Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Index/Archive 9

Archive 5

←

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

October 18, 2018 - Bot stopped early

@Walkerma: and @Audiodude: Last night while processing October 18 logs, it stopped. Wondering why bot is skipping logs for Oct. 9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16 and 17 for Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Catholicism articles by quality log?
---
* 00:18, 19 October 2018 (diff | hist) (+938)‎ Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Bihar articles by quality log ‎ (Log for October 18, 2018 (2G r541)) (current)
---
Trying not to be frustrated, JoeHebda (talk) 14:23, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

@Walkerma: and @Audiodude: Wondering if I should contact Village pump-technical to see if anyone there knows how to start bot processing? JoeHebda (talk) 17:12, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

IMHO, I think we have to wait till Audiodude has finished writing his code. I don't think there's anyone from the Village Pump who would know more than Audiodude & Kelson. It may be frustrating, but this rewrite will hopefully fix bugs that we've had to deal with periodically since 2012 or so. I'm frustrated too - I haven't been able to make any progress on the 1.0 project for a long time - but I also want to see something that will work for the long term. Regards, Walkerma (talk) 02:52, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Reassessing the same article every day

Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Anthroponymy articles by quality log "reassesses" Céline, Furse (surname) and Thomson (surname) every day without fail, for no particular reason as far as I can tell. Any ideas? —Xezbeth (talk) 07:00, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Quick look at Furse (surname) and the problem is the two {{WikiProject Anthroponymy}} templates with slightly different assessments. Keith D (talk) 07:38, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, I can't believe I didn't notice that. —Xezbeth (talk) 10:20, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

October 4, 2018 - WP 1.0 bot processed 5 days of assessment logs

Greetings @Kelson: and @Audiodude: - Wondering what happened last night to trigger WP 1.0 bot to process so many days all at once?

Any way of tracking back to see if the bot was manually "jump-started"?

Just my thought but even if the bot is re-written/replaced, will there still be the conflicting WikiProjects that block processing, and will a new bot do the same?

Is there a way to check to software code to see if tool "enwp10" is shutdown/stopped before WP 1.0 bot begins processing? To insure these two are not conflicting. And that enwp10 is re-started when WP 1.0 bot is done?

1. Stop/shutdown enwp10 tool.
2. WP 1.0 bot processing
3. Re-start enwp10 tool.

Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 14:23, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi @JoeHebda: I was actually watching the log update job run last night. As far as I can tell, it was not manually run, it was the normal cron job. I also downloaded and took a look at past logs for the bot, and could see that, the previous few nights, it had stopped unexpectedly without any stack trace or other error information. The bot does have logic for trying to "catch up" on pages when it falls behind, and I think this logic has served it well in the past to cover for unreliability, since most editors on WikiProjects are likely not closely monitoring it day by day by day.

It is unclear what is causing it to die in these situations, though. Clearly, a goal for the rewrite is to provide better logging and stack traces so that when something goes wrong, it can be diagnosed.

I'm interested in your idea about stopping the enwp10 web interface while the logging bot is running. Currently, no attempt is made to do that and the programs run concurrently. What is it that you think that there's a source of contention (presumably for database resources) and why do you think that this would help? audiodude (talk) 03:42, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Greetings @Audiodude: Wondering if there is any kind of a "timer" in the job that says "after X hours or minutes" to stop after WP currently being worked on is done. Or after X number of WikiProjects? That would explain randomness. Just as there is a "Start at" time,is there a "Stop time"?

In looking at Wikipedia:WikiProject Catholicism/Popular pages there is another bot (Community tech bot) doing assessments. It starts at Day 1 of each new month & plows through WikiProjects. It takes anywhere from 12 to 17 days to get to this specific WP. Could this be 2 bots that from time-to-time hit upon the same WP simultaneously, causing "WP 1.0 bot" to stop. Is there any "collision avoidance" logic in there? Like, "this WP is busy/locked, so, skip to the next WP & continue processing".

Another thing to be checked - is there any kind of WP limit in the code? X number of WP completed so it stops there? If yes, increasing that WP limit to accomodate more WP could be the solution.

A few more ideas. JoeHebda (talk) 13:34, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

@JoeHebda: The bot starts with a list of every project it knows about and runs until every item in that list is processed. There is no limit on the number of projects to process. Like I said before, the bot seems to crash sporadically, but it's unclear why. There is also no logic to avoid "collisions" with other bots, but honestly that shouldn't be an issue because they operate on different pages and use different resources. It is not clear how such a collision avoidance mechanism would even be implemented. Cheers! audiodude (talk) 19:48, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

@Audiodude: Thanks for explaining how the bot works.

Here are a few more questions.

1. Is there a way to view content of that starting project list? To see if any projects are repeated, causing a loop & job to abort.

2. That starting list of projects, does it include inactive ones?

3. Are there any projects "out there" without assessment table?

4. Still wondering why it can go X-number-of-days without logs? Is the bot still running 24/7 during those days?

Thanks for helping investigate this issue. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 23:47, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

@JoeHebda: Responses to your questions:

1. Yes, I've downloaded the list from the server and posted it as a as a csv here. There are no repeated projects as far as I can tell. Even if there were, that would not "cause a loop", so I'm afraid that's not the likely culprit.

2. Most likely. However I imagine it's a slippery slope, defining a project as "Inactive". Also, if it is Inactive, it is likely to have a relatively small number of pages to process so it shouldn't be a problem really.

3. I have no idea.

4. The log updating bot doesn't run 24/7. It starts at around Noon UTC time every day and runs until it is finished. Like I said, I looked at the logs and the bot seems to be quitting "mysteriously" and "without a stack trace" on those days that it fails.

Cheers, audiodude (talk) 03:09, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

@Audiodude: Thanks for the csv-file.

• While I did not read the whole thing, paging through I noticed an "odd line" at #2370. It is very long & unlike other WP lines. Wondering it this is the problem? I have no idea how to fix, or if fixing will solve the issue.

Wiki_Loves_Women,Wikipedia:WikiProject Wiki Loves Women,Wikipedia,Wikipedia:WikiProject,Wikipedia,Wikipedia-Books,Wikipedia:WikiProject,Wikipedia-Books,Wikipedia_1.0_Arts,NULL,Wikipedia_essays,NULL,Wikipedia_vital,Wikipedia:WikiProject Vital articles

• At random I picked "Wikipedia:WikiProject Cartoon Network" in the csv file & see it appears 5 times. Could this be making the bot to run much longer? And maybe causes it to occasionally stop when it becomes confused.

• The CSV file has over 2,400 lines, yet at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory the category tree there shows 1,490 projects:
  

674 Active projects
242 Defunct projects
1 Draft project
299 Inactive projects
274 Semi-active projects

• Is there a specific Category tree that drives the bot? I tried looking for one that matches & could not find.

The last Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Catholicism articles by quality log was on October 4, so any day now the bot should kick out multiple days. JoeHebda (talk) 14:23, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

@JoeHebda: Glad the CSV proved useful! The weird line you saw was just a result of the (crude) post-processing I did on the raw database results, it presumably should be broken across several lines. It's not causing any problems for the bot. I've updated the gist to display the "fixed" rows as they should have appeared in the original CSV. Note there were other errors in the CSV because of my (crude) post-processing, but none of these are reflected in the actual data the bot uses. See the updated gist here.

I looked at the appearances of "Cartoon Network", but it's all different sub-projects:

• WikiProject Cartoon Network/Adult Swim task force
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Cartoon Network/Aqua Teen Hunger Force task force
• WikiProject Cartoon Network/Ben 10 task force
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Cartoon Network/Ed, Edd n Eddy task force
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Cartoon Network

It is important to understand, even if a project appeared multiple times on this list, it would not necessarily cause problems for the bot. The likely behavior we would see is that the logs and tables for these projects would get multiple edit revisions with the same data, which would not cause any problems for the other projects. Looking for duplicate data as the source of the problem is a dead end. It's far more likely that the data sets are too big and the bot is running out of memory or something similar (though we can't confirm this because the bot dies without a stack trace).

The bot uses this category exclusively for seeding its list of projects. I believe this is in accordance with the instructions in the WP 1.0 documentation, along the lines of what a WikiProject needs to do to be included in assessments. However, we might be able to revisit this criteria. I think the WikiProject Council links you provided seem very useful! audiodude (talk) 16:23, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

@Audiodude: - Tonight watching WP 1.0 bot processing (User contributions) and wondering why sequence of Wikiprojects is not same as above link?

Tonight I contacted Oleg Alexandrov about helping solve conflicting WP categories issue. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 01:47, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Conflicting project tags

It appears that there is a problem with project tags conflicting with each other - namely, Military History and any project that contains a military task force or workgroup. Example: Talk:Kieran Fleming is assessed for WP Military History under its military biography task force, and for WP Biography under its military biography work group. Both projects have differing assessments for the article, but the project tags both call a common category series - the end result being that the page is in both Category:Start-Class biography (military) articles and Category:C-Class biography (military) articles. This, of course, causes the page to turn up on each day's assessment log, switching between assessment classes ad infinitum. One solution would be to unify the assessment across every project tag, but I know some projects have differing guidelines for assessment; the alternative would be to modify one of the project tags to withhold adding a category if a conflicting tag is present. (I'm not well-versed in the intricate template syntax required for these tags to begin with, so I don't know if that's even possible.) The same problem occurs between Military History and WP Australia, which has a military history task force (although there's even more going on with that project's log because the problem happens even when there is no difference in assessment).

I've read through the discussions above and have to wonder if this is related to WP 1.0 bot tending to get hung up on a log for one of the affected projects. --Sable232 (talk) 22:10, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Sable232 for identifying this conflict. I added Expert help needed tag above. I don't have any idea how to fix & see the complexity with inter-connecting WPs. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 23:54, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

October 23 to 24, 2018 - WP 1.0 bot processing errors

Greetings ( Kelson— Walkerma— Audiodude— Oleg Alexandrov — Sable232)

From last night's bot processing. Confirming problem with WikiProject(s) templates and/or Category Tree.
---
• 04:04, 24 October 2018 (diff | hist) (0)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Military history ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki) (current)
---
• 02:58, 24 October 2018 (diff | hist) (+539)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Biography (military) ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki) (current)
---
• 02:57, 24 October 2018 (diff | hist) (-686)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Biography (military) ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki)
---
• 02:20, 24 October 2018 (diff | hist) (0)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Military history ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki)
---
• 02:03, 24 October 2018 (diff | hist) (0)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Military history ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki)
---
• 00:53, 24 October 2018 (diff | hist) (+540)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Biography (military) ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki)
---
• 00:50, 24 October 2018 (diff | hist) (0)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/New Zealand ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki) (current)
---
• 00:31, 24 October 2018 (diff | hist) (-393)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Biography (military) ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki)
---
• 00:09, 24 October 2018 (diff | hist) (0)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Military history ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki)
---
• 21:59, 23 October 2018 (diff | hist) (+541)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Biography (military) ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki)
---
• 21:27, 23 October 2018 (diff | hist) (+868)‎ Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Bibliographies articles by quality log ‎ (Log for October 23, 2018 (2G r541)) (current)
---
It would not surprise me if there is nothing "wrong" with WP 1.0 bot. WikiProject templates and Category trees drive that thing so next step is: How to find and fix the errors? Still looing for Expert help.

Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 13:38, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

October 15, 2018 - WP 1.0 bot NO log since Oct. 8

Greetings @Walkerma: and @Audiodude: Wondering if Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Catholicism articles by quality log will be losing log data?

Is there a way to force bot to catch up?

JoeHebda (talk) 14:25, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi @JoeHebda:. I don't believe any of the data is lost, the logging data is still there, the bot just isn't getting to its processing. Giving enough time, care and resources I believe it would be possible to recover the logs, yes. As we've seen before, the bot will catch up provided it reaches the WikiProject. Thanks, audiodude (talk) 02:26, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi @Audiodude:. It's frustrating to see the bot getting stuck same way every day & not getting to WP after "B" for logs. I still think there is something broken either in Category Tree or WP Template(s). Need searching tool to find WP with bad tags. I notice when doing Assessments it is not-alphabetical, then when it starts on Logs, they are alpha sequence. JoeHebda (talk) 02:33, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

October 24, 2018 - enwp10 not running

Greetings @Kelson: and @Audiodude: The web service for enwp10 is not running & needs to be restarted. In browser tab, it is hung on Assessment page and never times out with any error. Requested from wikitable at Wikipedia:WikiProject Catholicism/Assessment. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 14:28, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T207877

The tool http://tools.wmflabs.org/enwp10/ is not working. All of the assessments in WikiProjects on the English Wikipedia depend on this tool (for instance, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Catholicism/Assessment -- all the links are to queries run by this tool) so it's important for maintenance and project work. Thanks!

JoeHebda (talk) 18:42, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks @Audiodude: for restarting enwp10. Wondering if the restart job can be posted onto a page so it is easier to run when needed? JoeHebda (talk) 20:17, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

I don't think restarting the web tool via a web process is possible, no. audiodude (talk) 02:28, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

It looks like the toolserver assessment tool is working normally again. Walkerma (talk) 18:09, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

October 26, 2018 - enwp10 not running

Hi @Audiodude: and @Kelson: The web service for enwp10 is not running & needs to be restarted. In browser tab, it is hung on Assessment page and never times out with any error. Requested from wikitable at Wikipedia:WikiProject Catholicism/Assessment. JoeHebda (talk) 13:24, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi @Audiodude: and @Kelson: Thanks for restarting tool enwp10 . JoeHebda (talk) 14:38, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

October 26, 2018 - WP 1.0 bot running?

Hi @Audiodude: and @Kelson: Today at noontime (UScentral-time) I ran WP Military history and WP Biography (military) manually using enwp10 tool to get some timings vs. the daily bot process.

It is now after 19:00 CT and I do not see WP1.0 bot starting the daily run yet. Does it need to be manually started? Or did my noontime requests cause it to fail? JoeHebda (talk) 00:11, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

Woops - it just started at 19:10. JoeHebda (talk) 00:13, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

October 27, 2018 - enwp10 not running

Hi @Audiodude: and @Kelson: The web service for enwp10 is not running & needs to be restarted. In browser tab, it is hung on Assessment page and never times out with any error. Requested from wikitable at Wikipedia:WikiProject Saints/Assessment. JoeHebda (talk) 17:48, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi @Audiodude: and @Kelson: it's running now. Thanks JoeHebda (talk) 18:24, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

Bot issue caused by incorrect article tags

Greetings ( Audiodude— Kelson— Walkerma)

After today's conference I had a chance to recall this problem and the solution.

Previously in WP Catholicism, the bot was repeating daily assessments (2 or 3) time for the entire WP. The cause was several articles with conflicting Class = tags.

Made-up example below. Because WP cath is a sub-project of WP Christianity, a particular article can have a tag of "catholicism=yes" on WP Christianity line.

{{WikiProject banner shell|1= {{WikiProject Christianity|class=C|importance=Top|theology-work-group=yes|theology-importance=Top|saints=yes|saints-importance=Top|catholicism=yes|catholicism-importance=Top|anglicanism=yes|anglicanism-importance=High}} {{WikiProject Religion|class=C|importance=Top}} {{WikiProject Biography|living=no|class=C|s&a-priority=Top|core=yes|listas=Aquinas, Thomas|s&a-work-group=yes}} {{WikiProject Philosophy|class=C|importance=Top|medieval=yes|philosopher=yes|religion=yes|ethics=yes|metaphysics=yes}} {{WikiProject Italy|class=C|importance=High}} {{WikiProject International relations|class=C|importance=}} {{WP1.0|v0.5=pass|class=C|category=Philrelig|VA=yes}} }}

If the article has a second WP Catholicism line, and the class= is different, the bot runs WP Cath assessment again. {{WikiProject Catholicism|class=start|importance=High}}

The solution is to either remove the cath. tag from WP Christianity, and match Class= on the Cath. line, Or delete WP Cath. line entirely.

Wondering if this is what is happening with both WP Biography (military) and WP Military history?

Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 19:38, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

---

Good evening ( Audiodude— Kelson— Walkerma) Tonight for first time I did Export pages for stub WP Military history & searched offline. I found 4 articles where WP Biography was not Stub. I re-assessed to have class= matching. I see the WP 1.0 bot is already past WP Military history today.

Tomorrow I will do comparison of Category Stub-Class biography (military) articles against WP Biography. Hoping to find & correct more class mis-matches.

JoeHebda (talk) 00:22, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks! The bot is supposed to be OK with conflicting assessments, but perhaps it got confused here - it would be great if that clears the block. Cheers, Walkerma (talk) 02:57, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

@Walkerma: Today, I found article Talk:Alan L. Gropman that had two lines same WP with diff classes (WP United States) so I removed the duplicate. The only block I removed today was from our downstairs bathroom sink (with a plunger)! Cheers! JoeHebda (talk) 20:27, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

---

October 27, 2018 - Report for WP 1.0 bot processing

Hi @Audiodude: and @Kelson: Firstly, during Assessment phase, Biography (military) ran once with no repeats.

• 20:35, 27 October 2018 (diff | hist) (+407)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Biography (military) ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki) (current)

From User contributions for WP 1.0 bot, processing during Log phase halted after WP Architecture.

• 21:15, 27 October 2018 (diff | hist) (-2,298)‎ Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Architecture articles by quality log ‎ (Log for October 27, 2018 (2G r541)) (current)

According to CSV listing, the next WP where it hung/locked up/died would be Wikipedia:GLAM/Archives of American Art. I checked Cat.GA and half of Cat-B. There are many duplicates of Archives of American Art on the talk pages.

In addition, for WP Saints, appears to be not updating assessments since 2010.

Wikipedia:WikiProject Saints/Assessment

Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Saints articles by quality statistics

From bot processing (below) plus I ran via enwp10 tool.

• 19:33, 27 October 2018‎ WP 1.0 bot (talk | contribs)‎ . . (12,179 bytes) (-123)‎ . . (Copying assessment table to wiki) (undo)

JoeHebda (talk) 04:12, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Logs not completed issue

Hi @Audiodude: and @Kelson: Looking at WP 1.0 bot User contributions from last night - a key question is Why does bot switch from doing WP logs & goes back to doing assessments? Should it not keep processing logs until all logs (A - Z) are done?
---
• 00:09, 28 October 2018 (diff | hist) (0)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Military history ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki)
---
• enwp10 request from Joe =
22:07, 27 October 2018 (diff | hist) (+123)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Saints ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki) (current)
---
• 21:29, 27 October 2018 (diff | hist) (+1,181)‎ Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Bihar articles by quality log ‎ (Log for October 27, 2018 (2G r541)) (current)
---

At 21:05, 27 October 2018 it started first Log processing & ran until 21:29. After that it started Military history for a second time.

Five hours on 2 WP assessment

What causes the bot to run for almost 5 hours on two WPs?
---
• 04:40, 28 October 2018 (diff | hist) (-407)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Biography (military) ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki) (current)
---
• 04:19, 28 October 2018 (diff | hist) (0)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Military history ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki) (current)
---
• 03:38, 28 October 2018 (diff | hist) (+407)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Biography (military) ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki)
---
• 03:19, 28 October 2018 (diff | hist) (0)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Military history ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki)
---
• 02:35, 28 October 2018 (diff | hist) (-407)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Biography (military) ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki)
---
• 01:26, 28 October 2018 (diff | hist) (0)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Military history ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki)
---
• 01:11, 28 October 2018 (diff | hist) (+263)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Biography (military) ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki)
---
• 00:41, 28 October 2018 (diff | hist) (-263)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Biography (military) ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki)
---
• 00:09, 28 October 2018 (diff | hist) (0)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Military history ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki)
---

IMO it is a "rats nest" of conflicting talk page WP tags that need cleanup. A tool is needed similar to enwp10 for finding duplicate WPs within each article of the requested WP. Part of difficulty is various spellings of Military history often WPMILHIST instead. Tool needed = Duplicate WikiProject finder for Talk pages. Wondering if this has already been invented? JoeHebda (talk) 14:03, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Focus on Biography (military) wikiproject

Discontinue manual searching of WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Military history, has over 220,000 articles.

Instead work on cleanup of WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Biography (military), has 61,000 articles.

•  Done - Category, Top-importance biography (military) articles (56 articles)
• Category, High-importance biography (military) articles (563 articles)
• Category, Mid-importance biography (military) articles (4223 articles)
• Category, Unknown-importance biography (military) articles (17,355 articles )
• Category, Low-importance biography (military) articles (20,364 articles)

•  In progress - Category, Stub-Class biography (military) articles (18,817 articles) 29 October 2018

Process for manual searching each category.

1. Export pages for Category.
2. Read pages offline in Notepad++. Search for duplicates, " Biography (", then second search " military) ".
3. Fix articles on Wikipedia as needed.
4. Run enwp10 tool for Biography (military) and check wikitable.

JoeHebda (talk) 14:33, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Today, after working on Stub-class articles, I manually ran enwp10 tool for Biography (military) articles. I did find one article with duplicate WPs. Tomorrow morning I will check tonights WP 1.0 bot logs. JoeHebda (talk) 23:46, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

October 29, 2018 - Broken WP1.0 bot?

Greetings (audiodude—Kelson—Walkerma) From last night, WP 1.0 bot for logs, it should have processed Oct. 29 only. Instead the bot repeated (duplicate) logs for Oct. 25, 26, 27 and 28. Then created new Oct. 29 logs.

• Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Bihar articles by quality log
• Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Bibliographies articles by quality log
• Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Bible articles by quality log
• Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Bhutan articles by quality log

Oct. 29 - 30 processing

1. It processed assessment tables for Oct. 29 only.

2. After custom table Canada-Roads-1, it began creating 5-days-of-logs for each WP, as described above.
---
• 21:05, 29 October 2018 (diff | hist) (+34,104)‎ Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/AFC articles by quality log ‎ (Log for October 25, 2018 (2G r541))
---
• 21:05, 29 October 2018 (diff | hist) (0)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Custom/Canada-Roads-1 ‎ (Copying custom table 'Canada-Roads-1' to wiki) (current)
---

3. After Bihar articles by quality log it began the Biography (military) / Military history death spiral.
---
• 02:49, 30 October 2018 (diff | hist) (0)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Military history ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki) (current)
---
• 02:44, 30 October 2018 (diff | hist) (0)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Military history ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki)
---
• 02:35, 30 October 2018 (diff | hist) (+407)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Biography (military) ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki) (current)
---
• 02:15, 30 October 2018 (diff | hist) (0)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Military history ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki)
---
• 01:06, 30 October 2018 (diff | hist) (-407)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Biography (military) ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki)
---
• 00:46, 30 October 2018 (diff | hist) (+407)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Biography (military) ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki)
---
• 22:03, 29 October 2018 (diff | hist) (-407)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Biography (military) ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki)
---
• 21:51, 29 October 2018 (diff | hist) (+407)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Biography (military) ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki)
---
• 21:40, 29 October 2018 (diff | hist) (+1,195)‎ Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Bihar articles by quality log ‎ (Log for October 28, 2018 (2G r541)) (current)
---

Attention needed

Wondering if there is any "Reset/restart" job for WP 1. bot? As it gets further behind (many WPs = no logs since Oct. 8) will it ever get current? JoeHebda (talk) 10:24, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Wikiproject Bihar talk pages cleanup

Greetings (audiodude—Kelson—Walkerma) When WP 1.0 bot stops doing Logs at WP Bihar, it then goes back to assessments, starting with WP Biography (military). I've seen this happen many times this exact same pattern.
---
• 21:51, 29 October 2018 (diff | hist) (+407)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Biography (military) ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki)
---
• 21:40, 29 October 2018 (diff | hist) (+1,195)‎ Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Bihar articles by quality log ‎ (Log for October 28, 2018 (2G r541)) (current)
---
It may be a longshot but this morning I began doing cleanup on WP Bihar & am finding about 1/4 of articles have mixed "class=". So far, all articles have been checked except for Class = Start & Stub-class.

At Central Time, I ran WP Bihar with enwp10 tool.
---
• 14:48, 30 October 2018 (diff | hist) (+244)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Bihar ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki) (current)
---
• 05:39, 30 October 2018 (diff | hist) (0)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Military history ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki) (current)
---
At this point I have very little confidence that cleanup of WP Bihar will fix the problem. Why does bot stop creating logs & go back to doing assessments? And it never goes beyond "B" inthe alphabet for logs. JoeHebda (talk) 20:01, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

October 31, 2018 - enwp10 tool not running

Greetings (audiodude—Kelson—Walkerma) - Please restart enwp10 tool. Thanks. JoeHebda (talk) 16:19, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Now running, thanks! JoeHebda (talk) 16:39, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

October 8, 2018 - processing of WP Biography (military)

Good-day (audiodude—Kelson—Walkerma)

For Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Biography (military) articles by quality log processing on Oct. 8, WP 1.0 bot created 15 chunks, a huge amount of work. There may be 100s of articles needing talk page cleanup. There are no more quality logs since then for this WP.

These articles have conflicting class = values that need to be unified. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 20:33, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Help - Bot quality logs "stuck" on Oct. 25th

Greetings (audiodude—Kelson—Walkerma) In tonight's WP 1.0 bot processing it is repeating days (for most WPs but not all WPs) from Oct. 25,26,27,28,29,30. Example at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Andorra articles by quality log. In addition to cluttering up logs, it is consuming more & more resources each day creating extra logs.

Is there any way to completely shutdown WP1.0bot and effectively start over? JoeHebda (talk) 02:30, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Tracking WP1.0 bot issue

Greetings (audiodude—Kelson—Walkerma)

From quality logs for AFC which has daily level of activity.

• October 24 - processed once
• October 25 - processed once
• October 26 - Oct. 26, Oct. 26
• October 27 - Oct. 25, 26, 27
• October 28 - Oct. 25, 26, 27, 28
• October 29 - Oct. 25, 26, 27, 28, 29
• October 30 - Oct. 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
• October 31 - Oct. 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31

Do not know what happened on October 26th when this problem began. Since WP 1.0 bot is broken, should it be shutdown? JoeHebda (talk) 13:46, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

WP 1.0 bot had another "meltdown" last night & processed SEVEN DAYS for most (but not all) wikiprojects. JoeHebda (talk) 15:30, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

Backtracking to August - WP1.0 bot issue

Greetings (audiodude—Kelson—Walkerma)

Digging back through the bot processing. Start of "issues".

• August 15 - logs generated okay, from A to Z - last = Zimbawe
• August 16 - started AFC log at 21:46
• August 16 - stopped logs at "Bible" at 22:04 & switched back to assessment tables
• August 17 - stopped logs at "Bihar" at 21:45 & switched back to assessment tables
• August 18 - started AFC log at 21:28
• August 18 - stopped logs at "Bible" at 21:51 & switched back to assessment tables
• August 19 - started AFC log at 21:24
• August 19 - stopped logs at "Bihar" at 21:51 & switched back to assessment tables
• August 20 - started AFC log at 21:34
• August 20 - stopped logs at "Bible" at 21:59 & switched back to assessment tables
• August 21 - started AFC log at 21:19
• August 21 - at 21:50 began processing "Biography (military)" 15-chunks for August 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21. Ending at 21:54
• August 21 - at 21:54 began processing "Biography (musicians)" Aug.16 to Aug.21
• Continued running, creating quality logs
• August 22 - at 03:06 processing ended at "Zimbawe" Aug. 16 to Aug. 21

This was the beginning of bot's meltdown. Last good complete process ran on August 15. JoeHebda (talk) 15:10, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Conflicting Wikiprojects - Talk pages

Below is what I just posted at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Christianity/Noticeboard. Conflict is WP Christianity talk pages with Bible workgroups, plus a Bible WP line.

Greetings, Today I updated 10 Christianity WP pages, removing "bible workgroup" from the christianity WP because the talk page already contains WP Bible line. The duplication is causing issues with daily assessment WP 1.0 bot.

• 400th anniversary of the King James Version (talk)
• Bible in Basic English (talk)
• Farrer hypothesis (talk)
• Historicity and origin of the Resurrection of Jesus (talk)
• King James Version (talk)
• Mary Magdalene (talk)
• Pauline epistles (talk)
• Synoptic Gospels (talk)
• Textual variants in the New Testament (talk)
• Category:Historicity and origin of the Resurrection of Jesus (talk)

Going forward, whenever this type of conflict is discovered in other articles, please update to remove the conflict. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 18:28, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Above changes had no effect on WP 1.0 bot October 31 processing . Bot appears to create "non-user generated" changes for the logs whenever all WPs do not have exact same "class =" and "importance =" values. JoeHebda (talk) 15:37, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

Why is bot "stuck" repeating WP Military history?

@Walkerma: and @Audiodude:
• 23:36, 21 October 2018 (diff | hist) (0)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Military history ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki) (current)
---
• 23:25, 21 October 2018 (diff | hist) (0)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Military history ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki)
---
• 22:46, 21 October 2018 (diff | hist) (0)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Military history ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki)
---
• 22:04, 21 October 2018 (diff | hist) (+541)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Biography (military) ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki) (current)
---
• 22:04, 21 October 2018 (diff | hist) (0)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Military history ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki)
---
• 21:24, 21 October 2018 (diff | hist) (+1,612)‎ Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Bihar articles by quality log ‎ (Log for October 21, 2018 (2G r541)) (current)
---
As reported earlier, no bot asssessment logs since OCTOBER 8. JoeHebda (talk) 13:13, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

@Walkerma: and @Audiodude: - FYI today I posted a link to above section at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history. Hoping an expert there can identify why the repeats. JoeHebda (talk) 19:43, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

I've been looking at this from time to time because it's quite puzzling and some projects whose logs I look at don't get updated. I noticed in today's Australian Military History log that there are numerous articles listed as reassessed when their talk pages haven't been edited in years - some are even redirects. There's no duplicate tags nor stray categories added to the talk pages. Could there something mis-coded with the Military History project template that's causing this? --Sable232 (talk) 03:20, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Bot processing Oct. 22 to Oct. 23

@Walkerma: and @Audiodude: - Last night starting at 22:15 WP 1.0 bot processed WikiProject Military history a total of EIGHT times finally halting the bot at 04:14 on Oct. 23. I have posted at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history hoping this issue can be fixed. JoeHebda (talk) 13:20, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Has this been resolved? I haven't seen the report for days. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:06, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

EIGHT DAYS - Bot quality logs "stuck" on Oct. 25th

Greetings (audiodude—Kelson—Walkerma) In tonight's November 1 WP 1.0 bot processing it is repeating days (for most WPs but not all WPs) from Oct. 25,26,27,28,29,30 and Nov 1. Example at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Andorra articles by quality log. In addition to cluttering up logs, it is consuming more & more resources each day creating extra logs.

Because the bot is malfunctioning, I am posting at Wikipedia:Bots/Noticeboard. The assessments (first part) seem to be processing correctly. It is the quality logs (second part) that is having a meltdown. After fixing, I don't know if the accumulated multiple repeating logs can be removed with a cleanup job.

Tonight after logs for WP Bihar it once again stopped processing WPs, not getting to "B" to "Z" WPs.

• 21:37, 1 November 2018 (diff | hist) (0)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Military history ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki) (current)

• 21:30, 1 November 2018 (diff | hist) (-105)‎ Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Bihar articles by quality log ‎ (Log for November 1, 2018 (2G r541)) (current)

Instead of processing Biography (military) tables multiple times, it did Military history. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 03:07, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

November 2, 2018 - enwp10 tool not running

Greetings (audiodude—Kelson—Walkerma) - Please restart enwp10 tool. Thanks. JoeHebda (talk) 14:31, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

It's running now. thanks :-) JoeHebda (talk) 20:01, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

November 2, 2018 - Duplicate WPs on Talk pages

Greetings (audiodude—Kelson—Walkerma) - Tonight I found duplicate WPs on these articles

• Talk:Stavanger Heliport, University Hospital
• Talk:Muller Ice Shelf
• Talk:2007 Chattanooga Mocs football team

In addition while watching WP 1.0 bot processing, after it completes assessment tables (part one), the very first WP for quality logs (part two) is "AFC". At Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/AFC articles by quality log are many, many articles with duplicate AFC lines. I added a message here at AFC talk page about removing duplicates. I did cleanup 3 or 4 articles & am now calling it a day. Will check tomorrow. JoeHebda (talk) 02:37, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Tracking - November, 2018 - Article quality logs

WP 1.0 bot creates "Assessment tables" for all articles "A" to "Z". Since October 8, the bot processes "quality logs" only for WPs "A" to part-way thru "B" stopping after WP Bihar. So for WPs "C" to "Z", no logs since October 8.

For example at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Catholicism articles by quality log.

Date	Log created	Comment
November 1	None	-
November 2	None	-
November 3	None	-
November 4	None	-
November 5	Bot blocked	Malfunctioning
November 6	-	-
November 7	-	-
November 8	-	-
November 9	-	-
November 10	-	-
November 11	-	-
November 12	•	•
November 13	•	•
November 14	•	•
November 15	•	•
November 16	•	•
November 17	•	•
November 18	•	•
November 19	•	•
November 20	•	•
November 21	•	•
November 22	•	•
November 23	•	•
November 24	•	•
November 25	•	•
November 26	•	•
November 27	•	•
November 28	•	•
November 29	•	•
November 30	•	•

This bot behavior is reported at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation seeking a search tool to find duplicate WPs on article talk pages. JoeHebda (talk) 14:17, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Please update the bots talkpage.

Please see User_talk:WP_1.0_bot. Toolserver has been gone now for years. Who's actually running this bot these days? Is it being run from toolforge now? What's the project name? SQL^{Query me!} 06:40, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

The bot is run by the few of us left on the WP:1 project, and we maintain it on behalf of all the WikiProjects. The main person who maintains it is User:Kelson, and he is working currently with User:Audiodude on writing new code to try and fix the problem. See User_talk:WP_1.0_bot/Third_generation for some initial ideas. Walkerma (talk) 03:51, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

BTW, I can't edit that bot talk page, because it's locked. But the "real" talk page for the bot is Wikipedia_talk:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Index. Walkerma (talk) 03:55, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

November 4, 2018 - WP 1.0 bot "quality logs"

Greetings (audiodude—Kelson—Walkerma) - Logs from last night show even more WPs with bad processing dates & processing times.

---

• Stopped after running for many hours

• 03:52, 5 November 2018 (diff | hist) (-264)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Biography (military) ‎ (Copying assessment table to wiki) (current)

• Last quality log, switches back to running assessment tables

• 21:37, 4 November 2018 (diff | hist) (+1,074)‎ Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Bihar articles by quality log ‎ (Log for November 4, 2018 (2G r541)) (current)

---

• Stopped here for this WP, consuming 19 minutes processing 1 wikiproj.

• 21:02, 4 November 2018 (diff | hist) (+2,055)‎ Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Astronomical Objects articles by quality log ‎(Log for January 10, 2011 (2G r541))
• 21:00, 4 November 2018 (diff | hist) (-98,032)‎ Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Astronomical Objects articles by quality log ‎(Log for November 18, 2010 (2G r541) [chunk 44 of 44]) (Tag: Replaced)
• 20:59, 4 November 2018 (diff | hist) (+128)‎ Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Astronomical Objects articles by quality log ‎ (Log for November 17, 2010 (2G r541) [chunk 1 of 43])
• 20:46, 4 November 2018 (diff | hist) (-43,589)‎ Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Astronomical Objects articles by quality log ‎ (Log for December 9, 2009 (2G r541) [chunk 107 of 107])

• First Astr.Objects WP, starting with 2009

• 20:43, 4 November 2018 (diff | hist) (+51,197)‎ Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Astronomical Objects articles by quality log ‎ (Log for December 8, 2009 (2G r541) [chunk 66 of 66])

• Last astrology log

• 20:41, 4 November 2018 (diff | hist) (+176)‎ Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Astrology articles by quality log ‎ (Log for November 3, 2018 (2G r541)) (current)

---

• Ending with October 2018

• 20:05, 4 November 2018 (diff | hist) (+357)‎ Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Accounting articles by quality log ‎ (Log for October 25, 2018 (2G r541))

• Starting with 2014 date

• 20:05, 4 November 2018 (diff | hist) (+169)‎ Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Accountancy articles by quality log ‎ (Log for March 9, 2014 (2G r541) [chunk 1 of 4]) (current)

---

• WP AFL is redirected to Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian rules football , ran for 12 minutes processing, started with 2009

• 19:44, 4 November 2018 (diff | hist) (+92,242)‎ Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/AFL articles by quality log ‎ (Log for December 8, 2009 (2G r541) [chunk 35 of 35]) (Tag: Removed redirect)

• Ran AFC ten times

• 19:43, 4 November 2018 (diff | hist) (-25,196)‎ Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/AFC articles by quality log ‎ (Log for November 4, 2018 (2G r541)) (current)

---

• First quality log, and it has bad date 2009

• 19:37, 4 November 2018 (diff | hist) (-18,284)‎ Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/19th century novels task force articles by quality log ‎ (Log for December 8, 2009 (2G r541) [chunk 6 of 6])

• Switching from last of Tables to start of Quality logs

• 19:37, 4 November 2018 (diff | hist) (0)‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Custom/Essays-1 ‎ (Copying custom table 'Essays-1' to wiki) (current)

---

Question - Is there a Bot or Script writing to file dates WP1.0bot uses? JoeHebda (talk) 15:10, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

November 3, 2018 - WP 1.0 bot processing

Greetings (audiodude—Kelson—Walkerma) - From last night's bot processing, at WP Bihar it created logs for Oct. 25, 27, 28, 29, 30, Nov. 1, 2, 3. Then it stopped "quality logs" and switched back to "assessment table" for WP Military history, which it ran only once & did not repeat-run Biography (military) at all.

Missing template for WP Bihar

It looks like WikiProject Bihar is actually a taskforce/subproject of WikiProject India. On an article I attempted to add {{WikiProject Bihar}} and it redlined = no template. I have zero knowledge of how WPs are created & setup correctly. Does the WP1.0bot expect there to be a template for every wikiproject? Could this be causing the "quality logs" blockage? JoeHebda (talk) 14:29, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

@JoeHebda: Regardless of how you are adding the WikiProject template, you should WP:PREVIEW your edits before saving to ensure that the template really exists. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:13, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

@Redrose64: - As I stated above I have zero knowledge of how WPs are created & setup correctly. So I have not done anything for WP Bihar, hoping an expert would fix this issue. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 19:20, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Not all WikiProjects have templates. In some cases (such as Women in Red), this is intentional; in others (like Bihar), it is because the "WikiProject" is actually a task force within a larger WikiProject (in this case India), which has its own template. See WP:COUNCIL. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:33, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

I have created {{WikiProject Bihar}} as a wrapper template, so it works just as if there was a standalone {{WikiProject Bihar}} template.

@JoeHebda: it was entirely reasonable of you to be expect to be able to simply add {{WikiProject Bihar}}. Unfortunately, @Redrose64 has decided for some reason to make this point on which they will make editors' live difficult. I have had several long discussions about this with Redrose64, most recently this evening, but the obstryuctiveness is unmovable. So I suggest simply ignoring Redrose64. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:34, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

It's not about "obstryuctiveness", whatever that is. It's about you (that is, both of you) taking responsibility for your actions, instead of leaving a mess that you then expect others to clear up. If you had fixed these problems at the time that they happened, only you would have known that there had been a problem, and nobody would be complaining. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:38, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

1. There was no "mess". Just a few missing redirects and wrappers.
2. I thought that my previous work a few years ago had ensured that there was a complete set of country-project banners, but this AWB run revealed a few exceptions. I took responsibility by fixing the problem as soon as I became aware of it.

Now @Redrose64, enough already from you. Stop wasting the tine of other editors, and stop harassing editors who are finding solutions. Your latest response chooses to try to score points off my typo, which is a good indication that you have nothing substantive to offer. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:43, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

@BrownHairedGirl: - I concur. Digging back through Archives, I find this bot was Created on 4 February 2007 and the original bot predates that. And records in Archives show on-going problems not solved. So here I am, struggling to just report issues & asking for Expert help because I do not have the skillset to fix it myself. After my 44 years in the computer industry it is personally frustrating to not find a solution. Starting to help Wikipedia in 2014, IMO this specific bot is VERY COMPLICATED. And unfortunately the bot's original author(s), maintainers & bot operator have all moved on. So who is "left standing"?

Since WP1.0bot is driven by Wikiprojects, if they are not coded correctly (one of the problems), it disrupts bot processing from what I can see in the botlogs.

• • • •• • • •

CC to (Adamdaley—Redrose64—audiodude—Kelson—Walkerma) Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 15:00, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Date timestamps, corruption

More bot news for (audiodude—Kelson—Walkerma) - On some Wikiprojects, for "quality logs" the bot switches back to dates of 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012.

---

• 21:47, 3 November 2018 (diff | hist) (-73,593)‎ Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/American Civil War articles by quality log ‎ (Log for October 25, 2018 (2G r541) [chunk 2 of 2])

• 21:47, 3 November 2018 (diff | hist) (-496)‎ Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/American Animation articles by quality log ‎ (Log for June 15, 2011 (2G r541) [chunk 1 of 8]) (current)

Processing dates 2009 to 2011

• 21:36, 3 November 2018 (diff | hist) (-96,773)‎ Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/American Animation articles by quality log ‎ (Log for December 8, 2009 (2G r541) [chunk 6 of 6]) (Tag: Replaced)

• 21:35, 3 November 2018 (diff | hist) (+99)‎ Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Amateur radio articles by quality log ‎ (Log for November 3, 2018 (2G r541)) (current)

---

•21:24, 3 November 2018 (diff | hist) (+4)‎ Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Abu Dhabi articles by quality log ‎ (Log for October 25, 2018 (2G r541))

• 21:24, 3 November 2018 (diff | hist) (+10,804)‎ Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Abortion articles by quality log ‎ (Log for March 27, 2011 (2G r541) [chunk 1 of 2]) (current)

Processing dates 2009 to 2011

• 21:22, 3 November 2018 (diff | hist) (-96,510)‎ Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Abortion articles by quality log ‎ (Log for December 8, 2009 (2G r541) [chunk 3 of 3]) (Tag: Replaced)

•21:22, 3 November 2018 (diff | hist) (+769)‎ Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Abkhazia articles by quality log ‎ (Log for November 2, 2018 (2G r541)) (current)

---

Is there a database file where "WP1.0bot" stores these dates? Wondering if another bot in error is overwriting the date-timestamps?JoeHebda (talk) 14:58, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

JoeHebda (talk) 14:41, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

tools.wmflabs.org/enwp10/cgi-bin/list2.fcgi

In Article lists I enter "Australia" for Project and "All orphaned articles" for Article category and all I get is Total results: Error. Any suggestions please. I am trying to find all orphan articles within the Australia project. Aoziwe (talk) 12:29, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

@Aoziwe: Greetings - alternate at WikiProject Cleanup Listings, choose your WikiProject, then click on by cat link. The WP 1.0 bot is malfunctioning, is blocked, and enwp10 tool uses that bot. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 14:28, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

@Aoziwe: To find orphan articles, at the "Contents" box, page down to "Links" section, then choose "Orphaned" line. JoeHebda (talk) 14:34, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

JoeHebda - many thanks - looks good. Aoziwe (talk) 23:55, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Article cleanup listings

Greetings (audiodude—Kelson—Walkerma) The link to weekly WikiProject Cleanup Listings may be a useful alternative while WP 1.0 bot is blocked.JoeHebda (talk) 20:15, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Bot data source

Hi all, I maintain an (offline) script to generate a list of recent article/category additions/deletions for the Video games wikiproject (sample output here). It primarily is based on the 1.0 bot's changelog output. This leads to an obvious problem- the bot has been down for a month, and from looking at this talk page and the v3 bot's talk page, it does not appear that it is going to be replaced or fixed any time soon. Given that, it seems that the best thing to do is to rewrite it to be based on another source, and should probably not be relying on other scripts/bots; does anyone know what datasource the 1.0 bot is using? --PresN 02:46, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Asking (audiodude—Kelson—Walkerma) if you would know Bot data source? Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 04:16, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

I'm perhaps not the best to answer, but I believe the bot can only track articles when they have a WikiProject tag on the talk page. That means if a page is created without a project tag it will be invisible to the bot. I apologize if you're looking for a deeper level of detail than that! Walkerma (talk) 04:38, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Obsolete listings

I am raising two issues:

1. The project index for WP 1.0 bot includes two entries for one project: WikiProject Law and "WikiProject Legal". As a result, the bot creates User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Legal (and will recreate it if it is deleted), which has been superseded by User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Law. Can the duplicate entry be removed?
2. Category:Version 0.5 articles by quality and its subcategories were deleted based on this discussion, but "Version 0.5" still appears in the index. Can the deleted project be removed?

Thanks, -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 02:46, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Greerings @Black Falcon: - Asking for help from (Kelson—Walkerma—audiodude) who may be able to help you. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 03:21, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Friendly ping to prevent archiving... -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 18:56, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

CleanupWorklistBot

Greetings (audiodude—Kelson—Walkerma) - In my wanderings around Wikipedia, I found CleanupWorklistBot reading WikiProject article tags. It runs weekly on Tuesdays. Unlike WP 1.0 bot it is driven by subpage Master lines. I doubt it is conflicting with WP1.0bot but I'm still left wondering if another bot might be "out-there" and corrupting the date-timestamps? It would explain the bot's malfunctioning. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 03:26, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Question for (Walkerma—Kelson—audiodude) - Do the database files that WP 1.0 bot uses have security on them? So that the bot is only one allowed to update? If not, then other bots or scripts might be corrupting causing the bot to malfunction. JoeHebda (talk) 14:30, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

November 19, 2018 - WP 1.0 bot "quality logs"

Greetings (Walkerma—Kelson—audiodude) - Now that the bot is blocked, I'm wondering how easy would it be to divide into two jobs?

• Process Assessment tables only (run now)
• Process Quality logs only (run after testing & fixed)

This way the Assessment tables could keep posting all the updates, especially for huge Biography & Military history wikiprojects. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 14:24, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

November 27, 2018 - Update

Greetings (Walkerma—Kelson—audiodude) - Today I added a "to-do" list for WP1.0bot and placed link at top of this page. JoeHebda (talk) 15:02, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

That's an excellent idea - thank you! I hope to talk with you tomorrow. Walkerma (talk) 13:21, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

1.0 bot not updating

User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/WikiProject Seamounts shows only one Featured article even though there are now two after Wōdejebato became a featured article. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 11:47, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Greetings @Jo-Jo Eumerus: - See above section "Alternate process" while "WP1.0bot" is malfunctioning & blocked. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 13:40, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

December 3, 2018 - enwp10 not running

Hi @Audiodude: @Kelson: and @Walkerma: - The web service for enwp10 is not running & needs to be restarted. In browser tab, it is hung on Assessment page and times out with 502 Bad Gateway error. Requested from wikitable at Wikipedia:WikiProject Catholicism/Assessment and WP Saints. JoeHebda (talk) 14:50, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

@Audiodude: - Yes, now it's working. Any chance of making a Restart button? Or showing me how/where to do this? I'm on here almost daily & it would be helpful. JoeHebda (talk) 20:27, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

December 6, 2018 - enwp10 not running

Hi @Gonzo fan2007: @Audiodude: @Kelson: and @Walkerma: - Enwp10 tool is hungup. For example when I click on Wikitable User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Saints tool does not run or timeout. JoeHebda (talk) 02:24, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

It's running now. Thanks. JoeHebda (talk) 03:05, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Good. In my experience, when it re-starts after a bug fix, there is often a lot of "dead wood" that it has to clear out of its system, so it often has a few hiccups and weird things till it settles down into a steady rhythm of normal posts. Thanks, Walkerma (talk) 13:26, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

Is WP1.0bot missing Wikiprojects?

Greetings @Ww2censor: @Gonzo fan2007: @Audiodude: @Kelson: and @Walkerma: - When looking at log for WP 1.0 bot I change view to 500 count. Entire processing is completed with less than 1,000 entries. My concern is - are there missing Wikiprojects? Thought there are over 2,000 Wikiprojects.

Also, as I mentioned previously, during the daily assessment process the bot no longer runs in Alpha (A-Z) sequence. JoeHebda (talk) 14:31, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

According to this list there are 2450 WikiProjects. Click on the "All" link to view them. ww2censor (talk) 23:06, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi (Ww2censor—Gonzo_fan2007—audiodude—Kelson—Walkerma) - Thanks Ww2censor for link to list of 2450 WikiProjects. I just checked a few against "WP1.0bot" log and see that "Yes" there are WPs not being processed -

• Abkhazia - last ran 19:54, 6 December 2018
• AIDS - last ran 18:32, 6 December 2018
• Arab world - ran 18:43, 8 December 2018 and ran 19:29, 10 December 2018

That 2450 list contains many Work groups, subprojects where the article counts are updated via the main project. Wish the list indicated "Bot updated" ones & Workgroup ones.

JoeHebda (talk) 04:08, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Does the bot update WikiProjects that have had no changes? I.e. if the wikitable is the same as the day before, then the bot would not perform an edit. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 14:52, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

December 11, 2018 - enwp10 not running

Good morning (Ww2censor—Gonzo_fan2007—audiodude—Kelson—Walkerma) Enwp10 tool is hungup. When I click on Wikitable User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Colorado the tool does not run or timeout. JoeHebda (talk) 14:57, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

JoeHebda All those links seem to be working now. I received 3 tables this morning and the links I tried from those tables all work. ww2censor (talk) 15:10, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

JoeHebda, full disclosure the bot has always been glitchy, with minor issues here and there. Even when it was "working", I had issues with tables not loading or the tool not running. Unless the bot shuts down for an extended period, I don't think you need to report here each time something is loading. Also, I have this page watched, so you don't need to ping me in every comment. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:51, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Gonzo_fan2007 for the heads-up about the pinging...was not aware of that. After 17yrs working IT in an IBM shop, guess I'm spoiled - the live system could be patched with minor changes as needed (mostly by me). For software upgrades & other major changes we had a total test environment; a main AS400 & two network servers & good software vendor support. That's why I know nothing is impossible. Too bad WP1.0bot has "history". Sounds like those defects were not identified & fixed. Glad bot is being re-written. Sorry for rambling on like this. Cheers, JoeHebda (talk) 18:57, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

No problem. As you aware, people often live with minor issues if the overall process generally works. Hopefully 3.0 can improve the process! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 20:17, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Bot not running ... again.

Seems like the bot went down last night and is still down. Can someone kick it? Thanks LibraryGeek (talk) 18:55, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

December 19, 2018 - enwp10 not running

Good afternoon (audiodude—Kelson—Walkerma—LibraryGeek) Enwp10 tool is hungup. When I click on Wikitable User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Colorado the tool does not run or timeout. JoeHebda (talk) 19:30, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

* ω Awaiting - After a long wait for enwp10 tool request, it shows 502 Bad Gateway error. JoeHebda (talk) 23:40, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Indeed, old Rusty the Bot seems to be down, again, though sometime today it DID generate a new assessment table, and tools.wmflabs.org/enwp10/cgi-bin/update.fcgi took me to the initial project selection page a moment ago (though that too seems to be down, now). Looks like it WAS running briefly, and died again. This old bucket of bolts doesn't seem much longer for this world. I'll cheer when it gets sent to the scrap heap. LibraryGeek (talk) 02:21, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

@LibraryGeek: - IMO it would be ironic if there's nothing wrong with the bot except it is starved for resources while running. Before I retired, for 17 yrs at an IBM AS400 computer shop this was not much of a problem. Any heavy-running job could be throttled back by giving it a lower priority, very simple. So then all interactive, real-time processing was fast. On Wikipedia I have zero understanding of how things are glued together. With over 6-million articles now the bot surely needs more resources compared to years ago. JoeHebda (talk) 02:59, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

I think you may well be right about this. It's not always a matter of bugs, it may be a sysadmin issue. At any rate, I think this page demonstrates the bot is wildly unstable, and something needs to be done. Just restarting it alone is not the answer. It's not a one-time fluke. BTW, it's running again, at the moment ... but for how long?? LibraryGeek (talk) 04:24, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

@LibraryGeek: - To clarify above, the actual bot is WP 1.0 bot while enwp10 tool is used to request & process a single wikiproject. So here is my "little list" of issues.

1. Bot processing resources
2. Inability of bot to log & report errors while processing
3. Broken "Quality logs" feature (bugs with timestamp)
4. Complexity of WikiProject template coding
5. Errors coding WikiProjects on article Talk pages, especially duplicate WPs

Yes, these are all signs of the need for the new bot to "do more" & be correct. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 14:30, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Wishlist for bot upgrade ... sort by Sort Key.

I'm trying to troubleshoot articles that show up in the Categories, but not in the bot generated data, or vice versa. I've found this is frequently a matter of links to the banners in Userspace, or duplicate banners on the page for the same project. Unfortunately, the Categories are sorted by Sort Key, and the bot can only sort by Article title ... and unlike Wikipedia, the sorts by article title are case sensitive (with the upper case alphabet being sorted before the lowercase alphabet), while Wikipedia is not. This makes comparing the bot generated list with the category to find the "missing" page a pain in the bleep. I know of no workaround, as Special:AllPages and Special:Categories only list Category pages, not the contents of those pages. It would be good if this could be addressed, at least in bot 3G, if not in the current bucket of bolts. LibraryGeek (talk) 04:47, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Possible Workaround

All, I was thinking of a possible workaround to our issue that would allow the bot to update the stats tables but not edit the logs. Thanks to a bot request, here is a list of all the WikiProject log pages: User:WP 1.0 bot/Logs. An admin (myself if no one else wants to try) could batch fully protect all of the log pages (using Twinkle). Full protection will make it impossible for the bot to edit the log pages, but if unblocked, should be able to update the statistics pages. I am no expert on how bots run, so I am curious as to any feedback that you all may have on this idea. At the very least it would appear that this workaround would make it possible for users to individually update projects using the normal means. Cheers, « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:36, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

I tested my theory. I fully protected Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Green Bay Packers articles by quality log, unblocked the bot, and then ran the bot for WP:PACKERS. It updated the statistics table and performed no other edits. Cheers, « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 17:54, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi @Audiodude: @Kelson: and @Walkerma: - Interesting news that would allow bot to update Wikitables only. JoeHebda (talk) 18:41, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Greetings @Gonzo fan2007: - I contacted group above with your news. I'm definitely in favor of anything that gets that "WP1.0bot" running again even if without the logs. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 19:21, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

After thinking it through, I don't see there being a lot of risk to testing this theory out on a large scale. I have fully protected all the log pages. I will unblock the bot and see what happens. Fram or another admin, feel free to block again if there are any issues. Cheers, « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 21:54, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Also, it appears a few of the logs were missed on the batch protection, so if the bot starts editing those pages please consider fully protecting them as well (or let me know and I will). I got success from 2415/2437 of the log pages, but no way to know which ones were missed. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 21:58, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

You can now manually update projects at least using the update link. Just updated WP:NFL. Interesting to see what happens when WP 1.0 bot (talk · contribs) runs by itself. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 22:02, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Can I ask if anything is being done to get the logs working as that is more important to me then the table of article counts. Keith D (talk) 00:15, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

@Gonzo fan2007: - I see the bot running now & right away it reminds me of another "bot-bug". When a certain talkpage has same Wikiproject listed more than once the bot repeats processing, especially when those 2 or more WPs have diff. class/importance values. For example,

• 18:09, 6 December 2018 diff hist +407‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Biography (military) ‎ Copying assessment table to wiki current
• 18:05, 6 December 2018 diff hist -407‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Biography (military) ‎ Copying assessment table to wiki
• 18:02, 6 December 2018 diff hist +116‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Biography (military) ‎ Copying assessment table to wiki
• 18:01, 6 December 2018 diff hist -407‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Biography (military) ‎ Copying assessment table to wiki
• 17:24, 6 December 2018 diff hist +551‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Biography (military) ‎ Copying assessment table to wiki

And I do not know how to search & find those talk pages to remove duplicates. I think same problem with WP Biography, WP Military History that I remember, and there are probably some more. JoeHebda (talk) 00:44, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

JoeHebda, is this an issue you are noting for version 3 of the bot, or something that necessitates blocking the bot again? In my opinion it seems like a fix for the next version of the bot and is something we can deal with for now. Keith D, I miss the logs too. Sorry, but this was just an attempt to get the statistics tables working again, since they were more or less still working correctly. The logs were the items that necessitated blocking the bot, and hopefully that issue is being addressed by those who have a better knowledge of bots than I do. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 01:30, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

@Gonzo fan2007: - Yes, next bot version is supposed to fix. For now, it is really a data-quality issue. What is needed is a daily audit/cleanup report to identify those talk pages with duplicate WPs. The bot is driven by those article talk pages & if not coded correctly, the current bot cannot handle those duplicate conditions.

Wondering why bot running tonight is not processing A-to-Z like previously?

For the logs, a couple weeks ago I briefly read thru the Perl source & found at least one place where Timestamp value was not initialized. When log "goes crazy" datewise I'm sure there must be Timestamp bug(s). JoeHebda (talk) 01:58, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

@Gonzo fan2007: - Above at Third generation WP1.0 bot section are links to talk page where new bot features, audit report, etc. are listed. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 02:05, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

JoeHebda, sounds good. It looks like the bot completed its first run. A quick perusal of its edits looks like the workaround worked for now. Interesting that it didn't go A thru Z as you said. Will be interesting to see how it runs tomorrow. Will continue to monitor, let me know if you notice anything that is fixable via admin tools or if the bot needs to be blocked again. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 02:10, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

@Gonzo fan2007: - Thanks so much for helping with this! Having the daily Wikitable assessments running again is a good step forward. Cheers! JoeHebda (talk) 02:16, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Excellent news that the tables will be back online! As to the logs, @Keith D:, on occasion you can get logs via the web portal like at [1], though it's only barely usable at all; over the last 3 weeks of checking I've only gotten it to return results about 4-5 times. That's enough for my use case (running a script to generate a "new articles report" for a wikiproject), though extremely frustrating, but may not be helpful for you. --PresN 03:34, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

@Gonzo fan2007: and @Audiodude: @Kelson: and @Walkerma: - Looks like a good run of WP 1.0 bot assessment tables tonight. I did not see any of those duplicate WPs being processed. Maybe that first run yesterday was like flushing the toilet? lol Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 02:38, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

December 9, 2018 - enwp10 not running

Hi @Gonzo fan2007: @Audiodude: @Kelson: and @Walkerma: - Enwp10 tool is hungup. For example when I click on Wikitable User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/ tool does not run or timeout.

Note: forthis bio-mil wp it processed 5 consecutive times during yesterday assessment updates. So I exported some of the over 60,000 artilces & am reading offline, hunting for those duplicates, & other cleanups. Wish there was a tool to find them. JoeHebda (talk) 15:14, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

Enwp10 tool is running now. Not certain when it was restarted. 01:20, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Here's a thought. Some time ago, while assessing articles that already had a military history project assessment banner, I noticed that when using the project rater gadget it shows an error message as follows: Error while parsing: Broken template invocation for :WikiProject Military history”. Fix the source code and try again. so I wonder if this has anything to do with stalling the bots progress as mention had been made of the military article assessments not working properly. ww2censor (talk) 17:16, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

@Ww2censor: - The daily "WP10bot" processing is different from "enwp10 tool". The tool was not running earlier today, and has since been restarted. For December 9 bot processing, WP Biography (military) was repeat processed at 16:23, 16:29 and 17:50 from WP10bot, not with enwp10tool. From the logs, WP Biography (military) was also processed at 00:32 time, possibly requested manually with enwp10tool. The only way I know to stop the WP repeats is to find those articles where the WP is duplicated & remove the extra WPs. I have done this previously with other WPs & know this solution works. Problem is how to find the duplicates? Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 01:34, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

JoeHebda I believe both the bot and the tool use the project assessment banners to get their results. So, I wonder do the duplicate assessment banners transclude only once, or twice, to the "What links here" results page. If twice, here's what I found could work. This results page, of 5000 links (you have to manually change the 500 in the url to 5000 and I don't know the limit) could be used to export the page names. If they show up twice then, considering there are 22300+ articles you would only need 5+ pages, one could copy and paste the resulting columns into a spreadsheet and sort by name. Then one would just need to review the list for duplicates. I exported the list of 5000 and sorted then very quickly. Just another idea. ww2censor (talk) 13:33, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

@Ww2censor: - Thanks for this idea. Will investigate yet today. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 14:29, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Bot blocked

I have blocked User:WP 1.0 bot, see Wikipedia:Bots/Noticeboard#Reporting article assessment "WP 1.0 bot" misbehaving (and specifically my comment there). Fram (talk) 14:50, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

To prevent archiving at this time. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:13, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Assessment bot cleanup

Greetings (Walkerma—audiodude—Kelson) - Today I found Category:Perl people and wondering if any of these people could be asked to help cleanup files that drive WP 1.0 bot so that the bot can be re-started? JoeHebda (talk) 21:50, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Third generation WP1.0 bot

Prevent archiving « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:47, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

As discussed above, we have begun working on the third generation version of User:WP_1.0_bot (the current version is the "second generation"). We are planning what features are needed, and we want to get the input from people who are using the bot regularly. I have also started a wiki page. If you are an active user of the bot (e.g., for WikiProject assessments), we would like to hear from you! We are setting up two venues:

1. User:WP_1.0_bot/Third_generation and the related discussion page, which will be for on-wiki discussion.
2. We're also planning a Jitsi discussion (audio only) on Thursday, October 18th, 2018, at 1800h UTC (2000h Central European Summer Time, 11am US Pacific Daylight Time).Walkerma (talk) 03:07, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

If you want to join us, then please sign your name below, and we'll contact you:

• Walkerma (talk) 03:07, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
• JoeHebda (talk) 13:44, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
• Adamdaley (talk) 09:46, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Asking for WP1.0 bot help

Volunteers wanted @AadaamS, Aamct, Acaos, Ak hepcat, Alanbly, Alba7~enwiki, Alexios Chouchoulas, AlthalusUK, Ame Errante, AmigoCgn, Amire80, Amityadavigib, Anand QED, Andargor, Andkaha, AndreniW/Userboxes, Andthu, Apatxe~enwiki, Archfalhwyl, Areana~enwiki, ARebour, Ariadoss, Aydee, Bdonlan, BeeTea, Belg4mit, Bitchen, Bkell, Boomklever, Burlingk, Canine828, Cassavau, Catbar, Cecilgol, Cedders, Chairboy, ChrisH, Christophe1972, Chuuumus, Cirne, Colin.faulkingham, Cr4shkitty, Culu, Cyberbisson, CyberSkull, and CzPoP: @Daen, DAllen, Damiantgordon, DanaJohnson, Darkness Productions, Dave85uk, David.s.hollman, Decoyjava, DG1NFO, DJBr, Dmnapolitano, DMZ, Dojo Mud, DPoon, Duke delirium, Dwibby, Edo13th, Egberts, EmmetCaulfield, EncMstr, Enigmatical, The Epopt, Errantsignal, Etniix, EvilSuggestions, FelineAvenger, FERcsI, Fo0bar, Gawdl3y, Gdickinson, GilHamilton, Goat-see, Grawlt, Greeneto, GT AE, H3xx, Hack-Man, Hackajar, Hankwang, Happy5214, Himatsu Bushi, Hosterweis, Inoesomestuff, and Iph: @Jagerman, Jake Wildstrom, JCDenton2052, Jdoe74, Jerome.Abela, Jhaselden, Jimbomorrison, Jobin~enwiki, Joeystanley, JohnOwens, Jonabbey, Jonadab~enwiki, Jope~enwiki, Joris Landman, Jpat34721, Jswhitten, Karlhahn, Kcowolf, Ke4roh, Kenny Moens, Kjr99044, Ko1, Krakrjak, Ksnortum, Lacavin, LANNOCC, Lauchlin, Lemnar, LGnome, Lklundin, Loadmaster, Macwhiz, Maddingue, Mark Shaw, Martin Kealey, Mathetes Ger, Matthewrbowker, Mawich, Mbertsch, Mdomig, Mdupont, MediaMangler, MeekMark, Mewcenary, MikaelLindmark, and Mikeblas: @MiniCruzer, Mjgardner, Mkb218, MOAI12, ModernGeek, MoHaG, Moxfyre, Mpeylo, Mr Shark, Musiphil, Nahaj, Namdnal Siroj, Narthring, Newtman, Nhinds, Nicerobot, NicolasDelerue, NitrogenTSRH, NoRams, Orca8767, Osurak, PaulSchreiber, PeterJeremy, Phlyming, Pkirlin, Polemic Thoughts, PonyoOnTheCliff, Pro crast in a tor, ProveIt, Quasar Jarosz, Rbulling, Richie765, Rick7425, Roadrunner, Robert Stone, Jr., Ronark, Ronnotel, Rp, RussianSpy, Sambc, Sarge 5150, Shenme, SineWave, Sipa1024, Sir kris, SMcCandlish, Soregashi, and Staffordj: @Steaphan Greene, Stephen P Simpson, Stephen Shaw, StephenFalken, Stolze, StonewallCanyon, Streapadair, SuperTails92, Suprcel, Syscomet, Taral, Teflontb, Thattommyguy, Thief~enwiki, Tietew, Tigger89, TimBuchheim, TimNelson, Tomh009, Tothwolf, TraxPlayer, TypoBoy, Undecidable, UnDeRTaKeR, Vtatila, Warlock, Who, Wikivmk, Wjmcqueen, Woju, Wpliao, Xaonon, Xiehan, Yellowking, Yogesh Sawant, Yumb, ZacBowling, ZaX, Zemyla, and Zero g:

Asking for help from people at User perl-3. JoeHebda (talk) 13:21, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

---

Additional @A beautiful mind~enwiki, Akramm, Allens, Altapulken, AngelFire3423, Anilkt, Anomie, Archfool, AubreyEllenShomo, Bcordes, Beland, Bmaynard, Bobby Tables, BrianCully, Brianski, Bzxzlg, Ceira, Chaos5023, Chrisirwin, Cjewell, Cjoprey, Codehead, Crazycomputers, Cs007, Dandv, Danielsmith, Dantheox, Daviki, Dbw~enwiki, Dcorrin, De Guerre, Distant highway, DocSigma, DoGooderJohnnyD, Dreish, Ear~enwiki, Flagongoblin, Goltz20707, Grokus, Gscshoyru, Hcblue, Hirudo, Holzman-tweed, Idonotlikepeas, and Ig0r~enwiki: @Jczorkmid, Jdavidb, Jgoldfar, Jkominek, Jmax-, Joe n bloe, Jok2000, Ken g6, Kevin Scannell, Kkaq, Kku, Kmbs, Kvan, Lbn, LeoFrank, LuisAugustoPeña, MattOates, Migmontano, Mirokado, Mrh30, Mysidia, Nathaniel Reindl, Oakwright, Pikkusiili, Pjoef, Poggioli, Poslfit, Pseudomonas, Psiphiorg, Puellanivis, Quasar Jarosz, Ralamosm, Randolf Richardson, Rational thinker, Raymond Keller, Rekhesh, ReyBrujo, Rhaas, Robertlowe, Rrohbeck, Ruakh, and Ryker-Smith: @Segv11, Shepaado, Shirayuki, Sifukurt, SirGeek CSP, Smallman12q, Sparky2002b, Spectre9, SpiceMan, Spicyjack, Spm, Spoon!, Sshenoy, Steinizethat, Sutekh.destroyer, Swedegeek, Thapap, The Raven, Trent, Txwikinger, V7ndotcom Elursrebmem, Whirl, WVH, and Ze miguel:

Asking for help from people at User perl-4. JoeHebda (talk) 17:43, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

---

Greetings @Acasson, AlanM1, Andrew Young, AzaToth, Bradd, Cooper0, Daniel.standage, Diham, Fcforrest, GreatMarkO, HPA, KPU0, Luke-Jr, Mmlange, Nids, PaleAqua, PaleCyan, Pbaker0804, Pbalyoz, Qcomplex5, Rcv, Robertcurrey, Simuliid, and Vulcan's Forge: This message is for people at Category:User perl-5.

---

Due to malfunctioning, WP 1.0 bot was blocked on November 5, 2018.

If any of you would like to help, the source for WP 1.0 bot is here (from User:Kelson).

• Look for wikimedia_wp1_bot/backend/DIRECTORY.MAP.txt for details.
• At the top of this page I added a plain to-do list to help direct this effort.
• Below at the Participants section, add your name with ~~~~ and interest level. Thanks.

My involvement consists of being a frustrated-article-assessmenter without skills needed to debug & fix any WP bots. After 44-years in computer industry, I'm now retired & enjoy helping to improve Wikipedia. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 19:14, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Participants

• I will take a look Wizzy…☎ 11:48, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Assessment CGI Not Working?

When attempting to use the tool to run a querry like this the last couple of days it hasn't been working. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 06:03, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

I had same problem but it looks like it's back up! For you too Barkeep49? Innisfree987 (talk) 18:17, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Checked it this morning and it is indeed working, but forgot to comment here. Thanks! Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 18:19, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

And I just went to use it again and it was once again unresponsive. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 00:03, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Yep: had it working for a second, then when I tried to refresh... Innisfree987 (talk) 05:09, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Adding importance categories

I attempted to add the importance categories for the women's tennis project five days ago (see here), and they haven't been populated. Is there something else I need to do to notify the bot, or will they be populated automatically? The bot was already tracking article quality for the project. Thanks! Sportsfan77777 (talk) 21:57, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Adding new wikiprojects?

How to do that, basically? RE Wikipedia:WikiProject Bull Riding --Kyerjay (talk) 20:35, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

@Kyerjay: the instructions are at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Using the bot, but note that the bot is currently blocked and will likely remain so until the next version of the bot is released, which will hopefully be soon. --PresN 20:41, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! --Kyerjay (talk) 20:43, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Reblocked

I have reblocked the bot at this time, per Wikipedia:Bots/Noticeboard#December 8, 2018 - update. Until ownership of the account can be established, the bot cannot be actively editing per our WP:BOTPOL. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:02, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

WP 1.0 bot - HISTORY

Going back through archives, below I have pieced together fragments of bot history. With possible gaps along the way.

---

• "second generation" bot, updated from original - WP 1.0 bot (talk | contribs)‏‎ (bot) (Created on 4 February 2007 at 15:45) (blocked)

---

Activation

On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the old bot was turned off and the new bot (2G) began to update the tables and logs on the wiki.

---

• User talk:Oleg Alexandrov - Wrote original bot

I have not been involved in this for a while, but try following the instructions at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Using the bot. If that does not work, try contacting CBM who runs the bot. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 1:05 pm, 22 June 2011, Wednesday (7 years, 4 months, 21 days ago) (UTC−5)

---

• User talk:CBM - Carl, maintained. Worked on newer version? - Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Index/Archive 6

---

Two other maintainers have taken over the WP 1.0 bot, by the way, Theopolisme and Wolfgang42. — Carl (CBM · talk) 16:14, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

---

• Theopolisme and Wolfgang42 - When ?

From about 2013 to 2015, though it was really only Theo, and it was basic maintenance to keep the bot running.Walkerma (talk) 19:06, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

---

• Kelson - When ?

Kelson has been involved almost since the beginning (2006), but initially only as a user. He first looked at the code in around 2016 when it became apparent that no one else was up to the job. He fixed some long-term problems, and successfully migrated it to a new server when the original one was being shut down. He continues to maintain things whenever he has time, but running Kiwix remains his top priority. Walkerma (talk) 19:06, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

---

There may have been other people on the WP 1.0 bot team years back, now lost to time. Question - is there a requirement for the "bot operator" to be one person vs. a team? Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 18:51, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

No one else really, other than User:Titoxd, who helped CBM in writing the 2G code. We had someone else volunteer to help before CBM, in about 2008, but he didn't end up writing any code. Walkerma (talk) 19:06, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Someone needs to have access to the bot account and take responsibility for the bots edits. This person needs to be able to login to the bot account to prove they have control over the account. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 20:12, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

A request for volunteers was written on 22:55, 20 December 2012. Wondering where is a good page to re-post asking for bot maintainers? Perhaps at Bot Noticeboard? JoeHebda (talk) 12:43, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

The Table is working, thank you

I suspect many people have been working hard to make this happen, thank you. New Zealand Project. (Dushan Jugum (talk) 02:43, 21 February 2019 (UTC)).

Mathematics Wikiproject:probability and statistics at Wikipedia:WikiProject Statistics

Wikipedia:WikiProject Statistics includes a table of articles tagged as probability and statistics with the {{maths rating}} template. But the table shows no articles. Can someone here take a look and fix it?

Thank you --76.14.38.58 (talk) 04:34, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't understand. The table on that page does have articles listed. Is there one particular column or row that is missing? Can you explain further? Thanks, Walkerma (talk) 04:10, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

I think they're referring to the table below that in the sidebar, which is empty- User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Custom/Mathematics-Probability. From the history, though, it's been empty since November 2017. --PresN 04:36, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Additionally anonymous poster, please note that the bot is currently broken and has been for months, so even if whatever issue happened in 2017 is fixed, the table will still not be populated. --PresN 04:39, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

@Pres:The tables are now being updated - the old bot was successfully restarted today, so let's see if that populated. The tests on the new bot are also going well. Walkerma (talk) 02:56, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

enwp10 assessment logs tool not working

The enwp10 assessment logs tool (located at [2]) is down- the page loads, but selecting any project returns "Project 'name' is not in the database", e.g. for [3]. This isn't unusual- I usually can only get a response once every few days or so- but I haven't been able to get any results for the past 2 weeks. Does anyone know 1) why it's down, 2) if it can be brought back up, or 3) why it is usually down but sometimes up in the first place? My understanding is that the tool is independent of the bot, and other tasks like getting a list of per-project articles (e.g. [4]) work, so it's just the assessment log tool that isn't working. Thanks! --PresN 19:35, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Same here. When I tried updating the table using this url, it says that update is successful in the logs, but the actual table is never updated. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 11:29, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Kelson is working on trying to fix the bot at the moment. I'll make sure he knows the tools are down as well. Meanwhile, we're hopeful that the first code for the new version of the bot will be tested this week. Once I get more news I'll let people know here. Walkerma (talk) 02:47, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

@Walkerma: Excellent news! --PresN 03:08, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Apparently work on the new bot is stalled, but Kelson is working on fixing the old bot. Kelson or I will update once we know more. Walkerma (talk) 14:37, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi @Walkerma: is there any further update on this? —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 13:54, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

@IndianBio:Funny you should ask that! Things were quiet for a couple of weeks, but this week audiodude has been testing his new bot on WP:Catholicism. He did a successful test run today. He's able to update the web tool here but apparently not on-wiki as yet. But we have some working code there, so things are progressing! I'll certainly let people know as things progress; I've been waiting a long time to see this working properly again. Walkerma (talk) 03:41, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

The test of the new bot has gone well. Also, audiodude got the old bot running again after he fixed a bug, so that's updating the tables again. He's definitely making progress! Walkerma (talk) 02:53, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

Thank you Walkerma and Audiodude! --PresN 04:27, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

Old WP1.0 bot - Logs

Greetings audiodude - Wondering if WikiProject Biography (military) can be added to the new bot beta? The reason I'm asking is that from last night's logs it looks like the bot completed processing at 20:02 time. And yet there are a bunch of log entries after that. Wondering if those are from a live person repeatedly running the tools? And not the bot. Here are the logs that I'm questioning.

• 00:17, 2 March 2019 diff hist -406‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Biography (military) ‎ Copying assessment table to wiki current
• 23:19, 1 March 2019 diff hist 0‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Military history ‎ Copying assessment table to wiki current
• 23:17, 1 March 2019 diff hist +406‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Biography (military) ‎ Copying assessment table to wiki
• 23:10, 1 March 2019 diff hist -406‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Biography (military) ‎ Copying assessment table to wiki
• 23:02, 1 March 2019 diff hist +406‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Biography (military) ‎ Copying assessment table to wiki
• 23:01, 1 March 2019 diff hist -406‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Biography (military) ‎ Copying assessment table to wiki
• 22:52, 1 March 2019 diff hist +406‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Biography (military) ‎ Copying assessment table to wiki
• 22:47, 1 March 2019 diff hist -406‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Biography (military) ‎ Copying assessment table to wiki
• 22:32, 1 March 2019 diff hist +406‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Biography (military) ‎ Copying assessment table to wiki
• 22:16, 1 March 2019 diff hist -406‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Biography (military) ‎ Copying assessment table to wiki
• 21:46, 1 March 2019 diff hist +406‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Biography (military) ‎ Copying assessment table to wiki
• 21:44, 1 March 2019 diff hist -683‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Biography (military) ‎ Copying assessment table to wiki
• 21:38, 1 March 2019 diff hist +406‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Biography (military) ‎ Copying assessment table to wiki
• 20:02, 1 March 2019 diff hist 0‎ User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Custom/Mathematics-Overall ‎ Copying custom table 'Mathematics-Overall' to wiki current

For the new bot, this is why it is important to show whether the log entry was created by the bot or a manual request via the tools. Better yet would be to show the Username of the requester. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 16:10, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi @JoeHebda:. We are specifically avoiding Biography Miltary History for now, as it is the largest and most complex project by far. Also, running the new bot for collecting the table data wouldn't have any effect on how the tables on the wiki get updated, it would just potentially effect the numbers in those table (though if we've done it right, it wouldn't effect that either).

As for how to explain these edits, I believe that yes, they could be from manual runs on the bot's web page. There's also a chance that the same problems that cause the bot to seem to "loop" over copying change logs causes it to also "loop" when copying the assessment tables for this project. Either way, using the new bot for the project probably wouldn't fix anything at the moment. audiodude (talk) 01:22, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

New WP 1.0 Bot in beta

Just wanted to announce that the new WP 1.0 bot, code named Lucky, is being run in a limited beta engagement. It is currently operating only on WIkiProject Catholicism, but in the coming days will be updated to the list of 22 projects listed here and then later to the list of 212 projects on that same page. The final goal is that, a couple of weeks from now, if everything runs smoothly, to switch over all projects to the new bot.

To be clear, this is only the data-gathering mechanism that has been implemented currently. What this means is that the code to generate logs will (sadly) remain offline, while the code that updates the assessment tables on the wiki (which has recently been bugixed -- it hadn't run since December 20 2018) will remain the old code. The web tool will also remain on the old codebase for now, though there are plans to revamp that as well.

What does this mean for your WikiProject, if it's been selected for the beta? You can help us by looking for anomalies or failure cases such as empty assessment tables, or ones with wildly different values. The part of the bot that is being updated is the part that gathers the raw numbers for those tables.

Thanks! audiodude (talk) 05:21, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Audiodude, will the new bot be utilizing the existing log pages at User:WP 1.0 bot/Logs? If so, let me know, as they will need to be unprotected (see background discussion here). Thanks, « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 15:38, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Good question @Gonzo fan2007:. As mentioned above, the log generation code is still running the old code and will remain offline for the time being. Thank you for your attention to this matter. audiodude (talk) 17:49, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Audiodude, sorry, what I meant is in the long run (when the bot is fully operational), do you plan on utilizing those log pages or will the new bot create its own subpages for the logs? « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 17:53, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

@Gonzo fan2007: Oh sorry. Currently I believe the plan would be to have the new bot update the same pages, so yes they would need to be unprotected at some point. This might change if we have new requirements but I'm not aware of any yet. audiodude (talk) 22:11, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Update: I've gotten some questions from WikiProject maintainers that this explanation is unclear. Here are some answers to frequently asked questions:

• What bot is this?
  • It is the Wikipedia 1.0 Bot, which handles a number of tasks. For the purposes of this beta, we are talking about updating assessment tables such as this one. These tables are updated once per day by the bot.
• So what code is actually rewritten?
  • Only the code that evaluates articles and places them into quality/importance buckets is affected. So as stated above, only the data gathering mechanism. The part that actually generates wikicode and updates the wiki remains unchanged.
• Can my WikiProject opt out of this beta?
  • Yes, you are more than welcome to opt out. If you would like to opt out, you can do so by posting a message on your WikiProject talk page where my original message was posted, or on this page. However, we must note that if the test goes well, all WikiProjects will be updated using the new code path sometime within the next month, and we will be reluctant to handle opt-outs at that time.
• What if something goes wrong?
  • The bot should only operate, as it always has, on the assessment table pages. If you see something weird or incorrect in your assessment pages, please let us know! We can easily switch the bot back to using the original data gathering mechanism ("old code") so that your numbers will be restored or remain unchanged.

Thanks, audiodude (talk) 02:40, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Update 2: The bot is now running over the 22 projects listed here. If you have any questions or see anything strange, please contact me either on wiki or through email. The first run will be tomorrow, Mar 3. Thanks, audiodude (talk) 01:23, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Bot testing - table counts not matching

Greetings @Audiodude: - for User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Catholicism the bot is updating daily as intended. For the table "???" column the numbers are not matching. For example, Class-B shows 1 and when I click, enwp10 tool kicks out an error (zero count). Same for Class-C. For Class-Start, table shows count of 119 and tool has 114 count. For the table I did cache purge to be certain I'm seeing the current table. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 15:32, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

@JoeHebda: I think this is because the tables in the tool are updated at 4 AM PT, but they don't get copied to the wiki until 12 hours later at 4 PM PT. If you look at the table right now, it correctly has zero for those columns. audiodude (talk) 22:15, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

enwp10 tool shutdown 03-24-2019

ALERT for (audiodude—Kelson—Walkerma) - This morning I just saw notice about enwp10 tool scheduled for shutdown on week of 03-24-2019.

• Tech News - Announcement is down in "Future changes" section. Here is a copy-and-paste from there.
  

Toolforge will shut down the Ubuntu Trusty job grid. This will happen the week of 25 March. Tools that use this grid needs to be moved to the new Debian Stretch job grid. If they haven't, they will be taken offline. Maintainers can restart the tools later. Users may not be able to use them in the meanwhile. You can see a list of affected tools.

For enwp10 and for Trusty-tools

Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 13:41, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

That must explain the 503 Bad Gateway I've been seeing the past day and a half. Brian (talk) 17:52, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

I posted at WP-VPT asking for help. JoeHebda (talk) 00:30, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

Thx JoeHebda, things are under control on our side. Let us know if not. Kelson (talk) 05:04, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

@Kelson: - As stated above tool ENWP10 is no longer running because it needs to be moved to the new "Debian Stetch" job grid (whatever that is?). Is there an ETA for completion? JoeHebda (talk) 13:33, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

@JoeHebda:, is that what you search for? Kelson (talk) 17:10, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

@Kelson: - An example here on WP Catholicism table. Error is on ALL Wikiproject tables, for All class or Importance that use enwp10 tool now fail. Error is 503 Service Not Available. JoeHebda (talk) 20:26, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi @JoeHebda: We were aware of this migration, and I actually attempted to migrate the tool last week. I thought it was working, but there were a few more configuration changes that needed to be updated. I have now finished that, and everything should be working fine. Thanks! audiodude (talk) 19:15, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

@Audiodude: - Thanks so much! I just ran a bunch of enwp10 for table at WP Catholicism here. It seems to be running faster! Hoping with the new environment the tool will stay running "forever" without the previous outage problems. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 19:22, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Anything specific

That needs to be done to get an assessment table for a new WikiProject? I think I did things right. Or do I just need to wait?

Wikipedia:WikiProject_Videowiki#By_quality_and_importance

Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:24, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

I guess it might be tough as all our scripts exist in "Wikipedia" space right now. Hope is to move them to a "Video" space eventually. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:32, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Have tried changing things to "videowiki" with a lower case. I am now seeing some scripts listed here[5] so hopefully getting closer. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:46, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Alternate process to generate WP Assessment tables

Bumping thread for 180 days. JoeHebda (talk) 02:43, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

@Adamdaley: - Here is a possible workaround for individual Wikiprojects that may help.

• Use the bot's data to generate lists of articles like this one, using a combination of the quality, importance and "external interest points score" for each article.
• Change "Project" to what you want, then click on "Generate list" button.
• After list is generated, page down & click on "Summary table"
• Once on that "Project summary tables" page, you can change name of Project, click on "Make table" button to repeat for a different WP.
  • or here and change project on URL line in browser.

Sharing to (audiodude—Kelson—Walkerma) - When I did the above, I see the table numbers for WP Catholicism & WP Saints have changed so it must be creating "fresh" wikitable based on current WP article assesssments. The table generated is "on-the-fly" and not stored at usual Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Saints articles by quality statistics location.

Cheers, JoeHebda (talk) 15:24, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

• @JoeHebda: – The alternative here how will this be updated to the new article assessments? Adamdaley (talk) 01:18, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

@Adamdaley: It looks to me like enwp10 tool is running as a real-time job to create a one-of wikitable for requested WP. So it is not posting to "WP 1.0 bot" wikitable. I just discovered this today - not sure how enwp10-wikitable (newer) can be copied/posted to WP1.bot wikitable (older).

• Wikitable from WP1.0bot (now blocked) - Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Saints articles by quality statistics
• Wikitable from enwp10 tool - here

Hope this clarifies a temporary work-around until new bot is ready. CC to (audiodude—Kelson—Walkerma) Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 01:51, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

• I've worked out a way to update the new assessment. Adamdaley (talk) 01:58, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

• @Adamdaley: - Glad to hear ofyour success. Could you please share what you did so as to help others with same issue on other WPs. JoeHebda (talk) 14:17, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

• Their solution, btw, was {{WPMILHIST Assessment table}}, which displays live article counts for categories- no historical data, no importance class counts/intersections. I've created a modified version for the video games project at Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Article statistics/table for projects that don't have the extra class categories that MILHIST does. --PresN 21:12, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

• Reply to (PresN—Adamdaley) - Good news you all are able to produce current article counts for your Wikiprojects with custom wikitable solution. CC to (audiodude—Kelson—Walkerma) Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 21:49, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

• First of all, I had this link to the Bot to update certain WikiProjects. Here [6] – Which is of course bookmarked on my laptop. Another bookmark of this [7] – Is this easy to understand? Adamdaley (talk) 23:25, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

• @Adamdaley: - Thanks for splainin' for me. Yes I understand the two-step process & will post this info below. :-) FYI to (audiodude—Kelson—Walkerma) JoeHebda (talk) 02:31, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Alternate process

While WP 1.0 bot is blocked, there is a way to get current article counts (assessment wikitable) for your WikiProjects. Follow the two-step process below.

1. Generate new project data - At Update project data page, choose your Wikiproject & click the Go button. Depending on how busy enwp10 tool is there may be considerable wait time. After completion, run step two.
2. Display project table - At Project summary tables page, choose your Wikiproject and click the Make table button.

• Both of these processes can be bookmarked on your laptop. Credit to Adamdaley (talk) for this helpful contribution. JoeHebda (talk) 02:31, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

• Not only bookmarked on a laptop, but also a desktop. Anyone doing this must remember to call each of the bookmarks differently to avoid confusion. Adamdaley (talk) 22:03, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
• After completing #2, is there a way to generate the table in wikicode for manual transfer to enwp (to replace the bot)? Or is this process purely to update the numbers within 1.0? czar 16:38, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

WP 1.0 bot - Assessment tables

Greetings (audiodude—Kelson—Walkerma) - It appears that WikiProject assessment tables are not updating. For example, at Wikipedia:WikiProject Catholicism/Assessment when I click on article list for Stub articles the same list appears even though I have updated several articles days ago, and the list should change. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 13:45, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Joe! We'll look into the problem. Cheers,Walkerma (talk) 03:04, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Thursday, 27 June 2019

Is the updating bot having problems the last few days? It isn't updating where in fact leaves the currently updated where they are. Meaning, they are not being moved from it's current place of being updated to the new place. Is there a problem with it? Adamdaley (talk) 06:35, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

How to?

So, this may be a stupid question:

How do I get this pretty table to appear on this wikiproject page? I have seen the tables on other WikiProject pages, and I can't seem to make the template work here. I am lost. Tea and crumpets (talk) 22:39, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

 Done - @Tea and crumpets: Just one of those tricky wikilinks that must be exact. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 00:06, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, JoeHebda! - Tea and crumpets (talk) 00:08, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Help! It is importing info from WikiProject Genetics instead of WikiProject Genealogy. What did I do wrong? Tea and crumpets (talk) 17:01, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

Oops, sorry. I meant to post that on the Article Alerts page. This table is working fine. Tea and crumpets (talk) 17:03, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

Defunct WikiProject

WikiProject St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador was recently merged into WP:WikiProject Newfoundland and Labrador and so its assessment categories were deleted via CSD. The assessment table (User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador) and its transclusion (WP:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador articles by quality statistics) should possibly be deleted but I'm not sure what the procedure is when a Project gets closed. BLAIXX 12:37, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks - I believe the bot should find the change and adapt to it. However, we're finding the bot doesn't always behave, so I'll see if we can check that it's not looking for the missing category. Walkerma (talk) 21:51, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

Quality logs - Timestamps issue, re-visited

Greetings, At the November 3, 2018 section here are details about timestamps being corrupted during WP1.0bot daily processing. JoeHebda (talk) 20:07, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

To view these timestamp errors, from left column - choose "Special pages"; then at "Users and rights" section - choose "User contributions". For User = WP 1.0 bot. From date = November 4, 2018; To date = November 5, 2018. Click on Search

Here is an example, of the many WPs in error.

• 21:35, 4 November 2018 diff hist +21,523‎ Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Biblical Criticism articles by quality log ‎ Log for December 8, 2009 (2G r541)

• 21:35, 4 November 2018 diff hist +1,551‎ Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Bible articles by quality log ‎ Log for November 4, 2018 (2G r541)

Processing went from Bible articles, dated Nov.4,2018 to Biblical Criticism articles, dated December 8, 2009. And processed BC many, many times until it arrived at Nov.4, 2018.

JoeHebda (talk) 20:33, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Assessment logs

Hi. Not sure if this is the right place to ask this, but does anyone know why the bot stopped updating this page for the assessment log? Grk1011 (talk) 22:15, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Grk1011 the bot was malfunctioning and was blocked. A new version of the bot is in progress. Enwebb (talk) 22:29, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Setting up a template to count the articles and their quality

I am hoping you can tell me how to construct a template for Wikipedia:WikiProject Noongar which will summarise all the articles whose talk page lists them as belonging to the Noongar project, in the same way that Wikipedia:WikiProject Western Australia does. For me it is one of the more useful features of that project page. MargaretRDonald (talk) 08:15, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Greetings User:MargaretRDonald - For the WP1.0 bot to process WP Noongar assessments, the Categories need to be moved around. I'm not an expert on how that needs to be done, so let me show you a comparison.

For Category:Adelaide articles by quality all of the assessments are subcategories.

For Category:Noongar articles by quality the assessments subcategories (which exist) need to be moved there.

Again, I do not know how to do that, but I'm confident once that is done the WP Noongar table will be fully populated by the bot.

fyi, here it describes how the assessment categories need to be sub-categories.

Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 14:27, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Links to importance categories in assessment tables

Just querying this edit by WP 1.0 bot: [8] Was it intentional to remove links to the project's importance categories? PC78 (talk) 11:11, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the report. Apparently that is a known bug, and they're working on it. Audiodude and Kelson have been working on the bot very heavily over the last ten days, so I expect they will have it under control quite soon. Thanks, Walkerma (talk) 02:10, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Cheers, seems to have sorted itself out. PC78 (talk) 02:11, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

I don't understand why we have a complain here. From a user perspective, nothing has changed. We still have a link pointing to the proper category because the template does that per default... Or do I miss something else?! Kelson (talk) 08:05, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Well, it's just a bit odd that the quality classes link to the project-specific categories (e.g. Category:FA-Class Korea-related articles), but the importance classes link to the general categories (e.g. Category:Top-importance articles). I don't think it's a complaint, and I don't think it's a big deal either way, just a question of if it was an intentional change or not. --PresN 16:28, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Also, it's actually a duplicate of above, the bug is tracked at [9]. --PresN 16:29, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

What PresN said. (Also restoring my earlier comment which seems to have got lost.) PC78 (talk) 03:46, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Also I'd like to humbly point out that it didn't "sort itself out", but rather the bug was reported and I fixed it. :) audiodude (talk) 02:27, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Ah-ha, of course! But you know what I mean. :) PC78 (talk) 02:33, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Problem for Project/Māori

I tried to Run the bot right away for User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Māori but something seems to have gone wrong in this, the latest diff. The problem may be related to the 'ā' in the project name. The numbers in the table did not update, but "Māori" was changed to "Māori" in the table headings. But the previous "Māori" was not correct anyway, I now see, and had been incorrect since this diff in Nov 2016. Nurg (talk) 02:50, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

For the record, this is all good now. Nurg (talk) 05:12, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

NotA-Class

Could the bot stop adding Template:NotA-Class? I believe the replacement is the plain text "Other". Thank you! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:33, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the bug report @Plastikspork:! Can you add an example table where this happens so I can verify that I've fixed it? --audiodude (talk) 12:00, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Seems to be fixed; User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Palaeontology was showing NotA-Class, but is no longer doing so (see page history). Plantdrew (talk) 15:24, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

see these 417 edits. unless you want Plastikspork's bot to clean up after WP 1.0 bot every time it runs, you probably want to fix the WP 1.0 bot code. Frietjes (talk) 18:23, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

looks like it is being fixed here? Frietjes (talk) 18:28, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Yes it is fixed in that PR. Just waiting for it to be deployed and for the bot to re-run. Thanks! audiodude (talk) 06:05, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Bot not running? August 2 and 3, 2019

Greetings - In Revision history there are no entries for these two days. For example, here and here. JoeHebda (talk) 11:59, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Glitches

I've noticed a couple glitches with some assessment tables. For a few weeks, articles were occasionally showing up as "Other" or "NA" classes when they were either assessed as articles or not assessed at all. It appeared to always be in cases of an article that was newly tagged, reassessed, or moved, and would be resolved by the next day. I don't have a current example of it, but if it happens again I'll post one.

The second glitch is this: [10] It seems the bot removed the project-specific importance categories and replaced them with links to the overall container categories.

Neither of these is a critical issue, but in case they're symptoms of something bigger I wanted to make note of them. --Sable232 (talk) 00:19, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for reporting these issues! The first one sounds tricky and I'm not sure I entirely understand what the symptom is, but I will look more into it. Definitely if you see an example please post it here. As for the second one, that is a known bug and is being tracked here. Thanks again! audiodude (talk) 06:10, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Example of the first: User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Fishes currently shows one articles as Other/Low importance. That article is Arrhamphus. That talk page has only been edited once, assessed as Stub/Low importance. Plantdrew (talk) 17:13, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

More examples; User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Lepidoptera, with Mallocephala rubripes. User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Mammal with Ringed seals and climate change. Plantdrew (talk) 17:19, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

It just appeared: Three articles, assessed several hours ago as Start-class and Low-importance, are appearing as "Other" and Low-importance: [11] --Sable232 (talk) 01:10, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Also in this update for Project/Māori. A new page (a template), the Talk page edited only once, placed in "Other" quality rather than with the other Templates. Nurg (talk) 08:55, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks everyone! I've logged a bug to track this issue. audiodude (talk) 03:58, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 18 August 2019

I would like the wikiproject Noongar Category:WikiProject Noongar to be added to the list of projects for which article assessment can show up on the project page. (I am not permitted to add it, not being an admin.) MargaretRDonald (talk) 21:17, 18 August 2019 (UTC) MargaretRDonald (talk) 21:17, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

I don't think that this can be done by editing this page; perhaps ask on WP:HD? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 14:42, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

MargaretRDonald, this should be fixed now. I believe the problem was the use of Category:WikiProject Noongar articles by quality and Category:Noongar articles by quality, the latter being the correct naming convention. It appears the bot is updating User:WP 1.0 bot/Tables/Project/Noongar correctly. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 21:02, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for that, @Gonzo fan2007:. I had been hoping for a cross-tabulation of quality by importance like that found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia....(Work still to be done?) MargaretRDonald (talk) 21:11, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

MargaretRDonald, same issue as before. You set it up using Category:WikiProject Noongar articles by importance instead of Category:Noongar articles by importance. I have fixed it. The table has been updated with the cross-tabulation of quality and importance. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 21:28, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, so much @Gonzo fan2007: and now I know how to do it in future! MargaretRDonald (talk) 12:15, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Logs will be back soon!

Hi, Audiodude has been working hard these last days to rewrite - hopefully without bugs - the WP1 logs. The rewrite of this part of the WP1 engine is almost over and we need your help to:

• Find one or two projects to test that it works fine.
• Remove the admin block on the log pages (or just tell me how to proceed). Kelson (talk) 08:31, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

You can test it on WikiProject Automobiles (log) - there's usually enough activity that that there will be at least something in the log each day. I'll put the log page on my watchlist. --Sable232 (talk) 00:19, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for volunteering, I'll definitely take you up on this once the pages are unprotected. audiodude (talk) 10:08, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Greetings @Sable232: we have manually pushed the logs for the Automobiles for the past week. Please take a look and let me know if anything looks strange or 'off'. The table is here. Thanks! audiodude (talk) 09:52, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Hello @Gonzo fan2007: You may remember that last year in October we protected all of the article assessment log pages because the bot was misbehaving and there was no way to shut it off. We have completed several milestones of the new WP 1.0 bot project and would like to unprotect those pages now. Can you help us or point us to someone who can?

For some more information, the old bot has been completely shut down at this time, and the new bot does not have log editing capacity (quite) yet. But as we add this functionality in the coming days, it would be useful to be able to write these logs again. For now, I am just writing logs in my own user space as tests. Thanks! audiodude (talk) 10:06, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

@Cyberpower678: this is the conversation I brought up with you this morning. audiodude (talk) 07:54, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Audiodude, they should all be unprotected. There may be 3 or 4 that still have protection on them after the batch unprotection. If so, let me know and I can unprotect them individually. Let me know if you need anything else. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 14:03, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your help, both before and this time! audiodude (talk) 11:04, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

@Gonzo fan2007: Looks like the articles listed in this list are still protected. Could you unprotect them when you get a chance? Thanks! audiodude (talk) 16:25, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

 Done. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 16:41, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

• I checked the log for WikiProject Automobiles and it appears to be in order. The only oddity I notice is that there are a couple articles, Mercedes-Benz W108 and Headliner (material) that were renamed on August 13, but show as being assessed on August 15. I suspect that these were among the phantom "NA" and "Other" entries in this table from the 13th, which were gone after the update on the 15th. (I haven't seen this glitch happen again in the projects I follow since I noted it below.) --Sable232 (talk) 22:08, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for checking things out! You definitely have a really good eye for detail, because I think the move -> assessed issue is an actual bug in the software that we should fix, and it probably led to the oddities in the table, as you have speculated. Thanks again! audiodude (talk) 03:31, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

I've created a bug to track this issue. audiodude (talk) 04:01, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

@Sable232: Hi, I've updated the automobiles log again, would you mind checking it out again to make sure it's still working more or less? Thanks! audiodude (talk) 02:30, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

It does appear to be working. One interesting detail: the articles that were showing up incorrectly in the table earlier this week (Other or NA) appear in the log twice - the first time with the correct assessments, the second time with just the quality rating. Overhang (vehicles), Turning radius, and Understeer and oversteer on the 20th and 21st, Geely Binyue on the 21st and 22nd, and MG 18/80 on the 22nd and 23rd. All were newly tagged with the project banner, which might help narrow down where this glitch is coming from. --Sable232 (talk) 22:40, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

@Sable232: I've tracked down and fixed the bug you mentioned with duplicate logs, once again, great eye! Unfortunately, duplicates will continue to appear for all projects until after tonight's run. You can see the code here. Thanks once again! audiodude (talk) 23:41, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Glad I could be of help! --Sable232 (talk) 17:05, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

• I am about to merge the code for log upload. Once that change is deployed, and assuming there are no show stopper bugs, all projects will have their logs uploaded starting this evening (0:00 AM Aug 26 UTC). Thanks! audiodude (talk) 19:51, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi User:Audiodude - Reporting that bot skipped logs for WP Catholicism. Also for WP Saints the log entries for August 19 to 26 appear to be repeating each day same. JoeHebda (talk) 13:17, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

I am aware that the Catholicism logs didn't update, and have filed a bug for them. As for the Saints page, yes we are aware of that issue. Thanks for reporting! audiodude (talk) 16:30, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Greetings Audiodude - Success! for several days now the logs are being updated for WP Catholicism and WP Saints both of which I've checked. Thanks so much for all your efforts getting these very useful logs running again. Cheers! JoeHebda (talk) 16:36, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Yes, thank you very much! The VG New Articles script is back up and running, so I'll let you know if I find any bugs in the assessment logs going forward. --PresN 18:43, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Is Log "stuck" for WP Saints?

Hi @Audiodude: - After checking WP Catholicism which looks correct, I noticed at WP Saints there are many "repeats" for all seven days of the log. For example, 7 entries for Pope Alexander I. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 14:10, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Seems to be already tracked here Kelson (talk) 16:08, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Removal of inactive project assessment

Hi, recently we noticed WP:CANTAB was listed as inactive and WP 1.0 bot emptied the assessment table. See diff. Is this usual behaviour for the bot? The project is semi-active so I have changed the project banner now. Aloneinthewild (talk) 16:30, 2 September 2019 (UTC)