User talk:CricketBot/substubs

Latest comment: 17 years ago by Stephen Turner in topic Update

Longer list edit

This list has got rather longer in the latest version because the List of cricketers now includes players without Test or ODI caps, and even some non-players. I'm inclined to think it's useful to list them here too, but I could restrict it to just the Test and ODI players if people prefer.

Stephen Turner (Talk) 18:33, 29 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

Are we to take it that ones that have dropped off the latest list are "done"? -- ALoan (Talk) 14:58, 15 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
I've just updated the "Done" list. I found 35 that had been done but not moved across. Stephen Turner (Talk) 15:09, 15 February 2006 (UTC)Reply

Glitch? edit

Yesterday I moved Robin Jackman from the To Do to the Done list. However the date/timestamp at the foot of the page continues to read 13 April, and viewing the page's history shows no update since that date. Is something broken?

JH 08:28, 26 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

Nope. The date/timestamp merely reflects the updates to this particular page - which contains the contents at User:CricketBot/substubs/todo and User:CricketBot/substubs/done. However, when updates are done to those pages, that is reflected here by reloading and not by actual editing.
Hope that made a bit more sense. The bottom line is, Jackman is listed as done, and a good stub it is too. Sam Vimes | Address me 09:06, 26 August 2006 (UTC)Reply
Thanks. That makes sense. JH 09:37, 26 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

Update edit

I wonder - would it be possible for to repeat the CricketBot search that created the list? I suspect a lot of "to do" substubs have in fact been "done". -- ALoan (Talk) 18:08, 12 September 2006 (UTC)Reply

You're probably right. I'll try and get round to it soon, but no promises because I don't have much time at the moment.
I think I might do away with the "Done" section, because it often doesn't get updated, and it's hard to do automatically.
Stephen Turner (Talk) 09:32, 13 September 2006 (UTC)Reply
Fair enough - no rush; it would just be nice to see how far we have got. I agree about the "Done" section. Could the bot perhaps be set to repeat the search say once per month? -- ALoan (Talk) 10:27, 13 September 2006 (UTC)Reply
I like the "Done" column because it gives those of us who do a few of these encouragement that we are making progress, albeit achingly slowly. Johnlp 13:01, 13 September 2006 (UTC)Reply
I like it too, but the problem is that lots of them get done without being added to the Done column. And then I have to go through by hand and try and see which ones were on the previous Todo list but not on the new list. Stephen Turner (Talk) 13:33, 13 September 2006 (UTC)Reply
Well, the least I can do is offer to help: if you tell me when you're likely to run the bot, I'll make a copy of the existing To do list and stick it in my sandbox, and then I can do the comparison at my leisure (whenever that might be). BTW, a related problem is that some substubs have indeed been expanded, but not to anything that might resemble a finished article, often with only an extra paragraph, or less than that. I hesitate to say that we need a list of stubs, or a list of substubs plus stubs that goes up to about 1000 characters... And then there are those like John Morris (cricketer) where an enthusiastic (and to-be-encouraged) editor has put in acres about his flying career, but almost nothing about cricket. Johnlp 13:48, 13 September 2006 (UTC)Reply
Oh, I just moved him - his article is not a sub-stub any more anyway! -- ALoan (Talk) 14:18, 13 September 2006 (UTC)Reply

Doesn't the edit history give tell you which are "done"? Diff the original list to the current list, and there you are. -- ALoan (Talk) 13:52, 13 September 2006 (UTC)Reply

No, because lots of them change size as well. And some are added. And some have changed their names. Here is a real diff from an update. Stephen Turner (Talk) 14:39, 13 September 2006 (UTC)Reply