User talk:ClueBot Commons/Archives/2017/May

How do I get CB3 to ignore stuff on my talk page

It tried to archive my introduction, trout button, etc. I tried putting its instructional code down below the stuff I wanted to keep, but it even archived its own instructions!

My current code is {{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis |archiveprefix=User talk:L3X1/Archive2 |format= %%i |age=200 |maxarchsize=150000 |numberstart=1 |archivebox=yes |box-advert=yes }} Thanks. d.g. L3X1 (distant write) 19:59, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Place the code near the top of your talk page, before any sections. If you want to keep certain sections around longer, use {{DNAU}}. If you want to keep heading sections around permanently, either elevate them to heading level 1, or use {{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|2147483647}} in those sections. -- Cobi^(t|c|b) 20:42, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

HI

Butterball873 (talk) 18:39, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Great

Uh-oh ClueBot is reverting vandalism, with vandalism. —JJBers 03:38, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

@JJBers: Although I'm not a ClueBot admin, I fully know how ClueBot works. It evaluates others' edits with an ANN score, and if that falls above a threshold, it automatically reverts all edits by the user who made the edit to the last version by a different editor (essentally in the same way as the rollback tool). For this reason, it might not revert all vandalism on the page, especially if multiple users vandalize a page quickly in succession and no other human user has reverted the earlier vandals, as your link has shown. I know that ClueBot has several maintainers who check for and report false positives, and I suppose they often detect unreverted vandalism in this way too, just as you do. Good catch! ««« SOME GADGET GEEK »»» (talk) 04:20, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Despite what some people believe, ClueBot NG was never meant to replace human vandal fighters. CBNG's job was to reduce the workload of said users. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 20:37, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Cluebot III is down.

Cluebot III is down, maybe someone should fix that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Terrariola (talk • contribs) 11:51, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Terrariola Can you explain what you mean? CB3 is still operating in its archive functions. d.g. L3X1 (distant write) 02:23, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

"The current status of ClueBot III is: Not running - last edit was User talk:L3X1 5824s ago" Terrariola 06:30, 16 May 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Terrariola (talk • contribs)

ClueBot 3 is rarely "running" it does what it needs to do and then stops. 5824 seconds is just a little more than an hour and a half. I thought you were referring to the time it broke not to long ago and didn't function as planned. d.g. L3X1 (distant write) 18:22, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

A question

What happened to Cluebot II and Cluebot IV to X? Terrariola 08:03, 16 May 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Terrariola (talk • contribs)

I believe ClueBot II is actually ClueBot NG, (Next Generation), and that IV-X have not yet been developed. d.g. L3X1 (distant write) 12:43, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

@Terrariola and L3X1:

• ClueBot II used to mark WikiProjects as inactive if their main page or talk page hadn't been edited in over 60 days. It was also tasked with removing redlinks from WP:SCV and cleaning the sandbox. (Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/ClueBot II)
• ClueBot IV used to clerk and archive WP:OP. (Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/ClueBot IV)
• ClueBot V used to be a New Page Patrolling bot, and it would automatically add maintenance or CSD tags to articles. (Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/ClueBot V)
• ClueBot VI used to clerk WP:CHU/U. That page is now clerked by AnomieBOT. (Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/ClueBot VI)

All other ClueBot names, up to X, appear to have been reserved for future use. All other ClueBot names appear to have been created by vandals.

P.S. L3X1, I expected you to do some research before saying CBII was CBNG... *le sigh* —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 17:26, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining, K6ka. I was planning on checking to make sure: my ES was will check to see if CB2 is actually a different bot. It is one of my shortcomings to speak first and research later, especially if I think I'm right >facepalm<. Would you mind taking a look at my draft User:L3X1/Cluebot NG and seeing if I have any egregious errors? d.g. L3X1 (distant write) 18:27, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

@L3X1: The [false positive] rate is currently set at 2%. {{citation needed}} —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 18:52, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#Jon.27s_head

User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#Jon.27s_head made me think you might want to be extra aggressive at biting edits with people's names in them. Siuenti (씨유엔티) 08:29, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

@Siuenti: ClueBot NG was down at the time the edit was made.

It's not the bot's fault. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 21:59, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

The CBNG feed for STiki is toast

and has been for some time? Is this a permanent change? Is Cluebot NNG on the way? d.g. L3X1 (distant write) 17:37, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Due to some issues in the relay causing it to not auth properly on reconnects, the servers got banned from IRC. I will look into resolving this when I have some spare time, but it's possibly time to look at others way of passing the high volumes of data. - Damian Zaremba ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:03, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

@DamianZaremba: You could also use the IRC server on the STiki machine (armstrong.cis.upenn.edu) if that's of any help. West.andrew.g (talk) 13:35, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

FYI — ClueBot NG is currently down...

...and it has been down for almost 24 hours now... 2601:1C0:4401:F360:B8DD:17E3:BAAB:24AB (talk) 11:57, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

@Cobi:

@Rich Smith:

I think they've fixed the bot in the past... 172.58.41.230 (talk) 16:46, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

I did try and get it back up... seems there is some issue with it - Rich^T|C|E-Mail 23:44, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

@Rich Smith: it could be an issue with the addition of the new filtering tool. Depending on how it's designed, the new tools could be interfering with the bots ability to find links. Gamebuster19901 (Talk║Contributions) 05:34, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

It should be back... apparently the core died and the logging super sucks in that area. Sorry it took so long, it's been a busy week for me. Apparently there's a few API changes we need to implement sometime shortly as well. - Damian Zaremba ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:57, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Page reporting that ClueBot is back. Do keep us posted. ««« SOME GADGET GEEK »»» (talk) 00:39, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Works in STiki. Time to Paaarty! Thanks so much for getting it back online! d.g. L3X1 (distant write) 21:57, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

However, I have noticed that I am tapping Innocent a lot more often than I used to, were any parameters changed?There is a disproportionate amount of displaying edits by advanced users over new ones and IPs. d.g. L3X1 (distant write) 22:04, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

• Party over. In STiki CBNG is still displaying 98 and 105 day old edits. d.g. L3X1 (distænt write) )evidence( 21:15, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

@L3X1: STiki isn't maintained by the ClueBot developers. You'll want WT:STiki instead. Although in this case, the reason why the ClueBot NG queue for STiki is still showing outdated edits is because ClueBot NG's internal IRC relay (Which passes on ANN score information about the edits it sees) is down, and the ClueBot NG queue for STiki draws from that feed. You should use the default STiki metadata queue if you want to catch any edits. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 22:22, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Is that the IRC Andrew was talking abotu yesterday on WT:STiki? d.g. L3X1 (distænt write) )evidence( 23:19, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

@L3X1: Yes. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 23:46, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Park Chanyeol

I made an issue at Park Chanyeol thinking it was "Simple Wikipedia". I'm sorry--186.54.20.86 (talk) 05:20, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

World War I music

My interns and I from WP:GLAM/PMML are working on adding public domain images from World War I songs in PMML's collection. The bot has reverted edits made to one of the song articles. Is there some way to have the bot skip Wikipedia articles on songs when the publication of the song occurred before 1922?

Your assistance is appreciated. TeriEmbrey (talk) 16:26, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi TeriEmbrey. Please report false positives made by the bot to this page.

Having the bot skip pages is undesirable because it allows vandals to go wild on those pages without fear of scrutiny by the bot. We don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater, do we? —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 19:07, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

A question.

I have a small "Opinion poll"-ish thing. Since Cluebot III is effectively falling apart, as expected since it was originally approved in 2007 (Ten years ago!) does anyone who will reply to this talk page section think Cluebot III should start being decommisioned soon? Just asking, I'm not actually requesting it to be shut off. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Terrariola (talk • contribs) 07:04, 30 May 2017 (UTC)