Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 40: Line 40:
:::Consider it a challenge... I am an expert programmer with ACL (a highly specialized language for auditors) and love challenges. Somebody who loves bots should accept the gauntlet! ;-)---'''[[User:Balloonman|<font color="purple">Balloonman</font>]]''' ''[[User talk:Balloonman|<b><sup><small>PoppaBalloon</small></sup></b>]]''<small>[[User:Balloonman/CSD Survey|Take the CSD Survey]]</small> 21:10, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
:::Consider it a challenge... I am an expert programmer with ACL (a highly specialized language for auditors) and love challenges. Somebody who loves bots should accept the gauntlet! ;-)---'''[[User:Balloonman|<font color="purple">Balloonman</font>]]''' ''[[User talk:Balloonman|<b><sup><small>PoppaBalloon</small></sup></b>]]''<small>[[User:Balloonman/CSD Survey|Take the CSD Survey]]</small> 21:10, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
:::A bot would be awesome. I tried to help with this once and it's very tedious. I have no objection to Majorly doing it. When I mentioned changes I meant major layout changes should be discussed first, that's all.<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — [[User:Rlevse|<b style="color:#060;"><i>R</i>levse</b>]] • [[User_talk:Rlevse|<span style="color:#990;">Talk</span>]] • </span> 21:38, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
:::A bot would be awesome. I tried to help with this once and it's very tedious. I have no objection to Majorly doing it. When I mentioned changes I meant major layout changes should be discussed first, that's all.<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — [[User:Rlevse|<b style="color:#060;"><i>R</i>levse</b>]] • [[User_talk:Rlevse|<span style="color:#990;">Talk</span>]] • </span> 21:38, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Summary: we gratefully accept Majorly's offer to update the page and we're all hopeful a bot might be able to undertake this task, if a developer can overcome the technical difficulties. --[[User:Dweller|Dweller]] ([[User talk:Dweller|talk]]) 11:18, 5 January 2009 (UTC)


== Toolserver down ==
== Toolserver down ==

Revision as of 11:18, 5 January 2009

    To contact bureaucrats to alert them of an urgent issue, please post below.
    For sensitive matters, you may contact an individual bureaucrat directly by e-mail.
    You may use this tool to locate recently active bureaucrats.

    The Bureaucrats' noticeboard is a place where items related to the Bureaucrats can be discussed and coordinated. Any user is welcome to leave a message or join the discussion here. Please start a new section for each topic.

    This is not a forum for grievances. It is a specific noticeboard addressing Bureaucrat-related issues. If you want to know more about an action by a particular bureaucrat, you should first raise the matter with them on their talk page. Please stay on topic, remain civil, and remember to assume good faith. Take extraneous comments or threads to relevant talk pages.

    If you are here to report that an RFA or an RFB is "overdue" or "expired", please wait at least 12 hours from the scheduled end time before making a post here about it. There are a fair number of active bureaucrats; and an eye is being kept on the time remaining on these discussions. Thank you for your patience.

    To request that your administrator status be removed, initiate a new section below.

    Crat tasks
    RfAs 0
    RfBs 0
    Overdue RfBs 0
    Overdue RfAs 0
    BRFAs 13
    Approved BRFAs 0
    Requests for adminship and bureaucratship update
    No current discussions. Recent RfAs, recent RfBs: (successful, unsuccessful)
    It is 10:55:58 on May 15, 2024, according to the server's time and date.



    Proposed additional job for SoxBot on CHU

    It'd be nice to get an automatic notification if there's no edits made by the requester, other than to CHU. Of course this isn't a definitive reason to always deny a change, but it's helpful if the Bots make things as clear as possible. Thoughts? --Dweller (talk) 16:04, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Good idea. Added. Xclamation point 19:48, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    That would be nice. bibliomaniac15 19:52, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    In a fragmented conversation on our talk pages, Rlevse and I have been discussing how WJBScribe used to keep this up to date.

    I'd be utterly hopeless. I did suggest TRM might be a good candidate, but of course he's away for some time still. I then noted that it needn't be a Crat - just someone competent - and suggested I post here as an "advert".

    Majorly has volunteered. IMHO this isn't a big deal, but just in case, thought I'd run this here anyway, in case one/some of the Crats has an objection. For the record, I thank Majorly for his offer and would be prepared to accept it, so long as the same system is perpetuated - I think it's a good page currently - with plenty of opportunity for discussion before any changes are implemented. --Dweller (talk) 19:24, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    OK with me. But yes, discuss changes before making them please. RlevseTalk 19:28, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Anyone should be able to update it. It's part of NoSeptember's project, which he specifically says anyone can update pages on. Majorly talk 19:32, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Umm...what in particular is so objectionable about Majorly updating the tables? bibliomaniac15 19:35, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Dunno if I came across in wrong tone - I have no objections to it, and so far, no-one else does either! --Dweller (talk) 20:34, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Sounds fine if he is volunteering for it. Thanks Maj. MBisanz talk 19:37, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    My only comment, remains the one I posted to Dweller's page. I think this would be an excellent use of a BOT, if somebody were to write one that could update the appropriate fields. That being said, I don't care who else makes the changes.---Balloonman PoppaBalloonTake the CSD Survey 19:47, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Agreed on Bot. --Dweller (talk) 20:34, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Color me "don't care who does it, but a bot would probably be best". EVula // talk // // 20:41, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    The table is a fairly big and complex one, and it may be fairly difficult to code a bot for that. Then again, I have seen magic. Majorly talk 20:42, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Presumably the bot wouldn't actually "edit" the table - it would just re-create it each month rather than parsing anything. I could do it pretty easily in C++, though that's probably not very useful for a bot. --B (talk) 20:55, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I could give it a go if someone wants me to.... Fritzpoll (talk) 20:56, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    It does sound like an interesting task to try and code, given the variable like the BotStatus and UserRights log to overcome, even if it just spit out raw data and people make it look pretty on a table it would save valuable man-hours. MBisanz talk 21:06, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Consider it a challenge... I am an expert programmer with ACL (a highly specialized language for auditors) and love challenges. Somebody who loves bots should accept the gauntlet! ;-)---Balloonman PoppaBalloonTake the CSD Survey 21:10, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    A bot would be awesome. I tried to help with this once and it's very tedious. I have no objection to Majorly doing it. When I mentioned changes I meant major layout changes should be discussed first, that's all.RlevseTalk 21:38, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Summary: we gratefully accept Majorly's offer to update the page and we're all hopeful a bot might be able to undertake this task, if a developer can overcome the technical difficulties. --Dweller (talk) 11:18, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Toolserver down

    The toolserver (useful eg for checking SUL usage of requested usernames) is down.

    Does anyone have any info about likely time of resumed function? --Dweller (talk) 15:21, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    I think it may be up again tomorrow. Not entirely sure though. Majorly talk 15:36, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    River said that it should be up within an hour or two. Xclamation point 23:28, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    11.5 hours on from X!'s post, it's still not working for me. Is there a central noticeboard for it? --Dweller (talk) 10:34, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    River said it would take longer than expected. Right now, bots on the toolserver can run again, but the webserver is still down. Xclamation point 15:38, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    It's back up, but s1 and s3 are unavailable. I just did a SUL report on myself to test it out, and the bulk of my accounts aren't being listed. EVula // talk // // 17:18, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Still not working. Is there a central noticeboard for it? --Dweller (talk) 12:05, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    There is an issue with yarrow. someone needs to go to the new data center to fix the issue, ETA is sometime next week. Canis Lupus 12:08, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Can someone place a big fat notice on the three flavours of name change pages, drawing attention to this problem and how it means in many cases we can't help with name changes right now. --Dweller (talk) 13:12, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    I just added a sufficiently garish notice on all the CHU pages. EVula // talk // // 06:37, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    @Canis: So now are we going to have a Neopolitan changing username page? Somehow, the SSP2 page seems reminiscent of Neopolitan... Xclamation point 08:15, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    I've been using my own SUL report to test if the server is back up, and I just got a full report. Tearing down the banners now. EVula // talk // // 19:25, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Suntag

    I withdrew my request for adminship at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Suntag. Thank you. -- Suntag 15:43, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Cratstats template

    Now that SoxBot is done its trial, and looks like its heading towards approval, the {{Cratstats}} template should probably go onto this page. I have put up a sample revision, to show what it would look like. What do people think of this? Xclamation point 16:49, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    Not to be a pain, but again, if it doesn't tell the ones that need attention I'm not sure what benefit it has. For bots a numerical summary of the status column of Wikipedia:BAG/Status would probably be helpful (though it actually just removes the approved but not yet flagged ones from its list while here it would be better to highlight those) and if similar could be done for the CHU bits I think that's what people were asking for out of this bot. I think you could remove the RfA/RfB part either way since there's more information summarized in the SQLbot report that's already there. Talk to ST47 about getting the code to BAGbot if you think it would be helpful. - Taxman Talk 19:06, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I already have the code for BAGBot (I used to have a BRFA running for a replacement at WP:Bots/Requests for approval/SoxBot IX), and I'll work on getting those implemented. I'll then run it through another short tria, to confirm it works. Xclamation point 18:42, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Ahh, sounds good. - Taxman Talk 19:25, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    And as I pointed out before and it got ignored, it lists CHU and CHUU but not CHU/SUL. :-( RlevseTalk 19:30, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Don't worry, Rlevse, it wasn't ignored. :) It was noted in my things to fix about the bot. Xclamation point 19:38, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Ok, I have added SUL requests, Overdue RfXs, and Approved (but not flagged) bots. Xclamation point 20:15, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Much better ;-) RlevseTalk 20:17, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Ok, is there still a chance of listing only the CHU requests that need attention? For example the number of Usurp requests that are actionable, as in over 7 days old, and other CHU requests that aren't awaiting user response? Also I still think there's no need to repeat the RfA/RfB stuff, but whatever everybody else thinks. Finally, it's nice to have direct links for everything in the table to where they can be taken care of, so if Approved BRFA or something nearby could link directly to Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Approved that would help. - Taxman Talk 20:29, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Any stylist changes can go into Template:Cratstats/Style. I thought I had it CHU requests needing attention already. The format of the CHUU page would also make the USURP row very difficult to say only the ones that need attention. Xclamation point 05:29, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

    Straw poll on 'trial' implementation of FlaggedRevisions

    The discussion on the implementation of a 'trial' configuration of FlaggedRevisions on en.wiki has now reached the 'straw poll' stage. All editors are invited to read the proposal and discussion and to participate in the straw poll. Happymelon 17:51, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]