This 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. |
RFCbot has just removed a RFC tag from the active policy RFC at Wikipedia talk:Spoiler#RFC:_Change_prominence_of_site_disclaimer_link_in_default_skin. I added the RFC tag on September 30th and it's still very busy with comments although there was a long hiatus between 8th and 27th of October. Does the bot automatically consider all RFCs to have expired after one month?
I've restored the tag so no harm done. - TS 17:17, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
It appears that the last two nights, One bot has rotated the previous November MFD dates to be below the October dates. So the current day shows at the top, then October appears in reverse chronological order, then the prior dates of November appear in reverse chronological order. See here and here. Easy enough to fix manually, so it's not a crisis, but hopefully something you can fix soon. Thanks. -- RL0919 ( talk) 00:33, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
Just a quick question - was this the intended behaviour of the bot? Or just a glitch of some sort? It seemed to sort itself out 15 mins later so no harm done anyway. Thanks — Amakuru ( talk) 14:50, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
Harej, for my own, personal purposes, I would like to view somehow a list of GAN reviews I have done. Is there a way for me to easily access this data somehow, so that I can place within a subpage of my userspace articles I have reviewed at GAN? Thank you for your time, -- Cirt ( talk) 09:29, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia_talk:Good_article_nominations#Karma_system. Any ideas on a timeframe to implementation, and how this would work? Cheers, -- Cirt ( talk) 11:38, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
I removed the ensuing exchange because I will not have my talk page be a forum for petty vindictive. I will do my best to present the data in such a way that it will not rank individuals or otherwise perpetuate a system of quid-pro-quo; simply, it would allow one to see the past GAN activities of a user. harej 11:32, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
You are invited to Wikipedia DC Meetup #13 on Wednesday, November 17, from 7 to 9 pm, location to be determined (but near a Metro station in DC).
To keep up-to-date on local events, you can join the mailing list.
You can remove your name from future notifications of Washington DC Meetups by editing this page:
Wikipedia:Meetup/DC/Invite/List.
BrownBot (
talk) 13:41, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
As far as I know the RfC tag is for requesting 3rd party comment on an article or particular editing practice, which is what I was doing; requesting a 3rd party comment. I have restored the template as I want a 3rd party to comment on this situation Barts1a ( talk) 22:19, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
Hey, one bot seems to be screwing up the listing by date of Wp:MFD. See for example this edit [1]. Yoenit ( talk) 23:43, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi Harej, thanks for your answer. As the question itself has become the survivor of me asking duplicate questions because I didn't read the rules, it remains with your batch only because you answered it where others hadn't before the election coordinators cleaned house behind me.
As an isolated question, it has become completely arbitrary and makes little sense to have it asked to you specifically, even to me. I'd have absolutely no objections if you'd prefer the question to be moved to the questions talk page, your own talk here or outright deleted. And please accept my apologies for having botched the whole thing. MLauba ( Talk) 16:26, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi. Best of luck in your upcoming trial by fire. As in previous years I have a series of questions I ask candidates. This year there are restrictions on the length and number of questions on the "official" page for questions, restrictions which I do not agree with, but which I will abide by. I nevertheless think my questions are important and relevant (and I am not the only person to think so, in previous years they have drawn favorable comment from many, including in at least one case indepth analysis of candidates answers to them by third parties). You are invited to answer them if you so choose. I suggest that the talk page of your questions page is a good place to put them and I will do so with your acquiescence (for example, SirFozzie's page already has them). Your answers, (or non-answers should you decide not to answer them), that will be a factor in my evaluation of your candidacy. Please let me know as soon as practical what your wish is. Thanks and best of luck. ++ Lar: t/ c 17:38, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
I'm going to be presumptuous enough to suggest a code change to RM bot, although I realise you may not have the time to make the change or indeed want to. Anyway I think adding:
$section[$transcludes[$i]] = preg_replace("/\[{2}(.*?)\]{2}/", "$1", $section[$transcludes[$i]]);
after
$section[$transcludes[$i]] = preg_replace("/\s*=+\n*/", "", $section[$transcludes[$i]]);
should fix the problem of links in the section titles breaking the listing. Dpmuk ( talk) 23:54, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
requestedmoves.php
now. Feel free to offer changes to my other scripts.
harej 01:17, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
Dear Harej, thank you for nominating yourself as a candidate in the 2010 Arbitration Committee elections. On behalf of the coordinators, allow me to welcome you to the election and make a few suggestions to help you get set up. By now, you ought to have written your nomination statement, which should be no more than 400 words and declare any alternate or former user accounts you have contributed under (or, in the case of privacy concerns, a declaration that you have disclosed them to the Arbitration Committee). Although there are no fixed guidelines for how to write a statement, note that many candidates treat this as an opportunity, in their own way, to put a cogent case as to why editors should vote for them—highlighting the strengths they would bring to the job, and convincing the community they would cope with the workload and responsibilities of being an arbitrator.
You should at this point have your own questions subpage; feel free to begin answering the questions as you please. Together, the nomination statement and questions subpage should be transcluded to your candidate profile, whose talkpage will serve as the central location for discussion of your candidacy. If you experience any difficulty setting up these pages, please follow the links in the footer below. If you need assistance, on this or any other matter (including objectionable questions or commentary by others on your candidate pages), please notify the coordinators at their talkpage. If you have followed these instructions correctly, congratulations, you are now officially a candidate for the Arbitration Committee. Good luck! Skomorokh 00:53, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
Arbitration Committee Election 2019 candidate:
Harej
|
Harej, if you wouldn't mind adding language to your nomination statement to the effect of ""I have never edited Wikipedia with an account other than those listed here", or whatever is appropriate to your situation? I am asking all the candidates to make sure their account disclosure is full and categorical. Thanks, Skomorokh 12:20, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
Efforts have been made to fix the problems with GAbot in your absence. They have not been successful, but have at least suggested that the problems were caused by the addition of a blank line after Jezhotwells signature which the bot insists on adding. I would be grateful if you would attend to this at an early opportunity! Thanks, Geometry guy 21:41, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
Would you happen to know why the bot is pruning this RfC of its content on the noticeboards? It was displaying properly for a few hours, but then it denigrated into a one-liner. — C M B J 11:48, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
When mentally pronouncing your username, does one say "hair-jay", like an African-American kindergartener might be nicknamed, or "har-ezh", like an elusive zorro-esque Arabian bandit-prince? I always imagined the latter, until learning of the name's deflatingly quotidian origin. The electorate deserves to know! Skomorokh 11:48, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
I was pleased to see you among the candidates for the 2010 Arbcom elections, as Wikipedia needs intelligent arbitrators who work on content review and automation to help other editors. Nevertheless, I can imagine that your candidacy might cause stress, self-censorship, and a wish to present yourself in the best light. Even though I would not be as brave as you to subject myself to the challenge of an Arbcom election, I would advise you to relax and be yourself as far as possible.
Don't be afraid to make mistakes! Arbitrators are not infallible. Kiril Lokshin made a mistake and resigned, but was reelected last year with enthusiasm. Similarly, Casliber's nomination explicitly addresses the mistake he made last year, and he may well be reelected this year. Both editors have my admiration and support. We all make mistakes; it is how we deal with those mistakes that matters, and they both handled their mistakes with grace and honor.
In my view, the ability to communicate is one of the most important skills in avoiding mistakes and dealing with them when they happen. Staying quiet and hoping it will all work out was the mistake Casliber made and now regrets. You have to trust that there are other good editors out there, talk with them, share information. Problems on Wikipedia cannot be solved by one editor alone.
Some editors may oppose your candidacy because you are idiosyncratic. I would not. However, you need to convince the community (and me) that you won't approach a problem as something to take home and think about until you come up with a solution. Many minds make illumination work. Geometry guy 23:22, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
Misplacing {{ Good article}} is to be placed "at the bottom of the article before defaultsort, categories and interwikis" not at the top of the article, as with Magnapop. A small matter, but one you might want to fix. — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 17:37, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
I created this RFC last night, the bot doesn't seem to have listed it. -- G W … 10:31, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
Our next Wikipedia NYC Meetup is this weekend on Saturday Dec 4 at Brooklyn Museum during their awesome First Saturdays program, starting at 5 PM.
A particular highlight for the wiki crowd will be ' Seductive Subversion: Women Pop Artists, 1958–1968', and the accompanying " WikiPop" project, with specially-created Wikipedia articles on the artists displayed on iPads in the gallery.
This will be a museum touring and partying meetup, so no excuses about being a shy newbie this time. Bring a friend too!
You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.
To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our
mailing list.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk) 22:20, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on User talk:Barts1a. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.
You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Comment duty. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot ( talk) 23:31, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
I know you've been tinkering with the code, and I just saw a bug that you may want to get ironed out. It first removed an expired tag, but then it invited Hellknowz to comment at the expired rfc (it also didn't follow a redirect here, which may be desired behavior) and then listed the rfc as unsorted. I apologize if this is correct behavior and I've overlooked something. VernoWhitney ( talk) 14:14, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi Harej. I noticed you operate RM Bot. If you get the time, could you see into this and see how you could help? We need all the help we could get :) Reh man 10:40, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
I passed a WP:GAN at GA/2 ( Tvrđa). Shortly afterwards GABot did this "maintenance" operation [2] which appears to be removing the review from WP:GAN and resequencing the article's position in the list. Then about 12 minutes later it removed the entry from WP:GAN [3] with the edit summary "failed" Tvrđa; and also from the section list [4] with the same summary statement, i.e., "failed" Tvrđa. I assume that Bot has not been programmed to make use of data from GA/2. The article was failed at GA/1, which is why I assume that that the edit summary for GA/2 was marked as a "failure". Pyrotec ( talk) 10:14, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of United States presidential assassination attempts and plots. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.
You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Comment duty. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot ( talk) 09:01, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:British Isles Terminology task force/Specific Examples. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.
You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Comment duty. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot ( talk) 12:01, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Someone has marked Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/RFC bot 2 as needing your input. Please visit that page to reply to the requests. Thanks! AnomieBOT ⚡ 11:54, 12 December 2010 (UTC) To opt out of these notifications, place {{bots|optout=operatorassistanceneeded}} anywhere on this page.
Hope this helps. [7] AGK [ • 19:04, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi, User:Teancum passed a WP:GAN at GA/2 ( Perfect Dark Zero), however it appears the GABot did the wrong operation, as it marked the article with the edit summary "failed" in the Revision history of Wikipedia:Good article nominations -- Niwi3 ( talk) 01:10, 20 December 2010 (CET)
if ((preg_match("/\|\s?currentstatus\s?=\s?GA/i", $contents) || preg_match("/\{{2}\s?GA(?! nominee)/", $contents)) && !preg_match("/\{{2}\s?FailedGA/i", $contents)) {
currentstatus=GA
appears on the page — or if {{GA
appears on the page, so long as it's not {{GA nominee
— and {{FailedGA
specifically does not appear on the page, then the article is one that has passed GA review. I'm starting to question whether that last bit is necessary. What do you think?
harej 22:20, 20 December 2010 (UTC)Shouldn't the template for VPC be modified or removed? Probably a task for a bot to remove it all. — raeky T 16:43, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi Harej, I was wondering if it would be possible to make multimove notifications by a non-flagged bot so that the posts would show up on people's watchlists by default. What do you think? I started a section at WT:RM to get some opinions on the issue. It would be good to hear what you think about the proposal. Regards, Jafeluv ( talk) 17:38, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Harej, hi. I hope you're having a lovely holiday season, assuming that you're someone and somewhere that this is a holiday season.
I'd like to draw your attention - with no urgency - to Wikipedia talk:Requested moves#Classifying moves and generating data, which follows from a discussion about some famous people with diacritics in their names. It seems that various people make claims about what our usual practice is, and I'm wondering if that's something we can pin down a bit more objectively. Please let me know what you think, if this idea is technically feasible and in accordance with how we do things 'round here. Thanks in advance. :) - GTBacchus( talk) 23:13, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
At Template:Requested move, I'd like to replace the transclusion of {{ movereq}}, which is a redirect, with {{ Requested move/dated}}, its target. But it looks like this was attempted in the past and impacted the operation of your bot. Could you assist me in seeing to this edit? -- Bsherr ( talk) 16:47, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Hello Harej! The GA bot is awesome. But, recently, I dropped a review and an administrator deleted the GA page ( Talk:Myles Kennedy/GA1). But, the WP:GAN page still shows that I'm reviewing the article. I tried removing it, but it comes up again. Can you fix it, if possible? Btw, I'm not good at programming :( Novice7 | Talk 14:04, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
The bot appears to have stopped running. Vegaswikian ( talk) 08:12, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Hey Harej. I just increased move-multi to a thirty title capacity. However, it now occurs to me that I don't know if RM bot's code needs to be tweaked at the same time, so I'm here asking its grand overlord.-- Fuhghettaboutit ( talk) 08:12, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Hey, just having some trouble with the GA bot. I've recently reviewed Somerhill House and Robert and Thomas Wintour, and in neither case did the bot accept that I was reviewing the articles, or recognise that I had put them on hold. I just promoted Somerhill House, and instead of removing it from the list, it did this. What am I doing wrong?! J Milburn ( talk) 12:03, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
The bot does that sometimes; rather than straightaway promoting an article, it will put one in that weird purgatory state you noted above and then marked it as passed. I'd be more concerned if the bot didn't get its head in the game in the end. Still, it's a curious issue. harej 18:47, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
The bot accepts me for who I am now. If you gave it a talking to, thanks. If not, we've made friends anyways. J Milburn ( talk) 02:19, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Template:RFC list footer unsorted has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Mhiji 01:02, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
You are invited to WikiXDC, a special meetup event and celebration on Saturday, January 22 hosted by the National Archives and Records Administration in downtown Washington, D.C.
Please RSVP soon as possible, as there likely will be a cap on number of attendees that NARA can accommodate.
Note: You can unsubscribe from DC meetup notices by removing your name at Wikipedia:Meetup/DC/Invite/List. BrownBot ( talk) 02:04, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Harej. I'm curious how you found consensus at Talk:Action at a distance (computer programming)#Requested move for the move? As far as I could tell, only one person was strongly in support of it. Powers T 15:20, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
Hey,
I noticed that the RfCbot included more text from my RfC than is really appropriate. I tried fixing it twice ( [8], [9]) but kept getting undone. Can you advise? NickCT ( talk) 15:15, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
I corrected the page from "Rosalie (play)" to "Rosalie (musical)". I made the amendment at both Talk:Rosalie and Wikipedia:Requested moves for 14 January 2011. The bot put it back to "Rosalie play" on the Requested moves page, which is not what I want. Snowman ( talk) 14:53, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
Can you revert your move please? (I'm guessing this request was in uncontroversial moves per WP:RM). Any move from this title ought to go through a move request as this is the most common name, and we continuously have editors changing the name from the most common one to excluding it. Thanks. — Spaceman Spiff 05:18, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
See Wikipedia_talk:Good_article_nominations#New_function_for_GA_bot.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 16:52, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
In User:RFC bot/rfcbot.php, you currently have {{Philosophy/Nav}}. Could this be changed to {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/Nav}} as I have moved the template to a new location. Thanks -- WOSlinker ( talk) 23:08, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
Well I asked the person who made the move a few days ago here but it's only just occurred to me looking at the list of requested moves that the bot takes no notice. It would appear to have been changed so as to allow the discussion to take place on a page other than the one to be moved. In this instance it would appear they were trying to say they'd like to move a lot of a pages and instead of listing each one they tried to just link to a list. I'm not sure that's a sensible idea as it means that notices aren't placed on every page, so that along with the bot taking no notice of it, made me decide that there was no point to it. Dpmuk ( talk) 00:43, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia_talk:Good_article_nominations#Clarify_my_argument.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 09:13, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
This is the BRFA I was talking about today: Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/WAPLeaderboardBot. Thanks -- Jeremyb ( talk) 02:13, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
Think I've worked out why this is broken. See Wikipedia talk:Requested moves#Invisible backlog. Dpmuk ( talk) 00:17, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi Harej. I fixed the link so that it will go to the actual questions page. But I think the code in User:RFC bot still needs to be updated. :) Thanks, œ ™ 00:00, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
Template:Rfctag-alt has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:50, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
The bot is restoring ( example) non-free content to Wikipedia space in violation of WP:NFCC #9. The file in question is File:Portrait of Edward James.jpg, which is properly marked in machine readable format as a non-free file. Please shut down the bot until this error is corrected. Thank you, -- Hammersoft ( talk) 17:10, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
As requested moves is not the appropriate venue for media files (at least I don't remember it being), it was not something I had kept in mind. However, something like this can easily be rectified. harej 22:32, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
I'm confused about why the RFC bot removed an RFC tag here for being expired when it was just placed. Thanks. - Hydroxonium ( H3O+) 18:46, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Please fix your bot. It is making several mistakes, as documented at Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations#Bot strangeness?. – MuZemike 16:25, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
The bot has notified a page "not" to refer to itself: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Avatar_%28Hinduism%29#Requested_move. Please correct the edit ("not this page"). Thank you. Hoverfish Talk 14:10, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
Please see User talk:Racepacket#Unblock proposal. Cheers.-- Fuhghettaboutit ( talk) 15:43, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
Bot did [10], but reviewer had done [11]. Is it possible the presence of the {{failedGA}} template, or the categories it produces, is a factor? Gimmetoo ( talk) 02:27, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi, as I think was discussed once before but not implemented, would it be possible when you have a spare moment to update the bot so that the "backlog" line that it adds or removes from WP:RM depending on whether there is a backlog reads as it does now, namely:
If this is technically impossible for some reason, I'll change it back, but I'd have thought it would be fairly trivial to do. (Oh, the point of it is that the word "backlog" will actually link to the backlog further down the page, instead of a category of all backlogs.) Thanks,-- Kotniski ( talk) 13:22, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi -- trying to figure out what is going wrong at WT:Good article nominations#Tony Blair, I looked over the php code for the bot. My php skills aren't very strong, but it looks to me like once the reviewer and subtopic info are placed in the database, the bot will always take them automatically from the database and there is no way to override this behavior -- hence, no way to correct an error. Did I miss something? If not, can the problem be fixed? Regards, Looie496 ( talk) 07:31, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
I've disabled the "feature" which causes this inflexibility. The bot now checks each time what the reviewer and subtopic are. Updates will take a little longer but the bot will be more responsive to changes. harej 00:22, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Apologies for the short notice for this meetup, but let's discuss when, where & what for DC Meetup #17. Also, if you haven't yet, please join wikimedia-dc mailing list to stay informed. Cheers, User:Aude ( talk)
Note: You can unsubscribe from DC meetup notices by removing your name at Wikipedia:Meetup/DC/Invite/List. -- Message delivered by AudeBot, on behalf of User:Aude
Because of the block and subsquent unblock with mentor, I am contacting you as well as Racepacket of my intention to review this article.
It has a good deal of work ahead of it however, it is VERY possible it can be accomplished in a 7 day hold period, mainly because it is a matter of adding needed work with some copy editing of the prose and not nearly as much removal of un-needed fluff.-- Amadscientist ( talk) 12:36, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
This 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. |
RFCbot has just removed a RFC tag from the active policy RFC at Wikipedia talk:Spoiler#RFC:_Change_prominence_of_site_disclaimer_link_in_default_skin. I added the RFC tag on September 30th and it's still very busy with comments although there was a long hiatus between 8th and 27th of October. Does the bot automatically consider all RFCs to have expired after one month?
I've restored the tag so no harm done. - TS 17:17, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
It appears that the last two nights, One bot has rotated the previous November MFD dates to be below the October dates. So the current day shows at the top, then October appears in reverse chronological order, then the prior dates of November appear in reverse chronological order. See here and here. Easy enough to fix manually, so it's not a crisis, but hopefully something you can fix soon. Thanks. -- RL0919 ( talk) 00:33, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
Just a quick question - was this the intended behaviour of the bot? Or just a glitch of some sort? It seemed to sort itself out 15 mins later so no harm done anyway. Thanks — Amakuru ( talk) 14:50, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
Harej, for my own, personal purposes, I would like to view somehow a list of GAN reviews I have done. Is there a way for me to easily access this data somehow, so that I can place within a subpage of my userspace articles I have reviewed at GAN? Thank you for your time, -- Cirt ( talk) 09:29, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia_talk:Good_article_nominations#Karma_system. Any ideas on a timeframe to implementation, and how this would work? Cheers, -- Cirt ( talk) 11:38, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
I removed the ensuing exchange because I will not have my talk page be a forum for petty vindictive. I will do my best to present the data in such a way that it will not rank individuals or otherwise perpetuate a system of quid-pro-quo; simply, it would allow one to see the past GAN activities of a user. harej 11:32, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
You are invited to Wikipedia DC Meetup #13 on Wednesday, November 17, from 7 to 9 pm, location to be determined (but near a Metro station in DC).
To keep up-to-date on local events, you can join the mailing list.
You can remove your name from future notifications of Washington DC Meetups by editing this page:
Wikipedia:Meetup/DC/Invite/List.
BrownBot (
talk) 13:41, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
As far as I know the RfC tag is for requesting 3rd party comment on an article or particular editing practice, which is what I was doing; requesting a 3rd party comment. I have restored the template as I want a 3rd party to comment on this situation Barts1a ( talk) 22:19, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
Hey, one bot seems to be screwing up the listing by date of Wp:MFD. See for example this edit [1]. Yoenit ( talk) 23:43, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi Harej, thanks for your answer. As the question itself has become the survivor of me asking duplicate questions because I didn't read the rules, it remains with your batch only because you answered it where others hadn't before the election coordinators cleaned house behind me.
As an isolated question, it has become completely arbitrary and makes little sense to have it asked to you specifically, even to me. I'd have absolutely no objections if you'd prefer the question to be moved to the questions talk page, your own talk here or outright deleted. And please accept my apologies for having botched the whole thing. MLauba ( Talk) 16:26, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi. Best of luck in your upcoming trial by fire. As in previous years I have a series of questions I ask candidates. This year there are restrictions on the length and number of questions on the "official" page for questions, restrictions which I do not agree with, but which I will abide by. I nevertheless think my questions are important and relevant (and I am not the only person to think so, in previous years they have drawn favorable comment from many, including in at least one case indepth analysis of candidates answers to them by third parties). You are invited to answer them if you so choose. I suggest that the talk page of your questions page is a good place to put them and I will do so with your acquiescence (for example, SirFozzie's page already has them). Your answers, (or non-answers should you decide not to answer them), that will be a factor in my evaluation of your candidacy. Please let me know as soon as practical what your wish is. Thanks and best of luck. ++ Lar: t/ c 17:38, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
I'm going to be presumptuous enough to suggest a code change to RM bot, although I realise you may not have the time to make the change or indeed want to. Anyway I think adding:
$section[$transcludes[$i]] = preg_replace("/\[{2}(.*?)\]{2}/", "$1", $section[$transcludes[$i]]);
after
$section[$transcludes[$i]] = preg_replace("/\s*=+\n*/", "", $section[$transcludes[$i]]);
should fix the problem of links in the section titles breaking the listing. Dpmuk ( talk) 23:54, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
requestedmoves.php
now. Feel free to offer changes to my other scripts.
harej 01:17, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
Dear Harej, thank you for nominating yourself as a candidate in the 2010 Arbitration Committee elections. On behalf of the coordinators, allow me to welcome you to the election and make a few suggestions to help you get set up. By now, you ought to have written your nomination statement, which should be no more than 400 words and declare any alternate or former user accounts you have contributed under (or, in the case of privacy concerns, a declaration that you have disclosed them to the Arbitration Committee). Although there are no fixed guidelines for how to write a statement, note that many candidates treat this as an opportunity, in their own way, to put a cogent case as to why editors should vote for them—highlighting the strengths they would bring to the job, and convincing the community they would cope with the workload and responsibilities of being an arbitrator.
You should at this point have your own questions subpage; feel free to begin answering the questions as you please. Together, the nomination statement and questions subpage should be transcluded to your candidate profile, whose talkpage will serve as the central location for discussion of your candidacy. If you experience any difficulty setting up these pages, please follow the links in the footer below. If you need assistance, on this or any other matter (including objectionable questions or commentary by others on your candidate pages), please notify the coordinators at their talkpage. If you have followed these instructions correctly, congratulations, you are now officially a candidate for the Arbitration Committee. Good luck! Skomorokh 00:53, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
Arbitration Committee Election 2019 candidate:
Harej
|
Harej, if you wouldn't mind adding language to your nomination statement to the effect of ""I have never edited Wikipedia with an account other than those listed here", or whatever is appropriate to your situation? I am asking all the candidates to make sure their account disclosure is full and categorical. Thanks, Skomorokh 12:20, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
Efforts have been made to fix the problems with GAbot in your absence. They have not been successful, but have at least suggested that the problems were caused by the addition of a blank line after Jezhotwells signature which the bot insists on adding. I would be grateful if you would attend to this at an early opportunity! Thanks, Geometry guy 21:41, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
Would you happen to know why the bot is pruning this RfC of its content on the noticeboards? It was displaying properly for a few hours, but then it denigrated into a one-liner. — C M B J 11:48, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
When mentally pronouncing your username, does one say "hair-jay", like an African-American kindergartener might be nicknamed, or "har-ezh", like an elusive zorro-esque Arabian bandit-prince? I always imagined the latter, until learning of the name's deflatingly quotidian origin. The electorate deserves to know! Skomorokh 11:48, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
I was pleased to see you among the candidates for the 2010 Arbcom elections, as Wikipedia needs intelligent arbitrators who work on content review and automation to help other editors. Nevertheless, I can imagine that your candidacy might cause stress, self-censorship, and a wish to present yourself in the best light. Even though I would not be as brave as you to subject myself to the challenge of an Arbcom election, I would advise you to relax and be yourself as far as possible.
Don't be afraid to make mistakes! Arbitrators are not infallible. Kiril Lokshin made a mistake and resigned, but was reelected last year with enthusiasm. Similarly, Casliber's nomination explicitly addresses the mistake he made last year, and he may well be reelected this year. Both editors have my admiration and support. We all make mistakes; it is how we deal with those mistakes that matters, and they both handled their mistakes with grace and honor.
In my view, the ability to communicate is one of the most important skills in avoiding mistakes and dealing with them when they happen. Staying quiet and hoping it will all work out was the mistake Casliber made and now regrets. You have to trust that there are other good editors out there, talk with them, share information. Problems on Wikipedia cannot be solved by one editor alone.
Some editors may oppose your candidacy because you are idiosyncratic. I would not. However, you need to convince the community (and me) that you won't approach a problem as something to take home and think about until you come up with a solution. Many minds make illumination work. Geometry guy 23:22, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
Misplacing {{ Good article}} is to be placed "at the bottom of the article before defaultsort, categories and interwikis" not at the top of the article, as with Magnapop. A small matter, but one you might want to fix. — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 17:37, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
I created this RFC last night, the bot doesn't seem to have listed it. -- G W … 10:31, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
Our next Wikipedia NYC Meetup is this weekend on Saturday Dec 4 at Brooklyn Museum during their awesome First Saturdays program, starting at 5 PM.
A particular highlight for the wiki crowd will be ' Seductive Subversion: Women Pop Artists, 1958–1968', and the accompanying " WikiPop" project, with specially-created Wikipedia articles on the artists displayed on iPads in the gallery.
This will be a museum touring and partying meetup, so no excuses about being a shy newbie this time. Bring a friend too!
You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.
To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our
mailing list.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk) 22:20, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on User talk:Barts1a. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.
You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Comment duty. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot ( talk) 23:31, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
I know you've been tinkering with the code, and I just saw a bug that you may want to get ironed out. It first removed an expired tag, but then it invited Hellknowz to comment at the expired rfc (it also didn't follow a redirect here, which may be desired behavior) and then listed the rfc as unsorted. I apologize if this is correct behavior and I've overlooked something. VernoWhitney ( talk) 14:14, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi Harej. I noticed you operate RM Bot. If you get the time, could you see into this and see how you could help? We need all the help we could get :) Reh man 10:40, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
I passed a WP:GAN at GA/2 ( Tvrđa). Shortly afterwards GABot did this "maintenance" operation [2] which appears to be removing the review from WP:GAN and resequencing the article's position in the list. Then about 12 minutes later it removed the entry from WP:GAN [3] with the edit summary "failed" Tvrđa; and also from the section list [4] with the same summary statement, i.e., "failed" Tvrđa. I assume that Bot has not been programmed to make use of data from GA/2. The article was failed at GA/1, which is why I assume that that the edit summary for GA/2 was marked as a "failure". Pyrotec ( talk) 10:14, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of United States presidential assassination attempts and plots. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.
You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Comment duty. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot ( talk) 09:01, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:British Isles Terminology task force/Specific Examples. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.
You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Comment duty. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot ( talk) 12:01, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Someone has marked Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/RFC bot 2 as needing your input. Please visit that page to reply to the requests. Thanks! AnomieBOT ⚡ 11:54, 12 December 2010 (UTC) To opt out of these notifications, place {{bots|optout=operatorassistanceneeded}} anywhere on this page.
Hope this helps. [7] AGK [ • 19:04, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi, User:Teancum passed a WP:GAN at GA/2 ( Perfect Dark Zero), however it appears the GABot did the wrong operation, as it marked the article with the edit summary "failed" in the Revision history of Wikipedia:Good article nominations -- Niwi3 ( talk) 01:10, 20 December 2010 (CET)
if ((preg_match("/\|\s?currentstatus\s?=\s?GA/i", $contents) || preg_match("/\{{2}\s?GA(?! nominee)/", $contents)) && !preg_match("/\{{2}\s?FailedGA/i", $contents)) {
currentstatus=GA
appears on the page — or if {{GA
appears on the page, so long as it's not {{GA nominee
— and {{FailedGA
specifically does not appear on the page, then the article is one that has passed GA review. I'm starting to question whether that last bit is necessary. What do you think?
harej 22:20, 20 December 2010 (UTC)Shouldn't the template for VPC be modified or removed? Probably a task for a bot to remove it all. — raeky T 16:43, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi Harej, I was wondering if it would be possible to make multimove notifications by a non-flagged bot so that the posts would show up on people's watchlists by default. What do you think? I started a section at WT:RM to get some opinions on the issue. It would be good to hear what you think about the proposal. Regards, Jafeluv ( talk) 17:38, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Harej, hi. I hope you're having a lovely holiday season, assuming that you're someone and somewhere that this is a holiday season.
I'd like to draw your attention - with no urgency - to Wikipedia talk:Requested moves#Classifying moves and generating data, which follows from a discussion about some famous people with diacritics in their names. It seems that various people make claims about what our usual practice is, and I'm wondering if that's something we can pin down a bit more objectively. Please let me know what you think, if this idea is technically feasible and in accordance with how we do things 'round here. Thanks in advance. :) - GTBacchus( talk) 23:13, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
At Template:Requested move, I'd like to replace the transclusion of {{ movereq}}, which is a redirect, with {{ Requested move/dated}}, its target. But it looks like this was attempted in the past and impacted the operation of your bot. Could you assist me in seeing to this edit? -- Bsherr ( talk) 16:47, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Hello Harej! The GA bot is awesome. But, recently, I dropped a review and an administrator deleted the GA page ( Talk:Myles Kennedy/GA1). But, the WP:GAN page still shows that I'm reviewing the article. I tried removing it, but it comes up again. Can you fix it, if possible? Btw, I'm not good at programming :( Novice7 | Talk 14:04, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
The bot appears to have stopped running. Vegaswikian ( talk) 08:12, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Hey Harej. I just increased move-multi to a thirty title capacity. However, it now occurs to me that I don't know if RM bot's code needs to be tweaked at the same time, so I'm here asking its grand overlord.-- Fuhghettaboutit ( talk) 08:12, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Hey, just having some trouble with the GA bot. I've recently reviewed Somerhill House and Robert and Thomas Wintour, and in neither case did the bot accept that I was reviewing the articles, or recognise that I had put them on hold. I just promoted Somerhill House, and instead of removing it from the list, it did this. What am I doing wrong?! J Milburn ( talk) 12:03, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
The bot does that sometimes; rather than straightaway promoting an article, it will put one in that weird purgatory state you noted above and then marked it as passed. I'd be more concerned if the bot didn't get its head in the game in the end. Still, it's a curious issue. harej 18:47, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
The bot accepts me for who I am now. If you gave it a talking to, thanks. If not, we've made friends anyways. J Milburn ( talk) 02:19, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Template:RFC list footer unsorted has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Mhiji 01:02, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
You are invited to WikiXDC, a special meetup event and celebration on Saturday, January 22 hosted by the National Archives and Records Administration in downtown Washington, D.C.
Please RSVP soon as possible, as there likely will be a cap on number of attendees that NARA can accommodate.
Note: You can unsubscribe from DC meetup notices by removing your name at Wikipedia:Meetup/DC/Invite/List. BrownBot ( talk) 02:04, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Harej. I'm curious how you found consensus at Talk:Action at a distance (computer programming)#Requested move for the move? As far as I could tell, only one person was strongly in support of it. Powers T 15:20, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
Hey,
I noticed that the RfCbot included more text from my RfC than is really appropriate. I tried fixing it twice ( [8], [9]) but kept getting undone. Can you advise? NickCT ( talk) 15:15, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
I corrected the page from "Rosalie (play)" to "Rosalie (musical)". I made the amendment at both Talk:Rosalie and Wikipedia:Requested moves for 14 January 2011. The bot put it back to "Rosalie play" on the Requested moves page, which is not what I want. Snowman ( talk) 14:53, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
Can you revert your move please? (I'm guessing this request was in uncontroversial moves per WP:RM). Any move from this title ought to go through a move request as this is the most common name, and we continuously have editors changing the name from the most common one to excluding it. Thanks. — Spaceman Spiff 05:18, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
See Wikipedia_talk:Good_article_nominations#New_function_for_GA_bot.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 16:52, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
In User:RFC bot/rfcbot.php, you currently have {{Philosophy/Nav}}. Could this be changed to {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy/Nav}} as I have moved the template to a new location. Thanks -- WOSlinker ( talk) 23:08, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
Well I asked the person who made the move a few days ago here but it's only just occurred to me looking at the list of requested moves that the bot takes no notice. It would appear to have been changed so as to allow the discussion to take place on a page other than the one to be moved. In this instance it would appear they were trying to say they'd like to move a lot of a pages and instead of listing each one they tried to just link to a list. I'm not sure that's a sensible idea as it means that notices aren't placed on every page, so that along with the bot taking no notice of it, made me decide that there was no point to it. Dpmuk ( talk) 00:43, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia_talk:Good_article_nominations#Clarify_my_argument.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 09:13, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
This is the BRFA I was talking about today: Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/WAPLeaderboardBot. Thanks -- Jeremyb ( talk) 02:13, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
Think I've worked out why this is broken. See Wikipedia talk:Requested moves#Invisible backlog. Dpmuk ( talk) 00:17, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi Harej. I fixed the link so that it will go to the actual questions page. But I think the code in User:RFC bot still needs to be updated. :) Thanks, œ ™ 00:00, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
Template:Rfctag-alt has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:50, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
The bot is restoring ( example) non-free content to Wikipedia space in violation of WP:NFCC #9. The file in question is File:Portrait of Edward James.jpg, which is properly marked in machine readable format as a non-free file. Please shut down the bot until this error is corrected. Thank you, -- Hammersoft ( talk) 17:10, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
As requested moves is not the appropriate venue for media files (at least I don't remember it being), it was not something I had kept in mind. However, something like this can easily be rectified. harej 22:32, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
I'm confused about why the RFC bot removed an RFC tag here for being expired when it was just placed. Thanks. - Hydroxonium ( H3O+) 18:46, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Please fix your bot. It is making several mistakes, as documented at Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations#Bot strangeness?. – MuZemike 16:25, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
The bot has notified a page "not" to refer to itself: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Avatar_%28Hinduism%29#Requested_move. Please correct the edit ("not this page"). Thank you. Hoverfish Talk 14:10, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
Please see User talk:Racepacket#Unblock proposal. Cheers.-- Fuhghettaboutit ( talk) 15:43, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
Bot did [10], but reviewer had done [11]. Is it possible the presence of the {{failedGA}} template, or the categories it produces, is a factor? Gimmetoo ( talk) 02:27, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi, as I think was discussed once before but not implemented, would it be possible when you have a spare moment to update the bot so that the "backlog" line that it adds or removes from WP:RM depending on whether there is a backlog reads as it does now, namely:
If this is technically impossible for some reason, I'll change it back, but I'd have thought it would be fairly trivial to do. (Oh, the point of it is that the word "backlog" will actually link to the backlog further down the page, instead of a category of all backlogs.) Thanks,-- Kotniski ( talk) 13:22, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi -- trying to figure out what is going wrong at WT:Good article nominations#Tony Blair, I looked over the php code for the bot. My php skills aren't very strong, but it looks to me like once the reviewer and subtopic info are placed in the database, the bot will always take them automatically from the database and there is no way to override this behavior -- hence, no way to correct an error. Did I miss something? If not, can the problem be fixed? Regards, Looie496 ( talk) 07:31, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
I've disabled the "feature" which causes this inflexibility. The bot now checks each time what the reviewer and subtopic are. Updates will take a little longer but the bot will be more responsive to changes. harej 00:22, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Apologies for the short notice for this meetup, but let's discuss when, where & what for DC Meetup #17. Also, if you haven't yet, please join wikimedia-dc mailing list to stay informed. Cheers, User:Aude ( talk)
Note: You can unsubscribe from DC meetup notices by removing your name at Wikipedia:Meetup/DC/Invite/List. -- Message delivered by AudeBot, on behalf of User:Aude
Because of the block and subsquent unblock with mentor, I am contacting you as well as Racepacket of my intention to review this article.
It has a good deal of work ahead of it however, it is VERY possible it can be accomplished in a 7 day hold period, mainly because it is a matter of adding needed work with some copy editing of the prose and not nearly as much removal of un-needed fluff.-- Amadscientist ( talk) 12:36, 6 March 2011 (UTC)