User talk:AnomieBOT

Category this bot uses listed at CfD

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

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)

@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)

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)

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)

I've made the relevant template changes in Template:Request edit/request/sandbox, Template:Request edit/significant/sandbox and Template:Request edit/new/sandbox (there are three templates for no good reason). The information you requested above:

• For "Tag", I created CAT:COIREQ and CAT:PREQ, although 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)

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)

@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)

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)

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

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)

TFDClerk

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)

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)

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

Review

Hello my dear,

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

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

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)

User:AnomieBOT III

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)

@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)

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

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)

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)

@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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

Update needed at User:AnomieBOT/EDITREQTable

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)

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)

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)

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

Dominican Republic delsort

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)

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)

Talk:Thomas Fleetwood (1661-1717))

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

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)

[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)

@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)

@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)

Introducing errors when attempting to date a cnspan template that contains a date

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)

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)

 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)

OrphanReferenceFixer: Blacklisted orphaned reference in Murder of Kishan Bharvad - Fixed

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)

I've looked at this and removed any remaining mentions of the removed ref from the article. The ref is no longer necessary. Hemantha (talk) 17:29, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

Launch a bot that creates monthly categories in Russian Wikipedia

Hello! Need help. Do you think it's possible to launch a bot to create monthly categories in the Russian Wikipedia? This one - User:AnomieBOT/source/tasks/DatedCategoryCreator.pm. If yes, what should be done for this? :) Iniquity (talk) 13:00, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

Vandalism of White Colombians page

Hello! I need help to block a user who for weeks has been deleting accurate information on many sources, even that user reversed your edition. I do not agree that this user continues to use vandalism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chauxlemount (talk • contribs) 17:33, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

History of Transylvania

Can I ask why did you revert my edit in History of Transylvania? It calls Hungarian or immigrant Vlach families indigenous without any source. It doesn't say literally that these families are indigenous but how could a family Magyarize to keep its positions when it had no positions in Hungary before the Decree of Torda? (Also no source that the decree forced anyone to change religion.)

• Bedőházi - Székely family.
• Bilkei and Ilosvai - Hungarian families deriving from the same Arpadian tribe.
• Drágffy - Moldavian Romanian (=immigrant) family.
• Dánfi and Dobozi - The same families with no sources of their origin. If we can't accept that Hungarians exist, my idea would be that they are of Saxon origin, since Germans were sometimes called Danes. An example would be Hincmar's writing in 862.
• Rékási - I doubt that this would be a Transylvanian noble family, I found nothing about it.
• Mutnoki - Nagymutnok was their estate, no more data.
• Dési - Székely family
• Majláth - Hungarian family in Upper Hungary.

Gyalu22 (talk) 14:42, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @Gyalu22: The most recent edit that AnomieBOT made to History of Transylvania was this one, and it was not a revert. Are you thinking of a different edit, or even a different article? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:36, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

In History of Transylvania: Revision history you can find this. Gyalu22 (talk) 19:42, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

@Gyalu22: What part of that says that AnomieBOT reverted your edit? If you click the "prev" link towards the left of the line, you will see exactly what AnomieBOT did, and will observe that there is no reversion whatsoever. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:30, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Than how can I see who reverted my edit? Gyalu22 (talk) 06:20, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

@Gyalu22: You have found the revision history: as you are aware, the most recent edits are at the top; so starting with the one above your edit and working up the list, click each "prev" link until you find the one where your edit no longer appears. To save you time, it was this one by TheLastOfTheGiants (talk · contribs), who appears to have reverted out a lot more than just your edit - edits by OrionNimrod (talk · contribs) on 19 July 2022 and Longsars (talk · contribs) on 18 July 2022 have also been reverted. You should really be discussing this at Talk:History of Transylvania because it is specific to that article and nothing to do with the actions of AnomieBOT (talk · contribs). --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 13:07, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for directing me, I'm quite new on WP Gyalu22 (talk) 14:39, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

@Gyalu22 183.171.137.126 (talk) 07:23, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Cherry (page)

Hello there fellow editor! I saw that you marked my reference for the health risks part in the page Cherry as I provided no link for the Youtube video I referred to. Instead I mentioned the title of the video as I was unable to post the link directly. If you wouldn't mind, you could type the said title on Youtube, and get the video I sourced to know about the information given. However, I shall state that the given video is from a verified scientist, who has accurately calculated the amount of cyanide found in a sampled cherry pit. I hope my message provides clarity about the same. Thank you! E3C4B1 (talk) 14:45, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

All AnomieBOT did was add |date= to a maintenance tag added by Dondville. You should probably ask them instead. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 14:46, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

I will notify Dondville about the same. The only thing I wanted to do was clarify the verification of the source I used. Thank you! E3C4B1 (talk) 14:51, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

OrphanReferenceFixer: Blacklisted orphaned reference in Nijeder Mawte Nijeder Gaan

When trying to fix orphaned refs in Nijeder Mawte Nijeder Gaan, MediaWiki's spam blacklist complained about filmcompanion.in. 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:

• Nijeder Mawte Nijeder Gaan revision 1102895324:
  • Fixed broken references
  • Rescued "FC" from rev 1102890332
    Removed in revision 1102895277 by CX Zoom (talk • contribs • logs) with comment "Fix references, prepare for archiving" (removed 172/8591 bytes, 2%)

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⚡ 13:56, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

FWIW, I requested whitelisting the reference at MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist#filmcompanion article for Nijeder Mawte Nijeder Gaan article. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 14:44, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

OrphanReferenceFixer: Blacklisted orphaned reference in Teresa Wright

When trying to fix orphaned refs in Teresa Wright, MediaWiki's spam blacklist complained about filmreference.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:

• Teresa Wright revision 1103956750:
  • Rescued "film-reference" from rev 1086796704
    Removed in revision 1103956364 by Rlink2 (talk • contribs • logs) with comment "Adding archives to assist with [[Wikipedia:Verifiability]], [[WP:SOURCEACCESS]]" (removed 13120/26850 bytes, 49%)

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⚡ 19:17, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Template:TFA title and User:AnomieBOT II

Hi. I'll start out by saying that I have an enormous amount of respect and admiration for much of the work, technical and otherwise, that you've put into Wikimedia wikis, personally and professionally, over the years.

Regarding Template:TFA title, I took a look at its transclusions and it has about 12 total uses in this project, 5 of which are in archives. Transclusions count isn't super relevant generally, but I think it can be important context when evaluating the cost of maintaining a particular technical implementation. There are over 4400 subpages of Template:TFA title and it has about 7 active uses, a few of which are playful pages such as User:Cscott/Telnet. The current implementation seems like a disproportionately high cost compared to the benefit.

In 2010, using a bot to create per-day subpages was perhaps a reasonable approach to take. In 2022, can't we use Scribunto/Lua to extract the article title from a subpage? It feels like it would be pretty easy to do. This would mean we could decommission AnomieBOT II's task and no longer need to create hundreds of dedicated subpages indefinitely each year.

As I'm writing this post, I'm remembering that you were previously heavily involved in Scribunto/Lua support, including rewriting the manual, so there seems like no better person to ask. --MZMcBride (talk) 16:44, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

@MZMcBride: (talk page stalker) The main use for Template:TFA title is via Template:Editnotices/Namespace/Main which, I think, gets re-processed whenever anyone hits the "Edit" button in mainspace. That's a very critical piece of code. I, for one, would be nervous about adding code there that had to any complicated parsing. -- John of Reading (talk) 06:45, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

@MZMcBride: As John of Reading mentioned, running extra Lua code from mainspace editnotices might be excessive when we already have a system in place to extract the titles. Plus those title-only templates will be easier to use for user scripts and external tools, should such things exist. In addition, a runtime-parsing based solution relies on people not throwing weird wikitext into the TFA blurb pages that would confuse the multitude of parsers that might then exist; I've had to deal with that a few times over the years in AnomieBOT's task. Anomie⚔ 12:19, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Bug: fixing reference errors

Fixing reference errors: good choice on quote parsing. Not sure if this is a pure bot or if it's user-run, but if it's the former, then this a decision for how to resolve typos that needs fixing, because then the next diligent editor who finds an improper citation either has to dig through history (after possibly dozens of intermediate new edits) to find the correct original reference, or more likely just removes the entire section. A starting fix would just be to comment out citation information within ref tags that doesn't affirmatively fit an error pattern (as opposed to removing that which does not affirmatively fit well-formed data), and let a human editor sort it out later. SamuelRiv (talk) 19:45, 14 August 2022 (UTC)