Jump to content

User talk:Slakr/Archive 26

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 20←Archive 24Archive 25Archive 26

SineBot don't work fine

hi, please see what about SineBot job today on Talk:COVID-19 testing:

09:46, 5 December 2020‎ SineBot talk contribs‎ m 9,689 bytes +254‎

--5.171.73.162 (talk) 10:12, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Bot work right; it was a mistake.. sorry. --109.52.248.53 (talk) 23:11, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Question about SignBot

Hi Slakr,

I saw passing this edit from SignBot, after my revert. Do you know how why it happens? Nieuwsgierige Gebruiker 09:59, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Suggestion for SineBot: add reflist-talk

I've noticed that in many cases, new users do not add {{reflist-talk}} after their messages that include refs. If sinebot detects such a message, including refs, but with no {{reflist-talk}} below it in the section, it would be useful for sinebot to automatically add one after the message. Of course, the same exclusion rules would apply for experienced or opted-out users, who might be doing things such as refactoring talk pages. Thanks for considering! Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 21:24, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Ушкуйник

Hi, user Ушкуйник (talk) was repeatedly warned. Сontinues pro-Russian vandalism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.73.62.157 (talk) 13:00, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Noticeboard notice

A discussion regarding your bot account is currently open at Wikipedia:Bots/Noticeboard#Clearing_bot_watchlists. Please see and respond to the discussion there. If you do not respond, developer action may be taken without your cooperation. — xaosflux Talk 14:58, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Technical Barnstar
For creating the wonderful SineBot-so useful for keeping track of conversations and who wrote what. EpicPupper 18:26, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

SineBot out of action again

Again, User:SineBot appears to be out of action. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:17, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Sinebot bug: signed optional AfD question

Sinebot just did this, signing an IP user's question at AfD; those usually don't have signatures, just the heading with username at the top. Might be enough of an edge case that it isn't worth fixing; not sure. Gaelan 💬✏️ 07:07, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

SineBot again

And again, User:SineBot appears to be out of action. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:50, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

SineBot

Hey slackr! If it's possible, I would love if you either released SineBot's source code publicly, shared it with me, or operated SineBot on other wikis across the Wikimedia movement. Could you consider any of those? Specifically, operating SineBot at Wikibooks is my current goal. Thanks! EpicPupper (talk, contribs) 03:38, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

ProcseeBot down?

Looks like the last logged action by ProcseeBot (talk · contribs · logs) is from 3 November 2020. Wanted to let you know, though it looks like you may also be inactive. Hope you're doing well! Shubinator (talk) 01:27, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious
Eight years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:12, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

SineBot down?

Seems that SineBot is down, unfortunately. An unsigned comment [1] has not been signed for over an hour. Bot sandbox doesn't seem to be monitored either. Any clue? — kashmīrī TALK 19:39, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

SineBot out of action, again

Out of action again, apparently. --David Biddulph (talk) 22:18, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

SineBot again

Is there any way SineBot can be repaired soon? I've had to constantly sign unsigned comments on my own Talk page for the past few months now and it's starting to annoy me at this point that the bot hasn't been doing what it's been programmed to do. Jalen Folf (talk) 16:36, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

I Request An Unblock

Hello Slakr, I see your Bot called ProxyBot/ProcseeBot has blocked me and I wish for your bot to either be shut down or Unblock me. Since I'm not an Administrator I can't power the bot down myself. Thanks. Sparklestern (talk) 00:59, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Slakr. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

--Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 18:07, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

New message from EpicPupper

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Bot requests § Bot to handle unsigned comments. 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him | talk) 23:31, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Could you respond here, Slakr? Liz Read! Talk! 01:13, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Hey Christian Fundamentalist

The barbaric act of Confessing Sins to the priest only began during the 14th century at the Lateran Council. The concept was quite unknown to earlier generation of Christians. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.25.24.139 (talk) 07:53, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

ProcseeBot

Hi Slakr, notice that your bot hasn't run in a year - is it's function no longer needed such that we can desysop it? — xaosflux Talk 00:13, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

@Xaosflux: Oh my bad... the old server one half of it was running on, an ancient bare-metal instance, seems to have died in the last year when IBM/Softlayer killed off the entire datacenter it was in. Unfortunately it was the part of the bot that was used to verify the proxy as open/usable (i.e., it had an httpd on it that responded back via a special handshake to verify authenticity/outbound ip addresses), so it's been assuming all the proxies it's been scanning this whole time are closed. :P
Anyway, it's likely still needed at least in part; iirc another admin is running something similar, but clearly it can't hurt to have backup (having anything less than 1 seems to devolve into wiki chaos quickly). I'll get it back up when I get a few ticks; I've been massively busy this year. :(
Hope everything is going well with you, incidentally. LTNS :P
Cheers =) --slakr\ talk / 07:42, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the update, yes User:ST47ProxyBot is running with a similar task. I took your bot off the to-be-desysoped list (normal inactivity of 1 year for admins), as it is your alt account and you are not inactive. Should you decide to put this off, please let us know at WP:BN to deflag the bot (you can always ask for restoration again later, bot's don't need RfA's!) Thank you and best wishes. — xaosflux Talk 10:26, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:09, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Administrators will no longer be autopatrolled

A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Bots Newsletter, December 2021

Bots Newsletter, December 2021
BRFA activity by month

Welcome to the eighth issue of the English Wikipedia's Bots Newsletter, your source for all things bot. Maintainers disappeared to parts unknown... bots awakening from the slumber of æons... hundreds of thousands of short descriptions... these stories, and more, are brought to you by Wikipedia's most distinguished newsletter about bots.

Our last issue was in August 2019, so there's quite a bit of catching up to do. Due to the vast quantity of things that have happened, the next few issues will only cover a few months at a time. This month, we'll go from September 2019 through the end of the year. I won't bore you with further introductions — instead, I'll bore you with a newsletter about bots.

Overall

  • Between September and December 2019, there were 33 BRFAs. Of these, Green checkmarkY 25 were approved, and 8 were unsuccessful (Dark red X symbolN2 3 denied, Blue question mark? 3 withdrawn, and Expired 2 expired).

September 2019

Look! It's moving. It's alive. It's alive... It's alive, it's moving, it's alive, it's alive, it's alive, it's alive, IT'S ALIVE!
  • Green checkmarkY Monkbot 16, DannyS712 bot 60, Ahechtbot 6, PearBOT 3, Qbugbot 3 · Dark red X symbolN2 DannyS712 bot 5, PkbwcgsBot 24 · Blue question mark? DannyS712 bot 61, TheSandBot 4
  • TParis goes away, UTRSBot goes kaput: Beeblebrox noted that the bot for maintaining on-wiki records of UTRS appeals stopped working a while ago. TParis, the semi-retired user who had previously run it, said they were "unlikely to return to actively editing Wikipedia", and the bot had been vanquished by trolls submitting bogus UTRS requests on behalf of real blocked users. While OAuth was a potential fix, neither maintainer had time to implement it. TParis offered to access to the UTRS WMFLabs account to any admin identified with the WMF: "I miss you guys a whole lot [...] but I've also moved on with my life. Good luck, let me know how I can help". Ultimately, SQL ended up in charge. Some progress was made, and the bot continued to work another couple months — but as of press time, UTRSBot has not edited since November 2019.
  • Article-measuring contest resumed: The list of Wikipedians by article count, which had lain dead for several years, was triumphantly resurrected by GreenC following a bot request.

October 2019

November 2019

Now you're thinking with portals.

December 2019

In the next issue of Bots Newsletter:
What's next for our intrepid band of coders, maintainers and approvers?

  • What happens when two bots want to clerk the same page?
  • What happens when an adminbot goes hog wild?
  • Will reFill ever get fixed?
  • What's up with ListeriaBot, anyway?
  • Python 3.4 deprecation? In my PyWikiBot? (It's more likely than you think!)

These questions will be answered — and new questions raised — by the January 2022 Bots Newsletter. Tune in, or miss out!

Signing off... jp×g 04:29, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

(You can subscribe or unsubscribe from future newsletters by adding or removing your name from this list.)

User:Slakr/sectionlinks.js

Hi, just to let you know that I fixed some cross-site scripting vulnerabilities in User:Slakr/sectionlinks.js. If an attacker created a page with certain JavaScript syntax in one of the headings or in the page title, then when a user with the script installed visited that page, they would run the attacker's code. As far as I can tell it is only you who has this script installed, so I guess that means you're a little bit safer now. :) Best — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 13:54, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

How we will see unregistered users

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:13, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

How we will see unregistered users

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:14, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Sinebot

What are sinebot's criteria for deleting talk posts? I made a talk comment about the Mu Us desert. Within a minute your bot deleted my post.

My post was not abusive or racist or trolling. I pointed out an inconsistency in the article content. 70.77.20.244 (talk) 14:57, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) You need to look again at what SineBot did. It doesn't delete messages. What it did in this edit was merely to add the signature which you forgot to include in your message. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:51, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Bots Newsletter, January 2022

Bots Newsletter, January 2022
BRFA activity by month

Welcome to the ninth issue of the English Wikipedia's Bots Newsletter, your source for all things bot. Vicious bot-on-bot edit warring... superseded tasks... policy proposals... these stories, and more, are brought to you by Wikipedia's most distinguished newsletter about bots.

After a long hiatus between August 2019 and December 2021, there's quite a bit of ground to cover. Due to the vastness, I decided in December to split the coverage up into a few installments that covered six months each. Some people thought this was a good idea, since covering an entire year in a single issue would make it unmanageably large. Others thought this was stupid, since they were getting talk page messages about crap from almost three years ago. Ultimately, the question of whether each issue covers six months or a year is only relevant for a couple more of them, and then the problem will be behind us forever.

Of course, you can also look on the bright side – we are making progress, and this issue will only be about crap from almost two years ago. Today we will pick up where we left off in December, and go through the first half of 2020.

Overall
In the first half of 2020, there were 71 BRFAs. Of these, Green checkmarkY 59 were approved, and 12 were unsuccessful (with Dark red X symbolN2 8 denied, Blue question mark? 2 withdrawn, and Expired 2 expired).

January 2020

A python
A python
A python
0.4 pythons
Yeah, you're not gonna be able to get away with this anymore.

February 2020

Speaking of WikiProject Molecular Biology, Listeria went wild in February

March 2020

April 2020

Listeria being examined

Issues and enquiries are typically expected to be handled on the English Wikipedia. Pages reachable via unified login, like a talk page at Commons or at Italian Wikipedia could also be acceptable [...] External sites like Phabricator or GitHub (which require separate registration or do not allow for IP comments) and email (which can compromise anonymity) can supplement on-wiki communication, but do not replace it.

May 2020

We heard you like bots, so we made a bot that reports the status of your bots, so now you can use bots while you use bots

June 2020

A partial block averted at the eleventh hour for the robot that makes Legos

Conclusion

  • What's next for our intrepid band of coders, maintainers and approvers?
  • Will Citation bot ever be set free to roam the project?
  • What's the deal with all those book links that InternetArchiveBot is adding to articles?
  • Should we keep using Gerrit for MediaWiki?
  • What if we had a day for bots to make cosmetic edits?

These questions will be answered — and new questions raised — by the February 2022 Bots Newsletter. Tune in, or miss out!

Signing off... jp×g 23:22, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

(You can subscribe or unsubscribe from future newsletters by adding or removing your name from this list.)

The Alyssa Wikipedia Page

If you are allowed to do so, could you please add the content that I added to the Alyssa talk page to its article? I used much time to add that content, but the page is protected.2600:8807:A788:6800:3966:13C1:8DBD:798 (talk) 01:41, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Vandalism

Your Sinebot has had its edit removed for vandalism, I am unsure but there may be a bug within your bot. ChefBear01 (talk) 21:30, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

Correction, it was an Annonymous user that posted the offending content. ChefBear01 (talk) 21:39, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

New administrator activity requirement

The administrator policy has been updated with new activity requirements following a successful Request for Comment.

Beginning January 1, 2023, administrators who meet one or both of the following criteria may be desysopped for inactivity if they have:

  1. Made neither edits nor administrative actions for at least a 12-month period OR
  2. Made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period

Administrators at risk for being desysopped under these criteria will continue to be notified ahead of time. Thank you for your continued work.

22:53, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Bot review

Heya, I know you've not been around much lately but I just wanted to let you know there is a discussion over at BOTN about ProcseeBot. If you get this message and are still interested in maintaining (or passing along, or restarting, or whatever) this bot, please join in the discussion. Thanks, Primefac (talk) 07:30, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Please note, this bot has been desysoped as inactive (Special:PermaLink/1087323198). Should you want to reactivate it please let us know at WP:BOTN. If it will be permanently retired please also let us know so we can -bot flag it. Thank you, — xaosflux Talk 22:54, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi!!

I was wondering if you could help me with the attempted deletion of my page on Jean E. Irving & page on Giovanni battista Meneghini!!. No prob if not!! Nyaytyhyaynyiyeylyluytyeysy (talk) 04:24, 25 May 2022 (UTC)


bot for Calcifediol

Would you mind reading the talk section for Calcifediol. I believe primary study is being misinterpreted and the main article for Calcifediol should be altered. Please see talk section "Conversion time of D3 to Calcifediol" for further information. Thanks.

Precious anniversary

Precious
Eight years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:44, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Change the date of birth on wikidata page of Baba Sawan Singh Ji Maharaj

Baba Sawan Singh Ji Maharaj was born 20 July 1858, not a 27 July 1858.

Reliable source

Disable TPA

Hey could you disable the TPA for ‎94.245.129.116? ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 13:43, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf: Looks like someone already did. =) --slakr\ talk / 18:52, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
Yep I asked Luk3 since you didn't seem to be available when I posted this. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 18:56, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Please unlock Bill Plante

Hi slakr. Please unlock the article so it can be edited for the ITN and DYK nominations currently underway. Mr. Plante's nom in ITN is likely to be directly impacted. As I say on the article Talk page, the content dispute can be moderated by editors with other methods, and in any case the participants are unlikely to resume disruptive edits with so much light now on the article. Thanks. Jusdafax (talk) 01:19, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Jusdafax: as I said at the talk page, the protection should remain while the issues are resolved.  — Amakuru (talk) 08:23, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
@Amakuru:, we regularly get some mild edit warring when a subject has just died. I think it can be discussed simultaneously on his talk page whilst other users contribute to his page. We're all adults here after all. The lock seems a little too heavy handed, in my opinion. Can you please unlock? --Jkaharper (talk) 09:08, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
@Jusdafax and Jkaharper: Sounds good to me. In retrospect I probably could have also made use of WP:ACDS due to WP:BLP. Feel free to drop {{Ds/alert}}s on people's talk pages if anything even remotely looks like it might start up again, too. --slakr\ talk / 09:45, 30 September 2022 (UTC)


Recreate jits bodunaxa as xpq -> en redirect

Hi! Many years ago I created an insufficiently detailed article about Jits Bodunaxa, which you rightly nominated for deletion. Since that same person now has a proper article about her, I think it would be appropriate to recreate the page as a redirect. I think a redirect under this spelling of her name is appropriate because it is the spelling used in the title of Modern Mohegan: The Dialect of Jits Bodunaxa. Since this book was the first I heard of her, I think it's quite likely that people finding it for the first time will search it in Wikipedia to find out more, and currently that search finds nothing. I would add this name to her page, but it is already there under a different orthographic system. ave mathju at ase manoya (talk) 14:07, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

@Ave matthew: Jits bodunaxa (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) wasn't sent to WP:AFD; it was speedily deleted, so you're likely free to recreate it as a redirect to the destination article if you feel it applies. Sorry for the late reply. --slakr\ talk / 18:57, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
I have "recreated" it, although I realized while doing so that I made an error in the original page, as the B should be capitalized. I think when I originally made the page I didn't realize Wikipedia had case sensitive page titles. So, I have actually created it under Jits Bodunaxa using the "From an alternative language" template.
No problem with the slow reply, look how long it took me to get around to appropriately remedying the error on my part! ave mathju at ase manoya (talk) 15:06, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

SineBot signing IP RfA question

See diff. 46.97.168.199 (talk) 16:55, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

SineBot signing addition to list

Hey! I noticed that in this edit SineBot added a signature to something that was just an addition to a list in a comment. I don't think the bot should've done this since the comment is already signed. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 21:48, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf: Sorry for the crazy-late reply, but yes; you're right. Normally when a user is doing something "advanced," like adding to an existing bulleted list (and that not being something like adding to WP:AIV / similar noticeboards / discussions, it's ignored because the presumption is the user knows what they're doing due to edit count. Because it was a "new entry" and a signature wasn't in-range of the diff, the bot assumed it was adding to a discussion. --slakr\ talk / 09:42, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Was speaking with SineBot but I needed to talk to you personally

@Slakr Hi! Only wanted to check how to add content to a protected page, or request it to be added by someone else as I find it extremely important to be added in the protected page. I was looking to add in the See Also section, the actress Tunisha Sharma's suicide, but in Sushant Singh Rajput's high profile suicide case (Internationally recognized) I saw a protection button which I could not infiltrate. Please help. I did add Sushant Singh Rajput in Tunisha Sharma's page. These are extremely popular Indian celebrities affecting different age groups, Tunisha was very popular in teen crowd and male crowds. While Sushant was Internationally acclaimed actor. Personally, I am devastated by these stories and cannot not think of helping Indian celebrities more and more, whatever it takes. To honor their contribution in my life. (talk) 12:52, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

@ SpottedCheetah
I added a request to Wikipedia:Help desk / April 30 / Wikipedia:Help desk #Edit request to a blocked page.
Ping welcome, Steue (talk) 01:10, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Call the SineBot's attention?

Once in a while I've come across a contribution which was not signed, e.g. from 2007, on Talk:Hinterland.

Is there a way to call the bot's attention to a specific contribution or talk page like with a template?

Ping welcome, Steue (talk) 01:07, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

@Steue: Not currently; it was a possible planned feature in a "Cosinebot" that hasn't yet come to fruition. I kind of got blackholed into the real world for the past few years. :( You can of course use {{unsigned}} (and related) to manually do it yourself, but there's not yet a magic way to get the bot to do it.--slakr\ talk / 09:37, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for: the ping, your answer and the link {{unsigned}}.
From this link's page it looks as if one would still have to:
  1. search in the history: when a specific post got posted,
  2. then who posted it ( registered or IP address ),
    Only when one knows this fact can one decide which template to use.
  3. remember how the appropriate template is called -- or fetch this information from somewhere else -- if one knows from where,
  4. pick / copy the necessary data manually from the history and
  5. insert them manually into the template.
What I was hoping for was/is a function which does all this, plus makes it un-necessary (for the human editor) to know whether a contributor was logged in or only had an IP address.
My guess is that most IP addresses are dynamic, which means: after more than 24 hours they are no longer valid, which would make a link to it's talk page useless as well.
So, in most cases, the only usefull service which was rendered by the template would be:
Because of all this "hassle", when I want to add a signature of someone else, I still just edit everything by hand, even if my wording might not be exactly standard.
Steue (talk) 00:00, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

SineBot query

Hi. Thanks for all your work on SineBot (and everything else). A question about the bot has come up at User talk:Bbb23#Removal of post. If you have a moment could you take a look at that thread and see if you can diagnose why the bot failed to sign in that instance? Obviously, the specific instance is trivial, but wondering if there's a more systemic issue that might warrant a tweak to the code. Thanks and regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 16:33, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

@Newyorkbrad: Based on the post (I'm assuming), my guess is the {{cite}} template. With a few exceptions for specific venues (e.g., iplinks/userlinks/etc on AIV), the bot will skip over posts with non-{{tl}} template use, making the assumption that either someone knows what they're doing, something more complex might be happening (e.g., collaborative editing), and/or that by signing the addition it might add a signature in an awkward way, given the unlimited variability of template output. It also flips from opt-out-of-signing to opt-into-signing when someone reaches 800 edits (though that's not the case here); I mention it because it might(?) also sometimes be a source of @Bbb23:'s frustration over when it skips someone's post. --slakr\ talk / 00:27, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

3RR report update

Hello, I just wanted to let you know that User:Kuia34 made another revert masked under an edit summary of "adding maintenance tags" [2], after your decision. I was redirected away from making another report, so I figured out messaging your talk page would be the best option. Also another diff which I forgot to mention, where user creates a talk page "box" to promote his opinion on the exact, ongoing content issue [3]. Kate the mochii (talk) 17:48, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

Your report was removed by Bbb23 for a reason let it go
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard%2FEdit_warring&diff=1162884320&oldid=1162884206

Most of the edits you were reporting me for were already from yesterday too. Kuia34 (talk) 17:49, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

Yes, the reason was "duplicate report". Kate the mochii (talk) 17:50, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
It's a duplicate report because most of the edits you reported me for was from yesterday. You refuse to remove things from the article because they go against your own personal opinion and ignore multiple sources and when your called out you try and report me??? Kuia34 (talk) 17:53, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
Here is a list of all your (section-blanking) reverts. There are in fact 4 in 24 hours.
15:07 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Multiplicity_(subculture)&oldid=1162865610 (hidden as "adding maintenance tags")
23:07 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Multiplicity_(subculture)&oldid=1162751609
16:49 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Multiplicity_(subculture)&oldid=1162697519
13:28 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Multiplicity_(subculture)&oldid=1162667467
12:06 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Multiplicity_(subculture)&oldid=1162656320 Kate the mochii (talk) 18:01, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
4/5 are BEFORE 23:42, 30 June 2023 which is aprox when you reported me(not to mention some os these edits are actually the exact same ones you reported me for yesterday)The only edit that is AFTER you reported me is https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Multiplicity_(subculture)&oldid=1162865610
I explained why I removed it on the noticeboard so I'll just copy and paste it here :
"the reason I removed that section is because we talked about it and you said you would implement the changes but you never implemented it so I decided to do it . https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AMultiplicity_%28subculture%29&diff=1162863714&oldid=1162863154(this is where you claimed you implemented it) for context this is some of the stuff I asked them about that they claimed to implement but didn't do : https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AMultiplicity_%28subculture%29&diff=1162799600&oldid=1162799519 " Kuia34 (talk) 18:08, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
I have brought up two additional diffs (one I missed which proves three revert rule violation, and another with a disingenuous edit summary and that is literally hours after the noticeboard post).
I will stop replying to you from now on. Kate the mochii (talk) 18:15, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
That's fine but don't forget to remove the stuff relating to the general DID community that isn't in reference to the multiplicty subculture since you have yet to get source to support your claims and you continue to be disingenuous and edit the article to fit your own opinion on some online discourse at that.......... Kuia34 (talk) 18:19, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Don't bludgeon the process Wikipedia:Casting aspersions Kate the mochii (talk) 18:19, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
It's not Wikipedia:Don't bludgeon the process I just type alot and even though I keep explaining to you what the topic is you keep saying that my claim is something else so then I have to come back and correct you as to what my actual claim is and then the process repeats. As for Wikipedia:Casting aspersions your right some of the comments I've made were a bit much and I could have brought them up better in a slightly more civil manner. Kuia34 (talk) 18:29, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

Close

Excellent close here. I wish all closers were so thorough and evenhanded (even if I think most parties would have preferred some kind of consensus being reached this time around). Thanks for not supervoting to manufacture one. I think an eventual RfC 3 will iron this out.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  21:27, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

I'm inclined to concur with McCandlish; I think you very fairly summarized the positions. Unfortunately, two of the involved editors are now edit warring to introduce substantially the same language into the MoS section despite the close. After being reverted twice, BilledMammal is now seeking to undertake further discussion on the talk (as they honestly should have from the start under the circumstances), but despite that discussion having already gotten underway, LokiTheLiar has chosen to force the language back in. I've tried to explain why I think this is problematic, very much out of process, and likely to frustrate a community already fatigued with issues around this language further, but Loki at least seems unconvinced.
I really have no inclination to take the matter to ANI (and lack the time even if I did), but I'm certain that's where this is headed if someone doesn't intercede quickly and get Loki to understand that this is not how consensus proceeds in such circumstances. Again, BilledMammal seems to have already slowed their roll and committed to discussing. I wasn't sure what the best option was if trying to avoid ANI, but I figured the admin who closed might be the most logical first top.
Jayron32, I'm not sure that Slakr is about just now, so I hope you will forgive me for notifying you as well, as the only other admin I know is aware of the previous discussion and the slow moving edit war. This feels like a potential tinderbox. I'm trying to decide right now whether to add a notice below the original discussion. On the one hand, I think the community perhaps should be informed about the result of the discussion being disregarded. One the other, I'd love to give the editor in question an opportunity to hear from someone else that they are beyond the EW line and stand down before really getting themselves stuck in a bad place. Unfortunately, their responses on the MoS talk page are not encouraging me to feel that is likely. Thoughts? If neither one of you wants wrangle this issue (which would be understandable), I'll simply leave a notice below the closed discussion about what is going on, and the community can sort the matter out. SnowRise let's rap 22:12, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
I left the notice at WP:VPP: I made pretty voluminous efforts (as have a number of other editors) to explain to BM and Loki why further discussion and consensus was necessary before adding this language to the MoS, especially in light of the scale of the previous discussions and the controversial nature of the proposed additions. And to explain why edit warring is not an acceptable way to enforce their preferred version regardless of the circumstances. But as of this moment, the response has been a bunch of IDHT. I'm not interested in getting into the dispute any deeper, but I felt the community ought to be made aware that the close is being disregarded.
That said, if either one of you feels, in your administrative capacity, that there is a better way to accomplish that oversight purpose, you have my full blessings and encouragement to remove the notice. Personally I don't have the inclination, nor especially the time, to push the behavioural issues to AE, ANI, or ANEW, but it feels like it is headed in that direction, unfortunately. And despite my attempts on the Mos talk page to encourage discussion over edit warring, I think at least Loki is only more entrenched as a result of my observations. BM is somewhat ambivalent to the feedback of myself and others, but is discussing rather than trying to force the changes at this juncture. Please ping me if I can clarify anything about the chain of events: otherwise I am washing my hands of the matter before it gets any more disruptive. SnowRise let's rap 06:03, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for the ping. I participated in an earlier discussion on the same topic, so consider myself involved from an administrative point of view, so I will refrain from acting in this regard on this discussion. Sorry! --Jayron32 11:30, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
No, not at all, Jayron: that's clearly the right call in the circumstances. I knew you hadn't contributed to the most recent RfC, but I didn't think to cntrl-f the first one. And admin with the ban hammer isn't necessarily the only option here in any event. It would be more useful to find somebody with credibility among those who !voted support in the RfC, who might be able to convince Loki (and to a lesser extent, BM) to slow their roll a little, rather than charging ahead. The most frustrating part about this is that the new language might be a viable compromise that enough of a consensus could get behind, in an open community discussion. But with this approach of trying to individually force the language into the page, by edit warring if needs be (a strategy that is never going to be tolerated longterm by the community, in this context) they are actually undermining that consensus that they will ultimately have to seek. Acting this way is just not going to do them any favours at the outset of that ultimate discussion, which is sure to be a close run thing. SnowRise let's rap 11:58, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
@SMcCandlish: No prob =)
@Snow Rise: Although it's a bit late of a reply (and it might be stating the obvious), but you probably don't need to try to hunt down an in-the-loop admin / closer if people start edit warring on a policy page; it's usually evident to onlookers, someone else will probably discover it, and/or you can point it out at AN3/ANI/RFPP, as you already mentioned. I usually sort of naturally avoid taking any ancillary action on a subject after a close (unless something obvious needs doing specifically from me, like a page protection); I effectively go into them uninvolved and leave uninvolved... besides, large closes are exhausting in and of themselves and by the end I'm typically completely done with reading about the subject for a while. :P
--slakr\ talk / 04:03, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
That's a perfectly fair tact for an admin (or any closer for that matter) to want to take, and this may be the first time I've ever brought such a matter to closing admin's attention in this fashion, but I think consulting you as closer was a logical first step in resolving the issue in the circumstances: I was observing editing of a policy page starting the very day of your close of a centralized community RfC of massive scope rejecting substantially the same proposed language, and felt someone with advanced permissions ought to have eyes on that situation. At the same time, I felt an ANX filing would have been an impractical and arguably unfair escalation that would have accomplished little other than to ramp up the temperature of the affair further and become a time sink for the community.
Thankfully, after a certain amount of discussion and additional community voices chiming in, the editors in question went back to the drawing board for a new proposal, which I think in time may ultimately create some resolution to this perennial issue--so all's well that ends well. :) SnowRise let's rap 10:19, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi

Dear @Slakr,
My name's Ayoub I'm an Editor from The ArabicWiki, Firstly Thank you for everthing you do. I just want to ask if there is a posibility to learn me how can i creat a bot just like SineBot nd let it add unsinged template to unsingned comments in arwiki. Peace.-- أيوب (talk) 16:34, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Human Antiviral for FIV Relief...?

I just want to check if any studies are out there for antiviral meds made for Humans have been able to help FIV positive symptoms and alleviate or help lessen negative effects of the virus? Please... I'm not looking for a miracle, just a little help. 2600:1002:A102:1B95:3656:86CD:4386:728C (talk) 01:19, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

@2600:1002:A102:1B95:3656:86CD:4386:728C: Sorry for the late response; been busy IRL. So I'm not a vet or doctor and this isn't medical advice, but I do have an FIV+ cat, so your question, of course, hits close to home. However, as a retrovirus (and specifically, a Lentivirus (so, same genus as HIV), the chances are pretty good anything that broadly affects retroviral and/or specifically lentiviral lifecycles could be good candidates. The downside, of course, is that FIV itself (much like HIV) doesn't directly cause the worst symptoms; usually the primary infection is nothing more than some flu symptoms that go away. It's what comes after the immune system is lowered. For example, in humans, HIV can lead to a condition where another virus causes Kaposi's sarcoma (KS), and once KS is established—even if HIV is brought entirely under control—the cancer that KS causes also has to be brought under control entirely separately (and, sadly, usually unsuccessfully; once you have disseminated KS, it's unlikely you'll live much longer). Similar situations can no doubt arise in felines with secondary infections.
Complicating things further, cats frequently have very different (and usually worse) tolerances for drugs than humans. A substance that humans can readily metabolize with their livers (or excrete with their kidneys) may be impossible for cats to handle and cause far more damage. For example, one of the now-PREP drugs involved in Truvada was/is used for antiviral purposes (hence why it's so useful for PREP). That drug is specifically bad for humans when they have pre-existing problems with their kidneys, so cats (notorious for eventual kidney problems, probably due to a high-protein diet) might be even more severely affected (I don't actually know; I'm just speculating). Long story short, treating/preventing HIV in humans can be problematic on its own, and the cross-species issues with physiology can be similarly so.
So I guess my answer is a "probably, but I have no idea, and I'd be extremely careful and instead enjoy what time you had/have left. Failing that, contact some vets and researchers that specialize in this sort of thing, if you can find them." You can try google scholar ([4]), but without a huge nerdy medical background, I probably wouldn't recommend trying to parse through it without expert help (it is extremely difficult to avoid scams and fake/bad/dangerous research if you aren't an expert).
I know it sucks. It really does. And I know it's not the answer you wanted to hear. Every day I worry about whether some random thing I bring inside might be the one thing that she can't handle, but it just makes every moment I do have with her that much more special. And if humans are indeed a benchmark in the immunodeficiency realm, me/us simply providing her/them a calm, stress-free environment to live in (rather than her former life on the streets) has kept her alive far longer than she ever would have been otherwise. I try to count that was a win, even though I know our time might be shorter than it would have been had she been completely healthy.
Hope that helps in some small way. I genuinely wish I could be an expert in all things everything (and especially this), but, well, ya know.... :P
Best of luck. *hugs* =)
--slakr\ talk / 02:51, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

BAG membership

Hello. You are listed as a member of the Bot Approvals Group but it appears you may not be actively helping in this area anymore. Do you intend to return to BAG-related activity on Wikipedia, or are you happy to be removed from this list? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:58, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

Just to let you know that I have now removed your name from the list of active BAG members. Thanks and best wishes — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:28, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Usurpation requested

Hi.

Please, pay attention to this. --Mykola7 (talk) 18:15, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Slakr. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 17:12, 14 May 2024 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

– DreamRimmer (talk) 17:12, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Oh great...

Now that disruptive IP is at it again on Smalljim's talk page. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 08:23, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

SineBot down?

SineBot appears to be down (it last edited on May 2). Would you be able to investigate? Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 01:31, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Apologies... I wasn't paying attention and I apparently need to verify the texting number it uses (that I'd normally get as a notification when it dies). :P --slakr\ talk / 06:07, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
I was wondering why @SineBot was down. There’s been a couple people on a big discussion (about F/EF5 tornadoes) on one of my WikiProjects that have forgotten to sign stuff and SineBot never signed any of the comments. West Virginia WXeditor (talk) 01:53, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Slight mistake by Sinebot

Morning Slak

[5] Looks like Sinebot wiped out… whatever the new user was saying (I dunno what they were going for) while signing. Dunno what Sinebot’s coding can learn from this one, but I’m no tech genius, and you might see something that I don’t.

Danke. MM (Give me info.) (Victories) 10:48, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in a research

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:22, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Slakr/Archive_26&oldid=1258425567"