User talk:Cyberpower678/Archive 56

Archive 50

←

Archive 54

Archive 55

Archive 56

Archive 57

Archive 58

→

Archive 60

Senior Editor II

Two Questions about IABot

Hey Cyberpower, I just have 2 questions about this wonderful bot.

1. Is it possible for it to rescue sources, but without mentioning a username?

2. Does it run automatically without any sort of user input?

Thanks

Artix Kreiger (talk) 20:18, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

1. No. If you tell it to do something, it will tell everyone who told it to do something.
2. Yes, it runs autonomously, going through Wikipedia alphabetically.

Cheers.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 20:39, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

ok understand. 1 last one, on the iabot interface when to submit j obs, is it something like google software? it looks smoothed out and the blue reminds me of google products. Artix Kreiger (talk) 21:21, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Nope, 100% written by me and using Bootstrap. All open source.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 21:22, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Aherm...

Unfortunately the community does have the authority to desysop admins

I think there's a typo in there somewhere, which apparently might be important because not everyone seems to be aware. GMG^talk 19:00, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Nah, I just unilaterally changed the policy per WP:IAR. :p—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 19:03, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

There's still a typo. :P GMG^talk 19:10, 6 March 2018 (UTC)</small

There! Ya happy now? :p—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 19:15, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Don't worry. It's been onna them days. GMG^talk 19:21, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

• I think your closure was inappropriate and premature. I'm not going to undo another administrator's closure, but I think you should let the thread run its course. Just because Arbcom is the only body that can desysop someone doesn't mean discussing whether an admin should be desysopped is "fruitless".--Bbb23 (talk) 19:22, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

  I got the impression was calling to desysop Fram. It didn't seem like a request for input.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 19:26, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

  To add on, no matter how much the discussion carries on, the result will end with no action. That same discussion can be carried on an ArbCom case request page and the discussion there can have a meaningful result. If the OP really had concerns regarding admin conduct and feels a desysop is necessary, opening a case is the best venue.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 19:29, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

  (edit conflict) Your impression is right, but that doesn't mean that the framing by the OP needs to be interpreted literally, particularly based on his subsequent comments in the thread. OTOH, if there is a consensus that the filing is "malicious", as Iridescent believes, or is otherwise meritless, then the thread can be closed for that reason, but it's kind of early to abort it.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:33, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

  Fair enough. I still think it should be taking place at an ArbCom request page, but I've opened it again.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 19:39, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

  I'm still trying to work out why the OP went to all this trouble right after he "retired". Thanks for being open-minded. Honestly, I don't know how helpful the thread will actually be and I haven't investigated the merits myself, but I don't like to speculate and don't like closing threads about alleged administrator abuse unless it's obviously a crock.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:43, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

  No problem. :-)—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 19:45, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

  I've got plenty of my own dirty laundry to fill up a section of an evidence phase (my talk page is hidden in the diffs there), but I'm not airing it on ANI that just as likely as anything will be later used to show that it's some kind of personal vendetta and not a legitimate concern over administrative conduct. But it doesn't look like we're getting any evidence phases out of the current request, and I haven't entirely made up my mind whether this is the perfect time to open a new request. Of course, my feeling wont be hurt if someone beats me to it. (With that, I'll leave Cyber's talk page alone since I've probably already worn out my welcome.) GMG^talk 19:51, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Didn't last very long did it? --Bbb23 (talk) 22:12, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Nope, but I'm not surprised. :p—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 22:35, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

tiny tweak on IABot

Hi. Thanks for IABot, which is extrememly helpful. I have a suggestion for a tiny (microscopic) but useful tweak: the link in the edit summary currently sends people to List OAuth applications. I think that page is moderately cryptic, and editors may not readily find a way to navigate to the bot interface. I suggest a link to [Analyze a Page in the edit summary instead. Tks again. Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 04:22, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

+1 ~ Amory (u • t • c) 12:18, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

That link is not part of the edit summary, so I have no control over it. It's a tag, and consequently you can use it as a filter to look up other users that have run the tool on pages on the recent changes feed.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 13:17, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

i feared something like that was the case. Can you add a link before that link? Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 13:56, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

No. External links don't work in edit summaries. Try it.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 13:57, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

• OK then thanks anyhow. Excellent tool. Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 14:01, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

What of pre- and post-nominals discussion?

Are you also deciding the pre-and post-nominals discussion issue by this ban? Even the one who closed it said there that he did it improperly. May I discuss pre-nominals in general as it pertains to other articles, infoboxes of other institutions? And please tell me what "indefinitely" means, and whether there is any recourse or possible appeal on this. Thanks. Jzsj (talk) 13:44, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

I am not deciding anything, I am enforcing consensus, and the consensus is that all topics I mentioned in your ban statement is now off limits for you. Indefinitely means the ban will not expire unless appealed.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 15:03, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Interpretation of ban

Please give me your authoritative interpretation of the ban you imposed on me which reads: Jzsj (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic banned from editing, discussing, or mentioning, any articles related to education or schools, broadly construed.
Someone has begun the process of deletion of articles which I created, and these articles can be construed as "related to education". Am I forbidden by your ban to defer this deletion process until the ban on me is lifted? Jzsj (talk) 13:12, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Correct. You may not go near it. If these articles are worth keeping, another editor will remove the PROD.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 15:04, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Add Pokemon: Sun And Moon: Ultra Adventure Correct Summary

You Just Deleted Summary From Pokemon: Sun And Moon: Ultra Adventures Saying That It's Junk Summary Now Add Right Summary Trainer2abdi (talk) 15:47, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Yes I did. The summaries made little sense.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 15:48, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Template:Adminstats ... what about Template:Userstats

I was wondering if you could adapt Cyberbot to also give userstats? Edits, pages moved, every that could appear in logs, etc... Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 14:17, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

I think that falls under the category of bot tasks that will be denied.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 13:16, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Why would that be denied? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 15:38, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

I think it was hashed out in the past that simple edit count bots were denied since they are a waste of resources and can easily be looked up with XTools. This is why adminstats is restricted to admins.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 15:45, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

You can't feed XTools into templates like you do here [1]. I don't really see the harm of this as an opt-in thing. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 04:04, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

@Headbomb: I think this should be run by BAG first at least.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 17:46, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

IABot on jawiki continued

@ネイ: It doesn't appear the conversation has gotten any attention. What should I or we do?—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 17:45, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

I added the conversation to ja:WP:RFC. Hopefully someone will be able to comment on it.--ネイ (talk) 13:17, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Hmm...

How does this fit in with Jzsj's school topic ban? 32.218.37.182 (talk) 23:29, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

logged out internet archive bot?

any ideas who this is? Special:Contributions/69.181.23.220 --Jeremyb (talk) 12:18, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Grammar and first impressions

A bot that one has never heard of would make a better first impression by writing

Rescuing 1 source and tagging 2 as dead.

than by writing

Rescuing 1 sources and tagging 2 as dead.

Michael Hardy (talk) 13:34, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

The edit summaries are statically assigned on the configuration page. So they can't be dynamically changed like that.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 13:36, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Link archive failed in "Lake tanker" wikiarticle

Hi, just noticed an old message from the archive bot that the following link in the Lake tanker article couldn't be archived:

• http://www.helderline.nl/classes/141/lake+maracaibo+tankers/

Checked the link, and is alive and without redirects. How can this be fixed, please? Thanks and regards, DPdH (talk) 00:52, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Use of Service Award progress bar template

Hi, I liked the "Service Award progress bar" that you have displayed, and tried to use the template in mine. Didn't work... not urgent, but can you please explain the changes I need to make to it? Thanks and regards, DPdH (talk) 01:20, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

IABot Management Interface

Sometimes when I submit a random bot job, the page refreshes to say the following "Checksum error: The given checksum for this request is invalid. You may have refreshed the page with form data.", even though the bot will run the job properly. Is there a way to fix this message display as there may be users submitting duplicate entries? Iggy (Swan) 17:56, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

I'll look into it.—CYBERPOWER (Around) 01:59, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

User migration in Spanish Wikipedia

Hi again, hope you can help me with this. In addition to my global account DPdH (originally created in the English Wikipedia), I have another account (DDH) in the Spanish Wikipedia. Before account "globalization" I intended to convert the Spanish account to the same name as the English account, but now I'm unsure how to do this. And I'd like that the renamed account maintains all the activity history and stats. Are you able to do this? If not, can you please point me in the right direction? Thanks and regards, DPdH (talk) 03:14, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Restarted on Japanese Wikipedia?

As far as I know, there was no conclusion on re-enabling IABot on Japanese Wikipedia. Why was it restarted? Could you please stop it and restart only after concensus is reached?--ネイ (talk) 08:48, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

OK I just switched it off. The switch should really be moved off Wikipedia as the current status is prone to vandalism.--ネイ (talk) 09:02, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

@ネイ: I thought I had fully protected that switch, but I guess not. I'm working on a new solution for that though. On a related note, to call the bot buggy is extremely harsh considering all the bugs of IABot have been fixed already so that run, though unauthorized, should be free of bugs.—CYBERPOWER (Around) 12:44, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Apologies that I might be too harsh - but regarding the edits done during this short period, there was a bug report. The report mentioned that there are cases where the link was not a dead link but was tagged as so by IABot. I am trying to confirm the reason. Meanwhile, could you please let me know if IABot uses an IP address outside of Japan?--ネイ (talk) 12:51, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

@ネイ: It doesn't. However, the bot getting some links wrong is par for the course. It does what it can to minimize errors, but factors such as geo-restrictions or a long-term outage can cause it to think the link is dead. In most cases a user merely needs to revert the bot to report the issue.—CYBERPOWER (Around) 12:53, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

OK. In that case we will need to see whether the Japanese Wikipedia community thinks it is worth enabling IABot given the possibility of such issues like geo-restrictions.--ネイ (talk) 12:57, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

@ネイ: Geo-restricted sites are an incredibly rare case from my observations. Like I said if IABot encounters a geo-restricted site and makes a bad edit, one need only revert the edit to report the link to me. I would then whitelist the entire domain and IABot stops checking it all-together. I also responded to the bug report there.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 13:00, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for page protection

The bot had a bit of a hiccup here. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 15:21, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Daniele Bonaviri – Copyvio and associated murkiness

Hi Cyberpower. I see you rev deleted Daniele Bonaviri for blatant copyvio yesterday. Well, the article's original creator (Rashtooiy) has just re-added it. I've removed it, but it's still in the history. The whole thing is quite murky. Another user (Designcore) repeatedly created Draft:Daniele Bonaviri with the same copyvio, albeit from a different source. User:Designcore/sandbox still contains the copyvio text. Oddly, his only other contribution was to submit the rejected Draft:Joel Vicent Joseph for AfC review [2] despite not appearing anywhere else in the contribution history. Designcore also appears to have registered two accounts [3]. The second one is suggestively named Vinart.promo. Their only edit here (I think) was to paste the copyvio into the community sandbox [4]. However, both Designcore and Vinart.promo and have repeatedly uploaded a now deleted copyvio photo of Bonaviri to Commons. See here and here. Voceditenore (talk) 12:24, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

@Voceditenore: I revdel'd the revisions on the Daniele page, Rashtooiy appears to have been warned about it, so I'm taking no action there. I deleted Designcore's sandbox, blocked the promo account as a UPOL vio, warned the account owner of multiple, and AGF with the primary account's name as their edits are completely unrelated to the company it appears to represent, and I am no commons admin so I can't do anything about the photos.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 13:18, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for that, Cyberpower. FYI Vinart Promo is the company that built and maintains Bonaviri's website. It's based in Tehran as is 5.236.185.145 who keeps removing the maintenance tags and Category:Living people from the article. I'll leave them a note and if they keep it up, I'll take it to ANI. The Commons photos are already deleted, although another one has been recently uploaded. I've started a deletion discussion on Commons. For now it appears that all is done and dusted. Thanks again. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 13:46, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Technical Barnstar
	Thanks so much for your Work for IABot in German WP. Cheers Ｔｏｍ (talk) 12:23, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

	The Technical Barnstar
	It's been a real challenge, there were draining discussions, you needed to meet additional requirements, and to adjust and reprogram your bot. Thank you so much for your patience and for your hard work during IABot's preparation and launch at the German Wikipedia! --Martina Nolte talk 01:58, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

IAB in de:WP

Moin Cyberpower678,
I'm referring to this IAB edit and got two questions.

1. Does the template "Toter Link" appear in maintenence lists? Might well be, I just want to be sure. Here's an example of an (unrelated) maintenance list.
2. Where's the notice of the change to the archived version on the talk page of the article? Haveing an archived link is fine, but in case I can find an unarchived link I'd want to change it, and thus I need to know there has been a change done by the IAB. The GiftBot places an automated thread on the talk page of the article, and if an author does something about that, he deletes the thread afterwards. Without that notification the IAB edit disappears in the version history and someone willing to improve the article won't notice it.

Kind regards, Grueslayer 08:23, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

@Grueslayer: Hi there. I can't be certain myself as I haven't looked at the template's code. I would imagine it should, and can easily be modified to do so if it doesn't. I don't have the permissions to do it myself though. :/ As for the article talk notifications, during IABot's initial trial phase it seemed a lot of people opposed to the additional talk notification and preferred none if IABot was editing the main article. You can find which ones the bot edited by looking for "Info: Der Archivlink wurde automatisch eingesetzt" and "Der Link wurde automatisch als defekt markiert." in the references. In the wiki text you can find the parameters "archivebot" and/or "archiv-bot" being used to create these messages. You can find more information here that can help you in more details. :-)—CYBERPOWER (Message) 10:32, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Hm. That kinda sucks. I mean, usually I follow my watchlist and see when the IAB does any changes. But ever so often it's a busy day and the watchlist fills up and at some point you start to lose track. GiftBot put a message on the talk page and next time you patrol the article you can deal with it (de:WP doesn't have these annoying "within the scope" boxes so the talk page is usually red, unless the article has or had issues). Well, you don't have to worry about that, I'll try to address it somewhere in de:WP - what would you estimate to be a good page to broach that issue on de:WP? Kind regards, Grueslayer 13:26, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

No idea. I would think de:Wikipedia_Diskussion:WikiProjekt_Weblinkwartung/InternetArchiveBot would be the best place.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 20:12, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

I'll try that one. Well actually I already did. ;-) Thanks, and also thanks for all your work! Kind regards, Grueslayer 20:44, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

 Done Maintenance logs are now available at de:Kategorie:Wikipedia:Defekte Weblinks with de:Kategorie:Wikipedia:Defekte Weblinks/Ungeprüfte Archivlinks‎ and de:Kategorie:Wikipedia:Defekte Weblinks/Ungeprüfte Botmarkierungen‎ --Martina Nolte _talk 02:04, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Issue with IAB

Hi! IAB has a problem at the ckb project, it writes the dates for the dead links in English instead of Kurdish. I thought you wanted the info to fix this issue when you asked on Phabricator. There's also another issue, it writes the numbers on the talk pages in the "I have edited [number] links" messages in your numerical system, which is unlike the ones in Kurdish. At the ckb project we use the fornatnum: thingy to format the numbers, I'd fix them myself but I don't know much about coding.--◂ ‎épine Ⓥ 10:40, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

@Épine: Formatnum? Please tell me more about that?—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 14:43, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

this: template:Formatnum. It formats the numbers automatically after it was used the way it has been in this template, I don't know if you can use it in the modules though, but it works just fine for the templates.--◂ ‎épine Ⓥ 23:40, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

@Épine: Here you go.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 00:12, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks! And the dates for template:dead link?--◂ ‎épine Ⓥ 01:53, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

I don't know about that. I'll add it to the big list of things to change in v2.0 of IABot.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 15:56, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Dead links

I would like to let you know that there are dead links on many of the following domains, http://www.premierleague.com/content/ being one of them, has resulted in dead links for numerous pages linked to players and clubs. For example, this results in a page saying 'we've moved home!' on it. You may want to set this to 'dead so IABot can rescue them properly. Iggy (Swan) 20:07, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

I've posted too soon, http://www.premierleague.com/en-gb/fans/ , http://www.premierleague.com/en-gb/history/ , http://www.premierleague.com/en-gb/matchday/ , http://www.premierleague.com/en-gb/news/features/ , http://www.premierleague.com/en-gb/news/ , http://www.premierleague.com/en-gb/photos-and-videos/ , http://www.premierleague.com/en-gb/players/index.html , http://www.premierleague.com/en-gb/players/profile.html/ , http://www.premierleague.com/en-gb/players/profile.overview.html/ , http://www.premierleague.com/fapl.rac? , http://www.premierleague.com/page/ , http://www.premierleague.com/staticFiles/ , http://www.premierleague.com/barclays-premiership-football-league-table.html and http://www.premierleague.com/competition/matchreport/ are all identified as dead which links to the same result, though some of them may have already been archived by the bot. Iggy (Swan) 20:21, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Also http://www.football-league.co.uk/documents/, http://www.football-league.co.uk/championship/news/, http://www.football-league.co.uk/clubs/, http://www.football-league.co.uk/footballeagueawards/ , http://www.football-league.co.uk/johnstonespainttrophy/, http://www.football-league.co.uk/latestnews/, http://www.football-league.co.uk/league1/news/, http://www.football-league.co.uk/league2/news/ have resulted in 404 errors too. Iggy (Swan) 20:32, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Well fuck me. This will be a heavy query on the DB.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 15:58, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

User:Gagibgd

Just to let you know this user has violated their topic ban. Thanks, Mattythewhite (talk) 15:15, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

User(s) blocked. Thank you.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 16:21, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

IAB bot in guwiki

Hi, We would like to enable IAB bot in guwiki (Gujarati Wikipedia). As, lots of references are coming from Gujarati newspapers and books and they are likely to become dead by either moving page, archiving pages or other issues. Let me know what are the steps for this. --Kartik Mistry ^talk 05:33, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

The first step is to start a discussion on guwiki to see if the community supports this bot. Please link me to the discussion.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 15:59, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Discussion started at: https://gu.wiki.x.io/wiki/વિકિપીડિયા:ચોતરો#ગુજરાતી_વિકિમાં_IABot_(internet_archives_bot)_સક્રિય_કરવાનો_પ્રસ્તાવ --Kartik Mistry ^talk 16:34, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

InternetArchiveBot not opted in to show detailed contributions

Hello,
after being informed that your bot has taken up it's work on de.wikipedia I checked out it's contributions (just because I was a little curious). I have noticed that a detailed user analysis is not available (f. ex. shows contributions per month) due to the bot is not opted in, see here. Is there a reason for it that this option is not activated?

I also want to say thank you. I'm very pleased to know that we now have such an automated weblink maintenance tool working permanently on de.wikipedia. Thanks a lot. --Zaccarias (talk) 17:00, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

I just never thought to turn it on. With that being said, checking a bot that will make a large amount of contributions may cause the tool to not work correctly.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 17:02, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Scan

I have been trying via the IA bot management interface to scan article Maharashtra but I find no results. Please do the needful. --✝iѵɛɳ२२४०^{†ลℓк †๏ мэ} 03:23, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Am I allowed to create sandboxes of templates in my own user space?

I want to make an edit request to Zanhe to change a template, but the changes are pretty big and I don't want to write a whole story of what to move where and which articles should be where so I want to know if I can create a sandbox for templates in my own userspace to request edits by linking to that sandbox as an example. --Donald Trung (talk) 14:54, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

I'm going to go ahead and say yes, but make sure to not edit the template namespace or its talk pages.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 15:36, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

E.G. User:Donald Trung/Template-sandbox - Chinese currency and coinage, you can mark this section as resolved. --Donald Trung (talk) 15:53, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

@Donald Trung: Let's be clear on this. It's not a violation of any of your terms to experiment with template in your user space. It IS a violation if you start transcluding your user space templates into other places outside your user space. If you want to honestly improve a template within your restrictions, you are going to create a sandbox version in your user space, and request for help with the {{help me admin}} template, on your talk page. If they say no to your request you will have to accept that and not push on.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 16:00, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

And if anyone doubts this to be gaming your restrictions, you can refer them to me.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 16:01, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Undid edition from InternetArchiveBot

Hello. I undid this edition from the bot because the original url from the reference was already from the archive and the only effect it had was duplicating the reference date.--Manbemel (talk) 20:48, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

You should update your userboxes...

The link is here. You're being categorized as an "administrator hopeful" even though you already got adminship. E to the Pi times i (talk | contribs) 23:00, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

I just decided to be bold and make the necessary change myself. You have full rein to revert. E to the Pi times i (talk | contribs) 23:12, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Notification of suspension

For use of admin tools, you have made this wiki great. As such, your access to the admin access have been suspended for the 1st of April.

Best, Artix Kreiger (talk) 15:38, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Well shit. I can block some good faith users like Oshwah or There'sNoTime if that helps.-Cyberpower678| verbalize _ 15:39, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

archiving googlebooks links; really?

Please tell me that this is a bug and that it has been fixed. Of the several that I tested (at India and other pages), only once did archive.org manage to display the googlebooks scan of the selected page; the rest simply displayed the html page on which google displays the scan. Unless IAbot can know unequivocally that the scan will be displayed, archiving googlebooks pages is meaningless.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 15:04, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

@Trappist the monk: It looks like the tool was used to preemptively archive all URLs. So what are you asking me to do?—Cyberpower (竜龙) 15:21, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

The tool should not attempt to archive googlebooks links. This edit created this (broken author – really editor – was already broken):

{{cite book|last=al.]|first=edited by Richard Pattman|title=Oxford handbook of genitourinary medicine, HIV, and sexual health|year=2010|publisher=Oxford University Press|location=Oxford|isbn=978-0-19-957166-6|page=95|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Jm1H4EeULmYC&pg=PA95|edition=2nd|deadurl=no|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150911165707/https://books.google.com/books?id=Jm1H4EeULmYC&pg=PA95|archive-date=September 11, 2015|df=mdy-all}}

al.], edited by Richard Pattman (2010). Oxford handbook of genitourinary medicine, HIV, and sexual health (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 95. ISBN 978-0-19-957166-6. Archived from the original on September 11, 2015. {{cite book}}: |first= has generic name (help); Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)

Click that archive link. Can you read page 95? If you cannot then the archive link is pointless (the main title link in |url= is also pointless but that is out of scope for this discussion).

What am I asking of you? If IABot can guarantee that the scanned book text that googlebooks displays can be archived, then go ahead and archive and include the archiving parameters in a cs1 citation. If not, don't; because archive links that don't link to a readable copy of the scan are just so much clutter that give the reader nothing.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 15:55, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

@Trappist the monk: I've deleted all archives in IABot's DB associated with Google Books, whitelisted them, and restricted the bot from finding new ones. This was applied to more than 1 million URLs.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 00:54, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. I think I get all of that except the bit about whitelisting. What does that mean in the context of IABot?

—Trappist the monk (talk) 01:09, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

IABot considers all links to Google Books alive, always, without question.—CYBERPOWER (Around) 01:11, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Understood. Thanks.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 01:15, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2018

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

Administrator changes

331dot • Cordless Larry • ClueBot NG

Gogo Dodo • Pb30 • Sebastiankessel • Seicer • SoLando

Guideline and policy news

• Administrators who have been desysopped due to inactivity are now required to have performed at least one (logged) administrative action in the past 5 years in order to qualify for a resysop without going through a new RfA.
• Editors who have been found to have engaged in sockpuppetry on at least two occasions after an initial indefinite block, for whatever reason, are now automatically considered banned by the community without the need to start a ban discussion.
• The notability guideline for organizations and companies has been substantially rewritten following the closure of this request for comment. Among the changes, the guideline more clearly defines the sourcing requirements needed for organizations and companies to be considered notable.
• The six-month autoconfirmed article creation trial (ACTRIAL) ended on 14 March 2018. The post-trial research report has been published. A request for comment is now underway to determine whether the restrictions from ACTRIAL should be implemented permanently.

Technical news

• There will soon be a calendar widget at Special:Block, making it easier to set expiries for a specific date and time.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee is considering a change to the discretionary sanctions procedures which would require an editor to appeal a sanction to the community at WP:AE or WP:AN prior to appealing directly to the Arbitration Committee at WP:ARCA.

Miscellaneous

• A discussion has closed which concluded that administrators are not required to enable email, though many editors suggested doing so as a matter of best practice.
• The Foundations' Anti-Harassment Tools team has released the Interaction Timeline. This shows a chronologic history for two users on pages where they have both made edits, which may be helpful in identifying sockpuppetry and investigating editing disputes.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:23, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

CyberBot CHUS Clerking

Looks like it’s not clerking the requests. Can you have a look? — regards, Revi 16:03, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

@-revi: Sometimes it gets stuck for a bit, but it comes back online on its own. It seems to be working now.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 14:36, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Bad archive

The bot made this edit in Pulvermacher's chain. The ref in question is "The collateral sciences in the work of Golding Bird (1814-1854)" and that is the link the bot should have inserted. It actually inserted an archive.today page of "Molecular cloning and sequence analysis of human Na,K-ATPase beta-subunit" which is completely the wrong article. Please check that this is not a widespread problem with PubMed cites and not just a one off. I cannot easily find other examples of PubMed cites being modified from the bot's edit history because the site is not recorded in the edit summary, but I guess you can do it more easily from your database. Thanks. SpinningSpark 10:09, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

The archive.is was added by my bot (via the IABot database). The URL in the article is http://ukpmc.ac.uk/pagerender.cgi?artid=232719 .. which is a dead link. The available archive link for it is https://archive.is/20120723230815/http://ukpmc.ac.uk/pagerender.cgi?artid=232719 .. however it is the wrong article. This is basically a soft-404 problem that requires manual intervention. It appears to be caused by PubMed having wrong redirects. It sent article ID 232719 to PMC339706 for unknown reason. I can fix the IABot database for this link (it's also in two other articles) but yeah I think other PubMed links should be checked out somehow. The problem really is that http://ukpmc.ac.uk/pagerender.cgi?artid=232719 is wrong, it should be https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1033981/ .. that is not something an archive bot can do. Sometimes websites change their URLs and Wikipedia needs to be updated with a special bot. Maybe post to WP:Bot requests -- GreenC 15:01, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

If the bot can't reliably update the links at pubmed then it should do nothing and leave it for people to do manually. It's better to have a dead link to the right page than a live link to the wrong page. SpinningSpark 20:28, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

The link even before it died went to the wrong page. That's why archive.is had the wrong page archived. -- GreenC 20:34, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

So it's just this one that is aberrant? SpinningSpark 20:39, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

It looks like any in the form http://ukpmc.ac.uk/pagerender.cgi?artid=#### are no longer operable and need a replacement URL like in the form https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC#####/. According to this, there are about a dozen or so articles with the old form. There's no way to automate as the #### is not the same from old to new form. -- GreenC 20:48, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

IAB Bot in guwiki

As I posted here at Archived discussion: User talk:Cyberpower678/Archive 56#IAB bot in guwiki, Community is positive about IAB bot for guwiki. What's next step? --Kartik Mistry ^talk 13:39, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

@Cyberpower678: Any blocker here? --Kartik Mistry ^talk 04:30, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

@KartikMistry: I've been meaning to answer sooner, but kept getting sidetracked. The current blocker is that IABot is awaiting v2.0 deployment and that when it deploys, that's when I can begin expanding to new wiki.—CYBERPOWER (Message) 04:35, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/

From this, I have clicked on a random sample of 10 links and they all lead to the same page or two instead of the relevant content - it looks like these links do not exist anymore and should be put into the database if it has not done so already. Some of them do have archive URLs, others do not. Thanks, Iggy (Swan) 12:09, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

I've set the entire domain to a dead state.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 23:48, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

List of webarchives used by the Internetachivebot

Hallo cyberpower, I would need a list of all webarchives used by your bot. I want to improve the template de:Vorlage:Webarchive –Boshomi (talk) 22:21, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

@Boshomi: IABot verwendet nur Webarchiv. Fragst du nach Archivdienste?—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 23:49, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

I saw edits like de:Special:Diff/175304983, with archive.wikiwix.com or de:Special:Diff/175557201 with arquivo.pt –Boshomi (talk) 06:36, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

(passing by..) see also Template:Webarchive which has a list of supported webarchives in the Module:Webarchive function serviceName() .. it also supports multiple webarchives ie. {{webarchive}url=..|url2=..|url3=..}} -- GreenC 23:52, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

@Boshomi: Here's the list:

1. http://collection.europarchive.org/nli/yyyymmddhhmmss/http://example.com
2. https://web.archive.org/web/yyymmddhhmmss/http://example.com
3. https://archive.is/yyyymmddhhmmss/http://example.com
4. https://timetravel.mementoweb.org/memento/yyyymmddhhmmss/http://example.com
5. https://www.webcitation.org/abcdefghi?url=http://example.com
6. https://wayback.archive-it.org/yyyymmddhhmmss/http://example.com
7. http://arquivo.pt/wayback/yyyymmddhhmmss/http://example.com
8. http://webarchive.loc.gov/all/yyyymmddhhmmss/http://example.com
9. https://www.webharvest.gov/yyyymmddhhmmss/http://example.com
10. http://web.archive.bibalex.org/web/yyyymmddhhmmss/http://example.com
11. https://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/webarchives/yyyymmddhhmmss/http://example.com
12. http://veebiarhiiv.digar.ee/a/yyyymmddhhmmss/http://example.com
13. http://wayback.vefsafn.is/wayback/yyyymmddhhmmss/http://example.com
14. http://webarchive.proni.gov.uk/yyyymmddhhmmss/http://example.com
15. http://nukrobi2.nuk.uni-lj.si:8080/wayback/yyyymmddhhmmss/http://example.com
16. https://swap.stanford.edu/yyyymmddhhmmss/http://example.com
17. http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/yyyymmddhhmmss/http://example.com
18. http://webarchive.parliament.uk/yyyymmddhhmmss/http://example.com
19. http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/webarchives/wayback/yyyymmddhhmmss/http://example.com
20. https://perma-archives.org/warc/yyyymmddhhmmss/http://example.com
21. various nla.gov.au archives
22. Google cache, but those get replaced with more persistent archives.
23. https://www.webarchive.org.uk/wayback/archive/yyyymmddhhmmss/http://example.com
24. http://archive.wikiwix.com/cache/yyyymmddhhmmss/http://example.com
25. freezepage.com

I hope this helps.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 14:34, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Book report updates

Hi Cyberpower, is the bot not running on book report updates anymore? —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 06:59, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

It should be. I know there are some bugs that I haven't had a chance to fix.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 14:49, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

It hasn't run for a long time, can you check once? —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 18:13, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

A small query

I have noticed that Mattythewhite messaged you re a topic ban on articles related to Serbian sport. I have noticed that on two occasions that IP addresses have edited Serbian sport articles beginning with '178.22...', which could mean that the user Gagibgd has used multi IPs to violate the topic ban you've issued in March 2018. I have a suspicion that Gagibgd may be the user who used the addresses (today and on 27 March). Let's see if you agree with me on this. Iggy (Swan) 16:40, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Are there behavioral similarities. We can’t run a CU here to confirm this.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 16:50, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Yes, they are only updating statistics and the table part of the articles. The user has updated stats e.g. on the 22 February while today's and the 27 March contributions are all identically similar editing patterns. Plus, they are all Serbian football players which is part of Serbian sport. Iggy (Swan) 18:22, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Book report updates again

Hi Cyberpower, sorry to bother you but can you please check why your bot is not updating book reports? Its been pretty long for most Book pages report not being updated. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 08:37, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

Thank you!

Just like to thank you. Especially for the InternetArchive-Bot – I don't know other parts of your work. I spotted this page after using the official Wikipedia-Application. And I 've clicked on an individual evidence of one page to prove the archived version of an link!

Warm greetings from an mostly inactive German “Wikipedian” [school takes time]... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.247.247.186 (talk) 16:10, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Aww, thanks. :-)—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 16:12, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Cyberbot counting

Why with this edit does Cyberbot I think there is still one thread remaining? I notice it happens a lot, is it an issue counting the threads that are not explicitly protected or not protected templates (like this one has an already protected by template)? --kelapstick^(bainuu) 17:39, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

problem accessing a page on archive.org server

Hello Cyberpower678, i made IBot check de:General Dynamics. Checking the links I have this problem: https://www.bizjournals.com/washington/stories/2008/11/17/daily53.html?page=all is accessable. http://web.archive.org/web/20180418190649/https://www.bizjournals.com/washington/stories/2008/11/17/daily53.html?page=all does not work. Hope you can use this as feedback for improvements. Best --Ｔｏｍ (talk) 19:21, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

cyberbot presuming my request to downgrade protection as an upgrade.

I placed a request to downgrade page protection at Request for Page protection page, in the downgrade protection section. The bot commented saying that the page that has requested protection is already protected. I clearly placed it in the downgrade section, then why is the bot thinking that I am asking for an upgrade in the protection. Aceing_Winter_Snows_Harsh_Cold (talk) 04:28, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Downgraded protection is still protection. If it has the downgraded protection already in place, then it will leave that message.—CYBERPOWER (Around) 01:04, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Archiving of Incidents

Could you please undo the manual archiving of this thread? I wish to comment further because the explanation for the swearing (that is was an unusual one-off because of that single day and was due to the removal of an in use template) does not ring true. The incivility occurred before the in use template was added,[5][6] and it is not a one-off.[7][8][9][10][11]. Thank you. Celia Homeford (talk) 07:39, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

It's been closed. I suggest opening a new thread.—CYBERPOWER (Around) 01:07, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Book reports

Cyberpower, my thread was archived before I received a response from you. The bot has not been running on book reports. For eg: in Book:Rebel Heart, all the articles are long GA but the bot has not updated them. Can you please check it and not just archive my query? Thanks in advance. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 16:11, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

I have no idea what's causing the bot to stall at the moment, and unfortunately, my plate is too full right now. If you are willing to wait, I can have a look at the code as soon as I am able to get to it.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 16:14, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for responding, yes sure I can wait, no issues. Just wanted to understand if the bot has really stalled. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 16:15, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Bahujan Azad Party

You removed the speedy deletion template I inserted on this page. To be clear, this article was previously nominated for deletion, was deleted a few hours ago, and then re-created by a new user. The only appropriate level of deletion criteria this article meets is speedy deletion. We should not let new users re-create deleted articles. GnarlyLikeWhoa (talk) 17:59, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Let me clarify my own misunderstanding of the edit history. You did not delete my template, but rather inserted a new one after an intermediate edit. My mistake. I do hope you will support me in an effort to re-delete this article. GnarlyLikeWhoa (talk) 18:12, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

I have nothing to do with this article, nor did I once ever touch it. I'm not sure why you're coming to me about it. With that being said, I have no opinion on it. Also asking users to support your efforts to get the article deleted is a violation of WP:CANVASS and can get you blocked.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 18:58, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Re: bringing you into this, there's been a huge misunderstanding. I obviously reached out to the wrong editor. Re: inappropriate canvassing, I was trying to defend the rules, only problem is I misunderstood them. I thought others would understand where I was coming from, but they didn't because, again, I misunderstood the rules. On both fronts, I didn't mean to offend, and I do apologize. GnarlyLikeWhoa (talk) 19:09, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

No worries. It's good. If I thought you were being disruptive, I would have blocked you already. :-)—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 19:21, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Green is not a creative color.

https://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Undefined&diff=prev&oldid=838396070 ? --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 20:01, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

@SarekOfVulcan: Can't you tell? I've taken up pro-vandalism as a new hobby. Lot's and lot's of fun. :D In all seriousness though, I have a JS script that loads buttons I can click on. They're supposed to make an edit to my page in my userspace, but instead, since one of the MW updates were released, it now edits "undefined" which is what JS uses if a variable is not defined when it's being read.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 21:09, 26 April 2018 (UTC)