Jump to content

User talk:JJMC89

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
Bot operator top icon
This user is a Wikimedia steward.
This user has signed the confidentiality agreement for access to nonpublic personal data.
This user is a member of the Wikimedia Volunteer Response Team.
Identified as a precious editor on 12 February 2017
This user has email notifications enabled.
This user uses the name JJMC89 on IRC.
JJMC89's page on GitHub
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by JJMC89 (talk | contribs) at 19:00, 4 June 2017 (→‎Converting coords for remaining Infobox settlement templates: I ran the bot and updated the report.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This user has opted out of talkbacks

JJMC89 bot task 12 / NFC

Note: This task is currently disabled. — JJMC89 23:51, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent bot approvals request has been approved. Please see the request page for details. SQLQuery me! 03:12, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Non-fair use deletions

It seems like this bot has deleted a lot of images from articles to which I contributed on the grounds that no fair use rationale was provided for the images. I can't seem to find the deleted images but I seem to recall a fair use rationale (chiefly historical) in every case. Is there further explanation?Mtsmallwood (talk) 14:55, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Without examples, I cannot tell you why certain images were removed. The likely case is that the provided FURs are not valid because they are missing the names of the articles the images are used in. — JJMC89 17:06, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Here is one example: Newport (steamboat). There are about 15 more on my watchlist. The problem is that I can't seem to be able to find the images that are supposedly causing the problem to link to the articles in question.Mtsmallwood (talk) 18:47, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The image is File:Steamer Newport before 1914.jpg. A link to Newport (steamboat) or the text Newport (steamboat) is missing from the FUR. It looks like the links to 'Newport (steamer)' should be changed to 'Newport (steamboat)'. — JJMC89 19:09, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
FUR updated and image restored to the article. — JJMC89 16:24, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Just reverted your bot

I just reverted an edit by your bot; I see why it did it but if you take a look at the text of the FUR you'll see it wasn't the right thing to do. Is there any way to stop the bot making this sort of mistake? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 10:21, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Also see here. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:46, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I've updated the code to (1) check direct links before redirects and (2) pipe wikilinks when updating file description pages. For that specific case, it will see the link to Analog Science Fiction and Fact and not need to edit. — JJMC89 04:09, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Another potential issue

This bot edit [1] while technically correct is something that should be easily detected as fixable, in that the rational used only "Hell Bent" rather than "Hell Bent (Doctor Who)". A human editor would clearly recognize what was meant by the rationale and would have likely fixed it. This was something that BetaCommand's bot that did similar checking did (it would recognize close-mispelling, missing disambiguation pages, and the like). It would still be appropriate to drop a warning or notification if the bot updated the link in such cases, but it shouldn't remove the image like it did in that diff. --MASEM (t) 16:02, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'll look into correcting the file description pages when a link is missing disambiguator. — JJMC89 01:15, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your bot is malfunctioning. Stop it.

Improper removal of File:Berkey-Joshua-H.jpg from Joshua H. Berkey (there is indeed a fair use rationale provided), which cascaded into a bot-generated deletion notice for the file. I have three of these on my page all of the sudden, dollars to donuts it is all your doing. Shut the bot down until you fix this!!! —Tim /// Carrite (talk) 18:12, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Carrite: It is not malfunctioning. The FUR was not valid since it did not contain link to the article or the title of the article. I corrected the issue. — JJMC89 18:19, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, Charles H. Cochrane is screwed up because of your bot also. Fair use rationales do not require the use of a template, if your bot is built on the premise that templates are required, you need to figure out how to work around that. Carrite (talk) 18:17, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
FUR updated. — JJMC89 18:22, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, indeed, it is a trifecta of malfunction. Jeffrey Friedman (politician) was also vandalized by your bot. Fix it. Carrite (talk) 18:21, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Until you added the link to the article, the FUR was not valid since it did not contain a link to the article or the article's title. — JJMC89 01:49, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
This bot should be called Frankenbot. I had a fair use rationale on Liberty (sternwheeler) but did not use the template on the fair use image. The image was wrongly tagged and also removed from the article.Mtsmallwood (talk) 18:49, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Mtsmallwood: When the bot made the edit the FUR was invalid since it did not contain the article title or a link to the article. — JJMC89 01:49, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Actually the image did contain a link to Liberty (sternwheeler) when it was uploaded. Check out the page history for the image. I am getting a number of orphan image messages as a result this bot, which I think is commenting out image links so that it appears that fair use images lack a link to an article.Mtsmallwood (talk) 00:50, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No, the link was to Liberty (sternwneeler), which has never existed. — JJMC89 01:10, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
An obvious error mistaking an n for an h, which could have been corrected easily without the trouble created by the bot.Mtsmallwood (talk) 01:45, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Same here, fair use image in Rescue of BAT 21 improperly marked as non-fair use. Makes me wonder how many other images are affected. — btphelps (talk to me) (what I've done) 23:24, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Btphelps: There is no FUR for File:IcealHambleton2-.jpg for use on Rescue of Bat 21 Bravo, only Iceal Hambleton, so the bot's edit was correct. — JJMC89 01:49, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

I've got two more wrongly flagged fair use files. Consider this your notice that you are being discussed at Administrator's Noticeboard/Incidents. Complaint to be filed there momentarily. SHUT YOUR FUCKING BOT DOWN!!! Carrite (talk) 19:16, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It hadn't been running for ~4 hours when you first wrote a message here, so there was nothing to shutdown. — JJMC89 02:22, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
All caps, and swearing. Classy, and an excellent demonstration of civility to boot. If you'd visited/read the bot's user page you would have known that you can shut it down yourself without the need for a block by simply editing this page. SQLQuery me! 02:32, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I assume you're already aware, but just in case; per my comment in this thread I've temporarily shut down the bot. It's fairly clear that in approving this task SQL hadn't thought through the implications; there's absolutely no obligation for a FUR to include a template; nor is it obligatory for a FUR to include a link to the article on which the image is to be used provided it mentions the name of the article; nor is it reasonable to immediately delete a FU image from an article just because the article in question has been renamed. ‑ Iridescent 22:12, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't look for a template. It looks for the two options in WP:NFCC#10c: a link to the article (redirects included) or the title of the article. — JJMC89 02:22, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
As I had requested on your talkpage, please reconsider your block, as this task can be disabled without such heavy-handed measures. SQLQuery me! 04:06, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bot may not be handling nested comments correctly

@JJMC89: Hi, I noticed with this edit that the bot doesn't notice nested comments in parts of an article it comments out. I don't know the correct way to nest comments, but for now, I think this can be fixed by neutering the nested comments like so:

<!-- outer comment < !-- inner comment --> rest of outer comment--> (note the space in the opening comment tag)

Or ending the bot's comment before the next one starts:

<!-- outer comment --><!-- inner comment --> <!--rest of outer comment-->

Thanks for considering running this bot. --BurritoBazooka If you reply here, please add {{ping|BurritoBazooka}} to your message 19:35, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, BurritoBazooka. That should be easy enough to fix. — JJMC89 01:13, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bot orphaning many non-free images?

Hello. I notice that your bot constantly orphans some of my uploads: this and that. The rationale says that my uploads failed WP:NFCC#10c. I don't see the purpose of the bot hiding those images other than orphaning them. May you explain why? --George Ho (talk) 23:57, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I see you've fixed Broken Vows, and I've fixed Billionaire Boys Club. WP:NFCC#10c requires a link to the article or the name of the article in the FUR. For both of those the FUR linked to the incorrect article, making the FUR invalid for the articles that the images were used on. FYI that bot task is currently disabled. See above regarding the issue of missing disambiguators. — JJMC89 02:35, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I was able to reinsert an image at Yesterday's Gone (song). Not only I saw your above discussion, but I also saw the bot issue raised at ANI. I wonder whether I can necessarily go there. --George Ho (talk) 02:38, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know what you expect to get at ANI. — JJMC89 05:16, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm... I see your point. Still, I've been receiving bot notifications about orphaned non-free images. I see you're still working on the bot issue, so I'll hold my patience until the whole situation is resolved. --George Ho (talk) 05:40, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The number of orphaned files at Category:All orphaned non-free use Wikipedia files rose to 1500+. Also, I reinserted the image of ...Baby One More Time (song). Where else do I address this matter besides here? --George Ho (talk) 03:16, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I realize I shouldn't have jumped into conclusions. I was just thinking numbers but did not thoroughly checked your contributions first. I hope you'll forgive me. I check your bot's contributions (JJMC89 bot (talk · contribs)), and I realize I was mostly wrong about your bot. Still, I think—to make up a major error on my part for jumping into premature conclusions—the bot's contributions to mainspace pages are worth looking at, just in case. --George Ho (talk) 12:22, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think the bot really is malfunctioning this time!

On the I Am the Greatest (A House album) article, the bot removed the album cover image, citing WP:NFCC#10c. This caused another bot to tag the image page with the orphaned non-free template. However, the image page has had a full fair use rationale - including a link to the album article - since its creation over nine years ago. I've reverted the changes. Unless I'm missing something, the bot should not have done this, correct? -- Hux (talk) 06:24, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The name of the article is I Am the Greatest (A House album); however, the FUR was for I Am The Greatest. I've updated the FUR. — JJMC89 06:32, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(Edit conflict! ;) )
I think I've figured out the problem: the FUR links to I Am The Greatest, but that link now goes to a redirect, which then goes to a disambiguation page; the album article was moved to I Am the Greatest (A House album) in 2014. In other words, your bot is requiring the FUR to link to the page on which the image is used, but that link can become invalid for reasons that are not the fault of that FUR. In this situation, the bot goes ahead and removes the image from the page anyway.
You're going to run into this quite a bit, I reckon, so would you perhaps consider looking into methods of avoiding such eager image deletions? Maybe put a warning on the image page for a week first, to give someone the chance to fix the problem? -- Hux (talk) 06:38, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
When pages are moved, the mover is responsible for updating the FUR accordingly. If the task is resumed, methods (e.g. notifications, bot correction of the FUR) of handling such things will be considered. — JJMC89 23:51, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A suggestion

You may want to add somewhere (preferably linked from the page histories) a list of common reasons why a file is removed as part of this task. For example, "NFC does not mention article", "similarly named article" and the like. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:29, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That is something I'll consider if I resume running the task. Thanks. — JJMC89 19:15, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Stub sorting

Hello JJMC89,

I noticed you marked an article as a stub using the {{stub}} template. Did you know that there are thousands of stub types that you can use to clarify what type of stub the article is? Properly categorizing stubs is important to the Wikipedia community because it helps various WikiProjects to identify articles that need expansion.

If you have questions about stub sorting, don't hesitate to ask! There is a wealth of stub information on the stub sorting WikiProject, and hundreds of stub sorters. Thanks! -- I dream of horses  If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{U|I dream of horses}} to your message  (talk to me) (My edits) @ 07:46, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Review - Newsletter No.4

Hello JJMC89,

Since rolling out the right in November, just 6 months ago, we now have 413 reviewers, but the backlog is still mysteriously growing fast. If every reviewer did just 55 reviews, the 22,000 backlog would be gone, in a flash, schwoop, just like that!

But do remember: Rather than speed, quality and depth of patrolling and the use of correct CSD criteria are essential to good reviewing. Do not over-tag. Make use of the message feature to let the creator know about your maintenance tags. See the tutorial again HERE. Get help HERE.

Stay up to date with recent new page developments and have your say, read THIS PAGE.


If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:43, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your BRFA was approved and is pending a flag. The approval requested an enwiki local user page be created. — xaosflux Talk 04:31, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. — JJMC89 05:21, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Converting coords for remaining Infobox settlement templates

Do you have time to figure out and convert coordinates in articles that transclude {{Infobox Parish PT}}? It looks like those are the vast majority if the remaining settlement articles. The rest can probably be done by hand. Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:31, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I previously set the bot up for that one but just never ran it. Running now. — JJMC89 19:50, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good. There appear to be a few more settlement templates to run through the bot: {{Infobox Province Spain}} and {{Infobox Syrian settlement}} are the ones I see right now.
Also, if you're in bot-running weekend mode, {{Infobox mountain pass}}, {{Infobox military installation}}, and {{Infobox government agency}} have pages ready to run. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:50, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Jonesey95: See User:JJMC89 bot/report/InfoboxCoordinatesParametersMigrator for the latest list of unresolved transclusions. — JJMC89 07:15, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Manual cleanup, hooray! I'll get to the settlement ones today, since there are so many transclusions. I'd like to close the book on those soon. – Jonesey95 (talk) 12:54, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

For this weekend, if you are around: {{Infobox mountain pass}}, {{Infobox London station}}, {{Infobox Manchester Metrolink station}}, {{Infobox motorway services}}, {{Infobox New York City Subway station}}, {{Infobox Pennsylvania historic site}}, {{Infobox power transmission line}}, and maybe one or two more that I forgot. I've been busy. Thanks! – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:43, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I ran the bot and updated the report. — JJMC89 19:00, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kafkaesque

IP gets reverted.[2] I tell them to make an edit request, which you decline.[3] So IP edits the article again as suggested by you.[4] Gets reverted again.[5] El_C 14:50, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for helping to remove the errors, but I've already filed a bot request to fix them so it might be best to wait until the bot clears out the easy fixes. Jc86035 (talk) Use {{re|Jc86035}}
to reply to me
04:05, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Coords bot conversion

@JJMC89: Question regarding this. As an example, the infobox for Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum now lists the coordinates twice. Will bot be deleting the secondary occurrence, or does this require human editor intervention? RM2KX (talk) 03:32, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@RM2KX: The bot will not be removing any coordinates; it requires human editor intervention. — JJMC89 03:46, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I've gone through uses of {{infobox presidential library}} and merged the duplicated coordinates. — JJMC89 04:04, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

For your edit to the page I created. It seems like it will be helpful for future times. Dinah Kirkland (talk) 18:38, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]