User talk:cyberpower678

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Are you my friend? Click here to find out.
Yes check.svg
This user is online, or has forgotten to update this message after finishing a wikisession.
(If there have been no edits from this user in the last 60 minutes, it is safe to assume that this user either forgot or is lurking.)
cyberpower ChatOnline
Click here to find out why my signature changes color.
Wikistress3D 1 v3.jpg

Disputes or discussions that appear to have ended or is disputed will be archived.—cyberpower

This user has created 1490 accounts on Wikipedia.
View my talk page Archives.
RfA candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report
RfB candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report

No RfXs since 22:14, 9 July 2014 (UTC).—cyberbot I NotifyOnline

X mark.svg

This user is watching his watchlist and does not want a TB at this time.

Cyberbot II likes to "pounce" ... waay too soon[edit]

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

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

You pointed out a stale edit. If protection is applied, it waits 5 minutes before applying the template. That update was implemented after the mention 8 second gap edit. As for waiting to re-apply the template, might have to do a bit of creative thinking.—cyberpower ChatOnline 05:14, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Additionally, could there be a 5-10 minute delay before readding the Pending changes template? There have have been just a few instances of Cyberbot immediately adding the protection template immediately some vandalism, and it's rather annoying to manually revert rather than just rollback. It's doing a great service adding the template, but just tone it back a bit for the vandalism patrollers. ^^ Tutelary (talk) 17:19, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Quoting from my previous response, "As for waiting to re-apply the template, might have to do a bit of creative thinking."  :-)—cyberpower ChatOnline 20:02, 9 July 2014 (UTC)


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

Suggestions for supercount[edit]

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

Couple suggestions:

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

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