User talk:Legobot/2021

Newly-added DoNotArchiveUntil code

Hi, Legoktm. I notice that beginning with this edit, Legobot is now adding DoNotArchiveUntil code to RfCs. I appreciate that this is to alleviate complaints like "why was my RfC archived before 30 days" that are being posted at the talk pages for ClueBot III and lowercase sigmabot III, but it has two negative effects.

The more serious one is that this uses up some of the permitted statement length: as you are aware from my posts here (and elsewhere), Legobot cannot handle statements where the {{rfc}} and the timestamp are further apart than about 2,000 bytes (I never did work out the exact figure), with this effect. The extra code is potentially between 108 and 115 bytes, representing a loss of approximately 5% in the maximum statement length.

The less serious one is that the DoNotArchiveUntil code is being copied to the RfC listing pages. Whilst these pages are never archived, and so no archiving is compromised, it's not really an appropriate place for {{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|...}} to be.

So, do you think you could adjust it so that the DoNotArchiveUntil code is placed before the {{rfc}} tag? This will not just prevent the {{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|...}} from being copied to the RfC listing pages, it will also increase the maximum length of the RfC statement. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 14:19, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Oh, I've just found this post. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:09, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Yep, flipped the order. Thanks for pointing that out. Legoktm (talk) 17:24, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Example. Legoktm (talk) 18:23, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:36, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

A Twophi Fuw U!

	2021 Furreters Award, Sponsored by Nookington's, yes yes!
	Hewwo fwen. You have wecieved da fiwst Fuwetews Awawd, sponsowd by Nukkintuns, mewe-mewe. UwU. Mewe-Mewe. UwU (talk) 17:04, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Talk:Suicide methods reverting my RFC

Hi Legobot, I'd appreciate you letting me know the issue with my WP:RFC on Talk:Suicide methods since you found it necessary to double revert it. Obviously, I'm missing something in your opinion. —FORMALDUDE^(talk) 23:09, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

@FormalDude: Legobot is a bot. That means it operates automatically and cannot "let you know the issue". I would presume that Legobot needs to find content besides a header after the {{rfc}} template and that is why you are having issues. --Izno (talk) 01:16, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

@FormalDude: Presumably you mean your edit that was partially reverted (twice). Please see WP:RFCST: there is no statement (brief, neutral or otherwise); no signature; and most importantly, no timestamp. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 13:58, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

I'll see myself out... —FORMALDUDE^(talk) 04:42, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

MfD archiver broken

It seems to be failing to edit Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion itself while still editing the archives, thus causing the archives to fill with duplicate entries. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:34, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

The problem seems to have begin with the run of 05:02, 26 March 2021 (UTC), where these two were added to the archive but left in the main list. The previous good run was on 23 March, so presumably something happened to the main list in those three days. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:14, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Your comment inspired me to take a closer look at the issue. The bot, according to its source code at https://github.com/legoktm/harej-bots/blob/master/mfdarchiver-rs/src/main.rs, processes each nomination from bottom to top order. It appears that, at the time of the last run before I started trying to fix things, it crashed while attempting Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Is a mRNA therapy a vaccine as generally defined?. When I manually archived that one and Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Step by step process how to meditate with mindfulness, the bot then proceeded to add all later entries needing archiving to the archives on its next run ... but it still failed to remove them from the main page and I had to do so manually. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:46, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Never mind, it's now working. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:43, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks both for looking into this. The bug is in page titles with a ? in them (probably a ! or other typically encoded characters will also trigger it). Working on a fix... Legoktm (talk) 05:21, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Or maybe just ?. I have a hotfix in place for now while I work on a proper fix. Legoktm (talk) 06:46, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Template:GANotice mistake

Hi Legobot! I just wanted to report a minor error that was made when you used Template:GANotice. I recently passed the article CT scan, which was nominated and improved by Iflaq. When I checked his talk page for delivery of the automatic message, I noticed that the parameter "result" had been set to "fail" rather than "pass". This issue has now been resolved. (You also used the same template on the same page 2 other times, both of those times correctly.) Thanks! Bibeyjj (talk) 21:19, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Bogus GA failures are a well-known bug. In this specific case, it was caused by the presence of {{FailedGA}} on the talk page at the time Legobot ran, which made the bot think the nomination had failed. The exact algorithm the bot uses for this determination is at https://github.com/legoktm/harej-bots/blob/master/goodarticles.php#L691. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:52, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

@Bibeyjj: Where there are any templates relating to previous GA noms (however they turned out) or GA reassessments, it's usually best to combine all of them into a single {{article history}}, to avoid confusing Legobot. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 12:46, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Is Task 15 (Indexing) working?

Hi, is Task 15 (indexing) still working because I read the documentation, it say it was scheduled to run on 11:23 and 22:23 UTC. However, I didn't receive notifications that my indexing page was changed by Legobot even after few hours from the scheduled run time. Or did I implement it wrongly, below is the code I pasted on my talk page.

{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn
|target=User talk:Paper9oll/Archive index
|mask=/Archive <#>
|leading_zeros=0
|indexhere=yes
|template=User:Paper9oll/Archive template
}}

— Paper9oll (📣 • 📝) 15:36, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

@Paper9oll: I don't think it's working, as the Archive index for the Talk:Slavery/Archive index hasn't been updated since 27 November 2020. Funandtrvl (talk) 19:32, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

I've left a message at User talk:Legoktm#Discussion at User talk:Legobot § Is Task 15 (Indexing) working? Funandtrvl (talk) 19:38, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Ah I see, thanks for the update. — 🍊 Paper9oll 🍊 (📣 • 📝) 04:23, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Honestly it sometimes works and sometimes doesn't. It's on my list of things to fix, but GA bot is first. Legoktm (talk) 21:09, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Legoktm! We know you're busy! Funandtrvl (talk) 21:30, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

In case anyone else is interested, I coded Module:Archive index, which does the same thing as this bot task using Lua, a while ago. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:02, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Does that work for pages with tons of archives? If so, I'd be happy to turn off the bot and figure out a way to migrate. Legoktm (talk) 01:50, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

I tested it on User talk:Jimbo Wales, and it ran into the 10-second Lua time limit. I hacked together a version at Module:Archive index/sandbox that stops running once 9 of the 10 seconds have been used, which processed 235 pages of archives, producing 1.2MB of wikitext. It might be possible to work around this with {{template cache}}, but I question whether an archive index that large is actually useful. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 22:02, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

For context, there are currently 5 /Archive index pages that are bigger than 1,000,000 bytes: Wikipedia:Village_pump/Archive_index, User talk:Ukexpat/Archive_index, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject_Football/Archive_index, Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/Archive_index, and Wikipedia talk:Did_you_know/Archive_index. Of those, Wikipedia:Village_pump/Archive_index was never actually a Legobot index (it was once created by the original HBC archive indexerbot, and was manually shut down in 2008), and the module can handle User talk:Ukexpat/Archive_index, Wikipedia talk:Did_you_know/Archive_index, and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject_Football/Archive_index without running out of time. This means the only currently existing archive index that my module can't handle is Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/Archive_index, which in any case hasn't been updated since 2015. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 22:20, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

That is very cool. I guess I need to do a bot run to switch most over your module? Is there a template wrapper for it? Legoktm (talk) 09:16, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

When I wrote Module:Archive index in March 2019, it was intended as a quick hack that I never expected to become widely used, so I didn't bother to implement a template wrapper, or for that matter several other bells and whistles the bot supports, such as custom templates and the (apparently never documented) support for time-based rather than year-based archives. I would be willing to code those features, though, if they are deemed necessary. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:35, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Glad to see it's working again, hooray!! --Funandtrvl (talk) 17:23, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Good article nominations

Posting this message here because the bot has not updated my pass hours ago and after checking, I can see it's been inactive on the GANs page since last night. Does anyone know why this may be and what any potential fixes are? --K. Peake 14:30, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Kyle Peake, The last time this happened we had to do manual updating. I bet User:SDZeroBot/GAN_sorting still works though (although it only updates once a day). (t · c) buidhe 18:12, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

There was a hiccup with the Toolforge infrastructure (can't get password entry for user "tools.legobot". Either user does not exist or error with NIS/LDAP etc.) and it got stuck in an error state. I stopped it manually and kicked off a run just now. Legoktm (talk) 23:40, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Legoktm, Thank you!!! We kind of depend on this bot to keep working :) (t · c) buidhe 23:46, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Help

Hi @Legobot:, i don't know how to Review GA could you give it for other users. Thanks --Siirski (talk) 00:50, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Legobot has nothing to do with this, as all it does is maintain listings of good article nominations and various other process maintenance and doesn't review any nominations itself. Honestly, if you are sufficiently confused as to be posting the above comment, you may not be familiar enough with Wikipedia's processes to involve yourself with reviewing good article nominations. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:21, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

More bad MfD archiver edits

Special:Diff/1017885776 listed Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Why do we sometimes disagree about colors? four times. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 04:15, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

I've archived the discussion causing the issue manually before it ends up growing exponentially again. 68.193.40.8 (talk) 14:43, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

I would have done that too if the discussion were closed, but it was still open at the time I posted the above comment (the discussion was closed only 15 minutes ago). * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 14:45, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Happened again with Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Is Warnitive a Word?. Almost certainly caused by the ? at the end of the page title, as a regression from the fix of the previous bug I reported. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:32, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

I've temporarily disabled the bot by adding {{bots|deny=Legobot}} to the top of the MFD page, since until that discussion is archived or the bot fixed it's making more of a mess than helping. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 11:14, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

• This is cleared off the page, but yes: appears there is a bot bug that needs to be looked in to. — xaosflux ^Talk 12:31, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Sorry about this, I'm a little swamped IRL right now. I've disabled the bot for now, I'll aim to have it fixed by the end of the weekend or just go back to the old code which didn't have this bug. And thanks everyone for helping with the cleanup. Legoktm (talk) 17:46, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Any update on this? * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 02:29, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

I restored the old code, sorry about the delay. Legoktm (talk) 03:52, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Legobot not working

Legobot has not updated the GAN page since 16:01, 12 May 2021 (t · c) buidhe 08:00, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Looks like a Toolforge hiccup (can't get password entry for user "tools.legobot". Either user does not exist or error with NIS/LDAP etc.). I kicked it manually. Legoktm (talk) 08:17, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

I gather Legobot is down again - no updates on the GAN page in almost 24 hours. Cheers, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 21:04, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

@Extraordinary Writ: Not down, since there had been plenty of updates to the RfC listings and several XfD edits at the time that you posted here. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:52, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

The GA portion of the bot is known to stop working independently of the rest of the bot. (I haven't the foggiest idea why.) That's what's happened here: for instance, Murine coronavirus was nominated over 36 hours ago but still hasn't shown up on WP:GAN. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 18:55, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

This appears to have been addressed. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 21:01, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

For reference, each task the bot runs is a separate crontab entry, and in theory is independent of the other tasks (though if e.g. all of Toolforge goes down, then everything will be down). Anyways, I kicked it again on Saturday. I just filed phab:T283477 as well, for the underlying issue. Legoktm (talk) 07:21, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

Weird Legobot bug

At Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Archived debates/June 2021 and Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Archived debates/May 2021, the bot has been adding the same archived MFDs over and over again for more than 24 hours already. I'm assuming there's some sort of hiccup or bug here? Hog Farm _Talk 03:12, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Error with Z with funny dots (Ż)

Why are you copying the Z with a funny dot (Ż) as a question(?) mark? Look at this edit. Turning it into a "?" breaks the link.VikingDrummer (talk) 09:20, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

@VikingDrummer: This is a known problem, see the archives of this page. All you needed to do to fix it was create this redirect: Talk:Jan ?aryn. BTW, don't make edits like this, it's a bot-built page and any non-bot edit will be overwritten on the next bot run, as you were advised when editing that page. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:55, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

::Thank you. Editing the page really didn't work.VikingDrummer (talk) 03:59, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Order issue

I noticed with this edit that Legobot is violating MOS:LAYOUT order rules when adding the GA tag to newly approved GAs. Could this be fixed? Thanks, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 19:15, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

That's kind of annoying for a bot to figure out since there are so many different hatnote templates that this should technically go under. My understanding is that @Firefly was working on a new bot to replace Legobot's GAN functions...Firefly, do you think that will be ready for usage soon? And will yours properly handle MOS:LAYOUT? Legoktm (talk) 12:37, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Legoktm, I am indeed, and hope to file a BRFA shortly (this week hopefully) once I'm confident it can handle various edge cases. As for this specific instance, that is indeed somewhat difficult to handle programmatically. However, I'll do my best to make it MOS compliant. firefly ( t · c ) 15:49, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Great! I guess you could recurse through Category:Hatnote templates to get a list of templates that the icon should be underneath. And please let me know if/when you need me to pause/shutdown Legobot's GA task.

@Sdkb: unless there's some urgency behind this, I'm going to leave Legobot's behavior alone in favor of the new bot coming online. Legoktm (talk) 02:02, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Definitely no urgency; sounds good! {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 02:04, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

RFCs

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

The bot behaves strangely. It has closed a freshly opened RFC immediately after assigning an ID to it. The hell? Relevant diffs (fresh diffs are at the top):

21:01, May 19, 2021 - «Removing expired RFC template.»

21:01, May 19, 2021 - «Adding RFC ID.»

20:05, May 19, 2021 - «‎Malassezia: D/SD: Reopen manually closed RfC»

Page: Malassezia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) AXONOV (talk) ⚑ 09:54, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The bot's bugging out

On the GAN page, it keeps repeatedly updating one particular onreview nomination as if it wasn't on review before. This is happening in intervals of exactly 20 minutes. Could someone check it out? Tayi Arajakate _Talk 16:55, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Edit request spam

I notice that the bot has recently been spamming archive indexes, such as Talk:Sarah Palin/Archive index, with semi-protected edit requests to the point that it's clogging up Category:Wikipedia semi-protected edit requests, the oldest being today at 04:12, most recently 09:14. I can't figure out why this is. —twotwofourtysix^{(My talk page and contributions)} 10:03, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

It appears to me that there is a critical oversight or bug in Legobot that prevents it from seeing raw template code in headers, resulting in {{tl|Example}} turning into a transclusion for the Example template. See User talk:Xeno/Archive Index for an example of this. One of the headers there is Your protection of {{tl|Gibsonian}} which appears as Your protection of {{Gibsonian}} when not in the editing window. Legobot does not see the {{tl}} template (like you would see in the editing window), and does not treat it as such, instead it only sees its output which is {{Gibsonian}}, and treats it as the code for transcluding the Gibsonian template. I see several instances of {{tl|editsemiprotection}} in the archives, so that should be why the bot is spamming archive indexes with semi-protected edit requests. GMX^{(on the go!)} 16:15, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

See also User talk:Legoktm#Legobot issues GMX^{(on the go!)} 17:18, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

Bot added transclusions of deleted templates

The bot added transclusions of deleted templates with this edit and some others from the same run. It looks like it copied the raw, rendered text of section headers, like {{Db-botnomain}} and related pages instead of copying the wikicode behind those headers. I have reverted the erroneous edits that I have found. Please adjust the bot's code before re-running that type of edit. Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:35, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

@Legoktm: it looks like the fix is to do this which anchorencodes the template link, at least for the second part of the table. you could probably use {{tl}} for the first part as well. Frietjes (talk) 18:45, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

other problems include brackets and wikilinks and pipes (e.g., see Talk:Mexico/Archive index and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Flag Template/Archive index). Frietjes (talk) 20:56, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

Legobot is trying to make a link that will reach the section concerned. If it were to use the [[...#{{tl|...}}]] form the link would fail.

These problems are some of the reasons why WP:SECTIONHEAD discourages template transclusions in section headings. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:26, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the reports and suggestions everyone, the task is disabled for now, I'll have a fix either later today or tomorrow. I assume most people won't mind that this task isn't running given that it's been broken on and off for a few years now. The problematic code was basically taking the HTML of the heading and running text_contents() on it, which I did not realize isn't "safe" in wikitext (obvious in hindsight of course). And none of the pages I spot checked exhibited the problem :| My current plan is to have Parsoid do the conversion to wikitext so it'll be literal text, appropriately guarded by nowikis as necessary. Legoktm (talk) 00:00, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Safest would be to use character entity references such as { etc. or numeric character references such as [ etc. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 00:05, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

After a bunch of testing (c.f. T296446) I've come to the same conclusion: example edit. I'm going to start a run now and check the edits as they come in. Legoktm (talk) 07:13, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

I reviewed the first ~300 edits and have been spot checking them since, aside from minor underscore to space adjustment making things look weird, the escaping of templates and links appears to be working correctly now. Legoktm (talk) 09:59, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Legoktm, it looks like there is still a problem with vertical bars, see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Flag Template/Archive index. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 13:41, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

That's a nasty one. I fixed it like this; there may be a better way. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:48, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Jonesey95, that works, but there are many more still on that page (and probably other pages) for example if you search that page for Ireland|rugby. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:10, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

I figured that after implementing the demo fix, the bot could run through affected pages again, as it did to fix the transclusions. Poor bot is going to get tired, though, but I'm busy preparing a Thanksgiving dinner that can't be beat. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:41, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Yep. I just copied wfEscapeWikitext into the bot, probably should've thought of that earlier. I'll kick off another run tomorrow, hope y'all had a good Thanksgiving and/or holidays. Legoktm (talk) 10:25, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

OK, after a false start, it's running now with a more complete set of sequences to escape. Here's an example of fixing a pipe. The " and ' fixes are a bit cosmetic, but I think it's worth getting out of the way just for completeness and edge-cases' sake. Legoktm (talk) 06:03, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

One more fix for brackets. Hopefully that's it. Legoktm (talk) 06:23, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Legobot glitch?

Been trying to add an RFC template to an RFC at Lalich's talkpage. Bot the bot keeps deleting it. What's wrong? GoodDay (talk) 21:17, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

@GoodDay: the timestamp you're trying to add the RFC to is from 4 December 2020, so the bot thinks its expired. See the guidance at Template:Rfc#Expiry. Legoktm (talk) 22:01, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

I tried to implement the example, but it wouldn't work. At least I tried :( GoodDay (talk) 23:51, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @GoodDay: Legobot looks for the first valid timestamp after the {{rfc}} tag. If that timestamp is more than 30 days ago, the tag is removed. Why are you trying to revive a two-year-old discussion? Surely it would be better to start a fresh one, that way the rfc will get the full 30 days. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 00:42, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Oh jeez, I'm embarrassed. I thought the date said 4 December 2021. GoodDay (talk) 00:44, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

GA review count

Hello,

Can I ask how the GA reviews amount is calculated? It doesn't appear to be quite correct in my case. This diff claims I've only made 2 reviews, but I'm pretty sure I did three reviews (and will be 4 after finishing this up): Talk:Babylon 5/GA1, Talk:Islamic criminal law in Aceh/GA1, and Talk:Spanish coup of July 1936/GA1. Yeah, not a ton, but I figure it's easier to count & bug report for the low number cases... maybe there's some issue with the script. SnowFire (talk) 09:34, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

@SnowFire: it's possible the bot missed a review, you can edit User:GA bot/Stats to fix your count. Legoktm (talk) 17:40, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi Legoktm, I'm seeing the same issue with a missing review (in this diff). Could it be because I updated the review status to onhold without it going through onreview first? If it's permitted, I'll fix my count on the stats page. Olivaw-Daneel (talk) 02:51, 13 December 2021 (UTC)