User talk:HBC AIV helperbot/Archive 2

Edit summary suggestion

Hey, great work on this bot. Would it be possible to move the "__ users/ips" left to the beginning of the edit summary? When I check AIV, it's more important to know if there is anything left than what was removed, and as the removal message is quite long I have to scroll right in my anti-vandal tool to see what's left.

Thanks! --Chris (talk) 02:39, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am not ignoring you, I am thinking about it. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 15:30, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see what you mean about the technical problem, it just seems so grammatically incorrect hehe. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 22:18, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Grammar should be taking a backseat to usability in my opinion. But really, what is so grammatically incorrect about "__ users/ips remain. (___ was blocked for ___ by ___)"? --Chris (talk) 22:27, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will add it to my list of things to do. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 22:40, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see it's already done. Thanks for changing this; it will be much help! --Chris (talk) 02:53, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 03:19, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Error

Great bot, but it accidentally removed the header from WP:AIV. Thought you'd like to know. Dar-Ape 02:12, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I fixed the problem[1] and tested it[2], and in good time too. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 02:28, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, that was fast! :-) Best, Dar-Ape 02:40, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nice Bot

Removed an error that I did by adding an already banned user to WP:AIV when the user was banned while I was typing the notice. Quite fast, nice work! JONJONAUG 13:39, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This bot has saved 2739 edits so far, the damn thing is catching up with me. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 15:33, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bot's counts are off

The bot is currently listing 1 IP and 1 User when the page is clear. - TexasAndroid 15:38, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, small bug fix. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 15:41, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed:[3],[4]. It was counting the templates in the example. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 15:47, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		Here's a barnstar for your tireless work in assisting the sysops on AIV. Thanks! Bushcarrot (Talk·Desk) 16:59, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate listings

Does this bot remove duplicate listings when such a situation arises? --²¹⁰physicq (c) 04:15, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It does not remove duplicate listings immediately, but when it removes a listing, it removes all occurrences of of it. I may make it take duplicate listings and show them as comments of the first, not sure. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 04:18, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Contradicts Self

I think the legend contradicts itself sometimes, as the bot sometimes uses the summary "AO ACB", meaning anonymous users blocked only and account creation blocked according to the legend. However, if this is true, it's not anonymous users only it's anons and account creation. --TeckWiz^Talk Contribs_@ 03:17, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

These are standard designations for the block types, not unique to the bot. "Anonymous only" means that of existing accounts, only anons are blocked while already-registered accounts are not. Newyorkbrad 03:23, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, what brad said, I am using the designations used by the IPblocklist. The only refers to the fact that logged in users are not effected by the block. Feel free to edit the legend to make it more clear. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 05:36, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just want to say

That this bot is amazingly awesome. So very helpful. Makes the lives of us regular AIV patrollers much easier. --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 13:00, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Problem in comment parser?

The bot uncommented the hidden instructions and treated them as "3 comments" here: [5] Flyingtoaster1337 18:19, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ugh, it is because someone posted a report above the comments, I will have to add a line that makes it do nothing if it sees that, at least until I can code a more intelligent fix. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 18:25, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Number of vandals left at WP:AIV

Hi, why did your bot think there's one IP left when in fact the list was empty? ???? Musical L inguist 23:43, 1 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I've looked at more examples. There are several. Every time the bot says there's one left, there aren't really any left, and I think that every time it says there are two, there's really only one, etc. Musical L inguist 00:02, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It happens when someone changes the example in the help instructions to a real IP. I need to make a better routine to ignore HTML comments. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 00:09, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm ... problem?

~~I had to remove this IP manually. Is this deliberate? Yuser31415 (Editor review two!) 21:54, 2 February 2007 (UTC)~~ Oops, forget it. My mistake. Yuser31415 (Editor review two!) 21:57, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate report for blocked user not merged or removed

I think the bot might have hiccuped on a duplicate report on a blocked IP. First report and second report. I blocked the IP and twiddled my thumbs a bit to see what the bot would do as I recalled you were testing the duplicate detection code. After nothing happened for a few minutes, I removed the two reports. Though it appears that the bot might have stopped working. -- Gogo Dodo 08:08, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Uh oh, did I just break the bot? Oops... sorry! – Qxz 08:45, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This bot doesn't seem to be working... No archival is happening on WP:AIV. --Extranet ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 09:36, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Power cord unplugged, battery died, I woke up, it works now. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 15:34, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Glad it was something simple. =) -- Gogo Dodo 18:21, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Backup bot idea

HighInBC, maybe it would make sense for someone else to be designated as back-up operator of this bot? It's become indispensible, and sometimes you're going to be away or your computer is going to go down or you'll be playing with the code or whatever, and this way the bot could keep running without you at those times. Just a thought. Newyorkbrad 18:23, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The way the bot is set up, it can run alongside itself and not disrupt itself, at least I am pretty sure that is the case. That means that the bot can run on two computers, on the same or different accounts, and each will take the jobs it gets to first, without stepping on the others toes.

The bot will call jobs when it sees then need, but when that job is actually ran it checks again to see if it is still needed, and if it hits an edit conflict will not try the job again till the need is re-demonstrated. If one bot went down, the other would continue oblivious to the fact.

I will do some preliminary testing on my two computers to make sure it works, and once that is a go, we just need a volunteer to run the code. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 19:06, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing my Bot Request for a similar bot to work in AIV didnt go very far, maybe I could run the bot... It just depends on my system.. --Extranet ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 20:25, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is written in perl, so it should work on almost any system, windows, mac, linux, beos. That is but one of the many wonders of perl. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 20:33, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is looking like it will need no change at all to deal with multiple instances, as I programmed it from the start to expect other users to be changing things. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 21:25, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bug report

Shed 8*6 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) got blocked, but the bot failed to remove it. _→AzaToth 20:15, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bug report 2

With this edit, the bot removed the entry related to Nargking (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) although that user was not blocked at that time. (He didn't need to be, actually, as he hadn't received a final warning, but your bot isn't that smart yet, right? :-) Sandstein 22:01, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not a bug, a mis-formatted report that looks like a comment. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 03:47, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is a automated to all bot operators

Please take a few moments and fill in the data for your bot on Wikipedia:Bots/Status Thank you Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 19:07, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Minor parse bug

I noticed that the bot is picky on the example it is got confused again [6]. Might I suggest that you to make the check a regular expression or check to see if it's a valid IP address? I vaguely recall you were thinking of making the bot monitor the header so that if any changes would be replaced? -- Gogo Dodo 06:15, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have to make it ignore anything in html comments. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 14:35, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Helperbot3 is currently running a test version that should eliminate this kind of problem, which we will hopefully be getting out to all of the bots later today, if it doesn't develop any problems. —Krellis 22:19, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Automated message to bot owners

As a result of discussion on the village pump and mailing list, bots are now allowed to edit up to 15 times per minute. The following is the new text regarding bot edit rates from Wikipedia:Bot Policy:

Until new bots are accepted they should wait 30-60 seconds between edits, so as to not clog the recent changes list and user watchlists. After being accepted and a bureaucrat has marked them as a bot, they can edit at a much faster pace. Bots doing non-urgent tasks should edit approximately once every ten seconds, while bots who would benefit from faster editing may edit approximately once every every four seconds.

Also, to eliminate the need to spam the bot talk pages, please add Wikipedia:Bot owners' noticeboard to your watchlist. Future messages which affect bot owners will be posted there. Thank you. --Mets501 02:58, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bot flag

Why does this bot have a bot flag? I would have thought it was useful for it's edits to appear in recent changes so admins RC patrolling will see when there is a backlog. I understood bot flags were intended for bots making 100s of edits in quick secession. This bot doesn't make enough edits to flood RC, so it doesn't really need a flag. --Tango 15:50, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The bot approval group decided to give the flag. I personally don't care if it carries the flag or not, but it does do the majority of edits to WP:AIV and some people may wish to filter bot edits from their watchlist to see only reports being added. The recent changes also has an option to show bot edits. You may wish to bring this up in a community forum of some sort, I will go with whatever people think is best. ^HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 15:55, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]