Misplaced Pages

Unexpired request

Hey -- I just wanted to make sure I let you know, I re-opened a bot request, which you had previously expired (the user wasn't active at the time), because the user came back and asked to re-open it. Misplaced Pages:Bots/Requests for approval/PseudoBot. I hope that's the right way to go about it... SQL 01:25, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

That's fine, don't worry about it :) --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 01:44, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey, regarding the NFCCBot thing.... If I "screwed the pooch", and messed everything up, I'm sorry. I just have a lot of other stuff going on right now, and, I've got no desire to work on it anymore, particularly with the ratio of amount_of_crap_generated to usage_and_usefulness at this point. Were you even still planning to run it anymore btw? I kinda figured your image bot, and Carnlido (I hope I got the spelling right...)'s (which, can do DAB's I understand), and the other one which for the life of me I can't find so may very well be imaginary, coupled with BCBot, kinda eliminated the need for further image bots of that type right now. Anyhow, After the last couple days, I'm done with it. Sorry again. SQL 03:08, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Image tagging bot

I uploaded an image of an album cover a while ago, having checked the Fair Use Policy, and included justification for why it complied with the fair use policy. However, STBotl tagged it, and (seemingly) subsequently removed it, before I'd had the chance to respond to the initial tag. I'd thought it was ok, so I just wanted to check whether it was a misunderstanding on my part of the fair use policy. Thanks

What image? Who are you? --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 00:50, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Image:Jealousy screwedcover.jpg

Hi, can you send me a copy of that image? (Image:Jealousy screwedcover.jpg) I saw on the deletion log that you deleted it, and I can't find anywhere on the internet. I would like to have a copy of it, for private use (on my music library). Is that possible for you? :D — Jhn* 20:45, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Please email me through the wiki interface so I can sent it as an attachment. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 00:49, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Newusers

Heya, regarding User:ST47/newusers, I've been updating it near-daily lately, and, I had a question. Would it be possible to filter out blocked accounts? SQL 05:55, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

That uses a database query, right? Post it here and I'll see what I can do. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 14:39, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Sure, here she is:

set @counter:=0; select @counter:=@counter+1 as rank, user_ids.user_name as username, count(logging.log_timestamp) as number from logging, user_ids left join ipblocks on ipb_user=user_id where logging.log_type='newusers' and logging.log_user = user_ids.user_id and ipblocks.ipb_id is null group by logging.log_user order by number desc limit 100;

I tried a few times, but, for the life of me I couldn't get it to do what I wanted it to :( SQL 00:52, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

That got it, thanks! SQL 01:32, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Betacommand 2

This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The remedies decided by the Arbitration Committee, viewable here, instruct Betacommand with regards to the operation of BetacommandBot, including placement of notifications and civility in replying to concerns raised about its operation. Betacommand is urged to be significantly more responsive to good-faith questions from users whose images he tags and either to respond directly to such questions, and also to develop an "opt-out" list for BetacommandBot without imposing conditions on its use.

All editors are advised that periodic review of images and other media to ensure their compliance with the non-free content criteria may be necessary for policy, ethical, and sometimes legal reasons, and are invited to participate in policy discussions concerning this and related areas. Editors are cautioned not to be abusive toward or make personal attacks against participants, including bot operators, engaged in this work. The community is also urged to re-examine our policies and practices for reviewing, tagging, and where necessary deleting images in light of experience gained since the policies and practices were previously developed, including the disputes underlying this case. The Committee listed five specific points in the specific remedy that they believe any review should attempt to cover.

The Committee expects that the disputes and disruption underlying this case will cease as a result of this decision. In the event of non-compliance or a continued pattern of disputes, further review by the Committee may be sought after a reasonable time. In such a review, the Committee may impose appropriate sanctions including but not limited to the revocation of any user's privilege to use automated tools such as bots and scripts, revocation of other privileges, topic bans, civility restrictions, or any other remedies needed to end the disruption. However, please note that nothing in this paragraph restricts the authority of administrators to take appropriate action to deal with any disruptive incidents that may occur.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Daniel (talk) 12:38, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Present

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		For putting up with all my cron problems, please accept this token of my gratification! Soxred93 | talk bot 22:40, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 7th and 14th, 2008.

Sorry, it seems that the bot quit before completing its run last week. Here is the last two weeks' worth of Signpost. Ralbot (talk) 09:05, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:05, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

WP:RFBOT

Your recent bot approvals request has been approved. Please see the request page for details. When the bot flag is set it will show up in this log. — Werdna talk 08:07, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 10:28, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Malfunctioning bot

User:STBotI again tagged for deletion sourced images, claiming they're unsourced (Image:EuropeanSerbia.jpg). --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 17:02, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

The image didn't, and still doesn't, have a copyright tag explaining the type of image. Foundation-level NFCC policy requires machine-readable non-free media verifiability, and we implement that through the copyright tags. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 18:04, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

RFRBot

RFRBot doesn't seem to be working at this time, is there anything wrong? — E _aussie 00:29, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

It seems a few changes I made to my common library caused all my bots to be unable to notify me if they got logged out. RFRBot got logged out, and I didn't notice. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 02:09, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Deleted Fruits Basket images

A comment about your deletion of a large number of images that were various Fruits Basket character articles. I fully understand, and agree with, the need for free use rationales and for using only essential non-free media. And, indeed, many of those were not essential -- and, in fact, I'm preparing to merge several of the affected articles into the list of characters, making images moot. But not all of them. It is extremely annoying that no notice that these images needed rationales was ever given in the articles, either by editing the captions or on the talk pages, thus giving interested editors the chance to provide valid fair-use rationales. Please, in the future, stongly consider giving your fellow editors due consideration. Or in other words, play nicely, eh? —Quasirandom (talk) 16:55, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Or, to put it another way, this is supposed to be a collaboration. —Quasirandom (talk) 18:27, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

They were tagged for over a week, and they were uploaded incorrectly in the first place. If you need then, reupload them properly. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 19:02, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

They may have been tagged, but pretty much no one but the original uploader watches an image. And since I wasn't the uploader, I don't have them to reupload. In other articles I've worked with, notifying the editors who work on it, somewhere in the article/talk page, has been SOP courtesy. —Quasirandom (talk) 19:08, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Chuck Lorre

Hey, I just wanted to say good job on that edit you did to Chuck Lorre's page. It was getting ridiculous. Misplaced Pages could use more people like you who cut out the BS and the spin and just state the facts. Well done.

I'd say thanks, but I haven't a clue what you're talking about - I've never edited that page. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 01:01, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Error with Bot/WP/EN/ST47/AfDBot/1.2

Bot/WP/EN/ST47/AfDBot/1.2 needs to be logged in! 91.198.174.194 (talk) 13:02, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Ecudor Mining

The information provided is correct, and is not copyrighted. Foxfoxfox87

Rationale tagging issue

Hi. Some non-free images were incorrectly tagged as having no/invalid rationale on 21 April . I just looked at a few of the more than 500 images tagged yesterday and noticed these; there may be more mistagged images. Also, you did not reply to my 20 April message about mistagged book covers on User talk:STBotI, so here is a link to it in case you did not see my message on that busy page. All the best, Bláthnaid 13:12, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I haven't been looking at stbotI's page recently. I've fixed the problem in your first link, however 2 and 3 are valid taggings - the bot needs to see a link back to the page it's used on, not just a reference. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 15:44, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

A wikilink to the article the image is used in is not required in WP:NFCC#10 (it is just "recommended"). Editors who hand-write their fair use rationales often to not have a link to the article because the article name is in the header, and headers generally do not have wikilinks. The tag added to this image says that the rationale does not have "The name of each article in which fair use is claimed for the item", when it clearly does. I don't mean to pick on your bot, as the vast majority of tagging it does is accurate, but mis-tagging might whip up more of the drama about bots tagging images that has thankfully died down in recent weeks. Bláthnaid 16:03, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh wait, I've just noticed that there is a conflict in the wording in WP:NFCC#10 ("The name of each article (a link to the articles is recommended as well)) "and the 2nd paragraph of {{Di-disputed fair use rationale}}, which says ("per WP:NFCC#10c, each fair-use rationale must include a link to the specific article in which fair use of the image is claimed") so that tagging is not your bot's fault. That's my mistake, so apologies! Bláthnaid 16:11, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Smile!

Dave1185 (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

User talk:Dividing

Is requesting unblock. I don't believe it is a bot, and do similar things myself with FF tabs. Please look into it and provide more guidance to the user if you would like him to get a bot flag. Either way, he can probably be unblocked. Thanks, - Rjd0060 (talk) 17:10, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

I unblocked cause he gave a reasonable and plausible explanation why he edits taht fast and Werdna pointed out that there is no rule against high speed editing, just against unapproved bot editing. MBisanz 17:16, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

User:MediationBot1

Hi ST47. If you have a moment, could you take a look at MediationBot1? It seems to have made rather a mess of the formatting on pages it edited today - e.g. , . Much appreciated, WjBscribe 18:16, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Probably from when I was screwing with my utf-8 code. I've reversed my changes. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 21:19, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

AWB Help

Hey, I was wondering if you could approve ShepBot for AWB so I can get to the trial edits soon? Thanks a ton! §hep • ¡Talk to me! 19:38, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Bot tagged Image:DatsolaleeBaskets.jpg in error?

Hi, your bot tagged this image in error, I believe. I carefully examined the image page, and can't find any problems. Would you please take a look, and let me know if I missed something? If not, please remove the tag. Thanks, Pete Tillman (talk) 20:04, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I've never seen a rationale tag accept unnamed parameters like that. I've added a way for the bot to check for that way of doing it, however rest assured that the image is correct. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 02:27, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Pete Tillman (talk) 15:54, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

MfDbot possible additional duties

Ping. I've left a message for you at Misplaced Pages talk:Miscellany for deletion#Think we could find a bot? regarding the addition of a task for MfDBot. Thanks.--Doug. 20:12, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Additionally, the bot is now removing the "old business" marker - why? Is this causing problems for the bot or something?--Doug. 03:02, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Looks like someone started using spaces in the headers for new sections, and the bot didn't expect that. Fixed. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 18:40, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Awesome! --Doug. 21:21, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 21st, 2008.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 16:30, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

!

eh? —Dark 11:14, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

That's a strange way to post a rationale, but I thought I accounted for that. I've added additional rules to the bot to prevent such issues. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 18:24, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Undelete Pamlico 140, please

Hello, ST47, nice to talk to you. Okay, So my username is Pamlico 140. And I created a Page Named Pamlico 140. Your spam bot read it and blocked me from posting, and therefore i had to log off to write this message. I can see how the bot recognized it as a page about me, or about my beliefs and opinion. But please, I can Explain. You see, I am a devoted sea kayaker. i own a kayak called the "wilderness Systems Pamlico 140" , Pamlico 140 is the model name (Like Camry, in toyota camry. it is my username because i am very fond of this kayak and It is my username for every website. I made a page for the Pamlico 140, and I was very neutral about it and it was an article about the kayak, not me. It simply stated facts, not opinions. At one point, some people changed it and put their opinions in it, but I fixed it. Also, your bot recognized it as an advertisement, and heres why thats unlogical- There are hundreds of articles on individual car models, just like my article of an individual kayak model. So if the "Subaru Legacy" page is not spam or an Ad, what makes "Pamlico 140" an ad or promotion. I did not intend to promote it. Please, if there is something unsatisfactory about it, tell me, and I'll try my best to correct the problem 64.136.26.201 (talk) 04:06, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

So you're evading a block? That's against policy. To contest a block, log in and add {{unblock|your reason here}} to your user talk page. I did not block you, nor did I delete your page. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 10:25, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Copyright forms for self-created images

Dear ST47,

I just received a message from one of your bots (STBotI) - copied below. I tried filling the necessary forms several times and I have specified that I took the pictures myself. I have read the instructions and followed them as close as I could. If there is something wrong with the forms, tell me how I should do it. Thanks. - Wikifulchemist. (I hope I'm signing this right - my first time signing) Wikifulchemist (talk) 18:39, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

--

Image copyright problem with Image:TexasRed.jpg Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:TexasRed.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Misplaced Pages takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 23:21, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Message left on userpage

I found this message on your userpage, so I've moved it here for you:

An article I created has been deleted or is going to be deleted because of being "not needed". It involves a poet, soon-to-be-published one. Is that :not important enough for Wiki, or what's going on? Ps. Sorry if the means of contact was wrong, I'm new to Misplaced Pages..Carablea (talk) 18:33, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Cheers, —paranomia (formerly tim.bounceback) 00:25, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Loretta Lynn albums

I noticed what you had said about the fair use rationales on the album covers. I explained it more with a new rationale on all of her pages. Please this new one is a much better rationale and leave it at that. Finding information for old albums isn't exactly easy and I can't possible know every single detail of the album, but there is enough information there explaining that it won't take away any rights of the wonder or copyright. I am very tired and need to rest since it its 10:43 PM and I need to sign out soon, so please respond back after you get this. Gracias. Dottiewest1fan (talk) 02:44, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Fritzl article

Hi. I noticed that you;ve set the Fritzl article to full protected. Would you consider putting it on semi? (which was apparently all that was requested in the first place). It's still a major, developing story, with new information emerging every day.--Redirectorial (talk) 05:33, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi, would you mind downgrading to semi? Thats all that is needed and full is out of scope for this. Lawrence Cohen § t/e 06:11, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I've asked for more opinions at ANI. I'm not saying your in the wrong as such, but fully-protecting IMO is a little too much. D.M.N. (talk) 07:06, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

An autoconfirmed user vandalized immediately after I semiprotected it. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 10:25, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Ludvikus

I do not think I'm responsible for that mistake. It looks like a bad joke. Or worse, Vandalism. Is it possible for someone else to be using my IP? --Ludvikus (talk) 21:40, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

You did create that page:

Page history

• (diff) 17:18, May 1, 2008 . . The way, the truth, and the light (Talk | contribs | block) (68 bytes)
• (diff) 08:49, May 1, 2008 . . Ludvikus (Talk | contribs | block) (51 bytes) (#REDIRECT Final solution to the Jewish question)

--uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 23:23, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Image:Hyland redslide.jpg

Hi, I added this image (Image:Hyland redslide.jpg) and later found it in the Misplaced Pages commons, so I didn't put the proper copyright status on it. I want the image deleted (but not from the commons). Could you help me out? Thanks! --Kaitlin510 (talk) 12:51, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

MFDBot

Is MFDBot malfunctioning? I noticed you reverted one of its edits when I was going to whitelist it in huggle, but I wanted to make sure it is running ok before I do that. Thingg 18:40, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

I was doing some debugging - there was a bug regarding format of the page. I've fixed it, and it will be returning to its once daily edit at 0:00 UTC. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 18:45, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

MfDbot archived three discussions in fully transcluded form and one of them wasn't closed yet! I'm trying to fix but my hotel connection is dreadfully slow today.--Doug. 22:44, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh, it actually archived straight through the Closed Discussions header, that would explain why I found the header missing the other day. I can't fix it right now due to connection speed. The biggest issue is the open discussion that needs to be put back in it's place. Thanks. And Thanks for all the hard work on this. I've never worked with a bot but I'm sure it must be a lot of work to get one to work properly sometimes and I know that this will eventually mean much less work for all of us at MfD.--Doug. 22:52, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Issue is when there are no closed discussions to archive. I've added a fix. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 23:35, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

• This bot appears to be malfunctioning and has been blocked. Please see Misplaced Pages:Bots/Requests for approval/MfDBot for details. You may unblock the bot yourself after the concerns on that page have been met. I see you have requested to be contacted off-wiki above, but I'm all out of {{shrubbery}}s right now. Thank you, — xaosflux 02:26, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

RfBAG

I asked a couple questions at your RfBAG. Dragons flight (talk) 23:48, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Will look in the morning. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 00:16, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Removing redirects

Thanks, but, given the chance of future double redirection, I don't think it's a bad idea. Also, I think I saw a WikiProject somewhere about reducing redirection. Sardanaphalus (talk) 12:48, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

I think it is a bad idea, and policy agrees. We have bots that deal with double redirects, if we need it. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 12:49, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

My reply was a bit curt and the edit was on one of your talkpage archives. My apologies. Sardanaphalus (talk) 13:13, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Perlwikipedia problem

When using get_pages_in_category; I get the error:

Can't call method "decoded_content" without a package or object reference at Perlwikipedia.pm line 513.

I've tried fixing it myself, but no luck. Any ideas? —paranomia (formerly tim.bounceback) 23:10, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Just by glancing at the code, try replacing line 513 with:

$content = $res->decoded_content();

Instead of:

$content = $self->{mech}->decoded_content();

And see if that fixes it. If so, please tell me so I can commit it, if not, I'll look into the code. Honestly, you shouldn't really be getting that error >.> That seems to indicate that you aren't getting a WWW::Mechanize instance. Your bot doesn't modify $editor->{mech}, does it? --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 02:10, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

That's exactly what I first tried after taking a look at the code, but still no luck. I should probably point out that the above error message is Perlwikipedia.pm with that patch applied, without I get a similar one:

Can't locate object method "decoded_content" via package "WWW::Mechanize" at Perlwikipedia.pm line 513.

And, no, my bot doesn't modify $editor->{mech}. —paranomia (formerly tim.bounceback) 21:23, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Can you try running this to see what version you have:

perl -e 'use WWW::Mechanize; print $WWW::Mechanize::VERSION. "\n";'

Also, try putting print ref($self->{mech}) . "\n"; to see what sort of object $self->{mech} is. That may help with debugging the problem. — Carl (CBM · talk) 21:41, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm running WWW::Mechanize 1.34 (the latest according to CPAN). Adding that line of code also confirms that $self->{mech}, is, in fact, a WWW::Mechanize object. —paranomia (formerly tim.bounceback) 00:43, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

How about perl -MWWW::Mechanize -e 'print $HTTP::Message::VERSION' ? --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 12:47, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

5.812, the latest. —paranomia (formerly tim.bounceback) 22:13, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Look through your @INC (perl -V if you need to see it, I think, or just try to perl -MRandomshitthatdoesntexist) and make sure there's a decoded_content sub in HTTP::Message. If you do something other than that sub, like a get_text() or edit(), does it work? --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 23:00, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Yep, it's defined on line 179 of Message.pm for me. —paranomia (formerly tim.bounceback) 23:59, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

And yes, edit() works . —paranomia (formerly tim.bounceback) 00:08, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

(←) You need to edit the last line of get_pages_in_category, and replace

return @pages;

return \@pages;

This can be diagnosed by noticing that the return value of the function is not an array reference, it is a numeric scalar. — Carl (CBM · talk) 01:21, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm far too tired to understand what you just said. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 01:41, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Never mind; I downloaded perlwikipedia, tried to figure out what could go wrong, but in retrospect I don't think I am getting the error he is.

Paranomia, is the error happening on these lines of Perlwikipedia.pm?

my @pages;
my $res = $self->_get( $category, 'view' );
unless ($res) { return 1; }
my $content = $res->decoded_content;

If so, I am not getting the same error when I run it. Could you check what type of reference the $res variable is? — Carl (CBM · talk) 01:47, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

This won't help in finding the fix, but I had the same problem when I upgraded to the fix for issue 9. I didn't pursue the problem because I was in the process of changing my code over to use CBM's Mediawiki::API package, and I just reverted the upgrade to keep the code running until I had completed the switchover of my fairly rudimentary code. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:15, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Odd. It is true that another way to work around this problem is to switch to a different framework (the one BrownHairedGirl mentioned is available at User:VeblenBot). But it would be nice to track down this problem as well. — Carl (CBM · talk) 14:12, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

I've considered trying MediaWiki::API (this is what I'll probably try doing next), and already have tried porting it to MediaWiki, but didn't like it because it didn't have a debug mode. And considering someone else has had this problem, it would be nice to have this fixed. —paranomia (formerly tim.bounceback) 14:20, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

No, it's line 513:

   while ( $res = $self->{mech}->follow_link( text => 'next 200' ) && ref($res) eq 'HTTP::Response' && $res->is_success ) {
        sleep 1;    #Cheap hack to make sure we don't bog down the server
        $content = $self->{mech}->decoded_content();

And the error persists when you change the last line to $content = $res->decoded_content(); ? Which category are you trying, I will try again to recreate the error later today. — Carl (CBM · talk) 14:16, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I'm trying Category:Misplaced Pages external links cleanup. —paranomia (formerly tim.bounceback) 14:20, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

OK - I can reproduce the problem now, on the latest version of Perlwikipedia from svn - but not with Category:Recursion_theory, only with the category you gave above. I'll see if I can work out what's up. — Carl (CBM · talk) 18:00, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

This diff fixes it for me:

--- lib/Perlwikipedia.pm        (revision 135)
+++ lib/Perlwikipedia.pm        (working copy)
@@ -508,9 +508,9 @@
             push @pages, $1;
         }
     }
-    while ( $res = $self->{mech}->follow_link( text => 'next 200' ) && ref($res) eq 'HTTP::Response' && $res->is_success ) {
+    while ( ($res = $self->{mech}->follow_link( text => 'next 200' ))  && ref($res) eq 'HTTP::Response' && $res->is_success) {
         sleep 1;    #Cheap hack to make sure we don't bog down the server
-        $content = $self->{mech}->decoded_content();
+        $content = $res->decoded_content();
     if ($content=~/<div id=\"mw-subcategories\">/i) {
         $content=~s/.+<div id=\"mw-subcategories\">//is;

— Carl (CBM · talk) 18:07, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

I see what happened, then. Thank you for your help, I'll go test+commit that now. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 19:39, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Test added to the test suite, it is now passing, and committed revision 136. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 19:56, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Excellent - works fine now. Thanks Carl and ST47, your help is appreciated :-). Cheers, —paranomia (formerly tim.bounceback) 20:32, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 2nd and 9th, 2008.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:35, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

RE: WikiProject on closed proxies

Hi, I've just signed up for WP:WikiProject on closed proxies as was wondering whether is project is still active and whether you are still an active member.  Atyndall93 | talk  01:06, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

It sort of fell apart when the founder left Misplaced Pages. Anyway, I'm not technically capable of operating a closed proxy anyway, so I'm not an active member. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 01:42, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Dude!

OK, here I am trying to resolve a bunch of images, across a bunch of wikis, that were wrongly put on commons and need to be FUR'ed onto en:wiki, see here. So I try to do the first one, to establish the fix procedure, and I get bot-templated within six minutes here. Now I have no intention of joining the ranks of the image-screamers nor the bot-screamers, but I do have a few comments:

1. Can there be at least a one-hour grace period? At least? I wasn't able to find the exact upload pick for "LAC images on commons needing to be re-uploaded on en:wiki with FUR's, click here", but I did figure I would be able to upload with a generic non-license then immediately replace it with the full scoop. Now that does take a while to do, what with the conservative estimate of seven tabs/windows open to do the task - so can the bot store and check with delay? I'm hoping to write up some pointers for others to help, but if they're gonna get spammed in the meanwhile, realistically, they'll just stop trying.
2. Then I check your bot page, and I see "my notice, because BetacommandBot checks" - umm, I thought it was your bot? I thought the idea was that you would take the load? And a little further down, "If you're here to whine and complain", WTF, if you are going to have the exact same attitude as Beta, why did you split the bot? Just to reduce the per-user ANI thread-count? And BTW, I will revert the bot's edit to my upage, since 1) I read it, and 2) it's a spurious notice, since I had a current edit token to the relevant Image page when it dropped the notice. Oh also, that floating notice to take questions to the copyright page - nice, I thought the idea was for you to take on the questions, I must have really misread that approval (was that the one that was closed early?).
3. Now moving on to your own utalk, bots and "heat death of the universe" - srs? What normal user should have to deal with that almost impenetrable obstacle, and why should any editor on the english wikipedia have to leave the site to do, well, anything? I can handle bug reports wherever, but I'm not normal, and here I am - on your utalk, it's not a problem with the bot, it's a problem with the philosophy and handling of bots.
4. This is not meant to be a general rant, 'tho it is partly my response to my first attempt to upload an image, which was made in utterly good faith and full resolve to comply with non-free in all aspects. I'm only noting here some general impressions which I hope you could address. I'll note that I've been active on discussing bot issues, many of which I think are failures of communication, some examples are outlined above. Note also, I'm trying hard with bots and non-free images, I intervene on Beta's page whenever I can. Don't take this as an attack, but it is a comment on the general situation. Cheers! Franamax (talk) 22:58, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

1. No. One hour is too long, the bot would lose too much data on a reset. This is more than enough for anyone who adds the correct data when they upload the image, and most everyone else needs to be reminded, or has no intention of following policy. You can't really just say "I'll deal with the law in a few hours, I don't feel like it right now."
2. The reference to BetacommandBot is a reference to a different bot. BetacommandBot operates on images that already exist, mine operates on recent uploads. If someone removes a tag without fixing the problem, BCBot will catch it on its next pass.
3. If there's a technical issue, and you want me to see it anytime soon, it goes on the bugtracker. Because it's a bug. And the bugtracker tracks it. That's the point of a bugtracker. Unfortunately, most users aren't even sufficiently competent to use it, but in general, that means whatever they're complaining about takes longer to fix. I check this talkpage only once a day sometimes, even less others. Typically, if it's a real problem, it takes me a few rounds of back-and-forth to get a good understanding. A proper bug report would allow me to start working on it immediately, but again most people can't write bug reports. I check the bug tracker almost whenever I have a chance, and whenever one of my bugs is modified, I get an email and a ping on IRC. It's the one place I need to go to if I'm working on something technical, because all of my bots are there, and so are requests for database queries. 10:38, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Atlantis Picture

Hello. I noticed you had cleaned up some problems with the image on the Atlantis: The Lost Empire article, and I hoped you could help me clean up a mess I have just caused there. I uploaded a movie poster for a different Atlantis movie, Atlantis (1913 film) but unfortunately called it the same name as the one that was already on the Altlantis: The Lost Empire article. I've tried to undo the mistake, but was unable. How can I revert that article back to its original and correct form? And the picture also? Thanks CactusWriter (talk) 09:51, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Okay... nevermind... I'm an idiot, but improving. I figured out how to work it and it's fixed now. Sorry to clutter up your page with this nonsense. Please delete CactusWriter (talk) 11:29, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

collen zenk pinter image

You have sent me a notice that the image of Ms. Pinter which I upload must be removed immediately. I was given the image by the public relations department, Ms. Lisa Lugassi, of As the World Turns, Proctor and Gamble Productions for use in disseminating information about Ms. Pinter's involvement with the Oral Cancer Foundation, and about her public efforts to raise awareness of this disease. I have uploaded the image within the parameters of the agreement with the aforementioned individuals and organizations. Your bot and the removal of this image is wrong. Brian Hill, bhill@oralcancerfoundation.org —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hilllaguna (talk • contribs) 02:47, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 12th, 2008.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:37, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Hello, I am the admin for tibettruth.com which is the website for Independent Tibet Network . One of our team (Wiki username=Zhiji) recently posted A Wiki entry about our organisation called 'Tibet campaign', which was deleted or frozen as it was claimed to be in copyright violation. Please explain how we, as originators and owners of tibettruth/independent tibet network, can be inviolation of our own copyrighted material or name? Secondly if the objection is based upon using the term 'Tibet campaign' well that is exactly what we are engaged in, it is a perfectly appropriate adjective and not in nay sense a misappropriaton of 'free tibet campaign'. Had we wished to do so we would have used the phrase 'campaign free tibet'.

Would you therefore please reinstore our entry. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tibettruth (talk • contribs) 12:02, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

If your material is copyrighted, it cannot be used on wikipedia. All contributions to Misplaced Pages must be licensed under the GFDL. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 18:07, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

reinstate two pages - American Orient Express and Grandluxe Rail

Hello, I received a notice that my two new pages were deleted for being redirects "from an implausible typo". But they are true words, for a true company. www.americanorientexpress.com and www.grandluxerail. And, the company is even referenced in this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/American_Orient_Express#Privately_run_trains_using_the_name Can you undelete them? --User3232 (talk) 03:24, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Protecting WP:BAG

You've had an issue with page protection before, and you promised not to use your tools in that way again. Dare I suggest it's not a good idea for you to be protecting WP:BAG on a version you prefer? rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 05:40, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

That isn't a BRFA. Edit warring is not acceptable practice. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 10:21, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Your pledge only applied to BRFAs, not closely related issues? Great. Edit warring isn't acceptable from either side. Protecting it on a version that you have an interest in is part of the edit war. rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 17:02, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Are you serious? I thought this was settled when you agreed not to use administrative tools in cases where you are directly involved. Do you really not see how your use of tools here is inappropriate? ➪HiDrNick! 17:10, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

No I don't. It obviously needed to be protected. We don't allow people to edit war over content of a page - we have policies about that, if you haven't seen them, WP:EW, WP:3RR. I don't see how I have a personal interest in supporting that system of BAG elections, as I haven't participated in any of the discussions about that for some time, didn't vote in any of those elections, and was one of the people who wanted to change away from that system. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 18:41, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I wasn't sure that you still supported the change, especially after withdrawing your confirmation discussion. Still, it's not exactly a good idea for you to always be the one protecting BAG pages. rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 18:52, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

And instead, we should let chaos reign until we can find someone you like? I'll make sure to check with you before I do anything in the future. Since my bot was the one that warned the user above of the speedy deletion of his articles, perhaps someone uninvolved should help him? We wouldn't want me to make a biased decision, would we? --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 18:52, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

No, Requests for Page Protection is that way. Admins can make use of it too. ➪HiDrNick! 19:26, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Waste of time, I don't think either of you has argued that the page should not have been protected. The result would have been that the page would have been protected, and that's what happened. I didn't intentionally wait for BC to revert locke's edits, I protected the page as soon as I noticed the edit war in my irc window. I don't think locke would have been reverting in the near future anyway, as I've since been told that he was blocked at the time of the protection. I don't see a need to allow anyone else to edit war over it. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 19:40, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Reinstating deleted page

Hello - I found a notice that a page I started work on was to be deleted. This is the FAQ project. I guess is because there was no content there, and I have been working to get it ready, so I was sort of early in creating the Misplaced Pages page. Can this be reinstated later once I have the content ready to go ?

Dineshbareja (talk) 22:34, 17 May 2008 (UTC)Dineshbareja

BLPWatchBot

You can probably change [http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Ann_coulter&diff=prev&oldid=213304829 diff the edit summary] to note that the bot is no longer on trial. - Rjd0060 (talk) 19:31, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

STBot

Just wanted to let you know that the password for STBot is available on FishEye subversion at the toolserver—I'm not going to give any links to be on the safe side, but you may wish to remove it from the source code. Cheers, —paranomia 20:43, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

How? I've always used passwordless login. Looking... --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 21:42, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

STbot is no longer used except for bot access to the API, so i've blocked the account and changed the password. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 21:48, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Good, glad that's out of the way. —paranomia 21:57, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

STBotI is marking public domain images for speedy deletion

I have blocked STBotI for the time being, as it appears to be marking images which are clearly released to the public domain for speedy deletion. Please review all of STBotI's recent edits and correct any that are erroneous. It would be very unfortunate for us to lose public domain images for no reason. Kaldari (talk) 17:34, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

There's no actual risk to those images, as they're on commons. At least I know now what that line of code I removed was supposed to do >.> --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 18:15, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Since your bot seems to be having so much trouble with images on Commons, would it be worthwhile to add an "Is this on Commons? If so, move on to the next image" check to the bot? --Carnildo (talk) 02:20, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

That was the original idea - it checks to see if the image exists, then if it's local or on commons, and only proceeds if it's local. For whatever reason, this was causing all sorts of errors from the bot on images with unicode filenames, so I removed the check without realizing what it was for. I've since reinstated the check and the bot hasn't made any more incorrect taggings, nor is it crashing. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 02:42, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Malleus RfA

I'm confused. You removed it with no edit summary. Enigma 00:17, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes. I've reverted it, since it isn't a WP:SNOW candidate, and I can't see where MF has withdrawn it. If I've missed something, please feel free to point it out to me. Thanks, Gwernol 00:19, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

How about the fact that with that RfA transcluded, RfA was blank? --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 00:20, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Casesunit committed some very clever vandalism involving a sort of time-bomb page blanking thingy. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 00:21, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

And when there's something like that going on, check before you same the page that you aren't reintroducing the vandalism. Your save at 20:17 was BEFORE my fixing of the vandalism at 20:18, so if you have hit preview, you'd have known what was going on. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 00:23, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I am exceedingly unhappy that you saw fit to snow close my RfA. It may indeed only have snowball's chance in Hell of passing, but you ought to have done me the courtesy of asking what my feelings were on the matter. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 00:27, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

And owing to your failure to read the above, I'm going to oppose your RfA. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 00:28, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

It's not closed. All is well. Was a misunderstanding due to some clever vandalism, as stated above. Enigma 00:29, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Feel free to oppose whatever you like; I'm quite used to that kind of wikimadness. But thanks to Enigmaman for explaining. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 00:35, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Bot malfunction

I'm not sure what ImageBacklogBot was supposed to do in this series of edits, but the net result is clearly incorrect. --Carnildo (talk) 19:52, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

What is so incorrect, besides the bracket imbalence here? I think it's quite clear that it's removing links to non-free images... --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 20:30, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Fix your bot

Your bot tagged Image:BanqiaoDamAfterFailure.jpg as having no fair use rationale. It does. Revert the edit and fix your bot. --Duk 21:02, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Your rationale fails to meet requirements. . Stop being stupid and fix your image. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹoɟʇs(st47) 21:18, 21 May 2008 (UTC)