Jump to content

User talk:GreenC/2021

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Angus (talk | contribs) at 22:54, 20 April 2021 (InternetArchiveBot in esWiki). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.



perse nuk vendosni import export te vitit 2020 por keni len ate te vitit 2017? Apo ngaqe esht deficiti shum me i lart

Happy New Year!

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year}} to user talk pages.

Iron Law of Oligarchy

You mention this on your userpage. I got indeffed and IP-banned from Conservapedia for a single well-sourced post noting that molality and molarity are respectively absolute and relative measures. If I hadn't bragged about it on RationalWiki, it'd probably still be there... Narky Blert (talk) 18:24, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have to say

"As a proof, they told me that the Keep vote of [GreenC which you see in the deletion discussion is done by them." If that's true, it's actually pretty cunning. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:47, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Eh, my guess is a high end fraud lawyer is more cunning to fall for it and then post tears of regret publicly on Wikipedia. Story doesn't add up. -- GreenC 20:56, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That feels probable, sure. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:59, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia Motivation Award The Wikipedia Motivation Barnstar
You are the true motivator :) Sliekid (talk) 07:16, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your Opinion Requested at Michael Shellenberger

Hi GreenC,
You've previously weighed-in on the issues of publicity at Michael Shellenberger. I recently tried to clean said page up and add academic literature to the page, and it seems the page's subject has recently taken umbrage with said revisions. If you have the time, do you mind taking a look at the issues that recently occurred at Talk:Michael Shellenberger? --Hobomok (talk) 20:41, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Edits reverted

Hey GreenC, thanks so much for reviewing Saket Modi. I noticed you reverted all of my edits although they were written in a neutral tone and were supported by third party, reliable sources. I read WP:LEAD that you highlighted in your comment and it says "a lead section should contain no more than four well-composed paragraphs and be carefully sourced as appropriate." and "The lead section should briefly summarize the most important points covered in an article." I am not trying to stuff the lead section rather updating it and adding an award. It was hardly a one-line addition and i provided citations too to back them up. In addition to this, i had made some small changes to the rest of the article with citations and they were also reverted. You seem to be very well versed in policies and guidelines. I would really appreciate your guidance and help with this. Thanks.2405:204:C:AD2D:18B4:8F41:A22B:98E2 (talk) 16:05, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sir, did you have a chance to look at it?.

Scripts++ Newsletter – Issue 20

Signature issue on your comment at AfD

It seems like there was a problem with your signature for your comment (Special:Diff/1004919157/1004929875) on the Jack Schlossberg AfD. It was a good comment any you might want to correct this issue. Cheers! - tucoxn\talk 13:42, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

crowd governance

the external link on your user page no longer works :( i dont want to edit your page, but i was able to enjoy the story at this address: https://web.archive.org/web/20200127053758/http://misrc.umn.edu/wise/2014_Papers/110.pdf have a good one Violarulez (talk) 20:39, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, added the archive link. Interesting and non-intuitive story. -- GreenC 20:43, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Esperanto literary awards requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz Read! Talk! 15:58, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz: I didn't create empty categories 11 years ago, I guess whatever was there has been deleted. -- GreenC 16:09, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

TravelMate URL's

Unfortunately I can not find the exact reference for this but back in June 2020 you stopped bot InternetArchiveBot from archiving links for [1] or possibly a shorther name, as the archived versions do not work - the only reference I can now find is Wikipedia:Australian_Wikipedians'_notice_board/Archive_57#premierpostal.com. I have now encountered a similar problem with Red Cliffs, Victoria where a link to http://www.travelmate.com.au/MapMaker/MapMaker.asp which is dead, is being archived but the archived versions do no work as the javascript does not operate. The bot has now for the second time archived this link, on both occasions removing the 'dead link' tag. Can you please again help in stopping this bot archiving links for this URL. Fleet Lists (talk) 02:52, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fleet Lists, I believe the correct action is to 'whitelist' the URL which means the bot will always consider it 'alive' and will not try to add an archive. I just did this which should stop IABot. It could still be a problem with any other bot trying to save dead links in the future due to the {{dead link}} tag. If the link is dead and no viable archive it might be better to convert these to {{citation}} without a |url=. -- GreenC 03:32, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your reply and update of the Red Cliffs article. However the bot has now revisited and removed the "dead link" tag. So we are back where we started. How can the URL be "whitelisted"? Fleet Lists (talk) 22:00, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Now I'm not sure what is happening. For the moment, I added {{cbignore}} which tells the bot to stay off the reference. This is fine, except when there are dozens or 100s of citations, as in this case, as each requires the cbignore. I'm going to ask the developer why the whitelist is not working. -- GreenC 22:45, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ah now figured it out: at iabot.org set the URL status to blacklist (not whitelist) and also delete the archive URL from the record. This action can only be done by an administrator. Should be set now. -- GreenC 22:51, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for George Dinning

On 21 February 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article George Dinning, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in 1897, former slave George Dinning was the first black man to successfully sue a mob of the Ku Klux Klan? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/George Dinning. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, George Dinning), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Brian Nelson (literature professor), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Swann in Love.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:14, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

there's a mess...

... in this edit.

Trappist the monk (talk) 23:02, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bug that caused this fixed. -- GreenC 16:36, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Removing archived urls

Hi! I'm sure you're doing great work, but not all of it seems to be going well. I've already posted at User talk:GreenC bot to ask why your bot removed an archived link from Louise Blouin. Why did you then again remove this archived url with this edit? Why should that url not be archived in case it ever ceases to be accessible in the future? Are you aware that, because of the General Data Protection Regulation, many North American websites block access for users from Europe? And that archive.org in many cases provides a way of restoring that access? Of course, if we have a policy that links should not be archived unless unavoidably necessary, do please point me to it. Otherwise, can you unconditionally guarantee that neither you nor your bot will again remove a working archived link from Wikipedia? And that you will, as a matter of priority, identify and repair any instance where either you or the bot has done so in the past? Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:23, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We don't use archives with the intention of bypassing policy blocks, that is not what are archives are meant for, there is no community consensus for that. Policy blocks, be it a pay wall or government regulation. There is no problem adding archive URLs as a precaution for link rot, but in this instance it was added directly into the URL with no citation template or {{webarchive}} thus in effect making to live URL inaccessible - literally deleting it. Now, the bot in this case was doing a URL move of observer.com because a user requested it - changing a dead URL to a live URL (there was a change in schemes at observer.com). During URL moves it does preserve the archive but only if there is a citation template or {{webarchive}}. I probably could add a feature to add a new {{webarchive}} when it's a square URL with an archive in order to preserve the archive. -- GreenC 22:48, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The archived link leads directly to the actual source cited when the content was written (see WP:Text-source integrity). That content may have been changed or completely removed from more recent versions of the external page. There is no obligation that I'm aware of to cite a current link to a page if we already have an archived link; nor is there any obligation to use citation templates or webarchive templates (WP:CITEVAR). Anyway, would you kindly either point me to community consensus that a working archived link may be removed without discussion or unconditionally guarantee that neither you nor your bot will again remove a working archived link from Wikipedia, and that you will, as a matter of priority, identify and repair any instance where either you or the bot has done so in the past? Thank you, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:32, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I already added the feature. I'll take a look about readding old ones. -- GreenC 13:53, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect IABot's edit summary in Russian

The current summary "Добавьте № книги для Википедия:Проверяемость" has no sense in Russian language. Correct summary can be "Добавление ссылок на электронные версии книг" or "Добавление ссылок на электронные версии № (plural|книги|книг)". MBH (talk) 14:10, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@MBH: I don't know which is better so I did the first one. Thank you very much. -- GreenC 14:31, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Also I advice you not to use machine translation for translating bot messages into any languages you don't know. Maybe machine translation between big Roman and Germanic languages is not very bad, but machine translation from English to Russian is always terrible due to big difference in languages' structure. MBH (talk) 14:42, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion

An article you created or have significantly contributed to has been nominated for deletion. The article is being discussed at the deletion discussion, located here. North America1000 11:41, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Backlinks?

Hi GreenC! I'm enjoying using the Backlinks functionality - it's been about a year now. I didn't receive any emails today - did your process stop for April Fools' Day?  :-) Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 13:48, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's not that clever :) I checked the logs and it appears to have run and sent emails, the data looks normal. I just sent you a test email from the server can you verify it came through? -- GreenC 15:09, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I did not receive the test email, and have received emails from other senders. @Certes: Did you receive the Backlinks emails today? GoingBatty (talk) 16:03, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm strange. Certes is using a new system that post results online instead of email. Do you want to use that instead? For example:
Config page: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Certes/Backlinks
Data page: User:Certes/Backlinks/Report
Otherwise I can try to debug why emails are not coming through. -- GreenC 16:08, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I'm interested in having the results posted online instead. I've created User:GoingBatty/Backlinks/Report. For User:GoingBatty/stopbutton, when stopped, does this mean that results are queued on your side, and then all posted once we set Action=RUN again? If so, I'm interested in using that on the days when I'm away from my computer. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 16:38, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Just ran it, and it worked. I forgot to adjust the filters you wanted to keep out Template, Project and some others, those will be in effect next run. The stop button is a hard stop the program does not cache results. Useful for extended disabled. For random days, recommend viewing the page history which serves as a cache of prior runs. -- GreenC 19:13, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There were quite a few links to be fixed in the Template, Project and other spaces, so feel free to keep those coming. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 00:53, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You now have everything except these:
(^Talk:|^Wikipedia:|^Wikipedia talk:|^Template talk:|^Portal talk:|^User:|^User talk:|^File talk:|^MediaWiki:|^MediaWiki talk:|^Help:|^Help talk:|^Category talk:|^Book:|^Book talk:|^Draft:|^Draft talk:|^TimedText:|^TimedText talk:|^Module talk:)
-- GreenC 01:32, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
My Backlinks appeared on the data page as usual at 10:47 UTC today. It has failed to appear a couple of times over the last few months, but worked fine today. I asked to stop receiving Backlinks by e-mail, as my long list produced lots of e-mails. If I'm away for a few days I'll just catch up using the page history. Certes (talk) 23:47, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

IABot bug - "blocked: You have been blocked from editing." despite not being blocked

Hello! I think phab:T274050 is back to bug us again. I'm getting a "blocked: You have been blocked from editing." error when trying to analyse & edit pages despite not being blocked. I can't seem to make the tool report on the exact API message it's getting (e.g. to see if an autoblock of a Toolforge IP is to blame), could you have a look? Thanks! ƒirefly ( t · c ) 15:36, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pages using duplicate arguments in template calls

is it possible to remove User:GreenC/test from Category:Pages using duplicate arguments in template calls (easier to see the actual problems when there aren't user pages in there)? thank you. Frietjes (talk) 16:22, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done. -- GreenC 16:33, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bot functionality request

Hi GreenC, nice to meet you. I found you trawling through the bot status report (User:MajavahBot/Bot status report). I was wondering if I could interest you or request a relatively simple bot task? That task is: periodically go through the entries in this category: Category:Peer review requests not opened.

For each peer review talk page there will be a template like {{Peer review|archive=X}}. There should be a corresponding peer review page called Wikipedia:Peer review/PAGENAME/archiveX, but about once a week someone starts the process but doesn't actually create the page, so the template just hangs there. It would be very useful for a bot to remove the template if the peer review wasn't started for, like, a week after the template was placed, as that probably means no review page will be created.

I've had some problems with single functionality bots before so I thought I might ask you because your bot seems unlikely to randomly become inactive :P. Crossing my fingers, Tom (LT) (talk) 10:28, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Tom (LT) - I can help with this, though it would be a standalone bot, running on Toolforge from cron ie. servers maintained by Wikimedia in their datacenter, with code accessible to anyone with a Toolforge account. I think once a day it could retrieve the list of page names in the tracking category, along with today's date, and add it to a text file in two columns (page name|added (ie. today's) date). If the page name is already in the text file don't add it again, but check if it has been more than 7 days since the added date. If so, verify there is Peer review archive and if not then remove the Peer review template, and remove from the text file. Likewise if the pagename is in the text file but not in the tracking category then remove the pagename from the file. Sound good? -- GreenC 02:19, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That would be wonderful. It is just one of those small thankless tasks that a bot could so, so I'm very appreciative of this. There are a couple of similar tasks lying around, would it be possible to pester you in the future if something similar arises? Tom (LT) (talk) 07:48, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Alright. Hopefully will get to it this week. It depends on the task how complicated, and how busy I am at the time. There is also BOTREQ. BTW I will need to send this through BRFA which sometimes can take forever but see no trouble in approval given it's simplicity and non-controversial. -- GreenC 15:30, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
User:GreenC bot/Job 20 & Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/GreenC bot 20 -- GreenC 03:29, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

When you have a moment

Hello Green C. I hope you are well. I asked for a run from Template:Cleanup bare URLs/bot last night that it still hasn't processed. You may already be aware of this but I wanted to let you know just in case. My year and a half long infobox person cleanup project is almost finished so I will have time to use this bot again. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 22:24, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello MarnetteD, there was a stuck/zombie process on one of the Toolforge grid computers blocking the spawning of new processes. That can happen, it's beyond my control to prevent but easily fixed by killing the process (done). If by chance it ever happens again and I am not around for a while, you can request help at Village Pump Technical who will point you to the right place (probably a Phab ticket), the stuck process will be called "tagbot.awk". Last resort waiting for the computer to reboot every couple months would also clear it. You take on big projects :) This one is probably infinite but every change is a huge help. -- GreenC 02:46, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You said it :-) Thanks for the info and the fix! MarnetteD|Talk 02:55, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

InternetArchiveBot in esWiki

Hi, GreenC. Thanks for taking care of this. Can you assure me that, in addition of fixing the duplicates, the bot won't perform inconsequential editions like this (it's difficult to find, it's just an added space)? That's the other half of the complaint. If that's so, I'll lift the block. Thanks. --Angus (talk) 22:07, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This bot is small and purpose-built it shouldn't make empty edits. Bigger bots that can happen as they are doing many functions adding and deleting text. -- GreenC 23:28, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry I misunderstood, you mean ensure IABot does not (was thinking the smaller fixer bot). I contacted Cyberpower678, this should be an easy bug to detect and avoid by removing all whitespace from the original and new article, compare the two strings and if they are equal abort the edit. -- GreenC 00:19, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
GreenC, yes, this will be corrected. I should have a fix for this ready fairly quick. —CYBERPOWER (Message) 02:51, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi guys, thanks for your cooperation. I unblocked the bot. --Angus (talk) 12:44, 19 April 2021 (UTC) cc user:cyberpower678[reply]

Hi Angus, could you recommend wording for a Spanish edit summary equivalent to "Fixing 1 redundant {{wayback}}" and "Fixing 2 redundant {{wayback}}" (plural). Will also need "Fixing 1 redundant archiveurl/urlarchvo argument" and "Fixing 2 redundant archiveurl/urlarchvo arguments". I've learned not to use Google Translate or guess but ask a native speaker. Thank you! -- GreenC 14:41, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Here:
  • Arreglo {{wayback}} redundante
  • Arreglo 2 {{wayback}} redundantes
  • Arreglo argumento urlarchivo/archiveurl redundante
  • Arreglo 2 argumentos urlarchivo/archiveurl redundantes
--Angus (talk) 14:52, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Angus, btw, the bot has a run page so it doesn’t need to be blocked to stop it. You can find the run page at https://iabot.toolforge.org/index.php?page=runpages&wiki=eswikiCYBERPOWER (Around) 16:27, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Cyberpower678, unfortunately the "IABot Management Console" wants me to give it unnecessary access to private information, like my email address and who knows what else, before it will show me that page. So it remains inaccessible to me. --Angus (talk) 16:49, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Angus, as the designer of the bot and the UI I can assure that not only is your email address not saved anywhere unless you explicitly tell the tool to, your email address is not ever passed to the tool on authorization. I have no idea why it says that. All you are giving the tool is your username and public accessible data like your registration date, permissions, and block status. —CYBERPOWER (Chat) 17:05, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Angus, user privacy is taken very seriously and is never leaked. Private data is only stored with the users’ permission and critical data is encrypted to prevent unauthorized access. —CYBERPOWER (Chat) 17:06, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cyberpower678, it's ok, no worries. Maybe the Mediawiki API (or whatever) should be changed so it doesn't request unneeded data...

GreenC, thanks man! Sorry I wasn't there when needed, I'm glad things are fixed now! --Angus (talk) 22:54, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

esWiki

Hi, I'm not sure if this is the right place to report this bug, but InternetArchiveBot duplicated two articles on esWiki while trying to fix a redundant archive. The first one is es:Anthem Sports (a duplicate of es:Anthem Sports & Entertainment) and the second one is es:Heckler (a duplicate of es:Heckler & Koch MP5). I think these are the only cases so far ([2]). --Soulreaper (talk) 15:08, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I am aware of this bug in the code and fixed it and had already redirected Heckler but was not aware of Anthem, now also redirected. If you think they should be deleted instead I'll start that process. -- GreenC 16:34, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]