Jump to content

User talk:Cyberpower678/Archive 57

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user uses Twinkle to fight vandalism.
This user has 70% energy left.
This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
This user is a global renamer.
This user is an edit filter manager on the English Wikipedia.
This user has interface administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
Trout this user
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 50←Archive 55Archive 56Archive 57Archive 58Archive 59Archive 60
Senior Editor II
Senior Editor II

InternetArchiveBot

Is this edit in the infobox okay? --Pelmeen10 (talk) 21:25, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Not really, but a newer version of IABot should be able to better detect when being inside a template.—CYBERPOWER (Around) 01:03, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi, please when will https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer:InternetArchiveBot run again ?

--Robin of locksley (talk) 21:26, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Bug report: all those comments are not necessary

(See previous section for comment about why my bug report is here.)

All those comments on Talk pages are not necessary. Your bot does simple edits. Lots of edits. You've done those edits loads of times and they're not difficult, and not controversial. You don't have to announce every simple edit and ask for help from the Wikipedia community in reviewing all those simple edits.

If Talk pages get filled up by automated messages from bots, human editors will start ignoring Talk pages. Please stop the thousands of automated messages. Great floors (talk) 23:56, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

They were disabled per this community consensus discussion. -- GreenC 14:15, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

InternetArchiveBot bug reports too messy, un-Wikipedia-like

Hi,

I wanted to leave a comment regarding the edits of InternetArchiveBot, but the Talk page is protected. That's not very nice.

Then I clicked the link to use the tool you want people to use for submitting bugs. Wrote my report, clicked Submit, then it wants me to go make an account somewhere. No.

Please stop asking people to make special effort to talk to you. We are all Wikipedians. If everyone thought they were so special that they could require others to go to another website and make a new account, the community would disappear very quickly. Great floors (talk) 23:53, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Phabricator is the standard bug reporting tool for Wikipedia itself. The bot is no more special than Wikipedia; surely that's not too special? Huon (talk) 19:14, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

InternetArchiveBot changes ignored

As someone who regularly checks the changes, I am astonished to find that most of them no one ever looks at. Perhaps you know that already, but it doesn't seem to be a well-functioning system. deisenbe (talk) 11:39, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Hey Cyberpower, I wonder now that the messages are disabled, maybe we should start a new discussion about removing old messages from active talk pages, to avoid wasting user's time with updating {{sourcecheck}}. -- GreenC 14:17, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
Maybe that would be a good idea. No sense leaving them around.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 19:08, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
Maybe, but if people are complaining about IABot adding useless text to articles, what sort of ruckus will be raised when a different bot goes through and removes all of those posts? We're having a hard enough time getting Lint errors and legitimate ISBN issues sorted. Primefac (talk) 19:23, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
The general complaint is that IABot is adding 'useless' text and making the talk page a less desirable place to discuss. Removing them would reverse that. Besides since it's a one time run, GreenC bot would only flood everyone's watchlist just once for the cleanup.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 19:25, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
Since one goal is to prevent wasted time updating {{sourcecheck}}, how about changing {{sourcheck}} instructions saying the system is deprecated. Users are encouraged to verify the archive links are accurate, as with any edit, but no action beyond that is required. With a link to the policy discussion that disabled the notices. Seems fair and easy and would immediately show up on all talk pages. The other goal of reducing clutter in talk pages .. 1 million talk pages is a lot. I could start a trial discussion see what people think (but after {{sourcheck}} is updated). -- GreenC 02:58, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
Proposed sandbox version of sourcecheck. -- GreenC 03:12, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2018).

Administrator changes

added None
removed Chochopk • Coffee • Gryffindor • Jimp • Knowledge Seeker • Lankiveil • Peridon • Rjd0060

Guideline and policy news

  • The ability to create articles directly in mainspace is now indefinitely restricted to autoconfirmed users.
  • A proposal is being discussed which would create a new "event coordinator" right that would allow users to temporarily add the "confirmed" flag to new user accounts and to create many new user accounts without being hindered by a rate limit.

Technical news

  • AbuseFilter has received numerous improvements, including an OOUI overhaul, syntax highlighting, ability to search existing filters, and a few new functions. In particular, the search feature can be used to ensure there aren't existing filters for what you need, and the new equals_to_any function can be used when checking multiple namespaces. One major upcoming change is the ability to see which filters are the slowest. This information is currently only available to those with access to Logstash.
  • When blocking anonymous users, a cookie will be applied that reloads the block if the user changes their IP. This means in most cases, you may no longer need to do /64 range blocks on residential IPv6 addresses in order to effectively block the end user. It will also help combat abuse from IP hoppers in general. This currently only occurs when hard-blocking accounts.
  • The block notice shown on mobile will soon be more informative and point users to a help page on how to request an unblock, just as it currently does on desktop.
  • There will soon be a calendar widget at Special:Block, making it easier to set expiries for a specific date and time.

Arbitration

Obituaries

  • Lankiveil (Craig Franklin) passed away in mid-April. Lankiveil joined Wikipedia on 12 August 2004 and became an administrator on 31 August 2008. During his time with the Wikimedia community, Lankiveil served as an oversighter for the English Wikipedia and as president of Wikimedia Australia.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:05, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Cyberbot on Portuguese Wikipedia

Hey, could InternetArchiveBot run on Portuguese Wikipedia? Leefeni de Karik (talk) 04:30, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Yes. It's pending deployment. I'm working on development issues for the 2.0 release of IABot.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 17:49, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

"Wiki God"

I wanted to say thank you for letting me fix my TBAN error. Being able to fix that mistake meant a lot to me and your going along with shortening the block let me do it that much faster. If you have another 'pain', I will hope you will give them a quick chance to fix mistakes before bring down the hammer (good faith) and all. I hope the past few months, I have been much less of a burden and thanks for all, just in case I can't say this latter. Thanks C. W. Gilmore (talk) 16:49, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

Your welcome? I'm slightly confused. Bring down what hammer?—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 17:55, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
Sorry, if I was cryptic. I did not even realize I had made a mistake when you blocked me last month. I only with I had caught it or had a chance to fix it before the block. No matter about that, you have been very straight forward and I do appreciate that, thank you. C. W. Gilmore (talk) 18:01, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
No problem. Happy editing. :-)—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 18:05, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
Given what is happening on An/I, not sure about that; however, I did want to say thank you for your help over this past year. Cheers! C. W. Gilmore (talk) 18:16, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
I've been going through my Echo notifications, and just noticed it.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 18:50, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

A problem about Cyberbot

Your bot transcluded 5 AfDs in today's log which I have tagged {{db-banned}}, see: [1]. Can you update your bot that when AfD debate has {{db}} tag, the bot should ignore, thanks! Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 09:28, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

IABot one time run

Hi Cyber,

The Victorian state election, 2018 will be held on 24 November this year. For some time now it has been the convention in Victoria for the Premier's personal website to serve as a dissemination point for government press releases. However, it is typical that if there is a change of government at the election, the entire old website vanishes within a few hours for the new leader's agenda to be installed. Of course, over the 4 years since the last election many (I would expect hundreds) of refs linking to this website have been added to Victorian politics—related articles. Given that there is a possibility these will vanish literally overnight on November 24, is there any way a one-time run for IABot (preferably as close to that date as possible) could be organised for these links? I'm not sure where to even begin looking for consensus if it's needed; perhaps you can point me in the right direction. Triptothecottage (talk) 22:22, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)@Triptothecottage: I am not Cyberpower, but you can run the bot on a page manually here. I don't think there's a way to schedule it, but you can just run the bot manually on that date. Darylgolden(talk) Ping when replying 03:16, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
@Darylgolden: Oh dear, apparently I did not make myself very clear: you have fallen for the same trap as Izno! What I would like to see is an run that archives all links to the premier.vic.gov.au domain. Can this be done from the interface? Triptothecottage (talk) 05:19, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
@Triptothecottage: I will contact Internet Archive's to arrange for a crawl on mid-November.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 17:52, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
@Cyberpower678: Thanks, great work! Triptothecottage (talk) 23:15, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
Would it be possible to log into the tool, Manage URL Data->Manage Entire Domains->premier.vic.gov.au->choose all three variants->Run Bot on Pages .. do this before the elections so IABot sends any links it finds to Wayback for archiving.. then again after the elections so any dead links are restored in the wikitext. -- GreenC 13:06, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
IABot does not save pages to the Wayback Machine by default, as they routinely do that on their end. So running the bot now, makes no difference. Hence, why I contacted them to arrange for a crawl of the entire domain.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 13:22, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

IABot

When running https://tools.wmflabs.org/iabot on a single page, I get the option to "Add archives to all non-dead references" which I use as I see so many problems with deadlink citations that I prefer to preemptively archive sources. However, when I use the "Queue bot on multiple pages", I don't get this option. Is it possible to get pre-emptive archiving for a list of pages in some way? Thanks Kerry (talk) 01:51, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Is it possible to run invoke IABot with the parameters in the URL? Kerry (talk) 02:00, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

IBAN

" it's rather pointless to have an IBAN against a banned user" - True, as long as the user remains banned -- but banned users have been known to be unbanned, not often, but occasionally. Because of that I think, in general, it's better to leave those types of IBANs in place, just in case. That way if the unusual does happen, and the user is unbanned, the IBAN is still logged and in effect, rather than having to be resurrected (if it's remembered at all). Just MHO. Best, Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:34, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

I will re-open per my response a couple threads down.—CYBERPOWER (Around) 11:16, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

"consensus isn't very strong"?

Regarding this, I have to question your close. 2-2 is not a consensus to at all, weak or no, and one of the two who were in favour of it has since stated that he never liked the sanction to begin with (meaning "the other party is banned" was just a pretext for undermining prior community consensus that CWG was hounding DS). Yes, my !vote, if you only read the boldface text, was not explicitly an oppose, but reading my full comment, especially in light of everything else I wrote in the thread, would have made it clear that I definitely don't think the thread should just be closed with "CWG is no longer subject to the IBAN, so no block", which is the result K.e.coffman is gunning for, and dissolving the IBAN preemptively (an action you essentially took usilaterally as an admin, since, again, there is no consensus to dissolve it) makes that result all the more likely.

Unless you are planning on also blocking CWG and saying that you dissolved the IBAN on the grounds that a simple majority kinda-sorta supported it and both parties are now blocked (I think even Tarage (talk · contribs) and I would support that), I can't see how that close could be justified.

Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 03:39, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Sadly I agree. I don't see consensus, and I feel that judgement was in error. --Tarage (talk) 04:36, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
Well to correct your numbers there is only ooppose and two supports. I considered closing this as the discussion on that sub-thread has died and CWG appears to be headed towards an indef anyway. Regardless, I will re-open since it appears unanimous that I misjudged this one.—CYBERPOWER (Around) 11:15, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
Regarding numbers, I was including myself: I'm not sure if you read through the entire thread before closing that subthread (or even if you'd technically be required to), but inside the subthread I had written lightening his restrictions would be a terrible idea, which is hardly neutral. That's why I clarified in my message above that while my !vote may not have explicitly include the word "oppose" in boldface, I had thought it was obvious how I actually felt. Anyway, thank you for re-opening. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 12:22, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Accident on Template:RfA tally

I made an edit on this template by mistake. Hope I didn't break anything. --Lee (talk) 00:51, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Lee, you undid the change, so no harm no foul. Primefac (talk) 16:33, 7 May 2018 (UTC) (talk page stalker)
You could literally replace the entire page with “Fuck you all” and t wouldn’t matter. Cyberbot will overwrite the page one minute later.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 17:19, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

User:Cyberpower678/RfX Report missing end tag for bold

User:Cyberpower678/RfX Report has missing end tag for bold ('') . It would appear that the solution is to insert two apostrophes ('') at the end of {{#ifeq:{{{smalltimestamp|false}}}|true|<small>}}''No RfXs since 15:32, 2 May 2018 (UTC).—{{#ifeq:{{{simplesig|false}}}|true|[[User:Cyberbot I|Cyberbot I]] ({{#switch:{{User:Cyberbot I/Status}}|enable=Online|disable=Offline| #default=Unknown}})|{{User:Cyberbot I/Signature}}}}{{#ifeq:{{{smalltimestamp|false}}}|true|</small>}}

Cheers, —Anomalocaris (talk) 22:48, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Trouted

Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

You have been trouted for: what is trouting? Respublika Narodnaya (talk) 02:56, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Book report

Here I am again asking, did you by chance get to see why the bot isn't updating book reports? —IB [ Poke ] 08:58, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Not once. Sorry.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 13:50, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Your close at the portals RFC

Hello Cyberpower,

You recently closed a RFC here, giving a brief closing statement. Were you aware that a multi-editor closure is in the works here? If you were not aware, I'd ask you to let that closure go forward. I feel like that discussion needs a much more substantive closing statement than the one that you provided. Cheers, Tazerdadog (talk) 04:30, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

No I was not aware but I was following the RFC since it started, and since the RFC was just one simple question, I closed it with a simple answer. Just because the RFC was massive, doesn’t mean the closing statement needs to be. With that being said the question was simply whether or not to end the system of Portals and to delete them. After reviewing the RFC and reading length rational, it was apparent to me the simply answer of no, the community does not want to end the system of portals. Why make the closing statement more complicated than it needs to be? With that being said, if they want to overwrite or supplement my close, they can do so if they wish.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 13:03, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
If you were actually following the RfC, you would have known about the organised closure. Let's hope no-one feels pressured to agree with your closing statement. I certainly don't. Cesdeva (talk) 20:07, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
I followed the main page, not what's on the respective talk page, or AN.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 20:38, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
Also , whether you agree with the close or not, until the supposed closers come forth and override/supplement my close, my close stands, and accurately reflects community consensus. If you feel I am out of line, you know where you can go to complain about me.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 20:50, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
Pinging the editors who declared that they're closing the discussion on WP:AN. @Mdann52, Winged Blades of Godric, and Primefac: I have no problem with that close staying in the interim while a multi-editor close goes forward, but I would like the final word for this discussion to be a bit more substantive. Tazerdadog (talk) 02:30, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
I'm totally fine with this close; there wasn't going to be a whole lot more than what Cyberpower said. If you want me to countersign to make it "officially" a multi-admin close, so be it, but the consensus is 100% clear with nearly 2:1 opposition to the question. Primefac (talk) 11:55, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
No objections here either. I had some additional thoughts, however I think he summed up the discussion nicely. Frankly, an RfC on this scale only had one inevitable result IMO. Mdann52 (talk) 15:44, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
How about mentioning the other consensus that the portal system is neglected and needs updating? The community deserves more reasoning and summarisation than is currently written in the closing statement. Also perhaps some qualification for the choice of 'strong' in front of consensus. I'm sorry if I appeared accusatory in my earlier post, Cyberpower, that was not my intention. Respect for stepping forward and closing it by yourself. I just think the closing statement could do the RfC more justice. Cesdeva (talk) 16:27, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
Cesdeva, the question asked by the RFC was "should they be deleted", to which the answer is "no". Further discussion was happening further down the page, and those discussions were not hatted specifically to allow further discourse. A good RFC closer answers the question asked; any more would be a supervote. Primefac (talk) 16:33, 14 May 2018 (UTC) (talk page stalker)
'Strong no' is a step further than 'no'. Sure a closer can get away with just addressing the proposal, but in this case it contrasts starkly with the complexity of the actual discussion as lots of editors ignored the overly broad wording of the proposal. I agree that stretching into 'supervote' territory is a risk, but there's still wiggle room to be used. Anyways there are more important things we could probably all be doing than hashing this out. Cesdeva (talk) 16:54, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Thank you all for weighing in with additional opinions. At this point the close has been pretty thoroughly endorsed, so there's no point in pursuing this any further. Tazerdadog (talk) 21:20, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

RFC/N discussion of the username "Hhhhhkohhhhh"

A request for comment has been filed concerning the username of Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk · contribs). You are invited to comment on the discussion here. Just letting you know since I mentioned your name in the discussion :)TonyBallioni (talk) 14:04, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

User page renaming

Hi I'd like you to rename my username. I feel like my current username is somewhat public since I use it in almost all my social Media accounts Peace BubblySnowflake (talk) 18:08, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Gerryshon254, you should go to WP:CHUS. Primefac (talk) 18:40, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
Thanks BubblySnowflake (talk) 18:59, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

A cheeseburger for you!

ty for being cool Stapmoshun (talk) 00:42, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Darkness Shines

FWIW, I have now commented about the TPA issue on Kundpung's page. I did notice it happen yesterday but discovered that I could not edit DS's own talk page. - Sitush (talk) 10:26, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

I have left a comment on the talk at DarknessShines. I don't want anyone to think I've been bullied into my decision, because I haven't - and least of all by any prolific content writers who believe themselves to be above the law when it comes to civility. I was bullied enough by admins before I got the bit myself, and fortunately most of them have since been desysoped or retired. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:48, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Deploying your bot on Commons

I just saw that you're the creator of the ArchiverBot, on Wikimedia Commons we have a huge issue with link rot, are there any immediate plans about deploying your bot there? It could be done easily as the upload date for most imported images and other files (which constitute about half of all files there) could be seen as the access date. --Donald Trung (talk) 10:44, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

There are no immediate plans, and IABot would need to be modified to handle the File namespace as it only touches the mainspace.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 13:25, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello, bot does something strange with links: https://www.ixbt.com/news/hard/index.shtml?02/05/60 -> https://web.archive.org/web/20161220114003/http://www.ixbt.com/news/hard/index.shtml?02%2F05%2F60. And I care about encode the last part of link. Iniquity (talk) 15:54, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

The encoding was sanitized. Slashes in the query string need to be encoded. The archive still works though.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 17:55, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
Ok, thanks for answer about encoding!:) However, I have two more questions: 1. https://www.ixbt.com/news/hard/index.shtml?02/05/60 - the link is working, 2. It is hard to receive worked link from archive version: http://www.ixbt.com/news/hard/index.shtml?02%2F05%2F60. Iniquity (talk) 10:41, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
Hmmm, that is interesting. The site does not conform to URI standards.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 15:43, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

sulinfo

...seems to be down. [2] Would you please have a look? Deryck C. 16:51, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

It was shut down due to a lack of maintenance. It apparently is breaking the servers everytime someone used the tools.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 17:16, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Inappropriate use of talk page by blocked user?

[3]

The other stuff ("I'd like to thank User:X for their help and would like to offer my opinions on this or that ongoing talk discussions I initiated shortly before my block") is all a bit weird and possibly crosses a line, but I'm really not comfortable with him continuing his bogus accusations against me personally, even if it is just to add a link to the "retaliatory" ANI thread that I opened "because he tried to report me for my recurring habit of accusing people of grave-dancing" (a lie that I might have considered withdrawing my support for an indef if he had ever considered retracting).

Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 00:44, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

  • You already got him blocked. Isn't that enough? Dozens of admins would be freed up if you quit running around following other editors around. And now I'm doing it as well! [4] Drmies (talk) 01:21, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
@Drmies: To be clear, "getting him blocked" was not the goal when I opened the ANI thread -- if it had been I would have mentioned a block in my ~1000 word OP comment -- and any one editor got him blocked it ... well, it wasn't me. (Heck, 5-2 would have been a weak consensus for an indefinite block if either of the two hadn't repeatedly refused to provide any kind of coherent argument against blocking.) Anyway, I guess I should have been clearer above that I am not asking for talk page access to be revoked but rather for someone who he'll listen to tell him to stop talking about people who feels "got him blocked". But I can also appreciate that fretting over it is a waste of my time. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 02:01, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
It is a waste of your time, Hijiri. There are a lot of good things you have done and that you can do, and as far as I know all those good things are in article space. Drmies (talk) 02:06, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
You can't seriously argue that the ANI threads on both Darkness Shines and C. W. Gilmore were bad, since virtually everyone who opposed either one of them supported the other. "Most of those things" would be more reasonable, and I'd probably agree with you. Anyway, there are off-wiki reasons (which I don't feel comfortable disclosing) for my not having done a whole lot of research-intensive article creation for the last few weeks, and if we're being honest even List of Man'yōshū poets probably should still be in my userspace since it's been six months and it's scarcely 20% "finished" (finished meaning just "having ripped all names and numbers from Nakanishi's list", not even FL-quality), and a userspace draft that takes three years to move to the mainspacecan't reasonably be called "in article space". ;-) Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 02:39, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Appeal

Could I appeal my ban on the category and template spaces? I've sent appeals to the ArbCom but my e-mail address is blacklisted and doesn't even reach moderation. Apparently Zanhe isn't present and under my current limitations I'm not allowed to ask more than once. Note that these limitations had nothing to do with my original block or subsequent re-block. --Donald Trung (talk) 15:00, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

@Doug Weller: Would you mind commenting on that? I find it odd that he can't email ArbCom.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 17:52, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
Yes, we did put him on the blacklist. Last August he sent us over 14 emails showing an inability to accept and acknowledge why he was blocked, etc. and we blacklisted him. We'll unblacklist him when appropriate. I need to check on something about his ban as I can't find it. I thought he was told when he could appeal his ban. I'll check on that also. Doug Weller talk 19:51, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
@Doug Weller: In regards, to what he's appealing is one of the heavy unblock restrictions I placed on him as a condition of being unblocked. He is currently TBANed from all namespaces except for article and user space and their respective talk pages.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 19:53, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
Do you mean he isn't trying to appeal to us? I'll be offline soon. Doug Weller talk 20:00, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
I'm guessing he misunderstood ArbCom as the only place to appeal restrictions. I subjected him to the following restrictions when I unblocked him: unblock request. Are there any other restrictions I am not aware of?—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 20:08, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

My point was that I'm trying to appeal to you to be allowed to enter template- and category-related spaces because I've never been disruptive in any of them, please see WP:PUNISH. With the current condition if I create an article that needs to be categorised appropriately I am not allowed to categorise it in a new category because I am not allowed to make it, nor am I allowed to add articles to templates or discuss either categories or templates. I genuinely fail to see how adding emoji's to a signature is related to organising articles correctly and don't want to keep bothering Zanhe for every little alteration which might irritate them after a while. --Donald Trung (talk) 06:51, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

You have been well behaved, so I am inclined to say yes, but I do want to check you history and consult with others first before loosening the restrictions.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 17:27, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
I don't see any issues with extending to the template space, but with all of two dozen edits there I don't see much to compare to anyway. If it's lifted, just make sure anything controversial is discussed first. Primefac (talk) 17:38, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
@Donald Trung: I will amend the restrictions if you can agree to stay out of trouble like you have been so far. I don't want to see you getting landed at ANI. Can you make sure of that? Also remember conditions 5 and 6 will still hold. You may be able to edit those namespaces but still being disruptive can get you blocked for good. Agreed?—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 17:44, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
Alright, do I have to wait until this is adjusted here or could I make those edits now? I haven't really been watching this conversation as I am busy on Commons. --Donald Trung (talk) 09:56, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
Does that by the way also include the talk spaces of templates and categories? --Donald Trung (talk) 09:57, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
Here you go.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 13:23, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
Sorry to take so long. He did misunderstand and there was no need to appeal to us. At the moment I see no need to remove him from the blacklist but if he does ever have a need he could email one of us. If his email request looks acceptable I'm sure we'll unblacklist him. Doug Weller talk 11:36, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Stop harassing me

You are accusing me of using the word "unbanning" in a discussion of your behaviour. I did not. 92.31.136.211 (talk) 20:48, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

He was the one who first suggested that yesterday he advocated an unban of somebody against consensus. On your own talk page wasn't you? Stop talking non-sense and stop mentioning me if you don't want me to "harass" you. Also just stop editing at all. Unless you are appealing, I will block you for Block Evasion.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 20:51, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
My use of the word "unbanning" was a simple reference to your earlier use of the word (on Green Giant's talk page). Do keep up. 92.31.136.211 (talk) 20:56, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
So you didn't make the following comment? The above comment by Cyberpower has an unpleasant whiff about it given his unqualified support earlier today for the restoration of editing rights to an editor who the Community has decided is going to remain banned for a very long time.. Interesting. Last I checked advocating the support of the restoration of editing rights to a banned user is unbanning. Which I didn't do. But since you insist on using your explicit words, I did not advocate for the restoration of anyone's editing rights.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 21:00, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
Going along with the colour scheme,

*I do get that, so I am really grateful Kudpung restored TPA. — Cyberpower678 16:07, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

So I had an admin restore TPA. That doesn't mean they can freely edit Wikipedia. They still do not have a right to edit Wikipedia, but they do have the ability to appeal the ban on their talk.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 21:15, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Rescuing refs

Would you please change the edit summary for the "IABotManagementConsole" to say something like "Adding archive links" instead of "Rescuing references"? Most of the time, there's nothing wrong or in need of rescuing (yet). Also, there's another tool that actually "rescues" refs (when the original named ref has been deleted but other named refs have been left in the wikitext), and when I see this tool's edit summary, I always assume that it's talking about the other kind of "rescuing". WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:33, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

IABot has been using this edit summary since it's inception 3 years ago. I'm hesitant to change it at this point.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 00:30, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

im not the guy removing afd templates

im gobsmacked coz im on wikipedia now never edited it but i suddenly have a message now on me talk page over here! so i got curious and checked out the contributions page am wondering why does the contributions list me as having edited these things that i never shoed any interested in? cheerleading films? aliens vs predators? never watched any of that stuff at all except maybe 1 aliens film with me cousins and tbh it sounds like too much work to do i mean the info on tge pages seems spot on so why would i go edit it with extra stuff? some bloke even went as far as to fake my identity and put up an edit from 2007! thats happened more than 10 years ago and i dont even live in america why would i know anything about who lives in tenessee ffs! yeah and concenring ur message i didnt have anything to do with removing an afd template, just letting u know someones been trying to copy my identity for more than 10 years and since ur a mod im asking u please solve this am not good with computer stuff hope u can help me clear my name — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.52.68.79 (talk) 23:10, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, but it's really hard to take you seriously the way you wrote your message. In any event your identity is not at risk. Your IP is like a dynamic IP, which means you were assigned an IP that was used by someone else at some point.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 23:29, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Update template for CurrentEventsBot task

Currently, the bot generates pages with the following code: 

{{Current events|year=2018|month=05|day=26|content=

<!-- All news items below this line -->
*
<!-- All news items above this line -->}}

but all headlines must include the ;Category and most include a *[[Topic]] which has **Headline. I think the template should be updated to one of the following: 

{{Current events|year=2018|month=05|day=26|content=        {{Current events|year=2018|month=05|day=26|content=

<!-- All news items below this line -->                    <!-- All news items below this line -->
;                                                          ;
*                                                          *
<!-- All news items above this line -->}}                  **
                                                           <!-- All news items above this line -->}}

so people can easily add the category and main topic.  Nixinova  T  C  06:27, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Your syntax makes little sense. You may want to either fix it, or explain what you are trying to achieve here.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 23:30, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Concerning portals

Dear Cyberpower,

Thank you for the efficient closing.

You mentioned that you had watched the RfC from the beginning with interest, and so I thought you might be interested in what has been happening with portals since then.

The Portals WikiProject is going strong (we're at 81 members and growing), and a record of what we have been doing and what is planned is kept at our newsletter archive. We're already on issue #6!

To see the current flurry of activity, see the WikiProject's talk page.

Cheers,    — The Transhumanist   00:28, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

P.S.: Hopefully, we can help reduce your stress level, before the thermometer breaks. :)

Hi, Why clear your bot the Wikipedia Sandbox?

Hi, I asking a question why the bot clears the content on the public sandbox every hour if there is content there, I want to keep my content without the bot clears the sandbox under I want to edit it, can you explain it? --46.227.72.88 (talk) 08:18, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi there. The Wikipedia sandbox is meant as a testing spot for new users and isn't meant for developing anything permanent. If you want a spot to keep your content indefinitely, consider creating an account and then using your own user sandbox to test/develop in. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 19:30, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2018).

Administrator changes

added None
removed Al Ameer son • AliveFreeHappy • Cenarium • Lupo • MichaelBillington

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • IP-based cookie blocks should be deployed to English Wikipedia in June. This will cause the block of a logged-out user to be reloaded if they change IPs. This means in most cases, you may no longer need to do /64 range blocks on residential IPv6 addresses in order to effectively block the end user. It will also help combat abuse from IP hoppers in general. For the time being, it only affects users of the desktop interface.
  • The Wikimedia Foundation's Anti-Harassment Tools team will build granular types of blocks in 2018 (e.g. a block from uploading or editing specific pages, categories, or namespaces, as opposed to a full-site block). Feedback on the concept may be left at the talk page.
  • There is now a checkbox on Special:ListUsers to let you see only users in temporary user groups.
  • It is now easier for blocked mobile users to see why they were blocked.

Arbitration

  • A recent technical issue with the Arbitration Committee's spam filter inadvertently caused all messages sent to the committee through Wikipedia (i.e. Special:EmailUser/Arbitration Committee) to be discarded. If you attempted to send an email to the Arbitration Committee via Wikipedia between May 16 and May 31, your message was not received and you are encouraged to resend it. Messages sent outside of these dates or directly to the Arbitration Committee email address were not affected by this issue.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:59, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Cyberbot AfD tag parsing

Hey there, I'm not sure if I've brought this up before, but in case I haven't:

When Cyberbot (specifically Snotbot/AfDBot) comes across an AfD tag which has a space between the parameter identifier "pg=" and the name of the discussion page (e.g. "| pg= Cyberbot |"), it seems to add the space into the title of the page that it checks (which would then be Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ Cyberbot). Since this page will almost never exist, it thinks the tag links to a redlink and will add it to User:Cyberbot I/AfD report. Now, this doesn't happen very often as none of the automated tools that nominate articles for AfD add the extra space, but when it does it can be quite confusing. It shouldn't be a difficult fix, though - the template doesn't parse spaces into the link, no matter how many, so there's no situation in which they should be included. Thanks, ansh666 17:49, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

@Ansh666: Thanks for the warning. If I don't have it fixed in the next two months, give me a reminder ping. I've got quite a full plate right now.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 15:15, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

InternetArchiveBot

Hi, I'm a huge fan of what InternetArchiveBot does. But the longer I edit, the more I find its notifications can tend to drown out the main purpose of an article's talk page. I believe (?) it's vanishingly rare that the bot really messes anything up, which is a testament to its design. So do we really need 1,468 characters of reporting to article talk every time it makes an edit? Even in the rare cases that "sourcecheck" is invoked, it doesn't shorten the notification much.

I would suggest moving the bulk of the content to a separate wiki page, which is prominently linked in the notification. The notification could then be shortened to something like this:

== External links modified ==
This bot modified one external link. Please see this page for more information, to report an error, etc. —InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:14, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

...for a grand total of 233 characters. (On my screen, it's also 3 lines instead of 17.) What do you think? -Pete Forsyth (talk) 01:31, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

@Peteforsyth: I think you are a little late to the game. ;-). After an RfC, consensus was to turn off the messages entirely. IABot hasn't been leaving messages for well over a month now. :p—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 15:22, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

Merchandise Giveaway Nomination - Successful

Hey Cyberpower678

You have been successfully nominated to receive a free t-shirt from the Wikimedia Foundation through our Merchandise Giveaway program (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Merchandise_giveaways). Congratulations and thank you for your hard work!

Please email us at merchandisegiveaway@wikimedia.org and we will send you full details on how to accept your free shirt.

Thanks! Seddon (WMF) (talk) 00:41, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

@Seddon (WMF): Ooooh. I didn't realize my nom was successful. :-). I will send an email shortly. :-)—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 15:23, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

Bot errors?

In WP:RPP, bot did not archive 3 ECP requests over 11 hours, and [5], requests are clear, but bot says 3 requests remaining, please fix, thanks. Hhkohh (talk) 11:43, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

This is a low priority fix, as long as the body the page is parsing and being edited correctly, I'll fix this eventually.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 15:30, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
Thanks, but bot didn't clerk WP:RPP after this edit, please also fix this. Hhkohh (talk) 14:04, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

InternetArchiveBot at the Spanish Wikipedia - signature

Hello.

As I translated the user page of the bot, I think should be a good idea to change the signature to point the local (Spanish Wikipedia) user page instead of the en:Wikipedia one. This may also apply to every project that has a properly redacted user page.

Your comments are welcome. --Amitie 10g (talk) 23:04, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

I’ll look into it tomorrow. Sorry for the delayed response.—CYBERPOWER (Around) 03:36, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
@Amitie 10g: I've made some suggested changes. Have a look. Looking forward to hearing back.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 00:48, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Small thing with Cyberbot I

Hey, CP678, I noticed a weird thing with Cyberbot I earlier today. The background is that a troll user nominated another user's user page for deletion at AfD. They didn't tag the userpage with an AfDin question (not surprising of course, since they're a troll), but Cyberbot I, in the course of clerking the AfD, tagged the userpage anyway. Now, obviously nobody could expect a bot to tell the difference between a troll AfD and a real AfD in general, but should a red flag have been raised that Cyberbot put an AfD tag on a userpage, when that sort of thing should go to MfD instead? This isn't a big issue or anything, I just thought I'd point it out. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 13:36, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

I don't think it's necessary to put in an emergency fix for this. Just delete and revert. :-)—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 16:53, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Section header broke when archiving

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&diff=next&oldid=845899364

Section headers broke a bit. Not sure why. Alexis Jazz (talk) 23:41, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Not a bot bug. Please see GIGO.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 23:42, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/RJCola

Please don't file reports for every sock you block, both unnecessary and per WP:DENY, unless there's something you want done beyond the block. Again, thank you for the filters.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:01, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Ok.—CYBERPOWER (Around) 02:35, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
Hey cyberpower, do you hard block every IP that enters the RJCola hoax word into an article? I was testing out the edit filter as an IP (so it would not go in my edit filter log) and then when I logged back in, I was hard blocked. L293D (☎ • ✎) 21:53, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
Erm, given how active this troll has been, I didn’t consider that someone would want to intentionally trip the filter, not to mention that edit tripped another LTA filter. Sorry. The idea wasn’t to prevent the troll from using their sock accounts.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 22:10, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
Oh, its OK, don't worry, in less than thirty seconds I had changed my IP so it wasn't a problem at all. Keep up the awesome work with edit filters and all! L293D (☎ • ✎) 22:20, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your help!

Thanks for your help closing Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/TheSandDoctor. I lost internet connectivity as I was trying to close it, so I appreciate you stepping in to get things sorted while I was offline. Cheers, 28bytes (talk) 02:22, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

No problem. Glad to help. I'm glad I was also able to do a first. "The first, non-bureaucrat to close an active RfA as successful and it actually be valid." :p—CYBERPOWER (Around) 02:43, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Pending changes edit summary test

Just to let you know, Special:Diff/846194699 was a test to see if Twinkle would allow long edit summaries when reverting pending changes. See WP:VPT#Pending changes reviews and edit summaries. Obviously, as you saw, the test was successful. Home Lander (talk) 15:59, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

User:Cyberbot I/Requests for unblock report issue

It's raising the big "out of date" message on Category:Requests for unblock (which the report is transcluded on) yet it's clearly relatively up-to-date. Bug, perhaps? - Penwhale | dance in the air and follow his steps 00:08, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Just wait it out.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 00:09, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
Got it. (It just vanished, so I assume it's all good.) - Penwhale | dance in the air and follow his steps 00:24, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

One more question: What would cause the bot to claim an unblock request was made 48 years ago? (See User talk:CulturalShock.) - Penwhale | dance in the air and follow his steps 00:06, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Bot not working

Your bot Cyberbot I is not clearing page Wikipedia talk:sandbox. 71.219.141.37 (talk) 22:37, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

It's clearing just fine from the looks of it.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 13:34, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Filter 920

My last edit was caught by this filter. As I understand you are fairly new to coding filters, can you give me an idea of what you have coded it for? 86.132.186.246 (talk) 13:27, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, the filter is not being discussed publicly. Needless to say, it's meant to protect DuncanHill from the onslaught of harassment he's been dealing with lately.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 13:39, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cyberpower678/Archive_57&oldid=847409389"