User talk:Tawkerbot2/May06

User talk:213.32.48.58
Hi Tawekerbot2 is there any way to stop you from doing this? I put the BV tag and hit save, all looked fine until I went to edit the page to say the IP was blocked. I then noticed that my original edit was missing. I didn't even get an edit conflict message. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 11:34, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

i think it's made a mistake on my reversion
Look here. I reverted an edit that was using content lifted from somewhere else (probably promotional material from the newspaper), as evidenced by the use of phrases such as "our history", and the Tawkerbot reverted my reversion. Why? Jizz 15:57, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
 * See reply on your talk page -- Tawker 17:16, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Well done, Tawkerbot!
I'd just like to congratulate Tawkerbot (and tawker) on a magnificently fast and accurate revert to Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, earlier today. I'd been reading about it almost 6 hours before, perusing this very talk/user page, then just now I was having a quick leaf through the recent changes list (I have recently discovered a passion for rving vandalism). And what do I see? A change to this page, with no summary, made by an IP with a user page (which can't be good - IPs with user pages are usually for block notices). I checked the article and saw there was a more recent edit, which is the one provided in that link - the full scale of the vandalism, plus the bot's almost immediate and perfect revert! Well done, Tawker + bot, for doing a fast, responsive, and well written job to fight the vandals.

Can bots receive barnstars? I sure hope so... &mdash;Vanderdecken&there4;&int;&xi;&phi;  19:10, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

This bot is not too bright...
Tawkerbot2 failed to catch wholesale vandalism (plus possible copyvio) in At-will employment on 18 April 2006. See. This is a no-brainer. When I identified and reverted the vandalism a few minutes ago, Tawkerbot2 reverted my edit. It looks like Tawkerbot2 needs A LOT MORE DEBUGGING. --Coolcaesar 19:16, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for fixing this. --Coolcaesar 20:01, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

This bot has problems
See this diff.

The way to fix it is never roll back to a last version that is by an anon IP -- anons use that trick all the time, they make two edits from two different IP's and someone invariably rolls back only the second edit leaving the first edit vandalism intact and hard to detect. -- Stbalbach 22:57, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I'll have to figure out how we can fix it, its a tricky one to do, even humans manage to screw it up so I'll have to try something else. -- Tawker 23:55, 24 April 2006 (UTC)


 * It would be simple, check to make sure the roll-back version is not by an anon IP. If it is, don't do the reversion but leave a warning comment on the talk page or something. It cpuld be further refined to compare the version dates, they would have to be within X hours of each other. Just some thoughts. -- Stbalbach 05:25, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Taking a look at solutions, that is one of the ideas we have in the works -- Tawker 05:36, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * And it should possibly send a note to some human to let them know that more attention is needed to determine how far to roll back. JoshuaZ 05:17, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Double vandalism problem
I see a similar issue was raised in the March archive, but thought I'd mention another incidence here in the hope it may be useful. The article Reading School had been vandalised twice, but Tawkerbot2 only noticed the second atack, thus reverted to a vandalised version. Not sure what can be done about this, maybe if a sequence of edits is close together (a->b->c) and b->c fails the "vandal test") then a->b comes under closer examination, and if it fails, revert to a instead of b? Regards, MartinRe 23:03, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Same as above, the double vandalism issue tag team is something I'm working on but not something I've quite figured out yet -- Tawker 23:55, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Why doesn't it check if the edit it's going to revert to was made by the same user that made the vandalism, and revert to the one before that if it's true? --SheeEttin 19:53, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * The bot will revert all edits by the editor to the previous editor, or at least it should. The problem is mostly tag team vandalism which is rather hard and fun to stop -- Tawker 20:55, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Quantum mysticism
Retitled appropriately to quantum metaphysics bot reverted change H0riz0n 23:22, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I see MartinRe replied, I'll assume you figured out what happened - ;) -- Tawker 23:55, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Unfair
Ok, i have been warned about pages i didn't even go to! This is outragous. I dont even edit pages! ever! The owner of this bot needs to take his bot off. NOw! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.198.201.245 (talk • contribs)
 * The anon who wrote this has nothing on his talk page, and only has this edit and one to another anon talk page on his contrib list. That other anon has several old TB2 warnings from over 2 weeks ago.  Someone is very, very mixed up here, and I don't think it's the bot. :) - TexasAndroid 20:33, 25 April 2006 (UTC)


 * It's a RoadRunner IP, likely out of Maine. He's probably behind one of the giant cable modem NAT boxes, seeing messages intended for someone else on the same cable plant, and getting a new IP assigned to him between the time he sees the messages and the time he complains. He should get an account - NAT boxes play hell with "identity" for this kind of thing. --Alvestrand 18:20, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Edits by 165.138.204.2 missed
User talk:165.138.204.2 just has blanked a some pages, of which a few were quickly reverted by the bot. Others were missed, though, includung his own talk page.--Matthead 18:41, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Suggestion
Hey - good work! I would like to suggest a slight change of the formatting on the edit summaries. People are generally more interested in the contributions of the users you revert than their user page, so I think you should consider changing the user name link to point to the user's contributions. This is how the admin revert summary is currently formatted. Thanks - SCEhard T 17:50, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Removal of Prod
Recently the bot reverted a anon who removed a prod-tag from Chippewa valley high school, surely it's not supposed to do that. I hope you can get that fixed, otherwise a fantastic bot! -- E ivindt@c 01:07, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Strike that, anon blanked the whole page, it was the right call. -- E ivindt@c 01:09, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Revert to Ass
Some quality control feedback on Tawkerbot2's revert to Ass. the revert worked on vandalism from 207.200.116.65. Unfortunately, the reverted version was the second (of two) edits by 194.83.172.131, another vandal. (Which edits were made after a third vandal, Keria Salia... Ass seems to be a vandal magnet. Go figure.) I understand that automagically reverting serial vandalism by different users is probably a hellishly difficult task; I just thought you'd like to review the events in this case to see if there is anything to be learned.

I did notice that user 194.83.172.131 has a talk page full of warnings, including one issued a day before the edits made to Ass. Is there any scope for the bot to check for warnings given to an editor before reverting to a page version created by that editor? Eron 14:49, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Tawkerbot2 screw up
OK.. I'm doing some cosmetic changes to the pages dealing with the medalists of the 2000 Olympic Games. More specifically here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rowing_at_the_2000_Summer_Olympics All I'm doing is adding color and changing the tables so they look cleaner. I would really appreciate it if this was looked into. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 136.168.101.51 (talk • contribs).
 * Yeah, tb2 caught the repetition (though obviously that's because it's a table that requires it). We're working on a fix. --Rory096 05:27, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Hmm
It'll probably prove impossible, but Joshbuddy should consider ways to prevent things like this happening. --Rory096 05:25, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Did the bot react to the category being deleted with the text the first time? That (everything from a certain point to the end deleted) is usually a sure sign of random deletion vandalism. - SCEhard T 05:42, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Page size reduction as a percentage is the catch there, sadly copyvio removal is the one major major fault of the bot that is next to impossible to fix -- Tawker 06:06, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Incorrect reversion
Hey, just wanted to let you know I reverted people censoring out the words 'fuck' and 'ass' in the Internet slang article and Tawkerbot2 reverted it back. I'm sure it was suspicisous over all the additions of 'fuck' ;) -- MacAddct1984 &#xF8FF; 17:53, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

malfunction . ..
hiya tawker. So on humanism, your bot recently reverted an anon edit back to the last version by KurtKocaine. However, the version by KurtKocaine had been a page blanking, inserting a naughty word in place of the article. the anon edit simply removed this bad word, leaving the page blank, when your bot reverted.  Another anon came along, and apparently finding the page empty except for the naughty word, proceeded to copy the article from some other source, in good faith. . . meaning i had to delete everything and then spend 15 minutes checking the boxes of each version i wanted restored, as the page had almost 850 edits. I don't blame you, this bot does great work. . . But i know you like to know about issues that come up so the bot can become more intelligent, and i figured i'd drop you a note. -- he ah  01:28, 28 April 2006 (UTC)


 * This isn't a malfunction per se. Just that tag team vandalism is tricky, whether bot or human. I don't think there is a super easy way to deal with this. I'm quite open to suggestions, though interestingly, the recent proposals Tawker and I have been batting around would not have worked in this case. Its a tough problem, one I certainly want to give a little more thought to. josh  buddy talk 05:16, 28 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, i doubt there is much the bot can do to educate newbies about checking the history or copyright regulations, which is really what went wrong here- the tag team vandalism (or whatever it was) was only the start to all that happened. But it was sort of an interesting series of events, so i figured i'd drop a note here . . .  cheers, and keep up the good work -- he  ah  01:25, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Asking for a batch correction
I really hate incorrect entries! Don't you? If somebody writes something about "algae" why he has to do this on the page of "alga"? One single alga doesn't form the whole group of algae! Could somebody please change all these green, yellow, red, brown alga pages to the algae pages? I don't have enough time to do this now. Thanks.
 * Tawerbot2 was right. I reverted rest of the changes this unsigned user did. They may (or may not) be right but he tried no discussion or consensus seeking before moving pages around and left his comments and greetings on article pages. Friendly Neighbour 20:14, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Non-vandal use of the F-word
What if articles should contain the F-word? I've been trying to edit Engrish to not contain a censored version of the word, but this bot just reverts it. 84.16.208.11 13:56, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Sorry!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


 * I thought I had fixed this problem. I will go back and take another look to make sure this doesn't happen again. josh  buddy talk 20:26, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

M5 Motorway and M5 Motorway (England).
RE: M5 Motorway and M5 Motorway (England).

Sorry to put it this way but there is some idiotic moving of articles going on.

An article which was formerly known as "M5 Motorway" was moved to "M5 Motorway (England)" but over 500 pages linking to "M5 Motorway" were ignored. Further edits meant a "M5" disambig page had a link to "M5 Motorway" and "M5 Motorway" had a link to "M5". However there was no link to "M5 Motorway (England)".

What I was trying to do before you reverted me on "M5 Motorway (England)", was to move back the text in "M5 Motorway (England)" to "M5 Motorway" where it aught to belong. All the other motorways in England e.g. M1 to M60 do not have the appendix (England) added, so why should the M5 Motorway.

I'm giving problem to you now. Hopefully you can sort out the 500 links to the M5 motorway whatever it is now know as. Actually they are now two identical articles. I think you reverted the wrong editor.

Pyrotec 08:41, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Responded on the user's talk page. (Basic situation, page converted to misspelled redirect.) - TexasAndroid 11:20, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Secret pattern matching
Hi! I am user Msoos, and I am a fan of cryptography, where open cryptographic protocols *always* mean better security. Virtually all cryptographic routines/protocols kept secret were later discovered to have major errors which were later used (when the code leaked or was uncovered) to break it, and were possibly used beforehand by people who did not wish to communicate their findings. All I am saying is, that security by obscurity is *not* an option in cryptography. I believe that not the exact same thing applies here, but something very similar. I urge you to please consider this, and act accordingly. Rationale: there are two kinds of vandals. One: stupid - he will NEVER look at the regex. Two: the intelligent - he will find the hole by trying out many edits. The first type will get caught either way. The second type will only get caught if you publish the regex and we as a community can improve it. Wikipedia has a *lot* of mindpower, especially in the computer science field - I am sure you are aware of this. Please make use of it! Thx, and I hope you take this comment in good faith, as it was written in good faith Msoos 19:14, 1 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Actually, I agree with you. Though, to be fair, this is not exactly security through obscurity. But yes, opening up the code would probably make sense if there were enough people to improve the code. josh  buddy talk 20:25, 1 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Consider me convinced as well. If Tawker himself agrees, then in theory this could be done.  The next question would be how best to do it.  I would think that we should likely have two pages with similar names, one for displaying the currently released criteria, and a second talk page for discussions of how to improve the criteria.  (I'm thinking such discussions should be kept separate from the main TB2 talk page, if only for orgaizational reasons.)  Something like: User:Tawkerbot2/Criteria and User talk:Tawkerbot2/Criteria.  Put links to them on the main TB2 User and Talk pages, and people can bookmark them separately if interested in participating in the discussions. - TexasAndroid 20:32, 1 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Releasing the exact specs would hurt, I believe. Obviously it would make no difference to the stupid vandal, but the intelligent vandal would now be able to test all their vandalism attacks off line and undetected, whereas now any tests they make that fail get flagged and brought to our attention eariler. Kerckhoffs' law does not mean that all security systems must be open to be secure, just that the system should still be secure if the enemy knows everything but the key. However in this case, I would suggest that the regrex expressions are the key. Regards, MartinRe 22:52, 2 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I must agree with this one. You have a sound reasoning (unlike the person below), I admit. I believe we could, however, agree on a solution that is between no-eyes and for-everyone. Maybe put the code into CVS, up into sourceforge, disable anonymous access, and give CVS read (or maybe even write to some) access to people who request it and are liable not to circulate it. What do you (as a community) say? Msoos 22:33, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Please only share the regex with people you trust. There's a high risk to get into an arms race with vandals here, and the temptation for them is even higher if vandals can try to find omissions in it. --Kurt Jansson 22:31, 2 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I expect a reasoning, Jansson. I gave an elaborate reasoning. Msoos 22:33, 3 May 2006 (UTC)


 * The sort of vandalism that is going to be at all detectable is the generally immature vandalism, and those vandals are not generally going to spend that much time improving their vandalsim to avoid a bot. JoshuaZ 22:40, 2 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I've waited a bit before factoring in on this one, it's something that has come up a fair bit in private messages and such. My biggest reservation in releasing the source code / filter set in a public manner does bring up the possibility of the scenario MartinRe brought up, vandals could test "the key" and test it offline.  I'm in favour of releasing it to a restricted access CVS to people who are likely not to distribute it. I think community involvement can improve the code, I just don't think full disclosure to everyone is a step to take. -- Tawker 23:04, 3 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Mmm, there's no "security threat" we're facing. RC patrollers fight vandalism, bots help; this is nothing of the sort of a virus-detection war. On the other hand, given the warning messages the bot gives, I'm guessing a fair number of vandals visit User:Tawkerbot2 upon their first encounter with the bot, so if the specs are linked on that page Tawkerbot2 would just lose a bunch of second customers, who would be picked up by RC patrol.
 * However, I'm close to positive that many first or second-time vandals are given the impression that vandalizing Wikipedia is just playing a lone cat-and-mouse game with a bot, and may normally be encouraged to deface an article another time just for the amusement factor of trying to outsmart it. Releasing the patterns may clear this up for them.  Maybe? ~ PseudoSudo 23:21, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

ask advice on personal attack
Hi, Tawkerbot2. I wonder if I could consult with you regarding PatCheng's offensive words "idiot" and groundless statement that "I never took foot in China".  

I wonder if this is allowed by wiki policy? Many thanks! Fnhddzs 04:22, 4 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Er, Tawkerbot is a bot, that is a computer program. You may be looking for its owner, that would be User:Tawker. JoshuaZ 06:51, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Tawkerbot is not very bright
I made a legit change on the Lowell, Michigan page. In fact, the only changes I've ever made on *any* page were just simple grammar or spelling mistakes, but I keep getting warnings for 'vandalizing'. Methinks Tawkerbot should observe what changes were made before warning users. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.200.116.6 (talk • contribs).
 * Tawkerbot2 has never edited Lowell, Michigan.... Are you sure you're thinking of the right page? --Rory096 06:37, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
 * It appears you are editing from a shared IP and so you will occasionally recieve messages that apply to other users. The simple way of dealing with this is to sign up for a Wikipedia account (which takes about 30 seconds and doesn't require any info, not even an email address). Also, please don't insult Tawkerbot2, just because it's a bot doesn't mean it doesn't have feelings. JoshuaZ 06:44, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
 * My feelings are hurt, I have feelings too! Do we have to make a nba (no bot attacks) template? Waaahh -- Tawkerbot2 06:47, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, I was just talking to another user about this a few seconds before you posted (is that Josh or Tawker?), the way WP:NPA is worded it could be seen as applying to bots. JoshuaZ 06:49, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

alarm !!!!!!!
This <> reverted a repair to a disambig page about the n-meanings of nightmare. Jclerman 16:04, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Broken disamb links after bot action
Can you please fix the following?:

The Nightmare should redirect to Nightmare (disambiguation) rather than to AM Crazy. The disambig page has all known meanings of nightmare catalogued, including the wrestler aka The Nightmare.

After the bot action I haven't been able to fix the problem.

Jclerman 16:26, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Ok, it appears to be fixed now so all is well -- Tawker 16:36, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Interesting ;-) it didn't work for 1/2 hr after my last edit. Is there a software saving delay? Jclerman 16:49, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Legit edit revert
Reverted this legit edit.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sukhoi_Su-37&oldid=51540268

- Emt147 Burninate!  16:28, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Yep, all caps addition caused that one, thaks for fixing it, though I don't know if its a cyborg killing machine :o -- Tawker 16:38, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Bot goof
Please see this edit. It looks like the bot got a bit confused when two vandals in a row struck on Same-sex marriage. I had already reverted the double-vandalism but the bot came in behind me and unreverted part way. --StuffOfInterest 18:23, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Mistaken edit pretty sure why
I think I know why it did this but I'm not going to say it here do to WP:BEANS, so I'll just note that the condition got triggered. JoshuaZ 04:24, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

William Shakespeare
I got my hand slapped by Tawkerbot2 on this article. It turns out that the vandal reverted at nearly the same time as me, and somehow I reverted their revert:. I don't revert with Popups very much, so possibly I screwed that up. Anyway, all's well, except I wanted to make sure I'm not on some black or grey list of the bot's. Thanks for your anti-vandalism efforts! johndburger 15:13, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Harsher Warning
when this bot reverts vandalism the warning it leaves is far to apologetic in the case it reverted a genuine edit yet with such a high accuracy rate the warning should be harsher and more assertive.--Childzy 17:11, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

I just got reverted by Tawkerbot2, and I think the warning was just right. Harshness might turn off a newbie who simply make a mistake. —johndburger 18:05, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Do Not Remove AfD Notices
Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion pages. The notices and comments are needed to establish community consensus about the status of an article, and removing them is considered vandalism. If you oppose the deletion of an article, you may comment at the respective page instead. Thank you. General Eisenhower 20:41, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Umm, you know its a bot, right? --Tawker 22:16, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

quick blanking articles
this edit was uncalled for, why did yo undo so many eidts--[[User:152.163.100.14|152.163.100.14] 02:40, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
 * If you check the history for that page, you'll see a vandal from your AOL IP blanked the page. Tawkerbot reverted your edits along with the vandal's because of the shared IP. Feel free to make your constructive changes again though. Llort 02:44, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Legitimate edit reverted
Hi,

Just to inform you about this revert by the bot. Thanks --Oblivious 03:25, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Error with formatting reports on WP:AIV/TB2
See this. If the user has a name that has a space in it, such as "Example Username", TB2 will link to the block log of User:Example then format the link to say Username Block Log. It's lead to some fairly interesting ones like the "Urban Block Log" above! Even if you can't fix this, you're bot is great! Thanks! --Lord Deskana Dark Lord of the Sith 08:31, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Legitimate edit reverted
This revert of Arsenal F.C. undid my reversion of a vandal edit. Thanks. Oldelpaso 12:18, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

I am sorry

Sorry
sorry, i was curious to see what the edit pg. would do... thanks to the bot we still have the article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.99.82.115 (talk • contribs) 18:31, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Re: List of places in Hawaii
Hi there,

User:CmdrObot 'collapsed' a bunch of unnecessarily piped wikilinks on this article and for some reason it trigered your vandalism detector. No real harm done, but I'm curious; what heuristic did CmdrObot run afoul of? Cheers, Cmdrjameson 19:45, 6 May 2006 (UTC)


 * The funny thing is that CmdrObot is an account with the bot flag enabled, so it's actions should have been ignored. Oh well...

Incorrect Reversion, Jesusland Map
Tawkerbot has incorrectly reverted an edit i made to the article the Jesusland Map. In a list of varying names used for the maps red and blue states, I included the name "Dumbfuckistan", a version I had previously encountered. This addition was intended to make the article more accurate and comprehensive, however it has been reverted by this bot, presumably because of the swear words included in the word. To add insult to injury I have been given a warning for my edit. It's not my understanding that Wikipedia has any generic policy of censoring swear words, and I have frequently encountered genuine uses of the word "fuck" on the site. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 159.134.63.237 (talk • contribs).
 * Ok, yeah, its just that the page had no "swear" words on it before so the bot thought it was out of context, you can safely ignore the vandalism warning, its a fully automatic process and its hard to stop, its just a bot pattern, nothing that can be done to make it intellegent that way, sorry -- Tawker 20:53, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Reverted edit to Celtic law
Following discussion (see Talk:Brehon law) I deleted the contents of the Celtic law article (which covered the same ground as Brehon law) in order to convert it into a disambiguation page for Brehon law and Welsh law. This was immediately reverted. Rhion 18:14, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Just revert again, the bot can't read talk pages sadly :o -- Tawker 20:54, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Garabit Viaduct
64.251.48.164 vandalized Garabit Viaduct once, and it was detected, and reiterated and obviously it was not detected the second time. Why ? 24.62.48.134 further vandalized as well. Hektor 19:34, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Either the bots 1 revet rule or the tag team didn't trigger its threshold went into play there, sorry, its a safety means not having the bot edit war -- Tawker 20:56, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

But...i didnt do it
But I didn't do anything...i dont know what you are talking about...edit wikipedia???? I dont even know how? I never went to a hip hop site...i just use wikipedia for my US history class...ive had alot of projects lately and ive been lookin up info....im relly confused —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.12.117.5 (talk • contribs) 21:04, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
 * It appears that you are using AOL. Unfortunately, AOL shares IPs, so other people might've been vandalizing using the same IP as you. That's one of the downsides to AOL...— G .H e  21:11, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Colin Peterson
I deleted the redirect from "Colin Peterson" that goes to "homosexuality". Although this was originally done in error, I had believed it was redirected to make an "attack" on Representative Collin Peterson (first name spelled with two L's). In running a "find" in Homosexuality for "Colin" or "Peterson", neither comes up. Therefore, I felt the redirection should be deleted. I'll leave this for you to determine. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.193.74.248 (talk • contribs) 03:36, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Reply on user's talk page. ~ PseudoSudo 03:52, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

IATSE
Hi, I was trying to move an article whose title was mispelled. The article with the correct spelling was a redirect to the article with incorrect spelling. I therefore attempted to switch the contents of the article to the correct one with copying & pasting. The bot reverted the edit which attempted to replace the contents of the original article (with bad spelling) with a redirect to the one with correct spelling.
 * Incorrect spelling: International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employes
 * Correct spelling: International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees

Thank you! Santaduck 04:00, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Reply on user's talk page. ~ PseudoSudo 04:15, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Mind control
Usually Tawkerbot2 is so well behaved. Just fyi, my removal of vandalism was tagged as vandalism. &mdash;Jnk [ talk ] 04:05, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Clear Channel and Air America
I tried to edit the List of Air America Radio affiliates to highlight in the table which stations are owned by clear channel but the bot seems to think this is vandalism. Why ?
 * Repetition Repetition Repetition Repetition Repetition Repetition Repetition Repetition Repetition Repetition my friend :o -- Tawker 15:43, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

The dozens
Please look into this edit by your bot, and, if you find it appropriate to do so, please remove this warning from my talk page. Thanks very much. --Allen 17:27, 7 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for removing the warning. I have reverted the edit to The dozens as well.  --Allen 17:34, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

HEY
WHAII U REVERT MAI EDIT?????????????????????????????????? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.82.121.136 (talk • contribs)


 * Because you were vandalizing.— G .H e  18:37, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

mistaken edit by bot
See this dif. JoshuaZ 01:07, 4 May 2006 (UTC)


 * It was massive vandalism on the IP's behalf, I must agree with Joshua, I had to revert the same thing. Эйрон Кинни  (t) 21:47, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Representation
Regarding this edit and similar, please remember that "our" implies a connection with the foundation or the project. Tawkerbot2 is not authorised to pass itself off as endorsed by either. Rob Church (talk) 17:48, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Obviously it wasn't the intent so its been changed slightly, I hope that works -- Tawker 20:42, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Reverted The Cockettes edit
The page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cockettes currently contains the term 'genderf__ck'. Since there is an actual page called Genderfuck, I un-censored the word and made it link to the Genderfuck page. Unfortunately, Tawkerbot2 seems to be a bit of a prude :-) and reverted my change. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.81.168.242 (talk • contribs) 18:50, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
 * From Wiki:profanity: "words should never be bowdlerized by replacing letters in the word with dashes, asterisks, or other symbols." --Larrybob 19:33, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I see its fixed, sorry about that, most times people add stuff like that its vandalism, you caught the oddball exception :( -- Tawker 20:22, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism
I did not vandalize anything! sorry about the missunderstanding-(Betty Yves 01:28, 9 May 2006 (UTC))

I also was reverted for something that I don't believe is vandalism. If it was can someone explain to me why. What I did was insert a 2 line blurb on the christian prespective of mohammed in the section titled

Shop 'Til You Drop
I did what I had to do because there's already a Shop 'til You Drop article but with a lower-case "t" as you can see. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Knowledgeman800 (talk • contribs) 03:09, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi I have found the following line from the Wikepedia. "According to Newsweek, Orwell "was the finest of his day and the foremost architect of the English essay since Hazlitt." Could you let me know the exact source - author, issue number, page number of the article? All the best Tea Lim --- tealim@hotmail.com

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steady-state_condition

The definition was too narrow and copied exactly words by words from other sources generated on Wed Feb 28 15:39:21 MST 2001 years earlier before placed on wikipedia.

Copied words by words from this web site http://www.atis.org/tg2k/_steady-state_condition.html

You reverted my edit to The Contrabandista/The Chieftain. This was a legitimate edit, as information that was formerly on one page was moved to two separate pages. Marc Shepherd 18:24, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

I was fixing a redirect, the bot stupped me
well I did an error in fixing that redirect see link 

hope it helps improving the bot --Melaen 18:24, 8 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes: I've tried making edits at South America, only to have them rolled back. Please recheck, repair, or discard your bot. 142.150.134.60 19:39, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Revert on Distillation
It looked like a legit edit to me ... or is there something i missed? -- &infin;Dbroadwell 20:02, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Um, nevermind ... different IP and yeah, a blanking is ~not~ legit. Ignore me. -- &infin;Dbroadwell 20:04, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

King Michael of Romania edits
I have added some new press articles about King Michael, and I get reverted as a vandal by some "bot"! So what do you suggest is happening? Am I one of the 2% of errors? I think so! This is a genuine attempt to add to the article, not vandalism.

Marina


 * Responded on user's talk page. - TexasAndroid 20:26, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Unintentional deletions
I edited Michael l of Romania by adding an external link to a new press article that had just come out. Half the article disappeared! - TexasAndroid left me a nice message explaining what was going on. He wrote: "When you added the new info to the Michael I of Romania page, you also deleted half the article. That is what the bot was complaining about above. I have reverted you a second time. If you want to put the new stuff back in, feel free to do so, but please be careful about deleting major portions of the existing article in the process. - TexasAndroid 20:25, 8 May 2006 (UTC)" But my point is, I deleted nothing at all! I simply added an external link (as I have done many times before, successfully) and WHAM the article was cut in half...I am now perplexed as to how I can avoid this in future. Actually, this happened to me once before. This is what I wrote on April 17 "I made a couple of minor edits, today Monday 17 April 2006, and the whole of the bottom part of the article disappeared....puzzled, I tried to revert the article to it's previous complete form, without success. Now horrified by either my incompetence or a fault in my computer (always blame your tools...) I used another computer and created a second account, and then managed to return the article to it's previous contents... Sorry for any inconvenience, it was not intentional. Marina C (2) 20:18, 17 April 2006 (UTC)" So, has a "bot" been put on me? As in "someone has put a bot on me"??!! Do I have to keep changing user names in order to edit freely? Please advise,manyy thanks. Marina C (2) 08:38, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
 * No, the bot was on you for all of 10 minutes, it is off you now :) -- Tawker 14:39, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

I am being blocked from changing a factual error
I attempted to change an incorrect edit to the JANEY GODLEY page and apparently my change is blocked as vandalism.

Why is this?

The words I removed were simply untrue. They refer to a specific show and claim that the show was not improvised. It was.

It was improvised to such an extent that it was barred from consideration by an awards panel because it was not a 'show' as such. I have spoken to the chairman of the panel and to another panel member.

The person who changed the original Wikipedia words either never saw more than one performance of this show (I saw three) or is referring to a totally different show.

The words I am being blocked from changing are factually incorrect.

Who do I e-mail about this?

The changed words I attempted to remove are vandalism, not my change.

John Fleming
 * I can find no sign of the bot having reverted this user on the article in question. The only interactions I can see between this user and the bot were mid April, when the user tried several times to blank the article on himself, and was correctly reverted. - TexasAndroid 14:36, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Local churches
My revision as of 14:22, 9 May 2006 to the article Local churches was to reinstate information that was blanked. See here. ... discospinster
 * Looking at the edit, the only thing I can come up with is that you hit the bot's repetition filter, due to the chain of templates, and large repetition of the parameters of the templates. Josh will need to look at this one to see if that was the trigger, or if there was something else involved.  This definitely looks like a true false positive. - TexasAndroid 20:02, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Hey-- I think your bot said I vandalised the entry for Albemarle County, Virginia (I'm not actually quite sure). Anyway, I've never heard of Albermarle County, much less edit its entry... Just wanted to let you know.

Thanks, Greg

Vader Quotes
"Nooooooooooooo" Is a ligitament quote from return of the jedi.
 * But uppercase NOOOOOOOOOO seems a little out of place, I'll see if I can override it -- Tawker 04:30, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Good job reverting Innsmouth
Obvious vandalism was reverted almost instantly! Cases like this are a good use for bots. ,-~ R 'lyeh R isin g  ~-, 05:05, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Online Brand Promotion
This article was spam. Can you delete the article rather than revert my edits to it?

--Just Some Guy 13:37, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Temple in Jerusalem one-level revert
Anon user vandalised the article, then User:Matt Drums (don't ask me why) modified the vandalism. Bot reverted only the last change, getting the article back to the original vandalised version. I'm not sure if this is because it didn't recognize the first edit as vandalism, or whether the bot is unable to revert back to versions other than the last one, but I thought you might like to take a look at it anyway. -- Hirudo 13:48, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Mistake by Bot..
This bot reverted an edit I made on Industrial rock and left an automatic message on my page, when I was legitametly adding a list of bands in the genre. May need to sort it out. - Deathrocker 14:43, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Mistaken revert
The latest revert reported on my talk was me reverting other's vandalism, so I'm pretty sure that it wasn't fair! Could you check and possibly do something to remove it from appearing in things such as VandalProof, as I havn't done anything wrong? Thanks. --Xyra e l T 14:48, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Definitely a flase positive, but such a massive change I cannot begin to figure out what set off the bot. Josh will have to look at this one.  OTOH, the original vandalism was fairly amusing.  The vandal converted the entire page into leet-speak.  Maybe that's been done before, but I at least have not seen it. - TexasAndroid 15:24, 10 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Not a false positive, per say, as it's yet another two vandalism in a row, see my latest revert on the 1990s page for details. MartinRe 15:34, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Titanium Spatula
I have been warned for a legitimate article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blazenbbw (talk • contribs)


 * Malformed redirect. Replied more extensively on user's talk page. - TexasAndroid 17:33, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Adam's catalyst
My edit to Adams' catalyst was legitimate. I probably reverted between the time that the bot realised there was vandalism and the time that the bot accessed the history. I hope my message will be useful to the further improvment of your bot. Neokid 18:55, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Mistaken revert
Just wanted to report a "false positive" Deli nk 19:35, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

mohammad in other religions
Seems to me there should be a hindu / buddest prespective as well but I did not have time to research that.

--chistofishman 18:20, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Hmm... this bot has made mistakes before. But its just a robot, Tawker is the one you want to talk to about this. He is the one that supervises it. :D Pseudoanonymous 00:27, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Sydney Roosters entry
Hey mate. I'm trying to fix an entry that has been destroyed by deleting wantless and needless information.

Don't revert it again please

This bot has made mistakes before. But its just a robot, Tawker is the one you want to talk to about this. He is the one that supervises it. :D Pseudoanonymous 00:28, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi.
I really dont know what is going on. If I accidently made a change to the page I apologise. Im not a robot I was just curious what the "edit page" did. Once agian, my apologies.

Yeah... that happens thanks for experimenting, my first edit got reverted too; don't sweat it. Pseudoanonymous 00:29, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Not a false positive...
...but an interesting occurance where the bot reverted one piece of vandalism to a prior vandalized version. . Good work by the bot otherwise, though. --badlydrawnjeff (WP:MEMES?) 00:22, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

What did i do?????

Chicago White Sox reversion
I was trying to revert someone else's edit to the same page -- looks like our reversions crossed. No worries... --Mhking 03:24, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

I changed the page 'Jimbo Wales rapes babies' because it is ridiculous and offensive. I thought it was highly inappropriate to have a picture of someone's child on the page. Paedophilia is not funny and I did not commit vandalism. I am going to change the page again as of now.

Tawker, please fix your bot
I edited a page that was an offensive and ridiculous joke centred around paedophilia. To put a picture of somebody's chils on this page is unacceptable and disgusting. If your bot goes about fixing changes that are genuine attempts to keep wikipedia a serious resource then it needs fixing. I am going to change the page again. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 125.209.176.44 (talk • contribs).
 * To give some context: The anon above is talking about Jimbo Wales rapes babies!, which has probably been speedied by now. This consisted of the title as cited and [[Image:Baby.jpg]] . 125.209.176.44 decided to blank the image tag; your bot reverted the blanking. Unfortunately in their zeal to remove the completely innocuous picture (the title's the problem, not the picture)  125.209.176.44 also blanked my db-vand tag, thus ensuring that the page hung around until somebody (me) retagged it. Sigh. I can't see how you're supposed to "fix your bot" in such circumstances as blanking is blanking. Tonywalton  | Talk 11:50, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Tsar Bomba
you keep reverting vandalism, but not far back enough. this page is being used as a discussion board by some assholes. Matt Gies 14:58, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Revert Count?
Hey, nice 'bot and thanks for reverting vandalism! Is there any way to track certain users that are reverted multiple times? (i.e.: how many times they get reverted) A Tawkerbot2 list of multiple offense vandals would make some policing work easier, methinks. Thanks again for the great bot. --Perimosocordiae 22:45, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
 * It's in a database and I can pull a report per ip, its just password protected due to the other information (the reasons it reverts mostly) -- Tawker 23:31, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

WW2 casualties
Thanks--Woogie10w 00:08, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
As an RC patroller, I appreciate the help from this bot. Though really, it's more that us human RC patrollers help the bot. -AndyBQ 09:21, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Serious flaw
There is a serious problem with Tawkerbot always reverting to the last user's edit when the last user's edit was vandalism, see this original vandalism on Robin Williams followed by this further vandalism which was reverted by Tawkerbot here. Is there a solution to this other than hoping a vigilant user will spot it? Arniep 15:31, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Tag team vandalism like this is a known problem, and one that noone has had brilliant ideas yet for how to solve. - TexasAndroid 16:22, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Another similar example at Flash memory where two different editors confused Tawkerbot2. The first editor slowly truncated article in 4 edits, then another truncated that, and Tawkerbot2 restored the last version of first vandal.
 * Slowly chopping out pieces is thw primary unrecognized behavior. Then simply comparing new and old - back one step only - will get confused.  It is almost as though Tawkerbot2 needs to know the average size of an article over the long-term, and balk at edit(s) which shorten that by drastic percentages. Shenme 21:58, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Sample study
I just took a look at 100 Tawkerbot2 reverts today from 17:14 to 19:29. The results were 2 reverts in error, and 2 accurate reverts, but they reverted back to an already-vandalized instance of the page. The other 96 were valid vandal reverts. Not sure how useful this information is... but since I checked I figured I'd share the results with you. --W.marsh 23:49, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Reverts to my revisions
Cool--it says "reverted edits by blah to last version by M1ss1ontomars2k4". legit. --M1ss1ontomars2k4 00:12, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

comment on my automated un-edit
I am a person from a community, and the article i edited is about my commmunity. I am good friends with on of the people there, and they requested I take off whatever was involvded with them on the article. I do so, and it is autoed back in. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.14.137.0 (talk • contribs) 03:28, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
 * The article failed WEB and was therefore deleted, I hope that makes life easier -- Tawker 00:02, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Wii
Thank you for treating me like a human being. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by HappyVR (talk • contribs) 20:18, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Batman Returns
Hello, my edits to the Batman Returns article are not vandalism, I am attempting to edit the page. Please revert to my edited version of the page and allow me to continue editing.

I am NOT vandalisng the page, I am making legitimate signed edits with a registered name, please look! --Flash-Gordon 21:35, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Eddie Guerrero Edit
What did you do to the Eddie Guerrero headline???
 * As far as I can see nothing -- Tawker 00:28, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

forgot something on Freddie Prinze, Jr.'s page
You forgot to mention that Freddie Prinze, Jr. is currently in the abc sitcom Freddie. I tried to fix it but instead you erased it, all i wanted to do is fix it...next time try finding current info before saying i'm wrong when i'm right! Freddie is on wendsdays at 8:30 on ABC 7
 * Well, "I LOVE CHICKEN" is usually seen as vandalism, not sure what you are talking about -- Tawker 02:42, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Stco23
Please delete Usertalk:Stco23/Archive1. I forgot to space User Talk. I put it like this (Usertalk) instead of this (User talk). Thank You very much.--Stco23 08:29, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Transformers Picture
Can you get rid of an old version of Transformers Season's 1 and 2 since I can't do it. I forgot to crop the old version so i put in a new version which has been croped. I hope you can delete the old version. Please do not delete the new version. Thank You.--Stco23 08:38, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

ABBA Discography
As per Wikipedia's manual of style, plus the general frequent misuse of hyphens (or in this case double hyphens) where they are not appropriate, i attempted to replace the double hyphens denoting missing data in the ABBA discography page with en dashes (arguably more appropriate), but my edits got reverted by Tawkerbot twice. I would appreciate if this could be rectified, as the use of double hyphens on this page is quite simply wrong. thanks. 80.177.20.202 17:04, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

See My Vest
Hi, I want to redirect See My Vest, but you bot won't let me. --Maitch 17:38, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

A bit late
I just realised i am not even sure what test i did say late March\early April and am having trouble finding it. Can you just remind me? Simply south 20:02, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
 * this - a bit of a weird one -- Tawker 06:29, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Reverted edit to Force Ten
I came across this link from the page on sleeping bags, so I changed it to go to that company's web site. Your bot seems to think it should be redirected to a Rush CD. Naturally.


 * I don't think this was intended vandalism—see User talk:68.183.194.34. —johndburger 03:09, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Alex
I know the vandalism-detection algorithm is complex and I sure as heck wouldn't want to write one myself. However, I did want to call attention to this edit by Tawkerbot:. It reverted a blanking back to a vandalized version. Probably not much to be done about it but thought I should mention in here anyway, just in case. Powers 13:54, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

You did it again.
Stop reverting the Sydney Roosters entry! It is currently bogus and needs some sort of official updating! It is criminally vilifying and could possibly be used to sue Wikipedia for libel. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 165.228.122.164 (talk • contribs) 04:53, 27 April 2006 (UTC).

Aylin page is incorrect
You reverted my erasing of the page named Aylin. Aylin however is a fake. It was connected to W.I.T.C.H., wherein some information got edited into disinformation, sabotage. 62.166.173.200, May 15th, 2006
 * If the page is blank a speedy might be in order -- Tawker 16:38, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

very sorry.i just wanna try.

sorry i just wanna try

yes
i decided to delete the article i wrote. since wikipedians would not verify proper infomations before 'soliciting' for deletion. secondly because they continually make annoying comments of things they have no idea about. i was only tring to contribute.. obviously a waste of time.Stillwaters111 19:26, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Trivia
How many reverts are made per day? Skinnyweed 22:35, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Too many I'm afraid, something like 800 a day -- Tawker 06:46, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Querry
What does this bot do when it identifies vandalism as first edit (i.e. vandal article creation)? Thanks, -Ambuj Saxena (talk) 10:44, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * It should tag it for speedy deletion -- Tawker 16:14, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Theresa Obermeyer
your reverts of my additions to this are inappropriate and makes me wonder whether you are being influenced by Ms. Obermeyer and her family. The statements made about her husband failing the bar exam dozens of times and her public obsession with this are, unfortunately, the main feature of her public reputation in Alaska. To verify this you may run her name on an Internet search or the Anchorage Daily News archives. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 12.217.48.255 (talk • contribs).

Thank you for your suggestion&#32;regarding Theresa Obermeyer! When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make whatever changes you feel are needed. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit any article by simply following the  link at the top. You don't even need to log in! (Although there are some reasons why you might like to…) The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes&mdash;they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome., simply blanking the page will trigger the bot to revert any time, perhaps you can submit a biography that doesn't focus on those issues -- Tawker 16:10, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Abuse report on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arusha#Schools
Dear Tawkerbot2,

I am the Head of Secondary Studies at St Constantine's International School.

A very damaging, false and malicious entry is regularly being made by an individual with an IP address of 86.141.100.127 on the webpage mentioned in the subject line.

I have manged to trace this individual to the UK and have reported the abuse to the BT Central abuse mailbox.

Is there any way that this malicious entry can be controlled? Here is a copy of the abuse entry:

There are three international schools in and around Arusha: International School Moshi Arusha Campus - this has an excellent repretation; Braeburn School - also a good repretation and St Constantine's International School Arusha- This school is run (badly) by the Greeks it is a very bad school. Concerns have been expressed over the use of handguns on site, the hitting of students, drunkeness amongst primary staff and the breach of teaching contracts. Many staff have left due to these concerns and the unprofessional nature of the management. St Constantines International School has a new Head Mr H. Jerkit. According to one recent poll St Constantine was voted 3rd as the worse school in the world. A recent study by the UK government Overseas Development Office was quoted as saying St Constantines is 'the worse run school in East Africa'. A favourite of the Times Education Message boards it seems St Constantines gets even worse.

I regularly change it to this entry:

There are three international schools in and around Arusha: International School Moshi Arusha Campus - www.ismoshi.org; Braeburn School - www.braeburn.com/braeburnarusha and St Constantine's International School - www.scisarusha.org

Any help and assistance will be much appreciated.

Regards,

James de Wit Scis 16:57, 16 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Responded on user's talk. (Can't really have TB2 catch this, but am now Watching the attacked page, and gave user a link to WP:AIV.) - TexasAndroid 17:36, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

reverting pov isn't vandalism
"Williamson's most unintentionally comical book" is the phrase I reverted. It seemed to diss the subject therefore povish. It was not vandalism just an attempt keep the article non pov.--71.28.252.20 17:15, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * responded on user talk. Mak (talk)  17:30, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Something missed
Any idea why Tawkerbot missed this edit? Arniep 21:13, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Bot bogged down maybe, it shoulda caught that -- Tawker 22:46, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Tawkerbot2 malfunction
Tawkerbot2 made this mistake - my edit clearly wasn't vandalism. However, I was able to make my edit stick by re-reverting. I understand vandalism wars and software limitations, so I'm just reporting a bug. Art LaPella 22:01, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks -- Tawker 22:47, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Tawkerbot2 Vandalism Recognition
I thought I left a similar message here, but I checked the archives and it had vanished. Oh well.

I am curious as to how Tawkerbot2 recognizes an edit as vandalism. Is it a blacklist? MegaHAL AI-type thing? How is the blacklist/AI brain database stored? If it is a database, what's the structure and how is it parsed? I am wanting to set up a similar bot at my own wiki, and am hoping that I could eventually assist in its development. If you have any questions for me, let me know on my talk page, or at my email address. -- N3X15  ( Scream  &middot;  Contribs ) 04:04, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

The bot's hot, but the message is not
Tawkerbot2 does great work, but it's warning message is way too wimpy. I don't think it screws up often enough to be so humble, and it kinda de-fangs a nice test, test2, test3... sequence when it lands in the middle of one. I would suggest something more like bv-n:

"Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. However, unconstructive edits, such as those you made to        , are considered vandalism. If you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the hard work of others. Thanks. (Note: this message was left by an automated bot. If you believe that this message is in error, please bring it to my attention at..."

In other words, throw in the unlikely possibility that the bot is wrong at the end, after a good, solid, "cut it out" message. -- Mwanner | Talk 21:14, 16 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I think the bot should try to determine whether an edit is a newbie test or blatant vandalism. Since the automated message no longer tells users to use the Sandbox, the jump from test1 to test4 might be too harsh if the user was just experimenting. --Ixfd64 14:56, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Jemma Hardey
Bot reverted a good edit to merge and redir a character stub into the associated novel. 24.240.34.82 05:56, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Responded on user's talk page. - TexasAndroid 14:41, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Mr Mann article
Hi,

I feel my edit to the Mr Mann article was legitimate, but I can see why your bot picked it out. Let me know what you think. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.45.239.132 (talk • contribs)
 * Assuming from the context that the change is correct, and it appears to be so, this appears to have been a legitimate uncensoring of the page. I've reverted the bot for now.  If anyone who knows the show know better, and knows that the change is not correct, feel free to revert me. - TexasAndroid 21:01, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I know the show well and I'll back-up User:82.45.239.132's edit. What is said in the article is actually correct, in that the phrase "c-word" is actually a direct quote from the character. What causes the problem is changing it to a wikilink for an existing article describing what 'c-word' means. For clarification purposes, this is also completely valid. Adding the Wikilink does not make the Mr Mann article offensive itself as you can't see any offensive words unless you click on it. I can understand however why the Tawkerbot2 may have picked up on this and under the circumstances I don't regard it as a fault, just an isolated incident which hopefully doesn't happen very often. User:Peteb16 21:25, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

I am sorry about the vandalism. I thought i was funny but now I realize it is not. I hope you accept my apology! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.78.102.44 (talk • contribs)

A suggestion
Hi. I have a suggestion. Is it possible when Tawkerbot is about to revert an edit that it check the previous edit also? Notice that when Tawkerbot performed this revert, of anon 194.83.68.114, the previous edit by 207.235.242.9 was also vandalism. Thus the result of Tawkerbot's revert was to preserve and obscure the prior vandalism, making it harder to find and fix. Thanks (and thanks for all your good work here). Paul August &#9742; 14:34, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
 * We've always had some problems with tag team vandalism, its something we're working on but its not an overnight process :o -- Tawker 16:12, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Neil Garrett
Neil Garrett has requested this page be temporarily removed - thus it is not vandalism — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.66.213.225 (talk • contribs)
 * A potentially complex situation, I'm trying to handle now. - TexasAndroid 18:02, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Protocrystalline
Virtually all the text on the Protocrystalline page appears to be taken from another source without permission. I was trying to delete it, but had the edit reverted. Any advice you can offer on what I should do? HistoryBA 01:25, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_%28band%29
Look at the huge ridiculous gaps on this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_%28band%29

I fixed them, and you said it was vandalism. I guess you want those retarded gaps then. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.20.155.95 (talk • contribs) 01:57, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

My Edit
I left a correct edit, and you keep changeing it back. This bothers me very much. People DID have a ceremony for Pope John Paul II's Vagina.
 * Then discuss it on the talk and cite it, it looks pretty much like vandalism to me -- Tawker 06:04, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

sorry
i was just a bit depressed and did a stupid thing for fun

i promise i won't do it anymore

sorry broz —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ssipseki2 (talk • contribs) 02:13, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Pinewood School, Los Altos Hills
Hey, I love you! You're the greatest at stopping vandalism! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.131.242.46 (talk • contribs) 04:59, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Black Rhinoceros
Missed this. This may be a stupid question, but if Tawkerbot is overloaded can we not have two or three Tawkerbots (or 100!). Arniep 19:32, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
 * It also missed all these . Why? Arniep 19:34, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, its network load, if anyone wants to help pool the 150 or so a month it costs to rent a dedicated server to run the thing, I won't object at all -- Tawker 03:30, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Are you saying you rent server space with your own money? Shouldn't the Wikimedia foundation pay? Arniep 13:51, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Bot error
For some reason Tawkerbot reverted my revert of grunge music to the wrong copy. Not sure how this happened, although it appears our reverts were at the same time.--Joe Jklin 19:03, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Feile na nGael
Feile is a GAA competition in Ireland for Girls and Boys under the age of 14.The offical website is www.feilenangael.com.I have'nt got time to edit the article but maybe you could put a note on the Hurling and GAA articles for editing help. GAAman2006 19:58, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Notice of possible time-of-action fluke edit at EK leaving inappropriate content in place
This is a note about a revert of vandalism on EK to an edit that itself was the product of vandalism. It looks like this was a timing problem with respect to Tawkerbot automation and, if that is correct, therefore a fluke. I've since restored content to an earlier, clean edit version. Regards, User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 01:24, 21 May 2006 (UTC)


 * vandalism by User:Sandossu
 * possible attempt to remove vandalism by User:85.120.156.50 four minutes after the last of two edits by User:Sandossu
 * Tawkerbot revert, immediately on the heels of User:85.120.156.50, which restored inappropriate content added by User:Sandossu

Computer art scene Vandalism
Good job with cleaning up the vandalism of the article Computer art scene. Much appreciated. Thanks. --roy&lt;sac&gt; Talk! .oOo. 05:02, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Revert mixup
Sorry! DakPow e  rs  ( Talk ) 19:05, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Algae pages
We have the unsatisfactory position of having a series of identical pages. Red algae = Red alga, Green algae= Green alga etc.. This is unhelpful. You reverted my conversion of Brown alga to Brown algae and I am about to do the same for their Green counsins. It is possible that the Red algae also need sorting. Can you please reign in your enthisiasm for these logical changes which preserve all the useful content. Velela 17:33, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Malformed redirect. I've fixed the redirect and responded on the user's talk page. - TexasAndroid 21:49, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Mintor Gardens
Hi, after I remade a new article with the proper spelling, it is now Minter Gardens I put a note on the old page and tried to move the page (I am still new at all this) It didnt work so I just left it the way it was with the new redirect note. Thanks for getting in touch about the problem I may have caused with my article WayneRay 22:03, 21 May 2006 (UTC)WayneRay

I don't know about the rest of wikipedia, but I think this bot rules :)

Go tawkerbot2 go!

Living with War
The recent inclusion of chart positions was reverted. Not sure why. -- Beardo 03:48, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Repetition I think, thanks for fixing it -- Tawker 16:23, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Need Help on Ban
72.140.166.161 which Tawkerbot2 found vandelizing the page on Islam has continued vandalism of pages on Nazi ideals, Christianity, and Lucifer. Would like to report this as I have no idea who can report this activity and request a ban of his IP

Thanks


 * Check out the instructions on Vandalism - I'm not an admin, but getting the sequence of warnings in place is something everyone can do. After that, it's a matter of calling the admins' attention. (I'm not one.) --Alvestrand 07:21, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Might be a good idea not to get too excited?
The bot started leaving vandalism warnings on my talk page after an accidental blanking. It was some kind of error in the editor I was using, but I got the warnings whilst trying to fix things. I understand the robot is supposed to be doing something useful, and it's certainly fast, but it's a little annoying. Perhaps this robot should inform a human before slapping warnings onto talk pages. Thanks.--Dogaroon 06:02, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I didn't get a response from you; I notice there were some other errors by this robot (like the one on the dog page). I'm going to remove the vandalism warning from my talk page, since it is obviously an error. Better to be safe than sorry. --Dogaroon 01:01, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Making the bot smarter
I created Disaster monitoring constellation. I then realised that this should be Disaster Monitoring Constellation, so created that and tried to delete the previous page to put a redirect in -- at which point the bot stepped in to revert.

I'm the creator and only editor of the page, and I'm logged in. Deleting my own work is not vandalism.

The bot should not treated deletions of own creations by logged-in users without anyone else editing as vandalism.

Lloyd Wood 18:33, 22 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I've redirected it; the bot shouldn't step in, as it usually doesn't revert established accounts. Must be a bug. Master of Puppets That's hot. 18:36, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't know that the bot makes that distinction, anon vs. account. I know that we get false positives in here from registered users.  The bot avoids admins, and has an explicit White List of users to ignore, but I'm pretty sure it watches edits from most users just like it watches anons. - TexasAndroid 18:43, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
 * User did not know how to do a redirect, but tried anyway and got reverted by the bot. Have responded on the user's page. - TexasAndroid 18:41, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

The bot ignores:


 * 1) Admins
 * 2) Whitelisted users

Anyone else gets checked, as the bot has no way of knowing an account age other than keeping a local database dump and I don't have that kind of hard drive space :o -- Tawker 22:21, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Tracking anonymous vandalism
I was wondering whether Tawkerbot2 has the facility to log the IP addresses of anonymous vandalism it reverts? If so, can it also keep track of anons who vandalise more than once, and report them to users/admins for warnings/blocking? If this feature is not already present, perhaps it could make a useful addition? Just a thought! Mushintalk 21:24, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Yep, it reports repeat vandals to WP:AIV/TB2, it does log every edit it makes so I can pull a user summary of bot reverts, its just all in a backend -- Tawker 22:18, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Good stuff! Keep up the good work. Mushintalk 00:01, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Regarding Dog
The bot has reverted a edit that I did in order to remove vandalism here, but Tawkerbot2 reinstated the vandal's edit here and warned me. I feel upset that this has happened. Let me know what you think. -- Master  jamie  23:59, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Sir Thomas Browne on America
Following upon the suggestion of another i moved this page to join rest of Sir T.B. page in order to eliminate an orphaned page. Hope this explains my apparent vandalism, nothing of the sort merely trying to tidy up contributions. Okay?Norwikian 06:42, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

about article changes.
I wrote 2 articles: "Multiterminal with Xephyr" and "Multiterminal with Xnest" Someone (probably a bot) asked to move the article to wikibooks, so I manually did it with both articles Multiterminal with Xephyr Multiterminal with Xnest

So I changed their Wikipedia pages, deleted everything and said "moved this article to wikibooks". And your bot undid the changes.

So, please, go there and delete those articles =)

Thanks =)


 * Ok all appears to be fixed, in the future if you need something deleted can you slap a db tag on it, that puts it in the speedy delete request que and won't trigger the bot :) -- Tawker 16:28, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

East Is East
Hello,

This bot automatically reverted my change to the article about East Is East (film). I'm assuming it's becuase my change contained the word 'fuck' but i can assure you that this was not vandalism, it is a quote from the film. 88.110.52.185 14:13, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Stu Klitenic
The article on Stu klitenic is not encyclopedic at all. It is just one long anti-stu klitenic rant. I deleted the whole article and wrote a short stub, trying to get a legitimate article started. The bot reverted it back, because it must have thought deleting all the text in an article is vandalism. In this case, however, it is not vandalism, so please allow the text of the Stu Klitenic article to be deleted so a new it can be rewritten as a real article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.32.200.24 (talk • contribs) 20:53, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Wristbands
On The Wristband page, I edited the table of Red Wristbands to include MATHCOUNTS wristbands. I would Know this because I have one. This was reverted by this bot. Is this okay to re-include this? Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.115.107.1 (talk • contribs) 21:02, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

eek
your bot seems to be restoring vandalism to certian articles, like this one--64.12.117.5 21:36, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Its reverting to the last editor, its a tag team vandalism problem not really a bot error -- Tawker 23:02, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Explicit song lyrics
Like as above, the bot reverted another user's edit to 300 Bars and Runnin' replacing "****" with expletives in song lyrics. In this case, I later removed the lyrics from the page because they were copyrighted. 24.226.62.205 03:28, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Not vandalism!
I was trying to improve Uncle Bus but all of my edits were reverted, presumably due to the profanity. Now all my work is gone... --219.79.207.234 04:42, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Royal Bank Cup 2007
The bot just killed my edits. DMighton 17:16, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Reversion of Optimal classification reverted
I've reverted a BOT edit. I see no red flags that could make a bot suspect vandalism, but hey, that may be because I'm too dumb to understand them. --Lambiam Talk
 * I got it. One of the sequence of edits was a (presumably unintended) page blanking, which was quickly undone. --Lambiam Talk 17:45, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

To:Tawkerbot2
An autobot didn't revert Current Events from User:216.72.4.99 recent vandalism, I did. --71.224.19.29 16:08, 25 May 2006 (UTC) I want some recognition.
 * As far as I can tell you never edited the page, as for recognition, trust me, this isn't a barnstar bot, if I gave a barnstar to everyone who reverted vandalism we'd go thru a gig an hour in edits :0 -- Tawker 16:23, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Diff in warning?
Don't know if this is impossible, genius or nonsense: Could a difflink of the "offending edit" be included in TB2's warning template? Would make it easier for other admins investigating vandalism by a given user / IP. Nice one, Deizio talk 20:49, 25 May 2006 (UTC)