Wikipedia:Bots/Noticeboard: Difference between revisions

Overview Dictionary Bot policy Bot Approvals Group Guide Noticeboard Newsletter Bot Requests Requests for Approval Adminbots {{BAG Tools}} Creating a Bot List of bots Activity monitor Status report History Types

Greetings, This morning I posted a notice here about bot not running. Because I have no idea how to get it re-started, wondering if someone here could help. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 18:34, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@JoeHebda: User:WP 1.0 bot is operated by User:Audiodude and User:Kelson - you can try their talk pages. — xaosflux ^Talk 19:25, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm wait, you are talking about a problem off-wiki right? for https://tools.wmflabs.org/enwp10/cgi-bin/list2.fcgi? If so, it happens to be those same maintainers. — xaosflux ^Talk 19:28, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Xaosflux: - I did the group ping. It usually takes a long time (days or weeks) for a response. That's why I am asking for help here for a more immediate fix. Previously, I had asked for a bot Restart button & was told it may be years for that to happen. JoeHebda (talk) 20:15, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@JoeHebda: Unfortunately us Wikipedia editors can not do anything about tools.wmflabs.org services. That service has a "issues" link to phab. You an try emailing the operators if they don't reply to their talk pages. — xaosflux ^Talk 20:19, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bot operator here. I got the message to restart the tool yesterday morning my time and restarted it. Looks like it's working fine now. Sorry for any delays or inconvenience. audiodude (talk) 02:02, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

reFill 2 is a much-used tool for expanding bare references, however its creator/maintainer seems to have retired months ago, and bug reports seem to have gone unresolved for even longer. I know this tool is not a bot, but it was suggested that I inquire here. I was hoping to either recruit one or more editors to take over the tool's maintenance, or at least be referred to another talk page where I'd be likely to find said editors. Thanks.— TAnthony^Talk 16:10, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@TAnthony: WP:VPT may be better. — xaosflux ^Talk 16:13, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's where I was referred here :/ — TAnthony^Talk 16:16, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You can try wikitech-l — xaosflux ^Talk 16:38, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

TAnthony, User:Cyberpower678 was looking into the possibility of adopting it. -- GreenC 17:38, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What is this about? News to me I'd been blocked, & I therefore launched no appeal. Johnbod (talk) 15:12, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Johnbod: will follow up at your talk, the "bot part" seems to be functioning correctly - but there may be a different issue. — xaosflux ^Talk 16:06, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Moved to Wikipedia:Bot requests § Feedback request - bot to maintain CAT:UAA and similar categories

 – * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 22:46, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

To a degree I have raised this previously and somewhat poorly in September 2019 at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Archive 154#BOT linking to archive.org possible copyrighted sources. And I learnt a real lots on open library and worldcat out of it and finding sources in books held on archive.org (search foobar site:archive.org). While bot url blue linking seemed to have ceased after that I have observed this has restarted. For example: [1]. This is actually really cool and really useful fantastic stuff. And I use IAbot regularly myself for Linkrot. My concerns revolve around the issues of book loans from Internet Archive and how this is being pointed to with a possible bias as opposed to worldcat where other sources can be located. ( The example I have above has isbn but that wouldn't be present pre-1980s? or so). In summary:

• At User:InternetArchiveBot IABot is described as 'an advanced bot designed to combat link rot, as well as fix inconsistencies in sources such as improper template usage, or invalid archives'. Blue linking arguably goes beyond the WP:LINKROT brief.
• I would be more comfortable if the BOT when blue linking also provided a worldcat (olcl=) link or perhaps an open library link (ol=) which gives library locations (worldcat) or also shows possible sellers (open library). I have done this for the example above.[2]

Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 22:57, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The diff you linked shows that there was already an ISBN present. The ISBN links to Special:BookSources, which leads to all of the sources you list and many more. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:56, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As I said there are cases where no isbn is present, or it may be the BOT operates only when an isbn is present? I support I could try and reverse engineer it or something but it is not reasonable for it to even try and I already mentioned about the isbn in this example. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 02:31, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to be GreenC bot doing this but it may be a called procedure. Is this authorised? Djm-leighpark (talk) 07:33, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Djm-leighpark: can you provide some diffs of recent edits that you are concerned with? — xaosflux ^Talk 12:16, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]