 2019. If you find an indefinitely blocked IP on the English Wikipedia that is not listed on the report, please let us know, of course. --MZMcBride (talk) 05:13, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Well, everything is okay then. I think this is a good idea...over the years, I've stayed at locations where I discovered that the IP account was blocked by Wikipedia, who knows how long ago. Unless it's a school block where vandalism is pretty consistent over the years, I don't think IP accounts should have indefinite or years-long block. Thanks for taking a moment to confirm this. Liz <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Read! Talk! 00:09, 19 June 2019 (UTC)