User talk:CitationCleanerBot

Did the bot screw something up? Suggestions? Leave a message on this page and I'll get back to you. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 20:13, 5 September 2011 (UTC) [reply]

Archives

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by when more than 4 sections are present.

Multiple errors

In this edit the bot subtly made most of the references disappear by leaving the opening half of hidden comment code in the reference. When it removed the Amazon link from a different reference, it didn't check if the ASIN parameter was already there before adding it. And it mysteriously deleted a forward slash from the title parameter of yet another reference. Modulus12 (talk) 09:15, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Modulus12: I'd fix the comment stuff, but the bot is dead for a little while. Duplicate ASINs should be caught by WP:AWB, so I'd report it there. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 14:33, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Turns out I had a backup. I put in new safeguards again this. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 15:21, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The same error was still made on 20 August 2018[1]. --Mewaqua (talk) 04:15, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Website cleanup error

In this edit, the bot removed the parameter "website" and created a date and journal error. It's been there for a while apparently. I stumbled across it. MartinezMD (talk) 23:00, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

JSTOR refs

Changing a JSTOR URL + |via=[[JSTOR]] to a |jstor= is not always an improvement. I've just reverted this edit to Bobbi Campbell, as it broke the rest of the reference. Is there something I should tag the reference with to prevent the bot making the same edit again? — OwenBlacker (talk; please {{ping}} me in replies) 16:17, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The problem was that it was |via=[[JSTOR]] blah blah blah and the bot ignored the blah part. AManWithNoPlan (talk) 19:51, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

caused duplicate ref defs

In this edit, CitationCleanerBot made some changes to a few references (but not to others) so they didn't match. After that edit, there were duplicate reference definitions in the article. I fixed it with this change. -- Mikeblas (talk) 23:39, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly, that's due to an AWB bug, which I can't do anything about until there's an AWB update with the fix. I do patrol things after the bot to cleanup those issues when they arise however. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 06:37, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]