User talk:ClueBot Commons/Archives/2016/November
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
"Archive failed"
Archiving seems to be failing over at the Village Pump (miscellaneous). Three such incidents in the past month. Brightgalrs (/braɪtˈɡæl.ərˌɛs/)[1] 12:47, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
- @Brightgalrs: Cobi seems to have been relatively quiet recently, maybe you could try switching to lowercase sigmabot III in the meantime? —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 23:04, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
- That indicates that the API failed to save the edit to the talk page, so the bot attempted to revert itself on the archive page. The bot will attempt to archive it again next time it runs. -- Cobi(t|c|b) 23:33, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
- @Cobi: I'm still confused. The discussions that the bot failed to archive were never "returned" to Wikipedia:Village_pump_(miscellaneous). Will the bot still know where to look to retry archiving? Brightgalrs (/braɪtˈɡæl.ərˌɛs/)[1] 04:08, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
CB III made a broken heading even more broken
Hi, in this edit CB III made a broken heading even more broken by removing an equals from the left instead of the right. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:37, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
CB III & «ArchiveNow»
Hi @Cobi: What I'm doing wrong?[1][2] XXN, 14:34, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
Duplicates in WTVG archives
ClueBot III made a bunch of duplicates when archiving WT:VG. It had been fine in previous archives so I don't know what caused the issue in 125... We've switched to a different bot for now, but I'd like to fix the issue and return to CB. Any ideas? You can see in Archive 125's history where ClueBot would duplicate the same archive in quick succession (usually identical timestamp, same file size). czar 03:42, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
- Bump to avoid archiving. Issue needs looked into, a previous question about this issue is already archived with no responses. -- ferret (talk) 21:48, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
- Unwatching this page due to large amount of spam, please ping me if you can look into the bug (would appreciate it) czar 14:36, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
Reversion of multiple edits
Excuse me, I have an "issue", I recently stumbled upon vandalism on Atomicity (database systems), there was vandalism made by two IPs, and you happened to only revert to the last edit, that edit was also vandalism. Can ClueBotNG revert multiple edits of vandalism or just to the last edit? ∼∼∼∼ Eric0928Talk 12:34, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
- @Eric0928: ClueBot NG's reversion scheme is identical to that of a normal rollback, in that it reverts all consecutive edits made by one user to the last edit not made by that user. It cannot revert consecutive edits made by multiple users. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 14:14, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
please stop vandalism
Please stop your vandalism as you did on Gwen Ifill. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samswik (talk • contribs) 19:40, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
- @Samswik: That edit was not vandalism. See this page for what we consider vandalism. Also, please read the boxes provided at the top of this talk page, which are not there for decoration, but to inform readers what this page is for and what to do in the event one of the bots here makes a mistake. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 23:14, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
Overzealous archiving of new comments
ClueBot III archived my new topic heading and comment on Talk:Rape of Belgium just 5 days after my comment was made [3]. In doing so, it also created a new talk page archive page without linking to that new archive page from the talk page, making it difficult to ever find the comment again from the talk page without going through the page history. So at least two things went wrong here: overzealous archiving of new comments, and archiving without linking. What is going on here? Please fix the bot behavior and correct this action. —Lowellian (reply) 08:13, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
- @Lowellian: (talk page stalker) I can help with the first point - the documentation at User:ClueBot_III/ArchiveThis#Required parameters says the "age" parameter is a number of hours. The instructions at the top of Talk:Rape of Belgium set the "age" to 120 hours, or five days. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:36, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks. I suspect that whoever originally filled out those parameters thought that the "age" parameter meant days rather than hours, so that the intent was 120 days rather than 120 hours. Also, reading those parameters, I now know why no archive link was created: the archive prefix was set to a previous article title that is not the current article title. I'll go fix up the archiving parameters now. —Lowellian (reply) 08:47, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
The Wrong Version
Hi, it would be good to have some guidance on what to do if ClueBot reverts on a page that had indeed been vandalised; however, the version it reverted to is just as bad or as useless as that reverted from. Example. Should I report such reverts through the false positive reporting facility (though it isn't technically a false positive), or go through some other route instead? — Smjg (talk) 23:01, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
- @Smjg:ClueBot is only doing what it is designed to do. It doesn't claim to detect 100% of all vandalism and if it didn't pick up a vandalistic edit at first, it's not going to go back and "change its mind" as a result of further vandalism from a different editor (all consecutive edits from the same editor would be reverted). Dealing with vandalism we learn to be alert to such cases and make sure we "revert to last good version" when necessary, as indeed you did: Noyster (talk), 10:24, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
Protected edit request on 6 December 2016
{{atop}}
 | This edit request to User:ClueBot NG has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Hi I think we got off on the wrong foot, or wing in your case haha. I think I deserve a second chance to prove my knowledge of Billy 'Mcwilly' Davies. All I'm saying is how do you know that what I said wasn't true? I mean Billy is an experimental guy, for example he played Jara at right-back and Halford up front, so now whos a twat eh? JAKEDYE123 (talk) 15:51, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
Not done: this is the talk page for communicating with the bot ClueBot Commons (talk · contribs). -- samtar talk or stalk 15:52, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
