User talk:ClueBot Commons/Archives/2015/June

Borderlands 2
Is Borderlands 2 open world?Dohvahkiin (talk) 20:44, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Wrong place, you should ask this question on a different website (wikia) or on the talk page for Borderlands 2. Reading the article may also answer your question. -- Anar  chyte   07:23, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Cluebot NG in other languages?
Does Cluebot NG operate in languages other than English? Do the other Wikipedias have their own anti-vandal bots? It would be a bit of a shame if they don't have any automatic vandal defenses. --EnronEvolvedMy Talk Page 15:31, 4 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Some other Wikipedias run their own anti vandal bots... Simple English Wikipedia has ChenzwBot, which runs like the old anti-vandal bots that use a simple list of heuristics, rather than a complex neural network. --I am  k6ka  Talk to me!   See what I have done  20:11, 4 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Could Cluebot NG's algorithms be easily adapted to other languages? Could we perhaps offer a Cluebot NG to some of the other Wikipedias? Could ClueNet (and the bot operators at that) handle the extra workload? That last one would probably be the biggest issue. --EnronEvolvedMy Talk Page 21:16, 4 June 2015 (UTC)


 * It may require a team of skilled, professional translators to get the job done... but that doesn't really change the fact that ClueNet is pretty much dead. irc.cluenet.org is already eerily quiet when I connect to it. --I am  k6ka  Talk to me!   See what I have done  02:32, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

A question
Will the ClueBot III creates the archive page, or I must create the archive page?

(told me if I'm on the wrong section)

Best regards, Hans5958 / Hans T.M ║ Lets Talk! ║ Sign my Guestbook! 03:47, 7 June 2015 (UTC)


 * The bot will create the archive pages for you automatically. --I am  k6ka  Talk to me!   See what I have done  11:45, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Impending change to MediaWiki will cause both CBNG and CB3 to stop working
A change being deployed to MediaWiki will cause both bots (and other very important bots) to stop working completely unless their code is updated, per WP:VPT. Gparyani (talk) 05:21, 9 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Damian is already aware.--5 albert square (talk) 05:49, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Good Work with 2265733
How could a robot detect such subtle vandalism? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blackhat999 (talk • contribs) 20:57, 11 June 2015 (UTC)


 * The bot has become sentient. Be very afraid Rejoice. Eman 235 / talk  21:12, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

ClueBot III "Fixing links to archived content" to the wrong archive
has been making edits like this, this, and this to point old discussions to Administrators' noticeboard/Archive272 with the edit summary "Fixing links to archived content."

However, Administrators' noticeboard/Archive272, Administrators' noticeboard/Archive272, and Administrators' noticeboard/Archive272 do not lead to the correct location for these discussions.

This is not a false positive (which talks about "ClueBot NG's revert ID"), so I am posting this here since none of the notices on this page say where to discuss ClueBot III archiving issues. Cunard (talk) 02:42, 10 June 2015 (UTC)


 * --5 albert square (talk) 13:00, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

ClueBot III not archiving again?
OK, so on talk page ClueBot III is set to archive threads that have not had a response in 36 hours. I happened to go on his talk page before to check something and couldn't help but notice that it was a little long. When I checked that further I noticed that ClueBot III has not archived this since 3rd June. There are a few threads on there that haven't had responses since 3rd/4th June which is definitely over 36 hours. ClueBot III did this recently and if my memory serves me correctly it was something to do with API changes. I'm wondering if the same thing has happened again? Is anyone else experiencing this? In the meantime, I'm about to go back to Jimbo's talk page and manually archive it.

, and  as you're the admins for the bot :)--5 albert square (talk) 02:09, 11 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Yeah, my own page isn't getting archived as well. I've set it to archive after 10 days, and there are discussions that are well beyond that point still unarchived. --I am  k6ka  Talk to me!   See what I have done  19:42, 11 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Yes, I've also noticed that this page is not getting archived either as I just cleared it out! There's nothing about this at WP:BOWN, I'm wondering if the proposed API changes that were due to come into effect in July have already started taking effect.  The bot's admins haven't been on since I posted this, hopefully it can be resolved soon :)--5 albert square (talk) 22:27, 11 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Ah,  I just checked Damian's talk page and noticed this message.  I'm going to guess that the changes they have made to ClueBot's coding for the API change are not working :(.  That would make sense as he's said that the changes have been running since the 3rd and oddly enough that's the last date it archived Jimbo's page.  Never mind, I've emailed Damian again.--5 albert square (talk) 21:16, 14 June 2015 (UTC)


 * ClueBot III is not working at TAFI or anywhere else at the moment. Qwertyxp2000 (talk - contributions) 20:39, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Overlooked occurrences of section-title blanking
Some obvious cases of vandalism (such as this one) have apparently been overlooked by ClueBot. Will it be possible for ClueBot to automatically detect edits like this one? Jarble (talk) 21:20, 21 June 2015 (UTC)


 * The bot already catches a large quantity of vandalism on Wikipedia thanks to its complex neural network. Because of it's complexity, though, even the developers of the bot may not be able to provide an explanation as to exactly why an edit was reverted or skipped. The bot does indeed revert edits where it shouldn't and skip edits where it should've reverted. Truth be told, technology like this probably won't replace humans, at least not in a long time, so human vandal fighters will always be needed. The bot isn't designed to replace human patrollers, only assist them. --I am  k6ka  Talk to me!   See what I have done  13:50, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

ClueBot NG Edit Summary
It seems that with extremely long IPs (or otherwise long usernames), ClueBot produces a summary with a broken userpage link, which covers up the revert ID (which recently is also bugged, as noted above):

''Reverting possible vandalism by 2601:1C2:4600:34D:348B:66DB:350F:BC54 to version by 68.36.243.85. False positive? Report it. Thanks, [[User:ClueBot NG|Cl...''

''Reverting possible vandalism by 2001:590:4802:2FB:78CB:DAAA:C75:1245 to version by Smalljim. False positive? Report it. Thanks, [[User:ClueBot NG|ClueBot...''

''Reverting possible vandalism by 2001:8003:102A:B101:9C66:6626:EBA8:6C8F to version by Massachusettsan. False positive? Report it. Thanks, [[User:ClueBo...''

See Special:Contributions/ClueBot NG for further examples (it only happpens with IPs with formats similar to the above). Maybe the edit summary could be shortened to prevent this happening? - Sonicwave ( talk &#124; c )  18:01, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

CBNG down
With the recent WMF Labs outage apparently finally (somewhat) fixed, as I have seen other bots editing, CBNG still hasn't recovered from the outage. --I am  k6ka  Talk to me!   See what I have done  11:45, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
 * It might need starting, I'm at work at the moment. I know the crontabs got lost commented out so it wouldn't have started itself -  Rich T&#124;C&#124;E-Mail 11:48, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I've started them up now YuviPanda (WMF) (talk) 14:01, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you! The bot's alive! --I am  k6ka   Talk to me!   See what I have done  16:36, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Yah! All bots are alive! Qwertyxp2000 (talk &#124; contribs) 10:04, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

CB NG not reporting revert IDs
See, ClueBot NG has been reporting a revert ID of "0" in its edit summaries instead of the correct number. Altamel (talk) 02:45, 21 June 2015 (UTC)


 * It's done this in the past before, annoyingly. --I am  k6ka  Talk to me!   See what I have done  03:52, 21 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Still doing it for some reason. Not sure why   .--5 albert square (talk) 19:39, 21 June 2015 (UTC)


 * It's minor, but it does make it hard to report false. This diff has a bad ID.—cyberpower  Chat:Online 21:02, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Just out of interest...................
Why would the bot have missed this edit to Carol Jackson? I know that the bot does miss some edits, and I know it's normally very good at picking up vandalism, however I'm surprised at it missing this. There's quite a few words in there that I know the bot usually associates with vandalism.--5 albert square (talk) 20:55, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Supporting your statement. Non-bot-owner comment: perhaps those words seemed to have a grammar structure that was not like most vandals' grammar structure. Qwertyxp2000 (talk &#124; contribs) 10:19, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
 * The bot takes the edit and generates a few hundred statistics about the edit, including a bayesian score, then these are all fed into an ANN (which internally does a lot of math and eventually outputs a single output). Unfortunately, it is hard to give a real reason why the bot would not treat it as vandalism.  I could give you a walk through of it, but the multiplications within the ANN is very hard to give an English reason to.  -- Cobi 18:19, 23 June 2015 (UTC)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.66.31.146 (talk)
 * Hi Cobi and Qwertyxp2000, thanks for the explanations :)--5 albert square (talk) 20:52, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I think that means "it's complicated". ;-) – anemone projectors – 08:43, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Text to treat as vandalism
ClueBot missed this edit; perhaps it might be amended to pick up some of the words used there. – Fayenatic  L ondon 14:05, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
 * That's because of the self-imposed 1RR by the bot. --TL22 (talk) 14:07, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
 * The bot won't revert to an edit it made itself, nor will it revert the same user on the same page within a 24 hour period. This is done deliberately in order to avoid hassling innocent users with false positives. --I am  k6ka  Talk to me!   See what I have done  01:23, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks. – Fayenatic  L ondon 13:47, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Slight Mistake in the Information About False Positives Section for Cluebot NG
The third sentence of the second paragraph says "By handling false positives well without getting upset, you are helping this bot catch over half of all vandalism on Wikipedia and keep the wiki clean for all of us." However, since the threshold was set to 0.1% the vandalism catching rate is at 40%, so should this say "almost half of all vandalism on Wikipedia"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.30.208.15 (talk) 03:52, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

ClueBot III not archiving again?
OK, so I happened to go on to talk page earlier and noticed that ClueBot III has not archived it for 5 days. The reason the page is not a mile long is because users have been using OneClickArchiver so there is not a backlog. The archiving instructions have not changed so I'm wondering why the bot is not archiving again? are you aware of this issue?--5 albert square (talk) 10:49, 27 June 2015 (UTC)