This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
I realise that there's a form for submitting errors, but I couldn't find the revert code since the edit summary was too long and was truncated to before the revert code. A diff can be found here though. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 18:35, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
You keep beating me to the revert! I'll get there first next time, or my name isn't an alias! Fliponymous (talk) 21:45, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
Unimaginably. My real name ranks just below "Zoey McButtface" on the Standard Elementary School Teasability Chart. Fliponymous (talk) 21:54, 30 May 2010 (UTC) Hi Cluebot
I have done this to get back at the people who destroyed my other article and i hope you will be able to sort these people out the name was something like Mitchell something please get back to this message as soon as possible —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ackworth97 (talk • contribs) 15:20, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
Please my Sundown Adventure Land Article has been deleted for no apparent reason please can you contact me so we can work it out if you have no time currently on wikipedia then i am also on youtube at Ackworth 97 just leave me a message there
Jack Scarr (talk) 15:21, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
I was looking through some archives recently and noticed that the archives are not ending up the same as the original text. In particular, it is replacing a VernoWhitney (talk) 18:22, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
((discussion top))
tag with a ((tl|discussion top))
tag. See for example this removal and archive. Is this an actual bug or is there a way around this?
Hi, Interiot's link here (User:ClueBot#My_stats) isn't working anymore. One of the alternatives is this or this. Just wanted to let you know. 14:21, 3 June 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Krinkle (talk • contribs)
Hello ClueBot, I was reading the 'Isabella I of Castile' page, saw your name in the edit history and couldn't help but notice that there was not one single citation on the entire page... Not even a 'references/' tag in markup! Nice article but it needs citations, throughout. Regards, GWillHickers (talk) 19:13, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi Cobi, wikibot.classes.php is very useful and should probably supplant pywikipediabot as being the standard bot framework for MediaWiki. I think it would be useful to commit it to the MediaWiki SVN, with some tweaks to make it more adaptable for use on wikis other than Wikipedia. Then the community can collaborate on it there. It seems to me that this would be preferable to creating forks of the code you have created for specific uses. Of course, it would be necessary to formally release it into a free software license like the GPL and/or CC-by-SA. What do you think? Thanks, Tisane (talk) 10:11, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
—The preceding comment was intended to be humorous.
ClueBot's back again...but for how long? mechamind90 01:44, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
Please see my test vandal edits at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ClueBot/Sandbox And adjust ClueBot accordingly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cit helper (talk • contribs) 04:13, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
I'm surprised ClueBot didn't revert this edit as it had detected previous similar edits to the same page in March. - Fayenatic (talk) 12:29, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
Though I am an autoconfirmed user, Cluebot warned me for move a page (Song Julieta Venegas) to (Julieta venegas song), is this normal? TbhotchTalk C. 04:09, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
I suggest ClueBot determine the difference between ClueBot's new version of the article and the one that is being reverted.
mechamind90 05:24, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
The reliable source is here. And on Wookieepedia they tell that the PC version will be developed by Aspyr. 84.86.199.99 (talk) 15:03, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
It would be really cool if the bot could fix any links made to other-wiki locations by placing the prefix : so it doesn't become an actual interwiki link in the languages bar. –xenotalk 19:59, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
I have nominated Inkfruit, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Inkfruit. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 15:46, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello ClueBot, please review the article 2007–08 C.D. Motagua season which I modified and you reverted, I didn't do anything wrong, I just tried to improve the whole article, please reconsider because it wasn't vandalism, thanks 98.254.10.30 (talk) 03:21, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
I received the following message, which was not warranted. It is for a page I haven't even accessed, let alone edited. This isn't a 'false positive' because it's not regarding any edits I've actually made. Is it possible this is due to variable IP addresses? A little alarmed to be accused of something I didn't do.
Message I received is below: 124.168.203.135 (talk) 12:00, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
User talk:124.168.203.135 From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search
[edit] June 2010 Information.svg
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, but at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Harry Kewell, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ClueBot.
* Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
* Cluebot produces very few false positives, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been detected as unconstructive, please report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
* The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Harry Kewell was changed by 124.168.203.135 (u) (t) making a minor change with obscenities on 2010-06-19T14:33:11+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 14:33, 19 June 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.203.135 (talk)
Hi
I don't think it's possible for ClueBot to warn some IP addresses and not others. Whilst I'm not saying that you would vandalise Wikipedia, it would be possible that someone else could use your computer and they could then vandalise Wikipedia, and if the IP address was on some form of 'ignore' list by the bots that person could continually vandalise Wikipedia.
I would suggest that you create an account to try and prevent this happening in the future. Any questions feel free to ask :)
PS, I have placed a welcome template on your page which explains everything above in more detail --5 albert square (talk) 12:41, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello there, I heard Cluebot reverted the edit I did to Cars Race-O-Rama but I undid it myself. Sorry for the accidental edit I did. I might need to send a message to ClueBot. Thanks 98.177.155.42 (talk) 06:44, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
ClueBot seems to make false positives on small edits that contain "sex" and "cock". Of course some of these are unavoidable, but it seems to me that at least those where the word is used in a compound term (same-sex, cock-a-hoop) and so on are most likely not obscene edits and that the regexes could be easily changed to avoid flagging them as such.
I do realise that this would mean some vandalism would pass under the net, but on balance I think it would save some trouble. I come here to see what other editors might think. In particular, references to the play Cock-a-Doodle Dandy have been falsely reported three times in June 2010 (already); and "same-sex" and "opposite-sex" also flagged up, when of course uses like this are not only innocent but, it seems to me, less likely to be used in a context of obscene vandalism.
I also note that "suckling" in an article on whales was erroneously flagged, similarly the regex could refuse to match on "suckl"; here the problem is that anything (or nothing) following "suck" to a word break is matched, but perhaps it should be "suck[^l]].*\b" or something like that.
I imagine this has been discussed before. I'm not new to WP, but am new to this. Apologies for inadvertently adding comments to the archive before I realised it was an archive; I've reverted those. (Didn't realise June 2010 was already archived.) Si Trew (talk) 09:40, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
Personally I think this article meets the criteria for ClueBot's Angry Opt-in mode. mechamind90 00:14, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
((sofixit|User:ClueBot/AngryOptin))
-- Cobi(t|c|b) 01:10, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
Hey Cobi. Just for your information: My bot reverted an edit, but then Cluebot warned the user for the same edit. Tim1357 talk 00:14, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
I think that if the ClueBot score equals -16383 or even lower, the edit should automatically be reported to AIV. Edits that do try to be constructive will most likely be higher than score equals -2500. I mention this after this IP address inputted a score equals -228828. I even recall an edit that fell below -2,000,000! mechamind90 02:06, 30 June 2010 (UTC)