User talk:ClueBot Commons/Archives/2007/November

Request
Please add Category:Wikipedia anti-vandal bots to the various cluebots. HOW DO U FIND IT SO QUICKLYY?? Thanks! Browsing existing bots aby function is currently a little difficult, and this is being rectified.--Esprit15d 17:22, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

A lot of its so called "vandilism" removal is not actually vadalism —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.22.71.123 (talk) 01:15, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Bot Broken
Bot is screwed up!

I just got a warning on my discussion page for adding "useless junk" to the Marsha Hunt page. Sorry, but wasnt me! Don't accuse me Mr Bot, or I'll have to rewire you! Never even heard of Marsha Hunt! How very rooooooooood! 82.152.203.50 09:42, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh i didnt know i could get in trouble for that, i thought you could do anything on this gay ass website —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.157.180.188 (talk) 21:07, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Just thought you should know.
I was searching through my watchlist and noticed that Cluebot had reverted some vandalism on The Legend of Zelda game article. I was curious about what the vandals had done, so I checked it out. In the process, I discovered a weakness in his programming; this particular vandal had done a series of edits, each more offensive than the last, and Cluebot only reverted the most recent of them. I went ahead and reverted further for it (by the way, it was my first full-fledged revert; hope I didn't screw anything up), but I thought you should know, in the off-chance that you may know a way to fix it. If not, oh well. By the way, you should probably delete this once you read it; the last thing we need is vandals getting ideas. Larrythefunkyferret 06:06, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

user Asd0011
Hi! I think he is a bit notorious at the moment. Wouldn't it be better to send him out of the house for a while?? --Fromgermany 02:26, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Elaborate. How would you plan on doing that?  I am not an administrator and neither is ClueBot.  Bug Animum or another admin.  :P  -- Cobi(t 05:09, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Source - repeated word
'/wanker/i'                            => -15, '/motherfucker/i'                      => -20, '/wanker/i'                            => -20,

"Wanker" has both -15 and -20; just thought you might like to trim your source by 1 line. You may have already done it and not updated the source at ClueBot's user page, but I thought I may as well let you know, just in case. (Respond on my talk page, please.) — metaprimer (talk) 19:06, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the revert
Thanks for the revert of the Martin S. Peterson article from vandalism. I really appreciate it. Please advise your owner of this. Chris 19:20, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Bot doesn't recognize uw-bv?
I recently warned a vandal using uw-bv. A few minutes later, Cluebot reverted the same vandal and added a level one warning to the talk page, which I'm guessing means it doesn't recognize this warning template. From uw-bv, it should go to a level 4 warning or directly to reporting the vandal (I generally do the former, but I know others do the latter). Heimstern Läufer (talk) 08:01, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
 * uw-bv is a very old template that no one uses anymore. It uses a special tag that the bot doesn't understand because the bot is new, and it wouldn't browse for templates that no one is expected to use. Try uw-vandalism4im instead. &mdash; Coasterge ekperson 04 's talk  00:24, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * On the contrary, it is a standard tag today. It was imported into the new set of warnings (note the uw- prefix) and is included in Twinkle. I still see it used regularly on RC patrol, and I certainly have no intention to stop using it. It is not the same as uw-vandalism4im. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 00:32, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Bot stopped working
ClueBot seems to have stopped working at 10:49 today, and boy do we need it now! Philip Trueman 18:59, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Someone changed User:ClueBot/Run ... I would suggest watchlisting it. -- Cobi(t 01:08, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Great bot
I always find it catching vandalism before I can get to it. Thanks for creating it.--Avant Guard 18:42, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

What that user did was not vandalism.
134.39.11.2 wrote in List of students at South Park Elementary "south park rocks!!!". I have issues with calling that vandalism. He/she might not have actually tried to hurt the page, they were just voicing their opinion. And their opinion on South Park was positive, therefore it is not vandalism, it is just "inappropriate appraisal". Please be gentler with your statements in future. Wilhelmina Will 22:27, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Just what are BOTs and how do they work
Just took a Linux admin class. Just what are these wiki bots and how do they work? I can see them all the place removing the "F" word, for example from articles. Feel free to remove this question soon if it compromises something or just reply on my page and not here. Thanks. Meanwhile I've found the how to create a bot at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Creating_a_bot SimonATL 02:06, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
 * In a nutshell, a wikibot is a computer program, programmed in programming language, that can make requests to Wikipedia. Bots do this the same way your browser would do it, with an HTTP request.  There are a few pages which provide information more suited for a bot, but making an edit still has to be done using the same page you would use.  The bots do not have to actually display the page on the screen, but they still have to load it.  Bots are used for repetitive or tedious tasks.  The bot ClueBot, for example, is programmed in PHP and you can see its source here.  -- Cobi(t 02:14, 10 November 2007 (UTC)


 * OK, understand that they are programs, automated processes. I see there is also an approval process to prevent these programs from running amuck. I am NOT a programmer, but I do work in IT, and much more comfortable talking history, so forgive my inane questions. After 2 weeks of Linux training at my company, I came away really impressed with the features and power within Linux, and based on that I have to ask, just how are these bots introduced into the entire Linux underlying system and how do you guys prevent totally unintended consequences, looping, etc? In other words, is there much in the way of any formal change control on all this stuff?  Originally amazed at the sheer volumn of info in wikipedia, I'm now almost MORE AMAZED at the sophistication of the underlying technologies - and the degree of dedication on the parts of a VAST world-wide network of not just the contributors, but the admins, the programmers. And to think of the ZILLIONS of un-compensated hours spent in contributing and system maintenance. Although there must also be a group of actually paid wiki employees, I imagine. The normal joe looking around wikipedia has to ask, "when do you people sleep? Do you have a life?"


 * All you hear about in the media is BS like "so many articles" and "anyone can claim to be a subject-matter expert in wikipedia and go unchallenged." Re. Academia is increasingly threatened by the proliferation of wiki "information" with no "academic" peer review that they demand for so-called reliability. But then THINK of the junk that is published in so-called "professional publications!"  My kid's same teachers who mouth the words, "Don't rely on wikipedia," are constantly checking stuff on wiki, themselves. Also writers and editors. Case in point. I have contributed a ton of stuff to articles on Theodore Roosevelt and his family. In Time Magazine last year, I found a few "re-worked" paragraphs from wikipedia shamelessly woven into the article. I knew my own stuff just by reading it on the Time series on TR. I actually read the magazine with absolutely NO thought of the stuff I had added in wikipedia, until I came to some sections and pushed my chair back and said, "Hey - I've SEEN this stuff beFORE - yeah, before alright - right here in wikipedia. I told my wife, "Looks like editors of Time Magazine have managed to pay us wikipedians a rather backhanded compliment this time! Thanks. SimonATL 02:38, 10 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Basically the bots run like any other program in Linux. They do not run on the Wikimedia servers, except perhaps the ones on Wikimedia's shell server (the toolserver).  They do not have special privileges.  The bot flag is really just to help obscure the edits by a bot.  The edits by bots aren't shown in Special:Recentchanges and minor edits by bots to users' talk pages do not make that ugly orange bar come up.  For example, ClueBot runs on a box here at my house.  To answer your question about sleep, ClueBot does not sleep :P  On a more serious note, there are just so many Wikipedians and Recent Change Patrollers that at least someone is on all the time.  -- Cobi(t 03:29, 10 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the information. I'm not normally a "golly-gee" type of person, but wikipedia is truely an international cooperation success story and says a lot about the maturation of most decent elements in the human race if you think about the massive amount of collaboration that has to work around this planet for this to work and more importantly to stay up and not crash. I'll do some more research and try to attend one of those wikepedia conventions. I'm in the USA Pacific Northwest, so maybe in Seattle or Portland. Thanks again. PS, I also noted your information on ClueNet and some of these other forms of Open-Source collaboration. For the future, until I really delve into Linux, scripting, etc., I'm going to stick with history because at least I can speak with some degree of authority in THAT particular information realm. SimonATL 04:16, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

GTFO
This diff here that was reverted by ClueBot seemed like a good faith edit, even though misguided. It was not vandalism as such, so I'm reporting it.--h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 06:03, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Paul Thelen
This is not a vandalism. --Sx12c (talk) 10:13, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Bot stopped working
ClueBot seems to have stopped working at 20:39 last night, when Dcd722 mucked around with the Run flag, but the Run flag is True again and yet the bot's not running. Philip Trueman (talk) 10:21, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Bot flag
The bot flag doesn't seem to be set for this bot. It can't be filtered from watchlists. Thanks. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 19:14, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
 * The Bot Approval Group have decided not to give ClueBot the bot flag because it is an anti-vandal bot and they don't give anti-vandal bots flags. Thanks.  -- Cobi(t 19:29, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Delivery
How do you get ClueBot Commons to deliver stats like User talk:Cobi? &mdash; Coasterge ekperson 04 ' s talk @11/29/2007 15:23


 * I could add you if you want, but the list is hardcoded into the little program that is run at 0000 (UTC -0500) my time. If it becomes more popular, I may make the list public - but I should probably get WP:BAG approval if I do.  -- Cobi(t 20:41, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

No warning issued
I've just issued a revert back to a version by ClueBot (ClueBot ref: 93836), and was a little surprised that ClueBot had not warned the vandal. Just too busy? I know the feeling! Philip Trueman (talk) 18:05, 29 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Probably because the database replication lag was greater than 10 seconds. ClueBot will check right before each time it tries to post something.  It was probably less when it reverted the vandalism, but when it went to warn the user it was probably more so ClueBot aborted it.  It does this so it doesn't load the Wikimedia servers too much.  -- Cobi(t 20:37, 29 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Ah! Yes, that would make sense - there was a lag at about that time. Philip Trueman (talk) 10:37, 30 November 2007 (UTC)