User talk:AntiVandalBot/Aug06

Green Day

The bot reverted edits I made to restore cited material removed by other editors, although I accidently also reverted some positive changes. WesleyDodds 07:12, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi

I had created the pages Binaca geetmala as well as Binaca geetmala 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1974, 1975, 1976, 1977, 1978, 1979, 1980. However some copyright issues were brought to my notice and I would like to delete the content. Hence, I am editing the content of these pages out. --Ghoshi 16:20, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Umm, speedy tag em -- Tawker 16:44, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Wrongfully Warned

I dont know why, but your bot wrongfully warned me on my talk page after i reverted vandalism on it. °≈§→ Robomæyhem: T/←§≈° 05:09, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Francisco Torres

While your bot may do much help, it is also changing a lot of non-vandalism edits rather arbitrarily. What are you going to do to fix this?

Edmondjohnson 23:28, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

• It does seem like that was a legit edit, but your bot keeps overacting to a very small change in wording--152.163.100.6 23:31, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

• Actually, i take it back, those edits are vandalism, well hidden vandalism, but none the less, your bot done good--152.163.100.6 23:34, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Wrongfully warned

Antivandalbot warned me for reversing rightful vandalism by Simple Thomas. Could you please remove the warning tags?--Gdo01 17:15, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I have removed the warning--Gdo01 17:24, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Bot acting up on PS3 page

Hi! Looks like your bot got into a revert war on the PS3 page recently where it started reverting everything back to a vandalized version, starting at 18:19 07/01/06. Did it about 3 times until two posts in a row caused it to start reverting things to a good version. --IndyLawSteve 19:10, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

invalid RV

(diff)

Your bot reverted my fix to a missing header at WP:CFD.

132.205.93.88 22:51, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

John Cena

I was just changing word in that paragraph since wikipedia is not censored for minors BionicWilliam 16:00, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Serious bug

The bug involving swear words really should be addressed. I realize that reverting swear words is probably critical to its effective operation, but is there a workaround? --Jtalledo (talk) 16:09, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

broken bot, it's reverting back *to* vandalism...

on Wikipedia:Long term abuse/The Autofellatio Redirect Vandal. The airport vandal hit it, and the bot keeps reverting back to the vandalized verson. NawlinWiki 03:10, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Shut down this broken bot!

This bot keeps "vandalizing" pages by reverting back to vandalism whenever I try to revert a vandalized page. Example can be seen on the "Auto-Fellatio Redirect Vandal" long-term abuse page. Some vandal vandalized the page, I reverted it, and the bot reverted MY reversion and slapped me with a warning for "vandalizing." I then attempted a revert once more, and was again thwarted by this rogue bot. And the bot gave me a "final warning." Fix or shut down this bot ASAP. I am furious! Dr Chatterjee 03:11, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Late revert nailed some legitimate edits

The bot reverted too late, after legitimate edits had been made. See diff. - Stephanie Daugherty (Triona) - Talk - Comment - 07:25, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

We've been running in an overload on the bots the last few days, sorry about that -- Tawker 15:39, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

serious problem

This looks very problametic to me. Is there a human watching over this? It is not good if we have an AntiVandalBot which actually vandalizes wikipedia by reverting good faith blankings....--Jimbo Wales 22:14, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

In fairness, I wouldn't call what the bot did vandalism. Blanking an article is not the means by which it should be deleted. The bot has no understanding of the content nor its validity, it merely looks for significant changes to articles, based on their size, who edited it, the edit summary, and other factors. The bot did not create the "vandalism" however it does seem that it restored it. Besides, blanking the article doesn't remove it's history, as a true deletion does. -- malo (tlk) (cntrbtns) 23:07, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Jimbo, note no speedy tag on the first blanking. I have no idea how on earth a bot is susposed to detect a "good faith" blanking - it's a blanking, there's no real way to detect em one way or another. It won't revert if the speedy tag is added to it but other than that, it fits the technical criteria of a blanking. As for human oversight, it gets looked at on occasion but at close to 1500 bot reverts a day (and me having only having 48 hours in a day to do 96 hours of work :) -- Tawker 00:27, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

I'll second this. Your "Anti-Vandal" bot seems to be doing MUCH more harm than good. Recently I attempted to revert a vandal's work, only to have your Anti-Vandal Bot revert my reversion back to the vandal's page, and slap my talk page with a warning for "vandalizing." Now your bot seems to be protecting the vandalized page from my further attempts to revert the vandalism. Dr Chatterjee 02:06, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to have to agree. You openly admit that you don't have the time to properly oversee this things. To me that seems plain reckless--something like letting Frankenstein's Monster loose and then copping a lame "I'm too busy to control it" excuse when it does great damage. Edmondjohnson 01:20, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

To be fair, in my experience with the bot, it seems to be doing much more good than harm. Go to the page Loser, for example, and check the history. I think that people who go to this talk page are disproportionally represented by those who have had problems; after all, if it works for you, why complain? -- Rei 22:40, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, I spoke with Jimbo, he wasn't aware that it was in fact another copy of Tawkerbot2 running here (and thought it was another bot - hence the concerns) With all due respect to Edmondjohnson I rather have one problem in 100 edits than have 99 acts of vandalism go un-fixed for a long amount of time due to the fact that there are only so many RC patrollers out there. I think most people on this site are aware of the bots, and their limitations and from what I've heard, people rather have bots running - I get more complaints when the bots die then I seem to get about bad reverts. It's not like it's not clear that it's a bot and that I haven't made the warning messages pretty understanding in case it's a false positive to avoid newbie biting -- Tawker 05:57, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Let me respond with all due respect: you are probably right that this bot does much more good than bad, but that should not prevent you from actively seeking ways of minimizing erroneous reversions. The big problem here, as I see it, is that there is no expedient and reliable way of making it clear that something is not vandalism. After trying to do a legitimate revision several times and having it reverted--even after leaving a message here--I think most people will do what I did: give up. And, in the long run, that will have a negative effect on the quality and comprehensiveness of information available here. Edmondjohnson 21:36, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Edit to check out, trusted users

I thought that you might want to look at this edit, if you have not already, to see what went wrong.

I noticed the problem above of the bot reverting back to a vandalized version multiple times. I have two ideas for a solution. First, perhaps the bot could be limited to the number of reverts it does to the same version (with the potential vandal's edits and AntiVandalBot's edits, the situation may attract attention anyway). Second, perhaps the bot could have a list of trusted users, like a list of active admins and maybe veteran vandal fighters (those approved for VandalProof?), that it would not revert. From the pie edit above, perhaps not reverting other bots, especially vandalism reverting bots, might be a good idea, too. Even if the other bot is malfunctioning, it might not be a good idea to revert it automatically with another bot since it may hide the problem, although people watching recent changes may notice. -- Kjkolb 05:22, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

• Also, the bot shouldn't be in "angry" mode all the time. --Ixfd64 10:48, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Ack

Damn it, I think the bot and I hit a vandalized page at the same time. Torinir _{( Ding my phone My support calls E-Support Options )} 15:04, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Warnings on Userpages

Why does AntiVandalBot add 2 line returns before the first edit to a userpage? Is it so it doesn't have to check to see if it is the first edit to the page or not to allow for proper spacing after a previous edit? Anyways, not a big deal, just curious. Also, AntiVandalBot does one good job on reverting vandalism. :-) Thanks! --Porqin 21:43, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

User talk page message

If this is a good example, The message that shows up on the user's Talk page is far too gentle for the vandalism that is being reverted. We should not weasel-word the warning.

Maybe I'm just in a bad mood today but I think that vandalism should be confronted directly. I know you have to worry about the problem of unintended consequences but the "humble creator's apologies" is too much. It weakens the rebuke - and a rebuke really is appropriate in most of the cases I've seen. Rossami (talk) 21:46, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Dark Side of the Moon

This bot keeps reverting a change regarding the voices at the beginning of Pink Floyd's famous Dark Side of the Moon album that is not vandalism. "I've been mad for fucking years" really is the first line (and quite famously so), and while the line that was quoted before does also appear in the same opening speech, it's not nearly as well-known. "I've been mad for fucking years" should stay. PurplePlatypus 22:22, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Edits outside of namespace

Just a suggestion, but whenever AVB or TB2 revert changes to a category, they leave a heading formatted like this

"==Your edits to [[Category:namehere]]==",

which of course adds that user to

[[Category:namehere]],

rather than warning them off, that should probably be altered so it adds the : in front of 'category'--64.12.116.6 18:22, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

The bot's edit summary when reporting at WP:AIV

Hi, can you change the bot so it'll link to Special:Contributions/... instead of User:..., so I'll get by with one less click next time. Thanks. (There's no real hurry, I'm just lazy.) - Bobet 21:08, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

The bot's edit summary when reporting at WP:AIV

Hi, can you change the bot so it'll link to Special:Contributions/... instead of User:..., so I'll get by with one less click next time. Thanks. (There's no real hurry, I'm just lazy.) - Bobet 21:08, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Two problems

Not vandalism Not only was diff my edit not vandalism, but it added my user talk page to the category Kurdish film directors. I don't know if you can fix it so that the "Category" namespace is written [[:Category:]], but that would be great. Thanks. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 23:12, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Edit conflicts

The bot seems to ignore edit conflicts: example. Owen× ☎ 00:34, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Tried to remove Opentask template from my page

Sorry, not intent to vandalize template. Just tried to remove it from my discussion page!--Fahrenheit451 02:12, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

edit to Lance Dowds

The edit of the Lance Dowds article ("Pickle Boy" to "Pickle Fucker") is a legitimate edit, as that is the character's nickname as used in the movie.

I have to agree with the above anonymous user. "Pickle Fucker" is the character's name. Sixtus LXVI 05:33, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Category:Parsis

This idiot bot has thrice restored a list that was mistakenly added to a category! Don't do that! --William Allen Simpson 13:43, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

I've blocked it for the time being. Feel free to unblock when the problem is worked out. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 14:06, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

That's another reason why this bot shouldn't be in "angry" mode all the time, especially when the other bots are reverting only once. --Ixfd64 18:04, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Blame someone who set it on angry.... it's not designed to start that way. I've reset on calm and unblocked -- Tawker 07:48, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Zar'it-Ayta ash-Shab incident

Dear AntiVandalBot,

Your automated thing refuses to let me fix a faulty move and re-move done by two inexperienced editors who are fighting each other. Instead of using the move tab, they have been copying and pasting and using redirect on both the article and the talk page, ending up with a situation where the edit log is almost impossible to find. So, I tried fixing this by doing their thing in revert and then do a proper move back to the article's established name. However, as soon as I empty the page Zar'it-Ayta ash-Shab incident, which I must do in order to be able to move the identical content from Ayta ash-Shab/Zar'it incident (which is the wrong name), the automated bot instantly reverts it, making it impossible for me to finish what I'm doing. It apparently reacts within seconds, thus making these clean-ups impossible. So, 1) Could you please sort out the mess on those two pages, as you probably can stop your diligent but stupid robot while you're doing it, and 2) perhaps you should look into the possibility of introducing at least 10-15 seconds delay into an otherwise good bot.

So, to help you along, what needs to be achieved is a restore whereby article, talk page and edit log all reside under the name Zar'it-Ayta ash-Shab incident, i.e. to the situation that existed before User:Yousaf465 did his first move, while Ayta ash-Shab/Zar'it incident only has a redirect to it. Thanks Thomas Blomberg 14:19, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Partially solved. See WP:SPLICE. Good night... Fuzzy 05:56, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Look up

AntiVandalBotwatchers replied on every mail after mine; please, see top of this page under 'Rumold' (best read till the end of that chapter before undertaking anything). -- SomeHuman 2006-06-19 01:09 (UTC)

Look up again

'Rumold'... SomeHuman 2006-06-21 04:37 (UTC)

Saint Rumold of Malines

After Tawker's first reaction where he seems to have misunderstood what was required, my further explaining and reminder (chapter 'Look up again') are still left unanswered. In short now: I risked to make 'Rumold' a redirect page myself (hoping AVB doesn't again intervene) and created the four other firstname redirection pages. So everything should be finished for Saint Rumbold and all its aliases.
BUT there is also still an article 'Saint Rumold of Malines' though the saint was never known that way: There is only one (non-wiki-)'Saint Rumold of Malines' on the web, with a link under 'Saint Rumold', the 'of Malines' is even in that single article not part of the name. Thus, please DELETE the 'Saint Rumold of Malines' page that is just taking up space and comprises a depricated name of the city of which Saint Rum(b)old is the patron saint. I do not know whether the 'proposed for deletion' tag would be opportune in a redirect page, that's why I ask Tawker's assistance. -- SomeHuman 2006-06-25 03:39 (UTC)

GUNDAGI PAGE

There is a link on the Gundagai page to a commercial venture near the bottom of the page then reference 2. Does wiki have commercial ventures signposted with links to them? Is the Gundagai page being vandalised? There is angst in this town (Gundagai) re the stuff I have put up re an Aboriginal massacre so not suprised if some here try and delete any talk re it as its a very sensitive topic around the area. Can someone check that commercial link at reference 2 on the bottom of the Gundagai page. I'm new here and dont know how to do stuff yet. Cheers.

Edit containing the word "bullshit"

The bot stopped me from making an edit containing the word "bullshit" in the context of a reference to the TV-show "Bullshit!".

pearl jam

this bot keeps fucking up the pearl jam page. Sort it out.

All Headline News

I keep posting accurate information about All Headline News and the bot keeps editing it out as "vadalism." The latest changes to the article are accurate. If you'd like to see the grammatical errors for yourself visit: www.allheadlinenews.com/briefs.

There you will find the errors as well as the unattributed articles. If you have time, simply revert to any major news outlet like AP, Reuters or the BBC and you will find these same stories on their sites. AHN plagiarizes. I am a writer for a major news organization and I would just like the public and AHN clients to know the shoddy product found at www.allheadlinenews.com/briefs. My language on this message may seem bias but the article I posted is accurate. Thank you

oooooOooOOoooOoOooh

please don't add nonsense to this encylopedia, it's a perfectly nice online reasource and you're ruining it with your vandalism

incorrect deletion by bot

Hi. Your bot incorrectly targetted an edit I did two days ago. My changes to Francisco Torres were not vandalism. They mostly involved fixing a very obvious stylistic problem (a sentence that stopped abruptly with no ending) and provided more detail.

Yours,

Ed Johnson

Naomi Robson

I simply edited 'fuck' in instead of leaving it censored since most pages do not censor the word and for the sake of consistancy.

Incorrect Change by AntiVandalBot

Hi,

I made a change to the List of NUS (Australia) Office Bearer Pages.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Office_Bearers_of_the_National_Union_of_Students_of_Australia

I changed the faction that Belinda Cooper, Queer Officer (WA 2005) belonged to from "unaligned" to GenderFuck Group.

I imagine the problem is the partword "fuck". However not only is this a legitamate group, but it is certainly NOT degrogatary in anyway.

GenderFuck is the particular practise of Drag (a form of cross-dressing) that tries to break down culturally normalised stereotypes in a upfront manner. The people that engage in this form of drag are proud and this change simply reflects Belinda's political alliances within the NUS structure. Although the genderfuck group was only ever small, it was something that she helped setup and actively worked on during her term.

Of course I understand the problem with the word "fuck" but in this context it is exactly the title that the group is called and their isnt an alternative name... if this change isnt possible then the next best thing is to leave it as unaligned.

Cheers

Fern

Rodne Galicha deletion

hi.. i mistakenly posted an article that is supposed to posted just within my user page not discolosed to the main. kindly delete the article. thanks. i do apologize...

Redirect to Operation actus-Lilly

Hi ya mate,you're bot wouldn't let me edit a page titled [[Helibridge over Meghna]], which was a legit edit, involving a redirection to the page [[Operation Cactus-Lilly]].

You fat ass

Peach DOES wear a thong in Mario Power Tennis. It's not my fault you don't know

List of female porn stars

Hi - this wasn't vandalism; it was just me not getting things quite right and having to make too many edits in a row, I think.

What I was attempting to do (and finally accomplished) was to add the "don't wikilink" comment to each section of the list, as people tend to edit only the section they're updating. Folks were continuing to wikilink names that don't have articles; since I spent a fair amount of time deleting all that wikilinking (but not the names themselves), I'd like to try to keep more from being created. I realize that it's probably a losing battle; but someone might get the message somewhere along the line.

I don't know what triggered the bot. If it wasn't the multiple edits, it may have been that I originally tried to use [[ WIKILINK ]] as part of the comment to illustrate what wikilinking was (there may be those unfamiliar with the term).

Thanks for your diligence. Have good days.—Chidom ^talk  15:46, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

use of ***

As unhabitant of a country were words such as fuck or cunt are used casually in all media at all times, this practice of eg. writing f*** looks extremely childish, reactionary and hypocritical, to name a few. I am sad to see Wikipedia fall into it.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.120.151.79 (talk • contribs)

• Just so you know, you're talking to an automated bot, essentially similar to anti vandal script, only this bot blindlyintelligently reverts all recent changes that flag from the 'bad words' list--64.12.116.6 21:51, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I remove vandalism, and this bot restores it

Administration was incorrectly reverted to its vandalised state by this bot Philbradley 23:59, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi

Hello,

Quite a useful bot you have there. I just wanted to mention that its recent reversion of this edit ([1]) was in error -- that was not vandalism, just me cleaning up the deletion-sorting queue. Not sure what would distinguish an edit like that from a vandalistic one, except perhaps that it was on a project page where I had already made a large number of non-vandalistic edits. Cheers, -- Visviva 19:17, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Hey! Your bot just did it again. Shouldn't it be focusing on article space anyway? -- Visviva 10:24, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Native-language instruction elimination

I suggest eliminating this page because the necessary information has been included in the bilingual education page. It pretty much says the same things, and the comments made about foreign parents wanting to keep their children immersed in their native language is irrelevent to the issue of bilingual education in the US and elsewhere, where it's simply implied that it is applied only to citizens or permanent residents.

Jps57 23:52, 17 August 2006 (UTC)jps57

Bot detecting blanking when removing absolute invalid URL

Stephishim (talk · contribs) has been trying to reference an image in a discography table through a full URL (of course, not working). When he finally gave up and removed the URL,^[2] AVB reverted it,^[3] warning the user.^[4] It does not appear the user has complained, but just in case, I am reporting this. -- ReyBrujo 05:02, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Dennis Mello

Dear Creator, This bot recently reverted my merge of Dennis Mello into List of characters from The Wire. The merge was made with support of another editor after tagging the page for merge 5 days earlier. I think the bot may have recognised it as vandalism because I made a mess of the redirect tag. Please could you strike through the warning on my talk page.--Opark 77 08:09, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

List of broadcast stations owned by Clear Channel

I recently made a change to the FOX section of the article and it was reverted.. it was a legitimate edit. Thanks. 65.7.41.27 06:32, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Can vandalbot delete web sites?

Hey Cyde, there is a problem user using multiple sock puppets to link to his web site.

The problem is he is using a dynamic IP so it is hard to keep track of him and probably impossible to block him effectively.

His domain name is www.heureka.clara.net and all the pages he is linking to are subpages of that site. Is it possible for vandalbot to be programmed to delete this material on sight? Thanks for any sugestions you might have to combat this guy. David D. (Talk) 02:37, 25 August 2006 (UTC)