confirmed, “welcome to the new…” now completely inoperative
appreciation for something i used so so often and never appreciated properly
Hello Version 1.0 Editorial Team, Philoserf has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Hello @Liz: I have recently submitted a fix to the WP 1.0 bot that should stop adding "Foo articles by quality" categories to all log pages. From what I understand, this should help with defunct categories not being re-created by the bot. It should take effect with today's updates, and in fact, for all updated pages it will actually remove this category from all pages. So let me know if this helps. Thanks, audiodude (talk) 18:29, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
BOT: Extremely slow
The bot has 2 problems which is both extremely slow. The search of WikiProjects and the update of manual WikiProjects. Adamdaley (talk) 05:36, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
What do you mean with slow exactly? How slow? I just tested the search of Wikiprojects and it gives me a response (the table of stats) within 1 second. Kelson (talk) 06:58, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
Done - first, created "Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Album articles by quality statistics"; second, activated wikitable by uncommenting on Assessment page. Cheers! JoeNMLC (talk) 03:04, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
This is odd, because the article was created and got a video games talk page template in 2010, was last edited in September 2021, the last action on the talk page was a page move in 2016.
I don't know it it's actually a bug in the bot or if the underlying data is throwing in a bunch of stale stuff from 6 years ago, but it's very strange. --PresN13:46, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
That definitely looks like some buggy behavior, thanks for pointing it out. I've filed a bug in the bot's repo here with the contents of your message. Thanks, audiodude (talk) 04:43, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
Correction: Above comment corrected as User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Serial killer-related was last updated on Wednesday 06 April 2022 at 01:17 UTC and didn't update either yesterday or today. I am sure I have assessed several serial killer articles in the last 24 - 48 hours and gave them ratings for the serial killer task force, so the table should have updated today if the bot was working properly. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 02:43, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
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 appears to have forgotten what Start-Class is for these articles, and puts all Start Class articles into the Other category of the table.. Any clue what this is? casualdejekyll19:52, 30 May 2022 (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.
@UnitedStatesian: Thank you! I eventually figured that that was the missing link, but wouldn't dare to poke into it, the whole thing was entangling and confusing enough. Isn't the bot supposed to create that itself? If so, what went wrong?
Hi. I've been coming back to something I worked on ages ago, which appears to have used data from the WP 1.0 bot circa 2009, for entire projects of 5-100k articles. The new version looks great - but is there a way to do bulk downloads directly from wp1.openzim.org? I had a look through the archives but couldn't see anything. It looks like "My selections" might be a way to do it if I filled that with a dump of all the articles from a project, there's a "Download" column on the selections page but nothing in it - do I just have to wait until the bot's next run and then it will process my selection and then allow me to download it? It's not terribly clear.... FlagSteward (talk) 19:43, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
My batch download is all sorted now. Once I'd found the API it was pretty straightforward (it could be better advertised though, unless I was being particularly unobservant). The only real gotcha is that the API pukes if you try to feed it an empty parameter (like importance=) whereas the web version just ignores empty parameters. It's easy enough to work round, you just have to test if a parameter is empty before adding it to the URL, but that could be something to fix for consistency's sake? FlagSteward (talk) 14:59, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
AAARGGGHHHHH!!!!!! Stepping through pages doesn't work, because the output is shuffled every time you request a page. You can see it on the web version if you refresh this a few times. Obviously it is sorted by "groups" such as High-importance FA's - but if you look within that group you will see that it is in a different order every time you refresh. Which is fine if the whole group fits on one page, but a recipe for total chaos if it breaks across multiple pages. If you take each refresh as a new "run", then you could have the same article on page 1 of run 1, page 2 of run 2, page 3 of run 3 and so on. Which would be fine if it tracked pagination, but it doesn't, going forward or back effectively puts you on a new "run", so you can see the same article on page 1 and page 2 and page 3 of you results. Which in turn means you lose two articles, the ones that would have been in that position on page 2 and page 3 of run 1. My experience is that I'm losing about 32% of my total articles due to this. It's weird, there seems to be some kind of underlying structure, as you can get runs of maybe 40 articles that are almost exactly repeating a run on the previous page - but not quite, it's a bit like when you forget to FALSE a VLOOKUP or something. So please, please @Audiodude: or whoever, can this be fixed ASAP as it makes the API useless? I'd suggest that since you're obviously sorting by importance and quality, that sorting by article name as a third sort should work as a quick fix. TIA FlagSteward (talk) 14:13, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Hi @FlagSteward. Sorry for the late reply. I'm glad you found the API, that is definitely the recommended way of doing the kind of bulk download you're asking for. Obviously, if the results are "jumping" between pages, that's a bug in the API that (as you pointed out) also gets reflected in the web interface. So sorry we missed that. I've added a bug on the project's github page to track the issue and hopefully it can be fixed soon (should just be a matter of adding an additional sort as you said). Thanks so much for reporting this. audiodude (talk) 20:49, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
Hi @FlagSteward, I don't know if you're supposed to reply to archives but here I am. I've fixed this bug and deployed it. It looks to me like the sort order is more stable now, but I'm not entirely sure. Feel free to try it out and report back if things are still broken. Thanks! audiodude (talk) 23:11, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
@Adamdaley: Sorry for the late response. What do you mean by "not being moved"? "Moved" from where to where? Like the log doesn't reflect the changes? The statistics table doesn't reflect the changes? Or something else? Thanks. audiodude (talk) 20:53, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
Help!
So I can go to the Wikipedia 1.0 Server and see a table for the Lichen task force (see here), but when I try to use the code {{Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Lichen task force articles by quality statistics}} (which is the code used without issue on the WP:FUNGI page) to display the results to the taskforce page, it's a red link. What am I doing wrong? MeegsC (talk) 09:47, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
Speaking of help for the Lichen task force, does anyone know how to make the "articles by quality statistics" show the Wikiwork factor numbers at the bottom of the table? Esculenta (talk) 13:44, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
Hi @Esculenta: I think you're running into this bug. The bot successfully outputs a table with the WikiWork template transcluded, but it doesn't work because WikiWork expects spaces and the bot is producing underscores. I just tried updating the table manually and it worked once I replaced the underscores with spaces. Thanks. audiodude (talk) 21:01, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
The Crime-related WikiProject table has not been updated today, while Crime-related articles quality log has. These normally update one after the other but this hasn't happened today. Also, it looks like the quality log has not picked up some recent changes made in at least the last six hours before 00:00 UTC on 10 September 2022. (Which may be a reason why the table has not updated, because the bot did not detect any changes.) Similarly, the Terrorism articles by quality log has been updated but none of the recent changes I have made in the last few hours have been detected. Normally, I see the list of Terrorism articles at wp1.openzim.org being updated shortly before the log and table are updated, which hasn't happened today. User:Kelson or Audiodude, is something wrong? - Cameron Dewe (talk) 03:03, 10 September 2022 (UTC) (edited 03:16, 10 September 2022 (UTC))
New WikiProject Protista having trouble with assessment
Hello, yesterday I created Wikipedia:WikiProject Protista and Template:WP Protista, but I'm having trouble understanding why the Assessment isn't working. I created all the necessary categories of "Protista articles by importance" and "by quality", but the bot's website doesn't seem to recognize Protista as a project. Any help is greatly appreciated. ☽ Snoteleks ☾ 09:04, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
Thanks but I think there's something wrong going on still. The template apparently doesn't assess a quality class, only an importance class, and I don't know why. Also, in the categories only the talk pages are showing up, not the articles themselves. Is that normal? ☽ Snoteleks ☾ 10:31, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
@Snoteleks: Your template had a few stray "Algae"s that weren't replaced with Protista; you didn't have the top-level Category:WikiProject Protista articles, or Category:Wikipedia requested images of protists, and the big one: you had "QUALITY_SCALE" set to "subpage", but didn't make a subpage: Template:WikiProject Protista/class. Please note that you have a bunch of class categories that weren't made (see that template for redlinks) - it's up to you if you want to add them or set the template to not use those classes. In either case, the template now knows what to do with the "quality=X" parameter, so the categories are being filled and the next bot run will populate the table. --PresN13:00, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
Thank you so much. I was really confused about this. The class categories exist now. Can't wait until the next bot run ☽ Snoteleks ☾ 18:38, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
Issue with (not) physics article
This article: UPt3, is stubbornly refusing to not show up on searches for the physics Wikiproject [1], even though as far as I can tell, it's not tagged for the project any more. I can't figure out what else I need to do for the bot to stop picking it up. It's been a week at this point, so it shouldn't just be a question of waiting for a refresh. Thanks! PianoDan (talk) 20:51, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
@PianoDan where are you seeing the article show up? On wp1.openzim.org, on some category on Wikipedia? Or somewhere else? This will help us debug your issue. audiodude (talk) 23:57, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
Sorry it took me a bit to reply - I was travelling. It was specifically at the link I added above, which is what you get when you click from the chart for the Physics Wikiproject. BUT, it seems to have resolved itself while I was away, so I may have just been impatient. Thanks for looking! PianoDan (talk) 16:37, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
Pagination updates
I've fixed a bug with pagination that was causing 1) the wrong number of results to be reported on article listing pages on wp1.openzim.org and 2) the article sort order to not be stable. I've responded to the bug mentioned above, but also there was @FlagSteward talking about this a couple of months ago:
> '''AAARGGGHHHHH!!!!!!''' Stepping through pages doesn't work, because the output is shuffled every time you request a page.
> You can see it on the web version if you [https://wp1.openzim.org/#/project/Scotland/articles refresh this a few times].
> Obviously it is sorted by "groups" such as High-importance FA's - but if you look within that group you will see that it is
> in a different order every time you refresh.
I replied on the archive page before I realized you're not supposed to do that (oops!). Anyways this should be fixed now. Thanks! audiodude (talk) 23:15, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
@Audiodude: Thanks for this. It seems to be halfway there - it's sorted by article name for Starts and Stubs, but not for articles classified as B or C, although it does seem to do so in a stable way. So for instance with my WP Scotland example, the Harris Tweed Authority seems to be stable at #519, but it also appears at #500 on the previous page. Looks like the higher classifications above B aren't sorting alphabetically either, but it doesn't matter because they don't go onto another page. Doncha just love computers.... FlagSteward (talk) 19:49, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
Ah, the apparent stability is obviously some kind of caching - I tried it in a different browser yesterday and it was still coming back with the HTA at #500 and #519, but a day later it's at #500 and #628. FlagSteward (talk) 15:51, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
@FlagSteward: Okay I've fixed it again, with a real fix this time. Before I assumed that the duplicate results in article lists was also causing the instability of ordering, and my cursory check seemed to confirm that. Now I'm actually sorting by article title. This should fix any remaining issues with sort order and is nice to look at too! This will be deployed tomorrow morning before the next bot run. Thanks, audiodude (talk) 03:59, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
When an article like Draft talk:Athletics at the 2024 Summer Olympics gets moved to draft space and it automatically gets classified as a Draft, the bot doesn't realise and continues to classify it as eg a Start even after the Start assessment is removed - see eg openzim-France Start NA. Any chance of this being fixed - presumably you could force a fix by deleting the template, waiting for a bot run, and then reverting the deletion, but it's a bit brute force. FlagSteward (talk) 04:58, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
Why do we destroy the assessment infrastructure for inactive projects?
Please see User_talk:Liz#Why_was_this_page_deleted? for details; long story short - when a project is declared inactive, it's assessments are not just hidden, but gutted - as categories are deleted! This might possibly result in reclassification of formerly asssessed articles into unasssed (I am not sure if this is the case), but we are certainly loosing useful statistics such as information about breakdown of articles assessed by now-inactive Wikiprojects. Examples of damage from the recently declared as inactive WikiProject Popular Culture:
Marquis de Sade in popular culture is an example of article that was assessed only by this defunct project. I am unsure if it is counted as assessed or not by our top-level listing. I have a feeling it is not, since it all assessment categories were deleted (compare with categories at Talk:Popular culture).
As to "why", I have no idea. But I think the better way forward than just to change the template to include the categories would be to formally separate quality assessment from WikiProjects. (I know that there will need to be a special case for MILHIST since they are the only people who have A-Class, but the way forward there is to recognise that A-Class is not a part of the usual assessment criteria, but a special MILHIST badge of honour). Re-activating at least the assessment categories for inactive WikiProjects would still help and probably not do much harm, though. —Kusma (talk) 06:46, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
I agree with Kusma, ratings are redundantly repeated on every talkpage with multiple banners. We can split off MILHIST A-class or just let MILHIST rate articles as A-class for all Wikiprojects. That said, the rating for Marquis de Sade in popular culture is not lost; it is rated as "Start". This rating is still visible in the wikicode and so is likely still being read by the relevant bots. The category infrastructure and so on I'm not sure is very important, as it's all managed by bots anyway. (And we do need a better process to wind down or merge Wikiprojects.) CMD (talk) 07:59, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
Just to be clear, the categories are not created by bots, at least not by the WP 1.0 bot. In fact, it is the other way around: the WP 1.0 bot consumes the category listings (aka "Z-Class Foo Project articles") in order to generate the data for the assessment tables. For assessment, the article is defined as having Class Z if its talk page appears in that category, and that is the singular definition. I think there might be some confusion because the normal way articles are added to the categories is by adding templates to the talk page, but that is just template inclusion which results in category inclusion. audiodude (talk) 02:59, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
I think the rationale is that no one would be available to rate inactive projects' class and importance assessment and maintain that? But, I too personally do not appreciate it. We loose some useful statistics when we do this. —CX Zoom[he/him](let's talk • {C•X})08:21, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
There has been a lot of assessment activity on pages related to the popular culture WikiProject, just check the history of Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Popular Culture articles by quality log. Many "active" projects also do not have any maintenance for parts of their assessment categories; I don't think anybody has put any thought into WikiProject Germany's distinctions between "Low"/"Mid" and "Mid"/"High" importance for at least a decade. —Kusma (talk) 08:49, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
For the record, I am occasionally using assessment templates for various projects that are deemed as inactive, some of them are "the best fit", and sometimes, like in the case of sade in popculture case, the only fit I can think of. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here06:26, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
IdiotSavant, linking the category directly as you did causes the page you link on to be put in that category, which I believe is not your intention, so I've taken the liberty of fixing your links. casualdejekyll12:37, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
WikiProject Albums is no longer using importance for its banner. Will the bot understand this? Also, can the semantics to the table be fixed?
I went to manually edit User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Album and it was a mess. Will the bot understand that {{album}} no longer includes importance= and therefore will no longer update these irrelevant columns? Can someone from this team please also ensure that this table has proper semantics, e.g. per MOS:TABLECAPTION? If I can help, please ping me. Thanks. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯19:26, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
Incidentally, if Audiodude sees this, there needs to be another purge for WikiProject Sports as well - it was good I saw this, because an editor with Template Editor permissions randomly restored the Importance parameter without doing a courtesy ping of the original edit-requester (i.e. me), so the categories were populated again with the deprecated Importance parameter. Oh well. I wonder if people with Toolserver access can just go poke around and do it manually... wish there was a documented procedure somewhere. SnowFire (talk) 02:35, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
This is just to let the bot operators know that a change in Template:WikiProject banner shell and Template:WPBannerMeta was made today that allows people to enter the class rating in the banner shell template, and this will then be inherited by all project banners on that page (unless they have opted out). The assessment categories should be unaffected, so I'm not sure if any changes to the bot's code will be needed — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:38, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
That first table for WP:USRD needs a couple of additions for a few task forces that have been added. (Along with this, the table name may need a new title since it's not for Roads writ large, but just the US Roads project.)
We need a row added with a gray background for Category:U.S. county road articles by quality with "CR" as the abbreviation in the first column of the table. It should be listed third after the USH row.
We need a row added with a gray background for Category:U.S. road junction articles by quality with "JCT" as the abbreviation in the first column of the table. It should be listed fifth after the Auto trail row. (That row's abbreviation can be changed to "TRL" to match the project's navbox.)
We need a row added with a gray background for Category:U.S. Route 66 articles by quality with "US 66" as the abbreviation in the first column of the table. It should be listed sixth after the JCT row.
The USRD row at the bottom should get a different shade since it's the project total row. Maybe a shade of green like #ddffdd.
The second table for WP:CARD only needs a background added for its project total row like the USRD table; that project uses red as its color, so a shade of pink like #ffdddd might work. That abbreviation of "CRWP" should be switched to "CARD" as well.
Along with this, there should be a third table created for WP:HWY. The rows needed would be based on the following assessment trees:
We don't create tables like this for you. The bot creates the tables automatically based on the presence of articles in the proper "... by quality" or "... by importance" categories. As far as having a table with multiple sub-projects listed in it, I think I'm vaguely familiar with this, but I would have to look more into how it's done. Do you have an example from another project where the sub-projects are listed in the same table? This might be something that you do yourself by transcluding templates. Thanks, audiodude (talk) 22:46, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
@Audiodude: these are the only tables with such a breakdown. We created a similar table out of templates for USRD, but it has no historical record. There are no past revisions of the table to see the assessment data on past dates because the templates just live update based on the current category contents at the time the page is purged or otherwise refreshed. At least with the custom tables, until the bot stopped updating them, we can go back in time and look through the revisions, just as we can with the existing standard project/TF tables. Imzadi 1979→23:44, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
If you have someone who can write Python code, I'd be happy to guide them in submitting a PR that would "re-activate" these tables (aka re-write them from scratch). Assuming you have such a person, I would be willing to do the groundwork of creating the "custom tables" framework (storing schema/metadata in the database) that they would use to write the custom table code.
Otherwise, I guess it requires a bit of understanding about the use case for these custom tables, which we've avoided re-implementing for this long. Are they providing functionality that can't be found elsewhere, or are they simply a convenience? What has been done in the past three years while they were unavailable?
@Audiodude: that was colloquially our "leaderboard", and for the last three years, the friendly competition to improve states' relative stats in the project has been absent, and project progress has stagnated compared to what we used to have. Without the combined table, you'd literally have to consult over 60 assessment tables to do the comparisons we used to be able to do in a single location (for the US), or consult 15 tables for Canada.
The template-driven live table has a flaw: with that many data rows, we can't display all of the assessment classes because we run out of "expensive parser function calls" to get that many category counts. As a result, the page can only display one assessment class and the WikiWork calculations. And that page still has no historical record in the page history of past assessments. Imzadi 1979→07:04, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
Okay I might be working on implementing this. Stay tuned. Likely the first version will be a copy of the old table before I can work in the new requests. audiodude (talk) 21:43, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
Hi @Imzadi1979, I've reimplemented custom tables for WP1, and added an implementation for the US Roads project. I will deploy this tomorrow and it should show up here when uploaded. I imagine there might be some bugs with the upload mechanism, since it is very hard to do an end to end test of that code in development/unit tests. Once that's figured out, keep an eye on the page I just linked, and let me know if it meets your expectations (keeping in mind that for this version I just copied over the current table configuration). Thanks, audiodude (talk) 03:37, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
@Audiodude: the table looks great. There is a math error though in the Ω column. That's the Relative WikiWork, which is calculated by dividing the Cumulative WikiWork, ω, by the total articles in a topic, or Ω = ω/T . Instead, we're getting the inverse (or Ω = T/ω), which isn't meaningful. Per the live table, the Ω for the IH row should be 3.691. Fix that, and it looks like the table is back. 😀 Imzadi 1979→00:13, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
Okay this should be fixed in the next bot run. Keep an eye on that page. Once I implement the requested changes for that page, I'll move the updates to a new name. Any requests? Should it be '../Tables/Custom/US-Roads'? Then I can get started on implementing the Canadian roads and the Highway pages you requested. audiodude (talk) 15:37, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
@Audiodude: that page name works for me. I'd suggest moving the old Roads page to that new title so that it's a seamless transition, if that makes sense. (That way the old revision history and the new history are "connected".)
Thank you for getting us this far. When I loaded the page yesterday, the table looked just like the old one, and was great to see. I'm excited to have this back up and running. Imzadi 1979→16:04, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
@Imzadi1979: Glad it's working and you're happy with the result! I've added the specifications for Canadian Roads, which will go at the same location as before and Highways, which will be here. In the future, if you need updates to these tables, you will likely need to request them on this talk page again, since there is no UI for updating these tables in the app. Thanks, audiodude (talk) 18:26, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
Also, the TCH assessments are under "Trans-Canada Highway articles" categories, not "Trans-Canada Highway road transport" categories. (I don't know why, they just are.) So the TCH row came up blank with a red link.
Quick thought, but the HWY table could use lighter shades of blue and green for the Highways and All Roads rows just for legibility, but otherwise, that table looks good. Imzadi 1979→00:21, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
Funny mistakes on Canada, will be fixed in the next bot run. Did I forget to mention that "custom" tables also means "handcrafted"? I've also updated the colors on HWY, but honestly it's going to be guess and check unless you just pick a color and tell me what you want. You can use "edit this page" and put the color you want in the table manually to "preview" it and see what you like. Glad you're happy with your new tables though! audiodude (talk) 01:25, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
Sorry didn't see this message until now. The Canadian Roads table hasn't been updated, because there was a syntax error in the code specifying it. Hopefully it will be fixed with tonight's bot run. Cheers, audiodude (talk) 19:30, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
@Audiodude: I have two questions related to the same topic. USRD added two topic-based task forces to USRD recently, one for State Highways, and one for Byways.
The WP 1.0 bot seems to not be detecting assessment changes in WikiProjects I have been assessing. The table for Crime related articles was last updated on 26 May 2023 at 0:44, while the Crime related log was last updated on the 28th, and does not report any assessments since the 26th. Yet I had already reassessed all 5 articles that are showing as not assessed by the bot before it ran on the 27th, as well as assessing additional articles yesterday and today. I have similar issues with Serial killer-related and Terrorism related article assessments. None of the recent assessments I have made appear to have been detected, yet the bot still appears to be running and dropping older days from the WikiProject logs. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 02:51, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
It looks like the bot ran on both May 28 and May 29, as evidenced here. Sometimes, the Wikipedia replica databases, that the bot uses to read the status of assessments on Wikipedia, get out of date and are lagging behind the live site. This might be the case now. If the bot tries to update a page and it hasn't changed (from the bot's perspective), it will look like there is no update (because the Mediawiki software detects that there is no actual change and skips the update). Let me check with the WMF cloud folks. audiodude (talk) 15:16, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
Yes, from the site that tracks the lag, I can see that it is currently at 129 hours, which would correspond with the delays we're seeing. Unfortunately, when this happens we can only cross our fingers and hope it resolves soon, there's no action we can take from our side. Hope this helps. audiodude (talk) 15:18, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
When a WikiProject stops tracking "importance" (i.e., {{WikiProject Anarchism}}) what needs to change on the 1.0 bot side so that the table stops generating importance columns in the table? Is it automatic once |importance= is depopulated from all banners? czar05:31, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
My initial guess would be that you have to delete the "*-Importance anarchism articles" categories, but it looks like you've already done that. I'm not sure the bot has the ability to disregard importance information when it doesn't find those categories, if the importance information existed previously. audiodude (talk) 02:40, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
Another log problem
Hello, in this entry it has added Fountains Fell as been changed from C-class to Unassessed-Class. The talk page of that article has not changed since 6 April 2017. No idea why it has made that entry as still C-class. Keith D (talk) 11:42, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
In this entry it has added Happy Valley (TV series) as been changed from C-class to Unassessed-Class. The talk page of that article has not changed since 1 February 2023. It appears to be picking random entries to reassses as that entry is still C-class. Keith D (talk) 12:04, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Sorry for the extremely delayed response to this. I looked at the revision quoted in the log [4] and it looks like the project was added to the Yorkshire project at that revision. So actually it makes sense in the log right, that it went from Unassessed to C, specifically for the Yorkshire project? audiodude (talk) 20:02, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
Okay sorry, I see that it went from C to Unassessed, my mistake. I guess the best explanation I can come up with off the top of my head is that the bot is somehow misreading the current rating and it is defaulting to Unassessed, but I'm not sure when or why this is happening. audiodude (talk) 20:06, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
On the Log pages, could we wrap {{Log}} in <noinclude> tags? I.e. {{Log}} would change to <noinclude>{{Log}}</noinclude>. Since this page if often transcluded onto WikiProject pages, this would get ready of the unnecessary template and provide more space to view the article links. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Green Bay Packers#Assessment for an example. Getting rid of the template in the transcluded view would provide more space to see articles (and the template itself isn't helpful in a transcluded view, since you would still need to navigate to the page to actually try to edit it. Thank you! « Gonzo fan2007(talk) @ 16:33, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
hi! i'm trying to make an article assessment table for WikiProject Artsakh. i've followed all the instructions & made all the categories here and here, but it seems that the project isn't in the index yet (despite having existed for years) & nothing comes up when i try to manually update it. it was inactive for a long time & i'm working on reviving it, so i wonder if it has to do with active status? or if it's just a glitch or even just a normal part of the process. thanks! Sawyer-mcdonell (talk) 01:44, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
i've discovered here that the categories should actually be called "[class] Artsakhian articles" although the template used is {{WPAM}} even though that's not the template for this WP ({{WikiProject Artsakh}} is the correct one) i'm confused! Sawyer-mcdonell (talk) 05:17, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
I tried doing a manual update on the openzim website, but it gets stuck at "Progress: Your job is almost finished, just wrapping up some tasks", never finishes. DFlhb (talk) 07:44, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
Is there some way to sort by assessment date? I.e., to see the Anarchism articles sorted by the ones most recently marked as stub-class (the third column). I could have sworn there was something like this but perhaps I got it wrong. czar21:38, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
Greetings @Czar - For a list of Anarchism stubs by date (last updated): Petscan; Depth 1; Category Anarchism stubs; Sort by date. However, does not show date when stub was added. Hope this helps. Regards, JoeNMLC (talk) 22:12, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
@JoeNMLC, thanks! So "sort by date descending" (example) is showing descending date of last edit (to the article), not descending date of when it was added as a stub? Is there any database/way to sort by when it was classified as a stub? I'm looking to create a report for recent article stubs. czar13:45, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
Hi @Czar Here are additional ideas that my be helpful.
While looking at WikiProject Anarchism, I see it does not have the bot-generated daily Assessment log like some other WPs (e.g. WikiProject Archaeology/Assessment). Adding this to the WP will show when articles are tagged as Stub-class (add/change/removal). So, over time you can make your list of New-stub-articles.
@Czar - honestly, I'm clueless how to do this, however on Talk here I did find some info that may be useful, especially the "how-to" explanation. Cheers! JoeNMLC (talk) 02:51, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
Bot skipping Video games
For the past few days, the bot hasn't run for the Video game project- last night it did "Video game characters" but not "Video games" despite the same changes logically being in both. It doesn't seem to be running out of time, so not sure why it's not doing that project. --PresN18:20, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
The bot still has not run for the video games project since February 28. Does @Audiodude: or anyone else have access to logs that could explain why? I tried to run it manually, and it stalled at "Your job is almost finished, just wrapping up some tasks." --PresN19:00, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
Now fixed, and it even put the backlog dates in the right headings instead of stacking them all in one day! Thanks, Audiodude! --PresN15:54, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
I'm just going to report the same problem, here no assessments/logs since 4 May. Anyone skilled who knows what to do with it? FromCzech (talk) 07:53, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
Yes, I took down the bot/server for about 8 hours today and completed the database migration. I've tested that the new database is working and kicked off a full bot run, which should complete in the next ~6 hours. Thanks for everyone's patience. audiodude (talk) 05:10, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
Hi! We started a new WikiProject here. I've created the categories, banner shell and tagged some pages. What do I do next? Vestrian24Bio (U • T • A • C • S) 11:46, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
XTools Edit Count not updating
XTools Edit Count not updated since 2024-08-03 03:11. I think it's more likely an issue across almost anything that is supposed to update stats. — Maile (talk) 14:07, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
Done - first, created "Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Album articles by quality statistics"; second, activated wikitable by uncommenting on Assessment page. Cheers! JoeNMLC (talk) 03:04, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
Moved from Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)