User talk:Cryptic/archive-5

This page is an archive. Please do not edit it.

I Need Help

This guy deleted my page and he called it vandalism. All I did was add one link that wasn't even close to being vandalism. I was on the Beatles page on wiki and added an external link called Beatle News at Beatlenews.blogspot.com and this guy called it vandalism. That link is the best Beatle news site out there right now and can you revert this back to what I had?

Bot archives post on Admin page

Hello, can you please explain to me how or why your bot would archive a notice on the Admin notice board within hours of it being listed?

Is this an automatic function gone awry or can someone program it to do this at will?

Thank youShenandoahShilohs 14:15, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He is referring to this. Johnleemk | Talk 15:42, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It probably happened because the poster on that section used a nonstandard date format. The bot only knows about standard date formats. And while the bot ignores sections where it cannot find any properly dated signature (since it usually happens when the creator of the section forgot to sign), the poster quoted someone else, complete with a months-old signature. The way to avoid it is to, as directed at the top of the page, sign all posts with ~~~~, which should add the date and time in the correct format. --cesarb 17:06, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this is exactly what happened. I tried to accomodate users using weird timestamps for the first few weeks where I was archiving, but it quickly became obvious that it was an arms race that I couldn't win. —Cryptic (talk) 02:39, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Need help or advice

Hi, I notice a bunch of articles that require sourcing. I tried an afd. They where all kept. NOw it just clicked. They should probably all be trans-wikified to wikisource. check the list out here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Olympic_games_medal_count I don't want a do anything because I was already blcoked (just yesterday because of that. So maybe you can help out and I sugest you take your time on this one. Any sugestions?--CyclePat 05:30, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

These don't look like Wikisource material to me; they've strongly discouraged raw data in the past. (s:Wikisource:Election Data implies that might be changing.)

As an aside, afd is only for articles that require deleting. If something's worthy of inclusion - and these quite obviously are - but their sourcing is insufficient, you either dig up the source yourself, or, if you can't find it or can't be bothered to look, tag it {{unreferenced}}. —Cryptic (talk) 02:43, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Tfd

As Template:Tfd is protected, I was wondering if you might try {{PAGENAMEE}} which should work in cases where {{PAGENAME}} hasn't. (In my testing, at User:Locke Cole/Template:Tfd, it seems to work on some of the TFD's I went to and previewed it with). —Locke Cole • t • c 05:06, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

{{PAGENAMEE}} is never correct, either (except when looking at the template itself, and the tfd notice is itself superfluous there) - it expands to the name of the page the template is used on, not that of the template itself. —Cryptic (talk) 05:07, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, you're right. You might be able to trick it into working via subst, but then if someone didn't subst it it wouldn't work. Maybe make the default text (if someone omits the parameter) put up red warning/error message so (hopefully) the person placing TFD will see it and include the parameter? —Locke Cole • t • c 07:12, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Coverting AFD-completion to WP:PROD

Have you considered, that instead of completing AFD nominations, that it would make more sense to convert to {{PROD}} tag instead. Basically, this allows anons to do what they couldn't do by themselves. It also gives newbies, in general, something they can easily do themselves without needing a fix (e.g. upon seeing the PROD tag, they'll say "gosh, I can do that", but if they see you complete the AFD nom, they'll not be able to figure it out so easily). The advantage of the prod tag, is it gives everybody an equal opportunity to review and either a) remove it or b) elevate to AFD if it's removed (as there's now a means of tracking removed tags). This then puts the whole review process in everybody's hands, equally, in its not up to you, as the operator, to make judgements about which to keep, and which not to. If you think about it, an uncompleted {{AFD}} and a {{PROD}} aren't very different from one another, in terms of intent. --Rob 07:29, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hrm. I like anything that reduces the amount of judgement I have to put into the process myself. Looks like a good idea at least for articles that have been tagged afd and abandoned, and I'll probably start doing that once I've gotten through the backlog that built up during my wikibreak.

However, it's probably better to complete the afd as normal if a subpage has been created, but never listed, especially if someone else has already edited it. While I agree in principle with your argument that prod is easier to figure out, it hasn't been substantiated by the results I've seen - I've only had to ask three or four contributors to complete their afd nominations on their own. Mostly relied on the assumption that they'll see the bot edit to the afd subpage on their watchlist, and it seems to have mostly worked. —Cryptic (talk) 08:02, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chevron (Stargate)

I generally don't, and I meant to come back for that one ;x

Adrian~enwiki (talk) 20:46, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion guidelines

Something relevant to PROD should be on the deletion guidelines, now, because admins are deleting PRODded articles. The paragraph on assessing rough consensus is not appropriate to PROD, because PROD does not attempt to gather consensus via a discussion the way AfD does.

If we can agree on the above two sentences, perhaps you'd care to put something up at Deletion Guidelines that would suit the purpose? I'm not quite sure what it should say, but perhaps that's because of my skewed POV; if you have an idea what it should say I am sure I would find myself in agreement with it.

-ikkyu2 (talk) 05:02, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Crypticbot's archiving of AN and ANI

Hi Cryptic,

I just noticed that you're back. How are things? I was wondering what you think about programming c-b to archive the AN boards at a size threshold rather than a date threshold. With WP slowing down periodically and the ever-increasing admin-related activity, the pages seem to keep increasing in size and download times. When you were away I had to archive both boards manually, as they had reached around 450K, IIRC, and were taking eons to load. If it was that way for me I'm quite sure folks on dialups simply won't be able to load the page at peak periods. I understand cesarb and you have discussed this; do you think a 256k limit is ok? Thanks! ENCEPHALON 14:57, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's been doing exactly that on WP:ANI since before I left, and on WP:AN since the 15th. —Cryptic (talk) 21:39, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

image-cv problems

Howdy. Thanks for fixing up my copyright problems entry. Why is the template not working as it should? Garglebutt / (talk) 22:30, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Because there was an equals sign in the image name - this made the template think that all the stuff in front of the equals sign to be the parameter name, not part of the parameter value. I fooled it by adding a 1= to explicitly name the parameter - that is, {{subst:image-cv|1=Image:Gallery?id=755658&page=5&ad=.jpg}}. —Cryptic (talk) 22:33, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. Thanks for enlightening me. Garglebutt / (talk) 22:37, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association

You should check before you delete random articles. This WAS on the copyvio page but the article was fixed and was not a copyvio. The link you posted as copyvio was not what was copywritten.

"Administrators, remember to check if anything links here, the page history (last edit) and any revisions of CSD before deletion." < the golden rule you forgot to do...Binarypower 02:22, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to reread the part on Template:Copyvio (which, unlike WP:CSD, is relevant here) that asks, "Please do not edit this page for the time being" and points out that "simply modifying copyrighted text is not sufficient to avoid copyright violation". While the version you replaced the infringement with was not itself infringing, it was still speediable for lack of context, which is why I didn't go to the trouble of undeleting that revision after deleting the history. —Cryptic (talk) 15:30, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't "modify copyrighted text" I completely re-wrote the article. You deleted the article due to a copyvio, not lack of context. You simply didn't read the article or the discussion area. Binarypower 23:27, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Clearly you know what I saw and what I did and why better than I do. The reverts back to the copyvio template by myself and others were purely coincidental. —Cryptic (talk) 15:10, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly I don't know "clearly what you saw" and have no clue why this article is being beaten up. I don't think I have stepped on anyones toes, I have not picked a fight, I am just trying to post an article that I feel is notable, I found out I could not post what I did so I tried to update it. I got a speedy delete for that which i later fixed, then for red links that I fixed, then when you posted lack of context and so I was in the process of updating that, I updated a few things, now less than 24 hours the article is gone again... for lack of context after I just added more to it and was in the process of reworking it. Out of the 6 people that have updated the article, 5 just try to delete it. Politics aside, I happen to be Democrat and I know this is considered a Republican financed organization but I'm thinking, is that it? Is that why everyone is trying to have the article removed? If so, it truly does not seem fair to me.Binarypower 18:56, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If you can write an actual article there, please feel free to do so. You might try looking at articles for similar organizations. The only encyclopedic content in the version that was deleted was the first line: "Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association is a nonprofit organization started in 1984." Having this (plus the completely unencyclopedic list of the board of directors), as opposed to the redlink, is not at all useful. (Neither, for that matter, are your hostile accusations above that I delete "random" articles, that I didn't look at the history, that I didn't read the article or its talk page, or outright trolling. And no, real-world politics has nothing to do with it, either.) —Cryptic (talk) 19:13, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Anger got the best of me for which I am truly sorry. I will try to make a better post completely redone with content in the near future. I had to take a step back and I've realized now that really my post was crap :-p I reread it from a fresh POV (called my brother and had him read it) and he thinks that I've acted too hastily and it was garbage. Sorry for the grief and trolling (I actually forgot I even posted that). I hope I haven't burnt any bridges and hope you can assist me in the future. All the best Binarypower 19:42, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete of Pork (instant messenger)

Hello; I'm inquiring regarding your delete of Pork (instant messenger) on February 18. You cited WP:CSD#G4 as the reason, however, if you look to Talk:Pork (instant messenger), you would see that I wrote Pork (instant messenger) without any previous knowledge of the existence of Pork (software) (see my comment beginning with 'Sidenote:'). As an unprivileged user I don't have a copy of Pork (instant messenger) handy but I assure you if you diff it with User:PseudoSudo/pork (software) it was not a repost of content by any means. Could you undelete the page and possibly post it as an AfD if you believe it is deserved? Pork (software) was deleted for non-notability, which according to Talk:Pork (instant messenger) is not the case with Pork (instant messenger). Thanks a lot! ~ PseudoSudo 22:06, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Afd usually covers subjects, not exact wording; these two articles looked very much like the same piece of software to me (if I'm wrong I'll happily undelete). Otherwise, we don't re-afd different articles on the same subject; they get speedied. Bring it up on Wikipedia:Deletion review if you're looking to overturn the afd. —Cryptic (talk) 15:15, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, after reading through the docs I easily understand your decision (yes, it is the same subject). Thanks for the recommendation; just submitted to Deletion review. Happy Friday! ~ PseudoSudo 20:39, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

pywikipedia problem

== subst:bot == um yeah, your bot seems to be subst:ing templates that are inside of <no wiki> brackets, should it be doing that? Seeing as how it's replacing a non template, such as {{test2}}, with the actual content of template:test2, only inside of a pair of no wiki brackets--205.188.117.11 04:38, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

<nowiki>{{AfD}}</nowiki>

Especially since people sometimes create headers like this one, only they get turned into..

Can't really reply personally to an AOL IP so I'll reply here. I've been working on some regex's to catch only the template and hopefully not include the nowiki content. It's tricky to prevent it from happening and there is no way I or anyone else here would want to do that task by hand (28,000 instances of welcome alone that needed to be subst'ed -- Tawker 05:26, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

replaceExceptNowikiAndComments in wikipedia.py looks to be made for exactly this problem. (On the other hand, I don't actually run pywikipedia myself, and the installation of pywikipedia that I'm looking at is several months old.) —Cryptic (talk) 15:28, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I did a CVS update before running this job, I'll look into it and possibly file a bug request. Tawker 18:28, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus

I understand that the PROD process is supposed to reflect a consensus, but I can't agree with you that it actually does that in any way. If it works the way it's supposed to, it certainly does reflect that consensus, but there's no mechanism to ensure that it does or that it has; and there's no metric to judge by or to make a record of that consensus. (Except, maybe, the toolserver page hit counter, which I think is probably the best part of PROD).

I do not have an ax to grind about it, though; I think it should probably be mentioned in Deletion guidelines for admins simply so that admins who start closing PRODs have some idea what they're doing, or can get some idea of what they're doing if they're so inclined.

Most PRODded articles that get deleted, the admin forgets to delete the talk page, which is routine and mechanical; when I see something like that, I despair of admins ever engaging their forebrain while deleting, much less on a regular basis. -ikkyu2 (talk) 22:38, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How dare you place MY artwork under GFDL

What right do you have to place MY artwork into the GFDL without my permission. You sir are a complete and utter asshole. My artwork. What rights do you think you have? Are you me? No. You aren't. So what gave you the notion to think that you could possibly decide what license MY work is under? You amaze me. Thepcnerd 06:10, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I pointed Thepcnerd to this edit.[1] Garglebutt / (talk) 06:27, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alright I'm not dealing with this any longer. Emailed board "at" wikimedia.org with my copyright violation notice and threat of legal action. I still can't believe any of this at all. I just wish that this never happened as I can no longer enjoy wikipedia. You should probably not edit other's works' copyright status, the legal issues surrounding it are far too dangerous. Thepcnerd 06:33, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sour grapes has progressed to poison pill. See discussion on my talk page. Garglebutt / (talk) 08:52, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hi Cryptic, thanks for making that list at Template talk:Infobox Company/Slogans, it's very helpful. Kurieeto 07:21, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hunter Ellis

I've put this up for deletion review, since you think the prior article was too large to qualify as having minimal content. I'd like to encourage you to comment, since I think it's pretty clear that the article should be undeleted. -Colin Kimbrell 17:12, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Bates (royal)

..."nothing links to it" isn't a CSD, nor even a strong reason to delete at WP:RFD. Bring it there if you must.

My apologies. I thought it unlikely that someone would enter "Michael Bates (royal)" as a search term, but I'm probably missing something obvious. Once bitten. Regards, David Kernow 19:30, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TfD nomination of Template:Logo

Template:Logo has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you.

Infobox Book

Had you checked with the last editor "Why" he changed the infobox. I myself thought the change was a bit draconian. There appears to be a very good reason. Although it might only be temporary if a fix to Wiki is made. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)} 15:38, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that Brion has said he (or indicated anyways) that he plans on adding conditional syntax to MediaWiki directly, but until that time this is the probably the best way to do conditionals that doesn't break for disabled readers/screen readers/text browsers. The "hiddenStructure" CSS hack is just not acceptable. See Kevinalewis's talk page (specifically, the two images there) for details. This has nothing to do with Netoholic beyond the fact that he was the one who made these changes back in December and January. My vendetta is purely from the accessibility POV. I do hope you won't go around mass reverting me again. —Locke Cole • t • c 17:44, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neither option is good, so the status quo should remain... until/unless the various options are addressed on a per-template basis. This "crusade" is destructive without consensus in either direction. -- Netoholic @ 19:19, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Look, I've made thousands of "unilateral" edits, so probably have you. It's a wiki. Get over it. - Netoholic. And there's nothing destructive about fixing pages so they render right. YOUR behavior, on the other hand, is disruptive and non-helpful to the encyclopedia and your ArbCom ban from the Template and Wikipedia namespace should be enforced. —Locke Cole • t • c 20:34, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re : Photoblog

Hi Cryptic,

Apologies, I think it could be a really freak error that I made - I restored the article. I tried tracing back my actions, can't really remember, perhaps the most possibly scenario is the consquence of reading other articles and closing VfDs at the same time. - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 04:31, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Islam in the Bible (book)

Could i ask why you deleted Islam in the Bible (book)? Peace. --Striver 19:39, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Because all the comments specifically about it on the afd it pointed at said to delete it. Besides which, is was a one-sentence substub with almost no context. —Cryptic (talk) 20:13, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Eh?

What does orphaned mean? Please move to my talkpage if possible. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ljlego (talk • contribs) 19:01, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Request to undelete Third culture

Hi Cryptic, hope you're well. Say, would you please undelete Third culture? It was just speedied (IMO quite out of process, it's a valid candidate for AfD but would probably survive). I've put in on Deletion Review. There's nothing remotely offensive (in any sense) in the article text. Speedies can't really be properly reviewed without access to the article (when possible). Thanks! Herostratus 09:05, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thx. Herostratus

Halliburton Shill

I received an email request to unblock this user, which I declined. Snottygobble 23:40, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Request for CrypticBot's services

Can you set up CrypticBot to archive Wikipedia:Requests for CheckUser. I would recommend archiving anything with no timestamp less than 28 days old. Kelly Martin (talk) 19:01, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. It'll be a day or two to write code to accomodate the archival scheeme that's been set up. —Cryptic (talk) 21:14, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spencer R. Rackley IV

I'm curious about this. I was going through random articles and found a blank page. When I saw the history I noticed, as you did, that the AfD was not properly formatted. Why go to the redirect rather than relist? I reverted it back to your redirect for now. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 10:56, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Equal parts laziness and second-guessing how I'd think an afd would turn out. It had been pointing at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scheels All Sports, which doesn't seem at all relevant, so I had to edit the page by hand anyway, and I thought redirecting immediately would prove less rancorous. (On the other hand, looking more closely at the history now, it's clearly autobiographical, and the article I redirected it to had been mis-afd'd, too, and promptly reverted.) —Cryptic (talk) 05:39, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CfD daily request

AllyUnion's NekoDaemon is down, has been for a week, and doesn't seem to be coming back soon. Any chance that you could do the daily for Wikipedia:Categories for deletion, too?

--William Allen Simpson 05:58, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Missed the daily for Wikipedia:Templates for deletion today, too.

--William Allen Simpson 18:28, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

VP archives

Hi - A while ago (can't find the reference off hand) there was a thread about actually archiving the VP discussions rather than the current archive/delete mechanism. I think I remember that Crypticbot was prepared and ready to start doing this. Do you know why it didn't happen? Are you waiting from some OK from someone? I'm not criticizing, just curious (I went looking for a VPT discussion today and searching history is a real drag). -- Rick Block (talk) 04:28, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Problem with TfD logs?

Hi there. I was currently following a link to find an old TfD discussion, in December 2005, and ended up here: Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log. Unfortunately, when I clicked on "December" (or rather the '<<' bit next to January), it took me to the Wikipedia article about December. Which was annoying. I'm not sure how to fix it, but I think you created that archiving box. Would you be able to fix it? Thanks. Carcharoth 00:08, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

HI I would like to request text for a deleted article

HI can I get the text for the article "Land ownership of Palestine", that was recently deleted. You may post it on my talk page. Thnx Bless sins 05:16, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alleluia! He is Risen!

Jesus Christ is risen today, Alleluia!
our triumphant holy day, Alleluia!
who did once upon the cross, Alleluia!
suffer to redeem our loss. Alleluia!

Hymns of praise then let us sing, Alleluia!
unto Christ, our heavenly King, Alleluia!
who endured the cross and grave, Alleluia!
sinners to redeem and save. Alleluia!

But the pains which he endured, Alleluia!
our salvation have procured, Alleluia!
now above the sky he's King, Alleluia!
where the angels ever sing. Alleluia!

-- Psy guy ^Talk 05:57, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your Bot

Would you be able to send me a copy, I think I'm an established bot operator, and for that matter, a sysop :) (anti WoW time for Tawkerbot2 I think) Thanks -- Tawker 00:27, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Cryptic/toggleundelete.js

Hi, I left a note on that talk page. Just a headsup in case it's not on your watchlist (which I doubt! :)) --kingboyk 06:55, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bot request

Hey Cryptic...I've got a bot request and remembered you've written a bot and thought you might be able to help. There's literally thousands of userboxes out there, and a percentage of them (somewhere around 3%) suffer from fair use violations. For example, [2] (I've since removed the fair use image from the template). Use of fair use images outside of the main article namespace is prohibited by Wikipedia:Fair use criteria item #9. I've been manually going through all userboxes finding ones that have fair use images on them. This is a painfully time consuming task. Worse, once complete, it's not really complete as there could be more violations in the userboxes since the last time a userbox was checked for them. I wonder if it would be possible to create a box that could scan all userboxes for fair use images and remove them, leaving an edit summary similar to the one at this edit [3]?

Another possibility; creating a bot that could scan categories of images and see if they are used in userspace. For example, Category:Logos. Then, remove them from userspace leaving a message on the user's talk page to the effect. This might be a bit tricky; fair use images could be used inside inclusion templates. Thus, in the code of the page there is no tag to the image.

Your thoughts? --Durin 13:16, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you here????

I just saw from your contributions that you have not been contributing since March 20, 2006. What happened? Are you still around? If you don't want to post here, please email me at wikidurin@hotmail.com. Thanks, --Durin 16:25, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you alright, my friend? My email is at your reach if you need to talk/rant about something of Wikipedia. - Mailer Diablo 01:35, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Automated archival

Hello,

You operate User:Crypticbot which seems to be maintaining the WP:AN archives. I reported an incident there with the heading ==User:Primetime==. I also linked to that heading reference from Wiktionary's wikt:WT:BP#User:Primetime. Then someone (a vandal? Primetime?) changed the section title to ==Wiktionary user== breaking the inter-project links. I restored the original title again, but your 'bot decided that very brief section was a candidate for archival.

Is there any way to add a link so that it won't become dissociated from the other title? TIA.

--Connel MacKenzie 04:07, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Transwikied Unicodes - HeadsUp!

I see you moved the Unicode files to Wikisource Last July. Please be advised that there is a post over there suggesting that they are about to delete[4] them. See the Wikisource:WS:S. Best regards, FrankB 20:52, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Crypticbot's archival of AN/I

It seems like a lot of material was removed that isn't in Archive 103 or 104. Could you check this out? Thanks. Guettarda 18:27, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Mistress Selina Kyle was reblocked

And very shortly after being unblocked. I thought you should know. I'm very sorry to see you go. --Durin 20:21, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Crypticbot lost content when archiving WP:RD/S

Hi, someone at the Reference Desk noticed that Wikipedia:Reference desk archive/Science/May 2006 lacks over a week's worth of questions and answers. It seems to me that Crypticbot has lost the data while archiving. Thanks for seeing on this one. –Mysid ^(t) 10:21, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The loss of data seems to have been caused by the maximum page size being exceeded. I received the following message when I tried to perform a manual archive of 21st May:

ERROR: The text you have submitted is 1,035 kilobytes long, which is longer than the maximum of 1024 kilobytes. It cannot be saved.

I have raised the issue at Wikipedia talk:Reference desk to find a way to fix the May archive, but a long term solution will need to be found to prevent it from happening again in the future. Road Wizard 02:21, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Archiving of WP:AN and WP:AN/I

Hi there, Cryptic. Apparently Crypticbot is using {{Administrators' noticeboard navbox all}} to archive AN(/I); I want to change the formatting significantly so that it's easier to use for navigation. I have a feeling that updating the bot to use this new layout might be a time-consuming task, though. Do you mind if I make this change at the cost of breaking bot archiving, or should I wait? (Reply on my talk, please.) æ l e ✆ 2006-06-07t22:25z

Template:Administrators' noticeboard navbox

Hi. I've just fixed Template:Administrators' noticeboard navbox - it had got the 3RR archives at 1-6. It tells me to update other stuff too, but I don't think your bot updates the 3RR component? William M. Connolley 17:48, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Crypticbot failure on Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities

Hi. Just reporting a failure by your bot to automatically archive the June 3 section of Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities. The problem appears to have been caused by a vandal renaming the June 3 section heading shortly before the archive was due to take place. [5] I have now performed a manual archival so there is no longer a problem, but I thought I'd report it in case there is a way you can improve the bot's behaviour to automatically compensate in future. If not, it will just be something we have to live with. Cheers. :) Road Wizard 01:08, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Remove page

Hello! I hope you are feeling fine. I have a request to make to you. Could you remove this page completely from Wikipedia because it has absolutely NO content in it. Valuable server space is being used up if this page remains in Wikipedia. Thank You! --S iva1979^{Talk to me} 14:22, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Crypticbot flagged?

Crypticbot's edits are not hidden in watchlist when "Hide bot edits" is chosen. Please see it's properly flagged to the engine. Thank you. John Reid 01:25, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Daily bot tasks

Hi - Any chance you could add some WP:CFD tasks to Crypticbot's list of daily duties that used to be done by NekoDaemon (AllyUnion has been somewhat unavailable lately)? The specific tasks are listed at User:NekoDaemon (there's a daily transclude, and some associated stuff). I think somebody else may be watching redirected categories at this point (but haven't really kept up). Anyway, if you could that'd be great. Looks like LDBot has stopped updating Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/current as well. Hmm. Maybe there needs to be a centralized list of daily tasks. -- Rick Block (talk) 02:30, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User Page

Err... I don't know the best way to ask this, but why don't you have a userpage? Fr e ddie _Message? 00:30, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See the delete summary. He doesn't seem to be active anymore. --W.marsh 01:36, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Archiving failure

I thought I would report that Crypticbot (talk · contribs) appears to have been having some trouble archiving in the last few hours. For some reason it missed out the archiving of the entire reference desk and help desk. I have now fixed those, but in the absence of Cryptic, can any other editors watching this page please check whether the bot's other archiving work needs fixing? I'll try checking for problems when I get up in a few hours if no one beats me to it. Thanks. Road Wizard 05:03, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Crypticbot stopped working

Special:Contributions/Crypticbot shows it stopped working about 12 hours ago. --cesarb 00:10, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, WP:AN is at 286 kb currently. What is the problem? Fr e ddie _Message? 01:36, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that many maintenance actions aren't getting done if Crypticbot is on the blink. Besides whatever it does for AN, it also does new-day, archiving, & similar stuff for Reference Desk, Help Desk, Village Pump, and miscellaneous other things. Those needs aren't being met, even if WP:AN is ok. -R. S. Shaw 03:38, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm away from home, and not getting any response when I try to telnet in, so whatever happened, I won't be able to fix it until I get back on Tuesday. —Cryptic (talk) 12:29, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The bot has stopped working because it has been banned as having no owner. Cryptic, even if you are not doing anything else, if you are still up for monitoring this bot please talk page me and I will unblock it. -- xaosflux ^Talk 00:28, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No, it stopped nearly a day earlier. Best guess is a power failure, since my router's up but my computer apparently isn't.

Given that I left due to the escalating red tape folks trying to keep the place running have to deal with, while those most successful at breaking it hide behind Wikipedia:Do what thou wilt, I find the block ironic, to say the least, and I'm not much interested in jumping through more hoops. Thanks for asking first.

If anyone else wants to run it, let me know - I'm as reachable as I always was. You'll need to be able to speak perl reasonably well, since installation isn't user-friendly in the least. —Cryptic (talk) 01:03, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

More of a general note than a specific offer, but if anyone with the perl knowledge has the masochistic streak necessary to talk me through installation, I'd be happy to run it off my toolserver space. Essjay (Talk • Connect) 08:26, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have pretty good perl knowledge and am willing to donate space on one of my linux boxes to run it. Let me know you can reach me at onthost @ gmail.com or my talk page. Mike _{(T C)}

18:36, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm actually a professional perlscript programmer and I'd be happy to help as well. :-) Netscott 18:48, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am proficient in Perl, and have some experience with Wikipedia bots (see User:Zorglbot); I am happy to take over (at least some) of crypticbot's tasks if needed; for example, the archival of WP:TFD is something that would be straightforward, since Zorglbot does it for WP:CP. Schutz 08:50, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

oldrevisiontodiffs.js

Just thought I'd let you know that the functionality of your oldrevisiontodiffs.js script is now part of MediaWiki (bugzilla:6511). Thanks for the inspiration. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 15:27, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your absence

Cryptic, as the person who nominated you for RfA I've followed your contributions and noticed your absence from the project. I'm of the understanding the reason for your departure was an unblock of User:Mistress Selina Kyle. That account has been indefinitely blocked since 28 May 2006. Is there another reason for your departure? You will be sorely missed around here. --Durin 14:51, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Archiving of village pumps

The bot has stopped archiving the pumps, I see there is some small discussion above but is anything going to happen to sort this out? I hadn't realised you had left the pedia cryptic, apologies, I would have kept a better eye on the pump had I known. Steve block Talk 16:11, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We need you!

Without you, who's going to check suffrage in the next ArbCom election? Editor88 05:01, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Crypticbot

I thought it would be worth asking, is there any chance that you might be willing to publish CrypticBot's source code? The reference desk could really use a replacement bot right about now, and since your bot was doing it for ages, it might be a good starting point for a new bot--VectorPotential^{71.247.243.173} 15:45, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yay!

You're back?

You do know that MSK is permanently banned now, yes? DS 01:39, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back?! --Ghirla ^-трёп- 08:07, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, yay. —Encephalon 06:04, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Album infobox conversions

Hey, I noticed you were once active at converting old infoboxes with your bot. Well, I've found a bunch that need converting, as I noted here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums/Needs infobox conversion. Cheers, Alcuin 03:50, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Serious Business Records (2nd nomination)

Please see http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22the+internet+is+serious+business%22&btnG=Google+Search "the internet is serious business" is a popular meme. Anomo 23:06, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

This is your last warning. The next time you remove a speedy deletion notice from an article you created, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. The Crying Orc 19:40, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How embarassing. It seems you're a moderator (you don't have a userpage so it's hard to tell)...sorry! I have met with such opposition here. I am reverting myself, I respect your judgment. The Crying Orc 19:42, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]