User talk:Magioladitis

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/MoohanBOT 9[edit]

Sorry to bother you again. I'd like to get a move on Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/MoohanBOT 9 since the issue that's blocking us is fairly minor and the task uncontroversial. Can you take a look? — Earwig talk 04:00, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

The Earwig after checking a bit I think you only need is in the Biography plugin to uncheck all the "Workgroup" boxes. I suspect you had them activated then you ran the bot. Please check and tell me. I can't test it myself and I can't comment in your BRFA because I am currently blocked. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:05, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

In the next 3 days there will a new AWB release with a newer KingbotK plugin version included. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:09, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. That's why I messaged you here. I'll relay this to Jamesmcmahon0. — Earwig talk 08:09, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

The Earwig BattyBot is already approved for this task and uses the same code with Yobot. MoohanBOT should face no problems as long as they uncheck the boxes I suggested. The extra boxes just add extra unneeded empty parameters. -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:46, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

I understand what you are saying, but I want to see Jamesmcmahon0 run the trial first to confirm. — Earwig talk 07:55, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
The Earwig of course. That's why I asked for a second trial. In case it does not work out we already have 2(?) bots doing the same task. A single run I did reduced the backlog by 50%. -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:56, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Got it. I thought you were asking me to approve the bot right now. — Earwig talk 07:58, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
The Earwig no way. KingbotK is difficult to use even for me. That's why there is a plan that we rewrite it form the scratch. Many of the longstanding issues I am accused is due to KingbotK plugin not working as it should be. I try to use other methods to tag pages lately. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:01, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

AWB text fields[edit]

Resolved

AWB 5.7.0.0 SVN 11328 (2015-07-14 19.56.59 Since error reporting for AWB is now virtually impossible, can I tell you of the following: On the skip pulldown screen, the Text area has 'contains' and 'doesn't contain' boxes to fill in. It used to be the case that doing cut and paste into these fields resulted in properly sized and thus readable content. For the last several months, this is no longer the case. Now the font from the cut location is used and this can result in the 'contains' and 'doesn't contains' fields being unreadable. Example: do a cut from an article name or a section name. Fixing this would be helpful Hmains (talk) 00:39, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @Hmains: I don't have that problem on my Windows 7 machine. You might want to try upgrading to AWB 5.8 or the most recent SVN. Hope that helps! GoingBatty (talk) 02:06, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
So far, upgrade to AWB 5.8 does not work on my machine. So new problem. Hmains (talk) 05:49, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Hmains try to download 5.8.5.0 and tell me if it works. -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:43, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

  • Thanks, I was able to download 5.8.5.0 successfully. Then I tried to use it with a previously prepared list of settings (articles). The result was each article was bypassed as though there was nothing to change, which was not true, so I had to quickly exit 5.8.5.0 before a save was made and get back into 5.7.0 to continue my work. Hmains (talk) 16:42, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Hmains we did no changes that woudld affect settings files. Perhaps Reedy knows something more. -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:48, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

  • 5.8.5.0 fixed the original problem I reported here: copying into the 'contains' and 'doesn't contains' fields now result in correct readable font being used. Thanks Hmains (talk) 06:20, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Hmains your words make me happy. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:47, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Unblock request[edit]

File:Orologio rosso or File:Orologio verde DOT SVG (red clock or green clock icon, from Wikimedia Commons)
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Magioladitis (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribsdeleted contribsabuse filter logcreation logchange block settingsunblock)


Request reason:

I ll remove the deprecated parameters using by bot account after BRFA and in one pass. -- Magioladitis (talk) 14:21, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Accept reason:

Will be unblocked under temporary editing restrictions below — xaosflux Talk 23:56, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Unblocking administrator: Please check for active autoblocks on this user after accepting the unblock request.
Magioladitis, as your blocking admin is not inactive, would really want to hear from them. — xaosflux Talk 15:59, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
@Materialscientist:xaosflux Talk 15:59, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Baring blocking admin comments, without lengthy discussion, I would support an immediate unblock under the condition that you run no automated or semi-automated editing on your main account until the end of the original block period; as well as only run automated or semi-automated tasks that have clear approval under your bot accounts. — xaosflux Talk 15:59, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Xaosflux I agree on both conditions. -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:01, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Magioladitis, I will follow up on this later today; barring any serious objection from Materialscientist or substantive objections from others. — xaosflux Talk 16:06, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Temporary editing restrictions[edit]

Following your unblock request and lack of objection from the blocking admin or other edits, your account is being unblocked with the following temporary editing restrictions:

  • Until Mon, 15 Feb 2016 04:38:19 GMT:
    1. You may not make any automated or semi-automated edits from this or any other standard user account. This is to be broadly construed. Basic exceptions would be for use of the administrators rollback tool for vandalism cleanup, and low volume use of standard gadgets such as Twinkle.
    2. Your bot accounts must strictly follow WP:BOTPOL, processing only approved tasks.

Violation of your editing restriction may lead to additional blocks or other sanctions. Appeal of these sanctions may be made with the original blocking admin or at WP:AN/I.

xaosflux Talk 23:56, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Logged at WP:RESTRICTIONS as Special:Diff/701505508, may be removed from that page upon expiration. — xaosflux Talk 00:09, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Please note, as you have been subsequently re-blocked and unblocked under new conditions, these restrictions are no longer in affect; please follow up with the new blocking/unblocking admins for any questions. This has been removed from WP:RESTRICTIONS. Best regards, — xaosflux Talk 14:58, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia: 15 years of free knowledge[edit]

Resolved

I am giving a talk next week [1]. I'll add info in my user page asap. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:24, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Talk is gaining publicity. Local media about my today's talk. -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:42, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Useless edits?[edit]

Resolved

Hi! How does this edit help Wikipedia? It appears to be no more than pointless and rather annoying fiddling about. As a general principle, if it isn't broken, there's no need to mend it. Please instruct your bot NOT to move {{COI editnotice}} from its usual position below the project tags and {{connected contributor}} templates, as there's often accompanying talk page text which refers to it as "the lowest yellow notice above" – unless of course you know of some policy which says it has to be at the top? Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:43, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Justlettersandnumbers the page was in some tracking WPBiography category. Probably some server delay. At any case there is WP:TPL. Is there a problem with that list? -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:51, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
The null editing seems to have removed the tracking category. I updated my bot lists. This should not happen in the future. Thank for the heads up. -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:55, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
I also did this without changing the order of templates. The bot won't revisit this page. -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:56, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
(edit conflict) I don't see the COI editnotice mentioned at WP:TPL. So what is your justification for moving it? In any case, please prevent your bot from doing so again, and confirm here once you've done so. More to the point, what was achieved by the edit you made to that page? Isn't there some sort of requirement that bots only make edits that are useful? To be useful it has to do something. Fiddling about with the order of templates helps nobody. It just leads to pointless waste of editor time (which is what this conversation is). Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:00, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
Justlettersandnumbers the page was visited for some stupid reason that the page was in some WPBiography category and not for the bot to rearrange the template order. As I said the bot won't revisit. Moreover, since I still get a lot of negative feedback I already requested other to take over in WPBiography fixes. I am sorry for any inconvenience.-- Magioladitis (talk) 12:04, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Request for someone to take over my talk page bot tasks[edit]

Things are really complicated with talk page bot tasks and I keep messing up. I would like someone to take over. @GoingBatty: perhaps? -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:00, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

I underline the fact that in the past I again asked others to take over and some they did for sometimes till they lost interest. -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:10, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

I will help Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/MoohanBOT 9 to pass tests so a part of fixing WPBiography errors will pass to another bot owner. -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:16, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Here User:Magioladitis/WPBiography I provide a list of tracking categories that are visited by my bot for anyone willing to take over any of them. -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:23, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Is this the list of talk page bot tasks you would like to pass along? Could you please adjust the table if I've made any mistakes. How about interested bot owners fill in the last column? Do you want to advertise this on WP:Bot requests? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 15:20, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
List of approved talk page tasks
Yobot BRFA Task Other BRFA Script
BRFA 3 Tagging people who died as "living=no" and those are alive as "living=yes" BattyBot 30

MoohanBOT 9 (trial)

BRFA 9 Wikiprojects tagging
BRFA 10
  • Inheriting class from other project to WikiProject Biography
    • (Additional) Minor cleanup to talk pages
BRFA 17 Various {{WikiProject Biography}} fixes User:Yobot/Task 17
User:Yobot/Task 17-persondata
BRFA 19 Adds listas in {{WikiProject Biography}}
BRFA 25 Fix WikiProject banners with deprecated or invalid parameters F&R; Needs to be replaced by Custom module

GoingBatty I think the best approach is that a complete module for all WPBiography fixes is created. Or it could be AWB general fixes. Meanwhile, yes, these are the tasks I would like to pass along. -- Magioladitis (talk) 18:00, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

The priority fixes module needs fix. I asked Rjw for help. -- Magioladitis (talk) 18:03, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

I can provide a plan of what is to be fixed and which way and then let other run the bots. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:02, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Non standard WikiProjects banners[edit]

Resolved

That's why I think all non standard wikiproject redirects should be replaced: [2], [3], [4], [5]. Frietjes is there a way that we create a tracing categories of misplaced (i.e. not in talk space) wikiprojects? -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:56, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

try this search. Frietjes (talk) 18:09, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Frietjes wow. That's easier than I thought :) -- Magioladitis (talk) 18:14, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Also, those articles would have been in Category:Unassessed France articles and Category:Unknown-importance France articles, and eventually would appear on Wikipedia:Database reports/Polluted categories, which is run weekly. However, if I don't keep up with the report, the categories starting with "U" don't appear. GoingBatty (talk) 18:21, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Draft talk:Hiroki Tsurumi[edit]

Resolved

I noticed Yobot's editing at Draft talk:Hiroki Tsurumi like this. First, there's no indication that this is actually inaccurately tagged so the edit summary is misleading. This is kind of annoying when my watchlist is filled with it but there's nothing wrong I can see. Second, there are just redirects from one template to the right one and per WP:NOTBROKEN, is it really necessary to go around removing these kinds of template redirects? -- Ricky81682 (talk) 22:13, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Ricky81682 Page is in category "Category:Incorrectly tagged WikiProject Biography articles" maybe @Frietjes: can tell me what is wrong with the page? -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:18, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Ricky81682 I do not recall Draft talk pages to be in that category. The bot failed to fix these because it did not find any problem. It should have skipped but it did not expect Draft pages. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:21, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Ricky81682 pages in Draft page are not expected to have infobox (I guess). After removing the |needs-infobox= the page was delisted. I wait for clarification if this was the correct fix or not. Frietjes should know I guess. If this was the correct fix I ll update the bot code otherwise I ll exclude Draft space form bot editing nd I will ask the tracking category to do the same. I think this resolves everything. Thanks for the heads up. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:28, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

correct. if you check the bottom of template:WikiProject Biography you will see that if any of the following are not blank, core, needs-photo, needs-infobox, needs-filmography, needs-discography, past-collaboration, and the transclusion is not on an article talk page, then the transcluding page is added to that category. it might be good to exclude this tracking for draft space, but that should be discussed on the template talk page. Frietjes (talk) 22:41, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

That's my drama: I am the target of many complains. Many changes happen around and I have to keep up with many different settings files. So everyone: please be more polite. I try to help as much as possible. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:08, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm not trying to be mean but seeing all these edits of mine being "corrected" when I didn't do anything wrong is frustrating. It seems like Friestjes figured out the error before there was a lot of unnecessary corrections. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 03:44, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Skip conditions[edit]

I had a thought: the bot tests whether its fix actually resolves the tracking category issue. If not, it doesn't make the edit. (Kind of like a machine-oriented "Show preview".) This could be done with the API, but since you're using AWB I assume it would be very difficult to implement that kind of functionality. — Earwig talk 07:47, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

The Earwig that's actually a very good idea. Requested at T124868 -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:13, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

all these codes and right boxand category stuff needs to be more clearly understandable.[edit]

IAM new here and it's like i have to read and understand so many codes for this category or that subject to be placed or risk deletion? Can't you come up with a much easier menu format that you don't need like 3 hour's to read or sift through without getting a headache or feel like you need a collage degree in decifering and understanding mega loads of codes and all kinds of data on what to do and how to do etc. Like at least to make it much more user friendly for everyone and just not look like pages upon pages of input codes and category's that they are to all be placed and in correct order or get dissed by others or deleted or edited by other people Plus taken out of most of it's original content because there opinions or beliefs are different so you must be wrong?Just saying maybe you can at least try and make your site more user friendly and much more easier to navigate it and understand it better on how to use it much more properly?:-) TY John E Wyse John Edward wyse (talk) 04:38, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

ISSN and the |id= parameter[edit]

Resolved

Hi, re edits like this - most of the cite templates, {{cite journal}} and {{cite magazine}} included, provide a parameter |issn= (and the alias |ISSN=) which is where this number should be placed. See Template:Cite journal#csdoc issn. --Redrose64 (talk) 00:32, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Redrose64 thanks for the heads up. -- Magioladitis (talk) 00:34, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Inconsequential edits[edit]

Magiladitis, I may miss something, but it seems to me as if edits like this,[6],this and this don't actually do anything, not to the rendered page and not even to maintenance categories. This type of edits looks similar to the ones that so recently got you blocked (then with AWB, now with AutoEd), and seem to be a violation of your unblock conditions. If this is correct, then please be a lot more careful in your editing and stick to edits that actually make a difference. Fram (talk) 13:57, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

These are flagrant violations of the unblock conditions. I propose to reblock for the original duration. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:45, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
Block reset. Will open a discussion at WP:AN shortly, because I think this needs a wider discussion of options. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:05, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

I did not violate AWB rules of use. -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:56, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

MSGJ it's been more than 1 hour. Where is the AN? -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:57, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Fram today I did 33 edits. Is there a rule that all my edits should be useful? Is there a rule for every other Wikipedia editor? -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:03, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

I think that the spirit of the block conditions was about AWB and editing too fast. Not semi-automated edit ban. Still if some Wikipedians want to go after me for today's edits they are welcome. I do not feel that I did something wrong. -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:05, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Fram thanks for your comments. Do you think what Martin just did is right? I can keep away of only whitespace changes. -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:10, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

MSGJ you are being impolite. you did not reply to my messages. Why is that? -- Magioladitis (talk) 20:42, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

I was not being impolite. I have been offline for several hours. The discussion is now open on AN. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:45, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
MSGJ OK No problem. Thanks. I read the message and I thought you already posted a discussion somewhere where I could not find it. Apologies. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:06, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
If there is anything you would like to contribute to the discussion, I can copy your comments there — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:37, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
I agree with xeno that I should participate in the discussion freely. Otherwise, the process will be delayed. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:57, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

xaosflux I did not consider AutoEd as semi-automated edit because I though you were referring only to AWB because the initial block was about AWB rules not about using user scripts. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:53, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I will leave it to others to decide if your edits were actually in violation of the restriction; but seeing as WP:AutoEd's description leads off with "AutoEd is a user script that helps to automatically make certain changes in articles" first glance suggests that it is contrary to: "may not make any automated or semi-automated edits". — xaosflux Talk 23:19, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
xaosflux I asked you because I would to clarify it. I would not do any edits that it was in violation of my restriction. If I did I apologise. It was not on purpose. First of all I feel awful becaue you tok the responsibility to unblock and it now seems I was untrustworthy. This is not me. Sorry. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:25, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Headbomb are you aware of the fact that Visual Editor which is massively used by the community contains tenths of bugs? I am a volunteer running multiple scripts. Visual Editor is implemented by professionals. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:57, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

A cookie for you![edit]

Choco chip cookie.png Always appreciated your work on AWB, never got around to thanking you. So here it is, for your work on improving the Kingbotk plugin (and one genfix Custom Module of yours too). QEDK (T 📖 C) 14:45, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

QEDK thanks. -- Magioladitis (talk) 16:56, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

ISSN in external links[edit]

When replacing an ISSN by the template, be aware of external links. The result looks strange: Henriette Tirman#External links --GünniX (talk) 07:26, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

GünniX I noticed the work you do! It's awesome. Yes, I had in mind to fix that. Thanks for the heads up. I 'll ask Bgwhite to check for all worldcat links too. Since you are on it check also all links to ISSN. 90% can be replaced. I reduced the links to less than 200 yesterday. -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:40, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
I think it is a good idea to scan the next dump with a regular expression for "[...{{ISSN|....-....}}...]". This should give a list of all cases.
There is another open question: Is it possible to handle this situation by a regular expression without writing code? --GünniX (talk) 07:51, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

GünniX What do you mean "regular expression without writing code"? If we are to write a regular expression we are to write code. Or I miss something? The ISSN conversion will help us detect errors via tracking categories. I am not sure we can also detect tings inside external links. -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:48, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

I'm using AWB only for "Find and replace" with "Normal settings" and "Advanced settings". But the result is not always correct.
The menu item "Tools"->"Make module" opens a dialog to write C# code for editing articles. This could be a way to make an advanced ISSN replacement.
I think it is a good idea to do it in 2 steps:
  1. recognize the environment (external link, template or simple text)
  2. depending on the environment use different methods to replace it
But it is difficult to write reliable C# code which handles all constellations automatically. --GünniX (talk) 06:10, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Frietjes & Bgwhite[edit]

Frietjes and Bgwhite you are two of my favourite wikieditors. I think you 'll find a way to clear things up. I wish I could write in your talk pages. Cooperating with you it's one of the reasons I am still around. After the recent events I thought I have to quit editing. One of the things I enjoy around is watching your edits. Please clear this up. Please. -- Magioladitis (talk) 07:52, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

It's not the tools[edit]

I think it's normal, while it should be avoided, that people who edit a lot sometimes to make "no value" edits. This happens with or without tools. [7], [8], [9] It can also be debated what edits add value or not. Many times in the past there were debates about which edits "they add no value". This is just for the record. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:56, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

It is not a valid defence to point to what other editors are doing wrong. If Lugnuts made these kind of edits habitually and in the volume you make them, the attention would soon be on them. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:20, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
MSGJ sure. I am just taking notes. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:26, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Which user was using AWB? Me or you? Oh yes, it was you. Maybe you can re-read (or maybe it's read) the rules of use while you have some free time. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 09:29, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Lugnuts Martin reblocked me while I was not using AWB. :) --Magioladitis (talk) 09:31, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Lugnuts I wrote "it's not the tools". The "no value" edits are connected to AWB or not? Let's decide this first. What is the discussion in AN about? About Me making "no value edits" or me making "no value edits with AWB"? -- Magioladitis (talk)

So I am not saying Lugnuts is doing bad edits. Let's cleat this. I say that I would expect the same rules to apply with or without tools. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:35, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Well here's the discussion if you're having difficulty understanding what it's about. You could always appeal your block. Good luck. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 09:36, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Lugnuts sure. I already asked to be unblocked to participate there my friend. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:37, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

I think it's mainly communication problem here. I ask for clarification about what is the problem exactly. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:38, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

I am not attacking Lugnuts here. I am using them as an example of a good and persistent editor in fact. Lugnuts has my appreciation for their contributions 100%. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:56, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

On Lugnuts and Frietjes: It's the two editors I wish they were using the tools more. We would be able to see more good edits on Wikipedia and they would become more effectove. That's shy sometimes I sneak and do what they do by using AWB. To save them time and see more good stuff. -- Magioladitis (talk) 10:00, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom preparation[edit]

  • Edits that do not change the visual outcome but simplify wikicode can be potentially beneficial. Example: in duplicated parameters only the latter is actually used but removing the unused one is a good thing.
  • Same rules should apply for editors whether they use user scripts or not
  • Any edit that complies with the Manual of Style is considered a good one
  • It is normal an editor to make multiple edits in a single page. No time limit between two edits is expected
  • Comments addressing to bot accounts should follow the rules of CIVILITY since bot accounts are operated by real people. Comments such as "stupid bot" should be avoided.
  • Bot scripts should try to be well balanced and well tested before executed. Still it is normal and expected that any bot script or tool comes with bugs. Developers should make an effort to fix these bugs.

-- Magioladitis (talk) 09:46, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Limited unblock[edit]

Resolved

Magioladitis, MSGJ (the blocking admin) has indicated that he has no problem with you being unblocked on the condition that you only edit your user talk page and the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Magioladitis discussion. Can you agree with these conditions and after the unblock please not edit any other page until the original block would have expired (00:00, 15 February 2016)? Fram (talk) 10:11, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Fram yes. -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:12, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Allright, I have unblocked you. Fram (talk) 12:15, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Fram can you please grant me permission to be allowed to edit bot's talk page and subpages? I would like to be able to reply in comments there and also test a piece of code that could resolve the problem of the "useless edits" when fixing deprecated parameters. I would liek to post a piece of code for testing. -- Magioladitis (talk) 18:08, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Agree - if the bot accounts are allowed to operate, responses to their talk pages should be allowed. Blocking admin should be invovled in this review. — xaosflux Talk 19:01, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Xaosflux thanks. I already have a a patch that will solve the main problem of not skipping when no deprecated/invalid parameters have removed thanks to Rjwilmsi. I also asked Reedy and I hope AWB will soon provide an efficient built-in way to skip pages if no categories have changes as Earwig suggested. This action will fix a long-standing problem in this direction. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:15, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

No problem with that exception either. In general, every admin is free to change the conditions I imposed, I'm not always available and haven't always thought about all problems or exceptions of course. Fram (talk) 13:12, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

So the initial unblock conditions were about AWB or for any tool in general (including AutoEd)? I would like this to be made clear just for the record I guess. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:26, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Yobot breaking templates[edit]

Resolved

With five recent edits - Talk:List of awards and nominations received by The Office (U.S. TV series), Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/The Office (US) articles by quality log, Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/The Office (US) articles by quality statistics, Talk:Deangelo Vickers, Talk:Jo Bennett - Yobot replaces a valid WikiProject banner with a redlinked banner. --Redrose64 (talk) 11:32, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Redrose64 the User:Magioladitis/WikiProjects needs to be updated. GoingBatty please fix it. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 12:12, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
@Redrose64: Fixed the AWB module with this edit.
Also Fixed each of those pages by using {{WikiProject Television|the-office=yes|the-office-importance=}}. GoingBatty (talk) 17:48, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Redrose64 GoingBatty just fixed the script. I hope that one of you will fix the pages too. I would do it but... -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:46, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

GoingBatty you are great! -- Magioladitis (talk) 18:01, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Radio interview[edit]

Resolved

I am giving an interview to ERA Corfu on Monday about the 15 years of Wikipedia. -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:13, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

"Break a leg!" GoingBatty (talk) 17:51, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks!! I try to extend my off-wiki activities. -- 15:55, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks!! -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:52, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Success. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:52, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

New skip conditions[edit]

GoingBatty, et al. New skip conditions can be found in User:Yobot/CatsCheck. They need some testing but right now I am still under restrictions, so if we are to save some time, please someone start testing this. I'll be around for questions. -- Magioladitis (talk) 20:06, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

GoingBatty check your emails. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:57, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

I've seen the emails - just need some time when I can focus on this. Thanks for the reminder. GoingBatty (talk) 03:30, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Some baklava for you![edit]

Baklava - Turkish special, 80-ply.JPEG Hang in there, bud. {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 15:32, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Checkingfax Thanks!! -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:54, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

64[edit]

Fram of the diffs you displayed at Bgwhite's page are OK. Error 64 (i.e. Link equal to linktext) is cleaned regularly by all AWB bots and not only. FrescoBot does this as sole task. -- Magioladitis (talk) 10:03, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Looking a FrescoBot edits, it certainly isn't the only thing it does. Adding spaces between a link and the remainder of the text is not the same as what those 5 edits from BGWhites bot did. See e.g. [10] which moves a comma outside the link (good) or [11] and [12] which corrects an URL (good), [13] this corrects the placement of a comma, which influences how the page looks (good), and so on. This is clearly not the same as what the listed edits at BGWhite's page do. Fram (talk) 10:41, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
Fram Frescobot does other tasks. However, in task #2, one of the things it will look for and do is exactly what #64 does. It will do that if it is the sole fix need on the page. I think this is what Magioladitis means by "sole task". Bgwhite (talk) 11:11, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Bgwhite yes I meant "with no other fixes as AWB does". Language problem here :) Frescobot does many things. -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:34, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

This is the problem I am trying to describe: We have different approaches of what we expect from bots here: Some people would like bots to do "all in one run" to save runs and energy. Some would like bots "to combine significant and insignificant tasks" where the definition insignificant can also vary from who tell it. Some other would like "the edit summary to describe exactly what the bot did". Some other would like "the bot to do only what it was supposed to do". Some of these wishes overlap, some other contradict. I do not have answers here. I just underline the problem. Moreover, CHECKWIKI right now has 100+ errors. Do we expect 100 different scripts with 100 different skip conditions? -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:53, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank-you[edit]

You evidently do some really good work with automated fixes. Sorry you are getting hassled for some mirror errors or unnecessary edits. If we tossed everyone that made an necessary edit there would be few users left. Legacypac (talk) 10:47, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Legacypac it's nice to see that my work is appreciated by the community. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:56, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

AutoEd[edit]

Resolved

I've removed AutoEd from your vector.js file. I don't want you to be tempted. Best you stay away from that. Bgwhite (talk) 09:59, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Bgwhite thanks. All the edits were just for testing anyway. I would like to see some day AutoEd not to come into conflict with AWB. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:49, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Multiple template moves[edit]

User:SMcCandlish please check WP:AWB/TR and make the appropriate corrections to match the renaming of the templates you performed today. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 07:58, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Working on it. This really needs to be done by a bot. It shouldn't be that hard to check that list, and for each item after "→", get a listing of its redirects and add them before the arrow. It could even ID templates by category, do the same lookup, and add them to the page if missing. The only catch would be a defined list of exceptions, but even that could be handled by having the exceptions have entries at /TR, and having the missing entries bot task check for them (e.g. have separate lines for redirecting "color" names to one "color" name, and "colour" names to one "colour" name, without redirecting all of the latter to the desired "color" name just because they're the same template). So, not really a catch. Anyway, this manual processing is an editorial time drain.  — SMcCandlish ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ʌ≼  10:31, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

User:SMcCandlish you are right. I'll work with in next week. -- Magioladitis (talk) 10:36, 8 February 2016 (UTC)