This user uses Twinkle to fight vandalism.
This user has 53% energy left.
This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
This user is a global renamer.
Trout this user.

User talk:cyberpower678

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from User talk:Cyberbot I)
Jump to: navigation, search
X mark.svg
This user is offline, or has forgotten to update this message since starting a wikisession.
(If there have been multiple edits from this user in the last 60 minutes and the most recent one wasn't to activate this template, it is safe to assume that this user forgot.)
Veteran Editor IV
Click here to find out why my signature changes color.
Wikistress3D 1 v3.jpg

  • Hello!! I am Cyberpower678. I am an administrator on Wikipedia. Despite that, I'm still your run of the mill user here on Wikipedia.
  • I specialize in bot work and tools, but I lurk around RfPP, AfD, AIV, and AN/I, as well as RfA. If you have any questions in those areas, please feel free to ask. :-)
  • I also serve as a mailing list moderator and account creator over at the Account Creation Center. If you have any questions regarding an account I created for you, or the process itself, feel free to email the WP:ACC team or me personally.
  • At current I have helped to create accounts for 2501 different users and renamed 722 other users.
  • Disputes or discussions that appear to have ended or is disputed will be archived.

All the best.—cyberpower

View my talk page Archives.
RfA candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report
RfB candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report
SoWhy 2‎ 90 6 6 94 12:30, 31 July 2017 4 days, 16 hours no report

Last updated by cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online at 19:47, 26 July 2017 (UTC)


How many times do I have to say this? STOP ARCHIVING ISURESULTS.COM. And no, I won't use some tool to report errors. You use this bot, so you should be careful. Trijnsteltalk 01:46, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Trijnstel, the last time you posted here, Cyberpower asked you a question and you never answered. So before you go yelling about how terrible the world is, maybe you should try explaining what's actually going wrong. Primefac (talk) 02:03, 23 July 2017 (UTC) (talk page stalker)
Primefac We did explain [1]. The problem is clear, that is not the issue. Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 07:20, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
@Trijnstel: This is the very first time you are asking me to stop rescuing sources to The first time you came to me you gave an edit the bot made and told me something was wrong with it. That wasn't very helpful. You and Taketa came by and clarified the URL was dead. My response was in turn that the easiest way to report those issues is to use the tool I mentioned. It's easier for the reporter, and it's easier for me. I have since not heard back from either of you which suggests to me that the issue is resolved. And it was at that time resolved. Effeietsanders used the tool to report that URL on 4 July 2017, and it was automatically corrected and perceived as alive. See this. YOU NEVER MENTIONED THAT THE ENTIRE DOMAIN HAS AN ISSUE. An issue which apparently the bot has since picked up on and adapted to. Do you have any recent examples for me to look at, because IABot shouldn't be touching URLs?—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 12:44, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
Yep, many. These are a few since 16 July: [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]. I was extremely busy at work, so didn't have the time to give a comprehensive response sooner. And apologies for my language last night. It was simply annoying to login for the first time in seven days and to see so many of these edits on my watchlist again - I've reverted a bunch a few weeks ago as well - without the ability to do something about it. Trijnsteltalk 12:54, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
I'm glad we can converse productively over this. :-) I'll investigate immediately.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 13:01, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
@Trijnstel: So there is indeed a bug in the bot. The domain is locked into the Paywall state, meaning the bot can never be certain if the URL is alive or not. As such, it should be ignoring that URL in terms of establishing whether it's alive or not. However, the bot is rescuing the link anyways. This is an indication of a bug unrelated to its ability to see links dead or alive. This could be a consequence of the latest update (v1.4.2). It fixed several problems, but apparently brought several more to light. If I had rollback rights there, I could quickly revert the problematic edits for you with a script. IABot keeps track of which pages have URLs, or domains. Responding to your comment on nlwiki, I agree bots should do useful edits, but a bot like InternetArchiveBot is a bot project that has been attempted over and over again on enwiki and ultimately failed in the end. The reason why IABot is able to be a success, is the sheer complexity of the bot code driving it. It's really advanced, and it tries to apply thinking equivalent to a human to do its job. Naturally, the more complex a bot, the more work it takes to fix issues and make it more reliable.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 13:12, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
You might try to request rollback rights at nl:WP:AT, but not sure you will get it for this reason... (the crats usually only give it for antivandalism work). But is the conclusion that the problem is fixed now, or not yet? Trijnsteltalk 22:50, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
Unfortunately not yet. But I can tell you this is contributing to the high false positive rate, if it isn't entirely responsible.—CYBERPOWER (Around) 22:55, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
@Trijnstel: I have found the bug and fixed it. You can expect to see this problem resolved when I deploy IABot v1.5.—CYBERPOWER (Message) 02:15, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
That's also the reason why I created these tools. I'm just one person working on a massive bot. If I could have users using the tools for simpler issues that I could have the tool fix for me, that would allow me to stay focused on code related bugs.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 13:15, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
  • @Trijnstel: Side question: Are you attending Wikimania 2017?—CYBERPOWER (Around) 20:01, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
    • No, I'm not. Trijnsteltalk 22:50, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
      Bummer. I would've have loved to talk to personally about IABot. :)—CYBERPOWER (Around) 22:55, 23 July 2017 (UTC)


New Zealand TW-17.svg Thanks for supporting my run for administrator. I am honored and grateful. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:13, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
For crying out loud, Cullen328, if you thank everyone that supported you you'll break the Foundation's budget for server expansion. EEng 17:32, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
@Cullen328: And I'll have to block you for spamming. ;-)—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 17:33, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
That too. He's going rouge already. EEng 17:36, 23 July 2017 (UTC)


This bot doesn't have a user page or in any way reference its task, or its approval. This is normally a basic requirement so that other editors can track down what it is doing and why. Linked edit summaries can sometimes help with this as well. Since you speedily approved the operation - would you please consider why you think this isn't appropriate - or work with the operator to update their pages and or summary if it was an oversight. Thank you, — xaosflux Talk 20:41, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Yes, this was an oversight. I was more concerned about why the user ran the bot without approval, and forgot about the user page.—CYBERPOWER (Around) 20:42, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
@Tohaomg: As I just mentioned above, I forgot about your userpage. Our policy requires that your userpage explain the tasks it does.—CYBERPOWER (Around) 20:53, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

User:Cyberpower678/RfX Report is stuck[edit]

What the headline said. User:Cyberpower678/Tally is being updated correctly, just the report is still saying "no nominations" (another one's just been added to the pile). As a possible speculation as to the root cause, following the events at Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Archive 246#Graveyard RfAs and a few other stale RfAs being cleaned up, now is the first time in several years that the tally file has been completely empty (after Cullen328's RfA closed yesterday), and it's possible that the bot can't cope with moving from that to populated. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:43, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

I fixed your problem.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 12:48, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
And that, ladies and gentlemen, is why you should never speculate what is wrong in a bug report, even if you're a dab hand at PHP. I will go and get the seafood. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:51, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
LOL. Cyberbot I is due for a rewrite. I will be eventually be tossing the entire code including Peachy and using new modern code that runs on PHP 7.1. As it is now, Cyberbot I can't run past PHP 5.5, else it breaks down.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 12:54, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
I still run stuff on php5 (well 5.6) - it ain't broke and doesn't need fixing. I'm still not sold on Python 3. Yes, I'm a luddite. Sure, there are nicer languages, and you can write some horrendous spaghetti code in PHP, but you can do that in any language, pretty much. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:57, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
Are you familiar with LabVIEW? THIS is spaghetti code.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 12:59, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
IABot runs on 5.6, but is tested to run on PHP 7.1.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 13:00, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Different RfX tool problem[edit]

(talk page stalker) Spotted this. Thanks chaps. Any of you learned people able to help with this? Might as well discuss it here. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 13:07, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

@Matthewrbowker and MusikAnimal: Isn't this in the beta XTools?—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 13:08, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

On review, there seem to be other bugs in the tool, so if it's been superseded, that's good news. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 13:54, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

@Dweller: Two separate tools exist now: The above now-maintained by Matt and Musik, as well as one by Enterprisey. Enterprisey's is a bit more refined at this time. --Izno (talk) 15:32, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
That's great, thanks Izno. Can I trouble you or anyone else for the links please? --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 16:21, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
@Dweller: Xtools 3 version and Enterprisey version. --Izno (talk) 18:38, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi, thanks Izno. Neither of those have the functionality I'm looking for, which is in Snottywong's tool - assessing peoples' RfX contributions against the results of the RfX. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 09:15, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

@Dweller: Which tool is that? Provide a link, please. --Izno (talk) 11:42, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Sorry. This one: [11] from the really rather terrific, but sadly semi-retired Scottywong. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 13:40, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

@Dweller: It looks like that one is on the current implementation list for Xtools 3: phab:T165710. It may work in the old Xtools. --Izno (talk) 14:36, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. Two problems with that tool. 1) (Bigger problem) it doesn't show in an easy way (like Snottywong's) how often my !vote corresponded with the outcome, which some people like. And 2) in my case the tool couldn't comprehend about 15% of my contributions. On a quick survey it seems this is because it sees every edit to those pages as a !vote, so when I closed RfAs, gnomed them or gently suggested NOTNOW in RfAs that ended 0/0/0, it renders them "unknown". --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 14:51, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Right, well I've got hold of pywikipediabot (seems you can just give it as a username if you only want to read stuff from here and it doesn't moan) and wrote me a script that dumps out successful RfAs with name, ordinal, tallies and percentage. Took about 15 minutes. Might have a go at a parser next. I think one that will work with everything is something like having a state machine that moves to "support" / "oppose" / "neutral" per header, a line starting with a hash and containing User:(.*)| or User talk:(.*)| AND has a UTC datestamp right at the end of the line (ie: a signature or Sinebot complaining about a lack of one) is a vote tied to a name. So you basically end up with a faster (?) tool (given how infrequently RfAs run, you might as well make a bot calculate the diffs once and cache it) that's GPL on github. Or something like that. Stop me if I'm reinventing the wheel. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:15, 25 July 2017 (UTC)


I became aware of Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/TohaomgBot via a comment at wp:BN. I have some comments and I'm not quite sure to put them but I'm pretty sure that BN is not the right place. So I'll start here.


I spend a fair amount of time fielding requests for logos in articles. While some logos are in public domain, most are not. My typical work process involves taking a logo provided by the company and reducing the size to comply with what I believe are fair use rules. On occasion, the original logo provided is an SVG but in most cases it is something else: JPEG, PNG and other options.

I know there has been some discussion about the use of SVG for logos. (Unfortunately, I haven't seen it in quite some time and don't have a link handy.) The obvious problem is that one of the main attributes of SVGs, the scalability, is actually a problem when it comes to a fair use image where we do not want an image that can be scaled up. I don't recall whether the consensus of the community is that this is not an issue we should worry about, but absent some clear consensus that we as a community no longer care about the reduced resolution aspect of fair use, I'd like some assurance that this bot won't be doing any conversions of their use images.

I note that the scope of the request refers to all name spaces, so I don't see anything in the discussion (I haven't looked at the source code) to ensure that such fair use images are not in scope.

I will also add that I can imagine some other exceptions, although I haven't tracked down an exact link. Presumably we have some articles either in mainspace or in Wikipedia space talking about conversion of or comparison of images among formats and would obviously not be a good idea to convert raster images to SVG in those articles. Has that been considered?--S Philbrick(Talk) 17:03, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

I can't speak for the bot operator, but if I understand the task correctly, the bot is started up by the operator by specifying an existing image, and then specifying an existing SVG replacement for it. So both images would have to exist in the first place. If the images themselves violate the copyright policy, and the operator is instructing the bot to make all these replacements xwiki, then I would say the botop is responsible since the bot isn't fully automatic in regards to what images it should start replacing on pages.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 17:35, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
  1. I do the replace ONLY IF new image is on Commons. If it is uploaded locally, I do not.
  2. Generally I work with insignia of administrative units of Ukraine or neighbouring countries or with logos of government or government-owned organizations of Ukraine. All of above are not subjects to the copyright (in case of Ukraine by the 10th paragraph of the Law on copyright and related rights).
--TohaomgTohaomg (talk) 17:49, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
Thanks to both of you. I had the impression (although I now realize it was not explicitly stated) that you were generating SVGs not just identifying existing ones. Regarding my concerns for fair use images, the fact that you ensure that the image is on Commons should be adequate, as none of these images should be on Commons.--S Philbrick(Talk) 18:18, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Wikinews NL Internet Archive Bot[edit]

Following this, there is consensus and your bot is listed on the request page. We are ready to submit a request to the stewards, then it will take another 5 days before a botbit is given. Maybe you can create a botaccountpage on the project? Later, you can activate it without any problems. I see you're busy, so take your time. --LIVE NIEUWS (talk) 22:58, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

(((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 23:13, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Not sure what to do[edit]

Here is the edit that the bot made to the page Britannia: [1] Neither on the "Original" link nor on the wayback machine link can one access the pdf that is linked to on the page.

However, here is the new ref I put in, and it works: [1]

Recommendations? I don't want to have to go in and fix by hand all the changes the Bot is making. Acad Ronin (talk) 03:17, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

As far the bot is concerned, it provided a working archive of the original URL. There's nothing more to say.—CYBERPOWER (Message) 03:26, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

IABot: Batch edit live status[edit]

Is it possible to batch edit the live status based on a URL pattern? It seems like all URLs with the pattern "" have live status "dying" now, and a few has already been marked as dead. I cannot change the whole domain however, since URLs with the pattern "" are actually dead. – Danmichaelo (talk) 14:55, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Hm, it's possible that whitelisting and not might work?Danmichaelo (talk) 14:56, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
    • ^ a b "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 2010-08-16. Retrieved 2011-01-28.  Register of Letters of Marque against France 1793–1815, p.54. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name "LoM" defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).