User talk:Σ/Archive/2015/January

Merry Christmas!

Dear Σ/Archive/2015,
MERRY CHRISTMAS!!! Best wishes to you, your family and relatives this holiday season! Take this opportunity to bond with your loved ones, whether or not you are celebrating Christmas. This is a special time for everybody, and spread the holiday spirit to everybody out there!
From a fellow editor,
--Nahnah4 (talk | contribs | guestbook)

This message promotes WikiLove. Created by Nahnah4 (talk | contribs | guestbook).

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Nahnah4 (talk • contribs) 06:40, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Happy holidays to everyone.

Thanks for the year. →Σσς. (Sigma) 18:59, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Dear Σ/Archive/2015,
HAPPY NEW YEAR!!! A new year has come! How times flies! 2015 will be a new year, and it is also a chance for you to start afresh! Thank you for your contributions!
From a fellow editor,
--Nahnah4 (talk | contribs | guestbook) 08:18, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

This message promotes WikiLove. Created by Nahnah4 (talk | contribs | guestbook). To use this template, leave {{subst:User:Nahnah4/Happy New Year}} on someone else's talk page.

Thanks. →Σσς. (Sigma) 00:02, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Creation–evolution controversy

You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Creation–evolution controversy. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:06, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

WikiCup 2015 launch newsletter

Round one of the 2015 WikiCup has begun! So far we've had around 80 signups, which close on February 5. If you have not already signed up and want to do so, then you can add your name here. There have been changes to to several of the points scores for various categories, and the addition of Peer Reviews for the first time. These will work in the same manner as Good Article Reviews, and all of the changes are summarised here.

Remember that only the top 64 scoring competitors will make it through to the second round, and one of the new changes this year is that all scores must be claimed within two weeks of an article's promotion or appearance, so don't forget to add them to your submissions pages! If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAN, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs), Miyagawa (talk · contribs) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs)
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list or alternatively to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Opted-out of message delivery to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:51, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

You have mail!

Hello, Σ/Archive/2015. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 05:50, 3 January 2015 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Lowercase sigmabot III is not editing most of the targets since new years holiday... — Revi 05:50, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Bot keeps missing old talk, archiving newer talk

The Lowercase sigmabot III (talk · contribs) keeps missing old talk, archiving newer talk. I manually archived this talk section [1] that should have been archived over a year ago. It has all its timestamps as {{unsigned}} type timestamps, so I think your bot has problems processing sinebot (talk · contribs) generated signatures/dates -- 65.94.40.137 (talk) 05:58, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

The bot defaults to keeping at least 5 threads on the page. →Σσς. (Sigma) 06:20, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

The bot missed that thread in the last run it did [2] ; so something is wrong with the archiving, since it archived newer threads but left this thread that should have been archived long ago. 2013 is a year before 2014, yet it archived 2014 threads, and not the 2013 thread. -- 65.94.40.137 (talk) 22:35, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Broken archive

Please can you take a look at this and see what went wrong with the archiving? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:53, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Why contd.

Hi, I didn't see the replies after my second comment (from 18 Dec) until just now when I was trying to find what had been deleted on this talk page, as the thread was gone. I have to start a new section on the same topic because (ironically) the original post has been archived, apparently without response by S. "You haven't actually said which talk page is being archived" - well, it seems to me that I did. Sorry if that wasn't clear enough. It also seems very strange to me, to retain 4 old sections on a talk page, randomly. These are older than the ones moved, why leave them? I find this automation bothersome and unnecessary. Thanks for explaining, RedRose64, it makes more sense now, but randomly clearing off everything from talk pages, leaving a few older sections, seems highly undesirable. Things are archived before they are responded to. I don't see the point, and lots of reasons why not to. Yesenadam (talk) 07:51, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

This relates to User talk:Σ/Archive/2014/December#Why.

@Yesenadam: You didn't make it clear; you put "the Nietzsche one", so we were left to guess: -revi guessed that you meant your own talk page; I guessed that you meant Talk:Friedrich Nietzsche. One of us must be wrong: but you haven't said which of us is correct - or even if we were both wrong.

The bot does not archive randomly, nor does it care whether the post has been replied to or not - nor by whom. It is done purely on the time that has elapsed since the most recent valid datestamp in the thread. If the thread has no valid datestamps, it will never be archived.

If you leave a question on a talk page, it's a good idea to watchlist that talk page, so that you are aware of any replies as soon as they are posted. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:46, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Ok thanks. (You were left to guess that I meant the only one I mentioned. Sorry, I thought it was obvious, I guess. But then I'm new here. ) Oh I see, thanks for explaining. So talk pages are continually shorn of everything but the wacky old comments no-one's ever bothered replying to. Well, the few I've seen are in that state anyway. Doesn't that defeat the purpose of having a talk page?! Seriously. I don't get how you can't see that. Isn't it possible to delete/archive (it seems you just refuse to stop this interfering with talk pages you have no interest in) these old fossil one-liners rather than just moving EVERYTHING to the archive? Sorry, it's hard for me to stay polite, I have found you, your bot, and this conversation, very frustrating and seemingly designed to be so. Well, the archiving bot seems then an unpleasant part of wikipedia that I just have to put up with. At least until I know enough to do something about it. But really, it seems that all the pages I have or am going to have anything to do with would be better off without it. Thanks. Yesenadam (talk) 04:24, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Archival of open "formal" discussions

Can the bot be made to not archive open formal discussions? (ie. WP:Requested moves, RFC, etc) ? Move requests carry a banner template in their section to indicate that it is an open discussion. At [3] the bot archived the discussion Talk:Death of Leelah Alcorn/Archive 1#Requested move 1 January 2015 (2) : rename the page to Leelah Alcorn which has yet to be closed in the RM-process. -- 65.94.40.137 (talk) 06:38, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Put {{subst:DNAU}} is the only solution for now. — Revi 06:43, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Bot error (skip)

Hi, I just set up a new auto-archive of Talk:Dune (franchise). The bot removed old items from the talk page here but did not create Talk:Dune (franchise)/Archive 1 and add the archived data there. Thanks— TAnthony^Talk 00:49, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Following up on this ... — TAnthony^Talk 21:30, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikicities is on the spam blacklist. The bot could remove the sections from the talk page but not add them to the archive, or restore it to the talk page.

I wonder how these blacklisted websites get onto talk pages in the first place... →Σσς. (Sigma) 00:26, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

OK that makes sense ... the earliest comments dated back to 2006 so the items in question probably predated the content being blacklisted. I'll move the comments manually (without the wikicities) and presumably the talk page will be autoarchived as normal moving forward. Thanks!! — TAnthony^Talk 01:03, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Still missing old threads and archiving newer threads instead

Per User_talk:Σ/Archive/2015/January#Bot keeps missing old talk, archiving newer talk, here's another case where the bot misses old threads which use datestamps of the format {{unsigned}} or {{undated}} as assigned by sinebot (talk · contribs) when people sign incorrectly. Prearchive - Postarchive - diff -- Note that the thread with the newest timestamp as "17:46, 4 June 2007‎ (UTC)" was not archived, but the thread with the newest timestamp as "07:39, 24 February 2011 (UTC)" was archived. So there is a problem with timestamp identification, and to me, it appears that {{subst:undated|17:46, 4 June 2007‎ (UTC)}} or {{subst:unsigned|someusername|17:46, 4 June 2007‎ (UTC)}} are not being processed properly.

— Preceding undated comment added 17:46, 4 June 2007‎ (UTC) {{subst:undated|17:46, 4 June 2007‎ (UTC)}} — Preceding undated comment added 17:46, 4 June 2007‎ (UTC)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by someusername (talk • contribs) 17:46, 4 June 2007‎ (UTC) {{subst:unsigned|someusername|17:46, 4 June 2007‎ (UTC)}} — Preceding unsigned comment added by someusername (talk • contribs) 17:46, 4 June 2007‎ (UTC)

-- 65.94.40.137 (talk) 02:23, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

There's a left-to-right mark in the string right after the "2007". Malformed timestamps are not parsed. →Σσς. (Sigma) 00:31, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

I'd say that's something that seems not too uncommon, since atleast in the Inter Milan case, it is a result of copying the page history listing. Thanks for clarifying the unseen hidden character error though. It seems to also be the problem with the earlier already archived discussion. -- 65.94.40.137 (talk) 05:31, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Pope Francis

Hello! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Pope Francis. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated.

For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:02, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Lowercase sigmabot III ignores edit conflicts

If another editor edits a a page while Lowercase sigmabot III is editing it (which is a relatively rare race condition), it overwrites their change instead of failing and retrying. It seems to me that this is happening because it's not sending basetimestamp and starttimestamp when it's editing. Can you see if you can fix this? Jackmcbarn (talk) 01:12, 22 January 2015 (UTC)