User talk:AnomieBOT: Difference between revisions

Despite T360488 asking them not to, Toolforge admins have gone ahead and broken AnomieBOT's scripts. Keeping things running properly will likely require manual intervention until they fix that or give me a usable workaround.

Live status for all AnomieBOT tasks is available at Toolforge.

Regarding the OrphanReferenceFixer and TagDater, please note:

AnomieBOT is not an anti-vandal bot, so complaints about AnomieBOT "hiding" or not reverting vandalism are out of place here. AnomieBOT's current strategy is "wait 10 minutes to an hour or so to let ClueBot, VoABotII, other anti-vandal bots, or RC Patrollers fix the vandalism". I am open to specific suggestions on detecting vandalism, but keep in mind that the false positive rate of any method must be near zero to be useful. AnomieBOT honors {{ inuse }}; please use it if you have excessive edit conflicts. If the reference errors or undated tags were caused by vandalism, just revert AnomieBOT's edits along with the vandal's. AnomieBOT will not be offended. If AnomieBOT made a mistake in correcting a reference error or dating a tag, please correct the error by hand and report the URL of the problem diff below. Don't just revert the bot without fixing the error, or AnomieBOT is likely to "fix" it again in the same broken way before I get a chance to fix the bug. If you have a problem with T11790, please take the issue up there. You will be having the problem with more than just AnomieBOT's edits. Thank you.

	Regarding deletions, please note:
If you are here because you think AnomieBOT III deleted an article, please check again. AnomieBOT III deletes redirects when someone else deletes the article the redirect pointed to, and you almost certainly want to talk to that person instead.

	Regarding {{ old AfD multi }}, please note:
If you are here because AnomieBOT added {{ old AfD multi }} to an article when the old AfD was about a different person with the same name, just remove it. The bot has no way to tell whether it's the same person or a different one.

Before requesting a WikiProjectTagger run, please read the following:

The bot can easily handle multiple projects at a time: Everything below can be specified on a per-project basis. If there is significant overlap (e.g. articles in Category:Physicists are likely in the scope of both WP:WikiProject Physics and WP:WikiProject Biography), please consider requesting tagging for all the projects at once. The terms of the bot's approval require that each WikiProject involved approve the list of categories to be processed. In your request, please link to the discussion on each wikiproject's talk page showing this approval. If you do not do this, I will have to post at the talk pages myself and wait a week for replies. That discussion should address all of the following points: Specify which categories to process. Including "all subcategories" is possible, but in general is no longer done. Certain pages will be auto-assessed for class and importance. If any of the below is not acceptable, specify how it should be changed (e.g. "Do not set importance", "Just tag, do not assess", or "Ignore the page, don't even tag it"). In all cases, if it looks like the specified class is not supported by your project's banner I will use class=NA instead. Article redirects will be auto-assessed as class=redirect and importance=NA. Articles in Category:All disambiguation pages will be auto-assessed as class=disambig and importance=NA. Articles in any category ending in "stubs" will be auto-assessed as class=stub, unless they are already assessed as something else by your project. All other articles will be tagged with no assessment. This can be turned off, if for some reason you only want stubs, redirects, disambiguation pages, and/or non-article pages tagged. Non-article pages will be assessed with the appropriate class (e.g. "category", "template", "image") and importance=NA. Action (and class) may be specified per namespace. Note this is not necessary for {{WPBannerMeta }}-based banners, as the assessment is done automatically there. The bot can canonicalize redirects to the project banner, for example replacing {{ cvgproj}} with {{WikiProject Video games }}. This will only be done if the page is going to be edited anyway, it will not be the only reason for editing the page. If you want this done, say so. The bot can add arbitrary extra parameters to the template, based on categories, page contents, talk page categories, or talk page contents. For example, it can add task force parameters, and it can do things like "Add living=yes if it is in Category:Living people, or living=no if it is in Category:XXXX deaths/executions, Category:XXXXs deaths/executions, Category:XXth century deaths/executions, Category:XXth millennium BC deaths, or Category:Date/Year of death missing/unknown". If you want any extra parameters set, specify what they are and under what conditions to add them. If you want the bot to remove existing parameters under certain conditions, that can be done too. The bot can also skip individual articles, based on categories, page contents, talk page categories, or talk page contents. For example, if WikiProject Foo wanted all articles in Category:Foo tagged unless they were also in Category:Bar or tagged by WikiProject Baz, that can easily be done. Thank you.

Archives

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III.

When trying to fix orphaned refs in Peanut butter, MediaWiki's spam blacklist complained about madehow.com. This probably means someone didn't properly clean up after themselves when blacklisting the link and removing existing uses, but a human needs to double-check it. The attempted changes were:

• Peanut butter revision 1073653010:
  • Rescued ":1" from rev 1068531319
    Removed in revision 1073653010 by DocWatson42 (talk • contribs • logs) with comment "Cleaned up image placement (to prevent the overrunning of the appendices in wide browser windows) and other matters, including references. I deleted a reference's URL as it is now on the blacklist, and have requested that it be whitelisted ([[MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist/Archives/2022/03#Request to whitelist madehow.com/Volume-1/Peanut-Butter.html]])." (removed 346/39338 bytes, 1%)

You might also use {{subst:User:Anomie/uw-orphans|1=rm diff|2=fix diff}} to let the remover know, if their edit summary indicates they were specifically removing the blacklisted ref. When you have fixed this issue, please change the section title (e.g. append " - Fixed") or remove this section completely. I will repost the notice if the page is still broken or is re-broken. Thanks! AnomieBOT⚡ 23:06, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Noting for the record that this particular use for this particular page is requested for whitelisting, so once that goes through it will be more clear whether to orphan the refs or restore the original. Primefac (talk) 12:16, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Named ref replaced, marking as fixed. Primefac (talk) 10:54, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I think that at User:AnomieBOT/EDITREQTable, it has wrongly colored a extended-protected page in red. Red color is only for the fully protected ones, as per the legend at Category:Wikipedia requested edits. Thanks! —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • C • L)} 19:55, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. Thanks for the report.  Fixed Anomie⚔ 01:03, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, to me, the Komala Party of Iranian Kurdistan request still appears in red, despite being only extended-protected. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • C • L)} 04:11, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

D'oh, I forgot to upload the fix. Anomie⚔ 11:15, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Now fixed. Thanks! —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • C • L)} 13:24, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2022 April 9#Category:Wikipedia requested edits * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:19, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully, if the change goes through, people can hold off on depopulating the old category until I can get around to updating the bot. I'll need the following parameters for each new category:

• "Tag", replacing "EDITREQ" in
  CAT:EDITREQ and User:AnomieBOT/EDITREQTable
  . Even if no redirect actually gets made, I still need the tag for the bot's subpage.
• "Type" for the table header.
• NID component used in the urn links created by the request template (currently "x-wp-requestedit" for EDITREQ), so the table can know the target page without having to parse templates.
  • Note if multiple categories use the same NID, then if both kinds of request are active on a talk page it'll list both requests in each table as it won't be able to tell which request goes with which category.
• Anchor used by the request template (currently "requestedit" for EDITREQ), so the table can try to link to the request.
  • Note if multiple templates use the same anchor and both kinds of request are active on a talk page, people might get confused when the link from one of the tables goes to the "wrong" template.

I'll assume any new categories coming out of that CFD should highlight mainspace like EDITREQ does and should use the same color scheme. Anomie⚔ 21:03, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Anomie, I just closed the CfD as split. I'm aware 2 templates need to be updated, but I'm not entirely sure what you mean by the above, for the bot. ― Qwerfjkltalk 10:19, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If it helps, the new categories are Category:Wikipedia conflict of interest edit requests & Category:Wikipedia partial-block edit requests (unpopulated currently). ― Qwerfjkltalk 10:21, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

While knowing the categories helps, hopefully someone who understands my list above will come along to provide that information. Anomie⚔ 11:52, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've made the relevant template changes in

Template:Request edit/new/sandbox

(there are three templates for no good reason). The information you requested above:

• For "Tag", I created
  CAT:EDITREQ will likely continue pointing to Category:Wikipedia conflict of interest edit requests
  due to historical baggage.
• For "Type", the current table uses "COI" which is inaccurate and will now become accurate. The one for Category:Wikipedia partial-block edit requests should be "partial block"
• For "NID", I kept the same one for COI edit requests and used "x-wp-editpartiallyblocked" for partial block requests
• For "Anchor", I kept the same one for COI requests and used "editpartiallyblocked" for partial block requests.

* Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:37, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and I think partially blocked requests shouldn't highlight any one namespace differently, since partial blocks can happen anywhere. To be clear, this is just my opinion, and was not discussed at the CfD (nor do I feel especially strongly about it). * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:42, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Pppery: Ok, User:AnomieBOT/COIREQTable and User:AnomieBOT/PREQTable should be functional. I turned off the green "highlighted" color for the PREQ table, otherwise both use the same coloring that User:AnomieBOT/EDITREQTable does. I recommend putting the sandbox templates on some test pages to make sure the bot picks them up correctly and that the generated links work right before switching everything over. Anomie⚔ 02:11, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've updated all of the templates and everything seems to work. Category:Wikipedia requested edits is now empty, and I turned it into a redirect to Category:Wikipedia edit requests (the parent category for all different types of edit request). FYI Qwerfjkl * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:35, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User:AnomieBOT/EDITREQTable has been empty since May 15th. ––FormalDude talk 02:29, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's because of the actions behind the above discussion. The changes described above emptied Category:Wikipedia requested edits. Looks like they're now all at User:AnomieBOT/COIREQTable; Category:Wikipedia partial-block edit requests appears to not have been used yet. Anomie⚔ 02:50, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bot templated the page as previously deleted, but the deleted page was a different person with the same name. How to fix this? Just delete the template? Hyperbolick (talk) 09:55, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's literally what it says at the top of this page. Anomie⚔ 22:18, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Help! I can't find the featured article link in

This is related to User talk:FACBot#FACBot recently featured list error. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 06:29, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I see all the FA blurbs for the past few years have used {{TFAFULL}} to produce a link to the article at the end of the blurb. Instead of continuing to chase the weird markup people decide to use in the FA link, I'll have the bot just look for that template. Anomie⚔ 12:57, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Anomie. I was wondering if AnomieBot was capable of something. As an example in April 2020 AnomieBot rescued this reference. The issue is of course that although the harvnb reference was rescued the accompanying cite was not. I'm thinking trying to save the cite might be more hassle thanks it's worth‡, but could AnomieBot add <!--some text--> to the ref about the page it came from? This would help solving no target errors. - LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 21:08, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

‡ I say this because the cite may or may not exist on the article with the ref and then may or may not exist on the article the ref is being rescued to, which sounds like a nightmare to code for. - LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 21:10, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Since you found the edit, the edit summary Rescuing orphaned refs ("Ilumae2016" from

harvnb}} and just skip it entirely, leaving it for a human to figure out. Would that be worthwhile? Anomie⚔ 22:43, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

Thinking of what's involved in solving each issue I would say leave it as is. Solving the no target issue is easier, as you point out I found the AnomieBot edit. Leaving it as a cite error only means that solving which page it came from manually, something the bot is already very good at. - LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 13:14, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Help! The template {{ffd top}} is missing the "is_closed" regex, or this regex is not at the beginning of the template's output. To avoid confusion, I'm not going to process any FFDs until it's fixed or I'm fixed. When you have fixed this issue, please change the section title (e.g. append " - Fixed") or remove this section completely. I will repost the notice if the page is still broken or is re-broken. Thanks! AnomieBOT⚡ 01:00, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It was probably this edit by Alexis Jazz (talk · contribs). --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:39, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Redrose64, I'm guessing this "is_closed" regex might be a regex that searches for "closed" at the end of the classlist, so I moved the "archived" class to the beginning. Perhaps User:Anomie could enlighten us. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 08:29, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's more than that, unfortunately. Currently it looks for <div class="boilerplate(?: metadata)?(?: ffd)? vfd xfd-closed". I can add "archived" to the beginning of that, although perhaps you should just look for one of the several existing classes instead of having to also edit {{tfd top}} and other templates in (and maybe not in) Category:Deletion archival templates. Anomie⚔ 12:05, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I wound up just making it more lenient in general, looking for only "xfd-closed" (or "tfd-closed" for old TFDs) and ignoring any other classes on the div: <div class="[^"]*(?<=[" ])xfd-closed[ "] Anomie⚔ 12:18, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Anomie, my script isn't enwiki specific, so looking for (for example) xfd-closed is not something I'd like too much. I've added .boilerplate to be treated the same as .archived, but if active discussions are ever wrapped in a .boilerplate this will cause problems. (I'll just wait for the complaints to come rolling in, hopefully there will be none) Anyway, thanks for fixing! — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 22:53, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure how much is gained from he broken link that you added. In addition to being broken, it is now on a statement that it was not originally referring to. I found current sources for the issues that were discussed. Thoughts? Dovidroth (talk) 05:25, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Dovidroth: The problem is that you replaced the one instance of <ref name=":1">...</ref> that had the content of the reference, but left <ref name=":1" /> elsewhere in the article that now had no content to display and so displayed a big red error. All AnomieBOT did was restore the content to one of the remaining <ref name=":1" /> you had left behind. If you want to replace all uses of that source with better ones, feel free to do so. Just do a complete job of it. ;) Anomie⚔ 11:40, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explanation. Dovidroth (talk) 08:39, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I created a redirect called Simple Truth, which redirects to Kroger#Simple Truth. Simple Truth is the flagship store brand of Kroger.

There used to be an article titled Simple Truth. It was some non-notable album by a non-notable band. The AfD's result was Delete.

AnomieBOT noticed the redirect I newly created, and tagged it with {{

Cheers, Manifestation (talk) 20:48, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That particular AFD used an odd syntax in the close that the bot did not recognize. Anomie⚔ 22:29, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh ok. Said AfD is over 15 years old. So this probably doesn't happen a lot? Cheers, Manifestation (talk) 22:39, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

When trying to fix orphaned refs in Mexico, MediaWiki's spam blacklist complained about nationsencyclopedia.com. This probably means someone didn't properly clean up after themselves when blacklisting the link and removing existing uses, but a human needs to double-check it. The attempted changes were:

• Mexico revision 1086531948:
  • Rescued "nationsencyclopedia1" from rev 1086349630
    Removed in revision 1086531520 by Amuseclio (talk • contribs • logs) with comment "/* Geographical characteristics */ waterways and lakes" (added 843/322026 bytes, 0%)

You might also use {{subst:User:Anomie/uw-orphans|1=rm diff|2=fix diff}} to let the remover know, if their edit summary indicates they were specifically removing the blacklisted ref. When you have fixed this issue, please change the section title (e.g. append " - Fixed") or remove this section completely. I will repost the notice if the page is still broken or is re-broken. Thanks! AnomieBOT⚡ 18:51, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your trying to tell me how to fix this glitch, but I have entered terra incognita concerning such issues.Amuseclio (talk) 19:37, 6 May 2022 (UTC)Amuseclio[reply]

Hello, this is more a question for Anomie than an issue with the bot, but would this bot task work on simple.wiki? After making the same inquiry about Citation Bot we now have that on simple.wiki as well, where it has been useful in proportion to the wiki's size, and the number of orphaned refs on simplewiki is way too many for the humans to fix. Ping me on reply. Mako001 (C)  (T)  🇺🇦 11:13, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mako001: It should be able to, although some of the template and category names in the code might need updating if simple.wiki uses different templates or categories. I'd be reluctant to personally run it there though, as I don't follow that wiki at all. I don't know the norms there, and I'd likely not be very responsive on the bot's talk page there. Anomie⚔ 11:33, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@GoingBatty has had some success with BattyBot there, maybe they might have some suggestions for porting it? You could redirect the talkpage there to this one, like is done for IABot? The only part that I'm particularly wanting to get over there is OrphanReferenceFixer, so if you can give a list of templates and cats that task uses, I can check if they are the same or not, and if not I'll advise which would need modification? Mako001 (C)  (T)  🇺🇦 12:54, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@

AutoWikiBrowser, which is different from Anomie's bots. See also simple:Wikipedia:An English Wikipedian's guide. GoingBatty (talk) 15:34, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks, I had forgotten that yours used AWB. Mako001 (C)  (T)  🇺🇦 15:50, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mako001: Porting it isn't the problem. Anomie⚔ 23:27, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

... and in any case simple wiki templates tend to be blindly imported from the English Wikipedia, even if they were modified in a way that only makes sense on the English Wikipedia and not on simple wiki. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 23:36, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please clarify which issue then is the most prohibitive of running OrphanReferenceFixer there? Mako001 (C)  (T)  🇺🇦 02:03, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Finding someone to run it who is part of the community, or who doesn't mind running it without being part of the community. Anomie⚔ 11:46, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For User:AnomieBOT/TPERTable (And most likely all other XYZEditProtected tables), the bot uses <syntaxhighlight​ enclose="none" ... for title blacklists, getting it thrown into Category:Pages using deprecated enclose attributes. Do you think you could change this to <syntaxhighlight​ inline ... as the category recommends? Thanks. Aidan9382 _(talk) 19:03, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Anomie⚔ 00:43, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just popped by TFDO and it looks like the clerk isn't clerking, both discussions are closed but still listed. Cheers, Primefac (talk) 20:40, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. Based on the timing, I suspect something about phab:T278541 made it freeze up. I'll get it restarted. Anomie⚔ 21:55, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Primefac (talk) 05:56, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello my dear,

I don't know why you are doing in my own page

NOELDEPARISTG228 (talk) 10:48, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The community wants {{welcome}} to always be substituted, so the bot does so. If you really want an un-substed copy on your user page, you can make it like {{welcome|nosubst=1}} or {{welcome|demo=1}} like it says in the doc page the bot links in its edit summary. Anomie⚔ 10:59, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Anomie,

Something odd is going on with AnomieBOT III and its reports, User:AnomieBOT III/Broken redirects. It typically is issued every 6:02 hours. Like clockwork, it's very dependable. Sometimes it is issued early and when I asked you about it, you told me that this occurred when you restarted the bot. But, for the first time that I've seen, it is LATE! It's never taken longer than 6 hours. What do you think is up?

This is probably unrelated but I had problems with Quarry queries I just ran the past hour, they've failed and are giving me error messages even though I've run them dozens of times successfully. Is there some system problem going on? Thanks in advance for any answers you can offer. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:54, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz: Looks like there is indeed a problem going on at the moment. I see you already commented on T309569, I can confirm that I'm seeing the relevant error in AnomieBOT's logs. Whenever they get it fixed AnomieBOT should recover and update the reports. Anomie⚔ 02:24, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It got fixed! Report issued! Praise the technology gods. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:06, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Another glitch. It looks like AnomieBOT III was restarted at 13:33 UTC and should have updated User:AnomieBOT III/Broken redirects around 19:35 UTC but it hasn't. It usually isn't late, if anything, it can be early when it is restarted. So, maybe another system problem? Thanks! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:55, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so it did end up being restarted again and generated a report at 20:57 UTC...so, better late than never! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:29, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz: Looks like what happened there is that it was restarted at 13:31 and made the edit at 13:33, then it was restarted again at 14:53 but did not find a need to make an edit at ~14:55. The 20:57 edit came six hours after that restart. P.S. You can check the last run and next scheduled run at toolforge:anomiebot if you want; for this task look at the row for "BrokenRedirectDeleter". Anomie⚔ 12:09, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, again, Anomie,

That's a helpful link to toolforge but there was no standard report so when I checked toolforge, it states that BrokenRedirectDeleter was last run at "2022-06-09 21:56:09", which is according to schedule, but there was no update to User:AnomieBOT III/Broken redirects page. The bot typically updates this page, even when there are no broken redirects to report. Unless....perhaps it doesn't if there are no changes AT ALL to the list? That would be odd, that there would be 12 hours with not a single redirect to any namespace on Wikipedia! With PRODs, AFDs, CSDs and all, there are usually some broken redirects because Twinkle never deletes the Talk pages for redirects, it will only delete the redirect page itself, leaving broken redirects on Talk pages. Maybe they finally fixed that glitch on Twinkle. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:27, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well, this gets even more curious, Anomie, I just ran a Quarry query (here, I ran it again) that someone wrote up that also catches broken redirects, but only in Article space. Well, it gave me one result and I thought, "A ha! There is a broken redirect out there!" But when I checked the page, it was a broken redirect that existed hours ago and had already been fixed hours ago. So, the current run of a query returned a version of a Wikipedia page from 12 hours ago that no longer exists! Another system lag? 22:43, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In case you are curious, the broken redirect was on Momodou Sarr (footballer) and you can see in the page history how it did exist but was later fixed by Explicit. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:45, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And Wikipedia:Database reports/Empty categories, that was just issued, includes a category that was deleted 15 hours ago! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:08, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So, I guess there is a 16 hour system lag. After I inquired at

WP:VPT, a phab ticket was filed here. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:18, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

Please update the bot functions so that it stops reverting Category:Wikipedia conflict of interest edit requests back to Category:Wikipedia requested edits in the page User:AnomieBOT/EDITREQTable, e.g. [1] – Fayenatic London 20:39, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alternately the bot could stop updating that page entirely, and it could be redirected to one of the other request tables. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:44, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User:AnomieBOT/EDITREQTable is the page for the now-discontinued category Category:Wikipedia requested edits. The page for Category:Wikipedia conflict of interest edit requests is User:AnomieBOT/COIREQTable. Anomie⚔ 12:43, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. I have updated all necessary links & transclusions now.– Fayenatic London 22:14, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A new delsort I recently created, Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Dominican Republic for the Dominican Republic, is not getting automatically archived by AnomieBOT. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:07, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like you figured out that you need to add it to Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Compact just after posting here. The next scheduled run of the task is at 12:43 UTC (although it'll take a bit after that for the bot to go down the list of all the delsort pages). Anomie⚔ 10:55, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, AnomieBOT keeps creating this talk page despite Thomas Fleetwood (1661-1717)) not existing. ✗plicit 04:49, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AnomieBOT would create Thomas Fleetwood (1661-1717)) too, except that page has been protected. Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 18#Thomas Fleetwood (1661-1717)) is the way to handle this: delete the en-dashed title too so AnomieBOT has no reason to create it. Anomie⚔ 11:39, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[Copied from User talk:Ritchie333 § FYI: Suboptimal protection at Anomie's suggestion] @Anomie, I was actually going to ask, regarding this case: Is there any way to get the bot to skip a title that has been previously deleted with "Redirects for discussion" mentioned somewhere in the deletion summary, maybe notifying some appropriate page instead? Or, better yet... although this might be a separate task... for the bot to reply at RfD if one of its redirects is created, suggesting that we bundle in the en-dash version? (I guess really anyone could set up that latter task, looking through Category:Avoided double redirects/error.) -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 00:19, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Tamzin: Re detecting a previous deletion mentioning "Redirects for discussion", it would be possible but I'm not sure it'd make a lot of sense. The bot couldn't tell the difference between a related RFD and an unrelated one (e.g. the en-dash page got validly recreated). So I ran some queries to analyze the last 43,045 redirect creations by this task, going back about a year. 765 creations had a previous deletion. Only 8 had a previous deletion mentioning an RFD, and 5 of those were because Explicit decided to war with the bot over Talk:Thomas Fleetwood (1661-1717)). Besides Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 7#Dave Cummings ((pornographic actor)), the other two RFDs were Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 September 21#Iceland–Turkey_relations (recreation was because Iceland–Turkey relations was recreated with sources and such five years later) and Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 September 4#Asianet Film Award for Best Actor - Female (recreated immediately and no one noticed). So overall, this doesn't seem worth the trouble of programming.

Having the bot comment on RFDs of one of its redirects to point out that the en-dash title should be deleted too appeals to me, but as above since there are so few re-creations it seems that admins aware of how the bot works generally catch these already so there doesn't seem to be much need.

By far most of the recreations were after a G8 deletion instead. Spot checking a few, it seems reasonably likely that the re-creation is valid, the redirect having been G8-ed after a deletion or draftification of the target and then the target got re-created later.

One thing that was easy to do and might help is that I adjusted the bot's User:AnomieBOT/Auto-G8 template to display a visible message that might better inform the less-clued nominators and admins of the correct way to handle this sort of thing, rather than warring with the bot and eventually salting the page. You can see it at e.g. 0-16. Anomie⚔ 02:40, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Explicit: Sigh. I see you took the wrong solution too, even after I pointed out that the correct solution was the RFD already in progress. I'm disappointed. Anomie⚔ 02:40, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

See [2] - the bot removed the date that was encompassed by the cnspan template - leaving behind an error message and a sentence that doesn't make sense.Nigel Ish (talk) 19:25, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

With most maintenance templates, if someone does like {{citation needed|20 September 1917}} it means they left off the |date= part. I'll have a look to see if the bot can somehow know when a template has an intentional |1= that could be a date, since there are a number of these rarely-used "span" templates. Anomie⚔ 19:51, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Done I'm having the bot look at templatedata and only do the "move a date from |1= to |date=" fix if the templatedata doesn't declare a "1". You might want to check that all other "span" templates that use |1= declare it in templatedata. Anomie⚔ 21:01, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

When trying to fix orphaned refs in Murder of Kishan Bharvad, MediaWiki's spam blacklist complained about newstracklive.com. This probably means someone didn't properly clean up after themselves when blacklisting the link and removing existing uses, but a human needs to double-check it. The attempted changes were:

• Murder of Kishan Bharvad revision 1096434630:
  • Rescued ":4" from rev 1096398499
    Removed in revision 1096430111 by Hemantha (talk • contribs • logs) with comment "rm names per [[WP:SUSPECT]]. rm unencyclopedic details. rm investigation section which is simply a catalog of police statements, per [[WP:NOTNEWS]]" (removed 4344/8324 bytes, 52%)

You might also use {{subst:User:Anomie/uw-orphans|1=rm diff|2=fix diff}} to let the remover know, if their edit summary indicates they were specifically removing the blacklisted ref. When you have fixed this issue, please change the section title (e.g. append " - Fixed") or remove this section completely. I will repost the notice if the page is still broken or is re-broken. Thanks! AnomieBOT⚡ 15:03, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]