This is an archive of past discussions with User:Josh Parris. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Done No, someone stopped the bot so it stopped updating all the boxes. I just forced it to look over the page you mentioned and it's happy at the moment. Josh Parris02:44, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Problem at Sicily?
Hi Josh. WildBot's banner at Talk:Sicily says that links needing disambiguation are: "Sicilian people, Saint Christina, Evangelist, Kamarina", but I can't find any links to "Sicilian people" or "Kamarina" in the article, for example the Dab solver tool only shows links to Saint Christina and Evangelist. What gives? Paul August☎22:36, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
Someone's fixed Kamarina while WildBot was down, so that mystery is solved.
I've realised what the problem with Sicilian people is; now Dispenser and I need to figure out what the solution is. The disambiguation page for Sicilian people points right back at Sicily#Demographics. We'll figure out what the correct response is. Josh Parris03:32, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
I tried running the .py script to fix the other dabs and it kicked out with the "registered users" message so no change was effected. I guess I will wait for the other links fixes. --Ancheta Wis (talk) 03:29, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
There is more than one way to skin a cat. If a link links to a dab page then there are three options leave it as it is the link is fine. Alter the link to link to a page that the dab page links to. The third option is move the dab page. It seems that you bot thinks that is altering the link is the only way to go. What it does not do is to see if the page the link links to has been altered from a dab page or a link to a dab page. This is a bug.
The bot then put the same template on the talk page at 09:07, 17 March 2010 yet the page it is complaining about North Riding was altered nearly a day earlier at 11:39, 16 March 2010
You're right, it is time for me to rebuild the 170,000 disambiguation page cache. This will take an hour, and then I'll restart the bot. Building a bot that can keep the cache up-to-date is a non-trivial task. Josh Parris12:14, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Err why have redirects at all? I thought redirects are "names and terms that readers are most likely to look for in order to find the article (and to which editors will most naturally link from other articles)." -- PBS (talk) 12:23, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Instead of frequently rebuilding cache why not check the target page for a dab template? Keep a log of how many pages it fail on and when it gets over a certain number %age whatever then rebuild. -- PBS (talk) 12:26, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Because a page could easily have hundreds of links on it, requiring pulling down hundreds to pages to find out if they're a disambiguation page or not. Given the bot checks several edits a minute, that is not viable as a solution. Josh Parris12:30, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Done fixed. I was running two instances to allow the bot to catch up; normally that's not a problem, but the database is lagging pretty hard at the moment, so the delays caused that behaviour. Josh Parris12:22, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Done forced the bot to re-examine Europe. I've often wondered about how to deal with repairs effected by changing the target article. I'm working on something that may provide a solution. Josh Parris22:41, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
The bot flag is usually set for bot edits that don't need to be seen by humans; the opposite is the case here. The bot's primary goal is to flag humans to fix errors machines can't. –xenotalk15:08, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
I see. It's worth noting that it's very annoying to have my watchlist suddenly deluged with notices of broken links on Talk pages. Fixing these are - at best - a very, very low priority and it's more likely that no one will ever care because the discussions are very old and outdated anyway. --ElKevbo (talk) 15:14, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
It's more of a "no flagged bots" switch. There are a number of bots which operate without a flag for various reasons. You could probably get a .js to manually ignore WildBot if it is really that intrusive. Alternatively, Josh may choose to start running with the bot flag on. I, for one, don't hide bots flagged or otherwise from my watchlist... Typically people will hide bots from RecentChanges but not WatchLists so I think the bot will still reach its intended audience even running with a flag - for the most part. –xenotalk18:42, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
The bot flag is meant to be used in a manner similar to that as the minor flag. Editors (bots) may elect to flag the edit as such, to indicate that the change is trivial and not worth inspecting. When WildBot notes the correction of errors, it uses the bot flag. However, when it notes errors it doesn't apply the bot flag, as those edits aren't considered (by myself) to be trivial and are worth inspecting. Josh Parris03:50, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
I would still rather not have my watchlist cluttered up. And note that the flag description switch does not make this distinction between major and minor bot edits. And if it did I would still expect the option of filtering out the major edits as well. Please reconsider setting the bot flag. --Michael C. Pricetalk06:19, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
I just fixed the dabs at the New Haven Line article, but I didn't use the dab solver. With all that text to replace, I found it too risky. On the other hand, it was good for tracking the dab links. ----DanTD (talk) 23:04, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi. I noticed that a bot tag was placed on the article talk page. It says that it should be removed in a few minutes, but this apparently has not happened. I checked the article with check links and everything seems to be okay. Thanks, epicAdam(talk)00:02, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello, the bot reports a dab issue for "Bayou City" yet when I try to fix, the tools reports that no disambig issues exist. Please check. Thanks, Postoak (talk) 04:01, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
I already fixed the needed link to list of bus rapid transit systems, but WildBot returned to the page and re-added a broken links claim regarding the empty letter sections. As the page is primarily an list of all metro systems worldwide (as one might guess with its name) organized (default sorted) alphabetically by country, it would be odd for the letter links at the top omit certain letters, even if there is nothing currently in those sections as no country beginning with that letter currently has a rapid transit system. These links are not "broken" but entirely appropriate for the page, much as a redlink is a placeholder for an article that hasn't been written yet. And no, redlinks are not bad things.
I don't know how to turn off WildBot, but it shouldn't return to the page to demand a "fix" for something that a flesh and blood editor believes is appropriate and has stated as such in edit summaries. I have a feeling that this exact issue may turn up again in the future with other such list articles, where the placeholder links are not "broken" but correct. oknazevad (talk) 04:16, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
You did? How did you do it? I noticed this might be a problem a day or two ago, and I haven't yet figured out an appropriate response, so I'd welcome your suggestions. Josh Parris05:13, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
I see: your workaround is to use <sup id=H /> for the letter H, etc. You could have equally used {{anchor|H}}. I'm not sure I'm convinced this is a great solution, and will continue to think about it. Josh Parris05:39, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
Well, that was the syntax that the page already had. Of the three broken links, H and R were simply missing (so I inserted them where they would go had they been where they should have been. As for the Q, I just stuck it in next to the R, as that's where it would fall alphabetically, but, alas Qatar has no metro system. Anchor templates might work better, but as I'm no expert on them (in fact, I've never used them before), they didn't cross my mind. oknazevad (talk) 05:46, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
Could have been, I am typing after drinking 14 Guinnesses, 6 Carbombs, 2 Irish Coffees and 5 shots of Connemara. Cheers!--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ05:32, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
I don't know why that title is marked as a dab when in reality it should be a definition/entry like President. But until that is cleaned up, could you set Wildbot to not mark these as dab links that need fixing? This link is used in a lot of city/region articles including quite a few FAs as an infobox parameter. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff07:09, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
Received WildBot memo, but can't find "#Public life and science popularisation" in the article. The subhead reads "Public life and popularisation". It's a long article, so please help me find the problem, or it won't get fixed. Regards, Macdonald-ross (talk) 08:36, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello Josh, in recent talkpage notifications by WildBot, the name of the ambiguous page links isn't displayed properly; instead it says "m01" (e.g. here). I suppose this is some problem with the way your template User:WildBot/m01 handles its parameters.
By the way, would it be possible to change the templates so that they display actual links to the ambiguous target page(s)? I think it would make it easier to handle the issues.
Done I've fixed the template problem. Putting in place infrastructure to allow that is one of the reasons the template broke (sorry). Josh Parris10:24, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
WildBot/tag in namespace 4 and 5
Hi Josh! Only 2 pages in ns5 were (assisted) edited. I manually fixed the broken links and removed these tags. I will avoid this ns in future. Are ns6, ns10, ns14 ok? -- Basilicofresco (msg) 10:35, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
Done Fixed, this one was a doozy. The library I use thinks that anchors can't start with a space or underscore. I've had to work around it. Josh Parris01:26, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
The reason is I did a massive rewrite of the code that does this work and shipped it into production. Once in production I realised that I ought to test it. I tested it against your test case (User:WildBot/test02), said a few choice swear words, and re-fixed the bug. It looks like it had a chance to manifest itself before the bug-fix was released. I've just manually forced the bot to re-examine the page and it's come back happy, so this won't happen again (assuming I don't go doing any more massive rewrites!) DoneJosh Parris11:52, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
WildBot template clutter
Someone else's bot has been flagging many physics-related articles for WildBot's attention. This has resulted in large templates being placed on already-template-rich talk pages. I've been adding "{{cot|Click to show link-fixing robot's report}} (template) {{cob}}" around its templates on pages where this is a problem. Would you be willing to tweak WildBot or its templates to do this from the start? On the five pages I've noticed, at least, it's made a bit of a mess (though I realize that its reports are valuable). --Christopher Thomas (talk) 17:25, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but this bot is over the line. Please remove mass templating from talk pages, as promptly as is reasonably possible. ... Kenosis (talk) 18:36, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
I've stopped the bot. Please remove the templates from the various talk pages. I really would prefer not to make a stink at the Bot Approvals Group. This should be common sense not to be mass-templating pages. Thanks very much. ... Kenosis (talk) 18:47, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
The problem here doesn't look like User:WildBot - it's User:FrescoBot, the same robot that added "wildbot, please look at this page" templates to several of the physics articles. Near as I can tell, WildBot only shows up where someone asks it to. --Christopher Thomas (talk) 19:19, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Kenosis, having had a run-in with WildBot myself recently, I must disagree with you. WildBot has approval to tag talkpages in this way, so is entitled to run unless and until you get the approval reversed at BAG. It isn't for you to decide unilaterally that talk-page tagging is not a good idea. BencherliteTalk19:26, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
In that case I trust Josh will just turn it back on. And I don't attempt to decide anything unilaterally--I'm certainly entitled to make my arguments, both here and at BAG (where I'd be speaking in part to Josh anyway), and we're entitled to disagree with one another as well. I'd thought this much would be accepted as standard. Anyway, it appears the case that Josh's bot got mass-prompted by FrescoBot, which is known to have previously run afoul of common sense and its own permissions. Sorry to see Josh get caught in the middle here. I trust it will get worked out soon enough. ... Kenosis (talk) 19:44, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
The problem (from my end) is pages like Talk:Black hole and Talk:Big Bang, where there are template-based notices that we want users to read. They'll generally only read the top one or two. Using cot/cob to toggle visibility of WildBot's report would seem like the best of both worlds for situations like that, though I recognize that other talk pages will have their own, different, requirements.
Format-wise, at WT:PHYSUser:Headbomb pointed out WildBot's book-project template as being nicely formatted. From a cosmetic POV, I'd certainly endorse it (though this will again be something that depends on individual talk pages' needs). --Christopher Thomas (talk) 19:54, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
I now see the bot permission for this function at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/WildBot 3, and can see that the permission includes placing a visible full-size template. If the intention was ever to make it an automatic function across the entire wiki, can it not instead just start a talk-page section rather than competing for reader attention in that valuable space at the top where local users attempt to set context for that talk page? Whether or not it's intended to be an opt-in bot function, Xeno and Christopher Thomas' suggest makes sense to me, i.e., that it might at least be placed beneath existing templates that attempt to set the broad context for the particular talk page. ... Kenosis (talk) 20:24, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
WildBot will automatically update or remove this message as issues are fixed (may take a couple of days). However, you may update it manually if you want.
I'm going to go ahead and alter WildBot so that the in the future talk page notices are placed after the last template that is before the first section. If anyone thinks this is not an adequate solution to these complaints, please pipe up. Josh Parris03:29, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
I do think it's an adequate solution, and imagine Xeno and Christopher Thomas' would agree since they made the suggestion. I'll note it accordingly at the Bot owners' noticeboard and Basilicofresco's page that you quickly found a workable solution. Nice work. And, of course, thanks for the valuable maintenance tasks provided by the bots. ... Kenosis (talk) 03:57, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
Done Positioning of message boxes will in the future be at the bottom of the start-of-page template stack. I've done several tests of this, but the real world has a nasty habit of breaking programs, so keep an eye out for weirdness. Josh Parris12:07, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
I'm sorry if the wide use of WildBot/tag caused any trouble. A standard section within the talk page would be even more unobtrusive, but Josh solution looks adeguate. What should I do now? Have I to switch on again the talk tagging on any page with suspected broken section links? Is the opt-in approach preferred? -- Basilicofresco (msg) 10:38, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
I'd certainly encourage you to restart tagging. It would be helpful if you could keep FrescoBot's edit rate down and watch this talk page while I'm asleep for the next 8 hours, and if something weird happens I can fix the code when I wake up. That's assuming this code change doesn't cause a crash! Josh Parris12:07, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
Josh, if it's feasible, something that might help editors of articles with broken section links or questionable DAB links would be to include in WildBot's templates the visible text that's placed in the article in conjunction with a given broken section link or DAB link. It would sure help in finding these links. Currently it's often necessary to open the edit box or do an extensive hunt-and-peck through articles to find the broken links and DABs. Thanks! ... Kenosis (talk) 16:55, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
Doing... I'm in the process of reworking the message boxes so that they're more heavily template based; that should give us flexibility is designing their look-and-feel. Josh Parris00:34, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
Super. To give an illustration, at the article on intelligent design it took a good while to find the broken links, requiring that I repeatedly guess what visible article text might link to the underlying broken #section wikilinks that were noted on the template. if the visible article text associated with the broken links were to be displayed in the template, I or any other editor would I'm sure have found them in very short order. But, once I fixed them, WildBot was extremely fast to catch the fixes (like, "whooosh") and removed the template from the talk page within a few minutes! Very impressive indeed. ... Kenosis (talk) 05:02, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
Done (ish) WildBot is transitioning existing message-box text over to the new format, which uses the following template for each link: {{User:WildBot/m03}}. Edit that to reveal, or hide, or format links as you see fit. The current settings emulate the hard-coded output. You can see at User:WildBot/m03/testcases a suggestion I have for re-working the template, that version being in the sandbox at the moment. Josh Parris06:40, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
Hiding WildBot
I was viewing my watchlist and I was trying to hide the bot edits to it when I realised that Wildbot kept showing up even when I had the 'Hide bot edits' option 'on'. I do not understand this; I thought WildBot was, well... a bot! so that meant his edits should disappear from the watchlist. Could you please help me? --:| TelCoNaSpVe :| (talk) 00:02, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
The bot flag is meant to be used in a manner similar to that as the minor flag. Editors (bots) may elect to flag the edit as such, to indicate that the change is trivial and not worth inspecting. When WildBot notes the correction of errors, it uses the bot flag. However, when it notes errors it doesn't apply the bot flag, as those edits aren't considered (by myself) to be trivial and are worth inspecting. Josh Parris00:05, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
Looks like a lag issue. Perhaps you saved the talk-page first? That might have triggered the bot, which might have found the main page unchanged, and thus replaced the notice. If you then altered the File: page, that would explain the immediate removal of the replaced notice. Josh Parris09:11, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
It just happened again at Talk:Adenanthos detmoldii. Article issue fixed at 13:19, Wildbot message removed from the talk page by me the same minute (but afterwards), Wildbot message restored at 13:23.
I'm not back here because it bothers me. I agree that it looks like a lag issue and I am happy with that. Just letting you know that what you're speculating definitely wasn't the case. Hesperian13:29, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
One of the 4 instances is now superfluous and has been killed.
The bot's internal buffers are a big contributing factor - each processing stage currently allows 10 pages to backlog into it, and there are several processing stages, so the lag between acquisition of the text of the page and finally being able to write the evaluation to the 'pedia seems to be getting quite long. I've long held suspicions that the section-checking code was the most time-consuming of all the checks, and recent statistics have borne that gut feeling out. Since seeing that processing is the bottle neck I've gone from one thread doing that work to two and then three, and I'm about to boost it to five. Meanwhile, I've lowered the inter-thread buffer from a top size of 10 pages to 5. I'm hoping this will reduce the likelihood of incidents such as you have cited; the delays we're seeing at the moment are due to recovering from a substantial down-time and I'm still throwing in code to make recovering a backlog of work not interfere with processing of what's happening now. Josh Parris14:24, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Regarding this edit, actually that is incorrect. The top of Scrimmage says "A scrimmage is a sports contest engaged in for practice purposes," with none of the dab links covering that sense, and that is precisely the sense that it's being wikilinked for. Said link was correct as is, and we've got a false positive on our hands. —Quasirandom (talk) 14:21, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
User talk:Josh Parris/Archive 7/faq - if you're looking for the dictionary definition, perhaps linking to wiktionary [[wikt:scrimmage]] would be more appropriate? 14:26, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
WildBot also doesn't seem to undersdand a section title that contains a slash. Perhaps it looks like a subdirectory? It tagged Feud#Blood feuds/vendetta in the Muhammad article. That section link is perfectly valid. I changed the slash to .2F in the WikiLink, which seemed to make the bot happy. ~Amatulić (talk) 22:00, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
They're inserted into the edit summaries. They don't seem to render. I blame MediaWiki, but I don't know if a bug has been raised. Josh Parris22:42, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
Done Ah, crap. Well spotted. I managed to get confused with the code to generate the contents of the message box. Josh Parris03:11, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
WildBot stated that it found the broken section link Maya calendar#Haab\' in Year. (I changed the link to the article Haab'.) However, the actual section link was correctly written Maya calendar#Haab' (no \). I supect that WildBot has a problem with an apostrophe in a section title (which in this case indicates how to pronounce its last letter). — Joe Kress (talk) 07:52, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
WildBot doesn't help to fix the broken section link. In fact WildBot may be sending alarms to the wrong article - the editor(s) of the article that had the section heading has some idea where would be a good target for the link now, while the the editor(s) of the article containing the link has no idea while the target weas changed. --Philcha (talk) 14:20, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
I believe you're saying that if the #section link is reported as wrong and it's fixed by changing section titles in the target article, WildBot won't notice and update the note on the article pointing to the target article. You're right, and in the next few weeks I hope to have something in place to address this (this is not a small change). Josh Parris01:58, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
The link on the Marchantiophyta page should point to the disambiguation page because it's discussing the fact that there is more than one meaning of the term and both have been used in the past. --EncycloPetey (talk) 05:30, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
I know, but your canned text there does not apply in this situation. There is a disambiguation page already, but it does not use "(disambiguation)", since that would be redundant. Linking to Wiktionary would also not be good, since the Wiktionary entry will always be minimal and will focus on the lexicographical issues, not topical ones. --EncycloPetey (talk) 00:34, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
#REDIRECT[[Bryophyta]]
{{R to disambiguation page}}
{{R to disambiguation page}} helps other automated programs know what the redirect is for (so, for example, if the disambiguation page moves bots can clean up after the move), and the redirect takes readers to the disambiguation page.
This bot is reporting an ambiguous link to Labour Party in Marxism. However, clicking on the "Fix" link leads to the message "There were no disambiguation links found in the wikitext". Please check and resolve this. RolandR (talk)10:17, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
Here we go: User talk:Josh Parris/Archive 7/faq. Now, I've had a look at your case and the disambiguation page is stuffed; if you can bear it, ignore WildBot's whining for a few days and hopefully someone will fix up the disambiguation page. Then it ought to be easy to fix. Josh Parris12:21, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
English Civil War From the banner on the talk page: "WildBot is a bot designed to remove this notice within a couple of minutes. If WildBot is malfunctioning, or you have suggestions for improvements, please leave a message." I'm leaving a message. -- PBS (talk) 19:42, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
DoneWouldn't you know it? Half an hour after I go to bed, something kills my programs. I've manually forced WildBot over these two pages, and have restarted processing. Josh Parris22:24, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
Done I manually forced WildBot to look at this page. WildBot is struggling along after being stopped eight hours ago. Josh Parris00:49, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
WildBot flagging a non-disambiguation page
Just a heads up that here WildBot picked up on Gears of War as a wikilink that needed disambiguation, but it looks like a perfectly standard article at the other end of the link. --McGeddon (talk) 11:10, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
You found a pretty nifty bug, which I'm still not sure I understand. It's to do with redirects and namespaces.
Done, fixing this bug has brought a significant performance improvement in a particularly slow section of code. Thanks! Josh Parris04:37, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
Yes, the piping thing means that [[The Beatles in 1966: Backlash and Controversy|1966]] should be updated to [[The Beatles in 1966|1966]]. It should probably the same for disambiguation pages that aren't explicitly disambiguation pages (aka [[Robert Smith (disambiguation)|Bob Smith]] is fine, but [[Robert Smith|Bob Smith]] isn't). Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books}03:13, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
