![]() | 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. |
Thanx 4 repairing Bank Medici 4 me. i don't know how i lost them in transit (copy and paste).
Furtive admirer ( talk) 06:55, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
I'd be happy to fix whatever problem is there, but I can't understand what's wrong with the references on the pages that the bot's messages are referring to. [1] Thanks, Reconsideration ( talk) 23:18, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
<ref name=skdhil/>
from some other article; AnomieBOT noticed that there was no definition for "skdhil" in
1940 in poetry, and found three different (but in this case, almost identical) possible matches in related articles. Since it can't tell by itself whether they are almost identical, much less which one is correct or "best", AnomieBOT posted the message on the talk page so a human could choose the right one without having to dig through all those related articles in the same way the bot did.
Anomie
⚔
01:25, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
The Citation Barnstar | |
Thank you for rescuing my ref! • -- MoHasanie ( talk) 20:02, 12 June 2009 (UTC) |
There are almost a hundred pages in Category:Pages with missing references list every day. A lot more than any one editor can handle. Many are new articles, or old articles which jave only now received their first reference. Some are vandalism or careless edits. Any suggestions? Debresser ( talk) 01:05, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
I thought we should just remove a reference because we can't find it. The bot did that here. I revertedit and fixed it here. I'll admit that no bot would be able to think of that, but Category:Pages with broken reference names says clearly "please do not delete the ref nor comment it out". Debresser ( talk) 21:38, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
I've twice started fixing a broken reference yesterday and today, and when I made the fix, I found you had already done that. Which may be a little frustrating, after spending sometimes 15 minutes on finding it. :)
What's with all other 220 articles? The bot will be able to fix them? Debresser ( talk) 13:01, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi, recently AnomieBOT moved some references from within {{ Graphic novel list}} to the lead on the article List of Hot Gimmick chapters. I then reverted, and AnomieBOT re-moved the refs, and left a note on my talkpage telling me to come here and leave a message. So, just so you know, WP:ANIME leaves refs in {{Graphic novel list}} on purpose, for several reasons, and AnomieBOT should not move them out (if you want more detail, feel free to ask). Thanks! 「 ダイノガイ 千?!」 ? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 17:59, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi Anomie, a problem with your bot. I'm currently working to improve the refs for Marshalsea. As I'm making changes, your bot is making others, which is leading to some confusion. Are you able to fix it so that it doesn't respond to my Marshalsea edits? SlimVirgin talk| contribs 23:15, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
The AnomieBOT removed external links, stub-type, categories and interwiki. -- Snek01 ( talk) 12:08, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi. In this edit, to First Harrogate Trains, the bot "fixed" the reference error simply by removing the second reference. However what I was trying to do was cite the same source in two different parts of the article. Despite following the instructions here to the letter, I kept getting the same error.
So now we have an article without an ugly error message but which is now lacking a citation..... -- RFBailey ( talk) 18:39, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
As the discussion has now been archived without anyone objecting, when the bot gets the chance (no rush at all), would it be possible to go ahead with the tagging run? That will be:
I'm pretty sure we've now weeded all the false-positive categories out. As discussed, there may be a few false positives from (for example) Category:King's College London, in that it may pick up people who briefly attended the college but otherwise don't have a strong connection (although I'd hope they're only in the categories if there is a strong connection), but any false positives can be manually removed when we go through the newly-tagged articles to assess the importance. – iride scent 20:13, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
I don't think W&M should be in the London cats - it's in Berkshire.-- Cavrdg ( talk) 17:09, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Striking my comments above – yes, Category:Buildings and structures in Windsor and Maidenhead is on the list and shouldn't be. I've shut off the bot; Anomie, can you do what's necessary to stop it tagging any more in this category – thanks. When I'm back at my desk I'll manually check all the Windsor & Maidenhead ones and un-tag if appropriate (given its proximity to London, some will be appropriately tagged). – iridescent 2 14:52, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. Can I take it the un-tagging review will happen in the next day or two?-- Cavrdg ( talk) 17:39, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Task. Thanks. AHRtbA== Talk 20:06, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
See the case [2]. This bot claimed an error and deleted my {{ Translated}} note. Why? I really translated a part of CS article. -- Franta Oashi ( talk) 15:50, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
Can you please fix refrences on Dubai Airport. Thanks -- MoHasanie Talk 01:51, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
Minor thing but thought if you work on this further, you might like to enhance the operation. When a page already has a {{ blp}}, it still adds another like this Talk:Roy_Shivers&diff=next&oldid=270415733. DoubleBlue ( talk) 18:44, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Anomie,
I would like to ask if it is possible to use AnomieBot for the following tagging tasks for the WP:Energy
1) Adding {{WikiProject Energy|class=category|importance=N/A}} to the talk page of categories under WP:Energy. As there are hundreds if not thousands categories (mainly because of countries series, like Energy in ..., Power stations in ..., Oil and gas companies of ... etc), I wonder if it is possible to search categories words and phrases in the category's name, such as "energy" (the only exception would be Energy drinks), "power stations", "power plants", "power companies" "oil companies", "oil fields", "oil shale", "oil sands", "petroleum", "natural gas", "oil and gas", "coal", "oil industry", "electricity", "electric power", "electrical power", "fuel", "fuels", "wind power", "hydropower", "hydroelectricity", "hydroelectric", "bioenergy". Probably there are more categories, but for start I think these are enough. Additional string could be if the category has {{EnergyPortal}} tag on the main page.
2) Adding {{EnergyPortal}} to the main page of categories tagged with {{WikiProject Energy|class=category|importance=N/A}}.
3) Adding {{WikiProject Energy|class=|importance=}} to all articles in the above mentioned categories, if they already don't have more precise assessment.
Do you think it could be done? Beagel ( talk) 13:21, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
There is a list about categories on the WP:Energy talk page, which would be better to be removed from the tagging list. Although most of these categories are belong to the scope of the WP:Energy, they also include other articles. Beagel ( talk) 17:37, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
{{#if:{{{autotagged|}}}|[[Category:Automatically tagged WikiProject Energy articles|{{PAGENAME}}]]}}
between the "}}" and the "<noinclude>" near the end of the template, and then having the bot set "autotagged=yes".
Anomie
⚔
02:05, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi there-
User:Legobot hasn't been running for quite awhile and its operator seems to be more or less inactive, at least for now. Since this bot manages holding cell updates and automatic closures at WP:FFD, I was wondering if it could do the same at WP:PUF? It works pretty much the same way, and having a bot is really helpful. Thanks! – Drilnoth ( T • C • L) 02:52, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
I've only just brought the discussion, but I may need your help on another round of WikiProject California related tagging. I've got a few questions first though. Is it possible to perform assessment based on the population parameter in Infobox settlement (I'm thinking population_total)? Also is there anything limiting the bot from tagging for multiple task forces on the same page? I'm looking at a couple daughter projects of the Southern California task force and wondering if there was any limitations to consider. I remember there were a few issues with the Southern California/Santa Barbara overlap on that last run. The new discussion is at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject California#Importance assessments of California settlement articles and Quality assessments. I'm trying to make this one pretty big so we don't have to revisit this every few months, and to limit the number of talk page writes by the bot. Thanks - Optigan13 ( talk) 05:01, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Ok, all the discussions are done and I've placed the formal wording with oldid links to discussions for the various consensuses at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject California#Task force replacement and assessment bot request. Here it is again for convenience
{{
WikiProject California|sfba=yes}}
.
Discussion{{
WikiProject California|la=yes}}
.
DiscussionFor the remaining ones see above for the discussion
Thanks again. Can AnomieBOT pull this off at the moment with all the various bugs and database issues? - Optigan13 ( talk) 02:21, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
Help! A section in Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2009 August 7 contains the "is_closed" regex but not at the beginning of the section. Probably someone put the {{ ffd top}} before a section header instead of after. Anyway, I can't do anything to that page until someone fixes it. When you have fixed this issue, please change the section title (e.g. append " - Fixed") or remove this section completely. I will repost the notice if the page is still broken or is re-broken. Thanks! AnomieBOT ⚡ 20:11, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Is fixing broken references one of the tasks that the bot can't do temporarily? I ask because I've been on a wikibreak, and found that the number of broken references had doubled from 225 to 450. Is there a timeframe when the bot will be able to resume this task? I've started fixing some, but every fix takes anywhere from 2-15 minutes, and there are just too many of them. Debresser ( talk) 00:29, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
Is it possible that one of your bots can tag all the project articles as stub-class which have the motorcycling stub {{ Motorcycle-stub}} in the articles for our recently formed assessment department? I estimate about 500+ articles use the stub. The talk pages that are already (mainly incompletely) tagged use the {{ Motorcycling}} project banner. If you are not the best person to deal with this, please advise me. Cheers ww2censor ( talk) 01:43, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
I notice that this bot automatically adds and removes the {{ adminbacklog}} template from WP:FFD (and possibly other pages). I recently suggested to User:Harej (owner of User:RFC bot) that a parameter be added to the {{ adminbacklog}} template to say it is updated by a bot as the message "Please remove this notice when the backlog is cleared." doesn't make much sense when a bot is doing the updating, so now use of the bot=name parameter produces the message "This notice is automatically updated by name (talk) and will no longer be displayed when the backlog is cleared". The template documentation has been updated. I'm not sure exactly how the process works on WP:FFD but thought I'd inform you of this change in case you considered it appropiate for your bot to use. Dpmuk ( talk) 10:38, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
The fix that has been done to: Pittsburgh mayoral election, 1965 Pittsburgh mayoral election, 1969 Pittsburgh mayoral election, 1973 Pittsburgh mayoral election, 1977 Pittsburgh mayoral election, 1985 Pittsburgh mayoral election, 1989 Pittsburgh mayoral election, 1993 Pittsburgh mayoral election, 2001 Pittsburgh mayoral election, 2005 and is probably going to be done to: Pittsburgh mayoral election, 1981 Pittsburgh mayoral election, 1997 is wrong. That source is election results for Pittsburgh mayoral special election, 2007 only. The problem is that the pages were originally copied from the 2007 page and the ref tags were not changed. 75.69.0.58 ( talk) 03:42, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
Help! A section in Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2009 August 25 contains the "is_closed" regex but not at the beginning of the section. Probably someone put the {{ ffd top}} before a section header instead of after. Anyway, I can't do anything to that page until someone fixes it. When you have fixed this issue, please change the section title (e.g. append " - Fixed") or remove this section completely. I will repost the notice if the page is still broken or is re-broken. Thanks! AnomieBOT ⚡ 20:09, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
You might want to have a look at this. [4] The Bot seems to have duplicated the text unnecessarily. It might have got confused because I copied the refs from Sérvulo Gutiérrez to Doris Gibson, where I found, after saving, that the link was already in use with the ref name "BBC" which I changed to "collyns", and the Bot came after me! Ty 02:34, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
The bot just broke just about every reference I have in List of Oklahoma Sooners in the NFL Draft ( here). It uses the new list-defined references function of {{reflist}} and I guess the bot doesn't like references inside of a template. Probably something that needs to be addressed.↔ NMajdan• talk 04:35, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
Help! A section in Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2009 September 20 contains the "is_closed" regex but not at the beginning of the section. Probably someone put the {{ ffd top}} before a section header instead of after. Anyway, I can't do anything to that page until someone fixes it. When you have fixed this issue, please change the section title (e.g. append " - Fixed") or remove this section completely. I will repost the notice if the page is still broken or is re-broken. Thanks! AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:08, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
Help! A section in Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2009 September 20 contains the "is_closed" regex but not at the beginning of the section. Probably someone put the {{ ffd top}} before a section header instead of after. Anyway, I can't do anything to that page until someone fixes it. When you have fixed this issue, please change the section title (e.g. append " - Fixed") or remove this section completely. I will repost the notice if the page is still broken or is re-broken. Thanks! AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
It seems so. I'm going to restart the stopped tasks, let me know if anyone sees any problems. Anomie ⚔ 20:44, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
Here (Line 14) I converted a bare URL used as a named reference to {{ cite web}} with a different name. I forgot to change other instances of the named reference to the new name (this is why I love your bot). AnomieBOT then rescued the orphaned reference name by restoring the bare reference from the previous version. Would it be possible to arrange for the bot to check the url= parameter or otherwise recognize a renamed and tweaked reference? Many thanks for your bot regardless, - 2/0 ( cont.) 14:22, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi, on the article William Stanley (Victorian inventor), the references in group "akpan" are all defined within the reflist (as per Wikipedia:Footnotes#List-defined_references). The bot left the references which were not in a group (i.e. all the others, which are also List-defined), but the group ones were all re-inserted (meaning that the full reference was both at the first occurrence and in the reflist!). Just thought I'd let you know, as this seems like a bug in the bot.
Regards, -- PhantomSteve ( Contact Me, My Contribs) 19:03, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
<ref name="akpan-12">Akpan p. 12</ref>
" as being in the default group rather than in the group named "akpan". Should be fixed now, if you see the same error after the timestamp of this post please let me know.
Anomie
⚔
04:03, 28 September 2009 (UTC)Hello, finally you can run this task from March 2009: Wikipedia:Bot requests/Archive 26#Robot for WikiProject Gastropods. After three months of announcing at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Gastropods#Bot task waiting for approving as you recommended User talk:Snek01#Re: Your email, the User:Invertzoo finally agreed User talk:Snek01#Your bot request. Thanks. -- Snek01 ( talk) 20:45, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
{{
taxobox|classis=
Gastropoda}}
should have the talk page tagged with {{
WikiProject Gastropods}}
.{{
WikiProject Gastropods}}
and lacking a "needs-photo" parameter should have that parameter set depending on whether the "image" or "image2" parameters in the taxobox are non-empty.{{
WikiProject Gastropods|needs-photo=yes}}
should have that parameter set to "no" if the "image" or "image2" parameters in the taxobox are non-empty.{{
WikiProject Gastropods}}
should be auto-assessed as follows:
OK. To other articles than above can be added just a text "importance=" {{
WikiProject Gastropods|importance=}}
and we will assess it by hand more easily later. ;) --
Snek01 (
talk)
10:57, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
To reduce edit conflicts, could the bot avoid editing articles tagged with 'underconstruction'? Thanks, Martin ( Smith609 – Talk) 10:02, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
The request link for your bot's SFBAProject edits is a redlink. Can you redirect it to whatever page the request was on? — RockMFR 02:59, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
Your bot has been causing a nuisance at Monarchy of Canada: Instead of fixing refs, it is destroying notes. Please regard the status quo before your bot's intervention: [5], and the result following [6]. I don't believe the notes are formatted incorrectly, as they appear normally at the foot of the page; so, I suspect the fault lies in your bot. But, please let me know if I'm wrong in this take! Cheers. -- Ħ MIESIANIACAL 17:40, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
I noticed that articles in [[Category:Coal County, Oklahoma]] have been added the WP: Energy, though they aren't related to that WikiProject. There are just a few articles in the category and removing them from the WikiProject isn't difficult, but there may be other unrelated categories that were caught that had "Coal" or something similar in their titles. Just wanted to give a heads up. Narthring ( talk • contribs) 04:41, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
I was trying to add a more complete reference than what was supplied. Thanks to you I'll have to try again tomorrow. Please refrain from interfering. 97.120.137.22 ( talk) 05:35, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
So your back again to fixing reference error, I see. And boy, am I happy with that! I was shocked to see how fast new broken references show up. Now that we are back to normal figures again in Category:Pages with broken reference names, I am trying to eliminate the last few instances. A few a day. In the last half hour I saw 5 new broken references! Debresser ( talk) 21:32, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for writing and running this bot. I can't tell you how often I've seen it identify and even correct reference errors. This project is better because of your participation. Will Beback talk 08:42, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
I loaded a file File:EE Berkeley 1968.JPG onto wikipedia, marking it not-free and noting it was copyright but that I had received permission to put it up on wikipedia. nevertheless someone marked it as possibly UNFREE and deleted it from my article (or it got screened out because tagged?). I see from the Possibly Unfree listing that you have added a note that unless there is another reason the listing will be deleted and the image kept. Do I need to do anything now to keep my image? Will the image be automatically restored in my article? (Sorry for these q's - am a relatively novice wikipedia user). Would appreciate reply to my talk, which I hope will happen with the box here,
{{
Talkback|DuncanCraig1949}}
thanks!
DuncanCraig1949 (
talk)
10:39, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
This a great tool, I would like to know if it is completely automatic, that is it will crawl every wiki page and fix orphan links or is it that it should be requested which pages to fix. In that case I would like to know how could I set it up and use it. Thanks. -- HappyInGeneral ( talk) 23:44, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
Do you know if you'll be able to restart the WikiProject tagging runs anytime soon? Also, what script/font support should I have for the last character in your signature? - Optigan13 ( talk) 21:45, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
I just noticed that there are still about 500 or so pages transcluding {{ SFBAProject}}. Do you think you could make another pass with the bot? - Optigan13 ( talk) 10:00, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
You did and re-did your edits to the Gary Allan[[ Link title]] article in the middle of vandalism repair. I have solicited for help on the vandalism that was done in numerous anonymous earlier edits. The repairs to vandalism are in progress. Wikibones ( talk) 20:30, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
Any reason why the bot didn't do this one as well? Debresser ( talk) 19:49, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
You should probably be aware of Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_National_Register_of_Historic_Places#User:AnomieBOT, if you aren't already. -- ThaddeusB ( talk) 02:56, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Is correcting citation style, such as the style on the page Avatar (2009 film), one of the tasks of this bot? Flash Man999 ( talk) 13:26, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
FYI, the bot failed to fix a mistake where I forgot "name=" in the ref. See here. The "fix" it applied made things worse. Colin° Talk 21:17, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
AnomieBOT,
I'm contacting you because of your extensive experience and special expertise with bots.
I wanted to get your opinion on an idea I had for creating new Wikipedia article stubs based on Public Domain Books hosted by Google Books. I got the idea when reading the Wikipedia Article on Wikipedia's Growth, link included here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Modelling_Wikipedia's_growth At one point in the article it mentioned that (Ram-Man) created an article stub for every town in the United States using Rambot in October of 2002. Here is the quote from the article.
"The sudden jump in article count in October 2002 is due to roughly 30,000 stub articles on U.S. towns and cities generated from a database being added by an auto-posting robot, Rambot, during an eight-day period. Although initially controversial as to whether these were "real" encyclopedia articles or merely "stubs", most of the Rambot articles have since been substantially expanded."
That got me thinking that other large data sets of notable and important information might also be worth automatically creating stubs for which can then later be expanded upon. With this information still fresh in my mind I was checking up on the progress of Google Books and noted that they are now hosting more than 1,000,000 public domain books as part of their Google Books project. http://booksearch.blogspot.com/2009/08/download-over-million-public-domain.html
I think it would be an incredibly valuable resource to have a bot like Rambot create, 1,000,000 stubs for the public domain books hosted on Google Books. This is a resource of already vetted and notable material, hopefully in a standard format at Google including author name, book title, year of publication, name of publisher, summary of the book and more.
Please let me know what you think of the idea and if you would be willing to create a special bot for the task. I'm happy to assist, but I lack the technical programming skill required to create the bot.
I hope to hear from you soon.
Sincerely,
OrangeCorner ( talk) 08:18, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
ThaddeusB, Thanks for your note as well. I agree it will absolutely be important to establish notability of the works. OrangeCorner ( talk) 06:17, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
AnomieBOT,
Thank you for the quick response to my message.
I appreciate the logical way in which you have presented the items that need to be accomplished before the BOT can tackle this type of project.
I agree with the path you have detailed and I will begin the process of, 1. obtaining access to the information in some machine-parsable format, 2. get permission from Google to access those synopses to be uploaded as part of the article (if there are synopses available which there may not be) 3. determine that any images are PD, for those synopses to be uploaded as part of the article.
I will work to accomplish those first three items on the list. They should just be a matter of time, negotiation, or workarounds. I agree with you that getting community consensus will be the most difficult part of the equation and I appreciate your offer to help write the proposal once the first three items are in place. I will certainly be taking you up on that offer.
As for use of BOTs I agree with you that they can be extremely useful in matters where pure tedium is preventing a positive contribution to Wikipedia. I certainly believe a project of this type falls squarely in that corner.
As for the question of notability I think it can be well argued that given these public domain books secured publication of hundreds or thousands or tens of thousands of copies they had an impact on enough people and other literature to be worthy of inclusion. As way of comparison if an American town of a few hundred residents is worth consideration given the effect it had on the lives of those people and all those who may have traveled through it, certainly a book which has achieved at least the same level of notice deserves the opportunity to be included and later expanded by those who it had an important effect on. Certainly just as we can't pre-judge the effect or history a small town had on the nation until its content is explored, neither can we fathom the importance of the literary history of our world until we open the page and see the connections to the other books we know so well. Just imagine the depth of knowledge it would give Wikipedia access to if we could summarize and map the timelines, connections, and authors of our literary history. In a way I see it as an opportunity to finally unlock the remaining depth of knowledge still outside of the internet. While Google may have scanned them in, only by linking them on Wikipedia to real world topics or other books of interest, could someone ever hope to find and unlock their value.
Again I appreciate the assistance and the detailed analysis of the tasks required. That is exactly what I needed to help kick this project off.
Talk with you again soon.
Cheers,
OrangeCorner ( talk) 06:14, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the helping hand. The errors were driving me crazy, and I was having no luck fixing them. 7&6=thirteen ( talk) 14:07, 4 December 2009 (UTC) Stan
Is this the right place to ask about renaming template transclusions?
We have a template {{ IPAr}} for transcribing pronunciations; nearly all of the 30k+ transclusions are automated transcriptions of Polish, using the |pl switch. It's hard to maintain these because they go beyond what AWB can handle. The template is now deprecated, and I'd like to move all transclusions with the pl switch, {{IPAr|pl|, to {{ IPAc-pl}}. Then I can go in manually or with AWB and mop up any remaining transclusions of IPAr.
If you spell out the relevant parameters for me so I don't screw up s.t. basic, I could do it myself, and maybe save you some time.
Thanks, kwami ( talk) 01:21, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
Ok, I'll run it per WP:SILENCE as no one but the creators cared to comment in the month since it was deprecated, with an edit summary "Replacing {{IPAr|pl}} with {{IPAc-pl}} per request. Errors or discussion? Post a note here to stop the bot." If anyone does object, I'll stop the bot until a more in-depth discussion takes place. Anomie ⚔ 15:06, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
Wow! 25,000 done already. Please make a note here when you're done, so I can clean up anything left behind. kwami ( talk) 01:18, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
If I give you a list of articles (not categories but the articles themselves), would you be willing to run a one-time tagging for WikiProject Trains? Thank you. -- NE2 01:26, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
|UK=yes
|UK-importance=
(the second is left blank for unassessed articles). --
Redrose64 (
talk)
22:27, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
{{
Infobox Closed London station}}
, {{
Infobox GB station}}
, {{
Infobox London station}}
, {{
Infobox UK disused station}}
, {{
Infobox UK heritage station}}
. That won't cover every UK railway-related article, but it'll catch the vast majority of the stations. Further, any talk page which already has {{
WikiProject London Transport}}
is highly likely (>99%) to be UK, whether or not it's a station. Consider
Talk:Bakerloo line, for example. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
22:55, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
The bot incorrected fixed reference errors here on the Bolton article. Although the references had different URLs, the bot gave them all with the name "ref". I've now corrected them. HLE ( talk) 16:05, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Hey there, I noticed that this bot maintains the old discussions over at
WP:FfD. I was wondering if it could be possible for AnomieBOT to do the same for the holding cells over at
WP:PUF. The bot that used to carry this task,
Legobot (
talk ·
contribs), hasn't run since November 20; its owner,
Legoktm (
talk ·
contribs), hasn't edited since October 21. It would be amazingly helpful for the bot could be set up to do this. I update the list most of the time, but tend to forget and am too lazy for the file count.
Is there any way this bot could be set up for this task? —
ξ
xplicit
05:51, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
Really cool feature, nice work! -- kingboyk ( talk) 19:00, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Seconded. This has just rescued a reference I had carefully created and which had then got inadvertently removed. Very clever! Thincat ( talk) 21:28, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Yes, very well conceived and implemented. ATren ( talk) 13:11, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
I'd like to draw your collective ( User:Rich Farmbrough and User:AnomieBOT) attention to the last three edits on 2006 Iditarod. I think this type of mistake can be easily avoided by AWB aided tools, and bots can easily fix them. Thank you for your efforts. Debresser ( talk) 12:34, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
Another type of fix that a bot or other tools can easily fix is this trivial one. Debresser ( talk) 12:40, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
And yet another easy type in this edit. Debresser ( talk) 12:44, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
Just out of curiosity, is there any particular reason for removing references from templates? Yours aye, Buaidh ( talk) 18:47, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
Hello there Anomie...BOT. Sorry in advanced for my lack of knowledge with bots. Could set up a run to move external links linked in {{ Infobox television film}} into the proper External links section of the article. It would be the same as this run. Thanks! BOVINEBOY 2008 :) 14:30, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
This edit that broke a <ref>
, was
“fixed” by AnomieBOT in a way that only created another error.
Svick (
talk)
01:36, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
This edit deleted paragraphs of content! Cheers, — sligocki ( talk) 05:06, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
This one also seems to have deleted content (although that article was pretty messed up already). Cheers, — sligocki ( talk) 05:35, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Your welcome. BTW, I was looking through the Bot contributions and I really appreciate all the orphaned refs you save. That's a great service you're providing. Thanks! — sligocki ( talk) 16:36, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
In
this edit, the bot is adding white space to closed references. For example, <ref name="whatever">...</ref>
is being turned into <ref name="whatever" >...</ref>
with additional space at the end of the opening element tag. This makes sense on constructs like <ref name="whatever"/>
being turned into <ref name="whatever" />
, but not with reference elements with actual closing tags. --
Scjessey (
talk)
21:46, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
The bot do not understand refs= as this
suggests? It should have changed the location of the {{
reflist}} ending }}<!-- end of reflist -->
The two last ref. was placed after this ending code, see the diff
[7].
Ok, will the bot correct this example (here's my adding of the two references }} below end of reflist):
{{reflist|group="."|refs= <ref name="refname1">This is reference 1.</ref> }}<!--end of reflist--> <ref name="refname2">This is reference 2.</ref> <ref name="refname3">This is reference 3.</ref>
to
{{reflist|group="."|refs= <ref name="refname1">This is reference 1.</ref> <ref name="refname2">This is reference 2.</ref> <ref name="refname3">This is reference 3.</ref> }}<!--end of reflist-->
This was the case here. Thanks anyway! Nsaa ( talk) 20:31, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
This edit caused a citation error. Sole Soul ( talk) 23:20, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Please add below information this in this article. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_security_forces_fatality_reports_in_Afghanistan
Afghan security forces losses in other time periods
2010
In 2010, 21 policemen and 16 soldiers were reported killed.
Afghan private security guard losses
AnomieBOT seems to have automatically included articles in Category:Winds (cf. relevant section in AnomieBOT's talk archive) but the article Sundowner (wind) clearly belongs in that category but really shouldn't fall under Wikiproject Physics. I'm removing the project from the article's talk page. Jason Quinn ( talk) 15:53, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Wouldn't you agree that the "early career" section should be condensed? Seriously, you won't find more than a stub for the 1950s film that he made uncredited cameos in, yet there are over 20 paragraphs about them on his page. Discussing plots, production, etc. This belongs on the page for those movies, not on Eastwood's. The same thing goes for the Dollars trilogy - nearly 50 large paragraphs that cover a total of three films. There's not even that much written on the articles for those movies. There is too much written in those sections - it's uneven and doesn't fit with the rest of the article. This has been brought out before on the talk page but no one writes anything on there. Please help me improve the article. 66.233.23.3 ( talk) 09:13, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
[8] the bot rescued dead links shortly after vandalism, making it harder for RC patrol to find it. I would recommend delaying orphan fixing for a day, and/or not allowing the bot to act if the previous edit removed an entire section. - Roy Boy 07:33, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Don't see a way of stopping this.
The bot has added the Wikipedia:WikiProject London Transport banner ({{ WikiProject London Transport}}) to a number of article talk pages where this is not needed. While the WPLT banner is used on many of the project's articles, WPLT is an associated project of Wikipedia:WikiProject Trains and article assessments for WPLT on railways related subjects can be set using code in the {{ TrainsWikiProject}} banner without the need for the WPLT's banner as well.
The effect of the bot's edits in adding the WPLT banner where the Trains Project banner already exists is to add a second, unnecessary, importance category. An example is Talk:London Necropolis railway station, where it can be seen that the article is categorised as both low importance and unknown importance. The former is set in the Trains Project banner and the latter in the WPLT banner.-- DavidCane ( talk) 19:40, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Please do not continue to add back fan site sources to the Minor characters of Days of our Lives article. They are deemed unreliable per WP:V. Rm994 ( talk) 00:58, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
Ok, I understand now. Thank you! Rm994 ( talk) 01:22, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
I made an incorrect rollback using Twinkle identifying you as a vandal. I apologise: the vandalism took place immeadiately before your edit so I reverted myself and then correctly rolled back to the version prior to the vandalism. Hope that makes sense and that I haven't gotten you into trouble? -- Jubilee♫ clipman 21:36, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
I would suggest upping the wait time to 15 or even 30 minutes. I'm pretty sure the only times I've seen the bot's work on my watchlist was due to a ref being removed from vandalism, thus some extra work to revert the original vandalism as rollback won't work. A little more time and people have a better chance to fix the problem. Aboutmovies ( talk) 21:44, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
I am looking to find and review more the this sort of wrong forum closure for a discussion . Would it be possible for AnomieBot to leave a clearer edit summary ? Gnevin ( talk) 21:52, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
I just wanted to thank you for this bot, Anomie. Hipocrite ( talk) 20:34, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
hello, i am in process of restructuring Literary sources for the origin of the Romanians Criztu ( talk) 21:47, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
I find it a bit disruptive for this bot to change the location of the main citation as placed by the editor. There is nothing inherently wrong with putting the materials in the first occurrance of a reference, even if it is in a template. We are trying to keep thing moving and don't need a bot shifting things around requiring us to search for them. Racepacket ( talk) 17:39, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
<!-- AnomieBOT: Don't move -->
anywhere inside the relevant <ref> tag.
Anomie
⚔
22:24, 6 February 2010 (UTC)What happends here? All the refs should go down to the reference section per Wikipedia:LDR#List-defined_references in the refs= list (per , not in the text. See also User_talk:AnomieBOT#Can.27t_handle_refs.3D_inside_the_.7B.7Breflist.7D.7D.3F Nsaa ( talk) 14:14, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
![]() |
The Citation Barnstar | |
As I was busy with some very cumbersome (read: 200kB) merges and forks, these two orphaned reference fixes came after my edits, and I was quite impressed. This is an incredibly useful and robust bot. — Akrabbim talk 15:18, 10 February 2010 (UTC) |
...by reproducing the closing admin's edit summary or something? – xeno talk 21:48, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
In this edit AnomieBOT corrected a ref that had the formatting error "<ref nane="bridges1"..." in both the body and the references area by removing the reference altogether. Perhaps a list of obvious typos such as this ("nane"->"name") could be developed? Or perhaps something better could be done with a ref with an invalid parameter than simply removing entirely? I grant that the ref as it stood was broken, and the bot edit drew attention to it so a human could fix it. But had there been several other edits before the bot edit was noticed (as could easily occur on a busy page), then the ref might well have been lost. Not sure what the best way to handle this would be, and it isn't strictly speaking an error by the bot. DES (talk) 01:43, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
I know you aren't sentient, but I still enjoyed our conversation. Someday, when you or your grandkids are sentient, we'll all look back and have a good laugh. Excellent work rescuing orphaned refs. Cheers, — ¾-10 17:44, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for keeping this up to date. I'd like to request a non-trivial change: if a BAG member created a BRFA, could they, for the purposes of that BRFA, be considered not a BAG member for the purposes of the "Last BAG edit" column? When I have BRFAs running, naturally I keep commenting on them - but now that I'm also a BAG member, that it appears that the BAG is providing my BRFAs with plenty of attention! Thanks again, Josh Parris 22:47, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
Further to this: I'm not sure if AnomieBOT ought to be considered an editor for the Last edit column, but at the same time can see a reason to note that the bot has notified the operator - I'll leave the call to your discretion. Josh Parris 02:18, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
AnomieBOT broke
Lichen in
this edit. It apparently tried to move refs out of templates and so it moved them out of {{
Reflist|2}}
which broke the refs.
Svick (
talk)
01:29, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
Restoring lost refs from previous diffs is an awesomely useful task, but in this diff, the bot restored a WP:CIRCULAR ref. -- Geniac ( talk) 00:54, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
with <ref name="Halley1988">Halley 1988, p. 436.</ref><ref name="Jefford 2001, p. 102">Jefford 2001, p. 102.</ref><ref>Moyes 1976, p. 285.</ref> But the whole poit of using ,<ref name="placeholder">Someone year, p xx.</ref> is that you can use ,<ref name="placeholder"/> for the same reference/page in the rest of the text so it will be combined into 1 a,b Someone year, p xx Dirk P Broer And next time wait till I am finished editing as well, please( talk) 16:40, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
I was just trying to rescue some references, when I realized the bot had done just that much faster than I did. Thank you! — Sebastian 23:59, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for this wonderful bot; it caught my carless mistake on The Concert and got it just right! — Robert Greer ( talk) 20:56, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
I also want to add a thank you. You are a very intelligent bot. It's high time we raise the standard for our human material as well. Dc76\ talk 22:02, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
I know you're probably getting embarrassed by all this, but I just wanted to add that OrphanReferenceFixer is the best feature I've ever seen from a bot. It's spared my carelessness on at least three occasions so far, and has doubtless saved countless hundreds of positive contributions from being lost due to a small but significant mistake. Well done! WFCforLife ( talk) 16:41, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
Brilliant! Rescued a link reference at Marriage for a reference I (and I suspect some other editors) thought had, due to editing history, never actually been spelled out. Thank you, and Bravo! -- Joe Decker ( talk) 13:53, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
Specifying which edit made the error would make it easier for humans to fix. I suggest a page that list errors not fixed by the bot in the form of:
Sole Soul ( talk) 21:42, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
Heya, AnomieBOT. Thank you for your help here. -- Shirt58 ( talk) 14:24, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
Same subject - Thank You!! you rescued an orphaned reference I made (after 1.5 hours of fixing article NPOV and squirrelly rearranging it) only 9 minutes after I finished editing! I'd never have noticed it. *hugs* to you! Tkech ( talk) 20:25, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
Please don't do what happened here, (yes to rescuing refs, no to moving them outside transcluding parts) it breaks the references on the main page. Thanks. Xeworlebi ( t• c) 11:15, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
I was wondering if the bot catches cases where no title is specified. In these cases, the link is not piped, and the link text simply reflects the article chosen by the template. De Fault Ryan 21:23, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
return ($pg,defined($p{'title'})?"[[$pg|$p{title}]]":"[[$pg]]");
Please view recent history of CheyTac Intervention. Deletionist vandal was missed by subsequent editors due to bot overlay. - Leonard G. ( talk) 16:04, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
I just wanted to thank you for helping to fix the problems in the article [[List of area seventies of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I love ensuring accurate information, and the help you gave was instrumental for the accuracy of the article. I will be posting an expression of gratitude on the talk page of that article, but wanted to take the opportunity to thank you personally. -- Jgstokes-We can disagree without being disagreeable ( talk) 23:17, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
This site attempted to download a virus on my computer, so I've removed all links to it from Wikipedia and reported it at the Wikimedia Spam Blacklist. In this edit, AnomieBOT effectifely attempted to undo one edit I had made just minutes before. -- Blanchardb - Me• MyEars• MyMouth- timed 14:01, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
Thank you. AMuseo ( talk) 17:25, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
I remember hearing someone described as "he means well" which was just a nice way of saying he got it wrong all the time. AnomieBOT means well when it rescues orphaned references but I haven't seen a case yet when it was not better to revert the damage done by the editor who removed a reference without thinking about it. Named references used in more than one place tend to be much better quality than most. So while it was worth a try and maybe seems like a good idea it just doesn't work in practice and AnomieBOT should be more serious and revert the changes or do nothing at all, so that at least there will be a slightly better chance of editors noticing the link breakages and reverting the vandalism/misguided edits. -- Horkana ( talk) 01:11, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I've been doing some work on the
Category:Pages with broken reference names, which I have seen your Bot has helped some and hurt others. In
this diff, the Bot repaired some refs where the names had spaces in them (which makes them not work) by adding quotes around them, which in this case puts the in the broken ref category, because an editor shouldn't have put the spaces int he name int he first place (the original ref was named "Humphreys,p.26"; the "bad" ones that the bot fixed were named "Humphreys, p. 26". In this particular situation, it would have been safer to remove the spaces, although making it kick out an error is better than it never being seen, which was the case before. I don't know if the bot checks for existing ref names (or even can). But it would be nice!
In another example in the same article, I made an error when combining other refs, by typing "name=" twice - i.e. name=name=HistoryRussia/>. AnomieBot came along, rightly saw it was a bad name, but
changed it to name=name/> ... brekaing the link and re-adding it to the list, which is how I discovered the problem. Can you add a parameter where if the bot comes across "name=name=" that it will just remove one of the "name=" ? I doubt I'm the first person to make this mistook.
Thanks for the Bot, it does good work (although I did call it stupid because I was annoyed with it earlier. Sorry!).
Salamurai (
talk)
17:13, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
www.behavior-analyst-online.org was moved to www.baojournal.com many months ago. Check out for yourself and please don't revert. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.92.124.65 ( talk) 04:15, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
Hello again, I'm still working on the Category:Pages with broken reference names, and I've encountered several instances where an editor mistakenly adds a link to a source formatted like <ref name="http://thisisislinktoawebpage.com/subpage/numbers/blah"/>, without there being any other ref by that name to crossref to. Is there a way to make AnomieBOT fix those to be <ref>http://thisisislinktoawebpage.com/subpage/numbers/blah</ref> ? It would probably have to check to make sure there isn't already a properly named & sequenced ref, some articles have ridiculously descriptive ref-names. If not, oh well. Thanks! - Salamurai ( talk) 02:18, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
{{NBA Year|1994|team=Washington Bullets|title=Bullets}} is an example of the new functionality added to {{ NBA Year}} to make it work like {{ cbb link}} and {{ cfb link}} in the sense that it will link to Washington Bullets until a bot notices that 1994-95 Washington Bullets season has been created. Can your bot watch this template for such instanced to reduce unnecessary template usage.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 07:40, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
That Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/AnomieBOT 38 became a redirect seems to have freaked AnomieBOT out - it lists AnomieBOT 38 as status Unknown. Josh Parris 01:20, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
Another tweak: a different background colour for the most recently editor/edit-time - so if a BAG member was the most recent editor, colour one, otherwise colour two. For extra credit you could put those colours only under the editor/edit-time. Unspecified colour is a colour, so you might only colour the most recent editor cell/line lightgrey for the alternate case. Josh Parris 22:11, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
I transferred a section from one article into another and forgot that one of the references was only a shortcut (and would therefore link to nothing in the new article). This bot found the error and fixed it by copying over the full original reference! Thanks. :) Esn ( talk) 20:50, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
![]() |
The Chicago Barnstar | |
You saved me several hours of ref fixing in my next WP:FAC ( Millennium Park) by completing copied refs from other articles. This was quite a time saver and may help salvage WP:CHIFTD. TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 02:03, 15 June 2010 (UTC) |
.
The reliable source is here. And on Wookieepedia they tell that the PC version will be developed by Aspyr. 84.86.199.99 ( talk) 14:06, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Anomiebot mistakenly reverted to a vandalized version of the Rachel Maddow page; an editor had changed a source, actually misquoting it in the process and relabeling it to avoid detection. I'm not sure if this is an error that can be prevented, but I just wanted to let you know. Qwyrxian ( talk) 06:34, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
With a cold tone, I'd rather that you keep references in templates, as at Austin, Texas, where finding them can be facilitated. And who knows when someone would wish to create a template from all that data? --- 华钢琴49 ( TALK) 23:13, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Nearly two years ago, it was requested that the orientation
parameter be removed from {{
Female adult bio}} (now {{
Infobox adult female}}). Was the same thing done for {{
Male adult bio}} (now {{
Infobox adult male}}) and {{
Adult bio}} (now {{
Infobox adult biography}})? I ask because I just found a leftover at
Kyle Bradford. Thanks! —
RobinHood70 (
talk •
contribs)
21:29, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Can you set yourself to delay a certain amount of time before jumping in?
I was editing and hit the "Save page" button by accident instead of the "Show preview" and then when I went to continue, I made all of my changes and then you came along and "Edit conflict"ed me out of my changes. Aaaarrrggghhh! Just give me a few minutes. Set yourself on a timer to fix the error, say, 1-hour after the last edit. Thanks. > Best O Fortuna ( talk) 22:24, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
I saw that the template became a red link and shown Template: Infobox nasa language ang pagtatae ng tao! Luckily, it was reverted. Please don't do such things again. If it was an accident, it's okay for me. I accept any apology. -- Sir Jazer 13 ( talk) 11:33, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
-- Sir Jazer 13 ( talk) 08:04, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
This, presumably triggered the ever-vigilant bot's subsequent edit in a failed bid to fix the vandalism. It's no big deal and I don't have a suggestion but thought it was worth reporting. Ben Mac Dui 15:49, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I'm a human being and I screw up once in a while, for example here I reverted some refspam but overlooked a second reference to it. Please consider notifying the most recent editor, if the diff for the most recent edit contains the deleted reference, that they have broken a reference, to give them a chance to revisit their edit and finish it properly. As an alternative, have AnomieBOT simply revert the bad edit (assuming it is topmost) and notify the user. Thanks, CliffC ( talk) 22:54, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Can you do smaller edit summaries? I get several lines like "Archiving closed XfDs to Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Comics and animation/archive Errors? User:AnomieBOT/shutoff/DeletionSortingCleaner" on my watchlist, and it clutters things up. If not, that's fine. - Peregrine Fisher ( talk) 17:23, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
In the instances (TemplateReplacer15, I think) where the bot is changing parameter 1
of {{
citation needed}}, would it be possible to check whether it contains a date, and if so, make it into a properly formatted date
parameter? It would be even better if you could have the bot reprocess recent changes under this task, in order to fix this for instances already changed by the bot. (I noticed this
here.)
TheFeds
23:10, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
AnomieBOT has recently (twice)
replaced {{
Cfb link}} in {{
NFLDraft-row}} with an inferior substitute. It is attempting to replace Cfb link with a simple wikilink: [[YYYY CollegeTeamName football team]] (e.g. [[
2009 USC Trojans football team]]).
The entire purpose of using Cfb link in this template is that in many cases and for many schools that page simply does not exist! I understand that {{
Cfb link}} uses an "expensive parser function", but it also provides functionality that simply isn't replaced by this simplistic solution. Please call off your bot. —
DeeJayK (
talk)
13:48, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
The information is erroneous as to the criteria used for a PTSD diagognosis. No doctor I know would make a PTSD diagnosis on the information in the article, the described issues in the article may be some co-morbidity issues with depression being a secondary diagnosis, but the DSM IV-R mentions nothing about a movie causing PTSD, and the PTSD diagnosis was related to 1966 - not the 1977 movie. 74.243.182.120 ( talk) 18:55, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Barring any unforeseen circumstances with this AN thread, I was wondering (if I gain consensus) if your BOT could go through and change all instances of </references> to {{reflist}}. This is not controversial as </references> is outdated to the far more accepted {{reflist}}. If consensus can be established, could your BOT do this? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:24, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
I have nominated Talk:Brazil national football team competitive record, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Talk:Brazil national football team competitive record. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Nergaal ( talk) 23:57, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
![]() | 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. |
Thanx 4 repairing Bank Medici 4 me. i don't know how i lost them in transit (copy and paste).
Furtive admirer ( talk) 06:55, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
I'd be happy to fix whatever problem is there, but I can't understand what's wrong with the references on the pages that the bot's messages are referring to. [1] Thanks, Reconsideration ( talk) 23:18, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
<ref name=skdhil/>
from some other article; AnomieBOT noticed that there was no definition for "skdhil" in
1940 in poetry, and found three different (but in this case, almost identical) possible matches in related articles. Since it can't tell by itself whether they are almost identical, much less which one is correct or "best", AnomieBOT posted the message on the talk page so a human could choose the right one without having to dig through all those related articles in the same way the bot did.
Anomie
⚔
01:25, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
The Citation Barnstar | |
Thank you for rescuing my ref! • -- MoHasanie ( talk) 20:02, 12 June 2009 (UTC) |
There are almost a hundred pages in Category:Pages with missing references list every day. A lot more than any one editor can handle. Many are new articles, or old articles which jave only now received their first reference. Some are vandalism or careless edits. Any suggestions? Debresser ( talk) 01:05, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
I thought we should just remove a reference because we can't find it. The bot did that here. I revertedit and fixed it here. I'll admit that no bot would be able to think of that, but Category:Pages with broken reference names says clearly "please do not delete the ref nor comment it out". Debresser ( talk) 21:38, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
I've twice started fixing a broken reference yesterday and today, and when I made the fix, I found you had already done that. Which may be a little frustrating, after spending sometimes 15 minutes on finding it. :)
What's with all other 220 articles? The bot will be able to fix them? Debresser ( talk) 13:01, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi, recently AnomieBOT moved some references from within {{ Graphic novel list}} to the lead on the article List of Hot Gimmick chapters. I then reverted, and AnomieBOT re-moved the refs, and left a note on my talkpage telling me to come here and leave a message. So, just so you know, WP:ANIME leaves refs in {{Graphic novel list}} on purpose, for several reasons, and AnomieBOT should not move them out (if you want more detail, feel free to ask). Thanks! 「 ダイノガイ 千?!」 ? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 17:59, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi Anomie, a problem with your bot. I'm currently working to improve the refs for Marshalsea. As I'm making changes, your bot is making others, which is leading to some confusion. Are you able to fix it so that it doesn't respond to my Marshalsea edits? SlimVirgin talk| contribs 23:15, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
The AnomieBOT removed external links, stub-type, categories and interwiki. -- Snek01 ( talk) 12:08, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi. In this edit, to First Harrogate Trains, the bot "fixed" the reference error simply by removing the second reference. However what I was trying to do was cite the same source in two different parts of the article. Despite following the instructions here to the letter, I kept getting the same error.
So now we have an article without an ugly error message but which is now lacking a citation..... -- RFBailey ( talk) 18:39, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
As the discussion has now been archived without anyone objecting, when the bot gets the chance (no rush at all), would it be possible to go ahead with the tagging run? That will be:
I'm pretty sure we've now weeded all the false-positive categories out. As discussed, there may be a few false positives from (for example) Category:King's College London, in that it may pick up people who briefly attended the college but otherwise don't have a strong connection (although I'd hope they're only in the categories if there is a strong connection), but any false positives can be manually removed when we go through the newly-tagged articles to assess the importance. – iride scent 20:13, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
I don't think W&M should be in the London cats - it's in Berkshire.-- Cavrdg ( talk) 17:09, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Striking my comments above – yes, Category:Buildings and structures in Windsor and Maidenhead is on the list and shouldn't be. I've shut off the bot; Anomie, can you do what's necessary to stop it tagging any more in this category – thanks. When I'm back at my desk I'll manually check all the Windsor & Maidenhead ones and un-tag if appropriate (given its proximity to London, some will be appropriately tagged). – iridescent 2 14:52, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. Can I take it the un-tagging review will happen in the next day or two?-- Cavrdg ( talk) 17:39, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Task. Thanks. AHRtbA== Talk 20:06, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
See the case [2]. This bot claimed an error and deleted my {{ Translated}} note. Why? I really translated a part of CS article. -- Franta Oashi ( talk) 15:50, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
Can you please fix refrences on Dubai Airport. Thanks -- MoHasanie Talk 01:51, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
Minor thing but thought if you work on this further, you might like to enhance the operation. When a page already has a {{ blp}}, it still adds another like this Talk:Roy_Shivers&diff=next&oldid=270415733. DoubleBlue ( talk) 18:44, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Anomie,
I would like to ask if it is possible to use AnomieBot for the following tagging tasks for the WP:Energy
1) Adding {{WikiProject Energy|class=category|importance=N/A}} to the talk page of categories under WP:Energy. As there are hundreds if not thousands categories (mainly because of countries series, like Energy in ..., Power stations in ..., Oil and gas companies of ... etc), I wonder if it is possible to search categories words and phrases in the category's name, such as "energy" (the only exception would be Energy drinks), "power stations", "power plants", "power companies" "oil companies", "oil fields", "oil shale", "oil sands", "petroleum", "natural gas", "oil and gas", "coal", "oil industry", "electricity", "electric power", "electrical power", "fuel", "fuels", "wind power", "hydropower", "hydroelectricity", "hydroelectric", "bioenergy". Probably there are more categories, but for start I think these are enough. Additional string could be if the category has {{EnergyPortal}} tag on the main page.
2) Adding {{EnergyPortal}} to the main page of categories tagged with {{WikiProject Energy|class=category|importance=N/A}}.
3) Adding {{WikiProject Energy|class=|importance=}} to all articles in the above mentioned categories, if they already don't have more precise assessment.
Do you think it could be done? Beagel ( talk) 13:21, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
There is a list about categories on the WP:Energy talk page, which would be better to be removed from the tagging list. Although most of these categories are belong to the scope of the WP:Energy, they also include other articles. Beagel ( talk) 17:37, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
{{#if:{{{autotagged|}}}|[[Category:Automatically tagged WikiProject Energy articles|{{PAGENAME}}]]}}
between the "}}" and the "<noinclude>" near the end of the template, and then having the bot set "autotagged=yes".
Anomie
⚔
02:05, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi there-
User:Legobot hasn't been running for quite awhile and its operator seems to be more or less inactive, at least for now. Since this bot manages holding cell updates and automatic closures at WP:FFD, I was wondering if it could do the same at WP:PUF? It works pretty much the same way, and having a bot is really helpful. Thanks! – Drilnoth ( T • C • L) 02:52, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
I've only just brought the discussion, but I may need your help on another round of WikiProject California related tagging. I've got a few questions first though. Is it possible to perform assessment based on the population parameter in Infobox settlement (I'm thinking population_total)? Also is there anything limiting the bot from tagging for multiple task forces on the same page? I'm looking at a couple daughter projects of the Southern California task force and wondering if there was any limitations to consider. I remember there were a few issues with the Southern California/Santa Barbara overlap on that last run. The new discussion is at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject California#Importance assessments of California settlement articles and Quality assessments. I'm trying to make this one pretty big so we don't have to revisit this every few months, and to limit the number of talk page writes by the bot. Thanks - Optigan13 ( talk) 05:01, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Ok, all the discussions are done and I've placed the formal wording with oldid links to discussions for the various consensuses at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject California#Task force replacement and assessment bot request. Here it is again for convenience
{{
WikiProject California|sfba=yes}}
.
Discussion{{
WikiProject California|la=yes}}
.
DiscussionFor the remaining ones see above for the discussion
Thanks again. Can AnomieBOT pull this off at the moment with all the various bugs and database issues? - Optigan13 ( talk) 02:21, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
Help! A section in Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2009 August 7 contains the "is_closed" regex but not at the beginning of the section. Probably someone put the {{ ffd top}} before a section header instead of after. Anyway, I can't do anything to that page until someone fixes it. When you have fixed this issue, please change the section title (e.g. append " - Fixed") or remove this section completely. I will repost the notice if the page is still broken or is re-broken. Thanks! AnomieBOT ⚡ 20:11, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Is fixing broken references one of the tasks that the bot can't do temporarily? I ask because I've been on a wikibreak, and found that the number of broken references had doubled from 225 to 450. Is there a timeframe when the bot will be able to resume this task? I've started fixing some, but every fix takes anywhere from 2-15 minutes, and there are just too many of them. Debresser ( talk) 00:29, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
Is it possible that one of your bots can tag all the project articles as stub-class which have the motorcycling stub {{ Motorcycle-stub}} in the articles for our recently formed assessment department? I estimate about 500+ articles use the stub. The talk pages that are already (mainly incompletely) tagged use the {{ Motorcycling}} project banner. If you are not the best person to deal with this, please advise me. Cheers ww2censor ( talk) 01:43, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
I notice that this bot automatically adds and removes the {{ adminbacklog}} template from WP:FFD (and possibly other pages). I recently suggested to User:Harej (owner of User:RFC bot) that a parameter be added to the {{ adminbacklog}} template to say it is updated by a bot as the message "Please remove this notice when the backlog is cleared." doesn't make much sense when a bot is doing the updating, so now use of the bot=name parameter produces the message "This notice is automatically updated by name (talk) and will no longer be displayed when the backlog is cleared". The template documentation has been updated. I'm not sure exactly how the process works on WP:FFD but thought I'd inform you of this change in case you considered it appropiate for your bot to use. Dpmuk ( talk) 10:38, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
The fix that has been done to: Pittsburgh mayoral election, 1965 Pittsburgh mayoral election, 1969 Pittsburgh mayoral election, 1973 Pittsburgh mayoral election, 1977 Pittsburgh mayoral election, 1985 Pittsburgh mayoral election, 1989 Pittsburgh mayoral election, 1993 Pittsburgh mayoral election, 2001 Pittsburgh mayoral election, 2005 and is probably going to be done to: Pittsburgh mayoral election, 1981 Pittsburgh mayoral election, 1997 is wrong. That source is election results for Pittsburgh mayoral special election, 2007 only. The problem is that the pages were originally copied from the 2007 page and the ref tags were not changed. 75.69.0.58 ( talk) 03:42, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
Help! A section in Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2009 August 25 contains the "is_closed" regex but not at the beginning of the section. Probably someone put the {{ ffd top}} before a section header instead of after. Anyway, I can't do anything to that page until someone fixes it. When you have fixed this issue, please change the section title (e.g. append " - Fixed") or remove this section completely. I will repost the notice if the page is still broken or is re-broken. Thanks! AnomieBOT ⚡ 20:09, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
You might want to have a look at this. [4] The Bot seems to have duplicated the text unnecessarily. It might have got confused because I copied the refs from Sérvulo Gutiérrez to Doris Gibson, where I found, after saving, that the link was already in use with the ref name "BBC" which I changed to "collyns", and the Bot came after me! Ty 02:34, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
The bot just broke just about every reference I have in List of Oklahoma Sooners in the NFL Draft ( here). It uses the new list-defined references function of {{reflist}} and I guess the bot doesn't like references inside of a template. Probably something that needs to be addressed.↔ NMajdan• talk 04:35, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
Help! A section in Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2009 September 20 contains the "is_closed" regex but not at the beginning of the section. Probably someone put the {{ ffd top}} before a section header instead of after. Anyway, I can't do anything to that page until someone fixes it. When you have fixed this issue, please change the section title (e.g. append " - Fixed") or remove this section completely. I will repost the notice if the page is still broken or is re-broken. Thanks! AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:08, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
Help! A section in Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2009 September 20 contains the "is_closed" regex but not at the beginning of the section. Probably someone put the {{ ffd top}} before a section header instead of after. Anyway, I can't do anything to that page until someone fixes it. When you have fixed this issue, please change the section title (e.g. append " - Fixed") or remove this section completely. I will repost the notice if the page is still broken or is re-broken. Thanks! AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:02, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
It seems so. I'm going to restart the stopped tasks, let me know if anyone sees any problems. Anomie ⚔ 20:44, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
Here (Line 14) I converted a bare URL used as a named reference to {{ cite web}} with a different name. I forgot to change other instances of the named reference to the new name (this is why I love your bot). AnomieBOT then rescued the orphaned reference name by restoring the bare reference from the previous version. Would it be possible to arrange for the bot to check the url= parameter or otherwise recognize a renamed and tweaked reference? Many thanks for your bot regardless, - 2/0 ( cont.) 14:22, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi, on the article William Stanley (Victorian inventor), the references in group "akpan" are all defined within the reflist (as per Wikipedia:Footnotes#List-defined_references). The bot left the references which were not in a group (i.e. all the others, which are also List-defined), but the group ones were all re-inserted (meaning that the full reference was both at the first occurrence and in the reflist!). Just thought I'd let you know, as this seems like a bug in the bot.
Regards, -- PhantomSteve ( Contact Me, My Contribs) 19:03, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
<ref name="akpan-12">Akpan p. 12</ref>
" as being in the default group rather than in the group named "akpan". Should be fixed now, if you see the same error after the timestamp of this post please let me know.
Anomie
⚔
04:03, 28 September 2009 (UTC)Hello, finally you can run this task from March 2009: Wikipedia:Bot requests/Archive 26#Robot for WikiProject Gastropods. After three months of announcing at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Gastropods#Bot task waiting for approving as you recommended User talk:Snek01#Re: Your email, the User:Invertzoo finally agreed User talk:Snek01#Your bot request. Thanks. -- Snek01 ( talk) 20:45, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
{{
taxobox|classis=
Gastropoda}}
should have the talk page tagged with {{
WikiProject Gastropods}}
.{{
WikiProject Gastropods}}
and lacking a "needs-photo" parameter should have that parameter set depending on whether the "image" or "image2" parameters in the taxobox are non-empty.{{
WikiProject Gastropods|needs-photo=yes}}
should have that parameter set to "no" if the "image" or "image2" parameters in the taxobox are non-empty.{{
WikiProject Gastropods}}
should be auto-assessed as follows:
OK. To other articles than above can be added just a text "importance=" {{
WikiProject Gastropods|importance=}}
and we will assess it by hand more easily later. ;) --
Snek01 (
talk)
10:57, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
To reduce edit conflicts, could the bot avoid editing articles tagged with 'underconstruction'? Thanks, Martin ( Smith609 – Talk) 10:02, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
The request link for your bot's SFBAProject edits is a redlink. Can you redirect it to whatever page the request was on? — RockMFR 02:59, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
Your bot has been causing a nuisance at Monarchy of Canada: Instead of fixing refs, it is destroying notes. Please regard the status quo before your bot's intervention: [5], and the result following [6]. I don't believe the notes are formatted incorrectly, as they appear normally at the foot of the page; so, I suspect the fault lies in your bot. But, please let me know if I'm wrong in this take! Cheers. -- Ħ MIESIANIACAL 17:40, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
I noticed that articles in [[Category:Coal County, Oklahoma]] have been added the WP: Energy, though they aren't related to that WikiProject. There are just a few articles in the category and removing them from the WikiProject isn't difficult, but there may be other unrelated categories that were caught that had "Coal" or something similar in their titles. Just wanted to give a heads up. Narthring ( talk • contribs) 04:41, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
I was trying to add a more complete reference than what was supplied. Thanks to you I'll have to try again tomorrow. Please refrain from interfering. 97.120.137.22 ( talk) 05:35, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
So your back again to fixing reference error, I see. And boy, am I happy with that! I was shocked to see how fast new broken references show up. Now that we are back to normal figures again in Category:Pages with broken reference names, I am trying to eliminate the last few instances. A few a day. In the last half hour I saw 5 new broken references! Debresser ( talk) 21:32, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for writing and running this bot. I can't tell you how often I've seen it identify and even correct reference errors. This project is better because of your participation. Will Beback talk 08:42, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
I loaded a file File:EE Berkeley 1968.JPG onto wikipedia, marking it not-free and noting it was copyright but that I had received permission to put it up on wikipedia. nevertheless someone marked it as possibly UNFREE and deleted it from my article (or it got screened out because tagged?). I see from the Possibly Unfree listing that you have added a note that unless there is another reason the listing will be deleted and the image kept. Do I need to do anything now to keep my image? Will the image be automatically restored in my article? (Sorry for these q's - am a relatively novice wikipedia user). Would appreciate reply to my talk, which I hope will happen with the box here,
{{
Talkback|DuncanCraig1949}}
thanks!
DuncanCraig1949 (
talk)
10:39, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
This a great tool, I would like to know if it is completely automatic, that is it will crawl every wiki page and fix orphan links or is it that it should be requested which pages to fix. In that case I would like to know how could I set it up and use it. Thanks. -- HappyInGeneral ( talk) 23:44, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
Do you know if you'll be able to restart the WikiProject tagging runs anytime soon? Also, what script/font support should I have for the last character in your signature? - Optigan13 ( talk) 21:45, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
I just noticed that there are still about 500 or so pages transcluding {{ SFBAProject}}. Do you think you could make another pass with the bot? - Optigan13 ( talk) 10:00, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
You did and re-did your edits to the Gary Allan[[ Link title]] article in the middle of vandalism repair. I have solicited for help on the vandalism that was done in numerous anonymous earlier edits. The repairs to vandalism are in progress. Wikibones ( talk) 20:30, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
Any reason why the bot didn't do this one as well? Debresser ( talk) 19:49, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
You should probably be aware of Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_National_Register_of_Historic_Places#User:AnomieBOT, if you aren't already. -- ThaddeusB ( talk) 02:56, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Is correcting citation style, such as the style on the page Avatar (2009 film), one of the tasks of this bot? Flash Man999 ( talk) 13:26, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
FYI, the bot failed to fix a mistake where I forgot "name=" in the ref. See here. The "fix" it applied made things worse. Colin° Talk 21:17, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
AnomieBOT,
I'm contacting you because of your extensive experience and special expertise with bots.
I wanted to get your opinion on an idea I had for creating new Wikipedia article stubs based on Public Domain Books hosted by Google Books. I got the idea when reading the Wikipedia Article on Wikipedia's Growth, link included here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Modelling_Wikipedia's_growth At one point in the article it mentioned that (Ram-Man) created an article stub for every town in the United States using Rambot in October of 2002. Here is the quote from the article.
"The sudden jump in article count in October 2002 is due to roughly 30,000 stub articles on U.S. towns and cities generated from a database being added by an auto-posting robot, Rambot, during an eight-day period. Although initially controversial as to whether these were "real" encyclopedia articles or merely "stubs", most of the Rambot articles have since been substantially expanded."
That got me thinking that other large data sets of notable and important information might also be worth automatically creating stubs for which can then later be expanded upon. With this information still fresh in my mind I was checking up on the progress of Google Books and noted that they are now hosting more than 1,000,000 public domain books as part of their Google Books project. http://booksearch.blogspot.com/2009/08/download-over-million-public-domain.html
I think it would be an incredibly valuable resource to have a bot like Rambot create, 1,000,000 stubs for the public domain books hosted on Google Books. This is a resource of already vetted and notable material, hopefully in a standard format at Google including author name, book title, year of publication, name of publisher, summary of the book and more.
Please let me know what you think of the idea and if you would be willing to create a special bot for the task. I'm happy to assist, but I lack the technical programming skill required to create the bot.
I hope to hear from you soon.
Sincerely,
OrangeCorner ( talk) 08:18, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
ThaddeusB, Thanks for your note as well. I agree it will absolutely be important to establish notability of the works. OrangeCorner ( talk) 06:17, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
AnomieBOT,
Thank you for the quick response to my message.
I appreciate the logical way in which you have presented the items that need to be accomplished before the BOT can tackle this type of project.
I agree with the path you have detailed and I will begin the process of, 1. obtaining access to the information in some machine-parsable format, 2. get permission from Google to access those synopses to be uploaded as part of the article (if there are synopses available which there may not be) 3. determine that any images are PD, for those synopses to be uploaded as part of the article.
I will work to accomplish those first three items on the list. They should just be a matter of time, negotiation, or workarounds. I agree with you that getting community consensus will be the most difficult part of the equation and I appreciate your offer to help write the proposal once the first three items are in place. I will certainly be taking you up on that offer.
As for use of BOTs I agree with you that they can be extremely useful in matters where pure tedium is preventing a positive contribution to Wikipedia. I certainly believe a project of this type falls squarely in that corner.
As for the question of notability I think it can be well argued that given these public domain books secured publication of hundreds or thousands or tens of thousands of copies they had an impact on enough people and other literature to be worthy of inclusion. As way of comparison if an American town of a few hundred residents is worth consideration given the effect it had on the lives of those people and all those who may have traveled through it, certainly a book which has achieved at least the same level of notice deserves the opportunity to be included and later expanded by those who it had an important effect on. Certainly just as we can't pre-judge the effect or history a small town had on the nation until its content is explored, neither can we fathom the importance of the literary history of our world until we open the page and see the connections to the other books we know so well. Just imagine the depth of knowledge it would give Wikipedia access to if we could summarize and map the timelines, connections, and authors of our literary history. In a way I see it as an opportunity to finally unlock the remaining depth of knowledge still outside of the internet. While Google may have scanned them in, only by linking them on Wikipedia to real world topics or other books of interest, could someone ever hope to find and unlock their value.
Again I appreciate the assistance and the detailed analysis of the tasks required. That is exactly what I needed to help kick this project off.
Talk with you again soon.
Cheers,
OrangeCorner ( talk) 06:14, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the helping hand. The errors were driving me crazy, and I was having no luck fixing them. 7&6=thirteen ( talk) 14:07, 4 December 2009 (UTC) Stan
Is this the right place to ask about renaming template transclusions?
We have a template {{ IPAr}} for transcribing pronunciations; nearly all of the 30k+ transclusions are automated transcriptions of Polish, using the |pl switch. It's hard to maintain these because they go beyond what AWB can handle. The template is now deprecated, and I'd like to move all transclusions with the pl switch, {{IPAr|pl|, to {{ IPAc-pl}}. Then I can go in manually or with AWB and mop up any remaining transclusions of IPAr.
If you spell out the relevant parameters for me so I don't screw up s.t. basic, I could do it myself, and maybe save you some time.
Thanks, kwami ( talk) 01:21, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
Ok, I'll run it per WP:SILENCE as no one but the creators cared to comment in the month since it was deprecated, with an edit summary "Replacing {{IPAr|pl}} with {{IPAc-pl}} per request. Errors or discussion? Post a note here to stop the bot." If anyone does object, I'll stop the bot until a more in-depth discussion takes place. Anomie ⚔ 15:06, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
Wow! 25,000 done already. Please make a note here when you're done, so I can clean up anything left behind. kwami ( talk) 01:18, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
If I give you a list of articles (not categories but the articles themselves), would you be willing to run a one-time tagging for WikiProject Trains? Thank you. -- NE2 01:26, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
|UK=yes
|UK-importance=
(the second is left blank for unassessed articles). --
Redrose64 (
talk)
22:27, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
{{
Infobox Closed London station}}
, {{
Infobox GB station}}
, {{
Infobox London station}}
, {{
Infobox UK disused station}}
, {{
Infobox UK heritage station}}
. That won't cover every UK railway-related article, but it'll catch the vast majority of the stations. Further, any talk page which already has {{
WikiProject London Transport}}
is highly likely (>99%) to be UK, whether or not it's a station. Consider
Talk:Bakerloo line, for example. --
Redrose64 (
talk)
22:55, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
The bot incorrected fixed reference errors here on the Bolton article. Although the references had different URLs, the bot gave them all with the name "ref". I've now corrected them. HLE ( talk) 16:05, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Hey there, I noticed that this bot maintains the old discussions over at
WP:FfD. I was wondering if it could be possible for AnomieBOT to do the same for the holding cells over at
WP:PUF. The bot that used to carry this task,
Legobot (
talk ·
contribs), hasn't run since November 20; its owner,
Legoktm (
talk ·
contribs), hasn't edited since October 21. It would be amazingly helpful for the bot could be set up to do this. I update the list most of the time, but tend to forget and am too lazy for the file count.
Is there any way this bot could be set up for this task? —
ξ
xplicit
05:51, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
Really cool feature, nice work! -- kingboyk ( talk) 19:00, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Seconded. This has just rescued a reference I had carefully created and which had then got inadvertently removed. Very clever! Thincat ( talk) 21:28, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Yes, very well conceived and implemented. ATren ( talk) 13:11, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
I'd like to draw your collective ( User:Rich Farmbrough and User:AnomieBOT) attention to the last three edits on 2006 Iditarod. I think this type of mistake can be easily avoided by AWB aided tools, and bots can easily fix them. Thank you for your efforts. Debresser ( talk) 12:34, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
Another type of fix that a bot or other tools can easily fix is this trivial one. Debresser ( talk) 12:40, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
And yet another easy type in this edit. Debresser ( talk) 12:44, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
Just out of curiosity, is there any particular reason for removing references from templates? Yours aye, Buaidh ( talk) 18:47, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
Hello there Anomie...BOT. Sorry in advanced for my lack of knowledge with bots. Could set up a run to move external links linked in {{ Infobox television film}} into the proper External links section of the article. It would be the same as this run. Thanks! BOVINEBOY 2008 :) 14:30, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
This edit that broke a <ref>
, was
“fixed” by AnomieBOT in a way that only created another error.
Svick (
talk)
01:36, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
This edit deleted paragraphs of content! Cheers, — sligocki ( talk) 05:06, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
This one also seems to have deleted content (although that article was pretty messed up already). Cheers, — sligocki ( talk) 05:35, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Your welcome. BTW, I was looking through the Bot contributions and I really appreciate all the orphaned refs you save. That's a great service you're providing. Thanks! — sligocki ( talk) 16:36, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
In
this edit, the bot is adding white space to closed references. For example, <ref name="whatever">...</ref>
is being turned into <ref name="whatever" >...</ref>
with additional space at the end of the opening element tag. This makes sense on constructs like <ref name="whatever"/>
being turned into <ref name="whatever" />
, but not with reference elements with actual closing tags. --
Scjessey (
talk)
21:46, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
The bot do not understand refs= as this
suggests? It should have changed the location of the {{
reflist}} ending }}<!-- end of reflist -->
The two last ref. was placed after this ending code, see the diff
[7].
Ok, will the bot correct this example (here's my adding of the two references }} below end of reflist):
{{reflist|group="."|refs= <ref name="refname1">This is reference 1.</ref> }}<!--end of reflist--> <ref name="refname2">This is reference 2.</ref> <ref name="refname3">This is reference 3.</ref>
to
{{reflist|group="."|refs= <ref name="refname1">This is reference 1.</ref> <ref name="refname2">This is reference 2.</ref> <ref name="refname3">This is reference 3.</ref> }}<!--end of reflist-->
This was the case here. Thanks anyway! Nsaa ( talk) 20:31, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
This edit caused a citation error. Sole Soul ( talk) 23:20, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Please add below information this in this article. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_security_forces_fatality_reports_in_Afghanistan
Afghan security forces losses in other time periods
2010
In 2010, 21 policemen and 16 soldiers were reported killed.
Afghan private security guard losses
AnomieBOT seems to have automatically included articles in Category:Winds (cf. relevant section in AnomieBOT's talk archive) but the article Sundowner (wind) clearly belongs in that category but really shouldn't fall under Wikiproject Physics. I'm removing the project from the article's talk page. Jason Quinn ( talk) 15:53, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Wouldn't you agree that the "early career" section should be condensed? Seriously, you won't find more than a stub for the 1950s film that he made uncredited cameos in, yet there are over 20 paragraphs about them on his page. Discussing plots, production, etc. This belongs on the page for those movies, not on Eastwood's. The same thing goes for the Dollars trilogy - nearly 50 large paragraphs that cover a total of three films. There's not even that much written on the articles for those movies. There is too much written in those sections - it's uneven and doesn't fit with the rest of the article. This has been brought out before on the talk page but no one writes anything on there. Please help me improve the article. 66.233.23.3 ( talk) 09:13, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
[8] the bot rescued dead links shortly after vandalism, making it harder for RC patrol to find it. I would recommend delaying orphan fixing for a day, and/or not allowing the bot to act if the previous edit removed an entire section. - Roy Boy 07:33, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Don't see a way of stopping this.
The bot has added the Wikipedia:WikiProject London Transport banner ({{ WikiProject London Transport}}) to a number of article talk pages where this is not needed. While the WPLT banner is used on many of the project's articles, WPLT is an associated project of Wikipedia:WikiProject Trains and article assessments for WPLT on railways related subjects can be set using code in the {{ TrainsWikiProject}} banner without the need for the WPLT's banner as well.
The effect of the bot's edits in adding the WPLT banner where the Trains Project banner already exists is to add a second, unnecessary, importance category. An example is Talk:London Necropolis railway station, where it can be seen that the article is categorised as both low importance and unknown importance. The former is set in the Trains Project banner and the latter in the WPLT banner.-- DavidCane ( talk) 19:40, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Please do not continue to add back fan site sources to the Minor characters of Days of our Lives article. They are deemed unreliable per WP:V. Rm994 ( talk) 00:58, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
Ok, I understand now. Thank you! Rm994 ( talk) 01:22, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
I made an incorrect rollback using Twinkle identifying you as a vandal. I apologise: the vandalism took place immeadiately before your edit so I reverted myself and then correctly rolled back to the version prior to the vandalism. Hope that makes sense and that I haven't gotten you into trouble? -- Jubilee♫ clipman 21:36, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
I would suggest upping the wait time to 15 or even 30 minutes. I'm pretty sure the only times I've seen the bot's work on my watchlist was due to a ref being removed from vandalism, thus some extra work to revert the original vandalism as rollback won't work. A little more time and people have a better chance to fix the problem. Aboutmovies ( talk) 21:44, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
I am looking to find and review more the this sort of wrong forum closure for a discussion . Would it be possible for AnomieBot to leave a clearer edit summary ? Gnevin ( talk) 21:52, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
I just wanted to thank you for this bot, Anomie. Hipocrite ( talk) 20:34, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
hello, i am in process of restructuring Literary sources for the origin of the Romanians Criztu ( talk) 21:47, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
I find it a bit disruptive for this bot to change the location of the main citation as placed by the editor. There is nothing inherently wrong with putting the materials in the first occurrance of a reference, even if it is in a template. We are trying to keep thing moving and don't need a bot shifting things around requiring us to search for them. Racepacket ( talk) 17:39, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
<!-- AnomieBOT: Don't move -->
anywhere inside the relevant <ref> tag.
Anomie
⚔
22:24, 6 February 2010 (UTC)What happends here? All the refs should go down to the reference section per Wikipedia:LDR#List-defined_references in the refs= list (per , not in the text. See also User_talk:AnomieBOT#Can.27t_handle_refs.3D_inside_the_.7B.7Breflist.7D.7D.3F Nsaa ( talk) 14:14, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
![]() |
The Citation Barnstar | |
As I was busy with some very cumbersome (read: 200kB) merges and forks, these two orphaned reference fixes came after my edits, and I was quite impressed. This is an incredibly useful and robust bot. — Akrabbim talk 15:18, 10 February 2010 (UTC) |
...by reproducing the closing admin's edit summary or something? – xeno talk 21:48, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
In this edit AnomieBOT corrected a ref that had the formatting error "<ref nane="bridges1"..." in both the body and the references area by removing the reference altogether. Perhaps a list of obvious typos such as this ("nane"->"name") could be developed? Or perhaps something better could be done with a ref with an invalid parameter than simply removing entirely? I grant that the ref as it stood was broken, and the bot edit drew attention to it so a human could fix it. But had there been several other edits before the bot edit was noticed (as could easily occur on a busy page), then the ref might well have been lost. Not sure what the best way to handle this would be, and it isn't strictly speaking an error by the bot. DES (talk) 01:43, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
I know you aren't sentient, but I still enjoyed our conversation. Someday, when you or your grandkids are sentient, we'll all look back and have a good laugh. Excellent work rescuing orphaned refs. Cheers, — ¾-10 17:44, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for keeping this up to date. I'd like to request a non-trivial change: if a BAG member created a BRFA, could they, for the purposes of that BRFA, be considered not a BAG member for the purposes of the "Last BAG edit" column? When I have BRFAs running, naturally I keep commenting on them - but now that I'm also a BAG member, that it appears that the BAG is providing my BRFAs with plenty of attention! Thanks again, Josh Parris 22:47, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
Further to this: I'm not sure if AnomieBOT ought to be considered an editor for the Last edit column, but at the same time can see a reason to note that the bot has notified the operator - I'll leave the call to your discretion. Josh Parris 02:18, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
AnomieBOT broke
Lichen in
this edit. It apparently tried to move refs out of templates and so it moved them out of {{
Reflist|2}}
which broke the refs.
Svick (
talk)
01:29, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
Restoring lost refs from previous diffs is an awesomely useful task, but in this diff, the bot restored a WP:CIRCULAR ref. -- Geniac ( talk) 00:54, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
with <ref name="Halley1988">Halley 1988, p. 436.</ref><ref name="Jefford 2001, p. 102">Jefford 2001, p. 102.</ref><ref>Moyes 1976, p. 285.</ref> But the whole poit of using ,<ref name="placeholder">Someone year, p xx.</ref> is that you can use ,<ref name="placeholder"/> for the same reference/page in the rest of the text so it will be combined into 1 a,b Someone year, p xx Dirk P Broer And next time wait till I am finished editing as well, please( talk) 16:40, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
I was just trying to rescue some references, when I realized the bot had done just that much faster than I did. Thank you! — Sebastian 23:59, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for this wonderful bot; it caught my carless mistake on The Concert and got it just right! — Robert Greer ( talk) 20:56, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
I also want to add a thank you. You are a very intelligent bot. It's high time we raise the standard for our human material as well. Dc76\ talk 22:02, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
I know you're probably getting embarrassed by all this, but I just wanted to add that OrphanReferenceFixer is the best feature I've ever seen from a bot. It's spared my carelessness on at least three occasions so far, and has doubtless saved countless hundreds of positive contributions from being lost due to a small but significant mistake. Well done! WFCforLife ( talk) 16:41, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
Brilliant! Rescued a link reference at Marriage for a reference I (and I suspect some other editors) thought had, due to editing history, never actually been spelled out. Thank you, and Bravo! -- Joe Decker ( talk) 13:53, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
Specifying which edit made the error would make it easier for humans to fix. I suggest a page that list errors not fixed by the bot in the form of:
Sole Soul ( talk) 21:42, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
Heya, AnomieBOT. Thank you for your help here. -- Shirt58 ( talk) 14:24, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
Same subject - Thank You!! you rescued an orphaned reference I made (after 1.5 hours of fixing article NPOV and squirrelly rearranging it) only 9 minutes after I finished editing! I'd never have noticed it. *hugs* to you! Tkech ( talk) 20:25, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
Please don't do what happened here, (yes to rescuing refs, no to moving them outside transcluding parts) it breaks the references on the main page. Thanks. Xeworlebi ( t• c) 11:15, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
I was wondering if the bot catches cases where no title is specified. In these cases, the link is not piped, and the link text simply reflects the article chosen by the template. De Fault Ryan 21:23, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
return ($pg,defined($p{'title'})?"[[$pg|$p{title}]]":"[[$pg]]");
Please view recent history of CheyTac Intervention. Deletionist vandal was missed by subsequent editors due to bot overlay. - Leonard G. ( talk) 16:04, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
I just wanted to thank you for helping to fix the problems in the article [[List of area seventies of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I love ensuring accurate information, and the help you gave was instrumental for the accuracy of the article. I will be posting an expression of gratitude on the talk page of that article, but wanted to take the opportunity to thank you personally. -- Jgstokes-We can disagree without being disagreeable ( talk) 23:17, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
This site attempted to download a virus on my computer, so I've removed all links to it from Wikipedia and reported it at the Wikimedia Spam Blacklist. In this edit, AnomieBOT effectifely attempted to undo one edit I had made just minutes before. -- Blanchardb - Me• MyEars• MyMouth- timed 14:01, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
Thank you. AMuseo ( talk) 17:25, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
I remember hearing someone described as "he means well" which was just a nice way of saying he got it wrong all the time. AnomieBOT means well when it rescues orphaned references but I haven't seen a case yet when it was not better to revert the damage done by the editor who removed a reference without thinking about it. Named references used in more than one place tend to be much better quality than most. So while it was worth a try and maybe seems like a good idea it just doesn't work in practice and AnomieBOT should be more serious and revert the changes or do nothing at all, so that at least there will be a slightly better chance of editors noticing the link breakages and reverting the vandalism/misguided edits. -- Horkana ( talk) 01:11, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I've been doing some work on the
Category:Pages with broken reference names, which I have seen your Bot has helped some and hurt others. In
this diff, the Bot repaired some refs where the names had spaces in them (which makes them not work) by adding quotes around them, which in this case puts the in the broken ref category, because an editor shouldn't have put the spaces int he name int he first place (the original ref was named "Humphreys,p.26"; the "bad" ones that the bot fixed were named "Humphreys, p. 26". In this particular situation, it would have been safer to remove the spaces, although making it kick out an error is better than it never being seen, which was the case before. I don't know if the bot checks for existing ref names (or even can). But it would be nice!
In another example in the same article, I made an error when combining other refs, by typing "name=" twice - i.e. name=name=HistoryRussia/>. AnomieBot came along, rightly saw it was a bad name, but
changed it to name=name/> ... brekaing the link and re-adding it to the list, which is how I discovered the problem. Can you add a parameter where if the bot comes across "name=name=" that it will just remove one of the "name=" ? I doubt I'm the first person to make this mistook.
Thanks for the Bot, it does good work (although I did call it stupid because I was annoyed with it earlier. Sorry!).
Salamurai (
talk)
17:13, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
www.behavior-analyst-online.org was moved to www.baojournal.com many months ago. Check out for yourself and please don't revert. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.92.124.65 ( talk) 04:15, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
Hello again, I'm still working on the Category:Pages with broken reference names, and I've encountered several instances where an editor mistakenly adds a link to a source formatted like <ref name="http://thisisislinktoawebpage.com/subpage/numbers/blah"/>, without there being any other ref by that name to crossref to. Is there a way to make AnomieBOT fix those to be <ref>http://thisisislinktoawebpage.com/subpage/numbers/blah</ref> ? It would probably have to check to make sure there isn't already a properly named & sequenced ref, some articles have ridiculously descriptive ref-names. If not, oh well. Thanks! - Salamurai ( talk) 02:18, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
{{NBA Year|1994|team=Washington Bullets|title=Bullets}} is an example of the new functionality added to {{ NBA Year}} to make it work like {{ cbb link}} and {{ cfb link}} in the sense that it will link to Washington Bullets until a bot notices that 1994-95 Washington Bullets season has been created. Can your bot watch this template for such instanced to reduce unnecessary template usage.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 07:40, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
That Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/AnomieBOT 38 became a redirect seems to have freaked AnomieBOT out - it lists AnomieBOT 38 as status Unknown. Josh Parris 01:20, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
Another tweak: a different background colour for the most recently editor/edit-time - so if a BAG member was the most recent editor, colour one, otherwise colour two. For extra credit you could put those colours only under the editor/edit-time. Unspecified colour is a colour, so you might only colour the most recent editor cell/line lightgrey for the alternate case. Josh Parris 22:11, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
I transferred a section from one article into another and forgot that one of the references was only a shortcut (and would therefore link to nothing in the new article). This bot found the error and fixed it by copying over the full original reference! Thanks. :) Esn ( talk) 20:50, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
![]() |
The Chicago Barnstar | |
You saved me several hours of ref fixing in my next WP:FAC ( Millennium Park) by completing copied refs from other articles. This was quite a time saver and may help salvage WP:CHIFTD. TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 02:03, 15 June 2010 (UTC) |
.
The reliable source is here. And on Wookieepedia they tell that the PC version will be developed by Aspyr. 84.86.199.99 ( talk) 14:06, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Anomiebot mistakenly reverted to a vandalized version of the Rachel Maddow page; an editor had changed a source, actually misquoting it in the process and relabeling it to avoid detection. I'm not sure if this is an error that can be prevented, but I just wanted to let you know. Qwyrxian ( talk) 06:34, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
With a cold tone, I'd rather that you keep references in templates, as at Austin, Texas, where finding them can be facilitated. And who knows when someone would wish to create a template from all that data? --- 华钢琴49 ( TALK) 23:13, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Nearly two years ago, it was requested that the orientation
parameter be removed from {{
Female adult bio}} (now {{
Infobox adult female}}). Was the same thing done for {{
Male adult bio}} (now {{
Infobox adult male}}) and {{
Adult bio}} (now {{
Infobox adult biography}})? I ask because I just found a leftover at
Kyle Bradford. Thanks! —
RobinHood70 (
talk •
contribs)
21:29, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Can you set yourself to delay a certain amount of time before jumping in?
I was editing and hit the "Save page" button by accident instead of the "Show preview" and then when I went to continue, I made all of my changes and then you came along and "Edit conflict"ed me out of my changes. Aaaarrrggghhh! Just give me a few minutes. Set yourself on a timer to fix the error, say, 1-hour after the last edit. Thanks. > Best O Fortuna ( talk) 22:24, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
I saw that the template became a red link and shown Template: Infobox nasa language ang pagtatae ng tao! Luckily, it was reverted. Please don't do such things again. If it was an accident, it's okay for me. I accept any apology. -- Sir Jazer 13 ( talk) 11:33, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
-- Sir Jazer 13 ( talk) 08:04, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
This, presumably triggered the ever-vigilant bot's subsequent edit in a failed bid to fix the vandalism. It's no big deal and I don't have a suggestion but thought it was worth reporting. Ben Mac Dui 15:49, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I'm a human being and I screw up once in a while, for example here I reverted some refspam but overlooked a second reference to it. Please consider notifying the most recent editor, if the diff for the most recent edit contains the deleted reference, that they have broken a reference, to give them a chance to revisit their edit and finish it properly. As an alternative, have AnomieBOT simply revert the bad edit (assuming it is topmost) and notify the user. Thanks, CliffC ( talk) 22:54, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Can you do smaller edit summaries? I get several lines like "Archiving closed XfDs to Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Comics and animation/archive Errors? User:AnomieBOT/shutoff/DeletionSortingCleaner" on my watchlist, and it clutters things up. If not, that's fine. - Peregrine Fisher ( talk) 17:23, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
In the instances (TemplateReplacer15, I think) where the bot is changing parameter 1
of {{
citation needed}}, would it be possible to check whether it contains a date, and if so, make it into a properly formatted date
parameter? It would be even better if you could have the bot reprocess recent changes under this task, in order to fix this for instances already changed by the bot. (I noticed this
here.)
TheFeds
23:10, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
AnomieBOT has recently (twice)
replaced {{
Cfb link}} in {{
NFLDraft-row}} with an inferior substitute. It is attempting to replace Cfb link with a simple wikilink: [[YYYY CollegeTeamName football team]] (e.g. [[
2009 USC Trojans football team]]).
The entire purpose of using Cfb link in this template is that in many cases and for many schools that page simply does not exist! I understand that {{
Cfb link}} uses an "expensive parser function", but it also provides functionality that simply isn't replaced by this simplistic solution. Please call off your bot. —
DeeJayK (
talk)
13:48, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
The information is erroneous as to the criteria used for a PTSD diagognosis. No doctor I know would make a PTSD diagnosis on the information in the article, the described issues in the article may be some co-morbidity issues with depression being a secondary diagnosis, but the DSM IV-R mentions nothing about a movie causing PTSD, and the PTSD diagnosis was related to 1966 - not the 1977 movie. 74.243.182.120 ( talk) 18:55, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Barring any unforeseen circumstances with this AN thread, I was wondering (if I gain consensus) if your BOT could go through and change all instances of </references> to {{reflist}}. This is not controversial as </references> is outdated to the far more accepted {{reflist}}. If consensus can be established, could your BOT do this? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:24, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
I have nominated Talk:Brazil national football team competitive record, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Talk:Brazil national football team competitive record. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Nergaal ( talk) 23:57, 17 August 2010 (UTC)