User talk:Intelligentsium/Archive 10

Archive 5

←

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

DYK review bot

Thank you for correcting your bot (on my talk) ;) - Perhaps teach the bot to recognize an emergency nomination: done last minute, with minimum length, - perhaps the bot could look for the word expand in the comment ;) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gerda Arendt (talk • contribs) 05:58, 25 July 2016‎

Hi, no problem! Sorry for any spam that goes out as I work out the kinks. Unfortunately an emergency nomination can take too many forms to be detected automatically, but the bot's reviews should only be seen as advisory. The human reviewer will be able to see and disregard any brainlessness on the bot's part! Intelligentsium 00:37, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Technical Barnstar
		A barnstar for your development of the exceptional DYKReviewBot, which is greatly appreciated to assist in the DYK nomination review process. – North America1000 23:29, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! Intelligentsium 01:32, 30 July 2016 (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. — xaosflux ^Talk 03:12, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for that, and thanks for the review! Intelligentsium 23:56, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

DYK Medal

		The DYK Medal
		For the development of the DYKReviewBot, for being so collaborative in the development process, and for the many contributions your bot will make to the DYK project in the future. Thank You and Well Done! EdChem (talk) 04:05, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! Intelligentsium 23:55, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

DYK Review bot down?

The DYK review bot has not had a run since July 24, 2016. I see it was approved on July 30. What's the status of the bot?

— Maile (talk) 20:48, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I'm actually moving right now so the physical bot is in a box haha. It should be back up in a few days. Sorry I haven't been too active on Wikipedia as I'm sorting things out. Intelligentsium 14:41, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

I totally believe the bot in a box story. Un huh. I was just about to suggest that once you get back over here, it might be a good idea to appoint a technology-savvy (not me, that's for sure) editor willing to be back up in case this stops running again. On the other hand ... I just realized nobody else seems to know how to re-start Shubinator's various bots. So maybe that's not a workable idea. Anyhow, I miss seeing it's detailed checks on nominations. — Maile (talk) 23:48, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

? It runs on an old desktop so it doesn't have to go down when I'm travelling with my laptop. Actually during the review process I applied for an account at Labs so this could run on an external server. Could do it if you can find a "willing volunteer". Intelligentsium 10:28, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Should it be an admin? It would need to be somebody who is reliably around DYK a lot. Reliability is a key factor, I think. That could be any number of people. — Maile (talk) 11:56, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

I don't think it needs to be an admin (and in fact the code is open-source). However the bot should require relatively little manual interaction once running, except to add new features if there is consensus for them. Intelligentsium 18:08, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Two bot issues

1. Part of the markup for an autoreview includes <noinclude><includeonly>...</includeonly></noinclude>, which never renders at all
2. Its edit summary still links back to the BRFA

Pppery (talk) 22:19, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the heads-up. I've fixed these issues. Please let me know if you see any more! Intelligentsium 23:00, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Problem with the closing "/noinclude" tag when the DYK template closes

Intelligentsium, we're just starting to see a problem with the new "noinclude" bot code when a review closes as either "approved" or "rejected".

What has happened heretofore is that, as part of the promotion, the DYKsubpage template, which has been the page's framework, is substituted. Part of the substitution involves clearing out comments and internal templates, and inserting "noinclude" and "/noinclude" tags at the beginning and end of the page respectively.

The problem seems to be that instead of pairing the internal "noinclude" and "/noinclude" that you've introduced as part of the bot's review, it takes your "/noinclude" as the end of the "noinclude" at the top of the page, and displays the rest of the page starting with DYKReviewBot's sig, even though we don't want it to. Is there anything we can do about this, so closed nomination pages won't display everything starting with the end of the bot's review?

You can see the issue at Template:Did you know nominations/Vic Lambden, which I've left in place for the moment. (See T:TDYK#Articles created/expanded on August 8; it's first under that date header.) I did some rough and quick surgery with another nomination, Template:Did you know nominations/Melchisedec Ștefănescu, to fix it so it wouldn't display; I took out both the inner "noinclude" and "/noinclude" and also the "includeonly" and "/includeonly" to be safe, and that did the trick.

I'll let you look at this and determine the best way to solve this. It may involve changes to DYKsubpage (perhaps stripping out any existing "noinclude" and "/noinclude" before inserting the new beginning and ending ones?). Let me know once you've made the fix, and also whether similar surgery will need to be done to Vic Lambden and any other recently closed nominations. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 07:22, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Intelligentsium, I noticed at WT:DYK that you're already looking into this. The partially visible templates are beginning to proliferate on the T:TDYK page. Can you let me know whether it's okay for me to start hand-editing them to clean them up? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:52, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the detailed description, it was really helpful! This was due to a brain fart on my part for not considering what would happen after the DYK templates are substituted once a decision is taken. It's always OK to hand edit them to clean them up as the bot doesn't touch them after but as this may be a lot of work, it may make more sense simply to remove or comment out affected nominations.

I have applied a fix, moving to a collapsible box rather than a noincluded bot review, per one of the other suggestions in the original discussion. However, it should be noted that while this keeps the nominations page more tidy than showing the reviews by default, unlike the noinclude solution, this does not address the issue of load time as everything in the hidden box is still part of the page HTML and thus still has to be rendered by the user's browser. Intelligentsium 04:09, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Intelligentsium, apparently this problem is still occurring. Gatoclass mentioned at Broken code on WP:DYKN that he's still encountering this. — Maile (talk) 14:14, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Another bot problem

When the QPQ review specified is of an article whose title contains slashes, DYKReviewBot will only include the text after the last slash as its link to the review. Pppery (talk) 19:48, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the report. Can you point me to where this issue has occurred? Intelligentsium 19:59, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/World Enough and Time Pppery (talk) 20:05, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

I think I know what the issue is; I'll make the fix, thanks. Intelligentsium 03:44, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:Did you know#Errors on nomination page

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Did you know#Errors on nomination page. This may be an error caused by DYKReviewBot in Template:Did you know nominations/WWT Slimbridge. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:49, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

DYK Problem is getting worse

DYK:Problem. This seems to be happening more now. Maybe it's just one nomination, but I don't know which one to correct. — Maile (talk) 12:03, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Single line breaks

See Template:Did you know nominations/BR-319. The text of the BR-319 article often includes single line breaks, as:

See User:Aymatth2#Line breaks for the reason. This displays as:

The bot interprets some of these lines as paragraphs with no reference:

A single line break has the same effect as a space when the article is displayed, and should be treated the same way by the bot. Once this is fixed, perhaps you could rerun the bot against the DYK nomination. Thanks, Aymatth2 (talk) 15:04, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. I wasn't aware of the reason for single-line breaks but I'll make the appropriate modifications to the bot so it only registers double-line breaks as new paragraphs. Intelligentsium 16:19, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

• Thank you for that. The bot really is useful in looking after all the standard checks. Thanks again, Aymatth2 (talk) 18:38, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

DYK bot request

Just a quick question, I noted you put the DYK bot on manual operation only. I understand that given it clogged up the syntax. But could I ask if the bot could be run just on Template:Did you know nominations/Robert Rinder please? Just so I know that I have defiantly done a 5x expansion. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 12:33, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

 Done Intelligentsium 22:26, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Question

Will the DYKreviewbot start to work again. Or is it on definite hiatus?. Regards,BabbaQ (talk) 08:21, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Because even though it had some issues I guess, it was a really good help to speed up the nomination process. Cheers.--BabbaQ (talk) 08:22, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Please make me a content box

Intelligentsium please go to my talk page and make a a Content box I would really appreciate it. Fdmjiv (talk) 02:19, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

How is the DYK bot triggered?

How is the DYK bot triggered? Does it automatically run on all nominations (apparently not, given that many nominations weren't responded to). Or is there a special incantation that will trigger the bot to review it? Might it be a good idea to explain this in the bot's page? HaEr48 (talk) 00:38, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I'm currently waiting on labs access. It is currently running on an old computer I own, but I've been having problems with the computer recently. I can run it manually from my laptop until I get access. Intelligentsium 22:21, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Formatting gets strange after Cerium DYK nomination

I'm not quite sure why there seems to be some odd formatting following the "Cerium" DYK nomination -- is it possibly a formatting issue relating to the robot? Thanks, Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 03:02, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

New Page Review needs your help

Hi Intelligentsium,

As an AfC reviewer you're probably aware that a new user right has been created for patrolling new pages (you might even have been granted the right already, and admins have it automatically).

Since July there has been a very serious backlog at Special:NewPagesFeed of over 14,000 pages, by far the worst since 2011, and we need an all out drive to get this back down to just a few hundred that can be easily maintained in the future. Unlike AfC, these pages are already in mainspace, and the thought of what might be there is quite scary. There are also many good faith article creators who need a simple, gentle push to the Tea House or their pages converted to Draft rather than being deleted.

Although New Page Reviewing can occasionally be somewhat more challenging than AfC, the criteria for obtaining the right are roughly the same. The Page Curation tool is even easier to use than the Helper Script, so it's likely that most AfC reviewers already have more than enough knowledge for the task of New Page Review.

It is hoped that AfC reviewers will apply for this right at WP:PERM and lend a hand. You'll need to have read the page at WP:NPR and the new tutorial.

(Sent to all active AfC reviewers) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:33, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

User group: New Page Reviewr

Hello Intelligentsium.

Based on the patrols you made of new pages during a qualifying period in 2016, your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed.

New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia, if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk.

• Be nice to new users - they are often not aware of doing anything wrong.
• You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted - be formal and polite in your approach to them too, even if they are not.
• Don't review a page if you are not sure what to do. Just leave it for another reviewer.
• Remember that quality is quintessential to good patrolling. Take your time to patrol each article, there is no rush. Use the message feature and offer basic advice.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:34, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Intelligentsium. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

New Page Review - newsletter

Hello Intelligentsium,

Breaking the back of the backlog

We now have 803 New Page Reviewers! Most of you requested the user right to be able to do something about the huge backlog. Now it's time for action.

Mid July to 01 Oct 2016

If each reviewer does only 10 reviews a day over five days, the backlog will be down to zero and the daily input can then be processed by each reviewer doing only 2 or 3 reviews a day - that's about 5 minutes work!
Let's get that over and done with in time to relax for the holidays.

Second set of eyes

Not only are New Page Reviewers the guardians of quality of new articles, they are also in a position to ensure that pages are being correctly tagged for deletion and maintenance and that new authors are not being bitten. This is an important feature of your work. Read about it at the new Monitoring the system section in the tutorial.

Getting the tools we need - 2016 WMF Wishlist Survey: Please vote

With some tweaks to their look, and some additional features, Page Curation and New Pages Feed could easily be the best tools for patrollers and reviewers. We've listed most of what what we need at the 2016 WMF Wishlist Survey. Voting starts on 28 November - please turn out to make our bid the Foundation's top priority. Please help also by improving or commenting on our Wishlist entry at the Community Wishlist Survey. Many other important user suggestions are listed at at Page Curation.

---

Sent to all New Page Reviewers. Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:16, 26 November 2016 (UTC) .

BBC 12-hour Editathon - large influx of new pages & drafts expected

New Page Reviewers are asked to be especially on the look out 08:00-20:00 UTC (that's local London time - check your USA and AUS times) on Thursday 8 December for new pages. The BBC together with Wikimedia UK is holding a large 12-hour editathon. Many new articles and drafts are expected. See BBC 100 Women 2016: How to join our edit-a-thon. Follow also on #100womenwiki, and please, don't bite the newbies :) (user:Kudpung for NPR. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:55, 7 December 2016 (UTC))

BBC 12-hour Editathon - large influx of new pages & drafts expected

AfC Reviewers are asked to be especially on the look out 08:00-20:00 UTC (that's local London time - check your USA and AUS times) on Thursday 8 December for new pages. The BBC together with Wikimedia UK is holding a large 12-hour editathon. Many new articles and drafts are expected. See BBC 100 Women 2016: How to join our edit-a-thon. Follow also on #100womenwiki, and please, don't bite the newbies :) (user:Kudpung for NPR. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:02, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

New Page Review - newsletter #2

Hello Intelligentsium,

Please help reduce the New Page backlog

This is our second request. The backlog is still growing. Your help is needed now - just a few minutes each day.

Getting the tools we need

ONLY TWO DAYS LEFT TO VOTE

• Improve the tools: Vote here.
• Reduce your review load: Vote here

---

Sent to all New Page Reviewers. Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:54, 11 December 2016 (UTC) .

Your GA nomination of Nizar Nayyouf

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Nizar Nayyouf you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Shearonink -- Shearonink (talk) 21:41, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Intelligentsium. You have new messages at Talk:Nizar Nayyouf/GA1.
Message added 23:13, 30 December 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Would like to work with you to improve this article to possible GA-status. Shearonink (talk) 23:13, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Nizar Nayyouf

The article Nizar Nayyouf you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Nizar Nayyouf for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Shearonink -- Shearonink (talk) 19:21, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Nizar Nayyouf

	Congratulations, it's a...
	...Wikipedia Good Article!! Shearonink (talk) 19:29, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Nizar Nayyouf

The article Nizar Nayyouf you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Nizar Nayyouf for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Shearonink -- Shearonink (talk) 19:41, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

New Page Review - newsletter No.2

Hello Intelligentsium,

A HUGE backlog

We now have 803 New Page Reviewers!
Most of us requested the user right at PERM, expressing a wish to be able to do something about the huge backlog, but the chart on the right does not demonstrate any changes to the pre-user-right levels of October.

Hitting 17,000 soon

The backlog is still steadily growing at a rate of 150 a day or 4,650 a month. Only 20 reviews a day by each reviewer over the next few days would bring the backlog down to a managable level and the daily input can then be processed by each reviewer doing only 2 or 3 reviews a day - that's about 5 minutes work!
It didn't work in time to relax for the Xmas/New Year holidays. Let's see if we can achieve our goal before Easter, otherwise by Thanksgiving it will be closer to 70,000.

Second set of eyes

Remember that we are the only guardians of quality of new articles, we alone have to ensure that pages are being correctly tagged by non-Reviewer patrollers and that new authors are not being bitten.

Abuse

This is even more important and extra vigilance is required considering Orangemoody, and

1. this very recent case of paid advertising by a Reviewer resulting in a community ban.
2. this case in January of paid advertising by a Reviewer, also resulting in a community ban.
3. This Reviewer is indefinitely blocked for sockpuppetry.

Coordinator election

Kudpung is stepping down after 6 years as unofficial coordinator of New Page Patrolling/Reviewing. There is enough work for two people and two coords are now required. Details are at NPR Coordinators; nominate someone or nominate yourself. Date for the actual suffrage will be published later.

---

Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:11, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

New Page Review-Patrolling: Coordinator elections

Your last chance to nominate yourself or any New Page Reviewer, See Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Coordination. Elections begin Monday 20 February 23:59 UTC. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:17, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

New Page Review - newsletter No.3

Hello Intelligentsium,

Voting for coordinators has now begun HERE and will continue through/to 23:59 UTC Monday 06 March. Please be sure to vote. Any registered, confirmed editor can vote. Nominations are now closed.

Still a MASSIVE backlog

We now have 803 New Page Reviewers but despite numerous appeals for help, the backlog has NOT been significantly reduced.
If you asked for the New Page Reviewer right, please consider investing a bit of time - every little helps preventing spam and trash entering the mainspace and Google when the 'NO_INDEX' tags expire.

---

Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:35, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

New Page Review - Newsletter No.4

Hello Intelligentsium,

Since rolling out the right in November, just 6 months ago, we now have 803 reviewers, but the backlog is still mysteriously growing fast. If every reviewer did just 55 reviews, the 22,000 backlog would be gone, in a flash, schwoop, just like that!

But do remember: Rather than speed, quality and depth of patrolling and the use of correct CSD criteria are essential to good reviewing. Do not over-tag. Make use of the message feature to let the creator know about your maintenance tags. See the tutorial again HERE. Get help HERE.

Stay up to date with recent new page developments and have your say, read THIS PAGE.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:43, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello Intelligentsium, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 18,511 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a a day.
• Some editors are committing to work specifically on patrolling new pages on 15 July. If you have not reviewed new pages in a while, this might be a good time to be involved. Please remember that quality of patrolling is more important than quantity, that the speedy deletion criteria should be followed strictly, and that ovetagging for minor issues should be avoided.

Technology update:

• Several requests have been put into Phabractor to increase usability of the New Pages Feed and the Page Curation toolbar. For more details or to suggest improvements go to Wikipedia:Page Curation/Suggested improvements
• The tutorial has been updated to include links to the following useful userscripts. If you were not aware of them, they could be useful in your efforts reviewing new pages:
  • User:Lourdes/PageCuration.js adds a link to the new pages feed and page curation toolbar to your top toolbar on Wikipedia
  • User:The Earwig/copyvios.js adds a link in your side toolbox that will run the current page through

General project update:

• Following discussion at Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers, Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Noticeboard has been marked as historical. Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers is currently the most active central discussion forum for the New Page Patrol project. To keep up to date on the most recent discussions you can add it to your watchlist or visit it periodically.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:48, 14 July 2017 (UTC)