Jump to content

User talk:Scsbot

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 87.102.17.246 (talk) at 22:39, 7 June 2010 (Bot malfunction.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This the talk page for a bot account.

To leave messages for the bot's maintainer, please do so at User talk:Ummit.

If you leave messages here, they will automatically stop the bot.

Source:Meteorite, Re.:Ref Desk.Misc.

This bot has malfunctioned and removed a source I was placing there. 65.163.112.225 06:16, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved; see User talk:Ummit#bot again. —Steve Summit (talk) 04:19, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The bot had malfunctioned at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science

The bot just asploded Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science. I've reverted the change and will be monitoring its next few edits and blocking if it continues to break pages. - CHAIRBOY () 01:36, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for catching that. Either Wikipedia is horribly slow tonight, or some part of the network is, because the bot wasn't getting anywhere. I control-C'ed out of it, not realizing that it was evidently in the middle of submitting its changes to the Science desk. —Steve Summit (talk) 02:53, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it flipped out on the Science desk again. :( Arakunem 02:07, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. It's not the bot's fault per se, but rather, something that's gone ghastlily wrong with my Verizon DSL connection, which for the past couple of days has had such horrendous latency and bletcherously low bandwidth that I (and my bot) can hardly do anything. Sorry about this, folks. —Steve Summit (talk) 02:14, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The bot's last edit was October 23, 2008. Should we manually add the desk headers for the time being? ~AH1(TCU) 23:48, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Language RD

Has the bot forgotten about WP:RD/L? It hasn't been archived in several days. —Angr 06:45, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The bot is manually invoked (not fully automatic), and I was traveling last week, with limited 'net access. Archiving is mostly back to normal now. —Steve Summit (talk) 22:13, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hate to be a pain, but the Language desk is full again! —Angr 11:00, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh! Thanks. I had no idea. (The bot's been issuing an error message for the past week or two, but I misinterpreted it and didn't realize what was actually going on.) Fixed now. —Steve Summit (talk) 00:37, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bot marked edits

Out of curiosity, why doesn't this bot mark its own edits as a "bot edit"? It is because it is not approved? Or maybe because it is only semi-automatic? Killiondude (talk) 06:00, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Either I didn't know there was such a thing as a "bot edit", or I don't actually know how to set it. I should learn about that. (But since you asked, Scsbot is approved for the tasks it does.) —Steve Summit (talk)
If you look at your watchlist you have the option to hide minor edits, bot edits, etc. Bot edits are marked on watchlists with a b in front of the page name they edit. I don't know how to do set any of that stuff because I have never created/ran a bot but I just noticed that this bot doesn't do that. Although perhaps I'm going crazy and I just overlooked it. I think the only way to tell is to monitor my watchlist when your bot archives those pages. Killiondude (talk) 05:46, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Clearly this bot should set that bit. I'll work on it. Now that you mention it, I'm surprised that, well, no one has ever mentioned it. Thanks. —Steve Summit (talk) 15:20, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Either you changed something or I was wrong originally. The bot just archived the page and it showed up as a b on my watchlist. Sorry if it was my fault and I didn't see it correctly. Killiondude (talk) 01:03, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh! Cool. Thanks. (No, I hadn't changed anything yet.) —Steve Summit (talk) 19:29, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Gah! I'm such a loser. Sorry about that. I was mistaken. Killiondude (talk) 19:57, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
For future reference, marking an account as a bot is done by bureaucrats. The Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard is probably the best place to ask if the bot is already approved (there may be another process I'm not familiar with, but someone there would point you in the right direction). --Tango (talk) 00:14, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, but I do know this bot is approved! (The question was merely what mechanism caused bot edits to be flagged as such -- I wasn't sure whether it was because the user making the edit had the bot bit set, or something else.) —Steve Summit (talk) 01:44, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mathematics reference desk oddities

I'm not quite sure what's going on, but something strange is happening with the date section headers and archiving on the Wikipedia:Reference desk/Mathematics page. -- Tcncv (talk) 04:08, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh! Let's continue this conversation on my talk page. —Steve Summit (talk) 02:25, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Corruption in WP:RD/S

Further to my earlier message about corruptions to WP:RD/S at User talk:Ummit#Scsbot issue: parsing snafu, today's corruption [1]. Given that it's now doing multiple corruptions (and with no obviously unusual or hard to parse markup implicated) I think it's best that the bot stop until you get around to beating it back into shape. I'll leave notes on the talk pages of those project pages affected so they know to do stuff manually in the interim. -- Finlay McWalterTalk 00:36, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another one just now. -- BenRG (talk) 00:39, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And it deleted the same text yesterday. Line length limit? -- BenRG (talk) 00:43, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
See response here. —Steve Summit (talk) 02:21, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bot malfunction.

The bot seems to have broken the misc desk includes here.

I'd fix it, but I can't quite tell what's been done wrong. APL (talk) 02:04, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It looks fine now. The bot reported no errors. Perhaps you caught it right in the middle of its run, when it had deleted the content from the main page and linked to the archive page, but not created the archive page yet. —Steve Summit (talk) 02:57, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reference desk

Bot forgot to add new date headers on 6th /7th june -see Wikipedia_talk:Reference_desk#Date_headers_going_AWOL.

Thanks.87.102.17.246 (talk) 22:39, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]