|WikiProject IRC||(Rated Start-class, High-importance)|
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the IRC bot article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Typoscript template problem
I have a problem when i am going to setup a template file in typoscript.
Error : Errors and warnings 1: Line 1854: An end brace is in excess
- Why are you asking here? ask on a support channel over IRC.
mIRC info needs rewrite
The paragraph about mIRC sounds to much like an ad. --Mr. Jenkins 23:21, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, and I think it should be mentioned that bots are not welcome on many networks. Both done. --lynX
Rogers Yahoo terminates access
Rogers Yahoo in Toronto treats IRC BOTS as a virus and suspends all access to its Internet Servers account when its security screening indicates one is being used. Its process for restarting service is opaque, vexatious, and time consuming, to say the least.
Abroker 15:11, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
How bots work
Should this page specifically mention how bots work with the IRC RFC (#1459)? Wikipedia is not a how-to, but mentioning PRIVMSG, JOIN, and the like could be helpful for improving the article. GracenotesT § 17:11, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
- I see that it has been mentioned in the IRC article. But some pseudocode might be helpful here. GracenotesT § 20:09, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
I've gone through all revisions of the page, and it seems that all but Eggdrop and Infobot have been added by anonymous IPs that haven't contributed anything to the article.               . I've written a chatbot myself, and in the progress I was told to look at the Eggdrop project - it's the only one I've ever heard of in my couple years of experience in IRC. Do we really need a spam farm like that? Can't we rewrite the paragraph to only mention Eggdrop, and maybe also Infobot? --MathiasRav 10:59, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
- Other pages that have these types of lists take two approaches. The normal WP:NOTABLE criteria (and expecially the web and software parts for the case at hand) are good for "should we including something?", so we could scrap all external links and keep links to things that have their own Wikipedia pages. There is also DMOZ, a moderated/currated/annotated directory of external sites that is less of a free-for-all than Wikipedia, and if there's a list of IRC bots, we could link that and then no external links for particular bots. DMacks 17:29, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
- The Related DMOZ page lists all bots in a row and only eggdrop owns its section. I am an eggdrop fan, but I think that it would unfairly sink really popular bots, such as infobot or energymech, in the deepest hidden hobbit hole. My heart tells me to quote only the 3 or 4 more used bots, and add a DMOZ link below. It sounds like the honnest way, but this mixed approach doesn't solve the problem (and might even be worse). -- skiidoo 19:33, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
- I don't think that solution fails to solve the problem (but there are several things happening, so I don't know what you envision as being unsolved or worse). If something has a WP page, I don't know a reason not to link it. If someone creates a WP page for his/her pet bot that isn't notable by WP community standards, then that page gets deleted same as usual. DMacks 19:49, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
As far as I know, Jyrki Alakuijala's "Puppe" was the first computer program to chat in IRC. Later, Vesa Perttunen modified the code to a variant personality, "Roope". These were simple C programs that pretended to be normal users, capable of using both public and private messages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 00:15, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
adding Python to the list of languages
I think that Python should be added to the programming languages IRC bots are written in. I have written one in Python, and so have many others. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 21:01, 12 November 2008 (UTC)