User talk:Cyberpower678/Archive 21

Archive 15

←

Archive 19

Archive 20

Archive 21

Archive 22

Archive 23

→

Archive 25

Senior Editor II

XY

ITV is showing them earlier than US broadcasts.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 14:22, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Got it! Thanks. :-)—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 14:26, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

User Analysis bug

I've noticed today that the edit counter isn't working properly. All that shows up is the left-side "Overview", the pie chart is missing and the tabs to view other pages (like monthly stats) don't work at all. Coinmanj (talk) 21:14, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Look over an edit that I made?

Hey Cyberpower. Since you're just about the best Wikipedia coder that I know and am willing to talk to, although this may be a bit different than what you usually do, mind if you look over this edit I made to Template:Unblock? Thanks, Lixxx235^{Got a complaint?} 13:40, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Looks fine from a coding stand point.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 13:54, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Edit count tool doesn't seem to count Flow edits

For example, none of my edits to Wikipedia talk:Flow/Developer test page seem to be counted by the tool. Wbm1058 (talk) 16:43, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

I've spoken with the devs. Flow is running on a completely separate database outside enwiki. I have schematics, so I can implement it, but the function will only be available when the actual database is available.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 01:37, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Unblock requests stuck

Someone has reported at AN/I, which led me to Category:Requests for unblock - the table appears to be stuck in the past and has a label saying to bug you about it. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:25, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Rebooted the script. Should be using the latest framework which should allow it to not stall.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 18:45, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Cyberbot II likes to "pounce" ... waay too soon

Does Cyberbot II have ninja-reflexes or something? Or at least, ClueBot NG reflexes? One of its tasks is to add the {{pp-pc1}} template to pages with said page protection settings, but does it really need to add the template seconds after the protection is applied? Edits like this one is more disruptive than constructive in my opinion. The bot's edit got in the way of rollback, forcing me to manually revert using Twinkle. Or how about this edit, where the bot tagged the page 8 seconds after the protection was applied. Less than a minute later, the administrator managed to add the protection template using Twinkle, but soon the page simply wound up with two of the same template. However, (with the help of popups) while CBNG can revert edits one second after they're made, and tools like Huggle can revert edits three seconds after they're made, human reverts within 10 seconds aren't that common, and this bot tags pages 10 seconds after it sees a page with pending changes protection protection-template-less. Such speed is unnecessary, in my opinion, since it usually just gets in the way and offers no real benefit. I would suggest a grace period of maybe 60 seconds to 5 minutes, especially considering that most edits that remove the template are done by users who haven't hit the auto-approval margin. Reviewers and admins certainly know what they're doing, and malicious edits from autoconfirmed users are rarer. And besides, if an IP or non-autoconfirmed user removed the template, it's not necessary for a bot to pounce on it, since most readers aren't going to see the missing template - heck, the vandalized article - anyways.

I hope you take this into consideration and hold the chains back on the bot before it jumps, so it doesn't get in the way of recent changes patrollers. --k6ka (talk | contribs) 02:00, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

You pointed out a stale edit. If protection is applied, it waits 5 minutes before applying the template. That update was implemented after the mention 8 second gap edit. As for waiting to re-apply the template, might have to do a bit of creative thinking.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 05:14, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Additionally, could there be a 5-10 minute delay before readding the Pending changes template? There have have been just a few instances of Cyberbot immediately adding the protection template immediately some vandalism, and it's rather annoying to manually revert rather than just rollback. It's doing a great service adding the template, but just tone it back a bit for the vandalism patrollers. ^^ Tutelary (talk) 17:19, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Quoting from my previous response, "As for waiting to re-apply the template, might have to do a bit of creative thinking."  :-)—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 20:02, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Cyberbot II wait time

I thought you fixed this? Could it be related to the above? Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:58, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

No it's not. I thought I fixed it too.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 07:19, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

It's the only time it's done it to me since I last spoke to you about it. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:27, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Might be a glitch. It may have processed the protection timestamp incorrectly.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 07:28, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Supercount

Hello Cyberpower678, is there any plan for the User Analysis Tool to create a possibility that the texts will be adjusted in the native language of the user? Or have those who want to look at the contribution statistics command of the English language? It would be nice if you'd leave me a reply on my talk page on the German Wikipedia. I hope my english is good enough that my question is understandable for you. Thanks in advance. --Lómelinde (talk) 13:25, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the information. :-) --Lómelinde (talk) 05:18, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Cyberbot II double tagging

Cyberbot II seems to be acting up. It is currently adding the PC template to articles that are already tagged. --Bongwarrior (talk) 18:24, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

How weird. But if it's doing that. You should just disable the respective task on the run page then notify me about.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 18:31, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

The bot has now done this to about 700 pages. I've disabled the task (I think correctly). SiBr₄ (talk) 19:13, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

I reverted you. You're late to the party.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 19:20, 14 July 2014‎ (UTC)

Since you did not report anything here I assumed the problem was still ongoing. Though is the bot going to remove the double templates again itself or do its edits have to be reverted manually? SiBr₄ (talk) 19:26, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

The problem was still ongoing as of an hour ago, and it seems to have tagged a number of pages which are not PC1 protected. I'll recheck, but I'll revert the task if I see any errors after the restore. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 19:49, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

It stopped when I shut down PCBot. PCBot can do up to 10 runs per minute, so if the malfunction was still happening, we'd be seeing by now. Also please don't {{unsigned}} me on my own talk page. Also since PC bot checks for the presence of the tag it can't see if there are more than one tag. So it has to be reverted by hand. Which is something I can take care of with a careful mass rollback.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 19:54, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Sorry. I see you're cleaning up. I wonder if a more complicated bot could check for the presence of more than one tag.... — Arthur Rubin (talk) 20:09, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Probably. I may need to rewrite the bot script powering PCbot.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 20:13, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

 Done I rolled back every single one of those 700 edits it made.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 20:35, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Suggestions for supercount

Great tool! I used to check my edit count vary rarely but now I seem to be using your tool for curiosity sake more and more. There were some major bugs early on when using Chrome but it seems to be resolved.

Couple suggestions:

• Could you reverse the display order of the monthly counts? In other words, showing most recent months at the top and the earliest at the bottom? For both the monthly charts and monthly tables. I find myself scrolling down through data that never changes to finally get down to the only thing on the page that does change. Makes sense no? You wouldn't want user contribution histories or page edit histories to do the same thing right?

• Extend the monthly breakdown of namespaces to the total edits by the user, instead of or in addition to the pie chart.

• Add a link to Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits. Anyone checking their own edit count would likely be interested in this list also.

Thanks for your time and efforts. --RacerX¹¹ Talk to me^{Stalk me} 16:39, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

• Yes
• I'm not sure I understand.
• No. This is a global tool and therefore a link to enwiki is inappropriate.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 06:29, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

My contributions

Hello, I would like to know if it's possible to add contributions from an old account to a new one excluding user pages and talk pages. My old account Jerm729 I retired recently in favor for a new account, but I would like to take credit for my edits on articles, templates, and creations of articles, and templates. -- Cheers -- JudeccaXIII (talk) 05:51, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Nope. You should've just requested a rename, and a crat would've renamed your account for you. You still can if you ask. Go to WP:USURP to request a username change.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 05:56, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

I completely forgot about that. I messed up. I changed my email and password to that account where I can't have access to it. I basically locked myself out. Thanks for your quick response though. -- Thnx -- JudeccaXIII (talk) 06:16, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

User Analysis Tool for multiple projects?

Hi cyberpower678, I'm quite a fan of your "Supercount" User Analysis Tool. Any chance there's a simple way to tabulate a user's combined stats for multiple projects (for example, en.wikipedia plus commons.wikimedia), similar to how we can combine multiple usernames? Thanks very much if feasible, either now or in the future. —Patrug (talk) 02:11, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Patrug: I asked Cyber this same question a while ago, and the explanation was that it would require a fundamental rewrite of how the tool works now, and isn't something to expect soon. In the meantime, however, I've found Luxo's Global Contribs tool which provides a total, but not too many stats. That tool is also at the bottom of the Wikipedia contributions page, as Global contributions.—LucasThoms 02:19, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Also, there's CentralAuth, which, for people with a lot of edits, is usually faster than any other. —LucasThoms 02:24, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

LT, thanks for those two alternatives, though they're certainly less detailed than Cyber's. I was hoping Cyber might have a way just to run Supercount in the background for multiple projects and then display the combined results. (I suppose if similar questions are asked frequently enough, it's more likely to become a future feature..)

Cyber, thanks anyway! It's already a terrific tool, and I'll eagerly look forward to your future efforts. —Patrug (talk) 03:34, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Any idea why Cyberbot is not picking up the class= from yEd in its book reports?

I am very appreciative of the Book: quality reports that Cyberbot creates and updates, and (for the books I've put together) I have been trying to fill in the missing assessments to give me a better idea what needs more work. I've noticed that one particular article, yEd, has two (matching) assessments that are not picked up by the bot (for instance in Book talk:Graph Drawing). I'm sure this is a problem with the talk page templates there rather than something the bot is doing wrong, but I just can't see what it is. Any ideas? —David Eppstein (talk) 17:56, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

I'm rather rusty on the book reports task. It's a task I took over and having been pushing minimal maintanance to. Perhaps Headbomb, who assisted in the initial development of the task can be of better help than me.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 18:02, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Scottywongs tools

Do you know what happened to that excellent suite of tools made by Scottywong? Have they been migrated to labs? Most important were the NPP stats, the NPP activity by user, RfA voter stats, and very important, AfD voter stats. I need this last one rather urgently. Cheers, --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:58, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Scottywong and Sigma migrated some of them. You should talk to them. However, I believe have an unmigrated copy of scottywong's tools if they don't exist that I may be able to set up if they haven't been migrated.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 09:00, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

I did that already, and Scott told me to contact you guys. He assures me that he released all the source codes. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:05, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

I was under the assumption he did it. I'll see if scottytools is still on labs. It should contain the unaltered version of his tools.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 09:11, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, much appreciated. I've looked everywhere on the lists of Labs tools but I can't find them. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:24, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

FYI, Cyberpower and @Kudpung:, I think everything linked from Template:RfA toolbox is working – including AfD votes and NAC of AfD's... For example Kudpung's AfD votes. See also WP:Wikimedia Labs/Toolserver replacements and mw:Tool_Labs/Collection_of_issues_after_Toolserver_shutdown#snottywong and you might want to coordinate with User talk:JackPotte#Snottywong's tools who, it appears, is also working on the tools. Mojoworker (talk) 15:35, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank very much for this. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:14, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Book talk:Chemistry

Hi! I noticed that the chemical reactions section of the chemistry wiki book has the acid page, but not the alkali page. I'm telling you this because it said "Report bugs and suggestions for improvements to cyberpower678." Also, I noticed that it had a section for common phases of matter. Maybe renaming that to phases of matter could make it more informative? I think that then you could add plasma to that section, which I always thought was very interesting. I hope that this wasn't about some other types of suggestions. Thanks for reading this, and nice to meet you! :) JonathanHopeThisIsUnique (talk) 02:14, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Unfortunately, those kinds of suggestions are not I'm here for. I run a bot that generates book reports based on information on the book pages. You'll have to make those changes to the book for the book report to update.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 07:18, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Bot Message error

I received a message on my talk page about having removed a deletion tag that someone had added to an article I created. I agreed with the deletion so blanked the page and added a speedy deletion tag, replacing the other deletion tag. So I guess I did remove it, but only in agreement of it. Being that I am the author of the article and it's only contributor I am under the impression that adding the speedy deletion tag and blanking the page as I did was the appropriate thing to do. (In the bot's message is directed me to post here if I felt the message was in error) Thx David Condrey (talk) 08:47, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

There is a deletion discussion present, so the tag may not be removed until the discussion is closed. That's why you were warned. You'll have to close the discussion first, then you can remove the tag.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 09:27, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Edit counter problem

It's not drawing its pie charts for me. Regards, Wbm1058 (talk) 00:13, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

No pie charts for me, and no bar charts, either. Any help you could provide would be appreciated. Howicus (Did I mess up?) 03:38, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

It appears a new namespace was added. 2600 (Topic), which is a new flow namespace is not defined on the tool. That's the cause. The solution is to define it. Unfortunately that won't happen until Sunday evening (UTC) at the earliest. Sorry guys, I have limited internet resources right now, so I can't really do much at the moment.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 07:15, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

(tps)Thanks for the prompt answer. No rush.--S Philbrick(Talk) 14:12, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Aaaaah. (Ugh, Flow. Disgusting name for a disgusting thing.) Yngvadottir (talk) 20:49, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

And  Fixed—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 10:11, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Removal of non-free file from book talk by Cyberbot I

User:cyberbot I removed File:BornToDieAlbumCover.png from the list of non-free files on Book talk:Born to Die – The Paradise Edition and Book talk:Lana Del Rey even though the file is still in the article Born to Die (Lana Del Rey album), which is part of both books, and the file is still non-free. What happened there? Littlecarmen (talk) 09:52, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

I honestly don't know what happened there. Noombot's scripts are something I'm going to rewrite at some point so I can maintain them better.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 10:37, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Tools

Hi Cyber. Forgive me if I'm expressing my concerns here but I really can.t be bothered with signing on for yet more accounts such as at GitHub (whatever that is, and I don't really want to know - I've even given up with Bugzilla)).

The Tools were userped from the ToolServer and migrated to Labs for whatever reason the Foundation thought fit. I 'm not really concerned with that either, but I was kinda expecting all those extremely useful tools to be migrated (and in a way that would be easy to follow and find), rather than this be used as an excercise for the Labs devs to redesign them.

One of the most often used tools is the edit counter and I'm now very disappointed in its revamp. I believe in if it ain't broke, don't fix it, and what we now have is a collection of separate pages, the loss of the pie chart, and the loss of the extremely clear overview that was provided by the vertical editcount summary with its mouseovers. The edit counter is not simply a vanity tool; it's used as an importance source for admins and other maintenance workers who really need to have this oververview displayes as clearly as possible and in just one click. I'm not sure how these redesigns take place but I assume there hasn't been significant community input whtere or not these so called 'improvements' really enhance our workflow. I'll bring this up at Wikimania next week but Anything you can do to respond to this request would be most appreciated not only by me but by many who have not taken the time to express their opinion. Cheers, --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:49, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

GitHub is a public source code repo and also a great place to report and manage bug reports. It's a better layout than Bugzilla for sure. The pie chart isn't gone. See three sections up for that issue as well as the monthly charts. Regarding the community input, you are number 2 to file a complaint regarding the new design. I have received many positive reviews both email and on wiki, so I would say consensus likes it. Also the edit counter was very much broken utilizing PHP code that would soon not only be deprecated, but no longer function. There's more details described in the FAQ. Cheers.—cyberpower ^Chat_Offline 04:03, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

I really appreciate your reply Cyber, if the code was broken, then of course repair it - I understand that of course but what has been happening to these tools is not so much a 'consensus', but new iterations of them being thrust upon the community at the whim of just a select view of devs who 'think' they know what the community wants - we get this often enough from the Foundation who are extremely hard to convince even after massive consensus that what they have forced upon us is not wanted. (We do get some good things, such as for example the Neww pages Feed / Curation toolbar for NPP_, but I was largely instrumental in making sufficient noise to get something like it developed, and many of my ideas for it were adopted, but most of this took place through personal meetings with the devs, senior WMF staff, and thos who use it). Bottom line is, where 'repositories' such as GitHub and places ,like Bugzilla are too far away from our home ground here at en.Wiki for most people to know where to comment even if they wanted to go through the rigmarole of registration, passwords, usernames, and another bookmark to add to their browsers. Hence I do not consider that the positive comments you may have received about the new edit counter are representative of the community. I will get my best feedback at Wikimania next week where I will probably start an impromptu track about Labs. PLease understand however that I am in no way criticising all the hard work you have been putting into this Labs vs ToolServer debacle and I do hope that if you are going to London we'll be able to sit down over a beer and discuss it. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:34, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

The code wasn't even worth fixing. It would've cost me more effort to fix it, than to just write a new one, with the modern PHP being used from the start. I maintained X!'s edit counter, as well as other tools from X! as long as I could. But the code was causing too many issues and xtools kept hanging up. A rewrite needed to be done, and during the rewrite we applied newer HTML. So we also redesigned it. Unfortunately, London isn't on my schedule, so you'll have to toss me a beer. Also with GitHub, I can keep better track of my todo list than I can with posts to my talk page, but users are still certainly welcome to post here. :-)—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 13:45, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Well, php isn't part of the code that is responsible for a user friendly graphic display, and I haven't noticed any useful new features in what has been rewritten. FWIW, the tool is down now anyway and the instructions are to leave any feedback here. What puzzles me is why software devs always release unfinished products instead of leaving old familiar programmes up and running until they've finished whatever wheel they are in the process of reinventing. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:05, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

I consider this more user friendly than the other version. And the edit counter isn't unfinished, it's just constantly getting new features.

Thanks for everything - I'm sorry if it sounded as if I was bitching, you were probably working on it while I was desperately needing to use it for some RfA stuff. We'll have that beer one of the days :) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:34, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Agreed. And yes, I was working on it.  :-)—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 18:45, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

The who what now?

Thanks for making the edit counter work again, so I can slake my curiosity before the end of the month about how out of whack my edit percentages are getting and how much of a bump I got from my annual vacation :-) However - "The project parameter is going to be changed. The .org will be dropped. This means that for faster operation, you should append the .org to the project parameter. What do you have to do? Nothing really. The .org will also be maintained for backwards compatibility, but the tool runs slightly faster if the .org was added directly to the parameter." Umm ... wot? where? do what that I don't really have to do? Eh? I'm sorry, you lost me at "project parameter." Are they monkeying with the URLs again? Yngvadottir (talk) 17:55, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

You know the part in the URL where it says project=en.wikipedia? Change it to project=en.wikipedia.org. That's basically what it's saying but you don't have to.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 18:09, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Perhaps the confusion is because many of us arrive at the edit counter from the links at the bottom of a user contributions page such as on Special:Contributions/NebY. Twinkle provides more such opportunities. I bet most users never use the URL so they can't figure out what the Important Alert is about, what they're being told to do or why it's important if they don't have to do anything or.... Maybe it could be changed to something like "Alert. If you use a URL to access this tool, it will soon run a little faster if you add .org to the project parameter (for example, project=en.wikipedia.org). But if you access it from an "Edit Count" link, you don't have to do anything." (Probably shouldn't add "because there's nothing you can do, bwahaha" even if it would be more accurate.) NebY (talk) 22:57, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

I'll just remove the alert. It supports both en.wikipedia and en.wikipedia.org. en.wikipedia is only .25 seconds longer.—cyberpower ^Chat_{Limited Access} 06:13, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Ah, that is a rather more elegant solution. NebY (talk) 08:33, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

phpwikibot

Hello sir,

After I have installed xampp which contains all of apache, mysql and php, Id like run a php bot, can you please show how to edit Config.php & Phpwikibot.php to run the bot. Must they be put in php folder ? Whats is the command ? Is it Config.php, I already had python bot, the python is too easy to run, but php a little complicated, the auther is not exist anymore, now I just need to succeed in login. Thanks--BeGC (talk) 11:39, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure why you're asking me how to operate Phpwikibot.php, since I don't maintain it, but it seems to me that you seem to be too inexperienced on Wikipedia and with PHP to perform a takeover. Also Kaspo hasn't edited for only a month. I hardly call that inactive. You need to talk to him first before even performing any takeover.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 16:59, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

User:Cyberpower678/RfX Report

Hello Cyberpower, Is it possible to Wikilink "Rfa" in RfX report page. When more then one RfA's are being run, then it will enable users to directly go to main WP:RfA page and see all nominations in one page. --Vigyani_talk^{ਯੋਗਦਾਨ} 13:29, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Sure.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 17:00, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

I tried but bot reverted me. --Vigyani_talk^{ਯੋਗਦਾਨ} 02:02, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

I didn't mean it that way. I have to program it in.—cyberpower ^Chat_Offline 04:38, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

ah okay. .--Vigyani_talk^{ਯੋਗਦਾਨ} 11:54, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Armbrust 3

I hope you don't mind I edited your comment as the {{hat}} collapsed the rest of the page included the entire neutral section and following opposes. I assume this was supposed to be a link to the talk page section or the like, so you might want to fix. PaleAqua (talk) 19:02, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes. I'm a little tipsy so...—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 19:25, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Error on automated comment

The page Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents is currently semi-protected.Gerry.y.ma (talk) 02:54, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

???—cyberpower ^Chat_Offline 04:35, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Help

Hi, I just don't get what is this ?. Please suggest how to over come such problem( on Uttar Pradesh's talk page). Thanks !--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ^☣ 10:12, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Get the link whitelisted, by following the instructions.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 10:19, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

 Done Thanks.--25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ^☣ 18:19, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Template for discussion

Template:Film-fiction, in your bot list, is proposed for deletion: Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2014_July_29

Supercount: The monthly table

Please bring back the monthly table of the supercount. I did not understand the alert: is it removed for good because of its "disgustiness" or have you just taken it away temporarily to do = to repair its layout? It was very useful for me, and as a semi-nerd I couldn't care less how it looked like as long as it worked. The percentages and other information is lost now. --Pxos (talk) 09:23, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

My idea was to fix it, but the current layout is incompatible with the new deleted edit analysis feature that I'm deploying soon, so I removed it for the time being.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 09:28, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

pong

Hey, you pinged on IRC? Legoktm (talk) 17:52, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Since flow is a global database, I was wondering if the edits are global as well. Example: I edit a flow board on dewiki. Will that edit show up on enwiki? If the answer is yes, then it's settled. If no, then how is are flow edits retrieved by wiki rather than global?—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 17:55, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Bot error?

Concerned that Cyberbot made a minor clerking error at WP:RFPP. See the "Del Yocam" section of the current revision of the page: an admin marked it as protected at 1124, and the bot said "it's not been protected" at 1136, even though actually it was protected at 1119. All dates are 2 August 2014; it's not a 24-hours-off error. Nyttend (talk) 21:27, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

The administrator claimed it was fully protected, so the bot looked for full protection. But there's only semi-protection, so it's technically not protected according to the administrator's claimed protection. No bot error here.—cyberpower ^Chat_{Limited Access} 05:18, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Misspelling in user message

"necessaryily" in the user messages left by the bot is misspelled. Example: [1]. Brianhe (talk) 06:02, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

OAuth Test Edit

This is an OAuth test edit made from the User Analysis Tool.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 18:52, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

"catimprove"?

Hallo, Can I suggest an enhancement to the bot's activities? In this edit it removed {{uncategorised}}. Fair enough, there were two categories: Category:Living people and Category:1989 births. Rather than just removing that tag, it would be brilliant if the bot could go one step further: If the only categories are any of "Living people", "nnnn births", "nnnn deaths", then add {{catimprove}}. (There are a few more much-less-common similar categories, for missing/unknown birth and/or death dates, but I'm trying to keep things simple.) Quite a lot of biographical articles have those categories, but they need more. I often add them myself while stub-sorting, using {{subst:L|nnnn|mmmm|Surname, Forename}} to add them and the DEFAULTSORT in a few quick keystrokes. I try to remember to replace "uncat" by "catimprove", but I don't always. An article with only those cats is effectively almost uncategorised: no indication of subject field, nothing to identify it to any editor or project working in a subject area as likely to be of interest.

So, there's a suggestion for making the bot even more useful. I hope it's of interest. PamD 18:01, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

AFAIK, that task isn't even approved, and I'm not sure why an editor keeps switching it on. Since I apparently haven't been hanged for it yet, I might as well file a BRFA to get the task approved and then implement the suggestion you suggested.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 07:12, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

autoreviewer→autopatrolled

I'm not sure if you know this, but your edit counter tool says that editors are autoreviewers, which is the former name for autopatrolled. Take a look at the counter for Wilhelmina Will: [2] Thanks Piguy101 (talk) 01:53, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

On a side note, you may want to adjust the wording of your "About Me" section on your userpage because I believe that you are missing a noun in "...I've been aspiring to simply become a better [editor?] that the majority of the community can appreciate and like." Piguy101 (talk) 01:59, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

The group really is still called autoreviewer in the software. We just changed its display name to autopatrolled. It's debatable which one is "right". Jackmcbarn (talk) 02:02, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, I didn't know that. Piguy101 (talk) 14:19, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Current AfDs

Current AfDs appears to be having some issues trying to redirect itself czar ♔ 01:46, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I also came here to point that out. It's frightening when one realises how much one relies on an excellent tool like this and is bereft when it disappears.  Philg88 ^♦talk 06:33, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Yikes. No one's pointed that out to me in all this time. :/ I guess I'll have to do some serious debugging.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 07:53, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Range contributions tool

The range contributions tool under Xtools seems to have stopped working:

Internal error

The URI you have requested, /xtools/rangecontribs/?lang=en&wiki=wikipedia&ips=24.236.0.0/16&limit=50&begin=2014-07-13, appears to be non-functional at this time.

Thanks, SpinningSpark 10:23, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

2014-08-14 07:37:34: (mod_fastcgi.c.2701) FastCGI-stderr: PHP Fatal error:  Class 'HTTP' not found in /data/project/xtools/public_html/RangeContribs.php on line 27

reported by the logs. I'll open an issue on GitHub to keep a note of it.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 07:42, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

It should be fixed now.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 12:47, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Cyberbot appears to be malfunctioning on some pages

CyberBot is posting the same message over and over on some pages. See here: Talk:Ascender Corporation. Jarble (talk) 21:07, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

It says it will remove the template from the main-page, but does not do that (maybe it does not understand it anymore after this edit?). I have removed the template from the main page - if Cyberbot has problems with it it will put it back, or leave it alone from now. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 10:51, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

It's a bug for sure, that I'll have to look at.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 12:45, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

 Debugging...—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 20:14, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Any clue why?

Cyberbot II is still hitting the spam blacklist on some occasions:

• 04:12, 19 August 2014 Cyberbot II (talk | contribs | block) caused a spam blacklist hit on Elena Sheynina by attempting to add http://my.mail.ru.
• 03:53, 19 August 2014 Cyberbot II (talk | contribs | block) caused a spam blacklist hit on Belfast Harbour by attempting to add http://belfast.ports-guides.com.
• 03:50, 19 August 2014 Cyberbot II (talk | contribs | block) caused a spam blacklist hit on Chris Bell (politician) by attempting to add http://www.political.com.
• 03:49, 19 August 2014 Cyberbot II (talk | contribs | block) caused a spam blacklist hit on Batik by attempting to add http://www.samuibatik.com.

In all these cases, the links are really there, and already there (so a re-addition of exactly the same link should not be blocked). I also tried it manually, taking the full link (http://my.mail.ru/mail/sekhmet_oko/#page=/mail/sekhmet_oko/info?), but I am not allowed to re-save. Either this is an issue with the MediaWiki software or something else is wrong. Anyway, can we think of a solution to get the remarks saved? Can the bot, when it detects it trips, nowiki the links? --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 06:21, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

This certainly looks like a MediaWiki bug. We should bugzilla this issue first before modifying Cyberbot. Right now, I'm trying to fix the spamming issue, and then AfDBot.—cyberpower ^Chat_{Limited Access} 11:26, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Have f*@ked up the log-links - but see https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=69775 --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 09:17, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Corrected deletion listing

This bot says that Mr Monk Gets on Board wasn't correctly added to the deletion log. But it was, with this edit. What, specifically, was wrong with the edit to the log on the 6th? -- Mikeblas (talk) 14:08, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

I honestly don't know. I have to do some debugging.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 18:58, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Cyberbot II edit loop on Indian removal

Hi there, Cyberpower678! There's a weird reversion loop at Indian removal involving Cyberbot II.

I set page protection so that edits by unregistered and new editors need to be reviewed, Cyberbot II and added a template. Unfortunately, anon IPs keep removing content (including the template) and when Cyberbot II readds the template it appears to be accepting the edits by the anon IPs, which then remove the template, etc.

Here is the page history

Thanks, BCorr|Брайен 16:25, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

I don't see anything that suggests that. See the blue highlighting on certain revisions? Those are accepted revisions. Non-highlighted revisions were never accepted.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 18:58, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Template:LSR need improvement

Template:LSR need improvement, name of the "article" parameter is misleading. My proposal is, We should have an optional parameter named "template_name". This should be used if article name is different from template name. Example at article Apache Geronimo the template edit link is not working probably due to edit (may be a good faith edit)

alternately somebody can run a bot to fix issues like this.

--208.15.90.2 (talk) 15:36, 24 August 2014 (UTC) (~Anonymous editor)

Regarding the blacklist hits

Could you please have a second look at what link the bot actually parses out of the page, and which exact link it is trying to save? It appears that all these links have an unusual character at the end (some are ending in a '.', others ending in a '?'. I was able to save a page with the link, but it seems to break elsewhere. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 06:14, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

See also: diff and others to that page - it does seem to work but CyberBot II seems to have an issue with it. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 06:45, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

It actually reads the DB. So there is an issue with how MediaWiki stores the link.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 17:00, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

It gets weirder and weirder then - I now wonder what triggered my blacklist-hit, where it is breaking then. Let me try something. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 06:32, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

OK, it turns out that 'bare linking' ('http://www.example.org') gets differently interpreted than the 'proper' way of linking ('[http://www.example.org text]'). See:

• http://www.example.org?
• link

In the former, the '?' is not part of the clickable link, in the latter it is. If the original link in the document is as the latter, and you try to put it as the former (as you do in the templates) it results in a blacklist hit. I have the feeling that they see this as a feature, and not as a bug, so I am afraid you'll have to work around it for the 4 pages (all 4 links have this type of 'problem'). --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 07:43, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Even funnier, in the latter example, the link is converted to 'http://www.example.org/?' ... --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 07:44, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

I do have a suggestion. You could temporarily whitelist it, modify the links accordingly, and de-whitelist them again. That should fix this problem.—cyberpower ^Chat_Absent 18:53, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Not necessarily - maybe the '?' is intended .. I think that modifying the bot to safe the template with '*[<link> <link>]' is a more permanent solution to the problem. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 04:14, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

If nothing comes after the ?, it's certainly not intended. The ? is a seperator so the browser can interpret what is URL and what is a GET parameter. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php? == https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php for example.—cyberpower ^Chat_Absent 15:18, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Supercount date range

Does supercount have the ability to filter by date range? In particular I want to see "most edited pages" during a certain date range, rather than for all time. (In particular since 1/1/2014 to the present)Gaijin42 (talk) 21:57, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Not yet, but it will in the future.—cyberpower ^Chat_Absent 18:53, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Deletion afd tag

Was the deletion of the afd tag wrong, given the consensus on the deletion talk page? Contributorzero (talk) 16:56, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

redirect expand service

Dear Cyberpower678, some time ago an url-shortener service was blacklisted on meta, resulting in cross-wiki 'disruption', and de-listing of the redirect service. Do you think the following would be feasible by bot:

• take all links using a certain redirect site
• Expand them to the original link and then:
  • either replace the original shortened link to the final target
  • Or, IF the link is pointing to a blacklisted site, comment out the original and tag the page

Optimally, the bot should operate on a list of 'to be expanded shortening sites' and not on all links, there are some exceptions of shortening sites that should NOT be blanket expanded (dx.doi.org is one of them).

Overall, the aim is transparency of where one goes, and to be pre-emptive in case the redirect service got abused (have them replaced so it can be blacklisted without 'disruption' and maybe even with reason). --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 09:36, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

You may want to email me while I'm on a Wikibreak. I happened to notice this by chance. Do I think it's feasible, perhaps. I have to study how the URL shortener works. If it can trace the location of the target it would be feasible. Upon returning to Wikipedia, I plan to overhaul Cyberbot's I and II, and expand Cyberbot II's functions.—cyberpower ^Chat_Absent 15:42, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

If your browser can do it, then a bot can do it as well. LiWa3 and COIBot just load the header of the page linked to, that results in the DNS servers and redirect servers to give you the actual url the requested 'document' REALLY resides on. In perl:

$diffFetcher = LWP::UserAgent->new;

$output = $diffFetcher->head($link);

$link2 = $output->base;

if ($link2 eq "") {

$link2 = $output->header('Location');

}

$link is the shortened link, $link2 is what you want here, that is the final destination. You can even force it to stop halfway for a multiple-redirect (you have to set parameters for the diffFetcher.

$output->status_line is also informative, that contains e.g. '404' if a page does not exist and other info.

There's no hurry, keeping this on-wiki is more transparent. I don't have to break your break by mailing you, and I presumed you would read back your talkpage when you return. Have a good one! --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 03:53, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Bot error

FYI, the bot just put a message on the talkpage of Matt57 (talk · contribs),[3] a user who has been gone for years, and citing an edit made in 2007.[4] --Elonka 13:27, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

@Elonka and Keith D: Hi just letting you know I've spoke with Cyberpower678 off-wiki. He informed he is still maintaining his bots during his wikibreak, but any such inquiries may be best reported by email. — MusikAnimal ^talk 18:41, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

BOT problem

Hi, is there some sort of BOT problem as the same bad link has been reported 4 times today on List of villages in Gower? Keith D (talk) 23:46, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Miracle Mineral Supplement

Bot added {{pp-pc1}} to the page, but the template was already there. Not sure why it would add a second copy of the template. —    Bill W.    (Talk)  (Contrib)  (User:Wtwilson3)  — 22:32, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Bug with special characters in books

If you take a look at Book:Supernovae and Book talk:Supernovae, you'll see that articles such as SN 1054 – Crab Supernova ([[SN 1054|SN 1054 – Crab Supernova]]) get reported on the talk page as SN 1054 &ndash Crab Supernova. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 12:44, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Bot error

It's adding {{pp-pc1}} multiple times to the same articles [5]. -- Mufka ^{(u) (t) (c)} 09:33, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Blocked til it gets fixed. -- Mufka ^{(u) (t) (c)} 09:36, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Another example. In the diff, see the line immediately below the added line; also see the previous edit to that page. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:41, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

@Mufka: I've disabled the task that is malfunctioning and unblocked the bot. I've also emailed Cyberpower678 with this report as he is on wikibreak and likely is not aware of the issue. Best — MusikAnimal ^talk 14:24, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Halloween Layout

Cyberpower678, your new Halloween layout will be displayed from tomorrow to October 31st this year. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HarpBasedBand (talk • contribs) 13:28, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Supercount alerts

Hello! I think that there are now too many colourful messages (alerts, useful info, not so useful info) on the page of Supercount. The pie chart, which is the most important, is at the bottom of the page. Can you please collapse the banners, make them go away, or move them where they are not so dominating? --Pxos (talk) 17:23, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Low-priority bot issue

Low-priority is the reason I'm writing here instead of emailing you.

Could you have Cyberbot II say "not PC protected" when removing the {{pp-pc1}} template? In this edit, the bot removed the template after PC was removed, but the edit summary of "Page is not protected" was inaccurate because it was protected — an admin had recently switched from PC to semiprotection. Perhaps it could say "Page is not PC protected", "Page is not semiprotected", and "Page is not fully protected" when removing the protection template for each of them? It might be less confusing, and in my non-tech-savvy opinion, it wouldn't take extra work. Nyttend (talk) 03:32, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Thank you, cyberpower678, you are improving my article phineas flynn (talk) 07:29, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Secular Order of Druids

The Deletion Debate was already closed by an Admin before I removed that Template from the Article. "Before the Discussion was complete" my foot, if the Discussion wasn't complete, why was the thread closed? Are outdated AfD Templates meant to stand forever? At some point we need to be allowed to remove those Templates from those Articles that have already passed AfD with a Keep Closure. The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 04:52, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Hi, I don't think Cyberpower is around much at the moment, The Mysterious El Willstro. The notice was replaced by a bot created by Cyberpower. You're correct that the original AFD was closed, with the comment: "with no prejudice against speedy renomination". The bot replaced the notice, I think, because there is a second nomination at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Secular Order of Druids (2nd nomination), which it linked to in its edit summary. Begoon ^talk 06:43, 8 October 2014 (UTC)