User talk:HBC AIV helperbot/Archive 1

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

Welcome!

Hello, HBC AIV helperbot, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!  Will (Talk - contribs) 04:54, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Bot flag not set even though "bot" is in the name

If this is a bot, it needs to have the bot flag set. Will (Talk - contribs) 04:56, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello, please see Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/HBC_AIV_helperbot. This bot is approved for testing, but has not yet been given the flag. This info is on the bots userpage. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 04:58, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

List empty / not empty

Hey, great bot! Could you add a "list empty" or "15 entries remaining, ADMINS COME HERE IMMEDIATELY!!!" to the edit summary so I know whether I have to come and help when I see your bot on my watchlist? Kusma (討論) 14:36, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

In the works already, except for the part about talking in all caps. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 15:49, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Excellent bot idea! It caught one of my blocks just now. Grandmasterka 07:38, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Your edit to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism

Your recent edit to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 16:09, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I am watching it, I shut it down. Was about to revert it myself. Thanks. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 16:13, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I love it when bots fight ! Seriously though, great bot. -- No Guru 01:04, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

You think that is neat, an anon listed my bot on AIV for the blanking, and the bot tried to remove itself from the list(because it was blocked) and of course failed(because it was blocked). Now that is funny. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 01:11, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

That's hilarious. I'm preserving your above comment on my userpage for posterity hilarity. --Deathphoenix ʕ 17:49, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

It's now BJAODN'd. :) -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 05:56, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Suggestion to add more info to the edit summary

It's interesting to see the bot automatically remove the names after we've blocked them. :-) I'd like to suggest adding the block duration (and possibly the blocking admin) to the edit summary as well. I'd also like to see the AO, AC, and autoblock flags in the edit summary, but I don't think those show up in the block logs, so the flags would probably be harder to get. --Deathphoenix ʕ 16:35, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Block durations come in to many syntaxes for me to reliably catch them, unless someone has an amazing regex for me. As for the blocking admin, I am way ahead of ya. I am not sure how to find out what type of block it is. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 16:50, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

How do you extract the block information? Judging by your comment above, I'm guessing that you don't get the information from the block logs... --Deathphoenix ʕ 18:10, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

To answer my own question, your code uses Special:Ipblocklist which, yeah, has an expiry timestamp rather than a block time period as listed in Special:Log. The expiry timestamp could be put into the edit summary... though not as useful as "blocked for 24 hours" it's still useful. --Deathphoenix ʕ 18:20, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Ah yes. I can even have it compare the expiry time to the current time to list duration. I have my computer synched to the correct UTC time, and so is Wikipedia so they are within seconds of each other. I will add that to my list of planned features. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 22:47, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I see the block type flags are there as well. I will harvest that too. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 22:54, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I see, Ipblocklist also contains the block type flags. Most excellent. --Deathphoenix ʕ 14:32, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I have added the Bot flags, and now the time shown is the original length of the block. The Ipblocklist shows both the time the block was made and the expiry, from which I can get the original length. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 20:30, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Great idea

I love this idea, it is very irritatring to look into someones contributions and warnings only to find someone else blocked them ages ago. Viridae^Talk 21:15, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

It needed to be done. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 21:46, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I concur, well done. Mangojuice^talk 16:40, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Jolly good

Hello! You've no doubt noticed that your bot is successfully removing comments [1], but I shall nevertheless congratulate you on programming this feature and thank you for your hard work in general on this bot, which was an excellent idea and is saving much time. Cheers, Dar-Ape 22:27, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Noticed it, I programed it hehe. The real test is to see if it gets false positives or negatives when looking for comments. It was my idea, but others also had it before me. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 22:30, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Too fast

Yeah, I have a major complain. The bot is too damn fast. It removed a vandal from AIV the moment I blocked them. That is a major problem that I think you should look into. ;-) EVula // talk // ☯ // 23:10, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Sarcasm? I hope so. I can always slow it down... maybe once every 20 minutes? HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 23:19, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Seriously though, in it's current state it will check every 10 seconds and remove instantly a name it sees as blocked. It will not do anything for 10 seconds after writing. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 23:20, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Most definitely sarcasm. I have no problem with a bot cleaning up after me. :-) As long as it isn't putting too much strain on the server, I think every 10 seconds is fine. EVula // talk // ☯ // 01:55, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I just noticed the speed too. Thats fantastic, the bot does the dirty work. Viridae^Talk 06:46, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

My, this is quick. ;) Saw you register the name, the other day, and figured I'd be in for a treat, come a day or two. Nice work! Luna Santin 13:18, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Holy crap, is this thing fast! Good work! -- Merope 16:57, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Much congratulations. By the way, every time I see the bot's username, I can't help but think that the HBC stands for "Hudson's Bay Company..." :-) theProject 19:03, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Gee I hope it isn't a username violation hehe. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 19:04, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Edit comments

Just wanted to note that you are now exceeding the number of characters allowed in the edit comments. There's only so much information that can go in there. - TexasAndroid 21:03, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I saw that and shortened it, thanks. I will shorten it more(somehow) if it is a problem again. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 20:56, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

You could make it "rm <username>" instead of "<username> removed"; that's only five characters, but it is at least something. EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:00, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Good idea, done. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 21:14, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Question

• Have you thought about making a similar bot to check for pages already protected/unprotected over at WP:RPP? ;-) --Richmeister_talk 16:26, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
  • It is being done by others. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 16:30, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Jolly good. --Richmeister_talk 17:27, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

an unforeseen problem

Hi, a minor problem to report. Here the bot correctly removed a user as blocked, because it had no way of knowing that the user was being reported for a WP:NPA violation on his talk page while blocked. Got any ideas how we could prevent it doing this? Creation of a new template, perhaps, that the bot recognises as requiring manual removal? Blood Red Sandman Open Up Your Heart - Receive My EviLove 00:09, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm ... maybe there should be some kind of "miscellaneous" section on AIV, outside the bot's jurisdiction, to deal with this kind of situation? Newyorkbrad 00:21, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

WP:RFP is what you need for blocked users still editing. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 00:23, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

That's one place one can go, but the lagtime is often much longer there than on AIV. When a blocked editor turns his or her talkpage into (e.g.) a gross personal attack on the blocking admin, sometimes pretty quick protection is required. I've posted those requests on AIV in the past and had them granted immediately, whereas on RFPP they'd go to the end of a list of much more complicated article problems. By the way, this peripheral issue doesn't detract from the fact that this is an outstanding idea for a bot and extremely well implemented. Newyorkbrad 00:28, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, the whole bot relies on the assumption that blocked users should be removed. Either the reports can be made in a different format than regular vandals or in a different place(perhaps a subpage transluce into the page like bot reports). HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 00:31, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

That's what I had in mind. I guess this can wait a few days and see how prevalent an issue it might be. Newyorkbrad 00:33, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

The subpage being transluced seems like the best solution because then it will get all the attention it needs, and would not require any modification to my script. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 00:35, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

That sounds pretty good from here. Great bot, by the way! Blood Red Sandman Open Up Your Heart - Receive My EviLove 00:36, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Beautiful Bot

The bot has truly earned the flag. Very nice work HighInBC! Unfortunately I beat it once, as shown here :P...¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 01:38, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Yer fast. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 01:40, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Just wanted to pile on with more praise for this bot! Gzkn 04:28, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, this bot kicks ass. Melchoir 22:29, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations on getting the bot flag!

• Barnstar moved to my userpage[2]. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 15:36, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

---

Congratulations on getting the bot flag! Feel free to put this barnstar on your page or your owner's page, and please keep up the excellent work. You have already made WP:AIV so much easier for the blocking admins to use. --Deathphoenix ʕ 04:36, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

I can die happy now

I beat the bot.[3]

Pretty much anything else I do with my life will pale in comparison. EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:33, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Lol i saw that edit summary Viridae^Talk 07:30, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

RFE

I noticed on the RFE page "Fix header of page if altered." This is out of scope for your bot approval. If this feature is requested, please bring it back to WP:RFBOT. Great work on the rest though! — xaosflux ^Talk 07:46, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree with that, it is down on the bottom of my priorities due to that. I should make another section for features outside my scopt of approval though. Thanks. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 16:20, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

wow. the speed.

The list was empty by the time Firefox finished loading the page after I reported an IP... great bot :) --wj32 ^{talk | contribs} 07:49, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Doesn't always catch on

A couple of times it has missed indef-blocked troll accounts, like this one. Maybe it's missing accounts with special characters or something? I don't know. Grandmasterka 07:27, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

yep, I need to add a URI escape command before the name goes into the URL. Thanks for helping. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 16:37, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Fixed! [4] HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 15:44, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Missed one with a preceding space

Hi HBC, looks like the bot missed this one, perhaps because there was a space before the IP's name in the vandal template. Cheers, Deathphoenix ʕ 17:17, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm, the user used Vandal instead of IPvandal, and put a space infront of it. Well since names cannot have leading spaces, I will strip out any spaces before the name to catch this type of mis-posting. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 00:59, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Fixed! [5] HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 15:45, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Odd edit summary (i.e. does not like decimals in blocks)

[6]. The user is in fact blocked for 2.37685 weeks, or should be. Of course, I probably shouldn't have used decimals anyways, but I thought I'd point it out. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 17:43, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

(CCed to Consumed Crustacean's talk page)

Hi Consumed Crustacean, regarding your report on User talk:HBC AIV helperbot, the bot gave such a long edit summary because your use of decimals has screwed up the blocking mechanism. It's a weird bug, perhaps something we need to report? I'm going to repair the block, but at the time of this message, the IPblocklist gave the following account of your block:

• 17:41, 8 January 2007, Consumed Crustacean (Talk | contribs | block) blocked 68.254.181.254 (contribs) (expires 02:37, 24 February 2020, anon. only) (Unblock) (Repeat school based IP-vandal, with much activity recently. Anon-only block.)

Cheers, Deathphoenix ʕ 18:05, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

...and I thought I was hard on vandals... EVula // talk // ☯ // 18:28, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, it is shorter than indefinite... --Deathphoenix ʕ 18:37, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

It's precisely enough time for the students at the school, including those who learn at a slower pace, to graduate. Though seriously, my apologies for the inconvenience -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 21:43, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

My system has no problems with decimals in times, it would ignore anything less than a minute, good to know it was not my bug hehe. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 01:00, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Very nice work!

The bot appears to work rather fine :-) Just a comment, would it be possible for the bot to add {{indefblockeduser}} to the user page of indef blocked users? I know this is not in the scope of the bot, but it seems an easy to do modification. Cheers! -- ReyBrujo 01:55, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I would have to see a consensus that the {{indefblockeduser}} should be placed on all indef blocked users pages regardless of other factors. Also, indefinite does not mean infinite, it means not defined. Often users are indef blocked then unblocked. The unblocking admin may not realize the notice has been placed there and the user may not know that how to remove it or even if they are allowed.

This would better be accomplished with a different bot that could monitor all blocks, instead of just the ones that go through WP:AIV. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 02:00, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to revert you

Yes, the user has been blocked, but he is abusing the ability to edit his talk page, which is still vandalism. John Reaves 07:35, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Bot hiccup?

The bot seems to be not doing its job during the past several minutes -- I found myself having to manually remove AIV reports. :) -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 22:22, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I am looking into it. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 22:49, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

They went and changed to html markup on the mediawiki software. I will have to repair the regex's used by the mediawiki perl module. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 23:04, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

lol, I blocked another bot account of mine because the bot is going to run off wiki, and I fergot to disable autoblock. I didn't notice because admins are not affected by autoblocks, but the bot was. I fixed it. Took my a long time to figure it out. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 23:28, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

The R2D2 Award

I'm not an admin or anything, but notice what a great job this bot is doing. Its creator had better watch its back... "This mission is too important for me to allow you to jeopardize it." Raymond Arritt 05:27, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

RFE

In the bot summary would you consider changing the block time reported to the style used by the admin (e.g. 31 hours instead of 1 day, 7 hours) ? — xaosflux ^Talk 06:00, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

No sorry, there are too many formats that can be entered in, and it would involve me checking two pages instead of one. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 08:09, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

What page are you getting this from (the block log appears to be in the originating format)?— xaosflux ^Talk 08:22, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Special:Ipblocklist&ip=. What is more, a custom name could be something like this: 06:00, 13 January 2007 (UTC) +2 weeks and 8 hours. Which is too long for my edit summery(you can only put so much in there). HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 17:17, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Ah Ok thanks for the update, I was acutally looking out for the summary getting too long (e.g. expanding "99 hours" in to "4 days, 3 hours") but clearly see that odd ones could be really long. Thanks,— xaosflux ^Talk 18:07, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Toggling backlog?

Hi, great bot this. AIV has the following in its header:

{{adminbacklog}} <!-- {{noadminbacklog}} or {{adminbacklog}} -->

When removing entries, could the bot also toggle the backlog flag as is appropriate? That would be another human click saved... Sandstein 18:29, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

This has been suggested before, the technical aspects are simple, would only take me 10-20 minutes. However a few things need to be settled first:

1. A consensus as to what constitutes a backlog, how many?
2. Is this something the community wants the bot taking over?
3. I would also need to make a request to expand the scope of this bot's approval to operate.

So, if you can take care of the first 2, then I can take number 3. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 18:44, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Great! Insofar as (1) is concerned, I'd say about 15 entries, but you may also want to put this into a publicly editable parameter subpage so we may work this out by ourselves. As to (2), I for one welcome our new backlog-flag-toggling overlords, and I guess if people complain about it you can always shut the feature off. Sandstein 19:12, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Good idea regarding point 1. I will take up point 2 on the AIV talk page, I am sure it will be welcomed. Consider it my next project. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 19:18, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Bot down?

Is the bot down (or auto-blocked) again? It does not appear to be functioning. - TexasAndroid 19:02, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

See Wikipedia_talk:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism#Bot_Hiccup HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 19:28, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

A small, niggling and pedantic feature request

Rather than "1 IPs" and/or "1 Users" can the bot report "1 IP" and/or "1 User" if there's only one? Even IP(s)/User(s) would stop my pedant muscle twitching quite so much. I know, I know, I'm a niggling pedant. Tonywalton  | Talk 11:20, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Changed it to IP(s)/User(s). HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 18:47, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Tonywalton  | Talk 18:51, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

I may eventually make it say 1 day, 2 days, for each value, but that will have to wait till I am bored. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 18:53, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.