User talk:Nettrom

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Hello Nettrom, Eduemoni↑talk↓ has given you a shinning smiling star! You see, these things promote WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day better. Spread the Shinning Smiling Star whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or someone putting up with some stick at this time. Enjoy!


Hello! I've wanted to ask if it's possible to start running this bot in ru.wikipedia: as I suppose, it would be helpful there. I could help you with local feedbacks received (and work as a translator) and could help you with the whole process of bot start there - I am a local bureaucrat and that wouldn't cause any problems. Rubin16 (talk) 12:47, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi, sorry about the delay responding to this. If there is interest from the community on Russian Wikipedia, I'm sure we could make that happen. What I usually do is that I post to the Village Pump (or somewhere similar, I noticed some Wikipedias have a specific place for discussions with non-native speakers) and see if there's a group of users who are interested in using it. If there is, I can make a push to get it set up there together with a couple of other Wikipedias that I've promised will get it. Also, one of my collaborators is Russian, so I'll have some local translation help too :) So my question is, is there a particular place on ru.wikipedia where I should post? Cheers, Nettrom (talk) 16:17, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Sorry for my delay now, I am on a bsuiness trip... We have an english-speaking village pump (ru:Википедия:Форум/Иноязычный), you can post there and I could translate it to Russian and move to some general forum to attract more interest. Or I can help you with prior translation and posting directly to the general village pump :) Rubin16 (talk) 19:05, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
Sorry for disturbing again - are there any news about that? Rubin16 (talk) 13:34, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
No need to apologise! I've just been really busy the past few weeks and didn't get around to take care of this. Have now made sure it's on my list of things to get done, I plan to get to it by the end of the day. Thanks for the reminder! Cheers, Nettrom (talk) 16:07, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
Just posted to the English-speaking Village Pump you pointed me to: ru:Википедия:Форум/Иноязычный#SuggestBot on Russian Wikipedia? If you don't have time to translate it, let me know, I have a Russian friend I can ask. Cheers, Nettrom (talk) 17:59, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
I think that we can summarize a little bit: we have a complete support of your bot (link) :) Rubin16 (talk) 14:27, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Thanks for the link! I kept track of the comments the first few days and noticed they were largely positive, awesome to see a few more drop in at the end. I'll get to work on this once New Year's rolls along in between other things, then. Thanks for helping out with keeping in touch and translating content. I might ask you a question or two about Russian Wikipedia as I work on this, unless my Russian colleague can help me out. Cheers, Nettrom (talk) 11:57, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Ok, waiting for you now :) Never mind to contact me with questions: the best way is a talk page in or wikimail - I don't often check :) Rubin16 (talk) 14:00, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Hi, Nettrom! Are there any news on possible implementation? :) or are you still busy? Rubin16 (talk) 06:17, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
Rubin16: Thanks for getting in touch about this! Things are quite hectic around here, but I've found some time to check up on the status of getting SuggestBot to Russian Wikipedia (as well as Persian, they're both on my list). I'll make a post to SuggestBot's talk page on ruwiki tomorrow about the most important problem to solve right now, which is to figure out categories of articles that SuggestBot should pick from (it always uses a local database of articles so it always suggest articles that need improvement). I have gathered a list of candidates, but users on ruwiki can probably help me find ones that I have missed and decide which ones are most important. Regards, Nettrom (talk) 22:46, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
ok, thanks! Rubin16 (talk) 04:05, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Hello! I've updated and expanded list of the categories to work on. Just one question: as I see in stub-categories are restricted to those that have "-stiu" in their name. For the check could be performed on "Незавершённые статьи" in the category name Rubin16 (talk) 08:43, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Thanks for the update and for confirming the pattern for Stub-categories. I had seen a similar pattern when I was looking at them, but of course would need a check by a native speaker. I've gathered articles from the categories and will post an update to ruwiki soon. Cheers, Nettrom (talk) 14:06, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Hello! I am done with the translation in, the translated version of is here - link. I've forked your repo for this purpose and also shared it with you via bitbucket. Please, write me if any questions will arise Rubin16 (talk) 05:13, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi Rubin16, no questions at the moment, instead a million thanks for the help! I merged your changes to the configuration and ran a test. Have also submitted a bot request so the bot approval process can get started. Thanks again! Regards, Nettrom (talk) 18:30, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi once again. I assigned flag to the bot Rubin16 (talk) 05:01, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
@Rubin16:: Thanks! I did a couple of tests to make sure our code works and it is now running. You should get some suggestions in a few minutes. Cheers, Nettrom (talk) 16:11, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
works great for me! :) so, can I start advertising your bot again? :) Rubin16 (talk) 03:29, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
@Rubin16:: Happy to hear it works, that's awesome! And yeah, feel free to let others know that it's now up and running, thanks! Regards, Nettrom (talk) 15:04, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi once again! I've got a little complaint :) I don't know why but Suggestbot ignores me and sends no suggestions for a while... I've set a weekly update by {{User:SuggestBot/userbox|частота=еженедельно}} on my user page but got just one initial message from him Rubin16 (talk) 09:23, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
@Rubin16: Complaints are very welcome, but particularly when something is not working the way it should. Sorry about SuggestBot not sending suggestions when it should! I did some testing here, the problem was that our configuration looked for the userbox under its Russian spelling, while in the examples we use "User:SuggestBot/userbox". The result was that it would instead use the default values, which is monthly suggestions. I updated the configuration so it looks for the right template and added an issue to our Bitbucket repository so we can handle localisations as well. Based on what's in our database now you should get some suggestions tomorrow. Thanks again for reporting it, happy I could get it solved! Regards, Nettrom (talk) 15:47, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
it works now, thanks! Rubin16 (talk) 04:51, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Community portal/Opentask[edit]

Heya; apparently SuggestBot should be updating Wikipedia:Community portal/Opentask, but doesn't seem to be :/. Any chance you could hit it with a stick? :). Ironholds (talk) 19:34, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

I should probably update the template while this part of SuggestBot is on leave, awaiting being moved to Tool Labs. With the shutdown of the Toolserver, I expired my account there and packed things up, so it's currently not running. At the moment I'm busy chasing a conference submission deadline, so it'll have to wait until after the 23rd. I will have some time to make some adjustments to the code and get it running on Tools Labs then, though, so it should be back in operation before the end of the month. Hope that's not a problem? Cheers, Nettrom (talk) 23:56, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
Naw, that sounds good :). Let me know if you have any difficulty with Tool Labs - I know people who know people on ;p. Ironholds (talk) 18:54, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Nettrom. Any news on this front, please? Thanks. --PFHLai (talk) 11:33, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

@PFHLai: I'm sorry for not getting this done. The main reason is that I'm conflicted about the Community Portal, as it is right now it does not appear to be an effective way to engage editors. Both my own research (which I hope to have published soon) and WMF's click data from the 2012 redesign (meta:Research:Community portal redesign/Opentask#Results) indicates that the portal doesn't really lead to saved edits. The WMF data suggests about 2-3 edits per day come through the portal, which is not a lot given that it gets about 8-10,000 views per day (ref Wiki ViewStats graph of WP:CP).
I'm not sure I have the time to lead a redesign effort of the portal, but I'd be happy to get the conversation started by writing something on the talk page. Then we could see where we go from there? Regards, Nettrom (talk) 16:46, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
That's alright, Nettrom. I'll take care of the template manually for now. Thank you for looking into this. Cheers! --PFHLai (talk) 03:26, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
@PFHLai: I wasn't happy about the answer I gave you and having you doing all this manually, so I went ahead and edited the script that updates the task list. It's a simpler version than what we had before in that it only picks articles randomly whereas the previous version used data on article popularity & quality for some of the articles. I've got it ready to run on Tool Labs now, so just let me know and I'll set it to update Wikipedia:Community portal/Opentask again. Regards, Nettrom (talk) 20:38, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
That's very nice of you, Nettrom. Please feel free to unleash your bot on WP:OT anytime. Thank you very much. --PFHLai (talk) 10:11, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
No problem, PFHLai! I've now set the bot up to update the list twice every hour. Thanks for taking care of the list manually while SuggestBot was away, and for nudging me to get it working again! Regards, Nettrom (talk) 11:05, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Brilliant Idea Barnstar Hires.png The Brilliant Idea Barnstar
For SuggestBot. Freshman404Talk 02:17, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
THANKS THAANKS THAANKS Husamu-d-din (talk) 21:45, 25 May 2014 (UTC)


Thank you for making those recommendations for me to edit on my talk page. How do you determine that? →→IBCPirates (talk) 23:38, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi IBCPirates, thanks for using SuggestBot and for getting in touch! Apologies for the delay in responding, I've been terribly busy at the moment getting a research paper ready for the CSCW conference, leaves little time for other things.
Here's how SuggestBot works: It first grabs the most recent articles (Main namespace) you've edited and then finds articles similar to those by using three types of algorithms. It first finds other users who have edited the same articles and collects articles they've edited but you haven't. Secondly it follows the wikilinks from the articles you've edited, gathering the ones that are linked most often. Third it compares the text of the articles you've edited with the rest of the English Wikipedia articles and find the ones that are most similar. From these three sets it filters it through our database of task categories, looking for articles tagged with improvement needs. The 30 that remain after filtering are then sent to you.
I hope that explains it, I can provide more details if necessary. Let me know if you have any questions, and thanks again for using SuggestBot! Regards, Nettrom (talk) 14:03, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Another barnstar for you![edit]

Vitruvian Barnstar Hires.png The Technical Barnstar
Thank you so much for your work on m:Research:Ideas/Screening WikiProject Medicine articles for quality/Prediction table. This is going to save me so much time and effort. I really appreciate it! Thank you, WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:33, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
@WhatamIdoing: Thanks so much! I was tremendously happy to get this started for WP Medicine since doing something like this has been an idea for a long, long time. Glad you like it, am looking forward to learning about your experiences and how we can make it work better! Cheers, Nettrom (talk) 16:50, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
I checked the bottom ten articles yesterday—the ones rated right around 50%—and they were really right about 50% in my opinion. The higher rated ones were of course definitely not stubs.
Would it be both useful and not too much work to see which ones of these get changed (over the next couple of weeks), as a means of validating the probability levels? WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:15, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
@WhatamIdoing: I'm pleasantly surprised that it seems that even a low probability of stub (e.g. around 50%) is still often right. It might be that we can improve the software, I have better data available but did not have the time to use it before the Hackathon. Next time we run it the results should be better (although exactly how much better I do not know).
And yes, I have been thinking about following up on this, both to understand which articles were reassessed, but I think it would also be great if I could discuss some of the articles that weren't reassessed with the WikiProject members, as I'm really curious to understand where the software failed. We could use that feedback to hopefully improve the training of the software as well. And it shouldn't be too much work to do, I have some code from a different project that looks for article reassessments, it should be easy to modify that. Cheers, Nettrom (talk) 17:39, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
I still do a lot of the article assessment for WPMED, and you can always talk to me. WT:MEDA is the official page for such discussions; you're welcome at the main WT:MED page, too. Wouterstomp does a lot of this work, too, and so does CFCF. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:20, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

I've got a false positive for you and User:EpochFail to consider: Henry Ford Health System rated above 95%. It has a lot of tables, but almost no text. It's possible that someone else would rate it as Start-class, but I think I'm leaving it as a Stub. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:44, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Shuvo Roy is another false positive (same type: lots of lists, almost no actual sentences). WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:24, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Also Monica Lin Brown. It might be appropriate to ignore anything inside blockquotes. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:32, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for doing this! The predictions seem pretty accurate. It would be interesting to see the actually predicted class as well. Can you also do this for other classes? (I assume stubs that aren't stubs were the easiest to start with). Also could you provide the list of redirects that were classified as stubs so we can correct those? --WS (talk) 07:29, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Ooh! Good idea. I've added a new column to the table to include the predicted assessment class. I'll look into making another run to show articles that need re-assessment in other classes. Maybe Nettrom will beat me to it. ;) --EpochFail (talkcontribs) 09:33, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
I think this would be interesting, but it does seem a lot less likely to be accurate. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:24, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Automation and improving the slush pile on ENWIKI[edit]

I watched caught the Research showcase video today, and it sort of got me thinking. Just some brainstorming here...

One of the places I do quite a bit of editing and reviewing is ENWIKI's article for creation process. If you are not familiar with it, in broad terms, it is an optional path that new editors can use to create article drafts, and wait to have them reviewed before being subjected the the full onslaught of Wikipedia's gatekeeping. Severe problems tend to be caught relatively quickly, but more modest, arguably correctable problems, in theory have a chance to survive.

It is also a somewhat ... err, problematic process. At present, there are roughly two thousand, six hundred new editors who have submitted new articles waiting for some feedback. A third of those have been waiting three weeks or more without having had a word said back to them. Many of the people who wait that long ... will never come back. I often worry that the process is a whisper-chipper for potential new editors.

Most new articles.. the vast majority of new articles, do not survive the process. It is my guess without evidence that most of the associated editors... same result. For the promotional ones, many of which are self-promoting or otherwise interest conflicted, that is probably an okay result. But as a total process result, it concerns me.

Here are some angles on where SuggestBot or similar ML techniques could (I say, handwaving feverishly) perhaps help things a bit:

  1. Identify interesting drafts to SuggestBot users and include them in Suggest results, drawing additional eyes to article drafts. Difficulty: Picking out the minority of salvageable drafts.
  2. Identify "articles more likely to survive" for the small cadre of AfC reviewers, letting reviewers focus more on articles with survival potential, and less on those with little survival potential.
  3. Identify cases where ML could actually provide constructive advice prior to the arrival of a trusted reviewer. (Probably hard.)
  4. More general understanding of the AfC slush pile.

Anyway, those are some thoughts that came to mind. Thanks for publicizing your research, and for SuggestBot. Cheers, --j⚛e deckertalk 01:02, 21 August 2014 (UTC)