Archive for March 2010
Please see Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#Size of archival pages. -- Wavelength (talk) 19:36, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- What about it? Миша13 23:06, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Why is there such a wide variety in the size of the archival pages? -- Wavelength (talk) 16:15, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Checking the edit histories, the small ones were done manually. The large ones were done by the bot, but sometimes the counter gets stuck, so it keeps adding to old archives as well as to the one that's supposed to be active. See 108, 109, & 110.
- —WWoods (talk) 18:45, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- How can the counter be prevented from becoming stuck? -- Wavelength (talk) 21:49, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Several months ago, an editor accidentally changed the archive line of an article from
|archive = Talk:Fox News Channel/Archive %(counter)d
}}
to
|archive = Talk:Fox News Channel/Archive %(counter)d}}
And ever since the bot has been "Archiving to [[Talk:Fox News Channel/Archive 23}}]]."
Without actually saving the stuff anywhere, or realizing that the name wasn't right. I don't know if there are any other instances of this; I hope not, as it was a pain to dig up all the lost sections.
—WWoods (talk) 07:47, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I've encountered this a few other times. The core of the problem is that MediaWiki doesn't throw a recognizable "page not saved" error in this case. Maybe I should really fix that, hmm... Миша13 07:52, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Misza13, I'm wondering why your bot archived a comment and link I left Feb. 15, 2010. This is the log entry:
- 03:37, 25 February 2010 MiszaBot I (talk | contribs) m (13,379 bytes) (Archiving 2 thread(s) (older than 4d) to Talk:Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed/Archive 12, Talk:Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed/Archive 11.)
Most posts on that page are older than 4d, but have not been archived. I will undo this action if it was a robot's mistake. Yopienso (talk) 22:45, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Doesn't look like a mistake, though there's an oddity: it didn't take the oldest section.
- The bot doesn't archive individual comments, but rather sections which have no dated comments less than the limit — up to a point. Out-of-date sections will be left if taking them would leave the page with less than
minthreadsleft, the default value of which is 5. And it won't take less than minthreadstoarchive, the default value of which is 2, so it won't archive Talk:Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed again until a couple of new sections are added.
- On a talk page, there's not a lot of point in putting URLs in
<ref> tags, since there's no {{reflist}} to show them. If they're cluttering the page, you can just put single brackets around them.
- —WWoods (talk) 23:45, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm confused: Who is WWoods? Who is Misza13? How is WWoods answering on Misza13's talk page?
- Hmm--seems like the bot selected my post irrationally, unless there's a clue word there that triggered it. Since there's nothing wrong with my comment and it's useful and should stay in context, I'll just undo the action. That "oddity," as you call it, makes no sense. Why doesn't it look like a mistake? (I'll wait for your response before undoing. No hurry, but thanks for your previous prompt reply.) Yopienso (talk) 00:42, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Forgot to thank you for explaining about URLs on talk pages. Thanks!Yopienso (talk) 05:09, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not Misza13, but I thought I knew the answer to your question. This page is on my watchlist since I've asked and answered questions about Miszbot before.
- More fully, three of the seven sections on the page were old enough to archive, but it couldn't take them all because that would have left only four. Evidently the bot simply took the first two it came to, working from the top of the page, without bothering to rank sections by relative age. So what it did seems odd, since it left the oldest section, but not wrong, since both of the archived sections did qualify for archiving.
- —WWoods (talk) 05:44, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not understanding this. Almost all the comments are over 4 days old. One goes back to October. Many talk pages have comments that are several years old. I'm thinking someone just wanted to hide the information I provided. I will provide it again, this time at the Stern peer review controversy. If it's hidden again, I'll conclude I was right, but will leave it hidden. Yopienso (talk) 07:08, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- You must understand two things:
- The bot works a thread at a time, from the top of the page.
- Once the page is reduced to a minimum size (5 threads by default), further threads are not processed, regardless of content.
- This edit is consistent with that algoritm. Don't look for conspiracies where there are none. You can, however leave a new comment in a thread to bump it. Миша13 07:43, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- But the bot didn't work from the top down; it took out my contribution from about the middle of the page, leaving much older contributions above it. But never mind--it's not worth the trouble. (No sour grapes--it really isn't worth the trouble!) I am curious about the technology and practice, though. Here, [[1]] to choose a random example, is a long talk page with contributions dating back 3 years. The page from which my contribution was excised was much shorter and more recent. Thanks for your information. Unfortunately, I am very unsavvy about wikis and bots....and even about how to post links and references. Yopienso (talk) 08:04, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like it worked to me: It left the first section (Sexpelled) because it had a timestamp less than 4 days old; it took the second and third sections (Sternberg 1, NPOV) which didn't; and then it stopped, because taking the fourth section (Second Sentence) would have left the page with only four sections — less than the minimum number.- By the way, I've lengthened the minimum_age_to_archive from 4 days to 90, since the page isn't getting the level of traffic it was. A couple of years ago, it peaked at almost 700k!
- —WWoods (talk) 02:05, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you for taking the time to try to clue me in on the procedure. I still don't get it, though--Second Sentence and One Question? are older than Sternberg peer review controversy 1. The older ones were left and the newer one was archived. And, it was put into Archive 11 instead of Archive 12.
- OK--so the time frame for archiving is tailored to each page. That makes sense. (Yay! I get it.) Yopienso (talk) 03:52, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Arrgh. Another case of the counter getting stuck. —WWoods (talk) 20:37, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think I broke my archiving by changing my username, and I don't think my fix worked. Would you have the time to take a gander at it?--~TPW 19:00, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- What exactly seems to be the problem - it archived some threads today? [2]. –xenotalk 19:16, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Ah, didn't see that it had worked (only checked my watchlist and the page, not its history). Sorry for the trouble!--~TPW 19:29, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- No trouble. –xenotalk 19:32, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've been archiving my talk pages by hand for years. I'm considering switching, but my scheme is that I archive at monthly boundaries (the number increments at the change of the month, see User:Lar/TalkArchivePageListTemplate) I figure the Talk page watchers here will have a good idea... where is a good place to ask general questions? (that is, if this bot can't do it, is there another bot that does, where is the theory of archive bots discussed, etc) I think I can write a formula using magicwords and parser functions that will determine what number the archive will be based on what today's date is, but is there a way to get a particular header, with certain parameter settings already set, embedded into an archive page when it's first set up or do I have to do that manually? For example my archive 63 has this template invocation:
- {{User:Lar/TalkArchiveHeader|ArchiveNum=63|EndDate=1 March 2010|StartDate= 1 February 2010}}
as you can see it has information about the start and end date, as well as the name of the archive itself. Thanks. Sorry if these are kind of clueless questions, I'm not a user of these bots so may be asking badly. ++Lar: t/c 16:08, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't think MiszaBot will be able to handle a parserFunction in its setting. For number based archives like that it decides where to place it based on a simple "counter=X" where X is the number. I find it's not too painful to manually update the counter each month (this year, each quarter), but YMMV. Not sure if ClueBot will be more automatble with this... –xenotalk 16:13, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks. So do I need to go round to all the archive bot author pages and ask, or is there a place where they are compared and contrasted already? I don't know what all the bots are. Is there a list of them somewhere? :) As for the specific issue, maybe I'll write a bot to change the template semiautomatically... because for crispness I need it to happen on the exact right day or the archive bot will put some things in the "wrong" archive. ++Lar: t/c 16:25, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I took a harder look at example 3 in the FAQ (which I had dismissed previously), it does almost what I want except the names of the archives are different. Perhaps I could set up a big gob of redirects from numerics to dates (for example point .../Archive 62 to ../Archives/2010/February or whatever)? Also you can specify a header to embed, so if I can get clever about the start and end date stuff, that might work too. Hmm... ++Lar: t/c 16:31, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I usually end up manually archiving at the borders to get things right (you're manually archiving now, so it's really not adding any work =). I think there are only two archiving bots running, User:ClueBot III and this one - but don't take my word for it. –xenotalk 16:37, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I considered that but it would (imo) needlessly bloat your user talk subspace. Furthermore, MiszaBot might not follow the redirect (Misza would have to advise if this is a viable option) –xenotalk 16:37, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry if I was unclear, the redirects would be to make nav work and would point to the // form, the bot would archive to the // form of the page and would not need to follow redirects. But ya, it's a lot of clutter. ++Lar: t/c 16:53, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Clever parserFunctions could be written to avoid needing the redirects - but there's something to be said for consistency. Unfortunately Misza doesn't have the cycles to update the bot code as frequently as s/he'd like - you might ping Cobi to see if s/he can add a config parameter to use date based archiving in a n+1 archive naming scheme. –xenotalk 17:11, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- To be clear I'm not asking anyone to change any code. Just trying to understand what's available now. Thanks for the info, it's been a great help. You're a good TPW. :) ++Lar: t/c 17:39, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- No worries, just bouncing ideas around. Cheers, –xenotalk 17:42, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the wonderful bots!!! Best, Robert
RobertMfromLI | User Talk 20:36, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. The Bot does a terrific job! Is there a way to make it ignore a particular thread even if it otherwise meets the archiving criteria? (There are old threads I would like to keep on my Talk page) Stephen Kirrage talk - contribs 19:25, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- See User:DoNotArchiveUntil. (Use a timestamp very far in the future). –xenotalk 19:30, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Simples!! Thanks. Stephen Kirrage talk - contribs 23:19, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I just cut two duplicate threads from one of the ANI archives. I don't know quite how this happened; mebbe someone unarchived for a bit, or otherwise confused the bot. And I've seen that this has occurred before. Anyway, I figure you would want to know. Cheers, Jack Merridew 07:25, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I tried to setup auto-archive for Talk:Ryanair/Archive 1. I think the config is OK and I also went through the FAQ, but the bot seems not to touch the page since more than 48 hours. What I made wrong? Thanks, best regards, --R.Schuster (talk) 11:27, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
P.S.: The goal is to reorganize the archive by year.[reply]
- That page hardly looks active enough to switch from the current number based archiving to another method (from 2004 to Oct 2008 only generated 85k worth of archive). And I don't think you can get Misza to run on an archive page like that as you are asking it to archive to other-than-a-subpage of the page being archived...so you would need a key from Misza13 to do that. –xenotalk 18:03, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- For a one-time run I could just manually run the bot with the subpage-security-check disabled and don't bother with a key. Either way, xeno is correct that with such a small archive, year-based archiving is a bad idea. Also, it is in general not recommended to re-archive pages under a different scheme (e.g. from numbered to date-based) because there might already be incoming links to the page that would become broken as a result. This is not the case though (at least no internal links), but it's still something to keep in mind. Миша13 21:23, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I understand, thanks for the explanations. In that case let's leave it as it is. Best regards, --R.Schuster (talk) 08:44, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(see this revision for the page with the prev. archive settings) My talk page has not been getting archived until a long time after I set it to do so. I checked the FAQ, but none of them seem to be the issue. (I updated my settings a few minutes ago.) Cheers!☮ —Ecw.Technoid.Dweeb | contributions | talk 13:23, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The settings change fixed it. Sorry to bother you. Cheers!☮ —Ecw.Technoid.Dweeb | contributions | talk 17:55, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
But, actually, no. There are none. This page, after all, is being archived by a very devoted little bot.
Is there A) an easy way to get to these suggestions (because archive pages are obnoxiously unhelpful) or B) a way we could convince the bot not to archive longstanding complaints in need of address (because the bot does not seem interested in addressing complaints)?
J.M. Archer (talk) 21:37, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Which page? –xenotalk 16:32, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The next edition of the WP:PW newsletter, Issue 64, is available for delivery here. Thanks as always, ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 14:12, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Your bot on the #cvn-wp-en connect is down. Just thought I would give you a heads up. -- /MWOAP|Notify Me\ 14:09, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I know this is asking a big favor, but I wonder is there is someone here willing to help out and install a talk page archive script to the talk page over at Talk:Gun laws in the United States (by state)? I looked at the instructions but feel that it is a bit too complex for my abilities. Thanks. If this isn't the right place to ask, could you suggest another place to ask for help? SaltyBoatr (talk) 14:50, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. –xenotalk 14:53, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Question, is there a way to "force" MiszaBot III to perform a cycle on my page, or is the only way is wait till it wants to ? The reason I'm wondering, it seem to have stopped working. Does changing the values ie. old,count will changing these reset the timing system, I mean after these changes does the bot now think it was just installed ? Mlpearc MESSAGE 16:21, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- No... MiszaBot III runs once a day. I believe it reads the settings once it reaches your page. Yesterday the bot passed over your page around 15:48 when it was at this revision. Only 1 thread was eligible to be archived and you haven't set a minthreadstoarchive value which defaults to 2, so the bot did not operate on your page. Note also you have threads on your page without timestamps. The bot won't touch these threads, you should manually archive them or delete them. –xenotalk 16:27, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you, much enlightenment ! Mlpearc MESSAGE 17:23, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry I have more, the setting you refer to "minthreadstoarchive value" is this the "age=" setting ? And thanks for reminding of the no time stamp I totally forgot that one . Mlpearc MESSAGE 17:37, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- No, "
age" goes in the {{Auto archiving notice}} (and hopefully has a value that matches the "algo" in the bot); "minthreadstoarchive" goes in the bot and tells it not to archive too frequently. The default is 2 sections; add "|minthreadstoarchive=1" to archive each section as soon as it's outdated (down to the "minthreadsleft" limit).
- —WWoods (talk) 18:45, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Seemed to have stalled today after SarekOfVulcan (talk · contribs). FYI. –xenotalk 17:34, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Epic toolserver reboot, would be my guess. Timing about fits if you read it as 4:40pm. And the uptime on nightshade confirms that. Миша13 19:14, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Figured as much. Saw something on VPT about that. –xenotalk 19:15, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I attempted to set archiving here, can you spot what (no doubt stupid) mistake I made, because the bot doesn't appear to be doing anything? I did just now wonder if it was the magic word for basepagename, so have changed that in case - if that's it, I apologize, as it'll kick in tomorrow, I suppose. Many thanks, Chzz ► 16:44, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Nm, working now, sorry to have bothered you Chzz ► 00:08, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Your archivebot is now running on cawiki. Just to tell you that I have had some problems identifying months with locale catalan. I have had to replace "ago" with "ag", unfortunadly both are correct, and it did not find "març" until I have modified in the line 243 txt.encode('cp1252'). Thanks for your work, it is great. --Vriullop (talk) 16:47, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The next edition of the WP:PW newsletter, Issue 65, is available for delivery here. Cheers, ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 11:59, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
|
