User talk:Misza13/Archives/2013/03

Suggested addition to FAQ
Maybe this question isn't asked "frequently", but it's a question I just had which I was unable to learn by reading User:MiszaBot/Archive HowTo and User:MiszaBot/Archive FAQ. Question: How can I prevent the bot from archiving a page which already contains a MiszaBot or MiszaBot-N template? The FAQ explains how to prevent a single thread from being archived, and I could apply that method to every thread on the page, and monitor the page in case any future person starts a new thread. However, my tentative theory is that this can be done by completely removing all MiszaBot-related templates from the page. This theory is based on the supposition that your bot roams Wikipedia looking for pages with its template. If, on the other hand, your bot maintains a database of pages that have requested archiving in the past, then perhaps this method would not work, and the answer requires something else? &mdash; Lawrence King ( talk ) 18:55, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I believe the bot looks for all pages that currently use its template. So to disable archiving, it is enough to remove it or comment it out. Feel free to add this to the FAQ. -- John of Reading (talk) 20:23, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Done. Thanks! &mdash; Lawrence King ( talk ) 22:07, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

script inactive sysops
Hei Misza13, just informing you that your script [//toolserver.org/~misza13/cgi-bin/inactive.py inactive sysops] is out of order. I know that it has been ok a few weeks ago. What's the problem with it now? Greetings -- Geitost 18:35, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Archived thread but failed to remove them from discussion page
See [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/MiszaBot_II&offset=20130313223543&limit=3&target=MiszaBot+II]. At 10:35 UTC-4, the bot archived three threads but failed to remove them from the main ANI page. As a result, four hours later it archived those same three threads again (plus two new ones), resulting in three duplicate entries in the archive page which I had to remove manually [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive788&offset=20130314055755&limit=3&action=history]. What happened? jcgoble3 (talk) 05:59, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * This is just a guess - but some bots are set up so that if an edit conflict happens when they are amending a page, they don't retry. At the time that the first three threads were copied to the archive page, was going on, so maybe MiszaBot II e/c'd with that? -- Red rose64 (talk) 12:28, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * If you have the correct timestamp format set in your preferences, you can see that the bot archived the threads at x:35:42, while GiantSnowman's edit was at x:35:31. Would the bot really take 11 seconds or more to process the page? jcgoble3 (talk) 19:21, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Franz Kafka
Hi Misza13. In the page about Franz Kafka:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franz_Kafka

...in the first line, it says:

Franz Kafka[a] (22 B.C.E –3 June 3014). ..

This must be an error, unless it is a reference to something implied, but not mentioned.

Regards

D. Westh — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.198.83.181 (talk) 19:03, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * It's . Please note that the best place to raise issues like this is the article's talk page, Talk:Franz Kafka; more so because isn't very active these days. -- Red rose64 (talk) 19:45, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Not archiving articles signed with Template:Unsigned?
I have such messages on my talk page. They are dated, but I guess the bot doesn't like how it is done? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 11:48, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Looks like it. I suggest you edit one of the timestamps to match the usual date format for signatures, and see if the bot springs into life. -- John of Reading (talk) 15:14, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I think that two factors combine to defeat MiszaBot. One is the timestamp being inside the, the other is the lack of a time zone. At Talk:Rupert Murdoch, I'm presently waiting to see if works, since  didn't. I had already determined with  that merely moving the timestamp was insufficient, but subsequently  then . -- Red rose64 (talk) 16:51, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Archiving of pages in the "Module talk" namespace
About a month ago two new namespaces were added to the English Wikipedia, "Module" and "Module talk". While I do not currently see a need for any of the Miszabots to archive anything in the Module namespace, it would be nice if discussions in Module talk could be handled by the bots. Would it be possible to add Module talk to one of the bots' list of coverage? --Allen3 talk 12:01, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

MiszaBot II and headers inside template.
Hi, MiszaBot II moved part of a discussion, because it didn't know a ==notes== header was inside a markup template and thought it was another section/discussion, as you can see here; the section is named "About references in templates". I think it should first search for headers inside such templates. I reverted the missing text move of that section. --KDesk (talk) 20:14, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * As advised by, you should use to avoid it being treated as a real section heading. -- Red rose64 (talk) 20:55, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Archive prevention didn't work
With this edit MiszaBot I archived the thread "Wikipedia:Today's articles for improvement on Main page" on Talk:Main Page, even though it had a future timestamp, per the bot's FAQ. (I had used to add the future timestamp) - Evad37 (talk) 03:46, 28 March 2013 (UTC)


 * From User:MiszaBot/Archive FAQ, Q5: "Note however, that if multiple timestamps appear on a single line, only the first one is read." Bump produces two timestamps, of which the first is the current date/time attached to the user's signature, and the second is the DNAU future timestamp. Per the FAQ, the bot only read the first timestamp and ignored the second, future timestamp. TL;DR: Bump doesn't work. Use DNAU directly instead. jcgoble3 (talk) 05:43, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
 * OK, that explains it. I've fixed Bump by adding a line break after the user signature, so it should work now. - Evad37 (talk)