User talk:ClueBot Commons/Archives/2012/September

This is an archive of past discussions with User:ClueBot Commons. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

I've just cleared the request queue for review users. Out of the 183 requests 62 where added (some being duplicates, other space/lacking experience). Let me know if I missed yours. - Damian Zaremba ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:04, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

{{/censor}}

Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page.

In this issue:

• Background: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem.
• Research: The most recent DR data
• Survey results: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey
• Activity analysis: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums
• DR Noticeboard comparison: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August
• Discussion update: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate
• Proposal: It's time to close the Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts noticeboard. Agree or disagree?

--The Olive Branch 18:55, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Republic of Macedonia Not Fyrom Please change — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.217.128.172 (talk) 14:39, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

I noticed that the bot not always reverts more than one time at the same page. For example, that was reverted, but this was not. These two cases are different in one thing: in the first c. bot didn't revert any edits for last days, in the second he did it three days before vandalism. Maybe I am wrong, but I saw this pattern in several more cases while I used Huggle. ♪ anonim.one ♪ 11:14, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

There's multiple reasons why the bot might not revert an edit (score, filters, network issues, toolserver issues, labs issues, restarting the bot etc). I'm currently working to move the bot to be queue based to try and catch more of the edits, however it requires a lot of time which I'm rather short on at the moment. For now it's best effort in multiple places. 78.144.143.134 (talk) 11:20, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

In the Electrical engineering case, I think it was simply that ClueBot doesn't revert to its own version of the page. I believe that rule is still in force? Yngvadottir (talk) 11:58, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Because of possible false positives? It makes sense, but means that once bot reverts vandal edit and someone repeats this edit, bot will not revert him. Maybe set more flexible preference depending on who makes changes after ClueBot? ♪ anonim.one ♪ 12:41, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

This ClueBot is deleting a lot of valid contributors who know a lot about their topics and find their contributions immediately deleted. This "bot" is clearly full of bugs and the author needs to take it offline. It's killing this site and making it a joke! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.15.108.152 (talk) 03:31, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

And just to add, Wikipedia is not a test bed for your "bot." We are not here to train your bot. This is the live site. You need to train your rules on a test site. Currently, it's buggy and is deleting legitimate edits. A LOT of them. You need to test and debug it on some other site, not the live wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.15.108.152 (talk) 03:42, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

ClueBot NG is an approved bot that has been running for years on this site. It's got a less than 1% false positive rate.—cyberpower ^Chat_Offline 03:46, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

What's your source for "less than 1%?" Because everywhere I look (admittedly obscure topics), it deletes everything, always, automatically. Always, every contribution. Somebody has to notice it and revert it, but that doesn't always happen. Lots of topics are suffering because of this buggy bot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.15.108.152 (talk) 04:00, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Everywhere you look? Evidence please. If you look at Special:Contributions/ClueBot NG, you will see the bot reverting vandalism all day. For more information about false positives, please read the FAQ. Then you might be informed enough to come back here with a more insightful, signed, comment. – Wdchk (talk) 06:07, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting the edits of the user on Recep Tayyip Erdogan page. However, edit summary should be deleted, since it includes defamation in Turkish. There are two separate edit summary of this user, thanks dear bot.Egeymi (talk) 05:20, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

ClueBot changes are considered "minor". Does that make sense? Vandalism is a big deal, and so is antivandalism.

The little b that shows up next to bot changes in my watchlist do not appear next to ClueBot changes. Isaac Rabinovitch (talk) 20:08, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Minor changes are considered minor (single word changes are minor no matter if they are vandalism). It's not flagged as a bot so won't show up as such in your watch list, explanation here. - Damian Zaremba ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:48, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, ClueBot, for reverting vandalism at Robotic arm. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 21:59, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

{{/censor}}

I noticed a few edits by ClueBot III that erroneously changed a link to an archive, even though the discussions in question were not actually archived. See [1] and [2] and [3]. I wonder if it got confused because it just archived this. Anomie⚔ 08:34, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

I keep getting this diff [4] in the dataset review. I've skipped it because while it's legit I can see the potential for it to be used in vandalism. Matthew Thompson ^{talk to me bro!} 06:25, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

That usually means the group is empty, a hard refresh might give you another. If not there will be more on the way shortly! - Damian Zaremba ^{(talk • contribs)} 09:15, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

I've refreshed a tonne. Yeah, I tend to get the same few repeated over and over, but this diffs driving me bonkers. Looking forward to more.... Matthew Thompson ^{talk to me bro!} 12:44, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

{{/censor}}

I have seen several examples (e.g., this) where ClueBot does not seem to notice previous warnings from the same month and creates a new level 1 entry with its own section title. Is this the default behavior or is there something about some messages that fools it? RockMagnetist (talk) 15:53, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Yeah... I have seen that many times too, it's awkward... MadGuy7023 (talk) 17:43, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

The bot will ignore warnings older than a few days. It only escalates recent warnings. There are some discussions around this in the archives and on the original BRFA, and probably on some of the bot noticeboards. I've got to run, so I don't have time to dig links up to those right now. -- Cobi^(t|c|b) 18:02, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

ClueBot's reversion no. 1238152 was a false positive. I tried to report it in the proper way, and failed because the page where I am meant to enter the number has no place for input. Maproom (talk) 16:37, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Fixed and reported. - Damian Zaremba ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:49, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

In my watchlist when I hide the bot contributions, this bot's edits do not get hidden. IRWolfie- (talk) 09:17, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

This is normal for an anti-vandalism bot. You can see a more detailed explanation at Why don't ClueBot NG's edits show up as bot edits? – Wdchk (talk) 19:19, 28 September 2012 (UTC)